Volume 1 2 Articles pdf

SAN BENITO COUNTY F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ESIDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

SCH No. 2010081009

VOLUME 1

OF

2

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

October 4, 2011

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RESIDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN Volume 1 of 2 SCH No. 2010081009

PREPARED FOR:

County of San Benito Ann Dolmage, Assistant Planner 3224 Southside Road Hollister, CA 95023 Tel 831.637.5313

EMC Planning Group Inc. 301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C Monterey, CA 93940 Tel 831.649.1799 Fax 831.649.8399 [email protected] www.emcplanning.com

October 4, 2011 This document was produced on recycled paper.

TABLE OF CONTENTS E XECUTIVE S UMMARY ........................................................ S-1 Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................................... S-1

1.0

2.0

3.0

I NTRODUCTION .......................................................... 1-1 1.1

Report Authorization and Purpose ..................................... 1-1

1.2

Project Location and Setting .............................................. 1-4

1.3

EIR Uses and Approvals ..................................................1-21

1.4

Environmental Review Process .........................................1-25

1.5

Terminology Used in the EIR ...........................................1-27

1.6

Scope and Organization ...................................................1-28

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION ............................................... 2-1 2.1

Project Overview .............................................................. 2-1

2.2

Project Location and Setting .............................................. 2-2

2.3

Project Characteristics ...................................................... 2-3

2.4

Project Objectives ............................................................2-47

2.5

Project Relationship to Existing Planning Documents .........2-48

2.6

Requested Actions And Required Approvals ......................2-52

E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING , I MPACTS ,

AND

M ITIGATION

M EASURES ............................................................... 3.0-1 3.0.1 Introduction ...................................................................3.0-1 3.0.2 Format of Resource Topic Sections ..................................3.0-2 3.0.3 Approach to Cumulative Impact Analysis .........................3.0-3

3.1

A ESTHETICS ............................................................ 3.1-1 3.1.1 Environmental Setting ....................................................3.1-1 3.1.2 Regulatory Setting ..........................................................3.1-4 3.1.3 Standards of Significance ................................................3.1-7 3.1.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures..........................3.1-7

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................ 3.1-21

3.2

A GRICULTURAL R ESOURCES ..................................... 3.2-1 3.2.1 Environmental Setting .................................................... 3.2-1 3.2.2 Regulatory Setting ......................................................... 3.2-5 3.2.3 Standards of Significance ................................................ 3.2-7 3.2.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures ......................... 3.2-8 3.2.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................ 3.2-16

3.3

A IR Q UALITY ........................................................... 3.3-1 3.3.1 Environmental Setting .................................................... 3.3-1 3.3.2 Regulatory Setting ......................................................... 3.3-3 3.3.3 Standards of Significance .............................................. 3.3-15 3.3.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures ....................... 3.3-18 3.3.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................ 3.3-31

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES .......................................... 3.4-1 3.4.1 Environmental Setting .................................................... 3.4-2 3.4.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................... 3.4-26 3.4.3 Standards of Significance .............................................. 3.4-32 3.4.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures ....................... 3.4-33 3.4.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................ 3.4-50

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE ................................................... 3.5-1 3.5.1 Environmental Setting .................................................... 3.5-1 3.5.2 Regulatory Setting ......................................................... 3.5-7 3.5.3 Standards of Significance .............................................. 3.5-19 3.5.4 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................ 3.5-21

3.6

C ULTURAL R ESOURCES ............................................. 3.6-1 3.6.1 Environmental Setting .................................................... 3.6-2 3.6.2 Regulatory Setting ......................................................... 3.6-8 3.6.3 Standards of Significance .............................................. 3.6-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.6.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures........................ 3.6-13 3.6.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................. 3.6-17

3.7

G EOLOGY A ND S OILS ............................................... 3.7-1 3.7.1 Environmental Setting ....................................................3.7-1 3.7.2 Regulatory Setting ..........................................................3.7-8 3.7.3 Standards of Significance .............................................. 3.7-10 3.7.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures........................ 3.7-10 3.7.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ..................................................................... 3.7-20

3.8

H AZARDS

AND

H AZARDOUS M ATERIALS ..................... 3.8-1

3.8.1 Environmental Setting ....................................................3.8-1 3.8.2 Regulatory Setting ..........................................................3.8-6 3.8.3 Standards of Significance .............................................. 3.8-10 3.8.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures........................ 3.8-11 3.8.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................. 3.8-15

3.9

H YDROLOGY

AND

W ATER Q UALITY ........................... 3.9-1

3.9.1 Environmental Setting ....................................................3.9-1 3.9.2 Regulatory Setting ..........................................................3.9-5 3.9.3 Standards of Significance .............................................. 3.9-10 3.9.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures........................ 3.9-11 3.9.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................. 3.9-22

3.10 L AND U SE

AND

P LANNING ...................................... 3.10-1

3.10.1 Environmental Setting ................................................ 3.10-1 3.10.2 Regulatory Setting ...................................................... 3.10-3 3.10.3 Standards of Significance ............................................ 3.10-9 3.10.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................... 3.10-10 3.10.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............. 3.10-30

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11 N OISE ................................................................... 3.11-1 3.11.1 Environmental Setting ................................................ 3.11-6 3.11.2 Regulatory Setting....................................................... 3.11-8 3.11.3 Standards of Significance........................................... 3.11-11 3.11.4 Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............................... 3.11-13 3.11.4 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures .............. 3.11-26

3.12 P UBLIC

AND

G OVERNMENTAL S ERVICES ................... 3.12-1

3.12.1 Environmental Setting ................................................ 3.12-1 3.12.2 Regulatory Setting ..................................................... 3.12-5 3.12.3 Standards of Significance............................................ 3.12-6 3.12.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures ..................... 3.12-6 3.12.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............. 3.12-11

3.13 P ARKS

AND

R ECREATION ........................................ 3.13-1

3.13.1 Environmental Setting ................................................ 3.13-1 3.13.2 Regulatory Setting ..................................................... 3.13-2 3.13.3 Standards of Significance............................................ 3.13-3 3.13.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures ..................... 3.13-3 3.13.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures .............. 3.13-9

3.14 T RAFFIC

AND

C IRCULATION .................................... 3.14-1

3.14.1 Existing Setting ......................................................... 3.14-1 3.14.2 Regulatory Setting .................................................... 3.14-20 3.14.3 Standards of Significance........................................... 3.14-28 3.14.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures .................... 3.14-39 3.14.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............. 3.14-59

3.15 W ET

AND

D RY U TILITIES

AND

E NERGY .................... 3.15-1

3.15.1 Environmental Setting ................................................ 3.15-2 3.15.2 Regulatory Setting ..................................................... 3.15-8 3.15.3 Standards of Significance........................................... 3.15-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15.4 Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures ................... 3.15-14 3.15.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures ............. 3.15-30

4.0

5.0

6.0

A LTERNATIVES .......................................................... 4-1 4.1

CEQA Requirements ........................................................ 4-1

4.2

Alternatives Analysis ........................................................ 4-3

4.3

Comparison of Alternatives ..............................................4-29

O THER S ECTIONS R EQUIRED

BY

CEQA......................... 5-1

5.1

Growth Inducing Impacts .................................................. 5-1

5.2

Significant Unavoidable Impacts ........................................ 5-6

5.3

Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes ................... 5-7

5.4

Effects Found Not to be Significant .................................... 5-8

R EPORT P REPARERS

AND

R EFERENCES ......................... 6-1

6.1

Persons Contacted ............................................................ 6-1

6.2

Documents Referenced...................................................... 6-2

6.3

Report Preparers............................................................... 6-8

Appendices

(Appendices B-L are included on CD inside back cover)

Appendix A

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan (Available at the County of San Benito Planning Department)

Appendix B

NOP, Initial Study and Written Responses to the NOP

Appendix C

Geotechnical Investigation of the Tres Pinos Fault

Appendix D

Geotechnical Investigation Evaluating Surface and Subsurface Soil Conditions

Appendix E

Biological Resources Analysis and USACE Determination Letter

Appendix F

Air Quality Analysis

Appendix G

Climate Change and GHG Emissions Calculations

Appendix H

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment

Appendix I

Initial Site Assessment

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Appendix J

Noise Analysis and Supplemental Memorandum

Appendix K

Traffic Impact Analysis and Supplemental Letter

Appendix L

Water Supply Assessment

List of Figures Figure 1

Regional Location ........................................................................... 1-5

Figure 2

Project Vicinity ............................................................................... 1-7

Figure 3

Vicinity Surrounding Uses ............................................................. 1-11

Figure 4

Aerial Photograph ......................................................................... 1-13

Figure 5

Site Photographs ........................................................................... 1-15

Figure 6

Topography and Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone .......... 1-17

Figure 7

Existing Drainage.......................................................................... 1-19

Figure 8

Water and Wastewater Service Area Boundaries ............................ 1-23

Figure 9

Proposed Land Use ......................................................................... 2-5

Figure 10

Conceptual Lotting Plan A .............................................................. 2-7

Figure 11

Conceptual Lotting Plan B............................................................... 2-9

Figure 12

Conceptual Lotting Plan C ............................................................ 2-11

Figure 13

Open Space Diagram..................................................................... 2-17

Figure 14

Circulation Diagram...................................................................... 2-19

Figure 15

Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Street Section.............. 2-21

Figure 16

Typical Collector Entry and Residential Street Sections .................. 2-25

Figure 17

Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Section ....................... 2-27

Figure 18

Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Plan....................................... 2-31

Figure 19

Potable Water Service Layout........................................................ 2-33

Figure 20

Wastewater Conveyance Options .................................................. 2-37

Figure 21

Conceptual Drainage Plan ............................................................. 2-39

Figure 22

Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram .................................................. 2-41

Figure 23

Preliminary Phasing Plan .............................................................. 2-45

Figure 24

Off-Site Study Areas ...................................................................... 2-49

Figure 25

Locations of Related Projects........................................................ 3.0-5

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Figure 26

Existing Views ............................................................................. 3.1-3

Figure 27

Soil Map ...................................................................................... 3.2-9

Figure 28

Special Status Species within the Project Vicinity .......................... 3.4-5

Figure 29

Special Status Species Observed within Five Kilometers ................ 3.4-7

Figure 30

Area Roadways...........................................................................3.14-3

Figure 31

Existing Lane Configurations .................................................... 3.14-11

Figure 32

Existing Traffic Volumes ........................................................... 3.14-13

Figure 33

Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities ................................... 3.14-21

Figure 34

Project Trip Distribution............................................................ 3.14-33

Figure 35

Project Trip Assignment ............................................................ 3.14-35

Figure 36

Existing With-Project Traffic Volumes ....................................... 3.14-41

Figure 37

Alternative Location ..................................................................... 4-19

List of Tables Table S-1

Summary of Project and Cumulative Impacts................................... S-4

Table 1

Permitted and Conditional Land Uses ........................................... 2-13

Table 2

Examples of Development Flexibility: Conceptual Lotting Plans .... 2-14

Table 3

Projects Considered Part of the Cumulative Project Scenario ......... 3.0-7

Table 4

Land Capability Classification ...................................................... 3.2-4

Table 5

Criteria Air Pollutants, Summary of Common Sources and Effects 3.3-4

Table 6

Summary of Ambient Air Quality Standards ................................. 3.3-5

Table 7

Summary of Ambient Air Quality Data – Hollister-Fairview Road Station ...............................................................................3.3-10

Table 8

NCCAB Attainment Status Designations .....................................3.3-11

Table 9

Estimated Daily Project Emissions (Ongoing Operations for Direct and Indirect Sources) ........................................................3.3-26

Table 10

Special Status Plant Species that Could Occur in the Project Vicinity .......................................................................................3.4-10

Table 11

Special-Status Wildlife Species that Could Occur in the Project Vicinity .......................................................................................3.4-13

Table 12

GHG Types and Their Contribution to Global Warming............... 3.5-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Table 13

Estimated Annual Electricity Demand .........................................3.5-25

Table 14

GHG Emissions from Electricity Generation ...............................3.5-26

Table 15

Total Unmitigated GHG Operational Emissions (metric tons/ year CO2e) ..................................................................................3.5-27

Table 16

GHG Measures ...........................................................................3.5-31

Table 17

Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale for Earthquakes......................... 3.7-2

Table 18

Uniform Building Code Fault Classifications ................................ 3.7-4

Table 19

Typical Noise Levels in the Environment .....................................3.11-3

Table 20

Definitions of Acoustical Terms...................................................3.11-5

Table 21

Recommended Criteria for Evaluation of Increases in Ambient Noise Levels .................................................................3.11-6

Table 22

Ambient Noise Levels .................................................................3.11-7

Table 23

Damage Potential to Buildings at Various Groundborne Vibration Levels ........................................................................3.11-10

Table 24

Annoyance Potential to People at Various Groundborne Vibration Levels ........................................................................3.11-10

Table 25

Significant Noise Increases ........................................................3.11-12

Table 26

Predicted Traffic Day/Night Average Noise Level .....................3.11-20

Table 27

Future Exterior Ldn Noise Levels (dBA) With Mitigation ..........3.11-22

Table 28

Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment .........3.11-25

Table 29

San Benito County School Enrollment and Capacity, School Year 2010-2011 ...........................................................................3.12-4

Table 30

Signalized Intersection Levels of Service Definitions Based on Control Delay ...........................................................................3.14-10

Table 31

Unsignalized Intersection Levels of Service Definitions Based on Control Delay ......................................................................3.14-15

Table 32

Existing Intersection Levels of Service .......................................3.14-15

Table 33

Existing Peak-Hour Traffic Signal Warrant Results ....................3.14-17

Table 34

LOS Criteria for Class I Two-Lane Highways ............................3.14-19

Table 35

Existing Two-lane Highway Levels of Service ............................3.14-19

Table 36

Trip Generation ........................................................................3.14-31

Table 37

Project Intersection Levels of Service .........................................3.14-43

Table 38

Peak-Hour Signal Warrant Checks With the Project ...................3.14-45

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Table 39

Project Intersection Queuing Analysis Results............................ 3.14-51

Table 40

Project Two-lane Highway Level of Service Results ................... 3.14-53

Table 41

Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service .................................. 3.14-63

Table 42

Cumulative Peak-Hour Signal Warrant Checks .......................... 3.14-67

Table 43

Project Water Demand .............................................................. 3.15-16

Table 44

Supply Reliability During Average/Normal Water Year for Entire Region............................................................................ 3.15-18

Table 45

Project’s Estimated Operational Energy Demand. ...................... 3.15-27

Table 46

Project Alternative Summary......................................................... 4-33

Abbreviations and Acronyms AB

Assembly Bill

ADT

Average Daily Traffic

AFUE

Annual Fuel Use Efficiency

AFY

Acre Feet per Year

AMBAG

Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments

AnB

Antioch Loam

APN

Assessor’s Parcel Number

AQMP

Air Quality Management Plan

BPM

Best Management Practices

CAAQS

California Ambient Air Quality Standards

CAL-FIRE

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection

CARB

California Air Resources Board

CCAA

California Clean Air Act

CDFG

California Department of Fish and Game

CEC

California Eergy Commission

CEQA

California Environmental Quality Act

CESA

California Endangered Species Act

CNDDB

California Natural Diversity Database

CNPS

California Native Plant Society

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

CO

Carbon Monoxide

CO 2

Carbon Dioxide

CRHR

California Register of Historical Places

CRLF

California Red-legged Frog

CTS

California Tiger Salamander

CVP

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s Central Valley Project

CWA

Clean Water Act

DOC

United States Department of Conservation

DPM

Particulate Emissions from Diesel Fueled Engines

DWR

California Department of Water Resources

DWTP

Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plan

ECDMS

Energy Consumption Demand Management System

EIR

Environmental Impact Report

EMS

Emergency Medical Response Services

EPA

Environmental Protection Agency

ESA

Environmental Site Assessment

EVA

Emergency Vehicle Access

FCAA

Federal Clean Air Act

FEIR

Final Environmental Impact Report

FESA

Federal Endangered Species Act

FIRM

FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map

FMMP

Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program

FTE

Full-time Equivalent

FVC-SP

Fairview Corners Specific Plan

g

Force of Gravity

GHG

Greenhouse Gases

GMO

Growth Management Ordinance

GP

General Plan

GPA

General Plan Amendment

gpm

Gallons per Minute

HAP

Hazardous Air Pollutant

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

HCP

Habitat Conservation Plan

kWh

Kilowatt Hours

LAFCO

San Benito County Local Agency Formation Commission

LCC

Land Capability Classification

LEED

Leadership in Energy Efficient Design

LGOP

Local Government Operations Protocol

LID

Low Impact Development

LIM

Land Inventory and Monitoring

LOS

Level of Service

LPS

Low-pressure Sodium

M&I

Municipal and Industrial

MBTA

Migratory Bird Treaty Act

MBUAPCD

Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District

mgd

Million Gallons per Day

MLD

Most Likely Descendent

MM

Mitigation Measure

MMRP

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

MOU

Memorandum of Understanding

MWh

Megawatt Hours

NAAQS

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NAHC

Native American Heritage Commission

NCCAB

North Central Coast Air Basin

NESHAPs

National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

NFPA

National Fire Protection Association

NHPA

National Historic Preservation Act

NMFS

National Marine Fisheries Service

NO 2

Nitrogen Dioxide

NOC

Notice of Completion

NOP

Notice of Preparation

NOx

Nitrous Oxides

NPDES

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

NRCS

Natural Resources Conservation Service

NRHP

National Register of Historic Places

O3

Ozone

OEHHA

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

PG&E

Pacific Gas & Electric

PM 2 . 5

Fine Particulate Matter 2.5 micrometers or less

PM I O

Particulate Matter 10 microns or less

ppm

Parts per Million

RAIWMP

San Benito County Regional Agency Integrated Waste Management Plan

ROG

Reactive Organic Gases

RsC

Rincon Silty Clay Loam

RWQCB

Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board

SbE2

San Benito County Clay Loam

SO 2

Sulfer Dioxide

SR25

State Route 25 (Airline Highway)

SR-SP

Santana Ranch Specific Plan

SSCWD

Sunnyslope County Water District

SWCP

Stormwater Control Plan

SWPPP

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan

SWRCB

State Water Resources Control Board

TAC

Toxic Air Contaminant

TDS

Total Dissolved Solids

Tg

Teragram (1,000,000,000 Kilograms)

TMDL

Total Maximum Daily Loads

TPY

Tons per Year

URBEMIS

Urban Emissions Modeling Software

USACE

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

USDA

United States Department of Agriculture

USFWS

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

USGS

United States Geologic Survey

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

UWMP

Urban Water Management Plan

VOC

Volatile Organic Compound

WSA

Water Supply Assessment

WWMP

Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Master Plan

μg/m3

Micrograms per Cubic Meter

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

This section of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) provides a summary of the contents of the EIR and its findings, including project environmental analysis, impacts, mitigation measures, and resulting impact significance. For additional detail regarding specific issues, please consult the appropriate subsection of Chapter 3.0, Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures.

S ETTING , I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES S.1 Purpose and Scope of the EIR This Draft EIR provides an analysis of the potential environmental effects associated with the approval of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan (“proposed project”). The purpose of an EIR is to identify the significant effect on the environment of a project, to identify alternatives to the project, and to indicate the manner in which those significant effects can be mitigated or avoided (CEQA Guidelines 21002.1(a)). The lead agency (County of San Benito) shall focus the discussion in the Draft EIR on those potential effects on the environment resulting from a proposed project that the lead agency has determined are or may be significant. Based in part on the results of public input generated during the Notice of Preparation comment period for the project, Section 3.0, Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures focuses on potential environmental effects in the following topic areas: aesthetics/visual resources, agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, climate change, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, parks and recreation, public and governmental services, traffic and circulation, and wet and dry utilities and energy.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-1

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

S.2 Project Characteristics The proposed project would amend the General Plan and change the land use designation of the project site from “Rural” to “FVC-SP” and would create the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan (FVC-SP) zoning district to guide the development of the project site. The Specific Plan provides a detailed description of the proposed residential community, as well as sets forth a comprehensive planning and regulatory framework for development of the project. To ensure the necessary flexibility to respond to market demand and community needs, the Specific Plan provides for a range of potential densities that may be developed as well as a variety of potential housing types, including secondary units. However, a maximum of 220 primary dwelling units would be permitted on the project site. In addition, the project proposes park and recreational uses, including active parks, open space and a pedestrian and bikeway network, as well as related on- and off-site project infrastructure. See Section 2.0, Project Description, for additional information.

S.3 Project Alternatives Considered CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a) requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the project’s basic objectives but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the project’s significant effects, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. For a detailed discussion of the alternatives considered, please refer to Section 4.0, Alternatives, of this EIR. The Draft EIR discusses the following alternatives: ƒ

Alternative 1: No Project – No Build Alternative

ƒ

Alternative 2: No Project – Development Consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation

ƒ

Alternative 3: Reduced Maximum Residential Units/Increased Open Space

ƒ

Alternative 4: Alternative Location: Northeast of San Benito Street/Union Road

CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) requires that the environmentally superior alternative be identified. If the environmentally superior alternative is the “No Project – No Build Alternative,” the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among other alternatives. In this case, Alternative 3, “Reduced Maximum Residential Units/Increased Open Space,” represents the environmentally superior alternative and would result in a lesser degree of environmental impact as compared to the proposed project. Table 46, Project Alternative Summary, in Section 4.0, compares each alternative with the proposed project.

S-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN D RAFT EIR

S.4 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Table S-1, Executive Summary, presents a summary of project impacts and proposed mitigation measures that would reduce, minimize, or avoid potentially significant individual and cumulative environmental impacts. In the table, the level of significance of each environmental impact is indicated after the application of the proposed mitigation measure(s). For detailed discussions of all project impacts and mitigation measures, the reader is referred to topical environmental analysis in Chapter 3.0, Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures of this Draft EIR.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-3

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Table S-1 Summary of Project and Cumulative Impacts Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

3.1 Aesthetics and Visual Resources Impact AES-1. The project would result in the development of rural land that is in the foreground of a view of the Diablo mountain range as viewed from Fairview Road and public streets within the Cielo Vista residential subdivision to the west. Project development would alter the character of the view, as well as obscure views of the Diablo mountain range from public viewing areas along Fairview Road.

Potentially Significant

MM AES-1. The frontage landscaping along Fairview Road shall be generally implemented as shown within the Specific Plan Figure 17 (Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Sections), and for the sound wall, if required, and in accordance with all applicable policies within Article 2, Land Use; Article 3, Circulation Plan; Article 4, Community Design; and Article 6, Public Facilities, of the Specific Plan as well as the project’s Street Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan and Open Space and Parks Master Plan (as may be amended). Further, the timing of implementation shall be in accordance with Article 7 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan).

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

Impact AES-2. The project would result in a substantial change in the visual character of the project site.

Potentially Significant

MM AES-2. The project developer shall comply with all development standards and design guidelines found in Article 4.0 of the Fairview Corners Specific Plan (Community Design). Compliance with Article 4.0 shall be subject to the review and approval of the County in accordance with Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan), as part of the project’s design and site review process.

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

S-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

Impact AES-3. The proposed project would introduce new sources of light and glare that could adversely affect properties in adjacent areas.

Potentially Significant

MM AES-3. The project developer shall be required to submit an exterior lighting plan for all subsequent development approval requests (e.g., subdivision maps, use permits, design review) pursuant to Article 7 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan). Said lighting plan shall demonstrate conformance with the Specific Plan, development standards and design guidelines with regard to exterior lighting as stated in Article 4.0 of the Specific Plan (Community Design), as well as with the Project’s Lighting Master Plan (as it may be amended), and Title 19, Chapter 19.31 of the County Code.

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

Impact AES-4. The project, in combination with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects along the Fairview Road corridor, may result in a cumulative impact on visual resources.

Potentially Significant Cumulative

The implementation of mitigation measures AES-1, AES-2, and AES-3 would reduce to a less than significant level any cumulative impacts on visual resources.

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

Less than Significant

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required.

3.2 Agricultural Resources Impact AG-1. Development of the proposed project would not result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Grade 1 farmland to urban uses.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Less than Significant

S-5

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

Impact AG-2. The project would not likely place development pressure on abutting parcels zoned as “Rural” to convert to nonagricultural use. However, there could be potential urban-agricultural conflicts that could place pressure on abutting parcels to change agricultural practices.

Potentially Significant

MM AG-2. Open space buffers shall be maintained along the eastern perimeter of the project site, as generally shown on the Specific Plan Figure 9, Open Space Diagram, incorporated in accordance with Phasing Plan. The required treatment of urban pollutants and application of pesticides on the project site shall be implemented in accordance with all applicable policies within Article 5 (Resource Management) of the Specific Plan, and with the project’s Open Space and Parks Master Plan (as may be amended), as well as other applicable standards and requirements.

Impact AG-3. The project site has a zoning designation of “Rural,” and is located adjacent to lands zoned as “Rural,” “Rural Residential,” “Single-Family Residential,” “Multi-Family Residential,” “Neighborhood Commercial,” and “Planned Unit Development.” Therefore, the change in the project site’s zoning to Fairview Corners Specific Plan (FVC-SP) and its development with suburban uses could result in conflicts with existing zoning, which allows agricultural uses.

Less than Significant

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required.

S-6

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

Less than Significant

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

Impact AG-4. The project, in combination

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

with other past, present and reasonably

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

foreseeable, probable future projects on

Cumulative

adjacent land within the Fairview Road corridor, would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution to the cumulative loss of Important Farmland within San Benito County. 3.3 Air Quality Impact AQ-1. Short-term constructiongenerated emissions could exceed MBUAPCD significance thresholds and could be inconsistent with the AQMP.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Potentially Significant

MM AQ-1a. The developer shall reduce exhaust NOx and particulate matter emissions by implementing one of the following measures: 1. The project shall prepare and implement a plan, acceptable to the MBUAPCD, demonstrating that the heavy-duty (> 50 horsepower) off-road vehicles and equipment to be used to construct the project, including owned, leased and subcontractor vehicles, shall achieve a minimum project wide fleetaverage 20 percent NOx reduction and 45 percent particulate reduction, in compliance with the thenmost recent MBUAPCD standards and CARB fleet average that are in effect at the time of construction; or

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

S-7

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance 2. The developer shall prepare and implement a plan, acceptable to the MBUAPCD, demonstrating that all off-road construction vehicles/equipment greater than 50 horsepower that will be used on site for more than one week shall: 1) be manufactured during or after 1996, 2) shall meet the NOx emissions standard of 6.9 grams per brakehorsepower hour or better, and 3) shall be equipped with CARB-verified level 2 or 3 diesel particulate matter filters. MM AQ-1b: The developer shall install and maintain temporary electrical service on the site whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g., compressors) during construction of the project. MM AQ-1c: The developer shall prohibit diesel equipment or vehicles from idling for longer than five minutes, except for rotating drum concrete trucks, which may keep their engines running continuously so long as they are staged more than 200 feet away from residences. The developer shall install clearly visible signage on the construction site that states these requirements. MM AQ-1d: The developer shall ensure that

S-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance construction equipment and vehicles are properly maintained for low emissions. MM AQ-1e: The developer shall ensure that all large diesel powered vehicles and equipment are staged at least 200 feet from any residences. MM AQ-1f: In addition to implementing Mitigation Measures MM AQ-1a through 1e above, the developer shall implement best-available control measures for the control of construction-related emissions from the project, as set forth in the then-applicable MBUAPCD’s CEQA Guidelines. For example, such mitigation measures may include the following:

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

•

Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. Frequency should be based on the type of operation, soil and wind exposure.

•

Prohibit all grading activities during periods of high wind (over 15 mph).

•

Apply chemical soil stabilizers on inactive construction areas (disturbed lands within construction projects that are unused for at least four consecutive days).

•

Apply non-toxic binders to exposed areas after

S-9

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance cut and fill operations and hydroseed area.

S-10

•

Maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard on haul trucks.

•

Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand or loose materials.

•

Plant the windbreaks on the windward perimeter of construction projects if adjacent to open land.

•

Plant vegetative cover in disturbed areas as soon as possible.

•

Cover inactive storage piles.

•

Install wheel washers at the entrance to construction sites for all existing trucks.

•

Pave all roads on construction sites.

•

Sweep streets if visible soil material is carried out from the construction site.

•

Post a publicly visible sign that specifies the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond to complaints and take corrective action within 48 hours. The phone number for

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District shall be visible to ensure compliance with Rule 402 (Nuisance). •

Limit the area under construction at any one time.

Impact AQ-2. Long-term operational emissions of the proposed project would not exceed MBUAPCD significance thresholds.

Less than Significant

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required.

Less than Significant

Impact AQ-3. Localized mobile-source emissions of carbon monoxide would not exceed applicable ambient air quality standards.

Less than Significant

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required.

Less than Significant

Impact AQ-4. The proposed project would not create new odor sources and would not be affected by existing nearby odors.

Less than Significant

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required.

Less than Significant

Impact AQ-5. The proposed project would not conflict with the local Air Quality Plan.

Less than Significant

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required.

Less than Significant

Impact AQ-6. Residential receptors associated with the proposed project would not be exposed to localized concentrations of toxic air contaminants exceeding applicable thresholds.

Less than Significant

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required.

Less than Significant

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-11

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

Impact AQ-7. The proposed project’s

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

population along with the population

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

projections for other cumulative projects is

Cumulative

within projections for San Benito County, and therefore the proposed project is consistent with the AQMP. 3.4 Biological Resources Impact BIO-1. Implementation of the

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

proposed project would not have a

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly or through habitat modification, on any plant species identified as a candidate, sensitive, endangered, threatened or other special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Impact BIO-2. Implementation of the

Potentially

proposed project may have a substantial

Significant

adverse effect, either directly or through

Impact

habitat modification, on several wildlife species identified as a candidate, sensitive,

S-12

MM BIO-2a. Prior to issuance of any grading permit on the project site, the developer shall obtain Incidental Take Authorization from the USFWS and the CDFG (if required). Incidental Take Authorization will require the identification and implementation of

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

endangered, threatened or other special-

measures suitable to avoid, minimize, or compensate

status species in local or regional plans,

for impacts to the species and its habitat, which are

policies, or regulations, or by the California

acceptable to USFWS and CDFG. To mitigate for the

Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish

loss of aestivation and dispersal habitat, the developer

and Wildlife Service (California tiger

shall procure a conservation easement for land at a

salamander, San Joaquin kit fox, American

minimum of 1:1 ratio of project site impact area to

badger, burrowing owl, western spade toad,

compensation habitat area, or in such other ratio as

nesting and migratory raptors and birds).

required by USFWS and CDFG. Compliance with one of the following off-site mitigation strategies shall be followed, or as otherwise required by USFWS and CDFG: a.

Off-site upland habitat mitigation. The

developer shall procure off-site aestivation habitat at a minimum of a 1:1 ratio of project site impact area to compensate for loss of habitat area. Off-site mitigation may include sites with occupied upland habitat or sites with upland habitat known to be occupied and occupied aquatic habitat. Conservation easements shall be offered for dedication to a suitable preservation entity, to be preserved and managed in perpetuity. Additionally, if the accepted mitigation site is located within the range

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-13

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance of the San Joaquin kit fox and supports suitable habitat for this species as well, the same mitigation site may be utilized to meet the mitigation requirement for this species as well. b. Off-site upland habitat mitigation and limited on-site mitigation. The developer shall procure off-site upland habitat at a minimum of a 1:1 ratio of project site impact area to compensation habitat area. The developer shall also preserve on-site the area in which the former stock pond was located, including, but not limited to, observance of a biological conservation easement of not less than a 100-meter radius around the former stock pond, fencing of said area, and installation of low level lighting. MM BIO-2b. Prior to construction activities for each phase of development, the developer shall provide to the County of San Benito, evidence of compliance with Incidental Take Authorization conditions of approval for CTS and Western Spadefoot Toad as prescribed by the USFWS and the CDFG (as may be required). The Incidental Take Authorization conditions of approval may include the following or similar preconstruction survey requirements:

S-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance For CTS: Prior to ground disturbance of the project site and as directed by the Project Biologist, temporary barriers are constructed along the limits of the disturbance areas to prevent the movement of the CTS into the area. This measure, if required by the USFWS would be performed by a qualified biologist (Project Biologist) retained by the developer and may include the following elements. Barriers typically consist of 3-foot-tall silt fencing with the bottom edge buried to a depth of at least 6 inches below the soil surface, held in place by rigid stakes or other stable means. Silt fence fabric may also be installed on any swinging gates or other movable sections of temporary construction fencing. Fence fabric installed on gates and movable sections of fence are draped onto the ground surface to form a continuous barrier to CTS access. All barriers would remain in place until all development activities within the disturbance area have been completed. Said barriers shall be inspected, maintained and repaired by the developer as necessary to ensure continuous functionality.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-15

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance For Western spadefoot toad: Preconstruction survey(s) would be conducted during the spring season prior to construction or within 30 days prior to the onset of construction activities (if they are to begin in Spring). The Survey would be performed by a qualified biologist (Project Biologist) retained by the developer to first determine the presence of either species, and may include measures similar to the following: If there is any lapse in construction activity, new surveys must be conducted prior to the re-initiation of construction activity. If this species is not detected during the survey(s), then no further mitigation would be required. However, if western spadefoot is found within the project area during the survey(s), then passive relocation techniques would be employed by the applicant to transfer the individuals from the project area to an appropriate off-site location. Consultation with the CDFG would be required prior to relocating individuals to determine an appropriate off-site location(s) and techniques for relocation to be employed.

S-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance MM BIO-2c: Prior to ground disturbance of the project site, a temporary barrier shall be constructed along the limits of the disturbance area, to prevent the movement of the CTS into the area. The barrier shall consist of three-foot-tall silt fencing with the bottom edge buried to a depth of at least six inches below the soil surface, held in place by rigid stakes or other stable means. Silt fence fabric shall also be installed on any swinging gates or other movable sections of temporary construction fencing. Fence fabric installed on gates and movable sections of fence shall drape onto the ground surface to form a continuous barrier to CTS access. Installation of silt fencing and fence fabric shall be supervised by a qualified biologist, who shall be retained by the developer and approved by the County. Said barriers shall remain in place until all development activities within the disturbance area have been completed. Said barriers shall be inspected, maintained and repaired by the developer as necessary to ensure continuous functionality. MM BIO-2d: Any netting or coir rolls used for erosion control or other purposes during the construction of

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-17

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance the project shall be of tightly woven natural fiber or similar bio degradable material to ensure that the CTS do not get trapped within the netting. Plastic monofilament netting (erosion control matting) or similar material shall not be used. This netting specification shall be incorporated within the bid and construction documents for the project. MM BIO-2e. The developer shall pay the mitigation fee per County Ordinance 541 (San Benito County Code, Chapter 19.19), which would pay towards the preparation of the San Benito County HCP that is being developed to mitigate impacts for all federallylisted species, including the San Joaquin kit fox. MM BIO-2f. A pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for burrowing owls within 30 days of the onset of construction, in accordance with methods described in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 1995). Any occupied burrows shall be mapped on an aerial photo. At least 15 days prior to the expected start of any project-related ground disturbance activities, or restart of activities, the developer shall provide the burrowing

S-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance owl survey report and mapping to the CDFG. If construction is delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the survey, the area shall be re-surveyed. If no burrowing owls are detected during the preconstruction surveys, then no further action is necessary. Based on the burrowing owl survey results, the following actions shall be taken by the developer to avoid impacts during construction (as outlined in CDFG guidance): If pre-construction surveys undertaken during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31 (CDFG 1995)) locate active nest burrows within or near construction zones, these nests, and an appropriate buffer around them (as determined by a qualified biologist approved by the CDFG), must remain off-limits to construction until the breeding season is over. The CDFG typically recommends setbacks from occupied nest burrows of at least 75 meters (approximately 246 feet).

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-19

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance If pre-construction surveys undertaken during the non-breeding season (September 1 through January 31) locate occupied burrows within or near construction zones, then resident owls may be passively relocated to alternative habitat. The relocation of resident owls shall be in accordance with a relocation plan prepared by the qualified biologist and in consultation with the CDFG. The relocation plan shall provide for the owl’s relocation to nearby lands possessing available nesting and foraging habitat and shall be in accordance with the protocol outlined in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 1995). In the event that active nests are found during pre-construction surveys, compensatory suitable habitat at the rate of 6.5 acres per pair of owls shall be identified and placed under a construction easement by the developer. MM BIO-2g. Pre-construction surveys for badger dens and burrows shall occur concurrently with burrowing owl and kit fox surveys to ensure that no occupied dens or burrows are present within or near project construction activities.

S-20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance If active dens or burrows are present on or immediately adjacent to (i.e., within 300 feet of) the disturbance area, a buffer, within which no construction activity shall be permissible, shall be maintained during the pupping season (i.e., February 15 through July 1, or as otherwise determined through surveys and monitoring of the den). The size of the buffer shall be determined by a qualified biologist in consultation with the CDFG but shall be no less than 300 feet. A biological monitor shall be present on-site during construction activities to ensure the buffer is adequate to avoid direct impacts to individuals as well as nest abandonment. The on-site monitor shall be necessary until it is determined that young are of an independent age and construction activities would not harm individual badgers. Once it has been determined that badgers have vacated the project site, the burrows could be collapsed or excavated, and ground disturbance could proceed. Any dens determined to be occupied, but which cannot be avoided through construction timing or activity buffers, may be vacated during the non-pupping season by a qualified biologist using the procedures identified in MM BIO-2f above, in consultation with the CDFG.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-21

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance If no active dens or burrows are found during the preconstruction surveys, then no further mitigation is necessary. MM BIO-2h: No more than 30 days prior to commencement of grading or construction activities occurring within 250 feet of trees located adjacent to the project site and within the agricultural land on-site, the developer shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct tree and agricultural land surveys to determine if active nest(s) of protected birds and raptors (white tailed kite, northern harrier, and loggerhead shrike) are present in the trees or on the ground. Surveys shall include searches of all potential nest sites, including snags, shrubs, ground, buildings and other structures. Two surveys shall be conducted, at least one week apart, with the second survey occurring no more than two days prior to vegetation removal or construction activities. Areas within 250 feet of the construction zone that are not within the control of the developer shall be observed from the project site.

S-22

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance If active nest(s) are found, the USWFS and/or the CDFG (as appropriate) shall be notified regarding the status of the nest(s). Furthermore, construction activities shall be restricted as necessary to avoid disturbance of the nest(s) until they are abandoned or the qualified biologist deems disturbance potential to be minimal. Restrictions may include establishment of exclusion zones (no ingress of personnel or equipment at a minimum radius of 250 feet around an active raptor nest and 100 feet around an active non-raptor migratory bird nest) or alteration of the construction schedule

Impact BIO-3. The project would not have

No Impact

No mitigation is necessary.

No Impact

No Impact

No mitigation is necessary.

No Impact

a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the CDFG or the USFWS. Impact BIO-4. The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-23

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

not limited to, coastal, riverine, stream, marsh, vernal pool, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Impact BIO-5. The project would not

Less than

No significant impact has been identified; therefore, no

Less than

interfere substantially with the movement of

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

Impact BIO-6. The project may impede the

Potentially

The implementation of mitigation measures BIO-2a

Less than

use of native wildlife nursery sites.

Significant

and BIO-2g would reduce this impact to a less than

Significant

any native or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors.

Impact

significant level.

with Mitigation Incorporated

Impact BIO-7. The project would not

Potentially

MM BIO-7. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the

Less than

conflict with any local policies or ordinances

Significant

developer shall prepare and implement a landscaping

Significant

protecting biological resources, except for a

Impact

and revegetation plan for each construction phase in

with

potential conflict with San Benito County

order to prevent the spread of invasive non-native

General Plan Open Space and Conservation

species. The plan shall include the following

Element Policy 6 (invasive plant species).

requirements:

Therefore, all impacts except those related

•

to Policy 6 are less than significant. Impacts

S-24

Mitigation Incorporated

An eradication plan for plants listed on the Invasive Plant Inventory (Cal-IPC 2007)

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

related to potential conflicts with Policy 6

currently growing on the project site to be

are potentially significant.

implemented during the grading phases of the project;

Impact BIO-8. Implementation of the

No Impact

•

Use of plants listed on the Invasive Plant Inventory (Cal-IPC 2007) shall be prohibited;

•

Exposed soil areas shall be planted, mulched, or covered between October 15 and the following April 15 each year;

•

Plant materials used in landscaping or erosion control shall consist of plants that are included in a list of appropriate native California plants as identified by a qualified biologist or landscape architect; and

•

To prevent erosion and conserve water during construction, bare soil between newly installed plant materials shall be mulched, covered with jute netting, or seeded with a mix of seeds best suited for the climate and soil conditions, and native to the San Benito County region.

No mitigation is necessary.

No Impact

project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-25

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or any other approved biological resources recovery or habitat conservation plan of any local, regional or state agency. Potentially Significant Cumulative

The implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3, BIO-4, BIO-5, BIO-6, and BIO-7 would reduce the impact to a less than significant level.

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

Impact CULT-1. Development of the

Potentially

MM CULT-1a. All ground disturbing activities shall

Less than

project could result in the potential

Significant

be conducted in accordance with Policy RM-7.1 of

Significant

Impact BIO-9. The proposed project, in addition to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects along the Fairview Road corridor, may disturb special-status species, critical habitats, and wildlife movement throughout the region. 3.5 Cultural Resources

with

destruction or damage of cultural resources

Article 5.0 of the Specific Plan (Resource

(i.e., prehistoric sites, historic sites, and

management).

isolated artifacts) and human remains.

MM CULT-1b: In the event that cultural resources are

Mitigation Incorporated

discovered, all work within a 50-meter radius (165 feet) of the find shall be stopped, the County Planning Department notified, and a qualified archaeologist (who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional

S-26

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance Qualifications Standards in archaeology and/or history) shall be retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations, including, if necessary, feasible mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level as set forth in Policy RM-7.1 of the Specific Plan, or as otherwise required by law. Such measures may include avoidance, preservation in place, or other appropriate measures consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. The project developer shall be required to implement the identified measures for the protection of cultural resources. MM CULT-1c: In the event that human remains are discovered, all work within a 50-meter radius (165 feet) of the find shall be stopped, the County Planning Department shall be notified, and the County SheriffCoroner shall be notified according to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, as set forth in Policy RM-7.1, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and as otherwise required by law. Subject to any applicable legal process, duly authorized representatives of the Coroner and the Planning Department shall be permitted to enter onto the project site and take all actions consistent with County Code Chapter 19.05,

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-27

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 27460) of Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission, and the procedures outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(d), (e) shall be followed.

Impact CULT-2. Development of the

Potentially

MM CULT-2. In the event that any previously

Less than

project could result in the potential

Significant

undiscovered paleontological resources are discovered,

Significant

destruction or damage of paleontological

all work within a 50-meter radius (165 feet) of the

resources (i.e., fossils, fossil formations).

finding shall be stopped, the County Planning Department notified, and a qualified paleontologist

with Mitigation Incorporated

retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations, including, if necessary, feasible mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The project developer shall be required to implement the identified mitigation measures for the protection of paleontological resources. Impact CULT-3. Development of the

Potentially

The implementation of MM CULT-1a – MM CULT

Less than

project combined with other past, present

Significant

1c would reduce this impact to a less than significant

Significant

and probable future development in the

Cumulative

level.

County of San Benito could result in the

S-28

with Mitigation

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

disturbance of cultural resources (i.e.,

Incorporated

prehistoric sites, historic buildings and isolated artifacts and features) and human remains. Impact CULT-4. Development of the

Potentially

The implementation of mitigation measure CULT-2

Less than

project combined with other past, present

Significant

would reduce this impact to a less than significant

Significant

and probable future development in the

Cumulative

level.

with

County of San Benito could result in the

Mitigation

disturbance of paleontological resources.

Incorporated

3.7 Geology and Soils Impact GEO-1. Implementation of the

Potentially

MM GEO-1. Development of the project site shall

Less than

project could expose people or structures to

Significant

comply with the then most recent California Building

Significant

potential substantial adverse effects,

Code guidelines for Seismic Zone 4 to avoid or

including the risk of loss, injury or death

minimize potential damage from seismic ground

involving rupture of a known earthquake

shaking. All plan sets shall include a 135-foot Building

fault.

Exclusion Zone as illustrated in Figure 7 of the

with Mitigation Incorporated

Specific Plan (Constraints Diagram), with future uses within the Building Exclusion Zone limited to nonhabitable improvements (e.g., roadway improvements, parks, open space, buffers, trails, etc.) and all recommendations included in the 1989 fault investigation and in the 2008 geotechnical

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-29

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance investigation prepared by Terrasearch, Inc. will be incorporated into the project design to the extent determined appropriate by the County, in consultation with the geotechnical consultant.

Impact GEO-2. Strong ground shaking

Potentially

MM GEO-2. Development of the project shall

Less than

occurring on the project site during a major

Significant

comply with the then-current California Building Code

Significant

earthquake may cause severe damage to

standards and requirements for Seismic Zone 4 to

with

future buildings and other improvements

avoid or minimize potential damage from seismic

Mitigation

constructed as part of the project, and

ground shaking, as well as recommendations set forth

therefore may expose people and structures

in the site-specific geotechnical report required under

to substantial adverse effects.

MM GEO-1. Design plans shall be subject to review

Incorporated

and approval by the appropriate design professional (i.e. geotechnical engineer, structural engineer) and the County as required. Impact GEO-3. There is a low risk of

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

seismic-related ground failure, including

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

liquefaction and seismically-induced differential settlement, due to the on-site soil conditions. Accordingly, there is a low risk of potential substantial adverse effects to people or structures as a result of seismicrelated ground failure

S-30

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

Impact GEO-4. Given the project site’s

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

topography and its soil characteristics, and

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

No Impact

No mitigation is necessary.

No Impact

Impact GEO-6. Project grading and

Potentially

MM GEO-6. The project developer shall comply with

Less than

removal of vegetation may result in soil

Significant

the policies found in Article 2.0 (Land Use) and Article

Significant

that no landslide or landslide-related features have been identified or mapped on the project site, the risk of landslides is considered low. Impact GEO-5. The project site is not located on a geologic unit that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project.

exposure, increased erosion and

5.0 (Resource Management) of the Fairview Corners

sedimentation of downstream water bodies.

Residential Specific Plan. Grading and ground disturbance on the site shall be implemented as shown

with Mitigation Incorporated

on the Specific Plan Figure 22, Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram, and the required treatment of urban pollutants and application of pesticides on the project site shall be implemented in accordance with all applicable policies within Article 5, Resource Management as well as the project’s Grading Master Plan (as may be amended). Further, the timing of

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-31

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance implementation shall occur in accordance with Article 7 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan).

Impact GEO-7. Expansive soils present on

Potentially

The implementation of mitigation measure GEO-1

the project site may cause movement or

Significant

would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.

heaving, potentially resulting in damage to

Significant with Mitigation

foundations, concrete pads and pavements.

Incorporated

Impact GEO-8. The soils on the project site

Potentially

may not be capable of adequately

Significant

supporting the use of septic tanks.

Less than

MM GEO-8. In the event the developer seeks approval to use septic systems to serve a portion of the project, all of the following requirements shall apply: 1. Use of septic systems shall be permitted only if soil suitability can be demonstrated to the County’s satisfaction and the developer has obtained any and all required permits, entitlements and approvals from relevant agencies to use septic systems on the project site. The developer shall comply with any space constraints imposed on the proposed lot by County and Regional Water Quality Control Board regulations for the location and placement of septic systems on the site.

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

2. Use of septic systems shall be consistent with the adopted Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan and the County’s requirements for the use, design, and

S-32

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance construction of septic systems, and applicable requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 3. The developer shall retain a qualified environmental health specialist or registered engineer to perform testing on each proposed lot, which shall include at least one soil profile analysis around a minimum of three percolation test holes spread out in the proposed location for the leachfield. Percolation testing shall adhere to the then-current federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) methodology. Said analysis shall be submitted to the County Environmental Health Department and Public Works Department for their approval as part of the subdivision map process for the lots being proposed to be served by septic systems. Prior to commencing the analysis, the developer shall give the County Environmental Health Department and the Public Works Department a minimum of 48 hours’ notice so that County staff may observe the testing. 4 Soils testing and the use of septic systems shall comply with all applicable standards and requirements, including, without limitation, those of the County, the

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-33

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Less than Significant Cumulative

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required.

Impact HAZ-1. The project may create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal or hazardous materials or through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

Potentially Significant

The implementation of mitigation measures AG-1, HYD-1a, and HYD-1b would reduce the impact to a less than significant level.

Impact HAZ-2. The project site is located more than one-quarter mile from existing schools, but within one-quarter mile of a proposed school.

Potentially Significant

Impact GEO-9. The project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable potential future projects, could result in the cumulative increase in the risk of geological impacts to the future residents of these projects.

Less than Significant

3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

The implementation of mitigation measure AG-1 would reduce the impact to a less than significant level.

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

S-34

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

Impact HAZ-3. The project site is not included on a list of any hazardous materials sites and therefore would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment in this regard..

No impact

No mitigation is necessary.

No impact

Impact HAZ-4. The project may impair

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

implementation of or physically interfere

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

Impact HAZ-5. The project may expose

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

people or structures to a significant risk of

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

Impact HAZ-7. Implementation of the

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

proposed project in addition to past, present

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

and reasonably foreseeable, probable future

Cumulative

MM HYD-1a. The project developer shall comply with the policies found in Article 2.0 (Land Use) and Article 5.0 (Resource Management) of the Fairview

Less than

with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.

projects, may result in cumulative hazardous risk impacts.. 3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality Impact HYD-1. Site preparation, grading

Potentially

and construction activities associated with

Significant

the project have the potential to degrade

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Significant with

S-35

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

water quality in downstream water bodies, in particular, the San Benito River, which is already impaired.

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance Corners Residential Specific Plan. Grading and ground disturbance on the site shall be implemented in accordance with the project’s approved Grading Master Plan and as generally shown on Figure 22 (Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram). For the required treatment of urban pollutants and application of pesticides on the project site, the developer shall comply with all applicable policies in Article 5.0 (Resource Management) as well as the project’s approved Grading Master Plan.

Mitigation Incorporated

MM HYD-1b: In accordance with the applicable law and with Specific Plan Policies RM-3.1, RM-4.3, RM6.1 (and related implementation measures), the developer shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which shall be approved by the County Public Works Department and which shall address stormwater management during the construction phase of the project. The SWPPP shall be consistent with RWQCB standards and NPDES permit requirements, and shall list BMPs, which specify how stormwater discharges would be controlled to protect water quality during the course of construction. Said BMPs may include, without limitation, the following:

S-36

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance 1.

Schedule earthwork to occur primarily during

the dry season to prevent most runoff erosion. 2.

Protect drainages and storm drain inlets from

sedimentation with berms or filtration barriers, such as filter fabric fences, hay bales, or straw wattles. 3.

Divert runoff from exposed slopes to on-site

sediment basins before the runoff is released off-site. 4.

Install gravel construction entrances to reduce

tracking of sediment onto adjoining streets. 5.

Sweep on-site paved surfaces and surrounding

streets daily to collect sediment before it is washed into the storm drains, the San Benito River or Santa Ana Creek. 6.

After construction is completed, clean all

drainage culverts of accumulated sediment and debris. 7.

Stabilize stockpiles of topsoil and fill material

by watering daily, or by the use of chemical agents. 8.

Store all construction equipment and material

in designated areas away from waterways and storm drain inlets. Surround construction staging areas with earthen berms.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-37

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance 9.

Wash and maintain equipment and vehicles in

a separate bermed area, with runoff directed to a lined retention basin. 10.

Collect construction waste daily and deposit in

covered dumpsters. The implementation of these mitigation measures along with mitigation measure GEO-1, GEO-6, and AQ-1, would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Impact HYD-2. Operational activities

Potentially

MM HYD-2a. The master developer shall submit a

Less than

associated with the proposed project have

Significant

Grading Master Plan, to be approved by the County

Significant

the potential to degrade water quality in

Public Works Department in accordance with the

downstream water bodies, in particular San

applicable timing and content requirements set forth in

Benito River, which is already impaired.

the Specific Plan.

with Mitigation Incorporated

MM HYD-2b: The master developer shall prepare a Storm Drainage Master Plan, to be approved by the County Public Works Department in accordance with the applicable timing and content requirements set forth in the Specific Plan, including, without limitation, the policies for the implementation of BMPs and LID as stated in Article 5.0 of the Specific Plan (Resource Management) (Policies RM-4.1, RM-

S-38

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance 4.2, and RM-4.3). The Storm Drainage Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all major drainage facilities proposed for the project site relative to drainage impacts, and would be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of this Plan shall satisfy all applicable regulations, standards and guidelines, including all of the following: The capacity design of the system-wide stormwater retention facilities is based on the 100-year storm event and is of adequate size to retain and infiltrate stormwater on the site to pre-development levels as required by applicable County standards (San Benito County Code, tit. 23, chap. 23.17, section 23.17.003(B) and chap. 23.31, art. III, section 23.31.040 et seq.). The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) may contour grade the entire Plan Area in accordance with the Grading Master Plan to achieve drainage and the efficient construction of water, sewer and underground utilities. As a condition of approval of the first subdivision map for the project site, the master

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-39

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain, at its expense, all necessary permits and agreements as required by other agencies having jurisdiction over drainage, water quality or wetlands issues including, but not limited to, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the California Department of Fish and Game. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare and implement a SWPPP, and shall construct and maintain BMPs as required by San Benito County. In addition, prior to the start of construction, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain a permit from San Benito County for the General Construction Storm Water Compliance Program, as required by the State Water Quality Control Board, prior to the start of any construction, including grading. Development and operation of the project shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan (as may be amended from time to time).

S-40

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance MM HYD-2c: The master developer and/or individual developer(s) shall construct drainage improvements and stormwater retention facilities on the site generally as shown on Figure 21, Conceptual Drainage Plan and in accordance with the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan required under MM HYD-2b above. Sitespecific grading and drainage plans shall be prepared for each phase of the project, which shall conform to the approved Grading Master Plan and the Storm Drainage Master Plan (as they may be amended), and shall be subject to the County Public Works Department’s review and approval.

Impact HYD-3. The project would not alter

Potentially

The implementation of mitigation measures AG-1,

Less than

the existing drainage pattern of the project

Significant

GEO-1, GEO 6, HYD-1, and HYD-2a – HYD-2c

Significant

site, which may substantially increase the

would reduce this impact to a less than significant

with

rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner

level.

Mitigation Incorporated

that would result in flooding or sedimentation and erosion on or off the site over the lifetime of the project. Impact HYD-4. The project may create or

Potentially

The implementation of mitigation measures HYD-2a -

Less than

contribute runoff water, which would

Significant

HYD-2c would reduce this impact to a less than

Significant

exceed the capacity of existing or planned

significant level.

with Mitigation

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-41

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

stormwater drainage systems or provide

Incorporated

substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Impact HYD-5. The project would not

No impact

No mitigation is necessary.

No impact

No impact

No mitigation is necessary.

No impact

Potentially Significant Cumulative

The implementation of mitigation measures HYD-2a HYD-2c would reduce this impact to a less than significant level.

place any structures within a 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped on the relevant FIRM, and would not impede or redirect flood flows. Impact HYD-6. The project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam, or inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Impact HYD-7. The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future developments in the area may cumulatively result in a significant effect with regard to drainage and water quality.

S-42

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Impact HYD-8. The proposed project, in addition to past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects in the vicinity would require the expansion and/or construction of new stormwater drainage facilities, which could result in cumulative environmental impacts to air and water quality.

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

Less than Significant

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required.

Less than Significant

Cumulative

3.10 Land Use and Planning Impact LU-1. The proposed project does not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental impact.

Less than Significant

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no mitigation is required.

Less than Significant

Impact LU-2. The proposed project would not disrupt or divide an established community.

No impact

No mitigation is necessary.

No impact

Impact LU-3. The proposed project would

No impact

No mitigation is necessary.

No impact

not conflict with an established habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-43

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

Impact LU-4. Development of the proposed

Potentially

The implementation of mitigation measure AG-1

Less than

project may create land use compatibility

Significant

would reduce this impact to a less than significant

Significant

conflicts with surrounding uses.

Impact

level.

with Mitigation Incorporated

Impact LU-5. The project would not induce

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

substantial population growth in an area,

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

Impact LU-6. The proposed project,

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

combined with other past, present, and

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

reasonably foreseeable probable future

Cumulative

Significant

either directly or indirectly.

projects in San Benito County may result in cumulative land use impacts to the project area. 3.11 Noise Impact NOISE-1. Construction activities

Potentially

MM NOISE-1: During all project construction

associated with the proposed project may

Significant

activities, the following mitigation measures shall be

expose nearby land uses to excessive noise

incorporated into construction documents and shall be

levels, a substantial temporary or periodic

implemented by the project developer:

increase in ambient noise levels above noise

a.

levels existing without the project.

Unavoidable

Restrict noise-generating activities at the

construction site or in areas adjacent to the construction site to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

S-44

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance Construction-related noise-generating activities shall be prohibited on Sundays and federally-recognized holidays. b.

Properly maintain construction equipment and

equip all internal combustion engine driven machinery with intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. Equipment engine shrouds shall be closed during equipment operation. c.

Construction vehicles and equipment shall not

be left idling for longer than 5 minutes when not in use. d.

Locate stationary noise generating equipment

such as air compressors or portable power generators as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Construct temporary noise barriers to screen stationary noise generating equipment when located near adjoining sensitive land uses. Temporary noise barriers could reduce construction noise levels by 5 dBA. e.

Utilize "quiet" air compressors and other

stationary noise sources where technology exists. f.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Route all construction traffic to and from the

S-45

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance project site via designated truck routes where feasible. Prohibit construction-related heavy truck traffic in residential areas where feasible. g.

Control noise from construction workers’

radios to a point that they are not audible at existing residences bordering the project site. h.

Prior to issuance of any grading and/or

building permits, the contractor shall prepare and submit to the County for approval a detailed construction plan identifying the schedule for major noise-generating construction activities. i.

Designate a "disturbance coordinator" who

would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule

S-46

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

Impact NOISE-2: Stationary noise

Potentially

MM NOISE-2a: Noise-generating landscape and

Less than

generated by the project could expose

Significant

facility maintenance activities shall be prohibited on

Significant with

persons to noise levels in excess of

the premises of the common parks and open space

applicable County noise standards at

areas between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. as an ongoing

Mitigation

existing noise-sensitive land uses adjacent to

operational requirement within the project site.

Incorporated

the project site and newly developed noise-

MM NOISE-2b: The recreational use of the common

sensitive residential land uses within the

parks and open space areas shall be limited to between

project site.

7 a.m. and 7 p.m., and amplified music shall be prohibited at the common parks and open space areas

Impact NOISE-3: Implementation of the

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

proposed project would not result in a

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

Impact NOISE-4: Predicted exterior noise

Potentially

MM NOISE-4a: For residences placed within 100 feet

Less than

levels at the proposed residences along

Significant

of Fairview Road, the project developer shall comply

Significant

with Policy LU-9.1, Measure #5 and Policy LU-10.2,

with

substantial permanent increase in ambient transportation-related source noise levels above noise levels existing without the project, and would not exceed the applicable noise standards at existing noise-sensitive land uses adjacent to the project site and newly developed noise-sensitive residential land uses within the project site.

Fairview Road could expose persons to

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-47

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

noise levels in excess of the applicable noise

Measure #3, found in Article 2.0 of the Fairview

standards.

Corners Residential Specific Plan (Land Use).

Mitigation Incorporated

Compliance with Article 2.0 shall be subject to the review and approval of the County in accordance with Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan), as part of the project’s design and site review process. Specifically, in the event that multi-story residences are proposed adjacent to Fairview Road, an acoustical study shall be prepared by the project developer and reviewed and approved by the County, including mitigation measures to ensure that interior noise levels within upper floor areas of the dwelling units will maintain an acceptable noise level of 45 dBA CNEL/Ldn, or less. The study shall be submitted to the San Benito County Planning and Building Department in conjunction with the first associated building permit application for the multi-story residences at issue. The developer shall implement all recommended mitigation measures in the study prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy for the multi-story residences. MM NOISE-4b: If residences are placed within 100 feet of Fairview Road, sound attenuation features shall

S-48

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance be required in accordance with the recommendations set forth in the approved acoustical report, and shall, at a minimum, include the following: a.

A minimum six-foot noise barrier shall be

constructed to reduce noise levels in outdoor use areas along Fairview Road. b.

The barriers shall be constructed solidly over

the entire surface and the base, and shall not contain openings or gaps between barrier materials or the ground which would decrease the reduction provided by the noise barrier. c.

Suitable materials for barrier construction shall

have a minimum surface weight of 3 lbs./ft2. (such as one-inch thick wood, masonry block, concrete, or metal), and shall be consistent with MM AES-1. d.

The final design of noise barriers shall be

completed and approved during design review for the project when detailed site plans and grading plans are available. Impact NOISE-5: Predicted groundborne

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

vibration levels would not be anticipated to

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

expose persons to or generate excessive

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-49

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

groundborne vibration, in excess of applicable thresholds for human annoyance or structural damage. Impact NOISE-6: Implementation of the

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

proposed project in combination with past,

Significant

mitigation is required.

Not Cumulatively Considerable

present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to future cumulative noise levels. 3.12 Public Services Impact PUB-1. The proposed project would

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

increase service demands for law

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

Impact PUB-2. The project would increase

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

the demand for fire protection services. This

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

enforcement patrol and incident response. This increase in demand, however, would not trigger the need for new or expanded law enforcement facilities to serve the project, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives.

increase in demand, however, would not

S-50

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

trigger the need for new or expanded facilities to serve the project, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Impact PUB-3. The project would result in

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

the development of new residences and

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

Impact PUB-4. The project would increase

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

the generation of solid waste at the project

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

Impact PUB-5. The proposed project, in

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

combination with past, present, and

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

therefore require school services, potentially resulting in the demand for new or expanded facilities to serve the project, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives.

site, thereby reducing the estimated longterm disposal capacity at the local landfill site, and potentially triggering the need to expand the facility, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives, the construction and operation of which could result in environmental impacts.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-51

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

reasonably foreseeable, probable future

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

Cumulative

projects within San Benito County, may result in the need for new, expanded, or altered public service facilities, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives, the construction and operation of which could result in environmental impacts. 3.13 Parks and Recreation Impact REC-1. The proposed project would

Potentially

MM REC-1a. Park and recreational facilities shall be

Less than

construct up to 220 new residences, which

Significant

generally constructed as shown in Figure 13 and

Significant

would result in additional demand on

Figure 17 and in accordance with all applicable

with

existing park and recreational facilities,

policies within Article 2.0 (Land Use), Article 3.0

which as a result, could lead to the

(Circulation Plan), Article 4.0 (Community Design)

occurrence or acceleration of substantial

and Article 5.0 (Resource Management) of the Specific

physical deterioration of those facilities.

Plan, as well as the project’s Open Space and Parks

Mitigation Incorporated

Master Plan (as may be amended). Timing of implementation shall be in accordance with Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan) and the approved Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan. MM REC-1b. On-site park and recreational facilities shall be provided by the developer and designed

S-52

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance consistent with applicable County standards for the provision of parkland and the County Parks Master Plan. In the alternative, the developer may pay the applicable in-lieu fee for park and recreational facilities as set forth in County Code Section 23.15.008. MM REC-1c. The project’s pedestrian and bicycle circulation network shall be developed in accordance with Article 7.0 (Implementation Plan) and the approved project’s Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan as approved by the Public Works Department.

Impact REC-2. The proposed project may

Potentially

The implementation of mitigation measures AQ-1 and

Less than

result in the construction of new parks and

Significant

N-1 would reduce this impact to a less than significant

Significant

level.

recreational facilities, which may have an

with Mitigation

adverse physical effect on the environment.

Incorporated Impact REC-3. The proposed project would

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

result in the development of new residences,

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

which could, in combination with other

Cumulative

past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects, contribute incrementally to demand for park and recreational facilities.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-53

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

Impact REC-4. The proposed project may

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

include the operation of new park and

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

recreational facilities, which could, in

Cumulative

combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects, contribute incrementally to water supply impacts within the groundwater basin serving the project. 3.14 Traffic and Circulation Impact TRA-1 The project would not

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

Impact TRA-2. The project may conflict

Potentially

MM TRA-2a: Prior to the issuance of building permits

Significant

with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy

Significant

for the 75th, 150th and the 200th residential units

Unavoidable

or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system since the addition of project traffic to existing traffic volumes would not cause study intersections to operate at unacceptable levels of service during peak hours.

establishing measures of effectiveness for the

(excluding secondary units) respectively, the project

performance of the circulation system since

developer shall monitor the intersection of Fairview

S-54

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

the addition of project traffic would result in

Road and Hillcrest Road to determine if signalization

peak-hour signal warrants being met at the

is warranted. Monitoring shall include the following:

Fairview Road/Hillcrest Road and

1.

Enterprise Road/Airline Highway (State Route 25) intersections.

Resulting

Conduct analyses of all applicable traffic signal

warrants based on field-measured data; 2.

Study prevailing traffic and roadway

conditions; 3.

Report the results to the San Benito County

Public Works Administrator, who, in coordination with the City of Hollister Engineering Department, shall determine if and when a traffic signal should be installed. MM TRA-2b: The developer shall install the traffic signal if directed in writing to do so by the San Benito County Public Works Administrator and so long as the City and County issue any required permits, consistent with MM TRA-2a above. The developer’s costs associated therewith may be subject to partial reimbursement to the extent other funding sources such as the TIF program, an established Benefit Area, or other development, are available and applicable; provided, however, the developer’s obligation to install the signal shall not be dependent on receipt of any reimbursement. The developer shall be obligated to

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-55

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance install the identified improvements promptly upon notification from the County of the need to do so, and no additional building permits for residential units (excluding secondary units) shall be issued until the traffic signal is installed. MM TRA-2c: If the San Benito County Public Works Administrator determines that the traffic signal at the intersection of Fairview Road/Hillcrest Road is not warranted at the time of issuance of the building permit for the project’s 200th residential unit or if the City of Hollister does not approve the installation of the traffic signal, then the developer shall comply with the following. If the identified traffic signal is expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, then the developer’s payment of the applicable TIF shall constitute a fair share contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the identified traffic signal is not expressly covered in the thencurrent TIF program, the developer shall pay its fair share contribution (based on its pro rata contribution of trips) to the Benefit Area toward the signalization of this intersection.

S-56

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance MM TRA-2d: Prior to the issuance of building permits for the 75th, 150th and the 200th residential units (excluding secondary units) respectively, the project developer shall monitor the intersection of Enterprise Road and Airline Highway (State Route 25) to determine if signalization is warranted. Monitoring shall include the following: 1.

Conduct analyses of all applicable traffic signal

warrants based on field-measured data; 2.

Study prevailing traffic and roadway

conditions; 3.

Report the results to the San Benito County

Public Works Administrator, who, in coordination with the City of Hollister Engineering Department, shall determine if and when a traffic signal should be installed. MM TRA-2e: The developer shall install the traffic signal if directed in writing to do so by the San Benito County Public Works Administrator and so long as Caltrans, the City and County issue any required permits, consistent with MM TRA-2d above. The developer’s costs associated therewith may be subject

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-57

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance to partial reimbursement to the extent other funding sources such as the TIF program, an established Benefit Area, or other development, are available and applicable; provided, however, the developer’s obligation to install the signal shall not be dependent on receipt of any reimbursement. The developer shall be obligated to install the identified improvements promptly upon notification from the County of the need to do so, and no additional building permits for residential units (excluding secondary units) shall be issued until the traffic signal is installed. MM TRA-2f: If the San Benito County Public Works Administrator determines that the traffic signal at the intersection of Enterprise Road/Airline Highway (State Route 25) is not warranted at the time of issuance of the building permit for the project’s 200th residential unit or if Caltrans and/or the City of Hollister does not approve the installation of the traffic signal, then the developer shall comply with the following. If the identified traffic signal is expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, then the developer shall pay the applicable TIF as a fair share contribution toward improvements at this intersection.

S-58

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance If the identified traffic signal is not expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, then the developer shall pay its fair share contribution (based on its pro rata contribution of trips) to the Benefit Area toward the signalization of this intersection.

Impact TRA-3. The project may conflict

Potentially

MM TRA-3: For the Fairview Road and Cielo Vista

Less than

with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy

Significant

Drive extension intersection, as part of the

Significant

performance of the circulation system since

infrastructure master planning for the proposed project, with Mitigation the developer shall design the southbound left-turn

the addition of project traffic would result in

pocket in compliance with County and Caltrans

insufficient vehicle storage within the left-

minimum design standards. Construction of this

turn pocket leading from southbound

improvement shall occur prior to issuance of the first

Fairview Road to the project site, which

building permit for residential development.

establishing measures of effectiveness for the

Incorporated

could result in increased traffic congestion on Fairview Road. Impact TRA-4. The project may conflict

Potentially

MM TRA-4: The developer shall pay the applicable

Significant

with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy

Significant

TIF as a fair share contribution towards the identified

Unavoidable

establishing measures of effectiveness for the

improvements, which would mitigate the project’s

performance of the circulation system since

impact to the extent feasible. However, even if the TIF

it would contribute traffic to the segments of

is paid by the developer, payment of this fee alone will

State Route 156 (Union Road to The

not guarantee the timely construction of the identified

Alameda) and State Route 25 (U.S. 101 to

improvements to mitigate the impact of the project.

State Route 156), which operate at

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-59

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

No Impact

No Impact

unacceptable LOS E under existing conditions. The addition of project traffic would cause the percent-time-spentfollowing to increase during both the AM and PM peak hours. Impact TRA-5. The proposed project would not conflict with the applicable congestion management program. Impact TRA-6. The proposed project’s

Potentially

Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM TRA-7

design features may increase hazards as a

Significant

would reduce the impact to less than significant.

result of inadequate site access.

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

Impact TRA-7. The proposed project may

Potentially

MM TRA-7. As part of its first subdivision map

result in inadequate emergency access.

Significant

application which proposes the development of

Impact

residential units, the developer shall show on said map either (1) the Airline Highway (State Route 25) EVA, or (2) an alternative EVA generally located in the

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

northwest corner of the project site or in such other location as is acceptable to the County Public Works Administrator. In the event that the Airline Highway (State Route 25) EVA route is not built or its construction is delayed beyond the commencement of

S-60

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance project construction, the developer shall construct the alternative EVA. Prior to issuance of the building permit for the first residential unit, either the Airline Highway (State Route 25) EVA or the alternative EVA route shall be constructed, consistent with applicable County standards and other requirements, shall be at least 24 feet in width in order to allow personal vehicles a means of emergency egress and simultaneous entry into the project site by emergency responders’ vehicles, and shall include a “Knox Box,” which could only be unlocked by fire district personnel. To ensure emergency access for all units, the developer shall be required to construct and maintain an all-weather access road connecting the proposed EVA (either the Airline Highway (State Route 25) EVA or alternative on-site EVA) to all homes constructed in each phase of development.

Impact TRA-8. The proposed project

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

includes policies that facilitate the

Significant

mitigation measures are required.

Significant

construction of public transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-61

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. Impact TRA-9. Implementation of the

Potentially

MM TRA-9a. Prior to the issuance of the building

Significant

proposed project in combination with past,

Significant

permit(s) for the 135th and 200th residential units

Unavoidable

present and reasonably foreseeable, probable

Cumulative

(excluding secondary units) respectively, the project

future projects would result in significant

developer shall monitor the intersection of Fairview

impacts at two intersections and may result

Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension to determine if

in insufficient vehicle storage within the left-

signalization is needed. Monitoring shall include the

turn pocket leading from southbound

following:

Fairview Road to the project site, which

1.

could result in increased traffic congestion on Fairview Road.

Conduct analyses of all applicable traffic signal

warrants and based on field measured data; 2.

Study prevailing traffic and roadway conditions;

and 3.

Report the results to the San Benito County

Public Works Administrator, who will determine if and when the traffic signal and extension of the turnpocket storage for the southbound left-turn movement on Fairview Road should be installed. MM TRA-9b: The developer shall install the traffic signal and extend the turn-pocket storage for the southbound left-turn movement on Fairview Road if

S-62

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance directed in writing to do so by the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, consistent with MM TRA-8a above. The developer’s costs associated therewith may be subject to partial reimbursement to the extent other funding sources such as the TIF program, an established Benefit Area or from other development are available and applicable; provided, however, the developer’s obligation to install the signal and extend the left-turn lane shall not be dependent on receipt of any reimbursement. The developer shall be obligated to install the identified improvements promptly upon notification from the County of the need to do so, and no additional building permits for residential units (excluding secondary units) shall be issued until the traffic signal is installed. MM TRA-9c: If the San Benito County Public Works Administrator determines that the traffic signal at the intersection of Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension and extension of the turn-pocket storage for the southbound left-turn movement on Fairview Road is not warranted at the time of issuance of the building permit for the project’s 200th residential unit, then the developer shall comply with the following. If the

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-63

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance identified traffic signal and extension of the turnpocket storage for the southbound left-turn movement on Fairview Road is expressly covered in the thencurrent TIF program, then the developer’s payment of the applicable TIF shall constitute its fair share contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the identified traffic signal and extension of the turnpocket storage for the southbound left-turn movement on Fairview Road is not expressly covered in the thencurrent TIF program, then the developer shall pay its fair share contribution (based on its pro rata contribution of trips) to the Benefit Area toward the signalization of this intersection. MM TRA-9d: Signalization of the Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road intersection, the addition of dedicated left-turn lanes on all four approaches, and the operation of the traffic signal with protected leftturn phasing will ensure acceptable traffic conditions. If the identified improvements are expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, then the developer’s payment of the applicable TIF shall constitute its fair share contribution toward the improvements at this intersection. If the identified improvements are not

S-64

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, then the developer shall pay the project’s fair share contribution (based on its pro rata contribution of trips) to the Benefit Area toward improvements at this intersection. However, given the current pace of development and the anticipated costs of the identified improvements at this intersection as well as the fact that this intersection lies entirely within the City of Hollister’s jurisdiction, the developer’s payment of its fair share of costs would not guarantee timely construction of this improvement to mitigate the project’s impact to a less than significant level.

3.15 Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy Impact UTIL-1. The proposed project

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

would increase the demand for potable

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

water. However, the existing public water system serving the project site can

(Individual and Cumulative)

adequately supply the proposed project, including existing and planned future uses over a 20-year period, and would not require the construction of new water facilities to serve the project or in order to maintain

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-65

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives, nor would it require new or expanded entitlements. It would require the installation of new distribution lines, but these facilities would not cause significant, adverse environmental effects. Impact UTIL-2. The proposed project

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

would not substantially deplete groundwater

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

Impact UTIL-3. The proposed wastewater

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

treatment provider that would serve the

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table.

project has adequate capacity to serve the projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments in accordance with applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements, would not violate any waste discharge requirements, and would not require the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities to serve the project in order to

S-66

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives. It will require the installation of new collection lines, but these facilities will not cause significant, adverse, environmental effects. Impact UTIL-4. The soils on the project site

Potentially

The implementation of mitigation measure GEO-1

Less than

may not be capable of adequately

Significant

would reduce this impact to a less than significant

Significant

level.

supporting the use of septic tanks.

with Mitigation Incorporated

Impact UTIL-5. The proposed project

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

would not result in the wasteful, inefficient

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

Impact UTIL-6. The proposed project, in

Less than

The impact is less than significant; therefore, no

Less than

addition to past, present and reasonably

Significant

mitigation is required.

Significant

foreseeable, probable future projects in the

Cumulative

or unnecessary consumption of electricity, natural gas or gasoline.

vicinity, would generate demand for wastewater treatment services. As discussed under Impact UTIL-3, the project would require the installation of new collection lines, in order to maintain acceptable service

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

S-67

E XECUTIVE S UMMARY

Potential Project and Cumulative Impacts

Level of

Summary of Mitigation Measures

Resulting

Significance

Level of

w/o Mitigation

Significance

ratios or other performance objectives, but these facilities would not cause significant, adverse, environmental effects, and it is not anticipated that new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities would be needed to serve this cumulative development. Impact UTIL-7. The proposed project, in

Less than

The impact identified is less than significant; therefore,

Less than

combination with other past, present and

Significant

no mitigation is proposed.

Significant

reasonably foreseeable, probable future

Cumulative

development within the County could result in the wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption of electricity, natural gas and gasoline. Source:

S-68

EMC Planning Group 2011

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO .

1.0 I NTRODUCTION

1.1

R EPORT A UTHORIZATION AND P URPOSE

Determination to Prepare an Environmental Impact Report The County of San Benito, acting as the lead agency, has determined that the proposed Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan (“proposed project”) may result in significant adverse environmental effects, as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15064. Therefore, the County of San Benito has had this environmental impact report (EIR) prepared to evaluate the potentially significant adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project. A copy of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan is available at the County of San Benito Planning Department.

Background In 2008, the Gavilan San Benito Campus and Fairview Corners Projects Final EIR (Gavilan College 2008) (“Gavilan EIR”) was prepared by Gavilan Joint Community College District. The Gavilan EIR evaluated the potential environmental impacts of both the Fairview Corners residential project and the San Benito Campus project. The two sites adjoin and the two property owners are working together collaboratively to develop the sites with complimentary uses; the property owners also intend to share (both physically and financially) certain infrastructure improvements and required mitigation of environmental effects resulting from development of the two sites. Originally, the two project sites were in common ownership until the Gavilan Joint Community College District purchased a 78-acre parcel for the San Benito Campus facility from the Fairview Corners residential project applicant. The College District and Fairview Corners LLC (project applicant) have worked together to implement development plans for both the San

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

1-1

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

Benito Campus and the Fairview Corners residential project. The Gavilan EIR evaluated the individual effects of each project on the combined 138-acre property and also the cumulative effects of both projects because they had been planned concurrently and have a relationship of shared roadways, infrastructure, open space, and mitigation requirements. The Gavilan EIR was certified by the Gavilan Joint Community College District Board of Trustees, as the lead agency for the San Benito Campus project, in December 2008 and the San Benito Campus project was approved.

Determination In its review of the Gavilan EIR, the County of San Benito, as the lead agency for the proposed project, determined that a separate, “stand-alone” project-level EIR would be necessary because, among other things, the Gavilan EIR did not evaluate the Fairview Corners residential project on a project level. Based on the decision to prepare an EIR, the County of San Benito prepared and distributed a notice of preparation (NOP) from August 3, 2010 to September 1, 2010, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15082. CEQA Guidelines Section 15375 defines an NOP as: …a brief notice sent by the lead agency to notify the responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and involved federal agencies that the lead agency plans to prepare an EIR for the project. The purpose of the notice is to solicit guidance from those agencies as to the scope and content of the environmental information to be included in the EIR. A scoping meeting was held on August 19, 2010 at the Veterans Memorial Building in Hollister. County of San Benito staff, the EIR technical consultants, the project representative, and four members of the public attended the scoping meeting. Written comments to the NOP were received from the following agencies: ƒ

California Department of Transportation (September 1, 2010)

ƒ

Department of California Highway Patrol (August 24, 2010)

ƒ

Council of San Benito County Governments (August 19, 2010)

ƒ

California Department of Fish and Game (September 15, 2010)

The County of San Benito allowed a 16-day extension of the public comment period in response to a request for extension from the California Department of Fish and Game. Written comments to the NOP also were received from the following members of the public:

1-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

Robert and Holly Huenemann (August 5, 2010)

ƒ

Rey and Jackie Mendizabal (Date unknown)

ƒ

Jeannette Langstaff (August 31, 2010)

The NOP and written comments on the NOP received from public agencies and members of the public are contained in Appendix B.

Preparation Standards and Methods This Draft EIR has been prepared for the County of San Benito by EMC Planning Group under contract to the applicant with the assistance from Hexagon Transportation and Illingworth & Rodkin (also under contract to the applicant), and the County’s Planning Department, Public Works Department and legal counsel, as well as their team of EIR consultants and attorneys: Impact Sciences, Fehr and Peers, and Miller Starr Regalia, under contract to the County of San Benito. This Draft EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the County of San Benito, in accordance with CEQA Section 21082.1. This Draft EIR has been prepared pursuant to applicable provisions in accordance with CEQA, its implementing guidelines, and the County’s local CEQA procedures. This Draft EIR uses available information from private and public sources noted herein, as well as information generated by the technical consultants through field investigation. This Draft EIR will be used to inform the decision-makers, as well as the public, responsible agencies, and trustee agencies and their constituents of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project. This Draft EIR is a public informational document, which describes and evaluates the existing environmental setting of the project site and surrounding areas, discusses the characteristics of the proposed project, identifies environmental impacts associated with the proposed project, and provides feasible mitigation measures to reduce or avoid identified significant adverse environmental impacts. This Draft EIR also evaluates a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project. If an EIR identifies a significant adverse impact, the lead agency may approve the project only if it finds that feasible mitigation measures have been required to reduce the impact’s significance, or that such mitigation is infeasible for specified social, economic, and/or other reasons (Public Res. Code § 21081). Public agencies are charged with the duty to consider and minimize environmental impacts of the development where feasible, and have an obligation to balance a variety of public objectives. In doing so, the County may consider economic, social factors, environmental, and other factors.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

1-3

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

This Draft EIR provides information on which decisions about the proposed project can be based. It has been prepared according to the professional standards and practices of the EIR preparers’ individual disciplines and in conformance with the legal requirements and informational expectations of CEQA and its implementing guidelines.

Type of Document The CEQA Guidelines identify several types of EIRs, each applicable to different project circumstances. This Draft EIR has been prepared as a project-level EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15161. A project EIR focuses on the changes in the environment that would result from development of the project, including construction and operation of the project. This Draft EIR examines environmental impacts of the project as compared to the existing environment in the vicinity of the project from both a regional and local perspective, on the basis of maximum use and intensity scenarios, as identified in the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan.

1.2

P ROJECT L OCATION AND S ETTING

Regional Location The 60-acre project site is located southeast of the City of Hollister, in unincorporated San Benito County. Figure 1, Regional Location, presents the regional location. San Benito County is situated in the California Coast range south of San Francisco Bay and east of Monterey Bay. San Benito County is bordered by Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties to the north, by Merced and Fresno Counties to the east, and by Monterey County to the west and south. All of San Benito County is unincorporated with the exception of the City of Hollister and the City of San Juan Bautista, both of which are located near the northern boundary of the County line.

Project Site Vicinity The project site is located northeast of the intersection of Airline Highway (State Route 25) and Fairview Road, approximately one-quarter mile to the north of Airline Highway and directly east of Fairview Road. The project site is located outside of the Hollister city limit and sphere of influence, but is located within the City’s General Plan Planning Area Boundary. Figure 2, Project Vicinity, presents the project site in relationship to the City of Hollister’s jurisdictional boundaries and the vicinity road network.

1-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Angels Camp 5 4

Sonora

Stockton

80

4

108

Oakdale

99

Tracy

580

Modesto

132 680

880

Waterford

Ceres

101 280

120

Escalon

Lathrop

Oakland

Hughson

Patterson Turlock

33

Palo Alto

1

San Jose

5

Newman

Livingston

99

Merced

85 85

1

Gustine

101

165 59 17

Morgan Hill 152

152

152

Gilroy

Santa Cruz

152

1

Los Banos

San Luis Reservoir

156

Dos Palos

Hollister

Pa

156

1

183

San Juan Bautista

Project Location

5

Salinas

ci

fic

Monterey 68

Carmel

Gonzales 101

Oc

Soledad

25

1

ea

Big Sur

Greenfield

n King City

Coalinga

41 Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2009

Not to Scale

1

Chow

Figure 1

Regional Location Atascadero

Fairview Corners Residential Specific58 Plan EIR San Luis Obispo

Mad

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

This side intentionally left blank.

1-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Hillcrest Rd

City of Hollister

Fairview Rd

Sunnyslope Rd

Project Site

Old Ranch Rd.

Harbern Way

Airlin

e Hw

y (St

Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

0

3500 feet

Project Site City of Hollister City Limits City of Hollister Sphere of Influence City of Hollister Planning Area

ate R

oute

25)

Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2010, Google Earth Pro 2009 City of Hollister General Plan 2005

Figure 2

Project Vicinity Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

This side intentionally left blank.

1-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Project Vicinity and Surrounding Uses The project site is bound by rural residential uses and grassland along Old Ranch Road to the north, rural residential uses and grassland along Harbern Way to the east, a small family-owned farm to the southwest, the undeveloped but approved San Benito Campus parcel to the south, and Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista single-family residential subdivision to the west. The Ridgemark Golf and Country Club, which includes a gated residential community, is located further to the south across Airline Highway. The approved, yet undeveloped 292-acre Santana Ranch Specific Plan area is located approximately one mile to the north, on Fairview Road. The area located between the approved Santana Ranch project and the project site is identified by the County as the Central Fairview Study Area. The Award Homes residential subdivision, on the west side of Fairview Road just north of the Cielo Vista subdivision, has been approved by the City of Hollister, but has not yet been developed. The future San Benito Campus will occupy approximately 78 acres between the project site and Airline Highway. Figure 3, Vicinity Surrounding Uses, illustrates the locations of these surrounding uses relative to the project site.

Project Site Existing Conditions The project site consists of one parcel of land (APN 025-190-068). The site is currently undeveloped land that is used to cultivate barley. The land is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. The western, northern, and eastern sides of the site are fenced. There are no trails, roads or other improvements on the site. The site does not support overhead or underground utility transmission lines. However, a water pump station, operated by the Sunnyslope County Water District (Sunnyslope), is located in the northwestern corner of the site along Fairview Road. The pump is connected to an agricultural water line that serves the project site. Figure 4, Aerial Photograph, presents an aerial view of the project site and its surroundings. Figure 5, Site Photographs, shows the existing conditions on the site. The San Andreas fault lies approximately eight miles southwest of the project site. The Calaveras fault, a branch of the San Andreas fault, bisects the City of Hollister and lies about 1.25 miles southwest of the project site. The project site is located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone due to the proximity of the Tres Pinos fault, a branch of the Calaveras fault that is generally considered to be potentially active. A geotechnical investigation of the Tres Pinos fault was conducted by Terratech, Inc. in 1989. Based on the investigation, a 35-foot wide trace of the Tres Pinos fault was mapped on the project site. In its report, Terratech, Inc. recommended a 50-foot wide building setback on each side of the fault. The proposed project includes a 135-foot “building exclusion zone” within which only low-intensity recreational or open space uses are allowed, which is consistent with

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

1-9

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

Terratech’s recommendations. The location of the fault and the proposed “building exclusion zone” is illustrated by Figure 6, Topography and Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone. A second geotechnical investigation evaluating surface and subsurface soil conditions was conducted by Terrasearch, Inc., in 2008. The topography of the project site consists of undulating hills with an overall gradual elevation change of about 45 feet from east to west. A former stock pond is located in a ground depression near the northeast corner of the site. As indicated by Figure 6, the highest elevation is near the center of the site and the lowest points are in the southwest corner near Fairview Avenue and in the northeast corner in the vicinity of the old stock pond. The site rises from Fairview Road to a crest of a hill located approximately 1,100 feet east of Fairview Road. Stormwater from the site generally drains toward a tributary of the Santa Ana Creek, north of the project site, and also to a tributary of the San Benito River, south of the project site. Existing drainage patterns on the site follow the topography and generally flow in three directions: west of the crest of the hill, the site drains toward Fairview Road; to the east, the site drains to a low point in the site’s northeastern corner; along the southern boundary of the site, the crest of the hill is interrupted by a saddle, which causes drainage to flow southward toward the adjacent property. The existing drainage pattern on the site is presented in Figure 7, Existing Drainage. The site supports habitat for a number of special-status wildlife species. In particular, the project site is within Critical Habitat for California tiger salamander, designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The project’s impacts to biological resources and proposed mitigation are discussed in Section 3.4, Biological Resources, of this Draft EIR. Water service in the area is provided by Sunnyslope. The project site is located within Sunnyslope’s existing service area for potable water, which would provide domestic water service to the project site. The Hollister Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant (DWTP) is located on San Juan Road (State Route 156) approximately 5.5 miles northwest of the project site. The facility is the primary wastewater treatment plant for the Hollister Urban Area, including areas within the County that are designated to be served by that facility. The project site is located within the Hollister Urban Area identified to be served in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for wastewater treatment and recycled water services for the City of Hollister, San Benito County, Sunnyslope, and the San Benito County Water District, as set forth more fully in the Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Master Plan (HDR 2008) (Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan). It is anticipated that LAFCO action would be required to approve wastewater and recycled water service to the project site, consistent with the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan. The location of the project site relative to the service boundaries of Sunnyslope and the study area of the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan are presented in Figure 8, Water and Wastewater Service Area Boundaries. 1-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Approved Santana Ranch Specific Plan Area

Fairview Road

City of Hollister

Central Fairview Study Area

Approved Award Homes Cielo Vista Development

Old Ranch Rd Project Site

Harbern Way Approved San Benito Campus Site

rlin

Ai e y

Hw te

ta (S

Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

e ut

Ro ) 25

2500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Google Earth 2009

Figure 3

Vicinity Existing Conditions Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

This side intentionally left blank.

1-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Fairvew Road

Award Homes

Old Ranch Rd

Project Site

Cielo Vista Subdivision

Harbern Way

Airline

Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

Highw

ay/St

ate R

oute

25

Project site

0

850 feet

City of Hollister Planning Area City of Hollister Sphere of Influence

Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2009, Google Earth Pro 2010

Figure 4

Aerial Photograph Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

This side intentionally left blank.

1-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

1

2

3

4

5

6

1 Looking east across the northern boundary of the project site.

4 Looking west along the northern boundary of the project site.

2 Looking southwest across the site towards the Cielo Vista subdivision.

5 Looking south across project site from the northeastern boundary.

3 Looking east along the northern boundary of the project site.

6 Looking southeast across the project site from the northeastern corner.

Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2010, Google Earth 2009

Figure 5

Site Photographs Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

This side intentionally left blank.

1-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

495 525

505 510 515

515 525

520

500

505 490

520

Proposed Fairview Corners Residential 535

Proposed Building Exclusion Zones

520 515

490

495

500

505

510 525

Approximate Fault Zone & Building Exclusion Zones Provided by Terratech Inc. On January 18, 1990 535 530 525

535

Building Exclusion Zone

525 525

Zone

530

Tres Pinos Fault

525

Building Exclusion Zone

530

Former Stock Pond

Future Gavilan San Benito Campus 525 530 535

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

Figure 6

Topography and Proposed Earthquake Fault Building Exclusions Zone Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

This side intentionally left blank.

1-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

PLAN AREA BOUNDARY

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

EXISTING DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY

Figure 7

Existing Drainage Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

This side intentionally left blank.

1-20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Project Site Planning Designations According to the County of San Benito 1998 General Plan Land Use Element, Policy 9, the site is located within an Area of Special Study, and is designated by the County’s General Plan as “R-Rural,” with a 5-acre minimum lot size. According to the definitions listed in the County General Plan Land Use Element, the intent of the Area of Special Study is as follows: …direct development from natural resources and environmentally hazardous areas, to provide for mixed land uses to reduce vehicle emissions, to effectively plan the design, development and financing of services, and to develop open space programs. Increased development density over base density may be awarded based on specified programs. New development will not be allowed within an Area of Special Study until there is full mitigation of public services, infrastructure and facility impacts. The County General Plan Land Use Element Policy 9 also identifies the types of land uses envisioned for the site as “residential, agricultural and open-space. Trails, parks, and public facilities including schools and churches, may be allowed subject to use permits.” The project site is located outside of the City of Hollister’s municipal boundaries and sphere of influence but within its Planning Area. The project site is designated “Residential Estate” on the City of Hollister General Plan Land Use Map. According to the Hollister General Plan Table LU2, the development intensity of Residential Estate uses is categorized as one single-family residential dwelling unit with a five-acre minimum lot size.

1.3

EIR U SES AND A PPROVALS

Intended Uses of this EIR This Draft EIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and is consistent with the most recent edition of the CEQA Guidelines. This document will be used by San Benito County and other responsible and trustee agencies to identify and evaluate significant environmental impacts of the project. As mandated by CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(d), this section contains a list of agencies that are expected to use this Draft EIR in their decision-making, and a list of the discretionary actions for which this Draft EIR will be used. Other ministerial permits and approvals that would be required are also listed below. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

1-21

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

Local Agencies ƒ

County of San Benito y

General Plan Amendment(s)

y

Specific Plan Adoption

y

County Code Amendment(s)

y

Zone Change

y

Parcel, Tentative and/or Final Subdivision Maps

y

Development Agreement

y

Conditional Use Permits

y

Design Review

y

Grading Permits

Regional Agencies ƒ

Sunnyslope County Water District y

Approvals related to water connections

State Agencies ƒ

California Department of Fish and Game y

ƒ

Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board y

ƒ

Potential Take Permit – California tiger salamander

San Benito Local Agency Formation Commission y

1-22

Encroachment Permit (State Route 25 - Airline Highway)

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service y

ƒ

Coverage under the Statewide NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity

Caltrans District 5 y

ƒ

Potential Take Permit - California tiger salamander

LAFCO action required for the proposed wastewater and recycled water services provision to the project. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Fairview Rd

City of Hollister

Project Site

Airlin

e Hw

y (St

ate R

oute

25)

Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

0

2500 feet

Project Site Boundaries Sunnyslope County Water District Service Area Hollister Urban Area

Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2010, Google Earth Pro 2009 City of Hollister General Plan 2006, 2008

Figure 8

Water and Wastewater Service Areas Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

This side intentionally left blank.

1-24

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

1.4

E NVIRONMENTAL R EVIEW P ROCESS

The CEQA statute, the CEQA Guidelines, and San Benito County’s local CEQA procedures encourage public participation in the planning and environmental review processes. Opportunities will be provided for the public to present comments and concerns regarding the project and this environmental review document through a 45-day CEQA public review and comment period, as well as at public hearings or meetings before the County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. The review and certification process for the EIR will involve the following procedural steps, as described more fully below.

Notice of Preparation In accordance with Public Resource Code Sections 21100, 21151 and Section 15064(a)(1) and (f)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines, the County determined that an EIR would be necessary for the project since it is not exempt from CEQA review and may cause a significant effect on the environment. As discussed above, the County circulated the NOP to the public; local, state, and federal agencies; and other interested parties as required under the law to solicit comments on the proposed project and the scope of environmental review. Comments raised in response to the NOP were considered during preparation of this Draft EIR and also are included in Appendix B.

Draft EIR The Draft EIR contains a description of the project, description of the environmental setting, and identification of the project’s potentially significant environmental effects, including direct, indirect, and long-term effects. It briefly sets forth the reasons that possible environmental impacts were found to be insignificant and therefore not discussed in detail. The Draft EIR also includes a discussion and analysis of potentially significant cumulative impacts, as well as an identification and description of any feasible measures that can be implemented to reduce or avoid each potentially significant environmental effect of the project. It also describes a reasonable range of alternatives to the project that could feasibly attain most of the project’s basic objectives while reducing or avoiding any of its significant impacts, as well as an examination of any growth-inducing impacts and significant irreversible environmental changes. Upon completion and publication of this Draft EIR, the County filed a Notice of Completion (NOC) with the State Office of Planning and Research, in accordance with Section 15085 of the CEQA Guidelines. This began the 45-day public review period (Pub. Res. Code § 21161) for the Draft EIR. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

1-25

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

Public Notice/Public Review Concurrent with the filing of the NOC, the County provided public notice of the availability of the Draft EIR for public review in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15087(a), and invited comment from the general public, responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and other organizations and interested parties. As discussed above, the Draft EIR public review and comment period is 45 days. Although no public hearings on the Draft EIR are required by CEQA, the County will hold a Planning Commission public review meeting during the 45-day review period at which time public comment on the EIR will be accepted both in written form and orally. Notice of the time and location of this meeting will be published in accordance with the applicable noticing procedures. All comments or questions regarding the Draft EIR should be addressed to: Ann Dolmage, Assistant Planner

Phone: 831-637-5313

County of San Benito

Email: [email protected]

3224 Southside Road Hollister, CA 95023

Response to Comments/Final EIR Following the public review and comment period for the Draft EIR, a Final EIR (FEIR) will be prepared. The County will evaluate the comments received on the Draft EIR during the 45-day comment period and will prepare written responses for inclusion in the FEIR as required under CEQA. These responses will describe the disposition of any significant environmental issues raised by the commenters.

Certification of the EIR If the County finds that: (1) the FEIR is “adequate and complete”; (2) it reflects the County’s independent judgment and analysis; and (3) it was presented to the Board of Supervisors, which reviewed and considered the information in the FEIR, the County will certify the FEIR.

Project Consideration Upon review, consideration, and certification of the FEIR, the County will decide whether to approve, revise or reject the project. A decision to approve the project would be accompanied by written findings in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, and if applicable, Section 15093 (Statement of Overriding Considerations).

1-26

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Mitigation Monitoring The County of San Benito must also adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for mitigation measures that have been incorporated into or imposed on the project to reduce or avoid significant effects on the environment (Pub. Res. Code § 21081.6(a)). This MMRP will be designed to ensure compliance with these measures during project implementation. Throughout the Draft EIR, mitigation measures have been clearly defined and presented in a language that will facilitate establishment of a monitoring and reporting program. Any mitigation measures adopted by the County as part of the certified FEIR will be considered as conditions of approval of the project and will be included in the MMRP to ensure and verify compliance.

1.5

T ERMINOLOGY U SED IN THE EIR

Characterization of Impacts This Draft EIR uses the following terminology to denote the significance of environmental impacts of the proposed project: ƒ

“Standards of Significance” refers to a set of criteria used by a lead agency to determine at what level, or “threshold,” an impact would be considered significant. Significance criteria used in this Draft EIR include the CEQA statute and Guidelines; factual or scientific information; and regulatory and performance standards of local, state, and federal agencies, including the County’s local CEQA procedures.

ƒ

“No impact” means that no change from existing conditions is expected to occur.

ƒ

A “less than significant impact” would cause no substantial adverse change in the physical environment, and no mitigation is required.

ƒ

A “significant impact” or “potentially significant impact” would, or would potentially, cause a substantial adverse change in the physical environment. Significant impacts are identified by the evaluation of project effects using specified standards of significance. Feasible mitigation measures and/or project alternatives are identified to reduce the project’s significant effects to the environment.

ƒ

A “significant and unavoidable impact” would cause a substantial change in the physical environment for which no feasible mitigation is available to reduce the impact to a less than significant level, although mitigation may be available to lessen the degree of the impact.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

1-27

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

ƒ

A “cumulative impact” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.

1.6

S COPE AND O RGANIZATION

Sections 15122 through 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines identify the content requirements for Draft and Final EIRs. As set forth more fully therein, an EIR must include a project description and a description of the environmental setting. In addition, the EIR must include consideration and discussion of environmental impacts, including significant impacts; feasible mitigation measures proposed to minimize significant impacts; a reasonable range of alternatives; significant irreversible environmental changes; growth-inducing impacts; and cumulative impacts. The consideration and discussion of the environmental issues addressed in the Draft EIR were the result of the preparation and documentation and supporting technical reports in connection with the project, as well as comments provided by public agencies and the public in response to the NOP. Based on technical reports, other relevant documentation, NOP comments, agency consultation, and review of the project application materials, the County has determined the scope of this Draft EIR, which is organized as follows.

Chapter S – Executive Summary This chapter summarizes the characteristics of the proposed project and provides a concise summary matrix of each of the project’s significant environmental impacts with proposed mitigation measures. This chapter also summarizes project alternatives; areas of controversy known to the County, including issues raised by agencies and the public; and issues to be resolved including the choice among alternatives and whether and how to mitigate the significant impacts.

Chapter 1.0 – Introduction This chapter provides an introduction and overview describing the intended uses of the Draft EIR, the environmental review and certification process, and the scope and organization of the Draft EIR.

1-28

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Chapter 2.0 – Project Description This chapter provides a detailed description of the proposed project, including an overview of the project, its regional location, project characteristics, the project’s relationship to existing planning documents, project objectives, and requested actions and required approvals.

Chapter 3.0 – Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures This chapter contains an analysis of environmental topic areas to be addressed, as identified below. Each subsection contains a description of the existing setting of the project site and vicinity, identifies individual project level and cumulative impacts, and recommends feasible mitigation measures as required. The following environmental topics are addressed in this chapter: ƒ

3.1

Aesthetics

ƒ

3.2

Agricultural Resources

ƒ

3.3

Air Quality

ƒ

3.4

Biological Resources

ƒ

3.5

Climate Change

ƒ

3.6

Cultural Resources

ƒ

3.7

Geology and Soils

ƒ

3.8

Hazards and Hazardous Materials

ƒ

3.9

Hydrology and Water Quality

ƒ

3.10

Land Use and Planning

ƒ

3.11

Noise

ƒ

3.12

Public and Governmental Services

ƒ

3.13

Parks and Recreation

ƒ

3.14

Traffic and Circulation

ƒ

3.15

Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

1-29

1.0

I NTRODUCTION

The County determined that the project would not result in any impacts on mineral resources. This environmental topic is, therefore, not addressed in this chapter, and instead, is discussed briefly in Section 5 (effects found not to be significant).

Chapter 4.0 – Alternatives CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to a project, which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project and avoid or lessen the project’s environmental impacts. This Draft EIR’s alternatives analysis compares the proposed project and the selected alternatives. These alternatives are discussed in Chapter 4.0, Alternatives to the Project, and include: ƒ

Alternative 1: No Project – No Build Alternative 2: No Project -- Development Consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation

ƒ

Alternative 3: Reduced Maximum Residential Units/Increased Open Space

ƒ

Alternative 4: Alternative Location: Northeast of San Benito Street/Union Road

Chapter 5.0 – Other Sections Required by CEQA This chapter contains required discussions and analysis of various topical issues mandated by CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2, including: significant and unavoidable environmental impacts, growth-inducing impacts, significant irreversible environmental changes, and effects found not to be significant.

Chapter 6.0 – Report Preparers and References The purpose of this chapter is to provide a list of all authors and agencies that assisted in the preparation of the report by name, title, and company or agency affiliation. It also itemizes supporting and reference data used in the preparation of the Draft EIR and lists all governmental agencies, organizations, and other individuals consulted in preparing the Draft EIR.

Appendices This section involves all notices and other procedural documentation pertinent to the Draft EIR, as well as all technical reports and other documents as appropriate or as otherwise required by CEQA to be included in the EIR’s appendices, which have been prepared and/or received in connection with or are otherwise relevant to the Draft EIR. 1-30

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

2.0 P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

The following information is based on the November 2010 Draft Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan, accompanying list of errata prepared by EMC Planning Group, and related project application materials. A copy of the draft Specific Plan is available at the County of San Benito Planning Department.

2.1

P ROJECT O VERVIEW

The project applicant, Fairview Corners, LLC (project applicant or developer) has applied to San Benito County for approval of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”) and related entitlements (“proposed project”). The applicant seeks to develop a residential project on an approximately 60-acre project site, which is located southeast of the City of Hollister, in unincorporated San Benito County. Among other things, this project is intended to build a residential community that is integrated with and supports the recently approved Gavilan College San Benito Campus. The proposed project would amend the San Benito County General Plan and change the land use designation from “Rural” to “FVC-SP”, and would create the Fairview Corners Specific Plan (FVC-SP) zoning district to guide the development of the project site. The Specific Plan describes the proposed residential community as well as provides a comprehensive planning and regulatory framework for development of the proposed project. To ensure the necessary flexibility to respond to market demand and community needs, the Specific Plan provides for a range of potential densities that may be developed as well as a variety of potential housing types, including secondary units. However, a maximum of 220 primary dwelling units would be permitted on the project site. In addition, the project proposes park and recreational uses, including active parks, open space and a pedestrian and bikeway network, as well as related onand off-site project infrastructure. For a more detailed description of the project components, see Section 2.3, Project Characteristics, below. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

2-1

2.0

2.2

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

P ROJECT L OCATION AND S ETTING

Regional Location The project would be constructed on an approximately 60-acre site, located southeast of the City of Hollister, in unincorporated San Benito County (project site). See Figure 1, Regional Location. San Benito County is situated in the California Coast Range Geomorphic Province, south of San Francisco Bay and east of Monterey Bay. San Benito County is bordered by Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties to the north, by Merced and Fresno Counties to the east, and by Monterey County to the west and south. All of San Benito County is unincorporated with the exception of the City of Hollister and the City of San Juan Bautista, both of which are located near the northern County line.

Project Site and Immediate Vicinity The project site is located approximately one-quarter mile to the north of Airline Highway (SR 25) and directly east of Fairview Road. The project site is located outside of the Hollister city limit and sphere of influence, but is located within Hollister’s General Plan Planning Area Boundary. See Figure 2, Project Vicinity, for the project site in relationship to the City of Hollister’s jurisdictional boundaries and the vicinity road network. The project site consists of one parcel of land (APN 025-190-068). The site is currently undeveloped land that is used to cultivate barley. The land is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. The western, northern, and eastern sides of the project site are fenced. There are no trails, roads or other improvements on the site. The project site does not support overhead or underground utility transmission lines. However, a water pump station, operated by Sunnyslope County Water District (Sunnyslope), is located in the northwestern corner of the site along Fairview Road. The pump is connected to an agricultural water line that currently serves the project site. Refer to Figure 4, Aerial Photograph, for an aerial view of the project site and its surroundings, and Figure 5, Site Photographs, for the existing conditions on the project site. The San Andreas fault lies approximately eight miles southwest of the project site. The Calaveras fault, a branch of the San Andreas fault, bisects the City of Hollister and lies about 1.25 miles southwest of the project site. The project site is located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone due to the proximity of the Tres Pinos fault, a branch of the Calaveras fault that is generally considered to be potentially active. A geotechnical investigation conducted of the project site shows that a 35-foot-wide trace of the Tres Pinos fault is mapped on the site; the location of this trace is shown on Figure 6, Topography and Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone.

2-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The project site’s topography consists of undulating hills with an overall gradual elevation change of about 45 feet from east to west. A former stock pond is located in a ground depression near the northeast corner of the site. The highest elevation is the crest of a hill near the center of the site and the lowest points are in the southwest corner near Fairview Road and in the northeast corner in the vicinity of the former stock pond. The site rises from Fairview Road to the crest of the hill located approximately 1,100 feet east of Fairview Road. Slopes on the site vary from zero to about 10 percent, as illustrated by Figure 5, Site Photographs, and inferred from the information presented in Figure 6, Topography and Proposed Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone. Existing drainage patterns on the site follow the topography and generally flow in three directions: west of the crest of the hill, the site drains toward Fairview Road; to the east, the site drains to a low point in the site’s northeastern corner; and along the southern boundary, the crest of the hill is interrupted by a saddle, which causes drainage to flow southward toward the adjacent property. Refer to Figure 7, Existing Drainage.

Surrounding Land Uses The project site is bounded by rural residential uses and grassland along Old Ranch Road to the north, rural residential uses and grassland along Harbern Way to the east, a small family-owned farm to the southeast, the approved but undeveloped Gavilan College San Benito Campus project to the south, and Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista single-family residential subdivision to the west. The Ridgemark Golf and Country Club, which includes a gated residential community, is located further to the south across Airline Highway. The approved but undeveloped 292-acre Santana Ranch project site is located approximately one mile to the north, on Fairview Road. The undeveloped area located between the approved Santana Ranch project and the project site is identified by the County as the Central Fairview Study Area. The Award Homes residential subdivision, on the west side of Fairview Road, just north of the Cielo Vista subdivision, has been approved by the City of Hollister, but has not yet been developed (Refer to Figure 3, Vicinity Surrounding Uses).

2.3

P ROJECT C HARACTERISTICS

The proposed Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan establishes a detailed framework for development of the project, which would comprise residential uses, as well as park and recreational facilities, and related on- and off-site infrastructure.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

2-3

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

Residential Uses Land Uses, Density and Unit Count The Specific Plan is designed to be a flexible, comprehensive planning document, which also provides the regulatory framework within which development would occur, taking into account market demand and community needs. Accordingly, the Specific Plan provides that a range of potential densities may be developed, from a gross density of one dwelling unit per five acres to a gross density of 3.6 dwelling units per acre, corresponding with a minimum of 12 primary dwelling units to a maximum of 220 primary dwelling units that would be permitted to be developed on the project site under the Specific Plan. The maximum allowed overall density would be less than 4.0 dwelling units per acre, at approximately 3.6 units per acre. The size of the lots may vary from a minimum of 4,000 square feet up to five acres. The project proposes to provide a variety of housing types to address the needs of a range of economic segments in San Benito County, from apartments and small lot cluster homes to single-family ranchettes on larger lots. Secondary units also are proposed, which could range from apartment flats over garages to detached units on single-family lots. In addition, as described further below, the project proposes park and recreational uses, including pocket parks, open space areas and a pedestrian and bikeway network, as well as related on- and off-site project infrastructure. As shown in Figure 9, Proposed Land Use, the project site would have a General Plan land use designation of “Fairview Corners-Specific Plan (FVC-SP).” Table 1, Permitted Land Uses, presents the proposed uses permitted under the FVC-SP land use designation.

Development Flexibility A maximum of 220 primary dwelling units would be permitted on the project site. Housing types allowed by the proposed project would vary from small lot cluster homes to single-family ranchettes. However, the proposed project also includes policy provisions that would allow higher density duplexes, multiple dwelling unit groups and apartment uses, with a corresponding reduction in the number of lower density residential units to maintain the maximum number of units at 220 units. Three conceptual examples of lotting plans are provided in Appendix B of the Specific Plan to demonstrate the flexibility of the proposed development approach for the project site. The three Conceptual Lotting Plans are illustrated here by Figures 10, 11, and 12 (Conceptual Lotting Plan A, Conceptual Lotting Plan B, and Conceptual Lotting Plan C, respectively), and are summarized in Table 2, Examples of Development Flexibility: Conceptual Lotting Plans.

2-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FVC-SP

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 9

Proposed Land Use Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 10

Conceptual Lotting Plan A Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 11

Conceptual Lotting Plan B Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

Figure 12

Conceptual Lotting Plan C Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 1

Permitted and Conditional Land Uses

Classification

Acceptable Uses a. Detached single family dwelling;

Principal Uses Permitted on Residential Lots Complementary Uses

b. Attached single, duet, duplex, triplex, fourplex dwelling; c. Other uses (prescribed by State law as required to be permitted uses in residential districts; i.e. pre-emptive uses). a. Multi-family dwelling(s);

Permitted on Lots

b. Common area landscaping and open space;

Designated on the

c. Utility(ies) or service facility(ies) serving the residential development;

Subdivision Map for a Specific Use Accessory Uses

d. Private road(s), driveway(s), parking lot(s), or trail(s). a. Guesthouse (as the term is defined in Policy LU-4.1 #3) or secondary dwelling unit, not to exceed one per lot and as further

Permitted on

specified herein;

Residential Lots

b. Detached garage, carport, workshop, storage building, pool house, patio cover, deck, trellis, gazebo, play structure, or greenhouse; c. Non-commercial garden, orchard, or other horticulture; d. Home occupation meeting the standards of San Benito County Code section 25.29.090 et sec.; e. Personal recreational vehicle or boat storage, but not within front yards and road side yards. Conditional Uses

a. Single-family residential lots of one acre or larger; b. Caretaker units; c. Day cares, elderly care homes, group homes and similar uses serving over six persons; d Park, recreational community building(s) or facility(ies); e. Non-commercial garden, orchard, or other horticulture in the absence of a principal use; f. Non-habitable accessory building in the absence of a principal use; g. Other uses (prescribed by State law) conditionally permitted in residential districts. See also Item c.

Source: EMC Planning Group, Inc. (2011)

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

2-13

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

Table 2

Examples of Development Flexibility: Conceptual Lotting Plans

Example A

Example B

Example C

Lot Sizes/Density

--

75 MFU

--

Multi-Family (14 du/ac)

7 SFU

39 SFU

38 SFU

Single-Family (10,000 – 12,000 s.f.)

18 SFU

34 SFU

54 SFU

Single-Family (8,000 – 10,000 s.f.)

17 SFU

42 SFU

29 SFU

Single-Family (7,000 – 8,000 s.f.)

95 SFU

25 SFU

46 SFU

Single-Family (6,000 – 7,000 s.f.)

83 SFU

5 SFU

12 SFU

Single-Family (5,000 – 6,000 s.f.)

220 SFU

220

179 SFU

--

(75 MFU, 145 SFU) Source: EMC Planning Group, Inc. (2010)

Commercial Uses The Specific Plan also includes policies generally supportive of future neighborhood-commercial uses on a maximum of five acres of land on the project site near Fairview Road, and acknowledges the anticipated compatibility of such potential uses. However, there is no application to develop any such neighborhood-commercial uses at this time. The Specific Plan, if approved, would not allow development of neighborhood-commercial uses at this time. To implement such uses, the developer would need to seek and obtain a Specific Plan amendment and other related discretionary approvals after compliance with project-level CEQA review. Accordingly, this EIR does not evaluate the environmental impacts of any such neighborhoodcommercial uses as part of the project studied herein.

Parks and Open Space The Specific Plan proposes to include parkland and open space to serve the project’s residents, as well as to facilitate connections with the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus.

2-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Specifically, the project would meet the County’s park and open space requirement, which mandates the provision of five acres of parkland per 1,000 new residents. According to Census information obtained through the California Department of Finance, as of January 2010, the average household size in San Benito County is 3.081. Assuming the maximum build-out of 220 units (678 residents at 3.081 persons per unit), the project would need to provide 3.4 acres of open space and parks on-site. In the alternative, the developer could pay the applicable in-lieu fee — particularly given the close proximity of extensive park and open space features planned on the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus site — which the County could then use to help fund park and open space facilities in other areas in the County. The proposed project intends to meet the County standard, by providing a minimum of 3.4 acres of parkland or by the provision of a lesser amount of parkland on the site in combination with the payment of in-lieu fees. The proposed project includes policies for the provision of active and passive recreational and open space opportunities. Active parks could take the form of “pocket parks” located strategically throughout the neighborhoods, as well as a potential par course. Passive and/or active open space uses could occur in certain areas of the project site that would otherwise be reserved for the geologic fault area (near the 35-foot Tres Pinos fault) that accommodates a “building exclusion zone,” as well as a potential habitat mitigation area near the former stock pond (located in the northeastern corner of the site), depending on resource agency requirements and the ultimate site plan. If required by these resource agencies, it is anticipated that the habitat mitigation area would consist of the former stock pond and a buffer zone (100-meter radius) around the former pond. A visual example of the potential locations and configuration of parkland and open space is provided in Figure 13, Open Space Diagram. As indicated by Figure 13, buffer areas are also located on the project site between residential lots and adjacent uses to the north and south. Also, the proposed project includes policies for an open space and park trail system in a loop configuration around the outer boundaries or within the interior of the project site, designed to interconnect the residential neighborhoods with each other and the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus. The ultimate design of the proposed park and open space features would be finalized as part of the first tentative map application process, as reflected in an approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

2-15

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

Traffic and Circulation Circulation The project’s circulation network includes roads, pedestrian and bicycle connections, and potential facilities that could support future public transit along Fairview Road. The proposed primary access to the project site would be an eastern extension of Cielo Vista Drive, intersecting Fairview Road and extending into the project site as the major collector street. This extension would provide access to both the project site and the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus, and would follow the boundary between the two sites. The major collector, the Cielo Vista Drive extension, would be built by either the Fairview Corners master/individual developers or Gavilan College District, depending on which area is developed first. The Cielo Vista Drive extension is expected to be constructed in at least three (3) stages as the respective developments proceed, commencing from the western portion of the site (near Fairview) and progressing east. Because the costs of constructing the Cielo Vista Drive extension are anticipated to be shared between Fairview Corners and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus projects and both projects have responsibility to ensure adequate access in connection with their respective projects, the entity and timing to initiate construction of the roadway will depend on which project commences construction first. Figure 14, Circulation Diagram, presents the extent of the shared roadway system on the project site. This diagram assumes full buildout of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the proposed project. Should all or a portion of the proposed project commence construction prior to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus, the Fairview Corners master/individual developers would be required to take the lead in constructing the portion of the Cielo Vista Drive extension to serve the Plan Area on a phase by phase basis. The Cielo Vista Drive extension would be a public street serving the Plan Area and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus, and at full buildout, would include curbs, gutters, separated sidewalks, street lighting, utilities, street trees, and additional landscape strips and medians in accordance with applicable County standards and requirements as set forth in the Specific Plan. If completed to serve both projects, the median would straddle the property line shared by these projects. Figure 15, Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Street Section, indicates a preliminary roadway layout to serve the full buildout of the Plan Area and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus, which consists of two 12-foot travel lanes in each direction, with a six-foot, Class II bike lane in each direction, a 12-foot center median, four- to six-foot landscaping (planter) strips on each side of the street, and seven-foot sidewalks on each side of the street. These improvements will be phased and scaled based upon construction of the Plan Area and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus.

2-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 13

Open Space Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 14

Circulation Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Street Section

Not to scale

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2008

Figure 15

Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Street Section Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-22

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Proposed internal circulation is assumed to be a loop roadway network with some cul-de-sacs. The on-site circulation network would be designed to integrate pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular modes of transportation, and to maintain open space at the end of cul-de-sacs that provide pedestrian and bicycle connectivity. Design and construction of the proposed roadways would be subject to the review and approval of the San Benito County Public Works Department and would be required to comply with applicable provisions of the Specific Plan as well as County standards and other requirements. Conceptual examples of possible street layouts are set forth in the conceptual lotting plans illustrated by Figures 10-12. The details of the on-site circulation plan would be finalized as part of the first tentative or parcel map application process (as the case may be), in accordance with an approved Street Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan for the project. Minor collector neighborhood streets extending from the Cielo Vista Drive extension may include design features that incorporate best management practices (BMPs) for storm drainage systems. These features may be incorporated into the design subject to approval by the County Public Works Department, and would transition to standard residential streets at appropriate locations. At buildout of the project, these internal streets would be two-lane roads with separated sidewalks and landscape strips on both sides of the street. See Figure 16, Typical Collector Entry and Residential Street Sections. Traffic calming features, such as bulb-outs and neck-downs, may be integrated into the project design, as appropriate, particularly along the Cielo Vista Drive extension to promote a safe pedestrian-friendly environment.

Off-Site Improvements The Specific Plan proposes a number of off-site circulation improvements that are necessary to accommodate the potential development within the project site. The developer would offer to dedicate the necessary right-of-way along the Fairview Road frontage of the project site to allow for the future widening of Fairview Road from two to four lanes. The developer would also construct frontage improvements on Fairview Road, concurrent with the first phase of development. As indicated by Figure 17, Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Section, the Specific Plan requires two 12-foot northbound lanes, two 12-foot southbound lanes, appropriate turn lanes, a 6-foot bike lane in each direction, a 14-foot raised median, as well as sidewalks, shoulders, a meandering pedestrian/bicycle path, curbs and gutters on Fairview Road. In addition, the Specific Plan includes policies that require improvements to the Cielo Vista Drive extension, including the installation of a traffic signal if warranted. With the construction of the project, the east leg of Cielo Vista Drive would be built, a northbound shared through/right-turn lane would be added to Fairview Road at this intersection, a southbound leftturn lane would be added to Fairview Road at this intersection, and the west leg of Cielo Vista

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

2-23

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

Drive eastbound would be re-striped to provide a left-turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane. A discussion of project-related impacts and mitigation measures for the intersection of Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension is found in Section 3.14, Traffic and Circulation, of this Draft EIR. The cumulative effects of project-related traffic and its impact to area roadways and intersections are also discussed in Section 3.14 of this Draft EIR.

Secondary Access The proposed project includes policy provisions for secondary access. All new roadways would be constructed to County and other applicable standards and requirements, including load and access requirements for emergency vehicles. The proposed project intends to utilize the emergency vehicle access (EVA) route planned for by the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus project, as shown on the Circulation Diagram (Figure 14). Placement and construction of the EVA route was considered in the Gavilan EIR and approved by the Gavilan Community College District as part of the San Benito Campus Master Plan. Once the campus project moves forward, the Gavilan College District will be installing the EVA route, pending Caltrans approval of an encroachment permit. The Gavilan College District has confirmed (email corr. March 7, 2011) that the proposed EVA route will be constructed in compliance with County and Caltrans conditions of approval. In the event the proposed project preceeds construction of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and/or the Gavilan College San Benito Campus project is not built, the developer of the Fairview Corners project would be required to construct an alternative EVA route acceptable to the San Benito County Public Works Department and in accordance with County and other applicable standards, prior to the issuance of any residential building permits. (See § 3.14, Traffic and Circulation.)

Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements The proposed Specific Plan includes policies for the provision of streets with bicycle lanes and pedestrian walkways, consistent with the County’s Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan (County Bicycle Master Plan). The project is designed to facilitate the construction and integration of bicycle and pedestrian facilities on- and off-site. The proposed project would include frontage improvements on Fairview Road designed to be consistent with the County’s Roadway Design Standards, which would include the provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities on Fairview Road. Additionally, sidewalks and pedestrian crossings would be provided at the intersection of Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension to connect the planned on-site pedestrian facilities to existing/future pedestrian facilities on Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive.

2-24

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Typical Collector Entry and Residential Street Sections

10’-12’

10’-12’

60’ ROW TYPICAL COLLECTOR ENTRY STREET SECTION

TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL STREET SECTION Not to scale

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

Figure 16

Typical Collector Entry and Residential Street Sections Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-26

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Section

EXISTING FAIRVIEW ROAD SECTION

1.5’

1.5’

110’

TYPICAL FUTURE FAIRVIEW ROAD SECTION

Not to scale

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2008

Figure 17

Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Section Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-28

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The on-site circulation network is designed to integrate pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular modes of transportation, and to maintain open space at the end of cul-de-sacs in order to provide pedestrian and bicycle connectivity within the project site. The project includes a network of internal bike lanes and pedestrian walkways along planned roadways. In addition, the proposed project includes an open space trail system in a loop configuration around the perimeter of or within the project site, which would connect with the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Pedestrian circulation routes would be separated from vehicular traffic on all streets, which would contain sidewalks or pedestrian paths. Figure 18, Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Plan, presents the anticipated routes for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. This access network would be connected to the proposed Class I bike lane and pedestrian path along the Fairview Road frontage indicated in the San Benito County Bikeway Master Plan, allowing for convenient access to services and destinations within the Hollister area and to the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Enhanced streetscape and landscaped medians, including landscape trees along the Cielo Vista Drive extension, would be constructed as part of the project, which would help create a sense of enclosure and further improve the pedestrian environment.

Public Transit The developer would work cooperatively with Caltrans, San Benito County and Gavilan College to develop, implement and maintain public transit services to the project site, commensurate with local demand for these services. Appropriate location(s) for a future bus stop on the Cielo Vista Drive extension would be reserved, likely near the Gavilan College San Benito Campus.

Parking The proposed Specific Plan includes policies to provide at least 1.5 automobile parking spaces for each principal dwelling unit. The project also would provide at least one automobile parking space for each secondary dwelling unit, although this additional parking space may be provided within a common parking lot under certain circumstances. These parking spaces would be provided in accordance with the San Benito County Code Section 25.31.020, except as otherwise indicated in the Specific Plan. In addition, any multi-family developments would be required to provide secure visitor bicycle parking, including one visitor bicycle parking space per five units.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

2-29

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

Infrastructure Components and Off-Site Infrastructure Proposed water and wastewater infrastructure improvements would be provided to serve the project, and would be phased to coincide with the service and infrastructure needs of individual developments on the project site.

Potable Water Service The project site is located within the existing service area boundary of the Sunnyslope County Water District (Sunnyslope), which would provide potable water service to the project. Potable water would be delivered to the project site via extension of an existing 12-inch water main, which would run along the west side of Fairview Road. A new domestic water line would tie-in at the intersection of Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista Road extension. This system extension would run along the proposed Cielo Vista Drive extension and distribute water through new lines throughout the residential streets to the units. At the eastern boundary of the project site, the line would be extended outside the project site as a potable water main, which would be connected to the end of an existing six-inch potable water main at the head of the Harbern Way cul-de-sac. The intent of this connection is to provide a redundant connection point to the Sunnyslope delivery system, to ensure continuous service and adequate fire flows in the event that service from the Fairview Road water main is interrupted. The sizing of the distribution lines would be required to meet Sunnyslope’s and other applicable standards for fire and residential flows. See Figure 19, Potable Water Service Layout. Although San Benito County Code Chapter 15.05 contains provisions regarding issuance of permits and standards for private wells, private wells are not proposed as part of the project.

Recycled Water Service The proposed project would install “purple pipe” to enable recycled water distribution throughout the project site when recycled water becomes available from the City of Hollister’s Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant (DWTP), consistent with the Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Service Master Plan (Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan). Based on available information, it is anticipated that recycled water will be available in the future from the planned recycled water system. When recycled water becomes available, recycled water could be used within the project to irrigate certain landscaped areas, subject to compliance with the adopted Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan. The operational timeframe for the public facilities for the recycled and distribution facilities is not currently known. However, while the project would be designed to use recycled water when it becomes available, the project has been designed to rely on existing water supplies to meet demand and would not rely on recycled water to serve the project. 2-30

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 18

Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Plan Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-32

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

GAVILAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE SAN BENITO CAMPUS

0

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2010

Figure 19

Potable Water System Layout Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-34

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Wastewater Service Wastewater generated within the project site would receive tertiary treatment, as required by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. It is anticipated that project wastewater would be treated through a connection to the DWTP in accordance with the adopted Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan. The proposed project would allow the use of septic systems on parcels with a minimum size of one acre, and if otherwise consistent with County and City of Hollister regulations and design criteria and other applicable laws and regulations; however, the proposed project intends to connect to the DWTP for treatment. The recently expanded DWTP is operational, and its planned capacity can accommodate the project site’s estimated wastewater flows, as further described in Section 3.14, Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy. There are two options to convey the project’s wastewater to the DWTP. Figure 20, Wastewater Conveyance Options, presents the locations of potential conveyance options. Both options would be gravity fed systems that would connect to the existing sewer main on Enterprise Road, west of the site. Neither option requires the construction of pumping or lift stations to convey the wastewater to connect to existing wastewater infrastructure. “Option 1” is to construct a new sewer main across Fairview Road, which would connect to the existing system at the intersection of Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista Drive extension. This connection would discharge the wastewater from the project site through the existing 8-inch main to the western end of the Cielo Vista Residential subdivision. This main would contain sufficient capacity to serve the project site, and also would accommodate flows from the existing Cielo Vista Residential subdivision. From Enterprise Road, wastewater would flow within the City of Hollister’s existing wastewater lines to the DWTP. “Option 2” is to construct a new sewer main within Fairview Road running south to Airline Highway. From here, a new main would be constructed within Airline Highway and Enterprise Road to serve existing and approved, but not yet developed, projects along Airline Highway, as well as the project site. A new main would then be constructed within Enterprise Road solely for the project site, connecting it to the existing sewer system within Enterprise Road. From Enterprise Road, wastewater would flow within the City of Hollister’s existing wastewater lines to the DWTP. Under both options, the sewer lines would be required to be sized in accordance with the applicable standards of the County and the Hollister Wastewater Master Plan.

Stormwater Drainage Under project conditions, assuming maximum buildout of 220 units, the project site would substantially maintain the existing drainage patterns on the site. The topography of the site exhibits gradual slopes that naturally drain toward the northeast and to the west, and a small

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

2-35

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

portion to the south. It is anticipated that drainage from the project site, once developed, will maintain the two main flows toward the northeast and west. It is anticipated that stormwater flows for these drainage areas would be collected by a network of curbs and gutters, storm drains, bioswales, and retention pond(s), with a primary retention pond placed in the location of the former stock pond, so long as the pond is determined by the relevant regulatory agencies to not be required for habitat mitigation. There are also Specific Plan policies that provide for the sharing of drainage capacities between the project and the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito site, so long as certain conditions are satisfied. In any event, the proposed project would be required to design the capacity of stormwater retention facilities to be based on 100-year storm events and to be of adequate size to retain and infiltrate all stormwater on the site to predevelopment levels as required by County standards (San Benito County Code, Title 23, Chapter 23.17, Section 23.17.003(B) and Chapter 23.31, article III, section 23.31.040). The proposed project also would incorporate, to the extent feasible, low impact development (LID) features, including directing drainage from impervious surfaces to bioswales for infiltration, utilizing biotreatment (natural pollutant filtering) where stormwater runs off of paved surfaces, and capturing roof drainage for reuse as irrigation. These LID features would help to further reduce flows and prevent urban pollutants from entering the County’s drainage system and migrating to off-site areas. Figure 21, Conceptual Drainage Plan, presents the preliminary drainage plan for the site.

Solid Waste Collection Solid waste generated by the project would be sent to the existing John Smith Landfill, located approximately two miles from the project site. The San Benito County Integrated Waste Management Department is responsible for oversight of landfill operations in the unincorporated San Benito County. Nor Cal Waste Systems would provide solid waste, recycling and yard waste collection in the unincorporated County, including the project site.

Grading Grading and fill would be required to prepare the project site for the construction of roadways and utility infrastructure. Grading is also required to provide drainage, level building sites, and to accommodate retention facilities, including an anticipated basin near the former stock pond in accordance with any resource agency requirements. This Draft EIR assumes that the grading for the two main roadways (Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista Drive extension), the backbone infrastructure, and the drainage improvements would occur during the first phase of the project. However, the project may be implemented over a period of five to 16 years as identified below. The proposed project would balance cut and fill areas on the site to avoid the need to import or export soils. The general effect of proposed grading to the site topography is presented in Figure 22, Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram.

2-36

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

EXISTING SEWER OPTION #1 OPTION #2

0Not to scale

? feet

Source: Kier & Wright 2009

Figure 20

Wastewater Conveyance Options Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-38

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

PLAN AREA BOUNDARY

0

300 feet PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

Figure 21

Conceptual Drainage Plan Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-40

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

0

350 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2010

Figure 22

Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-42

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Other Utilities The project would be served with electricity and natural gas by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E); all new utility lines would be undergrounded within the project site. Land line phone service to the project would be provided by AT&T. Cell phone service to the project’s residents would be provided from a variety of available service providers. Charter Communications would provide cable service to the project, as well as cable access to the Internet. Other internet providers are also available for dial-up, cable or network service.

Police, Fire and Emergency Medical Services The San Benito County Sheriff’s Department would provide law enforcement services to the project. The San Benito County Fire Department would provide fire service to the project, which is operated under contract with Cal Fire. The San Benito County Department of Emergency Services would oversee emergency medical response services to the project.

Schools It is anticipated that school-age children who live in the project would attend the existing Cerra Vista Elementary School and San Justo Middle School. Older children would attend the existing San Benito High School, although it is anticipated that the district will construct a new high school to serve the area, including the project site, at some point in the future.

Phasing Total project build-out is anticipated to occur in phases. The proposed project would be constructed in at least two major phases (Phase I and Phase II), over a period of five to 16 years. The two major phases would accommodate grading and infrastructure construction and may be divided into additional “sub” phases, each of which may last approximately two years, with up to four sub-phases within each major phase (Phase I (A-D) and Phase II (A-D)). The Specific Plan conceptually discusses the various project components; the ultimate site plan and related phasing for individual developments on the project site would be more precisely defined through the first subdivision map application process. The development phases are expected to occur sequentially (Phase I, then Phase II) although the phases may occur concurrently. Development of each phase shall include all infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities, both public and private, needed to serve the uses and structures within that phase, which would be completed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Specific Plan and relevant master plans, as discussed further below.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

2-43

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

Figure 23, Preliminary Phasing Plan, presents the conceptual phasing plan. It is anticipated that Phase I would contain the backbone access improvements to serve the proposed project. Development would occur first near Fairview Road, with successive phases progressing eastward across the site. It is anticipated that grading, drainage, and roadway backbone infrastructure would be completed during Phase I. The project developer would be required to prepare an Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan, to be approved by the County during the first subdivision map application process. All development within the project must be consistent with the approved Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan (as it may be amended).

Development Scenarios Studied in this Draft EIR Because of the inherent site plan flexibility as set forth in the Specific Plan, the ultimate unit count, density and land plan would be finalized as part of the subsequent subdivision map process, in accordance with applicable standards and requirements including, without limitation, a maximum unit count of 220 primary dwelling units. Accordingly, for purposes of environmental review, this Draft EIR evaluates those development scenarios that would result in the most significant environmental impacts to ensure a conservative analysis, as further described below.

Maximum Build-Out Scenario Evaluated For All Environmental Topics For all environmental topics studied herein, this Draft EIR evaluates the potential environmental impacts that could occur if the maximum number of primary dwelling units — 220 — were built, with all of these units developed as one- or two-story, single-family, detached homes on approximately 4,000-square-foot to 12,000-square-foot lots.

Additional Scenarios Evaluated For Specific Environmental Topics Following is a brief summary of the additional development scenarios studied in this Draft EIR in connection with certain environmental topics to ensure that all potential impacts of the project are fully evaluated. Aesthetics In addition to the maximum build-out scenario, the Draft EIR analyzes development of 220 units, where a portion of those units (75) would be built as multi-family housing in apartment complexes, as opposed to one- or two-story single-family ranchettes (See Figure 11, Conceptual Lotting Plan B, as an example). The Draft EIR analyzes the visual impact of locating these multi-family units in the western portion of the project site, adjacent to Fairview Road, or in other locations on the site, should market demand and any affordable housing requirements indicate that multi-family units are needed.

2-44

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Phase A Phase B

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010 For illustrative purposes only

Figure 23

Preliminary Phasing Plan Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-46

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Noise In addition to the maximum build-out scenario, the Draft EIR analyzes the potential noise impacts associated with development of 220 units, where a portion of those units (75) are built as multi-family housing in apartment complexes along Fairview Road.

Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy In addition to the maximum build-out scenario, this Draft EIR evaluates whether the effects of septic systems, if allowed for the proposed project, would result in groundwater quality impacts or in significant impacts to wastewater services.

Gavilan College San Benito Campus Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) Route The proposed project intends to utilize the Airline Highway EVA route planned for by the Gavilan College San Benito Campus. As such, the proposed project does not include construction of the EVA access route; instead, this route (refer to Figure 14, Circulation Diagram) is anticipated to be constructed by the College District. However, in cooperation with the College District, this Draft EIR evaluates potential hazards and potential impacts to cultural resources and biological resources resulting from construction within the Airline Highway EVA, which were not analyzed on a project level in the Gavilan EIR. This analysis will be used by the College District in its application for the Caltrans encroachment permit needed for the planned San Benito Campus EVA. The location of the proposed Airline Highway EVA is shown in Figure 24, Off-Site Study Areas.

2.4

P ROJECT O BJECTIVES

Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(b), a clear statement of objectives and the underlying purpose of the project shall be discussed. Following is a statement of the project objectives based on information provided by the project applicant: ƒ

Implement the intention of the San Benito County Board of Supervisors when the Board designated the Plan Area an Area of Special Study to allow higher density development.

ƒ

Create a mutually supportive relationship between the Plan Area and the adjoining future Gavilan College San Benito Campus site that integrates connections, shares facilities and infrastructure, and collaborates on mitigation where appropriate.

ƒ

Provide a maximum residential unit count of 220 for the creation of housing opportunities in proximity to existing utilities and infrastructure improvements.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

2-47

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

ƒ

Provide for a mix of housing types close to potential employment opportunities and students at the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus, public transportation, public facilities, and goods and services that will meet the needs of a variety of households.

ƒ

Provide for an Affordable Housing Program that encourages secondary units, and collaborates, where feasible, with the Gavilan College San Benito Campus.

ƒ

Provide a range of potentially mixed residential housing opportunities that will meet the needs of a variety of households with lot sizes ranging from 4,000 square feet to five acres, with a range of housing types and square footages.

ƒ

Provide convenient pedestrian connections and recreational opportunities through the provision of pocket parks, open space area, corridors, and connections with the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus site.

ƒ

Minimize the noise and speed of traffic to ensure the safety of residents through the design of cul-de-sacs and curvilinear streets.

ƒ

Provide employment opportunities resulting from infrastructure improvements and residential construction.

ƒ

Create a revenue neutral planned community where long term operation and maintenance costs are paid for by one or more of several potential funding options or appropriate financing district mechanisms.

2.5

P ROJECT R ELATIONSHIP TO E XISTING P LANNING D OCUMENTS

General Plan Government Code Section 65300 requires that each planning jurisdiction (i.e., city or county) prepare, and the legislative body adopt, a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the community. The general plan is a comprehensive document that covers many aspects of land use including development, density, circulation, resource preservation and safety. The San Benito County General Plan is the foundational planning document for San Benito County, and provides a comprehensive, long-term plan for the physical development within the County.

2-48

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Fairview Road

Enterprise Road

Cielo Vista Subdivision

Fairview Corners Residential Project Site

Sewer Extension Impact Area = 3.2 AC

Future Gavilan College Campus

Airlin

e Hig

0

650 feet

Existing Sewer Alternative #1 Alternative #2 Emergency Vehicle Access (E.V.A.) Approximate Project Site Boundary

hwa

y/Sta

te Ro

ute 2

5

E.V.A Road Impact Area = 1.2 AC

Source: Kier & Wright 2009 Google Earth 2010

Figure 24

Off-site Study Areas Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

This side intentionally left blank.

2-50

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The project site currently has a General Plan land use designation of “Rural.” On June 12, 1989, the San Benito County Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 89-21 designating approximately 758 acres east of Fairview Road, including the project site, as an “Area of Special Study.” This designation is described in the General Plan as follows: This designation applies to areas of the County where a combination of the following criteria apply: 1) More concentrated development than is presently allowed may be desirable provided a comprehensive plan for public service and resource conservation is integrated in order of priority into a specific plan, community plan or area plan. 2) As a result of prior, piecemeal subdivisions, a plan for integrated development and coordination of governmental services and/or community facilities is desirable. 3) The County has identified the area as a potential area for commercial, industrial, and/or residential development. The intent of the Area of Special Study designation is to direct development from natural resources and environmentally hazardous areas, to effectively plan the design, development, and financing of services and to develop open space programs. General Plan Amendments (GPAs) would be required to implement the project, including changing the current land use designation of Rural to “Fairview Corners – Specific Plan (“FVC – SP”); a new proposed land use designation that would allow development of the project as proposed in the Specific Plan. Additional specified conforming GPAs also are proposed to ensure consistency between the project and the General Plan.

San Benito County Code The San Benito County Code governs development of the project, except as those regulations may be amended or supplemented by the Specific Plan, as proposed as part of the project.

Zoning Ordinance The County’s Zoning Ordinance (title 25 of the San Benito County Code) implements the policies of the General Plan by classifying and regulating the land uses and associated development standards within the County. As discussed further below, while the Zoning Ordinance establishes the specific uses and development regulations for land uses for the County generally, a specific plan may include development standards tailored for a specific geographic area within the County.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

2-51

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

The current zoning designation for the project site is “Rural (R),” with a minimum parcel size of five acres, which corresponds with the General Plan land use designation of Rural. A zoning map amendment would be required to change the project site’s existing zoning designation to a new zoning designation, “Fairview Corners – Specific Plan (FVC – SP),” indicating that the project site is designated for development approval through the specific plan process. The Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan would set forth the zoning for the project site.

Specific Plan A specific plan is a regulatory and planning document that may be used to implement development in a localized area. While the general plan is the primary guide for growth and development in a community, a specific plan may specify planning processes and land use regulations for a particular geographic area, so long as it is consistent with the general plan. The Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan is intended to provide the comprehensive vision for development of the project. It is intended to generally work in concert with the existing regulatory structure of the County, except as may be amended or supplemented therein. As explained more fully in Section 3.9, Land Use and Planning, the Specific Plan establishes the permitted, conditionally permitted, and prohibited uses, as well as the physical development standards and design guidelines for the project. The project would require adoption of the Specific Plan, upon which the project site would be designated under the General Plan and rezoned to “Fairview Corners – Specific Plan (FVC - SP).” Thereafter, development of the project would be governed in accordance with the Specific Plan and other applicable local, state, and federal law. An analysis of the proposed project’s consistency with relevant General Plan policies is contained within each of the topical sections in Chapter 3.0, Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures and Section 3.9, Land Use and Planning.

2.6

R EQUESTED A CTIONS AND R EQUIRED A PPROVALS

As required under CEQA, this EIR provides the environmental information and analysis necessary for the decision makers and the public to adequately consider the effects of the requested development proposal. San Benito County, as the lead agency, has approval authority and responsibility for considering the environmental effects of the proposed project as a whole. In order to implement the project, a development application has been submitted to San Benito County. The project would require the following discretionary approvals from San Benito County:

2-52

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

Approval of an amendment to the San Benito County General Plan to change the General Plan Diagram to show the project site as “Fairview Corners – Specific Plan (FVC–SP)”; and to make any other specified conforming amendments to the General Plan to ensure consistency.

ƒ

Adoption of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan.

ƒ

Approval of amendments to the San Benito County Code to change the text to reflect the new zoning designation as “Fairview Corners – Specific Plan (FVC–SP)”; and to make any other conforming amendments necessary to ensure consistency between the County Code and the project.

ƒ

Approval of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan as the applicable zoning for the project.

ƒ

Approval of a development agreement between the County and the project applicant.

ƒ

Approval of parcel, tentative, and/or final subdivision maps for specific areas of development within the project site.

ƒ

Approval of grading permits.

ƒ

Approval of conditional use permits and design review consistent with the processes set forth in the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan.

In addition, the project may require discretionary approvals, permits, and entitlements from other federal, state, and regional agencies including: ƒ

Sunnyslope County Water District •

ƒ

California Department of Fish and Game •

ƒ

Approvals related to water connections

Potential Take Permit - California tiger salamander

Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board •

Coverage under the Statewide NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity

ƒ

Caltrans District 5 •

Encroachment Permit (State Route 25 - Airline Highway)

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

2-53

2.0

P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

ƒ

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service •

ƒ

Potential Take Permit – California tiger salamander

San Benito Local Agency Formation Commission •

Potential LAFCO action required for the proposed recycled water and wastewater services provision to the project.

2-54

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.0 E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING, I MPACTS , AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

3.0.1 I NTRODUCTION This section presents an analysis of each resource topic that has been identified through preliminary environmental analysis and the public scoping process as likely to be affected by the proposed project. Each subsection describes the environmental setting of the project as it relates to that specific resource topic; the impacts that could result from implementation of the project; and feasible mitigation measures that would avoid, reduce, or compensate for the significant impacts of the project.

Level of Significance Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a variety of terms are used to describe the levels of significance of adverse impacts. The definition of terms used in this Draft EIR is presented below. ƒ

Significant and Unavoidable Impact. An impact that exceeds the defined standards of significance and cannot be avoided or reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of feasible mitigation measures.

ƒ

Significant Impact. An impact that exceeds the defined standards of significance and that can be avoided or reduced to a less-than-significant level through implementation of feasible mitigation measures.

ƒ

Potentially Significant Impact. A significant impact that may ultimately be determined to be less than significant; the level of significance may be reduced through implementation of policies, standards, guidelines, or through further definition of the project detail in the

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.0-1

3.0

E NVIRON MENTAL S ETTING , I MPACTS , AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

future. Potentially significant impacts may also be impacts for which there is not enough information to draw a firm conclusion; however, for the purpose of this Draft EIR, they are considered significant. Such impacts are equivalent to Significant Impacts and require the identification of feasible mitigation measures. ƒ

Less-Than-Significant Impact. Impacts that are adverse but that do not exceed the specified standards of significance.

ƒ

No Impact. The project would not create an impact.

3.0.2 F ORMAT OF R ESOURCE T OPIC S ECTIONS Each resource topic considered in Section 3.0 is addressed under five primary subsections: Introduction, Environmental Setting, Regulatory Considerations, Impacts and Mitigation Measures, and Cumulative Impacts. An overview of the information included in these sections is provided below.

Introduction The introduction section describes the topic to be analyzed and the contents of the analysis. It also provides the sources used to evaluate the potential impacts of the project, and lists any issues and concerns relative to the resource topic specifically identified by the public and the agencies during the EIR scoping process.

Environmental Setting (Baseline) According to Section 15125(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the environmental setting, that is the physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project, is typically the on-theground conditions at the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) is issued. The environmental setting constitutes the baseline relative to which a lead agency determines whether an impact is significant. The NOP for the project was issued on August 3, 2010. The baseline condition for the project is the condition of the site (e.g., existing land uses, existing soil conditions, existing traffic conditions) at the time the NOP was issued, as further described in the environmental setting section for each resource topic. Therefore, for all resource topics the baseline condition comprises a site that is vacant and undeveloped. Impacts are evaluated by comparing the “with project” condition to this baseline condition.

3.0-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Regulatory Considerations The overview of regulatory considerations for each resource topic is organized by agency, including federal, state, regional, and local policies. The San Benito County General Plan policies relevant to each resource topic are provided in Section 3.9, Land Use and Planning and also in other topical EIR sections, as appropriate.

Impacts and Mitigation Measures This subsection lists significance criteria that are used to evaluate impacts, followed by a discussion of the impacts that would result from implementation of the project. Impacts and the corresponding mitigation measures are numbered consecutively within each topic. Cumulative impacts are also presented for each resource topic. For more information on the approach to the cumulative impact analysis, see the description under “Approach to Cumulative Analysis” below.

References The references used to prepare the environmental setting and impact analysis for each section of this Draft EIR are listed in Section 7.0, Documentation.

3.0.3 A PPROACH TO C UMULATIVE I MPACT A NALYSIS The cumulative impact analysis focuses on the change in the environment that would result from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonable foreseeable probable future projects at time of NOP issuance. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time. The analysis of cumulative impacts for each environmental factor can employ one of two methods to establish the effects of other past, current, and probable future projects. For purposes of determining the probable future projects to be included in the cumulatives analysis, a lead agency may select a list of projects, including those outside the control of the agency, or, alternatively, a summary of projections. These projections may be from an adopted general plan or related planning document, or from a prior environmental document that has been adopted or certified, and these documents may describe or evaluate regional or area-wide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact. This Draft EIR evaluates cumulative impacts using a list of reasonably foreseeable projects at the time of NOP issuance. The projects listed in Table 3, Related Projects, are included in the cumulative analysis for the project. The locations of these projects are shown in Figure 25, Locations of Related Projects. Reasonably foreseeable future projects are defined to include approved but not built projects and projects for which applications have been submitted to the COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.0-3

3.0

E NVIRON MENTAL S ETTING , I MPACTS , AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

City of Hollister or the County. These projects, together with development within the Hollister sphere of influence, are referred to in this section as “cumulative development” and provide the cumulative scenario for all resource topics, including traffic and noise. There are 22 pending or approved residential projects in northern San Benito County and the City of Hollister for a total of 2,401 dwelling units, as of the time of NOP issuance. The proposed project would add a maximum of 220 primary dwelling units for a total of 2,621 dwelling units in the cumulative scenario. The proposed project is expected to be under construction between five to 16 years once all necessary approvals and other entitlements are obtained. This Draft EIR assumes that construction of the projects listed in Table 3 may overlap with one or more phases of the proposed project. As such, there is potential for the construction impacts of these projects to accumulate with the impacts of the proposed project. For purposes of the cumulative analysis, the combined effects of these projects are evaluated in all the resource sections of this Draft EIR for potential short-term construction cumulative effects and long-term operational cumulative effects. The cumulative impacts discussion describes the cumulative impacts of the proposed project, and determines whether the proposed project in combination with other cumulative projects would result in a significant cumulative impact, and, if so, whether the project’s contribution to the significant cumulative impact would be cumulatively considerable. Section 15130 of the State CEQA Guidelines, among other things, provides the following direction regarding the cumulative impact analysis: ƒ

An EIR should not discuss cumulative impacts that do not result in part from the proposed project;

ƒ

A lead agency may determine that an identified cumulative impact is less than significant, and shall briefly indicate why it is not significant and shall identify facts and analysis in the EIR supporting its determination;

ƒ

A lead agency may determine a project’s incremental effect is not cumulatively considerable, and therefore is not significant, and shall briefly describe in the EIR the basis of its determination and shall identify facts and analyses in the EIR supporting its determination; and

ƒ

A lead agency may determine a project’s cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact may be rendered less than cumulatively considerable and therefore residually not significant, if the project is required to implement or fund its fair share of mitigation measure or measures designed to alleviate the cumulative impact in a manner that guarantees timely construction and/or implementation when needed by the project.

3.0-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

19 23 31 11

27

32

38 10

2 29

35

24 33

5

39

30

12 37

4

25 21

26

28 36

Project Site

34

20 17

3

18

1

22

0

4200 feet

Sites 6, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16 For more information, refer to EIR Table 3, Projects Considered Part of the Cumulative Project Scenario

Source: Google Earth Pro 2010, PMC Inc 2008 County of San Benito Planning Department 2010, City of Hollister Planning Department 2010

Figure 25

Locations of Related Projects Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

3.0

E NVIRON MENTAL S ETTING , I MPACTS , AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

This side intentionally left blank.

3.0-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 3 #

Projects Considered Part of the Cumulative Project Scenario Project Name

Size/Land Use

Location

Commercial/Industrial Projects 1

Ridgemark Zone Change

2.43 acres Neighborhood Commercial

Airline Highway at Ridgemark Country Club

2

Lowe’s

35 acres Commercial

190 Hillcrest Road

3

GPA from RR to C-2

26,000 SF Neighborhood Commercial

West of Fairview, North of Airline Highway

4

Commercial

12,000 SF Office Space

2220 Cienega

5

Use Permit

Five-parcel Mining and Concrete Operation

1350 Nash Road

6

Ausonio Inc.

15,600 SF Office Space

1850 Airway Dr., Lot 10

7

Bob Enz

10,800 SF Commercial Building

1900 Aerostar Way

8

Bob Enz

10,800 Square Feet Commercial Building

1961 Airway Dr.

9

Carlisle Office Pk

17,948 SF Office Space

Bert Dr.

10

City of Hollister – Animal Shelter

7,908 SF Commercial Building

1321 South St.

11

6 El Grullense

Alterations/Convert Autoshop to Restaurant

249 San Benito St.

12

Hazel Hawkins Hospital

60,500 SF Hospital Expansion

911 Sunset Dr.

13

Joel Grow

15,755 SF Commercial Building

Shelton Dr.

14

Mark Verdegaal

17,600 SF Commercial Building

1701 Lana

15

Mark Verdegaal

12,000 SF Commercial Building

1801 Lana

16

Life Sparc – Phase 1&2

14,480 SF Modular Office & Warehouse

1971 Airway Dr.

17

Zone Change and Use Permit

Senior Care Facility

3588 & 3586 Airline Highway

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.0-7

3.0

#

E NVIRON MENTAL S ETTING , I MPACTS , AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

Project Name

Size/Land Use

Location

Mixed Use Projects 18

Gavilan College San

77-acre Community College, 70

Fairview Road and Airline

Benito Campus

Multi-family Units and

Highway

Neighborhood Commercial Residential Projects 19

Fairview Road Minor

Two Residential Lots

3220 Fairview Road

Two Residential Lots

402 Southside Road

Three Residential Lots

2200 Southside Road

Possible Six Residential Lots

4998 Airline Highway

Possible Eight Residential Lots

2000 Santa Ana Valley Road

Subdivision 20

Southside Road (Corotto) Minor Subdivision

21

Southside Road (Lantz) Minor Subdivision

22

Southside Road (Lompa) , GPA & Zone Change from AP to R-1 and Rural

23

GPA from AR to APResidential Subdivision

24

Anderson Homes

Six Single-Family Homes

Mulberry Court

25

Annotti Senior

170 Senior Apartments

West of Valley View, South of

Project 26

Award Homes

Hazel Hawkins Hospital 595 Single-Family Homes and

West of Fairview Rd., South

100 Apartments

of St. Benedict's Church, East of Calistoga Dr.

27

Brigantino

15 Single-Family Homes

North of Brigantino Dr., South of Santa Ana Rd.

28

Cerra Vista 4

20 Single-Family Homes

South of Union Rd. at Cerra Vista Dr.

29

Eden West

55 Single-Family Homes

Between Apricot Lane, Line Street, Steinbeck Drive and Cannery Row

3.0-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

# 30

Project Name Hillock Ranch

Size/Land Use 41 Single-Family Homes

Location South and West of Hillock Dr., East of Morning Glory, on Jasmine and Honeysuckle

31

Hillview Subdivision

25 Single-Family Homes

South of Buena Vista Rd., North of Central Ave, between Ranchito Drive & Beresini Lane

32

La Baig 5 (Koch)

45 Single-Family Homes

North of Meridian along Koch

33

Las Brisas

17 Single-Family Homes

(Two Projects)

Along Marilyn Court and McDonald, North of Sunnyslope Road

34

Valley View

14 Single-Family Homes

Phase 3 and Phase 6

Along Driftwood St., East of Bayberry St. and South of Valleyview Rd.

35

Vista Meadows

72 Senior Apartments

Senior Apartments 36

Walnut Park A

North of East Park Street and East of Sherwood Dr.

5 Single-Family Homes

East and West side of Calistoga Dr. between Union Rd. and Brighton Dr.

37

Walnut Park B

27 Single-Family Homes

Along Calistoga Dr. , between Monte Vista and Vallejo Dr.

38

Westside Apartments

11 Apartments

4th Street and Westside Blvd.

39

Santana Ranch

1,092 Residential Units,

West of Fairview Road,

Specific Plan

Neighborhood Commercial,

North of John Smith Road

Elementary School and Parks Cumulative Residential

2,401 Dwelling Units

Units Source:

County of San Benito Planning Department 2010, City of Hollister Planning Department 2010, PMC 2008

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.0-9

3.0

E NVIRON MENTAL S ETTING , I MPACTS , AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

This side intentionally left blank.

3.0-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1 A ESTHETICS

This section of the Draft EIR addresses the project’s effects on visual resources, the change in the visual character of the project site and its surroundings due to the project, and the impacts of new sources of glare and light that would be added by the project. The discussion in this section is based upon independent site investigation and analysis by the technical consultants, information found in the County of San Benito General Plan (1994), and comments received on the Notice of Preparation.

3.1.1 E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING The project site is currently undeveloped land that is used to cultivate barley. The land is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. The topography of the site undulates with an overall gradual change in elevation from west to east. From Fairview Road, the topography slopes gradually upward before dropping down toward the eastern portion of the site. There are no unique or distinguishing visual or aesthetic characteristics on the project site, except for the open space nature of the property itself. The County of San Benito General Plan Environmental Resources and Constraints Inventory identifies the County’s overall rural landscape framed by the Gabilan Mountains to the west and the Diablo mountain range to the north and east, as important and character-defining visual resources (page 1). The project site contributes to the open space character of the rural landscape. Because the site is undeveloped, there are no sources of light or glare on the project site. The visual characteristics of the site are illustrated photographically in Figure 5, Site Photographs (refer to Section 1.0). Figure 26, Existing Views, presents public views of the site from six vantage points. Photograph #1 presents the existing views of the project site from Fairview Road looking southeast. Photograph #2 presents a view of the site from the Cielo Vista Drive intersection with Fairview Road. As demonstrated by these two photographs, existing public views of the site

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1-1

3.1

A ESTHETICS

from the west are limited to only that portion of the site closest to the roadway, which is framed by distant views of the Diablo mountain range, partially obscured by on-site topography. Existing views from Fairview Road looking east are limited by the gradual rise in the site topography, and afford limited views of the distant hills. The views of the natural setting from these locations are diminished by the presence of utility poles and lines. As demonstrated by Photograph #3 and Photograph #4, the site is not visible from the intersection of Airline Highway/Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive. Trees near Old Ranch Road are just visible over the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus site when viewed from eastbound Airline Highway. Views of the site are obscured by foreground topography when viewed from northbound Ridgemark Drive. The views of the natural setting are diminished by the presence of utility poles and lines from this location, as well. As evidenced by Photograph #5, limited views of the site are available from westbound Airline Highway; the site is visible only at the crest of the hill above and north of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus site, which is currently undeveloped and dominates the foreground view. As shown in Photograph #6, the site is in the foreground of public views south from Old Ranch Road. Public views of the site are not available from Harbern Way to the east, as evidenced by the aerial photograph in Figure 5, because the street ends in a cul-de-sac and views are blocked by existing homes. Because the site is undeveloped, existing nighttime illumination of the project site is very limited, consisting only of street light illumination in the immediate vicinity of the nearby intersections on Fairview Road. Glare from exterior lighting sources is therefore largely absent. The San Benito County Code recognizes the entire region as having topographic and atmospheric conditions that are uniquely suited for astronomical observations. Fremont Peak State Park observatory is located approximately 8.5 miles southwest of the project site. Pinnacles National Monument, which is located approximately 20 miles southeast of the project site, is a popular location for star gazing activities. Protection of night time views from both of these locations is encouraged in the County Code, and development in all parts of the County is required to take steps to minimize light pollution.

3.1-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

6

Old Ranch Rd

1 1 View looking southeast across the project site from Fairview Road.

4 View looking northeast towards the project site from Airline Highway.

Fairview Rd

2

2 View looking east across the project site towards the Cielo Vista extension.

5 View looking northwest at the project site from Airline Highway.

3 4

Airlin

e Hig

hway

5

6 View looking south across the project site from Old Ranch Road.

3 View looking northeast towards the project site from Airline Highway.

Source: Google Earth 2009

750 feet

Project site Boundary

Figure 26

Existing Views Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

3.1

A ESTHETICS

This side intentionally left blank.

3.1-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

3.1.2 R EGULATORY S ETTING San Benito County General Plan The following San Benito County General Plan policies associated with aesthetics and visual resources are applicable to the proposed project:

Open Space and Conservation Element Policies Policy 12: Direct Development to Urban Areas. It will be the County's policy to apply land use controls to ensure that only non-urban uses are located beyond Spheres of Influence and Urban Reserve Areas, except for specific areas designated Rural / Urban, Area of Special Study, Residential Commercial, or Industrial on the General Plan Land Use Map. Policy 16: Open Space Around Cities. It is the County's policy to preserve a rural atmosphere by directing population growth and public service extensions to infill development and avoiding leapfrog growth. Policy 17: Ridgeline Development. To preserve the rural character of the area, new development shall be directed away from the horizon through the use of building envelopes and integration of building architecture into the contour of the horizon. Policy 18: Protect Rural Atmosphere and Natural Resources. General Plan Amendments, Specific Plans, Area Plans and Areas of Special Study that result in a net increase in General Plan buildout (Table 1 of the Land Use Element), shall include methods to conserve open space for natural resources including agriculture, wildlife habitat, and water (e.g., conservation easements and/or other similar resource protection measures). Proposed development areas shall also include measures to protect resources on-site and contiguous to the project with the use of clustering, conservation easements, and other similar programs.

Land Use Element Policy 9. The type of development allowed within the residential areas includes residential, agricultural, and open space. Trails, parks, and

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1-5

3.1

A ESTHETICS

public facilities, including schools and churches, may be allowed subject to use permits. Policy 12. The County shall utilize specific zoning tools, such as Planned Unit Developments to allow for clustering and density transfer as a means to provide innovative and diversified development, and to avoid hazardous areas while maintaining the rural character of the County provided that the development design and diversity is consistent with Policy 9 and actions. Policy 36. The County should maintain high standards of siting and design in the development of all land uses. Standards and criteria shall be established by the County.

Scenic Roads and Highways Element Policy 1. It is the policy of San Benito County to provide for the protection of certain transportation corridors which are recognized as having unusual or outstanding scenic qualities. The project site is also designated as an “Area of Special Study,” described in the General Plan Land Use Element, Land Use Plan, as follows: This designation applies to areas of the County where a combination of the following criteria apply: 1) More concentrated development than is presently allowed may be desirable provided a comprehensive plan for public services and resource conservation is integrated in order of priority into a specific plan, community plan or area plan. 2) As a result of prior, piecemeal subdivisions, a plan for integrated development and coordination of governmental services and/or community facilities is desirable. 3) The County has identified the area as a potential area for commercial, industrial, and/or residential development. The intent would be to direct development from natural resources and environmentally hazardous areas, to provide for mixed land uses to reduce vehicle emissions, to effectively plan the design, development and financing of services, and to develop open space programs. Increased development density over base density may be awarded based on specified programs. New development will not be approved within an Area of Special Study until there is full mitigation of public services, infrastructure and facility impacts.

3.1-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

San Benito County Code San Benito County Code, Title 19 (Land Use and Environmental Regulations), Chapter 19.31 (Development Lighting) encourages lighting practices and systems that minimize light pollution, glare, and light trespass from all proposed new land uses, development, buildings, structures, or building additions. The chapter requires that all streetlights installed on County roadways or private roadways within the County shall be shielded and shall use low-pressure sodium (LPS) lamps. The chapter includes provisions such as prohibiting all outdoor floodlighting by flood light projection above the horizontal plane, requires that all light fixtures be appropriately shielded, and that all light fixtures, except streetlights, shall be located, aimed or shielded so as to minimize stray light trespassing across property boundaries. Chapter 19.31 regulates lighting on the project site. Chapter 19.31 divides the County into three “Lighting Zones,” depending on the distance from Fremont Peak State Park and Pinnacles National Monument Visitor Center, and includes requirements for all three zones. Chapter 19.31 also addresses development lighting and its impact on night skies, and encourages lighting practices and systems which minimize light pollution, glare, and light trespass. It also encourages practices that conserve energy and resources while maintaining night-time safety, utility, security and productivity, and curtail the degradation of the night time visual environment, as discussed above. The proposed project site is within Lighting Zone III, which is subject to the following special standards, as set forth in section 19.31.009, in addition to the general standards that apply to all zones, pursuant to section 19.31.006: A. Total outdoor light output (excluding streetlights used for illumination of County roadways or private roadways) related to any development project in Zone III shall not exceed 100,000 initial raw lamp lumens per net acre, averaged over the entire project. Furthermore, no more than 5,500 initial raw lamp lumens per net acre may be accounted for by lamps in unshielded fixtures permitted in Table 19.31.006(1) of Chapter [19.31]. B. Outdoor recreational facilities in Zone III shall not be illuminated after 11:00 p.m. except to conclude a scheduled recreational or sporting event in progress prior to 11:00 p.m. C. Outdoor internally illuminated advertising signs shall be constructed with either an opaque background and translucent letters and symbols, or with a colored (not white, cream, off-white or yellow) background and lighter letters and symbols. Lamps used for internal illumination of the signs shall not be included in the lumens per net acre limit set in this COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1-7

3.1

A ESTHETICS

division. The signs shall be turned off at 11:00 p.m. or when the business closes, whichever is later.

3.1.3 S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE CEQA Guidelines Appendix G indicates that a project will have a significant effect on the environment if it would: ƒ

have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista;

ƒ

substantially damage scenic resources including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway;

ƒ

substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings; and/or

ƒ

create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the adjacent area.

3.1.4 P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Scenic and Visual Resources Impact AES-1: The project would result in the development of rural land that is in the foreground of a view of the Diablo mountain range as viewed from Fairview Road and public streets within the Cielo Vista residential subdivision to the west. Project development would alter the character of the view, as well as obscure views of the Diablo mountain range from public viewing areas along Fairview Road. This is a potentially significant impact. A scenic vista is generally described as a clear, expansive view of significant regional features possessing visual and aesthetic qualities of value to the community. The existing view affected by the project is comprised of the Diablo mountain range in the background with the gently rolling topography of the project site in the foreground. Public views are primarily available to motorists traveling along Fairview Road at highway speed. As evidenced by the photographs in Figure 5, Site Photographs (refer to Section 1.0), there are no distinguishing visual features on the project site. The character-defining visual feature of the site is its undeveloped nature, framed by a visual backdrop of distant mountains. The proposed project would result in the development of rural land that is in the foreground of a public view of

3.1-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

the Diablo mountain range as viewed from Fairview Road and public streets within the Cielo Vista residential subdivision to the west. Any development of the project site would alter the character of the existing view. The proposed project would allow the development of one- and two-story single-family residential homes, fencing, new landscaping and trees, as well as other structures and elements ancillary to residential development. The proposed project also includes provisions for multifamily development such as townhomes, condominiums and/or apartments. The development of a substantial number of multi-family units is not anticipated due to the maximum 220 primary dwelling units allowed under the Specific Plan. The proposed project provides land use and development standards for the placement, size, and height standards as well as other development regulations and design guidelines allowed by the Specific Plan, which the master or individual developers would be required to comply with in connection with subsequent approvals (e.g., tentative maps, design review) for the project. For instance, the proposed maximum height limit for single-family residential uses is 30 feet and is 35 feet for multi-family residential uses, except for any multi-family units and other structures on parcels adjacent to the boundary of the site, which would be restricted to 30 feet. (See Specific Plan, Table 15, Height Limits.) It is anticipated that multi-family development allowed by the proposed project, if ultimately constructed, would be placed in proximity to the approved, but not yet developed, Gavilan College San Benito Campus on the adjoining parcel to the south. Although the proposed project does not require multi-family uses to be placed adjacent to Fairview Road, multi-family uses could be placed near this roadway, within the line of sight of public views of the Diablo mountain range. Either type of residential development, if placed adjacent to Fairview Road, would obscure views of the Diablo mountain range from the existing public viewing areas along Fairview Road as illustrated in Figure 5 and Figure 26. This view may be of some value to the motoring public. However, long-range views of rolling countryside, foothills and mountains are characteristic of San Benito County, and exist throughout the region. Among these views and features, the Diablo mountain range has not been identified in the San Benito County General Plan as a significant visual feature, or as a component of a significant scenic vista within the County. Further, the scenic quality of the view is already compromised by a number of factors, including the highly limited duration that views are available to motorists due to the high speed of travel along Fairview Road and the limited travel along the project frontage. As demonstrated by the photographs in Figure 26, portions of the project site may be visible, but not easily discernable, from Airline Highway to the south. The site is not visible from westbound Airline Highway. The planned Gavilan College San Benito Campus project, when completed, would dominate the foreground and block views of the project site and distant mountains from COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1-9

3.1

A ESTHETICS

Airline Highway. Nevertheless, if the proposed project is constructed prior to the campus project, the rooftops and some buildings would likely be visible from Airline Highway. The change in the visual quality of the project site and vicinity when viewed from Airline Highway would be most evident to viewers travelling eastbound on Airline Highway at its intersection with Fairview Road and Ridgemark Drive. The site is not visible from northbound Ridgemark Drive at this location. The impact of the project to the views would be most apparent to eastbound users of Cielo Vista Drive, who must stop prior to navigating the intersection. Additionally, while the undeveloped nature of the project site would be altered as a result of the project, a number of design features and policies within the Specific Plan have been included to ensure that the view of the project site from Fairview Road would be of high quality. The following policies and implementation measures are found in the Specific Plan Article 2, Land Use Plan and Development Standards, and Article 4, Community Design, and address project effects to aesthetics and visual resources. Tabular information that is referenced in the policies and implementation measures listed below is found in Article 2 of the Specific Plan (Land Use Plan and Development Standards).

Specific Plan Policies Policy LU-8.1. Limit lot coverage dependent on the development density and lot size. 1. Lot coverage shall be determined by lot size and use in accordance with Table 7, Lot Coverage. 2. Coverage calculations shall include all principal residential and accessory buildings, including garage space. Policy LU-8.2. Provide minimum yard areas for all residences. 1. A minimum rear or side yard area clear of structures or driveways shall be provided as prescribed in Table 8, Minimum Yard Space (Rear or Side Yard). Policy LU-9.1. Set development back from streets and lots dependent on development density and lot size. 1. Compact development, including attached and detached single family dwellings or two to three unit attached dwellings on lots of less than 5,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 9, Compact Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1] 3.1-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

2. Standard development, including detached single family dwellings or two to four unit attached dwellings on lots of 4,000 to 12,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 10, Standard Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1] 3. Large lot development, including detached single family dwellings or two to four unit attached dwellings on lots of greater than 12,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 11, Large Lot Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1] 4. Apartments, condominiums, and other multifamily dwellings of five or more units shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 12, Multifamily Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1] Policy LU-9.2. Establish specific set-backs and exceptions for special circumstances. 1. Additional setback requirements shall be observed in accordance with Table 13, Special Setback Requirements and Exceptions. Policy LU-10.1. Limit building and fence height dependent on the type of dwelling unit and characteristics of adjacent development. 1. Buildings and fences shall be limited to the maximum heights as prescribed in Table 14, Height Limits. 2. Structures near a shared boundary between the Plan Area and private property outside the Plan Area shall adhere to the additional height requirements in Table 15, Height Limits at Plan Area Boundaries. These requirements shall not apply to Plan Area boundaries within or adjacent to a road, except that any multi-family uses or other structures adjacent to the project site boundary (e.g., Fairview Road) shall adhere to the height requirements in Table 15. Policy LU-10.2. Limit the location of fences and vegetation to ensure visibility at roads. 3. Fencing, vegetation, and other landscape features shall not obscure the view between the front of the house and the road. Except along Fairview Road, where a minimum six-foot sound barrier may be required, solid fences and gates over three feet high are prohibited fronting public roads. Prune front yard tree canopies to at least seven feet

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1-11

3.1

A ESTHETICS

from the ground, and maintain plantings near walkways and building entries to under three feet tall. 4. On lots at the intersection of a road and pedestrian path, no fence or hedge over three feet high shall be allowed in the yard adjoining the path. Policy CD-1.1. Ensure that streetscape improvements enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood. 1. Carry a consistent landscape and streetscape character throughout the Plan Area. If custom homes will be individually designed, additional emphasis should be placed on a consistent streetscape design. The master developer shall prepare a Road Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan to ensure consistency within the Plan Area. 2. Coordinate streetscape, landscape, signage, and lighting to ensure a consistent visual character. 3. Deciduous shade trees shall be planted along roads at no less than 40foot spacing, and at an average spacing of no less than 30 feet. Street trees must be planted at least 15 feet from street lights and five feet from driveways. Street trees shall be allowed to grow to full natural size. [LEED ND NPD Credit 14] 4. If relatively fewer and larger lots are subdivided, a design theme for the collector roads shall be developed to include a consistent fencing and entry gate theme. Policy CD-1.2. Ensure that infrastructure improvements do not compromise the visual quality of the neighborhood. 1. Screen for visual privacy or noise attenuation with berms and landscaping and minimize solid fences or walls. If walls over six feet facing the public view are necessary, such as when a rear yard is adjacent to a road, screen with vegetation. 2. Use decorative poles and luminaries for street lighting. Policy CD-3.1. Maintain architectural continuity within developments and neighborhoods. 1. Obtain a consistent neighborhood character by using a consistent architectural style for residential buildings; architecture should feature

3.1-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

variation within a style, rather than through the use of several different styles. Architecture shall feature selected details drawn from traditional regional styles. The master developer shall prepare an Architectural Style Master Plan to ensure consistency of architectural style within the Plan Area. 2. Detached garages, and attached carports, workshops, storage buildings, pool houses, porches, and patio covers shall be architecturally consistent with the principal structure. 3. Match the design of multifamily development parking canopies, trash enclosures, and other accessory structures to the architecture of the main building. Integrate signs and information systems into the overall design of multifamily residential developments. Relate signs to the architecture of the main building. 4. Design multifamily dwellings, community buildings, and utility and service facilities to blend and harmonize with single-family dwellings and neighborhoods by using mass, detailing, and roof lines that express a scale similar to and drawn on elements of traditional single-family homes. 5. Arrange multifamily dwellings to front on the public right-of-way. Organize the property to place buildings adjacent to the road, and locate off-street parking behind buildings or in the interior of the property. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1] 6. Design utility structures to complement residential development in scale and style. 7. Use exterior color schemes that reflect the natural landscape and historic landscape features. Policy CD-3.2. Design dwellings with appropriate façade detailing. 1. Arrange windows, doors, and other façade elements in balance on each elevation. 2. Face entryways toward the street and make them a prominent part of the house design. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1] 3. Provide depth to the façade by employing recessed and projecting elements, including prominent features such as bay windows and

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1-13

3.1

A ESTHETICS

porches, and subtle features such as recessed window planes and raised trim. 4. Extensive blank, solid walls (overly long or overly tall) are discouraged on all elevations and are not permitted on elevations facing roads. If such walls are necessary for interior or structural reasons, provide some form of variation or decoration such as false windows and balconies, wainscoting, stringcourse, corbel-supported arcade roof, and/or trellis plantings. 5. Garage doors/carport openings facing a road may not constitute more than 50 percent of the width of any ground floor elevation. Where the garage door/carport opening constitutes more than 40 percent of the width of any ground floor elevation, special design treatment, such as an arbor or portico, shall be required at the garage/carport. Policy CD-3.3. Design dwellings to complement their lot position. 1. Design houses for corner lots (including lots fronting on pedestrian paths) to present equally important elevations to both frontages. 2. Orient front elevations of courtyard corner homes to face the road from which the courtyard gains access. Policy CD-3.4. Ensure that property improvements enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood. 1. Retaining walls facing the road shall have a decorative finish that is consistent with the streetscape theme. 2. Fences or walls facing roads or other public areas shall be designed to blend with the landscaping, be consistent with the streetscape theme, and should be at least partially screened by landscaping. 3. Locate air conditioning; mechanical equipment; antennae and television receiver dishes; and vents on sides of the roof that are not visible from the street, whenever possible. 4. Screen utility boxes from view of the road. 5. Position gas meters and electric meters to minimize their visibility from roads, or provide screening.

3.1-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

6. Provide landscaping and/or decorative paving or paving accents within courtyard and alley vehicular accesses. Garages should generally be set back of living areas, but not so much as to encourage parking that would encroach into the courtyard vehicular access area. Vary courtyard building height and/or setbacks, and place garages so that they do not dominate the view into the courtyard or alley. Design courtyard vehicular access so that the terminating vista features enhanced landscaping or a building element other than a garage. Policy CD-5.1. Design parking lot lighting and street lighting to prevent light spill onto adjacent properties. 1. The master developer shall prepare a Lighting Master Plan to ensure consistency of lighting treatment within the Plan Area. 2. Use full or three-quarter cut-off luminaires for all parking lot and street lighting. 3. Limit lighting standards to a height of 25 feet. 4. Design parking lots so that peripheral landscaping filters direct views of luminaires from adjacent residences. 5. Set subdued street lighting levels that maintain a rural ambiance. 6. Design street lighting so that streetlights are placed at side lot lines. Policy CD-5.2. Design building lighting to prevent light spill onto adjacent residential properties. 1. Shield exterior lighting from shining directly onto adjacent residential properties. 2. Locate exterior lights on the sides of houses below the top of the fence or shield the light from direct view of neighboring property. Policy CD-5.3. Use minimal lighting in peripheral areas. 1. Illuminated monument signs shall use the lowest practical level of lighting. 2. Illuminated monument signs shall use the concealed up-lighting or down-lighting.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1-15

3.1

A ESTHETICS

3. No lighting shall be provided on peripheral pedestrian paths. Policy CD-5.4. Plan lighting to maximize safety and security and conserve energy. 1. Set street lighting levels that adequately provide for safety and security. 2. Position street lights at the beginning of pedestrian paths to provide maximum illumination within the pathways. 3. Use low levels of lighting in multi-family residential developments to eliminate dark corners near areas of pedestrian movement. 4. When feasible use lighting technologies with higher efficiencies such as low voltage or LED lighting. Policy CD-6.1. Design multi-family residential signage to blend with the residential character of the Specific Plan. 1. The master developer shall prepare a Signage Master Plan to ensure consistency of sign designs within the Plan Area. 2. Multi-family residential development building signage shall be made of wood, metal, stone, or other natural or simulated natural material. Signs may be painted, stained, or tinted. Plastic signs are not permitted. 3. Signs shall be consistent with the architecture of the building and in scale with the property and building. 4. Illumination of signs shall be by focused lighting that is not directly visible from locations outside the Plan Area. 5. Internally lit and flashing or animated signs shall not be used in exterior locations. Policy CD-6.2. Entry signage shall be distinctive and attractive. 2. Provide ornamental monuments/decorative landscape wall to provide a distinguishing entry to the Plan Area at the intersection of Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive. 3. Provide complementary ornamental monuments at the intersection of Cielo Vista Drive and three collector entry roads.

3.1-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

4. Entry signs shall be constructed of durable materials, such as stone, textured concrete, heavy timber, or metal. 5. Entry sign materials shall be non-reflective. 7. Painted surfaces shall utilize graffiti-resistant paint. 8. A consistent design theme should be carried throughout the entry signs, with distinctive features to set apart each sign and create unique identities for each neighborhood. Policy CP-4.1. Promote a pleasant and conducive walking environment through implementation of traffic calming. 2. Amenities to enhance the pedestrian environment, including entry features (landscaping, monumentation, and signage etc.), traffic calming, and street trees shall be included on the improvement plans. 5. Streets shall have nighttime lighting that meets the minimum illumination standards contained in Article 4.0, Community Design. 6. The perimeter trail shall be designed to permit as many openings and viewpoints from other areas within the Plan Area as practical, in accordance with the design standards in Article 4.0, Community Design. Policy PF-6.1. Provide on-site parks and open spaces. 1. Utilize areas adjacent to any on-site biological conservation easement to provide opportunities for enjoyment of the open space. 2. Provide a small park/tot lot within 1,500 feet, if feasible, of each residential lot. 3. Each park/tot lot shall have trash and recycling receptacles, seating, and shade trees 4. To the extent feasible, pathways and trails shall be constructed with a smooth surface that is at least partly pervious to water, such as decomposed granite. 5. Pathways shall be landscaped with shade trees to facilitate use on hot days. 6. Parks shall be open from dawn until dusk.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1-17

3.1

A ESTHETICS

In addition, the project developer would be required to prepare a Street Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan, as well as an Open Space and Parks Master Plan as part of its application for the project’s first subdivision map, and all subsequent development approvals would be required to be consistent with these and other project Master Plans. As set forth above, the proposed project includes policies and implementation actions that would regulate the design and development of individual structures and the proposed project as a whole, and are consistent with County regulations and relevant General Plan policies intended to mitigate any potentially adverse aesthetic effects of development. These policies include, among other things, set-back and height requirements, landscaping standards, and architectural guidelines. The implementation measures for each of these policies include standards on site planning within individual lots and within the community as a whole, as well as guidelines on the architectural details and landscaping of the structures within the project site. For the above reasons, the project’s impacts on visual resources as a result of changing the rural nature of the site to suburban uses would be less than significant. However, given the flexibility in the Specific Plan policies, the project applicant has agreed to Mitigation Measure AES-1 below to ensure the identified impacts remain less than significant. According to the noise analysis, the project would include a continuous sound wall along the Fairview Road frontage if proposed residences are placed within 100 feet of the street frontage (Illingworth and Rodkin 2010). The impacts of noise are discussed in Section 3.11. If residences are not placed within 100 feet of the street frontage, a sound wall would not be required. Specific Plan Policy CD-1.2 includes screening for visual privacy or noise attenuation with berms and landscaping and minimizing solid fences or walls. Implementation Measure #1 of Policy CD-1.2 requires screening of walls over six feet in height that face public views. Additionally, Implementation Measure #2 of Policy CD-3.4 requires the design of fences or walls facing streets or other public areas to blend with landscaping, be consistent with the streetscape theme, and be at least partially screened by landscaping. The proposed project also includes provisions to ensure adequate land area east of the existing Fairview Road right-of-way to accommodate the County’s planned widening of this roadway to four lanes. In addition, two 12-foot lanes, a six-foot bicycle lane, a six-foot shoulder, a 12-foot landscaped strip and sidewalk, and a five-foot shoulder on the east side of Fairview Road will be added as development warrants. These proposed improvements are shown conceptually on the Specific Plan Figure 17, Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Sections. The proposed frontage improvements, including the potential soundwall for Fairview Road if found necessary, are required by the Specific Plan to be constructed concurrently with the development of each subdivision fronting on Fairview Road (Specific Plan Article 7,

3.1-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Implementation Plan), subject to the discretion of the County Director of Public Works, who may determine the sequence of and phasing of such improvements, in order to provide complete road segments for public safety, consistent with County requirements and the approved Specific Plan. If the sound wall is required, to the extent the sound wall would negatively affect the overall visual quality of the Fairview Road corridor by altering the character of the public views of the Diablo mountain range, this would be considered a potentially significant impact. It is assumed that the sound wall would be placed on the property line fronting Fairview Road, between the proposed development and the right-of-way. To ensure that the proposed sound wall and landscaped frontage and other project improvements are constructed in accordance with the applicable policies found within the Specific Plan, the following mitigation measure is included: MM AES-1: The frontage landscaping along Fairview Road shall be generally implemented as shown within the Specific Plan Figure 17 (Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Sections), and for the sound wall, if required, and in accordance with all applicable policies within Article 2, Land Use; Article 3, Circulation Plan; Article 4, Community Design; and Article 6, Public Facilities, of the Specific Plan as well as the project’s Street Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan and Open Space and Parks Master Plan (as may be amended). Further, the timing of implementation shall be in accordance with Article 7 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan). While the view of the project site would be altered, with implementation of the above mitigation, these alterations would result in an attractively landscaped frontage along Fairview Road. The alteration is therefore considered to be a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Change in Rural Character Impact AES-2: The project would result in a substantial change in the visual character of the project site. This is considered a potentially significant impact. The project site is rural and agricultural in character, composed of undulating hills with an overall graduating elevation change, and used for the cultivation of barley and periodic grazing of cattle. The project would result in the development of the project site with suburban uses, which would significantly change the visual character of the site and its immediate surroundings. The Specific Plan contains a number of features and policies intended to support implementation of suburban development of high visual quality, as described more fully above, and generally as

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1-19

3.1

A ESTHETICS

graphically indicated in Article 4.0 of the Specific Plan (Community Design). Among other things, these policies and related implementation measures are designed to accomplish the following objectives: ƒ

Ensure that streetscape improvements enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood. (Policy CD – 1.1)

ƒ

Ensure that infrastructure improvements do not compromise the visual quality of the neighborhood. (Policy CD - 1.2)

ƒ

Maintain architectural continuity within developments and neighborhoods. (Policy CD – 3.1)

ƒ

Design dwellings with appropriate façade detailing. (Policy CD – 3.2)

ƒ

Ensure that property improvements enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood. (Policy CD - 3.4)

ƒ

Design signage to blend with the residential character of the Specific Plan. (Policy CD – 6.1)

ƒ

Entry signage shall be distinctive and attractive. (Policy CD – 6.2)

ƒ

Promote a pleasant and conducive walking environment through implementation of traffic calming. (Policy CD – 4.1)

ƒ

Provide parks and open spaces. (Policy PF – 6.1)

In addition, the Specific Plan requires that all development within the project site be subject to design and site plan review by the County, to ensure consistency with the development and design standards and guidelines described in Article 2.0 and Article 4.0 of the Specific Plan as well as the Architectural Style Master Plan and other applicable Master Plans required by Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan), which would require approval by the County. The process for review and approval is outlined in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. For the above reasons, the project’s impacts on visual resources as a result of changing the rural nature of the site to suburban uses would be less than significant. However, given the flexibility in the Specific Plan policies, the project applicant has agreed to Mitigation Measure AES-2 below to ensure the identified impacts remain less than significant. To ensure that the above-described design and site plan processes are implemented throughout the life of the project, the following mitigation measure is proposed:

3.1-20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

MM AES-2: The project developer shall comply with all development standards and design guidelines found in Article 4.0 of the Fairview Corners Specific Plan (Community Design). Compliance with Article 4.0 shall be subject to the review and approval of the County in accordance with Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan), as part of the project’s design and site review process. Implementation of the above mitigation measure will ensure that the overall design of the project would be of high quality. Therefore, the impacts to the visual character of the site as a result of the project would be less than significant impacts with mitigation incorporated.

Light and Glare Impact AES-3: The proposed project would introduce new sources of light and glare that could adversely affect properties in adjacent areas. Increased direct and residual light and glare are potentially significant impacts. The proposed project would introduce new sources of light and glare where none currently exist. This development would introduce outdoor lighting for streets and parking areas, as well as any parks and recreational facilities that may be constructed as part of the project. This lighting has the potential to result in light and glare impacts to the nearby existing residences, as well as to future residents of the project. However, the proposed project includes policies that require shielding of lighting to minimize up-lighting and prevent light splay from shining directly onto adjacent properties, and also require that streetlights be subdued and focused to reduce light pollution. Specifically, as detailed above, the Specific Plan includes the following policies: ƒ

Design parking lot lighting and street lighting to prevent light spill on adjacent properties. (Policy CD – 5.1)

ƒ

Design building lighting to prevent light spill onto adjacent residential properties. (Policy CD – 5.2)

ƒ

Use minimal lighting in peripheral areas. (Policy CD – 5.3)

ƒ

Plan lighting to maximize safety and security and conserve energy. (Policy CD – 5.4)

Further, the project developer would be required to prepare and obtain County approval of a Lighting Master Plan, which would govern development of the project. In addition, the County Code addresses light pollution by requiring design features and performance thresholds that reduce lighting and glare impacts from exterior lighting. All project

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1-21

3.1

A ESTHETICS

exterior lighting is required to be reviewed for consistency with an approved Lighting Master Plan, prior to issuance of building permits. The Lighting Master Plan, among other things, must conform to the County’s Development Lighting Regulations of the County Code (Title 19, Chap. 19.31). These provisions include, but are not limited to: ƒ

Outdoor floodlighting by flood light projection above the horizontal plan is prohibited;

ƒ

All exterior light fixtures are required to be shielded to direct light downward toward the intended area of illumination, except for certain low-wattage fixtures; and

ƒ

Streets, parking areas and recreational facilities are limited to the use of glare shielded, low-pressure sodium lighting fixtures.

To ensure that the project complies with the Specific Plan development standards and design guidelines with regard to exterior lighting, as well as the County’s Development Lighting Regulations, the following mitigation measure is proposed: MM AES-3: The project developer shall be required to submit an exterior lighting plan for all subsequent development approval requests (e.g., subdivision maps, use permits, design review) pursuant to Article 7 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan). Said lighting plan shall demonstrate conformance with the Specific Plan, development standards and design guidelines with regard to exterior lighting as stated in Article 4.0 of the Specific Plan (Community Design), as well as with the Project’s Lighting Master Plan (as it may be amended), and Title 19, Chapter 19.31 of the County Code. Implementation of the above mitigation measure would minimize the potential for light and glare impacts from the project, by requiring submittal of a project lighting plan demonstrating conformance with applicable policies and standards. Therefore, the light and glare impacts associated with the project would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

3.1.5 C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES The cumulative setting includes current and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects. For purposes of this analysis, the cumulative scenario includes the following projects: ƒ

Gavilan College San Benito Campus: This project involves the construction of a 3,500 full-time equivalent (FTE) student college facility, as well as approximately 285 residential units and 35,000 square feet of retail space, on a 77-acre site south of the project site, at the northeast corner of Fairview Road and Airline Highway.

3.1-22

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

Award Homes Project: This project involves the construction of 595 single-family homes and 100 apartment units on the west side of Fairview Road, south of St. Benedict’s Church and east of Calistoga Drive within the City of Hollister.

ƒ

Santana Ranch Project: This project involves the construction of a maximum of 1,092 dwelling units, 65,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses, up to an additional 41,000 square feet of commercial mixed uses, and related community facilities and project infrastructure on a 292-acre site adjacent to the City of Hollister.

The cumulative projects list (Section 3.0) also includes a number of smaller residential projects within the City of Hollister, as well as a number of industrial and warehousing projects in the vicinity of the Hollister Municipal Airport.

Cumulative Visual Effect Impact AES-4: The project, in combination with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects along the Fairview Road corridor, may result in a cumulative impact on visual resources. The impact is considered to be potentially significant. The proposed project would be located on Fairview Road in an area to the east of the City of Hollister where new residential developments have been constructed in recent years and a substantial amount of additional suburban development is approved or planned at this time. Figure 3, Vicinity Surrounding Uses, illustrates the locations of several other developments proposed, approved or in progress along the Fairview Road corridor in the vicinity of the project site, including the approved Santana Ranch Specific Plan area, located approximately one mile to the north on Fairview Road. The area located between Santana Ranch and the project site is identified by the County as the Central Fairview Study Area. The 695-unit Award Homes residential subdivision, on the east side of Fairview Road, just north of the Cielo Vista subdivision, has been approved by the City of Hollister. The future San Benito Campus is planned for the property located between the project site and Airline Highway. Several smaller developments are currently proposed along Airline Highway, west of Fairview Road. The proposed project’s cumulative impacts on visual resources are discussed below in the context of these past, present and probable future projects.

Cumulative Impact on Scenic Vistas and Scenic Resources The development of the Fairview Road corridor as a result of past, present and probable future projects, including the proposed project, would construct new buildings and plant trees and other landscaping adjacent to the roadway which would obscure views of the Diablo mountain range available to the motoring public as they travel along Fairview Road. However, as noted in

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1-23

3.1

A ESTHETICS

Impact AES-1, long-range views of rolling countryside, foothills and mountains are characteristic of San Benito County, and exist throughout the region. Among these views and features, the Diablo mountain range has not been identified in the San Benito County General Plan as a significant visual feature, or as a component of a significant scenic vista within the County. Therefore, although some views of the range from Fairview Road would be lost, the cumulative impact would not be considered significant. Furthermore, Fairview Road has not been designated as a County scenic route. Therefore, the proposed project, in combination with other past, present and anticipated future development along the Fairview Road corridor, would not result in cumulative impacts to any County-designated scenic resources.

Cumulative Impact on Visual Character and Quality The proposed project, in combination with past, present and probable future projects, would result in the gradual conversion of the rural visual character of the Fairview Road corridor to a more suburban character, representing a potentially significant impact. This corridor, however, has been previously designated by the County as an Area of Special Study. As discussed previously, the purpose of this designation is to identify areas of the County suitable for higher intensity suburban development, in order to discourage scattered, uncoordinated development in the more rural areas of the County, thereby helping to maintain the overall rural character of the County. Further, the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan contains development standards, design guidelines and related policies that would result in the development of a landscaped corridor of high visual quality along the project’s Fairview Road frontage. Other cumulative projects along Fairview Road would also be required to comply with County and City requirements for landscaping and design of the Fairview Road frontage, as well as other architectural design guidelines, landscaping within project boundaries, and other visual amenities and aesthetic and design policies to ensure that the corridor, as developed, would be of high visual quality. Therefore, while it is anticipated that a change in character from rural to suburban would occur, this change would not necessarily be negative or adverse, providing that design controls are enforced and relevant General Plan policies and Specific Plan policies addressing project aesthetics and character are implemented, as required in Mitigation Measures AES-1 through AES-3, above.

Accordingly, the project’s contribution to a cumulative impact on visual

character and quality would not be cumulatively considerable.

Cumulative Impact Related to Light and Glare As the roadway corridor becomes developed with planned and reasonably foreseeable future projects, additional exterior light and glare will result, which could combine and result in significant cumulative light and glare impacts. The proposed project, however, would be

3.1-24

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

required to comply with identified mitigation as well as the County’s Development Lighting Regulations, which require implementation of measures to minimize glare and light spillage onto adjacent properties (Mitigation Measure AES-3). Other cumulative projects along Fairview Road would also be required to comply with these requirements. Accordingly, the project’s contribution to cumulative light and glare impacts within the Fairview Road corridor area would not be cumulatively considerable. Development of unincorporated areas of the County will introduce new sources of night time illumination that will cause a gradual decline in the quality of the unique astronomical viewing conditions currently available within the County. As more development is approved and implemented and the glow from ambient light encroaches further into the night sky, the quality of night viewing conditions would be gradually degraded. The proposed project would contribute incrementally to the cumulative decline in quality of night time viewing conditions, resulting from development. The proposed project, however, would be required to comply with identified mitigation measures (Mitigation Measure AES-3), in addition to the County’s lighting standards and Dark Sky Ordinance. Other cumulative projects along Fairview Road would also be required to comply with these requirements.

Accordingly, the project’s contribution to

cumulative light and glare impacts to the unique astronomical viewing conditions within the County would not be cumulatively considerable.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.1-25

3.1

A ESTHETICS

This side intentionally left blank.

3.1-26

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANNING

This section of the Draft EIR describes the existing land uses of the project site, characterizes surrounding land uses and evaluates the consistency of the project with relevant provisions of the San Benito County General Plan and other applicable County plans or policy documents. The discussion of potential impacts focuses on compatibility of the proposed project with adopted land use plans and policies and with surrounding land uses. This analysis is based on the San Benito County General Plan, the San Benito County Code, and project application materials.

3.10.1

E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING

Regional Setting The project site is located in the northern portion of San Benito County, near the eastern municipal boundaries of the City of Hollister. The County is primarily rural and agricultural in character, with large flatland areas as well as areas of rolling hills. The only urbanized areas within the County are the Cities of Hollister and San Juan Bautista, both of which are surrounded by agricultural row crop farming, orchards, vineyards, and lands used for livestock grazing.

Site Setting and Surrounding Land Uses The project site is undeveloped land used to cultivate barley and rural in character. It is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. The project site is bounded by rural residential uses and grassland along Old Ranch Road to the north, very low density residential uses and grassland as well as an organic herb farm along Harbern Way to the southeast, the approved but undeveloped Gavilan College, San Benito Campus project to the south, and Fairview Road and the Cielo

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-1

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

Vista single-family residential subdivision to the west. The Ridgemark Golf and Country Club, which includes a gated residential community, is located further to the south across Airline Highway. The approved but undeveloped 292-acre Santana Ranch project site is located approximately one mile to the north, on Fairview Road. The area located between the approved Santana Ranch project and the project site is identified by the County as the Central Fairview Study Area. The Award Homes residential subdivision, on the west side of Fairview Road, just north of the Cielo Vista subdivision, has been approved by the City of Hollister, but has not yet been developed.

Population According to the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) 2008 Population, Housing Unit and Employment Forecast (the most recently adopted forecasts by AMBAG), the total population of San Benito County in 2005 was 57,324, as follows: City of Hollister (37,002); City of San Juan Bautista (1,722); and unincorporated San Benito County (18,600). According to the forecast, the overall County population had increased to 62,431 by January 2010. By 2015, the total County population is projected by AMBAG to increase to 68,471, of which 44,613 persons would reside in Hollister, 2,121 persons would reside in San Juan Bautista and the remaining 21,737 persons would reside in the unincorporated areas of the County. By 2020, the overall population of the County is estimated by AMBAG to be 76,140 persons, and by 2025; to be 83,383 persons. Based on these estimates, the overall population of the County is projected by AMBAG to increase by 14,912, or 24 percent, between 2015 and 2025 (AMBAG 2008).

Jobs/Housing Balance At the present time, there are substantially more employed residents than jobs in San Benito County. The Hollister area has traditionally been an agriculturally-based economy and does not have a substantial manufacturing or office employment base. This results in out-commuting of residents to other counties, particularly Santa Clara County, and has the effect of increasing traffic, air pollutant emissions, and energy consumption. According to projections prepared by the San Benito County Planning Department, this condition is estimated to worsen over time. The “net out-commute" (i.e., out-commute minus in-commute) is projected to increase from 23 percent of the workforce in 1990 to 44 percent of the workforce in 2020. The jobs/housing imbalance also has an adverse effect on the County budget, since the tax revenue generated by new residential construction does not generally cover the cost of providing County services to those developments. Ideally, new housing construction would be balanced by industrial and commercial development, which generates more jobs and tax revenue than it requires in services, and thus offsets the revenue shortfall resulting from residential development.

3.10-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

3.10.2

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

R EGULATORY S ETTING

The purpose of this section is to evaluate the proposed project for land use consistency with relevant adopted plans and policies including the San Benito County General Plan and the San Benito County Code.

San Benito County General Plan The project site has a General Plan land use designation of “Rural”. The project site is also designated an “Area of Special Study”, described in the General Plan Land Use Element, Land Use Plan as follows: This designation applies to areas of the County where a combination of the following criteria apply: 1) More concentrated development than is presently allowed may be desirable provided a comprehensive plan for public services and resource conservation is integrated in order of priority into a specific plan, community plan or area plan. 2) As a result of prior, piecemeal subdivisions, a plan for integrated development and coordination of governmental services and/or community facilities is desirable. 3) The County has identified the area as a potential area for commercial, industrial, and/or residential development. The intent would be to direct development from natural resources and environmentally hazardous areas, to provide for mixed land uses to reduce vehicle emissions, to effectively plan the design, development and financing of services, and to develop open space programs. Increased development density over base density may be awarded based on specified programs. New development will not be allowed within an Area of Special Study until there is full mitigation of public services, infrastructure and facility impacts.

Land Use Element The following policies from the Land Use Element of the San Benito County General Plan are relevant to the proposed project: Policy 8. The residential areas of the County shall be developed at densities of up to twenty dwelling units per acre. For areas within the Sphere of Influence Rural/Urban land use designation, the density of 20 units per acre or the standards of Hollister may be used to allow for affordability, unmet special needs housing, affordable multi-family rental housing. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-3

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

Policy 9. The type of development allowed within the residential areas include residential, agricultural and open space. Trails, parks, and public facilities, including schools and churches, may be allowed subject to use permits. Policy 15. The majority of development with a density of greater than two units per acre shall occur within the Cities of San Juan Bautista, Hollister, the Paicines Ranch Resort project site, and the Santana Ranch project site. All commercial development providing comparative shopping and serving a regional need, major cultural and institutional uses and all industrial uses (excluding agricultural-related uses and low profile compatible industry) shall occur within the Cities, except for those uses which by their nature should or could be located in undeveloped areas. Policy 32. Specific development sites shall be free from the hazards identified within the Open Space and Conservation Element Maps (i.e., faults, landslides, hillsides over 30% slope, flood plains). The site shall also be on soil suitable for building and maintaining well and septic systems (i.e., avoid impervious soils, high percolation or high groundwater areas, set back from creeks). Absent adequate mitigation, development shall not be located on environmentally sensitive lands (wetlands, erodable soil, archaeological resources, important plant and animal communities). Policy 33. Specific development sites shall avoid, when possible, locating in an environmentally sensitive area (wetlands, erodable soils, important plant and animal communities, archaeological resources). Policy 35. The County shall encourage energy and water conservation techniques and energy efficiency in all new building design, orientation and construction. Policy 37. The individual and cumulative effects of development proposals that generate population growth shall be evaluated and all available means shall be used to assist full mitigation of school facility impacts.

Open Space and Conservation Element The following Open Space and Conservation Element policies are applicable to the project:

3.10-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Policy 1. Major subdivisions or intense development shall not be allowed within potential habitat of Federal or State listed rare, threatened, or endangered plant or animal species until said development(s) prepares habitat plans for the species unless an interim measure has been taken to mitigate the effect of development. Policy 2: Maintain corridors for habitat. In rural areas, road and development sites shall be designated to maintain habitat connectivity with a system of corridors for wildlife or plant species and avoiding fragmentation of open space areas. Measures to maintain the long-term health of the plant and animal communities in the area shall be incorporated into project design such as buffers, consolidation of/or rerouting access, transitional landscaping, linking nearby open space areas, and habitat corridors. Policy 3: Mitigation for wetland development. Development shall be sited to avoid encroachment on wetlands. Mitigation shall be required for any development proposals that have the potential to reduce wetland habitat from primary or secondary effects of the development. Policy 6: Exotic plants and animals. It is the policy of the County to work with State, Federal, and local agencies and land owners to develop programs to reduce the destruction of plant and animal life and habitat caused by invasive plants and animals. Policy 7: Grading, erosion, and native tree removal. It is the policy of the County to minimize erosion resulting from grading and cutting and native tree removal for all development proposals. Policy 8: Development in drainage basins. It is the County’s policy to minimize development/uses within drainage basins that could alter the path of watercourses and impede groundwater recharge. Policy 10: Air Quality. The County recognizes air as a natural resource and will strive to maintain air quality through proper land use planning. It shall be the County’s policy to utilize land use and transportation controls for the protection and enhancement of air quality. Finally, it shall be the County’s policy to review public and private development proposals in light of possible recreational and open space potential. Policy 12: Direct development to urban areas. It will be the County’s policy to apply land use controls to ensure that only non-urban uses are COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-5

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

located beyond Spheres of Influence and the Urban Reserve Areas, except for specific areas designated Rural/Urban, Area of Special Study, Residential Commercial, or Industrial on the General Plan Land Use Map. Policy 13: Specific plan requirements. It will be the County’s policy to require specific plans for small, large, new or expanding communities that are not incorporated which would clearly identify centers of urban growth and land uses within those areas. Policy 16: Open space around cities. It is the County’s policy to preserve a rural atmosphere by directing population growth and public service extensions to infill development and avoiding leapfrog growth. Policy 18: Protect rural atmosphere and natural resources. General Plan Amendments, Specific Plans, Area Plans and Area of Special Study that result in a net increase in General Plan buildout (Table 1 of the Land Use Element), shall include methods to conserve open space for natural resources including agriculture, wildlife habitat, and water (e.g., conservation easements and/or other similar resource protection measures). Proposed development areas shall also include measures to protect resources on-site and contiguous to the project with the use of clustering, conservation easements, and other similar programs. Policy 25: Legislative methods to protect agriculture and rural identity. It is the County’s policy to use the Williamson Act, agricultural zoning, and legislative means, where appropriate, to preserve agricultural resources, maintain a rural identity, and to define and shape the urban form. Residential growth should be directed to where services are already provided and to the least productive agricultural lands. Policy 29: Energy Conservation. It will be the County’s policy to encourage the use of energy-efficient design in new construction. Policy 31: Wastewater Treatment. Wastewater treatment systems shall be designed to ensure the long-range protection of groundwater resources in San Benito County. Septic systems shall be limited to areas where sewer services are not available and where it can be demonstrated that septic systems will not contaminate groundwater. Every effort should be made in developing and existing developed areas to reduce the use of septic systems in favor of domestic wastewater treatment. Domestic wastewater treatment systems shall be required to use tertiary wastewater treatment as defined by Title 22.

3.10-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Policy 34: Evidence water quality and quantity for development. Approval of new developments shall not be allowed without evidence of adequate water quality and quantity. Policy 46: County and City bike plans. It will be the County’s policy to require new development to provide easements for trails/bikeways identified in the City of Hollister Parks and Recreation Master Plan and to be consistent with the San Benito County Bike Plan. Policy 47: Parks master plan. Develop a County-wide parks master plan to identify long-range recreational needs of the County, potential trail corridors, and areas for potential recreational-tourist services/programs. Policy 56: Ratio of parks to population. Recreational facilities for existing and new development in the unincorporated areas of the County shall be provided to meet the needs of the population based on a ratio of five acres of park land per 1000 persons.

Housing Element Policy 1B. The County shall ensure that housing is affordable to extremely low, very low, low, and moderate-income families and members of the local workforce (e.g. teachers, fire and police, farm workers). Affordable housing units shall continue to be exempt from growth management programs in San Benito County. Policy 1I. The County shall actively promote the development and rehabilitation of housing to meet the needs of special needs groups including the needs of seniors, people with disabilities, farm workers, the homeless, people with HIV/AIDS, people in need of mental health [services], single parent families, large families, and other persons identified as having special housing needs. Policy 2A. The County shall encourage and assist the construction of a variety of housing types with varying densities and prices, for both sale and rental that are affordable to all income groups, particularly very low income and special needs groups. Policy 2C. The County shall assure that new housing efficiently uses land and causes minimum environmental impact.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-7

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

Policy 2I. The County shall ensure that there is sufficient land zoned for a variety of housing types, residential densities and housing prices that will meet the needs for projected growth while providing flexibility on the identification of housing sites. Policy 2L. The County shall require, through specific plans, neighborhood design standards and development review, a mix of housing types, densities, designs and prices/rents in each planning area where land is available. Policy 2M. The County shall disperse lower, moderate and higher cost housing throughout the County, each planning area and each subdivision where feasible due to the availability of land and adequate service facilities. Policy 2Q. The County shall encourage appropriately designed second units as a means of developing small, affordable units. Policy 2R. The County shall use land efficiently to encourage a diversity of housing types and to implement “smart” and sustainable development principles. Policy 5E. The County shall promote energy efficient land use planning by incorporating energy conservation as a major criterion for future decision making.

San Benito County Code San Benito County Affordable Housing Ordinance (San Benito County Code, Chapter 21.03) The Board of Supervisors adopted an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance in January, 2004 to facilitate the production of housing stock for very low, low, and moderate income households. In December 2010, the County replaced the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance with an Affordable Housing Ordinance, codified at Chapter 21.03 of the San Benito County Code. As amended, Chapter 21.03 provides for identified density bonuses and other incentives for residential projects that construct a certain level of affordable housing stock on- or off-site and/or donate land to a County-approved housing developer for the construction of such housing stock, rather than mandating inclusionary housing production.

3.10-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

San Benito County Zoning Ordinance (San Benito County Code, Title 25) The County Zoning Ordinance (San Benito County Code, Title 25) establishes land use and residential zoning designations corresponding with the General Plan. The current “Rural” zoning designation for the project site corresponds with the General Plan designation of Rural, and allows one unit per five acres. The Zoning Ordinance also establishes development standards for the range of allowable uses, including, but not limited to, maximum building heights, lot coverage and floor area ratios, as well as minimum standards for building setbacks.

San Benito County Growth Management Ordinance (San Benito County Code, Chapter 21.07) The County has adopted a Growth Management Ordinance (GMO) (San Benito County Code, Chapter 21.07), which has the goal, among others, “to encourage a rate of growth which will not exceed the county’s ability to satisfy future demands for such essential services as police and fire protection, roads, schools, water, sewers and the like….” To achieve its stated goals, the GMO restricts the County’s population growth to an annual population increase based on the State of California’s growth rate for the previous year or a one percent growth rate per year, whichever is greater, plus the population growth attributed to exempt projects. The GMO applies to all new residential development projects within the unincorporated area of the County, except for those projects specifically listed as exempt. In December 2009, the County Board of Supervisors amended the GMO to exempt from the growth restrictions those dwelling units within projects “that are subject to a Housing or Development Agreement that has been approved by the San Benito County Board of Supervisors….” The applicant proposes to enter into a development agreement with the County to establish the terms and conditions under which development will occur. In the event a development agreement is approved and executed, the project would be exempt from the GMO.

3.10.3

S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE

The following thresholds for evaluating the significance of a project’s environmental impacts are based on the State CEQA Guidelines and other significance standards recognized by San Benito County. For purposes of this EIR, impacts related to land use and planning as well as population and housing are considered significant if implementation of the proposed project would: ƒ

Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect;

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-9

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

ƒ

Physically divide or disrupt an established community;

ƒ

Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan; or

ƒ

Create incompatibility with surrounding uses. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Because the project site is undeveloped, there would be no displacement impacts; therefore, this issue is not evaluated further in this Draft EIR. See Section 5, Effects Found Not to be Significant). Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

(Because the project site is undeveloped, there would be no

displacement impacts; therefore, this issue is not evaluated further in this Draft EIR. See Section 5, Effects Found Not to be Significant).

3.10.4

P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

Consistency with Applicable Land Use Plans, Policies and Regulations Impact LU-1: The proposed project does not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental impact, and therefore development of the project would have a less than significant impact.

San Benito County General Plan Land Use Element: General Plan Designation. The project site has a General Plan designation of “Rural.” The current “Rural” zoning designation for the project site corresponds with the General Plan designation of Rural, and allows one unit per five acres. The project site is also designated as an “Area of Special Study”, which allows residential development at higher densities subject to the provisions of a comprehensive specific plan (refer to previous discussion).

3.10-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Consistency: The project site currently is designated under the General Plan as “Rural.” However, the project proposes a change in the designation of the project site to a new General Plan designation of “Fairview Corners-Specific Plan (FVC-SP)” and proposes to develop the site in accordance with the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan as envisioned by the Area of Special Study designation. As shown in Figure 9, Proposed Land Use, the specific plan would designate the entire site “FVC-SP.” The Specific Plan includes the following policies to ensure that development intensity is consistent with the County General Plan. Policy LU-1.1. Implement County Resolution No. 89-92 and the General Plan Land Use Element by planning appropriate uses for this designated Area of Special Study, including higher density residential uses than are currently allowed by existing zoning. 1. The County’s adoption by resolution of a general plan amendment and the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan, and by ordinance: the “Fairview Corners Specific Plan” zoning regulations, which constitute the land use designation and zoning for the Plan Area, will implement Resolution No. 89-92 and the County General Plan Land Use Element and will regulate the future development within the Plan Area. The Specific Plan is designed to provide a comprehensive, detailed planning and regulatory framework for developing the project. Upon approval of the project, the type of development that would be allowed within the residential areas would include residential (which may include single-family and multi-family), parks and recreational uses (including a trail network and possible par course as shown in Figure 13, Open Space Diagram), infrastructure and public facilities, in accordance with the Specific Plan’s implementation article, which sets forth the legal and regulatory framework for subsequent entitlements for the project. The proposed project provides for a range of potential residential densities, ranging from one dwelling unit per gross five acres, consistent with the existing land use designation, to approximately 3.6 dwelling units per gross acre, consistent with the increased density allowable in the Area of Special Study. The proposed density range corresponds to a minimum of 12 units or a maximum of 220 dwelling units that would be permitted on the 60-acre project site under the Specific Plan. The maximum allowed overall density would be less than 4.0 dwelling units per gross acre, or approximately 3.6 units per acre (220 / 60 = 3.6), consistent with the intended density anticipated in the Area of Special Study. Furthermore, development of the proposed project with the range of densities proposed is otherwise consistent with the intent of the Area of Special Study designation, as it directs

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-11

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

development away from natural resources and environmentally hazardous areas; provides for a range of housing types as well as pedestrian and bicycle connections to reduce vehicle emissions; and effectively plans the design, development and financing of services through the implementation of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan. Approval of the ultimate site plan for the project would be subject to the County’s consistency determination, as set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. Development of the project would represent the orderly expansion of the Hollister Urban Area eastward from its current boundary along Fairview Road, into a currently undeveloped area, consistent with the applicable General Plan designation of the project site as an “Area of Special Study”. The proposed project would facilitate efficient, orderly growth in certain areas in the County that are near existing urban uses, utilities and services such as the project site. The proposed residential units would be built in close proximity to domestic water and wastewater facilities provided by Sunnyslope County Water District and the City of Hollister. As such, the project would prevent leapfrog growth. The project would be developed in compliance with a comprehensive planning framework that provides for resource protection measures, including, among other things, a potential conservation easement to protect natural resources (refer to Section 3.4, Biological Resources), incorporation of a building exclusion zone to avoid potential seismic hazards (Section 3.7, Geology and Soils), provision of parks (Section 3.13, Parks and Recreation), and the provision of infrastructure improvements necessary to mitigate impacts to the extent feasible to the existing circulation network (Section 3.14, Traffic and Circulation). As such, the project would direct development away from natural resources. While the project proposes greater development density than allowed under the current General Plan and zoning designations, the project includes a change in these designations to ensure consistency and all development on the project site would be subject to the provisions set forth in the approved Specific Plan.

Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the

County’s general plan land use designation. Policy 8. The residential areas of the County shall be developed at densities of up to twenty dwelling units per acre. For areas within the Sphere of Influence Rural/Urban land use designation, the density of 20 units per acre or the standards of Hollister may be used to allow for affordability, unmet special needs housing, affordable multi-family rental housing. Consistency: The proposed project includes potential residential densities ranging from one dwelling unit per five gross acres, consistent with the existing General Plan land use designation, to approximately 3.6 dwelling units per gross acre, consistent with the increased density

3.10-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

anticipated by the County for the Area of Special Study. The proposed project is therefore consistent with Policy 8. As the project site is not located within the sphere of influence of the City of Hollister and is therefore not subject to the policy addressing the use of City of Hollister, the City of Hollister’s standards for affordability and unmet special housing needs cannot be used. The project is subject to the San Benito County Affordable Housing Ordinance, and the project proposes to provide affordable housing in accordance with any applicable County requirements. This topic is addressed in later discussion within this section. Policy 9. The type of development allowed within the residential areas include residential, agricultural and open space. Trails, parks, and public facilities, including schools and churches may be allowed subject to use permits. Consistency: The project site currently is designated under the General Plan as “Rural” and therefore is subject to Policy 9. However, the project proposes a change in designation to the General Plan category, “Fairview Corners-Specific Plan (FVC-SP).” The Specific Plan is designed to provide a comprehensive, detailed planning and regulatory framework for developing the project. Upon approval of the project, the type of development that would be allowed within the residential areas would include residential (both single-family and multifamily), parks and recreation (including a trail network and possible par course as shown in Figure 13, Open Space Diagram), and public facilities uses. The proposed uses would be constructed in accordance with Article 7.0 (Implementation Plan) of the Specific Plan, as well as other applicable County requirements, which sets forth the legal and regulatory framework for subsequent entitlements for the project. As part of the project, other, minor General Plan amendments also are proposed to ensure consistency between the project and the General Plan. One such amendment is to revise the language in General Plan Policy 9 to reflect that specific plans may be adopted to allow an area to be planned for and developed in a comprehensive fashion to include trails, parks and public facilities, rather than requiring approval of use permits to develop these uses. Upon approval of this amendment, the project is consistent with General Plan Policy 9. Policy 15. The majority of development with a density of greater than two units per acre shall occur within the Cities of San Juan Bautista, Hollister, the Paicines Ranch Resort project site, and the Santana Ranch project site. All commercial development providing comparative shopping and serving a regional need, major cultural and institutional uses and all industrial uses (excluding agricultural-related uses and low profile compatible industry) shall occur within the Cities, except for those uses which by their nature should or could be located in undeveloped areas.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-13

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

Consistency: The General Plan contains numerous provisions that discuss the goal of preventing inefficient, scattered development of higher density residential areas throughout the County. While the project site does not lie within a city, the Santana Ranch project site, or the Paicines Ranch Resort (a project that was ultimately denied), it is located within a designated Area of Special Study adjacent to the City of Hollister. This County designation is intended to direct development towards areas where urban services and utilities are available for projects with higher densities. Because the project is within an Area of Special Study, and therefore has been planned for higher density, urban development, consistent with a comprehensive specific plan, the project is consistent with Policy 15. Policy 32. Specific development sites shall be free from the hazards identified within the Open Space and Conservation Element Maps (i.e., faults, landslides, hillsides over 30% slopes, flood plains). The site shall also be on soil suitable for building and maintaining well and septic systems (i.e., avoid impervious soils, high percolation or high groundwater areas, set back from creeks). Absent adequate mitigation, development shall not be located on environmentally sensitive lands (wetlands, erodable soil, archaeological resources, important plant and animal communities). Consistency: The project site is not susceptible to landslides (See Section 3.7, Geology and Soils), and is not located in a FEMA flood zone (See Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality). As discussed in those EIR sections, the project has been designed to avoid structural development on areas potentially subject to physical hazards, including areas potentially subject to soil-related hazards and seismic hazards related to the location of the project site within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone for the Tres Pinos fault (refer to Section 3.7, Geology and Soils, and Section 3.9, Surface Water Hydrology and Water Quality). The project site is designated as critical habitat for the California tiger salamander (CTS), and contains suitable foraging habitat for other special-status species, and the analysis acknowledges that project development could result in significant biological resource impacts (refer to Section 3.4, Biological Resources). Finally, the cultural resources assessment prepared for the project did not identify any specific cultural resources on or near the project site, although it acknowledges the potential to significantly impact previously undiscovered cultural resources during construction of the project (refer to Section 3.7, Cultural Resources). Mitigation has been identified in this Draft EIR, however, which will reduce all identified impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, seismic hazards, and hydrology and water quality to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 32.

3.10-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Policy 33. Specific development sites shall avoid, when possible, locating in an environmentally sensitive area (wetlands, erodable soils, important plant and animal communities, archaeological resources). Consistency: The project site is not susceptible to landslides and is not located within a FEMA flood zone (See Section 3.7, Geology and Soils and Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality). As noted in the discussions of those EIR sections, the project has been designed to avoid structural development on areas potentially subject to physical hazards, including areas potentially subject to soil-related hazards and seismic hazards related to the location of the project site within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone for the Tres Pinos fault. The project site is designated as critical habitat for the CTS and contains suitable foraging habitat for other special-status species. The analysis acknowledges that project development could result in significant biological resource impacts (refer to Section 3.4, Biological Resources). Finally, the cultural resources assessment prepared for the project did not identify any specific cultural resources on or near the project site, although it acknowledges the potential to significantly impact previously undiscovered cultural resources during construction of the project (refer to Section 3.7, Cultural Resources). Mitigation has been identified in this Draft EIR, however, which will reduce all identified impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, seismic hazards, and hydrology and water quality to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 33. Policy 35. The County shall encourage energy and water conservation techniques and energy efficiency in all new building design, orientation and construction. Consistency:

Energy conservation measures would be incorporated into the project in

accordance with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. The project would be subject to the Specific Plan’s numerous sustainability policies, including its Energy Conservation Policies (Policy RM-8.1: Facilitate alternative energy sources); and Water Conservation Policies (Policy RM-5.1: Reduce potable water consumption), which would encourage sustainable building and project design, energy and conservation techniques and efficiency (Refer to Section 3.3, Air Quality and Section 3.5, Climate Change). Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 35. Policy 37. The individual and cumulative effects of development proposals that generate population growth shall be evaluated and all available means shall be used to assist full mitigation of school facility impacts. Consistency: This Draft EIR evaluates the project’s individual and cumulative effects on school facilities, as described more fully in Section 3.13, Public Services and Facilities. The project shall

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-15

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

be required to mitigate for the identified environmental impacts on school facilities to the extent provided under applicable law by payment of school facility mitigation fees. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 37.

Open Space and Conservation Element Policy 1. Major subdivisions or intense development shall not be allowed within potential habitat of Federal or State listed rare, threatened, or endangered plant or animal species until said development(s) prepares habitat plans for the species unless an interim measure has been taken to mitigate the effect of development. Consistency: Section 3.4, Biological Resources of this Draft EIR evaluated wildlife habitat impacts of the project and determined that the project site does not contain established or known migratory routes and/or wildlife corridors, and is not located in an area that is proposed for establishment of a wildlife corridor. However, the project site is designated as critical habitat for the CTS, and contains suitable foraging habitat for several other special-status wildlife species. The applicant is currently in the process of preparing a Habitat Conservation Plan in accordance with Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act. In addition, the Specific Plan requires adherence to a number of policies designed to promote the conservation of natural resources, such as Policy RM-1.1 (minimize impact to special status species and their habitat in accordance with federal and state regulatory requirements); Policy RM-1.2 (allow potential for localized grading in the on-site habitat conservation area); and Policy RM-1.3 (minimize adverse changes to natural habitats), as well as related implementation measures. In addition, the project would be required to comply with mitigation measures as set forth in Section 3.4 (Biological Resources) to ensure that any project impacts to special-status wildlife species were reduced to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 1. Policy 2: Maintain corridors for habitat. In rural areas, road and development sites shall be designated to maintain habitat connectivity with a system of corridors for wildlife or plant species and avoiding fragmentation of open space areas. Measures to maintain the long-term health of the plant and animal communities in the area shall be incorporated into project design such as buffers, consolidation of/or rerouting access, transitional landscaping, linking nearby open space areas, and habitat corridors. Consistency: Section 3.4, Biological Resources of this Draft EIR evaluated wildlife corridor impacts of the project and determined that the project site does not contain established or known migratory routes and/or wildlife corridors, and is not located in an area that is proposed for

3.10-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

establishment of a wildlife corridor. The applicant is currently in the process of preparing a Habitat Conservation Plan in accordance with Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act. In addition, the Specific Plan requires adherence to a number of policies designed to promote the conservation of natural resources, such as Policy RM-1.1 (minimize impact to special status species and their habitat in accordance with federal and state regulatory requirements); Policy RM-1.2 (allow potential for localized grading in the on-site habitat conservation area); and Policy RM-1.3 (minimize adverse changes to natural habitats), as well as related implementation measures. In addition, the project would be required to comply with mitigation measures as set forth in Section 3.4 (Biological Resources) to ensure that any project impacts to special-status wildlife species were reduced to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 2. Policy 3: Mitigation for wetland development. Development shall be sited to avoid encroachment on wetlands. Mitigation shall be required for any development proposals that have the potential to reduce wetland habitat from primary or secondary effects of the development. Consistency: Section 3.4, Biological Resources, of this Draft EIR evaluated potential impacts of the project on jurisdictional waters, including wetlands. As described more fully in Section 3.4, there are no wetlands or jurisdictional features (either federal or state waters) on the project site. The applicant is currently in the process of preparing a Habitat Conservation Plan in accordance with Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act. In addition, the Specific Plan requires adherence to a number of policies designed to promote the conservation of natural resources, such as Policy RM-1.1 (minimize impact to special status species and their habitat in accordance with federal and state regulatory requirements); Policy RM-1.2 (allow potential for localized grading in the on-site habitat conservation area); and Policy RM-1.3 (minimize adverse changes to natural habitats), as well as related implementation measures. In addition, the project would be required to comply with mitigation measures as set forth in Section 3.4 (Biological Resources) to ensure that any project impacts to special-status wildlife species were reduced to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 3. Policy 6: Exotic plants and animals. It is the policy of the County to work with State, Federal, and local agencies and land owners to develop programs to reduce the destruction of plant and animal life and habitat caused by invasive plants and animals. Consistency: Section 3.4, Biological Resources, of this Draft EIR, evaluates potential impacts on biological resources and identifies Specific Plan Policy RM-1.3 (minimize adverse changes to natural habitats) as well as a mitigation measure (MM BIO-4) that requires the developer to

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-17

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

prepare and implement a landscaping and revegetation plan(s) in order to prevent the spread of invasive non-native plant species. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 6. Policy 7: Grading, erosion, and native tree removal. It is the policy of the County to minimize erosion resulting from grading and cutting and native tree removal for all development proposals. Consistency: There are no trees on the project site. Section 3.7, Geology and Soils, evaluates potential erosion impacts that could occur as a result of project development. Specifically, grading, removal of vegetation, and other construction-related activities would disturb the soil, which could increase soil erosion rates. The developer would be required to submit erosion control plans, which would include measures to protect drainage courses and the on-site habitat conservation area from eroded soils and debris during construction. Furthermore, the developer would be required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program, in accordance with MM HYD-1a and MM HYD-1b. Specifically, the developer would need to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which specifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will prevent construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. In addition, the developer would be required to incorporate post-construction stormwater pollution management measures, including, among others, source control measures, to reduce stormwater pollution during operation of the project. Implementation of the identified measures would reduce project impacts associated with grading to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 7. Policy 8: Development in drainage basins. It is the County’s policy to minimize development/uses within drainage basins that could alter the path of watercourses and impede groundwater recharge. Consistency: There are no drainage courses or wetlands on the site due to the relatively flat topography. Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality evaluates impacts to drainage patterns and groundwater recharge and identifies Specific Plan Policy RM-4.1 (construct a stormwater collection and disposal system that retains and encourages percolation of stormwater generated within the project site to pre-development levels), Policy RM-4.2 (allows shared retention basins with the adjacent Gavilan San Benito Campus under certain conditions and requires the preparation of formal storm drainage plans in accordance with San Benito County design standards), and Policy RM-4.3 (BMPs and LID designs to minimize surface water quality degradation from discharge of storm drainage) as well as mitigation measures (MM HYD-2a through MM HYD-2c) that require the developer to prepare and implement an approved Grading Master Plan and Storm Drainage Master Plan in conformance with County of San Benito design, performance and construction standards and other applicable requirements.

3.10-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Implementation of the identified measures would reduce project impacts associated with drainage and groundwater recharge to a less than significant level. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Policy 8. Policy 10: Air quality. The County recognizes air as a natural resource and will strive to maintain air quality through proper land use planning. It shall be the County’s policy to utilize land use and transportation controls for the protection and enhancement of air quality. Finally, it shall be the County’s policy to review public and private development proposals in light of possible recreational and open space potential. Consistency: Section 3.3, Air Quality, of this Draft EIR evaluates air quality impacts resulting from project implementation and identifies various land use and transportation controls as set forth in the Specific Plan that are designed to protect air quality and reduce emissions to the extent feasible. The project also includes development of park and recreational facilities for the benefit of project residents and the surrounding community. The proposed project includes the provision of parkland in an amount that meets the County standard for open space and parks, either through on-site development or payment of the applicable fee to facilitate off-site development of parks and open space, or a combination thereof (Refer to Section 3.14, Parks and Recreation). Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 10. Policy 12: Direct development to urban areas. It will be the County’s policy to apply land use controls to ensure that only non-urban uses are located beyond Spheres of Influence and the Urban Reserve Areas, except for specific areas designated Rural/Urban, Area of Special Study, Residential Commercial, or Industrial on the General Plan Land Use Map. Consistency: The project site lies within an area designated as an “Area of Special Study,” where urban uses are allowed through application and adoption of a comprehensive specific plan. The proposed project is designed in accordance with a comprehensive specific plan, which has been prepared to guide the development of residential uses on the site. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 12. Policy 13: Specific plan requirements. It will be the County’s policy to require specific plans for small, large, new or expanding communities that are not incorporated which would clearly identify centers of urban growth and land uses within those areas. Consistency: The project will be developed in accordance with the proposed Specific Plan, which is designed to provide a comprehensive framework for development to ensure a coherent

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-19

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

development pattern for the project site, providing for the potential for a variety of housing types, interconnected with a system of pedestrian/bicycle trails to encourage non-vehicular travel. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 13. Policy 16: Open space around cities. It is the County’s policy to preserve a rural atmosphere by directing population growth and public service extensions to infill development and avoiding leapfrog growth. Consistency: The project is near the eastern edge of the City of Hollister and existing suburban development and is currently designated under the County General Plan as an “Area of Special Study.” Furthermore, development of the project is otherwise consistent with the intent of the Area of Special Study designation. By developing the project site with a variety of housing, subject to conformance with the policy provisions of the proposed Specific Plan, the project would direct development away from natural resources and prevent leapfrog growth. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 16. Policy 18: Protect rural atmosphere and natural resources. General Plan Amendments, Specific Plans, Area Plans and Area of Special Study that result in a net increase in General Plan buildout (Table 1 of the Land Use Element), shall include methods to conserve open space for natural resources including agriculture, wildlife habitat, and water (e.g., conservation easements and/or other similar resource protection measures). Proposed development areas shall also include measures to protect resources on-site and contiguous to the project with the use of clustering, conservation easements, and other similar programs. Consistency: The project site is near the eastern edge of the City of Hollister and existing suburban development, and is currently designated under the County General Plan as an “Area of Special Study.” Furthermore, development of the project is otherwise consistent with the intent of the Area of Special Study designation because by developing the project site with a variety of housing, the project would direct development away from natural resources and prevent leapfrog growth. The project would be developed in compliance with a comprehensive planning framework that provides for resource protection measures, including a potential conservation easement to protect natural resources. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 18. Policy 25: Legislative methods to protect agriculture and rural identity. It is the County’s policy to use the Williamson Act, agricultural zoning, and legislative means, where appropriate, to preserve agricultural resources, maintain a rural identity, and to define and shape the urban form. Residential growth should be directed to where services are already provided and to the least productive agricultural lands.

3.10-20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Consistency: The proposed project site and its surroundings do not contain high grade agricultural soils, prime or unique farmland, or land subject to Williamson Act contracts (refer to Section 3.2, Agricultural Resources). One means by which the County preserves agricultural resources and maintains a rural identity is the adoption and implementation of the Area of Special Study designation. The intent of this designation is to prevent leapfrog growth and to direct development away from key natural resources and the most productive agricultural land and towards areas with available utilities and services. The project would be developed in compliance with the Area of Special Study designation under a comprehensive planning framework that would be required to adhere to a variety of resource protection measures. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 25. Policy 29: Energy Conservation. It will be the County’s policy to encourage the use of energy-efficient design in new construction. Consistency: As discussed more fully in the Specific Plan and Section 3.15, Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy, the project incorporates numerous policies addressing energy efficient design, including building materials and passive solar energy as well as site orientation for solar access. Energy conservation measures would be incorporated into the project in accordance with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. The project would be subject to the Specific Plan’s numerous sustainability policies, including its Energy Conservation Policies (Policy RM-8.1: Facilitate alternative energy sources); and Water Conservation Policies (Policy RM-5.1: Reduce potable water consumption), which would encourage sustainable building and project design, and energy conservation techniques and efficiency. In addition, a network of bicycle and pedestrian paths may be provided, which would facilitate alternative modes of transportation. These policies and design features would result in the reduction of energy usage within the project. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 29. Policy 31: Wastewater treatment. Wastewater treatment systems shall be designed to ensure the long-range protection of groundwater resources in San Benito County. Septic systems shall be limited to areas where sewer services are not available and where it can be demonstrated that septic system will not contaminate groundwater. Every effort should be made in developing and existing developed areas to reduce the use of septic systems in favor of domestic wastewater treatment. Domestic wastewater treatment systems shall be required to use tertiary wastewater treatment as defined by Title 22. Consistency: The applicant proposes to provide wastewater collection and treatment through a connection to the City of Hollister’s Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant in accordance with the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan. However, the Specific Plan also provides for the

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-21

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

potential use of septic systems under certain circumstances in accordance with applicable County standards and other requirements regulating the placement and use of septic systems. Section 3.7 (Geology and Soils), Section 3.9 (Hydrology and Water Quality), and Section 3.15 (Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy) evaluate the project’s potential impacts on water quality should septic systems be used. To mitigate potential impacts, a number of mitigation measures are identified, including requirements that the developer demonstrate that all required permits (including RWQCB approval) have been obtained; compliance with any space constraints identified; demonstration of lot-specific soil suitability; and compliance with all applicable laws and regulations including, without limitation, the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan. Implementation of the identified mitigation would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 31. Policy 34: Evidence water quality and quantity for development. Approval of new developments shall not be allowed without evidence of adequate water quality and quantity. Consistency: Section 3.15, Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy, evaluates the adequacy of the available water supply from both a quantity and quality perspective. Specifically, Section 3.15 identifies potentially significant water quality and supply impacts; identifies mitigation that will reduce all impacts to a less than significant level; and concludes there is sufficient, high quality supply to serve the project. In addition, state law as well as the County approval process will require the developer to demonstrate adequate water quality and quantity as part of the subdivision map process for the project. Policy 46: County and City bike plans. It will be the County’s policy to require new development to provide easements for trails/bikeways identified in the City of Hollister Parks and Recreation Master Plan and to be consistent with the San Benito County Bike Plan. Consistency: The project would include a series of streets with bicycle lanes and pedestrian walkways, consistent with the County’s Bicycle Master Plan. In addition, the proposed project includes an open space trail system in a loop configuration around the perimeter and within the project site, generally as identified in Figure 13, Open Space. This system of open space and parks is anticipated to connect to the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Pedestrian circulation routes would be separated from vehicular traffic on all streets, which would contain sidewalks or pedestrian paths. See Figure 18, Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Plan. Further, the City of Hollister Park Facility Master Plan includes goals and implementing actions to provide a network of interconnected trails and bikeways linking parks, schools and scenic open space areas. In the vicinity of the project site, the City plans to establish an off-street (Class I) bike/pedestrian path along Airline Highway from Sunset Drive to the existing off-street bicycle

3.10-22

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

path connecting to Ridgemark and Tres Pinos. The proposed project would not impair or conflict with the City’s identified goals in this regard. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 46. Policy 47: Parks master plan. Develop a County-wide parks master plan to identify long-range recreational needs of the County, potential trail corridors, and areas for potential recreational-tourist services/programs. Consistency: The County adopted a County-wide Parks Master Plan on July 27, 2010 in accordance with Policy 47. The project would be required to comply with this plan, either through the creation of on-site park and recreational facilities or payment of the applicable inlieu fee to support the construction of park and recreational facilities in other parts of the County, as contemplated by the County’s Parks Master Plan. Therefore, the project would be consistent with Policy 47. Policy 56: Ratio of parks to population. Recreational facilities for existing and new development in the unincorporated areas of the County shall be provided to meet the needs of the population based on a ratio of five acres of park land per 1000 persons. Consistency: The proposed project includes the provision of parkland that meets the County’s requirements, either by constructing parks and recreational facilities as part of the project in an amount that satisfies the ratio set forth in Policy 56 or by payment of the applicable in-lieu fee, which could then be used to fund the construction of park and recreational facilities in other locations in the County, or by a combination of both. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 56.

Housing Element Policy 1B. The County shall ensure that housing is affordable to extremely low, very low, low, and moderate- income families and members of the local workforce (e.g., teachers, fire and police, farm workers). Affordable housing units shall continue to be exempt from growth management programs in San Benito County. Consistency: The project proposes development of various types of housing products (including secondary units), which would likely be available to a wide array of households and designed to address a broad range of community needs. In addition, the Specific Plan contains policies designed to facilitate the construction of affordable housing (see, e.g., Policy LU-2.1, Action #3; requires the master developer to prepare and implement affordable housing program that complies with County’s affordable housing requirements). Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 1B. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-23

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

Policy 1I. The County shall actively promote the development and rehabilitation of housing to meet the needs of special needs groups including the needs of seniors, people with disabilities, farm workers, the homeless, people with HIV/AIDS, people in need of mental health [services], single parent families, large families, and other persons identified as having special housing needs. Consistency: The project proposes development of various types of housing products (including secondary units), which would likely be available to a wide array of households and designed to address a broad range of community needs, including housing for college students, faculty and their families from the adjoining Gavilan San Benito College Campus. In addition, the Specific Plan contains policies designed to facilitate the construction of affordable housing (see, e.g., Policy LU-2.1, Action #3; requires the master developer to prepare and implement affordable housing program that complies with County’s affordable housing requirements). Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 1I. Policy 2A. The County shall encourage and assist the construction of a variety of housing types with varying densities and prices, for both sale and rental that are affordable to all income groups, particularly very low income and special needs groups. Consistency: The project proposes development of various types of housing products (including secondary units), which would likely be available to a wide array of households and designed to address a broad range of community needs. In addition, the Specific Plan contains policies designed to facilitate the construction of affordable housing (see, e.g., Policy LU-2.1, Action #3; requires the master developer to prepare and implement affordable housing program that complies with County’s affordable housing requirements). Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 2A. Policy 2C. The County shall assure that new housing efficiently uses land and causes minimum environmental impact. Consistency: The project proposes development of various types of housing products, which would likely be available to a wide array of households and designed to address a broad range of community needs. There would be a range of potential densities with a variety of lot sizes, which would be developed pursuant to a comprehensive planning framework. In addition, the project site has been designated as an Area of Special Study, which is intended to direct development away from sensitive natural resources and the most productive agricultural lands and to facilitate efficient, orderly growth in certain areas in the County that are near existing urban uses, utilities and services such as the project site. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 2C.

3.10-24

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Policy 2I. The County shall ensure that there is sufficient land zoned for a variety of housing types, residential densities and housing prices that will meet the needs for projected growth while providing flexibility on the identification of housing sites. Consistency: The project proposes development of various types of housing products (including secondary units), which would likely be available to a wide array of households and designed to address a broad range of community needs. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 2I. Policy 2L. The County shall require, through specific plans, neighborhood density standards and development review, a mix of housing types, densities, designs and prices/rents in each planning area where land is available. Consistency: The project proposes development of various types of housing products, which would likely be available to a wide array of households and designed to address a broad range of community needs. There would be a range of potential densities with a variety of lot sizes, which would be developed pursuant to a comprehensive planning framework as set forth in the Fairview Corners Specific Plan. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 2L. Policy 2M. The County shall disperse lower, moderate and higher cost housing throughout the County, each planning area and each subdivision where feasible due to the availability of land and adequate service facilities. Consistency: The project proposes development of various types of housing products, which would likely be available to a wide array of households and designed to address a broad range of community needs. The proposed residential units would be built in close proximity to domestic water and wastewater facilities provided by Sunnyslope County Water District and the City of Hollister. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 2M. Policy 2Q. The County shall encourage appropriately designed second units as a means of developing small, affordable units. Consistency: The project proposes development of various types of housing products, which would likely be available to a wide array of households and designed to address a broad range of community needs, including second units. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 2Q. Policy 2R. The County shall use land efficiently to encourage a diversity of housing types and to implement “smart” and sustainable development principles.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-25

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

Consistency: The project proposes development of various types of housing product, which would likely be available to a wide array of households and designed to address a broad range of community needs. There will be a range of potential densities with a variety of lot sizes, which will be developed pursuant to a comprehensive planning framework. In addition, the project site has been designated as an Area of Special Study, which is intended to direct development away from sensitive natural resources and the most productive agricultural lands and to facilitate efficient, orderly growth in certain areas in the County that are near existing urban uses, utilities and services such as the project site. The project would be subject to the Specific Plan’s numerous sustainability policies, including its Energy Conservation Policies (Policy RM-8.1: Facilitate alternative energy sources); and Water Conservation Policies (Policy RM-5.1: Reduce potable water consumption), which would encourage sustainable building and project design, energy and conservation techniques and efficiency. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 2R. Policy 5E. The County shall promote energy efficient land use planning by incorporating energy conservation as a major criterion for future decision making. Consistency: The project proposes development of various types of housing products, which would likely be available to a wide array of households and designed to address a broad range of community needs. There would be a range of potential densities with a variety of lot sizes, which would be developed pursuant to a comprehensive planning framework. In addition, the project site has been designated as an Area of Special Study, which is intended to direct development away from sensitive natural resources and the most productive agricultural lands and to facilitate efficient, orderly growth in certain areas in the County that are near existing urban uses, utilities and services such as the project site. The project would be subject to the Specific Plan’s numerous sustainability policies, including its Energy Conservation Policies (Policy RM-8.1: Facilitate alternative energy sources); and Water Conservation Policies (Policy RM-5.1: Reduce potable water consumption), which would encourage sustainable building and project design, energy and conservation techniques and efficiency. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 5E. In summary, the project would be consistent with relevant General Plan policies, and therefore land use impacts in this regard would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

3.10-26

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

San Benito County Affordable Housing Ordinance (San Benito County Code, Chapter 21.03) The Board of Supervisors adopted an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance in January, 2004 to facilitate the production of housing stock for very low, low and moderate income households. In December 2010, the County replaced its Inclusionary Housing Ordinance with a new Affordable Housing Ordinance, codified at Chapter 21.03 of the San Benito County Code. As amended, Chapter 21.03 provides identified density bonuses and other incentives for residential projects that provide a certain level of such housing stock on- or off-site and/or donates land to a County-approved housing developer for the construction of such housing stock, rather than mandating inclusionary housing production. The project is subject to the San Benito County Affordable Housing Ordinance, and the project proposes to provide affordable housing in accordance with the County’s requirements.

San Benito County Zoning Ordinance (San Benito County Code, Title 25) The current zoning designation of the project site is “Rural (R)” with a minimum building site requirement of five acres, consistent with the underlying base General Plan designation of “Rural.” While the project is not currently consistent with these designations, if approved, the project site would be re-zoned “Fairview Corners-Specific Plan (FC-SP).” Land uses proposed within the project site would be required to be consistent with this new designation, as shown on the Fairview Corners Specific Plan Land Use Map. With adoption of the Specific Plan and the related rezoning of the project site, the project would be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, and therefore land use impacts in this regard would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Effects upon an Established Community Impact LU-2: The proposed project would not disrupt or divide an established community. No impact would occur. Development of the project would not result in the disruption or division of an established community, but would instead represent the orderly expansion of the Hollister Urban Area eastward from its current boundary along Fairview Road, into a currently undeveloped area, consistent with the applicable General Plan designation of the project site as an “Area of Special Study.” Therefore, the project would have no impact in this regard. No mitigation is required.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-27

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

Conflict with any Applicable Habitat Conservation Plan Impact LU-3: The proposed project would not conflict with an established habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. No impact would occur. The project is not located within an established Habitat Conservation Plan area. The applicant is currently in the process of preparing a Habitat Conservation Plan in accordance with Section 10 of the Federal Endangered Species Act. Upon completion and approval by the USFWS, the project would be required to be developed in a manner consistent with the USFWS-approved Habitat Conservation Plan. Further, San Benito County Code, Chapter 19.19 mandates the payment of mitigation fees for development of open space in the Hollister area that is considered to be San Joaquin kit fox habitat. The project site lies within this required fee payment area, and the developer would be required to pay the applicable fee. See additional discussion in Section 3.4, Biological Resources. Therefore, the project would have no impact in this regard. No mitigation is required.

