HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1 - 2057 Safari Kid Daycare Center SDR CUP & MUP
Page 1 of 10
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL
DATE: June 19, 2018
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM:
Christopher L. Foss, City Manager
SUBJECT:
Safari Kid Daycare and Community Center Appeal of the Planning
Commission’s Decision to Deny the Site Development Review Permit,
Conditional Use Permit and Minor Use Permit (PLPA-2017-00050)
Prepared by: Mandy Kang, Senior Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The City Council will consider an appeal by the applicant for the approval of a Site
Development Review Permit, Conditional Use Permit and Minor Use Permit to build a
new daycare facility and community room on the vacant 2.1 -acre Semi-Public parcel in
Positano. The proposed project includes construction of a 14,936 square foot building
comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center to be operated by Safari Kid and a
4,269 square foot multipurpose room that will be open for rent to the community, and
related site improvements including an outdoor play area for the childcare center,
shared parking for both uses, and a minor amendment to the Planned Development
Zoning to establish development standards. On April 10, 2018, the Planning
Commission denied the request. The applicant has appealed that action to the City
Council. The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider the matter.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Conduct the public hearing, deliberate , and adopt the following: 1) Resolution
Reversing the Planning Commission’s Decision and Approving a Conditional Use
Permit for a Minor Amendment to the Planned Development Zoning Stage 2
Development Plan for the Site Designated as Semi-Public in Positano; 2) Resolution
Reversing the Planning Commission’s Decision and Approving a Site Development
Review Permit for a 14,936 Square Foot Building Comprised of a 10,667 Square Foot
Childcare Center and 4,269 Square Foot Community Center; and 3) Resolution
Reversing the Planning Commission’s Decision and Approving a Minor Use Permit for
Shared Parking between the 10,667 Square Foot Daycare and the 4,269 Square Foot
and Community Center; OR, direct the City Attorney to prepare a resolution affirming
the Planning Commission’s action including findings of fact, for City Council’s
consideration no later than July 17, 2018.
Page 2 of 10
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
All costs associated with processing this application are borne by the applicant.
DESCRIPTION:
The project site is an undeveloped parcel located at the southwest corner of Positano
Parkway and West Cantara Drive in the Positano neighborhood as shown in Figure 1.
The subject property is approximately 2.1 acres and currently vacant. The project site
has a General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designation of Semi -
Public which allows day care centers and community rooms among other community
serving uses. The site is generally surrounded by residential homes and a water quality
basin (across Positano Parkway).
Figure 1. Project Site
The Applicant is requesting approval to construct a 14,936 square foot building
comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center and a 4,269 square foot
multipurpose room that will be open for rent to the community. The proposed project
includes a 12,897 square foot outdoor play area for the childcare center, and related
improvements including parking, landscaping. Please refer to Attachments 1 and 2 for a
complete discussion of the proposed project.
The current request for the proposed project includes the following three entitlements:
1. Site Development Review Permit - For a 14,936 square foot building comprised
of a 10,667 square foot childcare center and a 4,269 square foot multipurpose room,
and associated site and landscape improvements with public access taken from a
driveway on West Cantara Drive (only emergency vehicles will be able to access the
site from the driveway on Positano Parkway).
Page 3 of 10
Figure 2. Proposed Site Plan
Figure 3. Perspectives
Page 4 of 10
2. Conditional Use Permit – To amend the Planned Development Zoning Stage 2
Development Plan to establish the following development standards (Table 1) and
set the limits on the hours of operation.
Table 1. Development Standards
Maximum Building Height 25 feet
Minimum Setbacks
Along Positano Parkway: 20 feet
Along West Cantara Drive: 20 feet
Adjacent to Residential Properties (South & Southeast): 40 feet
Adjacent to Vacant Land (Southwest): 40 feet
The daycare center will typically operate Monday through Friday during the day and the
community center will be open for use in the evenings during the week and throughout
the day on weekends. Outdoor activities, including use of the play equipment, will be
limited to the hours of 9:00 AM and 6:00 PM, Monday through Friday. The play
equipment will only be used by the daycare center. The building shall only be open for
use during the following hours (Table 2):
Table 2. Hours of Operation
Day Time
Monday-Thursday 6:30 AM - 8:00 PM
Friday 6:30 AM - 10:00 PM
Saturday 8:00 AM - 10:00 PM
Sunday 8:00 AM - 8:00 PM
3. Minor Use Permit – For a parking reduction for shared parking between the
daycare facility and the community center because they will operate at different
times. A condition of approval has been included which prohibits the daycare center
and community center from operating at the same time to ensure that adequate
parking is available on site.
Table 3. Parking Requirement
Land Use Parking Requirement
Square Footage/
Daycare Req.
Required
Stalls
Community
Center
1 parking space per 50 square feet for
non-fixed seating in the assembly area 4,269 85
Daycare
1 per employee, plus 1 per company
vehicle, plus a loading space for every 5
children or clients at the facility
25 Employees
229 children
2 company vehicles
73
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
On February 13, 2018, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the
proposed project. No members of the public addressed the Planning Commission
Page 5 of 10
regarding the project. The Planning Commission raised concerns about traffic and
safety, site improvements, architectural details, signage and landscaping. The Planning
Commission continued the item to allow staff and the applicant to address these
concerns. The Planning Commission Meeting Minutes are included as Attachment 3.
On April 10, 2018, the Planning Commission held a second public hearing to consider
the revisions made to the project to address the issues raised by the Commission on
February 13. The Planning Commission Meeting Minutes are included as Attachment
4. Twenty-four members of the public addressed the Planning Commission (seven
people spoke in favor of the project and 17 m embers of the public spoke in opposition to
the project). An additional 18 people submitted speaker slips but chose not to speak
(of those, 12 people indicated support of the project and six were opposed to the
project). The Planning Commission expressed concerns that the project site is not
suitable for the type and intensity of the proposed use and will generate more traffic
than the roadway can accommodate in an area the Planning Commission perceived as
already being congested. The Planning Commission voted unanimously (4-0-1 with
Commissioner Wright being absent) to adopt resolutions d enying the Site Development
Review Permit (Resolution 18-09), Conditional Use Permit (Resolution 18-10) and Minor
Use Permit (Resolution 18-11). These resolutions are included as Attachment 5.
The Planning Commission denied the project based on the following findings that it
could not make in the affirmative to support approval of the project.
Site Development Review Permit Denial Findings:
a. The subject site is not suitable for the type and intensity of the approved
development.
b. The site has not been adequately designed to ensure the proper circulation for
bicyclists, pedestrians, and automobiles.
Conditional Use Permit Denial Findings:
a. The project will adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or
working in the vicinity, and be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare.
b. There are not adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public
utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use and related structures
would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare.
Minor Use Permit Denial Findings:
a. The proposed use and related structures are not compatible with other land uses,
transportation and service facilities in the vicinity.
b. The project will adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or
working in the vicinity, and be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare.
c. There are not adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public
utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use and related structures
would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare.
On April 20, 2018, the applicant appealed the denial of the Safari Kid Daycare Center
Project by the Planning Commission (Attachment 6).
Page 6 of 10
APPEAL PROCESS:
Chapter 8.136 of the Zoning Ordinance contains the regulations and procedures that
must be followed if an action of the Planning Commission is appealed to the City
Council. In brief, an appeal and filing fee must be filed with the City Clerk within 10
calendar days of the Planning Commission action. Normally, the appeal must be
scheduled for a Public Hearing within 45 days of the filing of the appeal (June 3, 2018).
The City Council may defer the decision on the appeal at the Public Hearing but must
act within 75 days of the filing of the appeal (July 4, 2018), or the decision of the
Planning Commission is deemed affirmed. In this case however, the applicant
requested that the City Council postpone the public hearing until June 19, 2018 to
provide it with additional time to prepare for the meeting (Attachment 7).
Pursuant to the appeals process for planning decisions set forth in the Zoning
Ordinance, the appellant must state the “extent of the appeal and the reasons and
grounds for appeal”. The appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial on April 10, 2018
is confined to the approval of the findings for the Site Development Review Permit,
Conditional Use Permit and Minor Use Permit.
The Zoning Ordinance states that the City Council may, by majority vote, affirm, affirm
in part, or reverse the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the Project. If the City
Council decides to reverse the Planning Commission’s decision, the City Council may
adopt additional conditions of approval that address the specific subject of the appeal.
The City Council’s action must be supported by findings of fact based on information
before the Council when it hears and considers the appeal. Staff recommends that the
City Council reverse the Planning Commission’s decision, and adopt resolutions
approving the proposed Site Development Review Permit, Conditional Use Permit and
Minor Use Permit (Attachments 8, 10, and 12).
ANALYSIS:
The Zoning Ordinance provides findings which must be made by the decision-making
body to approve a Site Development Review Permit (Section 8.104.090), a Conditional
Use Permit (8.100.060), and a Minor Use Permit (Section 8.102.060). These findings
are included in Attachments 8, 10 and 12 of this Staff Report. The Zoning Ordinance
states that all of these findings must be made in order to approve each of these permit
types and shall be supported by evidence in the public record.
The appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision is confined to the denial of the Site
Development Review Permit, Conditional Use Permit, and Minor Use Permit on the
grounds that the project is not consistent with the Required Findings necessary for
approval of the subject entitlements. Accordingly, this Staff Repo rt addresses only
whether the decision made by the Planning Commission should be affirmed, affirmed in
part, or reversed.
Issues Raised in Appeal
The appeal asserts that the Planning Commission acted unfairly. The primary issues
raised by the appellant and responded to in detail below include the following:
Page 7 of 10
➢ The proposed project is consistent with the adopted General Plan/Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan Land Use Designation and Planned Development Zoning;
➢ The project site is adequately served by existing infrastructure to support the
proposed use; and
➢ Denial of the proposed project would constitute an inverse condemnation and
other constitutional violations including Due Process and Equal Protection.
The proposed project is consistent with the adopted Gene ral Plan/Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan Land Use Designation and Planned Development Zoning
Issues Raised by Appellant
The appeal states that the Planning Commission ignored the Semi-Public land use
designation and the Planned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan which
permits daycare centers and community rooms. The appeal further states that the
proposed use of the site is consistent with the City’s Semi-Public Facilities policy and
the uses that the City Council intended to occur on this site.
Staff Response
The City Council approved the Positano Project as part of the larger Fallon Village
Project in 2005. The approvals included a General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 2 Developmen t
Plan, and a Vesting Tentative Map creating the residential lots, along with the subject
Semi-Public site, and sites designated for a Neighborhood Park, Neighborhood Square,
elementary school site, and land designated Rural Residential/Agriculture and Open
Space.
The adopted General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment established
land use designations throughout the project. The subject site was given a Semi -Public
land designation which is defined below. The site was given this designation in
accordance with the Semi-Public Facilities Policy (Attachment 13). The purpose of the
policy is to ensure that sites are set aside to support future uses such as childcare
centers, religious institutions, and other uses that provide community services.
Semi-Public Facilities (Maximum FAR: .50; Employee Density: 590 square feet per
employee)
This designation allows quasi-public uses, such as child care centers, youth centers,
senior centers, special needs program facilities, religious institutions, clubhouses,
community centers, community theatres, hospitals, private schools and other
facilities that provide cultural, educational, or other similar services and benefit the
community. Semi-public facilities may be used for more than one such use.
The City Council also adopted Planned Development Zoning which established the
permitted and conditionally uses on the Semi-Public parcel. The zoning expressly
permits daycare centers and community centers on the subject site.
The applicant proposed to construct a 14,936 square foot daycare center and
community room with a floor area ratio of 0.19, well below the maximum FAR of 0.50
allowed on the site. The proposed project is conforming to the development standards
and regulations for the site including the maximum floor area ratio. The proposed use of
the site for a daycare center and community room is consistent with the General
Page 8 of 10
Plan/Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use, and the use implements the intent of the
adopted Semi-Public Facilities Policy by providing space for a daycare center and a
community room. These uses are also consistent with the uses permitted by the
Planned Development Zoning for the site.
The project site is adequately served by existing infrastructure to support the
proposed use.
Issues Raised by Appellant
The appeal challenges the Planning Commission’s findings that there is “inadequate
traffic capacity to serve the proposed project” and there are “inadequate public utilities”
to serve the site. The appellant asserts that there is adequate infrastructure, including
roads and utilities to serve the project and support by technical analysis.
Staff Response
The project site is located within the Positano neighborhood which is part of the larger
Fallon Village project area. Fallon Village was the subject of a Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) which supplemented two prior EIRs (the Eastern
Dublin EIR (SCH # 91103064), and the Eastern Dublin Properties Annexation and Pre -
Zoning EIR (SCH # 2001052114)). The SEIR includes a traffic study that was prepared
by TJKM Transportation Consultants. The traffic study analyzed development of the mix
of uses within the Positano neighborhood, including the use of the subject site for semi -
public uses.
The City’s Transportation and Operations Manager conducted a site visit and reviewed
the operating characteristics and site plan for the proposed project against the SEIR’s
traffic study for Positano. The proposed project was found to be consistent with the
assumptions in the traffic study and did not warrant additional traffic analysis. A site visit
confirmed that traffic on Positano Parkway increases when parents drop their children
off at Amador Elementary School, located east of the project site, between the hours of
8:00 AM and 8:30 AM. The applicant submitted a written statement that describes the
operation of the proposed daycare, including a summary of the student drop -off and
pick up times (Attachment 14). The daycare will have staggered drop -off and pick-up
times, and no drop-offs will occur from 8:00 AM - 8:30 AM. The staggered drop-off and
pick-up times help to distribute vehicle trips over a period of time rather than to
concentrate them all at one time. Staff included a Condition of Approval which requires
the staggered drop-offs and provides an enforcement mechanism should issues arise
during the peak traffic times of 8:00 AM to 8:30 AM (Attachment 10, Condition #95).
Additionally, the Applicant modified the site plan to address traffic and safety concerns
raised by the Planning Commission at their meeting on February 13, 2018. The primary
change was to eliminate the public use of the proposed driveway on Positano Parkway
to alleviate the Commission’s concerns about traffic impacts and visibility from vehicles
entering/existing the site from Positano Parkway. As modified, vehicular access to the
site will be restricted to West Cantara Drive. A driveway has been retained on Positano
Parkway for exclusive use by emergency responders to meet Building and Fire Code
requirements and will be restricted with bollards.
Page 9 of 10
Denial of the proposed project would constitute an inverse condemnation and
other constitutional violations including Due Process and Equal Protection.
Issues Raised by Appellant
The appeal indicates that the applicant will be submitting additional evidence prior to the
City Council hearing demonstrating that the denial would constitute an inverse
condemnation action, entitling the applicant to damages from the City. It also indicates
that the applicant would make additional constitutional claims, including Due Process
and Equal Protection, and claims that the denial would be arbitrary and capricious.
Staff Response
As of the date of this report, the City has not received the additional evidence the
applicant has indicated it intends to submit. Staff cannot therefore respond in any detail
to the potential claims. Obviously, were the appeal granted, such claims would not be
pursued. As it stands, because the lack of detail regarding the claims, this aspect of the
appeal would not serve as a proper basis for granting the appeal. Should the applicant
submit additional evidence prior to the hearing, Staff will provide a response to the City
Council in either open or closed session.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The project is located within the Fallon Village project, which was the subject of the
Fallon Village Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The EIR
supplemented the Eastern Dublin EIR which was certified by the City Council on May
10, 1993 (SCH # 91103064, Resolution No. 51-93). In 2002, a Supplemental EIR (SCH
# 2001052114, Resolution No. 40-02) was completed for the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan to analyze new information and changed circumstances since the 1993 EIR.
Supplemental mitigation measures were adopted.
Another Supplemental EIR (SCH # 2005062010, Resolution No. 222 -05) was adopted
on December 6, 2005, as part of the Fallon Village project. The project had proposed
some additional residential and commercial development beyond the 2002 app rovals
and adjusted some of the land use designation boundaries throughout the project area.
The Final Supplemental EIR was a supplement for both the 1993 and 2002 EIRs.
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines section
15168(c)(2), the proposed project was examined to determine if another environmental
document should be prepared. The project includes a proposal for a daycare and
community center on a Semi-Public site, which has been analyzed for potential
environmental factors in the previous Supplement EIR. There is no substantial
evidence in the record that any new effects would occur, that any new mitigation
measures would be required, or that any of the conditions triggering supplemental
environmental review under CEQA Guidelines section 15162 exists.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:
In accordance with State law, a public notice was mailed to all property owners and
occupants within 300 feet of the proposed project to advertise the project and the
upcoming public hearing. A public notice also was published in the East Bay Times and
Page 10 of 10
posted at several locations throughout the City. A Planning Application sign was posted
on the project site and the project was also included on the City’s development projects
webpage. A copy of this Staff Report has been provided to the Applicant.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Staff Report dated February 13, 2018 without attachments
2. Planning Commission Staff Report dated April 10, 2018 without attachments
3. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated February 13, 2018
4. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated April 10, 2018
5. Planning Commission Resolutions 18-09, 18-10 and 18-11
6. Appeal Letter dated April 20, 2018
7. Request to Extend Public Hearing dated May 2, 20 18
8. Resolution Reversing the Planning Commission Decision and Approving a
Conditional Use Permit for a Minor Amendment to the Planned Development Zoning
9. Exhibit A to Attachment 8 - Development Standards
10. Resolution Reversing the Planning Commission Decision and Approving a Site
Development Review Permit
11. Exhibit A to Attachment 10 - Project Plans
12. Resolution Reversing the Planning Commission Decision and Approving a Minor
Use Permit for Shared Parking
13. Semi Public Facility Policy
14. Applicant's Written Statement
Page 1 of 9
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: February 13, 2018
TO: Planning Commission
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC HEARING: Safari Kid Daycare Center—Site Development
Review, Conditional Use Permit and Minor Use Permit (PLPA -2017-
00050)
Prepared by:Mandy Kang, Senior Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Planning Commission will consider a request by the applicant, Meridian, for
approval of a Site Development Review Permit, Conditional Use Permit and Minor Use
Permit to build a new daycare facility and community room on the vacant 2.1-acre Semi-
Public parcel in Positano. The proposed project includes construction of a 14,936
square foot building comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center to be operated
by Safari Kid and a 4,269 square foot multipurpose r oom that will be open for rent to the
community, and related site improvements including an outdoor play area for the
childcare center, shared parking for both uses, and a minor amendment to the Planned
Development Zoning to establish development standards.
RECOMMENDATION:
Disclose ex-parte contacts, conduct the public hearing, deliberate and adopt the
following Resolutions: a) Approving a Conditional Use Permit for a minor amendment
to the Planned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan (Ordinance No. 33-05)
for the site designated as Semi-Public in Positano; b) Approving a Site Development
Review for a 14,869 square foot building comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare
center and 4,269 square foot community center; and c) Approving a Minor Use P ermit
for shared parking between the childcare center and community center.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The project site is an irregular shaped parcel located at the southwest corner of
Positano Parkway and West Cantara Drive in the Positano neighborhood as sh own in
Figure 1. The subject property is approximately 2.1 acres and currently vacant. The
project site has a General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designation
of Semi-Public. The site is generally surrounded by residential homes and a water
quality basin (across Positano Parkway).
Page 2 of 9
Figure 1. Project Site
On December 6, 2005, the City Council approved the Positano project as part of the
larger Fallon Village Project. The approvals included a General Plan and Eastern
Dublin Specific Plan Amendment, Planned Development Rezone with a related Stage 2
Development Plan, and a Vesting Tentative Map creating the residential lots, along with
the subject Semi-Public site, and sites designated for a Neighborhood Park,
Neighborhood Square, elementary school site, and land designated Rural
Residential/Agriculture and Open Space on the 488 -acres owned/controlled by
Braddock & Logan.
The adopted General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Amendment established
specific land use designations. As a part of that approval process, the subject site was
designated for Semi-Public land uses. The site was designated Semi -Public in
accordance with the Semi-Public Facilities Policy. The purpose of the policy was to
ensure that sites were provided to support future Semi-Public facilities such as childcare
centers, religious institutions, and other uses that deliver community services.
The Planned Development Zoning established the permitted and conditionally uses on
the Semi-Public parcel. This zoning allows both a daycare center and a community
center/clubhouse. The Planned Development Zoning further identified development
standards including proposed densities, development regulations, design guidelines,
architectural standards, and a preliminary landscaping plan.
Current Request
The Applicant is requesting approval to construct a 14,936 square foot building
comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center and a 4,269 square foot
multipurpose room that will be open for rent to the community. The proposed project
includes a 15,516 square foot outdoor play area for the childcare center , and related
improvements including parking, landscaping.
The current request for the proposed project includes the following entitlements:
Page 3 of 9
• Conditional Use Permit – To amend the Planned Development Zoning Stage 2
Development Plan to establish development standards and hours of operation.
• Site Development Review Permit - For a 14,869 square foot building comprised
of a 10,667 square foot childcare center and a 4,269 square foot multipurpose
room, and associated site and landscape improvements.
• Minor Use Permit – For a parking reduction for shared parking between the
daycare facility and the community center.
ANALYSIS
Conditional Use Permit – Minor Amendment to Stage 2 Development Plan
The Zoning Ordinance allows the Planning Commission, by means of a Conditional Use
Permit, to approve a minor amendment to an adopted Development Plan, subject to
findings related to compliance with the adopted Planned Development Zo ning District
Ordinance.
The application includes a Conditional Use Permit for a minor amendment to the
Planned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan for Fallon Village. Most of the
standards and requirements for a Stage 2 Development Plan required by Chapter 8.32
of the Zoning Ordinance were adopted in 2005 with the Stage 1 and 2 Development
Plans. A daycare center and a community center are both listed as permitted uses in
the Development Plans. However, the PD did not establish height and setback
requirements for buildings on this Semi-Public site.
The proposed amendment to the Stage 2 Development Plan will establish the maximum
height and minimum setback for any building on this site, as listed in the tables below.
Development Standards
Maximum Building Height 25 feet
Minimum Setbacks
Along Positano Pkwy: 20 feet
Along West Cantara Dr: 20 feet
Adjacent to Residential Properties (South & Southeast): 40 feet
Adjacent to Vacant Land (Southwest): 40 feet
The CUP will also establish the hours of operation for the building and outdoor activities.
The daycare center will typically operate Monday through Friday during the day and the
community center will be open for use in the evenings during the week and throughout
the day on weekends. The building shall only be open for use during the following
hours:
Day Time
Monday-Thursday 6:30 a.m.-8 p.m.
Friday 6:30 a.m.-10 p.m.
Saturday 8 a.m.-10 p.m.
Sunday 8 a.m.-8 p.m.
Page 4 of 9
Outdoor activities, including use of the play equipment, will be l imited to the hours of 9
a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday through Friday. The play equipment will only be used by the
daycare center.
A resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit to amend the Planned Development
Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan is included a s Attachment 1 with the proposed
development standards included as Attachment 2.
Site Development Review
The Zoning Ordinance requires a Site Development Review Permit for the construction
of new structures. Approval of the Permit is subject to findings related to compliance
with General Plan policies, impacts to general safety and welfare, site layout, impacts to
views, impacts to topography, architectural considerations and landscape
considerations as shown in the draft resolution included as Attachment 3. Please refer
to Attachment 4 for the project plans.
Site Layout
The proposed site layout shows the building located near the center of the site with
pedestrian access from both Positano Parkway and W. Cantara Drive. The playground,
trash enclosure and a majority of the parking has been located as far from adjacent
residences as possible. This layout was designed to minimize the impacts to adjacent
residences and to ensure efficient circulation. The proposed site plan is shown in Figure
2 below.
Figure 2. Proposed Site Plan
Page 5 of 9
A 20-foot wide path of travel provides a prominent pedestrian access from Positano
Parkway to the entry. Vehicular access to the project site is provided by a new
driveway on Positano Parkway, which is limited to right in/ ri ght out, and another
driveway on W. Cantara Drive. The existing driveway cut on W. Cantara Drive will be
removed and replaced with another driveway further to the east. Parents will utilize
both entrances/exits with staggered drop-off and pick-up times. The entrance of the
building faces Positano Pkwy.
Parking stalls are located along the north and east side of the building. These stalls
include disabled accessible, standard and EV/vanpool parking stalls.
The applicant is proposing to use a combination of lights attached to the building and
pole-mounted parking lot lighting in order to illuminate the site. Site lighting will be
reviewed once a building permit is submitted in order to ensure there are no light/glare
impacts to the adjacent residential development.
The trash enclosure is located on the southwest corner of the project site near the
Positano Parkway driveway entrance and away from the adjacent residences. It is
located in close enough proximity to the building but is not attached t o the building so it
doesn’t hinder the aesthetic appeal of the building. It will consist of masonry and
painted metal gates which will match the color of the building.
Outdoor Play Area
The proposed project will include a 15,516 square foot play yard located on the west
side of the building. It will be divided into sections with small gates based on various
age groups. The play areas will have colorful play structures for each age group. The
exact play structures have not yet been determined but conc eptual plans are included
as Attachment 5. The larger play structures are anticipated to be 10 -17 feet tall with
smaller 4 foot tall play structures. A condition of approval has been included requiring
the applicant to obtain a Site Development Review Waiver prior to installation. The play
areas will include a rubberized safety play surface for areas that fall within the safety fall
zone of the proposed play structures.
The project will include a six-foot tubular steel fence around the perimeter of the outdoor
play area. The fence is necessary for the safety and security of the children. The open
fence will blend in well with the surrounding area and complement the design of the
proposed building.
The proposed amendment to the Planned Development Zoning limits the use of the play
equipment to the hours of 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. Monday through Friday. The Zoning further
restricts the use of the play equipment to the daycare center (Attachment 2).
Floor Plan
The building consists of a 4,226 square foot community center room, 7 classrooms, a
kitchen, men’s and women’s bathrooms, 2 offices and a few storage/maintenance
closets. The community center and classrooms will be used for their respective uses.
The kitchen, bathrooms and storage closets will be sha red by all users.
Page 6 of 9
Architecture
The building features a California contemporary design that is consistent with the
surrounding residential neighborhood. The project utilizes a material palette with colors
and materials that are similar to the homes in t he surrounding area such as textured
stucco, stone veneer, a cement plaster accent columns and concrete roof tiles. The
single-story building will be 22 feet in height and include multiple windows for natural
lighting around the building. The main entry includes aluminum double doors and stone
columns to allow for a prominent entrance facing Positano Parkway. The building also
includes raised accent trim around the windows and doors.
Figure 2. Perspectives
A color and material palette has been provided that illustrates the variety of colors and
textures for the building. This materials board will be presented at the Planning
Commission meeting for review and consideration.
Landscaping
The landscaping has been designed to be compatible and comple ment the architecture.
Plantings and hardscape elements are used to create a visual screen for the site.
Improvements include trees, shrubs and groundcover along the perimeter of the
building and periphery of the outdoor play yard. The building entry and east elevation
will include a variety of plants along the building, as well as along the parking area
extending to the southern side of the site. A condition of approval has been included to
ensure that the landscape does not block visibility at the project driveway. The trash
enclosure will also include planting around it to help screen the structure.
Public Art Compliance
Page 7 of 9
The applicant intends to satisfy the City’s public art requirement through the payment of
in-lieu fees. A condition has been added in the Resolution for the Site Development
Review (Attachment 3).
A resolution approving the Site Plan Review Permit to construct the daycare center and
community center is included as Attachment 3, with the project plans attached as
Attachment 4.
Minor Use Permit – Parking Reduction for Shared Parking
The Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 8.76.050.F, allows a parking reduction for shared
parking between use types with approval of a Minor Use Permit. The reduction in off -
street parking requirements (from the sum of the parking required by each use type)
may be approved if there is sufficient parking to meet the greatest parking demand, the
use types and operating times don’t conflict, and overflow parking won’t impact adjacent
uses.
The table below illustrates the parking demand for the proposed daycare center and
community center. The applicant proposes to operate the daycare Monday through
Friday from 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. and the community room in the evenings and on
weekends when the daycare is closed. Therefore, the applicant is proposing to provide
a total of 90 parking stalls in order to exceed the greatest parking demand. The
proposed site plan has 5 more vehicular spaces than is required for the greatest parking
demand created by the community center. The parking stalls will include a mix of
disabled accessible stalls, standard stalls, and electric vehicle/vanpool stalls as required
by the Building Code.
Parking Requirement
Land Use Parking Requirement
Square Footage/
Daycare Req.
Required
Stalls
Community
Center
1 parking space per 50 square feet for
non-fixed seating in the assembly area 4,269 85
Daycare
1 per employee, plus 1 per company
vehicle, plus a loading space for every 5
children or clients at the facility
25 Employees
229 children
2 company vehicles
73
The classrooms will only be utilized for the daycare and will not be used as part of the
community center. The community center can be used by the existing daycare students
for special functions but will not be used as an addition al classroom or for any other
purpose that would increase the number of children and required parking stalls. A
condition of approval has been included which prohibits the daycare center and
community center from operating at the same time in order to ensure that adequate
parking is available on site (Attachment 6, Condition# 14).
A resolution approving the Minor Use Permit is included as Attachment 6.
Page 8 of 9
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is located within the Fallon Village project, which was the subject of the
Fallon Village Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The EIR
supplemented the Eastern Dublin EIR which was certified by the City Council on May
10, 1993 (SCH # 91103064, Resolution No. 51-93). In 2002, a Supplemental EIR (SCH
# 2001052114, Resolution No. 40-02) was completed for the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan to analyze new information and changed circumstances since the 1993 EIR.
Supplemental mitigation measures were adopted.
Another Supplemental EIR (SCH # 2005062010, Resolution No. 222-05) was adopted
on December 6, 2005, as part of the Fallon Village project. The project had proposed
some additional residential and commercial development beyond the 2002 approvals
and adjusted some of the land use designation boundaries thr oughout the project area.
The Final Supplemental EIR was a supplement for both the 1993 and 2002 EIRs.
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines section
15168(c)(2), the proposed project was examined to determine if anothe r environmental
document should be prepared. The project includes a proposal for a daycare and
community center on a Semi-Public site, which has been analyzed for potential
environmental factors in the previous Supplement EIR. There is no substantial
evidence in the record that any new effects would occur, that any new mitigation
measures would be required, or that any of the conditions triggering supplemental
environmental review under CEQA Guidelines section 15162 exists.
CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE:
The project site has a current General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use
designation of Semi-Public and consistent Planned Development Zoning. The project
will contribute to the surrounding neighborhood allowing for opportunities for a local
daycare and community events. The proposed project is consistent with the land use
designation, zoning and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, which allow for both a daycare
and community center.
The proposed project has been reviewe d for conformance with the Community Design
and Sustainability Element of the General Plan. The project has been designed to be
compatible with adjacent and surrounding development. Pedestrian circulation has been
linked together with sidewalks and public and private streets. In general, the proposed
project furthers the goals of the Community Design and Sustainability Element of the
General Plan by providing a high quality of life and preserving resources and
opportunities for future generations.
REVIEW BY APPLICABLE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES:
The Building Division, Fire Prevention Bureau, Public Works Department, and Dublin
San Ramon Services District have reviewed the project and provided Conditions of
Approval included in the attached Resolutions perta ining to the Conditional Use Permit,
Site Development Review, and Minor Use Permit (Attachments 1, 3 and 5) where
appropriate to ensure that the project is established in compliance with all local
ordinances and regulations.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH
Page 9 of 9
In accordance with the City’s policy, the Applicant installed a Planning Application
Notice Sign along the project frontages. The sign includes details about the project and
how to find out more information. The project is also included on the Cit y’s Project
Development Website.
A notice of this public hearing was mailed to all property owners and occupants within
300-feet of the proposed project. The Public Notice was also published in the East Bay
Times and posted at several locations throughou t the City. A copy of this Staff Report
was provided to the Applicant. The Staff Report for this public hearing was also
available on the City’s website.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving a Conditional Use Permit for a Minor Amendment to the
Planned Development Zoning
2. Exhibit A to Attachment 1 - Development Standards
3. Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit for a 14,869 Square Foot
Builidng
4. Exhibit A to Attachment 3 - Project Plans
5. Exhibit B to Attachment 3 - Conceptual Renderings of Outdoor Play Structures
6. Resolution Approving a Minor Use Permit for Shared Parking
Page 1 of 7
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: April 10, 2018
TO: Planning Commission
SUBJECT:
Safari Kid Daycare Center—Site Development Review, Conditional Use
Permit and Minor Use Permit
Prepared by:Mandy Kang, Senior Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Planning Commission will consider a request by the applicant, Meridian, for a Site
Development Review Permit, Conditional Use Permit and Minor Use Permit to build a
new daycare facility and community room on the vacant 2.1 -acre Semi-Public parcel in
Positano. The proposed project includes construction of a 14,936 square foot building
comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center to be operated by Safari Kid and a
4,269 square foot multipurpose room that will be open for rent to the community, and
related site improvements including an outdoor play area for the childcare center,
shared parking for both uses, and a minor amendment to the Planned Development
Zoning to establish development standards. The Planning Commission originally
considered this request on February 13, 2018 and continued the matter for further
consideration.
RECOMMENDATION:
Disclose ex-parte contacts, conduct the public hearing, deliberate and adopt the
following Resolutions: a) Approving a Site Development Review for a 14,936 square
foot building comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center and 4,269 square foot
community center; b) Approving a Conditional Use Permit for a minor amendment to the
Planned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan (Ordinance No. 33 -05) for the
site designated as Semi-Public in Positano; and c) Approving a Minor Use Permit for
shared parking between the childcare center and community center.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The project site is an irregular shaped parcel located at the southwest corner of
Positano Parkway and West Cantara Drive in the Positano neighborhood as shown in
Figure 1. The subject property is approximately 2.1 acres and currently vacant. The
project site has a General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use desi gnation
of Semi-Public which allows day care centers and community rooms among other
community serving uses. The site is generally surrounded by residential homes and a
water quality basin (across Positano Parkway).
Page 2 of 7
Figure 1. Project Site
The Applicant is requesting approval to construct a 14,936 square foot building
comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center and a 4,269 square foot
multipurpose room that will be open for rent to the community. The proposed project
includes a 12,897 square f oot outdoor play area for the childcare center, and related
improvements including parking, landscaping.
The current request for the proposed project includes the following entitlements:
• Site Development Review Permit - For a 14,936 square foot building comprised
of a 10,667 square foot childcare center and a 4,269 square foot multipurpose
room, and associated site and landscape improvements.
• Conditional Use Permit – To amend the Planned Development Zoning Stage 2
Development Plan to establish development standards and hours of operation.
• Minor Use Permit – For a parking reduction for shared parking between the
daycare facility and the community center.
On February 13, 2018, the Planning Commission held a Public Hearing to consider the
proposed project. The Planning Commission raised concerns about traffic and safety,
site improvements, architectural details, signage and landscaping. The Planning
Commission continued the item in order for staff and the applicant to address these
concerns. This staff report focuses on the modifications that have been made to the
project to address these concerns. Please refer to the Planning Commission staff
report dated February 13, 2018 and Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
(Attachments 1 and 2) for a complete ove rview of the project and the concerns raised
by the Planning Commission.
Page 3 of 7
ANALYSIS
Traffic and Safety
The Planning Commission expressed concerns about the analysis of impacts to the
roadway network resulting from this project, impacts resulting from t he proposed
driveway on Positano Parkway, and the 20’ wide pedestrian pathway from the project
entrance to Positano Parkway.
The City’s Transportation and Operations Manager reviewed the operating
characteristics and site plan for the proposed project as it relates to transportation and
circulation. The applicant provided a written statement that describes the operation of
the proposed daycare, including a summary of the student drop -off and picked up times
(Attachment 3). Amador Elementary School is located to the east of the project site.
Traffic on Positano Parkway increases when parents drop their children off at Amador
Elementary School between the hours of 8:00 AM-8:30 AM. The Applicant’s written
statement indicates that the daycare will have staggered drop-off and pick-up times, and
further states that no drop-offs will occur from 8:00 AM - 8:30 AM. A condition of
approval has been placed on the project which requires staggered drop -offs for the
daycare center and provides an enforcement mechanism should issues arise during the
peak traffic times of 8:00 AM to 8:30 AM (Attachment 4, Condition #95).
The concerns raised about the driveway on Positano Parkway included visibility,
impacts to the roadway and bicycle network from vehicles entering/exi sting from the
driveway, driveway curb cut design and the potential for illegal U -turns at the West
Cantara Drive intersection. The driveway is required in order to provide emergency
vehicle access. Therefore, the applicant has elected to restrict this driveway to
emergency vehicle access only. The driveway will be blocked off by a series of bollards
to prevent non-emergency vehicles from entering/existing onto Positano Parkway
(Figure 2). This eliminates the issues related to visibility, roadway network im pacts from
vehicles using this driveway, and it eliminates the potential illegal U-turn at the West
Cantara Drive intersection by vehicles that would have exited the site from this
driveway.
The location of this emergency vehicle driveway has shifted slightly to the east in order
to reorient the proposed trash enclosure and provide the trash hauler with the
necessary access to the enclosure. The proposed site plan previously had 90 parking
stalls, but two parking stalls were eliminated to accommodate the modified driveway
and trash enclosure. As described in the staff report dated February 13, 2018
(Attachment 1), the greatest parking demand would be for the proposed community
center, requiring 85 parking stalls (the community center and day care will no t operate
at the same time). Therefore, the proposed 88 parking stalls would still exceed the
amount of parking that is required for the project.
Vehicular access to the project site will be provided by a driveway on West Cantara
Drive. Driveway curb cuts will be designed to current City standards. The driveway curb
cuts will have an apron and a level (2% cross-slope) sidewalk that continues the
pedestrian path without a depression, so pedestrians do not have to ramp down and
then back up to the sidewalk level. Additionally, the applicant has incorporated
Page 4 of 7
enhanced paving at the driveways and pedestrian entries as requested by the Planning
Commission.
Figure 2. Proposed Site Plan
A required 20-foot wide path of travel provides direct pedestrian access from the
proposed building entry to Positano Parkway. The Planning Commission expressed
concerns that parents will use this pathway as a drop-off/pick-up location on Positano
Parkway, and that this pathway will encourage pedestrians to cross Positano Pa rkway
at this location. Parents are not allowed to drop off their children on the street and are
required to come inside the building and check-in/check-out their child (Attachment 3).
The pedestrian pathway is located about 130 feet from the cross walk a t the West
Cantara Drive intersection. Additionally, there is a center median and there is no entry
from Positano Parkway into the neighborhood across the street. Therefore, there is little
to encourage pedestrians to jaywalk across the street.
Architecture
The Planning Commission asked the applicant to add stone to the columns on the entry
facade. The applicant has added stone veneer to the columns on the north and east
elevations. It was also requested that the color scheme be “modernized”. The
applicant has proposed a revised color scheme to address this concern. The proposed
color pallet includes light trim color and beige base building color, complementing the
dark roof tile and beige/gray stone around the building as shown in Figure 3 below.
A color and material palette has been provided that illustrates the variety of colors and
textures for the building. This materials board will be presented at the Planning
Page 5 of 7
Commission meeting for review and consideration.
Figure 3. Perspectives
Landscape/Site Improvements
The Planning Commission expressed concern about the loss of parkway landscaping
along Positano Parkway due to the proposed driveway and sight visibility. The existing
landscape parkway strip fronting the project site includes street trees and low lying
vegetation. Since the proposed driveway on Positano Parkway is for Emergency
Vehicle Access only and the existing landscaping is low lying, no additional landscaping
will be removed except that to accommodate the actual driveway. One o r two trees
within the landscape parkway strip and two trees located behind the sidewalk will be
removed to install the emergency vehicle access driveway on the Positano Parkway
frontage. One tree in the landscape parkway strip on West Cantara Drive will b e
removed to install that driveway.
The applicant is proposing to use sod in place of hydro seed at the playground area to
address a concern by the Planning Commission.
Signage
The Planning Commission requested that the applicant utilize modest signs, including a
low-profile monument sign and small wall sign. All signs will be reviewed separately
through a building permit to make sure that they comply with the City’s Zoning
Ordinance. Staff will work with the applicant to make sure the monument and wa ll signs
on the site are smaller than what is allowed in the Zoning Ordinance to minimize the
visual impact (Attachment 4, Condition #19).
A resolution approving the Site Plan Review Permit to construct the daycare center and
community center is included as Attachment 4, with the project plans attached as
Page 6 of 7
Attachment 5. A conceptual rendering of the play yard is included as Attachment 6. A
resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit to amend the Planned Development
Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan is included as Attachment 7 with the proposed
development standards included as Attachment 8. A resolution approving the Minor
Use Permit is included as Attachment 9.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is located within the Fallon Village project, which was the subject of the
Fallon Village Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The EIR
supplemented the Eastern Dublin EIR which was certified by the City Council on May
10, 1993 (SCH # 91103064, Resolution No. 51-93). In 2002, a Supplemental EIR (SCH
# 2001052114, Resolution No. 40-02) was completed for the Eastern Dublin Specific
Plan to analyze new information and changed circumstances since the 1993 EIR.
Supplemental mitigation measures were adopted.
Another Supplemental EIR (SCH # 2005062010, Resolution No. 222-05) was adopted
on December 6, 2005, as part of the Fallon Village project. The project had proposed
some additional residential and commercial development beyond the 2002 approvals
and adjusted some of the land use designation boundaries throughout the project area.
The Final Supplemental EIR was a supplement for both the 1993 and 2002 EIRs.
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines section
15168(c)(2), the proposed project was examined to dete rmine if another environmental
document should be prepared. The project includes a proposal for a daycare and
community center on a Semi-Public site, which has been analyzed for potential
environmental factors in the previous Supplement EIR. There is no substantial
evidence in the record that any new effects would occur, that any new mitigation
measures would be required, or that any of the conditions triggering supplemental
environmental review under CEQA Guidelines section 15162 exists.
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH
In accordance with the City’s policy, the Applicant installed a Planning Application
Notice Sign along the project frontages. The sign includes details about the project and
how to find out more information. The project is also included on the City’s Project
Development Website.