Conflict with Surrounding Land Uses Impact LU-4: Development of the proposed project may create land use compatibility conflicts with surrounding uses. This is considered a less than significant impact. Residential Density The proposed development would alter the use of the site from rural open space to a suburban residential community, which represents a substantial change. Although the mix of housing types would be determined in the future based on market demand, the project would be residential in nature. In addition, the project is designed to complement and be supportive of the proposed uses on the adjoining Gavilan San Benito College Campus, both in terms of providing appropriate housing for students and faculty, as well as cooperative infrastructure planning. As such, the project would be compatible with the existing residential subdivisions located in the vicinity. As discussed above, the proposed project provides for a range of potential residential densities, ranging from one dwelling unit per gross five acres, consistent with the existing land use designation, to approximately 3.6 dwelling units per gross acre, consistent with the increased density allowable in the Area of Special Study. The proposed density range corresponds to a minimum of 12 units or a maximum of 220 dwelling units that would be permitted on the 60acre project site under the Specific Plan. The maximum allowed overall density would be less than 4.0 dwelling units per acre, consistent with the intended density anticipated in Areas of Special Study. 3.10-28

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Furthermore, development of the proposed project within the range of densities proposed is otherwise consistent with the intent of the Area of Special Study designation, by providing for a range of housing types as well as pedestrian and bicycle connections to reduce vehicle emissions; and effectively planning the design, development and financing of services through the implementation of the Fairview Corners Specific Plan. Development of the project would represent the orderly expansion of the Hollister Urban Area eastward from its current boundary along Fairview Road, into a currently undeveloped area, consistent with the applicable General Plan designation of the project site as an “Area of Special Study”. The proposed project would facilitate efficient, orderly growth in certain areas in the County that are near existing urban uses, utilities and services such as the project site. The proposed residential units would be built in close proximity to domestic water and wastewater facilities provided by Sunnyslope County Water District and the City of Hollister. While the project proposes at least or greater development density than allowed under the current General Plan and zoning designations, the project includes a change in these designations to ensure consistency and all development on the project site would be subject to the provisions set forth in the approved Specific Plan. In summary, the proposed project would not create land use incompatibility based on its residential density with surrounding uses, and the impact is less than significant. No mitigation is required. Urban Interface Conflicts As discussed in Section 3.2, Agricultural Resources, during the NOP scoping process, a concern was raised by the operators of the Foxhollow Herb Farm (farm) to the southeast of the project site that development of the project site with residential uses could expose the farm to urban pollutants such as household pesticide and fertilizer residues. The proposed project includes several approaches to reducing urban/agricultural conflicts at buildout. As shown on Figure 13, Open Space Diagram, an open space buffer would be provided at the southeast corner and along the eastern boundary of the project site between proposed residential uses and the fields. The proposed project places low density residential uses in proximity to the southeastern boundary as indicated by the Conceptual Lotting Plans A-C, (refer to Figures 10, 11, and 12) and includes policies that limit the use of pesticides on the site. Implementation of MM AG-1 would reduce impacts to adjacent agricultural uses to less than significant and the project would result in a less than significant impact related to land use compatibility with adjacent agricultural uses. No mitigation is required.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-29

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

Population and Housing Impact LU-5: The project would not induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly. Therefore, this would be considered a less than significant impact. According to updated Census data provided by AMBAG, the population estimate for unincorporated San Benito County in 2010 was 62,431 persons. The proposed project would result in a population increase of up to approximately 678 persons (based on 3.08 persons per household, Department of Finance 2010). The approved Santana Ranch project (1,092 dwelling units) to the north and Gavilan San Benito College Campus (70 dwelling units) for a combined total of 1,162 dwelling units, would equate to about 3,579 people. These two projects, along with the proposed project, would contribute to a total increase in population of about 4,257 persons over a period of five to 16 years.

The AMBAG population forecast for the

unincorporated San Benito County for 2020 is an estimated 24,720 persons, and for 2025 is estimated to be 26,671. Over the next 15 years, AMBAG forecasts indicate that the County population should grow by about 7,600 persons.

The proposed project’s individual and

cumulative contribution to population growth is consistent with this forecast. Therefore, the proposed project would not induce substantial population growth in an area. For additional information on potential growth inducing impacts, see Section 5.1, Growth Inducing Impacts.

3.10.5

C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

Conflicts with the Applicable Land Use Plan, Policy or Regulations Impact LU-6: The proposed project, combined with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects in San Benito County may result in cumulative land use impacts to the project area. This is considered a less than significant impact. Other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects have been and/or will be developed in the County (refer to Section 3.0), which may result in land use impacts. However, as discussed above, the proposed project is consistent with relevant plans, policies and regulations, and would be required to comply with all applicable regulations to ensure consistency and compatibility with surrounding land uses, and would not result in any significant land use impacts. Therefore, the project would not combine with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects in the vicinity to result in a cumulative impact on any existing nearby land uses, such as existing residential and small ranch uses, with 3.10-30

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS

R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

regard to land use compatibilities or generation of excessive noise. The proposed project would be subject to design review, which would ensure the proposed project meets the goals and policies of the Specific Plan for high-quality residential development, and would eliminate any land use incompatibilities. Therefore, the cumulative impacts with regard to land use is anticipated to be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.10-31

3.10 L AND U SE AND P LANN ING

This side intentionally left blank.

3.10-32

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11 N OISE

This section of the Draft EIR includes a summary of relevant background information and applicable regulations, a description of existing ambient noise conditions, and an analysis of potential noise impacts of the proposed project. Feasible mitigation measures are recommended, as necessary, to reduce significant noise impacts. The information contained within this section is based on information and data from the County of San Benito General Plan (1994) and Fairview Corners Residential Project Environmental Noise Assessment San Benito County, California (Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. 2010) (hereinafter “noise report”) and a supplemental memo to the noise report, dated May 26, 2011 (Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc.). Copies of the noise report and supplemental memo can be found in Appendix J.

Acoustic Fundamentals Sound is mechanical energy transmitted in the form of a wave because of a disturbance or vibration. Sound levels are described in terms of both amplitude and frequency. Amplitude is defined as the difference between ambient air pressure and the peak pressure of the sound wave. Amplitude is measured in decibels (dB) on a logarithmic scale. For example, a 65 dB source of sound, such as a truck, when joined by another 65 dB source results in a sound amplitude of 68 dB, not 130 dB (i.e., doubling the source strength increases the sound pressure by 3 dB). Amplitude is interpreted by the ear as corresponding to different degrees of loudness. Laboratory measurements correlate a 10 dB increase in amplitude with a perceived doubling of loudness and establish a 3 dB change in amplitude as the minimum audible difference perceptible to the average person. Noise may be defined as unwanted sound. Noise is usually objectionable because it is disturbing or annoying. Noise is generated by many mobile sources (e.g., automobiles, trucks, and airplanes) and stationary sources (e.g., construction sites, machinery, and industrial operations).

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-1

3.11 N OISE

Noise attenuates with distance from the noise source. The rate at which noise attenuates depends on the ground surface (whether soft or hard) and the number or types of objects between the noise source and the receiver (e.g., trees, buildings, walls). There are several noise measurement scales which are used to describe noise in a particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement which indicates the relative amplitude of a sound. The zero on the decibel scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Sound levels in decibels are calculated on a logarithmic basis. Each 10-decibel increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness over a fairly wide range of intensities. Therefore, an increase of 10 decibels represents a 10-fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 decibels is 100 times more intense, 30 decibels is 1,000 times more intense, and so forth. The most common method of characterizing sound in California is the A-weighted sound level or dBA. This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time, a method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statistical behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-varying events. This energy-equivalent sound/noise descriptor is called Leq. The most common averaging period is hourly, but Leq can describe any series of noise events of arbitrary duration. A comparison of noise levels to common sources is presented in Table 19, Typical Noise Levels in the Environment. Sound levels can be reduced by placing barriers between the noise source and the receiver. In general, barriers contribute to decreasing noise levels only when the structure breaks the "line of sight" between the source and the receiver. Since sound is actually a fluctuation in air pressure, a sound barrier must be an air tight structure; hence, solid walls, earthen berms, or changes in topography are commonly used as effective sound barriers. Wooden fences or broad areas of dense foliage can also reduce noise, but are less effective than solid barriers.

Noise Descriptors The intensity of environmental noise fluctuates over time, and several descriptors of time averaged noise levels are typically used when evaluating the impacts of noise. Sensitivity to noise increases during the evening and at night because excessive noise interferes with the ability to sleep; hence, 24-hour descriptors have been developed that incorporate artificial noise penalties added to quiet-time noise events. Many communities use 24-hour descriptors of noise levels to regulate noise.

3.11-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 19

Typical Noise Levels in the Environment

Common Outdoor Noise Source

Jet Fly-over at 1,000 feet Gas Lawn Mower at 3 feet Diesel Truck at 50 feet Travelling 50 MPH Noisy Urban Area, Daytime Gas Lawn Mower at 100 feet Commercial Area Heavy Traffic at 300 feet

Noise Level (dBA)

Common Indoor Noise Source

110

Rock Band

100 90

Food Blender at 3 feet

80

Garbage Disposal at 3 feet

70

Vacuum Cleaner at 10 feet Normal Speech at 3 feet

60 Large Business Office

Quiet Urban Daytime

50

Dishwasher in Next Room

Quiet Urban Nighttime

40

Theater, Large Conference Room (Background)

30

Library

Quiet Suburban Nighttime Quiet Rural Nighttime

Bedroom at night, Concert Hall (Background) 20 Broadcast/Recording Studio 10

Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Source:

0

Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing

Illingworth & Rodkin Inc. (2010), Technical Noise Supplement (TeNS), Caltrans (2009)

The three most commonly used descriptors are Leq, Ldn, and CNEL. The energy-equivalent noise level, Leq, is a measure of the average energy content (intensity) of noise over any given period. The day-night average noise level, Ldn, is the 24-hour average of the noise intensity, with a 10dBA “penalty” added for nighttime noise (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) to account for the greater sensitivity to noise during this period. CNEL, the community equivalent noise level, is similar to Ldn but adds an additional 5-dBA “penalty” for night-time noise (7 p.m. to 10 p.m.). Another descriptor that is commonly discussed is the single-event noise exposure level (SENEL), also referred to as

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-3

3.11 N OISE

the sound exposure level (SEL). The SENEL/SEL describes a receiver’s cumulative noise exposure from a single noise event, which is defined as an acoustical event of short duration (0.5 second), such as a backup beeper, the sound of an airplane traveling overhead, or a train whistle, and involves a change in sound pressure. Noise analyses may also depend on measurements of Lmax, the maximum instantaneous noise level during a specific period of time, and Lmin, the minimum instantaneous noise level during a specific period. Common noise level descriptors are summarized in Table 20, Definitions of Acoustical Terms.

Human Responses to Noise The human response to environmental noise is subjective and varies considerably from individual to individual. Noise in the community has often been cited as a health problem, not in terms of actual physiological damage, such as hearing impairment, but in terms of inhibiting general well-being and contributing to undue stress and annoyance. The health effects of noise in the community arise from interference with human activities, including sleep, speech, recreation, and tasks that demand concentration or coordination. Hearing loss can occur at the highest noise intensity levels. When community noise interferes with human activities or contributes to stress, public annoyance with the noise source increases. The acceptability of noise and the threat to public well-being are the basis for land use planning policies preventing exposure to excessive community noise levels. Unfortunately, there is no completely satisfactory way to measure the subjective effects of noise or of the corresponding reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. This is primarily because of the wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance and habituation to noise over differing individual experiences with noise. Thus, an important way of determining a person’s subjective reaction to a new noise is the comparison of it to the existing environment to which one has adapted: the so-called “ambient” environment. In general, the more a new noise exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the new noise will be judged. Regarding increases in A-weighted noise levels, knowledge of the following relationships will be helpful in understanding this analysis: ƒ

Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, 1-dB change cannot be perceived by humans.

ƒ

Outside of the laboratory, a 3-dB change is considered a just-perceivable difference.

ƒ

A change in level of at least 5 dB is required before any noticeable change in community response would be expected. An increase of 5 dB is typically considered substantial.

ƒ

A 10-dB change is subjectively heard as an approximate doubling in loudness and would almost certainly cause an adverse change in community response.

3.11-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 20

Definitions of Acoustical Terms

Term Decibel, dB

Definition A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure. The reference pressure for air is 20.

Sound Pressure Level

Sound pressure is the sound force per unit area, usually expressed in micro Pascals (or 20 micro Newtons per square meter), where 1 Pascal is the pressure resulting from a force of 1 Newton exerted over an area of 1 square meter. The sound pressure level is expressed in decibels as 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio between the pressures exerted by the sound to a reference sound pressure (e.g., 20 micro Pascals). Sound pressure level is the quantity that is directly measured by a sound level meter.

Frequency, Hz

The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below atmospheric pressure. Normal human hearing is between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz. Infrasonic sound are below 20 Hz and Ultrasonic sounds are above 20,000 Hz.

A-Weighted Sound Level, dBA

The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the Aweighting filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise.

Equivalent Noise

The average A-weighted noise level during the measurement period.

Level, Leq Lmax, Lmin

The maximum and minimum A-weighted noise level during the measurement period.

L01, L10, L50, L90

The A-weighted noise levels that are exceeded 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of the time during the measurement period.

Day/Night

The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 10 decibels to levels measured in the night between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am.

Noise Level, Ldn or DNL

Noise Equivalent Level, CNEL

The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 5 decibels in the evening from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and after addition of 10 decibels to sound levels measured in the night between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am.

Ambient Noise Level

The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.

Intrusive

That noise which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration,

Community

frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content as well as the prevailing ambient noise level. Source:

Illingworth & Rodkin Inc. (2010)

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-5

3.11 N OISE

A limitation of using a single noise-level increase value to evaluate noise impacts, as discussed above, is that it fails to account for pre-project noise conditions. With this in mind, the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) developed guidance to be used for the assessment of project-generated increases in noise levels that take into account the existing ambient noise level. Although the FICON recommendations were specifically developed to assess aircraft noise impacts, they are equally applicable to all sources of noise described in terms of cumulative noise exposure metrics. FICON-recommended noise evaluation criteria are summarized in Table 21, Recommended Criteria for Evaluation of Increases in Ambient Noise Levels.

Table 21

Recommended Criteria for Evaluation of Increases in Ambient Noise Levels

Ambient Noise Level Without Project

Increase Required For Significant Impact

<60 dB 60-65 dB >65 dB

5.0 dB, or greater 3.0 dB, or greater 1.5 dB, or greater

Source:

FAA, 2000

3.11.1

E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING

Existing Noise Environment Noise-Sensitive Land Uses Noise-sensitive land uses generally include those uses where exposure to noise would result in adverse effects, as well as uses where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose. Noise-sensitive land uses typically include residential uses, hospitals, convalescent facilities, parks, hotels, churches, libraries, and schools. The project site is undeveloped and therefore does not contain any noise-sensitive land uses. The only noise-sensitive land uses in the vicinity of the project site consist of residential uses, including those located on Harbern Way to the east, in the Cielo Vista subdivision west of Fairview Road and the two rural residential properties located north of the project site. The residential uses within the Cielo Vista subdivision are closest to the project site; these uses are separated from the project site by Fairview Road and are shielded from Fairview Road by an approximately six-foot tall wood and masonry fence.

3.11-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Existing Ambient Noise The project site is undeveloped. Existing sources of noise on the site consist of mechanical equipment used when the site is periodically mowed and disced, and in connection with the Sunnyslope agricultural water pumps near the northwest corner of the site. The noise report includes the results of an ambient noise monitoring survey conducted from March 21, 2008 to March 26, 2008, which serves as the basis for quantifying the existing noise environment at the project site and vicinity (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010). The report identifies vehicular traffic as the primary source of ambient noise on the site and in the vicinity. Based on past experience and noise measurements of various types of pumps, the noise consultant determined that the Sunnsylope facility is not a significant source of existing noise. Noise levels typically range from 60-70 dBA at a distance of three feet from this type of equipment. Additionally, noise from these types of facilities and ongoing agricultural operations are intermittent in nature and do not occur frequently enough to significantly increase day-night average noise levels at existing residences (Illingworth & Rodkin 2011). Noise levels were monitored on Fairview Road near the Cielo Vista residential subdivision, approximately 33 feet from the centerline of Fairview Road, south of Cielo Vista Drive, which would receive the greatest volume of project-related traffic according to the project’s traffic impact report and correspondingly, would be exposed to the greatest amount of project-related traffic noise. Based on the monitoring conducted, existing ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site predominantly result from traffic along Airline Highway and Fairview Road. Hourly average noise levels measured at this location ranged from 68 to 70 dBA Leq during the day, and from 54 to 68 dBA Leq at night. Measured ambient noise values (i.e., Leq, Lmax, and Lmin) are summarized in Table 22, Ambient Noise Levels. The calculated day-night average noise level on Fairview Road ranged from 70 to 72 dBA Ldn (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010). The calculated daynight average noise level at the monitoring location ranged from 70 to 72 dBA Ldn. Table 22

Ambient Noise Levels Measured Noise Levels (dBA)

Primary Location

Noise Source

AM/PM

Leq

Lmin

Lmax

Fairview Road

Vehicle

Day

69

68

70

at Cielo Vista

Traffic Night

61

54

68

Drive (33’ from Centerline) Source:

Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. 2010

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-7

3.11 N OISE

3.11.2

R EGULATORY S ETTING

San Benito County General Plan The Noise Element of the County’s General Plan sets forth noise compatibility standards for various land uses. For residential uses and school uses, noise levels of up to 60 dB CNEL/Ldn are “clearly acceptable,” and noise levels of up to 65 dB CNEL/Ldn are “normally acceptable.” Based on an average exterior-to-interior noise reduction afforded by common building construction, exterior noise levels within the “normally acceptable” range would be considered sufficient to ensure that interior noise levels remain within acceptable levels. For parks and playgrounds, noise levels of 55 dB CNEL/Ldn are considered “clearly acceptable” and levels of 65 dB CNEL/Ldn are considered “normally acceptable.” For less noise-sensitive land uses, such as commercial uses, noise levels of up to 75 dBA CNEL/Ldn are considered “normally acceptable” (San Benito County 1984). As it relates to traffic noise, the General Plan Noise Element generally notes that “…road noise becomes a concern when traffic counts approach 20,000 vehicles per day,” and goes on to state that traffic flows under 20,000 vehicles per day may have noise levels of 65 dBA Ldn within 100 feet of the roadway and 60 dBA Ldn or less beyond 100 feet (page 9). In addition, the San Benito County General Plan Noise Element contains the following applicable policies:

Noise Element Goal 2: To Reduce Ground Transportation Related Noise Impacts. Policy 7. To require the installation of noise attenuation features when new residential developments are located adjacent to freeways, highways, arterials, railroad rights of way, and other noise generating uses. Goal 4: To Reduce Construction Related Noise Impacts. Policy 1. It will be the County's continuing policy to control the operation of construction equipment at specific sound intensities and frequencies during specified hours. Policy 2. The County will encourage the use of barriers or enclosures for equipment having high noise emissions.

3.11-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

San Benito County Code San Benito County Noise Ordinance: Section 25.37.035 of the San Benito County Code, and the Noise Control Regulations, Chapter 19.39 of Title 19 of the San Benito County Code, identify maximum acceptable noise standards for noise emanating from any source (unless otherwise exempted), as it affects surrounding properties. Typical noise regulated by these ordinances includes heating, ventilation, air conditioning, and pool equipment. The Noise Control Regulations ordinance specifies that agricultural and rural residential land uses shall not be exposed to noise over a period of one hour in excess of 45 dBA Ldn during the day and 35 dBA Ldn during the nighttime. Residential land uses shall not be exposed to noise over a one-hour period in excess of 50 dBA Ldn during the day and 40 dBA Ldn during the nighttime. Industrial land uses shall not be exposed to noise levels in excess of 70 dBA Leq during the day, and 60 dBA Leq during the nighttime. Commercial land uses shall not be exposed to noise levels in excess of 65 dBA Leq during the day, and 55 dBA Leq during the nighttime. Sections 19.39.009(H) and 25.37.035(E)(2) state that temporary construction, demolition or maintenance of structures shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., except Sundays and federal holidays.

Groundborne Vibration There are no federal, state, or local regulatory standards for groundborne vibration. However, various criteria have been established to assist in the evaluation of vibration impacts. For instance, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has developed vibration criteria based on potential structural damage risks and human annoyance. The groundborne vibration criteria recommended by Caltrans for evaluation of potential structural damage is based on building classifications, which take into account the age and condition of the building. The criteria differentiate between transient and continuous/frequent intermittent sources. Transient sources of groundborne vibration include isolated events, such as blasting. Continuous/frequent intermittent events include the operations of certain types of equipment such as impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, chip-seal equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment, and vehicle traffic on roadways (Caltrans 2002). For residential structures and newer buildings, Caltrans considers a minimum peak-particle velocity (ppv) threshold of 0.25 inches per second (in/sec) for transient sources and 0.04 in/sec for continuous/frequent sources to be sufficient to protect against building damage. Continuous groundborne vibration levels below approximately 0.02 in/sec ppv are unlikely to cause damage to any structure. In terms of human annoyance, continuous vibrations in excess of 0.04 in/sec ppv and vibrations from transient sources in excess of 0.25 in/sec ppv are identified by Caltrans as the minimum perceptible level for ground vibration. Short periods of ground vibration in excess of 2.0 in/sec ppv can be expected to result in severe annoyance to people. Short periods of

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-9

3.11 N OISE

ground vibration in excess of 0.1 in/sec ppv (0.2 in/sec ppv within buildings) can be expected to result in increased levels of annoyance (Caltrans 2002). Caltrans-recommended criteria for the evaluation of groundborne vibration levels, with regard to structural damage and human annoyance, based on continuous and/or frequency of intermittent sources, are summarized in Table 23, Damage Potential to Buildings at Various Groundborne Vibration Levels, and Table 24, Annoyance Potential to People at Various Groundborne Vibration Levels, respectively. Table 23

Damage Potential to Buildings at Various Groundborne Vibration Levels Vibration Level (in/sec ppv) Structure and Condition

Extremely Fragile Historic Buildings, Ruins, Ancient

Transient

Continuous/Frequent

Sources

Intermittent Sources

0.12

0.08

Fragile Buildings

0.2

0.1

Historic and Some Old Buildings

0.5

0.25

Older Residential Structures

0.5

0.3

New Residential Structures

1.0

0.5

Modern Industrial/Commercial Buildings

2.0

0.5

Monuments

Source:

Caltrans (2004)

Table 24

Annoyance Potential to People at Various Groundborne Vibration Levels Vibration Level (in/sec ppv)

Human Response

Transient Sources

Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources

Barely Perceptible

0.04

0.01

Distinctly Perceptible

0.25

0.04

Strongly Perceptible

0.9

0.10

Severe

2.0

0.4

Source:

Caltrans 2004

Notes:

Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, chip-seal equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

3.11-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

3.11.3

S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE

The following significance thresholds used for the assessment of noise-related impacts are based on the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and County noise standards. Noise impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed project would be considered significant if the project would cause: ƒ

Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies;

ƒ

Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels (Because the project does not involve uses that would generate groundborne noise levels, this topic was not evaluated further in this Draft EIR; see Section 5.0, Effects Found Not to be Significant);

ƒ

A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project;

ƒ

A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project;

ƒ

Expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels for a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport (because the project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of an airport, this topic is not discussed further; see Section 5, Effects Found Not To Be Significant); and

ƒ

Expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels for a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip (because the project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, this topic is not discussed further; see Section 5, Effects Found Not To Be Significant).

For purposes of this analysis, the following thresholds are used to determine whether noise increases would be treated as “substantial,” thereby causing a significant impact. For short-term construction noise impacts, a substantial increase in ambient noise levels would be defined as construction-related hourly average noise levels received at noise-sensitive land uses that last for more than 12 months and: (1) exceed 60 dBA Leq, and (2) increase the withoutproject ambient noise level by 5 dBA Leq or more. Significant noise impacts would also result from construction if noise levels are sufficiently high to interfere with speech, sleep, or other normal residential activities during the more noise-sensitive evening and nighttime hours (i.e., 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.).

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-11

3.11 N OISE

For long-term stationary source noise impacts, a substantial increase would be defined as an increase in ambient noise levels at noise-sensitive land uses that would exceed the County’s noise standards for residential land uses, which are 50 and 40 dBA Leq, daytime and nighttime, respectively. For long-term transportation-related noise impacts, a substantial increase is defined in Table 25, Significant Noise Increases, as an increase of 5 dBA in areas where ambient noise levels are less than 60 dBA CNEL/Ldn; an increase of 3 dBA where ambient noise levels range from 60 to 65 dBA CNEL/Ldn; and an increase of 1.5 dBA where ambient noise levels exceed 65 dBA CNEL/Ldn.

Table 25

Significant Noise Increases

Ambient Noise Level Without Project (DNL/CNEL)

Significance Threshold

<60 dB 60-65 dB >65 dB

+ 5 dB or greater + 3 dB or greater +1.5 dB or greater

Source:

Illingworth & Rodkin Inc. (2010), FAA (2000), San Benito County General Plan (1984)

For purposes of assessing compatibility of proposed land uses with projected noise levels, the project’s impact would be considered substantial if it exceeded the County’s General Plan noise compatibility standard of up to 65 dB CNEL/Ldn (“normally acceptable”) for residential uses and parks/playground uses. For impacts related to groundborne vibration, excessive vibration would be defined as levels that exceed the vibration impact thresholds as set forth in Caltrans Transportation- and ConstructionInduced Vibration Guidance Manual. As discussed above, these thresholds are as follows: ƒ

0.04 in/sec ppv for continuous/frequent intermittent sources

ƒ

0.25 in/sec ppv for transient sources

If any of these conditions occurs as a result of the project, the impact would be considered significant and mitigation measures would be required to reduce the sound levels to acceptable levels.

Methodology A combination of a review of existing literature, noise level measurements, and modeling (using the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Traffic Noise Model and the cumulative trip

3.11-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

generation and traffic volumes presented in the project’s traffic report) were used to predict transportation-related and stationary noise levels and to evaluate the project’s noise impacts. As discussed more fully in the noise report, traffic noise levels were calculated using the FHWA roadway noise prediction model based on California vehicle reference noise levels and traffic data obtained from the traffic report. Predicted noise levels were calculated at a distance of 33 feet and 100 feet from the near-travel-lane centerline, as well as the distance to a predicted CNEL noise contour of 65 dBA. Increases in traffic noise levels attributable to the proposed project were determined based on a comparison of predicted noise levels, with and without project implementation. The noise modeling data for the project is included in Appendix J. The noise report found that the proposed project would not result in short-term and long-term groundborne vibration impacts or noise impacts from airport or airstrip operations. Stationary source noise levels at nearby land uses were calculated based on distance from the source and assuming an average noise attenuation rate of six (6) dB per doubling of distance. Predicted noise levels were compared to the noise standards and other applicable thresholds, as described above, to determine impact significance (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010).

3.11.4

I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

Short Term Construction Noise Impacts Impact NOISE-1: Construction activities associated with the proposed project may expose nearby land uses to excessive noise levels, a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels above noise levels existing without the project. As a result, noisegenerating construction activities would be considered to have a potentially significant short-term impact. Construction noise would result in a short-term increase in ambient noise levels. Noise impacts from construction activities associated with the proposed project would be a function of the noise generated by the construction equipment, equipment location, sensitivity of nearby land uses, and the timing and duration of the construction activities. As described above, for shortterm construction noise impacts, the County does not have any specific standards. Therefore, based on technical expertise and consistent with industry standards, the noise analysis defines a substantial increase in ambient noise levels as construction-related hourly average noise levels received at noise-sensitive land uses that last for more than 12 months and: (1) exceed 60 dBA Leq, and (2) increase the without-project ambient noise level by 5 dBA Leq or more. Therefore, temporary noise generated by construction that both exposes sensitive receptors to unacceptable noise and lasts for more than 12 months would be a potentially significant impact.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-13

3.11 N OISE

According to the noise report, worst-case hourly average construction source noise levels during busy construction periods would be 88 dBA Leq measured at a distance of 50 feet. The noise level standard used was 60 dBA Leq, based upon typical ambient noise levels for residential receivers. A 5 dBA Leq above the ambient would be 65 dBA. The noise report determined that construction noise levels would drop from 88 dBA to 65 dBA at a distance of approximately 700 feet from the source, based on the typical construction noise drop-off rate (six dBA per doubling of distance, as described previously). In sum, without any noise attenuation or shielding, the proposed project would expose sensitive receptors within 700 feet of construction areas to noise levels greater than 65 dBA, which represents an increase of five dBA and exceeds the County’s noise threshold (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010). This would include adjacent residences on Harbern Way and the two residences on Old Ranch Road, in addition to the closest receptors west of Fairview Road. Assuming no noise shielding from either natural or human-made features (e.g., trees, terrain, buildings, fences), outdoor areas for the closest noise-sensitive receptors (within 100 feet) could experience noise levels ranging from 75 to 92 dBA during construction. Build-out of the project may occur over a period of five to 16 years. Therefore, some residences, both off-site and on-site, may be subject to unacceptable construction noise levels that could last for more than 12 months, depending on the type and nature of the construction activity. Construction noise in any one particular area would be temporary and would include noise from activities such as excavation, site preparation, truck hauling of material, pouring of concrete, and use of power hand tools. Construction activities generate a considerable amount of noise that varies depending on the specific activities occurring at the site. Construction-related noise levels are less acute during building framing, finishing, and landscaping phases, and more acute during times when excavation equipment, material handlers, and portable generators are used. Figure 23, Preliminary Phasing Plan, presents the conceptual phasing plan (See Section 2.0, Project Description). It is anticipated that Phase I would contain grading, drainage, and roadway backbone infrastructure, and that construction of the project could occur over a period of five to 16 years. Development would occur first near Fairview Road, with successive phases or subphases progressing eastward across the site. According to Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan), the development phases are expected to occur sequentially (Phase I, then Phase II) although the construction phases could also occur concurrently. Development of each phase would include all infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities, both public and private, needed to serve the uses and structures within that phase, which would be completed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Specific Plan and relevant required master plans, as discussed throughout this document. The ultimate site plan and related phasing for individual development projects would be more precisely defined through the first subdivision application process. Given that the proposed project would be constructed in phases over a number of years, future project residents who occupy earlier phases of development could also

3.11-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

be subjected to unacceptable noise levels for a period longer than 12 months, as construction progresses in the later phases on the site (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010). According to Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan and as reflected in Figure 23, Preliminary Phasing Plan, Phase I would consist generally of the western one-half of the site and Phase II would consist of the eastern one-half of the site. The distance between the west and east property lines of the site is approximately 1,670 feet. Correspondingly, sensitive receptors in the Cielo Vista residential subdivision west of Fairview Road within 700 feet of construction would be exposed to construction noise generated by construction activity of Phase I, but only to constructionrelated traffic noise during the construction of Phase II. The existing sound wall along the west side of Fairview Road is expected to provide some shielding of construction noise for the nearest existing residences located west of the project site, across Fairview Road. Sensitive receptors in residences to the east along or near Harbern Way within 700 feet of the site would be exposed to unacceptable levels of construction noise during the Phase I construction of backbone infrastructure called for in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan, and to construction of residences during implementation of Phase II. Receptors on Harbern Way would not experience unacceptable noise levels during development of Phase I parcels, which are located across the site a distance greater than 700 feet to the west. The two residences on Old Ranch Road would be exposed to unacceptable construction during both Phases when activity would occur within 700 feet of the residences. As noted above, newly constructed residences would also be exposed to unacceptable construction noise from construction activity conducted within 700 feet of new residences. This potential impact is anticipated to affect the greatest number of receptors during construction of Phase I, which could include higher residential density (refer to Figures 10-12) than Phase II development. However, the new residences would also serve as a buffer between existing receptors west of Fairview Road, which would reduce noise levels and exposures as Phase I construction proceeds at greater distances. Compliance with the preliminary phasing plan generally as described in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan would reduce the duration of exposure to unacceptable construction noise for off-site receptors within 700 feet of construction activity, but not to new receptors introduced to the site. As noted above, the County Code prohibits construction activities during the nighttime hours (7 p.m. to 7 a.m.) when loud noise would be most disruptive and intrusive. Compliance with the County’s noise ordinances would ensure that the project would not result in nighttime construction noise that could result in increased levels of annoyance and potential sleep disruption for occupants of nearby existing noise-sensitive land uses. The project’s construction-related noise would exceed the applicable thresholds for a period longer than 12 months, and expose sensitive receptors to prolonged construction noise.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-15

3.11 N OISE

However, given the location of these off-site sensitive receptors within 700 feet of the project site, the following mitigation measures are recommended by the noise consultant (Illingworth and Rodkin 2010) to reduce the project’s impacts To the extent feasible. MM NOISE-1: During all project construction activities, the following mitigation measures shall be incorporated into construction documents and shall be implemented by the project developer: a.

Restrict noise-generating activities at the construction site or in areas adjacent to the construction site to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Construction-related noisegenerating activities shall be prohibited on Sundays and federally-recognized holidays.

b.

Properly maintain construction equipment and equip all internal combustion engine driven machinery with intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. Equipment engine shrouds shall be closed during equipment operation.

c.

Construction vehicles and equipment shall not be left idling for longer than 5 minutes when not in use.

d.

Locate stationary noise generating equipment such as air compressors or portable power generators as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Construct temporary noise barriers to screen stationary noise generating equipment when located near adjoining sensitive land uses. Temporary noise barriers could reduce construction noise levels by 5 dBA.

e.

Utilize "quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists.

f.

Route all construction traffic to and from the project site via designated truck routes where feasible. Prohibit construction-related heavy truck traffic in residential areas where feasible.

g.

Control noise from construction workers’ radios to a point that they are not audible at existing residences bordering the project site.

h.

Prior to issuance of any grading and/or building permits, the contractor shall prepare and submit to the County for approval a detailed construction plan identifying the schedule for major noise-generating construction activities.

i.

Designate a "disturbance coordinator" who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall

3.11-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule. Implementation of the above mitigation measures would reduce construction-related noise levels during the day, and would prohibit construction activities during the more noise-sensitive nighttime hours to the extent feasible. However, because the distance between the site and homes is less than 700 feet, implementation of MM NOISE-1 would reduce construction-related noise impacts, but not to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project’s construction-related noise impacts as they relate to existing off-site residences and future on-site residences would be considered significant and unavoidable.

Long-Term Stationary Noise Impacts Impact NOISE-2: Stationary noise generated by the project could expose persons to noise levels in excess of applicable County noise standards at existing noise-sensitive land uses adjacent to the project site and newly developed noise-sensitive residential land uses within the project site. This is a less than significant impact. The proposed residential development would generate stationary noise that could affect the noise environment within the proposed project and nearby existing rural and residential uses. As noted above, for long-term stationary source noise impacts, a substantial increase would be defined as an increase in ambient noise levels at noise-sensitive land uses that would exceed the County’s noise standards for residential land uses, which are 50 and 40 dBA Leq, daytime and nighttime, respectively.

Noise from Proposed Residential Development Stationary-source noise associated with residential development is primarily associated with the operation of landscape maintenance equipment, central air conditioning units, amplified music, and vehicle noise (car doors slamming, etc.). Noise in residential areas would be generated by vehicles on roadways, engine starts, door slams, and by the sound of human voices and children playing. However, increases in existing ambient noise levels from such sources are typically intermittent and are generally limited to the less noise-sensitive daytime hours. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the operation of any major on-site stationary noise sources within the project site. According to the project noise consultant (Illingworth & Rodkin 2011), the proposed residential project would not introduce any significant source of noise that could exceed the County’s Noise Ordinance or the Noise Control Regulations Ordinance at

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-17

3.11 N OISE

nearby sensitive receptors, based on past field measurements and study of residential developments similar to the proposed project. Additionally, to the extent the proposed project includes the placement of larger residential lots, open space, and recreational uses along the north and east side of the project site between existing rural residential uses and proposed residences, this may help serve as a further noise buffer to those existing uses. Stationary-source noise impacts associated with proposed residential land uses would therefore be considered less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Noise from Proposed Parks and Open Space The proposed project may include development of public-use parks, recreational trails and other recreational facilities, dispersed throughout the project site. These park facilities may include active and passive facilities including a small par course in the eastern portion of the site, tot-lots, a linear perimeter trail and a seven-acre habitat conservation area near the northeastern corner of the site. Additional recreational and open space areas are also proposed, including landscaped corridors and retention basins during the non-rainy season. The specific facilities to be included in the proposed parks have not yet been identified; however, more intense recreational uses, such as volleyball courts, baseball/soccer fields, and basketball courts that would attract spectators and increase vehicle traffic are not proposed and amplified music is not anticipated. The Specific Plan includes provisions to connect to public recreational facilities on the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus. As noted above, noise typically associated with play areas and related parking lots include children at play and vehicle noise (e.g., car doors slamming, etc.). According to the project noise consultant (Illingworth & Rodkin 2011), past field measurements and study of passive park uses similar to those proposed typically generate noise levels ranging from 55 to 65 dBA Leq at 24 feet. Additionally, the proposed project includes provisions for open space and trails around the perimeter of the site (refer to Figure 13), and would not place pocket or community parks that might generate unacceptable levels of noise in proposed open space areas. Noise levels associated with such uses are often intermittent and do not typically result in substantial increases in daytime ambient noise levels. In order for noise to exceed the County’s noise thresholds (50/40 dBA Leq),for nearby rural uses along Harbern Way or Old Ranch Road the sound would have to exceed the limit for more than 15 minutes over a period of one hour, measured at the property line or within the receiving use (County Code Section 19.39.006). For the reasons listed above, the proposed project would not exceed the County’s noise standards for rural residential uses. The operation of landscape maintenance equipment, such as gasoline-powered lawn mowers and leaf blowers, could result in intermittent increases in ambient noise levels. In the event landscape maintenance activities were to occur during the more noise-sensitive early morning

3.11-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

hours, the intermittent noise associated with the landscape maintenance equipment could result in increased levels of annoyance and potential sleep disruption to occupants of nearby residential dwellings, and would be considered potentially significant. As a result, noise impacts generated by the new parks are considered potentially significant. Implementation of the following mitigation measure will reduce the potentially significant impacts discussed above to a level of less than significant with mitigation incorporated: MM NOISE-2a: Noise-generating landscape and facility maintenance activities shall be prohibited on the premises of the common parks and open space areas between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. as an ongoing operational requirement within the project site. MM NOISE-2b: The recreational use of the common parks and open space areas shall be limited to between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m., and amplified music shall be prohibited at the common parks and open space areas.

Long-Term Transportation-Related Noise Impacts Impact NOISE-3: Implementation of the proposed project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient transportation-related source noise levels above noise levels existing without the project, and would not exceed the applicable noise standards at existing noise-sensitive land uses adjacent to the project site and newly developed noise-sensitive residential land uses within the project site. As a result, this impact is considered less than significant. The proposed project would generate transportation-related noise as a result of project-related vehicular traffic, particularly along Fairview Road, Airline Highway, Union Road, and the other roadway segments identified in Section 3.14 Transportation and Circulation. Ambient noise levels would increase as a result of this additional traffic. To determine the level of noise impacts of this additional project-related traffic, the noise report compared project traffic volumes to existing traffic volumes using information provided by the traffic consultant. As identified by the traffic consultant and discussed above, Fairview Road would carry most of the project traffic and the intersection of Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista Drive extension would be the most significantly impacted by transportation-related noise as a result. As noted previously, the noise analysis determined existing hourly average noise levels measured on Fairview Road near its intersection with the Cielo Vista Drive extension range from 68 to 70 dBA Leq during the day, and from 54 to 68 dBA Leq at night (refer to Table 22, Ambient Noise Levels). The calculated day-night average noise level at this location ranges from 70 to 72 dBA Ldn (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010).

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-19

3.11 N OISE

Predicted noise levels were calculated for both existing and existing plus project conditions using the FHWA roadway noise prediction model. Assuming maximum buildout, project-related traffic would increase ambient noise levels by 1 dBA Ldn or less (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010) at the intersection of Fairview Drive and the Cielo Vista Drive extension, which would be expected to experience the most traffic-related noise from the project. A traffic noise increase of 1 dBA Ldn is not typically perceptible and the impact of this increase is not considered substantial under the applicable threshold since it is less than 1.5 dBA (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010). Therefore, the noise impacts from project-related traffic would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Compatibility of Proposed Land Uses with Projected Noise Levels Under CEQA, the potential physical impacts of the project on the environment must be evaluated. However, CEQA does not require that the environment’s impacts on the project be evaluated. Nevertheless, because the County’s General Plan contains noise compatibility standards, this Draft EIR considers impacts of off-site traffic noise and noise generated by the outdoor sporting activities at the future adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus site for purposes of evaluating compatibility issues. Impact NOISE-4: Predicted exterior noise levels at the proposed residences along Fairview Road could expose persons to noise levels in excess of the applicable noise standards. As a result, this noise impact on the proposed new development would be considered potentially significant. Based on the modeling conducted using the FHWA Traffic Noise Model and cumulative trip generation and traffic volumes provided by the traffic consultant, and based upon the buildout scenarios of the City of Hollister and County of San Benito General Plans, it has been determined that proposed land uses within the project site would be primarily affected by traffic noise from Fairview Road. Planned on-site roadways would also result in traffic noise that could adversely affect proposed land uses. Predicted exterior exposures to traffic noise are presented in Table 26, Predicted Noise Levels.

Table 26

Predicted Traffic Day/Night Average Noise Level Location

Predicted Noise Levels (Ldn) Distance From Centerline

Cielo Vista Drive Extension

Fairview Road

57

67

70 feet

100 feet

Source:

Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. 2010

Note:

The Federal Highway Administration Traffic Noise Model was used to calculate future traffic noise levels.

3.11-20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

On-Site Exposure to Traffic Noise: Cielo Vista Drive Extension Traffic noise exposures from the Cielo Vista Drive Extension would be greatest in proximity to the roadway. As shown in Table 26, above, proposed residential and on-site passive recreational uses located within 70 feet from the center of the Cielo Vista Drive extension would be exposed to day-night average noise levels of approximately 57 dBA Ldn (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010) which meets the County’s exterior noise standard of 65 dBA CNEL/Ldn. Interior noise levels for residences within 70 feet of the new Cielo Vista Drive extension would be 42 dBA Ldn, also consistent with County requirements. Therefore the impacts of mobile source noise exposures to new residences on the site from traffic on Cielo Vista Drive extension would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. On-Site Exposure to Traffic Noise: Fairview Road As shown in Table 26 above, predicted exterior noise levels at the nearest proposed residential land uses located adjacent to Fairview Road, if left unmitigated, would be approximately 67 dBA Ldn, which exceeds the County’s noise compatibility standard of 65 dBA CNEL/Ldn (normally acceptable). Without attenuation, placement of residences within 100 feet of Fairview Road would result in a significant noise impact (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010). As a result, this impact of traffic noise on proposed residential uses along Fairview Road would be considered potentially significant. Interior noise levels are typically 15 decibels lower than outdoor noise levels due to the attenuating effect of building construction. The noise standards reflect this difference; since noise levels would exceed standards in outdoor areas, this analysis also assumes they would exceed the County’s standard of 45 dBA Ldn for indoor areas. Therefore, interior noise levels for residences within 100 feet of Fairview Road would be about 52 dBA Ldn, which exceeds the County’s standard by seven dBA, assuming standard construction with the windows open for ventilation. Without attenuation, the impact is considered potentially significant. Preliminary barrier calculations indicate that a six-foot solid barrier, relative to the residential pad elevation, would be required to reduce exterior noise levels at residential outdoor use areas proposed adjacent to Fairview Road to an acceptable level. Correspondingly, placement of this six-foot barrier would reduce ground level interior noise to 45 dBA Ldn, which is consistent with County standards for interior noise levels. However, second story interiors would remain exposed to noise levels that exceed the 45 dBA Ldn standard. Table 27, Future Exterior Ldn Noise Levels (dBA) With Mitigation, summarizes the future exterior noise levels of homes along Fairview Road assuming noise barrier heights ranging between 6 feet and 10 feet.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-21

3.11 N OISE

Table 27

Future Exterior Ldn Noise Levels (dBA) With Mitigation Sound Barrier

Noise source

No Barrier

6 foot

7 foot

8 foot

9 foot

10 foot

Fairview Road

67

60

58

57

56

55

Source:

Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. 2010

The project would be required to implement a number of policies and measures that are set forth in the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan which are designed to reduce noise impacts, as follows: ƒ

Set development back from roads and lots dependent on development density and lot size. (Policy LU-9.1)

ƒ

Two-story residences within 100 feet of the Fairview Road center line will require acoustical analyses, pursuant to the requirements of the San Benito County Code, and the project’s conditions of approval to ensure that interior noise levels on the second floor will be reduced to 45 dBA Ldn or lower. Building design shall include provisions for forced-air mechanical ventilation so that windows can be kept closed to control noise. The conclusions and recommendations of the specific analyses, including the description of the necessary noise control treatments, shall be submitted to the County along with the building plans for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. (Policy LU9.1, Action #5)

ƒ

A minimum six-foot sound barrier may be required along Fairview Road. (Policy LU-10.2, Action #3).

These policies are consistent with the recommendations in the noise report. In particular, the noise report recommends providing forced-air mechanical ventilation for residential units adjacent to Fairview Road, specifies the type of materials and height of any required sound barrier, and discusses appropriate construction techniques. Implementation of the above Specific Plan policies as well as MM AES-1 (Section 3.1, Aesthetics) would reduce the project’s compatibility-related noise impacts. To ensure these impacts are reduced to a less than significant level, implementation of the following additional mitigation measures is recommended. MM NOISE-4a: For residences placed within 100 feet of Fairview Road, the project developer shall comply with Policy LU-9.1, Measure #5 and Policy LU-10.2, Measure #3, found in Article 2.0 of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan (Land Use). Compliance

3.11-22

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

with Article 2.0 shall be subject to the review and approval of the County in accordance with Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan), as part of the project’s design and site review process. Specifically, in the event that multi-story residences are proposed adjacent to Fairview Road, an acoustical study shall be prepared by the project developer and reviewed and approved by the County, including mitigation measures to ensure that interior noise levels within upper floor areas of the dwelling units will maintain an acceptable noise level of 45 dBA CNEL/Ldn, or less. The study shall be submitted to the San Benito County Planning and Building Department in conjunction with the first associated building permit application for the multi-story residences at issue. The developer shall implement all recommended mitigation measures in the study prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy for the multi-story residences. MM NOISE-4b: If residences are placed within 100 feet of Fairview Road, sound attenuation features shall be required in accordance with the recommendations set forth in the approved acoustical report, and shall, at a minimum, include the following: a.

A minimum six-foot noise barrier shall be constructed to reduce noise levels in outdoor use areas along Fairview Road.

b.

The barriers shall be constructed solidly over the entire surface and the base, and shall not contain openings or gaps between barrier materials or the ground which would decrease the reduction provided by the noise barrier.

c.

Suitable materials for barrier construction shall have a minimum surface weight of 3 lbs./ft2. (such as one-inch thick wood, masonry block, concrete, or metal), and shall be consistent with MM AES-1.

d.

The final design of noise barriers shall be completed and approved during design review for the project when detailed site plans and grading plans are available.

Therefore, with mitigation as described above, predicted exterior traffic noise levels at proposed residential land uses would not exceed the County’s “conditionally acceptable” exterior noise standard of 65 dBA CNEL/Ldn and interior noise levels would be maintained within acceptable levels. This impact is considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Noise Exposure from College Events The project proposes residences in close proximity to the planned Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Planned campus athletic fields, include a soccer field, softball and baseball diamonds, and a football field surrounded by a track and bleachers. The athletic fields would include lighting and would be expected to generate noise in the late evening hours during sporting

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-23

3.11 N OISE

events. Actively-used playfields could potentially be a significant source of community noise at residential receptors within the project. Noise would primarily result from players, spectators, and public address systems. Noise levels resulting from the use from these athletic fields would be highest during highlyattended football games. Most home football games are expected to occur on Saturday nights at 7:00 p.m. It is assumed that there would be five regularly scheduled home games per year and the possibility of an additional scrimmage game. The proposed bleachers would accommodate 2,000 to 5,000 spectators; however, average attendance is expected to range from 500 to 2,000 spectators (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010). A credible worst-case assessment of potential noise from sporting activities at the junior college campus was made using noise data collected and extrapolated from a high-school football game (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010). High-school sporting events are generally attended by more spectators than junior college events. Worst-case average noise levels resulting from a football game would be approximately 61 to 63 dBA Leq at a distance of 465 feet from the center of the field and would include noise sources such as the cheering of the crowd, referee’s whistles, the public address system, horns, bands, and other amplified music. Maximum noise levels generated by these individual sources would typically range from 60 to 74 dBA Lmax at a distance of 465 feet. Noise levels generated by baseball, softball, track and field, and swimming events would be lower than those generated by football events (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010). The nearest noise-sensitive receiver on the project site would be located about 620 feet northeast of the center of the football field. Worst-case average noise levels generated by a football game with about 500 spectators would range from about 51 to 53 dBA Leq at the nearest residences, and maximum noise levels would range from about 50 to 64 dBA Lmax. Worst-case average noise levels generated by a football game with about 2,000 spectators would range from about 57 to 59 dBA Leq at the nearest residences. Maximum noise levels would range from about 56 to 70 dBA Lmax. Noise levels generated by a football game would exceed ambient noise levels by 10 to 20 dBA Leq at nearby residential land uses. Noise levels generated by the use of the soccer field, softball and baseball diamonds, and track would be less given the reduced expected attendance at such events (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010). Although the proposed project would expose new residences to ambient noise levels in excess of the General Plan noise and land use compatibility standard during well attended football games, these events would occur on five nights a year or less for about three hours during evenings and night. Due to the low frequency of these events and the limited duration when noise levels would be elevated, this would be considered a less than significant impact. No mitigation is required.

3.11-24

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Exposure to Groundborne Vibration Impact NOISE-5: Predicted groundborne vibration levels would not be anticipated to expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration, in excess of applicable thresholds for human annoyance or structural damage. Therefore, groundborne vibration impacts would be considered less than significant. No major groundborne vibration sources were identified in the vicinity of the project site. Longterm operational activities associated with residential uses would not be anticipated to include the use of any equipment or processes that would result in potentially significant levels of ground vibration. Increases in groundborne vibration levels attributable to the proposed project would be primarily associated with short-term construction-related activities. Construction activities that result in high levels of vibration are not proposed as part of the project. However, some construction activity could generate perceptible vibration levels at adjacent residences. Table 28, Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment, presents standard vibration source levels for common construction equipment at an industry standard distance of 25 feet.

Table 28

Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment Equipment

Reference PPV at 25 feet (in/sec)

Vibrational Rollers

0.210

Large Bulldozers

0.089

Caisson Drilling

0.089

Loaded Trucks

0.076

Jackhammer

0.035

Small Bulldozers

0.003

Crack-and Seat-Operations*

2.4

Source:

Illingworth & Rodkin 2011

*Note:

Vibrational rollers and crack and seat operations are not anticipated with this project.

According to the noise consultant (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010 and 2011), ground vibration levels diminish in strength with increased distance from the source. Predicted vibration levels at a distance of 50 feet from the source are anticipated to be less than 0.04 in/sec PPV. New buildings would be separated from construction areas by the roadway infrastructure constructed during Phase I. The proposed minimum 60-foot width for internal rights-of-way for public streets

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.11-25

3.11 N OISE

would further reduce the vibrational effects of construction. Therefore, predicted vibration levels at the nearest buildings on- and off-site would not exceed applicable standards for structural damage or human annoyance (refer to Tables 22 and 23, respectively). Short-term groundborne vibration impacts would be considered less than significant. No mitigation is required.

3.11.4

C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

Contribution to Future Cumulative Noise Levels Impact NOISE-6: Implementation of the proposed project in combination with past, present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to future cumulative noise levels. As a result, this impact would be considered less than significant. The geographic extent of the cumulative setting includes consideration of past, present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future development, including traffic volumes (see modeling results in the project’s traffic analysis), combined with the project. The primary factor for cumulative noise impact analysis is the consideration of future traffic volumes. These volumes would be associated with the Cumulative Projects presented in Section 3.0. Long-term noise generated by the project, as experienced at nearby land uses, would be primarily associated with increases in vehicle traffic on area roadways. As discussed in Impact NOISE-3, predicted near-term increases in traffic noise levels attributable to the proposed project would not contribute to a significant increase in ambient noise levels at nearby existing noisesensitive land uses, and would not exceed applicable noise thresholds. The project’s contribution to a cumulative increase in traffic noise was also studied in the noise report, which concluded that the project would contribute less than 1 dBA increase in cumulative traffic noise. Outside of a controlled environment, a 1 dBA noise increase is generally not perceptible to the human ear, and a gradual increase of less than 1 dBA over time would likewise be imperceptible (Illingworth & Rodkin 2010). Therefore, the project’s contribution to ambient noise levels would not be substantial (i.e., greater than 1.5 dBA above existing levels) and, therefore, is not cumulatively considerable.

3.11-26

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.12 P UBLIC AND G OVERNMENTAL S ERVICES

This section of the EIR addresses existing public services and facilities within unincorporated San Benito County and evaluates the potential environmental impacts associated with any physical expansion or alteration to public service facilities caused by implementation of the proposed project. Services examined for potential impacts include law enforcement, fire protection, schools, and solid waste. Environmental impacts associated with park and recreational facilities are evaluated in Section 3.13 of this EIR. This analysis is based on information contained in the San Benito County General Plan, the project’s application materials, and information supplied by the County of San Benito service providers.

3.12.1

E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING

Law Enforcement Services Law enforcement services in the unincorporated County are provided by the San Benito County Sheriff’s Department, which operates from its headquarters at 451 Fourth Street in Hollister, approximately 4 miles from the project site. The Sheriff’s Department consists of eight units and divisions, and is staffed by 29 sworn officers operating 13 marked patrol cars. According to Lieutenant Roy Iler of the San Benito County Sheriff’s Department (pers. comm. March 18, 2011), the adopted target ratio of officers to residents is one officer per 800 residents (1.25 officers per 1,000 residents), although the actual ratio at this time is well below this goal at approximately one officer for every 4,000 residents. Despite the lower than optimal staffing ratio, the Sheriff’s Department has been able to provide adequate law enforcement services to the residents and businesses in the County, typically responding to calls within 10 minutes. The Department maintains an average response time of 8 minutes for emergencies and 15 minutes

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.12-1

3.12 P UBL IC AND G OVERNMENTAL S ERVICES

for non-emergencies. Between the hours of 12:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m., response times are reduced to an average of 5 minutes for emergencies and 12 minutes for non-emergencies. The Sheriff’s Department also maintains mutual aid agreements with other local law enforcement agencies, including the City of Hollister Police Department, in order to maintain adequate response levels should the need arise.

Fire Protection Services The San Benito County Fire Department is responsible for providing structural fire protection and emergency response within all areas of the County outside of city limits. The project site is located within the San Benito County Fire Department Service Area 26. The County Fire Department contracts with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE) to manage and provide these services. The nearest CAL-FIRE station is located on Fairview Road, about two miles north of the project site; a City of Hollister Fire Department station is located about 3.4 miles west of the project site on Union Road, off Airline Highway. According to Battalion Chief Paul Avila of the San Benito County Fire Department (Avila pers. comm. March 26, 2011), the estimated response time to the project site from the CAL-FIRE station on Fairview Road is anticipated to be about five to six minutes, at project buildout. Similar to the Sheriff’s Department, the County Fire Department maintains mutual aid agreements with other fire protection agencies, including the City of Hollister Fire Department. According to Chief Avila, these two departments would serve the project site (Avila pers. comm. 2011). Current staffing levels of the County Fire Department are five full time firefighters and 21 volunteer firefighters. Recognized standards are to employ one firefighter per every 1,500 residents, in accordance with National Fire Protection Association Standard (NFPA) 1710, or 0.67 firefighters per 1,000 persons. The population of the County Fire Department service area (unincorporated San Benito County) is approximately 18,500 persons (California Department of Housing and Finance, 2011); therefore, the actual staff to population ratio currently is below this goal, at approximately one employed firefighter per 3,700 residents. According to Chief Avila, the countywide average response time for the department is 17 minutes 90 percent of the time. The County responded to 900 incidents in 2010 (Avila pers. comm. 2011). Per NFPA 1710 Standards of Cover, a fire in a single-family residence requires four firefighters on scene within four minutes and an additional 11 fire personnel on scene within eight minutes of the time of the report, for total personnel coverage of 15. Only two persons currently staff one fire engine at the County Fire Department. Although the County Fire Department is supplemented by volunteer paid-call firefighters, the above objective is rarely met. Volunteer paid-call firefighters typically respond from home in their personal vehicles, are not required to be available at any specific time, and may not be available for other reasons, such as being out of the area. 3.12-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The San Benito County Department of Emergency Services oversees emergency medical response services (EMS) to ensure that emergency medical care is available and consistent at the emergency scene, during transport, and in the emergency room. The EMS system includes fire departments, ambulance companies, hospitals, police departments, the American Red Cross, and the American Heart Association. The nearest hospital is the Hazel Hawkins Memorial Hospital in Hollister, located about two miles northwest of the project site.

Schools The project would be served by two school districts: the Hollister School District for students in grades Kindergarten through eighth grade and the San Benito High School District for students in grades nine through 12. According to Jack Bachofer, Chief Business Officer of the Hollister School District, the district serves a student population of approximately 5,533 students and operates a total of eight elementary schools, including two magnet schools, within six elementary school campuses (Pers. Comm. March 24, 2011). The two magnet schools are located within the Gabilan Hills Elementary School and Ladd Lane Elementary School campuses. Currently, of the six non-magnet schools, four are grades kindergarten through fifth and two are grades kindergarten through eighth. The school district also operates two middle schools (grades 6-8). The school district recently made the decision to shift all sixth grade students from the two middle schools to all of the elementary schools, and has received approval to increase class sizes at all schools within the district. Elementary school-aged students from the project site, estimated at 124 students at project buildout, would attend Cerra Vista Elementary School, located at 2151 Cerra Vista Drive in Hollister, approximately two miles northwest of the project site. Middle school-aged students from the project site would attend Rancho San Justo Middle School, located at 1201 Rancho Drive in Hollister, approximately 2.5 miles northwest of the project site. The Hollister School District would provide school bus service to elementary students residing more than 1.5 miles from school, and to middle school students residing more than two miles from school. The San Benito High School District serves a student population of approximately 2,940 students and operates a single school, San Benito High School. This school is located at 1220 Monterey Street in Hollister, approximately three miles to the northwest of the project site. The project site is estimated to have 42 high-school-aged students at project build-out. Table 29, San Benito County School Enrollment and Capacity, School Year 2010-2011, shows the current school enrollment and capacity for the school year. As indicated in the table, San Benito High School is currently over its design capacity.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.12-3

3.12 P UBL IC AND G OVERNMENTAL S ERVICES

Table 29

San Benito County School Enrollment and Capacity, School Year 2010-2011

School

Existing Enrollment

Capacity

% of Capacity

610

634

96%

859

952

90%

2,830

2,600

109%

Hollister School District Cerra Vista Elementary (K-5) Rancho San Justo Middle School (6-8) San Benito High School District San Benito High School (9-12) Source:

Hollister School District (2011), San Benito High School District (2011).

Although Cerra Vista Elementary School and Rancho San Justo Middle School were at 96 percent and 90 percent capacity, respectively, for the 2010-2011 school year, the school district’s decision to increase class sizes and shift all sixth grade students from the two middle schools to several of the elementary schools will alleviate this situation. As a result, Cerra Vista will now be allowed to have more students per classroom, resulting in an increase in capacity of 264, for a total capacity of 898 students. Rancho San Justo Middle School is also going to be allowed to have more students per classrooms and they will be losing sixth graders, resulting in an additional capacity of 396, for a total capacity of 1,348 students. Therefore, both schools are currently under, and are projected to stay under, capacity and the proposed project would not result in either school going over its capacity.

Solid Waste Solid waste generated in San Benito County is collected by franchise hauler Recology San Benito and taken to the John Smith Road Landfill, a County-owned facility located approximately two miles east of the project site on John Smith Road.

Landfill Capacity The projected remaining capacity of the landfill, as of April 2010, is approximately 1,553,000 tons, or 17 years based on the average daily refuse acceptance rate of 250 tons In December 2010, the Board of Supervisors approved the initiation of an expansion of the existing landfill that could expand the capacity by an additional 2,000,000 cubic yards. In a related action, the Board of Supervisors approved increasing the daily tonnage to 500 tons per day, and upon completion of the expansion of up to 1,000 tons per day. Consequently, depending on timing of

3.12-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

the expansion, remaining capacity would not increase beyond the stated 17 years. Furthermore, San Benito County also owns an approximate 130-acre site adjacent to the landfill, which is currently being proposed to be developed into a Resource Recovery Park (30 acres) and a new landfill (100 acres). CEQA compliance for the re-zoning of the Resource Recovery Park is pending as of this writing. The construction of the new landfill has not been scheduled at this time. (Mandy Rose, Integrated Waste Management, April 2010).

Waste Generation Rates Waste generation rates for single family residential uses are based upon San Benito County Integrated Waste Management waste disposal rates. According to information provided to the Gavilan College District by Mandy Rose, Director of Integrated Waste Management, the singlefamily disposal rate is 1.48 tons per year per residence and the multi-family disposal rate is 0.46 tons per year per residence (Gavilan College District 2008).

3.12.2

R EGULATORY S ETTING

School Facilities Act of 1998 The School Facilities Act of 1998, also known as SB 50, provides state funding for new school construction projects that can satisfy criteria for such funding, including eligibility due to growth, Division of State Architect plan approval, and California Department of Education site approval. However, the Act limits the maximum amount of impact fees that can be charged by school districts or imposed by local jurisdictions as mitigation for school impacts resulting from new residential, commercial, and industrial development. The Act also prohibits local agencies from denying a development application on the basis of the applicant’s refusal to provide school facilities mitigation that exceeds the fee amount and prohibits local agencies from refusing to approve any legislative or adjudicative act on the basis that school facilities are inadequate.

County General Plan and County Code Construction and maintenance of public services and facilities in unincorporated San Benito County are regulated by the San Benito County General Plan and the County Code. The following relevant policies from the San Benito County General Plan address the provision of public services and facilities:

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.12-5

3.12 P UBL IC AND G OVERNMENTAL S ERVICES

Land Use Element Policy 37: School Facilities. The individual and cumulative effects of development proposals that generate population growth shall be evaluated and all available means shall be used to assist full mitigation of school facility impacts.

Safety Element Policy 5: State of Readiness. It will be the County’s policy to maintain local police, fire and health forces in a state of readiness to insure adequate protection for the citizens of San Benito County.

3.12.3

S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE

The following thresholds for evaluating a project’s environmental impacts are based on the State CEQA Guidelines and the County’s local CEQA standards. Public service impacts may be considered significant if implementation of the project would result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: ƒ

Fire protection

ƒ

Police protection

ƒ

Schools

ƒ

Other public facilities, such as solid waste treatment facilities

3.12.4

P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

Law Enforcement Services Impact PUB-1: The proposed project would increase service demands for law enforcement patrol and incident response. This increase in demand, however, would not trigger the need for new or expanded law enforcement facilities to serve the project, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Therefore, this would be a less than significant impact. 3.12-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Buildout of the Fairview Corners project is anticipated to increase the Sheriff’s Department service area population by approximately 678 persons based on 220 proposed new residences with an average of 3.081 persons per household (Department of Finance 2011). Applying the optimal ratio (one officer per 800 residents), this population increase would result in the need for less than one additional officer in the Sheriff’s Department. The developer would be required to pay the applicable law enforcement impact fee for residential uses. The Sheriff’s Department has indicated, however, that no new or altered facilities would be required to accommodate any such additional staffing or equipment to serve the project in order to maintain acceptable response times or service capacity. Any additional staff and equipment required to serve the project could be accommodated by existing facilities (Iler pers. comm. 2011). Therefore, as no new facilities would need to be constructed, the project would not result in any physical environmental impacts associated with the construction of any new facilities. Therefore, the project’s impacts in connection with law enforcement services would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Fire Protection Services Impact PUB-2: The project would increase the demand for fire protection services. This increase in demand, however, would not trigger the need for new or expanded facilities to serve the project, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. This would be a less than significant impact. The development of the project would increase demand for fire fighting and emergency response services as a result of the increase in population in the unincorporated area of the County. Assuming the optimal ratios (one fire fighter per 1,500 residents), the project would increase staffing demands by less than one additional firefighter. The developer would be required to pay the applicable fire service impact fee to offset the increased demand for fire department services as a result of the project. While there would be a nominal increase in demand, this would not be expected to affect the Fire Department’s current response time of 17 minutes 90 percent of time, and no new facilities would be required to maintain an adequate response time as a result of the project. Any additional staff and equipment required to serve the project could be accommodated by existing facilities (Avila. pers. comm. 2011). As no new facilities would need to be constructed, the project would not result in any physical environmental impacts associated with the construction of any new facilities. Therefore, the project’s impacts in connection with fire protection services would be less than significant. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.12-7

3.12 P UBL IC AND G OVERNMENTAL S ERVICES

No mitigation is required.

Schools Impact PUB-3: The project would result in the development of new residences and therefore require school services, potentially resulting in the demand for new or expanded facilities to serve the project, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives. This would be a less than significant impact. As discussed above, the project would be served by two school districts: the Hollister School District for students in grades kindergarten through eighth and the San Benito High School District for students in grades nine through twelfth.

Hollister School District Based on the composite yield rate of 0.376 for kindergarten through fifth grade students per single-family dwelling unit, the project is anticipated to generate about 83 kindergarten through fifth grade students at buildout. Based upon the composite yield rate of 0.187 for sixth through eighth grade students, buildout of the project is anticipated to generate about 41 new sixth through eighth grade students. Based on the yield rate of 0.190 for high school students (grades 9-12) per dwelling unit, buildout of the project is expected to generate approximately 42 new high school students. It is anticipated that students from the project would attend existing public schools in the area. At the present time, the combined kindergarten through eighth grade school capacity in the district is below maximum capacity. As noted above, although Cerra Vista Elementary School and Rancho San Justo Middle School are at 96 percent and 90 percent capacity, respectively (refer to Table 29), the school district’s decision to shift all sixth grade students from the two middle schools to several of the elementary schools combined with increased class size, will alleviate this situation. After these changes are in place, Cerra Vista Elementary School is projected to have capacity for an additional 264 students, and Rancho San Justo Middle School is projected to have capacity for an additional 396 students. Therefore, both schools are currently under, and are projected to stay under, capacity and the proposed project would not result in either school going over its capacity (Bachofer pers. comm. 2011). Furthermore, the recently approved Santana Ranch project has reserved an elementary school site within its project to serve 700 students, in order to help accommodate the school children from its project and surrounding areas. The design and funding for this new potential elementary school have not yet been identified, and the school would ultimately be constructed and operated by the Hollister School District.

3.12-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

San Benito High School District As discussed above, the project would generate approximately 42 new high school students. San Benito High School is currently overcapacity by 230 students, and the project would exacerbate this overcapacity. Therefore, it is anticipated that the project would contribute to the need to expand high school facilities to serve the additional students associated with the development of the project, as well as other district students, over time.

School Impact Fees The project’s proposed residential development would be subject to the applicable school impact fees as calculated by the school districts, per statute, and due prior to issuance of occupancy permits. The school districts currently collect impact fees of $2.97 per square foot of residential living space for new residential construction, as provided by state law. Of this amount, approximately two-thirds are allocated to elementary/middle schools and one-third is allocated to the high school. The developer would be required to pay the applicable school impact fees, which would ultimately be programmed by the school districts, in combination with fees collected from other projects, to improve or expand school facilities. The payment of school district fees would mitigate the impacts of the proposed project’s contribution to the need for expanded facilities. Specific improvements as a result of the construction of a new school project, however, have not been identified; therefore, environmental analysis of specific potential impacts associated with development of any future facilities would be speculative at this time. However, it is anticipated that a range of environmental impacts would be required to be analyzed, including those typically associated with the construction and operation of school facilities. Examples of these impacts include traffic generation, noise and air quality. It also is anticipated that any school facilities proposed in the future would be required to undergo separate environmental analysis within their physical environmental contexts, during which specific impacts would be identified and mitigated based on project plans. Therefore, project impacts associated with the construction and operation of school facilities would be less than significant.

Solid Waste Impact PUB-4: The project would increase the generation of solid waste at the project site, thereby reducing the estimated long-term disposal capacity at the local landfill site, and potentially triggering the need to expand the facility, in order to maintain acceptable

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.12-9

3.12 P UBL IC AND G OVERNMENTAL S ERVICES

service ratios or other performance objectives, the construction and operation of which could result in environmental impacts. This would be a less than significant impact. As discussed above, the projected remaining capacity of the John Smith Road Landfill, as of August 2010, is approximately 1,553,000 tons, or 17 years of capacity based on the average daily refuse acceptance rate of 250 tons. As noted above, according to Integrated Waste Management Department, the single-family disposal rate is 1.48 tons per year per residence and the multifamily disposal rate is 0.46 tons per year per residence (Gavilan College District 2008). Using the single-family disposal rate the proposed project would generate approximately 326 tons per year of solid waste. Regulations contained in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations require the maintenance of a minimum of 15 years of permitted disposal capacity for each city and county jurisdiction. At the time of Specific Plan preparation, the projected remaining landfill service life was 17 years as of August 2010. However, more recent communications with Recology San Benito (see discussion above) indicate the site adjacent to the existing landfill has been identified as a future landfill site, and this site will be utilized to fulfill the obligation of the County and its incorporated Cities to maintain a 15-year minimum disposal capacity for the County as a whole. An analysis of the potential impacts of expansion of the existing facility or the construction of a new facility would require environmental review under CEQA once the application is initiated. It is anticipated that funding for the landfill expansion/construction will be derived from landfill franchise fees held in reserve. The new landfill is slated to be financed by the landfill contract operator, Waste Connections, Inc. under agreement with the County of San Benito. The amount of refuse produced by the project could reduce the current landfill’s service life, potentially triggering the need for expanded landfill capacity within a shorter timeframe. However, the contribution of the project to the overall solid waste stream accepted by the John Smith Landfill is relatively small when compared to that produced within the County as a whole. In addition, Article 6.0 (Public Facilities) of the Specific Plan contains a number of policies, which are summarized below, that are designed to reduce the project’s solid waste disposal rates: ƒ

As a condition of approval of any subdivision tentative or parcel map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain verification from Recology San Benito that it can provide solid waste collection services to meet demand from build out of the Plan Area. Waste collection services shall be financed through the most recently adopted fee program of Recology San Benito. (Policy PF-7.1, Action #1)

ƒ

It is anticipated that Recology San Benito will provide curbside recycling service to residential neighborhoods. Where curbside pick-up is not practical, conveniently located

3.12-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

centralized recycling collection and storage facilities will be provided by the developers. (Policy PF-7.1, Action #2) ƒ

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall distribute, to all home buyers, the educational program provided by the service providers as part of a countywide waste reduction, reuse and recycling effort. (Policy PF-7.1, Action #3)

ƒ

Require all construction contracts to include construction waste reduction and recycling clauses. (Policy PF-7.1, Action #4)

ƒ

Require public-use recycling cans at all locations where public-use refuse cans are provided. (Policy PF-7.1, Action #5)

Therefore, based on the above analysis and with implementation of relevant Specific Plan policies, the project’s impacts associated with overall landfill capacity and solid waste disposal would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

3.12.5

C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

Impact PUB-5: The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects within San Benito County, may result in the need for new, expanded, or altered public service facilities, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives, the construction and operation of which could result in environmental impacts. These impacts would be less than significant. The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future development in the County, would generate additional demand on existing public services and facilities, including fire and police protection, schools, and refuse disposal. Current and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects include: ƒ

Gavilan College San Benito Campus: This project involves the construction of a 3,500 full-time equivalent (FTE) student college facility, as well as approximately 70 residential units and 35,000 square feet of retail space, on a 77-acre site at the northeast corner of Fairview Road and Airline Highway.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.12-11

3.12 P UBL IC AND G OVERNMENTAL S ERVICES

ƒ

Award Homes Project: This project involves the construction of 595 single-family homes and 100 apartment units have been approved on the west side of Fairview Road, south of St. Benedict’s Church and east of Calistoga Drive within the City of Hollister.

ƒ

Santana Ranch Project: This project involves the construction of a maximum of 1,092 dwelling units, 65,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses, up to an additional 41,000 square feet of commercial mixed uses, and related community facilities and project infrastructure on a 292-acre site adjacent to the City of Hollister.

The cumulative projects list (Section 3.0) also includes a number of smaller residential projects within the City of Hollister, as well as a number of industrial and warehousing projects in the vicinity of the Hollister Municipal Airport. All cumulative projects would be required to pay the applicable impact fees or service fees for the purpose of providing new and/or expanded facilities (fire, police, schools, and landfill). These fees are programmed for the development of new, expanded or altered facilities by the providers of these public services, at their individual discretion, in response to increased demand for services resulting from these planned projects. While the proposed project, in combination with other cumulative development in the County, may ultimately result in the need for new or expanded facilities, specific improvements as a direct result of these projects have not been identified at this time and therefore any environmental analysis would be speculative. It is anticipated, however, that a range of environmental issues typically associated with facility expansion projects would be identified within the physical environmental context of these potential future projects, including traffic, biological resources, and aesthetics. Further, specific public facility improvements would be identified as part of the capital facilities planning process undertaken by the individual agencies, and these improvements would be subject to environmental review at the time they are proposed. For the reasons discussed above, cumulative environmental impacts as a result of the construction of new, expanded or altered public facilities are anticipated to be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

3.12-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.13 PARKS AND R ECREATION

This section of the EIR addresses existing park and recreational facilities within the County of San Benito, as well as planned park facilities within the Fairview Corners project. The project’s potentially significant impacts related to existing park and recreational facilities, as well as any significant impacts resulting from the construction and use of proposed facilities within the project, are evaluated and feasible mitigation measures are included, where applicable. The following analysis is based on information supplied by the San Benito County Planning Department and the City of Hollister, other technical documents, and on information from the project application materials.

3.13.1

E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING

The County of San Benito provides park and recreational facilities and services to County residents. The principal County park in the project vicinity is the 35-acre Veterans Memorial Park, located approximately 2 miles from the project site at Hillcrest Road and Memorial Drive. This park includes a tot-lot, lighted baseball and softball fields, basketball courts, soccer fields, and picnic areas. There are no neighborhood parks or school playgrounds in the immediate vicinity of the project site. Valley View Park, a City of Hollister park, is the nearest public park to the project site, located approximately one mile away near the intersection of Enterprise Road and Valley View Road. This park is currently 2.5 acres in size, with agreements in place to expand to five acres. Other public recreational areas of regional importance include Pinnacles National Monument (approximately 35 miles south of the project site), Fremont Peak State Park (approximately nine miles southwest of the project site), Hollister Hills State Vehicular Recreation Area (approximately five miles southwest of the project site), and Bolado Park (approximately five miles southeast of the project site), which is operated by the State of California 33rd Agricultural District and includes the County fairgrounds and a nine-hole golf course. The County Historical Park is located adjacent to Bolado Park. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.13-1

3.13 P ARKS AND R ECREATIO N

3.13.2

R EGULATORY S ETTING

San Benito County General Plan Parks and recreational facilities in San Benito County are addressed in the County of San Benito General Plan. The following policies from the General Plan are relevant to the project’s park and recreational facilities:

Open Space and Conservation Element Policy 45: Private recreation facilities. It will be the County’s policy to utilize land use ordinances to encourage land owners to provide private recreational facilities and open space areas. It will also be the County’s policy to allow for an economic return on land while it is being used as open space. Policy 46: County and City bike plans. It will be the County’s policy to require new development to provide easements for trails/bikeways identified in the City of Hollister Parks and Recreation Master Plan and to be consistent with the San Benito County Bike Plan. Policy 47: Parks master plan. Develop a county-wide parks master plan to identify long-range recreational needs of the county, potential trail corridors, and areas for potential recreational tourist services/programs. Policy 48: Park funding. Provide the optimum level of cost effectiveness and public use level at each park, recognizing that each facility has a different mission and a unique set of operating conditions associated with the natural or other available resources. Policy 55: Recreation and open space provide for recreation. It shall be the County’s policy to acquire, develop, operate and maintain a comprehensive…system of open space land uses and recreational facilities to provide for the low-intensity trails, picnicking, informal sports, park benches, and active recreational needs (sports fields for youth and adult leaguer play) of the County population. Policy 56: Ratio of parks to population. Recreational facilities for existing and new development in the unincorporated areas of the County shall be provided to meet the needs of the population based on a ratio of five acres of park land per 1,000 persons. 3.13-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

3.13.3

S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE

The following thresholds for determining the significance of the project’s impacts on park and recreational facilities are based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines and applicable local County CEQA standards. Impacts may be considered significant if implementation of the project would result in either of the following: ƒ

An increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities as a result of the project such that substantial physical deterioration of the facilities as a result of the project would occur or be accelerated.

ƒ

Construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.

3.13.4

P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

Demand for Park and Recreational Facilities Impact REC-1: The proposed project would construct up to 220 new residences, which would result in additional demand on existing park and recreational facilities, which as a result, could lead to the occurrence or acceleration of substantial physical deterioration of those facilities. This is considered a potentially significant impact. The proposed project would result in an increase in the County population. The project’s residential population is estimated to be approximately 678 persons based on the proposed 220 residential units with an average of 3.081 persons per household (Department of Finance 2010). The County General Plan requires that recreational facilities be provided at a ratio of five acres of parkland per 1,000 persons. Based on the estimated project-related population of 678 residents, 3.4 acres of parkland is required. The Specific Plan proposes to include parkland and open space to serve the project’s residents, as well as to facilitate connections with the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Specifically, the project would meet the County’s park and open space requirement, which mandates the provision of five acres of parkland per 1,000 new residents. Assuming the maximum build-out of 220 units (678 residents at 3.081 persons per unit), the project would need to provide at least 3.4 acres of open space and parks on-site, which are sufficiently improved to qualify as park facilities or recreational open space facilities as defined in the County’s Parks Master Plan. As an alternative, the developer may pay the applicable in-lieu fee in accordance with the County’s park requirements (County Code § 23.15.008) — particularly given the close

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.13-3

3.13 P ARKS AND R ECREATIO N

proximity of extensive park and open space features planned on the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus site — which the County could then use to help fund park and open space facilities in other areas in the County. As shown in Figure 13, Open Space Diagram (Section 2.0), it is anticipated that the proposed project would provide parks and open space on the project site. The project’s active parks could take the form of “pocket parks” located strategically throughout the neighborhoods. Passive and/or active open space uses could occur in certain areas of the project site that would otherwise be reserved for the geologic fault area (near the 35-foot Tres Pinos Fault) as well as a potential seven-acre habitat conservation area near the former stock pond (located in the northeastern corner of the site), depending on the resource agency requirements and the ultimate site plan. As indicated by Figure 13, it is anticipated the project would include an open space and park trail system in a loop configuration around the outer boundaries or within the interior of the project site, designed to interconnect the residential neighborhoods with each other and the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus. In addition, to allow useful recreational areas within private parcels, a minimum open space area is required, as described more fully in the Specific Plan, Section 2.4. The ultimate design of the proposed park and open space features would be finalized as part of the application process for the first tentative or parcel map (as the case may be), as reflected in an approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan. The developer also proposes to construct a series of streets with bicycle lanes and pedestrian walkways, consistent with the County’s Bicycle Master Plan. In addition, it is anticipated that an open space trail system in a loop configuration around the perimeter of or within the project site, which would connect to the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus, would be built as part of the project. Pedestrian circulation routes would be separated from vehicular traffic on all streets, which would contain sidewalks or pedestrian paths. See Figure 18, Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Plan (Section 2.0). In addition to policy provisions to protect and manage natural resources (Article 5.0) and to promote pedestrian and bicycle connectivity (Article 3.0), the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan contains a number of additional policies addressing the provision of park and recreational facilities that would be implemented as part of the project (refer also to the discussions in Section 3.1, Aesthetics, Section 3.4, Biological Resources, and Section 3.14, Traffic and Circulation, of this EIR). The Specific Plan contains the following policies that address potential impacts to parks and recreation. Policy LU-6.1. Provide passive and active open space on-site or off-site, or by paying in lieu fees commensurate with park requirements. 1. The master developer and/or neighborhood developer(s) shall provide land for passive and active open space, consistent with the

3.13-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Specific Plan and in accordance with County standards for the provision of parkland. The master developer shall conceptually design the open space and park areas, and the connections within the Plan Area by creating an Open Space and Parks Master Plan for the County’s approval. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL-6] 2. The master developer and/or neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare final designs, finance, and construct the open space and park areas within the Plan Area concurrently with the development of the neighborhood phase in which they are located (prior to the issuance of a building permit for the last home in the neighborhood phase), and in accordance with the applicable County standards, and the approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan. Parks shall be designed to facilitate surveillance by adjoining residents and police services. If the number of residential dwelling units is less than the maximum of 220, the open space and park area requirement for the Plan Area will be based on the number of residential dwelling units built, to be calculated as required under the County Code. 3. If the open space and park area standard is not met within the Plan Area and/or on the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, in lieu of the development of on-site parks and open space, the master developer shall pay fees to the County as allowed under the County Code, and in accordance with the Development Agreement. Policy LU-7.1. Interconnect open space and park areas. 1. The open space and park trail system will consist of a loop configuration around or within the Plan Area that interconnects with the residential neighborhood and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus recreational facilities. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL- 6] 2. Development plans for the open space and park trail system shall be included in the Open Space and Parks Master Plan, prepared by the master developer and approved by the appropriate County staff

in

accordance with Article 7.0 (Plan Implementation). 3. Anticipated open space improvements and the cost for those improvements are estimated in Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, and are illustrated in Appendix C, Open Space Categories (Lotting Program Example C).

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.13-5

3.13 P ARKS AND R ECREATIO N

Policy LU-8.2. Provide minimum yard areas for all residences. Policy PF-6.1. Provide on-site parks and open spaces. 1. Utilize areas adjacent to any on-site biological conservation easement to provide opportunities for enjoyment of the open space. 2. Provide a small park/tot lot within 1,500 feet of each residential lot, if possible. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL-6] 3. Each park/tot lot shall have trash and recycling receptacles, seating, and shade trees. 4. To the extent feasible, pathways and trails shall be constructed with a smooth surface that is at least partly pervious to water, such as decomposed granite. 5. Pathways will be landscaped with shade trees to facilitate use on hot days. 6. Parks shall be open from dawn until dusk. Policy PF-6.2. Park maintenance shall be self-funded. 1. Park development will be phased to occur concurrently with the development of the Plan Area, each individual neighborhood developer shall construct those components of the park system that is within its neighborhood or adjacent street frontage in accordance with the Parks Master Plan. 2. The master developer shall establish a funding mechanism or district, such as a CSA, CSD, CFD, or some other entity, to ensure that parks remain public and long-term park maintenance is funded without use of County general funds or parks funds. If park maintenance is funded by a private homeowner’s association, the parks will be private. Related policies are contained in Article 3.0 (Circulation Plan), Article 4.0 (Community Design) and Article 5.0 (Resource Management) of the Specific Plan. Related discussions are found in Section 3.1, Aesthetics, Section 3.4, Biological Resources, Section 3.9, Land Use and Planning, and Section 3.14, Traffic and Circulation of this EIR. Therefore, while the project includes uses that would generate demand on existing facilities, it is anticipated that the project would provide new park and recreational facilities in accordance with the County’s Parks Master Plan, which would meet County park standards. In the event 3.13-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

that adequate park acreage is not developed on-site, the developer would pay the applicable in-lieu fee that would be used to support park and recreational facilities in other parts of the County in accordance with County Code Section 23.15.008. In so doing, the increased demand would be offset and substantial physical deterioration of existing facilities would not occur or be accelerated. Nevertheless, to ensure adherence to relevant Specific Plan policies and applicable County statutes, the following mitigation measures are proposed: MM REC-1a: Park and recreational facilities shall be generally constructed as shown in Figure 13 and Figure 17 and in accordance with all applicable policies within Article 2.0 (Land Use), Article 3.0 (Circulation Plan), Article 4.0 (Community Design) and Article 5.0 (Resource Management) of the Specific Plan, as well as the project’s Open Space and Parks Master Plan (as may be amended). Timing of implementation shall be in accordance with Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan) and the approved Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan. MM REC-1b: On-site park and recreational facilities shall be provided by the developer and designed consistent with applicable County standards for the provision of parkland and the County Parks Master Plan. In the alternative, the developer may pay the applicable in-lieu fee for park and recreational facilities as set forth in County Code Section 23.15.008. MM REC-1c: The project’s pedestrian and bicycle circulation network shall be developed in accordance with Article 7.0 (Implementation Plan) and the approved project’s Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan as approved by the Public Works Department. With implementation of the above mitigation measures and Specific Plan policies, adequate park and recreational facilities would be available to meet the demand of the residents of the project, minimizing the potential for impacts on existing parks and recreational facilities outside the project boundaries, resulting in a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Construction of New Park and Recreational Facilities Impact REC-2: The proposed project may result in the construction of new parks and recreational facilities, which may have an adverse physical effect on the environment. This is considered a potentially significant impact.

Construction and Grading Impacts Park construction generally involves significant earthwork, which can result in dust emission impacts from grading equipment, as well as construction noise impacts, to nearby sensitive land uses. As discussed in Section 3.3, Air Quality and Section 3.11, Noise, of this EIR, there are

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.13-7

3.13 P ARKS AND R ECREATIO N

existing uses in the immediate project vicinity that would be sensitive to dust, emissions, and noise impacts. Additionally, newly occupied dwelling units within the project could experience similar dust, emissions, and noise impacts should park development activities take place nearby. To ensure that park development impacts on existing and future residents of the project would be minimized, Mitigation Measure AQ-1 (Air Quality), addressing air quality impacts during construction, and Mitigation Measure Noise-1 (Noise), limiting the hours of construction, would also be applicable to park development activities. Therefore, the project’s impacts related to construction and grading impacts associated with parks would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated

Operational Impacts Because the park facilities would be developed within the project site, it is anticipated that environmental impacts outside the project boundaries associated with operation of the park facilities would be minimal. However, as discussed in the Noise Section of the EIR, there is the potential for noise impacts to the future project residents resulting from park activities; in particular, from amplified noise and landscape maintenance equipment. Mitigation Measure Noise-1 (Noise), however, prohibits the use of noise amplification equipment in the parks and limits landscape maintenance activities to less sensitive daytime hours. Therefore, noise impacts associated with park operation would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. The park facilities would require irrigation to maintain the landscaped areas, which would increase water demand. This demand has been accounted for in the water supply assessment (Sunnyslope 2008) prepared in connection with the project. The water supply assessment determined that adequate water supplies exist for the project, including irrigation uses. Additionally, recycled water lines (i.e., purple pipe) would be installed within the project site to allow for park and open space irrigation with reclaimed water, at such time as recycled water is made available to the project site. Therefore, operational parkland irrigation impacts on the water supply would be less than significant. Additional discussion is found in Section 3.15, Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy. No mitigation is required.

3.13-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

3.13.5

C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

Regional Demand for Park and Recreational Facilities Impact REC-3: The proposed project would result in the development of new residences, which could, in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects, contribute incrementally to demand for park and recreational facilities. This is considered a less than significant impact. The increase in population resulting from the project would contribute incrementally to the demand for park and recreational facilities in the Hollister Urban Area, as other planned projects that are developed along the eastern side of Fairview Road and within the City of Hollister. These additional projects include the approved Award Homes project on the east side of Fairview Road, the planned Gavilan San Benito College Campus, and the Santana Ranch project, as well as the other projects within the Hollister Urban Area as set forth in the cumulative projects list in Section 3.0 of this EIR. This additional incremental demand, in combination with the demand from other projects, could result in the deterioration of existing park and recreational facilities serving the area, as a result of increased use of the facilities. This incremental impact of the project, however, would be mitigated, either by the provision of adequate park and recreational facilities within the project site to serve its future residents or by payment of the applicable in-lieu fee to support park and recreational facilities in other parts of the County. Similarly, the other projects in the cumulative scenario would be required to satisfy the park requirements of San Benito County or the City of Hollister, as applicable, to mitigate impacts. Therefore, cumulative impacts to existing park and recreational facilities would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Irrigation Demand for Parkland Impact REC-4: The proposed project may include the operation of new park and recreational facilities, which could, in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects, contribute incrementally to water supply impacts within the groundwater basin serving the project. This is considered a less than significant impact. Operation of the proposed park and recreational facilities within the project could, in combination with other planned projects within the groundwater basin, contribute incrementally

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.13-9

3.13 P ARKS AND R ECREATIO N

to water supply impacts within the basin, due to the need to irrigate park landscaping. These additional projects include the approved Award Homes project, the planned Gavilan San Benito College Campus, the Santana Ranch project, as well as other projects within the Hollister Urban Area as set forth in the cumulative projects list in Section 3.0 of this EIR. The Water Supply Assessment prepared in connection with the project, however, indicates that adequate water supplies exist for the Fairview Corners project, including parkland irrigation needs, in combination with other existing and planned projects within the groundwater basin serving Fairview Corners. Similarly, the other projects identified in the cumulative scenario also would be required to provide evidence of adequate water supplies, including water supplies required for park irrigation, either through approval of a water supply assessment, a finding of consistency with the approved Hollister Area Urban Water Management Plan, and/or documentation of adequate water supplies through the subdivision map process. Therefore, the proposed park and recreational facilities within the project, in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects are not anticipated to result in a substantial cumulative impact on water supply, and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

3.13-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14 T RAFFIC AND C IRCULATION

This section of the Draft EIR examines potential traffic and circulation impacts resulting from the proposed project based on the traffic impact analysis for the project prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, dated April 29, 2011, and a supplemental letter dated June 13, 2011 (collectively hereinafter “traffic report”). This analysis was prepared on behalf of the project applicant, in consultation with the County of San Benito Public Works Department and the Planning Department and was peer reviewed on behalf of the County by the traffic engineering firm of Fehr & Peers. The traffic report and supplemental letter are found in Appendix K of this Draft EIR.

3.14.1

E XISTING S ETTING

Roadway Network The project site is located at the intersection of Fairview Drive and Airline Highway (State Route 25), approximately 13 miles east of U.S. 101. Regional access to the site is provided by State Route 25 and State Route 156. Local access is provided by Union Road, Fairview Road, Airline Highway (State Route 25), Hillcrest Road, Sunnyslope Road, and other local streets. These facilities are described below and shown on Figure 30, Area Roadways.

Highways State Route 25 is a two-lane highway that carries regional traffic between Gilroy and Hollister. This route begins at its junction with U.S. 101 in Gilroy and extends south through Hollister towards Paicines, traversing the entire length of San Benito County southbound through Tres Pinos, Paicines and to the southern County boundary at the junction of State Route 198 near

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-1

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

King City. In Hollister, State Route 25 includes Airline Highway and Bolsa Road. Caltrans classifies this route as a minor arterial, and the route is primarily a rural, two-lane facility, except for a three-mile section that runs through the City of Hollister, where it is six and four lanes. A portion of State Route 25 between State Route 198 (south) and State Route 156 is eligible for designation as a State Scenic Route. State Route 25 is the primary commuter route between Hollister and Gilroy and through Hollister. Within the City of Hollister, State Route 25 runs in a generally north-south direction from the intersection of Sunnyslope Road to San Felipe Road and the State Route 156 Bypass north of the City. State Route 156 is a two-lane highway that carries regional traffic between U.S. 101 and Highway 152. State Route 156 is a major roadway for trucks traveling between U.S. 101 and Interstate 5. State Route 156 traverses northern San Benito County in an easterly direction from U.S. 101 (west) through San Juan Bautista and Hollister before turning northeast to the San Benito-Santa Clara County line where it connects with State Route 152. From U.S. 101 to The Alameda (intersection with 3rd Street at San Juan Bautista), State Route 156 is a four-lane expressway, before it narrows into a conventional two-lane rural highway toward Hollister. In the Hollister area, State Route 156 becomes a two-lane expressway as it bypasses Hollister and maintains that configuration to the San Benito-Santa Clara County line. The State Route 156 Bypass is aligned to the east of downtown Hollister.

Arterial Roadways The arterial street and road system primarily provides for vehicular movement through or between regions. Within urbanized areas, these facilities provide access to major activity areas and accommodate pedestrian and bicycle use. Arterial streets and roads usually have relatively high traffic volumes and travel speeds, which limit pedestrian and bicycle use. Arterial streets have limited parking opportunities or parking is prohibited altogether. Arterial roadways are defined in the San Benito County General Plan as roads that “. . . carry larger volumes of traffic than the nearby streets and may be two to six lanes. The efficient movement of traffic to other major road systems and feeder streets is the primary function of the arterial. Direct access to adjoining property is not a function of an arterial.” (San Benito County General Plan, Transportation Element, Transportation Plan, p. 6.) Arterial roadways in the vicinity of the project site are Hillcrest Road, Sunnyslope Road, Fairview Road, and Union Road. Hillcrest Road. Hillcrest Road is an east-west minor arterial composed of a three-lane roadway segment (two eastbound lanes and one westbound lane) from McCray Street, through the fully signalized intersection with the State Route 25 Bypass as it continues to Memorial Drive, and a two-lane roadway segment from Memorial Drive to Fairview Road, where it terminates. West of McCray Street, Hillcrest Road becomes South Street.

3.14-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Not to Scale

Source: Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. 2010

Figure 30

Area Roadways Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

This side intentionally left blank.

3.14-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Sunnyslope Road. Sunnyslope Road is an east-west arterial that extends from Fairview Road to the southern terminus of the State Route 25 Bypass at its common intersection with Airline Highway (State Route 25), where it becomes Tres Pinos Road. Between Fairview Road and El Toro Drive, Sunnyslope Road is a two-lane roadway, and between El Toro Drive and the intersections with State Route 25 Bypass and Airline Highway (State Route 25), it is a four-lane roadway. Fairview Road. In the vicinity of the project site, Fairview Road is a two-lane north-south arterial that is situated on the east edge of Hollister. Fairview Road provides access to Airline Highway (State Route 25) to the south and to State Route 25 and State Route 156 to the north. Fairview Road forms the western boundary of the project site. Union Road. Union Road is a two-lane arterial in south Hollister that extends from State Route 156 to beyond Airline Highway (State Route 25), where it terminates.

Collector Roads Collector streets and roads primarily provide vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle movement between residential, commercial, and industrial neighborhoods. Collector streets and roads usually have moderate traffic volumes and travel speeds, consistent with a moderate level of pedestrian and bicycle use. Collector streets have limited on-street parking opportunities. Collector roads are defined in the San Benito County General Plan as roads that “. . . have the function of guiding traffic from local streets or rural access roads and channeling it to arterials. Average trip lengths and travel speeds are generally less than on arterial routes. Collector streets may also serve local bus roads. The provision of direct property access is also a function of a collector road.” (San Benito County General Plan, Transportation Element, Transportation Plan, p. 6.) John Smith Road is a collector road in the vicinity of the project site.

Local Streets and Roads The local street and road system primarily provides for vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle movement within neighborhoods. Moderate to high traffic volumes and low travel speeds are consistent with the highest level of pedestrian and bicycle use. Main streets typically have onstreet parking opportunities, including diagonal parking stalls, for commercial uses. Local streets and roads are defined in the San Benito General Plan as roads that “. . . provide direct access to collectors and arterials. They offer the lowest level of mobility and rarely carry bus routes. Through traffic is discouraged and travel on local roads is generally over short distances.” (San Benito County General Plan, Transportation Element, Transportation Plan, p. 6.) Local streets in the vicinity of the project site include Cielo Vista Drive and other local streets within the Cielo Vista residential subdivision to the west, Old Ranch Road to the north, and Harbern Way to the east.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-5

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Private Roads Private roads are defined in the San Benito County General Plan as follows: “Many local access roads and streets are privately owned and maintained roads in order to restrict access to the general public, residents do not want their local streets to become part of the county or city systems. Although the roads are private, in new subdivisions/development the roads must still be constructed to County standards.” (San Benito County General Plan, Transportation Element, Transportation Plan, p. 6.) Ridgemark Drive to the south of the project site is an example of a private road in the vicinity of the project.

Site Access Fairview Road is the roadway adjacent to the project site. Other primary existing roadways in the vicinity include Airline Highway (State Route 25), Sunnyslope Road, and John Smith Road. As noted above, Fairview Road is a major north-south arterial road on the east side of Hollister linking Airline Highway (State Route 25) with State Route 156 and State Route 152 to the northeast. Cielo Vista Drive is a neighborhood street that leads west from Fairview Road into the Cielo Vista residential subdivision. As discussed further below, Cielo Vista Drive would be extended east into the project site as part of the proposed project. The project site is vacant; there are no roads on the site.

Existing Traffic Levels of Service The intersections and roadway segments studied in the traffic report (Hexagon 2011) were selected for evaluation by the project traffic engineer in consultation with the County of San Benito Public Works Department. The study included an analysis of traffic conditions for nine signalized intersections, nine unsignalized intersections, an anticipated future intersection of Fairview Road and Union Road (approved, but not yet constructed), and two highway segments (Hexagon 2011). Union Road will be extended from its current termination point, east of Airline Highway (State Route 25), eastward, and connected to Fairview Road. This roadway improvement is assumed to be constructed as part of the Award Homes Project. The potential impacts of the project on the study intersections were evaluated in accordance with the applicable standards set forth by San Benito County, the City of Hollister, and Caltrans. The traffic study was prepared using methodologies outlined in the Caltrans’ Guidelines for the Preparation of Traffic Studies, the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, and the 2010 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Traffic conditions were analyzed for the weekday AM and PM peak hours of traffic. The weekday AM peak hour of traffic generally falls within the 7:00 to 9:00 AM period, and the weekday PM peak hour is typically in the 4:00 to 6:00 PM period. It is during these times that the most congested traffic conditions occur on an average weekday. 3.14-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Intersections and Roadway Segments The study intersections are listed below and shown in Figure 30, Area Roadways. 1.

Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway (State Route 25)

2.

Enterprise Road and Airline Highway (State Route 25)

3.

Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway

4.

Fairview Road and Union Road (future intersection)

5.

Valley View Road and Union Road

6.

Airline Highway (State Route 25) and Union Road

7.

Southside Road and Union Road

8.

San Benito Street and Union Road

9.

Union Road/Mitchell Road and State Route 156

10.

Airline Highway (State Route 25) and Sunset Drive

11.

McCray Street/State Route 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Road/Tres Pinos Road

12.

Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road

13.

Fairview Road and Sunnyslope Road

14.

Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road

15.

Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road

16.

State Route 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Road

17.

McCray Street and Hillcrest Road

18.

Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road

19.

Fairview Road and McCloskey Road

The traffic analysis also studied project-related impacts on the following highway segments: 1.

State Route 25, between U.S. 101 and State Route 156; and

2.

State Route 156, between Union Road and The Alameda.

Traffic conditions were evaluated for the following scenarios (Hexagon 2011):

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-7

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Scenario 1: Existing Conditions. Existing conditions were represented by existing peak-hour traffic volumes on the existing roadway network. Existing traffic volumes were obtained from recent traffic counts conducted in May and June 2010. Additionally, some information from counts conducted in 2006 is included in the discussion of existing conditions at intersections near schools (see discussion below), in order to further validate traffic conditions. Scenario 2: Existing With-Project Conditions. Existing with-project conditions (also referred to as Project conditions) were developed by adding to existing traffic volumes the traffic that would be generated by the project. Project conditions were evaluated relative to existing conditions in order to determine potential project impacts. Scenario 3: Cumulative Conditions. Cumulative conditions represent future traffic volumes on the future roadway network that would result from traffic growth projected to occur by 2023; this planning horizon is based on a set of population, housing and employment projections that were developed using the relevant local land-use designations, County and other state, regional and local projections of population and employment growth, and the constrained projections adopted by the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG 2008). As discussed below, this scenario includes traffic associated with the approved Santana Ranch, Award Homes, and Gavilan College projects, among others.

Existing Conditions Existing conditions are represented by existing peak-hour traffic volumes on the existing roadway network. The traffic report obtained existing traffic volumes from recent (2010) traffic counts. As discussed in the traffic report, existing weekday AM and PM peak-hour traffic volumes were obtained from recent and available intersection turning movement counts. Because the counts for a number of intersections were taken during summer, after the normal school session was finished, a comparison with counts taken in 2006 during the school year and in the summer period was conducted for the following four intersections (which are the nearest to the schools) in order to further validate the counts. ƒ

Valley View Rd & Union Rd;

ƒ

Union Rd/Mitchell Rd & Hwy 156;

ƒ

McCray St/Hwy 25 Bypass & Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd; and

ƒ

Hwy 25 Bypass & Hillcrest Rd.

This analysis found that the AM peak-hour volumes were approximately 21 percent higher when school is in session, and the PM peak-hour volumes were approximately the same during the

3.14-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

school year and the summer. Accordingly, the traffic analysis accounted for this 21 percent difference by adjusting upward the 2010 AM counts at the four above-referenced intersections (i.e., those nearest to the schools) by 21 percent. Turning movements and existing traffic volumes at the study intersections are presented in Figure 31, Existing Lane Configurations, and Figure 32, Existing Traffic Volumes.

Intersection Level of Service Operations Level of Service (LOS) ratings are qualitative descriptions of intersection operations and are reported using an “A” through “F” letter rating system to describe travel delay and congestion, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions, and LOS F the worst. Traffic conditions associated with these levels of service for signalized and unsignalized intersections are described below in Table 30, Signalized Intersection Levels of Service Definitions Based on Control Delay and Table 31, Unsignalized Intersection Levels of Service Definitions Based on Control Delay.

Existing Intersection LOS Intersection LOS is presented in Table 32, Existing Intersection Levels of Service. Based on existing traffic volumes, all study intersections operate at LOS C or better under existing conditions with the exception of the intersection of Union Road/Mitchell Road and State Route 156, which operates at LOS D during the AM peak hour. The average delay for motorists using this signalized intersection is about 37.3 seconds.

Existing Signal Warrants Existing peak-hour traffic signal warrant analysis was also conducted to determine if existing peak-hour traffic volumes are high enough at unsignalized study intersections to warrant installation of traffic signals. It is important to note, however, that peak-hour warrant analysis should not serve as the only basis for deciding whether or not, or when, to install a signal. To make this decision, the full set of warrants should be investigated based on field-measured, rather than forecasted, traffic data and a thorough study of traffic and roadway conditions by an experienced engineer. Furthermore, the decision to install a signal should not be based solely on the warrants, since the installation of signals can also lead to certain types of collisions. Table 33, Existing Peak-Hour Traffic Signal Warrant Results presents the results of the peakhour signal warrant checks.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-9

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Table 30

Signalized Intersection Levels of Service Definitions Based on Control Delay

Level

Description

Avg Control

of

Delay Per

Service

Vehicle (Sec.)

A

Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable

Up to 10.0

progression and/or short cycle lengths. B

Operations with low delay occurring with good progression

10.1 to 20.0

and/or short cycle lengths. C

Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression

20.1 to 35.0

and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear. D

Operations with longer delays due to a combination of

35.1 to 55.0

unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high volume to capacity (V/C) ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable. E

Operations with high delay values indicating poor progression,

55.1 to 80.0

long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. F

Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring

Greater than 80.0

due to over saturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths. Source:

3.14-10

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2011)

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Source: Hexagon Transportation Consultants Inc. 2011

Figure 31

Existing Lane Configurations Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

This side intentionally left blank.

3.14-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Source: Hexagon Transportation Consultants Inc. 2011

Figure 32

Existing Traffic Volume Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

This side intentionally left blank.

3.14-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 31

Unsignalized Intersection Levels of Service Definitions Based on Control Delay

Level of Service

Description

Avg Control Delay Per Vehicle (Sec.)

A

Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression.

Up to 10.0

B

Operations with low delay occurring with good progression.

10.1 to 15.0

C

Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression.

25.1 to 25.0

D

Operations with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high V/C ratios.

25.1 to 35.0

E

Operations with high delay values indicating poor progression and high V/C ratios. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay.

35.1 to 50.0

F

Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to over saturation and poor progression.

Greater than 50.0

Source:

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2011)

Table 32

Existing Intersection Levels of Service Intersection

Existing Int. Control

Fairview Rd./Ridgemark Dr. and Airline Hwy.

All-Way Stop 2

Enterprise Rd. and Airline Hwy.

Two-Way Stop1

Fairview Rd. and Cielo Vista Dr. Project Driveway

One-Way Stop 1

Fairview Rd. and Union Rd. 3

Future Signal

Valley View Rd. and Union Rd.

Two-Way Stop 1

Airline Hwy. and Union Rd.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Signal

Peak Hour

Count Date

Avg. LOS Delay

AM

5/12/10

10.5

B

PM

5/12/10

11.4

B

AM

5/20/10

15.9

C

PM

5/20/10

21.7

C

AM

5/20/10

9.8

A

PM

5/20/10

10.5

B

AM

-

-

-

PM

-

-

-

AM

6/10/10

13.3

B

PM

6/2/10

20.1

C

AM

5/13/10

33.6

C

PM

5/13/10

31.8

C

3.14-15

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Southside Rd. and Union Rd.

San Benito St. and Union Rd.

Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156

Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr.

Signal

Signal

Signal

Signal

McCray St./Hwy. 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd./Tres Pinos Rd.

Signal

Valley View Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd.

All-Way Stop 2

Fairview Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd.

Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest Rd.

Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest Rd.

Hwy. 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd.

McCray St. and Hillcrest Rd.

Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana Rd.

Fairview Rd. and McCloskey Rd. Source:

Signal

One-Way Stop 1

All-Way Stop 2

Signal

Signal;

One-Way Stop 1

One-Way Stop 1

AM

5/19/10

13.9

B

PM

5/19/10

12.7

B

AM

6/6/06

10.7

B

PM

6/6/06

10.8

B

AM

6/8/10

37.3

D

PM

6/8/10

30.8

C

AM

5/27/10

12.0

B

PM

6/3/10

11.6

B

AM

6/9/10

28.1

C

PM

6/9/10

30.1

C

AM

5/25/10

13.5

B

PM

5/27/10

13.3

B

AM

5/19/10

10.9

B

PM

5/19/10

9.8

A

AM

5/18/10

17.0

C

PM

5/18/10

13.3

B

AM

5/26/10

13.5

B

PM

5/26/10

12.4

B

AM

6/8/10

24.7

C

PM

6/8/10

25.8

C

AM

6/3/10

25.4

C

PM

6/9/10

27.7

C

AM

5/13/10

14.6

B

PM

5/13/10

13.8

B

AM

5/12/10

14.6

B

PM

5/12/10

12.5

B

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2011)

Notes: 1. The reported delay and corresponding LOS for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections are based on the stop-controlled approach with the highest delay. 2. The reported delay and corresponding LOS for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents the average delay for all approaches at the intersection. 3. Future intersection. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the applicable LOS of service standard.

3.14-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 33

Existing Peak-Hour Traffic Signal Warrant Results Intersection

Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway (State

AM Warrant

PM Warrant

Met ?

Met?

Yes

Yes

Enterprise Road and Airline Highway (State Route 25)

No

No

Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Future Project Entrance

No

No

Valley View Road and Union Road

No

No

Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road

No

No

Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road

Yes

No

Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road

No

No

Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road

Yes

Yes

Fairview Road and McCloskey Road

No

No

Route 25)

Source:

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2011)

Note: Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition. Entries noted in bold indicate conditions that are high enough to satisfy peak-hour signal warrants.

As shown in Table 33, peak-hour traffic volumes are high enough to satisfy peak-hour signal warrants at the following three intersections under existing conditions: 1.

Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway (State Route 25);

2.

Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road; and

3.

Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road.

Existing Highway LOS Highway Segment Level of Service Standards and Methodologies. As prescribed in Chapters 12 and 20 of the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, the LOS for two-lane, two-way rural highway segments is determined based on two measures of effectiveness: (1) percent time-spent-following (PTSF), and (2) average travel speed. For two-lane highways, PTSF is a measure of the driver’s freedom to maneuver and to freely select the speed at which they wish to travel on the subject highway segment. PTSF also serves as an indicator of the comfort and convenience of travel on the subject highway segment. Average travel speed is a measure of the mobility of the highway segment. The two-lane, two-way highway LOS methodology categorizes highways into two categories for analysis:

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-17

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

ƒ

Class I highways are those on which motorists expect to travel at relatively high speeds. Class I highways are primary routes that often serve long trips or serve as connecting links between facilities that serve long trips. Typically, highways that are part of major commute routes would be Class I facilities.

ƒ

Class II highways are those on which motorists do not necessarily expect to travel at high speeds. Class II highways are not major arterials and often serve as scenic or recreational highways.

Both highways in the vicinity of the project site are classified as Class I highways. Table 34, LOS Criteria for Class I Two-Lane Highways, presents the LOS criteria for Class I two-lane highways. Highway Levels of Service under Existing Conditions. Existing peak-hour LOS was assessed for State Route 25, between U.S. 101 and State Route 156; and State Route 156, between Union Road and The Alameda (San Juan Bautista). Existing highway segment levels of service for the project study segments are summarized in Table 35, Existing Two-lane Highway Levels of Service. As shown in Table 35, the results indicate that both highway segments operate at LOS E, which exceeds the Caltrans threshold of LOS C.

Existing Transit Both short-range and long-range transit planning is conducted by the San Benito County Local Transportation Authority in coordination with the Council of San Benito County Governments (San Benito COG). Transit providers in San Benito County include County Express and Jovenes de Antaño’s specialized transportation services, Caltrain (located in Gilroy but also serving San Benito County users), public school bus operators, and taxi services (San Benito COG 2010).

3.14-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 34

LOS Criteria for Class I Two-Lane Highways

100

Percent Time-Spent-Following (%)

90

LOS E

80 LOS D

70 60

LOS C 50 LOS B

40 30 20

LOS A

10 0 30

Source:

35

40

45 50 Average Travel Speed (mph)

60

65

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2011)

Table 35

Existing Two-lane Highway Levels of Service Highway Segment

SR 25 – Between US 101 and SR 156

SR 156 – Between The Alameda and Union Road Source:

55

Percent Time-Spent-Following

LOS

AM Peak-Hour: 87.1%

E

PM Peak-Hour: 88.3%

E

AM Peak-Hour: 89.8%

E

PM Peak-Hour: 92.8%

E

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2011)

County Express operates three fixed routes, complementary ADA para-transit service, Intercounty service, and a general public Dial-A-Ride. Fixed-route service does not currently extend to the project site. The fixed-route bus stops nearest to the project site are located at the Hazel Hawkins Memorial Hospital near the intersection of Airline Highway (State Route 25) and Sunset Drive, and at Sunnyslope Elementary School, each of which is about 2.5 miles from the project site. Dial-A-Ride services are available to areas within ¾ mile of any fixed route within the service area and extend southward to Tres Pinos, which would include the project site. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-19

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Bicycle facilities are divided into three classes of service. Class I bikeways are bike paths that are on paved rights of way, physically separated from any motor vehicle travel lanes, and that offer two-way bicycle travel. Class II bikeways are striped bike lanes on roadways that are marked by signage and pavement markings for one-way travel. Class III bikeways are bike routes shared with pedestrian or vehicle travel lanes and are marked only by roadway signs. (San Benito County Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan (2009), p. 3.1.) There are no bicycle lanes or pedestrian facilities on either Fairview Road or Airline Highway (State Route 25) in the vicinity of the project site. The project frontage on Fairview Road currently does not have sidewalks. The locations of existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the project site are shown on Figure 33, Existing and Pedestrian Bicycle Facilities. These bikeway and pedestrian facilities are located on the following roads: ƒ

Fairview Road between Hillcrest Road and Sunnyslope Road;

ƒ

State Route 25, south from Tres Pinos School to Southside Road in Tres Pinos;

ƒ

Union Road between State Route 25 and Calistoga Drive;

ƒ

Sunnyslope Road between State Route 25 Bypass and Memorial Drive, then from Cerra Vista Road to Fairview Road;

ƒ

State Route 25 Bypass between San Felipe Road and Sunset Drive;

ƒ

San Benito Street between Nash Road and Union Road; and

ƒ

Southside Road between north of Union Road and south of Hospital Road.

3.14.2

R EGULATORY S ETTING

Regional Transportation Planning Council of San Benito County Governments (San Benito COG) The San Benito COG is an association of city and county governments created to address regional transportation issues. Its member agencies include the County of San Benito and the two incorporated cities within the County, the Cities of Hollister and San Juan Bautista. As the federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization and the state-designated Regional

3.14-20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

co a c he

Trl Northern San Benito County Existing Bikeways

Spring Grove Elementary School

nt R Gr a

Rd San Fe lip e

is Te v

Existing Facilities

d Class I - Multi-Use Paths

ll Fa

o

Rosa Morada Rd

d nR

Class II - Bike Lanes de Anza Trail

Flynn Rd

Union Pacific Railroad Creeks

Lone Tree Rd

Wright Rd

Rd ion

Best Rd

Elementary School

FS

t

cr

ee

ry 2009 Source: San Benito County Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan

eH

C ie ne g

Tr es

Pinos Cree k

Ai r lin

Tres Pinos

Ra

n

ch Figure 33 R

Existing Bicycle Facilities d

wy

Hollister Hills State Vehicular Park

a Rd

Southside

Rd

h e R an c

Tres Pinos

Un yo n

San ta Ana Vly Rd

an

Ridgemark

Tho

Fremont Peak State Park

nC

ver

Rd

J ua

o Ri

Sa n

School

Project Site

it Ben

Community

Jo hn Sm ith R d

ey

Rd Pinnacles

ll Va

id e

San

Hollister

na

er s

uan ta

City Limits

A ta

R iv

San ta Ana Rd St Merid ian St Sou th St Hillcrest Rd B St E Park St Nash Rd

Parks

Fairview Rd

Bu ena Vista R d Sa n Jua n Rd 4th

Valley View Rd Ya rro w St Alder St

Freitas Rd

Mitche ll Rd

R iv e r

Schools

McClo skey Rd

n Sa

Bixby Rd

San B e n i to

m as

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

Rd

V U 25

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

This side intentionally left blank.

3.14-22

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Transportation Planning Agency for San Benito County, the San Benito COG is responsible for developing and updating a variety of transportation plans and for allocating the federal and state funds to implement them. Acting in this capacity, the San Benito COG is responsible for developing and adopting several transportation planning documents and studies, including the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The RTP is a long-term (20+year) blueprint for the region's transportation network, and encompasses projects for all types of travel, including aviation and freight movement. The RTP identifies and analyzes transportation needs of the metropolitan region and creates a framework for project priorities.

San Benito County General Plan The following San Benito County General Plan goals, objectives, and policies are relevant to the proposed project regarding transportation and circulation impacts:

Transportation Element Goal. Develop a safe and efficient Countywide transportation system that will provide an opportunity for a variety of modes of transportation for the diverse segments of the population in the County. Objective 1. Provide for a balanced, safe and efficient transportation system to serve all segments of the County. Objective 2. The existing road patterns should form a continuous network of recognized categories or roads, i.e. Federal and State Highways, arterials, collectors, private roads and local roads. Objective 3. The intensity of road development should correspond to the volume the road carries and the areas through which the road travels. Objective 4. Transportation options should be available where practical to persons without access to an automobile. Objective 5. Non-motorized forms of travel (i.e. horses, bicycles, walking) should be encouraged whenever possible. Objective 6. Coordinate with the San Benito County Council of Governments to implement programs and policies in the San Benito County Regional Transportation Plan, the Measure A projects and Regional Transportation Improvement Program.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-23

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Objective 7. Coordinate with regional governments for integration of alternative modes of transportation and road systems. Policy 3. Improvements to road systems needed to accommodate traffic generated by new development shall be funded by that development. Policy 4. A level of service of C shall be used for the accepted minimum standard of operation for intersections and roadways. Policy 5. New road development and design (private or public) shall conform to County standards. Policy 7. To preserve the capacity of existing and future arterial and state highways in the County, access to these major roads shall be limited to collectors, arterials and state highways intersecting the roadways. Exceptions may be allowed only in cases where there is not an existing major road within a quarter mile. Policy 8. New subdivisions/developments shall be designed to utilize existing roads and minimize the construction of new driveways onto those roads. Policy 9. Measures shall be taken to discourage inter-neighborhood and through traffic movement on non-arterial streets through street alignment and intersection design. Policy 15. New development at urban density shall be required to dedicate funding for transit stops and signage and design subdivisions to allow easy access to public transit where service is available. Policy 16. All new development proposals/subdivisions shall be consistent with and implement policies regarding transit in the San Benito County Regional Transportation Plan. Policy 19. Improve the efficiency of road networks by increasing the number of occupants per car and promoting alternative modes of transportation. Policy 20. Support the development of mixed land uses to reduce vehicle trips on collectors and arterials. Policy 23. Bicycle use shall be encouraged within the county for commuting and recreational uses.

3.14-24

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Policy 24. Require dedication and construction of walkways for through safe pedestrian traffic and internal pedestrian circulation in new large scale developments or within the vicinity of concentrations of population. Policy 25. Encourage clustered land use to encourage pedestrian and combined pedestrian and transit use.

Safety Element Policy 1. Roads should be of adequate capacity for use in times of emergency. a. In accordance with Government Code Section 65302(i), the County hereby establishes a minimum all weather road width for private driveways serving two or more units as 16 feet. Policy 3. It will be the County’s policy to require that lands which are subdivided and developed in the future to residential or commercial uses be designed and constructed in such a manner that […] [r]oads which are suitable for safe passage for emergency vehicles, legible street name signs and two means of access to all parcels except on those with cul-de-sacs 600 feet or less. a. The County will adopt minimum street standards in the subdivision ordinance which will provide a 16-foot all weather road width for private driveways.

City of Hollister General Plan The following policies from the City of Hollister General Plan, Circulation Element and Land Use Element, are being considered in this EIR because a number of roadway intersections within the City are included in the traffic impact analysis for the project given their location near the project site. C1.1. LOS C or Better Arterial Roads. Ensure, to the maximum extent feasible, that the designated arterial roadway system is planned to operate at Level of Service (LOS) C or better during peak and off-peak hours as of the horizon year of the adopted General Plan. C1.2. Sub-Standard Roads. Determine the most practical (cost effective) means for bringing segments/intersections into compliance with the LOS

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-25

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

standard when it has been determined that one more segments/ intersections along the designated arterial system is operating at LOS D or worse (below the City standard). C2.1. Bicycle Facilities. Cooperatively work with COG, Caltrans, and San Benito County to develop, implement and maintain bicycle facilities providing direct access to major public facilities, schools and employment centers as described in the San Benito County Bicycle Master Plan. C2.3. Pedestrian Connections. Work with local businesses, private developers, and public agencies to ensure provision of safe pedestrian pathways to major public facilities, schools and employment centers. Require new developments to provide internal pedestrian connections and linkages to adjacent neighborhoods and community facilities. LU4.4. Streets, Paths and Bikeways. Ensure that streets, paths and bikeways contribute to the system of a fully connected transportation network. LU4.8. Pedestrian Environment. Design safe, accessible, convenient, comfortable and functional pedestrian crossings, intersections, sidewalks, street plantings, street furniture and traffic signals.

San Benito County Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan The San Benito COG and the County Board of Supervisors adopted the 2009 update to the San Benito County Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan (bikeway master plan), which guides the future development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the County. The bikeway master plan provides a broad vision, strategies, and actions for the improvement of bicycle and walking opportunities in the San Benito County region. The purpose of this plan is to expand the existing networks, connect gaps, address constrained areas, provide greater connectivity, educate, encourage, and maximize funding sources, as well as satisfy requirements of the California Bicycle Transportation Account and other state and federal funding programs that Caltrans oversees and reviews. This plan outlines recommended bikeway improvement projects, which are organized into Countywide, unincorporated, and incorporated areas (San Benito COG 2009). The bikeway master plan proposes Class II bike lanes along a 1.57-mile stretch of Fairview Road from Airline Highway (State Route 25) to Sunnyslope Road and along a 3.84-mile stretch of Airline Highway (State Route 25) from the Hollister city limits to the Tres Pinos School. This plan also includes improvement recommendations for pedestrian facilities throughout the

3.14-26

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

County; however, it does not identify any specific pedestrian improvements on or adjacent to the project site. This plan identifies developer impact fees and/or design requirements for new developments as efficient ways to implement the recommended improvements (San Benito COG 2009). The following bikeway master plan policies are relevant to the proposed project. Goal 1. Increase Bicycle and Pedestrian Access Objective 1-2. Expand bicycle and pedestrian facilities and access in and between neighborhoods, employment centers, shopping areas, schools, and recreational sites, in pursuit of the San Benito County Council of Governments General Plan and Regional Transportation Plan policies of encouraging bicycle and pedestrian travel. Objective 1-3. Consider bicycle and pedestrian facilities in all projects (e.g., . . . development . . .). Goal 4. Increase Bicycle and Pedestrian Trips Objective 4-3. Complete a network of bikeways and walkways that are feasible, fundable, and that serve bicyclists’ and pedestrians’ needs, especially for travel to employment centers, schools, commercial districts, transit stations, institutions and recreational destinations. Objective 4-4. Maintain and improve the quality, operation and integrity of bikeway and walkway network facilities. Objective 4-6. Provide short- and long-term bicycle parking in employment and commercial areas, in multifamily housing, at schools, and at recreation and transit facilities.

Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program Development projects within San Benito County, including incorporated cities, are required to pay traffic impact fees into the Hollister/San Benito County Regional Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) program. The San Benito COG administers the TIF program as authorized by the RTP. The purpose of the TIF program is to implement City and County roadway improvement projects identified in the San Benito County Traffic Mitigation Fee Study, based on anticipated regional development identified in the County’s and the Cities’ general plans (San Benito COG 2010).

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-27

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

The San Benito COG and its member entities (San Benito County, the City of Hollister, and the City of San Juan Bautista) have recently completed the process of updating the TIF program to ensure that the projects identified therein accurately represent the needs of the community and that the established fees are appropriate to fund the identified improvement projects, and to determine if new improvements are necessary (San Benito COG 2010).

3.14.3

S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE

The following thresholds for evaluating the significance of a project’s environmental impacts are based on the State CEQA Guidelines and applicable standards recognized by the County of San Benito. For the purposes of this EIR, impacts are considered significant if any of the following would result from implementation of the proposed project: ƒ

Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit;

ƒ

Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways;

ƒ

Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks (because the project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of an airport, this topic is not discussed further; see Section 5, Effects Found Not To Be Significant);

ƒ

Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment);

ƒ

Result in inadequate emergency access; and

ƒ

Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.

To evaluate project-level and cumulative impacts at study intersections and highway segments, the following specific thresholds were used in this Draft EIR. The project would create a significant traffic impact if, as a result of the addition of project traffic:

3.14-28

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections ƒ

In either peak hour, the level of service (LOS) at an intersection degrades from an acceptable LOS C or better under baseline conditions to an unacceptable LOS D or worse under project or cumulative conditions, or

ƒ

In either peak hour, the LOS at an intersection is an unacceptable LOS D or worse under baseline conditions and the addition of project trips causes the average intersection delay to increase by five (5) or more seconds.

Unsignalized Intersections ƒ

For either the AM or PM peak hour, the addition of project traffic causes the volume at an unsignalized intersection to increase such that it is sufficiently high to satisfy the peak-hour volume traffic signal warrant adopted by Caltrans and the County, where it was not satisfied before the addition of project traffic, or

ƒ

The intersection already meets the signal warrant under baseline conditions and the addition of project traffic would cause a significant LOS impact at the intersection by degrading the LOS to an unacceptable level or by exacerbating an already unacceptable LOS by causing the average delay to increase by five (5) or more seconds, as noted above.

Highway Segments ƒ

In either peak hour, the LOS on a two-lane highway degrades from an acceptable LOS C or better under baseline conditions to an unacceptable LOS D or worse under project conditions and cumulative, or

ƒ

The LOS on a two-lane highway is an unacceptable LOS D or worse under baseline conditions, and the addition of project traffic causes any increase in the percent-timespent-following (PTSF) or any decrease in the average travel speed to decrease.

Queuing ƒ

The traffic added by the project to baseline conditions would result in a significant impact on intersection operations if it would exceed the available capacity of turn pockets and cause through traffic to back up.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-29

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Methodology The following traffic impact evaluation is based on the traffic report prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants dated April 29, 2011 and a supplemental letter dated June 13, 2011 for the project applicant (as peer reviewed by Fehr and Peers); these materials are included as Appendix K. Hexagon prepared an analysis of existing, existing with-project, and cumulative (with- and without-project) conditions, based upon the maximum buildout scenario, involving development of the project site with 220 single-family residential units. Accordingly, the traffic analysis is conservative since it uses the single-family detached housing trip generation rate for all units (220) in the maximum buildout scenario to determine project-related impacts to traffic and circulation.

Project Traffic Estimates The amount of traffic produced by a new development and the locations where that traffic will occur are estimated based on three factors: (1) trip generation, (2) trip distribution, and (3) trip assignment. These factors are described more fully below.

Trip Generation The traffic report (Hexagon 2011) estimated the magnitude of traffic generated by the proposed project by applying to the size of the project the appropriate trip generation rates, as published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The trip generation estimates for the project are based on ITE trip generation rates for single-family homes (9.57 trips per day). According to ITE, trip generation rates for multi-family residential uses are lower (5.81 trips per day for condominiums or townhomes) than those for single-family residential uses. Accordingly, the traffic analysis is conservative since it utilizes trip rates for the single-family residential uses. Based on the applicable trip rate, the project would generate 2,105 daily trips, with 165 trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 222 trips occurring during the PM peak hour (Hexagon 2011). The trip generation for the proposed project based upon the development of 220 singlefamily homes is presented in Table 36, Trip Generation.

Trip Distribution The project trip distribution pattern was estimated using the traffic forecasting model that is cooperatively maintained by both the City of Hollister and San Benito County. This model is currently configured to project the future traffic associated with development growth within the modeled study area (Northern San Benito County) up to the year 2023. As a basis for the 2023 traffic forecasts, the model is also calibrated to “existing conditions,” which represents the traffic

3.14-30

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

volumes and roadway network development that existed when the model was last updated (2004). The project trip distribution pattern was developed based on the traffic patterns associated with trips traveling to and from the zone containing the project site. The traffic patterns were obtained from the traffic forecasting model (with the Highway 25 Bypass added) (Hexagon 2011). The project trip distribution pattern for the project is shown graphically in Figure 34, Project Trip Distribution.

Table 36

Trip Generation

Period

Trip Rate

Percent

Percent

Number

Number

Total

Trips In

Trips Out

Trips In

Trips Out

Trips

Daily

9.57

2,105

AM Peak Hour

0.75

25

75

41

124

165

PM Peak Hour

1.01

63

37

140

82

222

Source:

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2011)

Note:

ITE Use Code 210 – Single-Family Detached Housing (220 units)

Trip Assignment The peak-hour vehicle trips associated with the proposed project were added to the transportation network in accordance with the project trip distribution pattern discussed above. The assignment of project trips is presented graphically in Figure 35, Project Trip Assignment.

Transportation Network Under Project Conditions As part of the project, the developer would improve Cielo Vista Drive to serve as the major collector street and primary access point for the project, as follows: the east leg of Cielo Vista Drive would be built, a northbound shared through/right-turn lane would be added to Fairview Road at this intersection, a southbound left-turn lane would be added to Fairview Road at this intersection, and the west leg of Cielo Vista Drive eastbound would be re-striped to provide a left-turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane. Except for the above-specified improvements that are being constructed as part of the project, the traffic analysis assumes that no changes to the transportation network would occur with the development of the proposed project.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-31

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Specific Plan Policies The Fairview Corners Specific Plan requires developer compliance with a number of provisions that are designed to help reduce the project’s transportation impacts. In summary, the developer shall, either in combination with Gavilan College District, or individually: ƒ

Pay its applicable TIF fee for the purpose of facilitating the construction of off-site circulation improvements. (Art. 7)

ƒ

Provide adequate access to the project site. (Goal CP-1)

ƒ

Pay a proportional fair share or provide circulation improvements outside the project site, in combination with the Gavilan College District, when those circulation improvements outside the project site are warranted. (Policy CP-1.1)

ƒ

The proportional fair share contribution for the specified circulation improvements outside the project site will be based on the number of lots and/or dwelling units built within the Plan Area. (Policy CP-1.2)

ƒ

Construct Fairview Road frontage improvements along the project site frontage, and parking shall be prohibited along this frontage. (Policy CP-1.2, Implementation Measure #3)

ƒ

Provide adequate connections to adjoining areas and uses. (Goal CP-2)

ƒ

Provide street, pathway, and emergency vehicle connections to adjacent areas. (Policy CP2.1)

ƒ

Integrate circulation within the project site and with adjoining land uses, including the future Gavilan San Benito Campus. Lots and streets shall be arranged to facilitate convenient pedestrian circulation within the project site and to adjacent locations. (Policy CP-2.1, Implementation Measure #1)

ƒ

Provide street and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections to adjoining properties along the south, west, and north project site boundaries. (Policy CP-2.1, Implementation Measure #2)

ƒ

Include an emergency vehicle access that provides adequate secondary emergency access to the Plan Area. (Policy CP-2.1, Implementation Measure #3)

ƒ

Ensure that roads are designed to accommodate emergency vehicle turning movements. (Policy CP-2.1, Implementation Measure #4)

ƒ

Ensure that the project site’s circulation system facilitates mobility. (Goal CP-3.1)

3.14-32

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Source: Hexagon Transportation Consultants Inc. 2011

Figure 34

Traffic Distribution Under Project Conditions Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

This side intentionally left blank.

3.14-34

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Source: Hexagon Transportation Consultants Inc. 2011

Figure 35

Trip Assignment Under Project Conditions Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

This side intentionally left blank.

3.14-36

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

Provide a system of neighborhood roads that facilitate internal circulation. (Policy CP-3.1)

ƒ

Construct an internal street network as required under the Specific Plan and applicable County requirements. (Policy CP-3.1, Implementation Measure #1)

ƒ

Encourage the integration of cul-de-sacs within the project to provide pedestrian connections to open space or trail systems. (Policy CP-3.1, Implementation Measure #2)

ƒ

Construct residential streets adjacent to parks and open space within the project to be single-loaded with residences facing the street wherever feasible. (Policy CP-3.1, Implementation Measure #3)

ƒ

Consider alternative street configurations within the project (e.g., one-way streets, parking restricted streets with dedicated parking bays, alley designs, and streets with traffic calming measures and an abundance of trees). (Policy CP-3.1, Implementation #4)

ƒ

Provide quiet and safe residential streets. (Goal CP-4)

ƒ

Promote a pleasant and conducive walking environment through implementation of traffic calming. (Policy CP-4.1)

ƒ

Use the narrowest feasible travel lane widths on residential streets, while still accommodating fire apparatus. (Policy CP-4.1, Implementation Measure #1)

ƒ

Include amenities that enhance the pedestrian environment, including entry features, traffic calming measures, and street trees. (Policy CP-4.1, Implementation Measure #2)

ƒ

Consider the use of traffic calming techniques such as bulb-outs and neck-downs on all cross streets where they intersect with Cielo Vista Drive, and on Cielo Vista Drive at the Gavilan College San Benito Campus retail area. (Policy CP-4.1.1, Implementation Measure #3)

ƒ

Adhere to specified requirements for radii of street corners at intersections. (Policy CP-4.1, Implementation Measure #4)

ƒ

Construct streets with nighttime lighting that meets the project’s minimum illumination standards. (Policy CP-4.1, Implementation Measure #5)

ƒ

Design the perimeter trail to permit as many openings and viewpoints from other areas within the project site as practical, in accordance with specified design standards. (Policy CP-4.1, Implementation #6)

ƒ

Facilitate safe and convenient non-motorized transportation. (Goal CP-5)

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-37

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

ƒ

Design the circulation system to provide appropriate bicycle facilities. (Policy CP-5.1)

ƒ

Construct bicycle paths or lanes according to specified standards. (Policy CP-5.1, Implementation Measure #1)

ƒ

Provide bicycle path or lanes, as part of the Fairview Road frontage improvements along the project site frontage, designed to connect to regional bikeways as identified in the 2009 San Benito County Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan. (Policy CP-5.1, Implementation Measure #2)

ƒ

Provide Class II bicycle lanes on the entire length of Cielo Vista Drive. (Policy CP-5.1, Implementation Measure #3)

ƒ

Set signal light traffic sensors to detect bicycles and mark detector loop locations for bicycles. (Policy CP-5.1, Implementation Measure #5)

ƒ

Facilitate pedestrian circulation by providing clearly identifiable pedestrian circulation routes that connect neighborhoods, parks, recreation trails and facilities, and transit stops. (Policy CP-5.2)

ƒ

Separate pedestrian circulation routes from vehicular traffic on all streets, and construct sidewalks and pedestrian paths consistent with the specified requirements. (Policy CP-5.2, Implementation Measure #1)

ƒ

Provide a continuous pedestrian system along all streets and in accordance with all applicable requirements. (Policy CP-5.2, Implementation Measure #2)

ƒ

Provide sidewalks within the project that satisfy all specified requirements. (Policy CP-5.2, Implementation Measures #3 and #4)

ƒ

Provide all circulation improvement plans to the County for review to ensure traffic calming features are included, as required. (Policy CP-5.2, Implementation Measure #5)

ƒ

Provide handicap accessible routes in accordance with all specified requirements. (Policy CP-5.2, Implementation Measure #6)

ƒ

Utilize short-cut paths, if needed, to avoid circuitous pedestrian and bicycle routes, and to keep walking and bicycling distances between destinations as short as possible. Cul-de-sacs shall include pedestrian connections to open space areas wherever possible. (Policy CP5.2, Implementation Measure #7)

ƒ

Utilize emergency vehicle access routes for pedestrian circulation. (Policy CP-5.2, Implementation Measure #8)

3.14-38

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

Facilitate access to public transit. (Goal CP-6)

ƒ

Facilitate future transit service at or adjacent to the project site. (Policy CP-6.1)

ƒ

Work with Caltrans, COG, San Benito County, and Gavilan College District to develop, implement and maintain public transit services for the project site. (Policy CP-6.1, Implementation Measure #1)

3.14.4

P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

Intersection Level of Service Impacts Impact TRA-1: The project would not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system since the addition of project traffic to existing traffic volumes would not cause study intersections to operate at unacceptable levels of service during peak hours. This is considered a less than significant impact. As discussed above, the traffic analysis evaluated the effects of project traffic at 19 study intersections. Project trips, as represented in the project trip assignments, were added to existing traffic volumes at the study intersections to obtain existing with-project traffic volumes. The traffic volumes under existing with-project conditions are shown in Figure 36, Existing WithProject Traffic Volumes. The results of the intersection LOS analysis under existing with-project conditions are summarized in Table 37, Project Intersection Levels of Service. The intersection LOS calculation sheets are included in the traffic report appendices. As shown above in Table 37, the results indicate that none of the study intersections’ LOS would be significantly affected by the addition of project traffic. Under existing with-project conditions, all of the study intersections, except the intersection of Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156, would be at an acceptable LOS C or above for both peak hours; therefore, the project’s impacts to these intersections would be less than significant. Regarding the intersection of Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156, under both existing and existing with-project conditions, this intersection would operate at an unacceptable LOS D. However, while the project would exacerbate this condition, it would not result in a significant impact since the addition of project trips would not cause the average intersection delay to increase by five seconds or more under either peak hour. Therefore, the impact is less than significant. No mitigation is required.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-39

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Intersection Signal Warrant Impacts Impact TRA-2: The project may conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system since the addition of project traffic would result in peak-hour signal warrants being met at the Fairview Road/Hillcrest Road and Enterprise Road/Airline Highway (State Route 25) intersections. This is considered a potentially significant impact.

Signal Warrants Are Met At Two Intersections The traffic analysis determined that the addition of project traffic would cause the traffic volumes at the unsignalized intersections of (1) Enterprise Road and Airline Highway (State Route 25), and (2) Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road to increase such that it would be sufficiently high to satisfy the signal warrant during the PM peak hour. The results of the peakhour traffic signal warrant checks under project conditions are summarized in Table 38, PeakHour Signal Warrant Checks With the Project. The peak-hour signal warrant sheets are contained in the traffic report appendices. Fairview Road/Hillcrest Road Intersection This intersection meets the peak-hour signal warrant under existing conditions without the project during the AM peak-hour, but does not meet the signal warrant during the PM peakhour. As shown in Table 37, Project Intersection Levels of Service, presented earlier, this intersection is projected to maintain acceptable operations (LOS C during the AM peak-hour and LOS B during the PM peak-hour) with current stop sign control. However, because the project traffic would cause the PM peak-hour signal warrant to be met at this intersection, the project’s impact to intersection operations is considered a potentially significant impact. Enterprise Road/Airline Highway (State Route 25) Intersection This intersection does not meet the peak-hour signal warrant in either peak-hour under existing conditions. However, with the addition of project traffic, it would meet the signal warrant during the PM peak-hour. As shown in Table 37, Project Intersection Levels of Service, presented earlier, the intersection is projected to maintain acceptable (LOS C) operations with current stop sign control. However, because the project traffic would cause the PM peak-hour signal warrant to be met at this intersection, the project’s impact to intersection operations is considered a potentially significant impact.

3.14-40

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Source: Hexagon Transportation Consultants Inc. 2011

Figure 36

Existing Plus Project Traffic Volume Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

This side intentionally left blank.

3.14-42

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 37

Project Intersection Levels of Service Existing Intersection

Ex Int

Peak

Avg.

Control

Hour

Delay

LOS

Existing With-Project Avg.

LOS

Delay

Change in Delay 3

Fairview Rd./Ridgemark

All-

Dr. and Airline Hwy.

Way

Enterprise Rd. and Airline

Two-

Hwy.

Way

Fairview Rd. and Cielo

One-

2

1

1

AM

10.5

B

10.9

B

+0.4

PM

11.4

B

11.7

B

+0.3

AM

15.9

C

17.0

C

+1.1

PM

21.7

C

24.3

C

+2.6

AM

9.8

A

10.7

B

+0.9

PM

10.5

B

12.2

B

+1.7

Vista Dr. Project Driveway

Way

Fairview Rd. and Union

Future

AM

Rd.

Signal

PM

Valley View Rd. and Union

Two-

AM

13.3

B

13.4

B

+0.1

PM

20.1

C

20.3

C

+0.2

AM

33.6

C

34.7

C

+1.1

PM

31.8

C

32.7

C

+0.9

AM

13.9

B

13.8

B

-0.1

PM

12.7

B

12.7

B

n/c

AM

10.7

B

10.7

B

n/c

PM

10.6

B

10.6

B

n/c

AM

37.3

D

37.9

D

+0.6

PM

30.8

C

31.0

C

+0.2

AM

12.0

B

11.9

B

-0.1

PM

11.6

B

11.5

B

-0.1

AM

28.1

C

28.1

C

n/c

PM

30.1

C

30.1

C

n/c

AM

13.5

B

14.1

B

+0.6

PM

13.3

B

13.9

B

+0.6

4

Rd.

Way

1

Airline Hwy. and Union Rd. Signal

Southside Rd. and Union

Signal

Rd. San Benito St. and Union

Signal

Rd. Union Rd./Mitchell Rd.

Signal

and Hwy. 156 Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr.

McCray St/Hwy. 25 Bypass

Signal

Signal

and Sunnyslope Rd./Tres Pinos Rd. Valley View Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

AllWay

2

3.14-43

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Fairview Rd. and

Signal

Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest

One-

Rd.

Way

Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest

All-

1

2

Rd.

Way

Hwy. 25 Bypass and

Signal

Hillcrest Rd. McCray St. and Hillcrest

Signal

Rd. Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana

One-

Rd.

Way

Fairview Rd. and

One-

McCloskey Rd. Source:

Way

1

1

AM

10.9

B

11.4

B

+0.5

PM

9.8

A

10.0

B

+0.2

AM

17.0

C

18.8

C

+1.8

PM

13.3

B

13.6

B

+0.3

AM

13.5

B

14.2

B

+0.7

PM

12.4

B

13.1

B

+0.7

AM

24.7

C

24.9

C

+0.2

PM

25.8

C

26.0

C

+0.2

AM

25.4

C

25.3

C

+0.1

PM

27.7

C

27.9

C

+0.2

AM

14.6

B

14.9

B

+0.3

PM

13.8

B

14.0

B

+0.2

AM

14.6

B

14.8

B

+0.2

PM

12.5

B

12.7

B

+0.2

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2011)

Note: 1. The reported delay and corresponding level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections are based on the stopcontrolled approach with the highest delay. 2. The reported delay and corresponding level of service for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents the average delay for all approaches at the intersection. 3. Change in delay is measured relative to background conditions for the analysis of project conditions impacts. 4. Future intersection. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the current level of service standard. Delays in seconds.

3.14-44

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 38

Peak-Hour Signal Warrant Checks With the Project Existing Intersection

Existing Plus Project

AM Warrant Met ?

PM Warrant Met?

AM Warrant Met ?

PM Warrant Met?

Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway (State Route 25)

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Enterprise Road and Airline Highway (State Route 25)

No

No

No

Yes

Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Future Project Entrance

No

No

No

No

Valley View Road and Union Road

No

No

No

No

Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road

No

No

No

No

Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road

No

No

No

No

Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Fairview Road and McCloskey Road

No

No

No

No

Source:

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2011)

Notes: 1.

Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that meet the signal warrant.

2.

Bold font indicates a significant impact.

Signal Warrants Are Met At Two Additional Intersections But No Significant LOS Impact The two intersections of (1) Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway (State Route 25), and (2) Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road meet the signal warrant in both AM and PM peak-hours under existing and existing with-project conditions. However, as shown above in

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-45

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Table 37, Project Intersection Levels of Service, the addition of project traffic would not cause a significant LOS impact at either of these intersections as it would not cause the LOS at either intersection to degrade from an acceptable to an unacceptable level. Therefore, the project’s impacts would be less than significant at these intersections.

Signal Warrants Are Not Met At Remaining Intersections The signal warrants are not met at any of the remaining study intersections under existing or existing with-project conditions. Therefore, the project’s impacts would be less than significant at these intersections. The two intersection impacts and proposed mitigation measures necessary to maintain acceptable intersection operations under project conditions are described below.

Mitigation Measures: Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road According to the traffic analysis, signalization of the intersection of Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road may be needed to assign right-of-way and maintain orderly traffic flow. However, as noted earlier, the peak-hour warrant analysis should not serve as the only basis for deciding whether and when to install a signal. To make this decision, the full set of warrants should be investigated based on field-measured, rather than forecasted, traffic data and a comprehensive study of thenexisting traffic and roadway conditions by an experienced engineer. To that end, the following mitigation measures are proposed: MM TRA-2a: Prior to the issuance of building permits for the 75th, 150th and the 200th residential units (excluding secondary units) respectively, the project developer shall monitor the intersection of Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road to determine if signalization is warranted. Monitoring shall include the following: 1.

Conduct analyses of all applicable traffic signal warrants based on field-measured data;

2.

Study prevailing traffic and roadway conditions;

3.

Report the results to the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, who, in coordination with the City of Hollister Engineering Department, shall determine if and when a traffic signal should be installed.

MM TRA-2b: The developer shall install the traffic signal if directed in writing to do so by the San Benito County Public Works Administrator and so long as the City and County issue any required permits, consistent with MM TRA-2a above. The developer’s costs associated therewith may be subject to partial reimbursement to the extent other funding sources such as the TIF program, an established Benefit Area, or other development, are

3.14-46

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

available and applicable; provided, however, the developer’s obligation to install the signal shall not be dependent on receipt of any reimbursement. The developer shall be obligated to install the identified improvements promptly upon notification from the County of the need to do so, and no additional building permits for residential units (excluding secondary units) shall be issued until the traffic signal is installed. With implementation of MM TRA-2a and MM TRA-2b, the project’s impact to the Fairview Road/Hillcrest Road intersection would be mitigated to the extent feasible. However, because the identified improvements would also fall within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City of Hollister, implementation of MM TRA-2b cannot be guaranteed. Accordingly, the project’s impacts to the Fairview Road/Hillcrest Road intersection would be considered significant and unavoidable. In the alternative, if the San Benito County Public Works Administrator determines that the traffic signal at the intersection of Fairview Road/Hillcrest Road is not warranted at the time of issuance of the building permit for the project’s 200th residential unit, the following mitigation measure shall apply: MM TRA-2c: If the San Benito County Public Works Administrator determines that the traffic signal at the intersection of Fairview Road/Hillcrest Road is not warranted at the time of issuance of the building permit for the project’s 200th residential unit or if the City of Hollister does not approve the installation of the traffic signal, then the developer shall comply with the following. If the identified traffic signal is expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, then the developer’s payment of the applicable TIF shall constitute a fair share contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the identified traffic signal is not expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, the developer shall pay its fair share contribution (based on its pro rata contribution of trips) to the Benefit Area toward the signalization of this intersection. Accordingly, if this alternative mitigation approach is implemented, the project’s impacts would be mitigated to the extent feasible. However, because the identified improvements would also fall within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City of Hollister, implementation of MM TRA-2c cannot be guaranteed and, even if implemented, cannot guarantee the timely construction of the required improvements, when they are warranted, to mitigate the project’s impacts. Accordingly, the project’s impacts to the Fairview Road/Hillcrest Road intersection would be considered significant and unavoidable.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-47

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Mitigation Measures: Enterprise Road and Airline Highway (State Route 25) According to the traffic analysis, signalization of the intersection of Enterprise Road and Airline Highway (State Route 25) may be needed to assign right-of-way and maintain orderly traffic flow. However, with the addition of project traffic, the intersection just meets the warrant during the PM peak hour. As noted above, the peak-hour warrant analysis should not serve as the only basis for deciding whether and when to install a signal. To make this decision, the full set of warrants should be investigated based on field-measured, rather than forecasted, traffic data and a thorough study of traffic and roadway conditions by an experienced engineer. To that end, the following mitigation measure is recommended: MM TRA-2d: Prior to the issuance of building permits for the 75th, 150th and the 200th residential units (excluding secondary units) respectively, the project developer shall monitor the intersection of Enterprise Road and Airline Highway (State Route 25) to determine if signalization is warranted. Monitoring shall include the following: 1. Conduct analyses of all applicable traffic signal warrants based on field-measured data; 2. Study prevailing traffic and roadway conditions; 3. Report the results to the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, who, in coordination with the City of Hollister Engineering Department, shall determine if and when a traffic signal should be installed. MM TRA-2e: The developer shall install the traffic signal if directed in writing to do so by the San Benito County Public Works Administrator and so long as Caltrans, the City and County issue any required permits, consistent with MM TRA-2d above. The developer’s costs associated therewith may be subject to partial reimbursement to the extent other funding sources such as the TIF program, an established Benefit Area, or other development, are available and applicable; provided, however, the developer’s obligation to install the signal shall not be dependent on receipt of any reimbursement. The developer shall be obligated to install the identified improvements promptly upon notification from the County of the need to do so, and no additional building permits for residential units (excluding secondary units) shall be issued until the traffic signal is installed. With implementation of MM TRA-2d and MM TRA-2e, the project’s impact to the Enterprise Road/Airline Highway (State Route 25) intersection would be mitigated to the extent feasible. However, because the identified improvements would also fall within the responsibility and jurisdiction of Caltrans and the City of Hollister, implementation of MM TRA-2e cannot be guaranteed. Accordingly, the project’s impacts to the Enterprise Road/Airline Highway (State Route 25) intersection would be considered significant and unavoidable.

3.14-48

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

In the alternative, if the San Benito County Public Works Administrator determines that the traffic signal at the intersection of Enterprise Road/Airline Highway (State Route 25) is not warranted at the time of issuance of the building permit for the project’s 200th residential unit, the following mitigation measure shall apply: MM TRA-2f: If the San Benito County Public Works Administrator determines that the traffic signal at the intersection of Enterprise Road/Airline Highway (State Route 25) is not warranted at the time of issuance of the building permit for the project’s 200th residential unit or if Caltrans and/or the City of Hollister does not approve the installation of the traffic signal, then the developer shall comply with the following. If the identified traffic signal is expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, then the developer shall pay the applicable TIF as a fair share contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the identified traffic signal is not expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, then the developer shall pay its fair share contribution (based on its pro rata contribution of trips) to the Benefit Area toward the signalization of this intersection. Accordingly, if this alternative mitigation approach is implemented, the project’s impacts would be mitigated to the extent feasible. However, because the identified improvements would also fall within the responsibility and jurisdiction of the City of Hollister, implementation of MM TRA-2f cannot be guaranteed and, even if implemented, cannot guarantee the timely construction of the required improvements, when they are warranted, to mitigate the project’s impacts. Accordingly, the project’s impacts to the Enterprise Road/Airline Highway (State Route 25) intersection would be considered significant and unavoidable.

Intersection Queuing and Turn Pockets Impact TRA-3: The project may conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system since the addition of project traffic would result in insufficient vehicle storage within the leftturn pocket leading from southbound Fairview Road to the project site, which could result in increased traffic congestion on Fairview Road. This would be considered a potentially significant impact. In addition to analyzing project intersection LOS impacts, an analysis of intersection operations for selected intersections was also prepared. The operations analysis is based on vehicle queuing for high-demand turning movements at intersections. The intersections of Airline Highway (State Route 25)/Fairview Road-Ridgemark Drive and Cielo Vista Drive/Fairview Road were analyzed to determine peak-hour vehicle storage needs for existing and proposed turn lanes. These intersections were studied for queuing impacts because the project is anticipated to significantly increase demand in critical turn movements at these locations and these locations

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-49

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

are the most likely to experience queuing impacts due to the project. At other intersections further from the site, traffic demand in critical turn movements is much lower and queuing impacts would not occur (Hexagon 2011). The results of the queuing analysis are presented in Table 39, Project Intersection Queuing Analysis Results. According to the traffic analysis, the storage space currently available for high-demand turning movements at the Airline Highway (State Route 25)/Fairview Road-Ridgemark Drive intersection accommodates the projected maximum vehicle queues during both the AM and PM peak hours under existing conditions. Under existing with-project conditions, this intersection would accommodate the projected maximum vehicle queues during both the AM and PM peakhours. The storage space currently available for high-demand, northbound left-turn movements on Fairview Road at Cielo Vista Drive accommodates the maximum vehicle queues during both the AM and PM peak-hours under existing conditions and there is not currently any southbound left-turn movement from Fairview Road at the Cielo Vista Drive extension. However, under existing with-project conditions, the turn-pocket storage length for the southbound left-turn movement on Fairview Road at the Cielo Vista Drive extension intersection would need to accommodate a maximum queue of one vehicle or 25 feet (Hexagon 2011). The queue length results are based on the maximum or 95th percentile queue during the peak hours. A 95th percentile value indicates that a queue of this length or less would occur 95 percent of the time. Storage pocket lengths based on the 95th percentile peak hour queue length would insure that storage space would be exceeded only five percent of the time during peak hours. Therefore, the pocket length would be adequate during a majority of the peak hours and during the rest of the day. Additionally, the traffic analysis recommends that the proposed turn pocket length be designed, to the extent feasible, to include deceleration distance in the turn pocket based on the San Benito County Public Works Department’s design speed of 60 mph for Fairview Road, consistent with County standards and Chapter 400 of Caltrans’ Highway Design Manual. The traffic report notes that the ideal design for the southbound left-turn lane would include a total length of 530 feet to accommodate deceleration (including a 90-foot bay taper), plus a vehicle storage length of 50 feet (2 vehicles) (the minimum accepted by Caltrans) for a total length of 580 feet. The length of the project site frontage along Fairview Road is greater than 800 feet, which is sufficient to accommodate the recommended 580-foot length for turn pocket storage and deceleration consistent with the design standards.

3.14-50

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 39

Project Intersection Queuing Analysis Results Existing Conditions

Existing Plus Project Conditions

Req.

Intersection

Fairview Rd and Airline

Mvmt.

Existing

Existing

# of

Storage Per

Lanes

EBL

1

SBL

1

SBR

1

Hwy

Fairview Rd and Cielo Vista Dr/Project Driveway Source:

SBL

Req.

Vehicle

Storage

Vehicle

Storage

Peak

Queue

Per Lane

Queue

Per Lane

Lane (ft.)

Hour

/a/

(ft.) /b/

/a/

(ft.) /b/

380

AM

1

25

1

25

Existing storage adequate.

380

PM

1

25

1

25

Existing storage adequate.

380

AM

1

25

1

25

Existing storage adequate.

380

PM

1

25

1

25

Existing storage adequate.

380

AM

1

25

1

25

Existing storage adequate.

380

PM

1

25

1

25

Existing storage adequate.

See Note /c/

AM

N/A

N/A

1

25

See Note /c/

PM

N/A

N/A

1

25

1

Comments

Lane would need to be ~ 25 feet. Lane would need to be ~ 25 feet.

Hexagon Traffic Consultants 2011

Notes: /a/ Vehicle queue (# of vehicles) calculated using the Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence level. /b/ Required storage is calculated based on peak-hour vehicle queue calculation as follows: Vehicle queue x 25’. /c/ This turn pocket would be built with the project.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-51

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Article 7.0 of the proposed Specific Plan (Implementation Plan) states that the master developer and/or individual developer(s) of any portion of the project site that abuts Fairview Road shall be responsible for constructing frontage improvements and lane requirements. Construction of these improvements would occur in conformance with the Implementation Phasing and Infrastructure Master Plans as defined by Article 7.0 and during the tentative map process (see Specific Plan, page 7-10). Implementation of mitigation measure MM TRA-3, below, would ensure that the turn pocket storage and vehicle queues will meet County and Caltrans standards. With implementation of MM TRA-3, the impact is less than significant with mitigation incorporated. MM TRA-3: For the Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive extension intersection, as part of the infrastructure master planning for the proposed project, the developer shall design the southbound left-turn pocket in compliance with County and Caltrans minimum design standards. Construction of this improvement shall occur prior to issuance of the first building permit for residential development. Implementation of MM TRA-3 would result in the project’s queuing impacts being less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Roadway Segment Level of Service Impacts Impact TRA-4: The project may conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system since it would contribute traffic to the segments of State Route 156 (Union Road to The Alameda) and State Route 25 (U.S. 101 to State Route 156), which operate at unacceptable LOS E under existing conditions. The addition of project traffic would cause the percent-time-spent-following to increase during both the AM and PM peak hours. This is considered a potentially significant impact.

State Route 156 (Union Road to the Alameda) and State Route 25 (U.S. 101 to State Route 156) Under Project Conditions The LOS for peak-hour highway segments were evaluated for the section of Highway 25 between U.S. 101 and Highway 156 and the section of Highway 156 between Union Road and The Alameda. The project peak-hour LOS results for the study highway segments are summarized in Table 40, Project Two-lane Highway Level of Service Results. The two-lane highway LOS calculation sheets are included in the traffic report appendices.

3.14-52

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 40

Project Two-lane Highway Level of Service Results Existing Conditions Segment

Peak

% Time-Spent-

Hour

Following

LOS

Existing Plus Project % Time-Spent-

LOS

Following

SR 25 – Between US 101 and

AM

87.1%

E

87.3%

E

SR 156

PM

88.3%

E

88.6%

E

SR 156 – Between The

AM

89.8%

E

90.1%

E

Alameda and Union Rd

PM

89.0%

E

89.2%

E

Source:

Hexagon Traffic Consultants 2011

Notes: Based on the Two-Way-Two-Lane Highway Segment LOS Methodology from Chapter 20 of the Highway Capacity Manual. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed Caltrans’ current level of service standard.

The study highway segments currently operate at LOS E, an unacceptable operating level. The peak-hour LOS results for the study highway segments with the addition of project traffic indicate that both highway segments would continue to exceed Caltrans’ LOS standard during both peak hours with operations in the LOS E range. As illustrated by Table 40, the proposed project would contribute to the existing deficiency by increasing the percent time-spent-following on these roadways by less than one-half of one percent. However, this is an existing deficiency to which the project would contribute less than one-half of one percent and the impact would be significant. As noted above, an updated TIF study has been recently completed. As part of this update, specific improvements were identified, along with their anticipated costs, including widening State Route 156 to four lanes (Union Road to The Alameda) and installing two passing lanes, one in each direction, on State Route 25. Improvements of this magnitude would be financially infeasible for any single development project to implement. Given the regional significance of these improvements, associated preplanning, design and implementation of necessary acquisition of adjacent lands by Caltrans, as well as the substantial costs associated with them, the TIF study included the improvements to State Routes 156 and 25. Therefore, payment of TIF would constitute the project’s fair share contribution and implementation of MM TRA-4 below would reduce the impact. MM TRA-4: The developer shall pay the applicable TIF as a fair share contribution towards the identified improvements, which would mitigate the project’s impact to the extent feasible.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-53

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

However, even if the TIF is paid by the developer, payment of this fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the impact of the project. Therefore, the impact is considered significant and unavoidable.

Consistency with Congestion Management Program Impact TRA-5: The proposed project would not conflict with the applicable congestion management program. Therefore the project results in no impact. San Benito County does not have a Congestion Management Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any Congestion Management Plan. However, the Council of San Benito County Governments (San Benito COG) adopted an update to its regional transportation plan (RTP) in 2010. As noted above, the RTP presents a 20-year transportation vision for the San Benito County region and provides short-term and long-term investments that address local and regional transportation issues. The purpose of the 2010 RTP is to establish goals, policies, programs, and projects for transportation improvements in San Benito County. The document serves to express short-term strategies as well as long-term goals to consistently improve the overall efficiency of the transportation system, which includes streets and highways, public transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, aviation, and commodity movement. Off-site roadway and intersection improvements associated with the project are designed to handle capacity resulting from planned growth from buildout of the City of Hollister General Plan and the County General Plan, and are consistent with planned traffic improvements identified in the RTP. The proposed project would not conflict with implementation of the RTP and, with implementation of the mitigation measures described in this section, is consistent with the short- and long-term improvements and policies of the RTP including, but not limited to, level of service standards (refer to the previous discussions under Impact TRA-1 through Impact TRA-4, above, and Cumulative Impact TRA-8, below) and travel demand measures (refer to the discussion of multi-modal transportation under Impact TRA-8, below), or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways (refer to the discussion below of Impact TRA-6, Hazardous Design Features, and Impact TRA7, Emergency Access). Therefore, based on the above analysis in this regard, the project would not result in significant impacts.

3.14-54

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Hazardous Design Features Impact TRA-6: The proposed project’s design features may increase hazards as a result of inadequate site access, which would be a potentially significant impact. As described above, the proposed access to the project site would be provided from Fairview Road opposite Cielo Vista Drive, via an extension of Cielo Vista Drive onto the project site. This extension would provide access to the project site and the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Cielo Vista Drive would be extended along the southern edge of the project site to the Gavilan College site. (Refer to Figure 14, Circulation Diagram, in Section 2.0). As illustrated by Figure 15, Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Street Section (See Section 2.0), this access point would consist of two 12-foot eastbound and westbound travel lanes. This access point would not have a traffic signal, at least initially, although improvements at this intersection would be designed and built to facilitate the future installation of traffic signal equipment at the intersection for when the intersection will be signalized (Hexagon 2011). The proposed project intends to utilize the emergency vehicle access (EVA) route planned for by the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus project. In the event the Gavilan College District does not install the Airline Highway EVA prior to the development of the Fairview Corners project, the developer shall construct it or an alternative EVA, as described under Impact TRA-7 below, prior to the issuance of the first residential building permit for the Fairview Corners project. Given the potential construction of up to 220 residential units, having only one primary access point on the site raises challenges. To the extent primary access is blocked as a result of, for example, traffic accidents, car fires, chemical spills, or unexpected construction to remedy underground infrastructure issues, this design feature raises public safety concerns. If the project does not have access to the planned Airline Highway EVA route by the time construction commences on the project site, risk of these potential hazards would be increased. The potential safety issues that could result from the project’s design would be considered a potentially significant impact. However, this impact would be mitigated by providing adequate emergency access (including, without limitation, providing an EVA roadway that allows for simultaneous ingress/egress of emergency responder vehicles and project resident vehicles) required by Mitigation Measure MM TRA-7 below. Therefore, the project’s impacts in connection with design features that may increase hazards would be considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-55

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Emergency Access Impact TRA-7: The proposed project may result in inadequate emergency access, which is considered a potentially significant impact. The proposed project consists of the development of a maximum of 220 residential units on 60 acres with access to Fairview Road in an area of the County identified for development. All new roadways would be constructed to County standards, and would meet load and access requirements for emergency vehicles. The proposed project intends to utilize the Gavilan College EVA roadway, which is planned to be constructed by the College District between Airline Highway (State Route 25), extending from the southeast corner of the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus to the planned Cielo Vista extension along the eastern boundary of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus project site. The proposed Airline Highway EVA route would occur partially within the Caltrans rightof-way. This EVA route would be sufficiently wide to allow for emergency vehicles and vehicles of project residents to drive on the EVA simultaneously in the event of an emergency. The Gavilan College District has confirmed (email correspondence, March 7, 2011) that the Airline Highway EVA roadway will be constructed in compliance with the County’s and Caltrans’ conditions of approval. As noted in Section 2.0, the placement and construction of the Airline Highway EVA route roadway was considered in the Gavilan College San Benito Campus EIR and approved by the Gavilan Community College District as part of the San Benito Campus Master Plan. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Gavilan College District will install the Airline Highway EVA route, subject to Caltrans’ approval of an encroachment permit. In the event that the Gavilan College District does not install the EVA route or its construction is delayed such that the Fairview Corners project, would not have adequate emergency access, an alternative route would be needed. This would be a potentially significant impact. To mitigate this impact, the following mitigation measures are proposed: MM TRA-7: As part of its first subdivision map application which proposes the development of residential units, the developer shall show on said map either (1) the Airline Highway (State Route 25) EVA, or (2) an alternative EVA generally located in the northwest corner of the project site or in such other location as is acceptable to the County Public Works Administrator. In the event that the Airline Highway (State Route 25) EVA route is not built or its construction is delayed beyond the commencement of project construction, the developer shall construct the alternative EVA. Prior to issuance of the building permit for the first residential unit, either the Airline Highway (State Route 25) EVA or the alternative EVA route shall be constructed, consistent with applicable County standards and other requirements, shall be at least 24 feet in width in order to

3.14-56

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

allow personal vehicles a means of emergency egress and simultaneous entry into the project site by emergency responders’ vehicles, and shall include a “Knox Box,” which could only be unlocked by fire district personnel. To ensure emergency access for all units, the developer shall be required to construct and maintain an all-weather access road connecting the proposed EVA (either the Airline Highway (State Route 25) EVA or alternative on-site EVA) to all homes constructed in each phase of development. Implementation of the above mitigation measures would reduce this impact to less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Transit, Bicycle and Pedestrian Circulation Impact TRA-8: The proposed project includes policies that facilitate the construction of public transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. The impact would be less than significant.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Currently, the project site is not served directly by any bicycle or pedestrian facilities. There are no sidewalks on Fairview Road, excepting a stretch between Hillcrest Road and Sunnyslope Road on the west side of Fairview Road, or on Airline Highway (State Route 25). Bike lanes are provided on the following roadway segments in the vicinity: ƒ

Fairview Road between Hillcrest Road and Sunnyslope Road

ƒ

State Route 25, south of Tres Pinos School to Southside Road in Tres Pinos

ƒ

Union Road between State Route 25 and Calistoga Drive

ƒ

Sunnyslope Road between Highway 25 Bypass and Memorial Drive, then from Cerra Vista Road to Fairview Road

ƒ

State Route 25 Bypass between San Felipe Road and Sunset Drive

ƒ

San Benito Street between Nash Road and Union Road

ƒ

Southside Road between north of Union Road and south of Hospital Road

The San Benito County Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan proposes Class II bike lanes along a 1.57-mile stretch of Fairview Road from Airline Highway (State Route 25) to Sunnyslope Road and along a 3.84-mile stretch of Airline Highway (State Route 25) from the Hollister City limits to the Tres Pinos School.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-57

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Consistent with the recommendations of the traffic consultant, the project is designed to facilitate the construction and integration of bicycle and pedestrian facilities on and off the site. The proposed project would include frontage improvements on Fairview Road designed to be consistent with the County’s Roadway Design Standards, which would include the provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities on Fairview Road. Additionally, sidewalks and pedestrian crossings would be provided at the Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension intersection to connect the planned on-site pedestrian facilities to existing/future pedestrian facilities on Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive. Proposed internal circulation is assumed to be a loop roadway network with some cul-de-sacs. The on-site circulation network is designed to integrate pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular modes of transportation, and to maintain open space at the end of cul-de-sacs in order to provide pedestrian and bicycle connectivity within the project site. The project includes a network of internal bike lanes and pedestrian walkways along planned roadways. This access network would be designed to facilitate connection to the future Class I bike lane and pedestrian path along the Fairview Road frontage indicated in the San Benito County Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan, allowing for convenient access to services and destinations within the Hollister area and to the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus. In addition, as noted above, the Fairview Corners Specific Plan contains numerous policies that require developer compliance, which will facilitate pedestrian and bicycle connections. Accordingly, the project would provide a comprehensive system of internal bicycle and pedestrian paths ensuring alternative access throughout the project, consistent with the County’s Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan objectives to provide such facilities within development projects. Therefore, the project would be consistent with adopted policies, plans, or programs (including the San Benito County Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan and relevant General Plan policies) by facilitating programs supporting alternative transportation. Therefore, the project’s impacts on transit, bicycle and pedestrian circulation would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Public Transit Facilities The proposed project would increase the demand for transit service. The project’s traffic engineers estimate that the 220 dwelling units under the maximum build-out scenario would generate approximately five daily transit rides based on current transit ridership utilization rates in San Benito County (Elia email comm. June 1, 2011). This level of transit demand would not occur all at once, but rather would increase gradually over time as the project site develops.

3.14-58

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The fixed-route bus stops nearest to the project site are located at the Hazel Hawkins Memorial Hospital (near the intersection of Airline Highway (State Route 25)/Sunset Drive) and at Sunnyslope Elementary School (near the intersection of Sunnyslope Road/Memorial Drive). However, County Express currently provides a Dial-A-Ride service to all areas located more than 3/4-mile from fixed-route bus stops (unless an individual is disabled, in which case Dial-ARide is available at all locations). This would include the project site. Dial-A-Ride serves both the general public and persons with disabilities, on a reservation basis. Although the project site is expected to nominally increase transit demand to the Dial-A-Ride service area, this growth would occur over an approximate 5 to 16-year period, during which time fixed-route bus service is expected to be extended to serve the project site. For these reasons, the Dial-A-Ride service should not experience an overwhelming demand for additional service. Transportation objectives discussed in the San Benito County General Plan indicate that transit options should be available where practical to persons without access to an automobile. As set forth in the relevant Specific Plan policies discussed above, the developer would be required to work cooperatively with Caltrans, the San Benito COG, San Benito County, and the Gavilan College District to develop, implement and maintain public transit services to the project site, commensurate with local demand for these services. In addition, appropriate location(s) for a future bus stop on the Cielo Vista Drive extension would be reserved, likely near the Gavilan College San Benito Campus. While no fixed-route transit serves the project site presently, the proposed bus turnout(s) would facilitate the future extension of the existing fixed transit route network if and when demand conditions justify route extension. Therefore, because the fixed-route bus service is expected to be extended to the project site if and when demand conditions justify; bus turnout facilities would be included with the project’s roadway improvements; and the Dial-A-Ride service is able to serve the project until such time as fixed-route bus service is available, the project would have a less than significant impact to public transit facilities. No mitigation is required.

3.14.5

C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

This section presents the proposed project’s traffic impacts under cumulative conditions. The sections that follow describe the future transportation network that was used in the cumulative impact analysis, the methodology used to estimate cumulative traffic volumes, and the results of the analysis and related mitigation measures.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-59

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Transportation Network under Cumulative Conditions The transportation network assumed under

cumulative conditions includes various

transportation network improvements in and around the City of Hollister and unincorporated San Benito County. Roadway improvements identified in the RTP as well as those additional improvements identified in the then-adopted TIF program (as of the time the traffic analysis was prepared) are included under cumulative conditions. As noted above, the updated TIF study and related fee was recently updated. For purposes of this Draft EIR, the traffic analysis utilized the information as set forth in the then-applicable TIF in describing cumulative conditions, which was the best information available at the time the Notice of Preparation for this Draft EIR was issued. At the time the traffic analysis was prepared, the then-adopted TIF program identified roadway widening improvements throughout San Benito County to accommodate projected growth through the year 2023. Specific intersection improvements, however, were not identified in the TIF. For the study intersections situated along each improvement corridor, the traffic engineer identified likely lane geometry and traffic control improvements that would need to occur in order for the intersection geometry to be consistent with adjacent roadway widening projects. The likely intersection improvements were assumed to be in place under cumulative conditions. The following major transportation improvements are assumed under cumulative conditions: Highway Widenings. Both State Route 25 and State Route 156 are assumed to be widened to four lanes. Fairview Road Widening. Fairview Road is assumed to be widened to four lanes from Airline Highway (State Route 25) to McCloskey Road. Union Road Extension. Union Road will be extended from its current termination point, east of Airline Highway (State Route 25), eastward, and connected to Fairview Road. This roadway improvement is assumed to be constructed as part of the Award Homes Project. Union Road Widening. Union Road is assumed to be widened to four lanes from Fairview Road to State Route 156. Airline Highway (State Route 25) Widening. Airline Highway (State Route 25) is assumed to be widened to four lanes from Fairview Road to Sunset Drive. Union Road and State Route 156 Intersection. The intersection of Union Road/State Route 156 is assumed to have a second northbound left-turn lane to improve the level of service.

3.14-60

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Sunnyslope Road Widening. Sunnyslope Road is assumed to be widened to four lanes from El Toro Drive to Fairview Road Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway Intersection. For purposes of this cumulative analysis, this intersection is evaluated as a four-way intersection with the improvements described under existing with-project conditions. Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road Intersection. This intersection is assumed to be signalized with the necessary improvements as part of the Santana Ranch Specific Plan and as identified in the TIF program. Fairview Road and Sunnyslope Road Intersection. This intersection is assumed to have the necessary improvements as part of the Santana Ranch Specific Plan.

Year 2023 Development Projections and Cumulative Traffic Volumes Forecasts of future demand on the study area transportation system were prepared using the San Benito County/Hollister travel demand model. This model uses widely accepted transportation planning formulas to convert forecasts of future land uses into the number and distribution of future vehicle trips on the roadway network. The travel demand model uses the year 2023 as the long-range planning horizon. This planning horizon is based on a set of population, housing and employment projections that were developed based on the relevant land use designations in the City of Hollister and San Benito County General Plans, on County and other state, regional and local projections of population and employment growth, and on the constrained projections adopted by the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG 2008). Base cumulative traffic volumes at the study intersections were obtained from the 2023 travel demand model prepared for the original Fairview Corners/Gavilan Master Plan based on the combined projects studied in the Gavilan EIR (Gavilan College District 2008), which did not include the intersections of Valley View Drive/Sunnyslope Road and Valley View Drive/Union Road, because model volumes were not available for those two intersections. A growth rate was used to estimate the traffic volumes at these two intersections under cumulative conditions. Population growth rates in San Benito County have been very low since 2003 (less than 1 percent per year). For a conservative analysis, the traffic consultant used a reasonable growth rate of 1.5 percent per year to estimate cumulative traffic volumes at these two locations. Therefore, a future growth of 1.5 percent per year was applied to provide a comparable estimate the future year 2023 volumes for these two intersections (Hexagon 2011). There are two notable long-range development projects—the Santana Ranch Specific Plan and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus projects—which are in close proximity to the Fairview

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-61

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Corners project and would affect most of the study intersections. These two projects are not covered entirely by the growth projections contained in the 2023 travel demand model. Therefore, projected traffic from the approved Santana Ranch and Gavilan College projects was added to base cumulative volumes to yield cumulative without-project traffic volumes. In addition, traffic from the Award Homes project is included in the cumulative analysis. The cumulative with-project peak-hour traffic volumes are shown in the traffic report, Figure 10, Cumulative with Project Traffic Volumes (See Appendix K).

Intersection Levels of Service and Operations under Cumulative Conditions Impact TRA-9: Implementation of the proposed project in combination with past, present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects would result in significant impacts at two intersections and may result in insufficient vehicle storage within the left-turn pocket leading from southbound Fairview Road to the project site, which could result in increased traffic congestion on Fairview Road. Both of these are potentially significant cumulative impacts.

Intersection LOS The results of the intersection LOS analysis (Hexagon 2011) under cumulative conditions are summarized in the traffic report as well as in Table 41, Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service. Signal warrant checks under cumulative conditions were also performed and are presented in Table 42, Cumulative Peak Hour Signal Warrant Checks. The results show that the operations at two intersections would either degrade to unacceptable LOS standards or an already-existing unacceptable LOS standard would be further exacerbated under cumulative with-project traffic conditions. This indicates that over the next 10 to 15 years, it is likely that improvements at these locations would be necessary in order to ensure an acceptable LOS standard. For the most part, these deficiencies are a result of other cumulative development growth throughout the City of Hollister and the unincorporated County (Hexagon 2011). However, as shown in Table 41, the proposed project would contribute to significant cumulative LOS impacts at two of the study intersections: Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension and Memorial Street/Hillcrest Road. The remaining study intersections would not be significantly impacted by the project under cumulative conditions. The intersection level of service calculation sheets are included in the traffic report appendices. Described below are the two intersections at which the project’s contribution toward the impact would be significant and the recommended improvements necessary to ensure an acceptable LOS standard under cumulative conditions.

3.14-62

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 41

Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service Cumulative

Cumulative With-Project

WithoutProject Intersection Fairview Rd./Ridgemark

Ex Int

Peak

Avg.

Control

Hour

Delay

All-

AM

37.1

E

40.2

E

+3.1

PM

80.7

F

85.1

F

+4.4

AM

28.5

D

30.1

D

+1.6

PM

25.2

D

27.4

D

+2.2

AM

21.8

C

29.6

D

+7.8

PM

51.1

F

177.9

F

+126.8

Dr. and Airline Hwy.

Way

Enterprise Rd. and Airline

Two-

Hwy.

Way

Fairview Rd. and Cielo

One-

2

1

1

LOS

Avg.

LOS

Changed Delay 3

Delay

Vista Dr. Extension

Way

Fairview Rd. and Union

Future

AM

12.3

B

12.1

B

-0.2

Rd.

Signal

PM

12.0

B

12.0

B

n/c

Valley View Rd. and Union

Two-

AM

17.1

C

17.3

C

+0.2

PM

62.6

F

65.4

F

+2.8

AM

36.6

D

37.2

D

+0.6

PM

59.6

E

61.9

E

+2.3

AM

18.0

B

18.0

B

n/c

PM

18.0

B

18.0

B

n/c

AM

10.9

B

10.8

B

-0.1

PM

11.6

B

11.5

B

-0.1

AM

25.6

C

25.8

C

+0.2

PM

33.8

C

33.8

C

n/c

AM

9.2

A

9.1

A

-0.1

PM

10.8

B

10.8

B

n/c

AM

30.5

C

30.6

C

+0.1

PM

35.0

D

35.3

D

+0.3

4

Rd.

Way

1

Airline Hwy. and Union Rd. Signal

Southside Rd. and Union

Signal

Rd. San Benito St. and Union

Signal

Rd. Union Rd./Mitchell Rd.

Signal

and Hwy. 156 Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr.

McCray St./Hwy. 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd./Tres Pinos Rd.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Signal

Signal

3.14-63

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Valley View Rd. and

All2

Sunnyslope Rd.

Way

Fairview Rd. and

Signal

Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest

One-

Rd.

Way

Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest

All-

1

2

Rd.

Way

Hwy. 25 Bypass and

Signal

Hillcrest Rd. McCray St. and Hillcrest

Signal

Rd.

AM

16.7

C

17.2

C

+0.5

PM

21.7

C

22.8

C

+1.1

AM

19.2

B

19.4

B

+0.2

PM

18.7

B

18.8

B

+0.1

AM

17.6

B

17.7

B

+0.1

PM

18.0

B

18.1

B

+0.1

AM

57.7

F

65.0

F

+7.3

PM

112.8

F

124.0

F

+11.2

AM

38.7

D

40.5

D

+1.8

PM

63.4

E

66.7

E

+3.3

AM

37.6

D

38.3

D

+0.7

PM

57.2

E

59.4

E

+2.2

Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana

One-

AM

17.4

C

17.8

C

+0.4

Rd.

Way 1

PM

18.8

C

19.3

C

+0.5

Fairview Rd. and

One-

AM

20.5

C

20.9

C

+0.4

PM

23.2

C

24.0

C

+0.8

McCloskey Rd. Source:

Way

1

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2011)

Notes: 1. The reported delay and corresponding level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections are based on the stopcontrolled approach with the highest delay. 2. The reported delay and corresponding level of service for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents the average delay for all approaches at the intersection. 3. Change in delay is measured relative to background conditions for the analysis of project conditions impacts. 4. Future intersection. Entries denoted in bold/boxed indicate conditions that exceed the current level of service standard. Delays in seconds. Impacts shown in boxes.

Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension. As shown in Table 41, Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service, above, under cumulative without-project conditions, this intersection is expected to operate at an acceptable LOS C during the AM peak-hour and an unacceptable LOS F during the PM peak-hour. Under cumulative with-project conditions, the LOS during the AM peak-hour would decline from an acceptable LOS C to an unacceptable LOS D; during the PM peak-hour the intersection LOS would remain at an unacceptable LOS F but the average delay would increase by 126.8 seconds. Therefore, during the AM and PM peak-hours, the project would result in potentially significant cumulative impacts.

3.14-64

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Impact TRA-3 presents a project-level vehicle queuing analysis for high-demand turning movements. Under the cumulative condition (as outlined in Section 3.0), based on the maximum peak-hour vehicle queue, for the turn-pocket storage length for the southbound leftturn movement on Fairview Road at the intersection of Cielo Vista Drive extension would need to accommodate a maximum queue of eight vehicles and therefore would need to be about 200 feet long (Hexagon 2011). Under the cumulative conditions and to meet the County’s design standards, at the time the intersection is signalized, the turn pocket will need to accommodate 200 feet of vehicle storage, 440 feet for deceleration space, and a 90-foot bay taper, for a total length of 730 feet. The distance between the Cielo Vista Drive extension right-of-way and the north property line is greater than 800 feet, which is sufficient to accommodate a turn pocket that meets design standards. Article 7.0 of the proposed Specific Plan (Implementation Plan) assumes that this intersection will be fully signalized and improved during development of the first phase of the adjoining Gavilan San Benito Campus; however, if development of the project site precedes the Campus project, the master developer and/or individual developer(s) of any portion of the project site that abuts Fairview Road would be responsible for constructing these improvements as level of service or other factors warrant. Signalization of this intersection and extension of the left-turn lane may be needed to ensure acceptable traffic operations. The traffic analysis proposes the following measures to mitigate impacts. MM TRA-9a: Prior to the issuance of the building permit(s) for the 135th and 200th residential units (excluding secondary units) respectively, the project developer shall monitor the intersection of Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension to determine if signalization is needed. Monitoring shall include the following: 1.

Conduct analyses of all applicable traffic signal warrants and based on field measured data;

2.

Study prevailing traffic and roadway conditions; and

3.

Report the results to the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, who will determine if and when the traffic signal and extension of the turn-pocket storage for the southbound left-turn movement on Fairview Road should be installed.

MM TRA-9b: The developer shall install the traffic signal and extend the turn-pocket storage for the southbound left-turn movement on Fairview Road if directed in writing to do so by the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, consistent with MM TRA-8a above. The developer’s costs associated therewith may be subject to partial reimbursement to the extent other funding sources such as the TIF program, an established Benefit Area or from other development are available and applicable;

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-65

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

provided, however, the developer’s obligation to install the signal and extend the left-turn lane shall not be dependent on receipt of any reimbursement. The developer shall be obligated to install the identified improvements promptly upon notification from the County of the need to do so, and no additional building permits for residential units (excluding secondary units) shall be issued until the traffic signal is installed. With implementation of MM TRA-9a and MM TRA-9b, the project’s impact to the intersection of Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension would be mitigated to a less than significant level with mitigation incorporated. In the alternative, if the San Benito County Public Works Administrator determines that the traffic signal at the intersection of Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension and extension of the turn-pocket storage for the southbound left-turn movement on Fairview Road is not warranted at the time of issuance of the building permit of the project’s 200th residential unit (excluding secondary units), the following mitigation measure shall apply: MM TRA-9c: If the San Benito County Public Works Administrator determines that the traffic signal at the intersection of Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension and extension of the turn-pocket storage for the southbound left-turn movement on Fairview Road is not warranted at the time of issuance of the building permit for the project’s 200th residential unit, then the developer shall comply with the following. If the identified traffic signal and extension of the turn-pocket storage for the southbound left-turn movement on Fairview Road is expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, then the developer’s payment of the applicable TIF shall constitute its fair share contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the identified traffic signal and extension of the turn-pocket storage for the southbound left-turn movement on Fairview Road is not expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, then the developer shall pay its fair share contribution (based on its pro rata contribution of trips) to the Benefit Area toward the signalization of this intersection. Accordingly, if this alternative mitigation approach is implemented, the project’s impacts would be mitigated to the extent feasible However, even if implemented, the timely construction of the required improvements cannot be guaranteed. Accordingly, the project’s impacts to the Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension would be considered significant and unavoidable. Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road. Under cumulative conditions, this intersection would operate at LOS F during both peak hours with or without the project. However, the addition of project-related traffic would increase delay at this intersection. During the AM peak-hour, the delay would increase by 7.3 seconds and during the PM peak-hour it would increase by 11.2 seconds, both of which are greater than the threshold of an increase in delay of more than five seconds at an intersection operating at an unacceptable level of service. This is a potentially significant cumulative impact.

3.14-66

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The following measure is recommended to mitigate impacts to the extent feasible. MM TRA-9d: Signalization of the Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road intersection, the addition of dedicated left-turn lanes on all four approaches, and the operation of the traffic signal with protected left-turn phasing will ensure acceptable traffic conditions. If the identified improvements are expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, then the developer’s payment of the applicable TIF shall constitute its fair share contribution toward the improvements at this intersection. If the identified improvements are not expressly covered in the then-current TIF program, then the developer shall pay the project’s fair share contribution (based on its pro rata contribution of trips) to the Benefit Area toward improvements at this intersection. However, given the current pace of development and the anticipated costs of the identified improvements at this intersection as well as the fact that this intersection lies entirely within the City of Hollister’s jurisdiction, the developer’s payment of its fair share of costs would not guarantee timely construction of this improvement to mitigate the project’s impact to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project’s contribution to the cumulative impact is considered significant and unavoidable.

Table 42

Cumulative Peak-Hour Signal Warrant Checks Cumulative no-Project Intersection

AM Warrant Met ?

PM Warrant Met?

Cumulative with-Project AM Warrant Met ?

PM Warrant Met?

Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway (State Route 25)

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Enterprise Road and Airline Highway (State Route 25)

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Future Project Entrance

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Valley View Road and Union Road

No

No

No

No

Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road

No

Yes

No

Yes

Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.14-67

3.14 T RAFFIC AN D C IRCULAT ION

Cumulative no-Project Intersection

AM Warrant Met ?

PM Warrant Met?

Cumulative with-Project AM Warrant Met ?

PM Warrant Met?

Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Fairview Road and McCloskey Road

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Source:

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. (2011)

Note: Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition.

3.14-68

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15 W ET AND D RY U TILITIES AND E NERGY

This section of the Draft EIR addresses existing utility and infrastructure systems within San Benito County and the City of Hollister that would serve the proposed project. The analysis discusses the ability of existing and planned systems to accommodate the project in terms of distribution and supply, and identifies potential environmental impacts that could result from the construction of required new or expanded systems. This analysis is based on information from San Benito County General Plan (1994), the City of Hollister General Plan (2005), the Hollister Water and Wastewater Master Plan and Coordinated Water Supply and Treatment Plan (2008), the Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Master Plan (HDR Consultants 2008) (Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan), the Hollister Area 2008 Urban Water Management Plan (Kennedy/Jenks Consultants 2006) (Hollister UWMP), the City of Hollister Sanitary Collection System Master Plan (Wallace Group 2010), the Water Supply Assessment for Gavilan College & Fairview Corners Residential Development (Sunnyslope County Water District 2008) (WSA), the City of Hollister’s Long-Term Wastewater Management Program for the DWTP and the IWTP (2005), Summary Plan of the San Benito County Regional Agency Integrated Waste Management Plan (1996) (RAIWMP), information provided by County service providers, and project application materials. This section also includes a discussion of projected energy usage of the project, with an emphasis on avoiding or reducing inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy, pursuant to Appendix F in the State CEQA Guidelines.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-1

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

3.15.1

E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING

Water Service Project Site The project site is currently undeveloped, and does not receive any potable water service, although the site is within the Sunnyslope County Water District’s (Sunnyslope) existing water service area. On-site water infrastructure consists of an agricultural water pump station operated by Sunnyslope, which is located in the northwestern corner of the site along Fairview Road. The pump is connected to an agricultural water line that serves the project site’s existing agricultural uses. In terms of potable water distribution systems, there is an existing 12-inch water main that runs along the west side of Fairview Road, with which Sunnyslope would require the project to connect, and there is another existing water main in Harbern Way to which the project could connect.

Project Vicinity: Water Supply and Distribution The Hollister Urban Area (as discussed further below) is served by three water purveyors: the San Benito County Water District (County Water District), Sunnyslope, and the City of Hollister. The County Water District supplies wholesale water received from the San Felipe Unit of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation’s Central Valley Project (CVP) via a pipeline from the San Luis Reservoir to the City of Hollister and Sunnyslope. According to the City of Hollister UWMP, the municipal and industrial water supply in the Hollister Urban Area is provided by a combination of imported surface water from the federal CVP and local groundwater. Both water sources are discussed further below. Imported Surface Water. The CVP is operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau) for the benefit of its contractors and includes over 500 miles of major canals, as well as conduits, tunnels, and related facilities from the Cascade Mountains in the north to the Tehachapi Mountains in the south. The CVP annually delivers approximately seven million acre feet of water per year system-wide for agricultural, urban, and wildlife uses (UWMP, page 2-22), and provides a portion of this supply to serve San Benito County residents. In water year 2010, allocations were decreased to 45 percent of the contracted amount for agriculture and to 75 percent of historic use for M&I. . The City of Hollister and Sunnyslope both provide potable water service to County residents. Sunnyslope provides service to much of the eastern and southern portions of the Hollister Urban Area. The City of Hollister supplies the northern and western portions of the City with potable

3.15-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

water. Sunnyslope obtains its surface water supply from the CVP, through a contract with the County Water District. The County Water District is party to a contract with the Bureau, which requires the Bureau to provide up to 35,500 acre feet per year (AFY) to meet municipal and industrial (M&I) demands within designated areas of the County Water District service area, including the Sunnyslope service area (and therefore, the project site). Sunnyslope must apply for water annually from the County Water District and is required to treat water received before distribution to Sunnyslope customers. The LESSALT treatment plant was built in 2002, as a joint venture between the City of Hollister and Sunnyslope to treat imported CVP water for distribution to the City of Hollister and Sunnyslope service areas. In so doing, the plant provides replacement water for groundwater and improves water quality. According to the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan, in terms of capacity, the LESSALT plant was originally designed to treat up to three million gallons per day (mgd) (pp. 5-7). Due to hydraulic constraints and treated water capacity issues, however, the LESSALT plant does not operate at full capacity (pp. 2-17). In order to resolve this issue, the City and Sunnyslope are moving forward with a “Disinfection Byproduct Project,” which will include the addition of a booster pumping station and hydro-pneumatic tank. Once these improvements are completed, the plant will be able to operate at its rated 3.0 mgd. This project also includes the addition of potassium permanganate and coagulant for water quality improvements (pp. 2-17). Currently, the plant’s available treatment capacity is approximately 1,000 gallons per minute (gpm), equivalent to approximately 1,600 AFY. Sunnyslope and the City of Hollister equally divide the available capacity for the LESSALT plant, and therefore each can receive up to 800 AFY under maximum production. However, while Sunnyslope could receive up to 800 AFY in any one year from the LESSALT plant, the average quantity of treated surface water that Sunnyslope received between the years 2004-2008 was approximately 600 AFY. Essentially, the LESSALT plant is operating at approximately 70 percent of capacity (UWMP, pp. 2-25) and is expected to maintain, at a minimum, this operational capacity through 2035. Groundwater. Historically, San Benito County has relied heavily on groundwater from the Gilroy-Hollister Valley Groundwater Basin, deriving its groundwater supply from the Hollister Area Subbasin and the San Juan Bautista Subbasin. The Hollister Area Subbasin lies within the northeast portion of the Gilroy-Hollister Valley Groundwater Basin and is bounded on the north and east by the Diablo Range, with the Calaveras fault as its western boundary. The San Juan Bautista Subbasin lies within the southwestern portion of the Gilroy-Hollister Valley Groundwater Basin, is bounded on the north by the Sargeant fault and Sargeant Anticline and abuts the Bolsa Area Subbasin; the San Andreas fault and the Gabilan Range from its southwestern boundary and the Calaveras fault and the Hollister Area Subbasin form its eastern boundary. The Gilroy-Hollister Valley Groundwater Basin and its subbasin are further divided

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-3

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

into distinct relevant subbasins known as Hollister West, Hollister East, and Tres Pinos subbasins. These subbasins have remained stable over the past 30 years. The assumed sustainable yield of the groundwater basins is 16,000 AFY according to the Hollister UWMP (Kennedy Jenks 2006), The project site is located within the Southern Hollister East Sub-Basin (County Water District, Annual Groundwater Report, 2010). Sunnyslope obtains groundwater from its own wells, as well as the City of Hollister’s wells through a system intertie. Sunnyslope has three reservoirs for a total capacity of 2.5 million gallons. Sunnyslope pumps groundwater from five wells at various locations throughout its service area. Active wells are #2, #5, #7, #8, which provided approximately 3,450 gpm (Sunnyslope 2008), which equates to about 5,569 acre-feet per year (AFY), and more recently, well #11, which provides an additional 1,300 gpm (about 2,098 AFY). Currently, existing total capacity is approximately 4,750 gpm (about 7,667 AFY). Also, Sunnyslope is in the process of testing of an additional well (#12), and environmental review in connection with this well was completed in September 2010. The additional capacity of this new well will likely be about 2,100 gpm (about 3,390 AFY). Therefore, combined production capacity is anticipated to be approximately 6,850 gpm, or 11,057 AFY, once well #12 is completed and operational (Sunnyslope 2008). Operationally, this capacity provides Sunnyslope with the flexibility it needs to fill its storage tanks quickly and conveniently and distribute water as needed. According to the WSA (Sunnyslope 2008), in past single-year and multi-year droughts, the City’s and Sunnyslope’s groundwater supplies have proven reliable to meet both agricultural and municipal and industrial (M&I) demands. From 2000 – 2005, agricultural groundwater demand represented approximately 40 percent of overall groundwater withdrawals. Total groundwater withdrawals are considerably less than the assumed sustainable yield of 16,000 AFY. During times of drought, both agricultural and M&I demands are likely to increase due to reduced CVP deliveries. However, groundwater can be allocated to both agricultural and M&I uses at levels required to maintain a satisfactory supply reliability. The groundwater basin currently has a large volume of groundwater in storage that can serve as a reserve for future droughts. Water level declines in the past have not interfered with pumping efficiency and water levels have eventually recovered following the drought. It is anticipated that similar future droughts will not impact the reliability of the groundwater supply (p. 14). The Hollister Water and Wastewater Master Plan and Coordinated Water Supply and Treatment Plan (2008) is a long-term vision and implementation plan to achieve improved water supply reliability through a combination of actions. Among other things, opportunities are identified that would increase long-term water supply reliability in the Hollister Urban Area through the development of a North County groundwater bank. Currently, there is a surplus of groundwater in the north area, which is creating high groundwater levels and artesian springs. Pumping would lower groundwater levels and could supplement existing surface water supplies. In

3.15-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

addition to the North County groundwater bank, another source is located between Pacheco Creek and Arroyo de las Viboras. During surplus surface water years, water could replenish the groundwater basin via percolation. Recycled Water. The City of Hollister, the County Water District, and Sunnyslope do not currently supply recycled water to private parties. Recycled water use is in the planning stages and could supply some of the non-potable water demand in the region in the future. According to the WSA prepared for the project (Sunnyslope 2008), Sunnyslope’s planned reclaimed water treatment plant would be constructed in the Ridgemark area and when the system becomes operational, recycled water could be available for the project site (p. 10). Potential applications for recycled water include landscape irrigation, agricultural irrigation, industrial uses, and environmental enhancement. Before recycled water service can be provided from the Sunnyslope facilities, upgrades to existing treatment facilities would need to be completed to meet California Title 22 standards. According to the Hollister Water and Wastewater Master Plan and Coordinated Water Supply and Treatment Plan (2008), the City of Hollister has constructed a recycled water project that utilizes the new membrane bioreactor facility at the City’s DWTP facility and meet Title 22 standards. This first phase of the recycled water facility reuses approximately 0.3 mgd, with the balance being disposed by percolation; the City currently uses this recycled water at its facilities. Reuse is expected to gradually increase to a peak of 0.74 mgd by 2013. Availability to private parties is expected by 2015. The second phase of the recycled water facility project is expected by 2023, and intends to expand distribution of recycled water to agricultural users (Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan, pp. 2-24).

Wastewater Service Project Site No public sanitary sewer system currently serves the project site. The nearest area served by a sanitary sewer system is the Cielo Vista residential subdivision on Fairview Road. As discussed more fully below, the City of Hollister operates a municipal wastewater treatment plant (DWTP). The existing wastewater infrastructure closest to the project site includes City of Hollister sanitary sewer mains located west of the project site on Airline Highway and Enterprise Road, which convey wastewater flows to the DWTP (Wallace Group 2010).

City of Hollister’s Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant The City of Hollister collects and conveys all domestic wastewater to the DWTP, which is located south of the San Benito River on San Juan Road, approximately 5.5 miles northwest of

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-5

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

the project site. The DWTP was built in 1979 and became operational in 1980 to treat the City’s domestic wastewater, consisting predominantly of residential and commercial customers within the DWTP’s service area. At that time, the DWTP consisted of a primary and secondary pond system with percolation beds. In 2003, the City completed interim improvements at the DWTP to improve treatment and disposal quality and efficiency until the completion of the expansion. These improvements introduced significant changes to the treatment process by converting to a dual-powered multi-cellular process to improve efficiency. In addition to the treatment process changes, a new influent lift station was constructed to control odors and improve flow measurement. In 2008, the DWTP was completed (now referred to as the Water Reclamation Facility). According to the City of Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Management Plan (Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan), the facility’s hydraulic capacity (pumps, tanks, blowers, etc.) is approximately 5.0 mgd. The treatment capacity (membrane) is currently permitted at approximately 4.0 mgd. Wastewater system improvements identified in the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan have been planned to ensure that the DWTP is capable of treating 5.0 mgd by 2023, which has been identified as sufficient to serve all of the contemplated growth within the Hollister Urban Area, including the project site (pp. 4-15). Currently, treated water (at Title 22 standards) is reused at the Hollister Municipal Airport, a future park site, and via 11 on-site percolation/storage ponds (City of Hollister 2005). In 2004, the City of Hollister, the County Water District, and San Benito County entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the development of the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan. In 2008, this MOU was amended to, among other things, include Sunnyslope as a party. The Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan provides a long-term vision to guide water and wastewater improvements in the Hollister Urban Area, which includes the City of Hollister and adjacent unincorporated areas of San Benito County designated for urban development, including the project site (Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan, Fig. ES-1). The Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan addresses water quality, water supply reliability, as well as water and wastewater system improvements within the Hollister Urban Area. Among other things, the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan also provides a comprehensive plan describing the capacity and estimated cost of physical facilities and an implementation program including institutional arrangements, engineering, CEQA compliance, permitting, financing, coordination with ongoing projects and programs, stakeholder outreach, and scheduling. The Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan designates the City’s DWTP as the regional wastewater treatment provider. Figure 8, Water and Wastewater Service Area Boundaries (See Section 1.0) shows the project site relative to the Hollister Urban Area boundary and the Sunnyslope water service area boundary.

3.15-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

The City’s Long-Term Wastewater Management Program for the DWTP and the IWTP (City of Hollister 2005) (long-term wastewater management program) includes requirements for reliably treating and disposing of the City’s domestic and industrial wastewater through the year 2023, which is the planning horizon for the City’s General Plan and the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan. The long-term wastewater management program assumes that the City’s DWTP could treat wastewater from the Sunnyslope service area as well as from the City of Hollister in the future, consistent with the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan.

Energy Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) provides San Benito County with electricity and natural gas.

Electricity PG&E provides electricity to all or parts of 47 counties in California, including San Benito County, constituting most of the northern and central portions of the state. In 2009, PG&E obtained 38 percent of electricity from its own generation sources and the remaining 62 percent from outside sources. PG&E-owned generating facilities include nuclear, natural gas, and hydroelectric, with a net generating capacity of more than 6,800 megawatts. Outside suppliers to PG&E include the California Department of Water Resources, irrigation districts, renewable energy suppliers, and other fossil fuel-fired suppliers. PG&E operates approximately 159,000 circuit miles of transmission and distribution lines. PG&E is interconnected with electric power systems in the Western Electricity Coordinating Council, which includes 14 western states, Alberta and British Columbia, Canada, and parts of Mexico. In 2009, PG&E delivered 88,127 gigawatt hours of electricity to its customers (Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (2009) 10-K Annual Report).

Natural Gas PG&E provides natural gas to all or parts of 39 counties in California, including San Benito County, comprising most of the northern and central portions of the state. PG&E obtains more than 70 percent of its natural gas suppliers from western Canada and the balance from U.S. sources. PG&E operates approximately 48,000 miles of transmission and distribution pipelines. In 2009, PG&E delivered 845 billion cubic feet of natural gas to its customers (Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (2009) 10-K Annual Report).

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-7

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

3.15.2

R EGULATORY S ETTING

State California Urban Water Management Planning Act The Urban Water Management Planning Act (Cal. Water Code §§ 10610-10656) requires that all urban water suppliers with at least 3,000 customers prepare urban water management plans and update them every five years. The Act requires that urban water management plans include a description of water management tools and options used by that entity that will maximize resources and minimize the need to import water from other regions. Specifically, urban water management plans must: ƒ

Provide current and projected population, climate, land, and other demographic factors affecting the supplier’s water management planning;

ƒ

Identify and quantify, to the extent practicable, the existing and planned sources of water available to the supplier;

ƒ

Describe the reliability of the water supply and vulnerability to seasonal or climatic shortage;

ƒ

Describe plans to supplement or replace that source with alternative sources of water demand management measures;

ƒ

Describe the opportunities for exchanges or transfers of water on a short-term or long-term basis (associated with systems that use surface water);

ƒ

Quantify past and current water use;

ƒ

Provide a description of the supplier’s water demand management measures, including a schedule of implementation, a program to evaluate the effectiveness of measures, and anticipated water demand reductions associated with the measures; and

ƒ

Assessment of the water supply reliability.

Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance The Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance prepared by the state Department of Water Resources was adopted by the Office of Administrative Law in September 2009 and requires local agencies to implement water efficiency measures as part of its review of landscaping plans. Local agencies can either adopt the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or incorporate 3.15-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

provisions of the ordinance into code requirements for landscaping. For new landscaping projects of 2,500 square feet or more that require a discretionary or ministerial approval, the applicant is required to submit a detailed “Landscape Documentation Package” that discusses water efficiency, soil management, and landscape design elements.

SB 610 Water Supply Assessment Senate Bill 610 added Section 21151.9 to the Public Resources Code requiring that certain “projects,” as that term is defined in Section 10912 of the Water Code, comply with Water Code Section 10910 et seq. Commonly referred to as a “SB 610 Water Supply Assessment,” Water Code Section 10910 outlines the necessary information and analysis that must be included in an environmental document prepared under CEQA in connection with developments meeting certain specified criteria to evaluate the sufficiency of water supplies to serve the “project” as well as other existing and planned water demands over a 20-year projection. The WSA is required to be included in the administrative record that serves as the evidentiary basis for an approval action by the County. The Fairview Corners project does not meet the definition of a “project” for purposes of triggering the need to prepare a WSA. However, a WSA was prepared and approved in connection with the Fairview Corners/Gavilan College San Benito Campus project, which also evaluated water supply and demand in connection with the Fairview Corners’ project. To the extent relevant, this Draft EIR relies on technical information from that approved WSA. The WSA is included in Appendix L of this EIR.

California Energy Action Plan II The California Energy Action Plan II is the state’s principal energy planning and policy document, and serves as an “implementation roadmap for energy policies.” It identifies statewide energy goals, describes a coordinated implementation plan for state energy policies, and identifies specific action areas to ensure that the state’s energy is adequate, affordable, technologically advanced and environmentally sound. This Plan is designed to guide the State so that it may achieve the identified goals by taking specific and measurable actions throughout California’s energy sector. The Specific Action Areas identified in the Plan are as follows: Energy Efficiency; Demand Response; Reasonable Energy Resources; Electricity Adequacy; Reliability and Infrastructure; Electricity Market Structure; Natural Gas Supply, Demand and Infrastructure;

Transportation

Fuels

Supply,

Demand

and

Infrastructure;

Research,

Development and Demonstration; and Climate Change (California Energy Commission, 2005).

California Building Standards Code Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, also known as the California Building Standards Code, is a compilation of three types of building standards from three different origins: COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-9

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

ƒ

Building standards that have been adopted by state agencies without change from building standards contained in national and international model codes.

ƒ

Building standards that have been adopted and adapted from the national and international model code standards to meet California conditions.

ƒ

Building standards, authorized by the California legislature, which constitute extensive additions not covered by the model codes that have been adopted to address particular California concerns.

The California Fire Code is a component of the California Building Standards Code and contains fire-safety-related building standards. Title 24, Part 6, establishes California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for residential and nonresidential buildings. These standards were established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce energy consumption in California, and are updated periodically to allow for consideration and incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods.

California Green Building Standards Code The California Green Building Standards Code was adopted on January 12, 2009. The purpose of this code is to improve public health, safety and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the use of building concepts having a positive environmental impact and encouraging sustainable construction practices in the following categories: ƒ

Planning and design;

ƒ

Energy efficiency;

ƒ

Water efficiency and conservation;

ƒ

Material conservation and resource efficiency; and

ƒ

Environmental air quality.

The aim of this Code is to reduce energy usage and help meet reductions contemplated in Assembly Bill (AB) 32.

San Benito County General Plan The following San Benito County General Plan policies associated with utilities and energy are applicable to the proposed project:

3.15-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

Land Use Element Policy 10. Septic systems may be allowed on parcels one acre or greater if percolation tests demonstrate to the County Health Department Division of Environmental Health that soil is suitable for septic use. Sewage disposal on parcels less than one acre shall not be by the use of septic systems, but shall be through a public utility service district. Policy 11. Septic systems shall be properly designed, constructed, and maintained to avoid degradation of ground and surface water quality. Policy 32. Specific development sites shall be free from the hazards identified within the Open Space and Conservation Element Maps (e.g., faults, landslides, hillsides over 30% slope, flood plains). The site shall also be on soil suitable for building and maintaining well and septic systems (i.e., avoid impervious soils, high percolation or high groundwater areas, set back from creeks). Absent adequate mitigation, development shall not be located on environmentally sensitive lands (wetlands, erodable soil, archaeological resources, important plant and animal communities). Policy 35. The County shall encourage energy and water conservation techniques and energy efficiency in all new building design, orientation and construction.

Open Space and Conservation Element Policy 29: Energy conservation. It will be the County’s policy to encourage the use of energy-efficient design in new construction. Policy 30: Water quality from development. It is the policy of the County to require development projects that could contribute to the contamination and/or degradation of groundwater quality to be redesigned to avoid significant impacts. Policy 31: Wastewater treatment. Wastewater treatment systems shall be designed to ensure the long term protection of groundwater resources in San Benito County. Septic systems shall be limited to areas where sewer services are not available and where it can be demonstrated that septic systems will not contaminate groundwater. Every effort should be made in developing and existing developed areas to reduce the use of

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-11

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

septic systems in favor of domestic wastewater treatment. Domestic wastewater treatment systems shall be required to use tertiary wastewater treatment as defined by Title 22. Policy 32: Groundwater studies for new development. To prevent overdrafting in San Benito County, a groundwater development plan shall be required for appropriate new development proposals. Policy 33: Water conservation. To ensure more efficient use of groundwater resources it will be the policy of the County to require conservation of water resources in the County and encourage interagency conservation to develop policies and programs for the protection and enhancement of habitat for fish on major tributaries to the Pajaro River (San Benito River, Pacheco Creek). Policy 34: Evidence water quality and quantity for development. Approval of new developments shall not be allowed without evidence of adequate water quality and quantity.

San Benito County Code Following are specific San Benito County Code sections that are relevant to the project: Chapter 15.07 (Ord. 188): Sewage and Sewage Disposal. Ordinance 188 contains minimum design standards and performance thresholds for the construction of sewer systems under the jurisdiction of the County and includes criteria for the use of individual septic systems. Septic system design and installation is subject to the review and approval of the San Benito County Director of Public Health. Chapter 19.31 (Ord. 748): Development Lighting Regulations. Ordinance 748 encourages lighting practices and systems that will conserve energy and resources while maintaining night-time safety, utility, security and productivity. Chapter 21.07 (Ord. 848): Growth Management System Regulations. The County has adopted a Growth Management Systems Ordinance, which, among other goals, is designed “to encourage a rate of growth which will not exceed the County’s ability to satisfy future demands for essential services [such] as police and fire protection, roads, schools, water [services], sewers and the like…” (San Benito County Code, tit. 21,

3.15-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

ch. 21.07, art. I, § 21.07.002(C)). To achieve its stated goals, this Ordinance restricts the County’s population growth to an annual population increase based on the State of California’s growth rate for the previous year or a 1 percent growth rate per year, whichever is greater, plus the population growth attributed to exempt projects. (County Code § 21.07.005.) This ordinance applies to all new residential projects within the unincorporated area of the County, except for those projects specifically listed as exempt. (County Code § 21.07.003.) In December 2009, the County Board of Supervisors amended this ordinance to exempt from the growth restrictions those dwelling units within projects “that are subject to a Housing or Development Agreement that has been approved by the San Benito County Board of Supervisors….” (County Code § 21.07.004(K).) Title 23 (Ord. 617): Subdivision Ordinance. Chapter 23.17 identifies minimum design and construction standards and performance thresholds for required water, sewer, storm drainage and utility improvements. Required improvements are subject to the review and approval of the County Engineer. Chapter 23.31 sets forth specific improvement design specifications, as follows: 1) Article I - General Design Standards; 2) Article III - Storm Drainage Design Standards; 3) Article IV - Water System Design Standards; and 4) Article V - Sewer System Design Standards. Design Standards for the use of sewer disposal includes requirements for the preparation of a soils report to support the use of septic systems.

San Benito County Local Agency Formation Commission The San Benito County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) oversees public agency boundary changes, as well as the establishment, update and amendment of spheres of influence (Gov’t Code §§ 56001, 56375, 56425). The overarching goal of LAFCO is to encourage the orderly formation and extension of governmental agencies. The primary purposes of LAFCO are as follows: (1) to facilitate orderly growth and development by determining logical local boundary changes; (2) to preserve prime agricultural lands by building development away from presently undeveloped prime agricultural preserves; and (3) to discourage urban sprawl and encourage the preservation of open space by promoting development of vacant land within cities before annexation of vacant land adjacent to cities. It is anticipated that San Benito LAFCO’s approval may be required in connection with the proposed recycled water and wastewater treatment service to the project.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-13

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

3.15.3

S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE

The following thresholds for evaluating the project’s environmental impacts are based on CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G, and applicable local CEQA standards. For purposes of this EIR, impacts are considered significant if the following could result from implementation of the project: ƒ

Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements (see Section 3.9 for analysis regarding impacts related to surface water quality standards);

ƒ

Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted);

ƒ

Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities, or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives;

ƒ

Would not have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, and would require new or expanded entitlements;

ƒ

Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board;

ƒ

Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments; or

ƒ

It would cause wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy.

3.15.4

P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

Water Demand and Delivery Impact UTIL-1: The proposed project would increase the demand for potable water. However, the existing public water system serving the project site can adequately supply the proposed project, including existing and planned future uses over a 20-year period, and

3.15-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

would not require the construction of new water facilities to serve the project or in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives, nor would it require new or expanded entitlements. It would require the installation of new distribution lines, but these facilities would not cause significant, adverse environmental effects. This is considered a less than significant individual and cumulative impact. The project site is within Sunnyslope’s existing water service area. The Fairview Corners project does not meet the definition of a “project” for purposes of triggering the need to prepare a water supply assessment (WSA), pursuant to the requirements of SB 610 (summarized previously). However, a WSA was prepared and approved by Sunnyslope in connection with the Fairview Corners/Gavilan College San Benito Campus project. To the extent relevant to the proposed project, this Draft EIR relies on technical information from that approved WSA. The WSA is included in Appendix L of this Draft EIR.

Water Supply/Demand The WSA (Sunnyslope 2008) analyzed the sufficiency of water supplies to meet projected water demands of the project and other existing and planned uses through 2030. As noted above, the WSA provides existing and projected water demands, details water supplies, and includes a water supply sufficiency analysis based on the demand and water supply analysis. Sunnyslope obtains groundwater from its own wells, as well as the City of Hollister’s wells through system interties. Sunnyslope has three reservoirs for a total capacity of 2.5 million gallons. Sunnyslope pumps groundwater from five wells at various locations throughout its service area. Active wells are #2, #5, #7, and #8, and #11, which combined provide approximately 4,750 gpm (about 7,667 AFY) of total capacity (Sunnyslope 2008). Also, Sunnyslope is in the process of testing an additional well (#12), and environmental review in connection with this well was completed in September 2010. The additional capacity of this new well will likely be about 2,100 gpm. Therefore, combined production capacity is anticipated to be approximately 6,850 gpm, or 11,57 AFY, once well #12 is completed and operational (Sunnyslope 2008). Operationally, this capacity provides Sunnyslope with the flexibility it needs to fill its storage tanks quickly and conveniently and distribute water as needed. In the 2008 WSA, Sunnyslope estimated the current annual water demand at 3,409 AFY (Sunnyslope 2008). The WSA determined that a supply of 4,550 AFY would be required to meet existing demand, anticipated demand for the Santana Ranch project, the Gavilan San Benito Campus project, and the proposed project demand without affecting existing and planned service connections within the Sunnyslope service area (p. 13). Existing groundwater production capacity is 4,750 gpm (about 7,667 AFY).

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-15

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

Water demand for the project was estimated on the basis of unit water demand factors for residential and non-residential uses. Water demand for the proposed project is presented in Table 43, Project Water Demand. As shown in Table 43, the proposed project would require approximately 73.9 AFY to serve the residential development (220 SFU) that could be constructed under the maximum buildout scenario. An additional 6.3 AFY would be needed to irrigate parks and landscape buffer areas. Therefore, the total anticipated water demand for the proposed project would be 80.2 AFY (p. 8).

Table 43

Project Water Demand

Land Use

Units

Acreage

Gpd/sf

Water Use 1

Single-family

Water Use

Coefficient

Estimate2

300

0.33604

73.9

4.20

0.0195

0.095147

4.0

2.42

0.0195

0.095147

2.3

220

units (SFU) Open Space Areas/Parks Landscape Buffers Total

-

Source:

Sunnyslope County Water District 2008

Notes:

1. AFY per Unit

80.2

2. AFY

The proposed project would increase the demand for Sunnyslope water from 3,409 AFY (2010) to approximately 3,490 AFY. Since preparation of the WSA, water pumping restrictions have been implemented that limit the timing and volume of water provided by the CVP. According to Kenneth Girouard, the Sunnyslope County Water District engineer, despite the new restrictions, the water supply remains sufficient to serve the proposed project. Sunnyslope is improving their drought contingency plan, which includes water banking in San Benito County. In addition, there are several joint projects planned by San Benito County and the City of Hollister that would offset current or further water restrictions implemented by the state or federal governments (see Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan and related EIR certified by the San Benito County Water District). Therefore, Sunnyslope is expected to have adequate water to serve its existing customers and the planned growth within its service area boundary, including the proposed project (K. Girouard, September 2, 2010).

3.15-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

Supply Reliability As noted in the WSA, water supplies are sufficient during an average/normal water year to satisfy both agricultural and M&I demands through 2030. Groundwater withdrawals between 2000 and 2004 (normal to wet years) averaged 12,000 AFY, with approximately 40 percent withdrawn for agricultural uses and 60 percent for M&I. This is significantly less than the assumed 16,000 AFY sustainable yield of the underlying aquifers, resulting in a net recharge of the underlying aquifers. As noted above, in past single-year and multi-year droughts, the City’s and Sunnyslope’s groundwater supplies have proven reliable to meet both agricultural and M&I demands. From 2000 – 2005, agricultural groundwater demand represented approximately 40 percent of overall groundwater withdrawals. During times of drought, reliance on groundwater to serve agricultural and M&I demands is likely to increase due to reduced CVP deliveries. In 1976, the basin was receiving no imported water and was considered to be in overdraft. The groundwater levels in the Hollister East sub basin were at their lowest elevation in the period of record, approximately 50 feet below mean sea level. Modeling of historic groundwater recharge rates conducted by the San Benito County Water District found that the simulated water levels indicate that the WY 1976 drought would result in a decline in water levels in the HSA of only 25 feet (to about 215 feet mean sea level) with subsequent rapid recovery. Ground water pumping was assumed to equal the 16,000 AF/yr sustainable yield of the underlying aquifers. Additionally, groundwater can be allocated to both agricultural and M&I uses at levels required to maintain a satisfactory supply reliability. The groundwater basin currently has a large volume of groundwater in storage that can serve as a reserve for times of droughts. Water level declines in the past have not interfered with pumping efficiency and water levels have eventually recovered following the drought. It is anticipated that similar future droughts will not impact the reliability of the groundwater supply (Sunnyslope, p. 14). Table 44, Supply Reliability during Average/Normal Water Year For Entire Region, provides a summary of the average water year reliability for the three sub-basins. Both agricultural and M&I CVP water deliveries were assumed to be the average proportion of full U.S. Bureau of Reclamation contract entitlements that are delivered to the relevant three sub-basins. These values represent the average volume of water allocated to the three sub basins between 2000 and 2004. Groundwater pumping is assumed to equal the 16,000 AFY sustainable yields of the underlying Tres Pinos, Hollister East, and Hollister West aquifers (Sunnyslope 2008). The WSA analysis of supply reliability shown in Table 44 reveals that water supplies are sufficient during an average/normal water year to satisfy both agricultural and M&I demands through 2030. Groundwater withdrawals between 2000 and 2004 (normal to wet years) averaged 12,000 AFY, with approximately 40 percent withdrawn for agricultural uses and 60 percent for

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-17

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

Table 44

Supply Reliability During Average/Normal Water Year for Entire Region % of

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

100

6,174

6,880

7,752

8,624

9,445

10,265

100

1,261

1,330

1,399

1,472

1,544

1,621

100

1,632

1,715

1,799

1,886

1,973

2,065

9,067

9,925

10,950

11,982

12,962

13,951

12,761

11,812

10,011

7,096

6,559

5,583

21,828

21,737

20,961

19,078

19,521

19,534

100

10,913

10,913

10,913

10,913

10,913

10,913

100

3,124

3,124

3,124

3,124

3,124

3,124

Groundwater(e)

100

16,000

16,000

16,000

16,000

16,000

16,000

Recycled Water(f)

100

0

0

0

0

0

0

30,037

30,037

30,037

30,037

30,037

30,037

8,209

8,300

9,076

10,959

10,516

10,503

Difference as % of Supply

27.33%

26.63%

30.22%

36.48%

35.01%

34.97%

Difference as % of Demand

37.61%

38.18%

43.30%

57.44%

53.87%

53.77%

Normal Water Demands M&I for City(a) M&I for Sunnyslope’s (a)

unincorporated areas M&I for County’s

(b)

unincorporated areas M&I Demand Sub-total Agricultural(c)

100

Demand Total Available Water Supplies CVP Ag Deliveries(d) CVP M&I Deliveries

(d)

Supply Total Difference (Supply minus Demand)

Source:

Sunnyslope County Water District. Water Supply Assessment Report For Gavilan College & Fairview Corners Residential Development. July 2008

Note:

(a) M&I water demand for City and Sunnyslope were estimated using the service connection method as described in Section 4.4. (b) M&I water demand for unincorporated County areas were estimated using annual groundwater reports and increased at 1% per year as described in Section 4-6. (c) Agricultural demand data was extracted from Annual Groundwater Reports and reduced for conversion to M&I within the HSA as described in Appendix F. (d) The values shown for CVP agricultural and M&I deliveries are the average proportion of full USBR contract entitlements (35,500 and 8,250 AFY, respectively) for the entire Zone 6 that are delivered to the three relevant sub-basins. These values represent the average volume of water allocated to the three sub-basins between 2000 and 2004(e) See Section 3.4 for discussion of groundwater allocation to M&I and agricultural purposes. (f) All recycled water is proposed for reuse in the San Juan Groundwater Basin and is therefore not used in the Hollister Service Area.

3.15-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

M&I. These withdrawals are significantly less than the sustainable yield of the underlying aquifers, resulting in a net recharge of the underlying aquifers. Sufficient groundwater is available to satisfy both agricultural and M&I demands above and beyond those demands satisfied by imported CVP water (pp. 15-16).

Water Distribution Infrastructure Potable Water Infrastructure The project site is currently undeveloped. On-site water infrastructure consists of a Sunnyslope water pump station that is located in the northwestern corner of the site along Fairview Road. The pump is connected to an agricultural water line that serves the project site. There is an existing 12-inch water main that runs along the west side of Fairview Road (Sunnyslope, p. 10). The proposed project includes construction of a “backbone” domestic water line that would be installed in the Cielo Vista Drive extension and would connect to Sunnyslope’s existing 12-inch water main on Fairview Road. A series of distribution lines would connect to the new line in the Cielo Vista Drive extension to serve the project. The pipes would be sized to accommodate the project in accordance with the applicable requirements of the County and Sunnyslope. The proposed project would also connect to the existing six-inch water main in Harbern Way to provide an alternative source of water for the project per County requirements. Recycled Water Infrastructure Based on available information, it is anticipated that recycled water will be available in the future to serve the project. In anticipation of planned recycled water distribution, the proposed project includes policy provisions for the installation of “purple pipe” infrastructure to enable recycled water distribution throughout the project site once it becomes available. At such time as recycled water becomes available, it could be used within the project site to irrigate parks, open space areas and landscaped areas. Nevertheless, since the timing for provision of recycled water service to the project site is not currently known, this EIR’s analysis does not assume the provision of recycled water to meet the project’s demand. Instead, the analysis relies on existing water supplies to meet the project demand. As noted above, there are sufficient existing water supplies to serve the project. Relevant Specific Plan Policies Article 5.0 (Resource Management) and Article 6.0 (Public Facilities and Services) of the Fairview Corners’ Residential Specific Plan include the following policies and implementation measures to address water supply and water infrastructure:

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-19

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

Policy RM-5.1. Reduce potable water consumption. 1. The master developer shall prepare a detailed master recycled water distribution plan that identifies backbone collection infrastructure needed to serve front yards of residential lots, public parks, landscape strips, monument locations, and other open space/landscape areas within the Plan Area. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1] 2. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall comply with the San Benito County Water Conservation Plan in the design of landscape material, irrigation systems, and calculating the allowable water budget for landscape irrigation in the Plan Area. Additional water conservation methods should also be considered for implementation within the Plan Area, such as cisterns to catch and store runoff water for landscape irrigation, the use of native vegetation in landscape materials, and the use of ultra low-flow or dual flush toilets, shower heads and faucets in all residential units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1]. Policy RM-5.2. Facilitate water conservation. 1. In public spaces and residential front yards less than one acre, the master developer and individual developer(s) shall install droughttolerant landscaping prior to delivery of residential dwelling units to buyers. On lots of one acre or larger, perimeter drought-tolerant planting shall be provided along the street frontage. Homeowners shall maintain yards in weed-free condition and assure that soil erosion is prevented. 2. Use drought-tolerant landscaping for at least 50 percent of planted yard area, and limit turf to areas of active use, and in no case more than 50 percent of planted yard area. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1; Homes WE-2]. 3. Utilize only drought-tolerant landscaping along roads and in public landscaped areas. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1; Homes WE-2] 4. Design irrigation systems to minimize water use, including installation of ground moisture sensor controls, and temporary irrigation systems for drought tolerant plantings to be removed, where feasible, when plantings are established. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4]

3.15-20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

5. Equip dwellings with low water use washing machines and dishwashers, and dual-flush toilets. [LEED Homes EA-9] 6. Pre-plumb dwellings to accommodate gray water and rainwater recovery and irrigation systems, if feasible legally and permissible. [LEED Homes SS-4; Homes WE-2] 7. Multi-family residential buildings shall include a roof rainwater recovery system for storing irrigation water. 8. Use recycled water for park, streetscape, single-family residential front yard and multi-family residential common area irrigation, if available adjacent to the Plan Area at time of construction and permitted under applicable law and regulations. Encourage pre-plumbing to facilitate conversion to recycled water if recycled water is not available at the time of development, but will become available in the future. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes WE-1]. Policy PF 1.1. Ensure sufficient water supply for the build-out of the Plan Area. Policy PF 1.2. Construct a water supply system that expands on and is integrated with the existing system, meets the needs of future development, and, where appropriate, subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement. 1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall install water supply system improvements that tie into the backbone infrastructure system, which shall be installed by the master developer. Water supply improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Sunnyslope County Water District (SSCWD) for consistency with the approved Potable Water Master Plan and Recycled Water Master Plan, as well as related SSCWD requirements, in accordance with Article 7.0. 3. As a condition of approval of each tentative or parcel map (as the case may be), the developer shall grant easements for the SSCWD to maintain water supply mains to be located in the Plan Area. Article 7.0 (Implementation Plan) of the Specific Plan also includes numerous implementation steps for the financing, construction, and maintenance of water infrastructure to the project site.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-21

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

Based on the above analysis and as set forth more fully in the WSA, upon Sunnyslope’s planned infrastructure improvements, Sunnyslope would have sufficient water supply to meet the project’s demands and its other service area demands for the next 20 years. Also, available groundwater is projected to be more than adequate to serve the study area, including the Fairview Corners project, for the next 20 years. Thus, there would be sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, and the project would not require new or expanded entitlements. The project’s impacts in this regard would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Groundwater Impact UTIL-2: The proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table. This would be a less than significant impact. The proposed project does not include groundwater wells and, as noted above, would connect to the existing Sunnyslope water main located on Fairview Road. According to the WSA the proposed project would require 80.2 AFY per year. According to the Hollister UWMP, the underlying sustainable yield of the aquifers is 16,000 AFY. As determined by the WSA, the proposed project water demand would be served by Sunnyslope’s existing and planned levels of groundwater extraction and would not cause groundwater levels to drop to the extent that a net deficit in the 16,000 AFY sustainable capacity of area groundwater aquifers would occur. The proposed project would increase the amount of impervious surfaces on the site. Groundwater below the project site is located at depths of approximately 120 feet below ground surface and on-site soils have a low infiltration rate. Due to the depth of groundwater and the low infiltration rates of soils on the site, the proposed project would not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge. Therefore, the project’s groundwater impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Wastewater Collection and Treatment Impact UTIL-3: The proposed wastewater treatment provider that would serve the project has adequate capacity to serve the projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments in accordance with applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board

3.15-22

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

requirements, would not violate any waste discharge requirements, and would not require the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities to serve the project in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives. It will require the installation of new collection lines, but these facilities will not cause significant, adverse, environmental effects. Therefore, project impacts would be less than significant.

Wastewater Treatment Capacity As discussed above, the DWTP has a planned total capacity of five mgd per day, which is sufficient to accommodate the wastewater needs of the Hollister Urban Area, including the project site, through 2023. The project would generate approximately 60,818 gallons of wastewater per day, assuming that 85 percent of domestic water would enter the wastewater conveyance system and would not be used for exterior consumption (Gavilan College District 2008). As set forth in the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan, this wastewater generation, along with the other existing and future needs of the Hollister Urban Area, can be accommodated within the planned capacity of the DWTP. Therefore, the DWTP would have adequate capacity to serve the project as well as the provider’s other existing commitments within the Hollister Urban Area, and the project would not result in the need for a new or upgraded wastewater treatment facility. The proposed project includes infrastructure improvements to connect the project site to the City’s sanitary sewer system, consistent with the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan for wastewater conveyance and treatment. These improvements would involve extending sewer mains to the site, as described more fully below. The project would comply with the applicable requirements of this Master Plan as well as applicable County and Regional Water Quality Control Board standards, which would ensure there would be no violation of any requirements associated with waste discharge.

Proposed Conveyance to the DWTP Wastewater generated by the project would be collected through a system of gravity fed sanitary sewer lines on the project site and a new sanitary sewer main extension to the City’s existing infrastructure, which would be constructed as part of the project. The project proposes two wastewater service options for connecting to the City’s sanitary sewer system, as illustrated in Figure 20, Wastewater Conveyance Options (Section 2.0). Both scenarios would be gravity-fed and would connect to the existing main on Enterprise Road. Wastewater Service Option #1. Under this option, the existing sewer main that serves the existing residences in the Cielo Vista subdivision, which is located in Cielo Vista Drive across Fairview

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-23

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

Road, would be used to serve the project. The project would connect to the existing system at the intersection of Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive. This connection would discharge the project’s sewage through the existing 8-inch main to the western end of the Cielo Vista subdivision. From here, a new pipe would be constructed to connect to the existing sewer system within Enterprise Road. The new pipe would be sized to accommodate the project in accordance with applicable standards of the County, the City of Hollister, and the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan. Wastewater Service Option #2. Under this option, new dedicated sewer mains within Fairview Road and Airline Highway would be installed to connect with the existing sewer main located on Enterprise Road. The new pipe would be sized to accommodate the project in accordance with applicable standards of the County, the City of Hollister, and the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan.

Specific Plan Policies: Wastewater Collection and Treatment Article 6.0 (Public Facilities) of the Specific Plan includes the following policies that address the provision of adequate wastewater service and treatment on the site. Policy PF-2.1. Construct a wastewater collection system that expands on and is integrated with the existing system that connects to the City of Hollister’s Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant (DWTP), meets the needs of future development within the Plan Area, and, where appropriate, subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement. Policy PF-2.2. The demand for wastewater collection and treatment may be provided for by septic systems on lots not less than one acre in size. Lots less than one acre in size, and where the number of lots within the Plan Area exceeds 45, shall not be served by the use of septic systems, but shall be served by the City of Hollister DWTP. 1. The master developer shall work with the City of Hollister to ensure a “will serve” commitment, and prepare a master wastewater collection plan that identifies backbone collection infrastructure needed to serve new development within the Plan Area. Backbone infrastructure improvement plans for development within the Plan Area must be reviewed and approved by the City of Hollister for consistency with City standards prior to or concurrent with the approval by the County Public Works Department. The timing of approval shall occur in accordance with Article 7.0.

3.15-24

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

2. Where wastewater infrastructure is built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, those improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with Artcle 7.0 and as set forth in the Development Agreement. 3. Individual project developer(s) shall install wastewater collection improvements within the boundaries of their individual projects that tie into the backbone wastewater collection system. Wastewater collection system improvement plans for individual projects shall be subject to review and approval of the City of Hollister for consistency with the master wastewater collection plan and related City standards prior to or concurrent with County staff approval. The timing of the required approval shall occur in accordance with Article 7.0 of any individual subdivision phase final map or commercial development within the Plan Area. 4. As a part of the final map and improvement plans, the developer shall grant easements to allow for maintenance of wastewater collection improvements to be located in the Plan Area. 5

Septic systems provided to serve the Plan Area shall meet County

design, construction and maintenance standards. Designs shall be submitted prior to approval of tentative maps. The project would increase demand for wastewater collection and treatment, but not beyond the planned capacity of the City of Hollister’s DWTP. The project site is located within the City’s Planning

Area

and

within

the

Hollister

Urban

Area

identified

in

the

Hollister

Water/Wastewater Master Plan for wastewater service from the DWTP. In summary, the proposed project would not require an expansion of the City’s DWTP beyond current planned improvements but would require the construction of a new sewer line to connect the project site to the nearest point of connection with adequate conveyance capacity. The environmental impacts from the construction of the two sewer line options discussed above are evaluated in other sections of this EIR, in particular in the sections that address impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, air quality, noise, and growth-inducing impacts. As the analysis in those sections shows, construction of the sewer main would not result in significant environmental impacts. Therefore, the project’s wastewater impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-25

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

On-site Wastewater Treatment Impact UTIL-4: The soils on the project site may not be capable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks. This is a potentially significant impact. As discussed more fully in Section 3.7, Geology and Soils, the Specific Plan contemplates the potential use of septic systems for residential development on one-acre lots, so long as doing so would be consistent with applicable County and Regional Water Quality Control Board regulations. Groundwater below the project site is located at a depth of approximately 120 feet below ground surface, and on-site soils have a low infiltration rate. However, site-specific soil profile analysis and percolation testing will need to be performed at the tentative map or parcel map (as the case may be) stage to confirm soil suitability in the event the developer proposes to use septic systems rather than connect to the City of Hollister’s DWTP. Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM GEO-8, which requires site-specific analysis, would reduce the impact to a less than significant level.

Energy Consumption Impact UTIL-5: The proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption of electricity, natural gas or gasoline. This impact is considered less than significant. The project would consume energy for multiple purposes including, without limitation, building heating and cooling, lighting, appliances and electronics. Energy would also be consumed during each vehicle trip associated with the proposed land development. The project’s estimated operational energy consumption at buildout is provided in Section 3.5, Climate Change. The estimates are summarized here in Table 45, Project’s Estimated Operational Electrical Demand. As discussed in Section 3.5, residential development in San Benito County consumed a total of approximately 120 million kilowatt hours (kWh) of energy in 2008. U.S. Census data for 2008 indicate that there were approximately 17,827 housing units in the County. This data can be used to estimate that a single housing unit in the County consumed an average of approximately 6,732 kWh of energy in 2008. Using this factor, the project’s proposed 220 residential units would create an average demand for approximately 1,481,040 kWh per year of electricity or approximately 1,481 megawatt hours (MWh) per year for on-site use. As reported in Section 3.5, the LGOP energy use factor for off-site water pumping is 1,450 kWh per 1,000,000 gallons of

3.15-26

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

Table 45

Project’s Estimated Operational Energy Demand Use

Residential Electrical

Project Buildout 220 SFU

Estimated Average Annual Demand 1,481,040 kWh

Domestic Water Pumping

71,550 gpd

37,845 kWh

Wastewater Treatment

60,818 gpd

55,500 kWh

Total Electric Natural Gas Source:

EMC Planning Group 2010

Notes:

Units:

1,574,385 kWh 37,748 ft3 du/yr

8.3 million ft3

ft3 = cubic feet gpd = gallons per day kWh = kilowatt hours

water consumed. Water demand for the project is estimated at 71,550 gallons per day (approx. 26,115,750 gallons per year). This equates to an energy use of 37,845 kWh per year (approx. 38 MWh per year). The proposed project is expected to generate approximately 60,818 gpd of wastewater (approx. 22,198,570 gallons per year). Based on the LGOP energy demand factor of 2,500 kWh per 1,000,000 gallons of wastewater treated, electricity demand from wastewater treatment would be approximately 55,500 kWh per year. Accordingly, the total annual electrical energy demand of the proposed project is estimated to be approximately 1,574,385 kWh per year. The project’s estimated energy demand for natural gas use was derived using ECDMS results for natural gas consumption by County for the year 2008. Total natural gas consumption for San Benito County in 2008 was recorded as 6.729063 million therms (672.91 million ft3 (one therm = approximately 100 ft3). Assuming, approximately 17,827 housing units in the County, this equates to an average consumption rate of approximately 37,748 ft3 of natural gas per unit in the County. Using this factor, the project’s proposed 220 residential units would create an average demand for approximately 8.3 million ft3 per year of natural gas. The demand estimates are considered conservative since they do not reflect any energy conservation or other measures that might be employed as part of the project to reduce energy demand. It is important to note that actual energy usage could vary depending upon such factors such as miles driven by future residents and the degree to which energy conservation measures are incorporated into the various facilities. Efforts have been underway at the state and federal level for a number of years to significantly reduce energy consumption within many areas of the economy, including building construction, household use, commercial and office use, and transportation. State goals and policies contained

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-27

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

within the California Energy Action Plan II are generally representative of these efforts, and address the broad areas of energy efficiency and increasing use of renewable resources.

Specific Plan Policies Regarding Energy Conservation As noted in Table 15, GHG Measures of Section 3.5, Climate Change, the proposed project includes numerous policies related to resource conservation and sustainability. Policies in the Fairview Corners’ Residential Specific Plan also incorporate Leadership in Energy Efficient Design (LEED) design features intended to encourage sustainable development, as well as compliance with Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards. In addition, Article 5.0 (Resource Management) of the Specific Plan contains policies that specifically address energy conservation. Implementation of these measures would result in the more efficient use of energy supplies, including electricity, natural gas, and gasoline, consistent with state and federal goals and policies supporting energy efficiency, and are summarized below. ƒ

Facilitate alternative energy sources. (Policy RM-8.1)

ƒ

Pre-plumb/pre-wire at least one-third of units for solar power and offer solar power as an option on all units. (Policy RM-8.1, Action #1)

ƒ

Consider connecting the project to the Gavilan San Benito College Campus community geothermal heat pump energy or heating system, in the event such a system is constructed. (Policy RM-8.1, Action #2)

ƒ

Facilitate energy conservation through design techniques. (Policy RM-8.2)

ƒ

Design houses to facilitate passive solar heating during the winter, and use cool roofs and thermal window coverings to reduce solar heat gain during the summer. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #1)

ƒ

Design lots and houses to maximize rooftop solar energy output potential. Where feasible, roof pitches and roof orientation should be designed to maximize solar exposure to rooftop energy panels (minimum 300 feet of unobstructed roof area facing within 30 degrees of south). (Policy RM-8.2, Action #2)

ƒ

Make photovoltaic electrical systems and solar hot water available for at least one-third of dwelling units. Photovoltaic pre-wiring/conduit shall be installed and photo-voltaic electrical systems and solar hot water shall be offered as an option on all dwelling units. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #3)

ƒ

Equip dwellings with energy efficient water heaters and heat recovery drain systems. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #4)

3.15-28

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

ƒ

Vegetation within 10 feet of a property line that is deemed to interfere with solar access at an adjoining lot shall be subject to height restrictions as necessary to protect such solar access. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #5)

ƒ

Porches shall be placed only on the east, south, or west side of houses to provide shading in the summer, and to maximize northern light exposure to the interior of houses. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #6)

ƒ

South and west-facing elevations shall be designed with roof overhangs that block summer sun from windows and allow penetration of winter sun. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #7)

ƒ

Design residences to minimize the need for artificial lighting. Provide ample windows; light towers; light wells; dormers; skylights; or other features to enhance natural lighting. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #8)

ƒ

To increase natural light to small residential lots, consideration should be given to the orientation of roof gables and the effect of the roof line on yard shading. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #9)

ƒ

Landscaping should include deciduous trees to shade south and west-facing walls in the summer and allow sunlight penetration in the winter. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #10)

ƒ

Provide communications wiring within all dwelling units to facilitate telecommuting. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #11)

ƒ

Provide programmable thermostats for all heating systems. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #12)

ƒ

Use heating systems with an Annual Fuel Use Efficiency (AFUE) of 95% or greater, seal all ducts, and insulate ducts in unconditioned spaces. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #13)

ƒ

Equip all garages/carports with a 240-volt 40-amp circuit suitable for electric vehicle charging. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #14)

ƒ

If multi-family uses are developed, the parking lot shall be shaded by either high albedo (reflective) roofs, roofs with solar panels, or trees that provide a minimum of 50 percent shade within 10 years of planting. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #15)

With the implementation of the above-referenced, design and building features, inefficient use of energy resources would not occur and the impacts would be considered less than significant. No mitigation is required.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-29

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

3.15.5

C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES

Demand for Wastewater Treatment Impact UTIL-6: The proposed project, in addition to past, present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects in the vicinity, would generate demand for wastewater treatment services. As discussed under Impact UTIL-3, the project would require the installation of new collection lines, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives, but these facilities would not cause significant, adverse, environmental effects, and it is not anticipated that new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities would be needed to serve this cumulative development. This would be a less than significant cumulative impact. While the proposed project, combined with other cumulative development in the vicinity, would result in the increased demand for wastewater treatment services, it is anticipated that adequate treatment capacity would exist at the City of Hollister’s DWTP as contemplated by the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan to handle wastewater generated by existing and reasonably foreseeable future development within the Hollister Urban Area through 2023. The Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan identifies the DWTP as the regional provider for the City of Hollister and contiguous areas (Hollister Urban Area), including the project site. As noted above, a number of improvements are planned and/or have already been implemented to expand DWTP capacity to accommodate growth anticipated in the Hollister Urban Area. Because this capacity is already contemplated by the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan and would be available for the project as well as other cumulative development, it is not anticipated that additional facilities beyond those already contemplated would be needed to serve the project and other cumulative development within the Hollister Urban Area. Therefore, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to environmental impacts associated with increased demand for wastewater treatment capacity, and would not contribute to the need for new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities. No mitigation is required.

Energy Consumption Impact UTIL-7: The proposed project, in combination with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future development within the County could result in the wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption of electricity, natural gas and gasoline. This potential cumulative impact is considered less than significant. 3.15-30

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RES IDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN EIR

The project, combined with other cumulative development, would consume electricity, natural gas, and gasoline. However, Policy 29, Energy Conservation, in the San Benito County General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element, encourages the use of energy-efficient design in new construction. As discussed above, the project incorporates numerous design and building features that are intended to address the incorporation of energy efficient design and building materials, and passive solar energy, including, among other things, facilitating solar access. In addition, a network of bicycle and pedestrian paths would be provided to facilitate alternative modes of transportation. These and other features would result in the reduction of energy usage within the project. It is anticipated that other cumulative projects would also be required to incorporate similar energy-saving design features, in accordance with the requirements of San Benito County, as well as other applicable policies, laws and standards of the County and state, including, without limitation, Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards. Cumulative impacts resulting from the wasteful or inefficient consumption of electricity, natural gas and gasoline are therefore anticipated to be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.15-31

3.15 WET AND D RY UT ILITIES AND ENERGY

This side intentionally left blank.

3.15-32

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.2 A GRICULTURAL R ESOURCES

This section of the Draft EIR analyzes the project’s potential impacts of on agricultural resources, focusing on the conversion of the project site to suburban uses, any conflicts with Williamson Act contracts, and other changes that could result in conversion of Important Farmland adjacent to the project site. This evaluation is based on the San Benito County General Plan, the San Benito Zoning Ordinance, the San Benito County Important Farmland Map (2008), the Soil Survey of San Benito County (1988), and the applicant’s project description and application materials.

3.2.1 E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING Regional Setting The project site is located in the northern portion of San Benito County, near the eastern municipal boundaries of the City of Hollister. The County is primarily rural and agricultural in character, with large flatland areas as well as areas of rolling hills. The only urbanized areas within the County are the Cities of Hollister and San Juan Bautista, both of which are surrounded by agricultural row crop farming, orchards, vineyards, and lands used for livestock grazing. Agriculture is a significant economic activity in San Benito County, with a total agricultural commodity value of $293,090,000 in 2008 (San Benito County Annual Crop Report, 2008). The fertile soils of the area produce orchard and field harvests of grapes, plums, almonds and alfalfa, among others.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.2-1

3.2

A GRICULTURAL R ESOURCES

Project Site Characteristics The project site is undeveloped land that is used to cultivate barley. The land is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. The project site is designated as “Rural (R)” in the San Benito General Plan Land Use Element; it is also designated by the General Plan as an “Area of Special Study.” The project site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, by either the San Benito County Environmental Constraints Inventory (1994) or the San Benito County Important Farmland Map (Department of Conservation 2008). As described more fully below, the project site does not have a high agricultural value. There are no Williamson Act land conservation contracts in effect on any portion of the project site. There are no trees on the project site and it is not located within an area zoned for forestland, timberland, or Timberland Production

Surrounding Land Uses The project site is bound by rural residential uses and grassland along Old Ranch Road to the north, a small, family-owned farm to the southwest, rural residential uses and grassland along Harbern Way to the east, the approved but undeveloped Gavilan College San Benito Campus project to the south, and Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista single-family residential subdivision to the west. The Ridgemark Golf and Country Club, which includes a gated residential community, is located further to the south across Airline Highway. The approved, but undeveloped, 292-acre Santana Ranch project site is located approximately one mile to the north, on Fairview Road. The area located between the approved Santana Ranch project and the project site is identified by the County as the Central Fairview Study Area. The Award Homes residential subdivision, on the west side of Fairview Road, just north of the Cielo Vista subdivision, has been approved by the City of Hollister, but also has not yet been developed. The majority of surrounding land is not currently used for agricultural purposes, and none of the parcels abutting the project site are designated as Prime or Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Lands west of the project site and Fairview Road are designated and fully developed with residential uses. Lands south of the project site are designated “Rural,” “Single-Family Residential,” “Multi-Family Residential,” “Neighborhood Commercial,” and “Planned Unit Development,” and are either approved for development of a college campus or fully developed with a golf course and residential community. The abutting parcels north and south are designated “Rural” and as “Areas of Special Study.” Parcels abutting the eastern boundary have been developed with low-density “Rural Ranchettes.” Foxhollow Herb Farm, to the southwest of the project site, is a small agricultural operation that cultivates lavender.

3.2-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Farmland Classifications Land Capability Classification The Land Capability Classification (LCC) system is used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to determine a soil’s agricultural productivity. The LCC indicates the suitability of soils for most kinds of field crops. Crops that require special management are excluded. Groupings are made according to the limitations of the soils when used to grow crops, and the risk of damage to soils when they are used in agriculture. The soils are grouped according to their limitations for field crops, the risk of damage if they are used for crops, and the way they respond to management techniques. Soils are rated from Class I to Class VIII, with soils having the fewest limitations receiving the highest rating (Class I). The “prime” soil classification indicates the absence of soil limitations, which, if present, would require the application of management techniques (e.g., drainage, leveling, special fertilizing practices) to enhance production. Specific subclasses are also utilized to further characterize soils. The land capability classification shows, in a general way, the soils’ suitability for most kinds of farming. A general description of soil classifications, as defined by the NRCS, is provided below in Table 4.

Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) was established in 1982 by the State Department of Conservation (DOC) to continue the Important Farmland Mapping efforts begun in 1975 by the NRCS. The intent of the NRCS was to produce agricultural resource maps based on soil quality and land use across the nation. As part of the nationwide agricultural land use mapping effort, the NRCS developed a series of definitions known as Land Inventory and Monitoring (LIM) criteria. The LIM criteria classify the land’s suitability for agricultural production; suitability includes both the physical and chemical characteristics of soils and the actual land use. Important Farmland maps are derived from the NRCS soil survey maps using the LIM criteria. Since 1980, the State of California has assisted the NRCS with completing its mapping in the state. The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) was created by the California Department of Conservation (DOC) to continue the mapping activity with a greater level of detail by modifying the LIM criteria for use in California. The LIM criteria in California utilize the NRCS and Storie Index Rating systems, but also consider physical conditions such as a dependable water supply for agricultural production, soil temperature range, depth of the groundwater table, flooding potential, rock fragment content, and rooting depth.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.2-3

3.2

A GRICULTURAL R ESOURCES

Table 4

Land Capability Classification

Class

Definition

I

Soils have few limitations that restrict their use.

II

Soils have moderate limitations that reduce the choice of plants, or require special conservation practices.

III

Soils have severe limitations that reduce the choice of plants, require conservation practices, or both.

IV

Soils have very severe limitations that reduce the choice of plants, require very careful management, or both.

V

Soils are not likely to erode but have other limitations; impractical to remove soils that limit their use largely to pasture or range, woodland, or wildlife habitat.

VI

Soils have severe limitations that make them generally unsuited to cultivation and limit their use largely to pasture, or range, woodland, or wildlife habitat.

VII

Soils have very severe limitations that make them unsuited to cultivation and that restrict their use largely to pasture or range, woodland, or wildlife habitat.

VIII

Soils and landforms have limitations that preclude their use for commercial plant production and restrict their use to recreation, wildlife habitat or water supply, or to aesthetic purposes.

Sources: USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service

Under the FMMP, pursuant to California Government Code section 65570, the DOC publishes the Important Farmland Series map and a list of soil types that qualify for determination as Important Farmlands. Important Farmlands maps for California are compiled using the modified LIM criteria, as described above, and current land use information. The map does not necessarily reflect the general plan or zoning designations, city limit lines, changing economic or market conditions or other land use policies. The minimum mapping limit is 10 acres unless otherwise specified. Units of land smaller than 10 acres are incorporated into the surrounding classification. The Important Farmland maps identify five agriculture-related categories plus two nonagriculture listings: Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance, Grazing Land, Urban Land, and Other Land. The San Benito County Important Farmland Map classifies the project site as “Grazing Land,” which is

3.2-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

characterized as “Land on which the existing vegetation is suited to the grazing of livestock” (Department of Conservation 2008). The FMMP defines Prime Farmland as land with the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics able to sustain long-term production of agricultural crops. The land must have been used for production of irrigated crops some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. Farmland of Statewide Importance is land with a good combination of physical and chemical characteristics for agricultural production, having only minor shortcomings, such as less ability to store soil moisture, compared to Prime Farmland. Unique Farmland is farmland of lesser quality soils but used for production of the state’s leading agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated, but can include some nonirrigated orchards or vineyards. As noted above, the project site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, by either the San Benito County Environmental Constraints Inventory (1994) or the San Benito County Important Farmland Map (Department of Conservation 2008).

Storie Index The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service uses the Storie Index rating system to numerically express (from 0, lowest, to 100, highest) the relative degree of suitability and value of a soil map unit for general intensive farming purposes. The rating is based on soil profile characteristics, texture of the surface horizontal slope, and other conditions, such as high water table, risk of erosion, and high alkalinity.

3.2.2 R EGULATORY S ETTING Williamson Act The California Land Conservation Act, otherwise known as the Williamson Act, was enacted by the State Legislature in 1965 as a means of preserving California’s prime agricultural lands from urbanization. Prime Farmland under the Williamson Act includes land that qualifies as Class I and II under the NRCS classification of land. The Williamson Act involves voluntary contracts between landowners and a city or county in which the owners agree to retain their lands in agricultural or other open space uses for a minimum of 10 years. In return for entering into this contract, the landowners receive property tax relief on the lands under contract. This relief is provided through the assessment of lands based on their income-producing value rather than their market value, which may be considerably higher. The contracts have 10-year terms, which are automatically renewed each year on a common anniversary date of January 1st unless they

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.2-5

3.2

A GRICULTURAL R ESOURCES

are cancelled or a notice of non-renewal is given. If either party to a contract gives notice of nonrenewal, the non-renewal process begins on the following anniversary with nine years remaining. During the remaining term of the contract after notice of non-renewal has been given, the property taxes increase gradually according to a formula that eventually brings them up to the same level as non-Williamson Act lands. As noted above, none of the project site is covered by a Williamson Act contract.

San Benito County General Plan The San Benito County General Plan includes the following policies regarding consideration of agricultural resources:

Land Use Element Policy 3. [Storie Index] Grade 1 soils as defined in the Soils Survey of San Benito County shall be the highest priority for the protection of soils resources. Policy 4. Development proposals adjacent to Grade 1 agricultural lands and soils suitable for the production of row crops, flowers, or orchards shall be required to mitigate potential land use conflicts with agricultural operation.

Open Space and Conservation Element Policy 23: Avoid land use conflicts. The County policy should be to assign compatible land uses adjacent to agricultural lands and selected mineral resource lands to ensure their protection. The County should encourage the use of the Williamson Act, as well as agricultural zoning and other legislative means to preserve large agricultural open space areas. Policy 25: Legislative methods to protect agricultural and rural identity. It is the County’s policy to use the Williamson Act, agricultural zoning and legislative means, where appropriate, to preserve agricultural resources, maintain a rural identity, and to define and shape the urban form. Residential growth should be directed to where services are already provided and to the least productive agricultural lands.

3.2-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The project site is also designated as an “Area of Special Study,” described in the General Plan Land Use Element, Land Use Plan, as follows: This designation applies to areas of the County where a combination of the following criteria apply: (1) more concentrated development than is presently allowed may be desirable provided a comprehensive plan for public services and resource conservation is integrated in order of priority into a specific plan, community plan or area plan; (2) as a result of prior, piecemeal subdivisions, a plan for integrated development and coordination of governmental services and/or community facilities is desirable; (3) the County has identified the area as a potential area for commercial, industrial, and/or residential development. The intent would be to direct development from natural resources and environmentally hazardous areas, to provide for mixed land uses to reduce vehicle emissions, to effectively plan the design, development and financing of services, and to develop open space programs. Increased development density over base density may be awarded based on specified programs. New development will not be allowed within an Area of Special Study until there is full mitigation of public services, infrastructure and facility impacts.

3.2.3 S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE The following thresholds for measuring a project’s environmental impacts are based on the CEQA Guidelines and other standards of significance recognized by San Benito County. For the purposes of this Draft EIR, impacts are considered significant if the following would result from implementation of the proposed project: ƒ

Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resource Agency, to non-agricultural use;

ƒ

Convert [Storie Index] Grade 1 Farmland as defined by the Soil Survey of San Benito County;

ƒ

Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use;

ƒ

Conflict with a Williamson Act Contract (Because no portion of the project site is covered by a Williamson Act contract, there would be no impact. Therefore, this topic is not

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.2-7

3.2

A GRICULTURAL R ESOURCES

evaluated further in this Draft EIR; see Section 5.0, Other Requirements of CEQA for additional information); ƒ

Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g). (Because the project site is not zoned for forest land, timberland or Timberland Production, there would be no impact. Therefore, this topic is not evaluated further; see Section 5.0, Other Requirements of CEQA);

ƒ

Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. (Because the project site does not contain forest land, there would be no impacts. Therefore, this topic is not evaluated further in this Draft EIR. See Section 5.0, Other Requirements of CEQA); or

ƒ

Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.

3.2.4 P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Conversion of Farmland Impact AG-1: Development of the proposed project would not result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Grade 1 farmland to urban uses. Therefore, this would result in a less than significant impact.

Mapping Under the Soil Survey of San Benito County, prepared by the NRCS, soils are classified according to eight broad “Land Capability” classes, with Class I and II soils being the most fertile and well suited for cultivation. The Soil Capacity Survey (SCS) soil mapping indicates there are three soil types on the project site, including Rincon Silty Clay Loam (RsC), Antioch Loam, and San Benito Clay Loam (SbE2). These soil types all have SCS agricultural capability ratings of Class III and Class IV, and thus do not qualify as prime by virtue of being Class I or II soils. The distribution of these soils on the project site and vicinity are presented on Figure 27, Soil Map.

3.2-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

AnC2

AnC2

AnC2

SbD

SbE2 RsC

RsC

RsD2

RsC

Project Site

RsC

AoD2

RsC AnB

AoD2 AnB RsC

AnB

SlE2

RsD2

0

1,000 feet

Antioch loam (AnB) 2-5% slope

Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2011, SSURGO 2010

Rincon silty clay loam (RsC) 9-15% slope

Figure 27

San Benito clay loam (SbE2)15-30% slope

Soil Map Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

3.2

A GRICULTURAL R ESOURCES

This side intentionally left blank.

3.2-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Storie Index Ratings According to the Soil Survey of San Benito County, the on-site soils have Storie Index Ratings ranging from 46 to 73, which are further classified as Storie Index Grades 2 and 3 for agricultural suitability. Since none of the soils have a rating of 80 or greater, they are not Grade 1 or prime soils under the Storie Index. Therefore, the proposed project would not convert [Storie Index] Grade 1 Farmland as defined by the Soil Survey of San Benito County.

Farmland Monitoring and Mapping Program Finally, the project site is characterized as “Grazing Land,” and no portion of the project site contains Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as designated on the San Benito County Important Farmland Map (2008) prepared by the Department of Conservation. Furthermore, while the site supports the cultivation of barley, the on-site lands do not qualify as Important Farmland.

Area of Special Study Designation As stated in Policy 25 of the San Benito County General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element, important goals of the County include preservation of agricultural resources and the maintenance of rural identity within the County. Conversion of the project site to suburban uses would result in a loss of the project site as an agricultural and rural resource. Policy 25 further states, however, that residential growth should be directed to where services are already provided and to the least productive agricultural lands. As discussed earlier in this section, the project site has been designated as an Area of Special Study, which is a means of implementing Policy 25, by directing growth to areas where services already exist and to less agriculturally productive areas, such as the project site. The implementation of Policy 25 and the Area of Special Study designation serves to protect the highly productive farmland resources of the County. Because the project is consistent with these policies, it is consistent with the County goals to preserve agricultural resources and rural identity. The proposed project places suburban uses in an area of the County designated for growth, is located in proximity to existing development, and does not create a development “island” amid lands designated for rural and agricultural uses. For the reasons set forth above, conversion of the project site to suburban uses would result in a less than significant impact. No mitigation is required.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.2-11

3.2

A GRICULTURAL R ESOURCES

Indirect Conversion of Farmland to Non-Agricultural Use Impact AG-2: The project would not likely place development pressure on abutting parcels zoned as “Rural” to convert to non-agricultural use. However, there could be potential urban-agricultural conflicts that could place pressure on abutting parcels to change agricultural practices. This would be considered a potentially significant impact.

Development Pressure to Convert Surrounding Parcels to Suburban Uses and Conflicts Between Land Uses Development of the project site would result in the extension of utility services and other infrastructure such as roads to the project site. The growth-inducing impacts of the proposed project are discussed in greater detail in Section 4.1. As it pertains to development pressure on abutting parcels, it is important to evaluate whether the extension of infrastructure and services to the project site could lead to development pressure on abutting lands to convert those lands from rural to suburban uses. As noted above, lands west of the project site and Fairview Road are designated “Rural Residential,” and are fully developed as a residential subdivision, making current or future use of these lands for productive farming infeasible. Lands south of the project site are designated “Rural,” Single-Family Residential,” “Multi-Family Residential,” “Neighborhood Commercial,” and “Planned Unit Development,” and are either approved as a college campus or are fully developed as a golf and country club (including a 36-hole golf course, tennis courts and other recreational amenities, surrounded by a gated residential community), making current or future use of these lands for productive farming infeasible. The abutting parcels to the northeast and south carry land use designations of “Rural” but are located in the Area of Special Study and are thereby determined suitable for future growth in accordance with the County’s rural and agricultural preservation strategy. There are southeastern parcels to the north of the project site that appear to be in active agricultural uses, including dry farming and grazing. Parcels abutting the boundary of the site are developed with “rural ranchette” low density residential use as well as with the Foxhollow Herb Farm, a smallscale farm that cultivates lavender and other herbs. The majority of surrounding land is not currently used for agricultural purposes, and none of the parcels abutting the project site are designated as Prime or Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Parcels abutting the project site also are characterized as “Grazing Land” on the San Benito County Important Farmland Map (2008) prepared by the Department of Conservation. According to the SCS, soils on abutting parcels are of the same series found on the project site, and, as discussed previously, these soils are not Grade 1 soils. While the extension of infrastructure and utility services would occur, this would not result in the indirect conversion of Important Farmland as a result of development pressure on abutting parcels caused by the project since most of the surrounding land is already developed or already planned

3.2-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

for future suburban growth. With respect to the Foxhollow Farm, this is in active agricultural use; however, this land is not designated as an Area of Special Study, and is therefore not planned for higher density growth in the future. In addition, as discussed further, below, there would be measures in place, particularly open space buffers, between any of the project’s residential uses and the farm that would be developed. These factors would help protect this land from development pressure to convert to suburban uses, and therefore the project would not result in the indirect conversion of Farmland with respect to the Foxhollow Farm. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Pressure on Adjacent Parcels to Revise Agricultural Practices Conflicts could occur between the residential uses proposed by the project and abutting vacant parcels to the north as well as the existing small herb farm operation to the southeast. These parcels are zoned “Rural”, where agricultural uses are permitted. As noted above, much of this land is not in active agricultural uses and is slated for future development as an Area of Special Study. However, it is possible that existing and any future agricultural uses on these properties could potentially conflict with the planned residential uses on the project site. Typical residential-agricultural land use conflicts include use of pesticides and agricultural equipment along the residential/agricultural interface, which can result in concerns about health hazards and nuisance complaints. A variety of non-agricultural uses are also permitted within the Rural zoning district including single-family residential uses at minimum densities of one unit per five acres. Parcels abutting the northern boundary are located in the Area of Special Study, and are thereby determined suitable for future higher density growth in accordance with the County’s rural and agricultural preservation strategy. Dry farming and grazing agricultural operations abut the northern project boundary, northeast of the project site. None of the parcels abutting the site contain Grade 1 soils, and none are designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Because the soils are not prime, are eligible for residential subdivision under their current zoning designations, and are anticipated for future higher density suburban growth, it is unlikely these parcels will be used for intensive agriculture in the long term. The impacts typically associated with field preparation, application of pesticides and herbicides, and intensive harvesting techniques are therefore unlikely to occur between the project site and northern parcels. During the NOP scoping process, a concern was raised by the operators of the Foxhollow Herb Farm (farm) to the southeast of the project site. Specifically, concerns were raised that development of the project site with residential uses could expose their farm to urban pollutants such as household pesticides and fertilizer residues. Two of the farm’s field crops are located

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.2-13

3.2

A GRICULTURAL R ESOURCES

near the southeast corner of the project site (refer to Figure 4, Aerial Photograph), with the remainder of the farm operations located further south adjacent to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus site. The proposed project includes several approaches to reducing urban/agricultural conflicts at buildout. As shown on Figure 13, Open Space Diagram, open space area is proposed at the southeast corner and along the eastern boundary of the project site between proposed residential uses and the fields. Also, the proposed residential uses in proximity to the eastern boundary would be low density residential uses, as indicated by the Conceptual Lotting Plans A-C (refer to Figures 10-12, respectively). Further the Specific Plan, Article 5.0, includes the following policies and implementation measures that are designed to address urban pollutants and regulate the application of pesticides within these open space areas. Policy RM-4.3. Utilize best management practices and low impact development designs to minimize surface water quality degradation from discharge of storm drainage. 3. No chemical pesticides shall be utilized in the maintenance of common landscaped areas, open space areas, or parks. Fertilizers shall be applied sparingly, and shall be derived from natural sources, such as fish emulsion or manure. 4. The master developer shall cooperate with the County to create a public education program for future residents to increase their understanding of water quality protection, which should include but not be limited to: ƒ

Hazardous material use controls

ƒ

Hazardous material exposure controls

ƒ

Hazardous material disposal and recycling

5. Hazardous materials could consist of cleaning products, paint, oil, fertilizers, weed killers etc. The education materials shall encourage the use of alternative methods, and prohibit the dumping of hazardous materials in open space areas or the storm drain system. Further, the master developer shall require that all storm drain catch basins are labeled to discourage illegal dumping of hazardous materials. 8. To the extent feasible, direct stormwater run-off to percolation swale and basin areas rather than directing stormwater to storm drain pipes. 9. Use biotreatment (natural pollutant filtering) where stormwater runs off paved surfaces onto pervious surfaces. 3.2-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

10. Utilize sediment traps, evaporation basins, flow dissipaters, and other methods to reduce the volume and speed of stormwater run-off and reduce pollutant loads. [LEED ND GIB Credit 8] The following mitigation measure would ensure that the above Specific Plan provisions to reduce the effects of urban pollutants and pesticide use are incorporated into the project: MM AG-2: Open space buffers shall be maintained along the eastern perimeter of the project site, as generally shown on the Specific Plan Figure 9, Open Space Diagram, incorporated in accordance with Phasing Plan. The required treatment of urban pollutants and application of pesticides on the project site shall be implemented in accordance with all applicable policies within Article 5 (Resource Management) of the Specific Plan, and with the project’s Open Space and Parks Master Plan (as may be amended), as well as other applicable standards and requirements. The proposed project would place suburban uses in proximity to a small agricultural operation and the other land designated as Rural. However, for the reasons set forth above, project impacts associated with the indirect conversion of Important Farmland (including pressure on adjacent parcels to revise agricultural practices) would be considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Conflicts with Zoning for Agricultural Use Impact AG-3: The project site has a zoning designation of “Rural,” and is located adjacent to lands zoned as “Rural,” “Rural Residential,” “Single-Family Residential,” “MultiFamily Residential,” “Neighborhood Commercial,” and “Planned Unit Development.” Therefore, the change in the project site’s zoning to Fairview Corners Specific Plan (FVC-SP) and its development with suburban uses could result in conflicts with existing zoning, which allows agricultural uses. This is considered a less than significant impact.

Project Site As discussed above, while the proposed project would conflict with the current zoning of the project site as “Rural,” the project applicant has applied for a change in the zoning of the project site to allow for residential and other proposed uses as set forth in the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan. This proposed change would be consistent with the designation of the project site by San Benito County as an Area of Special Study, which designates the land for higher density residential and other associated uses through approval of a specific plan. Should the proposed zone change be approved, the project would not conflict with the applicable zoning designation.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.2-15

3.2

A GRICULTURAL R ESOURCES

Surrounding Parcels As noted previously, the project site is surrounded by rangeland and rural development to the north and east and the approved but undeveloped Gavilan College San Benito Campus project to the south, all with zoning designations of “Rural.” Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista singlefamily residential subdivision are to the west of the site, with a zoning designation of “Rural Residential.” The Ridgemark Golf and Country Club, which includes a 36-hole golf course, tennis courts and other recreational amenities, surrounded by a gated residential community, is located further to the south across Airline Highway, and is zoned “Single-Family Residential,” “Multi-Family Residential,” “Neighborhood Commercial,” and “Planned Unit Development.” The approved but undeveloped 292-acre Santana Ranch project located approximately one mile to the north, on Fairview Road, is zoned “Santana Ranch-Specific Plan (SR-SP), allowing for residential, commercial and mixed uses, a potential school site, parks and other public infrastructure. The area located between the approved Santana Ranch project and the project site is currently zoned “Rural,” and is designated as an Area of Special Study and therefore deemed appropriate for higher density development. The Award Homes residential subdivision, on the west side of Fairview Road, just north of the Cielo Vista subdivision, has been approved by the City of Hollister, but has not yet been developed. While agricultural uses are permitted in Rural and Rural Residential zoning districts, future intensive agricultural uses on these properties are not likely to occur since none of the parcels abutting the site contain Grade 1 soils, and none is designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance; and most of them are already approved for development, or have been designated as appropriate for higher density residential and/or commercial development. To the extent agricultural practices occur, the project would not likely result in conflicts given the land plan, which involves open space buffers and low-density residential uses near agricultural areas (such as the Foxhollow Farm). For the reasons stated above and particularly under the discussion of Impact AG-2 above, the proposed project does not directly or indirectly conflict with zoning that permits agricultural uses on the surrounding parcels. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

3.2.5 C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES The cumulative scenario includes the project, combined with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects, which could contribute to the cumulative loss of Important Farmland in San Benito County. Current and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects include: 3.2-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

Gavilan College San Benito Campus: This project involves the construction of a 3,500 full-time equivalent (FTE) student college facility, as well as approximately 285 residential units and 35,000 square feet of retail space, on a 77-acre site south of the project site at the northeast corner of Fairview Road and Airline Highway (State Route 25).

ƒ

Award Homes Project: This project involves the construction of 595 single-family homes and 100 apartment units have been approved on the west side of Fairview Road, south of St. Benedict’s Church and east of Calistoga Drive within the City of Hollister.

ƒ

Santana Ranch Project: This project involves the construction of a maximum of 1,092 dwelling units, 65,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses, up to an additional 41,000 square feet of commercial mixed uses, and related community facilities and project infrastructure on a 292-acre site adjacent to the City of Hollister.

The cumulative projects list (Section 3.0) also includes a number of smaller residential projects within the City of Hollister, as well as a number of industrial and warehousing projects in the vicinity of the Hollister Municipal Airport.

Cumulative Conversion of Farmland Impact AG-4: The project, in combination with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects on adjacent land within the Fairview Road corridor, would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution to the cumulative loss of Important Farmland within San Benito County. This impact is considered a less than significant impact. The project site has been classified as Grazing Land by the San Benito County Important Farmland map. Although the project site is not characterized as having a high agricultural value, its conversion from the cultivation of barley and the provision of periodic grazing lands to suburban uses would result in the loss of this farmland. While agricultural uses are permitted on lands to the north and east of the project site, it is not anticipated these lands would convert to non-agricultural uses as a result of the proposed project, for the reasons previously described under the discussion of Impacts AG-2 and AG-3. However, it is anticipated that other lands currently used within the County for agricultural purposes may be converted at some point to suburban uses. These lands would include the recently approved Santana Ranch and Gavilan College projects, as well as other lands not currently subject to development applications but which could be approved for suburban uses in the future, particularly those designated as Areas of Special Study.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.2-17

3.2

A GRICULTURAL R ESOURCES

Accordingly, the project, combined with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects, would contribute to the cumulative loss of farmland within San Benito County. However, as explained more fully above, the project would be consistent with the County’s agricultural preservation strategy, and the project site is not characterized as Important Farmland or as a site containing Grade 1 soils. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to the cumulative loss of Important Farmland in the region would not be cumulatively considerable. This impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

3.2-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3 A IR Q UALITY

This section summarizes the existing air quality conditions in the project site and vicinity; identifies potential air quality impacts from project construction and operation; and presents feasible mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate air quality impacts. This analysis is based on the results of an Air Quality Study prepared by Illingworth and Rodkin, Inc. (2008) in connection with the project, included as Appendix F to this Draft EIR; and using information from the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD), their respective air management plans and CEQA guidance documents, and project application materials.

3.3.1 E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING The proposed project is located in the North Central Coast Air Basin (NCCAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the MBUAPCD. Dispersion of air pollution in an area is determined by such natural factors as topography, meteorology, and climate, coupled with atmospheric stability. The factors affecting the dispersion of air pollution with respect to the NCCAB are discussed below.

Topography The NCCAB encompasses Santa Cruz, San Benito, and Monterey Counties. The NCCAB is generally bounded by the Diablo Range to the northeast, which together with the southern portion of the Santa Cruz Mountains, forms the Santa Clara Valley, which extends into the northeastern tip of the NCCAB. Farther south, the Santa Clara Valley transitions into the San Benito Valley, which runs northwest-southeast and has the Gabilan Range as its western boundary. To the west of the Gabilan Range is the Salinas Valley that extends from Salinas at the northwestern end to King City at the southeastern end. The northwestern portion of the NCCAB is dominated by the Santa Cruz Mountains.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-1

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

Meteorology and Climate The climate of the NCCAB is dominated by a semi-permanent high-pressure cell over the Pacific Ocean. In the summer, the dominant high pressure cell results in persistent western and northwestern winds across the majority of coastal California. As air descends in the Pacific high pressure cell, a stable temperature inversion is formed. As temperatures increase, the warmer air aloft expands, forcing the coastal layer of air to move onshore producing a moderate sea breeze over the coastal plains and valleys. Temperature inversions inhibit vertical air movement and often result in increased transport of air pollutants to inland receptor areas. In the winter, when the high pressure cell is weakest and farthest south, the inversion associated with the Pacific high pressure cell is typically absent in the NCCAB. Air frequently flows in a southeasterly direction out of the Salinas and San Benito Valleys in the NCCAB. The predominant offshore flow during this time of year tends to aid in pollutant dispersal, producing relatively healthful to moderate air quality throughout the majority of the region. Conditions during this time are often characterized by afternoon and evening land breezes and occasional rainstorms. However, local inversions caused by the cooling of air close to the ground can form in some areas during the evening and early morning hours. Winter daytime temperatures in the NCCAB typically average in the mid 50s during the day, with nighttime temperatures averaging in the low 40s. Summer daytime temperatures typically average in the 60s during the day, with nighttime temperatures averaging in the 50s. Precipitation varies within the region, but in general, annual rainfall is lowest in the coastal plain and inland valley, higher in the foothills, and highest in the mountains.

Existing Air Quality Conditions Existing air quality concerns within the NCCAB are primarily related to increases of regional criteria air pollutants (i.e., ozone and particulate matter); exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants and odors; as well as increases in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions contributing to climate change (see Section 3.5 Climate Change). Existing air quality conditions and applicable regulatory background associated with these emissions of primary concern are discussed separately, in the sections that follow.

Air Quality Study An Air Quality Study was prepared by Illingworth and Rodkin, Inc. in 2008 that evaluated the air quality effects in connection with the construction and operation of the project. The report describes existing air quality, temporary construction-related impacts, potential direct and indirect long-term emissions associated with the project’s maximum build-out scenario, and the 3.3-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

impacts of these emissions on both the local and regional scale. Mitigation measures warranted to reduce or eliminate any identified significant impacts are described. The analysis was conducted following guidance provided by the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District’s (MBUAPCD) CEQA Guidelines. Emissions, which are the quantities of a pollutant that the project would emit both directly and indirectly, are measured in pounds per day. The amount of pollutant material measured per volumetric unit of air is referred to as the concentration and is typically measured in parts per million (ppm) or micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3).

3.3.2 R EGULATORY S ETTING Criteria Air Pollutants Pollutants subject to federal air quality standards are referred to as “criteria” pollutants because the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) publishes criteria documents to justify the standards. Criteria air pollutants include ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2), lead, and airborne particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). Criteria air pollutants, common sources, and associated effects are summarized in Table 5, Criteria Air Pollutants, Summary of Common Sources and Effects. Sources of criteria air pollutants are regulated by several agencies including the U.S. EPA, California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the MBUAPCD. Each of these agencies develops rules, regulations, and policies to implement applicable federal and state law. Projects must be consistent with federal law and U.S. EPA regulations, although state and local laws and regulations may be more stringent. One of the most important reasons for air quality standards is the protection of those members of the population who are most sensitive to the adverse health effects of air pollution, termed “sensitive receptors.” The term “sensitive receptors” refers to specific populations, as well as the land uses where they would reside for long periods. Commonly identified sensitive populations are children, the elderly, the acutely ill, and the chronically ill. Commonly identified sensitive land uses are residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, retirement homes or convalescent homes, hospitals, and clinics. The federal and state standards for the criteria pollutants, as well as other state regulated air pollutants, are shown in Table 6, Summary of Ambient Air Quality Standards. The federal, state, and local regulatory environments pertaining to the control of these pollutants are discussed separately, as follows.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-3

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

Table 5

Criteria Air Pollutants, Summary of Common Sources and Effects Pollutant

Particulate Matter (PM10 & PM2.5) Airborne solid particles and liquid particles grouped into 2 categories: “Coarse Particles” (PM10) – up to 10 microns in diameter.

Major Human-Generated

Human Health & Welfare

Sources

Effects

Power plants, steel mills, chemical plants, unpaved roads and parking lots, wood-burning stoves and fireplaces, automobiles and others.

Increased respiratory symptoms, such as irritation of the airways, coughing, or difficulty breathing; aggravated asthma; development of chronic bronchitis; irregular heartbeat; nonfatal heart attacks; and premature death in people with heart or lung disease. Impairs visibility (haze).

Formed by a chemical reaction between volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrous oxides (NOx) in the presence of sunlight. Motor vehicle exhaust, industrial emissions, gasoline storage and transport, solvents, paints and landfills.

Irritates and causes inflammation of the mucous membranes and lung airways; causes wheezing, coughing and pain when inhaling deeply; decreases lung capacity; aggravates lung and heart problems. Damages plants; reduces crop yield. Damages rubber, some textiles and dyes.

Formed when fuel containing sulfur, such as coal and oil, is burned; when gasoline is extracted from oil; or when metal is extracted from ore. Examples are petroleum refineries, cement manufacturing, metal processing facilities, locomotives, large ships, and fuel combustion in diesel engines.

Respiratory irritant. Aggravates lung and heart problems. In the presence of moisture and oxygen, sulfur dioxide converts to sulfuric acid which can damage marble, iron and steel; damages crops and natural vegetation. Impairs visibility. Precursor to acid rain.

“Fine Particles” (PM2.5) – less than 2.5 microns in diameter. Ozone (O3) (Smog) A colorless or bluish gas

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) A colorless, nonflammable gas

3.3-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

Formed when carbon in

Reduces the ability of blood to

An odorless, colorless gas

fuel is not burned

deliver oxygen to vital tissues,

completely; a component of

affecting the cardiovascular and

motor vehicle exhaust.

nervous system. Impairs vision, causes dizziness, and can lead to unconsciousness or death.

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

Fuel combustion in motor

Respiratory irritant; aggravates

A reddish-brown gas

vehicles and industrial

lung and heart problems.

sources. Motor vehicles,

Precursor to ozone and acid rain.

electric utilities, and other

Contributes to global warming,

sources that burn fuel.

and nutrient overloading which deteriorates water quality. Causes brown discoloration of the atmosphere.

Lead

Metal refineries, smelters,

Anemia, high blood pressure,

Metallic element

battery manufacturers, iron

brain and kidney damage,

and steel producers, use of

neurological disorders, cancer,

leaded fuels by racing and

lowered IQ. Affects animals,

aircraft industries.

plants, and aquatic ecosystems.

Source: CARB, 2010

Table 6

Summary of Ambient Air Quality Standards

Pollutant Ozone (O3)

Averaging Time

California Standards(a)

Federal Standards(b) Primary(c)

1-hour

0.09 ppm

--

8-hour

0.070 ppm

0.075 ppm

AAM

20 μg/m 3

--

24-hour

50 μg/m 3

150 μg/m3

Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)

AAM

12 μg/m 3

15 μg/m 3

24-hour

No Standardf

35 μg/m 3

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

1-hour

20 ppm

35 ppm

8-hour

9.0 ppm

9 ppm

8-hour (Lake Tahoe)

6 ppm

--

Particulate Matter (PM10)

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Secondary(d,e)

Same as Primary

No Federal standards

3.3-5

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

Nitrogen Dioxide

AAM

0.030 ppm

0.053 ppm

Same as

(NO2)

1-hour

0.18 ppm

0.100 ppm

Primary

Sulfur Dioxide

24-hour

0.04 ppm

--

--

(SO2)

3-hour

--

--

0.5 ppm

1-hour

0.25 ppm

0.075 ppm

--

30-day Average

1.5 μg/m 3

--

--

Calendar

--

1.5 μg/m 3

Same as

Lead

Quarter Rolling

Primary 3-

--

0.15 μg/m 3

Same as Primary

Month Average Sulfates

24-hour

25 μg/m 3

Hydrogen Sulfide

1-hour

0.03 ppm

Vinyl Chloride

24-hour

0.01 ppm

Visibility-

8-hour

Extinction coefficient

Reducing

of 0.23 per kilometer

Particulate

– visibility of 10 miles

Matter

or more (0.07 – 30

No Federal standards

miles or more for Lake Tahoe) due to particles when the relative humidity is less than 70%. Source: CARB, 2010 a.

California standards for O3, CO (except Lake Tahoe), sulfur dioxide (1- and 24-hour), nitrogen dioxide, PM (PM10 to PM2.5), and visibility-reducing particles are values that are not to be exceeded. All others are not to be equaled or exceeded.

b.

National standards (other than O3, PM, and those based on annual averages or annual arithmetic means) are not to be exceeded more than once a year.

c. d.

The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public health. The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant.

e. f.

The national 1-hour ozone standard was revoked by the U.S. EPA on June 15, 2005. The annual PM10 standard was revoked by the U.S. EPA on September 21, 2006 and a new PM2.5 24-hour standard was established.

AAM = Annual Arithmetic Mean

3.3-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Federal Regulations At the federal level, the U.S. EPA has been charged with implementing national air quality programs. The U.S. EPA’s air quality mandates are drawn primarily from the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA), which was signed into law in 1970. Congress substantially amended the FCAA in 1977 and again in 1990. The FCAA required the U.S. EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and also to set deadlines for their attainment. Two types of NAAQS have been established; primary standards that protect public health, and secondary standards that protect public welfare from non-health-related adverse effects, such as visibility restrictions.

State Regulations The California Clean Air Act (CCAA), 1988, requires that all air districts in the state endeavor to achieve and maintain California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) by the earliest practical date. Plans for attaining CAAQS were required to be submitted to CARB by June 30, 1991. The CCAA specifies that districts focus particular attention on reducing the emissions from transportation and area-wide emission sources, and provides districts with authority to regulate indirect sources. Each district plan is required to either (1) achieve a 5-percent annual reduction, averaged over consecutive 3-year periods, in district-wide emissions of each nonattainment pollutant or its precursors, or (2) provide for implementation of all feasible measures to reduce emissions. Any planning effort for air quality attainment would thus need to consider both state and federal planning requirements.

Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) As required by the CCAA, the MBUAPCD adopted the 1991 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the Monterey Bay Region. The 1991 AQMP addressed planning requirements to meet the ozone standard mandated by the CCAA and included measures to control emissions of VOC from stationary and mobile sources. Since the 1991 AQMP was adopted, control requirements have been reduced. The AQMP was most recently updated in 2008 (MBUAPCD, 2008). The MBUAPCD prepared its CEQA air quality guidelines (last updated in 2008) to assist lead agencies in the preparation of CEQA-related air quality analysis. Emissions modeling, using an approved model such as the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS2007), should be used for proposed projects that exceed screening thresholds. The air quality analysis of an EIR for a project such as Fairview Corners should focus on cumulative effects. Specifically, the EIR should focus on the project's cumulative air quality impact on regional ozone and its localized COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-7

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

impact on carbon monoxide levels. A proposed project's cumulative impact should be analyzed by determining its consistency with the AQMP (MBUAPCD; CEQA Guidelines Section 5.5). Its localized impact should be assessed by identifying whether build-out would create or substantially contribute to carbon monoxide "hotspots" where federal or state AAQS are exceeded (MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines Section 5.4). The air district thresholds for PM10 emissions are based on maximum daily emissions. According to the guidelines, construction sites with earthmoving activities larger than 2.2 acres in size could lead to emissions of 82 pounds per day or greater, which would be considered a significant impact. The MBUAPCD guidelines include a threshold for emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) that would result in significant human health impacts. Equipment or processes that emit noncarcinogenic TACs could result in significant impacts if emissions would exceed a Hazard Index of 1.0 for acute and chronic exposures. Emissions of carcinogenic TACs that could result in a lifetime cancer incidence of one per 100,000 population or 10 in one million would also be considered significant. In general, diesel particulate matter is the primary TAC of concern associated with land use development projects. In December 1995, the MBUAPCD also prepared the 1995 Report on Attainment of the California Fine Particulate Standard in the Monterey Bay Region. This report was most recently updated in 2005. The updated report identifies implementation measures to achieve ambient air quality standards and to reduce public exposure to particulate matter (MBUAPCD, 2005). In accordance with FCAA requirements, the MBUAPCD recently adopted the 2007 Federal Maintenance Plan for Maintaining the National Ozone Standard in the Monterey Bay Region. The maintenance plan includes strategies for maintaining the NAAQS for ozone within the NCCAB. The FCAA requires that projects receiving federal funds demonstrate conformity to the local AQMP. Consistency guidelines for the AQMP extend these requirements to all regionally significant projects, regardless of whether federal funding is being sought. Emission forecasts contained in the AQMP are based, in part, on population forecasts adopted by the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (Jean Getchel pers. comm. 2011).

San Benito County General Plan Policies The San Benito County General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element contains the following policy with regard to air quality: Policy 10: Air Quality. The County recognizes air as a natural resource and will strive to maintain air quality through proper land use planning. It shall be the County’s policy to utilize land use and transportation

3.3-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

controls for the protection and enhancement of air quality. Finally, it will be County’s policy to review public and private development proposals in light of possible recreational and open space potential. 1. The County, by resolution, will establish a policy of urban concentration for the protection of air quality. The resolution should specifically discourage the development of commercial and residential areas outside of urban centers, other than those defined in the Land Use Element, in order to reduce the impacts of air pollution caused by commuting and shopping. 2. Require convenient pedestrian and bicycle access to parks and community facilities and the development of on-site private recreation to serve the needs of unincorporated clusters of population. 3. Develop land use programs to reduce vehicle miles and trips, thereby reducing traffic congestion and protecting and enhancing air quality. 4. Allow clustering and encourage conservation easements to direct population growth from natural resources to areas where services are provided.

Ambient Air Quality Ambient air quality in the Hollister Valley portion of San Benito County can be inferred from ambient air quality measurements conducted by the MBUAPCD at its Hollister-Fairview Road air quality monitoring station, which monitors concentrations of ozone and airborne particulate matter. The nearest station that monitors ambient concentrations of NO2 and CO is located in Salinas. Table 7 summarizes three years of published data (2007-2009) from these monitoring stations. As depicted in Table 7, ambient air quality has exceeded both the state and federal ozone standards on one occasion during this 3-year period of time. No other exceedance of state or federal AAQS for other pollutants has been measured at these stations during this period of time. Ozone concentrations within the basin are generally decreasing.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-9

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

Table 7

Summary of Ambient Air Quality Data – Hollister-Fairview Road Station Pollutant Standards

2007

2008

2009

0.087/0.074 0/2 0/0

0.090/0.072 0/2 0/0

0.093/0.073 0/2 0/0

2.0/1.15 0/0 0/0

2.2/0.89 0/0 0/0

N/A/0.90 0/0 0/0

0.050 0 0.007 0

0.049 0 0.007 0

0.040 0 0.006 0

40.0 0/0

40.0 0/0

38.0 0/0

0/0

0/0

22.7

17.3

0/0

0/0

Ozone (O3) Maximum concentration, 1-hr/8-hr period (ppm) Number of days state standard (1-hr/8-hr) exceeded Number of days federal standard (1-hr/8-hr) exceeded Carbon Monoxide (CO) Maximum concentration, 1-hr/8-hr period (ppm) Number of days state standard (1-hr/8-hr) exceeded Number of days federal standard (1-hr/8-hr) exceeded Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Maximum 1-hour concentration (ppm) Number of days state standard exceeded Annual arithmetic mean (AAM) AAM exceed federal standard Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) Maximum 24-hour concentration (μg/m3) Number of days state standard exceeded (measured/estimated) Number of days federal standard exceeded

0/0

(measured/estimated) Fine particulate Matter (PM2.5) Maximum 24-hour concentration (μg/m3) Number of days federal standard exceeded *

20.9 0/0

(measure/estimated) Source: CARB 2011; U.S. EPA 2011 Notes: AAM = Annual Arithmetic Mean; μg/m3 = Micrograms per Cubic Meter; ppm = Parts per Million; N/A = Data Not Available. Ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 data obtained from the Hollister-Fairview Road Monitoring Station. CO and NO2 data obtained from the Salinas Monitoring Station; concentrations are not monitored at the Hollister-Fairview Road Monitoring Station.

3.3-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Attainment Status for Criteria Air Pollutants The attainment status of the NCCAB is summarized in Table 8, NCCAB Attainment Status Designations. An attainment designation for an area signifies that pollutant concentrations did not violate the standard for that pollutant in that area. A nonattainment designation indicates that a pollutant concentration violated the standard at least once, excluding those occasions when a violation(s) was caused by an exceptional event, as defined in the criteria. Unclassified designations indicate insufficient data is available to determine attainment status. Under the FCAA, the NCCAB is currently designated attainment/unclassified for the recently established eight-hour ozone federal AAQS. The NCCAB is designated either attainment or unclassified for the remaining federal AAQS. Under the CCAA, the NCCAB is designated as a nonattainment transitional area for the state ozone AAQS. The NCCAB is also designated a nonattainment area for the state PM10 AAQS. Otherwise, the NCCAB is designated either attainment or unclassified for the remaining state AAQS.

Table 8

NCCAB Attainment Status Designations Pollutant

Federal Designation

State Designation

Ozone, 1 hour

Attainment/Maintenance

Nonattainment/Moderate

Ozone, 8 hour

Unclassified/Attainment

Nonattainment

PM10

Unclassified

Nonattainment

PM2.5

Unclassified/Attainment

Attainment

Carbon Monoxide

Unclassified/Attainment

Unclassified/Attainment

Nitrogen Dioxide

Unclassified/Attainment

Attainment

Sulfur Dioxide

Unclassified/Attainment

Attainment

Sulfates

Not Applicable

Attainment

Lead

Not Applicable

Attainment

Hydrogen Sulfide

Not Applicable

Unclassified

Visibility Reducing Particles

Not Applicable

Unclassified

Sources: U.S. EPA, 2011; CARB, 2011

Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) Toxic air contaminants (TACs) are regulated through implementation of federal and state laws. Federal law uses the term “hazardous air pollutants” (HAPs) to refer to the same types of

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-11

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

compounds considered as TACs under state law. Both terms encompass essentially the same compounds. For purposes of this Draft EIR, the term “TACs” will be used when referring to these pollutants. It is important to note that TACs are not considered “criteria pollutants” in that the federal and California Clean Air Acts do not address them specifically through the setting of NAAQS or CAAQS. However, enforcement of the NAAQS and CAAQS for the control of criteria pollutants, such as ozone and PM, can result in reducing airborne emissions of TACs. For example, controls on volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions to attain the ozone standard can significantly reduce emissions of TACs from stationary sources. The following is a summary of the major current federal, state, and local laws and regulations and programs for controlling TACs.

Federal Laws and Regulations. Title III of the FCAA requires the U.S. EPA to promulgate National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) for certain categories of sources that emit one or more pollutants identified as HAPs/TACs. Major sources are defined as stationary sources with potential to emit more than 10 tons per year (TPY) of any TAC or more than 25 TPY of any combination of TACs; all other sources are considered area sources. Promulgation of the emission standards involves two phases. In the first phase (1992-2000), the U.S. EPA developed technology-based emission standards designed to produce the maximum emission reduction achievable. These standards are generally referred to as requiring Maximum Achievable Control Technology. For area sources, the standards may be different, based on generally available control technology. In the second phase (2001-2008), the U.S. EPA is required to promulgate health risk-based emissions standards where such standards are deemed necessary to address risks remaining after implementation of the technology-based NESHAP standards. The 1990 amendments to the FCAA required the U.S. EPA to promulgate vehicle or fuel standards containing reasonable requirements to control toxic emissions, applying at a minimum to benzene and formaldehyde. Performance criteria were established to limit mobile-source emissions of toxics, including benzene, formaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene. In addition, Section 219 of the FCAA also required the use of reformulated gasoline in selected U.S. cities (those with the most severe ozone nonattainment conditions) to further reduce mobile-source emissions, including toxics.

State and Local Laws and Regulations. The CARB works in partnership with the local air districts to enforce regulations that reduce TACs. It has authority to regulate emissions from motor vehicles, fuels, and consumer products. The CARB identifies the TACs, researches prevention or reduction methods, adopts standards for control, and enforces the standards. The local air districts have the authority over stationary or industrial type sources. In accordance with MBUAPCD permitting requirements, projects 3.3-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

that require air quality permits from the MBUAPCD are evaluated for TAC emissions. The MBUAPCD prioritizes TAC-emitting stationary sources based on the quantity and toxicity of the TAC emissions and the proximity of the facilities to sensitive receptors. Health risk assessments are required for facilities that are categorized as having a potential significant risk under the Air Toxics “Hot Spot” Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (Health and Safety Code § 44300 et seq.). The CARB identified particulate emissions from diesel-fueled engines (diesel PM or DPM) as a TAC in August 1998. DPM is currently CARB’s primary TAC of concern for mobile sources, in part because, of all controlled TACs, DPM emissions are estimated to be responsible for approximately 70 percent of the total ambient TAC risk (CARB 2000). In 2000, the CARB developed and approved the Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles and the Risk Management Guidance for the Permitting of New Stationary Diesel-Fueled Engines. The CARB is now implementing an aggressive plan to require cleaner diesel fuel and cleaner diesel engines and vehicles, and is currently developing regulations designed to reduce DPM emissions from diesel-fueled engines and vehicles. The goal of each regulation is to make diesel engines as clean as possible by establishing state-of-the-art technology requirements or emission standards to reduce DPM emissions. These regulations required substantial reductions in DPM emissions beginning with the 2004 model year. Additional standards that are more stringent began to apply to engines starting in the 2007 model year. Off-road vehicles will be subject to standards that are more stringent during the upcoming years as well. Each of these sets of regulations will serve to reduce significantly DPM emissions and long-term human health risks attributable to diesel-fueled vehicles and equipment. The California State Legislature has also examined TAC hazards and has adopted several bills to control TACs. Implementation of state-adopted legislation pertaining to the control of TACs is the responsibility of the CARB and local air pollution control districts. The most important legislation applicable to development projects is summarized below. The Tanner Toxics Act. The Tanner Toxics Act established the California toxic air contaminant control program (Health and Safety Code § 39650 et seq.) to identify and control TACs. Under the Act, the CARB is required to identify a substance as a TAC based on the review of the scientific data and the recommendations by both the Office of Environmental and Health Hazard Assessment and the Scientific Review Panel. After designation, the CARB investigates appropriate measures to limit emissions of the TACs. These measures may include emission limitations, control technologies, operation and maintenance requirements, closed-system engineering, cost, or substitution of compounds. The CARB then prepares a report on the appropriate degree of regulation and adopts Air Toxics Control Measures. These control measures are the minimum regulations that must be imposed by each of the local air districts in the form of regulations. Districts must adopt rules that are at least as stringent as those of the State.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-13

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act. The Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (Health and Safety Code, Division 26, Part 6, commencing with § 44300) is a state law enacted in 1987. The law requires certain facilities to submit information regarding emissions of more than 550 TACs to their local air pollution control districts. The Act addresses public concerns that emissions from individual facilities might cause local concentration of air toxics “hot spots” at a level where individuals may be exposed to an excessive risk of adverse health effects. The program requires facilities to notify all exposed persons if it is determined that there is a significant health risk. Chapter 6 of the Act, entitled the Facility Toxic Air Contaminant Risk Reduction Audit and Plan (Health and Safety Code Division 26, Part 6, Chapter 6, commencing with § 44390) requires local air districts to establish a program to reduce risks from existing facilities that are deemed to pose a significant health risk. Toxic Emissions Near Schools Program. The Toxic Emissions Near Schools Program (Health and Safety Code §§ 42301.6–42301.9) addresses stationary sources of hazardous air pollutants near schools. Section 42301.6 requires public notice to the parents or guardians of children enrolled in any school located within one-quarter mile of the source and to each address within a 1,000-foot radius of a TAC source. Education Code Section 17213 and Public Resources Code Section 21151.8 of CEQA expand previous requirements to review sources of TACs near school sites. School districts must include in the school site acquisition analysis any emissions sources, including, but not limited to, freeways and other busy traffic corridors, large agricultural operations, and rail yards within one-quarter mile of a school site and the potential health risks of any of those sources to persons attending or working at the school. Land Use Compatibility with TAC Emission Sources. The CARB published an informational guide entitled: “Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective” (Handbook) in 2005. The purpose of this guide is to provide information to aid local jurisdictions in addressing issues and concerns related to the placement of sensitive land uses near major sources of air pollution. The Handbook includes recommended separation distances for various land uses that are based on relatively conservative estimations of emissions based on source-specific information. However, these recommendations are not site specific and should not be interpreted as defined “buffer zones.”

It is also important to note that the

recommendations of the Handbook are advisory and need to be balanced with other state and local policies (CARB, 2005). The CARB recommends separation distances for various sources of emissions such as distribution centers, railroads and ports, none of which is relevant to the proposed project. However, the CARB also recommends that new sensitive land uses, such as residential uses, should not be placed within 500 feet of a freeway or urban road with more than 100,000 vehicles per day, or rural roads with more than 50,000 vehicles per day (CARB, 2005).

3.3-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Odors Although offensive odors rarely cause any physical harm, they can be very unpleasant, leading to considerable stress among the public and often generating citizen complaints to local governments and the MBUAPCD. Common types of facilities that have been known to produce odors include wastewater treatment facilities, chemical manufacturing plants, feed lots/dairies, composting facilities, landfills, and transfer stations. Because offensive odors rarely cause any physical harm and no requirements for their control are included in state or federal air quality regulations, the MBUAPCD has no rules or standards related to odor emissions other than its nuisance rule. Any actions related to odors are based on citizen complaints to local governments and the MBUAPCD.

3.3.3 S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE For the purpose of this analysis, the following thresholds of significance from the MBUAPCD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (MBUAPCD 2008) and the County’s local CEQA procedures are used to determine if the proposed project would result in a significant air quality impact: ƒ

Short-term Increases in Regional Criteria Pollutants. Construction impacts would be significant if the proposed project would emit 82 pounds per day (lbs/day) or greater of PM10, or would cause a violation of PM10 federal or State AAQS at nearby receptors. Construction projects using typical construction equipment that temporarily emit precursors of ozone (i.e., ROG or NOx), are accommodated in the emissions inventories of State and federally-required air plans and would not have a significant impact on the attainment or maintenance of ozone AAQS. For this reason, the MBUAPCD has not established significance criteria for construction-generated precursors of ozone.

ƒ

Long-term Increases in Regional Criteria Pollutants. Regional (operational) impacts would be significant if the project generates direct and indirect emissions of ROG or NOX that exceed 137 lbs/day. Impacts from emissions of PM10 would be significant if the project emissions would emit 82 lbs/day or greater or if the project would contribute to local PM10 concentrations that exceed Ambient Air Quality Standards. The impact from emissions of SOx would be significant if the project generates direct emissions that are greater than 150 lbs/day.

ƒ

Increases in Local Mobile-Source CO Concentrations. Local mobile-source impacts would be significant if the project generates direct emissions of CO that are greater than 550 lbs/day or if the project would contribute to local CO concentrations that exceed the State AAQS of 9.0 ppm for eight hours or 20 ppm for one hour. (Indirect emissions are

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-15

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

typically considered to include mobile sources that access the project site but generally emit off-site; direct emissions typically include sources that emit on-site (e.g., stationary sources, on-site mobile equipment). ƒ

Increases in Toxic Air Contaminants. TAC impacts would be significant if the project would expose the public to substantial levels of TACs so that the probability of contracting cancer for the Maximally Exposed Individual would exceed 10 in 1 million and/or that project-related ground-level concentrations of non-carcinogenic TACs would result in a Hazard Index greater than 1 for the Maximally Exposed Individual.

ƒ

Increases in Odorous Emissions. Odor impacts would be significant if the project has the potential to frequently expose members of the public to objectionable odors.

ƒ

Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.

ƒ

Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

ƒ

Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the NCCAB is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.

Methodology Air quality analysis in this section is based on the Air Quality Study (Illingworth and Rodkin 2008) prepared in connection with the proposed project. As noted previously, the Air Quality Study is included in Appendix F of this EIR. Short-term construction-generated criteria pollutants and TACs from exhaust emissions were estimated using the URBEMIS2007 (Version 9.2.4) computer program. The URBEMIS2007 program is designed to model emissions associated with land use development projects and allows for the input of project-specific information, including construction equipment information, for this analysis. Project-specific construction information is not yet available, so default values for construction equipment were used. The MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines recommend determining construction dust emissions based on the total area of daily ground disturbance. Actual daily emissions would likely vary, depending on the specific construction activities conducted. Details about project phasing are not currently known. Therefore, for purposes of this Draft EIR, the analysis conservatively assumes that disturbance of approximately 25 percent of the total site acreage would occur during any one phase (i.e., approximately 15 acres).

3.3-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Regional area- and mobile-source emissions associated with proposed land uses were also estimated using the URBEMIS2007 computer program. Emissions were calculated for both summer and winter conditions based on the default parameters contained in the model. Default trip generation rates contained in the model were revised to correspond with predicted trip generation rates for the development of 220 single-family residential units identified in the traffic analysis prepared for this project. The Air Quality Study (Illingworth and Rodkin 2008) also analyzed the impacts of the proposed project on local air quality. CO emissions from project traffic would be the pollutant of greatest concern at the local level. Congested intersections with a large volume of traffic have the greatest potential to cause high localized concentrations of carbon monoxide. MBUAPCD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines require CO hotspot analysis under the following conditions: ƒ

Intersections where the Level of Service (LOS) would degrade below D;

ƒ

Volume to capacity ratio increases by 0.05 at LOS E or F intersections;

ƒ

The delay at LOS E or F intersections increases by 10 seconds or more; and/or

ƒ

Reserve capacity at unsignalized LOS E or F intersection decreases by 50 or more.

For intersections that meet one or more of the above conditions, CO concentrations were predicted using the Caline4 model following the Transportation Project Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol, developed by UC Davis. This assessment involved estimating CO emission rates from the EMFAC2007 model and using those along with peak-hour traffic and screening meteorological conditions in the Caline4 model to predict roadside CO levels. If modeling demonstrates that the project would not cause an exceedance of the CO ambient air quality standards, the project would not have a significant impact on CO concentrations. The standards are a concentration of 20 ppm over a 1-hour averaging period and 9.0 ppm over an 8-hour averaging period. The 1-hour levels are adjusted to 8-hour average levels using a persistence factor of 0.7. For both averaging periods, the 1-hour and 8-hour background concentrations are added to the modeled values and compared to the standards (Illingworth and Rodkin 2008).

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-17

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

3.3.4 P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Short-Term Construction-Generated Emissions (Airborne Particulate Matter, Toxic Air Contaminants, and Criteria Pollutants) Impact AQ-1: Short-term

construction-generated

emissions

could

exceed

MBUAPCD

significance thresholds and could be inconsistent with the AQMP. As a result, this impact is considered potentially significant. Construction-generated emissions are short-term and of temporary duration, lasting only as long as construction activities occur, but possess the potential to represent a significant air quality impact. The construction of the proposed project would result in the temporary generation of emissions from site grading and excavation, road paving, the application of architectural coatings, engine exhaust associated with construction equipment and worker trips, the movement of construction equipment (especially on unpaved surfaces), and wind blowing over bare ground.

Dust Emissions Emissions of airborne particulate matter are largely dependent on the amount of ground disturbance associated with site preparation activities. The peak construction phase emissions typically occur during initial site preparation, including grading and excavation, due to the increased amount of surface disturbance that can generate dust and to construction equipment emissions. The MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines (2008) allow the use of the acres of disturbance to determine the significance of grading and construction activities. Table 5-2 of the MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines identifies the level of construction activity that could result in significant impacts if not mitigated. Within the NCCAB, construction PM10 emission impacts on regional air quality are assessed based on the quantity of earth movement that would take place on a given day of construction. The MBUAPCD has determined that construction activities that involve minimal earth moving over an area of 8.1 acres, or more, could result in potentially significant temporary air quality impacts, if not mitigated. Construction activities that require more extensive site preparation (e.g., grading and excavation) may result in significant unmitigated dust impacts if the area of disturbance were to exceed 2.2 acres per day (MBUAPCD 2008). Construction projects below the screening level thresholds are assumed to be below the applicable 82 lb/day significance threshold (MBUAPCD 2008).

3.3-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The proposed project would result in potentially significant air quality impacts with regard to dust (PM10). For purposes of this analysis, construction activities are assumed to occur at times over a 10-year or longer period on the undeveloped site. Site grading would primarily be accomplished using diesel-powered heavy equipment. During other construction phases, additional material would be imported to the site. This would include base rock, select soil/gravel for trenches and building pads, concrete, and asphalt for paving. Building materials would also be imported to the site. The proposed project would require grading and site contouring to accommodate the proposed improvements. A grading plan for the proposed project is not yet available; however, the proposed project’s ground disturbance activities are expected to be extensive and are likely to exceed the 2.2-acre threshold on any given day during construction, which would be a potentially significant impact (Illingworth and Rodkin 2008). The Air Quality Study approximated daily fugitive dust emissions for grading and construction activities using emission factors developed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (Illingworth and Rodkin 2008). A general overall emission factor of 10 pounds per acre per day was found to represent typical daily emissions. On the most active days during grading, emissions would be higher. A conservative overall emission factor of 38.2 pounds per acre per day would apply to the most intense construction sites, which includes emissions associated with general construction activities, as well as those from intensive earth-moving activities. Specific emission factors require specific construction information, such as the amount of earthwork and the detail of control measures. Since that type of information is not available from the proposed project, the overall emission factors described above were used to estimate daily construction emissions (Illingworth and Rodkin 2008). Using an emission factor of 10 pounds per acre per day would result in significant emissions if over 8.2 acres were disturbed on a typical day. For the most active construction phases, emissions would be significant if over 2.2 acres were disturbed in one day. Grading activity that encompasses more than 2.2 acres in a single day could result in on-site PM10 emissions that would be considered a short term potentially significant impact. Emissions from wind erosion are difficult to predict since it is based on the amount of disturbed soil and changing wind speeds. Wind erosion emissions would vary considerably, but could be effectively controlled through active watering of the site or use of soil stabilization methods throughout the construction period. To greatly reduce wind erosion, disturbed areas also would have to be controlled on weekends or holidays when construction is not occurring. In general, the MBUAPCD recommends that grading activities be prohibited during periods of high wind (over 15 miles per hour) and that inactive storage piles be covered.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-19

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

Diesel Emissions/TACs The use of diesel-powered construction equipment associated with the proposed project would be temporary and episodic and would occur over a relatively large area limiting the concentrations at any one particular point. The Air Quality Study analyzed the air quality impacts of the proposed project in regard to TACs. Construction equipment and associated heavy-duty truck traffic generates diesel exhaust, which is a known TAC. Diesel engines emit a complex mix of pollutants including NOX, particulate matter, and TACs. The most visible constituents of diesel exhaust are very small carbon particles or "soot," known as diesel PM or DPM. Diesel exhaust contains over 40 cancercausing substances, most of which are readily adsorbed onto the soot particles. Among the TACs contained in diesel exhaust are dioxin, lead, polycyclic organic matter, and acrolein. Short-term exposure to DPM is associated with variable irritation and inflammatory symptoms. Diesel engine emissions are responsible for a majority of California's estimated cancer risk attributable to air pollution. In 2000, the CARB identified an average potential cancer risk of 540 excess cases per million people, statewide, from DPM. In addition, DPM is a significant fraction of California’s particulate pollution. Assessments by the CARB and the U.S. EPA estimate that DPM contributes to approximately 3,500 premature respiratory and cardiovascular deaths and thousands of hospital admissions annually in California. Diesel exhaust contains several chemicals detrimental to visibility and vegetation (OEHHA 2001). The Air Quality Study concluded that the proposed project could result in significant construction-related air quality impacts from diesel exhaust and included recommendations to reduce the impact to a less than significant level. However, since the Air Quality Study was prepared, the MBUAPCD has suspended the use of its recommended mitigation measures for diesel exhaust, in lieu of changes in diesel emissions thresholds and control measures at the state and federal level, and the increasing availability of low emissions diesel fuel. The U.S. EPA regulates diesel engine design and fuel composition at the federal level, and has implemented a series of measures since 1994 to reduce NOX and particulate emissions from offroad diesel equipment. The U.S. EPA Tier 2 diesel engine standards were implemented from 2001 through 2006, Tier 3 standards from 2006 through 2008, and Tier 4 standards are being phased in through 2014. Ultra low sulfur off-road diesel fuel (15 ppm) became standard in 2010, replacing the prior 500 ppm fuel. The Tier 4 engines and ultra low sulfur fuels will reduce emissions by up to 65 percent compared to older engines and fuel (U.S. EPA 2004). The CARB’s Regulation for In-use Off-road Diesel Vehicles establishes a state program to reduce emissions from older construction equipment. Although the implementation phasing for this regulation was delayed by budget legislation in early 2009, the regulation is currently in effect and will reduce construction equipment emissions over time.

3.3-20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Although the project buildout is likely to occur in several phases over a period of five to 16 years, the duration of construction activities per phase would occur over relatively short periods of time. Construction activity would be located a minimum of approximately 100 to 150 feet from sensitive receptors but would typically be located more than 500 feet away the majority of the time (Illingworth and Rodkin 2008). Exposure of sensitive receptors to diesel emissions during construction would be limited in duration and reduced through improvements in low emissions diesel fuel. However, if diesel-powered equipment were to be used within 100 feet of residences, a short term potentially significant impact could result. This impact would be mitigated to a less than significant level with implementation of MM AQ-1c (prohibiting idling longer than 5 minutes) and MM AQ-1e (staging large diesel vehicles at least 200 feet from residences).

Construction Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Construction period criteria pollutants are released in the form of exhaust from worker commute vehicles, generators, and construction equipment. URBEMIS modeling indicates that construction emissions for the proposed project could be as much as 322.5 lbs/day for ROG, 113.9 lbs/day for NOX, 377 lbs/day of PM10 and 79 lbs/day of PM 2.5 (Illingworth and Rodkin 2008). However, as noted above, ozone precursor emissions are accommodated in the emission inventories of State- and federally-required air plans and therefore would not have a significant impact on the attainment and maintenance of ozone standards. Therefore, the impact from these emissions is considered to be less than significant. Total emissions of PM10 (fugitive dust plus diesel exhaust) would, however, exceed 82 pounds per day during construction prior to mitigation. Therefore, the impact from PM10 is considered a short-term potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measures MM AQ-1a through MM AQ-1f are recommended below to address this potentially significant impact. The impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Specific Plan Policies Designed to Reduce Emissions The Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan contains a number of policies that are designed to reduce impacts associated with short-term construction generated emissions. These are summarized as follows: ƒ

Minimize impacts to air quality. (Policy RM-6.1)

Action #2 ƒ

Provide a construction dust mitigation plan prior to the start of construction that specifies the methods of dust control and other measures to be implemented. At a minimum, this plan shall include the following measures:

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-21

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

•

Limit the amount of acreage to be graded at one time.

•

Water all construction areas for specified periods of time.

•

Cover soil or maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard on all hauling trucks.

•

Pave, apply water, apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers, and/or hydroseed active construction areas, etc. according to certain criteria.

•

Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles.

•

Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.

•

Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.

•

Suspend excavation and grading activity when hourly-average winds exceed 15 mph and visible dust clouds cannot be contained within the site.

Action #3 ƒ

Reduce NOX exhaust and particulate matter emissions by preparing and implementing a plan, acceptable to MBUAPCD, which demonstrates that either: •

heavy duty construction vehicles and equipment will achieve specified NOX and PM reduction; or

•

heavy duty construction vehicles and equipment will meet certain criteria in terms of manufacturing year, ability to meet certain emissions standards, and being equipped with diesel particulate matter filters.

ƒ

Install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment.

ƒ

Prohibit diesel equipment idling for longer than 5 minutes (except under certain conditions) and install signage to that effect.

ƒ

Properly tune and maintain construction equipment and vehicles.

ƒ

Stage large diesel-powered equipment at least 200 feet from any active land uses (e.g., residences).

Action #4 ƒ

Divert a minimum of 25 percent of total materials taken off the construction site from landfills or incinerators.

3.3-22

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Implementation of the above-referenced Specific Plan policies and actions would help reduce the project’s short-term construction-related impacts. To ensure construction-related impacts are mitigated to a less than significant level, implementation of MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-3 (to reduce related impacts to soil erosion from grading) and Mitigation Measures AQ-1a through AQ-1f, below, are proposed. MM AQ-1a: The developer shall reduce exhaust NOx and particulate matter emissions by implementing one of the following measures: 1.

The project shall prepare and implement a plan, acceptable to the MBUAPCD, demonstrating that the heavy-duty (> 50 horsepower) off-road vehicles and equipment to be used to construct the project, including owned, leased and subcontractor vehicles, shall achieve a minimum project wide fleet-average 20 percent NOx reduction and 45 percent particulate reduction, in compliance with the then-most recent MBUAPCD standards and CARB fleet average that are in effect at the time of construction; or

2.

The developer shall prepare and implement a plan, acceptable to the MBUAPCD, demonstrating that all off-road construction vehicles/equipment greater than 50 horsepower that will be used on site for more than one week shall: 1) be manufactured during or after 1996, 2) shall meet the NOx emissions standard of 6.9 grams per brakehorsepower hour or better, and 3) shall be equipped with CARBverified level 2 or 3 diesel particulate matter filters.

MM AQ-1b:

The developer shall install and maintain temporary electrical service on the site

whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g., compressors) during construction of the project. MM AQ-1c:

The developer shall prohibit diesel equipment or vehicles from idling for longer

than five minutes, except for rotating drum concrete trucks, which may keep their engines running continuously so long as they are staged more than 200 feet away from residences. The developer shall install clearly visible signage on the construction site that states these requirements. MM AQ-1d: The developer shall ensure that construction equipment and vehicles are properly maintained for low emissions. MM AQ-1e: The developer shall ensure that all large diesel powered vehicles and equipment are staged at least 200 feet from any residences. MM AQ-1f:

In addition to implementing Mitigation Measures MM AQ-1a through 1e above,

the developer shall implement best-available control measures for the control of

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-23

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

construction-related emissions from the project, as set forth in the then-applicable MBUAPCD’s CEQA Guidelines. For example, such mitigation measures may include the following: ƒ

Water all active construction areas at least twice daily. Frequency should be based on the type of operation, soil and wind exposure.

ƒ

Prohibit all grading activities during periods of high wind (over 15 mph).

ƒ

Apply chemical soil stabilizers on inactive construction areas (disturbed lands within construction projects that are unused for at least four consecutive days).

ƒ

Apply non-toxic binders to exposed areas after cut and fill operations and hydroseed area.

ƒ

Maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard on haul trucks.

ƒ

Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand or loose materials.

ƒ

Plant the windbreaks on the windward perimeter of construction projects if adjacent to open land.

ƒ

Plant vegetative cover in disturbed areas as soon as possible.

ƒ

Cover inactive storage piles.

ƒ

Install wheel washers at the entrance to construction sites for all existing trucks.

ƒ

Pave all roads on construction sites.

ƒ

Sweep streets if visible soil material is carried out from the construction site.

ƒ

Post a publicly visible sign that specifies the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond to complaints and take corrective action within 48 hours. The phone number for the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District shall be visible to ensure compliance with Rule 402 (Nuisance).

ƒ

Limit the area under construction at any one time.

With implementation of the above-referenced mitigation measures, the project’s constructionrelated impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

3.3-24

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Long-Term Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants Impact AQ-2: Long-term operational emissions of the proposed project would not exceed MBUAPCD significance thresholds. Therefore, this would be a less than significant impact.

Operational Impacts Regional area (direct) and mobile-source (indirect) emissions associated with the proposed land uses were estimated using the CARB-approved URBEMIS2007 (version 9.2.4) computer program, based on model default settings and vehicle trip characteristics for San Benito County. Vehicle trip generation rates for proposed land uses were based on data obtained from the transportation analysis prepared for this project. Table 5-4 in the MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines identifies indirect sources that could significantly affect regional air quality if not mitigated. Projects that exceed the thresholds listed in Table 5-4 would contribute to a significant cumulative impact. According to Table 5-4, the threshold of significance for single-family residential projects is 810 dwelling units. Because the project’s maximum unit count would not exceed this threshold, the project’s contribution of indirect source ozone precursor emissions to regional air quality impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact. In accordance with MBUAPCD guidance, long-term operational emissions attributable to the proposed project were quantified assuming full buildout of 220 single-family residential units for both summer and winter conditions, and the project’s direct and indirect operational contribution to regional air quality was evaluated. The URBEMIS analysis looked at emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC), also known as reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and PM10. The results of the URBEMIS analysis of the proposed project can be found in Table 9, Estimated Daily Project Emissions (Ongoing Operations for Direct and Indirect Sources). According to the MBUAPCD guidance, the ROG and NOx thresholds of significance are applicable to the sum of direct and indirect emissions while the CO threshold is applicable to direct emissions and the PM10 threshold is applicable to emissions occurring on the project site. Emissions occurring on the project site would be from direct sources. According to the analysis, the proposed project would result in 29.3 lbs/day of ROG and 26 lbs/day of NOx from direct and indirect sources, 11 lbs/day of CO from direct sources, and 28 lbs/day of PM10 from direct sources. All emissions are predicted to be below MBUAPCD significance thresholds. Therefore, impacts from project emissions would be less than significant. The URBEMIS results are included in the Air Quality Study in Appendix F of this EIR.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-25

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

Table 9

Estimated Daily Project Emissions (Ongoing Operations for Direct and Indirect Sources) Modeled Daily Emissions (lbs/day) Scenario

Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) Summer

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) – Summer

Carbon Monoxide (CO) – Winter

Respirable Particulates (PM10) Winter

Residential (2020) Area Source Emissions

14.9

2.9

11

27.8

14.4

23.1

See note 3

See note 3

29.3

26

11

28

137

5501

822

(Direct) Mobile Source Emissions (Indirect) Total MBUAPCD Thresholds

137

Source:

URBEMIS2007 Air Emissions From Land Use Ver. 9.2.4 in the year 2020 and 2035, Illingworth and Rodkin 2008.

Notes:

1. For stationary sources only 2. Applies only to on-site emissions 3. These emissions are not listed in this table because they do not count towards the significance thresholds.

Based on the MBUAPCD thresholds, the proposed project’s operational ozone precursor emissions would contribute to a cumulative impact on regional air quality; however, the proposed project’s contribution to that impact would not be cumulatively considerable. As previously demonstrated, the project would not exceed the screening level for single-family residential projects of 810 dwelling units and would not exceed the threshold for ROG and NOx. According to the MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines, the project would not significantly affect attainment or maintenance of the ozone standards and would not have a significant impact on regional air quality (MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines § 5.4). No mitigation is required.

Specific Plan Policies Designed to Further Reduce Air Quality Impacts Although the proposed project would already have less than significant individual and cumulative air quality effects from indirect and direct criteria air emissions, implementation of various Specific Plan policies and related actions would further reduce these emissions by promoting energy efficiency and encouraging alternatives to motorized transportation within the project site. Following is a summary of those relevant policies: 3.3-26

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

Facilitate alternative energy sources. (Policy RM-8.1)

ƒ

Pre-plumb/pre-wire at least one-third of units for solar power and offer solar power as an option on all units. (Policy RM-8.1, Action #1)

ƒ

Consider connecting the project to the Gavilan San Benito College Campus community geothermal heat pump energy or heating system, in the event such a system is constructed. (Policy RM-8.1, Action #2)

ƒ

Facilitate energy conservation through design techniques. (Policy RM-8.2)

ƒ

Design houses to facilitate passive solar heating during the winter, and use cool roofs and thermal window coverings to reduce solar heat gain during the summer. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #1)

ƒ

Design lots and houses to maximize rooftop solar energy output potential. Where feasible, roof pitches and roof orientation should be designed to maximize solar exposure to rooftop energy panels (minimum 300 feet of unobstructed roof area facing within 30 degrees of south). (Policy RM-8.2, Action #2)

ƒ

Make photovoltaic electrical systems and solar hot water available for at least one-third of dwelling units. Photovoltaic pre-wiring/conduit shall be installed and photo-voltaic electrical systems and solar hot water shall be offered as an option on all dwelling units. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #3)

ƒ

Equip dwellings with energy efficient water heaters and heat recovery drain systems. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #4)

ƒ

Vegetation within 10 feet of a property line that is deemed to interfere with solar access at an adjoining lot shall be subject to height restrictions as necessary to protect such solar access. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #5)

ƒ

Porches shall be placed only on the east, south, or west side of houses to provide shading in the summer, and to maximize northern light exposure to the interior of houses. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #6)

ƒ

South and west facing elevations shall be designed with roof overhangs that block summer sun from windows and allow penetration of winter sun. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #7)

ƒ

Design residences to minimize the need for artificial lighting. Provide ample windows; light towers; light wells; dormers; skylights; or other features to enhance natural lighting. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #8)

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-27

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

ƒ

To increase natural light to small residential lots, consideration should be given to the orientation of roof gables and the effect of the roof line on yard shading. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #9)

ƒ

Landscaping should include deciduous trees to shade south and west-facing walls in the summer and allow sunlight penetration in the winter. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #10)

ƒ

Provide communications wiring within all dwelling units to facilitate telecommuting. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #11)

ƒ

Provide programmable thermostats for all heating systems. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #12)

ƒ

Use heating systems with an Annual Fuel Use Efficiency (AFUE) of 95% or greater, seal all ducts, and insulate ducts in unconditioned spaces. (Policy RM 8.2, Action #13)

ƒ

Equip all garages/carports with a 240-volt 40-amp circuit suitable for electric vehicle charging. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #14)

ƒ

If multi-family uses are developed, the parking lot shall be shaded by either high albedo (reflective) roofs, roofs with solar panels, or trees that provide a minimum of 50 percent shade within 10 years of planting. (Policy RM-8.2, Action #15)

Contribution to Local Mobile-Source CO Concentrations Impact AQ-3: Localized mobile-source emissions of carbon monoxide would not exceed applicable ambient air quality standards. As a result, this impact is considered less than significant. Localized mobile-source CO emissions near roadway intersections are a direct function of traffic volume, speed, and delay. Transport of CO is extremely limited because it disperses rapidly with distance from the source under normal meteorological conditions. However, under certain meteorological conditions, CO concentrations near roadways and/or intersections may reach unhealthy levels. Congested intersections with a large volume of traffic have the greatest potential to cause high localized concentrations of carbon monoxide. The highest carbon monoxide concentrations typically occur during winter in areas where traffic congestion occurs. For this reason, modeling of CO concentrations is typically recommended for sensitive land uses located near signalized roadway intersections that are projected to operate at LOS E or F. Unsignalized intersections projected to operate at unacceptable levels of service do not typically have sufficient traffic volumes to result in localized concentrations of CO that would exceed applicable standards.

3.3-28

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Currently, the California AAQS for mobile sources of carbon monoxide is nine parts per million (ppm). The highest carbon monoxide level measured in the NCCAB is one (1) ppm for an eighthour exposure. The air quality analysis reported that the highest concentration of mobile source carbon monoxide that would occur in connection with the project would be 2.5 ppm, which would occur at the intersection of Fairview Road and Airline Highway (page 94). This level is well below state standards and therefore the impacts on local air quality resulting from the proposed project individually would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Odors Produced by the Proposed Project or Affecting the Proposed Project Impact AQ-4: The proposed project would not create new odor sources and would not be affected by existing nearby odors. As a result, this impact is considered less than significant. According to the MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines, odors are objectionable emissions of one or more pollutants (sulfur compounds, methane, etc.) that are a nuisance to persons and may trigger asthma episodes in people with sensitive airways. Nuisance odors are commonly associated with refineries, landfills, sewage treatment, agriculture, etc. The proposed project may result in some short-term construction-related odors (e.g., asphalt during paving), but is not anticipated to produce offensive odors during operation, given the typical residential uses. Adjacent uses are not expected to result in significant odors that would be a nuisance to future project site residents. A small farm adjoins the southeast corner of the project site. This farm is a certified producer of dried herbs and flowers such as Lavender, Roses, Lemon, Orange, Calendula, Comfrey, Elderflower, Lemon Balm, Lemon Verbena, Marjoram, Rosemary, White Sage, and Willow. There are no indications of any livestock or other agricultural activities that would pose significant odors that would constitute a nuisance to future project residents. Further, the open space area and/or perimeter pathway would provide a sufficient buffer between the farm and residential uses, which should further reduce any potential odor impacts. The impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Consistency with the Applicable Air Quality Plan Impact AQ-5: The proposed project would not conflict with the local Air Quality Plan. As a result, this impact is considered less than significant.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-29

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

To achieve compliance with state AAQS, the MBUAPCD adopted the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) in 1991 (latest revision August 2008). Conformity of population-related projects with the AQMP is assessed by comparing the total potential population growth generated by the project to population forecasts adopted by Association of Monterey Bay Area Government (AMBAG). These population projections are used to generate emission forecasts upon which the AQMP is based. The 2008 Population, Housing Unit, and Employment Forecasts adopted by the AMBAG Board of Directors on June 11, 2008 have been incorporated into the current AQMP (2008). Therefore, project consistency with the Population, Housing Unit and Employment Forecast also indicates project consistency with the AQMP. MBUAPCD has determined that the project is consistent with the forecast (Jean Getchell, email corresp. May 26, 2011). Therefore, the project is consistent with the AQMP, and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Long-Term Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants Impact AQ-6: Residential receptors associated with the proposed project would not be exposed to localized concentrations of toxic air contaminants exceeding applicable thresholds. As a result, this impact is considered less than significant. Sensitive receptors could be exposed to low levels of TACs during operational phases of the proposed project. As noted above, health-related risks in connection with the emissions of DPM are primarily associated with long-term exposure and the related risk to contracting cancer. For residential land uses, calculations of the cancer risk associated with exposure to TACs are typically made based on a 70-year period of exposure. Long-term increases in health risks can result from either the operation of new stationary sources of TACs in the vicinity of existing sensitive receptors, or by introducing new sensitive receptors to existing sources of TACs that can include stationary or mobile sources. Major stationary sources of TACs have not been identified within the vicinity of the project site nor are any major stationary sources of TACs included in the proposed project. According to information provided by the County’s transportation consultant for the pending Comprehensive General Plan Update, the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on Fairview Road near the project site is about 3,890 vehicles per day and the ADT on Airline Highway ranges from 9,505 cars per day to about 19,328 cars per day in the vicinity of the project site (Jeff Elia. Personal communication March 10, 2011). Both of these roadways operate well under the threshold of 50,000 to 100,000 ADT, which is the volume of traffic that has the potential to result in a significant exposure to TAC emissions from mobile sources (CARB 2005). The proposed project is also not located within 500 feet of a freeway or Airline Highway. 3.3-30

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Therefore, impacts related to long-term TAC emissions would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

3.3.5 C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES The geographic extent of the cumulative setting consists of the project site and the remainder of San Benito County, including the City of Hollister, as well as consideration of regional activities and attributes (e.g., regional traffic volumes and patterns) that could adversely affect the NCCAB. Traffic volumes and patterns used in the analysis of cumulative impacts include consideration of past, present and reasonably foreseeable probable future land use development. Current and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects include: ƒ

Gavilan College San Benito Campus: This project involves the construction of a 3,500 full-time equivalent (FTE) student college facility, as well as approximately 285 residential units and 35,000 square feet of retail space, on a 77-acre site at the northeast corner of Fairview Road and Airline Highway.

ƒ

Award Homes Project: This project involves the construction of 595 single-family homes and 100 apartment units on the west side of Fairview Road, south of St. Benedict’s Church and east of Calistoga Drive within the City of Hollister.

ƒ

Santana Ranch Project: This project involves the construction of a maximum of 1,092 dwelling units, 65,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses, up to an additional 41,000 square feet of commercial mixed uses, and related community facilities and project infrastructure on a 292-acre site adjacent to the City of Hollister.

The cumulative projects list (Section 3.0) also includes a number of smaller residential projects within the City of Hollister, as well as a number of industrial and warehousing projects in the vicinity of the Hollister Municipal Airport. Project-generated emissions of ozone-precursor pollutants would contribute cumulatively to the entire air basin.

Cumulative Contribution to Regional Air Quality Conditions Impact AQ-7: The proposed project’s population along with the population projections for other cumulative projects is within projections for San Benito County, and therefore the proposed project is consistent with the AQMP. This cumulative impact is considered less than significant.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.3-31

3.3

A IR Q UALIT Y

As discussed earlier in this section, the proposed project is consistent with the AQMP. In accordance with the MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines, a project that is consistent with the AQMP is considered to have a less than significant impact on cumulative criteria air pollutant emissions. No mitigation is required.

3.3-32

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4 B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

This section of the Draft EIR evaluates the project’s potential impacts to biological resources. This evaluation is based on independent site investigation and analysis by EMC Planning Group, the site investigation and technical analysis set forth in the 2008 biological evaluation report prepared by Live Oak Associates (biological evaluation) attached as Appendix E to this Draft EIR, information found in the County of San Benito General Plan (1994), the City of Hollister General Plan (2005), the Gavilan San Benito Campus and Fairview Corners Projects Final EIR (Gavilan College 2008), comments received on the Notice of Preparation, biological resources peer review conducted by Impact Sciences, Inc.; and the project application materials. A comment letter in response to the NOP was received from the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) which requested the EIR study the following species: California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), American badger (Taxidea taxus), western spadefoot toad (Spea hamondii), rare plants, and nesting birds. The comment letter is included in Appendix B. The project site is within U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) designated “critical habitat” for the California tiger salamander, listed as “threatened” by both the federal government and the State of California. There are no regional Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other regional habitat planning efforts applicable to the project site (Live Oak Associates 2008, page 41). However, the applicant is in the process of preparing a draft Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the proposed project, which would also cover the Gavilan College San Benito Campus project, in cooperation with the College District and in consultation with USFWS and CDFG. Consideration and potential adoption of the HCP by the resources agencies is anticipated in late 2012.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-1

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

3.4.1 E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING Project Region The project site is located southeast of the City of Hollister in San Benito County, within the Central Coast range of California. The Diablo mountain range borders the County to the east and the Gabilan mountain range to the west. The two incorporated cities, San Juan Bautista and Hollister, are located on the nearly flat valley floor between these ranges, in the northern portion of the County. The valley floor is underlain by geologically young, unconsolidated stream deposits (San Benito County 1994). The region is generally characterized by rolling hills with annual grassland and oak woodland to the east, and flat, cultivated and developed land to the west (PMC 2008). The climate of the Hollister area is characterized by warm summers and cool, moist winters. The average temperatures for summer and winter are 73°F and 46°F, respectively. However, it is not unusual for temperatures to rise above 100°F occasionally in the spring and summer or to fall below 40°F occasionally in the winter. The average yearly rainfall is 13 inches, with most of this precipitation occurring from October to May.

On-Site Existing Uses and Topography As described in Chapter 2.0, Project Description, the project site consists of approximately 60 acres of land located southeast of the City of Hollister, in unincorporated San Benito County. The site is undeveloped and used to cultivate barley. The land is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. The project site’s topography consists of undulating hills with an overall relative elevation change of about 45 feet from east to west. Slopes on the site vary from zero to about 10 percent, as illustrated by Figure 5, Site Photographs, and inferred from the information presented in

Figure 6, Topography and Proposed Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone. A former stock pond is located in a ground depression near the northeast corner of the site. The highest elevation is near the center of the site and the lowest points are in the southwest corner near Fairview Road and in the northeast corner in the vicinity of the former stock pond. The site rises from Fairview Road to the crest of a hill located approximately 1,100 feet east of Fairview Road. Existing drainage patterns on the site follow the topography and generally flow in three directions: west of the hill, the site drains toward Fairview Road; to the east, the site drains to a low point in the site’s northwestern corner; along the site’s southern boundary, the hill is interrupted by a saddle, which causes drainage to flow southward toward the adjacent property. The project site’s existing drainage pattern is presented in Figure 7, Existing Drainage.

3.4-2

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Project Site Vegetation Communities — Agricultural Land Live Oak Associates conducted a reconnaissance-level field survey of the project site on October 23, 2007. Live Oak Associates conducted additional surveys on February 5, 2008 to evaluate aquatic features and in April and May 2008 to conduct botanical surveys. EMC Planning Group conducted reconnaissance-level surveys on April 30, 2009 and June 1, 2009 to verify site conditions. In addition, EMC Planning Group conducted site visits on December 12, 2009, January 14, 2010, and February 1, 2010 to provide further documentation of site conditions during seasonal changes. One vegetation community was identified during the surveys: Agricultural Field. This community is addressed in further detail below. The land cover/habitat within the project site is agricultural in nature. The project site primarily consists of a field of cultivated barley (Triticum aestivum) that is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. Common grasses and forbs observed throughout the field include, but are not limited to, soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), Mediterranean barley (Hordeum marinum ssp. Gussoneanum), yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), vinegarweed (Trichostem lanceolatum), and field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis). As reported in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) (Terrasearch 2007) discussed in Section 3.8 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials) and Section 3.9 (Hydrology and Water Quality), historically portions of the project site were periodically left fallow and devoted to grazing. However, the site has been cultivated for barley and annually disced for at least the past 10 years. Disced fields have little habitat value to wildlife. Although small mammals and their underground burrows may survive the discing, the lost vegetative cover makes them more likely to be preyed upon, reducing the habitat suitability. However, since the cultivated field supports California ground squirrels, it has the potential to support burrowing owl and other predatory species such as raptors and coyote.

Project Site Aquatic Communities Remnants of a former stock pond are found within the northeast corner of the project site. The former stock pond is known to have held water up until 2000, but, there have been no observations of ponding there since that time, including during the 2010/2011 rain season, where rainfall was recorded as being higher than average. Current agricultural practices, including regular discing of the site, have likely broken the soil barrier that had previously allowed water to accumulate in this location. This former stock pond was dry during each of the site visits conducted by Terrasearch in 2007 for the ESA, Live Oak in 2007 and 2008 for the biotic surveys, and during field visits by EMC Planning Group in 2009, 2010, and 2011. Based on this evidence, it is reasonable to conclude that water no longer ponds in the former stock pond area. Vegetation in the former stock pond is similar to that of the upland portions of the project site, such as barley and soft chess, with the addition of two facultative species, poison hemlock (Conium maculatum) and spiny cocklebur (Xanthium spinosum). COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-3

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

In October 2007 and February 2008, surveys were conducted in order to determine if the former stock pond could qualify as a jurisdictional feature. Those surveys determined that the former stock pond does not support the three indicators (soils, vegetation, and hydrology) that define the presence of federally jurisdictional wetlands. Further, the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) completed an analysis of the project site, including the former stock pond, in July 2008 and determined that no jurisdictional waters exist on-site. The pond is not hydrologically connected to any other water body. The USACE letter confirming the lack of jurisdictional features at the project site is included in Appendix E.

Special-Status Species As explained below and more fully in the biological evaluation, the project site and adjacent areas were evaluated for the presence or potential presence of a variety of special-status species. Data from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on-line species list, the California Department of Fish and Game’s (CDFG) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), and the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) on-line inventory were reviewed to determine the potential for special-status species to occur at the project site, within the Tres Pinos United States Geologic Survey (USGS) 7.5” quadrangle (in which the project site occurs), or within the eight surrounding USGS quadrangles (Cherry Peak, Hollister, Mariposa Peak, Mt. Harlan, Paicines, Quien Sabe Valley, San Felipe, and Three Sisters). Figure 28, Special-Status Species within the Project Vicinity, shows known locations of special-status species in the vicinity of the project site. Special-status species include species listed by the USFWS as threatened or endangered; the USFWS candidates for listing as threatened or endangered; species designated as “Species of Concern” by the USFWS; species listed by the CDFG as threatened, endangered, or designated as “Species of Special Concern”; and species included on the CNPS Lists 1A, 1B, 2, 3, or 4. The results of the CNDDB, CNPS, and USFWS queries are found in the Live Oak biological evaluation. Special-status species from these database searches were selected for consideration in this analysis based on habitat suitability within the project site, previously recorded occurrences of these species within the Tres Pinos USGS quadrangle or surrounding eight quadrangles, speciesspecific surveys, and professional expertise. Figure 29, Special-Status Species Observed within Five Kilometers, identifies the nearest recorded observations of special-status species within five kilometers of the project site.

Special-Status Plant Species Special-status plants generally occur in relatively undisturbed areas and are largely found within unique vegetation communities and/or habitats such as vernal pools or alkali flats.

3.4-4

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

California red-legged frog

6

5western pond turtle 12

2American badger 11western mastiff bat 12 western pond turtle 13 western red bat 1 alkali milk-vetch 2 American badger

6California tiger salamander California horned lark

4

6California tiger salamander San Joaquin kit fox

10 3burrowing owl 5California red-legged frog California tiger salamander6 San Joaquin kit fox

10

6 4California horned lark 14 6California tiger salamander

Legend

western spadefoot

Project Site Critical Habitat 1. alkali milk-vetch 2. American badger

prairie falcon 14western spadefoot

5

6California tiger salamander California tiger salamander

6California red-legged frog

California tiger salamander6 California horned lark4

6California tiger salamander 3. western burrowing owl

10

4. California horned lark 5. California red-legged frog

San Joaquin kit fox

14

9

6western spadefoot California tiger salamander

6. California tiger salamander 7. Indian Valley bush-mallow 8. Pinnacles optioservus riffle beetle 9. prairie falcon 7

10. San Joaquin kit fox 11. western mastiff bat

Pinnacles optioservus riffle beetleIndian Valley bush-mallow

8

12. western pond turtle 13. western red bat 14. western spadefoot toad

0

3,000 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2010, USFWS 2009, CDFG CNDDB 2010, USGS 100k DRG

Figure 28

Special Status Species Observed Within the Project Vicinity Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

This side intentionally left blank.

3.4-6

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

Figure 29

Special Status Species Observed within Five Kilometers Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

This side intentionally left blank.

3.4-8

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

As shown in Table 10, Special-Status Plant Species that Could Occur in the Project Vicinity (Live Oak Associates 2008), 10 special-status plant species were identified that could potentially occur within the project site based on initial background database searches, literature review, and an assessment of potential habitat present at the site. Surveys were conducted in the spring (April and May) of 2008 during the typical blooming periods of the special-status plant species known to occur in the project vicinity. None of these special-status plant species were identified on the site. Based on this evaluation, Live Oak Associates determined that all of these species should be removed from consideration due to the lack of appropriate habitat. The findings of the rare plant surveys are consistent with the marginal suitability of the project site for rare plants, due to the preponderance of non-native invasive species as a result of the agricultural cultivation and related practices, particularly discing, which tills the soil and removes existing vegetation. Therefore, based on these surveys, lack of habitat suitability, lack of previously-recorded occurrences of these species, and professional expertise, no special-status plant species have the potential to occur on-site. Special-Status Wildlife Species As shown in Table 11, Special-Status Wildlife Species that could Occur in the Project Vicinity (Live Oak Associates 2008), 28 special-status wildlife species were identified that could potentially occur within the project site, based on initial background database searches, literature review and an assessment of potential habitat present on the site. Of those, 20 would be absent or unlikely to occur on the site due to unsuitable habitat conditions, as noted in Table 11. These include the coast range newt, foothill yellow-legged frog, western pond turtle, San Joaquin coachwhip, peregrine falcon, black swift, Vaux’s swift, western yellow-billed cuckoo, tricolored blackbird, yellow-breasted chat, Townsend’s big-eared bat, hoary bat, pallid bat, ringtail, and. Amphibians California Tiger Salamander. The California tiger salamander (CTS) is federally- and statelisted as threatened. CTS typically occur in the Central Valley and in surrounding foothills of both the Coast Range and Sierra Nevada mountains. Adult CTS spend the non-breeding season below ground in existing ground squirrel or other rodent burrows. CTS migrate to aquatic breeding sites (i.e., seasonal ponds, stock ponds, reservoirs, lakes, and occasionally stream pools that are devoid of fish) during the winter and spring rainy season. The larvae spend approximately 2 to 4 months in the water before transforming to adults and seeking suitable terrestrial habitat. CTS can migrate considerable distances (more than one mile) to aestivation (summer) habitat (typically ground squirrel burrows in open grasslands) and to aquatic breeding sites (winter/spring).

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-9

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 10

Special Status Plant Species that Could Occur in the Project Vicinity

Species

Status

Habitat

Alkali milk-vetch (Astragalus tener var.

CNPS 1B

Alkaline soils of playas, adobe clay

Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for

valley and foothill grasslands, and

agricultural purposes. While moderately alkaline soils may

alkali vernal pools at elevations of

persist on the site, any suitable habitat that may have once

up to 60 meters. Blooms March-

been present has been eliminated from the site.

tener)

*Occurrence in the Study Area

May. San Joaquin

CNPS 1B

Chenopod scrub, meadows and

Unlikely. The project site has been heavily managed for

spearscale (Atriplex

seeps, playas, and valley and

agricultural purposes. While moderately alkaline soils may

foothill grasslands on alkaline soils

persist, any suitable habitat that may have once been present

joaquiniana)

at elevations of up to 835 meters.

has likely been eliminated from the site. However, this

Blooms April-October.

species was documented in 1995 approximately 5 miles southeast of the site.

Round-leaved

CNPS 1B

filaree (California macrophyllum) Vernal barley (Hordeum intecedens)

Clays of cismontane woodlands and

Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for

valley and foothill grasslands at

agricultural purposes. Any suitable habitat that may have

elevations between 15 and 1200

once been present has been eliminated from the site.

meters. Blooms March-May. CNPS 3

Coastal dunes, coastal scrub, saline

Unlikely. The project site has been heavily managed for

flats and depressions of valley and

agricultural purposes. Any suitable habitat that may have

foothill grasslands, and vernal pools

once been present has likely been eliminated from the site.

at elevations of between 5 and 1000 meters. Blooms March-June.

3.4-10

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

Species Woolly-headed

Status CNPS 3

lessingia (Lessingia hololeuca)

Habitat

*Occurrence in the Study Area

Broadleafed upland forest, coastal

Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for

scrub, lower montane coniferous

agricultural purposes. Any suitable habitat that may have

forest, and valley and foothill

once been present has likely been eliminated from the site.

grassland on clay or serpentinite at

Additionally, serpentine soils are absent from the site.

elevations between 15 and 305 meters. Blooms June-October. Marsh microseris (Microseris paludosa)

CNPS 1B

Closed-cone coniferous forest,

Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for

cismontaine woodland, coastal

agricultural purposes. Any suitable habitat that may have

scrub, and valley and foothill

once been present has been eliminated from the site.

grassland at elevations of between 5 and 300 meters. Blooms April-June and rarely in July. Shining navarretia (Navarretia

Cismontane woodland, valley and

Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for

foothill grassland, and vernal pools

agricultural purposes. Any suitable habitat that may have

nigelliformis ssp.

at elevations of between 76 and

once been present has likely been eliminated from the site.

radians)

1000 meters. Blooms May-July.

Prostrate navarretia (Navarretia prostrata)

CNPS 1B

CNPS 1B

Mesic soils of coastal scrub,

Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for

meadows and seeps, alkaline valley

agricultural purposes. While moderately alkaline soils may

and foothill grassland, and vernal

persist on the site, any suitable habitat that may have once

pools at elevations of between 15

been present has been eliminated from the site.

and 700 meters. Blooms April-July. Hairless popcorn-

CNPS 1A

flower (Plagiobothrys glaber)

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Alkaline meadows and seeps and in

Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for

salty marshes and swamps at

agricultural purposes. While moderately alkaline soils may

elevations of between 15 to 180

persist on the site, any suitable habitat that may have once

meters. Blooms March-May.

been present has been eliminated from the site.

3.4-11

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Species

Status

Habitat

CNPS 1B

Marshes and swamps, vernal pools,

Unlikely. The project site has been heavily managed for

tropidocarpum (Trifolium depauperatum var.

and mesic, alkaline soils of valley

agricultural purposes. Any suitable habitat that may have

and foothill grasslands at elevations

once been present has likely been eliminated. The nearest,

of up to 300 meters. Blooms April -

documented occurrence of this species occurred in 1998,

hydrophilum)

June.

more than 9 miles from the site.

Caper-fruited

*Occurrence in the Study Area

Source:

Live Oak Associates, Inc. Gavilan College/Fairview Corners ADEIR/DEIR Biotic Evaluation. Hollister, California, August 2008

Notes:

*Explanation of Occurrence Designations and Status Codes

Present: Species observed on the sites at time of field surveys or during recent past. Likely: Species not observed on the site, but it may reasonably be expected to occur there on a regular basis. Possible: Species not observed on the sites, but it could occur there from time to time. Unlikely: Species not observed on the sites, and would not be expected to occur there except, perhaps, as a transient. Absent: Species not observed on the sites, and precluded from occurring there because habitat requirements not met. STATUS CODES FE

Federally Endangered

CE

California Endangered

FT

Federally Threatened

CT

California Threatened

FPE

Federally Endangered (Proposed)

CP

California Protected

FC

Federal Candidate

CSC

California Species of Special Concern

3

Plants about which more

CNPS

California Native Plant Society Listing

1A

Plants Presumed Extinct in California

1B

Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere

2

information is needed – a review list 4

Plants of limited distribution – a watch list

Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere

3.4-12

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

Table 11

Special Status Animal Species that Could Occur in the Project Vicinity

Species Listed as Threatened or Endangered under the State and/or Federal Endangered Species Act Species

Status

Habitat

*Occurrence in the Study Area

Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum)

CE

Individuals breed on cliffs in the Sierra or in coastal habitats; occurs in many habitats of the state during migration and winter.

Unlikely. Peregrine falcons may occur incidentally on the site during migration or foraging. Suitable nesting habitat is absent from the site.

California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense)

FT, CSC

Breeds in vernal pools and stock ponds of central California; adults aestivate in grassland habitats adjacent to the breeding sites.

Possible. This species was documented on the site in 2000 as occurring in the stock pond, when it used to hold water. Additionally, this species has been documented in at least four locations within two miles of the project site since 1999. Two of these offsite occurrences, occurring in 1999, include the presence of larvae in water features associated with the Ridgemark Golf Course approximately 0.25 miles south of the site, on the other side of Highway 25. Breeding habitat is currently absent from the project site and has been absent for several years due to the site having been regularly farmed and disced. The remains of the stock pond feature were dry during all site visits conducted by LOA in 2007 and 2008. The site provides potential aestivation habitat in the form of ground squirrel burrows and other ground surface crevices.

California redlegged frog (Rana aurora draytonii)

FT, CSC

Rivers, creeks and stock ponds of the Sierra foothills and coast range, preferring pools with overhanging vegetation. May also be found in a variety of upland habitats.

Absent. Suitable breeding habitat for this species is absent from the project site. This species was observed in 2005 in a detention pond and a Ridgemark Golf Course pond on the south side of Highway 25, approximately 0.1 miles south of the project site.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-13

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Species

Status

Habitat

*Occurrence in the Study Area

Western yellow-

FC,

Nests in dense riparian forests.

Absent. This species has not been observed within San Benito

billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis)

CE

Inhabits broad, lower flood bottoms

county since 1899 in the vicinity of Paicines. Furthermore,

of larger river systems

suitable habitat for this species is absent from the project site.

San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica)

FE,

Frequents annual grasslands or

Unlikely. At best, marginally suitable onsite breeding and

CT

grassy open stages with scattered

foraging habitat for this species occurs onsite. However, the

shrubby vegetation. Needs loose-

nearest observation of this species was documented

textured sandy soils for burrowing

approximately 0.5 miles north of the project site in 1971.

and suitable prey base. Utilizes

Since that sighting, only one occurrence, which took place in

enlarged (4 to 10 inches in diameter)

1992, approximately 5 miles from the site, has been

ground squirrel burrows as denning

documented in the region. Numerous regional surveys,

habitat. May forage in adjacent

conducted before and since the date of the 1992 occurrence,

agricultural habitats.

have failed to detect this species. In total eight occurrences of this species have been recorded within ten miles of the project site over the past 37 years. In the off-chance that a migrating kit fox is found in the region, the marginal quality of the project site suggests that they would not choose this site for denning or breeding. The likelihood of this species occurring on the project site is extremely low.

3.4-14

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

California Species of Special Concern and Protected Species Species Coast Range newt (Taricha torosa

Status CSC

torosa)

Habitat

*Occurrence in the Study Area

Breeds in ponds, reservoirs and slow

Absent. Suitable habitat for this species is absent from the

moving water. May also occur in

project site. The remnant stock pond feature no longer appears

large streams and rivers.

to hold water and is therefore unsuitable for this species. One regional occurrence of this species appears to have taken place approximately 5 miles to the west of the site in 1998, beyond many roadways and some urban development.

Western spadefoot (Spea hammondii)

CSC

Primarily occurs in grasslands, but

Unlikely. This species has been documented in three locations

also occurs in valley and foothill

within two miles of the project site since 1978, including one

hardwood woodlands. Requires

documented occurrence on the northern portion of the site in

vernal pools or other temporary

2000. This species is known to breed within the golf course

wetlands for breeding.

ponds of Ridgemark Golf Course immediately south of the site. Individuals occurring on nearby lands could move onto the site, which provides potential, albeit marginal, aestivating habitat for the spadefoot. Breeding habitat is absent from the site, as the stock pond does not appear to hold water for a sufficient duration to support breeding populations.

Foothill yellow-

CSC

legged frog (Rana boylii) Western pond

CSC

turtle (Actinemys

Found primarily in swiftly flowing

Absent. Suitable habitat for this species is absent from the

creeks.

project site.

Open slow-moving water of rivers

Absent. Suitable habitat for this species is absent from the

and creeks of central California with

project site.

rocks and logs for basking.

marmorata)

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-15

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Species San Joaquin

Status CSC

coachwhip (Masticophis flagellum ruddocki)

Habitat

*Occurrence in the Study Area

Frequents chaparral habitats,

Unlikely. Suitable habitat for this species is marginal to absent

specifically scrublands, rocky

from the project site. While this species has been known to

hillsides, gullies, canyons, and

utilize farmland habitats, this site is heavily managed, which

stream courses of the foothills.

would preclude it from supporting a suitable prey base to attract or support this species.

Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos)

CSC

Typically frequents rolling foothills,

Likely. The trees on adjacent properties provide suitable

mountain areas, woodland areas,

perching and possible breeding habitat for this species. This

sage-juniper flats, and desert

species was observed perching in eucalyptus trees immediately

habitats.

east of the project site during the October 2007 survey. The site itself lacks suitable breeding habitat and provides a marginally suitable prey base for this species.

White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus)

CP

Northern harrier (Circus cyaneus)

CSC

Merlin (Falco columbarius)

CSC

Open grasslands and agricultural

Possible. Breeding habitat is absent from the site. This species

areas throughout central California.

would be expected to forage on and near the project site.

Frequents meadows, grasslands,

Unlikely. Because it is so heavily managed through discing

open rangelands, freshwater

and grazing, breeding and foraging habitat is marginal to poor

emergent wetlands; uncommon in

for this species. This species may occasionally pass through

wooded habitats.

the site.

Breeds in Canada but winters in a

Unlikely. Breeding habitat is absent from the site, and

variety of California habitats,

foraging habitat is marginal to absent. This species may occur

including grasslands, savannahs, and

as an occasional winter migrant.

wetlands.

3.4-16

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

Species Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia)

Status CSC

Habitat

*Occurrence in the Study Area

Open, dry grasslands, deserts and

Unlikely. LOA did not observe direct or indirect evidence of

ruderal areas. Requires suitable

burrowing owls during site visits to this property conducted

burrows. This species is often

during the breeding and non-breeding seasons in April, May,

associated with California ground

and October 2007 and February 2008. While ground squirrel

squirrels.

burrows found on the site provide marginally suitable nesting habitat and there appears to be marginally suitable foraging habitat onsite, the present site management regime results in the site being functionally poor habitat for this species. This species was observed utilizing a burrow approximately 1 mile north of the project site in November 2000.

Black swift (Cypseloides niger)

CSC

Migrants and transients found

Unlikely. Suitable breeding habitat and foraging habitats are

throughout many habitats of state.

absent from the site. However, this species may occasionally

Breeds on steep cliffs or ocean bluffs,

pass through the site.

or in cracks and crevasses of inland deep canyons. Vaux’s swift (Chaetura vauxi)

CSC

Migrants and transients move

Unlikely. Suitable breeding habitat and foraging habitats are

through the foothills of the western

absent from the site. However, this species may occasionally

Sierra in spring and late summer.

pass through the site

Breeds in coniferous forests. Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus)

CSC

Frequents open habitats with sparse

Possible. Suitable breeding habitat is absent from the project

shrubs and trees, other suitable

site. Foraging habitat is marginal; however, this species could

perches, bare ground, and low

reasonably be expected to occasionally pass through the site.

herbaceous cover. Often be found in cropland.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-17

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Species Yellow-breasted

Status CSC

chat (Icteria virens)

Habitat

*Occurrence in the Study Area

Breeds in brushy tangles, briers, and

Unlikely. Suitable breeding habitat is absent from the site, and

stream thickets. May occur in

foraging habitat is marginal to absent. However, this species

overgrown pastures and upland

may occasionally pass through the site.

thickets. Tricolored

CSC

blackbird (Agelaius tricolor)

Breeds near fresh water, primarily

Unlikely. Suitable breeding habitat is absent from the site, and

emergent wetlands, with tall thickets.

foraging habitat is marginal. However, this species may

Forages in nearby grassland and

occasionally pass through the site.

cropland habitats. Townsend’s big-

CSC

eared bat (Plecotus townsendii

Primarily a cave-dwelling bat that

Unlikely. While suitable roosting and breeding habitat is

may also roost in buildings. Occurs

absent for this species, foraging habitat is marginal to absent.

in a variety of habitats of the state.

This species may occasionally pass through the site.

Forages over many habitats. Roosts

Unlikely. While suitable roosting and breeding habitat is

mainly in coniferous and deciduous

absent for this species, foraging habitat is marginal to absent.

trees.

This species may occasionally pass through the site.

Grasslands, chaparral, woodlands,

Unlikely. While suitable roosting and breeding habitat is

and forests of California; most

absent for this species, foraging habitat is marginal to absent.

common in dry rocky open areas

This species may occasionally pass through the site.

townsendii) Hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus)

CSC

CSC

that provide roosting opportunities. American badger (Taxidea taxus)

CSC

Found in drier open stages of most

Unlikely. Marginally suitable habitat is present on the project

shrub, forest and herbaceous habitats

site for this species. This species was observed utilizing a

with friable soils.

burrow approximately 1.5 miles north of the project site in June 1993.

Source:

3.4-18

Live Oak Associates, Inc. Gavilan College/Fairview Corners ADEIR/DEIR Biotic Evaluation. Hollister, California, August 2008

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

3.4

Notes:

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

*Explanation of Occurrence Designations and Status Codes

Present: Species observed on the sites at time of field surveys or during recent past. Likely: Species not observed on the site, but it may reasonably be expected to occur there on a regular basis. Possible: Species not observed on the sites, but it could occur there from time to time. Unlikely: Species not observed on the sites, and would not be expected to occur there except, perhaps, as a transient. Absent: Species not observed on the sites, and precluded from occurring there because habitat requirements not met. STATUS CODES FE

Federally Endangered

CE

California Endangered

FT

Federally Threatened

CT

California Threatened

FPE

Federally Endangered (Proposed)

CP

California Protected

FC

Federal Candidate

CSC

California Species of Special Concern

3

Plants about which more

CNPS

California Native Plant Society Listing

1A

Plants Presumed Extinct in California

1B

Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere

2

information is needed – a review list 4

Plants of limited distribution – a watch list

Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-19

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

The entire project site is within federally-designated critical habitat for CTS, as depicted in Figure 28. Critical habitat was designated for the CTS in 2005 (70 FR 49379 49458). The project site and adjacent lands to the north and east fall within Critical Habitat Unit 15A, Ana Creek Unit, San Benito County, 2,722 acres. Threats to Critical Habitat Unit 15A identified in the final rule include erosion and sedimentation, pesticide application, non-native predators, development, and road construction. There are 11 documented occurrences of this species within five kilometers of the site. This includes four locations within two miles of the project site since 1999. Two of these off-site occurrences, occurring in 1999, included the presence of larvae in water features with the Ridgemark Golf Course approximately 0.25 mile south of the site, on the other side of Highway 25. CTS larvae were previously documented on the project site in what is now referred to as the former stock pond; however, standing water has not been observed in the location of the former stock pond since 2000, including the 2010/2011 rain season, where rainfall was recorded as being higher than average. Further, the habitat value of the former stock pond is considered to be low due to repeated discing over the years as a part of agricultural activities on the site. Although suitable breeding habitat for CTS no longer occurs within the project site, suitable breeding habitat does occur in at least one location approximately 250 meters (approximately 820 feet) off-site to the northeast, and the project site may provide aestivation habitat for the species. Ground squirrels (Spermophilus beecheyi), ground squirrel burrows and Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomonys bottae) burrows were observed throughout and adjacent to the project site. As CTS uses burrows made by small mammals for aestivation, the presence of these small burrowing animals on and adjacent to the project site indicates that the site may provide suitable, albeit low quality, non-breeding (aestivation) upland habitat for CTS. For the reasons noted above, suitable breeding habitat for CTS is not present and potential aestivation habitat on the site is considered to be of low quality. However, given the project site’s location within Critical Habitat Unit 15A, the USFWS has identified the former stock pond as a potential resource that should either be restored or mitigated off-site. To address the potential loss of CTS individuals and their habitat, the applicant and their representatives initiated contact with the USFWS and CDFG in 2008. Due to the location of the project site within a critical habitat unit and the potential for take of CTS aestivation habitat, Incidental Take Authorization is required through the USFWS. A Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the CTS is currently being drafted in compliance with Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act and is anticipated to be completed and considered for adoption by the resource agencies in late 2012.

3.4-20

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

California Red-Legged Frog. The California red-legged frog (CRLF) is federally-listed as threatened and a California species of special concern. The project site is not located within federally-designated critical habitat for this species. The CRLF is California’s largest native frog, and is generally restricted to riparian and lacustrine (lake) habitats. This species prefers deep, still pools, usually greater than 2 feet in depth, in creeks, rivers or lakes below 5,000 feet in elevation. Breeding habitats require fresh water emergent vegetation or thick riparian vegetation, especially willow thickets adjacent to shorelines. CRLF can survive in seasonal bodies of water that dry up for short periods if a permanent water body or dense vegetation is nearby. They can move considerable distances overland, with dispersal occurring predominantly within creek drainages. Individuals are often found during the summer in foraging habitat not suitable for breeding, and therefore presumed to move seasonally between summer foraging and winter breeding habitats. No suitable breeding habitat for CRLF exists on the project site since the former stock pond no longer contains water and there are no other adequate aquatic features on or near the project site. Although the upland habitat within the project site may be used for dispersal, the species’ inability to be away from aquatic resources for long periods of time makes it unlikely that the CRLF would occupy the existing burrows in the project site’s uplands. Therefore, the species is considered to be absent from the site. Western Spadefoot Toad. Western spadefoot toad is a California species of special concern. This species of toad lives within grassland habitats of Central California and the Southern California coast. It requires temporary pools of water free of predators (such as fish, bullfrogs, or crayfish) for egg-laying. Breeding usually occurs in late winter. With the exception of the breeding season and foraging excursions during rain events, this species spends most of its life aestivating in self-excavated burrows, although burrows of small mammals are sometimes utilized. No western spadefoots were observed on-site during the surveys. There is no breeding habitat within the project site since the former stock pond does not accumulate water and there are no other temporary pools of water. This species has been documented in locations within two miles of the project site since 1978, and there was one documented occurrence on the northern portion of the project site in 2000. This species is known to breed within the ponds on Ridgemark Golf Course approximately 0.25 mile south of the project site, across Airline Highway. The dispersal distances of spadefoot toad are relatively unknown; however, current research on amphibian conservation suggests that average upland habitat use is within 368 meters (1,207 feet) of aquatic habitats (Semlitsch and Brodie 2003). Spadefoot toads are also highly sensitive to vibration (such as from an electric motor) while underground and may emerge prematurely (Dimmit 1980). If present in locations beyond the project site, individuals occurring on nearby lands could move onto the project site, which provides potential, albeit marginal, aestivating habitat for the species. However, disturbance from discing, mowing, or harvesting would likely cause

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-21

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

disruption during dormancy periods and the likelihood that spadefoot toad occurs on-site is considered low. Nevertheless, this species has been documented in locations near the project site. Therefore, project impacts on the spadefoot toad are potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2b would reduce impacts on western spadefoot toads to a less than significant level with mitigation incorporated. Birds White-tailed kite. White-tailed kite is a California fully-protected species. This species nests in shrubs (in the Delta), trees adjacent to grasslands, oak woodland, and edges of riparian habitats. White-tailed kites roost communally. They are a year-round resident that breeds between February and October. This species was not observed on-site during the surveys, and has not been observed within a five-kilometer radius of the site (Live Oak Associates 2008). This species may forage within and adjacent to the project site. However, there are no trees on the project site; therefore, the site contains no breeding habitat for this species. Loggerhead shrike. Loggerhead shrike is a California species of special concern, and occurs in grasslands and agricultural areas where trees and shrubs are scattered. Shrikes feed on insects, reptiles, small mammals and birds. Nests are usually built in trees and shrubs, although telephone poles and abandoned buildings and machinery may also be used. This species is a fairly common resident in the region; however, there are no recorded observations within five kilometers of the site (Live Oak Associates 2008). This species was not observed on-site during the surveys, but may forage within and adjacent to the project site. However, there are no trees, shrubs, or buildings on the project site. Therefore, the site contains no nesting habitat for the species. Northern Harrier. Northern harrier is a California species of special concern, and uses a wide variety of open habitats in California, including deserts, coastal sand dunes, pasturelands, croplands, dry plains, grasslands, estuaries, flood plains, and marshes. The species also forages over coastal sage scrub and other open scrub communities. Northern harrier takes small and medium-sized prey, including birds, rodents, reptiles, and frogs, but also insects, such as beetles, grasshoppers, crickets, and locusts in small amounts. Nesting areas are associated with marshes, pastures, grasslands, prairies, croplands, desert shrub-steppe, and riparian woodland. Most of the breeding population in California occurs in ungrazed parts of the state and in federal wildlife refuges. This species was not observed on-site during the surveys and there are no recorded occurrences within a five-kilometer radius of the project site (Live Oak Associates 2008). Because the project site is so heavily managed through disking and grazing, on-site breeding and foraging habitat is marginal to poor for this species. Although this species could pass through the site on rare occasions, it is unlikely to use the project site.

3.4-22

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Western Burrowing Owl. Western burrowing owl is state-listed as a species of concern. Burrowing owls live and breed in burrows in the ground, especially in abandoned ground squirrel burrows. Optimal habitat conditions include large open, dry and nearly level grasslands or prairies with short to moderate vegetation height and cover, areas of bare ground, and populations of burrowing mammals. Resident burrowing owls are rare in northern San Benito County, although wintering owls are known to occur in the area and have been sighted within several miles of the project site. This species was observed utilizing a burrow approximately one mile north of the project site in November 2000. During the field surveys, no burrowing owls were observed on-site, nor were there any signs of their presence on-site. Given the current land use practices associated with dry farming, it is highly unlikely that burrowing owls would breed on the project site. However, due to the availability of ground squirrel burrows, they may colonize the area at any time. Nesting Raptors and Migratory Birds. Many bird species are migratory and fall under the jurisdiction of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (discussed further in Section 3.4.2, Regulatory Setting, below). Several avian species were observed at the project site during the surveys, including American kestrel (Falco sparverius), rock pigeon (Columba livia), and Brewer’s blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus). Additionally, red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), Say’s phoebe (Sayornis saya), northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta), and lesser goldfinch (Carduelis psaltria) were observed flying over or near the site. Additional species were identified in the project vicinity, including golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and whitecrowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys). There are no trees or shrubs present on the project site that could offer nesting habitat on the site and no nesting activity was observed during the surveys; however, ground nesting species may occur and nesting varies from year to year. Mammals San Joaquin Kit Fox. The San Joaquin kit fox is a federally-listed endangered species and a state-listed threatened species. The present range of the San Joaquin kit fox extends from the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley, north to Tulare County, and along the interior Coast Range valleys and foothills to central Contra Costa County. San Joaquin kit foxes typically inhabit annual grasslands or grassy open spaces with scattered shrubby vegetation, but can also be found in some agricultural habitats and urban areas. This species needs loose-textured sandy soils for burrowing, and they also need areas that provide a suitable prey base, including blacktailed hare, desert cottontails, and California ground squirrels, as well as birds, reptiles, and carrion.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-23

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

The surveys conducted at the project site did not observe San Joaquin kit fox and found no indication of the presence of this species on the project site. Although the project site supports a prey base, and is contiguous to extensive suitable habitat to the east, the site is considered only marginal breeding and foraging habitat for the kit fox due to its adjacency to an urbanized area. Discing and mowing also diminish habitat suitability for the kit fox. Thus, if this species uses the site at all, it likely uses it only for foraging or dispersal on rare occasions and in low numbers. This is supported by the fact that the nearest observation of this species was documented approximately 0.5 mile north of the project site in 1971. Since that sighting, only one occurrence, which took place in 1992, approximately five miles from the site has been documented in the region. Numerous regional surveys, conducted before and since the date of the 1992 occurrence, have failed to detect this species. In total, eight occurrences of this species have been recorded within 10 miles of the project site over the past 37 years. In the off-chance that a migrating kit fox is found in the region, the marginal quality of the project site suggests that this species would not choose this site for denning or breeding. Therefore, the likelihood of this species occurring on the project site is extremely low (Live Oak Associates 2008). American Badger. American badger is state-listed as a species of special concern. This species is a permanent resident found throughout most of the state (although relatively uncommon in the San Benito County region), with the exception of the northern area of the North Coast. The badger is most abundant in grassland and the drier, more open successional stages of shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats with friable soils, although it also is found in open scrub and woodland habitats. This species requires an abundant source of burrowing mammals such as ground squirrels and gophers for sustenance. The nearest observation of this species occurred at a burrow approximately 1.5 miles north of the project site in 1993. No sign of badger was observed during the surveys and regular discing reduces the suitability of habitat at the project site; however, marginal habitat due to the presence of suitable prey remains on the project site.

Sensitive Habitats Sensitive habitat includes areas of special concern to resource agencies, such as: ƒ

Areas protected under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)

ƒ

Areas designated as sensitive natural communities by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG)

ƒ

Areas outlined in Section 1600 of the California Fish and Game Code

ƒ

Areas regulated under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. § 1344)

ƒ

Areas protected under Section 402 of the CWA (33 U.S.C. § 1342)

3.4-24

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

Areas protected under local regulations and policies

ƒ

Areas designated as critical habitat by the USFWS for federally-listed species

The USFWS defines “critical habitat” as a specific area that is essential for the conservation of a federally-listed species and that may require special management considerations or protection. As noted above, the project site is included in the area designated by the USFWS as “critical habitat” for the federally-listed CTS.