A notice of this public hearing, and the previous public hearing on February 13, 2018,
was mailed to all property owners and occupants within 300 -feet of the proposed
project, including the Homeowner’s Association. The Public Notice was also published
in the East Bay Times and posted at several locations throughout the City. A copy of
this Staff Report was provided to the Applicant. The Staff Report for this public hearing
was also available on the City’s website.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Staff Report dated February 13, 2018 without attachments
Page 7 of 7
2. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated February 13, 2018
3. Applicant's Written Statement
4. Resolution Approving a Site Development Review Permit for the Safari Kid Daycare
and Community Center
5. Exhibit A to Attachment 4 - Project Plans
6. Exhibit B to Attachment 4 - Conceptual Renderings of Outdoor Play Structures
7. Resolution Approving a Conditional Use Permit for a Minor Amendment to the
Planned Development Zoning
8. Exhibit A to Attachment 7 - Development Standards
9. Resolution Approving a Minor Use Permit for Shared Parking
k"-Vylf,
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Tuesday, February 73, 2078
A Regular Meeting of the Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, February
18, 2018, in the City Council Chamber. The meeting was called to order at 7:010 PM., by
Commission Chair Mittan.
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
Attendee Name
Title
Status
Scott Mittan
Commission Chair
! Present
Tara Bhuthimethee
Commission Vice Chair
Present
Am it Kothari
Planning Commissioner
Present
Samir Qureshi
Planning Commissioner
Present
Ste henWri ht
Plannin Commissioner
Present
2. Oral Communications
2.1. Elect 2018 Planning Commission Chair and Vice Chair.
The Planning Commission elected Commissioner Bhuthimethee as the 20118
Commission Chair for the Planning Commission.
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVED BY: Samir Qureshi, Planning Commissioner
SECOND: Amit Kothari, Planning Commissioner
AYES: Wright, Mittan, Bhuthimethee
The Planning Commission elected Commissioner Wright as the 2018 Commission
Vice Chair for the Planning Commission.
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVED BY: Samir Qureshi, Planning Commissioner
SECOND: Amit Kothari, Planning Commissioner
AYES: Wright, Mittan, Bhuthimethee
2.2. Public Comment
No public comments were made.
Planning Commission octo6er 24, 2017
P'fgurar Meeting Vag e I 1
3. Consent Calendar
3.1. Approval of the Minutes of the January 23, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting.
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVED BY: Stephen Wright, Planning Commissioner
SECOND: Samir Qureshi, Planning Commissioner
AYES: Kothari, Bhuthimethee, Mittan
4. Written Communication - Done.
5. Public Hearing
5.1. PUBLIC HEARING: Safari Kid Daycare Center —Site Development Review,
Conditional Use Permit and Minor Use Permit (PLPA- 2017 - 00050)
Mandy Kang, Senior Planner, made a presentation and responded to questions
posed by the Commission.
Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director, responded to questions
posed by the Commission.
Jeff Antrim, President of Proforma Construction, made a presentation and
responded to questions posed by the Commission.
Jason Voorhees, Architect with Perkins, Williams & Cotterill Architects, made a
presentation and responded to questions posed by the Commission.
Manoj Vuriti, Project Applicant, made a presentation.
Mark McClellan, P.E., Operations Manager for Mackay & Somps Civil Engineers,
Inc., responded to questions posed by the Commission.
Commission Chair Bhuthimethee opened the public hearing.
Christine Lillie provided public comment.
Commission Chair Bhuthimethee closed the public hearing.
T and inn commission C],- t.o6er 24, 2017
ftguhr96eting �p a g 6 12
Commissioner Mittan made a motion to approve the item with conditions. The
motion was seconded by Commission Chair Bhuthimethee, and by a 2 -3 vote
(Commission Vice Chair Wright, Commissioner Kothad and Commissioner
Qureshi voting No), the motion failed.
Commission Chair Bhuthimethee re- opened the public hearing.
Jeff Antrim, President of Proforma Construction, addressed the Commission.
Commission Chair Bhuthimethee closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commissioner Kothari, seconded by Commissioner Qureshi, and
by a 3 -2 vote (Commissioner Mittan and Commission Chair Bhuthimethee voting
against), the Planning Commission continued the public hearing so that Staff and
the applicant work together on the following issues:.
• Address the feedback from the Planning Commission and revise the project
plans to address project circulation and pedestrian and traffic safety
concerns.
• Incorporate enhanced paver treatment at driveway entries and the building
entry.
• Identify number of trees and shrubs that will be removed as a result of the
driveway on Positano Parkway.
+ Applicant shall match the style of new curb cuts in driveways of the
proposed project to those of the surrounding community.
• Include additional stone veneer on entry columns.
Present a more modern color scheme, which compliments and/or enhances
the surrounding neighborhood.
• Incorporate more modest signs which may include a low profile monument
sign and a smaller wall sign.
: Use a sod material in the playground areas in place of the proposed hydro
seed.
Tfartrt ue Commission Qtto&rR, 2017
ftufarMeeting T a g e 13
5.2. PUBLIC HEARING: Zeiss Innovation Center - Planned Development
Rezone with a related Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan and Site
Development Review Permit (PLPA -2017- 04025)
Martha Battaglia, Associate Planner, made a presentation and responded to
questions posed by the Commission.
Ben Tranel, Principal at Gensler, made a presentation and responded to questions
posed by the Commission.
Marcel Wilson, Landscape Architect at Bionic, made a presentation.
Dr. Matthias Ismael, Project Applicant at Zeiss, responded to questions posed by
the Commission.
Caroll Crump, Senior Associate and Senior Project Manager at Gensler,
responded to questions posed by the Commission.
Tim Cremin, City Attorney, responded to questions posed by the Commission
Commissioner Bhuthimethee opened the public hearing.
Christina Caro provided public comment and submitted a comment letter into the
record regarding the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Rebecca Davis provided public comment and submitted a comment letter into the
record regarding the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Commissioner Bhuthimethee closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commissioner Quereshi, Seconded by Commission Vice Chair
Wright, and by unanimous vote, the Planning Commission adopted the following
resolutions.
RESOLUTION NO. 18 — 02
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION
APPROVING A SUPPLEMENTAL MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE
ZEISS INNOVATION CENTER PROJECT
Tlannirq Commassion October24, 2017
Wsgular -Wee t i ng Tag e 4
RESOLUTION NO. 18 — 03
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE ZONING MAP AND APPROVE A PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT WITH A RELATED STAGE 1 AND
STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE ZEISS INNOVATION CENTER
PROJECT
(PLPA 2017 - 00025)
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION
APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT FOR PHASE 1 OF
THE ZEISS INNOVATION CENTER PROJECT
(PLPA 2017 - 00025)
6. Unfinished Business — None.
7. New Business — None.
8. Other Business — Brief information only reports from Planning Commission and/or Staff,
including committee reports and reports by Planning Commission related to meetings
attended at City expense (AB1234).
Mr. Baker reminded the Planning Commissioners about the upcoming League of
California Cities Annual Planning Commissioners Academy that will be held from April 4
to 6 in Monterey, California, and requested that they confirm if they would like to attend
the conference so that we can make their arrangements.
Commission Vice Chair Wright asked Mr. Baker how the commissioners can move
forward their ideas and concerns regarding the tools used by the City to provide public
notices. Mr. Baker noted that the City's public notice practices are directed by State Law,
direction from the City Council and the Communications Office within the City Manager's
{office, and that the Commissioners concerns will be noted in the minutes and meeting
video record.
9. Adiournment
The meeting was adjourned by Commission Chair Bhuthimethee at 11:09 p.m.
4faan* Commission October-24, 2017
ftgufar 941 eding (Page 15
Respectfully submitted,
Planning lZbmmission Chair
QOM -15
T ith xpw 4
Jeff Baker
Assistant Community Development Director
Pi2mning COMMIT nr n Orto6er-24, 2017
guar Mcetiree T, a E e 16
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Tuesday, April 10, 2018
A Regular Meeting of the Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 10,
2018, in the City Council Chamber. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM., by
Commission Chair Bhuthimethee.
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
Attendee Name
Title
Status
Tara Bhuthimethee
Commission Chair
Present
Stephen Wright
Commission Vice Chair
Absent
Am it Kothari
Planning Commissioner
Present-
Sam ir Qureshi
Planning Commissioner
Present
Scott Mittan
Planning Commissioner _
Present
2. Oral Communications
2.1 Public Comment
No public comments were made.
3. Consent Calendar
3.1. Approval of the Minutes of the March 27, 2018 Planning Commission
Meeting.
RESULT:
MOVED BY:
SECOND:
AYES:
ABSENT:
ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
Samir Qureshi, Planning Commissioner
Scott Mittan, Planning Commissioner
Bhuthimethee, Mittan, Kothari, Qureshi
Stephen Wright, Commission Vice Chair
4. Written Communication - None.
5. Public Hearing
5.1. PUBLIC HEARING: Safari Kid Daycare Center —Site Development Review,
Conditional Use Permit and Minor Use Permit (PLPA- 2017 - 00050)
Mandy Kang, Senior Planner, made a presentation and responded to questions
posed by the Commission.
Obaid Khan, Transportation and Operations Manager, provided comment and
responded to questions posed by the Commission.
T(anning Commission Aprif10, 2018
,RogufarMeeting Tag e I 1
Commission Chair Bhuthimethee opened the public hearing.
Shahatka Mutacavi, representing the applicant, gave a presentation and
answered questions posed by the Commission.
Jason Voorhees, Architect with Perkins, Williams & Cotterill Architects, made a
presentation and responded to questions posed by the Commission.
Manoj Vuriti, Project Applicant, responded to questions posed by the
Commission.
Qiang Bin, Dublin resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Debbie Wagner, Dublin resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Mahnoor Shamrao, Dublin resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Judy Lee, Dublin resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Suresh Babu Adiserla, Dublin Resident spoke in favor of the project.
Sunita Kulkarni, spoke in favor of the project.
Kavitha Doppalapudi, Dublin Resident, spoke in favor of the project.
Neha Nukala, spoke in favor of the project.
Manav Babbar, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Srimathi Thiagarajan, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Asif Awan, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Sivaranjeet Gadi, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Srikanth Mandava, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Sishu Shankar, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Jeff Lawrence, Braddock and Logan, spoke in favor of the project.
Sonny Adrobinack, Safari Kids Representative, spoke in favor of the project.
Bashir Sarwary, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
TPfcnrcing commission Ap;i(10, 2018
P,,-gulor 5rbeetirW Tag e 12
Gerald Soo Hoo, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Amit Jadhav, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Surender Kandakatla, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Jaisena Prasak, Dublin Resident, spoke in favor of the project.
Kamwaljeet, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Vebhhav Singh, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Shirish Rai, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Chandra Sirapu, Project Applicant, addressed the Commission.
Commissioner Bhuthimethee tallied the speaker slips for those that did not wish
to speak. She confirmed that twelve were in favor and six were in opposition to
the project.
Commissioner Bhuthimethee closed the public hearing for deliberations.
Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director, responded to questions
posed by the commission.
Commissioner Qureshi made a motion to deny the project based on findings that
he could not make in the affirmative and the motion was seconded by
Commissioner Kothari.
RESOLUTION NO. 18 -09
DENYING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT FOR A 14,936 SQUARE FOOT
BUILDING COMPRISED OF A 10,667 SQUARE FOOT CHILDCARE CENTER AND A
4,269 SQUARE FOOT COMMUNITY CENTER
PLPA- 2017 -00050
RESOLUTION NO. 18 -10
DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
SITE DESIGNATED AS SEMI - PUBLIC IN POSITANO
PLPA- 2017 -00050
RESOLUTION NO. 18 -11
DENYING A MINOR USE PERMIT FOR SHARED PARKING BETWEEN THE 10,667
SQUARE FOOT DAYCARE AND THE 4,269 SQUARE FOOT COMMUNITY CENTER
PLPA- 2017 -00050
Panning Commission Apri(10, 2018
fgufar Meeting T a 1 e 13
RESULT:
DENIED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVED BY:
Samir Qureshi, Planning Commissioner
SECOND:
Amit Kothari, Planning Commissioner
AYES:
Bhuthimethee, Mittan, Kothari, Qureshi
ABSENT:
Stephen Wright, Planning Commissioner
6. Unfinished Business — None.
7. New Business
7.1 Boulevard
Kristi Bascom, Consulting Planner with M- Group, made a presentation and
responded to questions posed by the Commission.
Commissioner Bhuthimethee opened the item for public comment.
Joe Guerra, Applicant, Brookfield Residential Properties on behalf of Dublin
Crossing, LLC, made a presentation and responded to questions posed by the
Commission.
Nicole Moore, Development Planning Manager, Brookfield Residential
Properties, made a presentation to the Commission.
Mandi Misasi, Project Manager, Lennar Homes, made a presentation to the
Commission.
Robert Lee, Architect, William Hezmalhalch /WHA Architects Inc., made a
presentation to the Commission on Neighborhood 19.
Emily Bonato, Architect, Dahlin Architecture Planning, made a presentation to the
Commission on Neighborhood 20.
Debra Feliz, Architect, Woodley Architectural Group, Inc., made a presentation to
the Commission on Neighborhood 21, 22 and 23.
Michael Stone, Architect, Bassenian and Lagoni Architects, made a presentation
to the Commission on Neighborhood 24.
Melonie O'Sullivan, Landscape Architect, Gates and Associates Landscape
Architecture, made a presentation to the Commission.
Francis Aneya, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Srikanth Mandava, Dublin Resident, spoke in opposition of the project.
Parud commission Apr' 10, 208
Q;Euf0rm6ai;W Page 14
Joe Guerra, Project Applicant, addressed comments from the speakers and the
Planning Commission.
The Commission provided the applicant with feedback regarding the project.
8. Other Business — None.
9. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned by Commission Chair Bhuthimethee at 11:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Jeff aker
Assistant Community Development Director
Planning Commission Apri(10, 2018
Wsgular 11feeting Page 1 S
RESOLUTION NO. 18-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
DENYING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT FOR A 14,936 SQUARE FOOT
BUILDING COMPRISED OF A 10,667 SQUARE FOOT CHILDCARE CENTER AND A 4,269
SQUARE FOOT COMMUNITY CENTER
(APN 985-0073-005-00)
PLPA-2017-00050
WHEREAS, the applicant, Meridian, is requesting approval to build a 14,936 square foot
building comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center to be operated by Safari Kid, and a
4,269 square foot community center located at the southwest corner of Positano Parkway and
West Cantara Drive in Positano; and
WHEREAS, the application includes a Site Development Review, Minor Use Permit for
shared parking, and a Conditional Use Pe rmit to establish development standards in the
Planned Development Zoning; and
WHEREAS, the project site is 2.1 acres and has a General Plan and Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan land designation of Semi-Public; and
WHEREAS, projects that are denied are exempt from environmental review pursuant to
Section 15061 (b)(4) of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the said application on
February 13, 2018, at which time the interested parties had the opportunity to be heard and at
which time the Planning Commission continued the public hearing so that staff and the applicant
could address concerns raised by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the said application on
April 10, 2018, at which time the interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings was given in all respects as required by
law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated April 10, 2018, was submitted recommending that the
Planning Commission approve a Site Development Review Permit for the proposed project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use independent judgment and
considered all said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin hereby
makes the following findings and determinations regarding the proposed Site Development
Review for the Safari Kid Daycare and the Community Center building:
2 of 2
A. The subject site is not suitable for the type and intensity of the approved development
because: 1) Positano Parkway does not have the adequate capacity to serve the
additional traffic that would be generated by the proposed project; and 2) The
increased number of automobile trips from the proposed project pose safety
concerns.
B. The site has not been adequately designed to ensure the proper circulation for
bicyclist, pedestrians, and automobiles because: the development of this project on
this particular property will increase traffic and automobiles in the area which will
cause additional traffic in an already congested area , increasing safety concerns for
existing residents whether they are walking, bicycling or driving.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin hereby
denies the Site Development Review Permit for the Safari Kid Daycare and Community Center.
DENIED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of April 2018 by the following vote:
AYES: Bhuthimethee, Mittan, Kothari, Qureshi
NOES:
ABSENT: Wright
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Assistant Community Development Director
RESOLUTION NO. 18-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT ZONING STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SITE DESIGNATED
AS SEMI-PUBLIC IN POSITANO
(APN 985-0073-005-00)
PLPA-2017-00050
WHEREAS, the applicant, Meridian, is requesting approval to build a 14,936 square foot
building comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center to be operated by Safari Kid, and a
4,269 square foot community center located at the southwest corner of Positano Parkway and
West Cantara Drive in Positano; and
WHEREAS, the application includes a Site Development Review, Minor Use Permit for
shared parking, and a Conditional Use Permit to establish development standards in the
Planned Development Zoning; and
WHEREAS, the project site is 2.1 acres and has a General Plan and Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan land designation of Semi-Public; and
WHEREAS, the site has Planned Development Zoning with a Stage 2 Development Plan
(Ordinance No. 33-05); and
WHEREAS, the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designat ion of
Semi-Public permits a mix of uses consistent with the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan for
Fallon Village; and
WHEREAS, the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans for Fallon Village allow a daycare
and community center as a permitted use ; and
WHEREAS, projects that are denied are exempt from environmental review pursuant to
Section 15061 (b)(4) of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the said application on
February 13, 2018, at which time the interested parties had the opportunity to be heard and at
which time the Planning Commission continued the public hearing so that staff and the applicant
could address concerns raised by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the said application on
April 10, 2018, at which time the interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings was given in all respects as required by
law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated April 10, 2018, was submitted recommending that the
Planning Commission approve a Conditional Use Permit for the proposed project; and
2 of 2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use independent judgment and
considered all said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin hereby
makes the following findings and determinations regarding the proposed Conditional Use Permit
for the Safari Kid Daycare and the Community Center building:
A. The project will adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the
vicinity, and be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare because: the
proposed project will increase traffic in the area.
B. There are not adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public utilities
and services to ensure that the proposed use and related structures would not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare because: the roadway network is not
adequate to serve the traffic generated by the proposed project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin does
hereby deny the Conditional Use Permit for a minor amendment to the Planned Development
Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan (Ordinance No. 33 -05) for the Safari Kid Daycare and
Community Center project.
DENIED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of April 2018 by the following vote:
AYES: Bhuthimethee, Mittan, Kothari, Qureshi
NOES:
ABSENT: Wright
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Assistant Community Development Director
RESOLUTION NO. 18-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
DENYING A MINOR USE PERMIT FOR SHARED PARKING BETWEEN THE 10,667
SQUARE FOOT DAYCARE AND THE 4,269 SQUARE FOOT COMMUNITY CENTER
(APN 985-0073-005-00)
PLPA-2017-00050
WHEREAS, the applicant, Meridian, is requesting approval to build a 14,936 square foot
building comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center to be operated by Safari Kid, and a
4,269 square foot community center located at the southwest corner of Po sitano Parkway and
West Cantara Drive in Positano; and
WHEREAS, the application includes a Site Development Review, Minor Use Permit for
shared parking, and a Conditional Use Permit to establish development standards in the
Planned Development Zoning; and
WHEREAS, the project site is 2.1 acres and has a General Plan and Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan land designation of Semi-Public; and
WHEREAS, the site has Planned Development Zoning with a Stage 2 Development Plan
(Ordinance No. 33-05); and
WHEREAS, projects that are denied are exempt from environmental review pursuant to
Section 15061 (b)(4) of the California Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project will include 88 parking stalls which would
accommodate either a daycare or community center use independently, and the two uses will
not have operational hours that overlap; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the said application on
February 13, 2018, at which time the interested parties had the opportunity to be heard and at
which time the Planning Commission continued the public hearing so that staff and the applicant
could address concerns raised by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the said application on
April 10, 2018, at which time the interested parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearings was given in all respects as required by
law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated April 10, 2018, was submitted recommending that the
Planning Commission approve a Minor Use Permit for the proposed project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and use independent judgment and
considered all said reports, recommendations, and testimony hereinabove set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
2 of 2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin hereby
makes the following findings and determinations regarding the proposed Minor Use Permit for
shared parking between the Safari Kid Daycare and the Community Center building:
A. The proposed use and related structures are not compatible with other land uses,
transportation and service facilities in the vicinity because: the location of the project
site is not well suited for this type of use because existing roadways cannot
adequately serve the site.
B. It will adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the
vicinity, and be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare because: the
project will increase traffic in the area.
C. There are not adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public
utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use and related structures would not
be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare because: the roadway network
is not adequate to serve the traffic generated by the proposed project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Dublin does
hereby deny the Minor Use Permit for shared parking between the Safari Kid Daycare and the
Community Center project.
DENIED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of April 2018 by the following vote:
AYES: Bhuthimethee, Mittan, Kothari, Qureshi
NOES:
ABSENT: Wright
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Assistant Community Development Director
April 20, 2018
Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director
Community Development Department, Planning Division
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
DUBLIN, CA 94568
SUBJECT: Appeal to the City Council regarding Planning Commission Decision
REFERENCE: Appealable Action Letter, dated April 13, 2018
PROJECT: PLPA- 2017 -00050 Safari Kid SDR, CUP and MUP
PROJECT /SITE ADDRESS: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive (APN: 985 - 0073 - 005 -00)
Dear Mr. Baker,
CITY OF DUBLIN
CITY
We are writing to appeal against the decisions made by the Planning Commission in the following three
resolutions denying the approval of the above referenced project.
• RESOLUTION NO. 18 -09 DENYING A SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT FOR A 14,936 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING
COMPRISED OF A 10,667 SQUARE FOOT CHILDCARE CENTER AND A 4,269 SQUARE FOOT COMMUNITY CENTER
• RESOLUTION NO. 18 -10 DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT ZONING STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SITE DESIGNATED AS SEMI - PUBLIC IN POSITANO
• RESOLUTION NO. 18 -11 DENYING A MINOR USE PERMIT FOR SHARED PARKING BETWEEN THE 10,667 SQUARE
FOOT DAYCARE AND THE 4,269 SQUARE FOOT COMMUNITY CENTER
We believe that the Planning Commission acted unfairly against our project and did not consider the facts and
evidence presented by the City Staff and the Applicant. The Planning Commission determined, without any
facts or data that there was "inadequate traffic capacity to serve the proposed project" and "inadequate public
utilities" to serve the site. The project is fronted on two public roads, Positano Parkway and W. Cantara Drive.
Both of the streets were designed to serve the project and have adequate traffic capacity as determined by the
Traffic Study prepared by TJKM, Traffic Consultants. Contrary to the findings made by the Planning Commission,
the project site has all utilities located on -site, including sewer, storm water, potable water, recycled water,
cable, electrical, and phone service. Finally, the site was improved as part of the larger Positano Project, the
topography is flat and is located entirely on engineered fill designed for such a project. The proposed project
was reviewed by all relevant City Departments and outside agencies and found in conformance with all relevant
codes, policies, ordinances and regulations.
The Planning Commission ignored the fact the site was designated by the City as Semi - Public as part of the
original City approvals which occurred in 2005. The use associated with Safari Kids project is principally
permitted by the Stage 2 Zoning adopted by the City Council in 2005. The proposed project is both consistent
with the adopted Stage 1 and 2 Planned Development Zoning of PD Semi - Public and the General Plan
designation of Semi - Public adopted for the site.
In addition, the City of Dublin adopted a "Semi- Public Policy" back in 2004, which stated that Semi - Public
Facilities included uses such as the proposed project. The Semi - Public facilities policy went on to state that
these types of uses are necessary to "create a greater sense of community and to recognize and anticipate the
different needs of Dublin residents ". The proposed Safari Kids project is precisely the type of project the Council
had in mind when it crafted the Semi - Public Policy and resultant land use designation.
Finally, additional material will be submitted prior to the City Council hearing that will provide evidence that a
denial of the proposed Safari Kids project would constitute an inverse condemnation action by the City. Other
constitutional violation claims will also be pursued including violation of Due Process and Equal Protection. We
will demonstrate that a denial of Safari Kids project would be arbitrary and capricious and therefore not a
proper exercise of police power by the City.
We were very disappointed by the action of the Planning Commission, the lack of order at the meeting
prevented residents in favor of the project from speaking by the aggressive and unchecked actions by several
outspoken members of the public. We strongly disagree with the findings cited in the denial resolutions. We
request you to process our appeal to be heard by the City Council at the earliest date possible.
Please let us know if you need further information.
Sincerely
Chandra Sirapu
Applicant
May 2, 2018 Rcelye
Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director 4lgy'02 2018
Community Development Department, Planning Division ��Y o
City of Dublin 1ANVVING
100 Civic Plaza
DUBLIN, CA 94568
SUBJECT: Request to extend the City Council hearing date to June 19, 2018
REFERENCE: Applicant's Appeal to the City Council dated 20th April 2018
PROJECT: PLPA- 2017 -00050 Safari Kid SDR, CUP and MUP
PROJECT /SITE ADDRESS: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive (APN: 985 - 0073 - 005 -00)
Dear Mr. Baker,
Thank you for considering our request to appeal to the City Council for the above referenced project. We
understand that the Dublin Municipal Code (Section 8.136.060.A) requires that the City Council hold a hearing
within 45 days and make a final decision within 75 days of the appeal filing date.
We are working diligently towards presenting evidence and information that will address questions that the
Council may entertain at the meeting and respectfully request a Continuance of the Hearing to the June 19th
City Council meeting date so we can adequately prepare for that meeting.
Please confirm at your first opportunity.
Sincerely
Chandra Sirapu f
Applicant
RESOLUTION NO. XX-18
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
REVERSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION AND APPROVING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT ZONING STAGE 2 DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE SITE DESIGNATED
AS SEMI-PUBLIC IN POSITANO
(APN 985-0073-005-00)
PLPA-2017-00050
WHEREAS, the applicant, Meridian, is requesting approval to build a 14,936 square foot
building comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center to be operated by Safari Kid, and a
4,269 square foot community center located at the south west corner of Positano Parkway and
West Cantara Drive in Positano; and
WHEREAS, the application includes a Site Development Review Permit, Minor Use
Permit for shared parking, and a Conditional Use Permit to establish development standards in
the Planned Development Zoning; and
WHEREAS, the project site is 2.1 acres and has a General Plan and Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan land designation of Semi-Public; and
WHEREAS, the site has Planned Development Zoning with a Stage 2 Development Plan
(Ordinance No. 33-05); and
WHEREAS, the General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designation of
Semi-Public permits a mix of uses consistent with the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan for
Fallon Village; and
WHEREAS, the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan s for Fallon Village allow a daycare
and community center as a permitted use ; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act certain projects
are required to be reviewed for environmental impacts and when applicable, environmental
documents prepared; and
WHEREAS, the project is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, which
was the subject of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH# 91103064) approved on May
10, 1993, a Supplemental EIR for the Eastern Dublin Properties annexation and prezoning
project (SCH# 2001052114) approved for the project site by the City Council on April 2, 2002,
and a Supplemental EIR (SCH #2005062010) approved for the project site by the City Council
on December 6, 2005. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
section 15168(c)(2), the proposed project was examined to determine if another environmental
document should be prepared. There is no substantial evidence in the record that any new
effects would occur, that any new mitigation measures would be required, or that any of the
conditions triggering supplemental environmental review under CEQA Guidelines section 15162
exists; and
2 of 6
WHEREAS, the proposed Planned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan
Amendment, attached as Exhibit A, to this Resolution details the proposed minor amendments
to the development plan, including development standards and hours of operation; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the said application on
February 13, 2018, at which time the Planning Commission continued th e public hearing so that
staff and the applicant could address concerns raised by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the said application on
April 10, 2018, at which time the interesting parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted to the Planning Commission recommending
approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 18 -10 denying the Conditional
Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted resolutions denying the companion Site
Development Review Permit and Minor Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant, appealed the action of the Planning Commission in
accordance with Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.136; and
WHEREAS, the applicant waived the requirement of the Public Hearing to be scheduled
within 45 days of the filing of the appeal; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is the hearing body for the appeal of a decision by the
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all reports, recommendations and
testimony herein above set forth and used its independent judgment to evaluat e the project; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated June 19, 2018 and incorporated herein by reference,
described and analyzed the proposed Safari Kid Daycare and Community Center Project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin hereby makes
the following findings and determinations regarding the proposed Conditional Use Permit for the
Safari Kid Daycare and the Community Center building:
A. The proposed use and related structures are compatible with other land uses,
transportation and service facilities in the vicinity in that: 1) the daycare and community
center will help serve the neighborhood for daycare needs and community events; 2) the
Project site is well suited for this type of use; and 3) the project provides an orderly,
3 of 6
attractive and harmonious development compatible with the site’s surrounding properties;
4) The building location, on-site circulation, parking, architecture and landscaping are
designed in an efficient manner; and 5) the project utilizes a similar material palette with
colors and materials that are similar to the homes in the surrounding area; and
B. It will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the
vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare in that: 1) the Project will
conform to all applicable regulations contained in the General Plan, Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Planned Development Zoning, as amended ; and 2)
Conditions of Approval have been applied to the Project to ensure o n-going compatibility
with the Project’s surroundings.
C. It will not be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood in that : a daycare
and community center are consistent with the intent of the Stage 1 and 2 Development
Plans for this site.
D. There are adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public utilities and
services to ensure that the proposed use and related structures would not be detrimental
to the public health, safety, and welfare in that: 1) vehicular access to the site will be
available from W. Cantara Dr. after the driveway on W. Cantara Dr. is moved further east ;
2) the Project frontage along both roads is fully improved with a sidewalk that provides
pedestrian access to the Project; and 3) the Project will be served by existing public
utilities and services.
E. The subject site is physically suitable for the type, density and intensity of the use and
related structures being proposed in that: 1) the project is consistent with the General
Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use designation of Semi -Public; 2) the
project site has Planned Development Zoning which allows for a daycare and community
center under the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans; and 3) the proposed project falls
within the allowed building area for the site.
F. It will not be contrary to the specific intent clauses, development regulations, or
performance standards established for the zoning district in which it is located in that: 1)
the project is consistent with development standards established in the Planned
Development Zoning Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans, as amended, for this site; and 2)
the Project site is well suited for a daycare and community center.
G. It is consistent with the Dublin General Plan and with any applicable Specific Plans in
that: the Project site has a General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan designation of
Semi-Public and Planned Development Zoning with a Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan
which allows for a daycare and community center.
H. That the amendment substantially complies with and does not materially change the
provisions or intent of the adopted Planned Development Zoning District Ordinance for
the site: the amendment allows for further clarification regarding development standards,
operating hours and outdoor activity which were not specified in the Planned
Development without materially changing what was previously approved.
4 of 6
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby
reverses the Planning Commission’s decision and approve the Conditional Use Permit for a
minor amendment to the Planned Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan (Ordinance
No. 33-05) the Safari Kid Daycare and Community Center project, subject to the conditions
included below.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance
of building permits or establishment of use, and shall be subject to Planning Department review
and approval. The following codes represent those departments/agencies responsible for
monitoring compliance of the conditions of approval. [PL.] Planning, [B] Building, [PO] Police,
[PW] Public Works [P&CS] Parks & Community Services, [ADM] Administration/City Attorney,
[FIN] Finance, [F] Alameda County Fire Department, [DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District,
[CO] Alameda County Department of Environmental Health, [Z7] Zone 7.
# CONDITION TEXT RESPON.
AGENCY
WHEN REQ’D
Prior to:
PLANNING
1. Approval. This Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval (PLPA-
2017-00050) is for a minor amendment to the Planned
Development Zoning Stage 2 Development Plan for the site
designated as Semi-Public in Positano (APN: 985-0073-005-00)
(Ordinance No. 33-05), to establish development standards and
hours of operation as shown in Exhibit A to this resolution.
PL Ongoing
2. Effective Date. This CUP approval becomes effective 10 days
after action by the Planning Commission unless otherwise
appealed to the City Council.
PL Ongoing
3. Compliance. The Applicant/Property Owner shall operate this
use in compliance with the Conditions of Approval of this CUP,
the approved plans and the regulations established in the Zoning
Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions specified may
be subject to enforcement action.
PL On-going
4. Revocation of Permit. The CUP approval shall be revocable for
cause in accordance with Section 8.96.020.I of the Dublin Zoning
Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions of this permit
shall be subject to citation.
PL On-going
5. Requirements and Standard Conditions. The Applicant/
Developer shall comply with applicable City of Dublin Fire
Prevention Bureau, Dublin Public Works Department, Dublin
Building Department, Dublin Police Services, Alameda County
Flood Control District Zone 7, Livermore Amador Valley Transit
Authority, Alameda County Public and Environmental Health,
Dublin San Ramon Services District and the California
Department of Health Services requirements and standard
conditions. Prior to issuance of building permits or the installation
of any improvements related to this project, the Developer shall
supply written statements from each such agency or department
to the Planning Department, indicating that all applicable
conditions required have been or will be met.
Various Building Permit
Issuance
5 of 6
6. Required Permits. Applicant/Developer shall obtain all permits
required by other agencies including, but not limited to Alameda
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Zone 7,
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Army Corps of
Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Caltrans and
provide copies of the permits to the Public Works Department.
PW Building Permit
Issuance and
Grading Permit
Issuance
7. Fees. Applicant/Developer shall pay all applicable fees in effect
at the time of building permit issuance, including, but not limited
to, Planning fees, Building fees, Traffic Impact Fees, TVTC fees,
Dublin San Ramon Services District fees, Public Facilities fees,
Dublin Unified School District School Impact fees, Fire Facilities
Impact fees, Alameda County Flood and Water Conservation
District (Zone 7) Drainage and Water Connection fees; or any
other fee that may be adopted and applicable. Approved
Development Agreement supersedes where applicable.
Various Building Permit
Issuance
8. Indemnification. The Applicant/Developer shall defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Dublin and its agents,
officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding
against the City of Dublin or its agents, officers, or employees to
attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Dublin
or its advisory agency, appeal board, Planning Commission, City
Council, Community Development Director, Zoning Administrator,
or any other department, committee, or agency of the City to the
extent such actions are brought within the time period required by
Government Code Section 66499.37 or other applicable law;
provided, however, that the Applicant’s/Developer's duty to so
defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be subject to the
City's promptly notifying the Applicant/Developer of any said
claim, action, or proceeding and the City's full cooperation in the
defense of such actions or proceedings.
ADM On-going
9. Clarification of Conditions. In the event that there needs to be
clarification to the Conditions of Approval, the Director of
Community Development and the City Engineer have the
authority to clarify the intent of these Conditions of Approval to
the Applicant/Developer without going to a public hearing. The
Director of Community Development and the City Engineer also
have the authority to make minor modifications to these
conditions without going to a public hearing in order for the
Applicant/Developer to fulfill needed improvements or mitigations
resulting from impacts to this project.
PL, PW On-going
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of June 2018 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
6 of 6
Mayor
ATTEST:
________
City Clerk
1
EXHIBIT A
Stage 2 Development Plan Amendment
Site: Semi-Public in Positano (APN: 985-0073-005-00)
1. Compliance with Stage 1 & 2 Development Plans. This minor amendment to the Stage 2
Development Plan is to amend the previously adopted Stage 2 Development Plan
(Ordinance No. 33-05) as shown below. Other than the proposed changes listed below, the
provisions of the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans remain as originally adopted.
2. Development Regulations.
The following development regulations apply to this site:
Maximum Building Height 25 feet
Minimum Setbacks
Along Positano Pkwy: 20 feet
Along West Cantara Dr: 20 feet
Adjacent to Residential Properties (South & Southeast): 40 feet
Adjacent to Vacant Land (Southwest): 40 feet
3. Hours of Operation-Daycare and Community Center.
The operation of a daycare center or a community center shall be limited for use during the
following hours:
Day Time
Monday-Thursday 6:30 a.m.-8 p.m.
Friday 6:30 a.m.-10 p.m.
Saturday 8 a.m.-10 p.m.
Sunday 8 a.m.-8 p.m.
4. Outdoor Activity.
Outdoor activities, including use of the play equipment, shall be limited to the hours of 9 a.m.
and 6 p.m. Monday through Friday. The play equipment shall only be used by the daycare
center.
RESOLUTION NO. XX-18
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
REVERSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION AND APPROVING A SITE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT FOR A 14,936 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING COMPRISED
OF A 10,667 SQUARE FOOT CHILDCARE CENTER AND A 4,269 SQUARE FOOT
COMMUNITY CENTER
(APN 985-0073-005-00)
PLPA-2017-00050
WHEREAS, the applicant, Meridian, is requesting approval to build a 14,936 square foot
building comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center to be operated by Safari Kid, and a
4,269 square foot community center located at the southwest corner of Positano Parkway and
West Cantara Drive in Positano; and
WHEREAS, the application includes a Site Development Review Permit, Minor Use
Permit for shared parking, and a Conditional Use Permit to establish development standards in
the Planned Development Zoning; and
WHEREAS, the project site is 2.1 acres and has a General Plan and Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan land designation of Semi-Public; and
WHEREAS, the site has Planned Development Zoning with a Stage 2 Development Plan
(Ordinance No. 33-05); and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act certain projects
are required to be reviewed for environmental impacts and when applicable, environmental
documents prepared; and
WHEREAS, the project is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, which
was the subject of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH# 91103064) approved on May
10, 1993, a Supplemental EIR for the Eastern Dublin Properties annexation and prezoning
project (SCH # 2001052114) approved for the project site by the City Council on April 2, 2002,
and a Supplemental EIR (SCH #2005062010) was approved for the project site by the City
Council on December 6, 2005. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines section 15168(c)(2), the proposed project was examined to determine if another
environmental document should be prepared. There is no substantial evidence in the record
that any new effects would occur, that any new mitigation measures would be required, or that
any of the conditions triggering supplemental environmental review under CEQA Guidelines
section 15162 exists; and
WHEREAS, the Site Development Review Permit Project Plan Set, attached as Exhibit
A, to this Resolution illustrates the proposed site layout, driveway and parking circulation
system, building architecture, access to public streets, and landscaping for the proposed project;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the said application on
February 13, 2018, at which time the Planning Commission continued the public hearing so that
staff and the applicant could address concerns raised by the Planning Commission; and
2 of 24
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the said application on
April 10, 2018, at which time the interesting parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 18 -09 denying the Site
Development Review Permit; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted resolutions denying the companion
Conditional Use Permit and Minor Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant, appealed the action of the Planning Commission in
accordance with Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.136; and
WHEREAS, the applicant waived the requirement of the Public Hearing to be scheduled
within 45 days of the filing of the appeal; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is the hearing body for the appeal of a decision by the
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all reports, recommendations and
testimony herein above set forth and used its independent judgment to evaluate the project; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated June 19, 2018 and incorporated herein by reference,
described and analyzed the proposed Safari Kid Daycare and Community Center Project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin hereby makes
the following findings and determinations regarding the proposed Site Development Review
Permit for the Safari Kid Daycare and the Community Center building:
A. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of Title 8, with the General Plan and any
applicable Specific Plans and design guidelines because : 1) The project is in
compliance with the development standards of the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan
for the Fallon Village Project 2) the project is consistent with the General Plan and
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan land use of Semi -Public which permits a community
center and daycare; 3) the project provides an orderly, attractive and harmonious
development compatible with the site’s surrounding properties; and 4) the building
location, on-site circulation, parking, architecture and landscaping are designed in an
efficient manner.
B. The design of the project is appropriate to the City, the vicinity, surrounding
properties, and the lot in which the project is proposed because: 1) the design of the
3 of 24
proposed building and associated improvements provides for a seamless transition
with the surrounding residential properties; 2) the proj ect utilizes a similar material
palette with colors and materials that are similar to the homes in the surrounding area;
and 3) the overall design of the project is consistent with the design requirements of
the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Development Plan.
C. The subject site is suitable for the type and intensity of the approved development
because: 1) the project consists of a daycare and community center which is an
allowed use under the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan for the site; 2) the project is
in conformance with the design requirements of the Planned Development Zoning
District, the General Plan, and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; 3 ) the project site will
be fully served by existing infrastructure, services, and facilities; and 4) the proposed
building size and configuration would not exceed the allowable building area or create
adverse conditions on-site or for surrounding properties.
D. Impacts to existing slopes and topographic features are addressed because : 1) the
project site is generally flat; and 2) landscaping along the street frontage and
throughout the project will be complete.
E. Architectural considerations including the character, scale and quality of the design,
site layout, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, screening of
unsightly uses, lighting, building materials and colors and similar elements result in a
project that is harmonious with its surroundings and compatible with other
developments in the vicinity because: 1) the proposed building reflects a similar and
compatible architectural style and development pattern of the surrounding residential
buildings; 2) the materials proposed will be high-quality and long-lasting; and 3) the
color and materials proposed are appropriate for the California contemporary
architectural design proposed for the project.
F. Landscape considerations, including the location, type, size, color, texture and
coverage of plant materials, and similar elements have been incorporated into the
project to ensure visual relief, adequate screening and an attractive environment for
the public because: 1) the landscaping and hardscape are designed throughout the
site to complement the architecture of the building; and 2) the project is also required
to conform to the requirements of the State’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.
G. The site has been adequately designed to ensure the proper circulation for bicyclist,
pedestrians, and automobiles because: 1) the proposed layout of the parking area
has been reviewed for safety and adequate circula tion; and 2) development of this
project will conform to the major public improvements already installed allowing
patrons the safe and efficient use of these facilities.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin hereby reverses
the Planning Commission’s decision and approves the Site Development Review Permit for the
Safari Kid Daycare and Community Center as shown on the project plans dated February 21,
2018 and included as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
4 of 24
Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance
of building permits or establishment of use and shall be subject to Planning Department review
and approval. The following codes represent those departments/agencies responsible for
monitoring compliance of the conditions of approval. [PL.] Planning, [B] Building, [PO] Police,
[PW] Public Works [P&CS] Parks & Community Services, [ADM] Administration/City Attorney,
[FIN] Finance, [F] Alameda County Fire Department, [DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District,
[CO] Alameda County Department of Environmental Health, [Z7] Zone 7.
# CONDITION TEXT RESPON.
AGENCY
WHEN REQ’D
Prior to:
PLANNING
1. Approval. This Site Development Review (SDR) approval is for
the Safari Kid Daycare and Community Center located at
Positano Parkway and Cantara Drive (APN: 985-0073-005-00)
within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area (PLPA-2017-00050).
The SDR approval is for a 14,869 square foot building comprised
of a 10,667 square foot childcare center and a 4,269 square foot
multipurpose room that will be open for rent to the community,
and associated site and landscape improvements. This approval
shall be as generally depicted and indicated on the project plans,
attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A, prepared by Perkins,
Williams & Cotterill Architects dated February 21, 2018, on file in
the Community Development Department, and other plans, text,
color and materials boards relating to this Project and as
specified by the following Conditions of Approval for this project.