Wildlife Corridors Many wildlife species need more than one type of habitat during their life cycles. Animals use ridges, canyons, riparian areas, and open spaces to travel between their required habitats. Wildlife corridors refer to established migration routes commonly used by resident and migratory species for passage from one geographic location to another. Corridors are present in a variety of habitats and link otherwise fragmented acres of undisturbed areas. Maintaining the continuity of established wildlife corridors is important to sustain species with specific foraging requirements, preserve a species’ distribution potential, and retain diversity among many wildlife populations. For these reasons, resource agencies consider wildlife corridors to be a sensitive resource. Large mammals such as coyote and deer, and smaller mammals such as raccoons and weasels, rely on wildlife corridors for migrations necessary for their survival. Amphibians often require the ability to move between wetlands and other aquatic systems such as streams to forage and breed successfully. These wildlife movements may occur on a seasonal or even daily basis. Corridors provide foraging opportunities and shelter during migration. In wooded areas, these corridors often occur in open meadow or riverine habitats and provide a clear route for migration, in addition to supporting ample food and water sources during movement. The project site is surrounded on three sides by undeveloped land. However, the adjacent Cielo Vista residential community on the west side of Fairview Road and the homes near the project site hinder its use for migration of large mammals. In addition, the project site does not contain habitat types that provide cover (i.e. riparian, woodland or forest habitats) for species that need cover for migration. Periodic livestock grazing and agricultural activities that disturb the site (i.e., discing and cultivation) further hinder its use as a wildlife corridor. Finally, the project site does not contain any established or known migratory routes and/or wildlife corridors, and is not located in an area that is proposed for establishment of a wildlife corridor (Penrod 2001). For the reasons set forth above, the project site is not considered to function as a wildlife corridor.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-25

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

3.4.2 R EGULATORY S ETTING Federal Law and Regulations Special-Status and Other Protected Species Federal Endangered Species Act The Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) (16 U.S.C. § 1531) forms the basis for the protection of threatened or endangered plants, insects, fish and wildlife. The FESA contains four key sections. Section 4 outlines the procedure for listing endangered plants and wildlife. Section 7 imposes limits on the actions of federal agencies that might impact listed species. Section 9 prohibits the “taking” of a listed species by anyone, including private individuals, and state and local agencies. Section 10 requires the issuance of an incidental take permit before any public or private action may be taken that would harm, harass, injure, kill, capture, collect or otherwise hurt any individual of an endangered or threatened species. In the case of salt water fish and other marine organisms, the requirements of the FESA are enforced by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The USFWS enforces all other cases. Below, Sections 9, and 10 of the FESA are discussed since these are the two sections most relevant to the proposed project. Generally, Section 9 of the FESA prohibits the “take” of any fish or wildlife species listed as “endangered” or “threatened.” “Take” is defined under the FESA as follows: “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” “Harm” is defined to mean an act that actually kills or injures wildlife. Such an act may include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering. Section 9 applies to any person, including natural persons, corporations, and federal, state and local agencies. If “take” of a listed species is necessary to complete an otherwise lawful activity and if a federal agency will carry out, fund or approve that activity, this triggers the need for consultation under Section 7 of FESA. For those projects, such as the proposed project, that do not involve federal agency action (i.e., a federal agency is carrying out, funding, or approving a project), Section 10 of the FESA can be utilized to obtain authorization for the “incidental take” of listed species. In accordance with the statutory criteria set forth in Section 10(a)(2)(B), the applicant is required to submit a “habitat conservation plan” to the USFWS that specifies, among other things, the impacts that are likely to result from the taking; the measures that the applicant will undertake to minimize and mitigate such impacts; and the funding that will be available to implement those steps.

3.4-26

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Migratory Bird Treaty Act Migratory birds are protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C. §§ 703-711). The MBTA makes it unlawful to take, possess, buy, sell, purchase or barter any listed migratory bird, including their feathers or other parts, nests, eggs, young or products, except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior (50 CFR § 21). The vast majority of birds found in the project region are protected under the MBTA, including geese, ducks, shorebirds, raptors, songbirds, wading birds, seabirds, and passerine birds.

Wetlands and Waters of the United States U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdiction and General Permitting The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is a federal agency with regulatory authority over navigable waters and other aquatic sites, including wetlands, which may be impacted by development. The goal of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. §§ 1342, 1344) is to “restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.” To meet this objective, the CWA prohibits the discharge of any pollutants into navigable waters, except as allowed by permits issued under Sections 402 and 404 of the CWA. Section 402 establishes the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program, which allows the issuance of NPDES permits by the EPA or by the states (such as California) with EPA-approved permit programs. Section 404 authorizes the USACE (or the EPA under certain circumstances) to issue permits for and to regulate the discharge of dredged or fill materials into waters of the United States.

State Laws and Regulations Special-Status and Other Protected Species California Endangered Species Act Under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), the CDFG maintains a list of endangered and threatened species (Cal. Fish & Game Code § 2070). The CDFG also maintains a list of “candidate species,” which are those species that the CDFG is considering listing as endangered and threatened species. Finally, the CDFG maintains lists of “species of special concern,” which serve as species “watch lists.” Under the CESA, an agency reviewing a proposed project within its jurisdiction must determine whether any state-listed endangered or threatened species may be present in the project study area and determine whether the proposed project will have a potentially significant impact on such species. In addition, the CDFG encourages informal consultation on any proposed project that may impact a candidate species. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-27

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

Section 2080 prohibits, among other things, the “take” of state-listed threatened or endangered species. Under CESA, “take” means to “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill,” or to attempt any of these acts. However, the CDFG has the authority to permit the “incidental take” of statelisted species, subject to certain conditions. Project-related impacts to species on the CESA endangered or threatened list would be considered significant. State-listed species are fully protected under the mandates of the CESA. Birds of Prey Under Section 3503.5 of the California Fish and Game Code, it is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders of Falconformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird, except as otherwise provided by the applicable statute and regulations. Fully-Protected Species California statutes also accord “fully-protected” status to a number of specifically identified birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. Specific species subject to this level of protection are listed in Sections 3505 and 3511 (birds), Section 4700 (mammals), and Section 5050 (reptiles and amphibians).

Water Quality Protection Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act The CWA contemplates states implementing many of its provisions for point and non-point source regulation. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act is California’s comprehensive water pollution statute, and authorizes the state to implement the CWA. It specifically regulates the discharge of waste that could affect the quality of the “waters of the State.” The Act requires that any person discharging waste, or proposing to discharge waste, which could affect state jurisdictional waters file a report of discharge with the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) through an application for a “Report for Waste Discharge.” In turn, the RWQCB determines whether a permit (“Waste Discharge Requirements”) is required. The RWQCB will evaluate the proposed Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would be implemented during construction and operation of the project. Preconstruction requirements would need to be consistent with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), as set forth in an approved Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). In addition, a post-construction BMPs plan, or a Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP), would be developed and incorporated into the site development plan (Refer to Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality).

3.4-28

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Clean Water Act, Section 401: Water Quality Certification If an applicant proposes to discharge dredged or fill material into jurisdictional waters, Section 401 of the CWA (33 U.S.C. § 1341) requires that the applicant obtain a Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to confirm that the discharge will comply with applicable effluent limitations and water quality standards. Streambed Alteration Agreement State and local public agencies are subject to Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code. Under this statute, the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) must approve any proposed activity that would substantially divert, obstruct, or alter the natural flow, or substantially modify the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream or lake, the purpose of which is to protect fish and wildlife resources, through the issuance of a Streambed Alteration Agreement.

Protection for Special-Status Plant Species California Native Plant Protection Act The Native Plant Protection Act (Cal. Fish & Game Code §§ 1900-1913) is intended to preserve, protect and enhance endangered or rare native plants in California. The Act directs the CDFG to establish criteria for determining which native plants are rare or endangered. Under the Act, a species is endangered when its prospects for survival and reproduction are in immediate jeopardy from one or more causes. A species is rare, although not threatened with immediate extinction, if it is in such small numbers throughout its range that it may become endangered if its present environment worsens. This Act prohibits any person from importing into or taking, possessing, or selling within the state any endangered or rare native plant, except as incident to the possession or sale of the real property on which the plant is growing or as otherwise excepted under the Act. California Native Plant Society The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) maintains a list of plant species native to California that have low numbers, limited distribution, or are otherwise threatened with extinction. This information is published in the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California. Potential impacts to populations of rare plants receive consideration under CEQA. The CNPS ranking systems are defined below: ƒ

List 1A: Plants presumed extinct

ƒ

List 1B: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-29

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

ƒ

List 2: Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more numerous elsewhere

ƒ

List 3: Plants about which more information is needed (a review list)

ƒ

List 4: Plants of limited distribution (a watch list)

A new Threat Code extension has been added to the CNPS ranking system: ƒ

.1: Seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened / high degree and immediacy of threat)

ƒ

.2: Fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened)

ƒ

.3: Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened or no current threats known)

In general, plants appearing on the CNPS Lists 1A, 1B, or 2 are considered to meet the criteria of endangered, rare or threatened under the state CEQA Guidelines. Additionally, plants identified on the CNPS Lists 1A, 1B, or 2 meet the definition of rare or endangered species under the California Fish and Game Code.

Local Policies and Plans San Benito County General Plan The San Benito County General Plan contains the following policies with regard to biological resources: Land Use Element Policy 32. Specific development sites shall be free from the hazards identified within the Open Space and Conservation Element Maps (e.g., faults, landslides, hillsides over 30% slope, flood plains). The site shall also be on soil suitable for building and maintaining well and septic systems (i.e., avoid impervious soils, high percolation or high groundwater areas, set back from creeks). Absent adequate mitigation, development shall not be located on environmentally sensitive lands (wetlands, erodable soil, archaeological resources, important plant and animal communities). Policy 33. Specific development sites shall avoid, when possible, locating in an environmentally sensitive area (wetlands, erodable soils, important plant and animal communities, archaeological resources). 3.4-30

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Open Space and Conservation Element Policy 1. Major subdivisions or intense development shall not be allowed within potential habitat of federal or state listed rare, threatened, or endangered plant or animal species until said development(s) prepares habitat plans for the species unless an interim measure has been taken to mitigate the effect of development. Policy 2: Maintain corridors for habitat. In rural areas, road and development sites shall be designed to maintain habitat connectivity with a system of corridors for wildlife or plant species and avoiding fragmentation of open space areas. Measures to maintain the long-term health of the plant and animal communities in the area shall be incorporated into project design such as buffers, consolidation or of rerouting access, transitional landscaping, linking nearby open space areas, and habitat corridors. Policy 4: Avoid loss of habitat from other mitigation measures. Mitigation measures to reduce other environmental hazards (e.g., fire hazard, flood hazard, soil erosion) shall not be acceptable if they will significantly degrade existing habitat, riparian areas, or isolate habitat. Policy 6: Exotic plants and animals. It is the policy of the County to work with state, federal, and local agencies and land owners to develop programs to reduce the destruction of plant and animal life and habitat caused by invasive plants and animals. Policy 7: Grading, erosion, and native tree removal. It is the policy of the County to minimize erosion resulting from grading and cutting and native tree removal for all development proposals. Policy 18: Protect rural atmosphere and natural resources. General Plan Amendments, Specific Plans, Area Plans, and Areas of Special Study that result in a net increase in general plan buildout (Table 1 of the Land Use Element), shall include methods to conserve open space for natural resources including agriculture, wildlife habitat, and water (e.g. conservation easements and/or similar resource protection measures). Proposed development areas shall also include measures to protect resources on-site and contiguous to the project with the use of clustering, conservation easements, and other similar programs.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-31

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

San Benito County Code Chapter 19.19 (Ordinance No. 541) In April 1988, San Benito County adopted Ordinance No. 541, which established a habitat conservation plan study area for the San Joaquin kit fox and set interim mitigation fees for the preparation and adoption of a Habitat Conservation Plan to provide for the long term protection of the species. The current interim mitigation fee is $550 per developed acre converted from raw land to developed uses, paid prior to alteration of habitat, and $0.15 per square foot of any structures, paid at the building permit stage. Also, an interim mitigation fee is required to be paid at the time of recordation of each final map, based on the size of the building lot. To date, an applicable Habitat Conservation Plan has not been prepared or adopted by the County.

3.4.3 S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE The following thresholds for evaluating a project’s environmental impacts are based on the state CEQA Guidelines (Appendix G) and other applicable County CEQA standards. For purposes of this Draft EIR, a project may have a significant effect on the environment if it would: ƒ

have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, endangered, threatened or other special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;

ƒ

have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;

ƒ

have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, coastal, riverine, stream, marsh, vernal pool, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means;

ƒ

interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites;

ƒ

conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; and/or

ƒ

conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan.

3.4-32

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

3.4.4 P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Impacts to Endangered, Threatened, and Other SpecialStatus Species: Plants Impact BIO-1: Implementation of the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly or through habitat modification, on any plant species identified as a candidate, sensitive, endangered, threatened or other special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. The biological evaluation reported 10 special-status plant species that could potentially occur within the project site, based upon initial background database searches and literature review. In addition, species-specific surveys were conducted to evaluate the potential for the identified special-status plant species to occur on-site. These surveys, which were conducted during the typical blooming periods, concluded that all special-status plant species were absent from the project site. The findings of the rare plant surveys are consistent with the marginal suitability of the project site for rare plants, due to the preponderance of non-native invasive species as a result of previous agricultural production and ongoing agricultural practices, particularly discing, which tills the soil and removes existing vegetation. Therefore, based on these surveys, lack of habitat suitability, lack of previously-recorded occurrences of these species, and professional expertise, no special-status plant species have the potential to occur on-site. Impacts of the project would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Impacts to Endangered, Threatened, and Other SpecialStatus Species: Wildlife Impact BIO-2: Implementation of the proposed project may have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on several wildlife species identified as a candidate, sensitive, endangered, threatened or other special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (California tiger salamander, San Joaquin kit fox, American badger, burrowing owl, western spade toad, nesting and migratory raptors and birds). Therefore, impacts would be potentially significant.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-33

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

California Tiger Salamander As discussed more fully above, the proposed project would result in the loss or disturbance of aestivation and dispersal habitat for California tiger salamander (CTS). Suitable breeding habitat for CTS is not present on-site. However, there have been 11 documented occurrences of the species within three miles of the project site, there have been at least four documented sitings within two miles of the project site, and the entire site is within federally designated CTS critical habitat. The overall habitat quality of the project site has been degraded from many years of agricultural practices and is annually disced; therefore, it is considered to be low-quality habitat for aestivation and dispersal of CTS. Nevertheless, project development that results in the destruction of the existing on-site ground squirrel and gopher burrows could result in the take of aestivating CTS that may occupy these burrows. This potential impact, in addition to the overall loss of upland habitat, would represent a potentially significant impact. Incidental Take Authorization and Preparation of Habitat Conservation Plan Given the project site’s location within Critical Habitat Unit 15A, the applicant initiated contact with the USFWS and the CDFG in 2008, and the applicant will be required to comply with Section 10 of the FESA. The process of obtaining Incidental Take Authorization requires identifying measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for impacts to protected species. One method employed to mitigate impacts to protected species is to compensate for habitat loss through implementation of mitigation measures both on- and off-site. As part of the Section 10 process, a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and Implementing Agreement are currently being prepared. Many locations have been researched and analyzed by the applicant as potential sites for off-site mitigation for the loss of CTS habitat on the project site. Of the multiple locations considered over the last two years, one site within San Benito County has emerged as a preferred mitigation location, a site known to support CTS upland habitat and of suitable size to accommodate the project’s anticipated off-site mitigation requirements for the species. With the approval of USFWS and CDFG (if required), the applicant intends to acquire from the landowner the right to place a conservation easement against the site which will preserve land as CTS habitat in perpetuity. The HCP will incorporate the final measures designed to avoid, minimize, or mitigate potential impacts to CTS, and is anticipated to be completed in late 2012. In April 2010, the CDFG preliminarily indicated that due to the low habitat quality and location of the project site, it intended to decline jurisdiction over the project site and Incidental Take Authorization would not be required (personal communication between Justin Sloan, CDFG Biologist, and the applicant, 2010). However, because no formal determination was completed, the NOP letter submitted by the CDFG identifies the potential for the proposed project to affect

3.4-34

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

CTS and indicates that Incidental Take Authorization may be needed. Therefore, for purposes of this Draft EIR, it is assumed that Incidental Take Authorization from the CDFG may still be required. Specific Plan Policies Relating to Resource Management Article 5.0 (Resource Management) of the Specific Plan requires compliance with a number of policies that are designed to minimize the project’s impact on special-status wildlife species, including CTS. These include requirements to: Policy RM-1.1, Action #1 ƒ

Obtain Incidental Take Authorization from the USFWS (if required) by preparing an acceptable Habitat Conservation Plan that identifies adequate measures to avoid, minimize or compensate for the loss of protected species and habitat. Mitigation may occur off-site, on-site, through payment of in-lieu fees, or any combination as approved by USFWS.

ƒ

Mitigation is intended to occur off-site, and land may be acquired for purposes of species protection through a conservation easement, the details of which would be finalized in consultation with the USFWS as part of the Habitat Conservation Process.

ƒ

To the extent on-site mitigation is proposed, it may include provisions required by USFWS, without limitation, the following: •

A biological conservation easement of not less than a 100-meter radius shall be provided around the former stock pond. No development other than stormwater runoff and filtering, interpretive signage, fencing and unpaved trails shall take place within the easement. Fencing shall be suitable for protection of the aquatic resources.

•

Use fencing and low level lighting adjacent to the biological conservation area, with the type of fencing being suitable to allow the passage of animals while still marking the area to be protected from intrusion, and the lighting screened to prevent direct light penetration into the area.

Policy RM-1.1, Action #2 ƒ

Comply with mitigation measures required by the CDFG regarding the protection of statelisted special-status species.

The above-referenced Specific Plan policies are designed to reduce the project’s impacts on CTS. However, to ensure that these impacts are reduced to a less than significant level, the following mitigation measures are recommended:

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-35

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

MM BIO-2a: Prior to issuance of any grading permit on the project site, the developer shall obtain Incidental Take Authorization from the USFWS and the CDFG (if required). Incidental Take Authorization will require the identification and implementation of measures suitable to avoid, minimize, or compensate for impacts to the species and its habitat, which are acceptable to USFWS and CDFG. To mitigate for the loss of aestivation and dispersal habitat, the developer shall procure a conservation easement for land at a minimum of 1:1 ratio of project site impact area to compensation habitat area, or in such other ratio as required by USFWS and CDFG. Compliance with one of the following off-site mitigation strategies shall be followed, or as otherwise required by USFWS and CDFG: a.

Off-site upland habitat mitigation. The developer shall procure off-site aestivation habitat at a minimum of a 1:1 ratio of project site impact area to compensate for loss of habitat area. Off-site mitigation may include sites with occupied upland habitat or sites with upland habitat known to be occupied and occupied aquatic habitat. Conservation easements shall be offered for dedication to a suitable preservation entity, to be preserved and managed in perpetuity. Additionally, if the accepted mitigation site is located within the range of the San Joaquin kit fox and supports suitable habitat for this species as well, the same mitigation site may be utilized to meet the mitigation requirement for this species as well.

b.

Off-site upland habitat mitigation and limited on-site mitigation. The developer shall procure off-site upland habitat at a minimum of a 1:1 ratio of project site impact area to compensation habitat area. The developer shall also preserve on-site the area in which the former stock pond was located, including, but not limited to, observance of a biological conservation easement of not less than a 100-meter radius around the former stock pond, fencing of said area, and installation of low level lighting.

MM BIO-2b: Prior to construction activities for each phase of development, the developer shall provide to the County of San Benito, evidence of compliance with Incidental Take Authorization conditions of approval for CTS and Western Spadefoot Toad as prescribed by the USFWS and the CDFG (as may be required). The Incidental Take Authorization conditions of approval may include the following or similar preconstruction survey requirements: For CTS: Prior to ground disturbance of the project site and as directed by the Project Biologist, temporary barriers are constructed along the limits of the disturbance areas to prevent the movement of the CTS into the area. This measure, if required by the USFWS would be performed by a qualified biologist (Project Biologist) retained by the developer and may include the following elements. Barriers typically consist of 3-foot-tall silt

3.4-36

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

fencing with the bottom edge buried to a depth of at least 6 inches below the soil surface, held in place by rigid stakes or other stable means. Silt fence fabric may also be installed on any swinging gates or other movable sections of temporary construction fencing. Fence fabric installed on gates and movable sections of fence are draped onto the ground surface to form a continuous barrier to CTS access. All barriers would remain in place until all development activities within the disturbance area have been completed. Said barriers shall be inspected, maintained and repaired by the developer as necessary to ensure continuous functionality. For Western spadefoot toad: Preconstruction survey(s) would be conducted during the spring season prior to construction or within 30 days prior to the onset of construction activities (if they are to begin in Spring). The Survey would be performed by a qualified biologist (Project Biologist) retained by the developer to first determine the presence of either species, and may include measures similar to the following: If there is any lapse in construction activity, new surveys must be conducted prior to the re-initiation of construction activity. If this species is not detected during the survey(s), then no further mitigation would be required. However, if western spadefoot is found within the project area during the survey(s), then passive relocation techniques would be employed by the applicant to transfer the individuals from the project area to an appropriate off-site location. Consultation with the CDFG would be required prior to relocating individuals to determine an appropriate off-site location(s) and techniques for relocation to be employed. MM BIO-2c: Prior to ground disturbance of the project site, a temporary barrier shall be constructed along the limits of the disturbance area, to prevent the movement of the CTS into the area. The barrier shall consist of three-foot-tall silt fencing with the bottom edge buried to a depth of at least six inches below the soil surface, held in place by rigid stakes or other stable means. Silt fence fabric shall also be installed on any swinging gates or other movable sections of temporary construction fencing. Fence fabric installed on gates and movable sections of fence shall drape onto the ground surface to form a continuous barrier to CTS access. Installation of silt fencing and fence fabric shall be supervised by a qualified biologist, who shall be retained by the developer and approved by the County. Said barriers shall remain in place until all development activities within the disturbance area have been completed. Said barriers shall be inspected, maintained and repaired by the developer as necessary to ensure continuous functionality. MM BIO-2d: Any netting or coir rolls used for erosion control or other purposes during the construction of the project shall be of tightly woven natural fiber or similar bio-degradable material to ensure that the CTS do not get trapped within the netting. Plastic monofilament netting (erosion control matting) or similar material shall not be used. This netting specification shall be incorporated within the bid and construction documents for the project. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-37

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

As noted above, this species’ federal- and state-listed status necessitates consultation with the USFWS and perhaps also with the CDFG. Accordingly, final measures designed to avoid, minimize, or compensate impacts to CTS will be implemented through the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) process in coordination with the USFWS and a similar process with CDFG (if necessary). The developer shall comply with any requirements from those resource agencies, including any required mitigation. By requiring replacement of habitat impacted by the project, installing barriers to prevent the CTS from entering the construction work area, and implementing measures to minimize the potential harm to the CTS during construction, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2a through 2d would reduce impacts on CTS to a less than significant level with mitigation incorporated.

Western Spadefoot Toad No western spadefoots were observed on-site during the surveys, and there is no breeding habitat on-site since there are no temporary pools of water. The dispersal distances of spadefoot toad are relatively unknown; however, current research on amphibian conservation suggests that average upland habitat use is within 368 meters (1,207 feet) of aquatic habitats (Semlitsch and Brodie 2003). Spadefoot toads are also highly sensitive to vibration (such as from an electric motor) while underground and may emerge prematurely (Dimmit 1980). Individuals occurring on nearby lands could move onto the project site, which provides potential, albeit marginal, aestivating habitat for the species. However, disturbance from discing, mowing, or harvesting would likely cause disruption during dormancy periods and therefore the likelihood that this species occurs on-site is low. Nevertheless, this species has been documented in locations near the project site. Therefore, project impacts on the spadefoot toad would be potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM BIO-2b would mitigate impacts on the Western Spadefoot Toad to a less than significant level with mitigation incorporated.

San Joaquin Kit Fox Direct evidence of San Joaquin kit fox was not observed on the project site during the course of field surveys. There is no suitable denning habitat for San Joaquin kit fox on the project site. However, open grassland areas may provide marginal foraging and migration habitat, and presence of this species is presumed for purposes of this analysis. Therefore, the project’s impacts on the kit fox would be considered potentially significant. The agricultural land on-site provides potential foraging habitat for the kit fox, but at +/-60 acres, the project site is very small relative to the one- to 12-square-mile range required for a typical home range for San Joaquin kit foxes. Development of the project site would therefore not represent a substantial loss of foraging habitat for individuals or the local population as a

3.4-38

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

whole. The very low densities of this species in the Hollister region and the large expanses of unbroken annual grassland habitat to the east of the project site make it even more unlikely that loss of grassland habitat on-site would prove to be a detrimental factor in the success of the species in the area. The cultivated field provides neither potential denning habitat nor highquality foraging habitat for the San Joaquin kit fox. As this species would utilize the project site and vicinity, if at all, only for occasional foraging, direct impacts to individuals of this species have a low potential to occur. However, given occurrences of the species in the project vicinity, there is some potential that the loss of or harm to individual kit foxes could result if they seek shelter within artificial structures, such as stored pipes or exposed trenches during construction. Therefore, impacts to kit fox would be potentially significant. As a federally listed species, San Joaquin kit fox will be included in the HCP prepared for the project. Final measures designed to avoid, minimize, or compensate for impacts to this species will be incorporated into the HCP, in accordance with the requirements of USFWS and CDFG. Implementation of Specific Plan Policy RM-1.1 as well as Mitigation Measures BIO-2b through BIO-2e address potential impacts to the species. In addition, Mitigation Measures BIO-2i through BIO-2l below address construction-phase impacts to all special-status wildlife species, including kit fox. MM BIO-2e: The developer shall pay the mitigation fee per County Ordinance 541 (San Benito County Code, Chapter 19.19), which would pay towards the preparation of the San Benito County HCP that is being developed to mitigate impacts for all federally-listed species, including the San Joaquin kit fox. Therefore, the project’s impacts on the San Joaquin kit fox would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Western Burrowing Owl Open areas and available burrows at the project site provide foraging habitat for western burrowing owls. While no burrowing owl was observed on-site during the field surveys, burrowing owls have been previously recorded within one mile of the site. Should active burrowing owl nests occur on or immediately adjacent to the project site, any construction or site preparation activities within or immediately adjacent to an active nest, if conducted during the nesting season, could result in the direct loss of nests, including eggs and young, or the abandonment of an active nest by the adults. Therefore, implementation of the project may result in direct and indirect impacts in the form of loss of habitat and mortality of individual burrowing owls. This would be considered a potentially significant impact. Therefore, the following mitigation measure is proposed. MM BIO-2f: A pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist for burrowing owls within 30 days of the onset of construction, in accordance with methods described

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-39

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 1995). Any occupied burrows shall be mapped on an aerial photo. At least 15 days prior to the expected start of any project-related ground disturbance activities, or restart of activities, the developer shall provide the burrowing owl survey report and mapping to the CDFG. If construction is delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the survey, the area shall be resurveyed. If no burrowing owls are detected during the pre-construction surveys, then no further action is necessary. Based on the burrowing owl survey results, the following actions shall be taken by the developer to avoid impacts during construction (as outlined in CDFG guidance): ƒ

If pre-construction surveys undertaken during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31 (CDFG 1995)) locate active nest burrows within or near construction zones, these nests, and an appropriate buffer around them (as determined by a qualified biologist approved by the CDFG), must remain off-limits to construction until the breeding season is over. The CDFG typically recommends setbacks from occupied nest burrows of at least 75 meters (approximately 246 feet).

ƒ

If pre-construction surveys undertaken during the non-breeding season (September 1 through January 31) locate occupied burrows within or near construction zones, then resident owls may be passively relocated to alternative habitat. The relocation of resident owls shall be in accordance with a relocation plan prepared by the qualified biologist and in consultation with the CDFG. The relocation plan shall provide for the owl’s relocation to nearby lands possessing available nesting and foraging habitat and shall be in accordance with the protocol outlined in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 1995).

ƒ

In the event that active nests are found during pre-construction surveys, compensatory suitable habitat at the rate of 6.5 acres per pair of owls shall be identified and placed under a construction easement by the developer.

American Badger Open areas on the project site may provide habitat for the American badger. Direct impacts to this species may occur if it is present during construction activities, as a result of den destruction during compaction or earthmoving activities. Indirect impacts such as noise or ground disturbance may cause the badger to abandon its den or relocate and forage in another location. Therefore, project impacts to this species would be potentially significant. The following mitigation measures are proposed.

3.4-40

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

MM BIO-2g: Pre-construction surveys for badger dens and burrows shall occur concurrently with burrowing owl and kit fox surveys to ensure that no occupied dens or burrows are present within or near project construction activities. If active dens or burrows are present on or immediately adjacent to (i.e., within 300 feet of) the disturbance area, a buffer, within which no construction activity shall be permissible, shall be maintained during the pupping season (i.e., February 15 through July 1, or as otherwise determined through surveys and monitoring of the den). The size of the buffer shall be determined by a qualified biologist in consultation with the CDFG but shall be no less than 300 feet. A biological monitor shall be present on-site during construction activities to ensure the buffer is adequate to avoid direct impacts to individuals as well as nest abandonment. The on-site monitor shall be necessary until it is determined that young are of an independent age and construction activities would not harm individual badgers. Once it has been determined that badgers have vacated the project site, the burrows could be collapsed or excavated, and ground disturbance could proceed. Any dens determined to be occupied, but which cannot be avoided through construction timing or activity buffers, may be vacated during the non-pupping season by a qualified biologist using the procedures identified in MM BIO-2f above, in consultation with the CDFG. If no active dens or burrows are found during the pre-construction surveys, then no further mitigation is necessary. As noted above, the special status of the American badger may necessitate consultation with the CDFG. The developer shall comply with any CDFG requirements in accordance with applicable law, including any required mitigation, in addition to MM BIO-2g. With implementation of MM BIO-2g, the project’s impacts to the American badger would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Nesting Migratory Birds and Raptors Nesting Habitat No evidence of nesting activity was observed on-site during site investigations. However, some ground nesting species may become established. Trees and shrubs located adjacent to the project site have the potential to provide nesting habitat for raptors and migratory birds. If active nest(s) of protected bird species, including, but not limited to, white-tailed kite, northern harrier, loggerhead strike, should occur in the agricultural land, trees or shrubs adjacent to the project site, construction and site preparation activities, if conducted during the nesting season, could result in the direct loss of nests, including eggs and young. Excessive noise, disturbance, and

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-41

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

vibrations can cause nesting raptors and migratory birds to abandon their nests, resulting in the mortality of eggs and chicks, as well as stress from loss of foraging areas. The loss of individuals of these species or abandonment of their nests would be a potentially significant impact. Therefore, the following mitigation is proposed: MM BIO-2h: No more than 30 days prior to commencement of grading or construction activities occurring within 250 feet of trees located adjacent to the project site and within the agricultural land on-site, the developer shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct tree and agricultural land surveys to determine if active nest(s) of protected birds and raptors (white tailed kite, northern harrier, and loggerhead shrike) are present in the trees or on the ground. Surveys shall include searches of all potential nest sites, including snags, shrubs, ground, buildings and other structures. Two surveys shall be conducted, at least one week apart, with the second survey occurring no more than two days prior to vegetation removal or construction activities. Areas within 250 feet of the construction zone that are not within the control of the developer shall be observed from the project site. If active nest(s) are found, the USWFS and/or the CDFG (as appropriate) shall be notified regarding the status of the nest(s). Furthermore, construction activities shall be restricted as necessary to avoid disturbance of the nest(s) until they are abandoned or the qualified biologist deems disturbance potential to be minimal. Restrictions may include establishment of exclusion zones (no ingress of personnel or equipment at a minimum radius of 250 feet around an active raptor nest and 100 feet around an active non-raptor migratory bird nest) or alteration of the construction schedule. If construction activities are not scheduled between March 1 and August 31, no further mitigation is required, and vegetation removal or construction activities may proceed. With implementation of MM BIO-2h, the project’s impacts on protected birds and raptors would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Foraging Habitat Foraging habitat within the project site would also be lost as a result of the project. While this habitat provides suitable foraging opportunities for many avian species, including some raptors and other migratory birds, overall foraging habitat in San Benito County is abundant, and would not be significantly diminished as a result of this project. Therefore, the project’s impacts on foraging habitat are less than significant.

3.4-42

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

California Red-Legged Frog As discussed above, the project site is not located within federally-designated critical habitat for CRLF; and no suitable breeding habitat for CRLF exists on the project site since there are no aquatic features. While there is the possibility that the upland habitat within the project may be used for dispersal, this is unlikely given the species’ inability to be away from aquatic resources for long periods of time. Therefore, this species is considered to be absent from the site and project impacts on the CRLF would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

All Special-Status Species The approved HCP would be the governing document for the treatment and dispensation of mitigation measure (above) applicable to all special-status wildlife species that would potentially be impacted by the project. In addition, the approved HCP would identify minimum qualifications, responsibility and authority for the Project Biologist, hired at the developer’s expense, and would identify the protocol that ensures no direct take or harm to special-status species during construction. A required component of an approved HCP is a construction worker education program that typically includes measures to explain (1) compliance provisions and restrictions of all project permits; (2) how to recognize special-status species that could occur on-site; and (3) how best to avoid the accidental take of special-status species during construction. Verification of training is submitted to the USFWS and/or CDFC (as appropriate). Mitigation Measures BIO-2a through 2h would reduce impacts to special-status wildlife species with the potential to occur within the project site to a less than significant level with mitigation incorporated. These species’ federal- and state-listing status may necessitate consultation with the USFWS and/or the CDFG. The developer shall comply with those agencies’ recommendations, including any required mitigation, in addition to the above mitigation measures.

Riparian Habitat Impact BIO-3: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the CDFG or the USFWS. Therefore, the project would have no impact. As discussed above, there is no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the CDFG or USFWS, within the project site. Therefore, the project would have no impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-43

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

No mitigation is required.

Wetlands Impact BIO-4: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, coastal, riverine, stream, marsh, vernal pool, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Therefore, the project would have no impact. There are no federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act on the project site. Remnants of a former stock pond are located within the northeast corner of the project site, although there have been no indications of ponding since 2000. In addition, current agricultural practices (i.e., annual discing) further impair its ponding ability. Surveys of the former stock pond determined that it does not support the three indicators (soils, vegetation, and hydrology) that define the presence of federal jurisdictional wetlands, and the USACE has verified that it does not constitute federal jurisdictional waters (See Appendix E). Therefore, the project would have no impact on any federally protected wetlands. No mitigation is required.

Wildlife Corridors and Nursery Sites Impact BIO-5: The project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors. This is a less than significant impact. The project site is surrounded on three sides by undeveloped land. However, the adjacent suburban community on the opposite side of Fairview Road and the homes near the project site hinder its use for migration of large mammals. In addition, it does not contain habitat types that provide cover (i.e. riparian, woodland or forest habitats) for species that need cover for migration. Periodic grazing and agricultural activities that disturb the site (i.e., herbicides, insecticides, discing and cultivation) further hinder its use as a wildlife corridor. Finally, the project site does not contain established or known migratory routes and/or wildlife corridors, and is not located in an area that is proposed for establishment of a wildlife corridor. Therefore, the project’s impacts on wildlife corridors would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

3.4-44

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Conflict with Policies Protecting Biological Resources Impact BIO-6: The project may impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. This is considered a potentially significant impact. As discussed above under Impact BIO-2, there is no indication of any native wildlife nursery sites. However, to the extent any wildlife nursery sites are discovered on-site during construction, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2a through BIO-2h would mitigate any such impacts through the implementation of pre-construction surveys, protection, and avoidance measures, if needed. Therefore, the project’s impacts on native wildlife nursery sites would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impact BIO-7: The project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, except for a potential conflict with San Benito County General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element Policy 6 (invasive plant species). Therefore, all impacts except those related to Policy 6 are less than significant. Impacts related to potential conflicts with Policy 6 are potentially significant. The project would be consistent with the following relevant local policies and ordinances:

Land Use Element Policy 32. Specific development sites shall be free from the hazards identified within the Open Space and Conservation Element Maps (e.g., faults, landslides, hillsides over 30% slope, flood plains). The site shall also be on soil suitable for building and maintaining well and septic systems (i.e., avoid impervious soils, high percolation or high groundwater areas, set back from creeks). Absent adequate mitigation, development shall not be located on environmentally sensitive lands (wetlands, erodable soil, archaeological resources, important plant and animal communities). Consistency: As discussed above, the project site is designated as critical habitat for the CTS, and contains suitable habitat for other special-status species, and the analysis acknowledges that project development could result in significant biological resource impacts. Mitigation has been identified in this Draft EIR, however, which will reduce all identified impacts to biological resources, cultural resources and those related to geology and soil as well as hydrology, seismic hazards, and water quality to a less than significant level (Refer to Section 3.5, Cultural and Paleontological Resources; 3.7, Geology and Soils; and Section 3.9, Surface Water Hydrology and Water Quality for additional discussion). Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 32.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-45

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

Policy 33. Specific development sites shall avoid, when possible, locating in an environmentally sensitive area (wetlands, erodable soils, important plant and animal communities, archaeological resources). Consistency: As discussed above, the project site is designated as critical habitat for the CTS, and contains suitable habitat for other special-status species, and the analysis acknowledges that project development could result in significant biological resource impacts. Mitigation has been identified in this Draft EIR, however, which will reduce all identified impacts to biological resources, cultural resources and those related to geology and soil as well as hydrology, seismic hazards, and water quality to a less than significant level (Refer to Section 3.5, Cultural and Paleontological Resources; 3.7, Geology and Soils; and Section 3.9, Surface Water Hydrology and Water Quality for additional discussion). Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 33.

Open Space and Conservation Element Policy 1. Major subdivisions or intense development shall not be allowed within potential habitat of federal or state listed rare, threatened, or endangered plant or animal species until said development(s) prepares habitat plans for the species unless an interim measure has been taken to mitigate the effect of development. Consistency: As discussed above, the project site does not contain established or known migratory routes and/or wildlife corridors, and is not located in an area that is proposed for establishment of a wildlife corridor. However, the project site is designated as critical habitat for the CTS, and contains suitable habitat for several other special-status wildlife species. The applicant is currently in the process of preparing an HCP in accordance with Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act. In addition, the Specific Plan requires adherence to a number of policies designed to promote the conservation of natural resources, such as Policy RM-1.1 (Minimize impact to special-status species and their habitat in accordance with federal and state regulatory requirements); Policy RM-1.2 (Allow potential for localized grading in the on-site habitat conservation area); and Policy RM-1.3 (Minimize adverse changes to natural habitats), as well as related implementation measures. In addition, the project would be required to comply with mitigation measures as set forth in this Section 3.4 to ensure the long-term protection of special-status plant and animal communities within the project site. Implementation of the identified mitigation measures would reduce all impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 1. Policy 2: Maintain corridors for habitat. In rural areas, road and development sites shall be designed to maintain habitat connectivity with a system of corridors for wildlife or plant species and avoiding

3.4-46

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

fragmentation of open space areas. Measures to maintain the long-term health of the plant and animal communities in the area shall be incorporated into project design such as buffers, consolidation of or rerouting access, transitional landscaping, linking nearby open space areas, and habitat corridors. Consistency: As discussed above, the project site does not contain established or known migratory routes and/or wildlife corridors, and is not located in an area that is proposed for establishment of a wildlife corridor. The applicant is currently in the process of preparing an HCP in accordance with Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act. In addition, the Specific Plan requires adherence to a number of policies designed to promote the conservation of natural resources, such as Policy RM-1.1 (Minimize impact to special-status species and their habitat in accordance with federal and state regulatory requirements); Policy RM-1.2 (Allow potential for localized grading in the on-site habitat conservation area); and Policy RM-1.3 (Minimize adverse changes to natural habitats), as well as related implementation measures. In addition, the project would be required to comply with mitigation measures as set forth in this Section 3.4 to ensure the long-term protection of special-status plant and animal communities within the project site. Implementation of the identified mitigation measures would reduce all impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 2. Policy 4: Avoid loss of habitat from other mitigation measures. Mitigation measures to reduce other environmental hazards (e.g., fire hazard, flood hazard, soil erosion) shall not be acceptable if they will significantly degrade existing habitat, riparian areas, or isolate habitat. Consistency: The applicant is currently in the process of preparing an HCP in accordance with Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act. Additionally, this EIR identifies mitigation measures, as appropriate, to address soil erosion (Section 3.7, Geology and Soils). These measures, including addressing barriers to ensure that species are not trapped and to protect water quality, are specifically designed to not negatively impact habitat or riparian areas. Policy 6: Exotic plants and animals. It is the policy of the County to work with state, federal, and local agencies and land owners to develop programs to reduce the destruction of plant and animal life and habitat caused by invasive plants and animals. Consistency: Invasive species can spread during ground disturbances associated with construction. Some species, such as thistles, contain thousands of seeds from just one flower. The project would be required to comply with policies identified in Article 5.0 of the Specific Plan (Resource Management), in particular. Policy RM-1.3, which requires avoidance of planting species listed in the California Invasive Plant Council’s inventory as having a Moderate

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-47

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

or High rating and affecting the Central West region, or included in the Exotic Pest Plant Council’s “Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern in California” list. Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan) further requires as a condition of approval of the first subdivision map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) prepare a Landscape Master Plan, subject to review and approval of the appropriate County staff. In addition, the following mitigation measure is proposed: MM BIO-7: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall prepare and implement a landscaping and revegetation plan for each construction phase in order to prevent the spread of invasive non-native species. The plan shall include the following requirements: ƒ

An eradication plan for plants listed on the Invasive Plant Inventory (Cal-IPC 2007) currently growing on the project site to be implemented during the grading phases of the project;

ƒ

Use of plants listed on the Invasive Plant Inventory (Cal-IPC 2007) shall be prohibited;

ƒ

Exposed soil areas shall be planted, mulched, or covered between October 15 and the following April 15 each year;

ƒ

Plant materials used in landscaping or erosion control shall consist of plants that are included in a list of appropriate native California plants as identified by a qualified biologist or landscape architect; and

ƒ

To prevent erosion and conserve water during construction, bare soil between newly installed plant materials shall be mulched, covered with jute netting, or seeded with a mix of seeds best suited for the climate and soil conditions, and native to the San Benito County region.

Therefore, any project impacts related to potential conflicts with Policy 6 would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Policy 7: Grading, erosion, and native tree removal. It is the policy of the County to minimize erosion resulting from grading and cutting and native tree removal for all development proposals. Consistency: There are no trees on the project site. Section 3.7, Geology and Soils, evaluates erosion impacts that could occur as a result of project development. Specifically, grading, removal of vegetation, and other construction-related activities would disturb the soil, which could increase soil erosion rates. The developer would be required to submit erosion control plans, which would include measures to protect drainage courses and the on-site habitat conservation area (to the extent it is created) from eroded soils and debris during construction.

3.4-48

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Furthermore, the developer would be required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program, in accordance with MM HYD-1a. Specifically, the developer would need to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which specifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will prevent construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. In addition, the developer would be required to incorporate post-construction stormwater pollution management measures, including, among others, source control measures, to reduce stormwater pollution during operation of the project. Implementation of the identified measures would reduce project impacts associated with grading to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 7. Policy 18: Protect rural atmosphere and natural resources. General Plan Amendments, Specific Plans, Area Plans, and Areas of Special Study that result in a net increase in general plan buildout (Table 1 of the Land Use Element), shall include methods to conserve open space for natural resources including agriculture, wildlife habitat, and water (e.g. conservation easements and/or similar resource protection measures). Proposed development areas shall also include measures to protect resources on-site and contiguous to the project with the use of clustering, conservation easements, and other similar programs. Consistency: The project site is near the eastern edge of the City of Hollister and existing suburban development, and is currently designated under the County General Plan as an “Area of Special Study.” Furthermore, development of the project is otherwise consistent with the intent of the Area of Special Study designation because by developing the project site with a variety of higher density housing, the project would direct development away from key natural resources and prevent leapfrog growth. The project would be developed in compliance with a comprehensive planning framework that provides for resource protection measures, including a Habitat Conservation Plan and/or potential conservation easement to protect natural resources. Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy 18. Accordingly, as discussed above and with implementation of the proposed mitigation, the project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances related to the protection of biological resources. Therefore, project impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Conflict with adopted HCP, NCCP, Or Other Approved Plans Impact BIO-8: Implementation of the project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or any

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-49

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

other approved biological resources recovery or habitat conservation plan of any local, regional or state agency. Therefore, the project would have no impact. Currently, there is no adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, nor any other conservation or recovery plan in effect for the project site, in whole or in part. The applicant is currently in the process of preparing a Habitat Conservation Plan in accordance with Section 10 requirements under the FESA. Once approved, the developer would be mandated to comply with all requirements under the project site’s Habitat Conservation Plan. Therefore, the project would have no impact. No mitigation is required.

3.4.5 C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Impact BIO-9: The proposed project, in addition to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects along the Fairview Road corridor, may disturb special-status species, critical habitats, and wildlife movement throughout the region. These impacts would be considered potentially significant cumulative impacts. The Fairview Corners project would result in the conversion of the project site from rural uses to suburban uses. Other planned projects along the Fairview Road corridor include: ƒ

Gavilan College San Benito Campus: This project involves the construction of a 3,500full-time equivalent (FTE) student college facility, as well as approximately 70 residential units and 35,000 square feet of retail space on a 77-acre site at the northeastern corner of Fairview Road and Airline Highway.

ƒ

Santana Ranch Project: This project involves the construction of a maximum of 1,092 residential units, approximately 65,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses, potential mixed uses within the residential multiple areas, an elementary school site upon which a future 700-student elementary school may be built, 18.2 acres of parks as well as additional park and recreational facilities, and related on- and off-site project infrastructure.

ƒ

Award Homes Project: This project involves the construction of approximately 595 singlefamily homes and 100 apartment units on the western side of Fairview Road, south of St. Benedict’s Church and east of Calistoga Drive within the City of Hollister.

In addition to the above-referenced projects, there are a number of smaller projects that have been included in this cumulative impacts analysis, as noted on the Cumulative Projects list in

3.4-50

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Section 3.0. It is also anticipated that, over time, the Fairview Road corridor will be further developed, consistent with the Area of Special Study designation of this corridor. As presented in the impact discussions above, implementation of the proposed project would result in a loss of habitat and contribute to biological resource impacts, including the potential disturbance of special-status species and critical habitat for CTS. Anticipated development and suburban expansion of the area generally is expected to further contribute to these impacts and is considered a potentially significant cumulative impact to biological resources. Implementation of mitigation measures presented within this section, MM BIO-2 through MM BIO-7 would, however, reduce the project’s overall contribution to cumulative biological resources impacts resulting from completion of the project to a less than significant level. Further, it is anticipated that future projects along the Fairview Road corridor also would be required to undergo environmental review, during which potential impacts to biological resources as a result of those projects would be identified and mitigated to the extent feasible. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative biological impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.4-51

3.4

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

This side intentionally left blank.

3.4-52

COUNT Y OF SAN BENITO

3.5 C LIMATE C HANGE

This section of the Draft EIR summarizes the relevant environmental setting in terms of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; identifies potential climate change impacts from project implementation; and evaluates the significance of those potential impacts. This analysis is based on the results of air quality modeling using URBEMIS 2007 conducted in support of the Fairview/Gavilan College Air Quality Study (Illingworth & Rodkin 2007), prepared for the Gavilan San Benito Campus and Fairview Corners Projects Final EIR. The URBEMIS model run results utilized in the analysis of climate change are included in Appendix G along with calculations supporting the information presented in this section. Additional information currently available from a number of state agencies, most notably the California Air Resources Board (CARB); legislation adopted by the state; and guidance provided by the California Attorney General’s Office was also utilized.

3.5.1 E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING Greenhouse Gas Emissions & Climate Change The Earth’s atmosphere has been warming for the past century. It is believed this warming trend is related to the release of certain greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions into the atmosphere. GHG emissions are naturally occurring gases such as water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O) that regulate the temperature on the Earth by absorbing infrared energy that would otherwise escape from the Earth’s atmosphere. As the infrared energy is absorbed, the air surrounding the Earth is heated. In addition to natural sources, human activities are exerting a major and growing influence on climate by changing the composition of the atmosphere and by modifying the land surface. Particularly, the increased consumption of fossil fuels (natural gas, coal, gasoline, etc.) has substantially increased atmospheric levels of

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-1

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

GHGs. GHGs most typically associated with land development projects include emissions of CO2 and, to a lesser extent, CH4, O3, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), and N2O, as discussed further below. Ozone (O3) occurs naturally in the stratosphere where it is largely responsible for filtering harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation. In the troposphere, ozone acts as a GHG by absorbing and re-radiating the infrared energy emitted by the Earth. As a result of the industrial revolution and rising emissions of NOx and VOCs (ozone precursors), the concentrations of ozone in the troposphere have increased compared to the pre-industrial era. (IPCC, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Summary for Policymakers (2007)). Due to the short life span of ozone in the troposphere, its concentration and contribution as a GHG is not well established. No 100-year global warming potential has been established for ozone or NOx. However, the greenhouse effect of tropospheric ozone is considered small, as the radiative forcing of ozone is 35 percent of that of carbon dioxide. Id. For these reasons, ozone is not a state-regulated GHG and therefore is not analyzed further in this Draft EIR. Based on currently available information, global GHG emissions resulting from human activities, especially the consumption of fossil fuels, have grown since pre-industrial times with an increase of approximately 70 percent between 1970 and 2004 (IPCC 2007). An overall warming trend has been recorded since the late 19th century, with the most rapid warming occurring over the past two decades. The 10 warmest years of the last century all occurred within the last 15 years. It appears that the decade of the 1990s was the warmest in human history. Most of the warming in recent decades likely occurred from human activities that resulted in increased GHG emissions. There are uncertainties as to exactly what the climate changes will be in various geographical areas of the Earth, and what effects clouds will have in determining the rate at which the mean temperature will increase. The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has declared that worldwide, average temperatures are likely to increase by approximately 3 to 7 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the 21st century. However, a global temperature increase does not translate to a uniform increase in temperature in all locations on the Earth. Regional climate changes are dependent on multiple variables, such as topography. One region of the Earth may experience increased temperatures, increased incidents of drought, and similar warming effects, whereas another region may experience a relative cooling. There are also uncertainties associated with the magnitude and timing of other consequences of a warmer planet, including: sea level rise; spread of certain diseases out of their usual geographic range; the effect on agricultural production, water supply, and sustainability of ecosystems; increased strength and frequency of storms; extreme heat events; air pollution episodes; and the consequence of these effects on the economy (CARB 2008).

3.5-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

In California, as discussed in a report prepared by the California Climate Change Center (2006) and a report by Moser et al (2009), climate change may result in consequences including the following: ƒ

Unpredictable weather: The years of 1995-2005 had the warmest global temperature ever recorded in human history, measured since 1850 (Rosenzweig et al. 2007). Combined with longer summer seasons, the increased temperature will reduce soil moisture levels, which will increase irrigation needs, increase the need for air conditioning use, increase the rate and spread of wildfires, and stress the electrical infrastructure.

ƒ

Increased rate of wildfires: Wildfire risk is based on a combination of factors including precipitation, winds, temperature, and vegetation, all of which are susceptible to the impacts of increased warming. Wildfires are likely to grow in number and size throughout the state as a result of increased temperatures induced by climate change. Even under the ‘medium’ warming scenario predicted by the IPCC, wildfire risk will likely increase by 55 percent in California.

ƒ

Deteriorating public health: Heat waves are expected to have a major impact on public health as well as decreasing air quality and increasing mosquito-breeding and mosquitoborne diseases. In particular, the elderly and young, and those vulnerable populations that do not have the resources to deal with the costs and adapt to the changes that are expected to impact the community, will need assistance.

ƒ

Decreasing supply and quality of fresh water: Warmer average global temperatures cause more rainfall than snowfall, making the winter snowfall season shorter and accelerating the rate at which the snow packs melt in the spring. The change to a liquid-precipitationcentric system has the potential to reduce storage capacity, water quality, and the accessibility of water for emergencies. With rain and snow events becoming less predictable and more variable, this could increase the rate of flooding and decrease the ability to maintain fresh water for consumption.

ƒ

Increased residential electricity demands for cooling: Warming temperatures are predicted to cause significant increases in residential electricity demand for cooling in summer months, especially for residential developments built in warm, inland areas. Coupled with the negative impacts of increased temperatures on electrical infrastructure and of earlier spring snowmelt on hydropower production, climate change could have significant impacts on energy supply in California.

ƒ

Reductions in the quality and quantity of certain agricultural products: Crops and food products that are likely to be hard hit include wine grapes, fruits, nuts, and milk.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-3

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

ƒ

A rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of coastal businesses and residences: During the past century, sea levels along California’s coast have risen about 7 inches. If heat-trapping emissions continue unabated and temperatures rise into the higher warming range, sea level is expected to rise an additional 16 to 55 inches by the end of the century. Elevations of this magnitude would inundate coastal areas with salt water, accelerate coastal erosion, threaten vital levees and inland water systems, and disrupt wetlands and natural habitats.

ƒ

Damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment.

ƒ

A decrease in the health and productivity of California’s forests.

Although certain environmental effects are widely accepted to be potential hazards to certain locations, such as rising sea level for low-lying coastal areas, it is currently infeasible to predict all environmental effects of climate change on any one location, and thus would be speculative to do so.

Greenhouse Gases The human-produced GHGs most responsible for global warming and their relative contribution to it are CO2, CH4, near surface ozone (O3), N2O, and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). The relative global contribution of these types of GHGs to global warming is summarized in Table 12, GHG Types and Their Contribution to Global Warming.

Table 12

GHG Types and Their Contribution to Global Warming

Carbon dioxide (CO2)

53 percent

Methane (CH4)

17 percent

Near Surface Ozone (O3)

13 percent

Nitrous Oxide (N2O)

12 percent

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) Source:

5 percent

California EPA, March 2006

Each type of GHG has a different capacity to trap heat in the atmosphere and each type remains in the atmosphere for a particular length of time. The ability of a GHG to trap heat is measured by an index called the global warming potential. CO2 is considered the baseline GHG in this index and has a global warming potential of one (1). CH4 has a global warming potential of 21 times that of CO2, and N2O has a global warming potential of 310 times that of CO2. The families of CFCs, including chlorofluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons and perfluorocarbons,

3.5-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

have a substantially greater global warming potential than other GHGs, generally ranging from approximately 1,300 to over 10,000 times that of CO2. While CO2 represents the vast majority of the total volume of GHGs released into the atmosphere, the release of even small quantities of other types of GHGs can be significant for their contribution to climate change. State law defines GHGs to include the following compounds: Carbon Dioxide (CO2). CO2 is an odorless and colorless GHG. CO2 is emitted from natural and anthropogenic (man-made) sources. Natural sources include: the decomposition of dead organic matter; respiration of bacteria, plants, animals and fungus; evaporation from oceans; and volcanic outgassing. Anthropogenic sources include: the burning of coal, oil, natural gas and wood. CO2 is naturally removed from the air by photosynthesis, dissolution into ocean water, transfer to soils and ice caps, and chemical weathering of carbonate rocks. The IPCC indicates that since the industrial revolution began in the mid-1700s, the sort of human activity that increases GHG emissions has increased dramatically in scale and distribution. Data from the past 50 years suggests a corollary increase in levels and concentrations. As an example, prior to the industrial revolution, CO2 concentrations were fairly stable at 280 parts per million (ppm). Today, they are around 370 ppm, an increase of more than 30 percent. Left unchecked, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is projected to increase to a minimum of 540 ppm by 2100 as a direct result of anthropogenic sources. CO2 is the most widely emitted GHG and is the reference gas (GWP of 1) for determining the GWP of other GHGs. In 2004, 82.8 percent of California’s GHG emissions were CO2 (California Energy Commission 2008). Methane (CH4). CH4 has both natural and anthropogenic sources. It is released as part of the biological processes in low oxygen environments, such as in swamplands or in rice production (at the roots of the plants). Over the last 50 years, human activities such as growing rice, raising cattle, using natural gas, and mining coal have added to the atmospheric concentration of CH4. Other anthropogenic sources include fossil fuel combustion, biomass burning, incomplete combustion in forest fires, landfills, manure management, and leaks in natural gas pipelines. In the United States, the top three sources of CH4 are landfills, natural gas systems, and enteric fermentation (US EPA n.d.[a]). CH4 is the primary component of natural gas, which is used for space and water heating, steam production, and power generation. CH4 is an extremely effective absorber of radiation, though its atmospheric concentration is less than CO2 and its lifetime in the atmosphere is brief (10-12 years), compared to other GHGs. The GWP of methane is 21. Nitrous oxide (N2O). N2O, also known as laughing gas, is a colorless GHG. It is produced by microbial processes in soil and water, including those reactions that occur in fertilizer containing nitrogen. In addition to agricultural sources, some industrial processes (fossil fuel-fired power plants, nylon production, nitric acid production, and vehicle emissions) also contribute to its atmospheric load. It is used as an aerosol spray propellant (e.g., in whipped cream bottles). It is

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-5

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

also used in potato chip bags to keep chips fresh, as well as in rocket engines and race cars. N2O can be transported into the stratosphere, be deposited on the Earth’s surface, and be converted to other compounds by chemical reaction. Primary human-related sources include agricultural soil management, animal manure management, sewage treatment, mobile and stationary combustion of fossil fuel, adipic acid production, and nitric acid production. Concentrations of N2O also began to rise at the beginning of the industrial revolution. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) indicates that the global concentration of N2O was 314 parts per billion (ppb) in 1998. The GWP of nitrous oxide is 310. Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). HFCs typically are used as refrigerants in both stationary refrigeration and mobile air conditioning. The use of HFCs for cooling and foam-blowing is growing particularly as the continued phase-out of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) gains momentum. The GWP of HFCs ranges from 140 for HFC-152a to 6,300 for HFC-236fa. Perfluorocarbons (PFCs). PFCs are compounds consisting of carbon and fluorine. They are primarily created as a byproduct of aluminum production and semiconductor manufacturing. PFCs are potent GHGs with a GWP several thousand times that of carbon dioxide, depending on the specific PFC. Another area of concern regarding PFCs is their long atmospheric lifetime (up to 50,000 years) (Energy Information Administration 2007). The GWPs of PFCs range from 5,700 to 11,900. Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6). SF6 is a colorless, odorless, nontoxic, nonflammable gas. It is most commonly used as an electrical insulator in high voltage equipment that transmits and distributes electricity. SF6 is the most potent GHG that has been evaluated by the IPCC with a GWP of 23,900. However, its global warming contribution is not as high as the GWP would indicate due to its low mixing ratio, as compared to CO2 (4 parts per trillion [ppt] in 1990 versus 365 parts per million [ppm] of CO2) (US EPA n.d.[b]).

Greenhouse Gas Inventories World/U.S. Estimates of GHG Emissions. GHG emissions are often expressed as “CO2 equivalent” or CO2e, which is defined as the weight of CO2 released into the atmosphere having the same estimated global warming potential as a given weight of another gas. It is computed by multiplying the weight of gas (methane, for example) by its global warming potential (21 for CH4). This allows GHG emissions volumes to be standardized against CO2. Data compiled by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change indicates that, in 2006, total worldwide GHG emissions were estimated to be 22,170 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e), excluding emissions/removals from land use, land use change, and forestry. GHG emissions in the U.S. were 7,054.2 MMTCO2e.

3.5-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

California GHG Emissions Inventory. In 2006, GHG emissions in California were estimated to be 483.9 MMTCO2e, although in 2008 (the latest year that emissions data is available), GHG emissions had decreased to 473.76 MMTCO2e. California is a substantial contributor of global GHG emissions, being the second largest contributor in the United States and the sixteenth largest in the world. However, while California’s GHG emissions inventory is large, with its relatively large size and population base, it has low emissions per capita compared to other states.

3.5.2 R EGULATORY S ETTING International and Federal In 1988, the United Nations and the World Meteorological Organization established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to assess “the scientific, technical and socioeconomic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of humaninduced climate change, its potential impacts, and options for adaptation and mitigation.” In March 1994, the United States joined a number of countries around the world in signing the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Under the Convention, governments gather and share information on GHG emissions, national policies, and best practices; launch national strategies for addressing GHG emissions and adapting to expected impacts, including the provision of financial and technological support to developing countries; and cooperate in preparing for adaptation to the impacts of climate change. A particularly notable result of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change efforts is a treaty known as the Kyoto Protocol, which went into effect in February 2005. When countries sign the Protocol, they demonstrate their commitment to reduce their emissions of GHGs or engage in emissions trading. More than 170 countries are currently participating in the Protocol. Industrialized countries are required to reduce their GHG emissions by an average of 5 percent below their 1990 levels by 2012. In 1998, United States Vice President Al Gore symbolically signed the Protocol; however, in anticipation of the signing, the U.S. Senate approved a non-binding “Sense of the Senate” resolution in July 1997 by a margin of 95-0 that expressed opposition to the treaty’s provisions, most notably the disparity in GHG emissions reduction obligations between industrialized nations and developing nations. In 2001, President George W. Bush indicated that he would not submit the treaty to the U.S. Senate for ratification, which effectively ended American involvement in the Kyoto Protocol. Since that time, in December 2009 and 2010, international leaders met in Copenhagen and Mexico City to address the future of international climate change commitments post-Kyoto.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-7

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

Coinciding with the opening of the Copenhagen Climate Conference, in December 2009, the EPA issued an Endangerment Finding under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, opening the door to federal regulation of GHGs. The Endangerment Finding notes that GHGs threaten public health and welfare and are subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act. The final findings were published in the Federal Register on December 15, 2009 and became effective on January 14, 2010. Federal regulation of GHGs can occur through other means, such as fuel efficiency standards. President Obama put into motion a new national policy to increase fuel economy for all new cars and trucks sold in the United States. The new standards would cover model years 2012 through 2016, and would require an average fuel economy standard of 35.5 miles per gallon in 2016. The U.S. EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, on behalf of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), released a notice of intent to conduct joint rulemaking to establish vehicle GHG emissions and fuel economy standards in May 2009. The final standards were adopted by the U.S. EPA and the DOT on April 1, 2010.

State There have been significant legislative and regulatory activities that affect climate change and GHGs in California. Relevant legislation is discussed below.

Title 24 Although it was not originally intended to reduce GHGs, California Code of Regulations Title 24 Part 6: California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Non-Residential Buildings, was first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California’s energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficient technologies and methods. The latest amendments were adopted and approved in 2008, and aim to reduce the State’s GHGs to 1990 levels, consistent with AB 32 (discussed below). The requirement for when the 2008 standards must be followed is dependent on when the application for the building permit is submitted. That is, if the application is submitted on or after January 1, 2010, the 2008 standard must be met.

California Green Building Standards Code The California Green Building Standards Code was adopted in January 2009. The purpose of this Code is to improve public health, safety and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the use of building concepts having a positive environmental impact and encouraging sustainable construction practices in the following categories:

3.5-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

Planning and design

ƒ

Energy efficiency

ƒ

Water efficiency and conservation

ƒ

Material conservation and resource efficiency

ƒ

Environmental air quality

The Code addresses exterior envelope, water efficiency, and material conservation components. The aim is to reduce energy usage in non-residential buildings by 20 percent by 2015 and help meet reductions contemplated in AB 32. With the 2008 Building Code, a 15 percent energy reduction over the 2007 edition is expected. Compliance became mandatory as of January 1, 2011.

AB 1493 The Clean Air Act allows California to adopt and implement vehicle emission standards that are more stringent than federal standards so long as the U.S. EPA grants California a waiver. California Assembly Bill 1493 (Pavley), enacted in July 2002, required the CARB to develop and adopt regulations that reduce GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks. The CARB is the state agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of GHG emissions that cause global warming. Regulations adopted by the CARB apply to vehicles that are a model year of 2009 or later. The CARB estimates that the Pavley regulations would reduce GHG emissions from the light-duty passenger vehicle fleet by an estimated 18 percent in 2020 and by 27 percent in 2030. However, implementation of the Pavley regulations was stalled by automaker lawsuits and by the U.S. EPA’s refusal to grant California an implementation waiver to allow California to enforce AB 1493. President Obama asked the U.S. EPA to review its denial of the waiver and the EPA granted it in June 2009. In light of the U.S. EPA and NHTSA standards, California – and states adopting California’s emissions standards – have agreed to defer to the national standard through model year 2016. The 2016 endpoint of the two standards is similar, although the national standard ramps up slightly more slowly than required under the California standard. The AB 1493 standards require additional reductions in CO2 emissions beyond 2016 (referred to as Phase II standards), which are expected to be drafted in late 2011.

Executive Orders S-3-05, S-20-06 and S-01-07 On June 1, 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-3-05, which established the following reduction targets for GHG emissions: ƒ

By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels;

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-9

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

ƒ

By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and

ƒ

By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.

The 2050 reduction goal represents what scientists believe is necessary to reach levels that will stabilize the climate. The 2020 goal was established as an aggressive, but achievable, mid-term target. To meet these targets, the Governor directed the Secretary of the California EPA to lead a Climate Action Team made up of representatives from the Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency; the Department of Food and Agriculture; the Resources Agency; the CARB; the Energy Commission; and the Public Utilities Commission. The Climate Action Team’s Report to the Governor in 2006 contained recommendations and strategies to help ensure the targets in Executive Order S-3-05 are met. In 2006, this goal was reinforced with the passage of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. As discussed further below, AB 32 sets the same overall GHG emissions reduction goals while also mandating that the CARB create a plan, which includes market mechanisms, and implement rules to achieve “real, quantifiable, cost-effective reductions of greenhouse gases.” AB 32 also requires that the CARB develop appropriate regulations and establish a mandatory reporting system to track and monitor global warming emissions levels. Executive Order S-20-06 further directs state agencies to begin implementing AB 32, including the recommendations made by the state’s Climate Action Team (CARB 2008). Executive Order S-01-07 was signed by the Governor in January 2007. The order mandates that a statewide goal shall be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020. It also requires that a Low Carbon Fuel Standard for transportation fuels be established for California.

Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Health and Safety Code, Division 25.5, commencing with Section 38500), creates a comprehensive, multiyear program to reduce GHG emissions in California, with the overall goal of restoring emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, and an 80 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2050. AB 32 does not contain detailed control measures. Instead, it creates statewide GHG limits and then requires those limits be met via sector-specific GHG emission reduction measures, to be developed and implemented by the CARB. In accordance with AB 32, the CARB has been directed to develop and implement regulations to reduce statewide GHG emissions. AB 32 does not explicitly apply to emissions from land development. However, GHG emissions associated with land development projects can result in 3.5-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

direct and indirect emissions within individual end-use sectors, including transportation and energy. As a result, GHG emissions associated with development projects will ultimately factor into emission reduction considerations. There are four major components of AB 32. First, it requires the CARB to prepare an emissions inventory by using the best available economic, scientific, and technological information on GHG emissions to determine the statewide GHG levels in 1990, and to approve a statewide GHG limit equivalent to that level to be achieved by 2020. The 2020 GHG emissions limit, which was approved by the CARB in December 2007, is 427 million metric tons of CO2. To achieve this objective, an approximately 29 percent reduction from the “business-as-usual” projections is required. Under the current “business as usual” scenario, statewide emissions are increasing at a rate of approximately 1 percent per year as noted below. Also shown are the average reductions needed from all statewide sources (including all existing sources) to reduce GHG emissions back to 1990 levels. ƒ

1990: 427 MMTCO2e

ƒ

2004: 480 MMTCO2e (an average 11-percent reduction needed to achieve 1990 base)

ƒ

2008: 495 MMTCO2e (an average 14-percent reduction needed to achieve 1990 base)

ƒ

2020: 596 MMTCO2e Business as Usual (an average 29-percent reduction needed to achieve 1990 base)

The 2020 business-as-usual forecast does not take any credit for reductions from measures included in the AB 32 Scoping Plan, including the Pavley GHG standards for vehicles, full implementation of the Renewable Portfolio Standard beyond current levels of renewable energy, or the solar measures. Second, AB 32 includes mandatory reporting requirements for major GHG sources. Major GHG sources are generally defined as facilities that emit more than 25,000 metric tons of CO2e. Third, the CARB was required to publish a list of discrete early action items to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective reductions in GHG emissions. These early action measures are intended to be initiated in the 2007 to 2012 time frame. The CARB has 44 early action measures that apply to the transportation, commercial, forestry, agriculture, cement, oil and gas, fire suppression, fuels, education, energy efficiency, electricity, and waste sectors. Of those early action measures, nine are considered discrete early action measures, as they are regulatory and became enforceable on January 1, 2010. The CARB estimates that the 44 measures are expected to result in reductions of at least 42 MMTCO2e by 2020, representing approximately 25 percent of the 2020 target.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-11

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

Fourth, the CARB is required to adopt the Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) for achieving the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective reductions in GHG emissions to meet AB 32’s GHG-reduction goals. The Scoping Plan “proposes a comprehensive set of actions designed to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions in California, improve our environment, reduce our dependence on oil, diversify our energy sources, save energy, create new jobs, and enhance public health.” In general, the Scoping Plan’s recommendations for reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 include a cap-and-trade program linked to Western Climate Initiative partner jurisdictions, green building strategies, recycling and wasterelated measures, and Voluntary Early Actions and Reductions. The measures in the Scoping Plan are scheduled to be in place by 2012. The Scoping Plan calls for an “ambitious but achievable” reduction in California’s GHG emissions, cutting approximately 29 percent from business-as-usual emission levels projected for 2020, or about 15 percent from 2008 emission levels. On a per-capita basis, that means reducing annual emissions from 14 tons of carbon dioxide for every person in California down to about 10 tons per person by 2020. The year 2020 goal of AB 32 corresponds with the mid-term target established by Executive Order S-3-05, which aims to reduce California’s fair share contribution of GHGs in 2050 to levels that will stabilize the climate. The foundation of the Scoping Plan is the imposition of GHG emission caps on most sectors of the California economy, so-called “capped sectors.” Within the capped sectors, reductions will be achieved through direct emission reduction measures (e.g., improved building efficiency standards and vehicle efficiency measures) as well as potential monetary and non-monetary incentives resulting from a cap-and-trade program. The Scoping Plan was approved by the CARB in December 2008 (CARB 2008). Currently, the recommended measures in the Scoping Plan are being developed into regulations. GHG emission reductions associated with these strategies are generally categorized into the following emission-reduction sectors, which are discussed in more detail, as follows. Transportation Sector. The transportation sector is estimated to contribute 38 percent of California’s total GHG emissions. As a result, emission reductions that target this sector are one of the key elements in the state’s efforts of reducing GHG emissions. The state’s multi-pronged approach to lower emissions from transportation focuses on working with Congress to allow California to set its own vehicle efficiency and mileage standards, to set lower levels of carbon in transportation fuels, to transition the state from gasoline and diesel to clean-burning alternative and renewable fuels, and to establish low-carbon fuel standards. Additional action items have been included to reduce emissions from vehicle refrigerants, to improve vehicle mileage with implementation of a tire-inflation program, and to reduce idling and auxiliary engine emissions (CARB 2008).

3.5-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Electricity and Commercial/Residential Energy Sector. This sector is the next largest contributor and is estimated to contribute over 30 percent of the state’s total GHG emissions. Increased energy efficiency and the promotion of renewable energy are considered essential components of the state’s efforts of achieving AB 32 requirements for this sector. Reductions in emissions associated with this sector will be achieved, in part, by establishing more energyefficient building and appliance standards, implementing traditional utility programs, and delivering new strategies and technologies through local governments, community organizations, and the private sector (CARB 2008). As part of this effort, the California Energy Commission (CEC) has focused on increasing efficiency standards for both appliances and buildings. The most current California Energy Code (Title 24, Part 6), containing Building Energy Efficiency Standards, went into effect in January 2010. With implementation of Title 24 standards, further reductions of GHG emissions are anticipated (CARB 2008). Industrial Sector. This sector includes refineries, cement plants, oil and gas production, food processors, and other large industrial sources. This sector contributes almost 20 percent of the state’s total GHG emissions, although this sector is not projected to expand significantly in the future. Other Sectors (Recycling and Waste, High Global Warming Potential (GWP), Gases, Agriculture, Forest). The above-referenced sectors contribute the remaining 32 percent of the state’s total GHG emissions. The evaluation of potential reductions of GHG emissions that can be achieved from these sectors is ongoing (CARB 2008). Emission reductions in California would not be able to stabilize the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere on a global scale. However, California’s actions set an example and drive progress towards an overall reduction in GHGs. If other countries were to follow California’s emission reduction targets, this could avoid medium or higher ranges of global temperature increases, thereby avoiding the most severe consequences of climate change. It should be noted that AB 32 did not amend CEQA or establish regulatory standards to be applied to new development or environmental review of projects within the State. Accordingly, the California Legislature adopted SB 97 (discussed below).

Senate Bill 97 Senate Bill 97, signed in August 2007, acknowledges that climate change is an important environmental issue that requires analysis under CEQA. This bill directs the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop and propose “guidelines for the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions or the effects of greenhouse gas emissions as required [by CEQA], including but not limited to, effects associated with transportation or energy consumption.” (Pub. Res. Code § 21083.05(a)). COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-13

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

The OPR transmitted proposed SB 97 CEQA Guidelines Amendments to the California Resources Agency in April 2009. In July 2009, the California Resources Agency commenced the Administrative Procedure Act rulemaking process for certifying and adopting these amendments pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.05. In December 2009, the California Resources Agency delivered its rulemaking package to the Office of Administrative Law for their review pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act. In February 2010, the Office of Administrative Law filed the Amendments with the Secretary of State. These amendments became effective on March 18, 2010.

Summary: Amendments To The CEQA Guidelines Following is a summary of the amendments to the CEQA Guidelines adopted in March 2010, which set forth a basic framework of analysis for assessing a project’s contribution to GHG levels. They do not, however, dictate a specific metric that lead agencies should use to determine whether a project’s incremental GHG emissions are cumulatively considerable in light of past, present and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Rather, it is the regional air quality districts and/or local lead agencies that are left to develop thresholds of significance to be applied within their respective areas of jurisdiction. An EIR or other environmental document must analyze the incremental contribution of a project to GHG levels and determine whether those emissions are cumulatively considerable. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4; Public Resources Code Section 21083, 21083.05; Final Statement of Reasons for Regulatory Action (Final Statement), p.55 (Dec. 2009).) In conducting this analysis, the following principles should be considered. ƒ

In defining the scope of other projects necessary to carry out a cumulative impact analysis, an agency may use a summary of projections adopted in a local, regional, or statewide plan, or some related planning document, such as a general plan, regional transportation plan, or a plan for the reduction of greenhouse gases. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(B).)

ƒ

An analysis of GHG emissions may rely on either a qualitative or quantitative analysis. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(a)(1) and (2).) The California Resources Agency has, however, explained that emissions should be quantified where possible, and refers to some existing models that may prove adequate in carrying out such an analysis. (See Final Statement, pp.20-21.)

ƒ

The CEQA Guidelines make general suggestions regarding a method of assessing the significance of an impact, such as reviewing:

3.5-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

•

The extent to which a project increases or decreases GHG emissions when compared to the existing environment. (Guidelines Section 15064.4(b).) “All project components, including construction and operation, equipment and energy use, and development phases must be considered.” (Final Statement, p. 24.)

•

Whether a project exceeds a threshold of significance (with the lead agency retaining the discretion to choose a threshold). (CEQA Guidelines Section 15065.5(h).)

•

The extent to which a project complies with regulations adopted to implement a statewide, regional or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions, such as those under SB 375 and local climate action plans. (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.4(b), 15183.5(b)(1).)

ƒ

Provide that an agency must discuss the extent to which a project is inconsistent with general plans, specific plans, and regional plans, the latter of which may include plans for the reduction of GHG emissions, regional transportation plans or other, more wide-scale planning documents. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(d).) CEQA does not define what it means to “comply” with a plan, in the context of determining consistency, though the California Resources Agency has suggested compliance means the plan actually addresses the emissions that would result from the project, or the project furthers the objectives and policies of the plan and does not frustrate their attainment.

ƒ

Allow agencies, when adopting thresholds of significance, to consider those previously adopted or recommended by other agencies, or recommended by experts, provided that substantial evidence informs such thresholds. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(c).)

ƒ

Provide options for mitigation measures, including: (1) those incorporated into an existing plan or program, ordinance or regulation for the reduction of GHG emissions; (2) implementation of project features, design or other measures to reduce GHG emissions; (3) off-site measures, including offsets that are not otherwise required to mitigate the project’s GHG emissions, which presumably will form part of an AB32 cap-and-trade program; and (4) measures that sequester GHGs. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4.(c).)

Attorney General CEQA Guidance In March 2009, the Attorney General’s Office issued an eight-page document entitled Climate Change, the California Environmental Quality Act, and General Plan Updates: Straightforward Answers to Some Frequently Asked Questions (“FAQs”) to provide guidance on preparing CEQA documents. In essence, the document informs lead agencies and prospective project developers that: lead agencies must calculate GHG emissions and describe climate change impacts in EIRs; technical guidance documents and tools to calculate GHG emissions are

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-15

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

available; lead agencies should consider lower-carbon alternatives; and lead agencies’ mitigation must be fully enforceable. The Attorney General’s Office also published a document entitled Addressing Climate Change at the Project Level, which included a non-exhaustive list of recommended mitigation measures to reduce GHG emissions. These measures relate to such areas as energy efficiency, renewable energy, energy storage, water conservation and efficiency, solid waste measures, land use measures, transportation and motor vehicles, agriculture and forestry, and offsite measures.

Senate Bill 375 In September 2008, the California legislature adopted SB 375, legislation which: (1) streamlines CEQA requirements for certain projects that meet goals for reducing GHG emissions, and (2) requires the regional governing bodies in each of the state’s major metropolitan areas to adopt, as part of their regional transportation plan, “sustainable community strategies” (SCS) that will meet the region’s target for reducing GHG emissions. In addition, SB 375 creates incentives for creating walkable, sustainable, transit-oriented communities, including funding conditions. SB 375 attempts to tie together climate change, regional planning, transportation funding, and affordable housing. The purpose of the SCS plans is to reduce GHG emissions associated with global climate change by improving the efficiency of land use and transportation patterns. SB 375 also directs the CARB to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved from the automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035. The CARB will determine the level of emissions produced by cars and light trucks, including sport utility vehicles, in each of California’s 17 metropolitan planning areas. Emissions-reduction goals for 2020 and 2035 would be assigned to each area. The CARB appointed a Regional Targets Advisory Committee in January 2009 to provide recommendations on factors to consider and methodologies to use in this target setting process; the CARB proposed draft targets in June 2010, and adopted final targets in September 2010. Local governments would then devise strategies for housing development, road building and other land uses to shorten travel distances, reduce driving and meet the new targets. If regions develop these integrated land use, housing, and transportation plans, residential projects that conform to the SCS (and therefore contribute to GHG reduction) may have the opportunity to take advantage of a more streamlined environmental review process.

Executive Order S-13-08 Executive Order S-13-08 indicates that “climate change in California during the next century is expected to shift precipitation patterns, accelerate sea level rise and increase temperatures, thereby posing a serious threat to California’s economy, to the health and welfare of its

3.5-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

population and to its natural resources.” Pursuant to the requirements in the order, in December 2009, the California Resources Agency released its 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy. The Strategy is the “…first statewide, multi-sector, region-specific, and information-based climate change adaptation strategy in the United States.” Objectives include analyzing risks of climate change in California, identifying and exploring strategies to adapt to climate change, and specifying a direction for future research.

Guidance from Professional Organizations The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) has authored a white paper entitled CEQA and Climate Change, which sets forth alternative methodologies for evaluating project impacts on GHG levels, and for determining whether a project’s contribution to global climate change is cumulatively considerable. The CAPCOA white paper identifies three programmatic approaches to establishing GHG significance thresholds, and also discusses the benefits and problems associated with each approach. Each approach has inherent advantages and disadvantages. The basic approaches are: ƒ

GHG emissions threshold set at zero; or

ƒ

GHG threshold set at a non-zero level based on achieving the objectives of AB 32 and Executive Order S-3-05; or

ƒ

GHG threshold set at a non-zero level with a tiered approach

At the end of the white paper, CAPCOA provides a list of potential mitigation measures and discusses each in terms of emissions reduction effectiveness, cost effectiveness, and technical and logistical feasibility.

Regional/San Benito County To date, neither the MBUAPCD nor San Benito County has formally adopted regulations, policies, or mitigation plans that explicitly address climate change.

MBUAPCD The MBUAPCD is currently in the process of developing recommendations for thresholds of significance for GHGs. The draft recommendations address thresholds for individual land use projects, land use plans, and stationary sources. To date, the land use development related thresholds being considered have focused on GHG efficiency metrics. This approach assesses the GHG efficiency of a project on a per capita basis (residential-only projects) or on a service

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-17

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

population (SP) basis, which reflects the total number of jobs and residents provided by a project, such that the project would ensure consistency with the goals of AB 32 (i.e., 1990 GHG emissions levels by 2020). The efficiency thresholds that have been discussed to date are 4.6 metric tons CO2e for individual land use projects and 6.6 metric tons CO2e for land use plan projects. The MBUAPCD expects to officially adopt GHG thresholds in early 2012.

San Benito County General Plan San Benito County is currently updating its General Plan. The General Plan update is expected to include a Climate Change element. However, it is not anticipated that the General Plan update will be adopted prior to the time the County Board of Supervisors considers whether or not to approve the proposed project. The San Benito County General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element contains the following policy with regard to air quality, the implementation of which would reduce the generation of criteria air pollutant emissions as well as GHG emissions: Policy 10: Air Quality. The County recognizes air as a natural resource and will strive to maintain air quality through proper land use planning. It shall be the County’s policy to utilize land use and transportation controls for the protection and enhancement of air quality. Finally, it will be County’s policy to review public and private development proposals in light of possible recreational and open space potential. Actions: 1.

The County, by resolution, will establish a policy of urban concentration for the protection of air quality. The resolution should specifically discourage the development of commercial and residential areas outside of urban centers, other than those defined in the Land Use Element, in order to reduce the impacts of air pollution caused by commuting and shopping.

2.

Require convenient pedestrian and bicycle access to parks and community facilities and the development of on-site private recreation to serve the needs of unincorporated clusters of population.

3.

Develop land use programs to reduce vehicle miles and trips, thereby reducing traffic congestion and protecting and enhancing air quality.

4.

Allow clustering and encourage conservation easements to direct population growth from natural resources to areas where services are provided.

3.5-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

3.5.3 S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE Global Climate Change and CEQA There are several unique challenges to analyzing a project’s impact on the global climate under CEQA, largely because of the “global” nature of climate change. Typical CEQA analyses address local actions that have local — or, at most, regional — impacts, whereas global climate change presents the considerable challenge of analyzing the relationship between local and global activities and the resulting potential, if any, for local or global environmental impacts. Most environmental analyses examine the “project-specific” impacts that a particular project is likely to generate. With regard to global climate change, however, it is generally accepted that the magnitude of global warming effects is so significant and the contribution of an individual project to global warming is so small that direct significant adverse impacts (albeit not necessarily cumulative significant adverse impacts) would be highly unlikely. The issue of global climate change is also fundamentally different from any other areas of air quality impact analyses, which are all linked to some region or area in which the impact is significant. Instead, a global climate change analysis must be conducted on a global level, rather than the typical local or regional setting, and requires consideration of not only emissions from the project under consideration, but also the extent of the displacement, translocation, and redistribution of emissions. For this reason, the CEQA analysis of any one project’s impact on climate change is inherently an evaluation of its cumulative impact. If a project’s contribution of GHG emissions is determined to be cumulatively considerable, the project would have a cumulatively significant impact on climate change. In the usual context, where air quality is linked to a particular location or area, it is appropriate to consider the creation of new emissions in that specific area to be an environmental impact whether or not the emissions are truly “new” emissions to the overall globe. In fact, the approval of a new developmental plan or project does not necessarily create new automobile drivers — the primary source of land use projects’ emissions. Rather, new land use projects merely redistribute existing mobile emissions. Accordingly, the use of models that measure overall emissions increases without accounting for existing emissions will substantially overstate the impact of the development project on global warming. This makes an accurate analysis of GHG emissions substantially different from other air quality impacts, where the “addition” of redistributed emissions to a new locale can make a substantial difference to overall air quality.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-19

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

Standards of Significance As discussed above, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G – Environmental Checklist Form includes two questions pertaining to GHG emissions. These are being used by many lead agencies as guidance for determining the potential significance of project impacts; this guidance is used in this EIR for the same purpose. The impacts related to GHG emissions resulting from the implementation of the proposed project would be considered significant if they would exceed the following significance criteria, in accordance with Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines: ƒ

Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or

ƒ

Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

At this time, no state agency, the MBUAPCD, or San Benito County has adopted numeric thresholds that may be used to determine whether the proposed project’s directly or indirectly generated GHG emissions could have a significant impact on the environment. The amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines reaffirm that the lead agency has the discretion to determine how to evaluate a project’s significance under CEQA. The State CEQA Guidelines includes a new Section 15064.4, which states that, when making a determination of the significance of GHG emissions, a lead agency shall have discretion to determine whether to use a model or methodology to quantify GHG emissions and/or rely on a qualitative analysis or performance-based standards. In the absence of applicable numeric thresholds or a local or regional GHG reduction plan, many local jurisdictions have used consistency with AB 32 for purposes of evaluating GHG impacts given that in such circumstances AB 32 is the only applicable GHG reduction plan. This is the threshold used to evaluate the project’s impacts for purposes of this Draft EIR.

Methodology Quantification of the Project’s Construction Phase GHG Emissions As recommended, this Draft EIR quantifies construction-related GHG emissions. These would be generated during site preparation and construction of the project. Typical sources of emissions include construction equipment and vehicle trips to transport workers and construction materials to and from the project site. As described in the Air Quality Study, URBEMIS 2007 air quality modeling was used to estimate construction phase criteria pollutant and GHG emissions. Default values for the construction phase were used.

3.5-20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Quantification of the Project’s Operational GHG Emissions As recommended, this Draft EIR also quantifies operation-related GHG emissions. GHG emissions from the operations of development projects are most typically associated with transportation and energy use/consumption. Direct GHG emissions sources include those from a specific operation or process on the site; e.g., fuel combustion emissions from a boiler. Indirect GHG emissions would include emissions resulting from project-related energy consumption; e.g., electricity consumed by the project’s residential units; electricity required to produce and transport water used by the project; electricity required to pump and treat wastewater; and fugitive hydrofluorocarbons emissions from the normal operation of refrigeration systems and the heating and utilities systems. URBEMIS results were used to estimate GHG emissions from mobile sources (transportation) and from area sources (most typically the on-site combustion of natural gas). The CARB’s Local Government Operations Protocol (LGOP) Version 1.0 was used to quantify GHG emissions resulting from off-site electricity generation needed to meet project demand (CARB 2010). Similar to the California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol, the LGOP contains emissions factors for use in quantifying indirect CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions resulting from electricity generation. These factors were supplemented with information obtained from the electricity provider, Pacific Gas and Electric, and through information from other sources including the Energy Consumption Demand Management System (ECDMS) data for San Benito County (http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.asp#results) and U.S. Census Data for San Benito County (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06069.html).

3.5.4 C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact CC-1: Project-generated GHG emissions could have a significant impact on the environment and could conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. However, due to the implementation of relevant regulations and the design features incorporated into the project, this impact is less than significant. As set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4, the determination of the significance of GHG emissions calls for careful judgment by the lead agency consistent with the provisions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064. A lead agency should make a good-faith effort, based on available information, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of GHG emissions resulting from a

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-21

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

project. The following discussion focuses on the proposed project’s contribution to global climate change by quantifying GHG emissions and qualitatively discussing the GHG emission reduction measures included in the proposed project that promote its consistency with and further the state’s goals and strategies for reducing GHG emissions as well as relevant regulations that would also help to ensure a reduction in GHG emissions.

Quantification of Construction Phase GHG Emissions The project would emit GHGs from upstream emission sources, direct sources (combustion of fuel in construction equipment), and individual sources (combustion of fuel in construction worker vehicles). An upstream emission source (also known as life cycle emissions) refers to emissions that are generated during the manufacture of products to be used for construction of the project. Upstream emission sources for the project include, without limitation, the following: emissions from the manufacture of cement and steel; and/or emissions from the transportation of building materials. The upstream emissions were not estimated for purposes of this evaluation because, after due consideration, it was determined that they are not within the control of the project and to do so would be speculative at this time. The CAPCOA white paper on CEQA and Climate Change supports this conclusion by stating, “The full life-cycle of GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions from construction activities is not accounted for…and the information needed to characterize [life-cycle emissions] would be speculative at the CEQA analysis level.” Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15144 and 15145, upstream/life cycle emissions are speculative and no further discussion in this Draft EIR is necessary. GHG emissions would be generated from other sources during construction of the proposed project. Typical sources of emissions include construction equipment (e.g., bulldozers, forklifts, backhoes, and water trucks) and vehicle trips to transport workers and materials to and from the project site. As described in the Air Quality Study, URBEMIS air quality modeling was used to estimate construction phase criteria pollutants and GHG emissions. For the purpose of estimating GHG emissions, the URBEMIS combined annual emissions report was utilized. Default values for the project’s construction phase were used. The total estimated volume of construction GHG emissions is approximately 577.3 tons or 523.7 metric tons. This analysis did not assume any mitigation measures and therefore reflects the amount of GHG emissions that would result in an unmitigated scenario. Emissions generated during the various construction phases would vary, depending on the level and specific type of activity. The highest annual emissions would likely occur during the initial year of construction when multiple construction phases (i.e., demolition, grading, and building construction) would occur within a single one-year period.

3.5-22

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Emissions of nitrous oxide and methane during the construction phase would be negligible because diesel-fueled construction equipment emit 99 to 99.9 percent of GHG emissions in the form of CO2 (CCAR 2009 and CEC 2002) on a per CO2e basis. Less than one percent of the GHG emissions, on a CO2e basis, are in the form of methane and nitrous oxide in comparison and therefore were not estimated.

Quantification of Operational GHG Emissions Operational or long-term emissions that would occur over the life of the project include emissions from the following sources: Mobile: ƒ

Motor vehicles and trucks associated with the new homes

Area: ƒ

Combustion of natural gas in the residential units

ƒ

Hearth use associated with the residential units

ƒ

Combustion of gas associated with landscape maintenance equipment

Electricity Demand: ƒ

Off-site electricity generation to provide electricity to the project

ƒ

Electricity required to transport and treat the water that would be used for the project

ƒ

Electricity to pump and treat wastewater generated by the project

Solid Waste: ƒ

Solid waste generated by the project taken to a landfill and decomposing

Fugitive Emissions from Heating/Cooling Systems: ƒ

Fugitive hydroflurocarbons emissions from normal operation of refrigeration systems and the heating and ventilation systems.

GHG Emissions from Mobile (Transportation) and Area Sources The URBEMIS2007 air quality model was run in order to estimate annual GHG emissions for operation of the project site with 220 single-family residential units (refer to Appendix G). The trip generation rate of 9.57 trips per day per dwelling unit that was used to estimate daily traffic

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-23

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

volumes and resulting emissions from mobile sources is based on the conservative assumption that all residential units would be detached single-family units. The Specific Plan provides flexibility in the types of residential units that may be constructed; higher-density residential development, which typically has lower trip generation rates, is permitted so long as the maximum unit count does not exceed 220 dwelling units. Hence, the trip generation rate used and the resulting mobile source GHG emissions may be somewhat conservative. None of the emission mitigation options available in the URBEMIS2007 model were selected for inclusion in the model run. Therefore, the results show the conservative, unmitigated GHG emissions for both mobile and area sources. Mobile source emissions were estimated at approximately 3,627 tons of CO2 per year. Area source emissions were estimated at approximately 823 tons of CO2 per year. The URBEMIS model does not provide estimates of other GHGs associated with combustion, namely CH4 and N2O. Therefore, in order to account for emissions of these compounds, the following adjustments were made to the URBEMIS emissions calculations: ƒ

Area sources (natural gas, hearths, gasoline-fueled landscaping equipment): The CO2 emissions from natural gas consumption and of the landscaping equipment were adjusted based on emission factors for CO2, CH4 and N2O from URBEMIS2007 and the California Climate Action Registry (California Climate Action Registry 2009).

ƒ

Motor Vehicles: The CO2 emissions associated with project-generated trips were multiplied by a factor based on the assumption that CO2 represents 95 percent of the CO2e emissions associated with passenger vehicles, which account for most of the project-related trips. This assumption was based on data provided by the U.S. EPA (EPA 2005). In addition, CO2 emissions were converted to CO2e estimates. Based on these conversions, the mobile source GHG emissions are estimated at 3,464 metric tons of CO2e per year and the area source GHG emissions are estimated at 748 metric tons of CO2e per year.

GHG Emissions from Electricity Generation Electricity Used By The Project’s Residential Units. The California Energy Consumption Data Management System (ECDMS) includes energy consumption data for individual counties. In 2008, ECDMS data shows that residential development in San Benito County consumed approximately 120,000,000 kilowatt hours (kWh) of energy. U.S. Census data for 2008 indicate that there were approximately 17,827 housing units in the County. This data can be used to estimate that a single dwelling unit in the County consumed an average of approximately 6,732 kWh of energy in 2008. Using this factor, the 220 proposed residential units would create a total

3.5-24

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

average demand for approximately 1,481,040 KWh per year of electricity or approximately 1,481 megawatt hours (MWh) per year for on-site use. Electricity Used to Transport and Treat Water and to Pump And Treat Wastewater. Energy used in water pumping and wastewater treatment is a notable source of GHG emissions. Please refer to Section 3.15, Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy, for calculations of project water demand and wastewater generation. The Local Government Operations Protocol (LGOP) energy use factor for off-site water pumping is 1,450 kilowatt hours (kWh) per 1,000,000 gallons of water consumed. Water demand for the project is estimated at 71,550 gallons per day. This equates to approximately 26.1 million gallons of water per year and the associated energy use is estimated at approximately, 37,845 kWh per year, or approximately 38 MWh per year. Assuming a residential water consumption rate of 85 percent (with approximately 15 percent of water that is ultimately consumed on-site for exterior use, which never enters the waste stream), the proposed project is expected to generate approximately 60,818 gallons per day of wastewater. This equates to 22.2 million gallons per year. The LGOP energy demand factor for wastewater pumping and treatment is about 2,500 kWh per 1 million gallons of wastewater treated. Electricity demand from wastewater pumping and treatment would, therefore, be approximately 55,500 kWh per year or approximately 56 MWh per year. Table 13, Estimated Annual Electricity Demand, summarizes the estimated annual average electricity demand of the proposed project based on on-site electricity use, water supply conveyance and treatment, and wastewater pumping and treatment. The demand shown is considered conservative and does not reflect any energy conservation or other measures that might be employed as part of the project to reduce electricity demand.

Table 13

Estimated Annual Electricity Demand

Sources of Demand On-Site Electricity Use Water Supply Transport and

Demand (MWh)/Year 1,481 38

Treatment Wastewater Pumping and

56

Treatment Total Source:

1,575 EMC Planning Group 2010

Table 14, GHG Emissions from Electricity Generation, summarize estimated GHG emissions resulting from the proposed project’s on-site and off-site demand for electricity. As noted above,

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-25

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

the estimate is considered conservative since it does not reflect any mitigation measures that might be employed as part of the project to reduce electricity demand.

Table 14

GHG Emissions from Electricity Generation

Projected Electricity

GHG Type

GHG Emissions

Global

CO2e(metric

Demand from Future

Factor

Warming

tons/yr)2

Development

(lbs/MWh)

Potential

(MWh) 1,575

CO2

1,575

CH4

1,575

N20

559.0

1

399

0.029

21

1

0.011

310

2

Total Source:

402 EMC Planning Group 2010

Notes: 1. CO2 factor from PG&E 2011; CH4 and N2O factors from Local Government Operations Protocol, 2010. 2. CO2 Equivalent is calculated as (electricity use) x (emissions factor) x (warming potential) / (2,204.62 lb/metric ton). Figures shown are rounded to the nearest metric ton.

GHG Emissions from Solid Waste Disposal As described in Section 3.15, Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy, the proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 326 tons per year of solid waste. The primary sources of GHGs from solid waste are in the form of CO2 and CH4 generated as a result of the decomposition of the waste in landfills. Such decomposition produces landfill gas that is typically composed of approximately 50 percent CO2 and 50 percent CH4. Solid waste from the proposed project would be delivered to the nearby John Smith Road landfill for disposal. The John Smith Road landfill employs a landfill gas collection system. Captured gas is burned in a flare. In the absence of a landfill gas collection and disposal system, up to 90 percent of the landfill gas produced in a landfill escapes to the atmosphere, thereby exacerbating global warming (U.S. EPA 2008). Combustion of the gas by flaring or alternative use (i.e., in an engine to produce electricity) “destroys” up to 99 percent or more of the CH4 contained in the landfill gas. Combustion also results in release of CO2, but the volume of CO2 released is no greater than would have been released to the atmosphere through the natural decomposition of the waste. Consequently, it is considered to be a biogenic source of emissions and is not included in the

3.5-26

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

GHG emissions inventory. Through combustion of landfill gas, the net volume of GHGs released to the atmosphere is substantially reduced. Consequently, GHGs from solid waste generated by the proposed project should not add measurably to the net project GHG emissions inventory.

GHG Emissions From Fugitive Hydrocarbons Fugitive hydroflurocarbons emissions, which are potent GHGs, are a notable GHG emissions source that can be generated from normal operation of refrigeration systems and heating and ventilation systems (CARB 2008). However, hydroflurocarbon emission sources would be nominal for this type of residential project and are not typically calculated for residential projects since there is no established methodology for calculating the emissions from these sources. Therefore, no such calculations were made for purposes of this Draft EIR. Table 14, Total Unmitigated Operational GHG Emissions, shows the sum of unmitigated direct and indirect emissions. Table 15

Total Unmitigated GHG Operational Emissions (metric tons/year CO2e)

GHG Emissions Source

GHG Emissions Volume

Mobile Sources

3,464

Area Source

748

Electricity Demand

402

Solid Waste

-------

Fugitive Emissions from Heating/Cooling Systems

-------

Total Source:

4,614 Illingworth and Rodkin, 2008, EMC Planning Group 2010

Existing Project Site Baseline GHG Emissions GHG emissions from current land use activities within a project site or associated with those activities can be an important factor in the overall emissions balance for a project. For example, undeveloped land can provide value as a source of carbon sequestration. Soil and plants can act as a carbon “sink” by absorbing (sequestering) CO2 from the atmosphere and converting it to forms that, under most conditions, do not exacerbate global warming.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-27

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

The project site is undeveloped land that is used to cultivate barley as well as periodic grazing of cattle. Dry farmed (non-irrigated) land, such as the project site, generally does not provide substantial potential carbon sequestration because crops are turned over in a relatively short time period, which results in the re-release of sequestered carbon back into the soil and atmosphere, and the vegetative massing is much less than that of trees. Consequently, conversion of the project site from dry farmland to the proposed suburban use would not result in a substantial loss of carbon sequestration capacity. The notable GHG emission-generating activities associated with the existing agricultural use of the project site are periodic use of agricultural machinery and the use of haul trucks for transporting dry farmed crops. Since these activities are periodic and minimal in frequency, it is assumed that GHG emissions associated with the current agricultural use are negligible. Hence, the proposed project could not be characterized as providing significant benefits by eliminating existing sources of significant GHG emissions. Given that changes in the existing GHG baseline conditions for the project site would not result in decreases in GHG emissions, no adjustments have been made to the emissions estimate for the proposed project reported above.

Consistency with Validated GHG Emissions Reduction Strategies Broadly accepted guidance on evaluating climate change impacts of new development and on GHG mitigation strategies and measures has been developed and continues to be refined in response to AB 32. Guidance provided by the California Attorney General’s Office and the CAPCOA are among the most widely utilized sources. These sources are utilized in this Draft EIR as a basis to identify a broad range of GHG emissions reduction measures that are applicable to the proposed project and to determine the extent to which the project has been designed to incorporate such measures. As noted above, the AB 32 Scoping Plan also includes a range of GHG reduction measures that may be applicable to local land use projects. These generally address such measures as energy efficiency in vehicles, water conservation (and reduced energy demand for water pumping and irrigation), green building measures, etc. However, the Scoping Plan measures are not specifically designed for project-level application, and therefore are not directly applicable to the project. However, as fuel, building and vehicle standards and regulations are adopted by the state in furtherance of the Scoping Plan measures, homes constructed on the project site and vehicles operated by the residents of the development would result in lower emissions compared to business as usual emissions. The CEQA Guidelines provide that a key question is whether a project complies with a plan for the reduction of GHGs that contains requirements that would result in the reduction of such

3.5-28

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

emissions to a less-than-significant level. There is no such applicable local, regional or state plan at this time. Therefore, the project will be evaluated for consistency with measures and guidance provided by the Attorney General’s Office and the CAPCOA white paper.

California Attorney General’s Office The California Attorney General has issued a range of opinions and documents that have reinforced CEQA as an appropriate tool for assessing climate change impacts of new development and for supporting implementation of AB 32. The California Attorney General’s Addressing Climate Change at the Project Level, released in 2008 and updated in 2010 is one key source of information. This document lists a range of GHG reduction measures to be considered for inclusion in development projects to reduce GHG emissions consistent with the intent of AB 32. As noted in the document, each measure should not be considered in isolation, but as part of a larger set of measures, that together, would help reduce GHG emissions and the effects of global warming.

CAPCOA An additional comprehensive source of GHG reduction measures for land use projects is CAPCOA’s white paper, CEQA and Climate Change – Evaluating and Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Projects Subject to the Environmental Quality Act, published in 2008. Appendix B of the CAPCOA document contains a compendium of GHG reduction measures, along with data about reduction potential, cost, ease of implementation, etc. Emission reduction measure guidance in connection with this project was developed by the two sources noted above in the context of AB 32 and the important role that local land use development projects and local lead agencies have in implementing AB 32. The “menu” of GHG reduction options developed by each source can be used by project developers in the design of proposed projects. The information is also useful to lead agencies for identifying GHG reduction measures that apply to a given project type and to determine the extent to which a project applicant has incorporated applicable GHG reduction measures. In the absence of a County or MBUAPCD plan for reducing GHG emissions, the extent to which a project includes GHG reduction measures designed to facilitate compliance with AB 32, the applicable GHG reduction plan, allows a lead agency to qualitatively determine if a project would conflict with or impede AB 32.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-29

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

GHG Emission Reduction Features Included in the Proposed Project As noted above, in the absence of a local, regional or state plan, this analysis will focus on the project’s consistency with measures and guidance provided by the Attorney General’s Office and the CAPCOA’s white paper. The Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan includes a broad range of policies and implementation measures to reduce GHG emissions. Further, the intentionally designed land use relationship of the proposed project to the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus project provides GHG reduction benefits that would not accrue in the absence of such intentional design. As discussed above, the extent to which the proposed project incorporates GHG reduction measures may be qualitatively considered as a measure of its consistency with AB 32. If the proposed project is found to be consistent with AB 32, it can also be assumed that the project would not have a cumulatively considerable cumulative impact on the environment. Table 16, GHG Reduction Measures, summarizes the GHG reduction measures recommended as part of a menu of options set forth in the two sources noted above and the GHG reduction measures incorporated into the project. Specifically, the left hand column of Table 16 includes a synthesis of GHG emission reduction measures recommended by the California Attorney General and CAPCOA, as described above. Only GHG reduction measures that are within the control of the applicant are listed. The second column of Table 16 includes GHG reduction measures included in the Specific Plan in the form of policies and implementation measures. It also includes integrated land use design features that serve to reduce vehicle miles traveled and by extension, GHG emissions, resulting from coordinated planning of the proposed project and the San Benito Campus project. As stated on page 169 of the Gavilan EIR: The college campus project includes on-site retail and adjacent residential. These adjacent uses are intended to reduce vehicle trips through internalization and reduction of trips to use college recreational, retail, library, and cultural facilities. The residential project may utilize the campus retail, as well as the open space, recreational, and cultural facilities on the campus, all of which will serve to reduce vehicle trips. As can be seen from Table 16, GHG Reduction Measures, the proposed project includes a comprehensive range of GHG reduction measures that are consistent with guidance provided by the California Attorney General’s Office and CAPCOA for the purpose of facilitating consistency of new land use projects with AB 32. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to conflict with or impede the state’s objectives of reducing GHG emissions as expressed in AB 32.

3.5-30

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 16

GHG Measures

Representative GHG

Measures Included in Project2

Estimated Effectiveness of

1

Reduction Measures

Measures Transportation/Mobile Source Related GHG Reduction Measures

Non-motorized

Policy LU-7.1 and implementation measure LU-7.1.1 require

Up to 2.5% reduction in vehicle

transportation (bike and

integrated open space, parks, and trails.

miles traveled for bicycle-related

pedestrian) access and

Policies CP 5.1 and 5.2 and their accompanying implementation

measures.

measures, and Policy CD-2.1 and its accompanying implementation

Between 3.0 and 21.3%

measures require integrated bicycle and pedestrian facilities

reduction in vehicle miles

throughout the project site including Class I and II bicycle lanes,

traveled for improved design

signal light sensors, separated routes, sidewalk connectivity, traffic

elements that enhance

calming, handicap access, cul-de-sac pedestrian connections,

walkability and connectivity.

features

connections to the Gavilan San Benito Campus, etc. Implementation measure LU-11.2.2 requires that multi-family developments provide secure bicycle parking. Traffic calming measures

Implementation measures CD-2.2.2 and CD-2.2.3 require that streets

Between 0.25 and 1.0%

to benefit non-motorized

within the project site be designed to limit speeds to 25 mph and that

reduction in vehicle miles

transport modes

traffic calming features be incorporated to slow traffic.

traveled for traffic calming

Policy CP-4.1 and its associated implementation measures CP-4.1.1

measures.

through CP-4.1.4 all directly require that traffic calming measures be incorporated into the circulation network.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-31

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

Representative GHG

Measures Included in Project2

1

Reduction Measures

Estimated Effectiveness of Measures

Transit service

Implementation measures CP-6.1.1 and CP-6.1.2 require

Between 0.5 and 24.6%

facilities/development

coordination with applicable agencies to make transit service

reduction in vehicle miles

density sufficient to

accessible to the project site. Reservation of one or more bus stops in

traveled. Transit stops should be

support public transit

coordination with needs generated by the Gavilan San Benito

located within a 5-10 minute

Campus project is required. The proposed project and the Gavilan

walking distance

San Benito Campus are likely to provide sufficient transit user density

(approximately ¼ mile) for bus

to warrant extending one or more transit routes to the area. In

service or within a 20 minute

addition to a maximum of 220 single-family homes, it is projected

walk (approximately ½ mile) for

that 55 secondary units, if constructed on owner-occupied lots, would

a rail station. Transit should be

increase potential transit user density within the project site.

fast, frequent, and reliable. The surrounding neighborhood should be designed for walking and cycling.

Affordable housing

Policy LU-5.1 and its associated implementation measures require

Between 0.04 and 1.2%

incorporated

that an affordable housing program be developed and implemented.

reduction in vehicle miles

If affordable housing requirements are entirely or largely met within

traveled for the incorporation of

the project site, the purpose of the reduction measure will be met.

affordable housing.

Implementation measure RM-8.2.1.11 requires that all dwelling units

Between 0.07 and 5.50%

be wired to support/promote telecommuting.

reduction in commuting vehicle

Telecommuting facilities

miles traveled. Land Use/Project Design Mix of uses within ¼ mile

3.5-32

Project residential uses would be located within ¼ mile of local

Between 9 and 30% reduction

serving retail commercial uses (if approved retail uses within the

in vehicle miles traveled from

adjacent Gavilan San Benito Campus site are constructed); open

mixed uses within ¼ mile.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Measures Included in Project2

Representative GHG 1

Reduction Measures

Estimated Effectiveness of Measures

space, parks, and trails (both within the project site and the adjacent Gavilan San Benito Campus site), and educational facilities – the Gavilan San Benito Campus. Recharging facilities for

Implementation measure RM-8.2.14 requires that all

Potentially between 0.4 and

cars, lawnmowers, other

garages/carports include a 240 volt, 40-amp circuit suitable for

20.3 percent reduction in

electric equipment

electric car charging. Implementation measure LU-11.2.1 requires

vehicle GHG emissions. Actual

electric car charging receptacles within reach of carport or garage

reduction would depend on

parking spaces.

end-users’ purchase of hybridelectric or all-electric vehicles. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Green Building

Development of projects consistent with green building codes and/or

Potential for substantial

Code/LEED certification

LEED certification requirements is deemed to improve project

reductions in GHG emissions

sustainability and would reduce energy demand. As set forth in

from building energy usage.

Appendix D of the Specific Plan, the Specific Plan includes 20 actions Actual reduction would depend that meet LEED Neighborhood Design or LEED for Homes

on the extent to which the

prerequisites or credit requirements, which may be included in the

buildings would exceed the

proposed project. Effective January 1, 2011, qualifying new

Title 24 energy standards.

developments in San Benito County, which could include development within the project site, may also be subject to requirements of CALGreen, the state green building code. Renewable energy

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

Policy RM-8.2 and implementation measures RM-8.2.1, RM-8.2.2,

Potential for substantial

RM-8.2.3, RM-8.2.5, RM-8.2.6, RM-8.2.7, RM-8.2.8, RM-8.2.9,

reductions in GHG emissions

RM-8.2.10, and RM-8.2.15 promote use of renewable energy by

from building energy usage.

requiring lots to be oriented to maximize solar exposure and by

Actual reduction would depend

3.5-33

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

Representative GHG

Measures Included in Project2

Estimated Effectiveness of

1

Reduction Measures

Measures requiring that a minimum of one-third of all dwelling units include

on end-users’ purchase of solar

solar panels. The option of wiring all remaining homes for solar

panels.

panels must be offered to future homebuyers. Solar hot water heaters

Implementation measures RM-8.2.3 requires solar water heaters or

Reductions in GHG emissions

tankless water heaters are available for one third of the residential

from natural gas-fired water

units and included as an option on all dwelling units.

heaters.

Passive solar

Implementation measure RM-8.2.1 requires that homes be designed

Potential for substantial

heating/cooling

to facilitate passive solar heating. Implementation measures RM-

reductions in GHG emissions

8.2.5, RM-8.2.6, RM-8.2.7, RM-8.2.8, RM-8.2.9, and RM-8.2.10

from building energy usage.

facilitate passive solar cooling and heating. RM-8.2.13 requires the

Actual reduction would depend

installation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning duct seals

on the extent to which the

that eliminate/substantially reduce leakage.

buildings would exceed the Title 24 energy standards.

Cool roofs

Implementation measure RM-8.2.1 requires that homes be designed

Potential for substantial

to include cool roofs.

reductions in GHG emissions from building energy usage. Actual reduction would depend on the extent to which the buildings would exceed the Title 24 energy standards.

3.5-34

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Measures Included in Project2

Representative GHG 1

Reduction Measures

Estimated Effectiveness of Measures

Window coverings to

Implementation measure RM-8.2.1 requires that homes be designed

Potential for substantial

reduce heat gain

to include thermal window coverings to reduce heat gain during the

reductions in GHG emissions

summer.

from building energy usage. Actual reduction would depend on the extent to which the buildings would exceed the Title 24 energy standards.

Energy efficient water

Implementation measure RM-8.2.4 requires that homes be equipped

Potentially between 1.2 and

heaters

with energy efficient water heaters and heat recovery drain systems.

18.4% of natural gas-fired water heater GHG emissions.

Minimize lighting needs

Implementation measure RM-8.2.8 requires home design features

Potential for substantial

such as light towers, light wells, dormers, skylights, etc., to minimize

reductions in GHG emissions

daytime interior lighting needs.

from building energy usage. Actual reduction would depend on the extent to which the buildings would exceed the Title 24 energy standards.

Programmable thermostats

Implementation measure RM-8.2.12 requires that programmable

There are no quantifiable

thermostats be installed with all residential heating systems.

reductions associated with this measure. However, this is a best management practice that influences building energy use for heating and cooling.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-35

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

Measures Included in Project2

Representative GHG

Estimated Effectiveness of

1

Reduction Measures

Measures

Manage fireplace type and

Use of wood-burning stoves is prohibited. Only natural gas stoves are

There are no quantifiable

use

permitted.

reductions associated with this measure.

Efficient heating systems

Implementation measure RM-8.2.13 requires that all home heating

Potential for substantial

systems have an Annual Fuel Use Efficiency (AFUE) of 95 percent or

reductions in GHG emissions

greater (see Recommended Measures below), and that ducts are

from building energy usage.

properly sealed.

Actual reduction would depend on the extent to which the buildings would exceed the Title 24 energy standards. Water Conservation

Low water use appliances

Implementation measure RM-5.2.5 requires that all homes be

Up to 20% reduction for indoor

and fixtures

equipped with low water use washing machines and dishwashers and

residential water use and

with low-flow water appliances.

associated GHG emissions.

Low water use landscaping Policy RM-5.2 requires facilitation of water conservation with

Up to 6.1% or more reduction

systems and landscaping

implementation measures RM-5.2.1 through RM-5.2.4, which require

for outdoor water use and

drought tolerant landscaping on private lots and public areas, water

associated GHG emissions.

saving irrigation systems, and low water use appliances. Policy RM 5.1 and its accompanying implementation measure RM-5.1.2 requires that new development comply with the San Benito County Water Conservation Plan, to reduce consumption of potable water.

3.5-36

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Measures Included in Project2

Representative GHG 1

Reduction Measures Gray water

Estimated Effectiveness of Measures

Implementation measure RM-5.2.8 requires that all park, streetscape,

Potential reduction of up to

front yards of all single-family dwellings and common areas of all

100% of outdoor water use and

multi-family dwellings be pre-plumbed to accommodate recycled

associated GHG emissions.

water.

Actual reduction would depend on the extent to which recycled water used for irrigation would replace potable water. Solid Waste Diversion

Re-Use Construction

Implementation Measure RM-6.1.4 requires the diversion of a

There are no quantifiable

Materials

minimum of 25 percent of total materials taken off the construction

reductions associated with this

site from landfills or incinerators

measure. However, this is a best management practice.

Source:

EMC Planning Group 2010 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association 2010

Notes:

1

Recommended measures are a synthesis of measures taken from the California Attorney General’s Addressing Climate Change at the Project Level and CAPCOA’s CEQA and

Climate Change – Evaluating and Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Projects Subject to the Environmental Quality Act. Measures are those that are applicable to a residential project of the type proposed and are within the control of the applicant or future project developers. 2

Policies and implementation measures refer to those in the Fairview Corners Specific Plan. Refer to Appendix A, Goals, Policies and Implementation Measures of the Fairview

Corners Specific Plan for a detailed list of policies and implementation measures.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-37

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

State Regulations and AB 32 Measures Regulation Reductions Although not relied upon in the CEQA impacts analysis for purposes of this Draft EIR, there are a number of other applicable state regulations and implementation measures that are considered and included in this EIR for informational purposes to better understand how the project’s business as usual emissions may be reduced during the life of the project. Following is a description of the applicable regulatory measures that can be expected to reduce the proposed project’s business as usual emissions. ƒ

Motor Vehicles, Project Design Features: Emissions from motor vehicles would be reduced as detailed in the emission reduction percentages identified in Table 16.

ƒ

Motor Vehicle, Pavley I Standards: The Pavley I (AB 1493) regulation, which has already been adopted by the CARB, requires GHG emission reductions from passenger cars and light trucks up to the 2016 model year. The full effect of this AB 1493 regulation is expected to provide 27.7 MMTCO2e of emission reductions in 2016.

ƒ

Motor Vehicles, Low Carbon Fuel Standard: This regulation is designed to reduce GHG emissions by decreasing the carbon intensity of transportation fuels used in California. It is expected to reduce total emissions from passenger vehicles and heavy-duty trucks by 7.2 percent by the year 2020.

ƒ

Motor Vehicles, Passenger Vehicle Efficiency: The CARB has identified several measures that would further reduce tailpipe GHG emissions from passenger vehicles, by increasing vehicle efficiency, including ensuring proper tire inflation and solar-reflective automotive paint and window glazing (cool car standards). These measures are expected to reduce total emissions from passenger vehicles by 0.9 percent.

ƒ

Natural Gas Combustions: The CARB Scoping Plan Energy Efficiency measure includes a number of actions that are designed to reduce energy consumption of both natural gas and electricity through improvements in building and appliance efficiency and through efficiency in combustion of natural gas. Example efficiency improvements include the use of condensing heaters, tankless gas-fired on-demand heaters and other super efficient gasfired heating appliances that will replace less efficient water and space heaters by attrition as they fail.

ƒ

Electricity Generation: The CARB Scoping Plan lists 12 strategies to maximize energy efficiency and reduce GHG emissions by more than 10 percent by 2020. In addition, there is an increased focus on satisfying the state’s electric load with renewable resources including (but is not limited to) wind, solar, geothermal, small hydroelectric, biomass,

3.5-38

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas. California’s current Renewable Portfolio Standard was intended to increase that share to 20 percent by 2010. Increased use of renewables will decrease California’s reliance on fossil fuels, thus reducing emissions of GHG from the Electricity sector. In view of the emissions reductions that are expected to result from recent new and evolving regulations, implementation of the proposed project is not anticipated to conflict with or impede the state’s objectives of reducing GHG emissions as expressed in AB 32.

Contribution to Climate Change As noted previously, emissions of GHGs and their contribution to global climate change are inherently a cumulative impact and, therefore, should be evaluated in this context. For instance, based on the modeling conducted for this project, long-term operation of the proposed project would generate a total of approximately 4,614 metric tons/year of CO2e. For comparison purposes only, this would equate to approximately 0.001 percent of the 2008 statewide GHG emissions inventory. Although when evaluated in this context, project-generated emissions would likely be considered nominal, the cumulative contribution from multiple projects could conceivably result in a substantial overall contribution to the state’s GHG inventory. As discussed above, although a project may result in increased GHG emissions, it is important to note that increased emissions would not necessarily result in an adverse effect with regard to climate change. Although emissions of GHGs can be quantified, it is typically not possible to determine the extent to which project-generated GHGs would contribute to global climate change or the physical effects often associated with global climate change (e.g., loss of snow pack, sea-level rise, severe weather events, etc.). In addition, to account accurately for GHGs attributable to the proposed project, it would be necessary to differentiate between new sources that otherwise would not exist but for the project, and existing sources that have simply relocated to the project area. Finally, the effectiveness of potential measures in reducing a project’s contribution to global climate change cannot always be precisely determined. In 2010, CAPCOA released its white paper, which local governments can use as a resource for estimating and quantifying GHG reductions from various mitigation measures. The estimated reductions are presented in Table 16. As shown, the project would include measures that would yield reductions for GHG emissions from transportation, energy, water, and solid waste. The most substantial of these reductions would be from the project’s bicycle and pedestrian-friendly measures, and its compliance with green building codes and/or LEED certification requirements. As a result, given the project design, building and siting features as discussed in the above analysis, this impact would be considered less than significant.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-39

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

No mitigation is required. Although not required mitigation measures, the project’s design features discussed above and in Table 16, GHG Reduction Measures, shall be included in the project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and conditions of approval to further assure their implementation.

Effects of Climate Change on the Proposed Project It is difficult to predict the specific potential effects of climate change on future project residents or project infrastructure with any degree of reliability. This difficulty arises from the lack of geographic specificity inherent in models developed to date to assess potential climate changes. Due to the global scale of climate change, current climate models have, to date, largely been developed to analyze climate change on a broad geographic scale, not on a regional or site specific scale. Models sensitive enough to accurately measure impacts of climate change on a localized basis are generally not available. As noted above, significant uncertainty exists about the geographic extent of global warming, the effects of warming, and the rate of warming over different geographic areas. Therefore, significant variability exists in the potential effects of warming on a regional or local level. However, some potential effects of climate change such as direct impacts from sea level rise can be dismissed for the proposed project simply due to its geographic location. The impact of climate change on water availability is a key concern that is relevant for development in water constrained areas around the world, including portions of California. A number of models have been developed which evaluate potential effects of climate change on water supplies in California, especially surface water supplies tied to snowpack in the Sierra Nevada. Such analysis has not been conducted for water supply availability within the Sunnyslope County Water District (Sunnyslope) service area boundary, which includes the project site, for the reasons noted above regarding uncertainty and model specificity. However, this Draft EIR contains information regarding water supply generally that is useful in evaluating this issue to the extent feasible (see Section 3.15, Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy). Water supply available from Sunnyslope is derived from both groundwater and surface water. Sunnyslope uses groundwater for approximately 70 percent of its supply and surface water from the Central Valley Project for the remaining 30 percent. Groundwater supply would appear to be somewhat buffered from surface water supply concerns related to a projected decline in Sierra Nevada snowpack. Surface water supplies derived from the Central Valley Project could be vulnerable due to climate change impacts (Kennedy/Jenks 2008). Therefore, it is possible that Sunnyslope’s ability to provide long-term water supplies could be indirectly affected by climate change. Sunnyslope is actively integrating climate change planning and adaptation into its long3.5-40

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

range water supply planning processes so that potential effects of climate change can be factored into its assessment of long-term water supply availability. This will help assure that over time, Sunnyslope will identify changes, if any, which may be needed in its water supply planning processes to address water supply availability as it may be affected by climate change.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.5-41

3.5

C LIMATE C HANGE

This side intentionally left blank.

3.5-42

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.6 C ULTURAL R ESOURCES

This section considers and evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project on cultural and paleontological resources. Cultural resources include historic buildings and structures, historic districts, historic sites, prehistoric and historical archaeological sites, and other prehistoric and historic objects and artifacts. Paleontological resources include fossil remains, as well as fossil localities and formations, which have produced fossil material in other nearby areas. This EIR utilizes technical information and analyses from cultural resource evaluations of the project site prepared by Archaeological Resource Management in January 2008, April 2010, and March 2011, including archeological literature reviews, checks of the Sacred Lands files and consultation with Native American Tribal Representatives with assistance from the Native American Heritage Commission, and site reconnaissance.