PL Ongoing
2. Effective Date. This SDR approval becomes effective 10 days
after action by the Planning Commission unless otherwise
appealed to the City Council, and approval of the companion
Conditional Use Permit amending the Planned Development
Zoning to established development standards.
PL Ongoing
3. Permit Expiration. Construction or use shall commence within
one (1) year of Permit approval or the SDR shall lapse and
become null and void. If there is a dispute as to whether the
Permit has expired, the City may hold a noticed public hearing to
determine the matter. Such a determination may be processed
concurrently with revocation proceedings in appropriate
circumstances. If a Permit expires, a new application must be
made and processed according to the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance.
PL One Year After
Effective Date
4. Time Extension. The original approving decision-maker may,
upon the Applicant’s written request for an extension of approval
prior to expiration, upon the determination that all Conditions of
Approval remain adequate and all applicable findings of approval
will continue to be met, grant an extension of the approval for a
period not to exceed six (6) months. All time extension requests
shall be noticed and a public hearing shall be held before the
original hearing body.
PL Prior to
Expiration Date
5. Revocation of Permit. The SDR approval shall be revocable for
cause in accordance with Section 8.96.020.I of the Dublin Zoning
Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions of this permit
PL On-going
5 of 24
shall be subject to citation.
6. Compliance. The Applicant/Property Owner shall operate this
use in compliance with the Conditions of Approval of this Site
Development Review Permit, the approved plans and the
regulations established in the Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of
the terms or conditions specified may be subject to enforcement
action.
PL On-going
7. Requirements and Standard Conditions. The Applicant/
Developer shall comply with applicable City of Dublin Fire
Prevention Bureau, Dublin Public Works Department, Dublin
Building Department, Dublin Police Services, Alameda County
Flood Control District Zone 7, Livermore Amador Valley Transit
Authority, Alameda County Public and Environmental Health,
Dublin San Ramon Services District and the California
Department of Health Services requirements and standard
conditions. Prior to issuance of building permits or the installation
of any improvements related to this project, the Developer shall
supply written statements from each such agency or department
to the Planning Department, indicating that all applicable
conditions required have been or will be met.
Various Building Permit
Issuance
8. Required Permits. Applicant/Developer shall obtain all permits
required by other agencies including, but not limited to Alameda
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Zone 7,
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Army Corps of
Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Caltrans and
provide copies of the permits to the Public Works Department.
PW Building Permit
Issuance and
Grading Permit
Issuance
9. Fees. Applicant/Developer shall pay all applicable fees in effect
at the time of building permit issuance, including, but not limited
to, Planning fees, Building fees, Traffic Impact Fees, TVTC fees,
Dublin San Ramon Services District fees, Public Facilities fees,
Dublin Unified School District School Impact fees, Fire Facilities
Impact fees, Alameda County Flood and Water Conservation
District (Zone 7) Drainage and Water Connection fees; or any
other fee that may be adopted and applicable. Approved
Development Agreement supersedes where applicable.
Various Building Permit
Issuance
10. Indemnification. The Applicant/Developer shall defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Dublin and its agents,
officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding
against the City of Dublin or its agents, officers, or employees to
attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Dublin
or its advisory agency, appeal board, Planning Commission, City
Council, Community Development Director, Zoning Administrator,
or any other department, committee, or agency of the City to the
extent such actions are brought within the time period required by
Government Code Section 66499.37 or other applicable law;
provided, however, that the Applicant’s/Developer's duty to so
defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be subject to the
City's promptly notifying the Applicant/Developer of any said
claim, action, or proceeding and the City's full cooperation in the
defense of such actions or proceedings.
ADM On-going
11. Clarification of Conditions. In the event that there needs to be
clarification to the Conditions of Approval, the Director of
Community Development and the City Engineer have the
PL, PW On-going
6 of 24
authority to clarify the intent of these Conditions of Approval to
the Applicant/Developer without going to a public hearing. The
Director of Community Development and the City Engineer also
have the authority to make minor modifications to these
conditions without going to a public hearing in order for the
Applicant/Developer to fulfill needed improvements or mitigations
resulting from impacts to this project.
12. Clean-up. The Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for
clean-up & disposal of project related trash to maintain a safe,
clean and litter-free site.
PL On-going
13. Modifications. Modifications or changes to this SDR approval
may be considered by the Community Development Director if
the modifications or changes proposed comply with Section
8.104 of the Zoning Ordinance.
PL On-going
14. Equipment Screening. All electrical equipment, fire risers,
and/or mechanical equipment shall be screened from public view
by landscaping and/or architectural features. Any roof-mounted
equipment shall be completely screened from adjacent street
view by materials architecturally compatible with the building and
to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. The
Building Permit plans shall show the location of all equipment and
screening for review and approval by the Community
Development Director.
PL Building Permit
Issuance
15. Site Lighting. Site lighting shall specify the color, finish, height
and method to shield light of light fixtures to the satisfaction of the
City.
PL Building Permit
Issuance
16. Temporary Promotional Banners and Balloons. Temporary
Promotional Banner Signs and Balloons shall only be permitted
after first securing an approved Temporary Promotional Sign
Permit. All temporary on-site signage shall be subject to the sign
regulations contained in the City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
PL On-going
17. Bicycle Parking. Provide bicycle parking details for both short
and long term parking that would show all offsets from adjacent
buildings, curbs and structures.
PL Building Permit
Issuance
18. Construction Trailer. The Applicant/Developer shall obtain a
Temporary Use Permit prior to the establishment of any
construction trailer, storage shed, or container units on the
Project site.
PL Establishment of
the Temporary
Use
19. Signage. If a monument sign is proposed, it shall be designed in
a manner that is sensitive to the surrounding area. Any wall sign
shall be smaller than what would be allowed in the City of Dublin
Zoning Ordinance to minimize the visual impact.
PL Building Permit
Issuance
20. Site Development Review Waiver for Playground. A Site
Development Review Waiver shall be required the playground
equipment prior to equipment installation.
PL Building Permit
Issuance
21. Public Art. The Applicant/Developer intends to make a
monetary contribution to the City in-lieu of acquiring and installing
a public art project in accordance with Chapter 8.58 of the Dublin
Municipal Code. The payment shall be equal or exceed 0.5% of
the building valuation (exclusive of land) for the community center
portion of the Project. The Building Official will determine the
building valuation at the time of Plan Check submittal for the first
PL Building Permit
Issuance
7 of 24
building permit on site.
PLANNING - LANDSCAPE
22. Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan. Plans shall comply with
Chapter 8.72 of the Zoning Ordinance and be generally
consistent with the project plans attached to this Resolution as
Exhibit A and dated February 21, 2018. A Final Landscape and
Irrigation Plan prepared and stamped by a State licensed
landscape architect or registered engineer shall be submitted for
review and approval by the Community Development Director.
The landscape plans shall be prepared on an accurately
surveyed topographic plan consistent with the architectural, site
and civil plans and show location of utilities including street lights,
fire hydrants, drain inlets, water meters, vaults, and transformers
including locations of underground utilities including water, sewer
and storm drain. Landscape and irrigation plans shall provide for
a recycled water system.
P Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
23. Site Improvements & Amenities. Site improvements and
amenities, including light fixtures, shown on the landscape plans
shall be clearly identified to include materials, colors, and finishes
to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director and
City Engineer.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
24. Water Efficient Landscaping Regulations. The
Applicant/Developer shall meet all requirements of the State’s
Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO).
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
25. Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. The
Applicant/Developer shall submit written documentation to the
Public Works Department (in the form of a Landscape
Documentation Package and other required documents) that the
development conforms to the State’s Model Water Efficient
Landscape Ordinance (MWELO).
PL, PW Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
26. Sustainable Landscape Practices. The landscape design shall
demonstrate compliance with sustainable landscape practices as
detailed in the Bay-Friendly Landscape Guidelines by earning 60
points or more and meeting the 14 required practices in the Bay-
Friendly Landscape Scorecard.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
27. Traffic Visibility Area. No fence, wall, hedge, sign or other
structure, shrubbery, mounds of earth, or other visual obstruction
shall be over 30 inches in height above the nearest curb elevation
shall be erected, placed, planted or allowed to grow within the
Traffic Visibility Area.
PL, PW Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
28. Landscape Screening. Landscape screening is of a height and
density so that it provides a positive visual impact within three
years from the time of planting. Screening, including the
screening of utility areas from roadways, shall conform to Chapter
8.72 of the Dublin Municipal Code.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
29. Landscape Edges. Concrete curbs or bands shall be used at the
edges of all planters and paving surfaces. The design width and
depth of the concrete edge to be to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Director and City Engineer.
PL, PW Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
30. Landscape Borders. All landscaped areas in parking areas shall
be bordered by a concrete curb that is at least 6 inches high and
6 inches wide. Curbs adjacent to parking spaces must be 12
inches wide. All landscaped areas shall be a minimum of 6 feet in
PL, PW Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
8 of 24
width curb to curb.
31. Mounds & Berms. Slopes of mounds and berms shall not
exceed 3:1 ratio, or 3 feet in height. Slopes 6:1 and over shall be
labelled and contours for berms, swales, drainage ponds, and
water quality elements, etc. shall be shown on the landscape
plans.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
32. Above Ground Utilities. Location of above ground utilities shall
be shown and screened with landscape from roadways and
walkways.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
33. Street Trees. Street tree species shall conform to City of Dublin
Standard Plans and Chapter 8.72 of the Dublin Municipal Code.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
34. Street Light and Trees. Maintain approximately 15’ clearance
between streetlights and street trees. Where such clearance is
not practical for design considerations, the spacing between the
trees shall be increased and the size of the tree shall be
increased to 36” box minimum to reduce conflict between the
lighting and foliage.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
35. Landscape Maturity. The landscape plans shall show plants at
the mature size and spaced to accommodate minimum spread
adjacent to buildings, sidewalks, roads or other obstructions. In
addition, plants shall be spaced to fill in location within six (6)
years.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
36. Plant Standards. That unless unusual circumstances prevail, all
trees on the site shall be a minimum of 15 gallons in size. All
trees that are on the exterior building perimeter shall be 24” box
minimum, with at least 30% at 36” box or greater. All shrubs shall
be 5 gallon minimum.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
37. Root Barriers & Tree Staking. The Landscape Plans shall
provide details showing root barriers and tree staking will be
installed that meet current City specifications.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
38. Plant Legend. Plant legend is extensive for the site and shall be
reduced to show the plant material intended to be used on the
site.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
39. Existing Landscape Improvements. Existing landscape
improvements adjacent to or within the project shall be shown
and labeled on the plans. Protection notes shall be included to
protect existing landscape improvements.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
40. Standard Plant Material, Irrigation and Maintenance
Agreement. The Applicant/Developer shall complete and submit
to the Dublin Planning Department the Standard Plant Material,
Irrigation and Maintenance Agreement.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
41. Plan Detail. All hardscape elements, fencing, play equipment
and site amenities shall be labeled and detailed. Material, finish
and colors shall be specified on plans.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
42. Slopes. Slopes 6:1 and over shall be labelled and contours for
berms, swales, drainage ponds, and water quality elements, etc.,
shall be shown on landscape plans.
PL Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
43. Maintenance of Landscape. All landscape areas on the site
shall be enhanced and properly maintained at all times. Any
proposed or modified landscaping to the site, including the
PL On-going
9 of 24
removal or replacement of trees, shall require prior review and
written approval from the Community Development Director.
PLANNING-ENVIRONMENTAL
44. Mitigation Monitoring Program. The Applicant/ Developer shall
comply with the Fallon Village Project Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) adopted by City Council
Resolution 222-05, including all mitigation measures contained
therein. The EIR is on file with the Community De velopment
Department.
PL On-going
45. SM-GEO-1. Prior to construction, design level geotechnical
report(s) and corrective grading plan(s) depicting the locations
and depths of landslide repairs, keyways and subsurface drains
is required. The corrective grading plans shall identify
appropriate mitigation for graded slopes. In order to stabilize
slopes where unstable geologic materials extend at beyond
proposed development areas, geotechnical corrective grading
may extend beyond the limits of improvements and into open
space areas. Grading in open space areas shall be limited to
excavations that remove unstable soils and landslide debris and
backfilling excavations with compacted, drained engineer fills. To
provide stable construction slopes, the back slopes of excavated
areas may extend up slope and beyond the limits of mapped
slides. The corrective measures used will be typical and
configured to conform at natural slope contours with materials
and compaction at the approval of a geotechnical engineer. This
may vary from original grade within repair envelope due to
geotechnical and slope drainage considerations.
PW Construction
46. SSM-BIO-3 (revised). Pre-construction surveys for burrowing
owls shall be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to any
ground disturbance between September 1 and January 31. If
ground disturbance is delayed or suspended for more than 30
days after the survey, the site should be re-surveyed. If no over-
wintering birds are present, burrows should be removed prior to
the nesting seasons. If over-wintering birds are present, no
disturbance should occur within 150 feet of occupied burrows. If
owls must be moved away from the disturbance area during this
period, passive relocation measures must be prepared according
to current CDFG burrowing owl guidelines, approved by CDFG,
and completed prior to construction.
PL Construction
47. SSM-BIO-4 (revised). If construction is scheduled during the
nesting season (February 1-August 31), pre-construction surveys
should be conducted on the entire site-specific Project area and
within 500 feet of such Project area prior to any ground
disturbance. A minimum buffer (at least 250 feet) shall be
maintained during the breeding season around active burrowing
owl nesting sites identified in pre-construction surveys to avoid
direct loss of individuals. Owls present on site after February 1
will be assumed to be nesting on or adjacent to the site unless
evidence indicates otherwise. All active burrows shall be
identified. If construction around active nests is scheduled ot
occur when nests are active (i.e., if they contain, or are assumed
to contain, eggs or unfledged young), 250-foot exclusion zone
around the nest shall be established or construction shall be
PL Construction
10 of 24
delayed until after the young have fledged, typically by August
31. If owls are present during the early part of the breeding
season, and evidence indicates that they have not yet begun
nesting, they may be passively relocated form the site if
authorized by CDFG.
48. SSM-BIO-5 (revised). If destruction of occupied (breeding or
non-breeding season) burrows, or any burrows that were found to
be occupied during pre-construction surveys, is unavoidable, a
strategy will be developed to replace such burrows by enhancing
existing burrows or creating artificial burrows at a 2:1 ratio on
permanently protected lands adjacent to occupied burrowing owl
habitat, and will include permanent protection of a minimum of
6.5 acres of burrowing owl habitat per pair or unpaired resident
owl. A plan shall be developed and approved by CDFG
describing creation or enhancement of burrows, maintenance of
burrows and management of foraging habitat, monitoring
procedures and significance criteria, funding assurance, annual
reporting requirements to CDFG, and contingency and
remediation measures.
PL Construction
49. Mitigation Measure 3.11/1.0: Construction-Related Dust
Abatement Measures (East Dublin EIR). Outline dust abatement
measures as conditions in the grading plan and the measures
shall be implemented during construction.
PL/PW Through
Construction
50. SM-AQ-1. The City of Dublin shall:
a) Require construction contractors to water or cover
stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials
that can be blown by the wind.
b) Require construction contractors to sweep daily
(preferably with water sweepers) all paved access
road, parking areas and staging areas at
construction sites.
c) Require construction contractors to install
sandbags or other erosion control measures to
prevent silt runoff to public roadways.
B Through
Construction
BUILDING CONDITIONS
51. Building Codes and Ordinances. All project construction shall
conform to all building codes and ordinances in effect at the time
of building permit.
B Through
Completion
52. CAL Green Building Standards Code. The project shall
incorporate the requirements of the CAL Green Building
Standards Code. The project shall be provided with: a) short and
long term bicycle parking, b) designated clean air vehicle parking
stall, c) conduit installed from the electrical supply panel to the
roof for the installation of future PV, d) automatic irrigation
controllers for landscaping, and e) covered main entries. The
Green Building Plan shall be submitted to the Chief Building
Official for review.
B Occupancy
53. Building Permits. To apply for building permits,
Applicant/Developer shall submit five (5) sets of construction
plans to the Building & Safety Division for plan check. Each set
of plans shall have attached an annotated copy of these
Conditions of Approval. The notations shall clearly indicate how
all Conditions of Approval will or have been complied with.
B Issuance of
Building Permits
11 of 24
Construction plans will not be accepted without the annotated
resolutions attached to each set of plans. Applicant/Developer
will be responsible for obtaining the approvals of all participation
non-City agencies prior to the issuance of building permits.
54. Construction Drawings. Construction plans shall be fully
dimensioned (including building elevations) accurately drawn
(depicting all existing and proposed conditions on site), and
prepared and signed by a California licensed Architect or
Engineer. All structural calculations shall be prepared and signed
by a California licensed Architect or Engineer. The site plan,
landscape plan and details shall be consistent with each other.
B Issuance of
building permits
55. Air Conditioning Units. Air conditioning units and ventilation
ducts shall be screened from public view with materials
compatible to the main building. Units shall be permanently
installed on concrete pads or other non-movable materials to be
approved by the Chief Building Official and Director of
Community Development.
B Occupancy of
Unit
56. Temporary Fencing. Temporary Construction fencing shall be
installed along perimeter of all work under construction.
B Through
Completion
57. Addressing.
a) Address signage shall be provided as per the
Dublin Commercial Security Code;
b) Address will be required on all doors leading to the
exterior of the building. Addresses shall be
illuminated and be able to be seen from the street,
4 inches in height minimum.
B
Occupancy
58. Engineer Observation. The Engineer of record shall be
retained to provide observation services for all components of the
lateral and vertical design of the building, including nailing,
holddowns, straps, shear, roof diaphragm and structural frame of
building. A written report shall be submitted to the City Inspector
prior to scheduling the final frame inspection.
B Scheduling the
final frame
inspection
59. Foundation. Geotechnical Engineer for the soils report shall
review and approve the foundation design. A letter shall be
submitted to the Building Division on the approval.
B Permit Issuance
60. Copies of Approved Plans. Applicant shall provide City with
two (2) reduced (1/2 size) copies of the City of Dublin stamped
approved plan.
B 30 days after
permit and each
revision issuance
61. Cool Roofs. Flat roof areas shall have their roofing material
coated with light colored gravel or painted with light colored or
reflective material designed for Cool Roofs.
B Through
Completion
62. CASp. Applicant shall obtain the services of a Certified Access
Specialist (CASp) for the review of the construction drawings and
inspections for the building interior and site exterior. A written
report shall be submitted to the City prior to approval of the
permit application. Additionally, a written report shall be
submitted to the City Inspector prior to scheduling the final
inspection.
B Permitting and
Occupancy
63. Accessary Structures. Building permits are required for all
associated amenities/structures (e.g., playground equipment) and
are required to meet the accessibility and building codes (for
structural review). A California state certified playground safety
B Through
Completion
12 of 24
inspector (CPSI) final review letter shall be required.
FIRE PREVENTION
64. Building and Fire Code Requirements. Construction shall
comply with the Building and Fire Code Requirements in effect at
the time of Building Permit submittal or improvement plans.
F Building Permit
Issuance & On-
going
65. New Fire Sprinkler System & Monitoring Requirements.
In accordance with the Dublin Fire Code, fire sprinklers shall be
installed in the building. The system shall be in accordance with
the NFPA 13, the CA Fire Code and CA Building Code. Plans and
specifications showing detailed mechanical design, cut sheets,
listing sheets and hydraulic calculations shall be submitted to the
Fire Department for approval and permit prior to installation. This
may be a deferred submittal.
F Building Permit
Issuance
66. Fire Alarm (detection) System Required. A Fire Alarm
Detection System shall be installed throughout the building so as
to provide full property protection, including combustible
concealed spaces, as required by NFPA 72. The system shall be
installed in accordance with NFPA 72, CA Fire, Building,
Electrical, and Mechanical Codes.
F Building Permit
Issuance
67. Fire Extinguishers. Extinguishers shall be visible and
unobstructed. Signage shall be provided to indicate fire
extinguisher locations. The number and location of extinguishers
shall be shown on the plans. Additional fire extinguishers may be
required by the Fire Inspector. Fire extinguishers shall meet a
minimum classification of 2A 10BC. Extinguishers weighing 40
pounds or less shall be mounted no higher than 5 feet above the
floor measured to the top of the extinguisher.
F Occupancy
68. FD Building Key Box. A Fire Department Key Box shall be
installed at the main entrance to the building. Note these
locations on the plans. The key box shall be installed
approximately 5 1/2 feet above grade. The box shall be sized to
hold the master key to the facility as well as keys for rooms not
accessible by the master key. Specialty keys, such as the fire
alarm control box key and elevator control keys shall also be
installed in the box. The key box door and necessary keys are to
be provided to the Fire Inspector upon the final inspection. The
inspector will then lock the keys in the box.
Key boxes and switches may be ordered directly from the Knox
Company.
F Occupancy
69. Gate Approvals. Fencing and gates that cross pedestrian
access and exit paths as well as vehicle entrance and exit roads
shall be approved for Fire Department access and egress as well
as exiting provisions where such is applicable. Plans shall be
submitted that clearly show the fencing and gates and details of
such. This should clearly be incorporated as part of the site plan
with details provided as necessary.
Building Permit
Issuance
70. FD Gate Key Box/Switch. Each manually operated gate that
serves as a means of fire access shall have installed a Knox Key
Box accessible from the entrance side of the gate. Where the
locking method of the gate is by a chain a Knox padlock shall be
installed on the chain. The key box door and necessary keys are
to be provided to the Fire Inspector upon the final inspection. All
Occupancy
13 of 24
electrically controlled gates shall be provided with an emergency
gate over-ride key switch for Fire Department access.
71. M Means of Egress. Exit signs shall be visible and illuminated with
emergency lighting when the building is occupied.
F Occupancy &
On-going
72. Maximum Occupant Load. Posting of room capacity is required
for any occupied load of 50 or more persons. Submittal of a
seating plan on durable placard is required prior to final
occupancy.
F Occupancy
73. Interior Finish. Wall and ceiling interior finish material shall meet
the requirements of Chapter 8 of the California Fire Code. Interior
finishes will be field verified upon final inspection. If the product is
not field marked and the marking visible for inspection, maintain
the product cut sheets and packaging that show proof of the
products flammability and flame-spread ratings. Decorative
materials shall be fire retardant.
F Occupancy
74. Addressing. Addressing shall be illuminated or in an illuminated
area. The address characters shall be contrasting to their
background. If address is placed on glass, the numbers shall be
on the exterior of the glass and a contrasting background placed
behind the numbers.
Building Address. The building shall be provided with all
addresses or the assigned address range so as to be clearly
visible from either direction of travel on the street the address
references. The address characters shall not be less than 5
inches in height by 1-inch stroke. Larger sizes may be necessary
depending on the setbacks and visibility.
Rear Doors. The address shall also be provided on any rear
doors to the tenant space with minimum 5-inch high characters.
Entrance Posting. Where the addressing on the building will not
be clearly visible from either direction of travel along the access
road the address references. Address posting shall also be
provided at the entrance to the property. The address size shall
be 5-inches high and should be on a reflective background.
F Occupancy
75. Hood & Duct Fire Extinguishing System & K Fire
Extinguisher. In accordance with the Fire Code, a ventilating
hood and duct system shall be provided in accordance with the
Mechanical Code for commercial-type food heat-processing
equipment that produces grease-laden vapors. An automatic fire
extinguishing system shall protect the hood and duct system and
the cooking appliances below. Plans and specifications showing
detailed mechanical design of fire protection system shall be
submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval.
F Building Permit
Issuance
76. Automatic Shutoffs for Ducts. Air moving systems supplying air
in excess of 2,000 cubic feet per minute to enclosed spaces
within buildings shall be equipped with an automatic shutoff.
Automatic shutoff shall be accomplished by interrupting the
power source of the air moving equipment upon detection of
smoke in the main supply air duct served by such equipment.
Smoke detectors shall be labeled by an approved agency
approved and listed by California State Fire Marshal for air duct
F Occupancy
14 of 24
installation and shall be installed in accordance with the
manufacturer’s approved installation instructions. Duct detectors
shall be accessible for cleaning by providing access doors. Duct
detector location shall be permanently and clearly identified.
77. Generators. The following shall apply:
1. Stationary generators for emergency and standby power
systems shall be listed in accordance with UL 2200 .
2. Generators shall be installed according to Article of the
California Electrical Code.
3. Portable and vehicle mounted generators shall be bonded
and grounded in accord with Article of the California
Electrical Code.
4. Code required Standby Power Systems shall be
according to the California Electrical Code.
5. Non-code required optional standby power systems shall
be according to Article 702 of the California Electrical
Code.
6. Life safety branch circuits shall be in accordance with
Article of the California Electrical Code.
7. All electrical wiring, devices, appliances and other
equipment shall be in accord with the California Electrical
Code.
F Building Permit
Issuance & On-
going
78. Electrical Equipment, Wiring & Hazards.
1. Electrical wiring, devices, appliances and other equipment
that is modified or damaged and constitutes an electrical
shock or fire hazard shall not be used.
2. A working space of not less than 30 inches in width, 36
inches in depth and 78 inches in height shall be provided
in front of electrical service equipment. No storage of any
materials shall be located within the designated working
space.
3. Doors into electrical control panel rooms shall be marked
with a plainly visible and legible sign stating ELECTRICAL
ROOM. The disconnecting means for each service,
feeder or branch circuit originating on a switchboard or
panel board shall be legibly and durably marked to
indicate its purpose.
4. Extension cords and flexible cords shall not be a
substitute for permanent wiring. Extension cords shall be
used only with portable appliances.
F Occupancy &
On-going
79. Fire Safety During Construction & Demolition.
1. Clearance to combustibles from temporary heating
devices shall be maintained. Devices shall be fixed in
place and protected from damage, dislodgement or
overturning in accordance with the manufacturer’s
instructions.
2. Smoking shall be prohibited except in approved areas.
Signs shall be posted “NO SMOKING” in a conspicuous
location in each structure or location in which smoking is
prohibited.
3. Combustible debris, rubbish and waste material shall be
removed from buildings at the end of each shift of work.
4. Flammable and combustible liquid storage areas shall be
F During
Construction
15 of 24
maintained clear of combustible vegetation and waste
materials.
PUBLIC WORKS GENERAL – PROJECT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
80. Construction Plans. Construction plan set shall include City of
Dublin General Notes and project specific notes, fully
dimensioned Horizontal Control plan, Erosion and Sediment
Control Plan, Clean Bay Blueprint (See City’s website:
http://dublin.ca.gov/1656/Development-Permits---Stormwater-
Require), details and sections of all improvements to be
constructed.
PW Building Permit
Issuance
81. Parking. Construction plan set shall include a signing and
striping plan for the site. All parking lot drive aisles with “stop”
locations shall have standard STOP signs, in accordance with CA
MUTCD. Similarly, Disabled Parking areas shall have standard
ADA signs, in accordance with the current building code.
PW Building Permit
Issuance
82. Site Improvements. Construction plan set shall include a
Composite Exhibit showing all site improvements, utilities,
landscaping improvements and trees, etc. to be constructed to
ensure that there are no conflicts among the proposed and
existing improvements.
PW Building Permit
Issuance
83. Grading and Drainage. Construction plan set shall provide
grading and drainage in all landscaped areas. All runoff shall be
collected and conveyed upstream of sidewalks.
PW Building Permit
Issuance
84. Concrete Step-Out. There shall be an additional 6” wide
concrete step-out at landscaped areas adjacent to driver side and
passenger side of parking stalls on construction plan set.
PW Building Permit
Issuance
85. Landscape Strips. Landscape strips adjacent to parking stalls
shall be unobstructed as such to allow for a 2-foot vehicular
overhang at front/rear of vehicles on the construction plan set.
PW Building Permit
Issuance
86. Parking Stalls. Parking stalls next to walls, fences and
obstructions to vehicle door opening shall be an additional 4’ in
width per DMC 8.76.070.A.16 on the construction plan set.
PW Building Permit
Issuance
87. Surface Slopes. Pavement surface slopes in parking lot shall not
exceed 5% in any direction on the construction plan set.
PW Building Permit
Issuance
88. Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk. Existing curb, gutter and sidewalk
along the project frontages within the public rights-of-way shall be
evaluated for condition and compliance with current Public Works
standards, and shall be repaired or replaced with the
development of the site, as determined by the Public Works
Department. Construction plan set shall show repair or
replacement required.
PW Building Permit
Issuance
89. Street Trees. Existing street trees along the project’s public
street frontages shall be evaluated, and shall be planted or
replaced with the development of the site, as determined by the
Public Works Department. The existing irrigation of street trees
shall also be evaluated and improvements made as needed.
Construction plan set shall show tree and irrigation improvements
required.
PW Building Permit
Issuance
90. Trash Capture. Specific information is required on the
construction plan set demonstrating how MRP Provision C.10
(trash capture) requirements are met. Trash capture devices
existing at the site shall be inspected and replaced if necessary,
as determined by the Public Works Department. The
PW Building Permit
Issuance
16 of 24
applicant/contractor shall install trash capture devices in all inlets
not currently containing one. Trash capture devices to be used
shall be listed and details shown on the construction plan set as
applicable. Trash capture devices shall be the consistent with
the approved list provided on the City’s website:
http://dublin.ca.gov/1656/Development-Permits---Stormwater-
Require
91. Sloped Area to West. Property owner shall be responsible for
maintenance of the sloped area along the west side of the
property between the fence and the property line. Access to the
sloped area shall be through the project site.
PW Building Permit
Issuance and
On-Going
92. Hydrology and Hydraulics. Applicant shall submit hydrology
and hydraulic calculations for review and approval. Construction
plan set shall show grate, invert and hydraulic grade line
information at all storm drain structures, slope and design flow at
all storm drain pipes.
PW Building Permit
Issuance
93. Pavement Treatment. A pavement treatment, such as a slurry
seal, shall be required after utility trenching on West Cantara
Drive and Positano Parkway, as determined by the Public Works
Department.
PW Building Permit
Issuance
94. Trash Enclosure.
a. Trash enclosure shall meet all the requirements set
forth in DMC Section 7.98 and the “Waste Handling
Standards for Commercial Properties and Multi-Family
Properties with Shared Service,” which can be
obtained from the City’s website:
http://dublin.ca.gov/1932/Development-Resources.
The construction plan set shall show additional
information demonstrating these requirements are
met. Design of trash enclosure for sizing and
servicing is subject to review and approval by the
Public Works Department.
b. Applicant shall submit a completed Waste Enclosure
Requirements Checklist with the submittal of the
construction plan set, which can be obtained from the
City’s website: http://dublin.ca.gov/1932/Development-
Resources
c. The area around and inside the enclosure must be lit
with a minimum of 1.0 foot candle with motion sensor
lighting.
d. Area outside of trash enclosure shall be graded away
from the enclosure structure. Runoff shall not drain
against structure nor into pedestrian door.
e. Applicant shall drain the interior of the trash enclosure
to the sanitary sewer system or incorporate the
following revisions to the landscaped area the
enclosure is proposed to drain into:
i. Landscaped area accepting drainage from the
trash enclosure directly adjacent to the
enclosure shall be designed with no gap
between the enclosure wall and the
landscaped area.
ii. Planting shall be provided in the area in
PW Building Permit
Issuance
17 of 24
addition to the river rock cobble.
f. The slope of the enclosure pad must be less than
1.5%
95. Staggered Drop Off. The Applicant/Developer shall implement
staggered drop off times for the Day Care Center which will be
designed to minimize drop offs during the peak traffic times along
Positano Parkway of 8:00 AM to 8:30 AM. If after the opening of
the Day Care Center traffic safety becomes a concern, as
determined by the City Traffic Engineer, due to the drop offs at
the Day Care Center, the Applicant/Developer/Operator of the
Day Care Center shall be required to prepare and implement a
mitigation plan to address the traffic safety concerns. At a
minimum the mitigation plan shall include further staggering of
drop off times to avoid peak congestion times along Positano
Parkway. The mitigation plan shall be approved by the City
Traffic Engineer
PW On-going
PUBLIC WORKS – STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
96. Public Works Standard Conditions of Approval. Developer
shall comply with the City of Dublin Public Works Standard
Conditions of Approval contained below (“Standard Condition”)
unless specifically modified by Project Specific Conditions of
Approval above.
PW On-going
97. Conditions of Approval. Developer shall comply with the City of
Dublin Title 7 Public Works Ordinance, which includes the
Grading Ordinance, the City of Dublin Public Works Standards
and Policies, the most current requirements of the State Code
Title 24 and the Americans with Disabilities Act with regard to
accessibility, and all building and fire codes and ordinances in
effect at the time of building permit. All public improvements
constructed by Developer and to be dedicated to the City are
hereby identified as “public works” under Labor Code section
1771. Accordingly, Developer, in constructing such
improvements, shall comply with the Prevailing Wage Law (Labor
Code. Sects. 1720 and following).
PW On-going
PUBLIC WORKS – AGREEMENTS AND BONDS
98. Improvement Agreement. Developer shall enter into an
Improvement Agreement with the City for all public improvements
including any required offsite storm drainage or roadway
improvements that are needed to serve the development, as
determined by the City Engineer.
PW Grading Permit
issuance
99. Security. Developer shall provide faithful performance security to
guarantee the improvements, as determined by the City Engineer
(Note: The performance security shall remain in effect until one
year after final inspections).
PW Grading Permit
issuance
100. O&M Agreement. The requirements of Provision C.3 of the
Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, Order No. R2-
2015-0049, require the property owner to enter into an
Agreement with the City of Dublin to provide verification and
assurance that all treatment devices will be properly operated
and maintained and to guarantee the owner’s perpetual
maintenance obligation for all storm drain inlet filters installed as
part of the project. The Agreement shall be recorded against the
property and shall run with the land.
PW
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements
18 of 24
PUBLIC WORKS – FEES
101. Fees. Developer shall dedicate parkland or pay in-lieu fees in the
amounts and at the times set forth in City of Dublin Resolution
No. 60-99, or in any resolution revising these amounts and as
implemented by the Administrative Guidelines adopted by
Resolution 195-99.
PW Building Permit
issuance
PUBLIC WORKS – PERMITS
102. Encroachment Permit. Developer shall obtain an Encroachment
Permit from the Public Works Department for all construction
activity within the public right-of-way of any street where the City
has accepted the street right of way. The encroachment permit
may require surety for slurry seal and restriping. At the discretion
of the City Engineer an encroachment for work specifically
included in an Improvement Agreement may not be required.
PW Start of Work
103. Grading Permit. Developer may be subject to obtaining a
Grading/Sitework Permit from the Public Works Department for
grading and private site improvements, as determined by the City
Engineer.
PW Start of Work
104. Non-City Agency Permits. Developer shall obtain all permits
required by other agencies including, but not limited to Alameda
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Zone 7,
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Army Corps of
Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Regional Water Quality Control
Board, Caltrans, DSRSD, BART, as applicable, and provide
copies of the permits to the Public Works Department.
PW Start of Work
PUBLIC WORKS - SUBMITTALS
105. Plan Submittals. All submittals of plans shall comply with the
requirements of the “City of Dublin Public Works Department
Improvement Plan Submittal Requirements”, the “City of Dublin
Improvement Plan Review Check List,” current Public Works and
industry standards.
PW
Approval of
Improvement
Plans
106. Submittals to non-City Agencies. Developer will be responsible
for submittals and reviews to obtain the approvals of all
participating non-City agencies. The Alameda County Fire
Department and the Dublin San Ramon Services District shall
approve and sign the Improvement Plans.
PW
Approval of
Improvement
Plans
107. Geotechnical Report. Developer shall submit a Geotechnical
Report, which includes street pavement sections and grading
recommendations. PW
Approval of
Improvement
Plans, and
Grading Plans
108. Master Files. Developer shall provide the Public Works
Department a digital vectorized file of the “master” files for the
project. Digital raster copies are not acceptable. The digital
vectorized files shall be in AutoCAD 14 or higher drawing format.
All objects and entities in layers shall be colored by layer and
named in English. All submitted drawings shall use the Global
Coordinate System of USA, California, NAD 83 California State
Plane, Zone III, and U.S. foot.
PW Acceptance of
Improvements
PUBLIC WORKS - EASEMENTS AND ACCESS RIGHTS
109. Abandonment of Easements. Developer shall obtain
abandonment from all applicable public agencies of existing
easements and right of ways within the development that will no
longer be used.
PW
Approval of
Improvement
Plans
19 of 24
110. Acquisition of Easements. Developer shall acquire easements,
and/or obtain rights-of-entry from the adjacent property owners
for any improvements on their property. The easements and/or
rights-of-entry shall be in writing and copies furnished to the City
Engineer.
PW
Approval of
Improvement
Plans
PUBLIC WORKS - GRADING
111. Erosion Control Plan. A detailed Erosion and Sediment Control
Plan shall be included with the Grading Plan submittal. The plan
shall include detailed design, location, and maintenance criteria
of all erosion and sedimentation control measures.
PW Issuance of
Grading Permit
112. Retaining Walls. Tiebacks or structural fabric for retaining walls
shall not cross property lines, or shall be located a minimum of 2’
below the finished grade of the upper lot.
PW Approval of
Grading Plans
PUBLIC WORKS - IMPROVEMENTS
113. Public Improvements. The public improvements shall be
constructed generally as shown on the Site Development
Review. However, the approval of the Site Development Review
is not an approval of the specific design of the drainage, sanitary
sewer, water, and street improvements.
PW
Approval of
Improvement
Plans
114. Public Improvement Conformance. All public improvements
shall conform to the City of Dublin Standard Plans and design
requirements and as approved by the City Engineer.
PW
Approval of
Improvement
Plans
115. Public Street Slopes. Public streets shall be at a minimum 1%
slope with minimum gutter flow of 0.7% around bumpouts.
Private streets and alleys shall be at minimum 0.5% slope.
PW
Approval of
Improvement
Plans
116. Curb Returns. Curb Returns on arterial and collector streets
shall be 40-foot radius, all internal public streets curb returns
shall be minimum 30-foot radius (36-foot with bump outs) and
private streets/alleys shall be a minimum 20-foot radius, or as
approved by the City Engineer. Curb ramp locations and design
shall conform to the most current Title 24 and Americans with
Disabilities Act requirements and as approved by the City Traffic
Engineer.
PW
Approval of
Improvement
Plans
117. Decorative Paving. Any decorative pavers/paving installed
within City right-of-way shall be done to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer. Where decorative paving is installed at signalized
intersections, pre-formed traffic signal loops shall be put under
the decorative pavement. Decorative pavements shall not
interfere with the placement of traffic control devices, including
pavement markings. All turn lane stripes, stop bars and
crosswalks shall be delineated with concrete bands or color
pavers to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Maintenance costs
of the decorative paving shall be the responsibility of the
developer or future property owner.
PW
Approval of
Improvement
Plans
118. Traffic Signing and Striping. Developer shall install all traffic
signage, striping, and pavement markings as required by the City
Engineer. PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements
119. Street Lighting. Street light standards and luminaries shall be
designed and installed or relocated as determined by the City
Engineer. The maximum voltage drop for streetlights is 5%. PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements
120. Water and Sewer Facilities. Developer shall construct all PW Certificate of
20 of 24
potable and recycled water and sanitary sewer facilities required
to serve the project in accordance with DSRSD master plans,
standards, specifications and requirements.
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements
121. Fire Hydrants. Fire hydrant locations shall be approved by the
Alameda County Fire Department. A raised reflector blue traffic
marker shall be installed in the street opposite each hydrant, and
shall be shown on the signing and striping plan.
PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements
122. Street Name Signs. Developer shall furnish and install City
standard street name signs for the project to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer. PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements
123. Utilities. Developer shall construct gas, electric, telephone, cable
TV, and communication improvements within the fronting streets
and as necessary to serve the project and the future adjacent
parcels as approved by the City Engineer and the various Public
Utility agencies.
PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements
124. Utility Locations. All gas, electric, telephone, cable TV, and
communications utilities, shall be placed underground in
accordance with the City policies and ordinances. All utilities shall
be located and provided within public utility easements or public
services easements and sized to meet utility company standards.
PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements
125. Utility Vaults and Boxes. All utility vaults, boxes, and structures,
unless specifically approved otherwise by the City Engineer, shall
be underground and placed in landscaped areas and screened
from public view. Prior to Joint Trench Plan approval, landscape
drawings shall be submitted to the City showing the location of all
utility vaults, boxes, and structures and adjacent landscape
features and plantings. The Joint Trench Plans shall be signed by
the City Engineer prior to construction of the joint trench
improvements.
PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements
126. Storm Drain Inlet Markers. All on-site storm drain inlets must be
marked with storm drain markers that read: “No dumping, drains
to creek.” The stencils may be purchased from the Public Work
Department.
PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements
127. Bus Shelters. Developer shall construct bus stops and shelters
at the locations designated and approved by the LAVTA and the
City Engineer. The Developer shall pay the cost of procuring and
installing these improvements.
PW
Certificate of
Occupancy or
Acceptance of
Improvements
PUBLIC WORKS - CONSTRUCTION
128. Erosion Control Implementation. The Erosion and Sediment
Control Plan shall be implemented between October 1 and April
30 unless otherwise allowed in writing by the City Engineer. The
Developer will be responsible for maintaining erosion and
sediment control measures for one year following the City’s
acceptance of the subdivision improvements.
PW On-going as
needed
129. Archaeological Finds. If archaeological materials are
encountered during construction, construction within 100 feet of
these materials shall be halted until a professional Archaeologist
who is certified by the Society of California Archaeology (SCA) or
the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has had an
opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest
appropriate mitigation measures.
PW On-going as
needed
130. Construction Activities. Construction activities, including the PW On-going as
21 of 24
idling, maintenance, and warming up of equipment, shall be
limited to Monday through Friday, and non-City holidays,
between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. except as
otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Extended hours or
Saturday work will be considered by the City Engineer on a case-
by-case basis. Note that the construction hours of operation
within the Dublin Boulevard right of way are more restrictive.
needed
131. Construction Noise Management Plan. Developer shall
prepare a construction noise management plan that identifies
measures to be taken to minimize construction noise on
surrounding developed properties. The plan shall include hours of
construction operation, use of mufflers on construction
equipment, speed limit for construction traffic, haul routes and
identify a noise monitor. Specific noise management measures
shall be provided prior to project construction.