Concepts and Terminology for Evaluation of Cultural Resources The following definitions are common terms used to discuss the regulatory requirements and treatment of cultural resources: “Cultural Resources” is a term used to describe several different types of resources, including prehistoric and historical archaeological sites; archaeological properties such as buildings, bridges, and infrastructure; and resources of importance in connection with Native Americans. “Historic Properties” is a term defined by the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) as any prehistoric or historic district or site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion on, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), including artifacts, records and material remains related to such a property.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.6-1

3.6

C ULTURAL R ESOURCES

“Historical Resources” is a CEQA term that includes buildings, sites, structures, objects, or districts, each of which may have historical, prehistoric, architectural, archaeological, cultural or scientific importance, and is eligible for listing or is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). “Paleontological Resources” includes fossilized remains of vertebrate organisms, fossil tracks and trackways, and plant fossils. A unique paleontological site would include a known area of fossil bearing rock strata.

3.6.1 E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING Prehistory Before the historic period began in 1770 with the coming of the Spaniards, Central California was the most densely-populated area north of Mexico, with over 10,000 people living in the coastal area between Point Sur and San Francisco Bay. These people belonged to approximately 40 different groups (PMC 2008; Margolin, 1978). Kroeber (1925) describes the area as being the home of the Costanoans and indicates a village existed to the northwest of the City of Hollister, but did not identify the specific location of the village. The Spanish sometimes referred to the area’s Native American people as Costenos – “people of the coast.” This name was mispronounced and changed into Costanoan. However, the descendents of the Bay Area native people are said to generally prefer yet another name: Ohlone (PMC 2008; Margolin, 1978). Archaeological investigations indicate that a group of Hokan-speaking Native Americans lived in the region of San Benito County as early as 8,500 B.C. Between 1,000 B.C. and 300 A.D., the Hokans were displaced or absorbed by the Ohlone population (San Benito County 1994).

Ethnography Early ethnographic accounts of local Native American cultures provide a cultural context for archaeological studies. The Ohlone language family consists of eight to twelve separate and distinct languages. An estimated six tribal groups were located within San Benito County and neighboring counties including the Mutsun, Pagsin, Chalon, Tamarron, Ansaima, and Salinan. The Pagsin resided in the Hollister area. The Mutsun Indians were a tribal group known to inhabit the San Juan Canyon area. The Ansaim lived in the San Juan Valley and northeast of Hollister. The Tamarron lived in the Diablo Range in the eastern portion of the county; the Chalon tribal group lived in the south central portions of the county; and the Salinan in the southernmost area. A junction of regional trade routes was found in the northwestern part of the county near the Pajaro Gap. One trade route was located along the San Benito River to

3.6-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Coalinga. Another route was along Pacheco Pass and on to the San Joaquin Valley. Trading routes to the Santa Clara Valley and Monterey Bay area also existed (San Benito County 1994). The archaeological reports prepared for the proposed project (ARM 2008, 2010, 2011) provide the following ethnographic background for the area: “The Ohlone, or Costanoan, Indians inhabited the San Francisco Bay regions from the Golden Gate south to Monterey. Derived from a Spanish word, Costanoan means “people of the coast,” and is an older term. Descendants of these people prefer to refer to themselves as “Ohlone,” and it is now the generally accepted term. The research area is located in the Mutsun linguistic area, which shared many cultural traits with other linguistic groups in the Ohlone region. It is believed that the Ohlone Indians inhabited the area since A.D. 500, and that speakers of the Hokan language previously inhabited at least part of the region (Levy 1978). However, it is unclear when the Hokan or even earlier PaleoIndians first came to the area. The earliest radiocarbon dates that are available for the area to which the Ohlone came to live are 12,000 B.P. (years before present) at SCR-177 (Cartier 1993), 3,200 B.P. at the University Village Site (SMA-77) (Gerow 1968:119), 6,349 B.P. at Palm Canyon (SCL-106) near Gilroy (Cartier 1980), and 6,628 B.P. at Camden Avenue (SCL-64) (Winter 1978). The Ohlone were gatherers and hunters who utilized only the native flora and fauna with the exception of one domesticate, the dog. Yet, the abundance and high quality of natural resources allowed them to settle in semi-sedentary villages. The Ohlone were typically organized in basic political units called “tribelets” that consisted of 100 to 250 members (Kroeber 1954). The “tribelet” was an autonomous social unit consisting of one or more permanent villages with smaller villages in a relatively close proximity (Kroeber 1962). Parties went out from the major villages to locations within the tribal territory to obtain various resources. The proximity of both mountainous and bay regions in the Central California area made a diversity of resources available during different seasons to the native inhabitants. During the winter months, the lowlying flats near the San Francisco and Monterey Bays have abundant marine and waterfowl resources, while the surrounding mountainous areas are best in the summer months for their nut, seed, and mammalian resources (King and Hickman 1973). A primary food source was acorns, abundant in autumn and easily stored for the remainder of the year.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.6-3

3.6

C ULTURAL R ESOURCES

According to Gifford, the acorn industry of California was probably the most characteristic feature of its domestic economy (Gifford 1951). An elaborate process of grinding and leaching acorns is necessary to render them palatable. The acorn industry first became a major source of food in the Middle Period as is indicated by the appearance of mortars and pestles in the archaeological record (King and Hickman 1973). Other important resources include various plant foods, land animals, and the marine resources of the San Francisco and Monterey Bays. Both large and small land mammals were typically hunted, trapped or poisoned. Many items, including shell beads and ornaments, were extensively traded with other groups as far away as the Great Basin of Nevada (Davis 1974). It is argued that contrary to usual conceptions of hunters and gatherers, native Californian groups, including the Ohlone, practiced a form of resource management that was close to agriculture. Bean and Lawton (1976) consider this pattern a “semi-agricultural” stage which included quasi-agricultural harvesting activity and proto-agricultural techniques. Some plants were pruned and reseeded seasonally for optimal production. Foods such as acorns were stored for many months at a time. Ethnographic accounts also report the repeated burning of woodlands grassbelt to increase animal and plant resources. It is likely to have made hunting conditions better by reducing scrubby growth and encouraging the growth of grasses and other plants that are appealing to grazers such as deer and elk. The plant growth succession after a burning is also rich in grains and legumes that were major food sources for Native Californians. Bean and Lawton also claim that the abundance of plant and animal resources in California and the development of ingenious technological processes allowed Native Californians to develop social structures beyond the normal parameters of hunting and gathering. These include extensive political systems, controlled production and redistribution of goods, and alliances and trade with other groups...”

Historic Period Historic period background for San Benito County was obtained from the Santana Ranch FEIR (PMC 2008).

3.6-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The historic period in San Benito County history began with Sebastian Vizcain landing at present day Monterey in 1602. This was the earliest documented contact with Native Americans in the central coast area. Following Vizcain’s landing, contact was minimal until the overland exploration of the area by Gaspar de Portola in 1769 (Hoover et al. 1990). Portola’s expedition followed the coast, while subsequent explorations of the region by Pedro Fuges in 1770 and 1772, Fernando Javier de Rivera in 1774, and Juan Bautista de Anza in 1776, traveled on the east side of the Santa Cruz Mountains, along a route which became known as El Camino Real (Beck and Haase 1974, PMC 2008). The founding of Mission San Juan Bautista in 1797, in what would later become San Benito County, established the Spanish presence in the area. The Mission San Juan Bautista was one of several missions to be established in the greater Monterey and central coast area, including the Monterey Mission, founded in 1769; Mission Carlos de Borromeo in 1770 (later relocated to Carmel (Jones et al. 1996)); Mission San Antonio de Padua, founded in 1771; Mission Santa Cruz, founded in 1791; Mission Soledad, founded in 1791; and Mission San Miguel, founded in 1797. These missions had a dramatic effect on Native American populations. The Spanish attempted to convert the Native American population to Catholicism and incorporate them into the “mission system.” The process of missionization disrupted traditional Salinan cultural practices. The Spanish, however, were intent on implementing this system, and by 1810, most Native Americans in the area were either incorporated or relocated into local missions. This factor, coupled with exposure to European diseases, virtually ended the traditional life of Native Americans in the area (PMC 2008). The Mexican period (ca. 1821-1848) in California was an outgrowth of the Mexican Revolution, and its accompanying social and political views affected the Mission system. In 1803, the missions were secularized and their lands divided among the Californians as land grants called ranchos. These ranchos facilitated the growth of a semi-aristocratic group that controlled the larger ranchos. Owners of ranchos used local populations, including Native Americans, essentially as forced labor to accomplish work on their larger tracts of land. Consequently, Costanoans, and other Native American groups across California, were forced into a regionalized existence as peons or vaqueros on the larger ranchos. Life during the early history of San Benito County centered on Mission San Juan Bautista. Much of the land surrounding the Mission was granted to the settlers by the Mexican government. In 1839, 34,620 acres called Rancho San Justo were given to Jose Castro by Governor Juan B. Alvardo. The Rancho was sold by Castro to Don Francisco Perez Pacheco in 1850, the year California was admitted to the United States. In 1855, the Rancho was bought by two pioneer families, the Flint family and the Hollister family. The Flint family came from Illinois with 2,000 sheep and included Dr. Thomas Flint, his brother Benjamin Flint, and their cousin, Llewellyn Bixby. The Hollister family came from Ohio with 6,000 sheep, and included William Welles Hollister, his brother Joseph Hubbard Hollister, and their sister, Lucy A. Brown. In 1861, the partnership between the families was dissolved and the

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.6-5

3.6

C ULTURAL R ESOURCES

rancho property was divided. Flint took the land east of the San Benito River, and Hollister took the land west of the river. Later, however, they exchanged their holdings. In 1868, William Hollister sold his land to the San Justo Homestead Association and moved to Santa Barbara. Twelve thousand acres of the land were divided into 50 homestead lots and 100 acres were reserved for the Town of Hollister. The remaining land was sold as farms (PMC 2008; San Benito Historical Society, 2009). The Southern Pacific Railroad line reached Hollister in 1870 and Tres Pinos by 1873. The railroad facilitated shipments of the area’s hay, grain, cattle and ore production to nearby areas. In 1872, the City of Hollister was incorporated and two years later the County of San Benito was created from the inland portion of Monterey County, and Hollister became the county seat. In 1887, San Benito County was enlarged with land from Merced and Fresno Counties. The county’s population grew from 1,000 in 1880 to 2,300 in 1910, 2,750 in 1925, and today has a population of over 55,000. The City of Hollister continues to be the focus of commercial and social activity in the predominantly agricultural county (PMC 2008; San Benito Historical Society, 2009).

Known Cultural Resources in the Project Area A cultural resource evaluation for the proposed project site was prepared by Archaeological Resource Management in January 2008, April 2010, and March 2011. An archaeological literature review for the project site was completed to search for evidence of recorded archaeological and/or historic sites in and around the project site. Checks of the Sacred Lands files were performed in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission and additional correspondence with Native American Tribal Representatives was initiated during the evaluation. To date, no responses have been received. No recorded archaeological sites are located within the project site boundaries. A recorded historic site (CA-SBN-151H) is located approximately one-half mile east of the project site (ARM 2008). This site is described as the Best Ranch Complex, an historic complex consisting of a residence constructed in the 1890s, a large barn, five outbuildings, and several historic trees. A general surface reconnaissance was also completed by a field archaeologist on all open land surfaces on the project site, as well as areas that could be disturbed by construction of proposed infrastructure improvements that would be shared by the proposed project and the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus. These off-site areas included the location options of proposed sewer extensions along areas of Fairview Road, Airline Highway, Enterprise Road, Cielo Vista Drive and undeveloped parcels between Cielo Vista Drive and Enterprise Road. The College District’s proposed Airline Highway EVA route was also surveyed for the purposes of providing technical documentation to support the College District’s encroachment permit application to Caltrans for the EVA route on Airline Highway.

3.6-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

A “controlled intuitive reconnaissance” was completed in places where any burrowing animals, exposed banks and inclines, and other activities may reveal subsurface indicators of cultural materials and soil contents. Traces of both prehistoric and historic cultural materials were noted on the project site and the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus site during the 2008 surface reconnaissance. Historic cultural materials observed during the reconnaissance included whiteware fragments, thick aqua glass vessel fragments, large mammal bone fragments (bovine), a rusted horseshoe, a rusted metal ring, as well as concrete and asphalt fragments. Prehistoric cultural materials consisted of three fragments of fire-cracked rock, two chipped lithic flakes, and a stone artifact which indicates long-term abrasion by narrow objects which may be associated with the preparation of basketry materials. All of the surface materials were observed in isolation, without associated midden or other cultural remains (ARM 2008). A test excavation program was conducted on the project site to determine the presence or absence of buried cultural deposits within the project site and, if deposits were present, to provide information on their placement, depth, and significance. The test trenches revealed no indications of a subsurface prehistoric or historic deposit on the site. The proposed project contemplates construction of improvements within the right-of-way on Airline Highway/State Route 25 for the emergency access route by the College District and also includes possible sewer main extensions. Field studies and cultural evaluation of these areas were conducted in April 2010 and March 2011 by Archaeological Resource Management. Field investigation was undertaken, archival records were reviewed, a Sacred Lands file check was performed in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission and additional consultation with Native American Tribal Representatives was conducted. The secondary report confirmed there are no records of known deposits on or near the project site other than the recorded historic Best Ranch Complex, east of the project site. The field survey found no surface indicators or evidence of historic cultural resources along the Airline Highway right-of-way in the location of the proposed EVA (ARM 2010). The field reconnaissance and archival research further found no evidence of any historic or prehistoric resources within either potential sewer line alignment.

Known Paleontological Resources and Unique Geologic Features in the Project Area Paleontology is the science of life of past geological periods from fossil remains. Paleontological resources include fossil remains as well as fossil localities and unique geologic formations that have produced fossil materials. Such locations and specimens are important resources. CEQA includes protection for these sensitive resources and requires that they be addressed during the environmental review process.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.6-7

3.6

C ULTURAL R ESOURCES

A search of the University of California Museum of Paleontology collection database was conducted for the nearby Santana Ranch Specific Plan project in 2008, which is about one mile north of the project site. As reported in the Santana Ranch DEIR, the only known paleontological resources in the vicinity of the Santana Ranch project site are located along Tres Pinos Creek. Tres Pinos Creek is located about one mile south of the proposed Fairview Corners project site, beyond Airline Highway and the Ridgemark Country Club. The proposed project site is within the within the radius of the Santana Ranch database search for paleontological resources and therefore an additional search was not performed. The paleontological features associated with the Tres Pinos Creek deposit consist primarily of micro fossils and invertebrates, but also include a small number of vertebrate fossils. Site surveys for paleontological resources were not conducted because evidence of paleontological resources is typically not apparent on the ground surface, and would only be discovered in any event during project excavation. No unique geological features are present on the site surface. In summary, there are no known paleontological resources or unique geological features within the boundaries of the project site, but the project area may be sensitive for paleontological resources.

3.6.2 R EGULATORY S ETTING State Law California Environmental Quality Act Under CEQA, public agencies must consider the effects of their actions on both “historical resources” and “unique archaeological resources.” Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21084.1, a “project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.” In addition, Section 21083.2 requires agencies to determine whether proposed projects would have effects on “unique archaeological resources.” For purposes of CEQA, an historical resource is a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in, the CRHR. Historical resources included in a local register of historical resources (lists of properties officially designated or recognized as historically significant), or those deemed significant under Section 5024.1(g), are presumed to be historically or culturally significant for purposes of CEQA, unless a preponderance of evidence indicates otherwise (Pub. Res. Code § 21084.1). Public agencies must treat any such resource identified above as significant unless a preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant (Pub. Res. Code § 15064.5(a)(2)).

3.6-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

In addition to assessing whether historical resources potentially impacted by a proposed project are listed or have been identified as listed in, or determined to be eligible to be listed in, the CRHR or included in a local register of historic resources, lead agencies have the responsibility to evaluate them against the CRHR criteria prior to making a finding as to a proposed project’s impacts to historical resources (Pub. Res. Code § 21084.1). According to the CEQA Guidelines (§ 15064.5(a)(3)), in addition to those discussed above, an historical resource is defined as any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that: a)

Is historically significant or is significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military or cultural annals of California, and

b)

Generally, a resource shall be considered to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the CRHR, including the following: 1)

Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage;

2)

Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past;

3)

Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or

4)

Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

As noted above, CEQA also requires lead agencies to consider whether projects will impact “unique archaeological resources.” Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(g) states that “unique archaeological resources” means an archaeological artifact, object or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: 1)

Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information;

2)

Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type; or

3)

Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.6-9

3.6

C ULTURAL R ESOURCES

Treatment options under Public Resources Code Section 21083.2 include activities that preserve such unique archaeological resources in place or leave them in an undisturbed state. Other acceptable methods of mitigation under Section 21083.2 include, but are not limited to: 1)

planning construction to avoid the site;

2)

deeding architectural sites into permanent conservation easements;

3)

capping or covering archaeological sites with a layer of soil before building the site; and

4)

planning parks, green space, or other space to incorporate archaeological sites.

Section 7050.5(b) of the California Health and Safety Code specifies the following protocol when human remains are discovered: In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered has determined, in accordance with Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 27460) of Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code, that the remains are not subject to the provisions of Section 27491 of the Government Code or any other related provision of law concerning investigation of the circumstances, manner and cause of any death, and concerning investigations of treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) requires that, in the event of accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, then excavation activities of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains shall be halted until the county coroner is contacted to determine whether an investigation into the cause of death is required. Also, if the coroner determines the remains are those of Native Americans, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) must be contacted within 24 hours, who shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most likely descendent of the deceased Native American, who may make recommendations regarding the treatment and/or disposal of the remains, with appropriate dignity. Section 15064.5 directs the lead agency (or applicant), under certain circumstances, to develop an agreement with the appropriate Native American representative for the treatment and disposition of the remains, and specifies how these remains and related goods should be addressed under the particular circumstances. 3.6-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

In addition to the mitigation provisions pertaining to the accidental discovery of human remains, the State CEQA Guidelines also require that a lead agency make provisions for the accidental discovery of historical or archaeological resources, generally. Pursuant to Section 15064.5(f), these provisions should include “an immediate excavation of the find by a qualified archaeologist. If the find is determined to be an historical or unique archaeological resource, contingency funding and a time allotment sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures or appropriate mitigation should be available. Work could continue on other parts of the building site while historical or unique archaeological resources mitigation takes place.” As of March 1, 2005, Senate Bill 18 (Gov. Code §§ 65352.3, 65352.4) requires that, prior to the adoption of a specific plan proposed on or after March 1, 2005, a city or county must consult with Native American tribes with respect to the possible prevention of, or the mitigation of impacts to, specified Native American places, features, and objects located within that jurisdiction. Paleontological resources are classified as scientific resources and are protected by state statute (Pub. Res. Code § 5097.5, and App. G). No state or local agencies have specific jurisdiction over paleontological resources. Further, no state or local agency requires a paleontological collecting permit to allow for the recovery of fossil remains discovered as a result of construction-related earth-moving on state or private land in a project site.

County of San Benito General Plan The San Benito County General Plan contains the following policies addressing cultural resources within the County:

Land Use Element Policy 33. Specific development sites shall avoid, when possible, locating in an environmentally sensitive area (wetlands, erodible soils, important plant and animal communities, archaeological resources).

Open Space and Conservation Element Policy 52: Native American and Archaeological Resources. It is the policy of the county to recognize the value of Native American, archaeological, and paleontological resources. Policy 53: Mitigation for Development. Mitigation for development proposals where Native American, archaeological, or paleontological resources exist shall be guided by the need to provide equitable resolution for rights of the free exercise of religion, the rights of individual property owners, and the rights of the state, and continue to regulate land uses.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.6-11

3.6

C ULTURAL R ESOURCES

Policy 54: Prohibit Unauthorized Grading of Resources. It is the policy of the county to prohibit unauthorized grading, collection, or degradation of Native American, archaeological or paleontological resources.

3.6.3 S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE Following Sections 21083.2 and 21084.1 of the Public Resources Code (CEQA), and Section 15064.5 and Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, cultural resource impacts are considered to be significant if implementation of the proposed project would result in any of the following: ƒ

Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource or an historical resource as defined in § 15064.5;

ƒ

Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature or;

ƒ

Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.

State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b)(1) defines “substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource” as physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource is materially impaired.

Methodology As stated above, a cultural resource evaluation for the proposed project site was prepared by Archaeological Resource Management in January 2008, April 2010, and March 2011, which included archaeological literature reviews, Sacred Lands file checks and site reconnaissance. As noted previously, a recorded historic site (CA-SBN-151H), known as the Best Ranch Complex, is located approximately one-half mile east of the project site; however, no evidence of archaeological sites was located within the project site boundaries, or within the portions of the Caltrans right-of-way that would be disturbed by the EVA route or the proposed sewer main option alignments. The general surface reconnaissance and the “controlled intuitive reconnaissance” completed on the project site noted traces of both prehistoric and historic cultural materials on the project site, but none in the Caltrans right-of-way, or other off-site infrastructure areas as described above. The presence of trace materials are indicators of the possible presence of intact subsurface deposits; however, these indicators are not always reliable in areas where substantial surface

3.6-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

disruption has occurred over time. In this case, the site has been annually disced for agricultural production and roads and other infrastructure have been constructed in other areas of proposed disturbance. Additional test excavations were conducted where indicators were present (ARM 2008) to provide further information regarding the likelihood of intact subsurface deposits on the site. The test excavation revealed no indications of a subsurface prehistoric or historic deposit. The remaining cultural resource evaluations, performed in April 2010 and March 2011 by Archaeological Resource Management, assessed areas off the site in the locations of the proposed sewer line alignment options 1 and 2 (refer to Figure 20, Wastewater Options) and an area within the Caltrans right-of-way on Airline Highway/SR 25 where the Gavilan College District intends to construct an EVA route to its property which would also serve the project site (Refer to Figure 24). As noted in Section 2.0, Project Description, this Draft EIR includes evaluation of the results of technical reports prepared for the College District’s EVA, which are supporting materials for an encroachment permit required by Caltrans. The reports confirmed there are no records of known deposits on or near the project site other than the recorded historic Best Ranch Complex east of the project site. The field surveys found no surface indicators or evidence of historic cultural resources in these areas (ARM 2011). As noted previously, the relevant database search of the University of California Museum of Paleontology collections databases, which was conducted during the preparation of the Santana Ranch Specific Plan DEIR, determined that there are no known paleontological features on the site.

3.6.4 P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Potential Destruction or Damage to Undiscovered Prehistoric Resources, Historic Resources, and Human Remains Impact CULT-1: Development of the project could result in the potential destruction or damage of cultural resources (i.e., prehistoric sites, historic sites, and isolated artifacts) and human remains. This is a potentially significant impact. Based on review by Archaeological Resource Management staff, archaeological and historical investigations of the project site are adequate to identify prehistoric and historic resources that would likely occur in the area. The archaeological and historical investigations did not identify any cultural resources that meet the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) or

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.6-13

3.6

C ULTURAL R ESOURCES

otherwise qualify as historic resources. To date, no comments have been received from Native American Tribal Representatives regarding sacred sites or human remains within the boundaries of the project site. Trace materials were observed on the site surface and test excavations were conducted to determine the likelihood that intact cultural features might be present underground. The test excavations revealed no indicators of intact subsurface features. However, the reports conclude that since known cultural resources have been discovered in the County of San Benito associated with Native American and Euro-American use and occupation of the area, there is always a possibility of inadvertent discovery of subsurface cultural resources during ground disturbing activities associated with implementation of the project. Therefore, development of the project could impact significant cultural resources and/or human remains, which would be potentially significant. The proposed project includes the following Specific Plan Policy RM-7.1, which are designed to reduce the project’s impacts on cultural resources. Policy RM-7.1. Protect archaeological resources. 1. If midden soil, cultural features or potentially significant cultural resources, or human remains are discovered during construction, work shall be halted within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find until a qualified professional archaeologist can evaluate the find. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated and implemented. 2. If cultural resources are located, mitigation shall include, at a minimum, recovery of significant cultural materials and professional analysis based on the types and quantities of those materials recovered, which might include analysis of lithic artifacts and materials, radiocarbon dating of shell fragments, bead analysis, faunal analysis, etc. Cultural materials recovered during monitoring and/or mitigation, other than those directly associated with Native American burials, should be curated in the public domain at a suitable research facility. 3. If human remains are found during construction there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of San Benito County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours.

3.6-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendent (MLD) from the deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation;

or

c)

the

landowner

or

his

authorized

representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner, consistent with Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. To ensure that proposed ground disturbing activities are conducted in accordance with the applicable policies found within the Specific Plan, and consistent with County of San Benito policy and other applicable laws and regulations, the following mitigation measures are recommended: MM CULT-1a: All ground disturbing activities shall be conducted in accordance with Policy RM-7.1 of Article 5.0 of the Specific Plan (Resource Management). MM CULT-1b: In the event that cultural resources are discovered, all work within a 50-meter radius (165 feet) of the find shall be stopped, the County Planning Department notified, and a qualified archaeologist (who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in archaeology and/or history) shall be retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations, including, if necessary, feasible mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level as set forth in Policy RM-7.1 of the Specific Plan, or as otherwise required by law. Such measures may include avoidance, preservation in place, or other appropriate measures consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. The project developer shall be required to implement the identified measures for the protection of cultural resources. MM CULT-1c: In the event that human remains are discovered, all work within a 50-meter radius (165 feet) of the find shall be stopped, the County Planning Department shall be COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.6-15

3.6

C ULTURAL R ESOURCES

notified, and the County Sheriff-Coroner shall be notified according to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, as set forth in Policy RM-7.1, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and as otherwise required by law. Subject to any applicable legal process, duly authorized representatives of the Coroner and the Planning Department shall be permitted to enter onto the project site and take all actions consistent with County Code Chapter 19.05, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 27460) of Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission, and the procedures outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(d), (e) shall be followed. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CULT-1a through CULT-1c adequately address the unanticipated discovery of cultural resources and human remains. Therefore, the project’s impacts in this regard would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Potential Destruction or Damage to Undiscovered Paleontological Resources Impact CULT-2: Development of the project could result in the potential destruction or damage of paleontological resources (i.e., fossils, fossil formations). This would be a potentially significant impact. As discussed above, the database search did not identify any paleontological resources within the boundaries of the project site, but did identify paleontological resources along Tres Pinos Creek. The paleontological features associated with the known resource consist primarily of micro fossils and invertebrates, but also include a small number of vertebrate fossils. Tres Pinos Creek is located south of the proposed project site, beyond Airline Highway and the Ridgemark Country Club. Site surveys for paleontological resources were not conducted, because evidence of paleontological resources is typically not apparent on the ground surface, and would only be discovered in any event during project excavation. No unique geological features are present on the site surface. In summary, there are no known paleontological resources or unique geological features within the boundaries of the project site. However, due to the proximity to the location of nearby paleontological resources, this analysis assumes that the project site may be sensitive for these resources. There is a possibility of the unanticipated discovery of paleontological resources during ground-disturbing activities associated with construction. Therefore, development of the project could impact significant paleontological resources. This impact is considered potentially significant. This impact, however, can be minimized or avoided with implementation of the following mitigation measure:

3.6-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

MM CULT-2: In the event that any previously undiscovered paleontological resources are discovered, all work within a 50-meter radius (165 feet) of the finding shall be stopped, the County Planning Department notified, and a qualified paleontologist retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations, including, if necessary, feasible mitigation measures to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The project developer shall be required to implement the identified mitigation measures for the protection of paleontological resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-2 addresses the impact related to unanticipated discovery of paleontological resources. Therefore, the project’s impacts in this regard would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

3.6.5 C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Potential Destruction or Damage to Undiscovered Prehistoric Resources, Historic Resources, and Human Remains Impact CULT-3: Development of the project combined with other past, present and probable future development in the County of San Benito could result in the disturbance of cultural resources (i.e., prehistoric sites, historic buildings and isolated artifacts and features) and human remains. This would be a potentially significant cumulative impact. The cumulative resource setting associated with the project site includes past, present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects within the County. These projects include those listed in Section 3.0. These projects could impact known and unknown cultural resources as well as human remains. These projects could include archaeological sites associated with Native American use and occupation of the area and historic resources associated with Euro-American settlement, farming and economic development. As discussed above, archaeological and historical investigations did not identify any cultural resources that meet the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the National Register of Historical Places and the California Register of Historic Resources or otherwise qualify as historic resources. Nevertheless, development of the project could impact undiscovered cultural resources or human remains and could contribute to their cumulative or incremental loss within the County. This contribution could be considerable, when combined with other past, present and reasonably

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.6-17

3.6

C ULTURAL R ESOURCES

foreseeable probable future development in the County. This impact is considered potentially significant. This impact would be minimized or avoided with implementation of the following mitigation measure: MM CULT-3: Implement Mitigation Measures CULT-1a through CULT-1c. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CULT-1a through CULT-1c and MM CULT-3 would address the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts to cultural resources and human remains. Therefore, with mitigation incorporated, the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts in this regard would not be cumulatively considerable.

Potential Destruction or Damage to Undiscovered Paleontological Resources Impact CULT-4: Development of the project combined with other past, present and probable future development in the County of San Benito could result in the disturbance of paleontological resources. This would be a potentially significant cumulative impact. As discussed above, a search of the relevant database did not identify any paleontological resources within the project site, but did identify paleontological resources near the site (Tres Pinos Creek) and elsewhere throughout the County. Development of the project could impact undiscovered paleontological resources and could therefore contribute to the cumulative loss of paleontological resources in the County. This contribution could be incrementally considerable. This impact is considered potentially significant, which would be minimized or avoided in the implementation of the following mitigation measure: MM CULT-4: Implement Mitigation Measure CULT-1 above. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-2 would mitigate the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts to undiscovered paleontological resources. Therefore, the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts in this regard would not be cumulatively considerable.

3.6-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.7 G EOLOGY AND S OILS

This section of the Draft EIR provides a discussion of the project site’s geologic, seismic, and soil conditions. The project’s potential impacts related to existing geologic, seismic and soil conditions are evaluated and feasible mitigation measures are proposed where applicable. The following analysis is based on the Combined Geotechnical Fault Investigation prepared by Terratech, Inc. (November 1989) (Refer to Appendix C), and an updated Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Terrasearch, Inc. (January 2008) (Refer to Appendix D). These investigations included: research and review of relevant geologic literature, including studies previously conducted, stereoscopic aerial photographs, geologic maps, Alquist-Priolo maps, seismic hazard maps, and a probabilistic earthquake study; performance of geologic field reconnaissance, including sampling and soil borings at the site, laboratory testing of selected soil samples, and analysis of the collected data.

3.7.1 E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING Regional Geologic Setting The project site is located in the California Coast Range Geomorphic Province near the City of Hollister. The primary local geologic feature is the Hollister Valley, which is bounded on the southwest by the San Andreas fault zone and the Gabilan Mountain Range, which is composed of granitic and Tertiary marine, as well as volcanic rocks. To the north and east, the valley is bounded by the Diablo Mountain Range, which is composed of metamorphosed marine sedimentary and igneous rocks of the Franciscan Formation and Great Valley Sequence.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.7-1

3.7

G EOLOGY AND S OILS

Regional Fault Setting Regionally, the Hollister area is considered an area of high seismicity with earthquakes strong enough to cause damage. The active San Andreas fault lies approximately 8 miles southwest of the project site. The Calaveras fault, a branch of the San Andreas fault, bisects the City of Hollister and lies about 1.25 miles southwest of the project site. The California Geological Survey divides the Calaveras fault into northern and southern sections, with an estimated earthquake recurrence interval for the southern section at 33 years and an estimated recurrence interval for the northern section at 146 years. Current data estimates that there is a 62 percent probability of a large magnitude (6.7 or greater) earthquake in the San Francisco Bay Area as a whole in the 30-year period ending in 2032. For a large earthquake along specific faults, percentage estimates are 21 percent for the San Andreas Fault and 11 percent for the Calaveras fault (PMC 2008).

Intensity Criteria for Earthquakes Earthquake magnitude is a measure of the total amount of energy released in an earthquake. With increasing magnitude (i.e., larger earthquakes), ground motions are stronger, last longer, and are felt over larger areas. Earthquake intensity is a measure of the effects of earthquake ground motions on people and buildings. Earthquake intensity is often more useful than magnitude when discussing the damaging effects of earthquakes. The most common intensity scale is the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale, which ranges from I to XII. Table 17, Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale for Earthquakes, describes the effects of earthquakes and compares the Richter Scale (magnitude) to the Modified Mercalli Scale (intensity).

Classification of Faults In addition to the Modified Mercalli Scale that classifies the intensity of the event, faults are classified according to criteria provided by the Uniform Building Code, as identified in Table 18, Uniform Building Code Fault Classifications.

Project Site Setting The project site is situated in an alluvial valley underlain by the marine sediments of the Pliocene Purisma Formation, primarily recent alluvium and uplifted, older alluvial deposits (i.e., PlioPleistocene river terraces). The surficial materials consist of young and old alluvium and terrace deposits, which are unconsolidated layers of sand, gravel, silt and clay.

3.7-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Table 17

Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale for Earthquakes

Richter

Modified Mercalli

Magnitude Scale

Scale

0.1-3.0

I

Earthquake shaking not felt.

0.1-3.0

II

Shaking felt by those at rest.

3.0-4.0

III

Felt by most people indoors; some can estimate duration of shaking.

4.0-5.0

IV

Felt by most people indoors. Hanging objects rattle, wooden walls, frames creak.

4.0-5.0

V

Felt by everyone indoors; many estimate duration of shaking. Standing autos rock. Crockery clashes, dishes and glasses rattle. Doors open, close and swing.

5.0-6.0

VI

Felt by all; many frightened and run outdoors. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys. Damage slight.

6.0

VII

People frightened and walls unsteady. Pictures and books thrown, dishes/glass is broken. Weak chimneys break. Plaster, loose bricks and parapets fall.

6.0-7.0

VIII

Difficult to stand, waves on ponds, cohesionless soils slump. Stucco and masonry walls fall. Chimneys, stacks, towers,

Effects of Intensity

elevated tanks twist and fall. 7.0

IX

General fright as people are thrown down. Hard to drive, trees broken, damage to foundations and frames. Reservoirs damaged, underground pipelines break.

7.0-8.0

X

General panic, ground cracks, masonry and frame buildings destroyed. Bridges destroyed, dams, dikes and embankments damaged. Railroads bent.

8.0

XI

Large landslides, water thrown, general destruction of buildings; pipelines destroyed; railroads bent.

8.0+

XII

Total nearby damage, rock masses displaced. Lines of sight/level distorted. Objects thrown into air.

Source: California Geologic Survey, 2002

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.7-3

3.7

G EOLOGY AND S OILS

Table 18

Uniform Building Code Fault Classifications

Fault Type

Characteristics

A

Faults that have a Richter magnitude potential of 7.0 and a slip rate equal to or greater than 5 millimeters/year. These types of faults are considered to be active and capable of producing large magnitude events. Most segments of the San Andreas Fault are classified as a Type A fault.

B

All faults that are not Type A or Type C. Includes most of the active faults in California.

C

Faults that have a Richter magnitude potential of less than 6.5 and a slip rate of less than or equal to 2 millimeters/year. These faults are considered to be sufficiently inactive and not capable of producing large magnitude events, such that potential near-source ground shaking effects can be ignored. Most faults outside of California are Type C.

Source: Uniform Building Code, 2010

Topography The project site’s topography consists of undulating hills with an overall gradual elevation change of about 45 feet from east to west. The highest elevation is a crest of a hill near the center of the site and the lowest points are in the southwest corner near Fairview Road and in the northeast corner in the vicinity of the former stock pond. The site rises from Fairview Road to the crest of the hill located approximately 1,100 feet east of Fairview Road. Slopes on the site vary from zero to about 10 percent, as illustrated by Figure 5, Site Photographs, and inferred from the information presented in Figure 6, Topography and Proposed Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone. There are no drainage courses on the site due to the relatively flat topography. Existing drainage patterns on the site follow the topography and generally flow in three directions: west of the crest of the hill, the site drains toward Fairview Road; to the east, the site drains to a low point in the site’s northeastern corner (near the former stock pond); and along the project site’s southern boundary, the crest of the hill is interrupted by a saddle, which causes drainage to flow southward toward the adjacent property. (Refer to Figure 7, Existing Drainage).

Soil Characteristics According to the Soil Survey of San Benito County (1965), soils on the project site consist of three types: Rincon silty clay loam, nine to 15 percent slopes (RsC); Antioch loam, two to five

3.7-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

percent slopes (AnB); and San Benito clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded (SbE2). All three of these soil series have moderate to high erosion potential based on the topography where they are found. On-site soils consist primarily of Rincon silty clay loam (refer to Figure 27, Soil Map). Antioch loam, 2 to 5 percent slopes. This soil series consists of moderately well-drained soils that formed in alluvium derived from a wide range of sedimentary rocks. These soils have a loamy surface and clayey subsoil. These soils are found on long terraces and fans, and nearly level to strongly sloping. Runoff is slow, and the hazard of erosion is slight. As illustrated by Figure 27, Soil Map, these soils are limited on the site and are generally located in two small areas, one in the southeastern corner of the site and the other near the southwestern corner of the site. Rincon silty clay loam, 9 to 15 percent slopes. Soils in this series consist of well-drained soils that formed in alluvium derived from sandstone and shale. These soils have a loamy surface layer and a clayey subsoil and occur on benches, terraces or fans. Included in this mapping are some small areas where there is less clay than normal in the subsoil and areas where the substratum is very firm. Also included are areas where erosion is only slight. Runoff is medium to rapid and the hazard of erosion is moderate to high. As indicated by Figure 27, Soil Map, soils of this series is the most prevalent on the project site. San Benito clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes. This soil occurs on moderately steep rounded hills or on ridge tops. Soils in this series consist of well-drained loamy soils. Permeability is moderately slow, runoff is rapid and the hazard of erosion is severe. As indicated by Figure 27, Soil Map, these soils are generally present on the project site along the eastern perimeter and in the northeast corner. Surface and near-surface soils observed during seismic trenching on the site consist of clays of medium to high plasticity. Shrinkage cracks were observed in some portions of the project site, although surface soils also include deep areas of sandy clay and gravel (Terratech, 1989). These soils are moderate to highly expansive soils, but are not considered susceptible to liquefaction. The 1989 geotechnical fault investigation report determined that on the project site, these soils consist of stiff to hard clays and medium dense to very dense sands and gravel, which are not conducive to seismically-induced differential settlement, liquefaction and landslides. Soil borings conducted as part of the 2008 geological investigation confirmed the expansiveness of these soils. Both reports include design recommendations for construction on expansive soils.

Faulting and Seismicity The project site is located within an Alquist-Priolo Special Study Zone and a Seismic Hazard Zone. Of the numerous faults known to exist in the Hollister area, the San Andreas, Quien Sabe,

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.7-5

3.7

G EOLOGY AND S OILS

and Calaveras faults, along with small segments of the Tres Pinos fault, are classified by the California Geologic Survey as active or potentially active locally. The active San Andreas fault lies approximately eight miles southwest of the project site. The Calaveras fault, a branch of the San Andreas fault, bisects the City of Hollister and lies about 1.75 miles southwest of the project site. The Quien Sabe fault crosses the edge of the Hollister Valley at the base of the Diablo mountain range, about 4 miles north of the site (PMC 2010). The Bolado Park fault, an inactive fault, has also been mapped to the southeast of the project site. The eastern portion of the project site is located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone due to the proximity of the Tres Pinos fault (Terratech 1989), a branch of the Calaveras fault that is generally considered to be potentially active. The background literature review conducted during the 1989 fault investigation revealed several mapped traces of the Tres Pinos fault: one across the eastern portion of the property, one mapped about 500 feet southwest of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus site, and one about 800 feet to the northeast of the site. Extensive trenching and subsurface investigation of the Tres Pinos fault trace was conducted in 1974 on the Ridgemark Estates property, south of the project site. Additional trenching and subsurface investigation was conducted on the project site in 1989, to verify the previously mapped traces of the Tres Pinos fault. During the course of trenching to expose subsurface soils, the location of the trace was more thoroughly identified, which led to the new mapping of the trace of the active Tres Pinos fault on the eastern portion of the project site, and a recommendation for the establishment of a “building exclusion zone” along the trace. No evidence of the other previously mapped Tres Pinos fault traces were found on the site during the trenching and subsurface investigations conducted on the project site (Terratech 1989). A subsequent geotechnical report, which also included the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus site to the south, was prepared in 2008 by Terrasearch to provide a current evaluation of surface and subsurface soil conditions and to establish criteria for grading and construction. According to the 2008 Terrasearch report, very intense ground shaking would occur at the project site if a large magnitude earthquake were to occur on one of the branches of the Calaveras fault or the San Andreas fault. If the maximum earthquake occurs with an epicenter very near the project site, maximum bedrock acceleration could approach or exceed 1g (g=force of gravity) (Terrasearch 2008).

Landslides According to the California Division of Mines and Geology landslide map for the Tres Pinos quadrangle (1994), portions of the project site are listed as “generally susceptible” to landslides (rating 3 out of a scale of 1-4, with 1 being the least susceptible).

3.7-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The topography of the project site consists of undulating hills with a relative elevation change of about 45 feet. Slopes on the site are less than 10 percent. The highest elevation of the site is the crest of the hill near the center of the site and the lowest points are in the southwest corner near Fairview Road and in the northeast corner in the vicinity of the former stock pond. (Refer to Figure 6, Topography and Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone). The gradual slopes of the site are not prone to landslide or erosion activity. As noted in the soil descriptions, above, on-site soils consist primarily of soils in the Rincon series, which are associated with moderate to high erosion hazards. However, the site-specific investigations (Terratech 1989, Terrasearch 2008) determined that the risk of landslides on the site is low based upon the relatively flat topography of the site combined with subsurface soil conditions as described above.

Liquefaction Soil liquefaction occurs where saturated, cohesion-less or granular soils undergo a substantial loss in strength due to excess build-up of water pressure within the pores during cyclic loading such as earthquakes. Due to the loss of strength, soils gain mobility that can result in significant deformation, including both horizontal and vertical movement where the liquefied soil is not confined. Intensity and duration of seismic shaking, soil characteristics, overburden pressure, and depth to water are all primary factors affecting the occurrence of liquefaction. Soils most susceptible to liquefaction are saturated, loose, clean, uniformly graded, Holocene age, and fine grained sand deposits. Silts and silty sands have also proven susceptible to liquefaction or partial liquefaction. The occurrence of liquefaction is generally limited to soils within 50 feet of the ground surface. As noted above, on-site soils are moderate to highly expansive, but are not considered susceptible to liquefaction (Terratech 1989). Based on the nature of the subsurface material encountered in exploratory drill holes at the project site, the potential for liquefaction to occur on-site is low (Terratech 1989, p. 7).

Seismically-Induced Settlement Seismic densification is the densification of unsaturated, loose granular soils due to strong vibrations such as that resulting from earthquake shaking. Granular soils and loose fills above groundwater may be subject to this phenomenon. The subsurface soils encountered during the on-site soils investigation consisted of medium dense to dense sand and gravel layers. These materials generally have low susceptibility to seismically-induced settlement (Terratech 1989, p. 7).

Expansive Soils As noted previously, subsurface soils consist of layers of clay, unconsolidated sand, silt and gravel, which are not present uniformly across the site. Surface and near-surface soils on some

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.7-7

3.7

G EOLOGY AND S OILS

portions of the project site have moderate to high expansion potential (Terratech 1989, Terrasearch 2008). These soils expand when wet and contract when dry. This shrink-swell characteristic of expansive soils can cause distress and damage to structures supported by the soil. Proper design and construction in accordance with building code requirements would mitigate the effects of expansive soils. The fault and geological investigation reports for the proposed project include recommended design criteria and performance standards for construction on expansive soils.

3.7.2 R EGULATORY S ETTING General Plan Policies The San Benito County General Plan contains the following policies with regard to geologic hazards:

Land Use Element Policy 32. Specific development sites shall be free from the hazards identified within the Open Space and Conservation Element Maps (e.g., faults, landslides, hillsides over 30% slope, flood plains). The site shall also be on soil suitable for building and maintaining well and septic systems (i.e., avoid impervious soils, high percolation or high groundwater areas, set back from creeks). Absent adequate mitigation, development shall not be located on environmentally sensitive lands (wetlands, erodible soil, archaeological resources, important plant and animal communities). Policy 33. Specific development sites shall avoid, when possible, locating in an environmentally sensitive area (wetlands, erodible soils, important plant and animal communities, archaeological resources).

Open Space and Conservation Element Policy 37: Development policy for hazardous areas. It will be the policy of the County to limit densities in areas that are environmentally hazardous (fault, landslides/erosion, hillsides over 30% slope, flood plains) to levels that are acceptable for public health and safety for citizens and property. It is the County’s policy to apply zoning categories and scenic easements for the protection of environmentally hazardous or aesthetically valuable resources. 3.7-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Policy 39: Restrict creation of new lots in hazardous areas. It is the policy of the County to prohibit new subdivisions or lot-line adjustments that will create new lots located entirely within hazardous areas (slopes greater than or equal to 30%, 100-year flood plain, landslide/erosion hazard, fault zone).

State Law California and Uniform Building Codes The California Building Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) and the Uniform Building Code provide standards for testing and building construction as well as safety measures for development within earthquake prone areas. The project site is located within Seismic Zone 4, which is expected to experience the greatest effects from earthquakes, and which requires the most stringent standards for seismic design.

Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Pub. Res. Code Division 2, Chapter 7.5, commencing with Section 2621) was passed in 1972 to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures for human occupancy. The Alquist-Priolo Act’s main purpose is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. The Act only addresses the hazard of surface fault rupture and is not directed toward other earthquake hazards. As noted above, the project site is located within the Earthquake Fault Zone defined for a trace of the Calaveras fault by the State Geologist pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo Act.

Seismic Hazards Mapping Act The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (Pub. Res. Code Division 2, Chapter 7.8, commencing with Section 2690) (1990) requires the State Geologist to designate Seismic Hazard Zones. These zones assist cities and counties in fulfilling their responsibilities for protecting the public from the effects of non-surface fault rupture earthquake hazards such as strong ground shaking, earthquake-induced landslides, liquefaction, or other ground failures. The California Geological Survey has not issued a Seismic Hazards Map for the Hollister area, which includes the project site.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.7-9

3.7

G EOLOGY AND S OILS

3.7.3 S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE The following thresholds for measuring a project’s environmental impacts are based on the CEQA Guidelines and generally accepted standards for environmental documents prepared pursuant to CEQA. For the purposes of this Draft EIR, impacts are considered to be significant if any of the following would result from implementation of the proposed project: ƒ

Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: •

Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault. Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publications 42

•

Strong seismic ground shaking

•

Seismic-related ground failure including liquefaction

•

Landslides

ƒ

Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil

ƒ

Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse

ƒ

Be located on an expansive soil, as defined in the Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code, creating substantial risks to life or property

ƒ

Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater

3.7.4 P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Fault Rupture and Other Seismic Hazards Impact GEO-1: Implementation of the project could expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault. This is a potentially significant impact.

3.7-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The project site is located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone delineated for a trace of the Tres Pinos fault, a branch of the Calaveras fault that is generally considered to be potentially active. A 35-foot wide trace of the Tres Pinos fault has been mapped on the site. The trace and the area immediately adjacent to the trace could be subject to ground rupture and displacement during a strong seismic event, which could expose people and structures to substantial adverse effects from seismic activity. However, the fault investigation report prepared in connection with the project site indicates that any future ground rupture would likely be confined to an area very close to the mapped trace. Based on this technical analysis, the proposed project includes a 135-foot wide Building Exclusion Zone that follows the Tres Pinos fault trace through the site, which would provide for a 50-foot wide building setback on each side of the trace, as recommended by Terratech in their 1989 report and in accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Act (Refer to Figure 6, Topography and Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone). Both technical reports prepared for the project include design specifications and performance standards for the construction of buildings and infrastructure on the project site to reduce hazards of seismically-induced human harm or property damage. These recommendations include: 1.

Preparation by a qualified geotechnical consultant of a project-specific geotechnical report for the County’s approval, as part of the application process for the project’s first tentative subdivision map, which shall cover the entire project site. This site-specific report shall incorporate the recommendations of both the Terratech (1989) geotechnical fault investigation and the Terrasearch (2008) geotechnical investigation relative to the proposed project, to ensure that all geotechnical and soils conditions are adequately mitigated.

2.

The project-specific geotechnical report shall also confirm that the proposed 135-foot Building Exclusion Zone is sufficient to adequately mitigate risks associated with ground rupture based on then-current site conditions, or make recommendations to modify the Building Exclusion Zone as determined necessary to adequately mitigate ground rupture impacts.

3.

The project shall be designed in accordance with the recommendations of the projectspecific report, and shall also incorporate the recommendations set forth in the 1989 fault investigation and in the 2008 geotechnical investigation to the extent determined appropriate by the County and the geotechnical consultant.

The Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan also includes the following policies that are designed to further reduce the effects of development in proximity to the known fault. Policy LU-2.1. Recognize the fault line and potential habitat constraints on the property and designate land to provide a mix of residential uses

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.7-11

3.7

G EOLOGY AND S OILS

and product types, and recreation and open space amenities to meet the needs of residents. Policy RM-2.1. Protect habitats and structures in the vicinity of known fault zones. 1. Ensure a 135-foot “building exclusion zone” in all plan sets as illustrated in the Constraints Diagram (Figure 7). 2. Limit future use of the “building exclusion zone” to non-habitable improvements (e.g. roadway improvements, park, open space, buffers, trails, etc.). Future uses within the Building Exclusion Zone would be limited to non-habitable improvements (e.g., roadway improvements, park, open space, buffers, trails, etc.). Implementation of the above Specific Plan policies would reduce the project’s impacts associated with ground rupture. However, to ensure these impacts are reduced to a less than significant level, the following mitigation measure is recommended: MM GEO-1: Development of the project site shall comply with the then most recent California Building Code guidelines for Seismic Zone 4 to avoid or minimize potential damage from seismic ground shaking. All plan sets shall include a 135-foot Building Exclusion Zone as illustrated in Figure 7 of the Specific Plan (Constraints Diagram), with future uses within the Building Exclusion Zone limited to non-habitable improvements (e.g., roadway improvements, parks, open space, buffers, trails, etc.) and all recommendations included in the 1989 fault investigation and in the 2008 geotechnical investigation prepared by Terrasearch, Inc. will be incorporated into the project design to the extent determined appropriate by the County, in consultation with the geotechnical consultant. Therefore, impacts related to ground rupture would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impact GEO-2: Strong ground shaking occurring on the project site during a major earthquake may cause severe damage to future buildings and other improvements constructed as part of the project, and therefore may expose people and structures to substantial adverse effects. This is considered a potentially significant impact. Historically, major earthquakes centered on the Calaveras and San Andreas faults have resulted in moderate to severe ground shaking in the project vicinity. As noted above, it is expected that a major earthquake will result in severe ground shaking on the project site during the life of the project.

3.7-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Strong ground shaking will cause dynamic loading, resulting in stress to buildings and other improvements. Both the fault rupture investigation (Terratech 1989) and the subsequent geotechnical report (Terrasearch 2008) determined that structures designed and built in accordance with the California and Uniform Building Codes should respond well except under the most severe circumstances. To reduce seismic shaking impacts to a less than significant level, the following mitigation measure is recommended: MM GEO-2: Development of the project shall comply with the then-current California Building Code standards and requirements for Seismic Zone 4 to avoid or minimize potential damage from seismic ground shaking, as well as recommendations set forth in the sitespecific geotechnical report required under MM GEO-1. Design plans shall be subject to review and approval by the appropriate design professional (i.e. geotechnical engineer, structural engineer) and the County as required. Therefore, impacts related to seismic ground shaking would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impact GEO-3: There is a low risk of seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction and seismically-induced differential settlement, due to the on-site soil conditions. Accordingly, there is a low risk of potential substantial adverse effects to people or structures as a result of seismic-related ground failure, and this is a less than significant impact. Seismically-induced liquefaction is a potential concern where there are loose, uniformly graded, saturated, fine-grained soils that lie close to the ground surface. The technical analyses found that the soils on the project site are not considered susceptible to liquefaction or seismicallyinduced differential settlement. Furthermore, data indicate that these soils are not saturated, given that the depth of groundwater is more than 50 feet below ground surface. Accordingly, the risk of seismically-induced liquefaction and settlement is low, and the project’s impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Landslides and Other Related Hazards Impact GEO-4: Given the project site’s topography and its soil characteristics, and that no landslide or landslide-related features have been identified or mapped on the project site, the risk of landslides is considered low. This is a less than significant impact.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.7-13

3.7

G EOLOGY AND S OILS

The topography of the project site consists of undulating hills with a relative elevation change of about 45 feet. Slopes on the site are less than 10 percent. As indicated by Figure 6, Topography and Proposed Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone, the highest elevation of the site is the crest of the hill near the center of the site and the lowest points are in the southwest corner near Fairview Road and in the northeast corner in the vicinity of the former stock pond. The gradual slopes of the site topography are not prone to landslide or erosion activity. As noted in the soil descriptions, above, on-site soils consist primarily of soils in the Rincon series, which are associated with moderate to high erosion hazards. However, the site-specific investigations (Terratech 1989, Terrasearch 2008) determined that the risk of landslides on the site is low based upon the relatively flat topography of the site combined with subsurface soil conditions as described above. Accordingly, the project’s impacts regarding landslide risk is less than significant. No mitigation is required. Impact GEO-5: The project site is not located on a geologic unit that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project. This is a less than significant impact. Surface and near-surface soils observed during seismic trenching on the site consist of clays of medium to high plasticity. Shrinkage cracks were observed in some portions of the property although surface soils also include deep areas of sandy clay and gravel (Terratech 1989). These soils are moderate to highly expansive soils, but are not considered susceptible to liquefaction. The 1989 geotechnical fault investigation report determined that on the project site, these soils consist of stiff to hard clays and medium dense to very dense sands and gravel, which are not conducive to seismically-induced differential settlement, liquefaction and landslides. Subsidence is the gradual lowering of the ground surface with little or no horizontal motion. Subsidence results from settlement over small or large areas as the consequence of compaction or loss of subsurface materials. The exception is tectonic subsidence, which occurs suddenly and is the compaction of soils due to ground shaking during earthquakes. Subsidence is usually the result of groundwater, gas or oil extraction, and hydro-compaction or the oxidation of organic soils. Soil borings conducted as part of the 2008 geological investigation did not reveal conditions that might lead to subsidence, but confirmed the expansiveness of these soils. Both reports include design recommendations for construction on expansive soils. No mitigation is required.

3.7-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Impacts Related to On-Site Soils Impact GEO-6: Project grading and removal of vegetation may result in soil exposure, increased erosion and sedimentation of downstream water bodies. This is considered a potentially significant impact. Grading, removal of vegetation, and other construction-related activities would disturb the soil, which could increase soil erosion rates. The proposed project includes altering the topography and contouring the site generally as indicated by Figure 22, Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram, and to allow the drainage patterns illustrated by Figure 21, Conceptual Drainage Plan. All excavated soils would be re-used on site. No soil export is proposed. Soil erosion could occur during the construction phases of the proposed project. Specifically, increased soil erosion may occur with the use of heavy earth-moving equipment to grade the site, remove vegetation, and compact the soil in connection with the construction of the project’s buildings, roads, drainage and other permanent improvements. The amount of erosion is dependent on soil type, vegetation cover, slope length and gradient. According to the Soil Survey of San Benito County (1965) soils on the project site consist primarily of Rincon silty clay loam, nine to 15 percent slopes (RsC), but also include Antioch loam, two to five percent slopes (AnB) and San Benito clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded (SbE2). All three of these soil series have moderate to high erosion potential based upon the topography where they are found. The topography of the project site consists of undulating hills with a relative overall elevation change of about 45 feet. Slopes on the site range from 0 to 10 percent. The site-specific investigations (Terratech 1989, Terrasearch 2008) determined that erosion hazards on the site are low due to the relatively flat topography of the site combined with subsurface soil conditions as described above. Nevertheless, both reports recommend erosion control measures and revegetation of graded areas to reduce the likelihood of erosion on the site. The Specific Plan also includes the following policies intended to further reduce the impacts of erosion during and after construction. Policy RM-3.1. Minimize soil erosion. 1. Erosion Control Plans shall be submitted to the County Public Works Department for review and approval when submitting subdivision improvement plans. Specific erosion control measures shall be included to protect drainage courses and the on-site habitat conservation area (should it be preserved on-site) from eroded soils and debris during construction. Soil exposed during grading that is no longer under active construction shall be stabilized.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.7-15

3.7

G EOLOGY AND S OILS

2. Slope stabilization and erosion control (during both the construction and postconstruction phases) shall only utilize mesh products that are made of biodegradable natural fiber materials. Plastic materials (such as silt fencing) may only be used if they are relatively solid (cannot entrap wildlife) and are removed from the site following use. Policy RM-1.2. Allow potential for localized grading in the on-site habitat conservation area. 1. If a habitat set-aside area is retained on-site, localized grading is allowed within the 100-meter radius around the existing dry pond for the purposes of expanding storm water storage within the Plan Area. The amount of grading will be based on the need to collect and store water. This effort is intended to expand the storm water collection and percolation area, but may also enhance habitat, and should be designed with the intent to achieve both purposes. 2. Use vegetated areas within the 100-meter radius area for natural filtration. Prepare a grading plan for the planned habitat set-aside area, if retained on-site, in accordance with the approved Habitat Conservation Plan and with appropriate agency approvals and/or permits prior to grading activities within this area. 3. If all CTS mitigation is conducted outside the Plan Area, grading may occur as needed within the area identified for habitat conservation. In addition, the Specific Plan requires that all development within the project site be subject to review by the County, to ensure consistency with the development and design standards described in Article 2.0, Land Use, and Article 5.0, Resource Management of the Specific Plan as well as the Grading Master Plan required by Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan). The process for review and approval is outlined in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. Furthermore, the developer would be required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program, in accordance with MM HYD-1b. Specifically, the developer would need to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which specifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would prevent all construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. In addition, the developer would be required to incorporate post-construction stormwater pollution management measures, including, among others, source control measures, to reduce stormwater pollution during operation of the project, in accordance with MM HYD-1b. (See Chapter 3.8, Hydrology and Water Quality for additional information) Mitigation Measure GEO-1 requires that the project implement the recommendations of the 1989 fault investigation and 2008 geotechnical reports. These reports include recommendations 3.7-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

to reduce erosion on the site, as noted above. Windborne erosion is addressed in Section 3.3, Air Quality, which includes MM AQ-1 to control dust during construction. Implementation of the following mitigation measure, in addition to Mitigation Measures GEO-1, AQ-1, HYD-1a, and HYD-1b would reduce the impacts of grading and erosion to a less than significant level. MM GEO-6: The project developer shall comply with the policies found in Article 2.0 (Land Use) and Article 5.0 (Resource Management) of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan. Grading and ground disturbance on the site shall be implemented as shown on the Specific Plan Figure 22, Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram, and the required treatment of urban pollutants and application of pesticides on the project site shall be implemented in accordance with all applicable policies within Article 5, Resource Management as well as the project’s Grading Master Plan (as may be amended). Further, the timing of implementation shall occur in accordance with Article 7 of the Specific Plan (Implementation Plan). Implementation of the above mitigation measures will ensure that the erosion impacts of the project are reduced. Therefore, impacts related to increased erosion and sedimentation would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impact GEO-7: Expansive soils present on the project site may cause movement or heaving, potentially resulting in damage to foundations, concrete pads and pavements. This is considered a potentially significant impact. According to the technical reports for the project site, moderate to highly expansive soils are present. Expansive soils can experience significant volume changes with variations in moisture content usually during seasonal wet and dry cycles. Expansive soils swell when wet, and shrink when dried. Such changes can cause distress to building foundations, slabs on grade, pavements, and other surface structures if not designed properly. However, the County routinely requires compliance with the then-current California Building Code (CBC), which includes provisions for the foundation design and construction in areas with expansive soils. Depending on site conditions and the nature of a project, a variety of approaches may be used, including over excavation and replacement of native soils with non-expansive fills, amendment and on-site use of native soils, and implementation of specialized foundation designs. The fault and geotechnical investigation reports prepared for the proposed project include design specifications and performance standards for construction on expansive soils; additionally, the County would require building code compliance prior to the issuance of a building permit. MM GEO-1 requires implementation of identified recommendations as to project design to ensure all geotechnical and soils conditions are adequately mitigated. Among other things, these recommendations shall adequately mitigate potential impacts related to structures from construction on expansive soils.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.7-17

3.7

G EOLOGY AND S OILS

Implementation of MM GEO-1 would reduce the impact of construction on expansive soils. Therefore, impacts related to expansive soils would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impact GEO-8: The soils on the project site may not be capable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks. This is a potentially significant impact. The Specific Plan anticipates that wastewater collection and treatment would be provided for by connecting to the City of Hollister’s DWTP. In the event this does not occur, the Specific Plan contemplates the potential use of septic systems for residential development on the site under certain conditions. The proposed project includes provisions for the limited use of septic systems on lots of one acre or more, consistent with County design and performance standards (Article 7.0, Implementation Plan), until such time that connection to the DWTP is feasible. In either circumstance, the proposed project would be subject to the applicable requirements of the County’s Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. In addition, the Specific Plan contains policies that are designed to reduce impacts related to the potential use of septic systems. Policy PF-2.2. The demand for wastewater collection and treatment may be provided for by septic systems on lots not less than one acre in size. Lots less than one acre in size, and where the number of lots within the Plan Area exceeds 45, shall not be served by the use of septic systems, but shall be served by the City of Hollister DWTP. 5. Septic systems provided to serve the Plan Area shall meet County design, construction and maintenance standards. Designs shall be submitted prior to approval of tentative maps. According to information provided by County staff, nearby areas in this general vicinity could not demonstrate suitable soil conditions following percolation testing and thus these adjacent sites did not obtain approval to subdivide. The general area has a fair amount of clay in the upper strata and has caused a 40 % +/- rate of septic system failure in the older houses around the project site (Ray Stevenson, pers. comm. 2011). Groundwater below the project site is located at a depth of approximately 120 feet below ground surface, and on-site soils have a low infiltration rate. Soils with a low infiltration rate may not be suitable for the provision of septic systems. However, the geotechnical investigations on the site also noted that clay soils with low infiltration rates were not uniformly present on the site. Therefore, a soil profile analysis and percolation testing would need to be performed to determine soil suitability in the event the developer proposes to use septic systems rather than

3.7-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

connect to the City of Hollister’s DWTP. Implementation of the following mitigation measure is recommended to reduce the impact of utilizing septic systems on soils incapable of supporting them, to a less than significant level. MM GEO-8: In the event the developer seeks approval to use septic systems to serve a portion of the project, all of the following requirements shall apply: 1.

Use of septic systems shall be permitted only if soil suitability can be demonstrated to the County’s satisfaction and the developer has obtained any and all required permits, entitlements and approvals from relevant agencies to use septic systems on the project site. The developer shall comply with any space constraints imposed on the proposed lot by County and Regional Water Quality Control Board regulations for the location and placement of septic systems on the site.

2.

Use

of

septic

systems

shall

be

consistent

with

the

adopted

Hollister

Water/Wastewater Master Plan and the County’s requirements for the use, design, and construction of septic systems, and applicable requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 3.

The developer shall retain a qualified environmental health specialist or registered engineer to perform testing on each proposed lot, which shall include at least one soil profile analysis around a minimum of three percolation test holes spread out in the proposed location for the leachfield. Percolation testing shall adhere to the thencurrent federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) methodology. Said analysis shall be submitted to the County Environmental Health Department and Public Works Department for their approval as part of the subdivision map process for the lots being proposed to be served by septic systems. Prior to commencing the analysis, the developer shall give the County Environmental Health Department and the Public Works Department a minimum of 48 hours’ notice so that County staff may observe the testing.

4

Soils testing and the use of septic systems shall comply with all applicable standards and requirements, including, without limitation, those of the County, the Hollister Water/Wastewater Master Plan, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Therefore, impacts related to septic systems would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.7-19

3.7

G EOLOGY AND S OILS

3.7.5 C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Geological Impact Risk to Projects Impact GEO-9: The project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable potential future projects, could result in the cumulative increase in the risk of geological impacts to the future residents of these projects. This is considered a less than significant cumulative impact. Similar to the project, other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future developments may pose geological and soils hazards if identified impacts are not adequately mitigated. However, these types of hazards are typically site-specific, and therefore tend not to combine with other developments for a cumulative impact. Further, each of these other developments, similar to the project, would be required to evaluate potential geology and soils impacts and to implement feasible mitigation measures to reduce or avoid such impacts. For these reasons, cumulative geological hazard impacts as a result of the proposed project, combined with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, are considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

3.7-20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.8 H AZARDS AND H AZARDOUS M ATERIALS

This section of the Draft EIR discusses the potential presence of hazardous materials and conditions on and near the project site, and analyzes the potential risk of any such conditions in proximity to existing and proposed development. This analysis is based on the results of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared in connection with the project site, included as Appendix H; an Initial Site Assessment: Proposed EVA Lane Driveway Approach on Airline Highway – Gavilan College San Benito Campus/Fairview Corners Residential Project (EMC, 2010) (ISA), included as Appendix I; the San Benito County General Plan; and the San Benito County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP).

3.8.1 E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING On-Site Uses The project site is undeveloped land that is used to cultivate barley. The land is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. There are no trails, roads, or other improvements on the site, except for an agricultural water pump station operated by Sunnyslope County Water District (Sunnyslope) located in the northwestern corner of the site along Fairview Road. The pump is connected to an agricultural water line that currently serves the project site. The project site does not support overhead or underground utility transmission lines.

On-Site Topography The project site’s topography consists of undulating hills with an overall relative elevation change of 45 feet. A former stock pond is located in a ground depression near the northeast corner of the site. The highest elevation is near the center of the site and the lowest points are in

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.8-1

3.8

H AZARDS AND HAZARD OUS M ATERIALS

the southwest corner near Fairview Road and in the northeast corner in the vicinity of the former stock pond. The site rises from Fairview Road to the crest of a hill located approximately 1,100 feet east of Fairview Road. Existing drainage patterns on the site follow the topography and generally flow in three directions: west of the crest of the hill, the site drains toward Fairview Road; to the east, the site drains to a low point in the site’s northeastern corner; and along the southern boundary, the crest of the hill is interrupted by a saddle, which causes drainage to flow southward toward the adjacent property (refer to Figure 7, Existing Drainage). Depth to groundwater is approximately 120 feet below ground surface.

Surrounding Uses The project site is bounded by rural residential uses and grassland along Old Ranch Road to the north, very low density residential uses and grassland along Harbern Way to the east, the Foxhollow Herb Farm (small agricultural operation cultivating lavender and other herbs and flowers) to the southeast, the approved but undeveloped Gavilan College San Benito Campus project to the south, and Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista single-family residential subdivision to the west. The Ridgemark Golf and Country Club, which includes a gated residential community, is located further to the south across Airline Highway. The approved but undeveloped 292-acre Santana Ranch project site is located approximately one mile to the north, on Fairview Road. The undeveloped area located between the approved Santana Ranch project and the project site is identified by the County as the Central Fairview Study Area. The Award Homes residential subdivision, on the west side of Fairview Road, just north of the Cielo Vista subdivision, has been approved by the City of Hollister, but has not yet been developed. The Hollister Municipal Airport, which supports general aviation activities, is located more than three miles from the project site. Due to the project site’s location, it is not within the San Benito County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. There are no public-use airports or private airstrips within two miles of the project site.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Findings A Phase I ESA dated October 30, 2007, was prepared by Terrasearch Inc. to determine the presence or absence of hazardous materials on or near the project site. The ESA did not recommend a Phase II investigation, and the findings of the ESA are summarized as follows. Based on the site observations, interviews, review of site plans, and review of relevant San Benito Water District and San Benito County Planning and Building Department files, a 20-foot wide easement to the San Benito Water Conservation and Flood Control District (District) is located on the north and east sides of the site. Based on interviews and review of regulatory agency files, the site consists of undeveloped land with no improvements, except for the water 3.8-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

pump station and related valves and barrel-shaped cement structures and electrical boxes. Interviews revealed that the site is used for periodic grazing as well as the cultivation of barley; these uses are generally not associated with the use of hazardous materials. As noted below, a review of historic aerial photographs (1939 – 1999) show that the site consisted of bare land during much of that time as well, with the exception of the Water District easement. (Terrasearch 2007). No surficial evidence indicating the presence of underground storage tanks was observed on the site. Additionally there was no visual evidence on the site of sumps, drains, pits, debris piles or stained soils indicating the presence of hazardous materials, including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). EDR Radius Reporting indicated that the federal EPA Radon Zone for San Benito County is “2”, which is associated with low exposure potential for radon by the United States Geological Survey (USGS). No secondary contamination sources were reported within a one- mile radius of the site. The report also confirms that the site is not located within a 100-year FEMA flood zone.

Records Search Terrasearch (2007) and EMC Planning Group (2010) performed a search of federal, state, and local databases listing contaminated sites, Brownfield sites (i.e., a development site having the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant), underground storage tank (UST) sites, waste storage sites, toxic chemical sites, contaminated well sites, clandestine drug lab sites, and other sites containing hazardous materials. No such sites were found within one mile of the project site (Department of Toxic Substances Control 2010). In addition, the project site is not listed on any of these databases.

Aerial Photographs and Topographical Maps As part of the ESA research, a review was conducted of available aerial photographs dating from 1939. The photographic evidence reveals that the project site has been vacant and has changed little over the past 60 years. Aerial photographs of the project site and vicinity dating back to 1939 were obtained as part of the ESA process. Historic United States Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps of San Benito County dating back to 1921 were reviewed as part of EMC Planning Group’s review. With the exception of the San Benito County Water District equipment and easement at the northwest corner, the site has never been developed or improved with structures.

Interviews With Current and Past Property Owners The current and previous owners of the site as well as a current lessee were interviewed during preparation of the ESA. All three interviewees noted that, with the exception of the Water District pump equipment, the site has always been undeveloped and used for dry farming or

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.8-3

3.8

H AZARDS AND HAZARD OUS M ATERIALS

grazing, and that to their knowledge, no hazardous materials have been stored on the site. The ESA concluded that based on the evaluation conducted in connection with the project site and given that these types of land uses do not involve the use of pesticides, the likelihood of contamination with agricultural pesticides is low (Terrasearch 2007).

Project Site Reconnaissance Terrasearch performed site reconnaissance in 2007. A detailed evaluation was performed by walking the project site to document the occurrence of any potential environmental concerns, including past or present petroleum storage tanks, surface stains, solid waste disposal, and transformers. Surrounding land uses were also identified during the site reconnaissance. As noted above, no evidence of potential environmental concerns was observed on the project site or surrounding lands during the site reconnaissance.

Hazardous Materials As noted above, the ESA found no evidence of hazardous materials on the site or associated with the District water pump station or any other uses. The report concludes that based on a review of literature, aerial photography, historic topographic maps, County and regulatory agency files, there is no evidence of any uses that would indicate contamination on or near the site. The ESA conclusions about whether specific hazardous materials may be present on the project site are summarized below. Agricultural Pesticides As noted previously, the ESA determined that there is a low likelihood that agricultural pesticide residues are present on the site based on the historic use of the site for dry farming or grazing. Asbestos Asbestos is the name given to a number of naturally occurring, fibrous silicate minerals mined for their useful properties, such as thermal insulation, chemical and thermal stability, and high tensile strength. With regard to naturally occurring asbestos, according to the Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, rock formations that contain naturally occurring asbestos are known to be present in 44 of California’s 58 counties, including San Benito County in the Clear Creek/New Idria area, approximately 70 miles southeast of the City of Hollister. The project site contains only undeveloped land. No structures have been or are currently present on the site except for the water pump station. According to the ESA, no asbestos materials were observed on the site or otherwise indicated to be present (Terrasearch 2007). Therefore, asbestos is not a significant environmental concern.

3.8-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Lead Lead-Based Paint Lead is a highly toxic metal that was used until the late 1970s in a number of products, most notably paint. Lead may cause a range of health effects, from behavioral problems and learning disabilities to seizures and death. Primary sources of lead exposure are deteriorating lead-based paint, lead-contaminated dust, and lead-contaminated soil. Since the project site contains only undeveloped land with no structures (except for the water pump station), no lead-based paint was observed on the site or otherwise indicated to be present. Therefore, lead-based paint is not a significant environmental concern. Aerially Deposited Lead Tetraethyl lead was used as a gasoline additive for automobiles from the 1920s until its use was banned by the State of California in January, 1992 and the federal government in January, 1996. As a fuel additive, tetraethyl lead prevents knocking or pinging in high compression engines. However, the lead in gasoline was borne in exhaust emissions where it was dispersed into the air and eventually settled onto the ground. Lead can potentially accumulate in soils, especially near roads, at levels high enough to cause health concerns. The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has identified concerns with potential presence of lead contaminated soils adjacent to roadways, due to the historical use of leaded gasoline in motor vehicles. Although lead additives in fuels were phased out by 1995, aerially deposited lead can persist in the environment. According to information obtained from the DTSC website, lead deposited on soils from automobile emissions remains in the top few centimeters of soil. Risks of exposure to aerially deposited lead along roadways are greatest during transport and disposal of contaminated soils, although these risks can be substantially reduced by capping the contaminated soils or burying them on-site, as permitted by the DTSC. This Draft EIR evaluates this potential concern in connection with the proposed Airline Highway EVA route, as discussed further below. Polychlorinated Biphenyls Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) are mixtures of synthetic chemicals with similar chemical structures. Because of their non-flammability, chemical stability, high boiling point, and electrical insulating properties, PCBs were used in hundreds of industrial and commercial applications. The project site contains only undeveloped land. No structures are on-site except for the water pump station. The ESA found no evidence of PCBs on the site (Terrasearch 2007). Therefore, PCBs are not a significant environmental concern.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.8-5

3.8

H AZARDS AND HAZARD OUS M ATERIALS

3.8.2 R EGULATORY S ETTING Definition of Hazardous Materials A material is considered hazardous if it appears on a list of hazardous materials prepared by a federal, state, or local agency, or if it has characteristics defined as hazardous by such an agency. A hazardous material is defined in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Section 66260.10, in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 25501(o), as follows: …any material that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment. “Hazardous materials” include, but are not limited to, hazardous substances, hazardous waste, and any material that a handler or the administering agency has a reasonable basis for believing that it would be injurious to the health and safety of persons or harmful to the environment if released into the workplace or environment. Factors that influence the health effects of exposure to hazardous materials include the dose to which the person is exposed, the frequency of exposure, the exposure pathway, and individual susceptibility.

Federal Laws and Regulations United States Environmental Protection Agency The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides leadership in the nation’s environmental science, research education and assessment efforts. The EPA works closely with other federal agencies, including the United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the United States Department of Transportation (DOT), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), as well as state and local governments and Native American tribes, to develop and enforce environmental protection laws and regulations. The EPA is responsible for researching and setting national standards for a variety of environmental programs and delegates to states the responsibility for issuing required permits as well as monitoring and enforcing compliance. The California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) is authorized to implement the State’s hazardous waste management program for the U.S. EPA. The U.S. EPA continues to regulate hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. 3.8-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq.) introduced active federal involvement to emergency response, site remediation, and spill prevention, most notably the Superfund program. This law created a tax on the chemical and petroleum industries and provided broad federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment. CERCLA contains prohibitions and requirements concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites, provides for liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites, and establishes a trust fund to provide for cleanup when no responsible party could be identified. The law authorizes two kinds of response actions: Short-term removals, where actions may be taken to address releases or threatened releases requiring prompt response, and long-term remedial response actions, which permanently and significantly reduce the dangers associated with releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that are serious, but not immediately life threatening. These actions can be conducted only at sites listed on EPA’s National Priorities List (NPL).

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (42 U.S.C. § 6901 et seq.) gave the U.S. EPA the authority to control hazardous waste from “cradle-to-grave.”

This includes the

generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. In addition, the RCRA sets forth a framework for the management of non-hazardous wastes. The 1984 amendments to the RCRA enabled the U.S. EPA to address environmental problems that could result from underground tanks storing petroleum and other hazardous substances. The program established tank and leak detection standards, including spill and overflow protection devices for new tanks. The tanks must also meet certain performance standards to ensure that the stored material will not corrode the tanks. The federal Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) (42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq.) to the RCRA required the phasing out of the practice of “land disposal” of hazardous waste. Some of the other mandates of this law include increased U.S. EPA enforcement authority, more stringent hazardous waste management standards, and a comprehensive underground storage tank program.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.8-7

3.8

H AZARDS AND HAZARD OUS M ATERIALS

Federal Toxic Substances Control Act The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq.) authorizes the U.S. EPA to secure information on all new and existing chemical substances and to control any of these substances determined to cause an unreasonable risk to public health or the environment. This Act also includes requirements for the storage, use, and disposal of Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB)-containing materials.

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act The primary focus of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. § 136 et seq.) is to provide federal control of pesticide distribution, sale, and use. The U.S. EPA was given authority under the FIFRA not only to study the consequences of pesticide usage, but also to require users (farmers, utility companies, and others) to register when purchasing pesticides. Through later amendments to this law, users also must take exams for certification as applicators of pesticides. All pesticides used in the United States must be registered by the U.S. EPA. Registration assures that pesticides are properly labeled and will not cause unreasonable harm to the environment.

State Laws and Regulations Cal-EPA and the State Water Resources Control Board The California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal-EPA) and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) establish rules governing the use of hazardous materials and the management of hazardous waste. Within Cal-EPA, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has primary regulatory responsibility, with delegation of enforcement to local jurisdictions that enter into agreements with Cal-EPA, for the management of hazardous materials and the generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous waste. San Benito County is currently responsible for implementing Chapter 6.95 of Division 20 of the California Health and Safety Code (§ 25500 et seq.) relating to hazardous materials release response plans and inventory.

Cal-OSHA The California Occupational and Health Administration (Cal-OSHA) is responsible for implementing workplace regulations. Cal-OSHA considers an asbestos-containing material (ACM) as one containing at least 1 percent asbestos. A contractor certified by the California Contractor’s State License Board to conduct asbestos-related work must perform the removal or

3.8-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

disturbance of 100 square feet or more of ACM. Requirements specifically addressing asbestos are contained in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) and in the California Health and Safety Code.

California Water Code California Water Code Section 231 requires the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) to develop well construction standards to protect California’s groundwater quality. DWR Bulletin 74-90 (Supplement to Bulletin 74-81), California Well Standards, Water Wells, Monitoring Wells, Cathodic Protection Wells (June 1991), contains the minimum requirements for constructing, altering, maintaining and destroying these types of wells. The standards apply to all water well drillers in California and the local agencies that enforce them.

California Health and Safety Code The California Hazardous Waste Control Act (HWCA) (Health & Safety Code § 25100 et seq.) is the State’s equivalent to the RCRA and closely parallels it by regulating the generation, storage, transportation, treatment, and disposal of hazardous waste in the State. The primary authority for enforcement of HWCA and RCRA itself lies with the DTSC. The EPA has granted the State the authority to administer all regulations under both the RCRA and the HCWA. California Health and Safety Code Sections 25531 et seq. incorporate the requirements of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act and the Clean Air Act as they pertain to hazardous materials. Health and Safety Code Section 25534 directs facility owners storing or handling acutely hazardous materials in reportable quantities to develop a Risk Management Plan (RMP). The RMP must be submitted to the appropriate local authorities, the designated local administering agency, and the EPA for review and approval.

Local Laws and Regulations San Benito County Environmental Health Department San Benito County is responsible for implementing Chapter 6.95 of Division 20 of the California Health and Safety Code (§ 25500 et seq.), relating to hazardous materials release response plans and inventory. The San Benito County Environmental Health Department (SBCEHD) has been designated the lead agency for hazardous materials programs, and acts as the single point of contact for issuance of permits. Site inspections of all hazardous materials programs (i.e., aboveground tanks and underground tanks, hazardous waste treatment, hazardous waste generators, hazardous materials management plans, etc.) are consolidated and accomplished by a single inspection. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.8-9

3.8

H AZARDS AND HAZARD OUS M ATERIALS

The program provides emergency response to chemical events to furnish substance identification; health and environmental risk assessment; air, soil, water, and waste sample collection; incident mitigation and cleanup feasibility options; and on-scene coordination for state Superfund incidents. The program also provides for the oversight, investigation, and remediation of unauthorized releases from underground tasks.

San Benito County Emergency Operations Plan The San Benito County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) (2005) provides guidance for the County’s response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, and nuclear defense operations – both during war and peacetime. The EOP concentrates on operational concepts and response procedures relative to large scale disasters, and addresses operations for the entire County.

San Benito County General Plan Safety Element The following policies from the Safety Element of the San Benito County General Plan are relevant to the proposed project: Policy 3. It will be the County’s policy to require that lands which are subdivided and developed in the future to residential or commercial uses be designed and constructed in such a manner that levels of “acceptable risk” identified in Appendix A of the Seismic Safety Element are not exceeded. It will be the County’s further policy that these uses will supply adequate water for normal use and fire suppression. Roads which are suitable for safe passage for emergency vehicles, legible street name signs and two means of access to all parcels except on those with cul-de-sacs 600 feet or less. Policy 4. It will be the County’s policy to update periodically information on existing hazards and reduce the risk from them.

3.8.3 S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE The following thresholds for evaluating a project’s environmental impacts are based on the State CEQA Guidelines and standards used by San Benito County. For purposes of this Draft EIR, impacts are considered significant if the following could result from implementation of the proposed project: 3.8-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials;

ƒ

Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment (during operation or construction);

ƒ

Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within a quarter mile of an existing or proposed school;

ƒ

Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment;

ƒ

Be located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport, public use airport, or private airstrip, and thus result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area (Because the project site is not located within an airport land use plan or located within two miles of a public airport, public use airport, or private airstrip, there would be no impact; therefore, this topic area is not evaluated further. See Chapter 5.0, Other Sections Required By CEQA);

ƒ

Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; or

ƒ

Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands.

3.8.4 P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Hazards Associated With Routine Use or Accidental Release of Hazardous Materials Impact HAZ-1: The project may create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal or hazardous materials or through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. This is a potentially significant impact. Project construction activities may involve the use and transport of hazardous materials. These materials may include fuels, oils, mechanical fluids, and other chemicals used during

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.8-11

3.8

H AZARDS AND HAZARD OUS M ATERIALS

construction. Transportation, storage, use and disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations. Compliance with these laws and regulations would ensure that human health and the environment are not impaired from exposure to hazardous materials. In addition, MM HYD-1a and MM HYD-1b require the project developer to implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction activities to prevent contaminated runoff from leaving the project site. Implementation of MM HYD-1a and MM HYD-1b would reduce the impacts of contaminated runoff during construction to a less than significant level. Therefore, no significant impacts in this regard would occur during construction activities. From an operational standpoint, the project proposes only residential and related uses and would not be a large-quantity user of hazardous materials. Small quantities of hazardous materials in the form of typical household products would be used on-site, including cleaning solvents, paints, disinfectants, pesticides, and fertilizers. Handling, usage and disposal requirements (e.g., Cal. Health & Safety Code § 25531) would apply. The potential risks posed by the use and storage of these hazardous materials are primarily limited to the immediate vicinity of the materials, and are anticipated to be low. Additionally, as discussed in Section 3.2 (Agricultural Resources), implementation of Specific Plan Policy RM-4.3 #3 would limit the use of pesticides and fertilizers in common open space areas between development on the site and abutting properties. Further, implementation of MM AG-1 ensures the provision of open space buffer areas around the perimeter of the site and reduces the effects of pesticide and fertilizer use in these areas to a less than significant level. There is a possibility that aerially deposited lead from gasoline exhaust may be present in undisturbed soils within the Caltrans right-of-way in the location of the planned EVA route on Airline Highway. Placement and construction of the EVA route in this location was evaluated in the Gavilan College San Benito Campus EIR and approved by the Gavilan Community College District as part of the San Benito Campus project. The planned EVA route would utilize the existing driveway opening in this location, which would minimize the extent of disturbance. The Gavilan College District has confirmed (email correspondence, March 7, 2011) that the proposed EVA route will be constructed in compliance with all Caltrans conditions of approval, including the protocols required by DTSC. In summary, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment from routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impact HAZ-2: The proposed project site is located more than one-quarter mile from existing schools, but within one-quarter mile of a proposed school. This is a potentially significant impact. 3.8-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

The project site is not currently located within one-quarter mile of a school; the closest school for school-aged children would be the one proposed to be located within the recently approved but not yet built Santana Ranch project (approximately two miles away) and for adults, the approved but not yet built Gavilan College San Benito Campus, which is planned on the adjoining parcel to the south. As noted below in the discussion of Impact HAZ-3, the project site is not included on a list of any hazardous materials sites. As noted above under the discussion of Impact HAZ-1, the project proposes only residential and related uses and would not be a largequantity user of hazardous materials. Small quantities of hazardous materials in the form of typical household products would be used on-site, including cleaning solvents, paints, disinfectants, pesticides, and fertilizers. Handling, usage and disposal requirements (e.g., Cal. Health & Safety Code § 25531) would apply. The potential risks posed by the use and storage of these hazardous materials are primarily limited to the immediate vicinity of the materials, and are anticipated to be low. Additionally, as discussed in Section 3.2 (Agricultural Resources), implementation of Specific Plan Policy RM-4.3 #3 would limit the use of pesticides and fertilizers in common open space areas between development on the site and abutting properties. Further, implementation of MM AG-1 would ensure the provision of open space buffer areas around the perimeter of the site and reduce the effects of pesticide and fertilizer use in these areas to a less than significant level. Therefore the project construction and operations would not create a significant hazard to nearby schools. The impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impact HAZ-3: The project site is not included on a list of any hazardous materials sites and therefore would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment in this regard. Therefore, no impact would occur. As noted above, the Environmental Site Assessment and Initial Site Assessment (see Appendices H and I) found that the project site is not included on any list of hazardous materials sites maintained by the County Health Department, EPA or DTSC. Additionally, a search of the Envirostor website (DTSC 2010) revealed that there are no listed sites within one mile of the project site. Therefore no impact would occur. No mitigation is required. Impact HAZ-4: The project may impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. This is a less than significant impact. The current San Benito County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) contains procedures for responding to various types of large-scale emergencies within San Benito County, and defines emergency response and management roles for County officials. The project would be required to adhere to the emergency response and management activities defined within the EOP, and therefore it would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with the EOP. COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.8-13

3.8

H AZARDS AND HAZARD OUS M ATERIALS

The proposed project would not impair implementation of an emergency response or evacuation plan. The proposed project consists of a maximum of 220 residential units provided on 60 acres with access to Fairview Road in an area of the County identified for development. Additionally, all new roadways would be constructed to County standards, which meet load and access requirements for emergency vehicles. Furthermore, a secondary access to the site will be provided on an emergency basis by the EVA road planned by the approved Gavilan College San Benito Campus project, which extends from the proposed project site, through the adjoining San Benito College Campus, to Airline Highway, as shown on the Circulation Diagram (Figure 14). The Gavilan College District has confirmed (email correspondence March 7, 2011) that the proposed EVA will be constructed in compliance with County and Caltrans conditions of approval. In the event the proposed project precedes construction of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and/or the Gavilan College San Benito Campus is not built, the developer(s) of the proposed project will construct an EVA lane acceptable to the San Benito County Public Works Department and in accordance with County standards prior to the issuance of any residential building permits. The developer would be required to provide an all-weather road connecting all residential units to the EVA to Airline Highway, or in the event the proposed project precedes construction of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and/or the campus project is not built, to the alternative EVA to be approved by the County for emergency access purposes. Therefore, the project’s impacts in this regard would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. Impact HAZ-5: The project may expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. This is a less than significant impact. Wildland fire impact may be considered significant if the proposed project would expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. According to CalFire, the project site is classified within the “moderate” fire severity zone, by the San Benito County Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map (2007). However, the project site is not located in an area prone to wildland fire or excessive fuel loading, and the County Fire Station is located in the vicinity on Fairview Road, and is readily accessible to emergency and fire personnel should an incident occur. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

3.8-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

3.8.5 C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Impact HAZ-6: Implementation of the proposed project in addition to past, present and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects, may result in cumulative hazardous risk impacts. This is considered a less than significant cumulative impact. Implementation of the proposed project would result in potential short-term impacts during construction activities associated with exposure to hazardous substances such as fuels, oils, mechanical fluids, and other chemicals used during construction. Further, typical household products that may be hazardous are also anticipated to be on-site in small quantities during operation of the project. However, any hazardous materials impacts would be site-specific and are generally not affected by cumulative development in the region. As described in this Section 3.8, with proper implementation of mitigation measures incorporated herein and adherence to applicable laws and regulations, the proposed project would not contribute to an increase in the potential for soil or groundwater contamination or the potential risk of upset as a result of current or past land uses. The proposed project would not combine with any planned growth in the area to cause an impact greater or more significant than the project impact alone, or result in incremental impacts associated with hazardous materials in combination with other past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects, which would be considered significant. Therefore, the cumulative impact of the project would be considered less than significant. No mitigation is required.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.8-15

3.8

H AZARDS AND HAZARD OUS M ATERIALS

This side intentionally left blank.

3.8-16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9 H YDROLOGY AND WATER Q UALITY

This section of the Draft EIR addresses the project’s potential environmental impacts associated with surface hydrology and water quality. The discussion in this section is based on site investigation, information found in the County of San Benito General Plan (1994), the City of Hollister General Plan (2005), the City of Hollister Stormwater Management Plan (2000), available flood mapping and other technical information, and project application materials.

3.9.1 E NVIRONMENTAL S ETTING Project Vicinity Drainage The project site is located within the City of Hollister’s Planning Area. All runoff from the City’s Planning Area flows to the San Benito River basin and the Santa Ana Creek basin (City of Hollister 2005). The San Felipe Lake watershed basin collects runoff from the Santa Ana Creek, north of the site. The San Felipe Lake basin also collects runoff from Dos Picachos, Arroyo De Los Viboras, Pacheco Creek, and the Tequisquita slough subbasins (City of Hollister 2000). The San Benito River and its tributary flow through the southern and western portions of the City’s Planning Area, approximately 1.5 miles south of the project site. The San Benito River is listed as an impaired water body under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA). It is impaired by fecal coliform and sedimentation/siltation. As a result, stormwater discharges into the San Benito River must meet water quality objectives and total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) established by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) for these pollutants. The Santa Ana Creek and its tributaries flow through the eastern and northern portions of the City’s Planning Area, approximately 1.5 miles north of the project site. A tributary to the Santa

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9-1

3.9

H YDROLOGY AND W ATER Q UALITY

Ana Creek is located on an adjacent parcel to the north of the project site. The tributary appears to be an intermittent drainage that eventually heads northwest and flows into the Santa Ana Creek approximately three miles northwest of the project site, near McCloskey Road. Santa Ana Creek drains to San Felipe Lake, which is located further to the northwest approximately 12.5 miles from the site.

On-Site Drainage Patterns As discussed in Section 3.7, Geology and Soils, the topography of the project site consists of undulating hills with an overall gradual elevation change of about 45 feet from east to west. A former stock pond is located in a ground depression near the northeast corner of the site. The highest elevation is the crest of a hill near the center of the site and the lowest points are in the southwest corner near Fairview Road and in the northeast corner in the vicinity of the former stock pond. The site rises from Fairview Road to the crest of the hill located approximately 1,100 feet east of Fairview Road. Slopes on the site vary from zero to about 10 percent, as illustrated by Figure 5, Site Photographs, and inferred from the information presented in Figure 6, Topography and Proposed Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone. There are no drainage courses on the site due to the relatively flat topography. Existing drainage patterns on the site follow the topography and generally flow in three directions: west of the crest of the hill, the site drains toward Fairview Road; to the east, the site drains to a low point in the site’s northeastern corner (near the former stock pond); along the southern boundary of the site, the crest of the hill is interrupted by a saddle, which causes drainage to flow southward toward the adjacent property. The existing drainage pattern on the site is presented in Figure 7, Existing Drainage. About one third of the site drains generally to the northeast toward a Santa Ana Creek tributary. The remainder of the site drains toward an unnamed tributary to the San Benito River.

Flood Hazards According to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) covering the project site, the site is not located within or near a 100-year flood zone. Flooding during a 100-year storm event would be confined to the areas adjacent to the San Benito River, south of the site or to Santa Ana Creek, north of the site. Both of these flood-prone areas are located sufficiently downslope of the project site such that the site would not be subject to flooding and inundation hazards.

3.9-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Urban Runoff Urban development is widely regarded as a leading cause of pollution throughout California and the nation, by altering the watershed hydrology and introducing pollutants. Urban development alters the natural hydrology in the watershed in several ways. Natural drainage systems are replaced with pipes and ditches, the land is graded, and impervious surfaces are created, all of which may reduce percolation, increase surface runoff, and damage aquatic habitat. Further, removal of vegetation increases erosion potential. In addition, urbanization tends to bring more pollutants. At the same time, the changes to the land’s natural hydrology may reduce the land’s natural capacity to remove pollutants, further heightening the problem of pollutants being washed into the storm drain system and ultimately into surface waters. In summary, urban development produces runoff that may be substantially greater in volume, velocity, and/or pollutant load than pre-development runoff from the same area. Increased runoff volume and velocity can also significantly affect beneficial uses of aquatic ecosystems due to physical modifications of watercourses, such as bank erosion and widening of channels. As noted in the Hollister SWMP, in the Hollister Urban Area, many different sources of urban runoff pollution have been identified due to the variety of land uses within the watershed. Sources and examples of activities that may generate urban pollutants are listed below: ƒ

Industrial facilities: Industrial chemical processes; chemical and waste storage; fleet maintenance and vehicle washing; and landscaping.

ƒ

Commercial businesses including food and vehicle service facilities: vehicle and equipment maintenance; food processing; vehicle washing; landscaping; and chemical and waste storage.

ƒ

Residential dwellings: vehicle washing; home vehicle repair; home painting and construction projects; chemical waste and storage; and landscaping.

ƒ

Construction and remodeling projects: grading; vegetation removal; concrete washout; vehicle and equipment fluids; landscaping; and material and waste storage.

ƒ

Municipal sewer system and private sewer laterals: leaking, cracked, and debilitated pipelines; and overflows from blocked pipelines.

In general, urban areas contain a number of urban pollutants associated with various types of residential and ancillary uses. In the Hollister Urban Area, stormwater pollutants of concern include: ƒ

Metals

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9-3

3.9

H YDROLOGY AND W ATER Q UALITY

ƒ

Solvents

ƒ

Paint

ƒ

Concrete and masonry products

ƒ

Detergents

ƒ

Vehicle fuels and fluids

ƒ

Oil and grease

ƒ

Pesticides and fertilizers (organic compounds and nutrients)

ƒ

Pet waste and sewage (bacteria, pathogens, and oxygen-demanding compounds)

ƒ

Debris and litter

ƒ

Sediment and silt

Low Impact Development Low Impact Development (LID) is the RWQCB’s preferred means for achieving healthy watersheds and mitigating the effects of urban development. LID is a land planning and design strategy with the goal of maintaining or replicating the pre-development hydrologic regime through the use of design techniques to create a functionally equivalent hydrologic site design. Hydrologic functions of storage, infiltration and groundwater recharge, as well as the volume and frequency of discharges, are maintained through the use of integrated and distributed microscale stormwater retention and detention areas, reduction of impervious surfaces, capture and reuse of runoff, and the lengthening of runoff flow paths and flow time. Other related strategies include the preservation and protection of environmentally sensitive site features such as riparian buffers, wetlands, steep slopes, valuable (mature) trees, flood plains, woodlands, and highly permeable soils. Common LID practices include the following: ƒ

Site design that reduces and disconnects impervious surfaces

ƒ

Native vegetation preservation

ƒ

Bioretention

ƒ

Tree boxes to capture and/or infiltrate street runoff

ƒ

Vegetated swales, buffers, and strips

ƒ

Directing roof runoff into planter boxes and other vegetated areas

3.9-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

Permeable pavement

ƒ

Soil amendments to increase absorption and infiltration rates

3.9.2 R EGULATORY S ETTING Federal Clean Water Act Section 303: Water Quality Objectives Section 303 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. § 1313) requires states to adopt water quality standards for all surface waters of the United States. Water quality standards are typically numeric, although narrative criteria based upon biomonitoring methods may be employed where numerical standards cannot be established or where they are needed to supplement numerical standards. Standards are based on the designated beneficial use(s) of the water body. Where multiple uses exist, water quality standards must protect the most sensitive use. In California, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the nine RWQCBs are responsible for assuring implementation of and compliance with the provisions of the CWA.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System The purpose of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program is to establish a comprehensive stormwater quality program to manage urban stormwater and minimize pollution of the environment to the maximum extent practicable. The NPDES program consists of: (1) characterizing receiving water quality; (2) identifying harmful constituents; (3) targeting potential sources of pollutants; and (4) implementing a Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program. NPDES permits are issued by the U.S. EPA or by the states under U.S. EPA-approved permit programs that incorporate the CWA technological standards. Specifically, Section 402(p) of the CWA (33 U.S.C. § 1342(p)) establishes a framework for regulating municipal and industrial stormwater discharges under the NPDES program, and requires controls to reduce the discharge of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable, including management practices, control techniques and systems, as well as design and engineering methods. California’s Municipal Storm Water Permitting Program is implemented through the SWRCB and the RWQCBs.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9-5

3.9

H YDROLOGY AND W ATER Q UALITY

Phase II: Construction Impacts Section 402 of the CWA (33 U.S.C. § 1342) mandates that certain types of construction activity comply with the requirements of the NPDES stormwater program. In California, permitting occurs under the General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity, issued to the SWRCB and implemented and enforced by the nine RWQCBs. The project site is within the jurisdiction of the Central Coast RWQCB. The first iteration of the Phase II Rule, issued in 1999, required that construction activities that disturb land equal to or greater than one acre require permitting under the NPDES program. The NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit) required all dischargers, where construction activity disturbed one or more acres, to take the following measures: ƒ

Develop and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which specified Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would prevent all construction pollutants from contacting stormwater with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters.

ƒ

Eliminate or reduce non-stormwater discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the U.S.

ƒ

Perform inspections of all BMPs.

On September 2, 2009, the SWRCB adopted a revised NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (Order 2009-0009 DWQ), which became effective in July 2010. This permit covers construction projects that disturb one or more acres, or those projects that are part of a larger common plan of development that disturbs more than one acre in total. One of the biggest differences in the revised General Permit involves the specificity necessary for BMPs. Whereas the previous General Permit left the selection of BMPs to the discretion of the applicant and allowed the applicant to present them in qualitative terms, the revised General Permit requires that the applicant implement a SWPPP that: (1) includes specific BMPs, (2) includes a greater number of BMPs, and (3) establishes quantitative numeric effluent limitations for water quality metrics such as pH and turbidity. The specific requirements will depend on an assessment of the risk level associated with a particular site. In addition, the revised General Permit requires a Rain Event Action Plan, which must be designed to protect all exposed portions of the site within 48 hours prior to any likely precipitation event. The revised General Permit also includes significant new monitoring and reporting requirements.

3.9-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

State Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969 (Cal. Water Code § 13020 et seq.) authorized the SWRCB to provide comprehensive protection for California’s waters through water allocation and water quality protection. This Act established the responsibilities and authorities of the nine RWQCBs, which include preparing water quality plans for areas in the region, identifying water quality objectives, and issuing NPDES permits and Waste Discharge Requirements.

Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board The SWRCB and the nine RWQCBs have the authority in California to protect and enhance water quality, both through their designation as the lead agencies in implementation the Section 319 non-point source program of the CWA (33 U.S.C. § 1329) and under the State’s primary water pollution control legislation, the Porter-Cologne Act. The Central Coast RWQCB guides and regulates water quality in streams and aquifers of the Central Coast region through designation of beneficial uses, establishment of water quality objectives, administration of the NPDES permit program for stormwater and construction site runoff, and Section 401 (33 U.S.C. § 1341) water quality certification where development results in infill of jurisdictional wetlands or other waters of the U.S. under Section 404 of the CWA (33 U.S.C. § 1344). Water quality objectives are defined as limits or levels of water quality constituents and characteristics established for the reasonable protection of beneficial uses or prevention of nuisances.

San Benito County General Plan Construction and maintenance of public services and utilities in San Benito County, such as drainage improvements, are enabled and regulated by the General Plan and County ordinances. The following policies from the San Benito County General Plan associated with hydrological impacts are applicable to the proposed project.

Land Use Element Policy 10: Septic System Policy. Septic systems may be allowed on parcels one acre or greater if percolation tests demonstrate to the County Health Department, Division of Environmental Health, that soil is suitable for septic use. Sewage disposal on parcels less than one acre shall not be by the use of septic systems, but shall be through a public utility service district.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9-7

3.9

H YDROLOGY AND W ATER Q UALITY

Policy 11: Septic System Design. Septic systems shall be properly designed, constructed, and maintained to avoid degradation of ground and surface water quality.

Open Space and Conservation Element Policy 8: Development in drainage basins. It is the County’s policy to minimize development/uses within drainage basins that could alter the path of watercourses and impede groundwater recharge. Policy 30: Water quality from development. It is the policy of the County to require development projects that could contribute to the contamination and/or degradation of groundwater quality to be redesigned to avoid significant impacts. Policy 31: Wastewater treatment. Wastewater treatment systems shall be designed to ensure the long-term protection of groundwater resources in San Benito County. Septic systems shall be limited to areas where sewer services are not available and where it can be demonstrated that septic systems will not contaminate groundwater. Every effort should be made in developing and existing developed areas to reduce the use of septic systems in favor of domestic wastewater treatment. Domestic wastewater treatment systems shall be required to use tertiary wastewater treatment as defined by Title 22. Policy 33: Water conservation. To ensure more efficient use of groundwater resources it will be the policy of the County to require conservation of water resources in San Benito County and encourage inter-agency conservation to develop policies and programs for the protection and enhancement of habitat for fish on major tributaries to the Pajaro River (San Benito River, Pacheco Creek). Policy 34: Evidence water quality and quantity for development. Approval of new developments shall not be allowed without evidence of adequate water quality and quantity. Policy 43: Reduce effects of flooding from development. It is the County’s policy to take measures to reduce potential effects of flooding from new development and encourage flood control improvements.

3.9-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Safety Element Policy 3. It will be the County’s policy to require that lands which are subdivided and developed in the future to residential or commercial uses be designed and constructed in such a manner that levels of “acceptable risk” identified in Appendix A of the Seismic Safety Element are not exceeded. It will be the County’s further policy that these uses will supply adequate water for normal use and fire suppression. Roads which are suitable for safe passage for emergency vehicles, legible street name signs and two means of access to all parcels except on those with cul-de-sacs 600 feet or less.

San Benito County Code Chapter 19.17 (Grading Ordinance) of the San Benito County Code provides performance standards and design criteria for grading, drainage, and erosion control. (San Benito County Code, tit. 19, ch. 19.17.) Grading permits are required for all new development prior to issuance of a building permit. The ordinance further requires the submittal of grading plans with each application including, but not limited to, detailed plans of all surface and subsurface drainage devices, walls, culverts, bridges, retaining walls, cribbing darns and other protective devices to be constructed with, or as a part of, the proposed work together with a map showing the drainage area and the estimated runoff of the area served by any drains. (County Code § 19.17.009(A)&(B)(5).) Grading plans are required to include methods proposed to control erosion and drainage such that it does not leave the site unless contained in an approved drainage channel and does not cause damage to neighboring properties; methods to establish vegetation on disturbed slopes; and estimates the vertical dimensions of cut and fill material. (County Code § 19.17.009(B)(8)&(9).) Drainage plans must meet the further performance standards and design criteria for grading, drainage, and erosion control specifications listed in the County Subdivision Ordinance (County Code, tit. 23) and the California Building Code (County Code § 19.17.011(C)(13)&19.17.014), and shall include on-site retention of water to pre-development levels (County Code § 19.17.011(C)(13). The Grading Ordinance further provides standards for the timing of grading to avoid unnecessary erosion or stream sedimentation or pollution during wet weather, requiring a separate permit for grading proposed between October 15 and April 15. (County Code § 19.17.011(H).) Engineered grading, drainage, and erosion plans require review and approval by

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9-9

3.9

H YDROLOGY AND W ATER Q UALITY

the County Engineer. (County Code § 19.17.011(J).) Design and construction of drainage improvements shall occur in compliance with County standards. (County Code § 19.17.011(C)(13).)

3.9.3 S TANDARDS OF S IGNIFICANCE The following thresholds for evaluating a project’s environmental impacts are based on the State CEQA Guidelines (Appendix G) and standards utilized by San Benito County. An impact to surface hydrology or water quality is considered significant if implementation of the proposed project would result in any of the following: ƒ

Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements;

ƒ

Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site;

ƒ

Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface run-off in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;

ƒ

Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff;

ƒ

Otherwise substantially degrade water quality;

ƒ

Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map;

ƒ

Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows;

ƒ

Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam; or

ƒ

Cause inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.

3.9-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

3.9.4 P ROJECT I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Short-Term Water Quality Impact HYD-1: Site preparation, grading and construction activities associated with the project have the potential to degrade water quality in downstream water bodies, in particular, the San Benito River, which is already impaired. This is a potentially significant impact. As discussed in Section 3.7, Geology and Soils, the proposed project includes grading and construction on up to 60 acres of undeveloped agricultural land. Grading and vegetation removal would increase erosion potential and could affect water quality and lead to downstream sedimentation in receiving waters. Grading and construction could result in the transmitting of sediments and other urban pollutants off-site to the Santa Ana Creek tributary or downslope toward the unnamed San Benito River tributary. Of particular concern is the contribution of additional sediments to the San Benito River, which is already impaired by sedimentation and siltation. Receiving waters may also include the on-site habitat conservation area (former stock pond), if this area is required to be preserved by the resource agencies. Soil erosion may occur along project boundaries during construction in areas where temporary soil storage is required. Grading and construction activities also could accidentally release urban pollutants from improper use and storage of gasoline and diesel-powered heavy equipment such as bulldozers, backhoes, water pumps, and air compressors, including chemicals such as solvents, paint, adhesives, diesel fuel, excavation spoils, gasoline, lubricating oil, hydraulic oil, lubricating grease, automatic transmission fluid, and construction wastes. A chemical release of any of these substances could degrade water quality of the surface water runoff and add pollutants into the drainage system. The project would be required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program, which reduces impacts in this regard. Specifically, the developer would be required to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which specifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will prevent all construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. Also, the developer would be required to incorporate post-construction stormwater pollution management measures, including, among others, source control measures to reduce stormwater pollution during occupancy of the residential development. In addition, the project would be required to implement mitigation to reduce erosion on the site. For example, the project would be required to implement: MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-6 to

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9-11

3.9

H YDROLOGY AND W ATER Q UALITY

reduce erosion (see Section 3.7, Geology and Soils); MM AQ-1 to control dust during construction (see Section 3.3, Air Quality); and numerous mitigation measures to protect biological resources and aquatic habitat (see Section 3.4, Biological Resources). In addition, the Specific Plan contains a number of policies designed to reduce water quality impacts, which the project would be required to implement, as follows: Policy RM-4.3. Utilize best management practices and low impact development designs to minimize surface water quality degradation from discharge of storm drainage.. 1. The master developer shall prepare and submit a storm water pollution prevention program [SWPPP] application to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the County Public Works Department to secure a NPDES General Construction Permit for the entire Plan Area. The master developer and/or individual developer shall incorporate the structural and institutional best management practices and low impact development designs identified in the storm water management plan in improvement plans for their respective projects. The County Public Works Department must review these plans to ensure inclusion of the practices prior to approval of a grading or building permit for that phase. [GIB Prerequisite 4; Homes SS-4] 2. Prior to construction, contractors and their personnel shall be trained in appropriate best management practices to ensure water quality is protected. Those construction practices shall include erosion control, sediment transfer reduction, and dust control measures. A construction manager familiar with NPDES permit requirements must monitor the construction activities to protect water quality. This provision shall be included as a note on construction improvement plans. [GIB Prerequisite 4; Homes SS-4] Implementation of MM GEO-1, MM GEO-6, and MM AQ-1, would reduce the impacts of grading and erosion during construction; however, construction of the proposed project would occur in phases over a period of five to 16 years and project-related construction activity could negatively affect downstream surface water quality during that time period. Therefore, to ensure that the project’s impacts to water quality are reduced to a less than significant level, the following additional mitigation measures are proposed: MM HYD-1a: The project developer shall comply with the policies found in Article 2.0 (Land Use) and Article 5.0 (Resource Management) of the Fairview Corners Residential

3.9-12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Specific Plan. Grading and ground disturbance on the site shall be implemented in accordance with the project’s approved Grading Master Plan and as generally shown on Figure 22 (Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram). For the required treatment of urban pollutants and application of pesticides on the project site, the developer shall comply with all applicable policies in Article 5.0 (Resource Management) as well as the project’s approved Grading Master Plan. MM HYD-1b: In accordance with the applicable law and with Specific Plan Policies RM-3.1, RM-4.3, RM-6.1 (and related implementation measures), the developer shall prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which shall be approved by the County Public Works Department and which shall address stormwater management during the construction phase of the project. The SWPPP shall be consistent with RWQCB standards and NPDES permit requirements, and shall list BMPs, which specify how stormwater discharges would be controlled to protect water quality during the course of construction. Said BMPs may include, without limitation, the following: 1.

Schedule earthwork to occur primarily during the dry season to prevent most runoff erosion.

2.

Protect drainages and storm drain inlets from sedimentation with berms or filtration barriers, such as filter fabric fences, hay bales, or straw wattles.

3.

Divert runoff from exposed slopes to on-site sediment basins before the runoff is released off-site.

4.

Install gravel construction entrances to reduce tracking of sediment onto adjoining streets.

5.

Sweep on-site paved surfaces and surrounding streets daily to collect sediment before it is washed into the storm drains, the San Benito River or Santa Ana Creek.

6.

After construction is completed, clean all drainage culverts of accumulated sediment and debris.

7.

Stabilize stockpiles of topsoil and fill material by watering daily, or by the use of chemical agents.

8.

Store all construction equipment and material in designated areas away from waterways and storm drain inlets. Surround construction staging areas with earthen berms.

9.

Wash and maintain equipment and vehicles in a separate bermed area, with runoff directed to a lined retention basin.

10.

Collect construction waste daily and deposit in covered dumpsters.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9-13

3.9

H YDROLOGY AND W ATER Q UALITY

Implementation of MM HYD-1a and MM HYD-1b, in addition to MM GEO-1, MM GEO-6, and MM AQ-1, would reduce short-term, construction-related impacts to water quality to a less than significant level and would ensure that no water quality standards or waste discharge requirements are violated. Therefore, the project’s construction impacts to water quality would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Long-Term Water Quality Impact HYD-2: Operational activities associated with the proposed project have the potential to degrade water quality in downstream water bodies, in particular San Benito River, which is already impaired. This is a potentially significant impact. The project site is undeveloped and does not contain any impervious surfaces. Development of the project would add impervious surfaces on the project site through construction of buildings, parking areas, roadways, and other project improvements. An increase in impervious surfaces has the potential to increase runoff from the site, which in turn could transport urban pollutants to off-site areas. As noted above, there are no watercourses on the site. However, a portion of the project site drains toward a tributary of Santa Ana Creek north of the project site; the tributary appears to be an intermittent drainage that eventually heads northwest and meets the Santa Ana Creek approximately three miles northwest of the project site. The proposed project may include restoration of the former stock pond as on-site mitigation for biological resources. An increase in impervious surface coverage would create the potential for discharge of urban pollutants into these watercourses and the on-site mitigation area (if constructed), as well as land adjoining the site. As identified previously, a number of pollutants and chemicals associated with development of the project that are typical of urban development, including bacteria from pet wastes, pesticides, fertilizers and landscape maintenance debris, petroleum products, hydrocarbons, litter, sediment, and construction debris, could enter urban runoff that is discharged from the project site. The impacts of urban runoff are particularly acute during the first storm event of the year, when accumulations of urban pollutants are flushed into the storm drain system. The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage patterns on the site. The topography of the site exhibits gentle slopes that naturally drain toward the northeast and to the west, and a small portion to the south. As shown on Figure 21, Conceptual Drainage Plan, under project conditions, the project site would maintain the two main flows toward the northeast and west (Refer also to Figure 22, Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram). It is anticipated that stormwater flow from these drainage areas would be collected by a network of curbs and gutters, storm drains, bioswales, and retention pond(s). It is anticipated that there will be a

3.9-14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

primary retention pond placed in the location of the former stock pond, so long as the former stock pond is determined by the relevant regulatory agencies to not be required for habitat mitigation. There are also Specific Plan policies that provide for the sharing of drainage capacities between the project and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus site, so long as certain conditions are satisfied (see Specific Plan Policy RM-4.2). In any event, the proposed project would be required to design the capacity of the system-wide stormwater retention facilities to be based on the 100-year storm event and to be of adequate size to retain and infiltrate stormwater on the site to pre-development levels as required by applicable County standards (San Benito County Code, tit. 23, chap. 23.17, section 23.17.003(B) and chap. 23.31, art. III, section 23.31.040 et seq.). Additionally, the proposed project also would incorporate, to the extent feasible, low impact development (LID) features, including directing drainage from impervious surfaces to bioswales for infiltration, utilizing biotreatment (natural pollutant filtering) where stormwater runs off of paved surfaces, and capturing roof drainage for reuse as irrigation. These LID features would help to further reduce flows and prevent urban pollutants from migrating to off-site areas and/or entering the County’s drainage system. Furthermore, as discussed in Section 3.2 (Agricultural Resources), the project would be required to limit the use of pesticides and fertilizers in common open space areas between development on the site and abutting properties (see Specific Plan, Policy RM-4.3 #3), as set forth in MM AG-1. In addition, the Specific Plan contains policies that are designed to reduce the impacts of increased stormwater flow on- and off-site and reduce the impacts of urban runoff effects to water quality, as follows. Policy RM-4.1. Construct a stormwater collection and disposal system that retains and encourages percolation of stormwater generated within the Plan Area to pre-development levels. Policy RM-4.2. Allow alternative conceptual grading and drainage plans that direct drainage to shared retention basins with the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, only if the Gavilan College Campus design and construction plans include retention basins with the capacity and water quality treatment measures to accommodate the Fairview Corners Plan Area, or that portion of the Plan Area to be served, so that the Plan Area’s stormwater discharge off-site is maintained at pre-development levels. 1. The master developer shall prepare a storm drainage master plan in accordance with San Benito County design standards, which identifies backbone collection and retention infrastructure needed to serve

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9-15

3.9

H YDROLOGY AND W ATER Q UALITY

development within the Plan Area, in accordance with the timing requirements set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. Any improvement plans shall conform to the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan and shall incorporate use of structural and institutional best management practices and low impact development designs for storm water quality management and to minimize soil erosion for the Plan Area and adjacent properties outside the Plan Area. The improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department in accordance with the timing set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. The master developer shall finance and construct the backbone storm drainage collection and retention infrastructure. [LEED ND GIB Credit 8] 2. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall design, finance, and construct subdivision storm drainage collection improvements, which tie into the backbone storm drainage infrastructure system. Stormwater collection system improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department in accordance with the timing set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. 3. Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Low Impact Development (LID) principles when designing storm water runoff facilities. Policy RM-4.3. Utilize best management practices and low impact development designs to minimize surface water quality degradation from discharge of storm drainage. 3. No chemical pesticides shall be utilized in the maintenance of common landscaped areas, open space areas, or parks. Fertilizers shall be applied sparingly, and shall be derived from natural sources, such as fish emulsion or manure. 4. The master developer shall cooperate with the County to create a public education program for future residents to increase their understanding of water quality protection, which should include but not be limited to:

3.9-16

ƒ

Hazardous material use controls

ƒ

Hazardous material exposure controls

ƒ

Hazardous material disposal and recycling

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

5. Hazardous materials could consist of cleaning products, paint, oil, fertilizers, weed killers etc. The education materials shall encourage the use of alternative methods, and prohibit the dumping of hazardous materials in open space areas or the storm drain system. Further, the master developer shall require that all storm drain catch basins are labeled to discourage illegal dumping of hazardous materials. 6. Where feasible, direct roof drainage to pervious surfaces for infiltration. 7. On larger lots (12,000 square feet or above) consider the capture of roof drainage for reuse as irrigation water. 8. To the extent feasible, direct stormwater run-off to percolation swale and basin areas rather than directing stormwater to storm drain pipes. 9. Use biotreatment (natural pollutant filtering) where stormwater runs off paved surfaces onto pervious surfaces. 10. Utilize sediment traps, evaporation basins, flow dissipaters, and other methods to reduce the volume and speed of stormwater run-off and reduce pollutant loads. [LEED ND GIB Credit 8] Implementation of MM GEO-1, GEO-6, and MM AQ-1, would reduce the impacts of grading and erosion during construction; however, construction of the proposed project would occur in phases over a period of 5-16 years and project-related construction activity could negatively affect downstream surface water quality during that time period. Therefore, to ensure compliance with the Specific Plan throughout the construction phases of the project, consistent with NPDES requirements, the following mitigation measures are recommended in addition to the mitigation measures listed above. In summary, implementation of MM AG-1 and the abovereferenced Specific Plan policies would reduce the project’s impacts to water quality. To ensure these impacts are reduced to a less than significant level, the following mitigation measures are proposed: MM HYD-2a: The master developer shall submit a Grading Master Plan, to be approved by the County Public Works Department in accordance with the applicable timing and content requirements set forth in the Specific Plan. MM HYD-2b: The master developer shall prepare a Storm Drainage Master Plan, to be approved by the County Public Works Department in accordance with the applicable timing and content requirements set forth in the Specific Plan, including, without limitation, the policies for the implementation of BMPs and LID as stated in Article 5.0 of the Specific Plan (Resource Management) (Policies RM-4.1, RM-4.2, and RM-4.3).

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9-17

3.9

H YDROLOGY AND W ATER Q UALITY

The Storm Drainage Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all major drainage facilities proposed for the project site relative to drainage impacts, and would be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of this Plan shall satisfy all applicable regulations, standards and guidelines, including all of the following: ƒ

The capacity design of the system-wide stormwater retention facilities is based on the 100-year storm event and is of adequate size to retain and infiltrate stormwater on the site to pre-development levels as required by applicable County standards (San Benito County Code, tit. 23, chap. 23.17, section 23.17.003(B) and chap. 23.31, art. III, section 23.31.040 et seq.).

ƒ

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) may contour grade the entire Plan Area in accordance with the Grading Master Plan to achieve drainage and the efficient construction of water, sewer and underground utilities.

ƒ

As a condition of approval of the first subdivision map for the project site, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain, at its expense, all necessary permits and agreements as required by other agencies having jurisdiction over drainage, water quality or wetlands issues including, but not limited to, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the California Department of Fish and Game.

ƒ

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare and implement a SWPPP, and shall construct and maintain BMPs as required by San Benito County. In addition, prior to the start of construction, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain a permit from San Benito County for the General Construction Storm Water Compliance Program, as required by the State Water Quality Control Board, prior to the start of any construction, including grading.

Development and operation of the project shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan (as may be amended from time to time). MM HYD-2c: The master developer and/or individual developer(s) shall construct drainage improvements and stormwater retention facilities on the site generally as shown on Figure 21, Conceptual Drainage Plan and in accordance with the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan required under MM HYD-2b above. Site-specific grading and drainage plans shall be prepared for each phase of the project, which shall conform to the approved Grading Master Plan and the Storm Drainage Master Plan (as they may be amended), and shall be subject to the County Public Works Department’s review and approval.