PW
Start of
Construction
activities; and
On-going as
needed
132. Construction Traffic Interface Plan. Developer shall prepare a
plan for construction traffic interface with public traffic on any
existing public street. Construction traffic and parking may be
subject to specific requirements by the City Engineer.
PW
Start of
Construction
activities; and
On-going as
needed
133. Pest Control. Developer shall be responsible for controlling any
rodent, mosquito, or other pest problem due to construction
activities.
PW On-going
134. Dust Control Measures. Developer shall be responsible for
watering or other dust-palliative measures to control dust as
conditions warrant or as directed by the City Engineer. PW
Start of
Construction
activities; On-
going as needed
135. Building Pad Certification. Developer shall provide the Public
Works Department with a letter from a registered civil engineer or
surveyor stating or certifying that the building pads have been
graded to within 0.1 feet of the grades shown on the approved
Grading Plans, and that the top & toe of banks and retaining
walls are at the locations shown on the approved Grading Plans.
PW
Issuance of
Building Permits
or Acceptance of
Improvements
136. Temporary Fencing. Temporary Fencing. Temporary
Construction fencing shall be installed along the perimeter of all
work under construction to separate the construction operation
from the public. All construction activities shall be confined within
the fenced area. Construction materials and/or equipment shall
not be operated or stored outside of the fenced area or within the
public right-of-way unless approved in advance by the City
Engineer.
PW
Start of
Construction and
On-going
PUBLIC WORKS - NPDES
137. NOI and SWPPP. Prior to any clearing or grading, Developer
shall provide the City evidence that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has
been sent to the California State Water Resources Control Board
per the requirements of the NPDES. A copy of the Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be provided to the
Public Works Department and be kept at the construction site.
PW
Start of
construction
activities
138. SWPPP. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
shall identify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriate
to the project construction activities. The SWPPP shall include
the erosion and sediment control measures in accordance with
the regulations outlined in the most current version of the ABAG
PW
SWPPP to be
Prepared Prior to
Approval of
Improvement
Plans;
22 of 24
Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook or State Construction
Best Management Practices Handbook. The Developer is
responsible for ensuring that all contractors implement all storm
water pollution prevention measures in the SWPPP.
Implementation
Prior to Start of
Construction and
On-going as
needed
DUBLIN SAN RAMON SERVICES DISTRICT
139. Complete improvement plans shall be submitted to DSRSD that
conform to the requirements of the Dublin San Ramon Services
District Code, the DSRSD “Standard Procedures, Specifications
and Drawings for Design and Installation of Water and Wastewater
Facilities”, all applicable DSRSD Master Plans and all DSRSD
policies.
DSRSD Building Permit
Issuance
140. All mains shall be sized to provide sufficient capacity to
accommodate future flow demands in addition to each
development project's demand. Layout and sizing of mains shall
be in conformance with DSRSD utility master planning.
DSRSD Building Permit
Issuance
141. Sewers shall be designed to operate by gravity flow to DSRSD’s
existing sanitary sewer system. Pumping of sewage is
discouraged and may only be allowed under extreme
circumstances following a case by case review with DSRSD staff.
Any pumping station will require specific review and approval by
DSRSD of preliminary design reports, design criteria, and final
plans and specifications. The DSRSD reserves the right to
require payment of present worth 30 year maintenance costs as
well as other conditions within a separate agreement with the
applicant for any project that requires a pumping station.
DSRSD Building Permit
Issuance
142. Domestic and fire protection waterline systems for Tracts or
Commercial Developments shall be designed to be looped or
interconnected to avoid dead end sections in accordance with
requirements of the DSRSD Standard Specifications and sound
engineering practice.
DSRSD Building Permit
Issuance
143. DSRSD policy requires public water and sewer lines to be
located in public streets rather than in off-street locations to the
fullest extent possible. If unavoidable, then public sewer or water
easements must be established over the alignment of each public
sewer or water line in an off-street or private street location to
provide access for future maintenance and/or replacement.
DSRSD Building Permit
Issuance
144. The locations and widths of all proposed easement dedications
for water and sewer lines shall be submitted to and approved by
DSRSD.
DSRSD Issuance of any
grading permit,
site work permit
or building permit
145. Planning and review fees, inspection fees, and fees associated
with a wastewater discharge permit shall be paid to DSRSD in
accordance with the rates and schedules and at time of
payments as established in the DSRSD Code. Planning and
review fees are due after the 1st submittal of plans. Construction
Permit and Inspection Fees are due prior to the issuance of a
Construction Permit. Capacity Reserve Fees are due before the
water meter can be set or the connection to the sewer system.
DSRSD Building Permit
Issuance
146. No sewer line or waterline construction shall be permitted unless
the proper utility construction permit has been issued by DSRSD.
A construction permit will only be issued after all of the items in
the previous condition listed above have been satisfied.
DSRSD Building Permit
Issuance
23 of 24
147. Where the narrow width of a proposed alley or cul-de-sac is so
restrictive that the standard separation requirements for water
mains and sewer mains cannot be maintained, the water and
sewer mains shall be installed within main thoroughfares, outside
of alleyways or cul-de-sacs. Water and sewer mains shall not be
installed within courtyards. Water meters shall be installed
around the outer perimeter of buildings. Installation of water lines
from the meter to each unit shall be documented and submitted
to the District.
DSRSD Building Permit
Issuance
148. Improvement plans shall include recycled water improvements as
required by DSRSD. Services for landscape irrigation shall
connect to recycled water mains. Applicant must obtain a copy of
the DSRSD Recycled Water Use Guidelines and conform to the
requirements therein.
DSRSD Building Permit
Issuance
149. Above-ground backflow prevention devices/double detector
check valves shall be installed on fire protection systems
connected to the DSRSD water main. The Applicant shall
collaborate with the Fire Department and DSRSD to size and
configure the fire system.
DSRSD Building Permit
Issuance and
ongoing
150. Development plans will not be approved until landscape plans
are submitted for DSRSD review and approval.
DSRSD Approval of Final
Landscape Plans
151. Applicant shall be required to pay all incremental capacity
reserve fees for water and sewer services as required by the
project demands, once the project has been analyzed by DSRSD
to determine if it represents additional water and/or sewer
capacity demands on the District. All capacity reserve fees must
be paid prior to installation of a water meter for water. If a water
meter is not required, the capacity reserve fee shall be paid prior
to issuance of a building permit. The District may not approve
the building permit until capacity reserve fees are paid.
DSRSD Installation of
Water Meter
and/or Issuance
of Building
Permit
152. The project shall used recycled water for irrigation of large
landscape areas upon the District’s determination that sufficient
supply of recycled water is available at the time of planned
connection and the connection is technologically and financially
reasonable.
DSRSD Building Permit
Issuance
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of June 2018 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
24 of 24
________
City Clerk
For full text of Attachment 11 – Project Plans
Use link below
https://ca-dublin2.civicplus.com/Archive.aspx?ADID=875
RESOLUTION NO. XX-18
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
REVERSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION AND APPROVING A MINOR USE
PERMIT FOR SHARED PARKING BETWEEN THE 10,667 SQUARE FOOT DAYCARE AND
THE 4,269 SQUARE FOOT COMMUNITY CENTER
(APN 985-0073-005-00)
PLPA-2017-00050
WHEREAS, the applicant, Meridian, is requesting approval to build a 14,936 square foot
building comprised of a 10,667 square foot childcare center to be operated by Safari Kid, and a
4,269 square foot community center located at the south west corner of Positano Parkway and
West Cantara Drive in Positano; and
WHEREAS, the application includes a Site Development Review Permit, Minor Use
Permit for shared parking, and a Conditional Use Permit to establish development standards in
the Planned Development Zoning; and
WHEREAS, the project site is 2.1 acres and has a General Plan and Eastern Dublin
Specific Plan land designation of Semi-Public; and
WHEREAS, the site has Planned Development Zoning with a Stage 2 Development Plan
(Ordinance No. 33-05); and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act certain pro jects
are required to be reviewed for environmental impacts and when applicable, environmental
documents prepared; and
WHEREAS, the project is located within the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area, which
was the subject of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH# 91103064) approved on May
10, 1993, a Supplemental EIR for the Eastern Dublin Properties annexation and prezoning
project (SCH# 2001052114) approved for the project site by the City Council on April 2, 2002,
and a Supplemental EIR (SCH #2005062010) was approved for the project site by the City
Council on December 6, 2005. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines section 15168(c)(2), the proposed project was examined to determine if another
environmental document should be prepared. There is no substantial evidence in the record
that any new effects would occur, that any new mitigation measures would be required, or that
any of the conditions triggering supplemental environmental review under CEQA Guidelines
section 15162 exists; and
WHEREAS, the Project plans, attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution, illustrate the
proposed site layout, driveway and parking circulation system, building architecture, access to
public streets, site amenities, and landscaping for the proposed project; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project will include 88 parking stalls which would
accommodate either a daycare or community center use independently, and the two uses will
not have operational hours that overlap; and
2 of 6
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the said application on
February 13, 2018, at which time the Planning Commission continued the public hearing so that
staff and the applicant could address concerns raised by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the said application on
April 10, 2018, at which time the interesting parties had the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted to the Planning Commission recommending
approval of the Minor Use Permit for the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 18-11 denying the Minor Use
Permit; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted resolutions denying the companion
Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review Permit; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant, appealed the action of the Planning Commission in
accordance with Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 8.136; and
WHEREAS, the applicant waived the requirement of the Public Hearing to be scheduled
within 45 days of the filing of the appeal; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is the hearing body for the appeal of a decision by the Planning
Commission; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all reports, recommendations and
testimony herein above set forth and used its independent judgment to evaluate the project; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report, dated June 19, 2018 and incorporated herein by reference,
described and analyzed the proposed Safari Kid Daycare and Community Center Project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct
and made a part of this resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin hereby makes
the following findings and determinations regarding the proposed Minor Use Permit for shared
parking between the Safari Kid Daycare and the Community Center building:
A. The proposed use and related structures are compatib le with other land uses,
transportation and service facilities in the vicinity in that: 1) the daycare and
community center will help serve the neighborhood for daycare needs and community
events; 2) the Project site is well suited for this type of use with existing roads,
services and utilities designed to serve the site ; and 3) a daycare and community
center are consistent with the intent of the Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans for this
site.
3 of 6
B. The proposed use meets the parking requirement for the use type in accordance with
the requirements of Chapter 8.76 (Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations), which
could include a parking reduction for shared parking in that: 1) the site proposes
enough parking stalls which would accommodate either a daycare or community
center use independently and the two uses will not have operational hours that
overlap; and 2) the conditions of approval have been listed below to ensure
compliance with Chapter 8.76 of the Zoning Ordinance.
C. It will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the
vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare in that: 1) the Project
will conform to all applicable regulations contained in the Dublin Zoning Ordinance,
General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan; and 2) Conditions of Approval have
been applied to the Project to ensure adequate parking for each use and on-going
compatibility with the Project’s surroundings.
D. It will not be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood in that : 1) a
daycare and community center are consistent with the intent of the Stage 1 and 2
Development Plans for this site; and 2) Conditions of Approval have been included to
ensure adequate on-site parking to satisfy the needs of the daycare center and the
community room.
E. There are adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public utilities
and services to ensure that the proposed use and related structures would not be
detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that: 1) vehicular access to the
site will be available from W. Cantara Dr. after the driveway on W. Cantara Dr. is
moved further east 2) the Project frontage along both roads is fully improved with a
sidewalk that provides pedestrian access to the Project; and 3) the Project will be
served by existing public utilities and services.
F. The subject site is physically suitable for the type, density and intensity of the use and
related structures being proposed in that: 1) the project site allows for a daycare and
community center under the General Plan, Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, and the
Planned Development Zoning Stage 1 and 2 Development Plans; and 2) the
proposed project falls within the allowed building area for the site.
G. It will not be contrary to the specific intent clauses, deve lopment regulations, or
performance standards established for the zoning district in which it is located in that:
1) the project is consistent with development standards established in the Stage 1 and
2 Development Plans as amended for this site; and 2) the Project site is well suited for
a daycare and community center.
H. It is consistent with the Dublin General Plan and with any applicable Specific Plans in
that: the Project site has a General Plan and Eastern Dublin Specific Plan designation
of Semi-Public and a Stage 1 and 2 Development Plan which allows for a daycare
and community center.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Dublin does hereby
reverses the Planning Commission’s decision and approve the Minor Use Permit for shared
4 of 6
parking between the Safari Kid Daycare and the Community Center project, subject to the
conditions included below.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance
of building permits or establishment of use and shall be subject to Planning Department review
and approval. The following codes represent those departments/a gencies responsible for
monitoring compliance of the conditions of approval. [PL.] Planning, [B] Building, [PO] Police,
[PW] Public Works [P&CS] Parks & Community Services, [ADM] Administration/City Attorney,
[FIN] Finance, [F] Alameda County Fire Department, [DSR] Dublin San Ramon Services District,
[CO] Alameda County Department of Environmental Health, [Z7] Zone 7.
# CONDITION TEXT RESPON.
AGENCY
WHEN REQ’D
Prior to:
PLANNING
1. Approval. This Minor Use Permit (MUP) approval is for the
Safari Kid Daycare and Community Center located at Positano
Parkway and Cantara Drive (APN: 985-0073-005-00) within the
Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area (PLPA-2017-00050). The MUP
approval is for shared parking between the 10,667 square foot
daycare and the 4,269 square foot community center. This
approval shall be as generally depicted and indicated on the
project plans, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A, prepared
by Perkins, Williams & Cotterill Architects dated February 21,
2018, on file in the Community Development Department, and
other plans, text, color and materials boards relating to this
Project and as specified by the following Conditions of Approval
for this project.
PL Ongoing
2. Effective Date. This MUP approval becomes effective 10 days
after action by the Planning Commission unless otherwise
appealed to the City Council.
PL Ongoing
3. Permit Expiration. Construction or use shall commence within
one (1) year of Permit approval or the MUP shall lapse and
become null and void. If there is a dispute as to whether the
Permit has expired, the City may hold a noticed public hearing to
determine the matter. Such a determination may be processed
concurrently with revocation proceedings in appropriate
circumstances. If a Permit expires, a new application must be
made and processed according to the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance.
PL One Year After
Effective Date
4. Time Extension. The original approving decision-maker may,
upon the Applicant’s written request for an extension of approval
prior to expiration, upon the determination that all Conditions of
Approval remain adequate and all applicable findings of approval
will continue to be met, grant an extension of the approval for a
period not to exceed six (6) months. All time extension requests
shall be noticed and a public hearing shall be held before the
original hearing body.
PL Prior to
Expiration Date
5. Compliance. The Applicant/Property Owner shall operate this
use in compliance with the Conditions of Approval of this MUP,
the approved plans and the regulations established in the Zoning
PL On-going
5 of 6
Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions specified may
be subject to enforcement action.
6. Revocation of Permit. The MUP approval shall be revocable for
cause in accordance with Section 8.96.020.I of the Dublin Zoning
Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions of this permit
shall be subject to citation.
PL On-going
7. Requirements and Standard Conditions. The Applicant/
Developer shall comply with applicable City of Dublin Fire
Prevention Bureau, Dublin Public Works Department, Dublin
Building Department, Dublin Police Services, Alameda County
Flood Control District Zone 7, Livermore Amador Valley Transit
Authority, Alameda County Public and Environmental Health,
Dublin San Ramon Services District and the California
Department of Health Services requirements and standard
conditions. Prior to issuance of building permits or the installation
of any improvements related to this project, the Developer shall
supply written statements from each such agency or department
to the Planning Department, indicating that all applicable
conditions required have been or will be met.
Various Building Permit
Issuance
8. Required Permits. Applicant/Developer shall obtain all permits
required by other agencies including, but not limited to Alameda
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Zone 7,
California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Army Corps of
Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Caltrans and
provide copies of the permits to the Public Works Department.
PW Building Permit
Issuance and
Grading Permit
Issuance
9. Fees. Applicant/Developer shall pay all applicable fees in effect
at the time of building permit issuance, including, but not limited
to, Planning fees, Building fees, Traffic Impact Fees, TVTC fees,
Dublin San Ramon Services District fees, Public Facilities fees,
Dublin Unified School District School Impact fees, Fire Facilities
Impact fees, Alameda County Flood and Water Conservation
District (Zone 7) Drainage and Water Connection fees; or any
other fee that may be adopted and applicable. Approved
Development Agreement supersedes where applicable.
Various Building Permit
Issuance
10. Indemnification. The Applicant/Developer shall defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Dublin and its agents,
officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding
against the City of Dublin or its agents, officers, or employees to
attack, set aside, void, or annul an approval of the City of Dublin
or its advisory agency, appeal board, Planning Commission, City
Council, Community Development Director, Zoning Administrator,
or any other department, committee, or agency of the City to the
extent such actions are brought within the time period required by
Government Code Section 66499.37 or other applicable law;
provided, however, that the Applicant’s/Developer's duty to so
defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall be subject to the
City's promptly notifying the Applicant/Developer of any said
claim, action, or proceeding and the City's full cooperation in the
defense of such actions or proceedings.
ADM On-going
11. Clarification of Conditions. In the event that there needs to be
clarification to the Conditions of Approval, the Director of
Community Development and the City Engineer have the
authority to clarify the intent of these Conditions of Approval to
PL, PW On-going
6 of 6
the Applicant/Developer without going to a public hearing. The
Director of Community Development and the City Engineer also
have the authority to make minor modifications to these
conditions without going to a public hearing in order for the
Applicant/Developer to fulfill needed improvements or mitigations
resulting from impacts to this project.
12. Clean-up. The Applicant/Developer shall be responsible for
clean-up & disposal of project related trash to maintain a safe,
clean and litter-free site.
PL On-going
13. Modifications. Modifications or changes to this MUP approval
may be considered by the Community Development Director if
the modifications or changes proposed comply with Section
8.104 of the Zoning Ordinance.
PL On-going
14. Use of Building. The daycare and community center shall not
have operational hours that overlap. The classrooms shall only
be utilized for the daycare and cannot be used as part of the
community center. The community center can be used by the
existing daycare students for special functions but shall not be
used as an additional classroom or any other purpose that would
increase the number of children. The lobby, storage closets,
kitchen and bathrooms can be utilized by both uses.
PL On-going
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of June 2018 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
________
City Clerk
CITY OF DUBLIN
SEMI-PUBLIC FACILITIES POLICY
It is the policy of the City Council of the City of Dublin that in reviewing amendments to the land use
map of the Dublin General Plan and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, the City shall also review the
provision of opportunities for cultural, educational and other community services. Semi-Public
Facilities, such as child care centers, religious institutions and others defined below, deliver important
community services. It is the intent of the Policy to increase the opportunities for Semi-Public
Facilities by increasing the locations of lands designated Public/Semi-Public Facilities on the General
Plan land use map. To that effeCt, all land use amendments may be reviewed for designation of Semi-
Public Facilities lands according to the guidelines below:
A. Purpose of Semi-Public Facilities Policy
The purpose of the Semi-Public Facilities Policy is to:
1. Create a greater sense of community in Dublin neighborhoods and commercial centers;
2. Enrich community identity and foster a sense of civic pride;
3. Recognize and anticipate the different needs of Dublin residents who represent diverse ages,
interests, national backgrounds, and cultural, social and creative pursuits;
4. Leave future generations a cultural legacy which can change and develop as the City grows and
changes; and
5. Increase public access to cultural, educational and community services, citywide.
B. Definitions
1. Semi-Public Facilities. Semi-Public Faciliiies will include uses such as child care centers,
youth centers, senior centers, special needs program facilities, religious institutions,
clubhouses, community centers, community theatres, hospitals, and other facilities that provide
cultural, educational, or other community services. A semi-public facility may be used for more
than one semi-public use. Semi-Public Facilities are generally part of the Public/Semi-Public
Facilities land use category.
2. Transportation and Circulation Systems. Adequate transportation and circulation systems
criteria is defined as a site located on a class 1 collector street with two points of access.
C. ApplieabiliW
This Policy shall be applicable to all General Plan and Specific Plan Amendment applications. This
Policy shall apply to residential amendments involving 150 or more Single-Family Density housing
units and/or 250 or more Medium Density or greater density housing units, or increments and
combinations thereof.
EXHIBIT A
Final Task Force Recommendation
D. Procedure
ciFy St~ff shall work with project applicants to meet the goals and intent of the Semi-Public Facility
Policy according to the'following procedure:
1. The location(s) of the Semi-Public Facility site(s) as pan of a Public/Semi-Public Facility land
use category will be determined as a part of the amendment project review by the City.
2. Identification of Semi-Public Facilities sites will begin at the early stages of the amendment
application.
3. The City Council shall have final approval of the Public/Semi-PubliC Facility site identified for
Semi-Public Facility land uses.
E. Standards
1. When reviewing the sufficiency of the' sites proposed as part of an amendment application
pursuant to the Semi-Public Facility Policy, the City will consider the following furore
modifications of design requirements for Semi-Public Facility projects: parking reductions;
design modifications; use of nearby public facilities to meet over-flow parking demand;
partnering of Semi-Public Facilities with City facilities where feasible; and transfer of Semi-
Public Facility land use sites to other locations in the City of Dublin that meet the location
criteria described below.
2. When reviewing the sufficiency of sites proposed as a part of an amendment application
pursuant to the Semi-Public Facility Policy, the City will consider modification of these
standards for, or exempt, projects that provide affordable housing in excess of the City of
Dublin Inclusionary Zoning Regulations.
3. New residential development subject to this Policy shall strive to provide sites for Semi-Public
Facilities land uses at a rate of 1 acre (net) per 1,000 residents. In practice, General Plan and
Specific Plan Amendment applications shall strive to provide .5 acres of land designated for
Public/Semi-Public Facilities per 150 units of Single-Family Density (.9 - 6.0 units per acre)
and/or .5 acres of land designated Public/Semi-Public Facilities per 250 units of Medium
Density or greater density (6.1 or more units per acre), or increments and combinations thereof.
4. Private residential facilities* to be used to satisfy this Policy may not be restricted to project
residents and employees.
5. Future facilities will have an identifying architectural style that is attractive and that is
recognizable from the public right-of-way.
6. Sites for future Semi-Public Facilities will be reviewed per the location guidelines below.
Private residential facilities are recreation rooms or facilities in housing developments that are
developedfor the use of the project residents only.
F. Location of Semi-Public Facilitv Sites
In considering the potential location of Semi-Public Facilities, the City Council will consider
locations in all parts of the City. In addition, it is encouraged that Semi-Public Facilities be located
at sites:
1. with adequate transportation and circulation systems that have the least conflict with residential
uses;
2. where shared parking might occur between complementary uses;
3. with open space and landscaping amenities;
4. with proximity to City parks; and
5. with proximity to schools.
1
Safari Kid: Traffic Flow (Staggered and Not Conflicting)
Safari Kid offers two different programs: Preschool and Afterschool.
Safari Kid Preschool: We offer part-time and full-time preschool programs to cater to
Parent’s needs, which are staggered throughout the day. Age group (18 months to 5
years)
Safari Kid Afterschool: This program caters to kids in Dublin Unified elementary grade
levels (KG to 5) with staggered bell dismissal times.
Safari Kid Program Timings
Full Day Preschool 07:30 AM - 05:00 PM
Part-Time Preschool 09:00 AM - 12:00 PM
After School (Kindergarten) 01:00 PM – 06:00 PM
After School (School Age) 02:30 PM – 06:00 PM (Mon-Tue)
03:30 PM – 06:00 PM (Wed-Fri)
Safari Kid Drop-off and Pick-up:
Children are brought to our center by vanpool pick-up services in batches of 5-9
children at a time. Safari Kid also has 2 vans that transport up to 13 children in
each. This reduces the number of vehicles and the amount of traffic. (e.g. on an
average of 6 children per vehicle, only 10 vehicles will be needed to transport 60
children)
Parents or Pick-up Service personnel are required topark the vehicle and walk the
children in or out of the center to check-in or check-out. Two to three Safari Kid staff
members will assist in the smooth operation of check-in and check-out at our lobby and
front-desk. This process typically takes less than 3 minutes per vehicle .
The following is a comparison of the Amador Elementary School Bell Schedules
with the traffic flow analysis typical of similar daycare centers. Note that the
primary hours of drop-off for the Safari Kids preschool (7:00am to 8:00am) will be
prior to the peak time for Amador Elementary school drop-off, which was
observed by the City Traffic Engineer and Staff as being 8:05am to 8:25am. Thus
the concerns about overlapping traffic between the Safari Kids preschool and Amador
Elementary school are not valid.
Amador Elementary School Timings
Kindergarten 08:35 AM – 12:26 PM
1st – 5th Grades 08:25 AM – 02:00 PM (Mon-Tue)
08:25 AM - 03:00 PM (Wed-Fri)
2
Below is a Detailed Traffic Flow Analysis (with sample admission data based on similar
Childcare Centers).
Note that Amador Elementary school drop off timings are highlighted in light beige
background below to illustrate that there is no conflict of traffic flow in or out of Safari Kid
during those times.
*We arrange for Pick up services to drop-off children for our KG and Afterschool Programs. They usually operate 7-8
seater vans and on an average 6 kids are dropped-off per each vehicle (e.g. only 10 vehicles to drop-off 60 kids)
Furthermore, it should be noted that the Cottonwood Elementary School (950
student capacity located on Jordan Ranch to the south) is scheduled to open in Fall 2018
which will divert a large number of kids (currently) attending Amador Elementary School
over to the new Cottonwood Elementary School on Jordan Ranch.. This would begin
to offer an immense positive impact to Positano Parkway’s reduced traffic, months
before Safari Kid could begin operations at the proposed site.
Students Arriving at Safari Kid Students Leaving Safari Kid
Preschool KG Afterschool Preschool KG Afterschool
07:00 – 07:30 AM 75 0 0 0 0 0
07:30 - 08:00 AM 25 0 0 0 0 0
08:00 – 08:30 AM
(Amador timings- All) 0 0 0 0 0 0
08:45 - 09:00 AM 50 0 0 0 0 0
09:00 - 11:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
11:45 AM - 12:15 PM 0 0 0 50 0 0
12:15 - 12:45 PM
(Amador timings - KG) 0 0 0 0 0 0
12:45 PM - 01:15 PM* 0 40* 0 0 0 0
02:00 - 02:30 PM (M/T)
Or
03:00– 03:30 PM (W/T/F)
(Amador timings– 1 to 5)
0 0 0 0 0 0
02:30 PM – 03:00PM*
Or
03:30 PM – 04:00PM*
0 0 60* 0 0 0
03:30 PM - 05:00 PM 0 0 0 40 0 0
05:00 PM - 05:30 PM 0 0 0 60 0 0
05:30 PM - 06:00 PM 0 0 0 0 35 20
06:00 PM – 06:30 PM 0 0 0 0 5 40
June 19, 2018
SB 343
Senate Bill 343 mandates supplemental materials that
have been received by the City Clerk’s office that relate to
an agenda item after the agenda packets have been
distributed to the City Council be available to the public.
The attached documents were received in the City Clerk’s
office after distribution of the June 19, 2018, City Council
meeting agenda packet.
Item 6.1
Safari Kids Childcare & Community Center
a (https: /idublin- development. Icityr.,ork.comi #projectdetail602)
Details
Planning Application # PLPA- 2017 -00050
Application Type Conditional Use Permit. Site Development Review & Minor
Use Permit
Application Submittal 08/08/2017
Date
General Plan Land Use Semi - Public
Specific Plan Area Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
Zoning PD (Planned Development)
Project Area 2.1 acres
Building Area 14.936 square feet
Foor Area Ratio 19 FAR
Stories /Height 1 story / 23 feet
Parking Provided 90 parking spaces
Applicant Safari Kids. Chandra Sirapu
800 Henley Court. San Ramon, CA 94583
510) 585 -5541
Project Planner Mandy Kang - Senior Planner
925) 833 -6613
mandy.kang @dublin.ca.gov
mailto :mandy.kang @dublin.ca.gov)
11
si; ..
Planning
Application Submitted Public Hearing
i
Pre - Application Application Final Action
Under Review
Project Description
Safari Kid is proposing anew daycare facility and community room on the vacant 2.1 -acre Semi - Public parcel at the corner of Positano
Parkway and West Canters Drive in Positano. The proposed project includes a 14,936 square foot building comprised of a 10,667
square foot childcare center and a 4,269 square foot multipurpose room that will be open for rent to the community. The project
includes an outdoor play area for the childcare center, shared parking for both uses and landscaping throughout the site.
The childcare center is proposed to operate Monday - Friday from 6:30am - 6:30pm with staggered pick -up and drop-off times.
Classrooms and the outdoor play area wilt not be accessible after the childcare center closes. The community center is proposed to
operate M -F in the evenings and on weekends during the following hours:
Sunday: 8am -8pm
Monday- Thursday: 8:30pm -8pm
Friday: 6:30pm -10pm
Saturday: 8am -i0pm
The application includes a Conditional Use Permit to amend the PD Zoning and a Site Development Review for the Safari Kids
Childcare & Community Center. The project also includes a Minor Use Permit to allow the two uses to utilize shared parking.
On February 13, 2018, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and continued the project to an unknown date, The project has
been modified, and it is scheduled to go back to the Planning Commission on April 10, 2018.
Dublin Parents and Residents IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT: (Please Sign)
Dublin Resident Name Address S
POOZA 11BREWA t
21 Page
4 - I.... -_Fa zt itllicavn_ sfi.._..Ruk
kolg OSHf A 204r. 'DOBAT-d
StHtila
Planning
Application Submitted Public Hearing
Pre - Application Application Final Action
Under Review
Project Description
Safari Kid is proposing anew daycare facility and community room on the vacant 2.1 -acre Semi - Public parcel at the corner of Positano
Parkway and West Centers Drive in Positano. The proposed project includes a 14,936 square foot building comprised of a 10,667
square foot childcare center and a 4,269 square foot multipurpose room that will be open for rent to the community. The project
includes an outdoor play area for the childcare center, shared parking for both uses and landscaping throughout the site.
The childcare center is proposed to operate Monday - Friday from 6:30am - 6:30pm with staggered pick -up and drop-off times.
Classrooms and the outdoor play area will not be accessible after the childcare center closes. The community center is proposed to
operate M -F in the evenings and on weekends during the following hours:
Sunday: 8am -8pm
Monday- Thursday: 6:30pm -8pm
Friday: 6:30pm -10pm
Saturday: 8am -10pm
The application Includes a Conditional Use Permit to amend the PD Zoning and a Site Development Review for the Safari Kids
Childcare 8 Community Center. The project also Includes a Minor Use Permit to allow the two uses to utilize shared parking.
On February 13, 2018, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and continued the project to an unknown date. The project has
been modified, and it is scheduled to go back to the Planning Commission on April 10. 2018,
Project Images
M ` t 7
Dublin Parents and Residents IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT: (Please Sign)
Dublin Resident Name Address Signature
A/ f - I
GGM,rirt 6au._ I tstcZ Swvh l.d nlb6n I
ic'" {?G ctr•aaaCicaw 434°I )en,ldsbu gu. Wbhh
2 1Page
Dublin Resident Name Address
CAv Tti A Do
es vmi
1\4 O'A
Iro [- t,
11-vs
0
7 6
322-(o 1l!-06
2_ 8 3._crxcp< v:<
I
3.jL
Dublin Resident Name Address
loop
i C-NWAJ 7
St
yo,thjaj\v)l o101yi
51 P
Dublin Resident Name Address Signature
M aio. G6 393 C1 4 rD"
5c S P44 - 9L56
kos 7 as yc Sbr. DtL up)
Dublin Resident Name Address Signature
D
At
lcl
wa!6-t
s r6 IIAV" I L f5L1!•1
rDub Iin Resident Name I Address Signat re
Vy I NS Ul.p
man=-EcAaki—O
dl, - L G M 14 Pa
Ai ni' I 69 1 peslt r;! 7
A mot/ Also al S5
41 Page
Dublin Resident Name Address
I. -- ., :I
Th
Iv) cA,
Sl Yks, 6-,t
O)OA
Z4 3 7-3 I-e e- Iko mP P uh
Sash
It La
01
b,;-o Hoberld CL Y-, 2Y
U -1 U VA A \1 K k
4-0 CkaJ V
haver
fo
vqch Salle
121 qpkScrt
K. C
ej
Qtn
gf WqH IL t
t& fCO
ctp J jt,(
tv-1 C, (`4W , A 19
t_oSl_ (,hid/ '
51 P a g e
Dublin Resident Name Address Signature
Y2g8 n7iAWIAiYRANIAN AAlrH 'cry -
G-rjW I
VAnjo
WCA - s
33.35
M
01
LtjcA 4 253 M DUiNDS_ 0 6Z ---
p r D A S „qri UZ z- V1iDt C
Su tiq I rk-M !1 D t ^i
j t I 7AP, Soho f Y, bl
Voln.2?A_L— /-
PY >`lgrtk Q S-o 'Zo
T'
31 Pape
1
Braddock and Logan Exhaustion Letter
Law Offices of
Michael Patrick Durkee
1250- I Newell Avenue, #156
Walnut Creek CA 94596
Via Email
June 18, 2018
Honorable Mayor
and City Council
City of Dublin
Attention: City Attorney and
City Clerk
Dublin Civic Center
100 Civic Plaza,
Dublin, CA 94568
Re: Legal and Factual Grounds Supporting Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of
Safari Kids Daycare Center – Site development Review, Conditional Use permit
and Minor Use Permit
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council:
On behalf of Braddock and Logan, the property owner of the below-described “Site,” and for
the factual and legal reasons set forth in this letter and the administrative record (as a whole),
we respectfully submit that the Dublin Planning Commission’s denial of the above-referenced
Safari Kids applications violated controlling state and federal law, should be reversed, and the
project applications should be approved.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
From the outset, Braddock and Logan proposed 11 to 12 residential units on this 2.1 acres (net)
site (“Site”):
• In September of 2004, City Council approved the General Plan Amendment and Stage 1
Zoning for the Site as “Single Family Residential” (0.9 to 6.0 Units Per Acre).
• In September of 2005, Braddock and Logan’s Vesting Tentative Map No 7586 was
deemed complete, with the Site shown as 11 single family lots. Under controlling law,
Braddock and Logan had a vested right to pursue residential development of the Site.
Braddock and Logan is politically sensitive and enjoys strong and positive relations with the
City. At the urging of certain City Council members who wanted a site for a church or other
2
Braddock and Logan Exhaustion Letter
community-serving use, the City changed the regulations applicable to the Site. The Site
received a “Semi-Public” General Plan and Specific Plan designations, and Planned
Development Zoning, including PD Semi-Public Stage 1 and Stage 2 approvals:
• In October of 2005, City Staff requested that the Site be designated as “Semi Public” and
that the 11 residential lots be removed.
• In November of 2005, the Planning Commission approved a vesting Tentative Map for
1,043 residential units, with the Site designated as Semi-Public (the approval was
subject to the City Council approval of the Stage 2 Development Plan rezoning).
• In December of 2005, the City Council approved the Stage 2 Development Plan Rezoning
for the Site, with the Site designated – and included in the Site Plan attached to the
Ordinance – as “Semi-Public.” According to that Ordinance, the maximum allowed FAR
is 0.50, and the permitted as of right uses of the Site include: Day Care Center,
Community Center/Clubhouse; Community Theater, Cultural Center, Education
Facilities, Private School, Recreational Facilities-public, Religious Institution, Senior
Center, Special Needs Facilities, Trail Staging Area, Youth Center, and similar uses as
determined by the Community Development Director.
For the next five (5) years, Braddock and Logan marketed the Site to potential buyers, but none
was found. Because of this, Braddock and Logan again approached the City seeking to develop
the Site with residential uses:
• On December 7, 2010, the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment Study,
authorizing City Staff to evaluate the removal the Semi-Public designation from the Site
and replacing the designation with a Single Family Residential (0.9-6.0 Units Per Acre)
designation.
• On January 11, 2012, Mr. Andy Byde of Braddock and Logan held a community meeting
with the Positano community to explain the proposed residential uses of the Site. The
Positano Community’s very strong reaction (and consensus) was to leave the Semi-
Public Land Use designation in place. When Mr. Byde explained to the community that
if the Semi-Public designation was not changed, the Site would likely end up as a Child
Care Facility, the overwhelming response was they would take their chances with the
existing Semi-Public land use over having 12 new residential neighbors.
• On January 24, 2012, the Planning Commission denied Braddock and Logan’s request for
a General Plan Amendment and Vesting Tentative Map for 12 Single Family Units on the
Site. The Planning Commission recommend that the Land Use designation be retained
as Semi-Public, so that uses such as child care facilities would have a place to go in the
Positano community.
• Thereafter, in February of 2012, Mr. Byde spoke with Mayor Tim Sibranti regarding the
Planning Commission’s actions. In response, Mayor Sibranti stated that the approval for
a General Plan Amendment and Vesting Tentative Map for 12 Single Family Units would
be a “heavy lift” and may not receive approval from the City Council. Mayor Sibranti
3
Braddock and Logan Exhaustion Letter
recommended that Braddock and Logan not move forward with the proposal to place
12 Single Family Units on the Site.
• On April 20, 2012, at the request of the Mayor and other Council Members privately,
Braddock and Logan withdrew the application request for the General Plan Amendment
and Tentative map regarding its proposed 12 Single Family Units.
With that result, Braddock and Logan again attempted to market the Site to potential buyers.
Finally, in November of 2016, Braddock and Logan hired Michael Copeland, Managing Director
of Cushman and Wakefield, to market the property to preschool/day care providers.
• In February of 2017, Braddock and Logan selected Safari Kids as a suitable buyer.
Braddock and Logan reasoned that the City would support Safari Kids, as they already
operated a successful franchise in Dublin.
• In June of 2017, Safari Kids finished its due diligence on the Site and decided to move
forward with the purchase.
City Staff indicated to Safari Kids that although all land use approvals had been granted for the
Site in 2005, somehow the Semi-Public “hours of operation” and building “setbacks” had
inadvertently not been addressed by the City. Under existing City Code provisions, such items
can be administratively handled, with the Community Development Director empowered to
make such revisions without a public hearing. However, City Staff insisted that Safari Kids seek
a Conditional Use Permit to establish hours of operation and building setbacks. Safari Kids was
also instructed to submit applications for design review and a minor use permit for shared
parking:
• On August 8, 2017, Safari Kids submitted such applications, proposing a 10,667 square
foot child care facility and a 4,269 square foot community room, with shared parking
between the two facilities.
• The proposed hours of operation were 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., consistent with the
business practices and City-approved operations hours of other day care facilities in the
City. Parking was ample, and the design was likewise consistent with new development
in the Positano area.
In February and April of 2018, the Planning Commission held public hearings regarding Safari
Kids’ applications. At the first hearing, few if any neighbors from the Positano community were
present. Commissioner Amit Kothari wrongly blamed the applicant, asserting that notice had
not been properly provided. That was untrue. At the continued hearing, the room was packed.
The Planning Commission succumbed to the political pressures caused by the angry neighbors,
and instead of focusing on the merits of the applications – as required by law - turned the
hearings into a referendum on the Site’s Semi-Public designation, including Safari Kids’ day care
proposal (which is a permitted use under that designation). The City Council’s review of the
Planning Commission hearings is strongly advised. Perhaps Planning Commissioner Kothari’s
efforts were geared to secure favor with the neighbors at the applicant’s – and Braddock and
Logan’s – expense, leading to designed political pressure being placed on the Planning
4
Braddock and Logan Exhaustion Letter
Commission as a whole, resulting in the Commission doing the bidding of the Positano
neighbors instead of providing the applicant with the fair and impartial “Due Process” and
“Equal Protection” required by controlling law:
• February 13, 2018: At the Planning Commission hearing, no members of the Positano
community were in attendance. Because of this, Commissioner Amit Kothari - who lives
in the Positano Community – asserted that the absence of attendance was a result of
inadequate notification by the applicant and a lack of posting on to social media
platforms. Mr. Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director, corrected
Commissioner Kothari, and stated that the applicant complied with all City notification
procedures, including the required 300-foot radius mailed notification to all property
owners and tenants. In addition, the applicant complied with the City requirement that
two on-site signs be posted on the property explaining the nature of the application
(which were posted in August of 2017). Finally, the City maintained an extensive
description of the project and the time and date of all public hearings associated with
the project on the City’s development projects website (https://dublin-
development.icitywork.com).
• Given input by the Planning Commission at the February 13, 2018 hearing, the applicant
voluntarily revised its project, including access points, staggered drop off and pick up
times, parking lot layout, design features (e.g., adding additional stone on the exterior of
the building, adding pavers at the entrance of the site, reducing the size of signage to
below what the City’s sign ordinance allowed, eliminating the driveway entrance from
Positano Drive), etc.
• At the February 13, 2018 hearing, Commissioner Kothari asked the applicant if a
licensed traffic engineer had been retained to evaluate the on-site and off-site impacts
of the project. In response, it was explained that the Safari Kids project does not include
any construction of a new roadway, and that a day care is a principally permitted use
under the Semi-Public land use designation. Therefore, the project is not required to
have a traffic engineer as part of the design team. Moreover, City Staff stated the
project had been designed by the applicant’s licensed civil engineer (McKay and Somps)
and had been evaluated by both the City’s licensed Civil Engineer and the City’s licensed
Traffic Engineer for consistency with all City traffic and safety requirements and
professional standards. Despite the assertion by City Staff that the project had already
been evaluated by all appropriate professionals, Commissioner Kothari continued to
insist that traffic and safety issues would result from the project, without citing any
evidence (substantial or otherwise) supporting his argument.
• Commissioner Kothari’s unsubstantiated arguments began to be picked up by the other
Planning Commissioners, who in turn requested a peer review of the project by an
outside traffic engineer. Again, Mr. Baker told the Planning Commissioners that the
project before them was a “design review permit” and not a question of permitted land
use, that therefore the request of additional traffic studies was not be under the
authority of the Planning Commission, and that the City’s Traffic Engineer had already
reviewed the project and found it consistent with City’s traffic and safety requirements.
5
Braddock and Logan Exhaustion Letter
• Despite being warned by City Staff that the project before the Planning Commission was
not a question of use and that therefore the traffic associated with the project was not
subject to the Commission’s evaluation, Commissioner Kothari stated that the he could
not make a decision on the project without a without a third-party traffic evaluation.
Commissioner Kothari continued to state that his role as a planning commissioner was
to protect the public and to determine what was the best “use of the property for the
community.”
• At the end of the meeting, Commissioner Kothari continued to stress the traffic analysis
issue by stating that State law had changed and now required traffic analysis to be
conducted to determine impacts on pedestrians, cyclist, transit, and traffic, because of a
new law called “Complete Streets.”
• Throughout the proceedings, we believe that Commissioner Kothari was more
interested in his role as a member of the Positano community than in his obligations as
a member of the Dublin Planning Commission. As a result, we assert that Commissioner
Kothari refused to accept City Staff’s assertion that the use associated with the
proposed Safari Kids project (and its associated traffic) was not subject to the Planning
Commission’s review. Commissioner Kothari concluded his comments by stating that he
would like to continue the item until the City’ Traffic Engineer could address his
concerns, especially regarding the “New State Law of Complete Streets.”
• April 10, 2018: The Planning Commission heard the continued Safari Kids project on
April 10, 2018. According to City Staff, that Planning Commission meeting was one of
the most well-attended meetings in the City’s history. Litigation “Discovery” may
uncover the root of that public outcry. Dozens of speakers from the Positano
community – as if reading from a script - asserted that they did not want a “commercial
use in Positano.” Many angry members of the audience could be heard yelling at the
Commission and at speakers who were speaking in favor of the project. Enraged
neighbors ignored all applicable rules and interrupted and shouted over the comments
of public members testifying in support of the Safari Kids applications. An atmosphere
of fear, intimidation and retaliation was created, and the Planning Commission did little,
if anything, to control or correct this situation.
• Ultimately, the Planning Commission voted to deny the project’s applications based on
traffic impacts, despite not only the absence of any evidence supporting that conclusion,
but the abundance of evidence contradicting that conclusion: The City’s Traffic Engineer
clearly stated that in his professional opinion, after applying controlling regulations, that
there would be no safety impacts from the project and that the project met all City
traffic requirements. No one from the audience nor the Commission provided contrary
evidence; only conclusions were voiced that traffic and safety impacts would result. The
Planning Commission simply “folded” to community pressure to deny the project,
echoing the “refrain” that the project would result in additional traffic and safety
impacts on the community. This decision was made despite repeated warnings from
City Staff that the decision before the commission was a design question, not a use
question - the question of use had already been answered by the City Council’s adoption
6
Braddock and Logan Exhaustion Letter
of the General Plan, Specific Plan, Stage 1, and Stage 2 Planned Development Zoning of
“Semi- Public,” which lists preschools and community facilities as principally permitted
uses.
• During the vote, the Planning Commission had difficulty forming findings for denial.
Despite the clear evidence to the contrary, members of the Planning Commission
incorrectly stated that the project only had one way in and one way out (there are four
ways in and out of the Positano Area). Perhaps as a result of fear of potential adverse
neighbor reaction and incorrect conclusions about the Project and its impacts on the
Positano area, the Commission arrived at unsubstantiated and false conclusions,
including: “Positano Parkway did not have adequate capacity to serve the project,” and
“development of this project will increase traffic.” Ultimately, the Planning Commission
denied all the Safari Kids applications.
• Despite the lack of any evidence in the record supporting their conclusions, the Planning
Commission’s denials cite “inadequate traffic capacity to serve the proposed project,”
“inadequate public utilities to serve the site,” and additional vehicle trips that will result
in safety impacts to pedestrians and cyclists as the sole grounds for their denial of the
applications.
This appeal from those denials was timely brought. In May of 2018, Braddock and Logan hired
TJKM, Transportation Consultants and Engineers, to evaluate the project’s safety impacts to
pedestrians and vehicles, its parking adequacy, as well as its impact on traffic, traffic volumes,
and Levels of Service. Their report is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference
as if set forth herein in full.
TJKM studied the Safari Kids project, including the following: (1) level of service and queuing on
Positano Parkway with and without the proposed project; (2) potential traffic operational
effects from the proposed project; (3) project trip generation; (4) existing traffic, pedestrian,
bicycle, and transit conditions of the Positano area; (5) the existing plus project traffic
conditions (6) future traffic plus project traffic conditions of the Positano area; and (6) Site
Access, Circulation, and Parking of the proposed project. The conclusions of the traffic impact
study are as follows:
• Under “Existing Conditions,” all study intersections operate at acceptable LOS D or
better during all peak periods.
• Under “Existing plus Project Conditions,” all intersections will continue to operate at LOS
D or better during all peak periods, and all 95th percentile queue lengths will be
accommodated within available storage lanes.
• Under “Future Conditions,” all study intersections operate at acceptable LOS D or better
during all peak periods.
• With the project, pedestrian connection to the site will be safe and adequate, with no
safety conflicts.
• With the project, no impacts to pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities will result.
7
Braddock and Logan Exhaustion Letter
• The proposed project will not conflict with existing and/or planned pedestrian or bicycle
facilities and will add very few trips to existing transit facilities.
• The project site layout is adequate for on -site vehicle circulation, including vans,
emergency vehicles, and garbage trucks.
• No traffic operations issues are expected, and ample on-Site site parking will work well
with no delays or backups into the nearby streets.
• The proposed project has an ample supply of parking spaces to be provided on-Site (90
parking stalls), and that no parking impacts will result, either on-Site or on neighboring
City streets.
• Consistent with the evidence presented by City Staff to the Planning Commission, TJKM
concludes that the proposed project introduces no impacts to pedestrian, bicycle,
transit facilities or traffic facilities; that the roadway network has adequate capacity to
serve the project; and that no substantial impacts would result to the roadway network
from the project. The TJKM analysis wholly undermines each finding for denial made by
the Planning Commission.
No doubt additional information will surface through litigation if this appeal is denied. In short,
evaluating the Planning Commission decision as a whole, including the decision to continue the
hearing, improperly request traffic analysis, and ultimately use unsubstantiated and false findings
to deny the project, leads one to reasonably wonder whether the Planning Commission’s denials
were the product of bias and political pressure, perhaps created by Commissioner Kothari as a
Positano resident, and multiplied by the Planning Commission as a whole, which violated the
protections provided the applicant and Braddock and Logan under controlling state and federal
law.
LEGAL ARGUMENT
A. The Planning Commission Failed to Provide a Fair Process;
Liability Will Attach if the Appeal is Denied
Controlling law makes clear that local decision-makers must ensure that due process and equal
protection safeguards are provided when applications - like those here - are presented for
evaluation and decision. This body of law hinges on fair and impartial proceedings, with neutral
arbiters basing their decisions on substantial evidence in the administrative record.
California law is consistent with this Constitutional mandate, with the elements of a fair hearing
including the requirement that decision makers be unbiased, and that decisions be based on
substantial evidence in the record. As California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5
provides in pertinent part:
(b) . . . The [judicial] inquiry in such a case shall extend to . . . whether there was
a fair trial; and whether there was any prejudicial abuse of discretion. Abuse of
discretion is established if the respondent has not proceeded in the manner
8
Braddock and Logan Exhaustion Letter
required by law, the order or decision is not supported by the findings, or the
findings are not supported by the evidence.
(c) . . . abuse of discretion is established if the court determines that the findings
are not supported by substantial evidence in the light of the whole record. (Id.)
As your City Attorney will confirm, Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5(c) applies to the
quasi-judicial project applications that are the subject of this appeal.
Such rules of “fairness” serve two basic goals: (i) providing more accurate, principled, and
predictable decisions; and (ii) demonstrating to the public that their government will treat them
in a just and evenhanded manner.
We respectfully submit that the facts of this case support a reasonable conclusion that the
Planning Commission was unfair and biased in their decision making, that their denials were
politically motivated and lacked any supporting substantial evidence, and that the only
substantial evidence in the record supports the reversal of the Planning Commission’s denials
and the approval of the project applications.
1. The Planning Commission Was Unfairly Biased.
A fair process demands impartial proceedings. As California’s Institute for Local Government
provides in Chapter 5 (“Fair Process Laws and Merit-Based Decision-Making”) of its treatise
Understanding the Basics of Public Service Ethics (2013) (“ILG Guide”):
When an official sits in a quasi-judicial capacity, that official’s personal
interest or involvement, either in a decision’s outcome or with any
participants, can create a risk that the agency’s decision will be set aside
by a court . . . Decision-makers are also well advised to step aside on
participation in a quasi-judicial matter when the decision-maker has pre-
judged the matter. Attributes of having “pre-judged the matter” include
having a closed mind or a preconceived and unalterable view of the
proper outcome without regard to the evidence.
* * *
If the violation rises to the level of a denial of due process under
constitutional law, the affected individual(s) may seek damages, costs
and attorney’s fees.
Id. at 73.
We understand that some degree of bias in decision making is unavoidable. But when bias for
the neighbors and against the applicant leads to denial decisions based solely on unreasonable
and unsubstantiated conclusions, a “fair process” is the casualty. We respectfully submit that
such is the case here.
9
Braddock and Logan Exhaustion Letter
The applicant and Braddock and Logan have a due process right to be protected from a
Planning Commissioner and full Commission whom a reasonable person would determine to be
unfairly biased, given advertised views and subsequent actions.
California courts have shown a willingness to find the absence of a fair hearing when one sitting
in a position of judgment has shown through words and conduct that he was “not a
disinterested, unbiased decision maker.” See, Clark v. City of Hermosa Beach, 48 Cal. App. 4th
1152, 1173 (1995). Likewise, in Nasha v. City of Los Angeles, 125 Cal. App. 4th 470 (2004), the
court, in finding an unacceptable probability of actual bias (Id. at 482), focused on a planning
commissioner who as president of a homeowners’ association published an unsigned
newsletter against the project. The court found that authorship of the article produced an
unacceptable probability of actual bias.
We submit that the facts in Nasha v. City of Los Angeles are remarkably similar to the situation
at hand. We believe, and upon that belief assert, that Commissioner Kothari was more
interested in his role as a member of the Positano community than in his obligations as a
member of the Dublin Planning Commission. As formal discovery may reveal, we believe that
Commissioner Kothari put considerable energy into his outreach, seeking to pack the hearing
room with individuals against the project, hoping to influence the Planning Commission’s
decisions, and hence secure political favor for himself. We submit that those are not the
actions of an unbiased decision maker.
As the court in Woody’s Group, Inc. v. City of Newport Beach, 233 Cal. App. 4th 1012, 1027
(2015), concluded, “a person cannot be a judge in his or her own cause.” If Commissioner
Kothari’s “cause” was to kill this project, and in doing so, to ingratiate himself to his neighbors,
then he should have recused himself, and not sought to influence the remainder of the
Planning Commission. He did not recuse himself. Possibly as a result, instead of focusing on
the design merits of the permitted as of right day care facility on the already-designated “Semi-
Public” Site, the Planning Commission (as a whole) succumbed to the political pressures caused
by the very vocal and very angry neighbors and twisted the focus of the hearings into a
referendum on the Site’s Semi-Public use. In sum, we assert that the Planning Commission’s
denial of the project applications was wholly political in nature and was influenced entirely by
the anti-project opinions and emotions of the neighbors, possibly gathered into the hearing
chambers by the efforts of Positano resident, Commissioner Kothari.
The City cannot have it both ways: it cannot deny Braddock and Logan’s request to re-designate
the Site “Residential” - affirming its desire to retain the community-serving uses envisioned by
the “Semi-Public designation – and then deny a use envisioned and permitted by that Semi-
Public designation. If the City wishes to keep the Site vacant, it can; it simply must pay for it.
Fairness must be restored: the biased denial of the project applications by the Planning
Commission must be reversed and the project applications approved.
10
Braddock and Logan Exhaustion Letter
2. The Planning Commission’s Denials Were Not
Supported by Substantial Evidence in the Record.
A fair process demands that decisions be based on substantial evidence in the administrative
record. As Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5(c) provides in pertinent part:
(c) . . . abuse of discretion is established if the court determines that the findings
are not supported by substantial evidence in the light of the whole record. (Id.)
Again, as your City Attorney will confirm, Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5(c) applies to
the quasi-judicial project applications that are the subject of this appeal.
Once more, we respectfully submit that the Planning Commission denied the project
applications, concluding that there was inadequate traffic capacity to serve the proposed
project, and that additional vehicle trips caused by the project would result in safety impacts to
pedestrians and cyclists, without any substantial evidence in the record supporting those
conclusions. As set forth above and in the attached traffic report from TJKM, the project suffers
from none of the impact conclusions reached by the Planning Commission in their denial of the
project applications.
Fairness must be restored: the unsupported denials of the project applications by the Planning
Commission must be reversed.
3. If the Planning Commission’s Denials Are Not Reversed,
City Liability May Result.
Consistent with the ILG Guide’s admonitions and controlling law, 42 United States Code (USC),
section 1983 provides a civil action against a person or persons, who, under the color of
government, violate the rights of a citizen, including their Due Process and Equal Protection
rights guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution:
Every person under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or
usage, of any State . . . [who] subjects, or causes to be subjected, any
citizen of the United States . . .to the deprivation of any rights, privileges,
or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the
party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding
for redress. 42 USC § 1983.
Further, controlling law supports private property owner compensation from public agencies
whose actions “take” the economically viable use of a property. If neither Residential nor
permitted as of right Semi-Public uses are allowed, clearly no economically viable use value
remains in the Site. See, e.g., Agins v. Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255, 261 (1980) (a regulation must
advance a legitimate governmental interest and not deprive the property of economically
viable use); Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, 505 U.S. 1003 (1992) (sand dune
preservation regulation was a “taking” per se because it took all viable economic use from
property); see also, Nolan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987), and Dolan v.
11
Braddock and Logan Exhaustion Letter
Town of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994) (there must be “nexus” between the evidence in the record
and the decision reached).
Likewise, there is a point by which the City is estopped from refusing to honor a land use
designation it has placed on a property. We have reached that point. If this appeal is denied, it
will be clear that, despite the long history of this Site, the City will allow neither Residential nor
Semi-Public uses on the Site. As such, no viable economic use will remain in the Site. Braddock
and Logan will lose this sale to Safari Kids and will have no option but to seek all remedies
available in law and equity, including without limitation, lost opportunity costs, damages, and
attorneys’ fees and costs.
B. The Planning Commission’s Denials Must be Reversed
The Planning Commission’s denials were not the product of a fair process. Instead, they were
the product of bias and political pressure, possibly created by Commissioner Kothari as a
Positano resident, and multiplied by the Planning Commission as a whole. Their actions
violated the protections guaranteed the applicant and Braddock and Logan under controlling
state and federal law. Such violations are actionable in litigation and will be acted upon by
Braddock and Logan if the City Council affirms the actions of the Planning Commission.
Embrace the rules of “fairness.” Demand adhesion to the law. In return, you will secure more
accurate, principled, and predictable decisions, and you will remind your citizens and those who
come before the City that they will be treated in a just, lawful, and evenhanded manner.
The Planning Commission’s project denials must be reversed. The only substantial evidence in
the record demands the approval of the project applications.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael Patrick Durkee, Esq.
Cc: City Clerk
City Manager
City Attorney
Braddock and Logan
Enclosure
Traffic Impact Study Report
Safari Kids Daycare Center
June 13, 2018
City of Dublin, California
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 3
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 5
Study Intersections and Scenarios ............................................................................................................................................ 5
Study Methodology ....................................................................................................................................... 9
Level of Service Analysis Methodology .................................................................................................................................. 9
Significant Impact Criteria and Level of Service Standards ..........................................................................................10
Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................................................... 11
Existing Setting and Roadway System ..................................................................................................................................11
Existing Traffic Conditions .........................................................................................................................................................12
Existing Pedestrian Facilities .....................................................................................................................................................13
Existing Bicycle Facilities .............................................................................................................................................................14
Existing Transit Facilities .............................................................................................................................................................14
Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing Conditions ........................................................................................15
Existing plus Project Conditions ................................................................................................................. 18
Project Trip Generation ...............................................................................................................................................................18
Project Trip Distribution and Assignment ...........................................................................................................................18
Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing plus Project Conditions ...............................................................21
Queuing Analysis ...........................................................................................................................................................................22
Future Conditions ......................................................................................................................................... 24
Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Future Conditions...........................................................................................24
Future plus Project Conditions ................................................................................................................... 26
Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Future plus Project Conditions .................................................................26
Site Access and On-Site Circulation and other impacts ........................................................................... 28
Site Access ........................................................................................................................................................................................28
On-Site Circulation .......................................................................................................................................................................28
Drop-Off and Pick Up Operations ..........................................................................................................................................29
Pedestrian Access ..........................................................................................................................................................................29
Bicycle Access .................................................................................................................................................................................30
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | ii
Transit ................................................................................................................................................................................................30
Parking ...............................................................................................................................................................................................30
Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................... 31
Tables
Table 1: Unsignalized Intersection Delay and LOS Definitions........................................................................................ 10
Table 3: Existing Transit Services ................................................................................................................................................. 15
Table 4: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing Conditions ........................................................................... 15
Table 6: Project Trip Generation .................................................................................................................................................. 18
Table 7: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing plus Project Conditions .................................................. 21
Table 8. 95th Percentile Queue Lengths .................................................................................................................................... 22
Table 9: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Future Conditions ............................................................................. 24
Table 10: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Future plus Project Conditions .................................................. 26
Table 11: Safari Kids Student Arrivals and Departures ....................................................................................................... 29
Figures
Figure 1: Vicinity Map ......................................................................................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2: Project Site Plan ................................................................................................................................................................. 8
Figure 4: Existing Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes, Lane Geometry, and Traffic Controls ...................... 17
Figure 5: Project Trip Assignment and Distribution ............................................................................................................. 20
Figure 6: Existing plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes, Lane Geometry, and Traffic Controls ................... 23
Figure 7: Future Conditions Traffic Volumes, Lane Geometry, and Traffic Controls ............................................... 25
Figure 8: Future plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes, Lane Geometry, and Traffic Controls ...................... 27
Appendices
Appendix A – Existing Turning Movement Counts
Appendix B – Existing Conditions Level of Service Worksheets
Appendix C – Existing Plus Project Conditions Level of Service Worksheets
Appendix D – Future Conditions Level of Service Worksheets
Appendix E – Future plus Project Conditions Level of Service Worksheets
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report summarizes the results of the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) conducted for the proposed Safari Kids
daycare facility to be located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Positano Parkway and West
Cantara Drive in the City of Dublin, California. The purpose of this traffic impact study is to evaluate the
potential traffic impacts resulting from the development of the proposed project on the surrounding
transportation system.
The proposed project consists of a 14,963 square foot (sq. ft.) building that includes a 10,667 sq. ft.
daycare center and a 4,296 sq. ft. community center. The access to the project site will be via one primary
driveway on West Cantara Drive and one emergency access driveway on Positano Parkway. An alternative
project scenario was evaluated, with the driveway on Positano Parkway permitting entry only. The project
site is currently vacant.
This analysis evaluated level of service and queuing on Positano Parkway with and without the proposed
project and taking into consideration the construction of the new Cottonwood Creek Elementary school
nearby. Two project scenarios were evaluated, based on two driveway operation alternatives. The report
also includes evaluations and recommendations concerning project site access and on-site circulation for
vehicles.
To evaluate the impacts on the transportation infrastructure due to the addition of traffic from the
proposed project, three study intersections were evaluated during the weekday a.m. peak hour, afternoon
school peak hour, and p.m. peak hour, under three study scenarios. The study intersections and roadway
segments were evaluated under Existing No Project and Existing plus Project, Future, and Future plus
Project scenarios. Future conditions include redirection of approximately 30 percent of school-related
traffic from Amador Elementary School on Positano Parkway to the planned Cottonwood Creek
Elementary school on Central Parkway. For the purposes of this analysis, potential traffic operational
effects from the proposed project are identified based on established traffic operational thresholds of the
City of Dublin.
Project Trip Generation
The proposed daycare center is expected to accommodate between 190 and 200 students. Drop-off and
pickup periods would be staggered by age group and feature vanpools to minimize the number of peak
hour trips generated. The community space would operate entirely outside school peak hours. Based on
the planned drop-off and pickup operations, the site is expected to generate 80 vehicle trips (40 inbound
and 40 outbound) during the a.m. peak hour and 60 vehicle trips (30 inbound and 30 outbound) during
the afternoon school peak and 160 vehicle trips (80 inbound and 80 outbound) during the p.m. peak hour.
Existing Conditions
Under this scenario, all study intersections operate at acceptable LOS D or better during all peak periods.
The 95th percentile queue lengths at the intersections of Positano Parkway & West Cantara Drive/Salerno
Drive and Fallon Road & Positano Parkway are all accommodated within available storage lanes. Although
the study area experiences significant congestion for about 20 minutes in the before and after school
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 4
periods, standard procedures utilized by the City of Dublin and other agencies evaluate level of service
over a full one-hour period. This results in overall acceptable conditions for the busiest peak hours.
Existing plus Project Conditions
Under both trip assignment scenarios, all intersections would continue to operate at LOS D or better
during all peak periods, and all 95th percentile queue lengths would be accommodated within available
storage lanes. The project is expected to produce less than significant impacts.
Future Conditions
This scenario represents the changes to traffic on Positano Drive due to the redirection of school trips
from Positano Parkway to the planned Cottonwood Creek Elementary school on Central Parkway. Under
this scenario, all study intersections improve but continue to operate at acceptable LOS D or better during
all peak periods. The 95th percentile queue lengths at the intersections of Positano Parkway & West
Cantara Drive/Salerno Drive and Fallon Road & Positano Parkway are all accommodated within available
storage lanes.
Future plus Project Conditions
Under both trip assignment scenarios, all intersections would continue to operate at LOS D or better
during all peak periods, and all 95th percentile queue lengths would be accommodated within available
storage lanes. The project is expected to produce less than significant impacts.
Site Access, Circulation, and Parking
The project site would be accessed via two 25-foot driveways, one of which may be restricted to
emergency vehicles only. Under either project alternative, site access and circulation would be adequate.
The proposed project would provide 90 parking spaces, including four accessible spaces and eight clean
air/vanpool-only spaces. This is higher than the minimum shared parking supply of 83 spaces, required
under City of Dublin zoning requirements for community centers and shared parking. The project is
expected to produce a less than significant impact. TJKM recommends installing an ingress-only
driveway along Positano Parkway.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 5
INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the results of the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) conducted for the proposed Safari Kids
Daycare Center to be located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Positano Parkway and West
Cantara Drive in the City of Dublin, California. The purpose of this traffic impact study is to evaluate the
potential traffic impacts resulting from the development of the proposed project on the surrounding
transportation system.
The proposed project consists of a 14,963 square foot (sq. ft.) building consisting of a 10,667 sq. ft.
daycare center and 4,296 sq. ft. community center, on a site that is currently vacant. The proposed daycare
center is expected to accommodate between 190 and 200 students. The community center would be
available for rent and would operate outside of the hours the daycare is active.
This chapter discusses the TIS purpose, project study area, analysis scenarios and levels of service
methodology, and criteria used to identify significant impacts. Two project scenarios were evaluated,
based on two driveway operational alternatives. A staff report by City of Dublin staff, released April 10,
2018, discussed driveway visibility, emergency vehicle access, trash access, vehicle access, on-site
circulation, parking, and pedestrian access. This report briefly discusses site access and circulation for both
project access alternatives.
STUDY INTERSECTIONS AND SCENARIOS
TJKM evaluated traffic conditions at three study intersections during three peak periods: a.m., school, and
p.m. peak periods. The 7:00-9:00 a.m. peak period corresponds with peak morning commute and school
drop-off traffic. The 2:00-4:00 p.m. school peak period corresponds with the period when most children
are picked up from the elementary school. The 4:00-6:00 p.m. peak period corresponds with peak
afternoon commute traffic. The highest single one-hour periods recorded for each peak period are used
in the analysis. The study intersections and associated traffic controls are as follows:
1. Positano Parkway & West Cantara Drive/Salerno Drive (signal)
2. Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue (signal)
3. Fallon Road & Positano Parkway (signal)
Figure 1 illustrates the study intersections, roadway segments and the vicinity map of the proposed
project. Figure 2 shows the proposed project site plan.
This study addresses the following four traffic scenarios:
1. Existing Conditions – This scenario evaluates all the study locations based on existing traffic
volumes, lane geometry and traffic controls.
2. Existing plus Project Conditions – This scenario is identical to Existing Conditions, but with the
addition of traffic from the proposed project.
3. Future Conditions – This scenario represents the changes to traffic on Positano Drive due to the
redirection of school trips to the planned Cottonwood Creek Elementary school near the project
site.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 6
4. Future plus Project Conditions – This scenario is identical to Future Conditions, but with the
addition of traffic from the proposed project.
Vicinity Map
Figure 1157-xxx
N
Cottonwood
Elementary School
(Planned)
3
2
1
Suns
e
t
V
i
e
w
D
r
.
Central Pkwy.
Vinton Ave.
Fallo
n
R
d
.
W. Cantara Dr.
L
a S
tr
a
d
a Dr.
Va
l
e
n
t
a
n
o
D
r
.
S
a
l
e
r
n
o
D
r.
Positano Pkwy.
Jose Maria Amador Elementary School
Legend
X Study Intersection
Project Site
Elementary School
Project Site Plan
Figure 2157-xxx
N
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 9
STUDY METHODOLOGY
This section describes the methods used to determine the traffic conditions for each scenario described
above. It includes descriptions of the data requirements, the analysis methodologies, and the applicable
level of service standards.
LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
LOS is a qualitative measure that describes operational conditions as they relate to the traffic stream and
perceptions by motorists and passengers. The LOS generally describes these conditions in terms of such
factors as speed, travel time, delays, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort, convenience, and
safety. The operational LOS are given letter designations from A to F, with A representing the best
operating conditions (free-flow) and F the worst (severely congested flow with high delays). Intersections
generally are the capacity-controlling locations with respect to traffic operations on arterial and collector
streets in urban areas.
Signalized Intersections
The study intersections under traffic signal control were analyzed using the 2000 Highway Capacity
Manual (HCM) Operations Methodology for signalized intersections described in Chapter 16 (HCM 2000).
TJKM utilized HCM 2000 methodology at the request of the City. This methodology determines LOS
based on average control delay per vehicle for the overall intersection during peak hour intersection
operating conditions. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped
delay, and final acceleration delay. The average control delay for signalized intersections was calculated
using Synchro 9.0 analysis software and was correlated to a LOS designation as shown in Table 1. At most
elementary schools, there is significant congestion during before and after school periods for about 20
minutes. However, the level of service evaluates conditions averaged over a full peak hour. Therefore, the
level of service during the busiest 20 minutes are softened when averaged and reported over a full 60
minutes.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 10
Table 1: Unsignalized Intersection Delay and LOS Definitions
Source: Highway Capacity Manual 2010, (Transportation Research Board, 2010)
Average Control Delay per vehicle in seconds
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT CRITERIA AND LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
The transportation impact analysis assesses how the study area’s transportation system would operate
with the implementation of the proposed project. The potential impacts were identified by applying a set
of significance criteria based on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines and set forth
by the City of Dublin, and the Alameda County Transportation Commission (CTC).
City of Dublin Intersections
The City of Dublin General Plan specifies LOS D as the minimum acceptable level of service for
intersections in Dublin. A project impact is considered to be significant if:
The project traffic causes the intersection operations to degrade from an acceptable LOS D or
better under no project conditions to LOS E or worse under project conditions (unless within the
boundaries of the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan area); or
If the intersection is already operating below an acceptable threshold (i.e., at LOS E or LOS F)
under no project conditions and the project adds 50 or more peak hour trips to the intersection.
Level of
Service Description Average
Control Delay
A
Signal progression is extremely favorable. Most vehicles arrive during the green
phase and do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to the very
low vehicle delay.
10.0 or less
B
Operations characterized by good signal progression and/or short cycle lengths.
More vehicles stop than with LOS A, causing higher levels of average vehicle
delay.
10.1 to 20.0
C
Higher delays may result from fair signal progression and/or longer cycle
lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. The number of
vehicles stopping is significant, though may still pass through the intersection
without stopping.
20.1 to 35.0
D
The influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result
from some combination of unfavorable signal progression, long cycle lengths, or
high volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle
failures are noticeable.
35.1 to 55.0
E
This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values
generally indicate poor signal progression, long cycle lengths, and high volume-
to-capacity (V/C) ratios. Individual cycle failures occur frequently.
55.1 to 80.0
F
This level of delay is considered unacceptable by most drivers. This condition
often occurs with oversaturation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the
capacity of the intersection. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be
major-contributing causes of such delay levels.
greater than 80.0
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 11
EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section describes existing conditions in the immediate project site vicinity, including roadway
facilities, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and available transit service. In addition, existing traffic volumes
and operations are presented for the study intersection, including the results of LOS calculations.
EXISTING SETTING AND ROADWAY SYSTEM
Important roadways adjacent to the project site are discussed below:
Fallon Road within the project vicinity is a six lane, generally north-south arterial, connecting the
neighborhoods in the project vicinity to east-west arterials and I-580. The posted speed in the project
vicinity is 45 miles per hour (mph).
Positano Parkway within the project vicinity is a two lane, southwest-northeast collector street
connecting to Fallon Road in the southwest and serving Jose Maria Amador Elementary School. The
posted speed limit within the project vicinity is 35 mph. This roadway has a two-lane divided cross section
with a landscaped median. The roadway is not wide enough to accommodate intersection U-turns east of
Fallon Road. It provides local access to residential land uses and the Amador School. An entrance
driveway from the project site is proposed to be provided on Positano Parkway.
Cantara Drive (West and East) within the project vicinity is a two lane, generally east-west collector
street connecting in a looped fashion twice to Positano Parkway. Near the proposed project, the street is
named West Cantara Drive. West Cantara Drive changes designation at Positano Parkway and continues
to the north as Salerno Drive. Near the Amador School and the adjacent park, it is named East Cantara
Drive. East Cantara changes its name near the school north of Positano Parkway and continues to the
north as Valentano Drive. The speed limit within the project vicinity is 25 mph. The main driveway to the
project site is located on West Cantara Drive.
Salerno Drive within the project vicinity is a two lane, east-west collector street connecting Armantea
Way in the north to Positano Parkway in the south. The posted speed limit within the project vicinity is 25
mph.
Vinton Avenue within the project vicinity is a two lane, east-west collector street connecting Positano
Parkway in the west and Jordan Ranch Drive in the east. The speed limit within the project vicinity is 25
mph.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 12
EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
A field review of morning traffic conditions in the project vicinity was conducted on multiple occasions
including Thursday, May 24, 2018, when the accompanying photos were taken. TJKM observed that
congestion exists on Positano Parkway in
the morning period between about 8:00
and around 8:35. During this period
eastbound traffic on Positano Parkway,
consisting primarily of motorists taking
children to the elementary school. During
the same period, westbound residents
from the area are leaving their homes to
go to work. After the parents drop off their
children, many of them travel back down
Positano Parkway in the same direction as
the outbound commuters. The first photo
was taken at 8:07, the second at 8:16 and
the lower photo on Fallon Road at 8:18
a.m.
West Cantara Drive serves as a backdoor
short cut to and from the school for some
parents. This results in very heavy traffic
on these two streets, but confined to a
fairly short period. The uphill (eastbound)
congestion is focused between about 8:10
and 8:25 a.m. while the westbound
congestion lasts for a longer period, until
about 8:35. School starts at 8:30. The
busiest traffic during this period is
associated with student drop-offs for
Amador Elementary School.
Queuing at the study intersections was
most pronounced on Positano Parkway,
West Cantara Drive, and Fallon Road.
Around 8:00 a.m., roadways were lightly
used, and dedicated turn lanes generally
had no more than one vehicle queuing at
any of the study intersections. By 8:15
a.m., longer queues had developed, filling
available turn lane storage. In some
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 13
places, queues from one
intersection spilled back to the
previous intersection. Between
about 8:20 a.m. and 8:30 a.m.,
queues at all three study
intersections were lengthy.
The top photo shows traffic on W.
Cantara in advance of where the
Safari Kids driveway is proposed.
These are mostly leaving the
school taking the “back door”
route after dropping off the
school children. This photo was
taken at 8:29. The lower photo
taken at 8:34, shows the downhill
traffic is still busy, while the uphill
traffic has fully dispersed.
The applicant has indicated that
most of the all-day Safari Kids
students will arrive prior to 8 a.m.
with minimal additional arrivals
after that time, particularly
between 8 a.m. and 8:30 a.m.
These photos demonstrate that
with the elementary school 8:30
a.m. starting bell, there will be
minimal overlap of the traffic from the elementary school and the day-care facility.
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Walkability is defined as the ability to travel easily and safely between various origins and destinations
without having to rely on automobiles or other motorized travel. The ideal “walkable” community includes
wide sidewalks, a mix of land uses such as residential, employment, and shopping opportunities, a limited
number of conflict points with vehicle traffic, and easy access to transit facilities and services.
Pedestrian facilities consist of crosswalks, sidewalks, pedestrian signals, and off-street paths, which
provide safe and convenient routes for pedestrians to access the destinations such as institutions,
businesses, public transportation, and recreation facilities.
In the project vicinity, the study intersections are signalized. Surrounding intersections are generally stop-
controlled. Crosswalks are provided on most collector streets, and signalized intersections provide
crosswalks with pedestrian signals. Continuous sidewalks are provided throughout the vicinity, with a
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 14
network of multi-use trails between neighborhoods without direct street connections. Curb cuts are
uniformly compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Parking strips with trees provide shade to
the sidewalks on most major collectors. There is adequate street lighting in the vicinity.
The neighborhoods of the project vicinity are generally new construction, implementing best practices for
pedestrian accessibility and connectivity. However, the lack of non-residential land uses prevents the area
from being considered truly walkable. The existing pedestrian facilities in the study area are shown in
Figure 3. Existing peak hour pedestrian counts are provided in Appendix A.
EXISTING BICYCLE FACILITIES
Bicycle facilities include the following:
Bike Paths (Class I) – Paved trails that are separated from roadways
Bike Lanes (Class II) – Lanes on roadways designated for use by bicycles through striping,
pavement legends, and signs
Bike Routes (Class III) – Designated roadways for bicycle use by signs or other markings which
may or may not include additional pavement width for cyclists
Class II bicycle lanes are provided along both sides of Positano Parkway and Fallon Road within the
project vicinity. Class I multiuse trails provide connectivity between neighborhoods without direct street
connections. There are adequate signage/markings for the bicyclists to maneuver without confusion.
Overall, existing bicycle facilities provide adequate connectivity between the proposed project site and the
adjacent residential neighborhoods.
The existing bicycle facilities in the study area are shown in Figure 3. Existing peak hour bicycle counts are
provided in Appendix A.
EXISTING TRANSIT FACILITIES
There are three bus stops on Positano Parkway in the immediate vicinity of the project site; one pair of
bus stops are located between La Strada Drive and East Cantara Drive/Valentano Drive, and one
eastbound bus stop is located north of Vinton Avenue. Existing transit service to the project is provided by
Tri-Valley Wheels. The Wheels system provides bus service to various communities in eastern Alameda
County, including the City of Dublin. It operates local and school buses and is a paratransit service
provider. Buses are generally equipped with front-loading racks that can hold up to two bicycles. In the
immediate vicinity of the proposed project, Bus Route #9 provides local weekday service to the project
site and vicinity, operating as a loop based at the East Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station with three circuits
in the morning and four in the afternoon. Route #501 is a school route, connecting the neighborhood to
Dublin High School with three morning and two afternoon trips on school days. Table 3 describes the
services and frequency for the transit services. The existing transit facilities in the study area are shown in
Figure 3.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 15
Table 3: Existing Transit Services
Route
# From To
Weekdays
Operating
Hours
Headway
(minutes)
2 East Dublin/Pleasanton
BART Station
Positano Pkwy. &
Valentano Dr.
6:30-9:20 a.m.
3:20-6:50 p.m. 60
501 Positano Pkwy. &
Valentano Dr.
Dublin High
School
6:30-7:30 a.m.
3:40-4:30 p.m. Varies
Source: Tri-Valley Wheels website, www.wheelsbus.com
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – EXISTING CONDITIONS
This scenario evaluates the study intersections based on existing traffic volumes, lane geometry and traffic
controls. The existing operations of the study intersections were evaluated for the highest one-hour
volume during the weekday morning, school, and afternoon peak periods. Turning movement counts for
vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians were conducted during typical weekday a.m. peak, afternoon school
peak, and p.m. peak periods at the study intersections in May 2018. Appendix A includes data sheets for
the collected vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian counts. Figure 4 illustrates the existing traffic volumes, lane
geometries and controls at the study intersections. The peak hour factors calculated from the existing
turning movement counts were used for the study intersections for the Existing Conditions analysis. The
results of the LOS analysis using the HCM 2000 methodology and Synchro 9.0 software program for
Existing Conditions are summarized in Table 4.
Under this scenario, all study intersections operate at LOS D or better during all peak periods. The highest
delays occur during the morning peak period, which coincides with the drop-off period for all grades at
Jose Maria Amador Elementary School. LOS worksheets are provided in Appendix B.
Table 4: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing Conditions
ID Intersection Intersection
Control
Peak
Hour¹
Existing Conditions
Average
Delay LOS2
1
Positano Pkwy &
W. Cantara Dr./
Salerno Dr.
Signalized
AM 46.4 D
School 26.8 C
PM 36.1 D
2 Positano Pkwy &
Vinton Ave. Signalized
AM 25.1 C
School 6.5 A
PM 7.7 A
3 Fallon Rd. &
Positano Pkwy Signalized
AM 20.2 C
School 12.2 B
PM 12.3 B
Notes:
1AM – morning peak hour (between 7 and 9 a.m.), School – afternoon school-related peak hour (between 2 and 4 p.m.), PM –
afternoon peak hour (between 4 and 6 p.m.)
2LOS – Level of Service calculations conducted using the Synchro 9.0 level of service analysis software package, which applies the
…methodology described in the 2000 HCM.
Bold text indicates intersection operates at a deficient Level of Service.
Existing Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Facilities
Figure 3157-xxx
N
Suns
e
t
V
i
e
w
D
r
.
Vinton Ave.
Fallo
n
R
d
.
W. Cantara Dr.
L
a Str
a
d
a Dr.
Va
l
e
n
t
a
n
o
D
r
.
S
a
l
e
r
n
o
D
r.
Positano Pkwy.
Jose Maria Amador Elementary School
Cottonwood
Elementary School
(Planned)
Central Pkwy.
3
2
1
Legend
X Study Intersection
Sidewalk Missing
Crosswalk
Class I Bike/Multi-Use Trail
Class II Bike Lane
Bus Stop
Bus Route
Existing Conditions Peak Hour Traffic Volumes, Lane Geometry, and Traffic Controls
Figure 4157-xxx
N
Suns
e
t
V
i
e
w
D
r
.
Central Pkwy.
Vinton Ave.
Fallo
n
R
d
.
W. Cantara Dr.
L
a S
tr
a
d
a Dr.
Va
l
e
n
t
a
n
o
D
r
.
S
a
l
e
r
n
o
D
r.
Positano Pkwy.
Jose Maria Amador Elementary School
Cottonwood
Elementary School
(Planned)
3
2
1
1(7)[1]
12(3)[3]
29
6
(
2
0
8
)
[
3
9
5
]
35
3
(
3
2
5
)
[
4
8
5
]
232(101)[84]
39
2
(
2
6
8
)
[
3
2
4
]
66
(
9
1
)
[
1
3
0
]
12
1
(
6
7
)
[
6
3
]
52
4
(
3
9
7
)
[
5
0
6
]
14
(
2
9
)
[
4
7
]
0(
0
)
[
1
]
49
7
(
3
1
9
)
[
2
1
8
]
4(
3
)
[
1
]
20
(
1
1
)
[
7
]
90
8
(
5
1
2
)
[
3
4
1
]
19
9
(
1
2
5
)
[
1
2
7
]
58
1
(
4
3
7
)
[
4
7
2
]
113(51)[60]
52(12)[7]752(249)[320]
301(142)[68]
195(100)[44]
4(4)[2]
1(0)[0]
Intersection #1
Positano Pkwy. & W. Cantara Dr. / Salerno Dr.
Intersection #2
Positano Pkwy. & Vinton Ave.
Intersection #3
Fallon Rd. & Positano Pkwy.
Salerno Dr.W. Cantara Dr.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
Fa
l
l
o
n
R
d
.
Vinton Ave.Positano Pkwy.
Legend
X Study Intersection
Project Site
Elementary School
AM Peak Volume
School Peak Volume
PM Peak Volume
XX
(XX)
[XX]
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 18
EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
These analysis scenarios present the impacts of the proposed project at the study intersections and
surrounding roadway system. This scenario is similar to Existing Conditions, but with the addition of traffic
from the proposed project. Two project alternatives were considered, with variations in driveway
entry/exit operations.
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
TJKM developed estimated project trip generation for the proposed project based on information
provided by the project applicant. The proposed daycare center is expected to accommodate between
190 and 200 students. Drop-off and pickup periods would be staggered by age group and feature
vanpools to minimize the number of peak hour trips generated. Based on the children arrival patterns,
TJKM expects there would be 100 children arriving between 7 a.m. and 8 a.m. However, during the
existing a.m. peak hour -- between 7:45 a.m. and 8:45 a.m. – 40 of the children arrive. Sixty Safari Kids
children arrive during the public school afternoon peak hour between 2:45 a.m. and 3:45 p.m. Many of
these arrive in vans. There are 100 Safari Kids children leaving during the existing p.m. peak hour between
5:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. Peak hour trips were calculated for these number of students. The community
space would operate entirely outside peak hours.
Table 6 shows the trip generation expected to be generated by the proposed project. Based on the
planned drop-off and pickup operations, the site is expected to generate 80 vehicle trips (40 inbound and
40 outbound) during the a.m. peak hour, 60 vehicle trips (30 inbound and 30 outbound) during the
afternoon school peak and 160 vehicle trips (80 inbound and 80 outbound) during the p.m. peak hour.
Unlike public or private schools in which most of the students arrive and depart at the same time, usually
resulting in congested streets and parking lots, preschools have a considerably less pronounced peak in
traffic. This results in fewer impacts on parking lots, at driveways and on surrounding streets and
intersections. Although it is expected that few students and their parents would walk to school, some
students are likely to be dropped off at the preschool by parents on their way to work, thereby not
creating a new trip on the road network. As noted, the daycare would provide vanpools to serve many of
the after-school arriving daycare students.
Table 6: Project Trip Generation
Land Use AM Peak Hour School PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Size In Out Total Size In Out Total Size In Out Total
Day Care Center 100 kids 40 40 80 60
kids 30 30 60 100 kids 80 80 160
PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT
Trip distribution is a process that determines in what proportion vehicles would be expected to travel
between the project site and various destinations outside the project study area, Trip assignment also
determines the various routes that vehicles would take from the project site to each destination using the
calculated trip distribution. Trip distribution assumptions for the proposed project were developed based
on existing travel patterns and knowledge of the study area.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 19
The distribution assumptions are as follows:
25 percent to/from Fallon Road to the northwest
35 percent to/from Fallon Road to the south
10 percent to/from Salerno Drive to the northwest
10 percent to/from Positano Parkway to the northeast
10 percent to/from West Cantara Drive to the southeast
Trip assignment varied between the two project alternatives based on driveway operations. Entry/exit
operations for the two alternatives are as follows:
1. Entry at western driveway (Positano Parkway) and both entry and exit at the northern driveway
(West Cantara Drive).
2. Entry and exit at northern driveway. Western driveway on Positano Parkway restricted to
emergency access only.
Figure 5 illustrates the trip distribution percentages and trip assignment project volumes developed for
the proposed project under each project alternative. The assigned project trips were then added to traffic
volumes under Existing Conditions to generate Existing plus Project Conditions traffic volumes.
Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
Figure 5157-xxx
N
Suns
e
t
V
i
e
w
D
r
.
Central Pkwy.
Vinton Ave.
Fallo
n
R
d
.
W. Canta r a D r.
L
a Stra
d
a Dr.
Va
l
e
n
t
a
n
o
D
r
.
S
a
l
e
r
n
o
D
r.
Jose Maria Amador Elementary School
Cottonwood
Elementary School
(Planned)
3
2
1
P o sitano Pkwy.
4(3)[8]
14
(11
)[
28
]
24
(1
9)[
48
]
4(3)[
8]
4(3)[
8]
24
(1
9)[
48
]
10
(8)[
20
]
4(3)[8]14(11)[28]
10(8)[20]
28(22)[56]
4(3)[8]
4(3)[8]
Intersection #1
Positano Pkwy. & W. Cantara Dr. / Salerno Dr.
Intersection #1
Positano Pkwy. & W. Cantara Dr. / Salerno Dr.
Intersection #2
Positano Pkwy. & Vinton Ave.
Intersection #3
Fallon Rd. & Positano Pkwy.
Salerno Dr.W. Cantara Dr.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
Fa
l
l
o
n
R
d
.
Vinton Ave.Positano Pkwy.
Project Alternative 1
Project Alternative 2
10%
10%
10%
25%
35%
Alt 1
Alt 2
Alt 1
4(3)[8]
72
(28
)[
36
]
8(6)[16]
4(3)[
8]
4(3)[8]
72
(28
)[
36
]
36(28)[72]
4(3)[
8]
28
(22
)[
6
]
Legend
X Study Intersection
Trip Distribution
Project Site
Elementary School
AM Peak Volume
School Peak Volume
PM Peak Volume
XX
XX
(XX)
[XX]
4(3)[8]
4(3)[
8]
28(22)[56]
4(3)[8]
4(3)[8]
Salerno Dr.W. Cantara Dr.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
28
(22
)[
6
]
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 21
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Intersection levels of service were calculated with the new traffic added by each proposed project
alternative to evaluate the operating conditions of the intersections and identify potential impacts to the
roadway system. The results of the intersection level of service calculations for Existing plus Project
Conditions are presented in Table 7. Appendix B contains the corresponding calculation sheets. The
results for Existing Conditions are included for comparison purpose, along with the projected increases in
average delay. The changes in delay between Existing and each Existing plus Project Conditions are used
to identify potential significant impacts. Figure 6 shows projected turning movement volumes at all the
study intersections for Existing plus Project Conditions under each project alternative.
Under the Existing plus Project Alternative 1 scenario, all intersections would continue to operate at LOS D
or better during all peak periods. The intersection of Positano Parkway & West Cantara Drive/Salerno
Drive would experience an increase in average delay of 6.8 seconds in the a.m. peak hour, with smaller
increases in the afternoon school and p.m. peak hours.
Under the Existing plus Project Alternative 2 scenario, all intersections would continue to operate at LOS D
or better during all peak periods. The intersection of Positano Parkway & West Cantara Drive/Salerno
Drive would experience an increase in average delay of 8.1 seconds in the a.m. peak hour, with smaller
increases in the afternoon school and p.m. peak hours.
Project alternatives 1 and 2 led to very similar results, with alternative 1 producing a lower increase in
delay during the a.m. peak hour but slightly higher increases during the afternoon school and p.m. peak
hours.
Table 7: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing plus Project Conditions
ID Intersections
Peak
Hour Existing
Conditions
Existing with Project
Alternative 1 Conditions
Existing with Project
Alternative 2 Conditions
Average
Delay LOS3 Average
Delay LOS3 Change in
Ave. Delay2
Average
Delay LOS3 Change in
Ave. Delay2
1
Positano Pkwy &
W. Cantara Dr./
Salerno Dr.
AM 46.4 D 53.2 D 6.8 54.5 D 8.1
School 26.8 C 34.5 C 7.7 34.3 C 7.5
PM 36.1 D 41.6 D 5.5 40.6 D 4.5
2 Positano Pkwy. &
Vinton Ave.
AM 25.1 C 29.4 C 4.3
School 6.5 A 7.3 A 0.8
PM 7.7 A 9.0 A 1.3
3 Fallon Rd. &
Positano Pkwy.
AM 20.2 C 21.7 C 1.5
School 12.2 B 12.0 B -0.2
PM 12.3 B 13.0 B 0.7
Notes:
1 Level of Service calculations conducted using the Synchro 9.0 level of service analysis software package, which applies the
…methodology described in the 2010 HCM.
4 Change in delay between Existing and Existing plus Project Conditions.
Bold text indicates intersection operates at a deficient Level of Service.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 22
QUEUING ANALYSIS
Queueing operations were evaluated at selected dedicated turn lanes where the project would add trips.
The 95th percentile queuing analysis results for the two signalized intersections under Existing and both
Existing plus Project Conditions are summarized in Table 5, rounded to the nearest ten feet. (The daycare
would not add left or right turning trips at Positano Parkway and Vinton Avenue. The results for Existing
Conditions are included for comparison purposes, along with projected increases in queue length with the
addition of project traffic under each alternative. All but one of the existing 95th percentile queues are
accommodated in the available storage lengths, in all peak hours. The westbound left turn queue at the
intersection of Positano Parkway & West Cantara Drive/Salerno Drive overflows the available storage
length. Field observations of queuing operations at this intersection were conducted to validate calculated
queue lengths. Queues were observed extending 200-250 feet back from the intersection.
The proposed project is expected to add less than one vehicle length to this overflowing queue under
both project alternatives, and it is not expected to produce any new overflows. The proposed project does
not create a significant impact by itself on the expected left-turn or right-turn queues at the study
intersections.
Table 8. 95th Percentile Queue Lengths
ID Study
Intersections Lane Group Storage
Length1
Peak
Hour
Existing Existing plus
Project Alt. 1
Existing plus
Project Alt. 2
Queue
Length2
Queue
Length
Change
in Queue
Queue
Length
Change
in Queue
1 Positano Pkwy &
W. Cantara Dr./
Salerno Dr.
Westbound Left 100
AM 200 240 40 220 20
School 80 90 10 90 10
PM 50 90 40 60 10
Northbound
Through/Right 919
AM 330 430 100 420 90
School 150 200 50 210 60
PM 220 230 10 240 20
3 Fallon Rd. &
Positano Pkwy. Westbound Left 360
AM 230 230 0
School 60 70 10
PM 80 90 10
Westbound Right 420
AM 50 50 0
School 30 30 0
PM 20 30 10
Northbound Right 180
AM 20 20 0
School 40 40 0
PM 50 60 10
Southbound Left 280
AM 150 160 10
School 80 80 0
PM 80 100 20
1 Length in feet of dedicated turn lane, or link of roadway segment for shared movements.
2 95th percentile queue length (feet), rounded to nearest ten feet.
Existing plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes, Lane Geometry, and Traffic Controls
Figure 6157-xxx
N
Suns
e
t
V
i
e
w
D
r
.
Central Pkwy.
Vinton Ave.
Fallo
n
R
d
.
W. Cantara Dr.
L
a S
tr
a
d
a Dr.
Va
l
e
n
t
a
n
o
D
r
.
S
a
l
e
r
n
o
D
r.
Positano Pkwy.
Jose Maria Amador Elementary School
Cottonwood
Elementary School
(Planned)
3
2
1
(10)[9]
12(3)[3]
310
(2
1
9)[
4
23
]
35
3
(
3
2
5
)
[
4
8
5
]
232(101)[84]
39
2
(
2
6
8
)
[
3
2
4
]
66
(
9
1
)
[
1
3
0
]
12
1
(
6
7
)
[
6
3
]
548
(4
16
)[
5
4
]
14
(
2
9
)
[
4
7
]
4(3)[
9]
49
7
(
3
1
9
)
[
2
1
8
]
4(
3
)
[
1
]
24(1
4)[
1
]
932
(5
31
)[
3
89
]
20
9(1
3
3)[
14
]
58
1
(
4
3
7
)
[
4
2
]
113(51)[60]
56(1)[1]766(260)[348]
311(10)[88]
223(122)[100]
8()[10]
(3)[8]
(10)[9]
12(3)[3]
232(101)[84]
39
2
(
2
6
8
)
[
3
2
4
]
66
(
9
1
)
[
1
3
0
]
149
(89
)[
11
9
]
4(3)[
9]
49
7
(
3
1
9
)
[
2
1
8
]
4(
3
)
[
1
]
223(122)[100]
8()[10]
(3)[8]
Intersection #1
Positano Pkwy. & W. Cantara Dr. / Salerno Dr.
Intersection #2
Positano Pkwy. & Vinton Ave.
Intersection #3
Fallon Rd. & Positano Pkwy.
Salerno Dr.W. Cantara Dr.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
Fa
l
l
o
n
R
d
.
Vinton Ave.Positano Pkwy.
Intersection #1
Positano Pkwy. & W. Cantara Dr. / Salerno Dr.
Salerno Dr.W. Cantara Dr.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
Project Alternative 2
Project Alternative 1
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 24
FUTURE CONDITIONS
This scenario is similar to Existing Conditions, taking into account the planned construction of the
Cottonwood Creek Elementary school on Central Parkway. This new school is expected to draw away
some students who currently attend Jose Maria Amador Elementary School, which will in turn reduce
traffic volumes on Positano Parkway near the project site. The neighborhoods that will switch attendance
areas to the new school account for approximately 30 percent of school traffic under existing conditions.
TJKM made this calculation based on the number of homes in each of the new attendance boundaries of
the three nearby elementary schools whose boundaries will change with the opening of the new school in
the fall of 2018.
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – FUTURE CONDITIONS
Intersection levels of service were calculated with expected traffic volumes after the new school opens,
using existing lane geometry and intersection control. Figure 7 shows projected turning movement
volumes at all study intersections for Future Conditions. The results of the intersection level of service
calculations for Future Conditions are presented in Table 9. Under Future Conditions, all study
intersections operate at LOS D or better during all peak periods. Appendix C contains the corresponding
calculation sheets. Figure 7 shows projected turning movement volumes at all the study intersections for
Future Conditions.
Table 9: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Future Conditions
ID Intersection Intersection
Control
Peak
Hour¹
Future Conditions
Average
Delay LOS2
1
Positano Pkwy &
W. Cantara Dr./
Salerno Dr.
Signalized
AM 41.1 D
School 26.1 C
PM 36.1 D
2 Positano Pkwy &
Vinton Ave. Signalized
AM 16.2 B
School 6.1 A
PM 7.7 A
3 Fallon Rd. &
Positano Pkwy Signalized
AM 17.0 B
School 11.4 B
PM 12.3 B
Notes:
1AM – morning peak hour (between 7 and 9 a.m.), School – afternoon school-related peak hour (between 2 and 4 p.m.), PM –
afternoon peak hour (between 4 and 6 p.m.)
2LOS – Level of Service calculations conducted using the Synchro 9.0 level of service analysis software package, which applies the
…methodology described in the 2000 HCM.
Bold text indicates intersection operates at a deficient Level of Service.
Future Conditions Traffic Volumes, Lane Geometry, and Traffic Controls
Figure 7157-xxx
N
Suns
e
t
V
i
e
w
D
r
.
Central Pkwy.
Vinton Ave.
Fallo
n
R
d
.
W. Cantara Dr.
L
a S
tr
a
d
a Dr.
Va
l
e
n
t
a
n
o
D
r
.
S
a
l
e
r
n
o
D
r.
Positano Pkwy.
Jose Maria Amador Elementary School
Cottonwood
Elementary School
(Planned)
3
2
1
Intersection #1
Positano Pkwy. & W. Cantara Dr. / Salerno Dr.
Intersection #2
Positano Pkwy. & Vinton Ave.
Intersection #3
Fallon Rd. & Positano Pkwy.
1(7)[1]
12(3)[3]
20
7
(
1
4
5
)
[
39
]
35
3
(
3
2
5
)
[
4
8
5
]
232(101)[84]
29
3
(
2
0
5
)
[
32
4
]
66
(
9
1
)
[
1
3
0
]
85
(
6
7
)
[
6
3
]
39
2
(
3
3
4
)
[
0
6
]
14
(
2
9
)
[
4
7
]
0(
0
)
[
1
]
40
0
(
2
4
4
)
[
21
8
]
4(
3
)
[
1
]
20
(
1
1
)
[
7
]
82
7
(
4
3
7
)
[
34
1
]
19
9
(
1
2
5
)
[
1
2
7
]
58
1
(
4
3
7
)
[
4
7
2
]
113(51)[60]
52(12)[7]26(175)[320]
301(142)[68]
195(100)[44]
4(4)[2]
1(0)[0]
Salerno Dr.W. Cantara Dr.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
Fa
l
l
o
n
R
d
.
Vinton Ave.Positano Pkwy.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 26
FUTURE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
These analysis scenarios present the impacts of the proposed project at the study intersections and
surrounding roadway system in the future. This scenario is similar to Future Conditions, but with the
addition of traffic from the proposed project. Two project alternatives were considered, with variations in
driveway entry/exit operations.
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – FUTURE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS
Intersection levels of service were calculated with the new traffic added by each proposed project
alternative to evaluate the operating conditions of the intersections and identify potential impacts to the
roadway system. The results of the intersection level of service calculations for Future plus Project
Conditions are presented in Table 7. Appendix D contains the corresponding calculation sheets. Figure 6
shows projected turning movement volumes at all the study intersections for Existing plus Project
Conditions under each project alternative.
Under the Existing plus Project Alternative 1 scenario, all intersections would continue to operate at LOS D
or better during all peak periods. The intersection of Positano Parkway & West Cantara Drive/Salerno
Drive would experience an increase in average delay of 13.5 seconds in the a.m. peak hour, with smaller
increases in the afternoon school and p.m. peak hours.
Under the Existing plus Project Alternative 2 scenario, all intersections would continue to operate at LOS D
or better during all peak periods. The intersection of Positano Parkway & West Cantara Drive/Salerno
Drive would experience an increase in average delay of 13.5 seconds in the a.m. peak hour, with smaller
increases in the afternoon school and p.m. peak hours.
Project alternatives 1 and 2 led to very similar results, with alternative 2 producing a lower increase in
delay during all peak hours.
Table 10: Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Future plus Project Conditions
ID Intersections
Peak
Hour Future
Conditions
Future with Project
Alternative 1 Conditions
Future with Project
Alternative 2 Conditions
Average
Delay LOS3 Average
Delay LOS3 Change in
Ave. Delay2
Average
Delay LOS3 Change in
Ave. Delay2
1
Positano Pkwy. &
W. Cantara Dr./
Salerno Dr.
AM 41.1 D 46.7 D 5.6 44.7 D 3.6
School 26.1 C 30.6 C 4.5 30.8 C 4.7
PM 36.1 D 41.6 D 5.5 40.6 D 4.5
2 Positano Pkwy. &
Vinton Ave.
AM 16.2 B 17.9 B 1.7
School 6.1 A 6.7 A 0.6
PM 7.7 A 9.0 A 0.2
3 Fallon Rd. &
Positano Pkwy.
AM 17.0 B 18.1 B 1.1
School 11.4 B 11.2 B -0.2
PM 12.3 B 13.0 B 0.7
Notes:
1 Level of Service calculations conducted using the Synchro 9.0 level of service analysis software package, which applies the
…methodology described in the 2010 HCM.
4 Change in delay between Existing and Existing plus Project Conditions.
Bold text indicates intersection operates at a deficient Level of Service.
Future plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes, Lane Geometry, and Traffic Controls
Figure 8157-xxx
N
Suns
e
t
V
i
e
w
D
r
.
Central Pkwy.
Vinton Ave.
Fallo
n
R
d
.
W. Cantara Dr.
L
a St
r
a
d
a Dr.
Va
l
e
n
t
a
n
o
D
r
.
S
a
l
e
r
n
o
D
r.
Positano Pkwy.
Jose Maria Amador Elementary School
Cottonwood
Elementary School
(Planned)
3
2
1
Intersection #1
Positano Pkwy. & W. Cantara Dr. / Salerno Dr.
Intersection #2
Positano Pkwy. & Vinton Ave.
Intersection #3
Fallon Rd. & Positano Pkwy.
Intersection #1
Positano Pkwy. & W. Cantara Dr. / Salerno Dr.
Project Alternative 2
Project Alternative 1
(10)[9]
12(3)[3]
221
(1
5
6)[
42
3
]
35
3
(
3
2
5
)
[
4
8
5
]
232(101)[84]
29
3
(
2
0
5
)
[
32
4
]
66
(
9
1
)
[
1
3
0
]
11
(0
)[
6
3
]
416
(3
3
)[
4
]
14
(
2
9
)
[
4
7
]
4(3)[
9]
40
0
(
2
4
4
)
[
21
8
]
4(
3
)
[
1
]
22
(
1
4)[
1
]
81
(4
5
6)[
38
9
]
20
9(1
3
3)[
1
4
]
58
1
(
4
3
7
)
[
4
7
2
]
113(51)[60]
56(1)[1]540(186)[348]
311(10)[88]
223(122)[100]
8()[10]
(3)[8]
Salerno Dr.W. Cantara Dr.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
Fa
l
l
o
n
R
d
.
Vinton Ave.Positano Pkwy.
(10)[9]
12(3)[3]
232(101)[84]
29
3
(
2
0
5
)
[
32
4
]
66
(
9
1
)
[
1
3
0
]
141
(89
)[
11
9
]
4(3)[
3
]
40
0
(
2
4
4
)
[
1
2
2
]
4(
3
)
[
1
]
223(122)[100]
8()[10]
(3)[8]
Salerno Dr.W. Cantara Dr.
Po
s
i
t
a
n
o
P
k
w
y
.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 28
SITE ACCESS AND ON-SITE CIRCULATION AND OTHER IMPACTS
SITE ACCESS
This section analyzes site access and internal circulation for vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles based on
the site plan presented in Figure 2, dated February 21, 2018. TJKM reviewed internal and external access
for the project site for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles.
TJKM reviewed the proposed project site plan to evaluate on-site access to the project. The access to the
project site will be via two driveways, one on Positano Parkway, which will be entry only and the second
driveway on West Cantara Drive, which will be full access. A second access alternative was also evaluated,
with the driveway on Positano Parkway restricted to emergency access only.
The entry only driveway on Positano Parkway is approximately 350 feet to the south of the intersection of
Positano Parkway & West Cantara Drive/Salerno Drive and would be 25 feet wide. The full access driveway
on West Cantara Drive is approximately 200 feet to the east of the intersection of Positano Parkway &
West Cantara Drive/Salerno Drive and is also 25 feet wide. TJKM recommends that the Positano Parkway
driveway be utilized and be designed to restrict traffic to right turn entries only. Based on the evaluation,
the driveways are expected to be adequate for passenger vehicles accessing the site under both
alternatives. Figure 5 shows the project trips at the driveways.
ON-SITE CIRCULATION
Both project access alternatives would include two-way circulation with a 25 foot wide drive aisle. It is
expected that 60 percent of vehicles would approach from the south. Under the project alternative that
allows entry from Positano Parkway, the majority of vehicles will circulate one-way, exiting onto West
Cantara Drive. Under the alternative with this entrance closed to vehicles, all traffic would circulate two-
way. The largely one-way circulation pattern on-site would be advantageous in several ways: project traffic
would be divided over two separate driveways rather than focused on a single location or street. The
generally one-way flow simplifies on-site passenger loading and unloading, as it will be simpler for
guardians dropping off and picking up students to park their vehicles and exit parking spaces with most
conflicting traffic coming from only one direction.
TJKM also examined the project site plan in order to evaluate the adequacy of on-site vehicles, vans and
emergency vehicles circulation. The internal circulation was reviewed for issues related to queueing,
turning radii, and safety and circulation aisles. The circulation aisle accommodates two-way travel, and the
turning radii appears to be adequate for the passenger vehicles, vans, emergency vehicles, and garbage
trucks. Emergency vehicles can access the project via both driveways under either alternative. The trash
enclosure is placed to allow easy access for trash collection. Overall, the proposed on-site vehicle
circulation is adequate and should not result in any significant impacts either on-site or on City streets.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 29
DROP-OFF AND PICK UP OPERATIONS
Due to the planned operating schedule for the proposed project, drop off times for the four programs
offered would be staggered. Full day preschool begins at 7:30 a.m., and part-time preschool begins at
9:00 a.m., as shown in Table 11. The City of Dublin traffic engineer and staff observed the peak drop-off
period for Amador Elementary School, located two blocks northeast of the project site, determining it to
be 8:05-8:25 a.m. After-school programs would begin approximately 30 minutes after the release time for
Kindergarten and grades 1-5 at the elementary school. The planned Safari Kid program operations/traffic
flow and the bell schedule for Amador Elementary School are included in Appendix C.
For drop-off and pickup, students will be transported by a mix of parents and vanpool. According to the
planned traffic flow, vanpool vehicles would transport 5-9 children at a time, significantly reducing the
number of vehicles entering and exiting the site from the estimated trip generation evaluated in this
report. Marked vanpool spaces are located on the north side of the project site, close to the West Cantara
Drive entrance. Parents or pickup service personnel will enter the site, park their vehicle, and accompany
the child to the building, where they will sign in. In the afternoon, the process is reversed. In both cases,
the parent/vanpool visit to the site takes just a few minutes.
As discussed below, the proposed parking supply is based on the total amount required for the
community space and is higher than the supply required by a childcare center of this size. The proposed
parking supply will be sufficient to allow every family to park for pickup. As a result, on-site queueing is
expected to be minimal.
Table 11: Safari Kids Student Arrivals and Departures
Program Timings
Full Day Preschool 7:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.
Part-Time Preschool 9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.
After School (Kindergarten) 1:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
After School (School Age)
2:30 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. (M-T)
3:30 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. (W-F
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS
Pedestrian access to the project site will be facilitated by existing sidewalks and crosswalks on Positano
Parkway, West Cantara Drive, and all other surrounding streets. As shown in Figure 2, the site plan shows a
20 foot wide pedestrian walkway from the sidewalk on Positano Parkway to the main entrance to the
project. Perhaps a few of the students are expected to live within walking distance and be walked to
school by their parents. An impact to pedestrians occurs if the proposed project disrupt existing
pedestrian’s facilities, or create inconsistencies with planned pedestrian facilities. The proposed project
provides adequate and appropriate facilities for safe non-motorized mobility. The proposed project will
have adequate pedestrian access to the project site from the surrounding area. The proposed project will
not result in significant impacts to existing pedestrian facilities in the immediate vicinity of the project.
The proposed project does not conflict with existing pedestrian facilities; therefore, the impact to
pedestrian facilities is less-than-significant.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 30
BICYCLE ACCESS
There are existing Class II Bike lanes on Positano Parkway on both the sides of roadway within the vicinity
of project. The surrounding local streets are generally bike-friendly, and Class I multi-use trails connect
the project vicinity to surrounding neighborhoods. An impact to bicyclists occurs if the proposed project
disrupts existing bicycle facilities; or conflicts or creates inconsistencies with adopted bicycle system plans,
guidelines, policies or standards as per the City of Dublin. The project does not conflict with existing and
planned bicycle facilities; therefore, the impact to bicycle facilities is less-than-significant.
TRANSIT
The proposed project will generate very few trips via transit services, which can be accommodated by the
existing transit capacity; therefore, the project is anticipated to have a less-than-significant impact on
transit facilities.
PARKING
The City of Dublin Zoning Ordinance specifies the minimum parking requirements for both community
centers and day care centers, and it allows shared parking requirements if the proposed parking supply is
adequate for peak demand. Community centers without fixed seating are required to supply one space
per 50 square feet in the assembly area, plus one per classroom, if any. The 4,296 sq. ft. community center
portion of the project would require 86 parking spaces. Day care centers are required to provide one
space per employee, plus one per company vehicle, plus a loading space for every five children or clients
at the facility. The proposed Safari Kids project would consist of 25 employees, up to 229 children (based
on classroom square footage), and two company vehicles, requiring a parking supply of 73 spaces. As the
daycare center and community center would operate at different times, without overlap, the required
parking supply for the community center represents peak parking demand and the minimum number of
spaces required under City regulations. The Americans with Disabilities Act requires that parking lots
providing 76-100 total parking spaces include four accessible spaces, one of which must be van
accessible.
The project proposes to provide 90 spaces, including three standard accessible spaces and one van
accessible spaces. Eight spaces would be restricted to clean air vehicles and vanpools. This satisfies all
parking requirements. In addition, one bike rack for bicycle parking is provided at the northeast corner of
the building. Based on the proposed parking spaces to be provided on site, no parking impacts are
projected on City streets.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | 31
CONCLUSIONS
The proposed preschool is expected to accommodate between 190 and 200 students. Due to a
staggered program schedule, the project is expected to generate 80 vehicle trips (40 inbound and
40 outbound) during the a.m. peak hour and 60 vehicle trips (30 inbound and 30 outbound)
during the afternoon school peak hour and 160 vehicles (80 inbound and 80 outbound) during
the p.m. peak hour.
Under Existing Conditions, all study intersections operate at acceptable LOS D or better during all
peak periods.
Under both trip assignment scenarios under Existing plus Project Conditions, all intersections
would continue to operate at LOS D or better during all peak periods, and all 95th percentile
queue lengths would be accommodated within available storage lanes. Based on the City of
Dublin impact criteria the project is expected to have a less-than-significant impact at all study
intersections under Existing plus Project Conditions. TJKM evaluated day care operations with and
without an entrance only driveway on Positano Parkway.
Under Future Conditions, all study intersections operate at acceptable LOS D or better during all
peak periods. This scenario includes baseline traffic reductions due to the opening of the
Cottonwood Creek Elementary School nearby reducing traffic demand at Amador Elementary
School by about 30 percent.
Under both trip assignment scenarios under Future plus Project Conditions, all intersections
would continue to operate at LOS D or better during all peak periods. Based on the City of Dublin
impact criteria the project is expected to have a less-than-significant impact at all study
intersections under Future plus Project Conditions.
Pedestrian access to the site will be via existing sidewalks on Positano Parkway and West Cantara
Drive, with a 20 foot wide pedestrian entrance on Positano Parkway. There are three bus stops
within the vicinity of the project site. The proposed project does not conflict with existing and
planned pedestrian or bicycle facilities and will add very few trips to existing transit facilities,
which can be accommodated by the existing transit capacity. Therefore, the project introduces no
impacts to pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities.
TJKM examined the project site plan in order to evaluate the adequacy of on-site vehicle
circulation, including vans, emergency vehicles, and garbage trucks. Based on the evaluation, the
proposed on-site two-way vehicle circulation is adequate under both access scenarios. No traffic
operations issues are expected. Student drop off and pick up is staggered over multiple time
periods; when parents drop off and pick up their students and sign in, ample on-site parking and
the use of vanpooling will work well with no delays or backups into the nearby streets.
TJKM recommends that the site plan include an entrance-only driveway on Positano Parkway.
Based on the proposed ample supply of 90 parking spaces to be provided on site, no parking
impacts are projected either on-site or on City streets.
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Appendix | A
Appendix A – Existing Turning Movement Counts
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Three-Hour Count Summaries
Note: For all three-hour count summary, see next page.
Total
4
13
3
1
21Peak Hour 2 1 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 13 2
8:30 AM
8:00 AM
8:15 AM 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1 0
2 0 0 1 3 0 0 1 3 0
0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 8 1
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
EB WB NB SB Total EB WB NB SB Total East West North South
2 5 0
HV%-2%0%0%--0%0%-0%0%0%-0%0%1%0%0
Peak
Hour
All 0 66 392 121 0 0 497 4 0 195 4 1 0 12 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
232 1,525 0
HV 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
0
0
0
497 0
8:30 AM 18 52 15 0 0 160 2 0 67 1 0 0 0 0 44 359 1,525
8:15 AM 25 136 41 0 0 126 0 0 75 1 1 0 2 1 89
224 0
8:00 AM 17 136 53 0 0 129 1 0 30 2 0 0 9 0 68 445 0
7:45 AM 0 6 68 12 0 0 82 1 0 23 0 0 0 1 0 31
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy W Cantara Dr Salerno Dr 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound
UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Date: 05-03-2018
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 10:00 AM
SB 0.8%0.67
TOTAL 0.3%0.77
WB 0.2%0.77
NB 0.0%0.65
Peak Hour: 7:45 AM 8:45 AM
HV %:PHF
EB 0.3%0.70
0
0
0
0 0 0
000
0
0
0
13
2
3 3
N
W Cantara Dr
Positano Pkwy
Positano Pkwy
W
C
a
n
t
a
r
a
D
r
Positano Pkwy
Sa
l
e
r
n
o
D
r
1,525TEV:
0.77PHF:
23
2
1 12
24
5 74
0
4
497
0
501
4050
14
19
5
20
0
12
2
0
121
392
66
579
924 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
Three-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Three-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.
Total
3
0
2
4
13
3
1
4
3
0
0
1
34
2120003313
18 7
Peak Hour 2 1 0 2 5 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 6Count Total 11 8 0 2 21 0
0 1 00000009:45 AM 2 3 0 0 5
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
9:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 3
9:15 AM 2 1 0 0 3 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 1 1
9:00 AM 2 1 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 08:45 AM 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
1
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 1
8 1
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 2
1 3 0
8:00 AM 0 1 0 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 0
0
7:30 AM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 3 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 2 0 0 1 3
0 0 0
-0%0%HV%-2%0%0%-
1 1
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
West North South
7:00 AM 1 2 0
0
195 4 1 0 12 11210049740
0
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
EB WB NB SB Total
0%-0%0%1%0%-0%0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 66 392
5 0 318 6 3 0
0 0 0 2 5 0100000
232 1,525 0
HV 0 1 1 0 0
Count Total 0 128 570 154 0 0 946 13 1 451 2,595 0
97 480000001300420011
0 0 24 111 580
9:45 AM 0 4 23 4
0 0 11 0 0 0
137 828
9:30 AM 0 6 17 6 0 0 47
0 0 0 0 0 2300460021
0 0 25 135 1,188
9:15 AM 0 14 26 7
1 0 12 0 0 0
197 1,498
9:00 AM 0 10 25 4 0 0 58
1 1 0 0 0 4000770035
0 0 44 359 1,525
8:45 AM 0 12 27 4
2 0 67 1 0 0
497 1,341
8:30 AM 0 18 52 15 0 0 160
1 1 0 2 1 89001260075
9 0 68 445 973
8:15 AM 0 25 136 41
1 0 30 2 0 0
224 617
8:00 AM 0 17 136 53 0 0 129
0 0 0 1 0 3100821023
0 0 45 175 0
7:45 AM 0 6 68 12
0 0 15 1 0 0
129 0
7:30 AM 0 5 23 6 0 0 80
0 0 0 0 0 3300560011
1 0 16 89 0
7:15 AM 0 8 20 1
0 0 7 0 1 07:00 AM 0 3 17 1 0 0 43
UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound
UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy W Cantara Dr Salerno Dr 15-min
TotalUTLTTHRTTHRT
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
Three-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Three-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 00
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
000 0 0 0
000 0 0 0
0000
0
0
0
00
0
THLT
00000000
0
00
0
0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
THLT
0000000
0 00000
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
0 0Count Total
0
00000
0 0
9:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0
9:30 AM
0000000
0 0
9:15 AM
0 0 0
0
9:00 AM
0000000
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
0
0 0
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0
8:30 AM
0000000
0 0
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
8:00 AM
0000
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0
7:30 AM
00000007:15 AM 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 07:00 AM
RT
5 0
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy W Cantara Dr Salerno Dr 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 0 0 2001000
RTTHLT RTTHLTRT
0 0 2 21 0
Peak Hour 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0Count Total 0 1 7 3 0 0 8
5 11000000003000
0 0 0 0 7
9:45 AM 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 7
9:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0001000
0 0 0 3 4
9:15 AM 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 3
9:00 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0000000
0 0 0 0 5
8:45 AM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 6
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0000000
0 0 1 2 6
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 7
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 1000000
0 0 0 1 0
7:45 AM 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0000000
0 0 0 3 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound
UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy W Cantara Dr Salerno Dr 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestbound
SouthboundNorthboundWestboundEastbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Four-Hour Count Summaries
Note: For all three-hour count summary, see next page.
Total
6
7
3
2
18Peak Hour 2 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 5 7
3:30 PM
3:00 PM
3:15 PM 0 0
1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
2:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4
1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 3
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
EB WB NB SB Total EB WB NB SB Total East West North South
1 3 0
HV%-1%0%0%--0%0%-0%0%--0%0%1%0%0
Peak
Hour
All 0 91 268 67 0 0 319 3 0 100 4 0 0 3 7
0 0 0 0 0 0
101 963 0
HV 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
0
280 0
3:30 PM 32 53 15 0 0 42 1 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 22 171 963
3:15 PM 20 76 19 0 0 105 1 0 32 2 0 0 0 2 23
188 0
3:00 PM 22 71 11 0 0 122 1 0 52 2 0 0 2 2 39 324 0
2:45 PM 0 17 68 22 0 0 50 0 0 10 0 0 0 1 3 17
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy W Cantara Dr Salerno Dr 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound
UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Date: 05-03-2018
Peak Hour Count Period: 2:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.9%0.65
TOTAL 0.3%0.74
WB 0.0%0.65
NB 0.0%0.48
Peak Hour: 2:45 PM 3:45 PM
HV %:PHF
EB 0.5%0.93
0
0
0
0 0 0
000
0
0
0
5
7
5 1
N
W Cantara Dr
Positano Pkwy
Positano Pkwy
W
C
a
n
t
a
r
a
D
r
Positano Pkwy
Sa
l
e
r
n
o
D
r
963TEV:
0.74PHF:
10
1
7 3
11
1 98
0
3
319
0
322
2710
04
10
0
10
4
74
0
67
268
91
426
520 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
Four-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Four-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.
Total
2
1
0
6
7
3
2
0
2
5
1
1
1
1
0
2
34
187000155
7 17
Peak Hour 2 0 0 1 3 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 9Count Total 10 8 1 6 25 0
0 1 10000005:45 PM 2 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 1
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1
5:00 PM 0 1 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 04:45 PM 1 0 0 3 4
0 0 0 0 0 1
3
4:30 PM 1 1 0 1 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 0
0 0
4:15 PM 1 2 0 0 3 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
0 0 0
4:00 PM 2 2 0 0 4 0
0 0 0 0 0 03:45 PM 1 1 0 0 2
0 0 0 1 1 0
0
3:30 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 2 0
2 3
3:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
0 2 4
3:00 PM 1 0 0 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
1
2:30 PM 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
2:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
-0%0%HV%-1%0%0%-
0 2
2:15 PM 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
2:00 PM 0 1 0
0
100 4 0 0 3 7670031930
0
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
EB WB NB SB Total
--0%0%1%0%-0%0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 91 268
9 0 215 11 0 0
0 0 0 1 3 0000000
101 963 0
HV 0 1 1 0 0
Count Total 0 346 1,055 210 0 3 869 10 14 316 3,058 0
241 871000101900540010
1 1 23 241 809
5:45 PM 0 43 95 19
1 0 10 2 0 0
188 733
5:30 PM 0 28 94 16 0 0 65
0 0 0 1 0 2001440014
0 0 22 201 715
5:15 PM 0 26 66 16
0 0 10 0 0 0
179 699
5:00 PM 0 33 69 12 0 0 55
2 0 0 0 0 2900481015
1 0 23 165 690
4:45 PM 0 17 60 7
0 0 8 0 0 0
170 696
4:30 PM 0 13 59 18 0 0 43
1 0 0 0 0 1901502012
1 3 18 185 806
4:15 PM 0 12 66 7
1 0 5 0 0 0
170 945
4:00 PM 0 28 73 8 0 0 48
1 0 0 1 0 1800510011
0 0 22 171 963
3:45 PM 0 23 56 9
1 0 6 0 0 0
280 936
3:30 PM 0 32 53 15 0 0 42
2 0 0 0 2 23001051032
2 2 39 324 773
3:15 PM 0 20 76 19
1 0 52 2 0 0
188 543
3:00 PM 0 22 71 11 0 0 122
0 0 0 1 3 1700500010
1 1 10 144 0
2:45 PM 0 17 68 22
1 0 8 0 0 0
117 0
2:30 PM 0 9 62 14 0 0 38
1 0 0 0 1 60127004
0 1 8 94 0
2:15 PM 0 16 50 11
0 0 8 0 0 02:00 PM 0 7 37 6 0 0 27
UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound
UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy W Cantara Dr Salerno Dr 15-min
TotalUTLTTHRTTHRT
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
Four-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Four-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.
0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
000 0 0 0
000 0 0 0
0000
0
0
0
00
0
THLT
00000000
0
00
0
0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
THLT
0000000
0 0
0
0
0000
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
0 0Count Total
0
0000
0 0
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0
5:30 PM
0000000000
0 0 0
0
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0
5:00 PM
0000
0 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0
4:30 PM
0000000
0 0
4:15 PM
0 0 0
0
4:00 PM
0000000
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
0
0 0
3:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0
3:30 PM
0000000
0 0
3:15 PM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0
3:00 PM
0000
0 0
2:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0
2:30 PM
00000002:15 PM 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 02:00 PM
RT
3 0
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy W Cantara Dr Salerno Dr 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 0 0 1000000
RTTHLT RTTHLTRT
1 0 5 25 0
Peak Hour 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 1 0 0Count Total 0 1 9 0 0 0 8
2 3000000000000
0 0 0 0 5
5:45 PM 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 8
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0000000
0 0 0 1 11
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 14
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 3000000
1 0 0 3 12
4:45 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 10
4:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0002000
0 0 0 4 7
4:15 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 5
4:00 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0001000
0 0 0 1 3
3:45 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 3
3:30 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0000000
0 0 1 2 4
3:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 3
3:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0000000
0 0 1 1 0
2:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0
2:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0000000
0 0 0 1 0
2:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
2:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound
UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy W Cantara Dr Salerno Dr 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestbound
SouthboundNorthboundWestboundEastbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Three-Hour Count Summaries
Note: For all three-hour count summary, see next page.
Total
0
4
1
0
5Peak Hour 3 3 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1
8:15 AM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 2 2 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1
--0%0
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
EB WB NB SB Total EB WB NB SB Total East West North
HV 0 0 2 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-0%7%0%0%0%--0%-0%--
South
0 1,632 0
6 0
363 1,632
8:15 AM 0 0 151 5 0 10 296 0 0 35
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 524 14 1 20 908 0 0 113 0 52 0 0 0
HV%-
8:30 AM 0 0 74 6 0 7 252 0 0 23 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 20 0 0 0 0
0 263 0
8:00 AM 0 0 200 1 1 3 221 0 0 34 0 29 0 0 0 0 489 0
517 0
UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
7:45 AM 0 0 99 2 0 0 139 0 0 21 0 2 0 0 0
WB 0.3%0.76
NB 0.0%0.65
Peak Hour: 7:45 AM 8:45 AM
HV %:PHF
EB 0.6%0.67
Date: 05-03-2018
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 10:00 AM
SB --
TOTAL 0.4%0.79
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy Vinton Ave 0 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound
0
0
00
0
0
0
1
0 4
N
Vinton Ave
Positano Pkwy
Positano Pkwy
Vi
n
t
o
n
A
v
e
Positano Pkwy
1,632TEV:
0.79PHF:
908
20 929
5771
52
11
3
16
5
34
0
14
524538
1,021
0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
Three-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Three-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.
Total
0
0
1
0
4
1
0
3
2
1
0
0
12
5
UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy Vinton Ave 0 15-min
TotalUTLTTHRTTHRT
7:00 AM 0 0 23 1 0 1 66
UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound
0 1 109 0 0 24
0 0 0 103 0
7:15 AM 0 0 24 1
0 0 12 0 0 0
0 0 0 209 0
7:45 AM 0 0 99 2
0 0 33 0 1 0
160 0
7:30 AM 0 0 40 1 0 1 133
0 1 0 0 0 0
263 735
8:00 AM 0 0 200 1 1 3 221
0 2 0 0 0 0001390021
0 10 296 0 0 35
0 0 0 489 1,121
8:15 AM 0 0 151 5
0 0 34 0 29 0
0 0 0 363 1,632
8:45 AM 0 0 43 3
0 0 23 0 1 0
517 1,478
8:30 AM 0 0 74 6 0 7 252
0 20 0 0 0 0
226 1,595
9:00 AM 0 0 36 3 0 1 93
0 4 0 0 0 0001460030
0 2 89 0 0 21
0 0 0 156 1,262
9:15 AM 0 0 44 3
0 0 23 0 0 0
0 0 0 128 670
9:45 AM 0 0 36 0
0 0 17 0 0 0
160 905
9:30 AM 0 0 28 4 0 1 78
0 1 0 0 0 0
119 56301000000650017
Count Total 0 0 798 30 1 27 1,687 0 0 0 2,893 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 524
0 0 290 0 60 0
0 0 0 0 6 0300000
0 1,632 0
HV 0 0 2 1 0 0
113 0 52 0 0 01412090800
0
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
EB WB NB SB Total
0%----0%0%0%--0%-HV%--0%7%0%
0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
7:00 AM 1 2 0 0 3 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 2 2 0 0 4
0 0 1 0 0 0
0
7:30 AM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
8:15 AM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 0
0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 1 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 1 1 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 1
9:15 AM 2 1 0 0 3 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 3
9:00 AM 2 0 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
9:45 AM 2 3 0 0 5
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
9:30 AM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0000000
0 5
Peak Hr 3 3 0 0 6 0 0
0 0 0 0 7 0Count Total 13 10 0 0 23 0
1000400
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
Three-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Three-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.
Northbound Southbound
UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy Vinton Ave 0 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestbound
0 0 0 3 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
UT LT TH RT UT LT
0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0000000
0 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
7:45 AM 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 6
8:15 AM 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 8
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 7
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0000000
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 6
8:45 AM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 5
9:15 AM 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 4
9:00 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 7
9:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0001000
0 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 8
9:45 AM 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5 11000000
0 0 0 23 0
Peak Hour 0 0 2 1
0 0 0 0 0 0Count Total 0 0 11 2 0 0 10
Westbound Northbound Southbound
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
6 0
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy Vinton Ave 0 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound
0 0 0 0 0 0003000
0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
9:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
9:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
9:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0000000
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0000000Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Four-Hour Count Summaries
Note: For all three-hour count summary, see next page.
Total
0
0
7
1
8Peak Hour 4 2 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 1
3:30 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0
3:45 PM 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
3:00 PM 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
--1%0
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
EB WB NB SB Total EB WB NB SB Total East West North
HV 0 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-1%3%-0%0%--0%-0%--
South
0 1,012 0
6 0
197 1,012
3:30 PM 0 0 79 10 0 1 63 0 0 11
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 397 29 0 11 512 0 0 51 0 12 0 0 0
HV%-
3:45 PM 0 0 93 3 0 2 82 0 0 15 0 2 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 0 0
0 344 0
3:15 PM 0 0 127 14 0 2 147 0 0 13 0 2 0 0 0 0 305 0
166 0
UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
3:00 PM 0 0 98 2 0 6 220 0 0 12 0 6 0 0 0
WB 0.4%0.58
NB 0.0%0.88
Peak Hour: 3:00 PM 4:00 PM
HV %:PHF
EB 0.9%0.76
Date: 05-03-2018
Peak Hour Count Period: 2:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB --
TOTAL 0.6%0.74
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy Vinton Ave 0 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound
0
0
00
0
0
0
1
0 7
N
Vinton Ave
Positano Pkwy
Positano Pkwy
Vi
n
t
o
n
A
v
e
Positano Pkwy
1,012TEV:
0.74PHF:
512
11 523
4090
1251
6340
0
29
397426
563
0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
Four-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Four-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.
Total
2
0
0
0
0
0
7
1
1
3
1
0
3
1
4
0
23
8
UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy Vinton Ave 0 15-min
TotalUTLTTHRTTHRT
2:00 PM 0 0 52 1 0 0 43
UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound
0 0 43 0 0 10
0 0 0 104 0
2:15 PM 0 0 70 4
0 0 8 0 0 0
0 0 0 157 0
2:45 PM 0 0 96 5
0 0 9 0 3 0
130 0
2:30 PM 0 0 90 2 0 1 52
0 3 0 0 0 0
195 586
3:00 PM 0 0 98 2 0 6 220
0 11 0 0 0 00179003
0 2 147 0 0 13
0 0 0 344 826
3:15 PM 0 0 127 14
0 0 12 0 6 0
0 0 0 166 1,010
3:45 PM 0 0 93 3
0 0 11 0 2 0
305 1,001
3:30 PM 0 0 79 10 0 1 63
0 2 0 0 0 0
197 1,012
4:00 PM 0 0 99 3 0 1 71
0 2 0 0 0 002820015
0 2 78 0 0 10
0 0 0 194 862
4:15 PM 0 0 87 12
0 0 15 0 5 0
0 0 0 183 764
4:45 PM 1 0 97 5
0 0 19 0 1 0
190 747
4:30 PM 0 0 82 5 0 0 76
0 1 0 0 0 0
207 774
5:00 PM 0 0 107 11 0 1 87
0 0 0 0 0 002900012
0 1 77 0 0 7
0 0 0 225 805
5:15 PM 0 0 111 8
0 0 16 0 3 0
0 0 0 262 901
5:45 PM 0 0 152 18
0 0 13 0 1 0
207 822
5:30 PM 0 0 136 10 0 3 99
0 3 0 0 0 0
274 96800000002780024
Count Total 1 0 1,576 113 0 25 1,385 0 0 0 3,340 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 397
0 0 197 0 43 0
0 0 0 0 6 0200000
0 1,012 0
HV 0 0 3 1 0 0
51 0 12 0 0 02901151200
0
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
EB WB NB SB Total
0%----1%0%0%--0%-HV%--1%3%-
0 1
2:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
West North South
2:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
2:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
2:30 PM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
3:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
3:00 PM 1 1 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3:45 PM 1 1 0 0 2
0 0 7 0 0 0
0
3:30 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
4:15 PM 4 2 1 0 7 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1
4:00 PM 2 2 0 0 4 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 1 4 0 0 5
0 0 0 0 0 1
2
4:30 PM 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 1
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 0
0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 2 1 0 0 3
0 0 0 0 0 4
0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0000000
0 11
Peak Hr 4 2 0 0 6 0 0
0 0 0 0 12 0Count Total 13 13 3 0 29 0
1000700
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
Four-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Four-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.
Northbound Southbound
UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy Vinton Ave 0 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestbound
0 0 0 0 0
2:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
2:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
UT LT TH RT UT LT
0 0
2:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0000000
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
2:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 3
3:15 PM 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
3:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 4
3:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0000000
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 4
3:45 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 8
4:15 PM 0 0 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 6
4:00 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
7 14
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0002001
0 0 4 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 15
4:45 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 15
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
5 18
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 8
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0000000
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 6
5:45 PM 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 4000000
0 0 0 29 0
Peak Hour 0 0 3 1
0 0 3 0 0 0Count Total 0 0 10 3 0 0 13
Westbound Northbound Southbound
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
6 0
Interval
Start
Positano Pkwy Positano Pkwy Vinton Ave 0 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound
0 0 0 0 0 0002000
0 0 0 0
2:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT LT TH RT
2:00 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0
2:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
2:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
3:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0000000
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0000000Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Three-Hour Count Summaries
Note: For all three-hour count summary, see next page.
Total
4
1
0
1
6030000223Peak Hour 0 2 18 12 32
1 1 0 0 1 0
0
8:45 AM 0 1 3 3 7 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 2 1 3 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 0
0 2 0
8:15 AM 0 0 5 4 9 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
East West North South
8:00 AM 0 1 8 4 13
Total EB WB NB SB Total
1%0
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
EB WB NB SB
4%1%-1%2%--0%-0%100%-
3 0
2,483 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
353 296 0 199 581 00752030110
2,483
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 0 0
0 0 77 31 0 14
1 11 0 32 0
HV%----
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0
667
202 0 32
47 0 52 130 0 59923904700848:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0
118 0 474
0
RT
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT UT LT TH RT
192 0 743 0
LT
0 0 91 88 0 68
0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
Interval
Start
0 Positano Pkwy Fallon Rd Fallon Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
135 0 94 1 0 101
UT LT TH
SB 1.5%0.75
TOTAL 1.3%0.84
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
UT LT TH RT UT
176 0 128
130 0 65 141 0
14
WB 0.2%0.87
NB 2.8%0.70
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %:PHF
EB --
Date: 05-08-2018
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 10:00 AMN
Fallon Rd
Positano Pkwy
Positano Pkwy
Fa
l
l
o
n
R
d
Fa
l
l
o
n
R
d
2,483TEV
0.84PHF
58
1
19
9
78
0
65
4
0
301
752 1,053
495
0
29
6
35
3
65
0
1,
3
3
4
1
2 0
00
0
0
3
0
0 3
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
Three-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Three-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.
Total
0
0
3
2
4
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
11
60022303
4 0
Peak Hr 0 2 18 12 32 0 0
0 0 3 3 7 0Count Total 0 13 55 26 94 0
0 0 00000009:45 AM 0 0 4 3 7
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
9:30 AM 0 1 3 0 4 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
9:15 AM 0 2 11 3 16 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0
0 1 0
9:00 AM 0 1 3 2 6 0
0 0 0 1 1 08:45 AM 0 1 3 3 7
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
8:30 AM 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 0 0
2 0
8:15 AM 0 0 5 4 9 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 0
0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 1 8 4 13 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
0 1 0
0
7:30 AM 0 1 7 1 9 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 8 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 0 2 0 4 6
0 0 2
100%-4%HV%-----
0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 5 1 6 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
7:00 AM 0 4 4
1
0 353 296 0 199 5810075203011
0
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
EB WB NB SB Total
1%-1%2%-1%0%-0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 0
441 2 0 947 563 0
0 1 11 0 32 00110143
0 2,483 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 1,570 0 293 1,339 0 5,155 0
273 1,2266726079400740500
7 89 0 270 1,427
9:45 AM 0 0 0 0
14 0 0 69 26 0
320 1,756
9:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 65 0
86 29 0 8 84 009901400
6 109 0 363 2,179
9:15 AM 0 0 0 0
14 1 0 69 39 0
474 2,483
9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 125 0
77 31 0 14 118 0020203200
52 130 0 599 2,480
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
47 0 0 84 47 0
743 2,303
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 239 0
91 88 0 68 192 00176012800
65 141 0 667 1,872
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
94 1 0 101 130 0
471 1,446
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 135 0
85 71 0 40 110 0013003500
15 135 0 422 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
30 0 0 75 30 0
312 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 137 0
78 20 0 7 80 0010901800
4 57 0 241 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
10 0 0 65 26 07:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 79 0
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound
UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
0 Positano Pkwy Fallon Rd Fallon Rd 15-min
TotalUTLTTHRTTHRTUTLTTHRTUTLT
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
Three-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Three-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.
0 2 0000002Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 3 0 3 0Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1000000
0 2
9:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2
9:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 09:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 1 3
2
9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 1
0 1
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 18:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0
Westbound Northbound Southbound
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
32 0
Interval
Start
0 Positano Pkwy Fallon Rd Fallon Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound
14 3 0 1 11 0010110
2 24 0 94 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
4 1 0 44 10 0Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 9 0
7 33310030000000
0 0 0 4 33
9:45 AM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 2 1 0
16 32
9:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9 2 0 0 3 0020000
0 2 0 6 25
9:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 1 0
7 32
9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
3 0 0 1 2 0000100
0 1 0 3 31
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 0
9 37
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 2 0 0 4 0000000
0 4 0 13 34
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 7 0 0
6 29
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 3 0020000
0 1 0 9 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 7 0 0
6 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
5 0 0 0 1 0000000
0 0 0 8 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 2 2 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound
UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
0 Positano Pkwy Fallon Rd Fallon Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Four-Hour Count Summaries
Note: For all three-hour count summary, see next page.
Total
1
1
0
2
4010010013Peak Hour 0 3 3 4 10
0 1 2 0 0 0
0
5:45 PM 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0
5:30 PM 0 0 1 1 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
5:15 PM 0 1 1 1 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
East West North South
5:00 PM 0 2 0 1 3
Total EB WB NB SB Total
1%0
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
EB WB NB SB
1%0%-2%0%--1%-1%0%-
0 0
1,868 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
485 395 0 127 472 0032006810
1,868
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 0 0
0 0 134 111 0 37
2 2 0 10 0
HV%----
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0
432
92 0 22
90 0 27 115 0 44377012001225:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0
116 0 512
0
RT
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT UT LT TH RT
118 0 481 0
LT
1 0 134 104 0 34
0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
Interval
Start
0 Positano Pkwy Fallon Rd Fallon Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
75 0 20 0 0 95
UT LT TH
SB 0.7%0.98
TOTAL 0.5%0.91
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
UT LT TH RT UT
76 0 14
90 0 29 123 0
3
WB 0.8%0.85
NB 0.3%0.90
Peak Hour: 5:00 PM 6:00 PM
HV %:PHF
EB --
Date: 05-08-2018
Peak Hour Count Period: 2:00 PM 6:00 PMN
Fallon Rd
Positano Pkwy
Positano Pkwy
Fa
l
l
o
n
R
d
Fa
l
l
o
n
R
d
1,868TEV
0.91PHF
47
2
12
7
59
9
55
3
0
68
320 388
522
0
39
5
48
5
88
1
79
3
1
0 0
00
0
1
1
0
0 3
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
Four-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Four-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.
Total
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
0
1
2
0
1
1
0
2
11
40001301
3 0
Peak Hr 0 3 3 4 10 0 1
2 0 0 2 8 0Count Total 0 13 21 36 70 0
0 0 00100125:45 PM 0 0 1 1 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
5:30 PM 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
5:15 PM 0 1 1 1 3 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 2 0 1 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 04:45 PM 0 1 2 1 4
0 0 2 0 0 0
0
4:30 PM 0 1 1 2 4 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
4:15 PM 0 3 0 1 4 0 0
1 0 0 1 0 0
0 1 0
4:00 PM 0 2 0 4 6 0
0 0 0 0 0 03:45 PM 0 0 0 4 4
0 0 2 0 0 0
0
3:30 PM 0 1 2 4 7 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0
3:15 PM 0 1 0 4 5 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
3:00 PM 0 0 5 5 10 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0
2:30 PM 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 5 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
2:45 PM 0 0 1 3 4
0 0 0
0%-1%HV%-----
0 0
2:15 PM 0 0 2 2 4 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
2:00 PM 0 0 3
2
0 485 395 0 127 472003200681
0
Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg)
EB WB NB SB Total
0%-2%0%-1%1%-1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 0
360 6 0 1,551 1,106 2
0 2 2 0 10 0010030
0 1,868 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 1,113 0 408 1,707 0 6,253 0
512 1,868134111037116009202200
27 115 0 443 1,779
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 122 90 0
481 1,707
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 77 0
134 104 0 34 118 007601410
29 123 0 432 1,589
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
20 0 0 95 90 0
423 1,521
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 75 0
130 77 0 21 110 006701710
22 109 0 371 1,462
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
11 1 0 106 70 0
363 1,467
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 52 0
91 73 0 14 105 006401600
27 91 0 364 1,573
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0
18 0 0 88 71 0
364 1,550
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 69 0
77 74 0 27 109 005901620
26 127 0 376 1,486
3:45 PM 0 0 0 0
18 0 0 84 51 0
469 1,372
3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 70 0
76 62 0 80 134 006205500
9 85 0 341 1,259
3:15 PM 0 0 0 0
53 0 0 86 48 0
300 1,314
3:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 60 0
79 47 0 10 91 005701600
11 89 0 262 0
2:45 PM 0 0 0 0
8 1 0 74 32 0
356 0
2:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 47 0
98 42 0 13 95 008102700
21 90 0 396 0
2:15 PM 0 0 0 0
37 0 0 77 64 22:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 105 0
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound
UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
0 Positano Pkwy Fallon Rd Fallon Rd 15-min
TotalUTLTTHRTTHRTUTLTTHRTUTLT
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
www.idaxdata.com
Four-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Four-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.
0 1 0000000Peak Hour 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 2 0Count Total 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
1000001
0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 04:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 1
0
4:00 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
3:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 03:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
3:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
2:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
2:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
2:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT LT TH RT
2:00 PM 0 0 0 0
Westbound Northbound Southbound
LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
10 0
Interval
Start
0 Positano Pkwy Fallon Rd Fallon Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastbound
3 0 0 2 2 0020100
10 26 0 70 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 20 1 0Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 12 0
2 10100100000000
0 1 0 2 12
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
3 14
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 0 0010000
0 1 0 3 15
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
4 18
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
2 0 0 1 0 0010000
1 1 0 4 18
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
4 21
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 0 0030000
3 1 0 6 22
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 26
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 1 3 0000000
0 4 0 7 26
3:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 0
5 22
3:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 4 0010000
1 4 0 10 21
3:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 5 0 0
4 16
3:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 3 0000000
0 0 0 3 0
2:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 0
4 0
2:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
2 0 0 0 2 0000000
0 2 0 5 0
2:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 1 0
TH RT
2:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound
UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
0 Positano Pkwy Fallon Rd Fallon Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One HourEastboundWestbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 project.manager.ca@idaxdata.com
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Page | i
Appendix B – Existing Conditions Level of Service Worksheets
Queues
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing Conditions AM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 1
Lane GroupEBLEBTWBLWBTNBLNBTSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)18347300894733650
v/c Ratio0.190.870.930.010.810.770.84
Control Delay49.839.576.819.692.124.937.3
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay49.839.576.819.692.124.937.3
Queue Length 50th (ft)1188189260350365
Queue Length 95th (ft)25951979#103333415
Internal Link Dist (ft)9641274919859
Turn Bay Length (ft)80100220
Base Capacity (vph)97452322641116957778
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.190.770.930.010.810.770.84
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing Conditions AM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 2
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)121232195416639212104974
Future Volume (vph)121232195416639212104974
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes1.000.971.000.991.000.991.00
Flpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.851.000.961.000.961.00
Flt Protected0.951.000.951.000.951.001.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770154017701780177017861860
Flt Permitted0.951.000.951.000.951.001.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1770154017701780177017861860
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.670.670.670.650.650.650.700.700.700.770.770.77
Adj. Flow (vph)181346300629456017306455
RTOR Reduction (vph)0166 0010090000
Lane Group Flow (vph)1818103007094724006500
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)33213
Turn TypeProtNAProtNAProtNAProtNA
Protected Phases74385216
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)1.017.817.534.36.351.140.3
Effective Green, g (s)1.017.817.534.36.351.140.3
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.180.180.340.060.510.40
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)17274310611111913750
v/s Ratio Prot0.01c0.12c0.170.000.05c0.41c0.35
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio1.060.660.970.010.850.790.87
Uniform Delay, d149.538.240.921.646.320.027.3
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d2238.25.941.90.041.67.012.8
Delay (s)287.744.182.821.687.927.140.2
Level of ServiceFDFCFCD
Approach Delay (s)56.181.334.040.2
Approach LOSEFCD
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay46.4HCM 2000 Level of ServiceD
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio0.86
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 99.9Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization72.8%ICU Level of ServiceC
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Queues
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing Conditions AM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 3
Lane GroupWBLWBRNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)17480803261195
v/c Ratio0.480.130.780.140.95
Control Delay21.05.025.322.332.1
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay21.05.025.322.332.1
Queue Length 50th (ft)425~2607~380
Queue Length 95th (ft)5713#30521#495
Internal Link Dist (ft)355673919
Turn Bay Length (ft)100160
Base Capacity (vph)65867510331821255
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.260.120.780.140.95
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing Conditions AM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 4
MovementWBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)113525241420908
Future Volume (vph)113525241420908
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor1.001.001.001.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.001.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.851.001.001.00
Flt Protected0.951.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701583185617701863
Flt Permitted0.951.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701583185617701863
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.650.650.670.670.760.76
Adj. Flow (vph)1748078221261195
RTOR Reduction (vph)033 1000
Lane Group Flow (vph)174478020261195
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)4
Turn TypeProtpt+ovNAProtNA
Protected Phases88 1216
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)8.616.126.03.033.5
Effective Green, g (s)8.616.126.03.033.5
Actuated g/C Ratio0.170.320.510.060.66
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)2974989441031221
v/s Ratio Protc0.100.030.430.01c0.64
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio0.590.090.850.250.98
Uniform Delay, d119.612.410.923.08.5
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d22.90.19.41.321.1
Delay (s)22.512.420.324.329.6
Level of ServiceCBCCC
Approach Delay (s)19.420.329.5
Approach LOSBCC
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay25.1HCM 2000 Level of ServiceC
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio1.01
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 51.1Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization62.6%ICU Level of ServiceB
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Queues
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing Conditions AM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 5
Lane GroupWBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)864346504423284830
v/c Ratio0.850.490.330.550.910.29
Control Delay30.14.917.05.161.67.5
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay30.14.917.05.161.67.5
Queue Length 50th (ft)148051010253
Queue Length 95th (ft)#225455615#15153
Internal Link Dist (ft)6731248646
Turn Bay Length (ft)360420180280
Base Capacity (vph)103671915367733112815
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.830.480.330.550.910.29
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing Conditions AM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 6
MovementWBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)752301353296199581
Future Volume (vph)752301353296199581
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor0.971.000.911.001.000.91
Frt1.000.851.000.851.001.00
Flt Protected0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)343315835085158317705085
Flt Permitted0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)343315835085158317705085
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.870.870.700.700.700.70
Adj. Flow (vph)864346504423284830
RTOR Reduction (vph)0244029500
Lane Group Flow (vph)864102504128284830
Turn TypeProtPermNAPermProtNA
Protected Phases8216
Permitted Phases82
Actuated Green, G (s)17.617.618.018.010.533.0
Effective Green, g (s)17.617.618.018.010.533.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.300.300.300.300.180.55
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)101346715354783112815
v/s Ratio Protc0.250.10c0.16c0.16
v/s Ratio Perm0.060.08
v/c Ratio0.850.220.330.270.910.29
Uniform Delay, d119.815.816.115.824.17.1
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d27.10.20.61.429.60.3
Delay (s)26.916.116.717.253.77.4
Level of ServiceCBBBDA
Approach Delay (s)23.816.919.2
Approach LOSCBB
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay20.2HCM 2000 Level of ServiceC
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio0.66
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 59.6Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization50.5%ICU Level of ServiceA
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Queues
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing Conditions PM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 1
Lane GroupEBLEBTWBLWBTNBLNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)3965421594721264
v/c Ratio0.020.390.250.011.030.400.010.28
Control Delay29.712.229.120.0116.810.729.013.1
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay29.712.229.120.0116.810.729.013.1
Queue Length 50th (ft)10191~7087064
Queue Length 95th (ft)837476#1702205121
Internal Link Dist (ft)9641274919859
Turn Bay Length (ft)80100220240
Base Capacity (vph)1455233357521541183145933
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.020.180.160.001.030.400.010.28
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing Conditions PM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 2
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)318444201303246312181
Future Volume (vph)318444201303246312181
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes1.000.971.001.001.001.001.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.851.001.001.000.981.001.00
Flt Protected0.951.000.951.000.951.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701540177018631770180817701862
Flt Permitted0.951.000.951.000.951.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701540177018631770180817701862
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.880.880.880.820.820.820.820.820.820.830.830.83
Adj. Flow (vph)319554201593957712631
RTOR Reduction (vph)085 0000060000
Lane Group Flow (vph)31105420159466012640
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn TypeProtNAProtNAProtNAProtNA
Protected Phases74385216
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)0.97.14.710.95.439.00.934.5
Effective Green, g (s)0.97.14.710.95.439.00.934.5
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.100.070.160.080.560.010.49
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)22156119291137101122921
v/s Ratio Prot0.00c0.01c0.03c0.00c0.09c0.260.000.14
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio0.140.070.450.011.160.460.050.29
Uniform Delay, d134.028.331.324.832.19.134.010.4
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d22.80.22.70.0126.51.50.90.8
Delay (s)36.828.534.024.8158.710.634.811.1
Level of ServiceDCCCFBCB
Approach Delay (s)28.733.747.911.2
Approach LOSCCDB
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay36.1HCM 2000 Level of ServiceD
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio0.45
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 69.7Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization46.7%ICU Level of ServiceA
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Queues
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing Conditions PM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 3
Lane GroupWBLWBRNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)86106838401
v/c Ratio0.310.020.500.040.27
Control Delay20.95.410.720.44.0
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay20.95.410.720.44.0
Queue Length 50th (ft)27082339
Queue Length 95th (ft)364#2961178
Internal Link Dist (ft)355673919
Turn Bay Length (ft)100160
Base Capacity (vph)64559413771791466
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.130.020.500.040.27
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing Conditions PM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 4
MovementWBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)607506477341
Future Volume (vph)607506477341
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor1.001.001.001.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.001.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.850.991.001.00
Flt Protected0.951.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701583184117701863
Flt Permitted0.951.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701583184117701863
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.700.700.810.810.850.85
Adj. Flow (vph)8610625588401
RTOR Reduction (vph)083000
Lane Group Flow (vph)86268008401
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)7
Turn TypeProtpt+ovNAProtNA
Protected Phases88 1216
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)5.310.935.21.140.8
Effective Green, g (s)5.310.935.21.140.8
Actuated g/C Ratio0.100.200.640.020.74
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)1703131176351379
v/s Ratio Protc0.050.00c0.370.00c0.22
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio0.510.010.580.230.29
Uniform Delay, d123.717.85.726.62.4
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d22.40.02.13.30.5
Delay (s)26.017.87.829.92.9
Level of ServiceCBACA
Approach Delay (s)25.27.83.4
Approach LOSCAA
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay7.7HCM 2000 Level of ServiceA
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio0.58
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 55.1Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization43.4%ICU Level of ServiceA
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Queues
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing Conditions PM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 5
Lane GroupWBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)37680539439130482
v/c Ratio0.530.200.250.490.450.15
Control Delay21.46.412.54.125.64.7
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay21.46.412.54.125.64.7
Queue Length 50th (ft)5404203718
Queue Length 95th (ft)812375548337
Internal Link Dist (ft)67312481130
Turn Bay Length (ft)360420180280
Base Capacity (vph)115958721148983483165
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.320.140.250.490.370.15
Intersection Summary
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing Conditions PM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 6
MovementWBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)32068485395127472
Future Volume (vph)32068485395127472
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor0.971.000.911.001.000.91
Frpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.000.981.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.851.000.851.001.00
Flt Protected0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)343315835085154517705085
Flt Permitted0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)343315835085154517705085
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.850.850.900.900.980.98
Adj. Flow (vph)37680539439130482
RTOR Reduction (vph)064026000
Lane Group Flow (vph)37616539179130482
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3
Turn TypeProtPermNAPermProtNA
Protected Phases8216
Permitted Phases82
Actuated Green, G (s)11.111.122.222.27.534.2
Effective Green, g (s)11.111.122.222.27.534.2
Actuated g/C Ratio0.200.200.410.410.140.63
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)70132320786312443202
v/s Ratio Protc0.110.11c0.070.09
v/s Ratio Perm0.01c0.12
v/c Ratio0.540.050.260.280.530.15
Uniform Delay, d119.317.410.610.721.84.1
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d20.80.10.31.12.20.1
Delay (s)20.117.410.911.924.04.2
Level of ServiceCBBBCA
Approach Delay (s)19.611.38.4
Approach LOSBBA
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay12.3HCM 2000 Level of ServiceB
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio0.40
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 54.3Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization42.4%ICU Level of ServiceA
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Queues
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing School Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 1
Lane GroupEBLEBTWBLWBTNBLNBTSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)5166208898360496
v/c Ratio0.040.550.730.010.730.370.68
Control Delay32.013.945.118.864.010.623.5
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay32.013.945.118.864.010.623.5
Queue Length 50th (ft)248324174164
Queue Length 95th (ft)920787#123150186
Internal Link Dist (ft)9641274919859
Turn Bay Length (ft)80100220
Base Capacity (vph)128520295662135972734
Starvation Cap Reductn 0000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 0000000
Storage Cap Reductn 0000000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.040.320.710.010.730.370.68
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing School Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 2
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)3710110040912686703193
Future Volume (vph)3710110040912686703193
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes1.000.971.001.001.000.991.00
Flpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.861.001.001.000.971.00
Flt Protected0.951.000.951.000.951.001.00
Satd. Flow (prot)1770155717701863177017961860
Flt Permitted0.951.000.951.000.951.001.00
Satd. Flow (perm)1770155717701863177017961860
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.650.650.650.480.480.480.930.930.930.650.650.65
Adj. Flow (vph)51115520880982887204915
RTOR Reduction (vph)0132 0000080010
Lane Group Flow (vph)53402088098352004950
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn TypeProtNAProtNAProtNAProtNA
Protected Phases74385216
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)0.910.911.121.15.337.127.3
Effective Green, g (s)0.910.911.121.15.337.127.3
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.150.150.290.070.510.38
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)21233270541129917699
v/s Ratio Prot0.00c0.02c0.120.00c0.060.20c0.27
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio0.240.150.770.010.760.380.71
Uniform Delay, d135.526.829.518.333.010.819.3
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d25.80.312.70.022.31.26.0
Delay (s)41.327.142.218.455.312.025.3
Level of ServiceDCDBEBC
Approach Delay (s)27.541.321.325.3
Approach LOS CDCC
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay26.8HCM 2000 Level of ServiceC
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio0.61
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 72.6Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization46.5%ICU Level of ServiceA
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Queues
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing School Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 3
Lane GroupWBLWBRNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)581463614674
v/c Ratio0.230.030.450.080.45
Control Delay20.65.69.321.14.9
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay20.65.69.321.14.9
Queue Length 50th (ft)19068576
Queue Length 95th (ft)35715513115
Internal Link Dist (ft)355673919
Turn Bay Length (ft)100160
Base Capacity (vph)64258514031781492
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.090.020.450.080.45
Intersection Summary
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing School Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 4
MovementWBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)51123972911512
Future Volume (vph)51123972911512
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor1.001.001.001.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.001.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.850.991.001.00
Flt Protected0.951.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701583184617701863
Flt Permitted0.951.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701583184617701863
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.880.880.670.670.760.76
Adj. Flow (vph)58145934314674
RTOR Reduction (vph)011 2000
Lane Group Flow (vph)583634014674
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)7
Turn TypeProtpt+ovNAProtNA
Protected Phases88 1216
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)4.710.336.11.141.7
Effective Green, g (s)4.710.336.11.141.7
Actuated g/C Ratio0.080.190.650.020.75
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)1502941202351402
v/s Ratio Protc0.030.00c0.340.01c0.36
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio0.390.010.530.400.48
Uniform Delay, d124.018.45.126.82.7
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d21.70.01.77.31.2
Delay (s)25.618.46.834.23.8
Level of ServiceCBACA
Approach Delay (s)24.26.84.5
Approach LOSCAA
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay6.5HCM 2000 Level of ServiceA
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio0.53
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 55.4Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization40.9%ICU Level of ServiceA
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Queues
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing School Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 5
Lane GroupWBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)300171335214189662
v/c Ratio0.460.390.160.280.590.20
Control Delay20.96.611.83.727.84.4
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay20.96.611.83.727.84.4
Queue Length 50th (ft)4202505224
Queue Length 95th (ft)643146377731
Internal Link Dist (ft)67312481130
Turn Bay Length (ft)360420180280
Base Capacity (vph)118966021057643573237
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.250.260.160.280.530.20
Intersection Summary
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 05/22/2018
Safari Kid TIS Existing School Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 6
MovementWBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)249142325208125437
Future Volume (vph)249142325208125437
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor0.971.000.911.001.000.91
Frpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.000.981.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.851.000.851.001.00
Flt Protected0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)343315835085154517705085
Flt Permitted0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)343315835085154517705085
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.830.830.970.970.660.66
Adj. Flow (vph)300171335214189662
RTOR Reduction (vph)0139012700
Lane Group Flow (vph)3003233587189662
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3
Turn TypeProtPermNAPermProtNA
Protected Phases8216
Permitted Phases82
Actuated Green, G (s)9.99.921.521.58.034.0
Effective Green, g (s)9.99.921.521.58.034.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.190.190.410.410.150.64
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)64229620666272673268
v/s Ratio Protc0.090.07c0.11c0.13
v/s Ratio Perm0.020.06
v/c Ratio0.470.110.160.140.710.20
Uniform Delay, d119.217.810.09.921.33.9
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d20.50.20.20.58.30.1
Delay (s)19.718.010.110.329.64.0
Level of Service BBBBCA
Approach Delay (s)19.110.29.7
Approach LOSBBA
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay12.2HCM 2000 Level of ServiceB
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio0.38
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 52.9Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization40.3%ICU Level of ServiceA
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Appendix | B
Appendix C – Existing Plus Project Conditions Level of Service
Worksheets
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT 1 - Existing Plus Project AM Peak Hour
TJKM Page 1
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)125232223856639212144974
Future Volume (vph)125232223856639212144974
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.99 1.000.99 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.85 1.000.94 1.000.96 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701543177017301770178617701860
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701543177017301770178617701860
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.670.670.670.650.650.650.700.700.700.770.770.77
Adj. Flow (vph)1873463431289456017356455
RTOR Reduction (vph)0163 0050090000
Lane Group Flow (vph)18190034315094724056500
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3 3 2 13
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)2.118.3 21.537.7 6.955.2 1.049.3
Effective Green, g (s)2.118.3 21.537.7 6.955.2 1.049.3
Actuated g/C Ratio0.020.16 0.190.33 0.060.48 0.010.43
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)32247 333572 107864 15804
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01c0.12c0.190.01c0.05c0.41 0.000.35
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.560.77 1.030.03 0.880.84 0.330.81
Uniform Delay, d1 55.545.8 46.225.8 53.125.5 56.228.2
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d220.713.5 57.30.0 50.29.5 12.78.6
Delay (s)76.259.3103.525.8103.435.0 68.836.8
Level of Service EE FC FD ED
Approach Delay (s)60.1 99.2 42.8 37.1
Approach LOS E F D D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 53.2HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.89
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 114.0Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.5%ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT - Existing Slus Project AM Peak Hour
TJKM Page 1
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)125232223856639214944974
Future Volume (vph)125232223856639214944974
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.99 1.000.99 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.85 1.000.94 1.000.96 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701543177017301770177317701860
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701543177017301770177317701860
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.670.670.670.650.650.650.700.700.700.770.770.77
Adj. Flow (vph)1873463431289456021356455
RTOR Reduction (vph)0163 00500110000
Lane Group Flow (vph)18190034315094762056500
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3 3 2 13
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)2.118.3 21.537.7 6.955.2 1.049.3
Effective Green, g (s)2.118.3 21.537.7 6.955.2 1.049.3
Actuated g/C Ratio0.020.16 0.190.33 0.060.48 0.010.43
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)32247 333572 107858 15804
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01c0.12c0.190.01c0.05c0.43 0.000.35
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.560.77 1.030.03 0.880.89 0.330.81
Uniform Delay, d1 55.545.8 46.225.8 53.126.6 56.228.2
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d220.713.5 57.30.0 50.213.2 12.78.6
Delay (s)76.259.3103.525.8103.439.8 68.836.8
Level of Service EE FC FD ED
Approach Delay (s)60.1 99.2 46.6 37.1
Approach LOS E F D D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 54.5HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.92
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 114.0Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 76.2%ICU Level of Service D
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 Report
Page 2
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)113565481424932
Future Volume (vph)113565481424932
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.851.00 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701583185617701863
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701583185617701863
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.650.650.670.670.760.76
Adj. Flow (vph)1748681821321226
RTOR Reduction (vph)028 1000
Lane Group Flow (vph)174588380321226
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)4
Turn Type Protpt+ovNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 88 12 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)8.616.125.9 3.033.4
Effective Green, g (s)8.616.125.9 3.033.4
Actuated g/C Ratio0.170.320.51 0.060.65
Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)298499942 1041220
v/s Ratio Prot c0.100.040.45 0.02c0.66
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.580.120.89 0.311.00
Uniform Delay, d1 19.512.411.3 23.08.8
Progression Factor1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d22.90.112.3 1.727.0
Delay (s)22.512.523.6 24.735.8
Level of Service CBC CD
Approach Delay (s)19.2 23.6 35.5
Approach LOS B C D
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 29.4HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 1.03
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 51.0Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.9%ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Existing Slus Project AM Peak Hour
TJKM
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportExisting Slus Project AM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 3
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)766311353310209581
Future Volume (vph)766311353310209581
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.971.000.911.001.000.91
Frt 1.000.851.000.851.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)343315835085158317705085
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)343315835085158317705085
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.870.870.700.700.700.70
Adj. Flow (vph)880357504443299830
RTOR Reduction (vph)0251030900
Lane Group Flow (vph)880106504134299830
Turn Type ProtPermNAPermProtNA
Protected Phases 8 2 16
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s)17.717.718.018.010.533.0
Effective Green, g (s)17.717.718.018.010.533.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.300.300.300.300.180.55
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)101746915334773112810
v/s Ratio Protc0.260.10c0.17c0.16
v/s Ratio Perm 0.07 0.08
v/c Ratio 0.870.230.330.280.960.30
Uniform Delay, d1 19.915.816.215.924.47.1
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d27.80.20.61.540.50.3
Delay (s)27.716.116.717.464.97.4
Level of Service C BBBEA
Approach Delay (s)24.3 17.0 22.6
Approach LOS C B C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 21.7HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.68
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 59.7Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.5%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Project Driveway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT - Existing Slus Project AM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 4
Movement EBTEBRWBLWBTNELNER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)122364200364
Future Volume (Veh/h)122364200364
Sign Control Free FreeStop
Grade 0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)133394217394
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)284
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume172378152
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 172 378152
tC, single (s)4.1 6.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %100 94100
cM capacity (veh/h)1405 622894
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NE 1
Volume Total 17222143
Volume Left 0439
Volume Right 3904
cSH 17001405640
Volume to Capacity0.100.000.07
Queue Length 95th (ft)005
Control Delay (s)0.00.211.0
Lane LOS AB
Approach Delay (s)0.00.211.0
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 23.7%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT 1 - Existing Slus Project AM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 1
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)31010112273912686733193
Future Volume (vph)31010112273912686733193
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.99 1.000.99 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.86 1.000.96 1.000.97 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701563177017651770179617701860
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701563177017651770179617701860
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.650.650.650.480.480.480.930.930.930.650.650.65
Adj. Flow (vph)515155254156982887254915
RTOR Reduction (vph)0133 0040090010
Lane Group Flow (vph)537025417098351054950
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)0.911.0 11.521.6 5.335.3 0.930.9
Effective Green, g (s)0.911.0 11.521.6 5.335.3 0.930.9
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.14 0.150.28 0.070.46 0.010.40
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)20224 265497 122826 20749
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00c0.02c0.140.01c0.06c0.20 0.00c0.27
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.250.17 0.960.03 0.800.42 0.250.66
Uniform Delay, d1 37.628.8 32.420.0 35.213.9 37.618.6
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d26.50.4 43.40.0 30.51.6 6.54.6
Delay (s)44.029.2 75.820.0 65.715.5 44.023.2
Level of Service DC EC EB DC
Approach Delay (s)29.6 71.5 26.2 23.4
Approach LOS C E C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 34.5HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.7Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.5%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT - Existing Slus Project 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 1
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)31010112273912688933193
Future Volume (vph)31010112273912688933193
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.99 1.000.99 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.86 1.000.96 1.000.96 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701563177017651770177917701860
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701563177017651770177917701860
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.650.650.650.480.480.480.930.930.930.650.650.65
Adj. Flow (vph)515155254156982889654915
RTOR Reduction (vph)0133 00400120010
Lane Group Flow (vph)537025417098372054950
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)0.911.0 11.521.6 5.335.3 0.930.9
Effective Green, g (s)0.911.0 11.521.6 5.335.3 0.930.9
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.14 0.150.28 0.070.46 0.010.40
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)20224 265497 122818 20749
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00c0.02c0.140.01c0.06c0.21 0.00c0.27
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.250.17 0.960.03 0.800.45 0.250.66
Uniform Delay, d1 37.628.8 32.420.0 35.214.1 37.618.6
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d26.50.4 43.40.0 30.51.8 6.54.6
Delay (s)44.029.2 75.820.0 65.715.9 44.023.2
Level of Service DC EC EB DC
Approach Delay (s)29.6 71.5 26.1 23.4
Approach LOS C E C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 34.3HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.62
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.7Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 48.8%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 Report
Page 2
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)51154162914531
Future Volume (vph)51154162914531
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.850.99 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701583184617701863
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701583184617701863
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.880.880.670.670.760.76
Adj. Flow (vph)58176214318699
RTOR Reduction (vph)013 3000
Lane Group Flow (vph)584661018699
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)7
Turn Type Protpt+ovNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 88 12 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)4.811.532.8 2.239.5
Effective Green, g (s)4.811.532.8 2.239.5
Actuated g/C Ratio0.090.220.62 0.040.74
Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)1593411136 731380
v/s Ratio Prot c0.030.00c0.36 0.01c0.38
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.360.010.58 0.250.51
Uniform Delay, d1 22.816.46.1 24.72.9
Progression Factor1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d21.40.02.2 1.81.3
Delay (s)24.216.48.3 26.54.2
Level of Service CBA CA
Approach Delay (s)22.5 8.3 4.8
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 7.3HCM 2000 Level of Service A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 53.3Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.9%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Existing Slus Project 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 Report
Page 3
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)260150325219133437
Future Volume (vph)260150325219133437
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.971.000.911.001.000.91
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.000.981.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frt 1.000.851.000.851.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)343315835085154517705085
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)343315835085154517705085
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.830.830.970.970.660.66
Adj. Flow (vph)313181335226202662
RTOR Reduction (vph)0146014400
Lane Group Flow (vph)3133533582202662
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3
Turn Type ProtPermNAPermProtNA
Protected Phases 8 2 16
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s)10.110.118.918.99.733.1
Effective Green, g (s)10.110.118.918.99.733.1
Actuated g/C Ratio0.190.190.360.360.190.63
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)66430618415593283224
v/s Ratio Prot c0.09 0.07c0.11c0.13
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.05
v/c Ratio 0.470.110.180.150.620.21
Uniform Delay, d1 18.717.411.411.219.54.0
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d20.50.20.20.63.40.1
Delay (s)19.217.511.611.823.04.2
Level of Service BBBBCA
Approach Delay (s)18.6 11.7 8.6
Approach LOS B B A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 12.0HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.39
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 52.2Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.0%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Existing Slus Project 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Project Driveway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 Report
Page 4
Movement EBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)74283104283
Future Volume (Veh/h)74283104283
Sign Control Free FreeStop
Grade 0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)80303113303
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)356
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume11021495
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 110 21495
tC, single (s)4.1 6.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %100 96100
cM capacity (veh/h)1480 773962
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NB 1
Volume Total 11011633
Volume Left 0330
Volume Right 3003
cSH 17001480787
Volume to Capacity0.060.000.04
Queue Length 95th (ft)003
Control Delay (s)0.00.29.8
Lane LOS AA
Approach Delay (s)0.00.29.8
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.3
Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.9%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
ALT - Existing Slus Project 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT 1 - Existing Slus Project PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 1
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)39841001081303246392181
Future Volume (vph)39841001081303246392181
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.98 1.001.00 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.86 1.000.93 1.000.98 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701566177017091770180817701862
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701566177017091770180817701862
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.880.880.880.820.820.820.820.820.820.830.830.83
Adj. Flow (vph)31095122121015939577112631
RTOR Reduction (vph)084 0080060000
Lane Group Flow (vph)32101221401594660112640
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)0.98.2 7.815.1 5.438.5 0.934.0
Effective Green, g (s)0.98.2 7.815.1 5.438.5 0.934.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.11 0.110.21 0.070.52 0.010.46
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)21174 188351 130948 21862
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00c0.01c0.070.01c0.09c0.26 0.010.14
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.140.12 0.650.04 1.220.49 0.520.31
Uniform Delay, d1 35.929.3 31.523.3 34.011.2 36.012.3
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d23.10.3 7.50.0150.91.8 21.60.9
Delay (s)39.029.7 39.023.4184.913.0 57.613.2
Level of Service DC DC FB EB
Approach Delay (s)29.9 36.6 56.3 15.0
Approach LOS C D E B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 41.6HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 73.4Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 49.2%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT - Existing Slus Project PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 1
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)398410010813032411992181
Future Volume (vph)398410010813032411992181
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.98 1.000.99 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.86 1.000.93 1.000.96 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701566177017091770177317701862
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701566177017091770177317701862
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.880.880.880.820.820.820.820.820.820.830.830.83
Adj. Flow (vph)310951221210159395145112631
RTOR Reduction (vph)084 00800120000
Lane Group Flow (vph)32101221401595280112640
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)0.98.2 7.815.1 5.438.5 0.934.0
Effective Green, g (s)0.98.2 7.815.1 5.438.5 0.934.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.11 0.110.21 0.070.52 0.010.46
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)21174 188351 130929 21862
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00c0.01c0.070.01c0.09c0.30 0.010.14
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.140.12 0.650.04 1.220.57 0.520.31
Uniform Delay, d1 35.929.3 31.523.3 34.011.8 36.012.3
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d23.10.3 7.50.0150.92.5 21.60.9
Delay (s)39.029.7 39.023.4184.914.3 57.613.2
Level of Service DC DC FB EB
Approach Delay (s)29.9 36.6 53.1 15.0
Approach LOS C D D B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 40.6HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 73.4Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.6%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportExisting Slus Project PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 2
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)60155544715389
Future Volume (vph)60155544715389
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.850.99 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701583184317701863
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701583184317701863
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.700.700.810.810.850.85
Adj. Flow (vph)86216845818458
RTOR Reduction (vph)016 3000
Lane Group Flow (vph)865739018458
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)7
Turn Type Protpt+ovNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 88 12 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)5.311.931.7 2.138.3
Effective Green, g (s)5.311.931.7 2.138.3
Actuated g/C Ratio0.100.230.60 0.040.73
Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)1783581110 701356
v/s Ratio Prot c0.050.00c0.40 0.01c0.25
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.480.010.67 0.260.34
Uniform Delay, d1 22.415.86.9 24.52.6
Progression Factor1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d22.10.03.2 1.90.7
Delay (s)24.415.810.1 26.43.3
Level of Service CBB CA
Approach Delay (s)22.7 10.1 4.1
Approach LOS C B A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 9.0HCM 2000 Level of Service A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 52.6Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.9%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportExisting Slus Project PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 3
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)34888485423147472
Future Volume (vph)34888485423147472
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.971.000.911.001.000.91
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.000.981.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frt 1.000.851.000.851.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)343315835085154517705085
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)343315835085154517705085
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.850.850.900.900.980.98
Adj. Flow (vph)409104539470150482
RTOR Reduction (vph)082028200
Lane Group Flow (vph)40922539188150482
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3
Turn Type ProtPermNAPermProtNA
Protected Phases 8 2 16
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s)11.711.721.921.97.634.0
Effective Green, g (s)11.711.721.921.97.634.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.210.210.400.400.140.62
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)73433820356182453160
v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.11c0.080.09
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01c0.12
v/c Ratio 0.560.070.260.300.610.15
Uniform Delay, d1 19.217.111.011.222.24.3
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d20.90.10.31.34.50.1
Delay (s)20.117.211.312.526.64.4
Level of Service CBBBCA
Approach Delay (s)19.5 11.9 9.7
Approach LOS B B A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 13.0HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 54.7Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.3%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Project Driveway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT - Existing Slus Project PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 4
Movement EBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)6572846728
Future Volume (Veh/h)6572846728
Sign Control Free FreeStop
Grade 0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)7178950789
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)377
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume149178110
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 149 178110
tC, single (s)4.1 6.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %99 9099
cM capacity (veh/h)1432 807943
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NB 1
Volume Total 1495987
Volume Left 0978
Volume Right 7809
cSH 17001432819
Volume to Capacity0.090.010.11
Queue Length 95th (ft)009
Control Delay (s)0.01.29.9
Lane LOS AA
Approach Delay (s)0.01.29.9
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 3.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.4%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
Queues
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/08/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT 1 - Existing Slus Project AM Peak Hour
TJKM Page 1
Lane Group EBLEBTWBLWBTNBLNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)1835334320947335650
v/c Ratio 0.200.910.970.030.830.790.060.82
Control Delay 55.848.485.518.999.530.252.038.5
Queue Delay 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay 55.848.485.518.999.530.252.038.5
Queue Length 50th (ft)121132445673954405
Queue Length 95th (ft)2711423816#11043114440
Internal Link Dist (ft)964 204 299 859
Turn Bay Length (ft)80 100 220 240
Base Capacity (vph)8841935361111392482788
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.200.840.970.030.830.790.060.82
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Queues
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/08/2018
Alt 2 Existing plus Project AM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 1
Lane GroupEBLEBTWBLWBTNBLNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)1835334320947735650
v/c Ratio0.200.910.970.030.830.840.060.82
Control Delay55.848.485.518.999.533.252.038.5
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay55.848.485.518.999.533.252.038.5
Queue Length 50th (ft)121132445674334405
Queue Length 95th (ft)2711423816#11046514440
Internal Link Dist (ft)964204919859
Turn Bay Length (ft)80100220240
Base Capacity (vph)8841935361111392082788
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.200.840.970.030.830.840.060.82
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Queues
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 06/08/2018
Synchro 9 ReportExisting Slus Project AM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 2
Lane Group WBLWBRNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)17486839321226
v/c Ratio 0.480.140.810.170.98
Control Delay 21.05.727.422.837.1
Queue Delay 0.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay 21.05.727.422.837.1
Queue Length 50th (ft)427~2838~398
Queue Length 95th (ft)5716#32524#514
Internal Link Dist (ft)355 659 535
Turn Bay Length (ft)100 160
Base Capacity (vph)66067310331831254
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.260.130.810.170.98
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Queues
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 06/08/2018
Synchro 9 ReportExisting Slus Project AM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 3
Lane Group WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)880357504443299830
v/c Ratio 0.870.500.330.560.960.30
Control Delay 31.14.917.05.271.77.5
Queue Delay 0.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay 31.14.917.05.271.77.5
Queue Length 50th (ft)152051010953
Queue Length 95th (ft)#232465614#16253
Internal Link Dist (ft)6591248 646
Turn Bay Length (ft)360420 180280
Base Capacity (vph)103572615337873112811
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.850.490.330.560.960.30
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Queues
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/08/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT 1 - Existing Slus Project 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 1
Lane Group EBLEBTWBLWBTNBLNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)517025421983605496
v/c Ratio 0.040.560.870.040.730.390.040.68
Control Delay 32.014.459.615.764.613.132.023.8
Queue Delay 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay 32.014.459.615.764.613.132.023.8
Queue Length 50th (ft)26104441742164
Queue Length 95th (ft)9219311#1241979187
Internal Link Dist (ft)964 276 360 859
Turn Bay Length (ft)80 100 220 240
Base Capacity (vph)127520293627135919127729
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.040.330.870.030.730.390.040.68
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Queues
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/08/2018
Alt 2 Existing plus Project PM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 1
Lane GroupEBLEBTWBLWBTNBLNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)517025421983845496
v/c Ratio0.040.560.870.040.730.420.040.68
Control Delay32.014.459.615.764.613.332.023.8
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay32.014.459.615.764.613.332.023.8
Queue Length 50th (ft)26104441792164
Queue Length 95th (ft)9219311#1242119187
Internal Link Dist (ft)964276919859
Turn Bay Length (ft)80100220240
Base Capacity (vph)127520293627135913127729
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.040.330.870.030.730.420.040.68
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Queues
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 06/08/2018
Alt 2 Existing plus Project PM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 2
Lane GroupWBLWBRNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)581766418699
v/c Ratio0.220.040.510.100.47
Control Delay19.75.012.220.65.2
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay19.75.012.220.65.2
Queue Length 50th (ft)19073680
Queue Length 95th (ft)35816415122
Internal Link Dist (ft)355663919
Turn Bay Length (ft)100160
Base Capacity (vph)65760113101821477
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.090.030.510.100.47
Intersection Summary
Queues
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 06/08/2018
Alt 2 Existing plus Project PM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 3
Lane GroupWBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)313181335226202662
v/c Ratio0.470.400.180.320.620.21
Control Delay21.06.512.53.929.34.5
Queue Delay0.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay21.06.512.53.929.34.5
Queue Length 50th (ft)4402505624
Queue Length 95th (ft)673246398232
Internal Link Dist (ft)66312481125
Turn Bay Length (ft)360420180280
Base Capacity (vph)118666518417033563221
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio0.260.270.180.320.570.21
Intersection Summary
Queues
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 06/08/2018
Synchro 9 ReportExisting Slus Project 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 2
Lane Group WBLWBRNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)581766418699
v/c Ratio 0.220.040.510.100.47
Control Delay 19.75.012.220.65.2
Queue Delay 0.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay 19.75.012.220.65.2
Queue Length 50th (ft)19073680
Queue Length 95th (ft)35816415122
Internal Link Dist (ft)355 663 475
Turn Bay Length (ft)100 160
Base Capacity (vph)65760113101821477
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.090.030.510.100.47
Intersection Summary
Queues
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 06/08/2018
Synchro 9 ReportExisting Slus Project 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 3
Lane Group WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)313181335226202662
v/c Ratio 0.470.400.180.320.620.21
Control Delay 21.06.512.53.929.34.5
Queue Delay 0.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay 21.06.512.53.929.34.5
Queue Length 50th (ft)4402505624
Queue Length 95th (ft)673246398232
Internal Link Dist (ft)6631248 1125
Turn Bay Length (ft)360420180280
Base Capacity (vph)118666518417033563221
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.260.270.180.320.570.21
Intersection Summary
Queues
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/08/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT 1 - Existing Slus Project PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 1
Lane Group EBLEBTWBLWBTNBLNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)31051222215947211264
v/c Ratio 0.020.420.480.051.100.430.080.30
Control Delay 31.014.233.514.4138.112.732.015.3
Queue Delay 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay 31.014.233.514.4138.112.732.015.3
Queue Length 50th (ft)14463~76100471
Queue Length 95th (ft)9428819#17623218127
Internal Link Dist (ft)964 297 386 859
Turn Bay Length (ft)80 100 220 240
Base Capacity (vph)1375063166571451108137867
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.020.210.390.031.100.430.080.30
Intersection Summary
~ Volume exceeds capacity, queue is theoretically infinite.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/08/2018
Alt 2 Existing plus Project PM Peak HourSynchro 9 Report
TJKM Page 1
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)398410010813032411992181
Future Volume (vph)398410010813032411992181
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes1.000.971.000.981.000.991.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frt1.000.861.000.931.000.961.001.00
Flt Protected0.951.000.951.000.951.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701566177017091770177317701862
Flt Permitted0.951.000.951.000.951.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701566177017091770177317701862
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.880.880.880.820.820.820.820.820.820.830.830.83
Adj. Flow (vph)310951221210159395145112631
RTOR Reduction (vph)084 00800120000
Lane Group Flow (vph)32101221401595280112640
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn TypeProtNAProtNAProtNAProtNA
Protected Phases74385216
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)0.98.27.815.15.438.50.934.0
Effective Green, g (s)0.98.27.815.15.438.50.934.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.110.110.210.070.520.010.46
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)2117418835113092921862
v/s Ratio Prot0.00c0.01c0.070.01c0.09c0.300.010.14
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio0.140.120.650.041.220.570.520.31
Uniform Delay, d135.929.331.523.334.011.836.012.3
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d23.10.37.50.0150.92.521.60.9
Delay (s)39.029.739.023.4184.914.357.613.2
Level of ServiceDCDCFBEB
Approach Delay (s)29.936.653.115.0
Approach LOSCDDB
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay40.6HCM 2000 Level of ServiceD
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio0.57
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 73.4Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization52.6%ICU Level of ServiceA
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Queues
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 06/08/2018
Synchro 9 ReportExisting Slus Project PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 2
Lane Group WBLWBRNBTSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)862174218458
v/c Ratio 0.300.050.580.100.32
Control Delay 20.04.715.320.64.3
Queue Delay 0.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay 20.04.715.320.64.3
Queue Length 50th (ft)25093546
Queue Length 95th (ft)366#3351791
Internal Link Dist (ft)355 673 446
Turn Bay Length (ft)100 160
Base Capacity (vph)66361612851841451
Starvation Cap Reductn 00000
Spillback Cap Reductn 00000
Storage Cap Reductn 00000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.130.030.580.100.32
Intersection Summary
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Queue shown is maximum after two cycles.
Queues
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 06/08/2018
Synchro 9 ReportExisting Slus Project PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 3
Lane Group WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Group Flow (vph)409104539470150482
v/c Ratio 0.550.240.260.520.510.15
Control Delay 21.56.013.04.327.24.9
Queue Delay 0.00.00.00.00.00.0
Total Delay 21.56.013.04.327.24.9
Queue Length 50th (ft)5904304319
Queue Length 95th (ft)882677569538
Internal Link Dist (ft)6731248 1130
Turn Bay Length (ft)360420180280
Base Capacity (vph)115160020699073463127
Starvation Cap Reductn 000000
Spillback Cap Reductn 000000
Storage Cap Reductn 000000
Reduced v/c Ratio 0.360.170.260.520.430.15
Intersection Summary
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Appendix | B
Appendix D – Future Conditions Level of Service Worksheets
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 05/24/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture &onGitions AM Peak Kour
TJKM Page 2
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)12123219541662938504004
Future Volume (vph)12123219541662938504004
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.99 1.000.99 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.00
Frt 1.000.85 1.000.96 1.000.97 1.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)177015401770178017701790 1859
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)177015401770178017701790 1859
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.670.670.670.650.650.650.700.700.700.770.770.77
Adj. Flow (vph)181346300629441912105195
RTOR Reduction (vph)0206 0010090010
Lane Group Flow (vph)1814103007094531005230
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3 3 2 13
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)1.016.0 17.532.5 6.351.1 40.3
Effective Green, g (s)1.016.0 17.532.5 6.351.1 40.3
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.16 0.180.33 0.060.52 0.41
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)18251 315589 113932 763
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01c0.09c0.170.00c0.050.30 c0.28
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 1.000.56 0.950.01 0.830.57 0.69
Uniform Delay, d1 48.537.8 39.922.0 45.416.0 23.7
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d2212.12.9 37.90.0 38.12.5 5.0
Delay (s)260.740.7 77.822.0 83.518.5 28.7
Level of Service FD EC FB C
Approach Delay (s)51.5 76.4 28.2 28.7
Approach LOS D E C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 41.1HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.73
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 98.1Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.0%ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 05/24/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture &onGitions AM Peak Kour
TJKM Page 4
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)113523921420827
Future Volume (vph)113523921420827
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.851.00 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701583185417701863
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701583185417701863
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.650.650.670.670.760.76
Adj. Flow (vph)1748058521261088
RTOR Reduction (vph)055 2000
Lane Group Flow (vph)174256040261088
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)4
Turn Type Protpt+ovNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 88 12 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)8.616.126.0 3.033.5
Effective Green, g (s)8.616.126.0 3.033.5
Actuated g/C Ratio0.170.320.51 0.060.66
Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)297498943 1031221
v/s Ratio Prot c0.100.020.33 0.01c0.58
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.590.050.64 0.250.89
Uniform Delay, d1 19.612.29.1 23.07.3
Progression Factor1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d22.90.03.3 1.310.0
Delay (s)22.512.212.5 24.317.3
Level of Service CBB CB
Approach Delay (s)19.3 12.5 17.5
Approach LOS B B B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 16.2HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.93
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 51.1Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.4%ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 05/24/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture &onGitions AM Peak Kour
TJKM Page 6
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)526301353207199581
Future Volume (vph)526301353207199581
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.971.000.911.001.000.91
Frt 1.000.851.000.851.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)343315835085158317705085
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)343315835085158317705085
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.870.870.700.700.700.70
Adj. Flow (vph)605346504296284830
RTOR Reduction (vph)0254020300
Lane Group Flow (vph)6059250493284830
Turn Type ProtPermNAPermProtNA
Protected Phases 8 2 16
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s)15.315.318.118.110.533.1
Effective Green, g (s)15.315.318.118.110.533.1
Actuated g/C Ratio0.270.270.320.320.180.58
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)91542116034993232932
v/s Ratio Protc0.180.10c0.16c0.16
v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.06
v/c Ratio 0.660.220.310.190.880.28
Uniform Delay, d1 18.716.414.914.322.86.1
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d21.80.30.50.822.70.2
Delay (s)20.516.715.415.145.56.4
Level of Service CBBBDA
Approach Delay (s)19.1 15.3 16.4
Approach LOS B B B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 17.0HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.57
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 57.4Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.1%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 05/24/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture &onGitions 6cKool PM Peak Kour
TJKM Page 2
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)3710110040912056702443
Future Volume (vph)3710110040912056702443
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.001.00 1.000.99 1.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.00
Frt 1.000.86 1.001.00 1.000.96 1.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (prot)177015571770186317701781 1859
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 1.00
Satd. Flow (perm)177015571770186317701781 1859
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.650.650.650.480.480.480.930.930.930.650.650.65
Adj. Flow (vph)51115520880982207203755
RTOR Reduction (vph)0132 00000110010
Lane Group Flow (vph)53402088098281003790
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)0.910.9 11.121.1 5.337.1 27.3
Effective Green, g (s)0.910.9 11.121.1 5.337.1 27.3
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.15 0.150.29 0.070.51 0.38
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)21233 270541 129910 699
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00c0.02c0.120.00c0.060.16 c0.20
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.240.15 0.770.01 0.760.31 0.54
Uniform Delay, d1 35.526.8 29.518.3 33.010.3 17.8
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.00
Incremental Delay, d25.80.3 12.70.0 22.30.9 3.0
Delay (s)41.327.1 42.218.4 55.311.2 20.8
Level of Service DC DB EB C
Approach Delay (s)27.5 41.3 22.3 20.8
Approach LOS CDCC
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 26.1HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.53
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 72.6Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.1%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 05/24/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture &onGitions 6cKool PM Peak Kour
TJKM Page 4
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)51123342911437
Future Volume (vph)51123342911437
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.850.99 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701583184317701863
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701583184317701863
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.880.880.670.670.760.76
Adj. Flow (vph)58144994314575
RTOR Reduction (vph)011 3000
Lane Group Flow (vph)583539014575
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)7
Turn Type Protpt+ovNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 88 12 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)4.710.336.1 1.141.7
Effective Green, g (s)4.710.336.1 1.141.7
Actuated g/C Ratio0.080.190.65 0.020.75
Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)1502941200 351402
v/s Ratio Prot c0.030.00c0.29 0.01c0.31
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.390.010.45 0.400.41
Uniform Delay, d1 24.018.44.8 26.82.5
Progression Factor1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d21.70.01.2 7.30.9
Delay (s)25.618.46.0 34.23.3
Level of Service CBA CA
Approach Delay (s)24.2 6.0 4.1
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 6.1HCM 2000 Level of Service A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.46
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 55.4Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.9%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 05/24/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture &onGitions 6cKool PM Peak Kour
TJKM Page 6
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)175142325145125437
Future Volume (vph)175142325145125437
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.971.000.911.001.000.91
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.000.981.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frt 1.000.851.000.851.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)343315835085154517705085
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)343315835085154517705085
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.830.830.970.970.660.66
Adj. Flow (vph)211171335149189662
RTOR Reduction (vph)014408600
Lane Group Flow (vph)2112733563189662
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3
Turn Type ProtPermNAPermProtNA
Protected Phases 8 2 16
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s)8.48.422.222.28.234.9
Effective Green, g (s)8.48.422.222.28.234.9
Actuated g/C Ratio0.160.160.420.420.160.67
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)55125421586552773393
v/s Ratio Prot c0.06 0.07c0.11c0.13
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.380.110.160.100.680.20
Uniform Delay, d1 19.618.89.39.020.83.3
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d20.40.20.20.36.80.1
Delay (s)20.118.99.49.327.63.5
Level of Service CBAACA
Approach Delay (s)19.6 9.4 8.8
Approach LOS B A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 11.4HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.35
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 52.3Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.2%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 05/22/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture &onGitions PM Peak Kour
TJKM Page 2
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)318444201303246312181
Future Volume (vph)318444201303246312181
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.85 1.001.00 1.000.98 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701540177018631770180817701862
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701540177018631770180817701862
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.880.880.880.820.820.820.820.820.820.830.830.83
Adj. Flow (vph)319554201593957712631
RTOR Reduction (vph)085 0000060000
Lane Group Flow (vph)31105420159466012640
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)0.97.1 4.710.9 5.439.0 0.934.5
Effective Green, g (s)0.97.1 4.710.9 5.439.0 0.934.5
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.10 0.070.16 0.080.56 0.010.49
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)22156 119291 1371011 22921
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00c0.01c0.03c0.00c0.09c0.26 0.000.14
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.140.07 0.450.01 1.160.46 0.050.29
Uniform Delay, d1 34.028.3 31.324.8 32.19.1 34.010.4
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d22.80.2 2.70.0126.51.5 0.90.8
Delay (s)36.828.5 34.024.8158.710.6 34.811.1
Level of Service DC CC FB CB
Approach Delay (s)28.7 33.7 47.9 11.2
Approach LOS C C D B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 36.1HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.45
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 69.7Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 46.7%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 05/22/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture &onGitions PM Peak Kour
T-.M Page 4
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)607506477341
Future Volume (vph)607506477341
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.850.99 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701583184117701863
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701583184117701863
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.700.700.810.810.850.85
Adj. Flow (vph)8610625588401
RTOR Reduction (vph)083000
Lane Group Flow (vph)86268008401
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)7
Turn Type Protpt+ovNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 88 12 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)5.310.935.2 1.140.8
Effective Green, g (s)5.310.935.2 1.140.8
Actuated g/C Ratio0.100.200.64 0.020.74
Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)1703131176 351379
v/s Ratio Prot c0.050.00c0.37 0.00c0.22
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.510.010.58 0.230.29
Uniform Delay, d1 23.717.85.7 26.62.4
Progression Factor1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d22.40.02.1 3.30.5
Delay (s)26.017.87.8 29.92.9
Level of Service CBA CA
Approach Delay (s)25.2 7.8 3.4
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 7.7HCM 2000 Level of Service A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.58
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 55.1Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 43.4%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 05/22/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture &onGitions PM Peak Kour
T-.M Page 6
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)32068485395127472
Future Volume (vph)32068485395127472
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.971.000.911.001.000.91
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.000.981.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frt 1.000.851.000.851.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)343315835085154517705085
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)343315835085154517705085
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.850.850.900.900.980.98
Adj. Flow (vph)37680539439130482
RTOR Reduction (vph)064026000
Lane Group Flow (vph)37616539179130482
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3
Turn Type ProtPermNAPermProtNA
Protected Phases 8 2 16
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s)11.111.122.222.27.534.2
Effective Green, g (s)11.111.122.222.27.534.2
Actuated g/C Ratio0.200.200.410.410.140.63
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)70132320786312443202
v/s Ratio Prot c0.11 0.11c0.070.09
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01c0.12
v/c Ratio 0.540.050.260.280.530.15
Uniform Delay, d1 19.317.410.610.721.84.1
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d20.80.10.31.12.20.1
Delay (s)20.117.410.911.924.04.2
Level of Service CBBBCA
Approach Delay (s)19.6 11.3 8.4
Approach LOS B B A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 12.3HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.40
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 54.3Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.4%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
Safari Kids Daycare Center
Appendix | B
Appendix E – Future plus Project Conditions Level of Service
Worksheets
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/13/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT 1 - )uture Slus Project &onGitions AM Peak Hour
TJKM Page 1
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)125232223856629311744004
Future Volume (vph)125232223856629311744004
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.99 1.000.99 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.85 1.000.94 1.000.96 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701544177017311770177017701859
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701544177017311770177017701859
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.670.670.670.650.650.650.700.700.700.770.770.77
Adj. Flow (vph)1873463431289441916755195
RTOR Reduction (vph)0186 00500110000
Lane Group Flow (vph)18167034315094575055240
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3 3 2 13
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)1.017.8 23.039.8 8.250.8 0.943.5
Effective Green, g (s)1.017.8 23.039.8 8.250.8 0.943.5
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.16 0.210.36 0.070.46 0.010.39
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)16248 368623 131813 14731
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01c0.11c0.190.01c0.05c0.32 0.000.28
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 1.120.67 0.930.02 0.720.71 0.360.72
Uniform Delay, d1 54.843.6 43.022.8 50.023.9 54.528.3
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d2268.47.0 30.10.0 17.15.1 14.96.0
Delay (s)323.250.6 73.022.8 67.129.0 69.534.3
Level of Service FD EC EC EC
Approach Delay (s)63.8 70.3 34.3 34.6
Approach LOS E E C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 46.7HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.78
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.5Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.1%ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/13/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT - )uture Slus Project &onGitions AM Peak Hour
TJKM Page 1
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)125232223856629314144004
Future Volume (vph)125232223856629314144004
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.99 1.000.99 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.85 1.000.94 1.000.95 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701544177017311770175717701859
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701544177017311770175717701859
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.670.670.670.650.650.650.700.700.700.770.770.77
Adj. Flow (vph)1873463431289441920155195
RTOR Reduction (vph)0190 00500140000
Lane Group Flow (vph)18163034315094606055240
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3 3 2 13
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)2.016.8 22.837.6 8.552.1 0.944.5
Effective Green, g (s)2.016.8 22.837.6 8.552.1 0.944.5
Actuated g/C Ratio0.020.15 0.210.34 0.080.47 0.010.40
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)32234 364588 136827 14747
v/s Ratio Prot 0.01c0.11c0.190.01c0.05c0.35 0.000.28
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.560.70 0.940.03 0.690.73 0.360.70
Uniform Delay, d1 53.944.5 43.324.3 49.823.6 54.627.5
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d220.78.7 32.50.0 14.15.7 14.95.4
Delay (s)74.553.2 75.724.3 63.929.3 69.533.0
Level of Service ED EC EC EC
Approach Delay (s)54.2 72.9 33.9 33.3
Approach LOS D E C C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 44.7HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.79
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 110.6Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 70.6%ICU Level of Service C
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture Slus Project &onGitions AM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 2
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)113564161424851
Future Volume (vph)113564161424851
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.851.00 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701583185517701863
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701583185517701863
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.650.650.670.670.760.76
Adj. Flow (vph)1748662121321120
RTOR Reduction (vph)059 1000
Lane Group Flow (vph)174276410321120
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)4
Turn Type Protpt+ovNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 88 12 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)8.616.125.9 3.033.4
Effective Green, g (s)8.616.125.9 3.033.4
Actuated g/C Ratio0.170.320.51 0.060.65
Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)298499942 1041220
v/s Ratio Prot c0.100.020.35 0.02c0.60
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.580.050.68 0.310.92
Uniform Delay, d1 19.512.19.4 23.07.6
Progression Factor1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d22.90.04.0 1.712.4
Delay (s)22.512.213.4 24.720.0
Level of Service CBB CB
Approach Delay (s)19.1 13.4 20.1
Approach LOS B B C
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 17.9HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.95
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 51.0Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.6%ICU Level of Service B
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture Slus Project &onGitions AM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 3
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)540311353221209581
Future Volume (vph)540311353221209581
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.971.000.911.001.000.91
Frt 1.000.851.000.851.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)343315835085158317705085
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)343315835085158317705085
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.870.870.700.700.700.70
Adj. Flow (vph)621357504316299830
RTOR Reduction (vph)0261021700
Lane Group Flow (vph)6219650499299830
Turn Type ProtPermNAPermProtNA
Protected Phases 8 2 16
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s)15.415.418.118.110.533.1
Effective Green, g (s)15.415.418.118.110.533.1
Actuated g/C Ratio0.270.270.310.310.180.58
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)91942316004983232927
v/s Ratio Protc0.180.10c0.17c0.16
v/s Ratio Perm 0.06 0.06
v/c Ratio 0.680.230.320.200.930.28
Uniform Delay, d1 18.816.415.014.423.16.2
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d22.00.30.50.931.30.2
Delay (s)20.816.715.515.354.46.4
Level of Service CBBBDA
Approach Delay (s)19.3 15.4 19.1
Approach LOS B B B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 18.1HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.59
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 57.5Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.1%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Project Driveway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportAlt - )uture Slus Project &onGitions AM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 4
Movement EBTEBRWBLWBTNELNER
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)114364200364
Future Volume (Veh/h)114364200364
Sign Control Free FreeStop
Grade 0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)124394217394
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)289
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume163368144
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 163 368144
tC, single (s)4.1 6.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %100 94100
cM capacity (veh/h)1416 630904
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NE 1
Volume Total 16322143
Volume Left 0439
Volume Right 3904
cSH 17001416648
Volume to Capacity0.100.000.07
Queue Length 95th (ft)005
Control Delay (s)0.00.210.9
Lane LOS AB
Approach Delay (s)0.00.210.9
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 23.7%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportAlt 1 - )uture Slus Project &onGitions 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 1
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)31010112273912057032443
Future Volume (vph)31010112273912057032443
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.99 1.000.99 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.86 1.000.96 1.000.96 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701563177017651770177817701859
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701563177017651770177817701859
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.650.650.650.480.480.480.930.930.930.650.650.65
Adj. Flow (vph)515155254156982207553755
RTOR Reduction (vph)0133 00400120010
Lane Group Flow (vph)537025417098283053790
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)0.911.0 11.521.6 5.335.3 0.930.9
Effective Green, g (s)0.911.0 11.521.6 5.335.3 0.930.9
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.14 0.150.28 0.070.46 0.010.40
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)20224 265497 122818 20748
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00c0.02c0.140.01c0.06c0.16 0.00c0.20
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.250.17 0.960.03 0.800.35 0.250.51
Uniform Delay, d1 37.628.8 32.420.0 35.213.3 37.617.2
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d26.50.4 43.40.0 30.51.2 6.52.4
Delay (s)44.029.2 75.820.0 65.714.4 44.019.6
Level of Service DC EC EB DB
Approach Delay (s)29.6 71.5 27.2 20.0
Approach LOS C E C B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 35.2HCM 2000 Level of Service D
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.7Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.0%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportAlt - )uture Slus Project &onGitions 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 1
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)31010112273912058932443
Future Volume (vph)31010112273912058932443
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.99 1.000.99 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.86 1.000.96 1.000.95 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701563177017651770176117701859
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701563177017651770176117701859
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.650.650.650.480.480.480.930.930.930.650.650.65
Adj. Flow (vph)515155254156982209653755
RTOR Reduction (vph)0133 00400160010
Lane Group Flow (vph)537025417098300053790
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)0.911.0 11.521.6 5.335.3 0.930.9
Effective Green, g (s)0.911.0 11.521.6 5.335.3 0.930.9
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.14 0.150.28 0.070.46 0.010.40
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)20224 265497 122810 20748
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00c0.02c0.140.01c0.06c0.17 0.00c0.20
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.250.17 0.960.03 0.800.37 0.250.51
Uniform Delay, d1 37.628.8 32.420.0 35.213.5 37.617.2
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d26.50.4 43.40.0 30.51.3 6.52.4
Delay (s)44.029.2 75.820.0 65.714.8 44.019.6
Level of Service DC EC EB DB
Approach Delay (s)29.6 71.5 26.8 20.0
Approach LOS C E C B
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 34.9HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.7Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.5%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture Slus Project &onGitions 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 2
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)51153532914456
Future Volume (vph)51153532914456
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.850.99 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701583184417701863
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701583184417701863
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.880.880.670.670.760.76
Adj. Flow (vph)58175274318600
RTOR Reduction (vph)013 3000
Lane Group Flow (vph)584567018600
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)7
Turn Type Protpt+ovNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 88 12 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)4.811.532.8 2.239.5
Effective Green, g (s)4.811.532.8 2.239.5
Actuated g/C Ratio0.090.220.62 0.040.74
Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)1593411134 731380
v/s Ratio Prot c0.030.00c0.31 0.01c0.32
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.360.010.50 0.250.43
Uniform Delay, d1 22.816.45.7 24.72.6
Progression Factor1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d21.40.01.6 1.81.0
Delay (s)24.216.47.3 26.53.6
Level of Service CBA CA
Approach Delay (s)22.5 7.3 4.3
Approach LOS C A A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 6.7HCM 2000 Level of Service A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.50
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 53.3Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 37.9%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture Slus Project &onGitions 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 3
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)186150325156133437
Future Volume (vph)186150325156133437
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.971.000.911.001.000.91
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.000.981.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frt 1.000.851.000.851.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)343315835085154517705085
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)343315835085154517705085
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.830.830.970.970.660.66
Adj. Flow (vph)224181335161202662
RTOR Reduction (vph)0150010100
Lane Group Flow (vph)2243133560202662
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3
Turn Type ProtPermNAPermProtNA
Protected Phases 8 2 16
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s)8.68.618.918.99.633.0
Effective Green, g (s)8.68.618.918.99.633.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.170.170.370.370.190.65
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)58326918995773353316
v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 0.07c0.11c0.13
v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 0.04
v/c Ratio 0.380.110.180.100.600.20
Uniform Delay, d1 18.617.810.610.318.83.5
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d20.40.20.20.43.00.1
Delay (s)19.118.010.810.721.83.7
Level of Service BBBBCA
Approach Delay (s)18.6 10.8 7.9
Approach LOS B B A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 11.2HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.36
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 50.6Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.9%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Project Driveway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportAlt - )uture Slus Project &onGitions 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 4
Movement EBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)74283160283
Future Volume (Veh/h)74283160283
Sign Control Free FreeStop
Grade 0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)80303174303
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)254
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume11027595
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 110 27595
tC, single (s)4.1 6.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %100 96100
cM capacity (veh/h)1480 713962
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NB 1
Volume Total 11017733
Volume Left 0330
Volume Right 3003
cSH 17001480730
Volume to Capacity0.060.000.05
Queue Length 95th (ft)004
Control Delay (s)0.00.110.2
Lane LOS AB
Approach Delay (s)0.00.110.2
Approach LOS B
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.8%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/13/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT 1 - )uture Slus Project &onGitions 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 1
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)31010112273912057032443
Future Volume (vph)31010112273912057032443
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.99 1.000.99 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.86 1.000.96 1.000.96 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701563177017651770177817701859
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701563177017651770177817701859
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.650.650.650.480.480.480.930.930.930.650.650.65
Adj. Flow (vph)515155254156982207553755
RTOR Reduction (vph)0132 00400130010
Lane Group Flow (vph)538025417098282053790
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)1.211.1 13.022.9 5.333.3 0.928.9
Effective Green, g (s)1.211.1 13.022.9 5.333.3 0.928.9
Actuated g/C Ratio0.020.15 0.170.30 0.070.44 0.010.38
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)27227 301529 122775 20704
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00c0.02c0.140.01c0.06c0.16 0.00c0.20
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.190.17 0.840.03 0.800.36 0.250.54
Uniform Delay, d1 37.128.5 30.718.9 35.014.4 37.418.5
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d23.30.3 18.90.0 30.51.3 6.52.9
Delay (s)40.428.9 49.618.9 65.515.7 43.821.4
Level of Service DC DB EB DC
Approach Delay (s)29.2 47.3 28.1 21.7
Approach LOS CDCC
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 30.6HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.3Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.0%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1: Positano Parkway & W Cantara Drive 06/13/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT - )uture Slus Project &onGitions 6cKool PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 1
Movement EBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)31010112273912058932443
Future Volume (vph)31010112273912058932443
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.000.97 1.000.99 1.000.99 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.86 1.000.96 1.000.95 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701563177017651770176117701859
Flt Permitted 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701563177017651770176117701859
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.650.650.650.480.480.480.930.930.930.650.650.65
Adj. Flow (vph)515155254156982209653755
RTOR Reduction (vph)0132 00400160010
Lane Group Flow (vph)538025417098300053790
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)5751
Turn Type ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 74 38 52 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)1.011.1 12.822.9 5.333.6 0.929.2
Effective Green, g (s)1.011.1 12.822.9 5.333.6 0.929.2
Actuated g/C Ratio0.010.15 0.170.30 0.070.44 0.010.38
Clearance Time (s)4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)23227 296529 122774 20710
v/s Ratio Prot 0.00c0.02c0.140.01c0.06c0.17 0.00c0.20
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.220.17 0.860.03 0.800.39 0.250.53
Uniform Delay, d1 37.328.6 30.918.9 35.014.4 37.418.3
Progression Factor1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d24.70.3 21.00.0 30.51.5 6.52.9
Delay (s)42.028.9 51.918.9 65.515.9 43.921.2
Level of Service DC DB EB DC
Approach Delay (s)29.3 49.4 27.7 21.5
Approach LOS CDCC
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 30.8HCM 2000 Level of Service C
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 76.4Sum of lost time (s)18.0
Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.5%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
2: Positano Parkway & Vinton Avenue 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture Slus Project PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 2
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)60155544715389
Future Volume (vph)60155544715389
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.5 4.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Frt 1.000.850.99 1.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)17701583184317701863
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.00 0.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)17701583184317701863
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.700.700.810.810.850.85
Adj. Flow (vph)86216845818458
RTOR Reduction (vph)016 3000
Lane Group Flow (vph)865739018458
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)7
Turn Type Protpt+ovNA ProtNA
Protected Phases 88 12 16
Permitted Phases
Actuated Green, G (s)5.311.931.7 2.138.3
Effective Green, g (s)5.311.931.7 2.138.3
Actuated g/C Ratio0.100.230.60 0.040.73
Clearance Time (s)4.5 4.5 4.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.0 3.0 3.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)1783581110 701356
v/s Ratio Prot c0.050.00c0.40 0.01c0.25
v/s Ratio Perm
v/c Ratio 0.480.010.67 0.260.34
Uniform Delay, d1 22.415.86.9 24.52.6
Progression Factor1.001.001.00 1.001.00
Incremental Delay, d22.10.03.2 1.90.7
Delay (s)24.415.810.1 26.43.3
Level of Service CBB CA
Approach Delay (s)22.7 10.1 4.1
Approach LOS C B A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 9.0HCM 2000 Level of Service A
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.64
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 52.6Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.9%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
3: Positano Parkway & Fallon Road 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 Report)uture Slus Project PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 3
Movement WBLWBRNBTNBRSBLSBT
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (vph)34888485423147472
Future Volume (vph)34888485423147472
Ideal Flow (vphpl)190019001900190019001900
Total Lost time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Lane Util. Factor 0.971.000.911.001.000.91
Frpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.000.981.001.00
Flpb, ped/bikes 1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Frt 1.000.851.000.851.001.00
Flt Protected 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (prot)343315835085154517705085
Flt Permitted 0.951.001.001.000.951.00
Satd. Flow (perm)343315835085154517705085
Peak-hour factor, PHF0.850.850.900.900.980.98
Adj. Flow (vph)409104539470150482
RTOR Reduction (vph)082028200
Lane Group Flow (vph)40922539188150482
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)3
Turn Type ProtPermNAPermProtNA
Protected Phases 8 2 16
Permitted Phases 8 2
Actuated Green, G (s)11.711.721.921.97.634.0
Effective Green, g (s)11.711.721.921.97.634.0
Actuated g/C Ratio0.210.210.400.400.140.62
Clearance Time (s)4.54.54.54.54.54.5
Vehicle Extension (s)3.03.03.03.03.03.0
Lane Grp Cap (vph)73433820356182453160
v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 0.11c0.080.09
v/s Ratio Perm 0.01c0.12
v/c Ratio 0.560.070.260.300.610.15
Uniform Delay, d1 19.217.111.011.222.24.3
Progression Factor1.001.001.001.001.001.00
Incremental Delay, d20.90.10.31.34.50.1
Delay (s)20.117.211.312.526.64.4
Level of Service CBBBCA
Approach Delay (s)19.5 11.9 9.7
Approach LOS B B A
Intersection Summary
HCM 2000 Control Delay 13.0HCM 2000 Level of Service B
HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.43
Actuated Cycle Length (s) 54.7Sum of lost time (s)13.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.3%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
c Critical Lane Group
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
4: Project Driveway & W Cantara Drive 06/07/2018
Synchro 9 ReportALT - )uture Slus Project PM Peak Hour
T-.M Page 4
Movement EBTEBRWBLWBTNBLNBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h)6572846728
Future Volume (Veh/h)6572846728
Sign Control Free FreeStop
Grade 0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor 0.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)7178950789
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)377
pX, platoon unblocked
vC, conflicting volume149178110
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol 149 178110
tC, single (s)4.1 6.46.2
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)2.23.53.3
p0 queue free %99 9099
cM capacity (veh/h)1432 807943
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NB 1
Volume Total 1495987
Volume Left 0978
Volume Right 7809
cSH 17001432819
Volume to Capacity0.090.010.11
Queue Length 95th (ft)009
Control Delay (s)0.01.29.9
Lane LOS AA
Approach Delay (s)0.01.29.9
Approach LOS A
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 3.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 20.4%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15