3.9-18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Implementation of MM HYD-2a, MM HYD-2b and MM HYD-2c would reduce the impacts to water quality from project-generated urban runoff to a less than significant level and would ensure that no water quality standards or waste discharge requirements are violated. Therefore, the project’s operational impacts to water quality would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impact HYD-3: The project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site, which may substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding or sedimentation and erosion on or off the site over the lifetime of the project. This would be considered a less than significant impact. As discussed above, development of the project would convert the project site from agricultural land uses to a maximum 220-unit residential development with associated community facilities and related improvements and infrastructure. This would result in the coverage of a significant portion of the project site with impervious surfaces, such as pavement, roofing, walkways, and roadways, and would therefore increase storm water runoff from the project site, creating the potential for greater volumes of runoff to leave the site at greater velocity and to enter downstream waterways such as the San Benito River tributary. An increase in stormwater flows can cause flooding and erosion problems in downstream areas. As noted in the discussion of Impact HYD-2, the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage patterns on the site. The proposed project would incorporate low impact development (LID) features, to the extent feasible, which would help to further reduce flows and prevent urban pollutants from migrating to off-site areas and/or entering the County’s drainage system. The project would be required to construct a stormwater collection and disposal system that captures and retains stormwater runoff in accordance with applicable County and other standards (see Impact HYD-2 discussion and related MM HYD-2a through MM HYD-2c above). In addition, as discussed above in Impact HYD-1, the project would be required to implement mitigation to reduce erosion on the site. For example, the project would be required to implement: MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-6 to reduce erosion (see Section 3.7, Geology and Soils); MM AQ-1 to control dust during construction (see Section 3.3, Air Quality); and numerous mitigation measures to protect biological resources and aquatic habitat (see Section 3.4, Biological Resources). With implementation of the above identified Specific Plan policies and MM GEO-1, MM GEO6, MM AG-1, MM HYD-1a, MM HYD-1b, MM HYD-2a through MM HYD-2c, and numerous measures to protect biological resources and aquatic habitats (see Section 3.4, Biological Resources), the project’s impacts related to downstream flooding and erosion impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9-19

3.9

H YDROLOGY AND W ATER Q UALITY

Impact HYD-4: The project may create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. This is a potentially significant impact. The project would increase stormwater runoff on the project site due to the addition of impervious surfaces. This increased runoff necessitates the construction of on-site drainage facilities. As discussed above, the project would be required to construct a stormwater collection and disposal system that captures and retains stormwater runoff in accordance with applicable County and other standards (see Impact HYD-2 discussion and related MM HYD-2a through MM HYD-2c above).

In addition, the proposed project would incorporate low impact

development (LID) features, to the extent feasible, which would help to further reduce flows and prevent urban pollutants from migrating to off-site areas and/or entering the County’s drainage system. Also, the Specific Plan contains policies that are designed to adequately address the capacity needs of the project’s drainage system, as follows: ƒ

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct storm drain mains and laterals in accordance with the Storm Drainage Master Plan and in accordance with the County’s improvement standards and other applicable standards and requirements. Storm drain laterals shall be constructed to the property line concurrently with the construction of connecting open channels or storm drain mains.

ƒ

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct the required retention basin(s) in accordance with the Storm Drainage Master Plan and with the County’s design standards and other applicable standards and requirements. In addition, •

Retention basins shall be improved for the purpose of providing recreational uses where feasible.

•

The retention basin in each phase shown in Article 6.0, and the associated drainage facilities shall be constructed by the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) when the affected phase begins development.

ƒ

Construction of the Plan Area’s storm drainage system shall be privately financed. Funding for ongoing operation and maintenance of this system shall be funded by assessments collected through one of several potential financing mechanisms such as a County Service Area (CSA), Community Services District (CSD), Community Facilities District (CFD), Homeowners Association (HOA), or other appropriate financing district. Development of the Plan Area shall be subject to payment of the fee for regional drainage improvements in the Santa Ana basin, if required by the County.

3.9-20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct the backbone infrastructure needed for the Plan Area’s storm drainage system with private financing.

ƒ

As part of the Tentative Map process for each phase of the Plan Area, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for constructing the storm drainage system infrastructure needed to serve the development being proposed under the requested Tentative Map.

ƒ

The storm drainage system shall be offered for dedication to the County. Once this offer is accepted, maintenance of the system will be the responsibility of the County (or other entity such as CSD, CFD, or HOA, if applicable) in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.

ƒ

All system infrastructure improvements shall be reviewed by the County during the Tentative Map review process to ensure consistency with the Specific Plan, and to ensure that the design and construction meet the applicable County standards and other requirements.

The project would be required to comply with all applicable Specific Plan policies, including, without limitation, those referenced above. In addition, the project would be required to comply with MM HYD-2a through MM HYD-2c, above, including the requirement to prepare and implement an approved Storm Drainage Master Plan with all required collection and retention facilities needed to serve the project. Therefore, the project’s impacts related to the storm water drainage system would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Impact HYD-5: The project would not place any structures within a 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped on the relevant FIRM, and would not impede or redirect flood flows. Therefore, there would be no impact. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) covering the project site, no portion of the project site is subject to flooding during 100-year or 500-year events. Accordingly, no impact would result. No mitigation is required. Impact HYD-6: The project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam, or inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Therefore, there would be no impact.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9-21

3.9

H YDROLOGY AND W ATER Q UALITY

There is no levee or dam near the project site that would expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding. With respect to seiches and tsunamis, these are the result of waves in bodies of water created by earthquakes. A tsunami is not likely to affect the project site as the nearest point of the Pacific Ocean is approximately 40 miles away and is separated by mountain ranges. It is unlikely that seiches would cause an impact on the proposed project since there are no large water bodies in the vicinity of the project site. Since the project site is relatively flat, no mudflow impacts on the proposed project would occur. Therefore, risks associated with a failure of a levee or dam, and risks associated with inundation caused by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow would result in no impact. No mitigation is required.

3.9.5 C UMULATIVE I MPACTS AND M ITIGATION M EASURES Impact HYD-7: The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future developments in the area may cumulatively result in a significant effect with regard to drainage and water quality. This cumulative impact is considered potentially significant. Development of the project site would contribute to cumulative drainage flows and surface water quality impacts when combined with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future growth and development in the project vicinity, including: ƒ

Gavilan San Benito College Campus: This project involves the construction of a 3,500 full-time equivalent (FTE) student college facility, as well as approximately 70 residential units and 35,000 square feet of retail space, on a 77-acre site at the northeast corner of Fairview Road and Airline Highway.

ƒ

Award Homes Project: This project involves the construction of 595 single-family homes and 100 apartment units on the west side of Fairview Road, South of St. Benedict’s Church and East of Calistoga Drive within the City of Hollister.

ƒ

Santana Ranch Project: This project involves the construction of a maximum of 1,092 residential units, approximately 65,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial uses, up to an additional 41,000 square feet of potential mixed uses within the residential multiple areas, a school site on which a 700-student elementary school may be built, approximately 18.2 acres of parkland, as well as related on- and off-site project infrastructure, located on a 292-acre site east of the intersection of Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road and Sunnyslope Road.

3.9-22

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

It is also anticipated that, over time, the Fairview Road corridor would be further developed, consistent with the Area of Specific Study Designation for this corridor. The cumulative projects list (Section 3.0) also includes a number of smaller residential projects within the City of Hollister, as well as a number of industrial and warehousing projects in the vicinity of the Hollister Municipal Airport. San Benito County requires that all new developments mitigate storm drainage impacts through the construction of retention/detention basins with adequate capacity to handle projected flows generated by each development in accordance with applicable County standards. In addition, the project would be required to implement Mitigation Measures MM HYD-2a through MM HYD2c, which mandate compliance with applicable performance standards to ensure the stormwater drainage collection and detention/retention systems conform to these requirements. The project would also be required to comply with numerous Specific Plan policies to address water quality issues and ensure adequate drainage improvements. In addition, the project would be subject to RWQCB requirements to effectively address short-term and long-term water quality impacts, as would other cumulative projects. The imposition of the above-referenced standards and other requirements on all cumulative development, including the project, would result in a less than significant cumulative impact with regard to drainage and water quality with mitigation incorporated. Impact HYD-8: The proposed project, in addition to past, present, and reasonably foreseeable, probable future projects in the vicinity would require the expansion and/or construction of new stormwater drainage facilities, which could result in cumulative environmental impacts to air and water quality. These impacts are considered to be less than significant. Similar to the project, development of other cumulative projects would require the construction of storm drain facilities to collect and manage stormwater runoff generated by these projects in accordance with applicable County standards and other requirements. The construction of these facilities would involve activities such as site clearing, mass grading, excavation and trenching, which could adversely affect water quality by increasing soil erosion rates in the construction area. The exposure of raw soil to the natural elements (e.g., wind, rain) during grading operations may impact surface runoff by increasing the amount of silt and debris carried by stormwater runoff. These impacts could combine and result in potentially significant air quality and water quality impacts. However, it is anticipated that other cumulative projects, similar to the proposed project, would be required to comply with the applicable revised General Permit requirements and would be required to prepare SWPPPs to address construction-related impacts and Storm Water Management Plans to address operational-related impacts, and that these plans would be

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

3.9-23

3.9

H YDROLOGY AND W ATER Q UALITY

required to incorporate BMPs for the protection of water quality and air quality during site construction, thereby mitigating impacts to a less than significant level. Furthermore, for the same reason, the project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to water quality and air quality impacts associated with the construction and operation of storm water facilities, and it is anticipated that cumulative impacts associated with new or expanded storm water drainage facilities would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

3.9-24

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.0 A LTERNATIVES

4.1

CEQA R EQUIREMENTS

CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(a) requires that an EIR include a reasonable range of project alternatives sufficient to permit informed decision-making and public participation. The alternatives discussed in the EIR should represent scenarios that could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the project’s significant effects. An EIR must discuss alternatives even if all of the project’s significant environmental impacts will be avoided or reduced by mitigation measures. CEQA also requires an evaluation of the comparative merits of the alternatives. In identifying suitable alternatives, potential alternatives must be reviewed to determine whether they: ƒ

Can avoid or substantially reduce significant environmental effects;

ƒ

Can attain most of the basic project objectives;

ƒ

Are potentially feasible; and

ƒ

Are reasonable and realistic.

CEQA provides the following additional guidance for discussing project alternatives: ƒ

An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather, it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives.

ƒ

An EIR is not required to consider alternatives that are infeasible. The term “feasible” means capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, technological and legal factors.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4-1

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

ƒ

The EIR must focus on alternatives to the project or its location that are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project.

ƒ

The alternatives discussed should be ones that offer substantial environmental advantages over the proposed project.

ƒ

The EIR should briefly describe the rationale for selecting the alternatives to be discussed, as well as alternatives that the lead agency considered but rejected.

ƒ

The EIR shall include sufficient information about each alternative to allow meaningful evaluation, analysis and comparison with the proposed project.

ƒ

The alternatives analysis discussed must be reasonable, and selected to foster informed decision-making and public participation. An EIR need not consider an alternative where the effect cannot reasonably be ascertained or where the implementation is remote or speculative, because unrealistic alternatives do not contribute to a useful analysis.

Relationship to Project Objectives The following is a summary of the basic objectives of the project based on information provided by the applicant. The objectives provide an important benchmark in conducting the comparative alternatives analysis. As discussed previously, an alternative is only meaningful for consideration if it can meet most of the project’s basic objectives. ƒ

Implement the intention of the San Benito County Board of Supervisors when they designated this site for higher density development by designating the site an Area of Special Study.

ƒ

Create a mutually supportive relationship between the residential community and the adjoining future community Gavilan Campus site that integrates connections and facilitates shared infrastructure.

ƒ

Provide for housing opportunities in proximity to existing utilities and infrastructure improvements.

ƒ

Provide

for

housing

opportunities

close

to

employment

opportunities,

public

transportation, public facilities, and goods and services. ƒ

Provide a range of potentially mixed residential housing opportunities that will meet the needs of a variety of households with lot sizes ranging from 4,000 square feet to five acres with a range of housing types and square footages.

4.2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

ƒ

Provide convenient pedestrian connections and recreational opportunities through the provision of pocket parks, open space areas, corridors and connections with the adjacent future Gavilan College campus site.

ƒ

Minimize the noise and speed of traffic to ensure the safety of residents through the design of cul-de-sacs and curvilinear streets.

ƒ

Provide employment opportunities in connection with the construction of the project’s required infrastructure improvements and residential construction.

4.2

A LTERNATIVES A NALYSIS

As identified in Chapter 3.0, most of the potential environmental impacts of the Fairview Corners project can be mitigated to a level of insignificance, with the exception of significant and unavoidable impacts related to noise and area traffic and circulation patterns. The discussion in this chapter identifies and examines a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives to the proposed project, as follows: ƒ

Alternative 1: No Project – No Build Alternative

ƒ

Alternative 2: No Project – Development Consistent with the Rural General Plan Land Use Designation

ƒ

Alternative 3: Reduced Maximum Residential Units/Increased Open Space

ƒ

Alternative 4: Alternative Location: Northeast of San Benito Street/Union Road

Environmental impacts associated with each of the alternatives are compared with impacts resulting from the proposed project. Table 46, Project Alternative Summary, at the end of this section provides a summary of this analysis. This section also includes identification of the “environmentally superior” alternative, as required under CEQA. Each of these alternatives is described below, followed by an analysis of how each alternative may reduce significant impacts associated with the proposed project.

Alternative 1: No Project-No Build The “No Project-No Build” alternative assumes that if the project is not approved, no further development of the project site would occur. This alternative would result in the continued use of all areas of the project site as described in the environmental setting of Section 2.0, which consists of the cultivation of barley and the periodic grazing of cattle. Since no development

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.3

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

would occur, this alternative also assumes that other key features of the project, such as the collaborative potential infrastructure sharing with the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus; implementation of numerous sustainable design, siting and building features; and the development of parks and recreational facilities, as well as roadway trails, landscaped parkways, naturally designed retention basins, and a pedestrian and bicycle roadway network that connects the project with the substantial open space facilities planned for the adjoining college campus, would not occur.

Comparative Analysis This alternative would avoid each of the impacts identified in this Draft EIR, which are listed in the Impact Summary Table. However, none of the project objectives would be achieved.

Alternative 2: No Project-Development Consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation The “No Project-Development Consistent with General Plan Land Use Designation” alternative assumes that development would proceed consistent with the project site’s existing “Rural” General Plan land use designation and “Rural Residential” zoning designation. To that end, this alternative assumes the project site would be developed with estate homes on minimum five-acre lots. For the 60-acre project site, the maximum gross density allowed by this designation would be 12 units. This represents a 95 percent reduction in total unit count under the project’s maximum buildout scenario. These lots would not be comprehensively planned in accordance with a specific plan and may be sold individually, with each buyer contracting separately to build custom homes. This alternative also assumes that other key components of the project, including the provision of a range of housing opportunities to meet community needs, the collaborative potential infrastructure sharing with the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus; implementation of numerous sustainable design, siting and building features; and the development of parks and recreational facilities, as well as roadway trails, landscaped parkways, naturally designed retention basins, and a pedestrian and bicycle roadway network that connects the project with the substantial open space facilities planned for the adjacent college campus, would not occur. The potential impacts of this alternative are discussed below, relative to the impacts associated with the proposed project.

4.4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Comparative Analysis Aesthetics/Visual Quality This alternative would result in a very low profile of development on the project site. The visual character of the site would be altered by development under this alternative; however, much of the site would be developed with five-acre “ranchettes,” which would likely be perceived as rural in character. Significantly less outdoor lighting would be required, thereby reducing the potential for light and glare impacts. While it is anticipated that frontage improvements would be built along Fairview Road in accordance with applicable County regulations, it is assumed these improvements may not be as cohesive or extensive as those proposed by the project given that the project site would not be comprehensively planned under an adopted specific plan. This alternative could result in the development of residential uses that lack a cohesive design, since the project site would not be developed as part of a comprehensive specific plan and because the County currently does not typically impose design review requirements on residential projects. In summary, the impacts to aesthetics and visual quality under this alternative would be reduced compared to those of the proposed project. Agricultural Resources Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would result in the conversion of approximately 60 acres of agricultural land to residential uses. However, because this land is not prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance, the impacts of this conversion would be less than significant, similar to the proposed project. By subdividing the project site into five-acre ranchettes without comprehensive planning for the site’s development through the adoption of a specific plan, this could result in more intense development of agricultural lands being directed elsewhere in the County, in order to accommodate future anticipated growth. Accordingly, this alternative’s impact on agricultural resources could potentially be more significant than those of the project. In summary, the agricultural resources impacts of this alternative are similar to or greater than those of the proposed project. Air Quality This alternative assumes that only 12 homes would be built, which is a 95 percent reduction in unit count as compared to the units proposed to be developed under the maximum project buildout scenario. Therefore, the criteria pollutant air quality impacts identified in Table 9, Daily Project Emissions (Refer to Section 3.3), would be reduced by approximately 95 percent. In summary, the air quality impacts of this alternative would be less significant than those of the proposed project.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.5

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

Biological Resources This alternative would not prevent grading and development of the project site associated with development of five-acre “ranchettes” and therefore may result in impacts to special-status species including the California tiger salamander (CTS), San Joaquin kit fox, American badger, burrowing owl, western spadefoot toad, nesting raptors, and migratory birds. The impacts to these species would be similar to those that would occur as part of the project. There may be an increase in some marginal foraging habitat as compared to the project because development of the site would be less intense, particularly if home sites were precluded from constructing perimeter fences and allowed to revert to annual grassland. However, impacts to the habitat of these species would still occur. Therefore, the impacts of this alternative on biological resources would be similar to or less than those of the proposed project. Climate Change This alternative assumes that only 12 homes would be built, which is a 95 percent reduction in unit count as compared to the units being proposed to be developed under the maximum project buildout scenario. This would equate to a significant decrease in vehicle trips, which would result in a corresponding decrease in GHG emissions. However, since this alternative could be viewed as a relatively inefficient land use pattern, given its low density and lack of clustering, and because numerous sustainable design, siting and building features would not likely be built given the lack of a comprehensive specific plan, this alternative could be viewed as not furthering stated objectives and goals to reduce GHG emissions contributing to climate change. In summary, the impact related to GHG emissions and climate change would be less significant in certain respects. Cultural Resources This alternative would develop the project site with rural residential uses, albeit on a smaller scale. Because there would be fewer ground-disturbing activities, there would be fewer opportunities to potentially damage or destroy cultural or paleontological resources, although some risk remains. In summary, impacts to cultural and paleontological resources under this alternative would be similar to or less significant than those of the proposed project. Geology and Soils Under this alternative, the project site would be subject to similar seismic hazards as the proposed project. The project site would still be developed with residential uses, which would involve ground-disturbing activities, albeit on a smaller scale. However, because of the reduced unit count, the population exposed to these hazards would be much smaller as compared to the population potentially exposed following development of the project. Further, potential soil erosion and sedimentation impacts associated with this alternative would be similar in kind to

4.6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

the proposed project, although they would be less significant overall, given the reduced amount of ground disturbance that would occur under this alternative. In summary, the geology and soils impacts under this alternative would be similar to or less significant than those of the proposed project. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Under this alternative and the proposed project, there is some risk of exposure to hazardous and potentially hazardous materials as a result of the pesticides used to cultivate the barley. While the potential for exposure would be reduced under this alternative, as a result of the lower numbers of population overall, impacts are less than significant under either circumstance given the low levels of contamination in the soils. Under this alternative, it is assumed that potential exposure to hazardous materials as a result of off-site surrounding uses would be similar in type but lower overall as a result of a significantly lower level of development and thus lower population figures; although impacts would be less than significant in any event. Therefore, the impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials under this alternative would be similar to or less significant than those of the proposed project. Hydrology and Water Quality The amount of impervious surfaces and rates and volumes of peak runoff associated with the proposed project would be significantly reduced under this alternative. Correspondingly, the site would generate less stormwater runoff that could impact the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems and nearby tributaries. As with the proposed project, development of this alternative would be subject to compliance with applicable requirements of the County and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to ensure there are adequate drainage facilities and that all performance standards are satisfied; water quality issues would also need to be adequately addressed. It is assumed that existing drainage facilities could accommodate the relatively minor amount of runoff that would result under this alternative. Therefore, no drainage facilities would need to be expanded or constructed, and no impacts associated therewith would occur under this alternative. Additionally, the magnitude of construction-related impacts to water quality as a result of soil erosion and sedimentation would be significantly reduced since there would be less soil disturbance associated with site preparation, grading, and construction activities. This alternative would also generate fewer urban non-point source pollutants in stormwater runoff, given the significant decrease in total unit count, including lower volumes of on-site traffic and less area required for parking. However, very low density residential development under the alternative would likely incorporate fewer biofiltration measures, such as vegetated, grassy or street swales. Under this alternative, it is anticipated that the homes would be served by individual septic systems, rather than the City of Hollister’s DWTP. These septic systems would be required to

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.7

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

adhere to applicable requirements of the County and the RWQCB to ensure there would be no significant, unmitigated impacts on water quality. Flood hazards under this alternative and the proposed project would be similar (less than significant), given that no portion of the project site is subject to flooding during the 100-year event. In summary, the hydrology and water quality impacts under this alternative would be similar to or less significant than those of the proposed project. Land Use and Planning Under this alternative, only very low density residential development would be permitted. This could be viewed as potentially inconsistent with the project site’s Area of Special Study designation, which is intended to allow higher levels of development as a means of directing anticipated growth to certain areas in the County that have been determined appropriate and able to provide adequate facilities and infrastructure to serve the increased growth. Dividing the project site into five-acre parcels for development of individual estate homes also could be viewed as potentially inconsistent with the Area of Special Study designation, which envisions comprehensive planning for the project site. In terms of other land use and planning impacts, this alternative would have similar impacts to those of the proposed project, since it would not disrupt or divide an established community; would not conflict with any adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan; and would not result in incompatible development with surrounding uses. Therefore, land use and planning impacts under this alternative would be similar to or greater than those of the proposed project. Noise Under this alternative, the total unit count would be substantially reduced, with a corresponding reduction in noise impacts, including a reduction in the number of new sensitive receptors that could be exposed to traffic noise from Fairview Road and noise from athletic events at the planned adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus, as well as a reduction in traffic-related noise impacts on existing sensitive receptors. Noise impacts due to construction activities also would be reduced in intensity and duration given the significant reduction in overall unit count. This alternative would result in some new development, which would introduce new sources of noise to the site. However, these sources would be consistent with other nearby rural residential uses, and would not include multifamily dwellings or public parks and recreational facilities. With respect to exposure to groundborne vibration, it is assumed that short-term, constructionrelated vibration impacts would be less than significant under this alternative, similar to the proposed project. Long-term, operational vibration impacts would also be less than significant, similar to the proposed project, since neither scenario would involve the use of any equipment or processes that would result in potentially significant levels of groundborne vibration. Therefore, the noise impacts of this alternative would be less significant than those of the proposed project.

4.8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Public and Governmental Services The demand for fire, police, emergency response, and solid waste services would be substantially reduced under this alternative given the substantial reduction in the number of units that would be developed, and thus the number of households that would be generated. In addition, the projected number of school-age children would be significantly lower under this alternative for the same reason, and therefore, the associated impact on existing school facilities would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. Solid waste impacts would be lower under this alternative, due to the significantly reduced population and the related solid waste disposal needs. In summary, the impact on public services under this alternative would be less significant than those of the proposed project. Parks and Recreation The impact on existing park and recreational facilities would be substantially decreased under this alternative given the substantial reduction in the total number of units to be constructed. Under this alternative, it is assumed the development would not need to build any additional parks or recreational facilities given the relatively small amount of additional population that would be generated. Therefore, associated water supply impacts as a result of irrigation, and potential noise and air quality impacts that could occur as a result of construction, grading, and operation of such park and recreational facilities would not occur under this alternative. In summary, the impact of park and recreational facilities under this alternative would be less significant than those of the proposed project. Traffic and Circulation This alternative’s transportation impacts would be less significant due to the substantial reduction in the total number of units to be constructed. This alternative would generate approximately 115 vehicle trips per day, which equates to an approximate 95 percent reduction as compared to the estimated daily trip generation of 2,105 for the proposed project. With this significant decrease in daily trips, LOS and signal warrant impacts under this alternative would be less than significant. However, the alternative would add traffic to highway segments operating at LOS E, and would therefore result in the same significant and unavoidable impacts as the proposed project. In summary, the transportation impacts of this alternative would be less significant than those of the proposed project, though the significant and unavoidable impacts related to the TIF relative to timing of improvements would not be avoided. Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy Under this alternative, there would be a significant reduction in demand for potable water as a result of the significant decrease in the total unit count. Therefore, water supply impacts would be less significant as compared to the proposed project. With respect to wastewater impacts,

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.9

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

under this alternative, the homes likely would be served by individual septic systems. Therefore, it is assumed that the quality of the wastewater would be poorer than the treated effluent from the City of Hollister’s Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant (DWTP). For this reason, disposal via individual septic systems is less protective of the environment when compared with the City’s DWTP option. On-site soil conditions, however, appear suitable for leach field disposal, and the overall quantity of wastewater would be much less than that generated by the proposed project. Furthermore, septic systems would need to be constructed and operated in accordance with the applicable requirements of the County and the RWQCB, similar to the proposed project. Regarding energy consumption, this alternative would generate significantly less overall energy usage due to the decreased total unit count. However, the alternative would not likely include the implementation of numerous sustainable design, siting, and building features proposed by the project that could reduce energy usage and enhance conservation efforts. In summary, impacts to water supply, wastewater service, and energy consumption under this alternative would be less significant than those of the proposed project.

Summary of Comparative Analysis In summary, the impacts resulting from the No Project-Development Consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation in most categories would be similar to or less significant than those of the proposed project as a result of the significant decrease in density and total unit count. Additionally, significant and unavoidable impacts to off-site uses related to construction noise would be eliminated. However, the significant and unavoidable traffic impacts from the timing of TIF improvements relative to TIF payments would not be avoided. Furthermore, impacts under land use and planning as well as agricultural resources could be greater than those associated with the proposed project. Few, if any, of the basic project objectives would be achieved under this alternative. For example, a range of housing types and options, affordable to a variety of households, would not be constructed; a mutually supportive relationship with the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus site with shared infrastructure would not likely occur; and a convenient pedestrian/bicycle network and related recreational facilities that connect to the adjoining campus would not be constructed. In addition, this alternative would not result in the comprehensive planning of the project site; may not be consistent with the intention of the Area of Special Study designation; and therefore may not provide a balanced approach to land use that accommodates future growth, while protecting community assets and the environment.

4.10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Alternative 3: Reduced Maximum Residential Units/ Increased Open Space The Reduced Maximum Residential Units/Increased Open Space alternative was developed from Specific Plan Lotting Example C, which reduces the total unit count to 179 single-family homes, an approximate 19 percent reduction in unit count as compared to the units proposed under the proposed project which assumes a maximum buildout of 220 units. This number was developed by the project civil engineer in an effort to reduce on-site grading and provide an onsite mitigation area of about seven acres. This alternative assumes that the resource agencies (USFWS and CDFG) would require on-site mitigation for impacts to CTS in the form of an approximate 7-acre habitat preservation easement consisting of the former stock pond and a 100meter “buffer zone.” However, this alternative assumes that off-site mitigation would still be required. The maximum total land area available for development would be 53 acres and the corresponding gross density would be about 3.4 dwelling units per acre, slightly less than the maximum proposed by the Specific Plan, which is 3.6 units per acre. This alternative assumes the following characteristics of the proposed project: the project site would be comprehensively planned in accordance with an adopted specific plan; the project would be served with potable water from the Sunnyslope County Water District (Sunnyslope); the project’s wastewater would be collected and treated by the City’s DWTP; sustainable design, siting and building features would be included; and the development of parks and recreational facilities, roadside trails, landscaped parkways, naturally designed retention basins, and a Class I trail and sidewalks within landscaped corridors along the collector streets and Cielo Vista Drive extension, would be constructed. This alternative also includes provisions for secondary emergency access either by utilizing the Gavilan College Airline Highway (State Route 25) EVA or an alternative on-site EVA, similar to the proposed project. The impacts that would result from this alternative are discussed below, relative to the impacts associated with the proposed project.

Comparative Analysis Aesthetics/Visual Quality This alternative would result in less infrastructure and fewer buildings overall, a somewhat lower profile of development, and would result in a less-dense appearing project, as viewed from Fairview Road. However, these differences would not substantially reduce the visual impact resulting from the change of the project site from rural to suburban in character. The additional open space provided by this alternative would likely be characterized as a significant project amenity. However, since this additional open space would be located in an area of the site that is

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.11

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

not visible from public vantage points, it would not affect the aesthetics impact conclusion. Potential light and glare impacts would also be similar, although somewhat lower given the reduction in overall development and the related decrease in size and scale of certain project features (e.g., park and recreational facilities). This alternative reduces the total unit count by 41 units and may result in larger lot sizes, but this increase would not substantially affect the impacts of development since it is not anticipated that the reduction in density and unit count would be generally perceptible to the viewer. With respect to landscaping, it is assumed that similar or slightly less landscaping would be provided under this alternative to soften the visual impacts of the development. It is also assumed that development of the proposed structures would be required to receive design review approval, similar to the proposed project, which would help ensure the overall positive aesthetic quality of development. In summary, the impacts to aesthetics and visual quality under this alternative would be similar to or less significant than those of the proposed project. Agricultural Resources The conversion of approximately 60 acres to suburban uses and preserved habitat would still occur under this alternative. Because this land is not prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance, the impacts of this conversion would be less than significant, similar to the proposed project. However, because this alternative would involve the development of fewer homes, this could result in more intense development of agricultural lands being directed elsewhere in the County in order to accommodate future anticipated growth. In summary, the agricultural resources impacts under this alternative would be similar to or possibly greater than those of the proposed project. Air Quality Short-term construction-generated emissions would be reduced by approximately 19 percent under this alternative, as a result of the reduced total unit count. Long-term air quality operational impacts also would be reduced for the same reason by approximately 19 percent. Under both this alternative and the proposed project, there would not be an exceedance of established thresholds by the MBUAPCD for any criteria air pollutants. With respect to localized mobile-source emissions, these would be reduced by approximately 19 percent under this alternative, and would be less than significant, similar to the proposed project. Regarding long-term exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants, this alternative would result in temporary emissions of diesel exhaust during construction similar to those of the proposed project, and therefore would have similar, although fewer, impacts due to the reduced size. In summary, the air quality impacts would be similar to or less significant than those of the proposed project.

4.12

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Biological Resources Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would result in the grading and development of the project site, and therefore may result in impacts to biological resources, including impacts to special-status species including the San Joaquin kit fox, CTS, western spadefoot toad, American badger, the burrowing owl, nesting raptors, and migratory birds. The impacts to these species would be similar to those that would occur under the project. Development would still be subject to regulatory take permit requirements. However, this alternative involves the preservation of a defined habitat area for CTS on the site in and around the area of the former stock pond, whereas the proposed project proposes commensurate off-site mitigation of project impacts to the species by providing dedicated habitat at a 1:1 ratio preserved in perpetuity and contiguous with other habitat areas. This alternative requires habitat restoration and preservation on the site, which may reduce the magnitude of the impact of the proposed project but does not eliminate the impacts that would result from habitat loss on the remainder of the site. Therefore, the biological resource impacts under this alternative would be similar to or less significant than those identified for the proposed project. Climate Change The reduced number of units (approximately 19 percent) under this alternative would correspond to a reduction in total GHG emissions resulting from vehicle trips and energy use. Therefore, under this alternative, emissions generated by development that contribute to climate change would be less than those of the proposed project (less than significant). Cultural Resources This alternative would result in the development of the project site, which would involve ground-disturbing activities, and, despite the increase in open space area, this alternative also requires restoration that may involve ground disturbance in and around the former stock pond. Undiscovered cultural and paleontological resources could still potentially be damaged or destroyed as a result of ground-disturbing activities on the entire site. In summary, impacts to cultural and paleontological resources under this alternative would be similar to those of the proposed project. Geology and Soils This alternative would be subject to the same seismic hazards as the proposed project, given that development of this alternative would result in the development of the project site, except that the population exposed would be somewhat smaller. The potential geology and soils impacts associated with this alternative would be similar to those of the proposed project as well. While the total unit count would be reduced under this alternative, it would still require substantial earthmoving activities to construct the stormwater retention basin, roadways and other

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.13

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

infrastructure needed to serve the development. In summary, geology and soils impacts under this alternative would be similar (less than significant) to those of the proposed project. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Under this alternative, similar to the project, there is some risk of exposure to hazardous and potentially hazardous materials as a result of any residual pesticides used in connection with the agricultural uses on the project site. While potential exposure to residual pesticides would be lower under this alternative, given the somewhat lower numbers of population overall, impacts would be less than significant under either circumstance, due to the low levels of contamination in the soils. Under this alternative, it is assumed that potential exposure to hazardous materials as a result of off-site surrounding uses would be similar in type but somewhat lower overall as a result of the reduced level of development. In summary, impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials under this alternative would be similar to or somewhat less significant than those of the proposed project. Hydrology and Water Quality The amount of impervious surfaces and rates and volumes of peak runoff associated with the proposed project would be somewhat reduced under this alternative given the decrease in total unit count and increase in open space. Correspondingly, the site would generate less stormwater runoff that could impact the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems and nearby tributaries. It is assumed that stormwater retention facilities would still need to be constructed under this alternative, albeit on a somewhat smaller scale. Similar to the proposed project, development of this alternative would be subject to compliance with applicable requirements of the County and the RWQCB to provide adequate drainage facilities, to ensure there would be no increase as compared to existing runoff quantities in accordance with County standards, and to adequately address water quality impacts. Additionally, the magnitude of construction-related impacts to water quality as a result of soil erosion and sedimentation would be reduced since there would be somewhat less soil disturbance associated with site preparation, grading, and construction activities. This alternative would also generate fewer urban non-point source pollutants in stormwater runoff, given the decrease in total unit count, including lower volumes of on-site traffic and less area required for parking, thereby reducing impacts to water quality. Flood hazards under this alternative and the proposed project would be similar, given that no portion of the project site is subject to flooding during the 100-year event. In summary, the hydrology and water quality impacts under this alternative would be similar to or somewhat less significant than those of the proposed project.

4.14

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Land Use and Planning Under this alternative, the total unit count would be reduced by 41 units (excluding secondary units), or approximately 19 percent, as compared to the units proposed to be developed under the proposed project, but would otherwise be similar to the project in terms of consistency with land use and planning policies. Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would not disrupt or divide an established community, and it would not conflict with any adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. In terms of compatibility of development with surrounding uses, this alternative could be characterized as consistent with existing single-family development across Fairview Road, similar to the proposed project, for the reasons set forth in the impact discussion in Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning. However, the reduction in total unit count would also reduce the opportunities available to provide a variety of housing types and lot sizes to meet community needs, including affordable housing and the housing needs of students, faculty and their families for the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus. In summary, land use and planning impacts under this alternative would be similar to or greater than those of the proposed project. Noise Under this alternative, the total unit count would be reduced by approximately 19 percent, which may result in a reduction in the duration of construction-related noise on the project site. However, implementation phasing would likely be similar to that of the proposed project, with construction occurring on the site for more than 12 months at a time over a period of several years. Further, the reduced unit count would correspond with a reduction in exposure of sensitive receptors to traffic noise, and would result in a reduction of the number of sensitive receptors exposed to such noise. However, these reductions are not anticipated to be perceived as substantially less significant as compared to the proposed project, because this alternative would still be of substantial scale, and would not eliminate significant and unavoidable impacts to off-site sensitive receptors. With respect to exposure to groundborne vibration, it is assumed that short-term, construction-related vibration impacts would be somewhat less significant under this alternative, given the reduced scale of development and duration of construction, and that long-term, operational impacts would be similar to those of the proposed project, since neither scenario would involve the use of any equipment or processes that would result in potentially significant levels of groundborne vibration. Overall, the noise impacts under this alternative would expose fewer receptors to unacceptable noise levels, and the impacts would be similar to or somewhat less significant than those of the proposed project. Impacts resulting from construction activities (as more fully described in Section 3.11, Noise) would remain significant and unavoidable.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.15

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

Public and Governmental Services The demand for fire, police, emergency response, and solid waste services would be somewhat reduced under this alternative, given the reduced total unit count. Further, the projected increase in the number of school-aged children would be somewhat lower under this alternative for the same reasons, and therefore, the associated demand on existing school facilities would be less significant. Solid waste impacts would be somewhat lower under this alternative for the same reasons. In summary, the public services impacts under this alternative would be less significant than those of the proposed project. Parks and Recreation While this alternative would have fewer units than the proposed project, it is assumed that additional park and recreational facilities would still be constructed in order to meet the needs of the project’s residents and to satisfy the County’s park and open space requirements. As with the proposed project, impacts to existing park and recreational facilities would not be anticipated to occur. However, since new facilities would be constructed, this alternative would also have the associated water supply impacts as a result of irrigation, and potential noise and air quality impacts as a result of construction, grading and operation of these other park facilities, similar to those of the project. Under this alternative, fewer park facilities would be required, which, given the reduced acreage for development, may also reduce opportunities for park and pedestrian connectivity between the project site and the adjoining campus, which would not further stated objectives. In summary, the impact on parks and recreational facilities under this alternative would be similar to or greater than those of the proposed project. Traffic and Circulation Due to the approximate 19 percent reduction in total unit count, this alternative would result in reducing project traffic to approximately 1,713 daily trips, as compared to the estimated daily trip generation of 2,105 for the proposed project. The volume of traffic generated under this alternative would still negatively affect the level of service at the intersection of Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension and contribute to an unacceptable level of service at the intersection of Memorial Drive/Hillcrest Road under cumulative conditions. Similar to the proposed project, traffic generated by this alternative would also contribute to impacts to State Route 156 and State Route 25. While the developer would be required to mitigate these impacts to the extent feasible, it is assumed that the timely construction of needed improvements could not be assured under this alternative, similar to the proposed project, and therefore it is not likely that this alternative would eliminate all of the significant and unavoidable traffic impacts (as more fully described in Section 3.14, Traffic and Circulation). In summary, the transportation impacts under this alternative would be less significant than those of the proposed project, but the significant and unavoidable impacts would remain.

4.16

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy Under this alternative, the demand for water would be reduced as a result of the decrease in total unit count. Therefore, impacts to water supply would be less significant than those of the proposed project. With respect to wastewater impacts, under this alternative, it is assumed that the homes would be served by the City of Hollister’s DWTP, similar to the proposed project, and therefore similar impacts would occur in that regard. The impacts of constructing connections to existing City of Hollister wastewater mains would remain relatively the same as the proposed project, although there would be approximately 19 percent fewer connections. Regarding energy consumption, this alternative would generate somewhat less overall energy usage due to the decreased total unit count, although the project would still be required to incorporate specified design features. In summary, impacts to water supply, wastewater service, and energy consumption under this alternative would be less significant than those of the proposed project.

Summary of Comparative Analysis In summary, the impacts resulting from this alternative in most categories would be similar to or less significant than the impacts associated with the proposed project as a result of the approximate 19 percent decrease in total unit count. However, the reductions in impacts are relatively marginal and are not substantial enough to eliminate the significant and unavoidable impacts to traffic and circulation infrastructure and from construction noise. Further, impacts to agricultural resources, land use and planning policies, and parks and recreation would be similar to or possibly greater than those associated with the project. While a number of the basic project objectives would be achieved under this alternative, the reduced total unit count would result in less density overall and may also result in fewer employment opportunities from construction activity and for service workers from operational maintenance activities. Under this alternative, variations in housing options that serve a broad range of community needs, including students, faculty and their families from the adjoining campus, would be reduced. A reduced total unit count combined with a smaller developable land area may also reduce opportunities for park and pedestrian connectivity between the project site and the adjoining campus. On balance, this alternative does not offer significant environmental advantages over the proposed project and would not satisfy most of the project objectives to the same extent as the proposed project.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.17

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

Alternative 4: Alternative Location: Northeast of San Benito Street/Union Road The “Alternative Location: Northeast of San Benito Street/Union Road” alternative examines placing the proposed development in an alternative location. The 51.5-acre alternative site, presented in Figure 37, Alternative Location, is immediately south of the City limits, within the City’s Planning Area and is partially within the City’s sphere-of-influence. Vacant lands that could be evaluated as an alternative location within the County’s Area of Special Study were not considered as suitable alternatives because their development would be expected to result in the same impacts as the proposed project and would not eliminate or substantially reduce significant impacts. Lands south of Airline Highway were also reviewed as suitable alternative locations, but these sites are designated as Prime Farmland, are also within critical habitat areas, and further from existing water and wastewater infrastructure, and also would not eliminate significant impacts of the proposed project. The Alternative Location Northeast of San Benito Street/Union Road was chosen because of its proximity to existing services and infrastructure and location outside the critical habitat for CTS. The alternative site is relatively flat and is currently used as agricultural (orchard and row crop), and is designated as Prime Agricultural land in the City of Hollister General Plan. The site is bounded by Union Road to the south, San Benito Street to the west, vacant land and residential uses to the north and east. The Ladd Lane Elementary School is also located to the east, and a church and children’s center are present to the west across San Benito Street. The alternative site is not located within designated critical habitat for CTS. Additionally, the presence of specialstatus species on this alternative site is considered unlikely given its current use for agricultural crop production and because there are no recorded observations of other special-status species on or near the site (refer to Figure 29 in Section 3.4). Also, the site also is not located on a government-identified hazardous material site or within a FEMA 100-year flood zone. Additionally, there are no known earthquake faults on the site. The County’s General Plan land use designation for this alternative site is “Rural Residential,” which allows 2 dwelling units per acre; it is not designated as an Area of Special Study. Therefore, if developed in the County, this site would allow under the current zoning a maximum of 103 dwelling units. The City’s General Plan land use designation for this site is Low Density Residential, allowing 8 dwelling units per net acre, which would be sufficient to accommodate 220 residential units. The 51.5-acre site is located within Phase 1 of the City’s General Plan phasing strategy for annexations (page 2.21). The City’s General Plan also identifies the site as being located in a “Specific Plan Overlay” area (pp 2.12-2.13), which “promotes a mix of land uses that remain flexible enough to adjust to changing market

4.18

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

y.

Hw

o St.

line

Benit

Air

San

Union

0

1,000 feet

City of Hollister City limits City of Hollister Sphere of Influence

Rd.

City of Hollister Planning Area 51.5 acres, Alternative #4

Source: Google Earth 2009, City of Hollister 2010, San Benito County 2010

Figure 37

Alternative Location Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

This side intentionally left blank.

4.20

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

demands”, and requires the preparation of a specific plan to guide development. Additionally, the City’s General Plan also designates those portions of the site within the City’s sphere of influence as a “Priority Infill” area (page 2.19). According to information received from the City of Hollister, the vacant property immediately north of this alternative site has been granted a growth allocation of 100 affordable units and 75 market rate units (Mary Paxton, pers. com., November 18, 2010). If this site were to be developed under the City’s jurisdiction, it is assumed that approval of a specific plan, a sphere of influence amendment, and annexation to the City would be required. For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that this alternative site would be developed within the City, and that a specific plan would be prepared for the development of 220 residential housing units on the 51.5 acre site. Under the City’s low density residential land use designation (eight dwelling units per acre), over 400 single-family residential units could be developed on this site, consistent with the City’s existing land use designation. However, this site could also support development with a range of residential housing types provided a specific plan is prepared and adopted as the comprehensive planning document (City of Hollister 2005).

Comparative Analysis Aesthetics/Visual Quality The alternative location is not in an area identified as a scenic resource in the City’s General Plan. The visual and scenic characteristics of this alternative location are of somewhat lesser quality than the project site due to its location contiguous to existing urban uses within the City limit. The impacts to visual characteristics of this site would be most evident when viewed from Union Road and San Benito Street. From these public roadways, views of the site are framed by existing urban development to the north and east of the site. Development under this alternative would place new development in an area contiguous with existing and/or planned urban residential uses to the north and east, and would contribute to the conversion of rural to urban uses anticipated by buildout of the City’s General Plan. Given the limited availability of public views of the site, public perception of impacts to scenic quality related to this alternative would be less compared to the same impacts of the proposed project. Under this alternative, development would generate light and glare impacts, similar to the proposed project, it would also be subject to City and County “Dark Sky” ordinances and other applicable lighting regulations. Subject to compliance with these applicable County regulations, the impacts of light and glare would be similar to the proposed project. Therefore, the impacts to aesthetic resources and visual quality of the site and its surroundings, as well as lighting impacts to the night sky would be similar to or less significant than those of the proposed project.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.21

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

Agricultural Resources The City’s General Plan identifies this alternative site as prime agricultural land (page 6.3); therefore, development of the project in this location would result in a loss of 51.5 acres of prime farmland. The conversion of prime farmland to urban uses is considered a significant, adverse impact under CEQA. In contrast, the proposed project site is designated as “grazing land.” Therefore, the impact of this alternative to agricultural resources would be greater than those of the proposed project. Air Quality Short-term construction-generated emissions would be generally similar to the proposed project since the overall unit count would remain the same. Due to its location adjacent to the City limits and existing infrastructure, this alternative would not require construction of utility infrastructure to the extent required by the proposed project. Additionally, construction emissions could be somewhat less significant during site preparation due to the smaller size of the site (51.5 acres vs. 60 acres) and a potentially shorter duration of construction. However, construction of this alternative has the potential to expose a greater number of nearby receptors to construction emissions, due to the proximity of the site to existing homes, the Ladd Lane Elementary School to the east, and a church and children’s center to the west across San Benito Street. Accordingly, construction-related impacts would be greater than that of the proposed project in this regard. Long-term air quality operational impacts would be similar to the proposed project since the overall unit count would remain the same. This alternative would not exceed MBUAPCD established thresholds for all pollutants, similar to the proposed project. With respect to localized mobile-source emissions, these would be similar to the proposed project since the number of vehicle trips would be similar under this alternative and the proposed project, although perhaps somewhat less due to the close proximity of the site to existing schools, transit stops and bicycle facilities. Regarding long-term exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants, this alternative would also result in temporary emissions of diesel exhaust during construction, although these would be less than significant similar to the proposed project. In summary, the air quality impacts would be similar to or somewhat greater than the proposed project. Biological Resources Under this alternative, development can be assumed to result in some impacts to biological resources. The site may provide nesting habitat for migratory birds and raptors, and its development may affect these species, similar to the proposed project. However, unlike the project site, this alternative site is not located within designated critical habitat for CTS. Additionally, the presence of special-status species on this alternative site is considered unlikely

4.22

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

given its current use for agricultural crop production and because there are no recorded observations of other special-status species on or near the site (refer to Figure 29 in Section 3.4). Under this alternative, the impacts associated with habitat loss for special-status species would be reduced. Therefore, the impacts to biological resources, in particular the potential loss of CTS critical habitat, would be reduced compared to those of the proposed project. Climate Change As the total number of dwelling units under this alternative would be the same as the proposed project, the total GHG emissions resulting from vehicle trips and energy use in the dwelling units under this alternative would be similar to the emissions under the proposed project, although perhaps somewhat reduced due to the close proximity of the site to existing schools, transit stops and bicycle facilities. Emissions from the development and energy use associated with water and wastewater conveyance would be reduced somewhat due to the alternative site’s proximity to existing water and wastewater infrastructure. Therefore, under this alternative, emissions generated by development that contribute to climate change would be somewhat less significant than the proposed project. Cultural Resources This alternative would result in the development of the alternative site, which would involve ground-disturbing activities, similar to the proposed project. Although the total area that would be disturbed would be somewhat reduced compared to the proposed project, as with the proposed project, undiscovered cultural and paleontological resources could still potentially be damaged or destroyed as a result of ground-disturbing activities. In summary, impacts to cultural and paleontological resources under this alternative would be similar (less than significant) to those of the proposed project. Geology and Soils This alternative would be subject to similar seismic hazards as the proposed project given that development of this alternative would result in the development of the alternative site with suburban uses. As with the proposed project, this alternative would still be required to address stormwater runoff from development and substantial earthmoving activities would still be necessary to construct stormwater retention basin, roadways and other infrastructure needed to serve the development. This site is located in a seismically active area; however, no known earthquake faults are present on the. As a result, development of this site would be expected to have lower risks of exposure to damage or harm from seismic faulting. In summary, geology and soils impacts under this alternative would be reduced as compared to those of the proposed project.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.23

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

Hazards and Hazardous Materials Under this alternative, similar to the project, there is some risk of exposure to hazardous and potentially hazardous materials as a result of any residual pesticides used in connection with the agricultural uses on the alternative site. A portion of this alternative site is under orchard production, which typically requires more irrigation and pest control, but less ground disturbance than annual grain crops. As a result, there may be a greater potential for soils being contaminated with pesticide residues on the alternative site. The extent of historic pesticide use on this site is unknown. However, it is assumed that exposures, at minimum, would be similar to those of the project (dry-farmed barley), but could be potentially greater due to the presence of the orchards. Under this alternative, it is assumed that potential exposure to hazardous materials as a result of off-site surrounding uses would be similar to the proposed project. In summary, impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials under this alternative would be similar to or somewhat greater than those of the proposed project. Hydrology and Water Quality Impervious surfaces and rates and volumes of peak runoff associated with the proposed project would be reduced under this alternative due to the reduced land area (51.5 acres vs. 60 acres). Correspondingly, the site would generate less stormwater runoff that could impact the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems and nearby surface waters. It is assumed that stormwater retention facilities would still need to be constructed under this alternative. However, given the lack of adjacency with the Gavilan College San Benito campus facility, there would be no opportunities to share drainage infrastructure. For this alternative, the site would connect to the City’s existing network of stormwater collection and storm drains and would be subject to the City’s General Plan and City Municipal Code requirements for the design and construction of stormdrain infrastructure improvements. The environmental impacts associated with storm drainage would be similar to those of the proposed project. Development of this alternative would be required to comply with applicable standards of the City and the RWQCB for the design and control of stormwater flow and drainage to provide adequate drainage facilities, to ensure that there would be no increase as compared to existing runoff quantities, and to adequately address water quality impacts. Further, the magnitude of construction-related impacts to water quality as a result of soil erosion and sedimentation would be reduced somewhat since there would be less soil disturbance associated with site preparation, grading, and construction activities. However, this alternative would generate similar amounts of urban non-point-source pollutants in stormwater runoff as compared to the proposed project given that the same number of units would be constructed. Septic systems would not be allowed on this alternative site.

4.24

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Flood hazards under this alternative and the proposed project would be similar, given that no portion of the alternative site is subject to flooding during the 100-year event (FEMA 2009). In summary, the hydrology and water quality impacts under this alternative would be similar to or less significant than those of the proposed project. Land Use and Planning Under this alternative, the total number of units – 220 – would remain the same although density of the development would be increased due to the overall reduction in developable land area (51.5 acres vs. 60 acres). In terms of other land use and planning impacts, this alternative would have similar impacts to those of the proposed project (less than significant), assuming it would be developed under the City’s jurisdiction, since the alternative site is within the City’s sphere of influence and the City’s General Plan has designated it as a “Priority Infill” site. However, if the alternative were developed under the County’s jurisdiction, it could be characterized as having significant land use impacts as a result of inconsistency with numerous County General Plan policies addressing the protection of prime agricultural resources and directing growth towards land that has been designated as an Area of Special Study. In other respects, the alternative would have similar (less than significant) impacts to the proposed project since it would not disrupt or divide an established community; and it would not conflict with any adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. If the site were to remain in the County, the development of multi-family residential uses in proximity to existing low-density single-family uses on land that is not located within a designated Area of Special Study, would conflict with maximum allowed density of the County General Plan “Rural Residential” land use designation. However, if the site were to be entitled under the City’s jurisdiction, then it could be considered consistent with the City’s General Plan land use designation and Specific Plan Overlay policies, which permits development to include a range of single- and multi-family uses provided that a specific plan is prepared and adopted by the City. In terms of compatibility of development with surrounding uses, this alternative could be characterized as consistent with the existing, adjacent single-family development within the City limits, although neither this alternative nor the proposed project would be considered incompatible in this regard, for the reasons set forth in the Impact discussion in Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning. In summary, the impacts to land use and planning that would result under this alternative would be similar to or greater than those of the proposed project. Noise Under this alternative, the land area available for development of the 220 residential units would be reduced, and the density per acre would be increased. The impacts of prolonged noise exposure from construction-related noise on the alternative site may be reduced as compared to the proposed project, since the duration of construction may be reduced. However, despite the

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.25

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

smaller size of the site and proximity to existing infrastructure, the duration of construction would likely remain longer than 12 months, which would still be a significant and unavoidable impact, similar to the proposed project. Additionally, noise generation from construction of this alternative has the potential to expose a greater number of nearby receptors (within 700 feet of construction activity) to construction noise, due to the proximity of the site to existing homes, the Ladd Lane Elementary School to the east, and a church and children’s center to the west across San Benito Street. Also, substantial development would still occur on the alternative site, with related exposure of noise-sensitive receptors to noise resulting from the operation of the project, including noise impacts related to traffic. However, this alternative may result in somewhat fewer vehicle trips due to the proximity of schools and community services, although any such decrease is not anticipated to be noticeable to the sensitive receptors given the overall scale of development. Additionally, the western and southern sides of the alternative site would be exposed to traffic noise from San Benito Street and Union Road. Depending upon site design, sound walls would likely be required on the site to protect receptors from excessive traffic noise on these roadways. With respect to exposure to groundborne vibration, it is assumed that short-term, constructionrelated vibration impacts would be similar to the proposed project, given the similar unit count, and that long-term, operational impacts would be similar to those of the proposed project, since neither scenario would involve the use of any equipment or processes that would result in potentially significant levels of ground vibration. Overall, the noise impacts under this alternative would be similar to those of the proposed project, although certain construction- and operational-related noise impacts may be greater as compared to the proposed project. Additionally, impacts related to construction noise would remain significant and unavoidable. Public Services The demand for fire, police, emergency response, and solid waste services would be similar to the proposed project given that the total unit count would be the same, resulting in the same number of households. Further, the projected number of school-aged children associated with the proposed project would be similar under this alternative for the same reasons, and therefore, the associated demand on existing school facilities would be similar as well. Solid waste impacts would be similar under this alternative, due to the fact that the same number of units would be built under either scenario. In summary, the public services impacts under this alternative would be similar to those of the proposed project. Parks and Recreation While this alternative would be more dense than the proposed project, the same number of people would be added to the general area and the alternative would also be required to construct sufficient park and recreational facilities in order to meet the needs of the residents and

4.26

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

to satisfy the City’s applicable standards. Therefore, as with the proposed project, impacts to existing park and recreational facilities would not be anticipated to occur. However, since new park facilities would be constructed, this alternative would also have the associated water supply impacts as a result of irrigation, and potential noise and air quality impacts as a result of construction, grading and operation of these other park facilities, similar to the proposed project. In summary, the impact on parks and recreational facilities under this alternative would be similar to those of the proposed project. Traffic and Circulation This alternative would generate the same number of daily and peak hour trips as the proposed project. Primary access to the alternative site would be available from either San Benito Street or Union Road, with secondary access provided through existing residential subdivisions to the north and/or by connecting interior circulation routes to Ladd Lane to the east. Traffic volume would be similar to or somewhat less than the proposed project under this alternative given that the same number of units would be constructed, and would have the same effect to SR 25 and SR 152 traffic volume. However, some traffic impacts of the alternative would likely occur in different locations, being most evident on nearby intersections and roadways along San Benito Street, Union Road and on City of Hollister neighborhood streets in the immediate vicinity of the site. The County Board of Supervisors has noted concern with traffic congestion in this area of the City in proximity to the high school. Traffic-related congestion and level-of-service impacts to city streets could be more severe with this alternative, due to the limited opportunities available to increase street capacity to serve new development at this location. In this regard, this alternative could result in greater impacts to area roadway capacity. However, this alternative also may result in somewhat fewer vehicle trips due to the proximity of schools and community services. Transit stops are available to the north of this site on Nash Road and Tres Pinos Road within one mile of the project site. Class II bicycle lanes are present on San Benito Street adjacent to the alternative site. Additionally, the site is within walking distance of Ladd Lane Elementary School and San Benito High School. In summary, this project would be closer to existing schools, transit, and bicycle facilities, which could reduce vehicle miles traveled and affect traffic characteristics (volume and dispersal) generated by the development of the alternative. While the developer would be required to mitigate identified traffic impacts to the extent feasible, it is assumed that the timely construction of needed improvements could not be assured under this alternative, similar to the proposed project, and therefore it is not likely that this alternative would eliminate all of the significant and unavoidable traffic impacts. In summary, the transportation impacts under this alternative would be similar to the proposed project, and the significant and unavoidable impacts would remain.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.27

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy Under this alternative, the scale of development (220 dwelling units) would be the same as under the proposed project. Water service would be provided by the City of Hollister under this alternative. The demand for water would be unchanged, regardless of location, and the project would connect to the City’s infrastructure, upon annexation to the City. Therefore, the environmental impacts associated with water supply and infrastructure would be similar to those of the proposed project. With respect to wastewater impacts, under this alternative, it is assumed that the homes would be served by the City of Hollister’s DWTP, similar to the proposed project. Wastewater generation would be similar to the proposed project given that the same number of units would be developed, and the alternative would connect to the City’s wastewater collection infrastructure. Treatment would be provided through the City of Hollister DWTP. Under this alternative, the extension of sewer mains would be required to serve the site, although the alternative site is located near the City limit and is closer to existing infrastructure than the proposed project site. Construction-related impacts of constructing the necessary utility infrastructure to serve the project may be somewhat reduced since the alternative site is closer in proximity to existing City infrastructure. Overall, the impacts to wastewater service would be similar to the proposed project. Regarding energy consumption, this alternative would generate similar energy usage since the same number of units would be built. In summary, impacts to water supply, wastewater service, and energy consumption under this alternative would be similar to those of the proposed project.

Summary of Comparative Analysis In summary, the impacts resulting from this alternative in most categories would be similar to the impacts associated with the proposed project since the overall unit count remains the same. However, impacts to biological resources, given the assumed lack of special-status wildlife species on the alternative site and specifically, loss of CTS critical habitat, would be reduced and impacts to aesthetics and hydrology would be similar to or somewhat reduced. Air quality impacts would be similar or somewhat greater than those of the proposed project, given the greater number of sensitive receptors that would be exposed to emissions during construction. Impacts to agricultural resources would be significantly greater given that development of this alternative would occur on prime agricultural land, which would result in the conversion of prime farmland to non-agricultural use. Impacts related to exposures to hazardous materials associated with agricultural production and residual pesticides would be similar to or perhaps greater than those of the proposed project, as would impacts related to consistency with land use and planning policies. Certain construction- and operational-related noise impacts would be

4.28

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

similar to or perhaps greater than those of the proposed project, given the increased number of sensitive receptors that may be exposed. Development under this alternative would generate the same number of vehicle trips, but has the potential to reduce traffic volumes on local streets in proximity to the site; however, any local increase in traffic volume that occurs in areas with fewer opportunities to improve roadway capacity, may result in greater impact to traffic conditions on neighborhood streets. Additionally, the timely construction of needed improvements could not be assured under this alternative, similar to the proposed project, and the significant and unavoidable impacts related to TIF collection and the construction of improvements would remain. Therefore, traffic-related impacts to area roadways may be more severe than those associated with the proposed project, and the alternative would not eliminate significant and unavoidable impacts. Finally, key project objectives would not be achieved with implementation of this alternative given its lack of adjacency to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Specifically, this alternative would not create a mutually supportive relationship between the residential community and the adjacent future community college campus site that integrates connections and facilitates shared infrastructure. In addition, under this alternative, there would be no ability to provide convenient pedestrian connections and recreational opportunities through the provision of pocket parks, open space areas, corridors and connections with the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus site. Finally, implementation of this alternative would not be consistent with the County’s objective to direct greater densities to the Area of Special Study.

4.3

C OMPARISON OF A LTERNATIVES

The comparison of the alternatives are summarized and compared in a matrix format in Table 46, Project Alternative Summary.

Alternative 1: No Project-No Development The “No Project-No Development Alternative” would result in the least environmental impact, since it would not involve any new development. This alternative would avoid each of the impacts identified in this EIR, which are listed within the Impact Summary Table. However, none of the project objectives would be achieved.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.29

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

Alternative 2: No Project-Development Consistent with Rural General Plan Land Use Designation The “No Project-Development Consistent with General Plan Land Use Designation” alternative assumes the project site would be developed with estate homes on five-acre lots for a total of 12 units. This represents a 95 percent reduction in total unit count under the proposed project’s maximum

buildout

scenario.

In

summary,

the

impacts

resulting

from

the

No

Project-Development Consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation in most categories would be similar to or less significant than those of the proposed project as a result of the significant decrease in density and total unit count; however, the significant and unavoidable traffic impacts under the proposed project would not be avoided. Additionally, the impacts under land use and planning as well as agricultural resources could be greater than those associated with the proposed project. Few, if any, of the basic project objectives would be achieved under this alternative.

Alternative 3: Reduced Maximum Residential Units/ Increased Open Space The “Reduced Maximum Residential Lots/Increased Open Space” alternative was developed from Specific Plan Lotting Example C, which reduces the total unit count to 179 single-family homes, an approximate 19 percent reduction in unit count as compared to the units proposed under the maximum buildout scenario. In summary, the impacts resulting from this alternative in most categories would be similar to or somewhat less significant than the impacts associated with the proposed project as a result of the approximate 19 percent decrease in total unit count. However, the reductions in impacts are relatively marginal and are not substantial enough to reduce identified significant impacts to a less than significant level. This alternative also would not eliminate significant and unavoidable impacts to traffic and circulation, or those impacts from construction noise. Further, impacts related to agricultural resources, land use and planning, and parks and recreation would be similar to or possibly greater than those associated with the project. While a number of the basic project objectives would be achieved under this alternative, the reduced total unit count would result in fewer opportunities for housing, such as less variation in housing options to serve a broad range of community needs, including those for students, faculty, and their families, from the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Development under this alternative would also result in fewer employment opportunities from construction activity and over the long term from operational maintenance activities. A reduced total unit count combined with a smaller developable land area may also reduce opportunities

4.30

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

for park and pedestrian connectivity between the project site and the adjacent campus. Accordingly, on balance, this alternative does not offer significant environmental advantages over the proposed project and would not satisfy most of the project objectives to the same extent as the proposed project.

Alternative 4: Alternative Location: Northeast of San Benito Street/Union Road The “Alternative Location: Northeast of San Benito Street/Union Road” alternative examines placing the proposed development in an alternative location. In summary, the impacts resulting from this alternative in most categories would be similar to the impacts associated with the proposed project since the overall unit count remains the same. However, impacts to biological resources would be substantially reduced, since the site is not designated as CTS critical habitat, and impacts to aesthetics, hydrology, and wet and dry utilities may be somewhat reduced. Air quality impacts would be increased due to the greater number of sensitive receptors that would be exposed to emissions during construction. Impacts to agricultural resources would be significantly greater given that development of this alternative would occur on prime agricultural land, which would create a new significant and unavoidable impact resulting from the conversion of prime farmland to non-agricultural use. Impacts related to exposures to hazardous materials associated with agricultural production and residual pesticides could be greater than those of the proposed project, as would impacts related to consistency with land use and planning policies. Certain construction- and operational-related noise impacts may be greater than those of the proposed project. Development under this alternative would generate the same number of vehicle trips, but has the potential to reduce traffic volumes on local streets in proximity to the site; however, any local increase in traffic volume that occurs in areas with fewer opportunities to improve roadway capacity, may result in greater impact to traffic conditions on neighborhood streets. Additionally, the alternative would add traffic to highway segments operating at LOS E.the timely construction of needed improvements could not be assured under this alternative, similar to the proposed project, and the significant and unavoidable impacts related to TIF collection and the construction of improvements would not be eliminated. As a result, traffic-related impacts to area roadways in proximity to the alternative site could be more severe than those associated with the proposed project, and the alternative would not eliminate significant and unavoidable impacts. Finally, key project objectives would not be achieved with implementation of this alternative given its lack of adjacency to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Specifically, this alternative would not create a mutually supportive relationship between the residential community and the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus site that would integrate connections and facilitate shared infrastructure. In addition, under this alternative,

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.31

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

there would be no ability to provide convenient pedestrian connections and recreational opportunities through the provision of pocket parks, open space areas, corridors and connections with the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus site. Finally, implementation of this alternative would not be consistent with the County’s objective to direct greater densities to the Area of Special Study.

Environmentally Superior Project Alternative CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) requires that the environmentally superior alternative be identified. If the environmentally superior alternative is the “No Project” alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. In this case, the “No Project-No Build” alternative represents the environmentally superior alternative because all of the impacts would be avoided relative to the project. However, the “No ProjectNo Build” alternative does not meet any of the project objectives and is inconsistent with the County’s designation of the site as an Area of Special Study. Similarly, the “No ProjectConsistent with Rural General Plan Land Use Designation” alternative could be viewed as an environmentally superior alternative as compared to the other alternatives because most of the impacts would be reduced or avoided relative to the proposed project (although certain impacts would be similar to or greater than those of the proposed project). However, this alternative does not meet most of the project objectives and also is inconsistent with the County’s designation of the site as an Area of Special Study. In addition, both of the above-referenced alternatives are “No Project” alternatives and therefore, another environmentally superior alternative among the remaining alternatives must be identified. Of the two remaining alternatives, the “Reduced Maximum Residential Units/Increased Open Space Alternative” alternative would be the environmentally superior alternative, since there would be some reduction in impacts as a result of the decrease in unit count and increase in open space, as well as the fact that the alternative location would result in the development of prime agricultural land. For additional comparative analysis, see above discussion. Nevertheless, despite being the environmentally preferred alternative, the reductions in impacts are relatively marginal and are not substantial enough to affect the impact conclusions or eliminate significant and unavoidable impacts to traffic and circulation infrastructure and those resulting from prolonged exposure to construction noise. Further, impacts to agricultural resources and land use and planning would be similar to or possibly greater than those associated with the project. While a number of the basic project objectives would be achieved under this alternative, the reduced total unit count would result in fewer opportunities for housing, such as less variation in housing options to serve a broad range of community needs, including those of students, faculty, and their families, from the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Development under this alternative would also result in fewer employment opportunities from construction activity

4.32

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

and over the long term from operational maintenance activities. A reduced total unit count combined with a smaller developable land area may also reduce opportunities for park and pedestrian connectivity between the project site and the adjacent campus. Accordingly, on balance, this alternative does not offer significant environmental advantages over the proposed project and would not satisfy most of the project objectives to the same extent as the proposed project. A summary matrix is provided below, which compares in relative terms, each considered alternative with the proposed project.

Table 46

Project Alternative Summary

Environmental

Alternative 1

Alternative 2

Alternative 3

Alternative 4

Topic

No Project-No

No Project-

Reduced

Alternative

Build

Development

Maximum

Location

Consistent with

Residential

General Plan

Units

Land Use Designation Aesthetics

Less

Less significant

Similar or less

Similar or less

Agricultural

Less

Similar or more

Similar or more

More (new

Resources

significant impact)

Air Quality

Less

Less significant

Similar or less

Similar or somewhat less

Biological

Less

Similar or less

Similar or less

Less

Less

Less/more

Less

Less

Less

Similar or less

Similar

Similar

Less

Similar or less

Similar

Similar or less

Less

Similar or less

Similar or

Similar or

somewhat less

somewhat more

Resources Climate Change Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Hazards and Hazardous Materials

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

4.33

4.0

A LTERNATIVES

Hydrology and

Less

Similar or less

Water Quality Land Use and

Similar or

Similar or less

somewhat less

significant

Less

Similar or more

Similar or more

Similar or more

Less

Less

Similar or

Similar or more

somewhat less

(still significant

(still significant

and unavoidable)

Planning Noise

and unavoidable) Public Services

Less

Less

Less

Similar

Parks and

Less

Less

Similar

Similar

Less

Less (still

Less (still

Similar (still

significant and

significant and

significant and

unavoidable)

unavoidable)

unavoidable)

Less

Less

Similar

Recreation Transportation

Wet and Dry

Less

Utilities and Energy Source:

EMC Planning Group

Note:

Table compares each alternative to the proposed project.

4.34

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

5.0 O THER S ECTIONS R EQUIRED BY CEQA

This section of the EIR discusses the long-term implications of the proposed project as required by CEQA. The topics discussed in this section include growth-inducing impacts, significant unavoidable environmental effects, significant irreversible environmental changes and irretrievable commitment of resources. The discussion in this section is based on information found in the County of San Benito General Plan (1994) and the project application materials.

5.1

G ROWTH I NDUCING I MPACTS

CEQA Requirements Public Resources Code Section 21100(b) (5) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) require a discussion in the EIR of the growth-inducing impacts of a proposed project. The EIR must discuss the ways in which the project may directly or indirectly foster economic or population growth or additional housing in the surrounding environment, remove obstacles to growth, tax existing community services facilities, or encourage or facilitate other activities that cause significant environmental effects, either individually or cumulatively. Direct growth-inducing impacts result when the development associated with a project directly induces population growth or the construction of other development within the same geographic area. The analysis of potential growth-inducing impacts includes a determination of whether a project would remove physical obstacles to population growth. This often occurs with the extension of infrastructure facilities that can provide services to new development. In addition to direct growth-inducing impacts, an EIR must also discuss growth-inducing effects that will result indirectly from the project, by serving as catalysts for future unrelated development in an area. Development of public institutions and the introduction of employment opportunities within the same geographic area are examples of projects that may result in growth-inducing impacts.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

5-1

5.0

O THER S ECTIONS R EQUIRED BY CEQA

An EIR’s discussion of growth-inducing effects should not assume that growth is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment. An EIR is required to discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster growth. However, it is not required to forecast and mitigate the environmental effects of development described as induced growth.

Standards of Significance CEQA Guidelines Appendix G indicates that a project may have significant growth-inducing impacts if the project would induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure).

Analysis Precedent for Future Development The approval of the proposed project would not represent a new commitment of rural lands for urban development. Urban development of the project site has been envisioned by the County since 1989, when the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 89-92, which designated this site in the County’s General Plan (as part of a larger 558-acre area) as an Area of Special Study. This area was deemed appropriate for urban development due to its location contiguous with other existing and planned urban uses, the relative lack of natural resources or environmental hazards that could otherwise constrain development, and the opportunities it presents for higher density development, provided future development is guided by a comprehensive plan for public services and resource conservation. As stated in the General Plan, Land Use Element, the Area of Special Study designation “applies to areas of the County where a combination of the following criteria apply: 1) More concentrated development than is presently allowed may be desirable provided a comprehensive plan for public services and resource conservation is integrated in order of priority into a specific plan, community plan, or area plan; 2) As a result of prior, piecemeal subdivisions, a plan for integrated development and coordination of governmental services and/or community facilities is desirable; and 3) The County has identified the area as a potential area for commercial, industrial and/or residential development.” As discussed in Section 3.9, Land Use and Planning, the project is consistent with the Area of Special Study land use designation criteria. Therefore, approval of the project would not represent the first decision in favor of extending urban development into this non-urbanized area, and would not induce further outward urban expansion beyond this special study area by way of setting a precedent for such outward growth.

5-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Precedent for Suburban-Density Development in the Unincorporated County The approval of the proposed project would not represent the first time that suburban-density development has been approved in the unincorporated areas of San Benito County. Several previous projects, including, without limitation, Ridgemark Golf Course, Cielo Vista Estates, Oak Creek, Quail Hollow, Riverside Estates, Ashford Highlands, and most recently, Santana Ranch, were approved by the County and developed (or are planned for development in the case of Santana Ranch) within the past 20 to 30 years. Since approval of the project would not represent the first suburban-density project in San Benito County, it would not induce growth by way of setting a precedent for similar development in the unincorporated area of the County. Growth Induced By Increased Infrastructure Capacity and Extension of Infrastructure Water Infrastructure As discussed in Section 3.15, Wet and Dry Utilities and Energy, the project would connect to the existing water main located in Fairview Road, and water infrastructure would be sized to serve the project only. Therefore, the project’s proposed water infrastructure would not induce growth since it is not extending infrastructure beyond the project site nor is it sizing the infrastructure beyond what is needed to serve the project. Wastewater Infrastructure New sewer mains would be required in order to connect the project site to the City of Hollister Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant (DWTP). As discussed in Section 3.15, the DWTP has been identified in the draft Hollister Wastewater Master Plan as the regional facility that would provide wastewater treatment capacity to properties within the City and adjacent areas (Hollister urban area), including the project site. Two wastewater service options have been evaluated in this EIR to connect the project site to the City’s existing sewer main on Enterprise Road. The first option entails installing a connection from Enterprise Road east, to the existing sewer main within the Cielo Vista residential subdivision. The existing sewer main within this subdivision has the capacity to accommodate existing flows from that subdivision as well as flows generated by the proposed project. A new pipeline segment from Cielo Vista to Enterprise Road would be constructed to connect the project to the existing main. Under this first option, the project would not be growth-inducing in this regard, because the Hollister Wastewater Master Plan contemplates an extension of service to the Hollister urban area, including the project site, and the infrastructure is already sized to accommodate only the wastewater needs of existing Cielo Vista residences and the proposed project.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

5-3

5.0

O THER S ECTIONS R EQUIRED BY CEQA

The second option entails installing a sewer main within Fairview Road and Airline Highway to connect with the existing sewer main located on Enterprise Road. The proposed project would size the Fairview Road and Airline Highway main to accommodate only the project’s sewer requirements. If the second option is implemented, the proposed project has the potential to encourage future growth within the City of Hollister Sphere of Influence along Airline Highway between the Cielo Vista residential subdivision and Enterprise Road in unincorporated San Benito County, by placing a wastewater line where none currently exists, despite sizing. However, this growth has already been contemplated in the General Plans of the City and the County. Therefore, the project would not remove potential obstacles to growth that have not already been anticipated. Road Improvements and Access Infrastructure The project includes internal neighborhood streets and an extension of Cielo Vista Drive on to the project site as a collector street. The Fairview Corners Specific Plan, which would guide development of the project, includes policy provisions for open-space connections between neighborhood streets and the adjoining undeveloped property to the north and south of the project site. These open-space areas could be used in the future to extend a roadway north to the adjacent parcel, should development on the adjacent parcel be proposed consistent with the Area of Special Study land use designation. Off-site roadway and intersection improvements associated with the project are designed to handle capacity resulting from buildout of the City of Hollister General Plan, and the County General Plan, and, as discussed in Section 3.14, Transportation, are consistent with planned traffic improvements identified in the Regional Transportation Plan (SBCOG 2010). However, the project’s transportation facility improvements would only provide additional capacity to accommodate planned growth; would be consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan; and would not remove potential obstacles to growth that have not already been anticipated by the City of Hollister and San Benito County General Plans. Stimulus for Economic Growth The proposed project is a residential project. Residential uses are typically not associated with direct economic growth because these uses do not create new permanent employment opportunities, as compared with industrial or commercial uses. Residential development is generally considered a product rather than a cause of economic growth. However, during the construction phase, temporary jobs would be created and others supported through the purchase of materials. The residential uses would also have a minor secondary economic effect resulting from the anticipated consumer demand for goods and services by project residents.

5-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Removal of Obstacles to Growth The proposed project would place development and infrastructure near the southern boundary of the Area of Special Study identified in the County General Plan. The proposed project has the potential to encourage future growth on vacant land on approximately 334 acres of land located between the project site and the Santana Ranch project to the north. This land is also located within the County’s Area of Special Study, but no development is currently proposed. In addition, the proposed project has the potential to encourage growth in about 200 acres of vacant land on or near Fairview Road and Airline Highway, within the City of Hollister Sphere of Influence. The Sphere of Influence has been identified by the City as an area for potential urban development. Similarly, the Area of Special Study has been identified by the County as an area of potential urban development. The project would result in the conversion of the project site from rural uses to suburban uses, and could potentially influence the type of development that would occur on this vacant land, in that market decisions may be influenced by the presence of residential uses on both sides of Fairview Road. Therefore, the project could facilitate additional development to the north of the project site and within the remaining areas of the City’s Sphere of Influence in the vicinity of the project site. However, it is also anticipated that, over time, the Fairview Road corridor would be further developed, with or without the proposed project, consistent with the County’s Area of Special Study designation for lands east of Fairview Road, and consistent with the County’s or the City of Hollister’s urban land use designations for lands west of the roadway. The increased residential density and additional infrastructure on and near the project site and the Santana Ranch site could influence owners of the property between these two projects to consider proposing similar land use changes. Therefore, the project could remove some economic obstacles to growth and hasten the development of these areas. Population and Housing Growth According to updated Census data provided by AMBAG, the population estimate for unincorporated San Benito County in 2010 was 62,431 persons. The proposed project would result in a population increase of up to approximately 678 persons (based on 3.08 persons per household, Department of Finance 2010). The approved Santana Ranch Specific Plan (1,092 housing units) to the north and Gavilan San Benito College Campus 70 residential units for a combined total of 1,162 dwelling units, which would equate to about 3,579 people. These two projects, along with the proposed project, would contribute to a total increase in population of about 4,257 persons over a period of five to 16 years. The AMBAG population forecast for the unincorporated San Benito County for 2020 is an estimated 24,720 persons, and for 2025 is estimated to be 26,671. Over the next 15 years, AMBAG forecasts indicate that the County population should grow by about 7,600 people. The proposed project’s individual and

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

5-5

5.0

O THER S ECTIONS R EQUIRED BY CEQA

cumulative contribution to population growth is consistent with the forecast. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in population growth that exceeds regional population forecasts for unincorporated San Benito County. In summary, the project would not result in significant growth inducement by way of setting a precedent for similar projects, by creating excess infrastructure capacities, by stimulating significant economic growth, or by generating significant additional demand for housing.

5.2

S IGNIFICANT U NAVOIDABLE I MPACTS

CEQA Requirements Public Resources Code Section 21100(b)(2)(A) requires an EIR to include a detailed statement setting forth any significant adverse unavoidable environmental impacts. Significant adverse effects that cannot be mitigated must be described as well as effects that can be mitigated but not reduced to a level of insignificance (CEQA Guidelines § 15126.2(b)). If significant unavoidable impacts cannot be reduced or avoided without changing the design of the project, the EIR must describe the reasons the project is being proposed despite the significant unavoidable impacts. CEQA Guidelines § 15126.2(b). CEQA Guidelines section 15093(a) allows the decision-making agency (County of San Benito) to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. CEQA Guidelines section 15093(b) states that when the lead agency approves a project despite the occurrence of significant unavoidable impacts, the agency shall adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which sets forth in writing the specific reasons that support its action. The Statement of Overriding Considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. Substantial evidence includes facts, reasonable assumptions predicated upon facts and expert opinions supported by facts. Substantial evidence is not argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion or narrative, evidence that is clearly inaccurate or erroneous, or evidence of social or economic impacts that do not contribute to or are not caused by physical impacts in the environment.

Analysis Based on the environmental analysis provided in Chapter 3.0 of this EIR, most of the potential impacts associated with the proposed project can be avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance through the imposition of mitigation measures. However, the project would result in significant unavoidable impacts to noise and area traffic and circulation. 5-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Noise Receptors on and off the site would be subject to temporary noise generated by construction that both exposes sensitive receptors to unacceptable noise and lasts for more than 12 months. Mitigation measures are available to reduce the impacts, but not to a less than significant level. As a result these construction impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. Please see Section 3.11 for a discussion of these impacts.

Traffic and Circulation A number of roadway intersections and two highway segments within the Hollister area will be impacted by the proposed project. Most of these intersections and the two highway segments will be improved using traffic impact fees collected from the project by the County, or by funds collected through the establishment of benefit areas for the intersection improvements not included in the TIF. Because improvements to these intersections and highway segments may not be implemented in time to mitigate the immediate project impacts to these intersections, however, project impacts must be considered to be significant and unavoidable. Please see Section 3.14, Traffic and Circulation, for a detailed discussion of these impacts.

5.3

S IGNIFICANT I RREVERSIBLE E NVIRONMENTAL C HANGES

CEQA Requirements Public Resources Code Section 21100(b)(2)(B) requires an EIR to include a detailed statement setting forth any significant effects on the environment that would be irreversible if a proposed project is implemented. Examples of irreversible environmental changes, as set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(c), include the following: ƒ

The proposed project would involve a large commitment of nonrenewable resources such that removal or nonuse thereafter is unlikely;

ƒ

The primary and secondary impacts of a proposed project would generally commit future generations to similar uses (e.g., a highway providing access to a previously inaccessible area); or

ƒ

The proposed project involves uses in which irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental accidents associated with the proposed project.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

5-7

5.0

O THER S ECTIONS R EQUIRED BY CEQA

Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified.

Analysis The proposed project, as a typical residential development, does not involve uses in which irreversible damage could result from any potential environmental accidents associated therewith. However, the development of the project would permanently alter site topography. While relatively minor, this topographical alteration would represent a permanent change since it would be infeasible to return the site to its existing topography. The construction of the proposed uses, including the residential areas, the project infrastructure, and the park and recreational facilities would also represent permanent changes. In addition, the project would include the consumption of non-renewable building materials and energy resources during the construction phase, as well as the ongoing consumption of energy for lighting, air conditioning, space and water heating, and travel to and from the site during the life of the project. However, the consumption of such resources is typical of this type of development and would be reduced to the extent feasible by the implementation of a number of sustainable building and design features as set forth in the Specific Plan. While these changes would be permanent, it is anticipated that the project would include the production of a mix of housing types to serve the needs of a range of households, as well as contribute to community amenities in the form of complementary housing opportunities for the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, and park and recreational facilities that tie into the adjacent campus facility.

5.4

E FFECTS F OUND N OT TO BE S IGNIFICANT

A significant effect on the environment is generally defined as a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the physical environment (CEQA Guidelines § 15382). The term “environment” means the physical conditions, both natural and man-made, which exist within the area that will be affected by a proposed project, including land, air, water, animals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historic or aesthetic significance; the area involved shall be the area in which significant effects would occur either directly or indirectly as a result of the proposed project (CEQA Guidelines § 15360). Detailed analysis and discussion of environmental topics found to be significant are provided within Chapter 3.0 of this EIR. Listed below are those environmental effects that were determined not to be significant and therefore not discussed in detail in the EIR (Pub. Res. Code § 21100(c); CEQA Guidelines § 15128).

5-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Mineral Resources Mineral resource impacts are considered significant if the proposed project would result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and to the residents of the state or of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local General Plan, Specific Plan, or other land use plan. According to the San Benito County General Plan, there are no significant mineral resources or mining operations within the project site. Since there is no evidence of any mineral resources on the project site, and therefore implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of access to, or availability of, a known mineral resource that would be of value to the county, region, or state, this topic was not evaluated further.

Noise A project may result in significant impacts if it would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels when the project is located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, or within the vicinity of a private airstrip. The Hollister Municipal Airport, which supports general aviation activities, is located more than three miles from the project site. Due to the project site’s location, it is not within the San Benito County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. There are no private airstrips within two miles of the project site. Therefore, this topic was not evaluated further.

Air Traffic Patterns A project may result in significant impacts if it would result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. As noted previously, the proposed project site is not located within two miles of any airport or airstrip and subsequently is not located within a flight path. Therefore, this topic was not evaluated further.

Additional Topic Areas In addition to the above-referenced topics, there are a number of other topic areas noted throughout the Draft EIR where no further evaluation was included in this Draft EIR since these topic areas would not apply to the project and would not otherwise be relevant to the environmental analysis. These topic areas include, without limitation, those involving Williamson Act/Farmland Security Zone, forestland, hazardous materials sites, 100-year flood plains, risks associated with being near a levee/dam, risks associated with seiche, tsunami or mudflow, the disruption/division of an established community, conflicts with HCP or NCCP, and groundborne noise.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

5-9

5.0

O THER S ECTIONS R EQUIRED BY CEQA

This side intentionally left blank.

5-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

6.0 R EPORT P REPARERS AND R EFERENCES

6.1

P ERSONS C ONTACTED

Avila, Paul. Battalion Chief, San Benito County Fire Department. Telephone conversation, March 26, 2011. Bachofer, Jack. Chief Business Officer Hollister School District, Telephone conversation, March 24, 2011. Blohm, Harry. Program Manager, San Benito County Water District. Telephone conversation, September 16, 2010. Elia, Jeff. Hexagon Transportation Consultants. Telephone conversation. March 10, 2011. Getchell, Jean. Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District. Email message to Sally Rideout, May 26, 2011. Girouard, Kenneth. District Engineer, Sunnyslope County Water District. Telephone conversation, September 2, 2010. Iler, Roy. Lieutenant, San Benito County Sheriff’s Department, Telephone conversation, March 18, 2011. Knight, Lissette. Senior Planner, County of San Benito. Voicemail message, September 30, 2010. McDaniel, Jared. Illingworth and Rodkin Inc. Email message to Sally Rideout, July 14, 2011. Paxton, Mary. Planning Manager. City of Hollister Development Services. Telephone Conversation, November 18, 2010.

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

6-1

7.0

R EPO RT P RE PARERS AND R EFERENCE S

Rodriguez, David, Gavilan College District. Email message to Sally Rideout. March 7, 2011. Rose, Mandy. Integrated Waste Management. Telephone conversation, April 2010. Sloan, Justin. CDFG Biologist. Email message to the applicant, November 4, 2010. Stevenson, Ray. Registered Environmental Health Specialist, San Benito County Health and Human Services Agency, Public Health Division, Environmental Health Services. Email message, February 7 and 8, 2011.

6.2

D OCUMENTS R EFERENCED

Archaeological Resource Management. Archaeological Survey Report for the Fairview Corners Highway 25 Emergency Encroachment Permit Project. San Benito County, California. April 29, 2010. Archaeological Survey Report for the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Sewer Line Alternatives Project. San Benito County, California. March 9, 2011.

Mechanical Test Trenching Program, July 2008 Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments. Monterey Bay Area 2008 Regional Forecast Population, Housing Unit and Employment Projections for Monterey, San Benito and Santa Cruz Counties to the Year 2035. Adopted by the AMBAG Board of Directors June 11, 2008. http://www.ambag.org/pdf/2008Forecast.pdf Bay Area Air Quality Management District. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines.

June

2010.

http://www.baaqmd.gov/Divisions/Planning-and-

Research/CEQA-GUIDELINES.aspx California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. CEQA and Climate Change – Evaluating and Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Project Subject to the Environmental Quality Act. January 2008. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures – A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. August 2010. California Air Resources Board. AB 32 Scoping Plan. December 2008. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/scopingplandocument.htm Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April 2005. http://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/landuse.htm

6-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN D RAFT EIR

Area Designations Maps/State and National. September 2010. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm California Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2000-2006 — Summary by IPCC Category. 2007. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/archive/archive.htm Climate Change Scoping Plan, (2008), Table 4.16-4, AB 32 Scoping Plan Measures (SPMs). Local Government Operations Protocol. May 2010. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/protocols/localgov/pubs/lgo_protocol_v1_1_2010-0503.pdf Risk Management Guidance for the Permitting of New Stationary Diesel-Fueled Engines. October 2000. http://www.arb.ca.gov Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles. October 2000. http://www.arb.ca.gov California Climate Action Registry. California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol: Reporting Entity-Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Version 3.1 January 2009. California Climate Change Center for the California Energy Commission. The Future is Now: An Update on Climate Change Science Impacts and Response Options for California. May 2009. California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection. San Benito County Important Farmland Map. 2008. ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/fmmp/pdf/2008/sbt08.pdf Landslide Hazards in the Tres Pinos and Paicenes Area, San Benito County, California, Landslide Hazards Identification Map No. 31. 1994. California Department of Finance. City/County/State Population and Housing Estimates, http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/estimates; Census 2010. Demographic Profile Table 2. May 12. 2011. http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/state_census_data_center/census_2010/ documents/2010Census_DemoProfile2.xls#'2010'!A1 California Department of Fish and Game. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. 1995. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/survey_monitor.html California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. San Benito County Fire Hazard Severity Zone Map. Adopted November 7, 2007. http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/webdata/maps/san_benito/fhszs_map.35.pdf

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

6-3

7.0

R EPO RT P RE PARERS AND R EFERENCE S

California Department of Toxic Substances Control: Information Advisory: Clean Imported Fill (retrieved March 2, 2011, and Notice of final Variance Determination for the Caltrans Statewide Reuse

of

Lead-Contaminated

June

Soils.

30,

2009.

http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/2007_serp.cfm?q=aerially+deposited+lead&cx=001779225245 372747843%3Appzm0gzume0&cof=FORID%3A10&ie=UTF8&submit.x=13&submit.y=13#1117 California State

Department Route

of

Transportation.

(SR)

25

in

San

Transportation Benito

County.

Planning

Fact

Sheet

http://www.dot.ca.gov/

dist05/planning/sys_plan_docs/fact_sheets/san_benito_sr25.pdf Transportation-

and

Construction-Induced

Vibration

Guidance

Manual.

2002.

http://www.dot.ca.gov California Energy Commission. California Energy Action Plan II. 2005. http://www.energy.ca.gov/energy_action_plan/2005-09-21_EAP2_FINAL.PDF Diesel Use in California, Remarks by Commissioner James D. Boyd. August 2002. http://www.energy.ca.gov Energy Consumption Demand Management System (ECDMS) data for residential electrical usage in Santa Clara County. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.asp#results. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Data - 2000 to 2008. May 2008. http://www.energy.ca.gov California Environmental Protection Agency. Climate Action Team Draft Biennial Report. March 2009. Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature. March 2006. California Natural Resources Agency. 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy Discussion Draft. December 2009. California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. OEHHA Lists 5 Toxic Air Contaminants of Concern for Children. September 18, 2001. California Office of Planning and Research. Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Significance Thresholds for Greenhouse Gases under the California Environmental Quality Act. October 2008. http://www.opr.ca.gov/ Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended. 2010. http://www.opr.ca.gov/

6-4

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN D RAFT EIR

California Public Utilities Commission, California Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/puc/energy/renewables/index.htm. City of Hollister. City of Hollister General Plan. December 2005. http://www.hollister.ca.gov City of Hollister Stormwater Master Plan. 2000. http://www.hollister.ca.gov City of Hollister Wastewater (Sewage) Treatment Project or "New Sewer System" Project Information Fact Sheet. Found online on September 14, 2010 at http://www.hollister.ca.gov/site/html/gov/office/documents/RevisedfactSheetFAQsfi nal.doc. Long-term Wastewater Management Program for the DWTP and IWTP. December 2005. http://www.hollister.ca.gov/Site/html/gov/office/documents/TitlePage_SectionDivid ers.pdf Sanitary Collection System Master Plan (Wallace Group). 2010. County Express Transit Information. Found online August 10, 2010. http://www.sanbenitocountyexpress.org/fixedroute.html County of San Benito Agricultural Commissioner. Annual Crop Report 2008. http://www.sanbenito.ca.us/departments/ag/documents/2008CropReport.pdf County of San Benito. Environmental Resources and Constraints Inventory. 1994. http://www.sanbenito.ca.us/ County of San Benito General Plan and amendments. 1998. Available online: http://www.san-benito.ca.us/ San Benito County Code, as amended. http://www.san-benito.ca.us/ EMC Planning Group Inc., Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Initial Study. July 2010. Available on the County of San Benito website: http://www.san-benito.ca.us/ Initial Site Assessment: Proposed EVA Lane Driveway Approach on Airline Highway - Gavilan College San Benito Campus/Fairview Corners Residential Project. Technical Memorandum. May 13, 2010. (Included in Appendix J) Mark A. Dimmitt and Rodolfo Ruibal. Environmental Correlates of Emergence in Spadefoot Toads (Scaphiopus). Journal of Herpetology, Vol. 14, No. 1 (Mar. 31, 1980), pp. 21-29. Published by: Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

6-5

7.0

R EPO RT P RE PARERS AND R EFERENCE S

Gavilan College, Gavilan San Benito Campus and Fairview Corners Projects Final EIR. David J. Powers and Associates. November 2008. Available on the County of San Benito website: http://www.san-benito.ca.us/ HDR Consultants. Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Master Plan. November 2008. Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Fairview Corners Residential Transportation Impact Analysis. April 29, 2011. (Included in Appendix L) Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. Fairview Corners Residential Project San Benito County, California. September 2010. (Included in Appendix K) Fairview/Gavilan College Air Quality Study. May 16, 2008. Revised August 19, 2008. (Included in Appendix G) Intergovernmental The

Panel

Physical

on Science

Climate

Change

Basis,

(IPCC).

Summary

for

Climate

Change

Policymakers.

2007: 2007.

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_assessment_repor t_wg1_report_the_physical_science_basis.htm Kennedy/Jenks Consultants. Hollister Area 2008 Urban Water Management Plan. September 2008. Live Oak Associates, Inc. Gavilan College/Fairview Corners Adeir/Deir Biotic Evaluation City of Hollister California. August 19, 2008. (Included in Appendix F) Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District. CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. June 2008. http://www.mbuapcd.org 2008 Air Quality Management Plan for the Monterey Bay Region. September 2008. http://www.mbuapcd.org 1995 Report on Attainment of the California Fine Particulate Standard in the Monterey Bay Region. (Updated 2005). http://www.mbuapcd.org Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Carbon Footprint Calculator Assumptions. Found online August 10, 2010: http://www.pge.com/myhome/environment/calculator/assumptions.shtml. GHG Emissions Factors. Found online May 20, 2011: http:/www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/mybusiness/energysavingsrebates/incentivesbyindustry/ GHG_Emission_Factor_Guidance.pdf. Pacific Municipal Consultants, Inc. San Benito County Santana Ranch Specific Plan FEIR. August 2010. Available on the County of San Benito website: http://www.san-benito.ca.us/

6-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN D RAFT EIR

Penrod, K., R. Hunter, and M. Merrifield. 2001. Missing Linkages: Restoring connectivity to the California landscape, Conference Proceedings. California Wilderness Coalition. The Nature Conservancy, U.S. Geological Survey, Center for Reproduction of

Endangered

Species,

and

California

State

Parks.

http://www.calwild.org/linkages/table_of_contents.html Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Basic Science page. Found online at www.pewclimate.org/global-warming-basics/basic_science. San Benito County Council of Governments. San Benito County Bikeway and Pedestrian Master

Plan.

Alta

Planning

+

Design.

December

2009.

http://www.sanbenitocog.org/files/Bike_Ped_Master_Plan_2009/2009_Bike_Ped_Mas ter_Plan.pdf San Benito County 2010 Regional Transportation Plan http://www.sanbenitocog.org/pdf/2010%20FINAL%20RTP.pdf San Benito County Water District, Annual Groundwater Report. 2010. http://www.sbcwd.com/AnnualGWReport.pdf Schaaf and Wheeler. Hydrological Analysis (Prepared for the Gavilan San Benito Campus and Fairview Corners Projects EIR). 2007. (Included in Appendix E) Semlitsch, R. D., and J. R. Brodie. 2003. Biological criteria for buffer zones around wetlands and 10 riparian habitats for amphibians and reptiles. Conservation Biology 17(5):1219-1228. Sunnyslope County Water District. Water Supply Assessment Report For Gavilan College & Fairview Corners Residential Development (2008) Terrasearch, Inc. Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Hollister College Campus/Residential Development North East Corner of Airline Highway and Fairview Road Hollister, California for Fairview Corners, LLC. January 2008. (Refer to Appendix D) Phase I Environmental Site Assessment on Proposed Residential Development Airline Highway Property Fairview Road and Airline Highway 136-Acres Parcel, APNs 251-190-046 & -049 Hollister, California for Fairview Corners LLC. October 30, 2007. (Included in Appendix I) Terratech, Inc. Combined Geotechnical and Fault Investigation Fairview Road Property, Fairview Road San Benito County, California. November 1989. (Refer to Appendix C) United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Letter, Subject: file number 2008-00215. (Included in Appendix F)

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

6-7

7.0

R EPO RT P RE PARERS AND R EFERENCE S

United States Census Bureau. Data for San Benito County, found July 26, 2010, online at http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06069.html.html. United States Department of Homeland Security. FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Map # 06069C0185D,

Panel

185.

April

16,

2009.

http://msc.fema.gov/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/FemaWelcomeView?storeId=10001& catalogId=10001&langId=-1 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Rule (EPA420-F-04032). May 2004. http://www.epa.gov/nonroaddiesel/2004fr.htm Climate Leaders Greenhouse Gas Inventory Protocol Offset Project Methodology for Landfill Methane Collection and Combustion. August 2008. http://www.epa.gov Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Typical Passenger Vehicle (EPA420-F-05-004). 2005. http://www.epa.gov Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 –2005. April 2007. http://www.epa.gov Monitor Values Report – Criteria Pollutants. Accessed: March 10, 2011: http://www.epa.gov/air/data/monvals.html?st~CA~California Region 9: Air Programs, Air Quality Maps. March 2011. http://www.epa.gov/region9/air/maps/index.html. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2009b. Critical Habitat Data Portal. http://crithab.fws.gov/

6.3

R EPORT P REPARERS

County of San Benito Gary Armstrong Director of Planning and Building Byron Turner Assistant Director of Planning and Building Lissette Knight Senior Planner

6-8

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN D RAFT EIR

Ann Dolmage Associate Planner Steve Wittry Public Works Administrator, Public Works Department Art Bliss Senior Engineer, Public Works Department Shirley Murphy Deputy County Counsel

Miller Star Regalia PLC Nadia Costa Contract Legal Counsel

Impact Sciences – Peer Review Alan Sako, Air Quality Manager Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Daryl Koutnik, Principal Biologist Biological Resources Shabnam Barati, Principal All sections

Fehr & Peers – Peer Review Jane Bierstedt, Principal Traffic

With Technical Assistance from EMC Planning Group Michael Groves, AICP, Senior Principal Principal in Charge Teri Wissler Adam, Senior Principal Project Advisor

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

6-9

7.0

R EPO RT P RE PARERS AND R EFERENCE S

Sally Rideout, Senior Planner Project Manager Richard James, AICP, Principal Planner Air Quality and Traffic Ron Sissem MRP, Principal Planner Climate Change Janet Isle, Senior Biologist Biological Resources Christine Bradley, Associate Planner Graphics E. J. Kim Graphics and Production Vickie Bermea Production

Hexagon Transportation Consultants Inc. Jeff Elia, Traffic Engineer, P.E. Traffic Impact Analysis

Illingworth & Rodkin Inc. Jared McDaniel, Project Manager Environmental Noise Assessment

6-10

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

SAN BENITO COUNTY F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ESIDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN

DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT

SCH No. 2010081009

VOLUME 2

OF

APPENDICES

October 4, 2011

2

APPENDIX A

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ESIDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN

T HE F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ESIDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN IS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW ON THE C OUNTY OF S AN B ENITO W EBSITE ( HTTP :// WWW . COSB . US /) AND AT THE C OUNTY OF S AN B ENITO P LANNING D EPARTMENT .

APPENDIX B

NOP, I NITIAL S TUDY AND W RITTEN R ESPONSES TO THE NOP

Notice of Preparation To:

Interested Parties and Responsible Agencies

Subject:

Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report

Lead Agency:

Consulting Firm:

County of San Benito 3224 Southside Road Hollister, CA 95023 Contact: Lissette Knight, Senior Planner [email protected]

EMC Planning Group, Inc. 301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C Monterey, CA 93940 Contact: Sally Rideout, Senior Planner

Project Title: Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Project Applicant: Fairview Corners LLC Notice is hereby given that the County of San Benito will be the Lead Agency and EMC Planning Group, Inc., on behalf of Fairview Corners LLC, will prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan project. The County of San Benito is interested to know your views regarding the scope and content of the environmental information germane to your agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared when considering any permits, entitlements or approvals for the Project The purpose of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is to inform decision makers and the general public of the environmental effects of a proposed project. The EIR process is intended to provide environmental information sufficient to evaluate a proposed project and its potential for significant impacts on the environment, establish methods for reducing adverse environmental impacts, and identify and consider alternatives to a project. The EIR for the proposed Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan project will be prepared and processed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended. In accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the EIR will include: •

A summary of the EIR

•

A project description

•

A description of the existing environmental setting, potential environmental impacts, and mitigation measures

•

Alternatives to the project as proposed

•

Environmental consequences, including: (a) any significant environmental effects which cannot be avoided if the project is implemented; (b) any significant irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources; (c) the growth-inducing impacts of the proposed project, (d) effects found not to be significant, and (e) cumulative impacts.

1

The project description, location, and the probable environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent no later than 30 days after receipt of this notice.

Notice of Scoping Meeting: The County will conduct a public scoping meeting to solicit comments from adjacent jurisdictions, interested parties requesting notice, responsible agencies, and trustee agencies as to the proper scope and content of the EIR. The scoping meeting will be held on August 19,2010 at 6:30pm at the following location: Veterans Memorial Building Room 105 649 San Benito Street Hollister Ca, 95023 Please send your agency's comments, as well as relevant contact information, to Lissette Knight, Senior Planner, at the address shown above.

Date:

J

1'30[7...0 10

Signature: Title: Phone: Fax: Email:

Lissette Knight, SeniorlPI nner (831) 637-5313 (831) 637-5334 [email protected]

2

Notice of Preparation Project Title:

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

Project Applicant:

Fairview Corners LLC

Property Owners:

Fairview Corners LLC

Project Location:

The site of the proposed Project is located southeast of the City of Hollister, in unincorporated San Benito County, directly east of Fairview Road and approximately one-quarter mile to the north of Airline Highway (State Route 25). The project site is located outside of the City of Hollister and outside the City's Sphere of Influence, but within the City's Planning Area Boundary. The project site consists of one approximately 60 acre parcel of land (Assessor's Parcel Number 025-190-068).

Project Description: The Project includes the proposed development of up to 220 dwelling units (including a range of residential uses that may vary from apartments and small lot cluster homes to single-family ranchettes), together with park, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and open space buffers. It is anticipated that the project will be constructed in two phases with up to eight sub-phases. Each phase is anticipated to be implemented over a period of two years, with anticipated project build­ out occurring in five (5) to 16 years from the time of tentative map approval. The domestic water for the Project is proposed to be supplied by the Sunnyslope County Water District (SSCWD) and to connect to the City of Hollister's Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Project includes provisions to install "purple pipe" to enable recycled water distribution on the site when it becomes available. On-site and off-site water, sewer and storm drain infrastructure improvements will be phased to coincide with project development. The primary access to the site would be from Fairview Road opposite Cielo Vista Drive, which would be extended along the southern edge of the plan area. Interior circulation will be in a loop pattern with access to and from Fairview Road. The Project includes an EVA road extends from Highway. The proposed Caltrans right-of-way on

emergency vehicle access (EVA) road to Airline Highway. The proposed the southeastern corner of the site through the adjacent parcel to Airline roadway improvements would occur on the adjacent parcel and within the Airline Highway.

The Project would require the following discretionary approvals from San Benito County: • Approval of the San Benito County General Plan Amendments to change the General Plan Diagram to show the Plan Area as "Fairview Corners Residential-Specific Plan (FC-SP)"; and make other specified conforming amendments to the General Plan to ensure consistency between the General Plan and the Project.

3

• Adoption of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan. • Approval of a text amendments to the San Benito County Code to reflect the new zoning designation of "Fairview Corners Residential-Specific Plan (FC-SP)"; to change the County's Zoning Map to show the plan area as zoned "FC-SP"; and to make other specific conforming amendments to ensure consistency between the County Code and the Project. • Approval of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan as the applicable zoning for the Plan Area. • Approval of a Development Agreement between the County and the Property Owners. • Approval of parcel, tentative, and/or final subdivision maps for specific areas of development within the Plan Area. • Approval of grading permits. •

Design review approved consistent with the process set forth in the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan.

The Project also could require discretionary approvals from other federal, state and regional agencies including: • Approval of permits from federal regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over the project (such as the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, United States Army Corps of Engineers) in connection with biological impacts. • Approval by the San Benito County LAFCO for changes of organization or reorganization or to otherwise approve the proposed annexation of the Plan Area, as well as other potential LAFCO actions required for the proposed water and wastewater service provision to the Project. • Approval of permits from other state and regional agencies such as the California Department of Fish and Game, State Water Resources Control Board, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Department of Transportation, California Department of Health Services, Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District in connection with air quality, biological, public services, transportation and utilities impacts.

4

.,

.. S",- .ies;;

.;~ ....

j'i

;

",,"

.!

)'

',,_. j

G ··;·i·t.!organ­

'"

. . .:>.

,,..

.... ...

... ,....... ..\ \.

/

. ..

,J'~"

'j

("

'<":~"" .~

'.~~

)~,:,

, .r

'·/;rWF"

"

E.3)" .

'.:.~

'"/

..... ',",<.

'"'\

.~.~

.,..

'" "', ~

.~ ...

,~

/

....... , ..... ,/,"

.......

..

..~

.

...... "._,~

..

", "

./

~e.as :.~
C.3

..,

<-,

?c:"d"d

"L I•

i4B

",

~-"

__ -=::::J__===::JI

~

!'\ ".

Regional

5

Loc~tion

•....1 :.·J..I:f1r.;' ... I· ...

i:"

I:

··-:.t.:","fp;

""'. •

:.~

- ....1" :.",

I -.f-':;~li:r..r:-:~.~

.-. I ·

·r:::-.':"'

I

L

---

.

-I I I I

'­

I

\

•

..:. ;~ .•."i.. ,;

"

r"" I i . '~I':

.

',,:: .... ~- ....., h',.;.

...; .

;'.• ',

I

':'::,

· . r r l l.. ;'-.·'[.:'.

Hoi ! i s t ;e',,,,,·,.

:<

•.•.;'.,,1;;:...... .1;

~

legend .-­ L _ 2 P'an4.r.;';3 [ '~> .//] P"'(Il 8 Ci .~. ~8;..' "'//

j

Project LocLltion

6

Dr",r,:

0 - ' .'~' .

I,

••

,~:~.,~.:'.I,~'~.

';"~.'

. :.':.,:

-,I ',1-:. ': ~ ", I' l .. i :':,1

".:

D',,····~·,·,

0

D",,·····,··,h .::'-.:

B

;., ...." ..;..,:.,

1 ,: ..,...".,...

r .~r: :t'.. ;:

Project Area

7

rlnrllm~nt

inrlt

Irl~c::: ~n\l c:::innifir~nt ~nrl l,n~\Inirl~hlo on\lirnnl'Y\ont<:>1 offor-tc

I niti",1

"'cc, ,..... "'+i"n'"

NOTICE OF PREPARATION AND INITIAL STUDY

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ESIDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN

PREPARED FOR

County of San Benito July 15, 2010

NOTICE OF PREPARATION

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ESIDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN

PREPARED FOR

County of San Benito Lissette Knight, Senior Planner County of San Benito Planning and Building Inspection Services 3224 Southside Road Hollister, CA 95023

PREPARED BY

EMC Planning Group Inc. 301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C Monterey, CA 93940 Tel 831.649.1799 Fax 831.649.8399 [email protected] www.emcplanning.com

July 15, 2010

This document was produced on recycled paper.

FAIRVIEW C ORNERS R ESIDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN P ROJECT D ESCRIPTION

Description of Project The proposed project is a specific plan that would amend the general plan and guide development, including road and utilities infrastructure, parks, and open space buffers, on the project site. County review and approval is required for the Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment and Zoning Change requests. The proposed project does not include a tentative map. To respond to market conditions when tentative map(s) are proposed and to coordinate residential development with the planned San Benito Campus on the adjoining parcel, the proposed project allows a range of residential uses that may vary from apartments and small lot cluster homes to single-family ranchettes. Regardless of the final lotting arrangement, the maximum number of residential units would not exceed 220 units, excluding secondary dwelling units. The proposed project would be constructed in two or more phases, and the initial two phases may be divided into additional phases of up to four per phase, for a maximum of eight phases. Each phase is anticipated to be implemented over a period of about two years, with project buildout occurring in five to 16 years from the time of tentative map approval. The proposed project amends the San Benito County General Plan to allow development of uses described in the Specific Plan. Allowed uses would include detached single-family dwellings, attached single, duet, duplex, triplex, fourplex dwellings, multi-family dwellings (five units), a guesthouse or other secondary residential units, not to exceed one per lot, and accessory buildings and uses. The proposed project also includes policies that allow a potential for up to five acres of neighborhood commercial uses near Fairvew Road.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

1

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN P RO JECT D ESCRIPTION

The minimum building site area for residential uses would be four-thousand (4,000) square feet. Proposed lot sizes range from 4,000 square feet to 5-acre lots to provide a variety of residential housing opportunities for ownership or rental adjacent to the San Benito Campus planned for by the Gavilan College District. The proposed project includes policies that require entering into an affordable housing agreement with the County of San Benito and requires the provision of an affordable housing program. The proposed project provides parkland and open space exceeding County standards through physical construction and/or the payment of in-lieu fees. Proposed open space and parkland opportunities include a building exclusion zone near the Tres Pinos fault, buffer zones near the project boundaries, pocket parks, and drainage basins. The proposed project includes provisions to connect on-site open space and parks through a series of trails and provides connectivity with the adjoining San Benito Campus site. The primary access to the site would be off of Fairview Road opposite Cielo Vista Drive, which would be extended along the southern edge of the plan area. Interior circulation is anticipated to be a loop pattern with access to and from Fairview Road. Water service would be provided by SSCWD. Currently, there are no formal spheres of influence or service area boundaries for wastewater treatment for the project site. However, based on the MOU agreement described previously it is anticipated that the City of Hollister Sanitary Sewer District will provide wastewater treatment service to the project site, pending a formal application by the City of Hollister to the San Benito County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for annexation of the project site into the City of Hollister Sanitary Sewer District. Will serve letters have been received from each of these service providers. The proposed project includes provisions for the use of septic systems on lots of one acre or more, consistent with County design and performance standards, and in no case more than 22 lots serviced by septic systems. The proposed project includes provisions to install “purple pipe” to enable recycled water distribution on the site when it becomes available. On and off-site water, sewer and storm drain infrastructure improvements will be phased to coincide with project development. Off-site Improvements. The proposed project includes an emergency vehicle access (EVA) road to Airline Highway, and a connection to the City of Hollister sanitary sewer system. A cultural resources analysis is required for the Caltrans encroachment permit for the emergency access point and the sanitary sewer line alternative on Airline Highway. The proposed EVA road extends from the southeastern corner of the site through the adjacent parcel to Airline Highway. The proposed roadway improvements would occur on the adjacent parcel and within the Caltrans right-of-way on Airline Highway.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

2

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN P RO JECT D ESCRIPTION

Two opportunities for connection to the City of Hollister sanitary sewer system are identified in the Specific Plan. The first requires the retrofitting and extension of existing mains within the Cielo Vista residential subdivision west of the site. This option (referred to in the Specific Plan as Alternative #1) would extend a new sewer main west from the site to the existing sewer mains in the Cielo Vista subdivision, and further extends the main west from the Cielo Vista pipe network to the existing sewer main on Enterprise Road. The second option (Alternative #2) is the construction of a new sewer main from Enterprise Road to the site along the north side of Airline Highway, and up Fairview Road to the project site. A portion of the Alternative #2 sewer main improvement construction would occur within the Caltrans right-of-way on Airline Highway. Alternative #2 would be implemented if the sewer main extension to and from the Cielo Vista subdivision is not feasible.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

3

INITIAL STUDY

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ESIDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN

PREPARED FOR

County of San Benito Lissette Knight, Senior Planner County of San Benito Planning and Building Inspection Services 3224 Southside Road Hollister, CA 95023

PREPARED BY

EMC Planning Group Inc. 301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C Monterey, CA 93940 Tel 831.649.1799 Fax 831.649.8399 [email protected] www.emcplanning.com

July 15, 2010

This document was produced on recycled paper.

TABLE OF CONTENTS A.

B ACKGROUND ............................................................... 1

B.

E NVIRONMENTAL F ACTORS P OTENTIALLY A FFECTED .... 23

C.

D ETERMINATION ......................................................... 24

D.

E VALUATION

E.

OF

E NVIRONMENTAL I MPACTS .................. 25

1.

Aesthetics ......................................................................... 27

2.

Agriculture and Forest Resources ........................................ 29

3.

Air Quality ....................................................................... 31

4.

Biological Resources .......................................................... 38

5.

Cultural Resources ............................................................ 43

6.

Geology and Soils.............................................................. 46

7.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions................................................. 50

8.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................... 51

9.

Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................. 53

10.

Land Use and Planning ...................................................... 58

11.

Mineral Resources ............................................................. 60

12.

Noise ............................................................................... 61

13.

Population and Housing ..................................................... 63

14.

Public Services .................................................................. 64

15.

Recreation ........................................................................ 66

16.

Transportation/Traffic ....................................................... 67

17.

Utilities and Service Systems .............................................. 70

18.

Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................... 73

S OURCES .................................................................... 75

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

Appendices Appendix A

Initial Site Assessment Memorandum

Figures Figure 1

Regional Location .............................................................................. 9

Figure 2

Project Vicinity ................................................................................ 11

Figure 3

Aerial Photograph ............................................................................ 13

Figure 4

Site Photographs .............................................................................. 15

Figure 5

Topographic and Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone ............ 17

Figure 6

Land Use and Circulation Map......................................................... 19

Figure 7

Off-site Improvements ...................................................................... 21

Tables Table 1

Daily Project Emissions in Pounds Per Day ...................................... 33

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations AMBAG

Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments

AQMP

Air Quality Management Plan

CDFG

California Department of Fish and Game

CEQA

California Environmental Quality Act

CO

Carbon Monoxide

CO2

Carbon Dioxide

EIR

Environmental Impact Report

EVA

Emergency Vehicle Access

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

GHG

Greenhouse Gases

GP

General Plan

HCP

Habitat Conservation Plan

MBUAPCD

Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District

MOU

Memorandum of Understanding

NCCAB

North Central Coast Air Basin

NPDES

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NOx

Nitrous Oxides

OEHHA

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Pb

Pleasanton Silty Loam, soil type

PM10

Particulate Matter 10 microns or less

ROG

Reactive Organic Gases

SSCWD

Sunnyslope County Water District

TAC

Toxic Air Contaminant

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

This side intentionally left blank.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

A.

BACKGROUND

Project Title

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

Lead Agency Contact Person

County of San Benito

and Phone Number

Planning and Building Inspection Services 3224 Southside Road Hollister, CA 95023

Date Prepared

July 15, 2010

Study Prepared by

EMC Planning Group Inc. 301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C Monterey, CA 93940 Sally Rideout, Senior Planner Christine Bradley, Associate Planner

Project Location

The project site is located near the northeast corner of the intersection of Airline Highway (State Route 25) and Fairview Road, in unincorporated San Benito County.

Project Sponsor Name and Address

Lissette Knight County of San Benito Planning and Building Inspection Services 3224 Southside Road Hollister, CA 95023 (831) 637-5313

General Plan Designation

San Benito County General Plan: R-Rural (5-acre minimum lot size) City of Hollister General Plan: R-Rural Residential (1-5 dwelling units/5 acres)

Zoning

San Benito County: Rural City of Hollister: none

Approach and Methodology The proposed project is a Specific Plan (herein after “proposed project”) that amends the San Benito County General Plan to allow future development of mixed residential uses on an approximately 60-acre site. The intent of this initial study is to determine if any new potentially significant impacts would result from the project which were not previously studied in and adequately mitigated by an EIR previously prepared for the project by the Gavilan College EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

1

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

District, and to focus a project specific EIR that has been requested by San Benito County. CEQA Guidelines Section 15152(b) encourages agencies to use tiering approaches to avoid repetitive discussions of the same issues and to focus later EIRs or Negative Declarations. CEQA Guidelines Section 15152(f) also states that “A later EIR shall be required when the initial study or other analysis finds that the later project may cause significant effects on the environment that were not adequately addressed in the prior EIR.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15153(c) further states, “An EIR prepared for an earlier project may also be used as part of an Initial Study to document a finding that a later project will not have a significant effect…”

Previous Environmental Analysis An EIR was prepared in November 2008 by the Gavilan College District, entitled Gavilan San Benito Campus and Fairview Corners Projects EIR (David J. Powers & Associates, Inc.). This EIR analyzed the individual and combined environmental effects for two projects on adjoining sites: the Gavilan San Benito Campus located at the northeast corner of Airline Highway and Fairview Road, and the Fairview Corners residential development project located on Fairview Road. The EIR analyzed the environmental effects of both projects because the two projects have been planned concurrently and have a relationship of shared roadways, infrastructure, open space, and mitigation requirements. However, each project site is subject to the requirements of two different public agencies. In December 2008, the Final EIR (hereinafter “Gavilan EIR”) was certified by the Gavilan College District Board of Trustees as the Lead Agency for the San Benito Campus project. San Benito County, however, is the permitting authority for the residential component studied in the Gavilan EIR and is therefore the Lead Agency for the proposed project. However, because San Benito County is the permitting authority and Lead Agency for the residential component studied in the Gavilan EIR, review and approval by the County was also required for the residential project. In its review of the Gavilan EIR and proposed Fairview Corners General Plan and Zone Change applications, San Benito County determined that a specific plan is required for the proposed residential project, due to its location within the designated Area of Special Study. Subsequently, environmental review of the Specific Plan and related approval requests is required prior to the County’s consideration of project-related discretionary approvals. However, since development of the project site with uses consistent with the proposed project was studied in the Gavilan EIR, technical studies, analysis and conclusions of the Gavilan EIR that are relevant and applicable to the proposed project are incorporated herein.

2

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

Setting The proposed project site is located southeast of the City of Hollister, in unincorporated San Benito County, as seen in Figure 1, Regional Location. The project site is located directly east of Fairview Road and approximately one-quarter mile to the north of Airline Highway (State Route 25). The project site is located outside of the city limit of the City of Hollister and the City’s Sphere of Influence, but within the City’s Planning Area Boundary. Figure 2, Project Vicinity, presents the project site in relationship to the vicinity road network and surrounding existing and planned land uses. Figure 3, Aerial Photograph, presents an aerial view of the project site and its surroundings. The property is bound by rural residences, small farms, and grassland along Old Ranch Road to the north, rural residential uses and grassland along Harbern Way to the east, the San Benito Campus parcel to the south, and Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista single-family residential subdivision to the west. The Ridgemark Golf and Country Club, which includes a gated residential community, is located further to the south across Airline Highway. The 292-acre Santana Ranch Specific Plan area is located approximately one mile to the north. The project site consists of one parcel of land (APN 025-190-068). The site is currently unimproved rangeland and consists of an agricultural field of cultivated barley that is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. The western, northern, and eastern sides of the site are fenced. There are no trails, roads or other development on the site. The site does not support overhead or underground utility transmission lines; however, a water pump station, operated by the SSCWD, is located in the northwestern corner of the site along Fairview Road. A former stock pond is located in the northeast corner of the site. Figure 4, Site Photographs, shows the existing conditions on the site. The eastern portion of the project site is located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone for the Tres Pinos Fault. This fault runs across the northeastern portion of the project site and is considered potentially active. The proposed project includes a building exclusion zone adjacent to the fault. Figure 5, Topography and Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone, shows the topography of the site and the location of the earthquake fault building exclusion zone. The topography of the project site consists of undulating hills with a relative elevation change of about 45 feet. As indicated by Figure 5, the highest elevation is near the center of the site and the lowest points are in the southwest corner near Fairview Avenue and in the northeast corner in the vicinity of the old stock pond. These soils have moderate to highly expansive soils, which are discussed in the Geology and Soils section of this document. The topography of the site project site is not subject to landslides. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood zone.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

3

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

Existing drainage patterns on the site follows the topography and consists of dispersed overland flow concentrating through areas of lower elevation. In general, the project site drains toward Fairview Road to the west and on the east into a low point on the northeastern corner of the property. Drainage from the western portion of the site ultimately flows to a tributary of the Santa Ana Creek. Drainage from eastern se area flows to a tributary of the San Benito River. According to the County of San Benito 1994 Environmental Resources and Constraints Inventory, the project site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Surrounding properties are designated Urban and Built-up Land, Other Land, or Grazing Land, by the California Department of Conservation. The proposed project site is not located within a recorded archaeological or cultural deposit and there are no known historic or cultural resources on the project site. The project site is located within the range of the San Joaquin kit fox, a federally protected species. The site provides suitable habitat for the San Joaquin kit fox, although individuals of the species have not been observed on the site. The project applicant is currently working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) to determine the need, extent and location of off-site mitigation for the loss of kit fox habitat. The project site is within the range of other special status species including California tiger salamander, burrowing owls, American badger, and nesting raptors. The project site is a State identified site for the California tiger salamander and the proposed project includes provisions for an on-site conservation/open space easement to mitigate for the loss of California tiger salamander habitat. A discussion of potential impacts to biological resources are found in Section 4, Biological Resources. The project site is within the San Benito County Fire Department Service Area 26 and is located in a medium fire hazard zone. The nearest fire station is located at 1979 Fairview Road, approximately two miles north of the site. The project site is also located within the San Benito County Sheriffs Department service area. The project site is also located within the Sunnyslope County Water District (SSCWD) service area. The SSCWD prepared a water supply assessment for a larger project that includes the project site in 2008. A water main is present in Fairview Road, west of the site. The Hollister Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant is the primary wastewater treatment plant for the Hollister Urban Area, including areas within the County that are designated to be served by that facility. The project site is located within the Hollister Urban Area. Coordination between the City of Hollister, the San Benito County Water District, and the Sunnyslope County Water District has determined that the City of Hollister would provide wastewater treatment service to the project site. The three entities entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and a Statement of Intent in 2005 to develop and maintain the Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Master Plan. One of the key objectives of the MOU, as agreed to by the

4

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

above parties, is for the City of Hollister’s new Water Reclamation Facility to provide a regional wastewater treatment facility for the Hollister Urban Area. The agencies are working on a number of issues; such as preparation of an environmental document and determining the appropriate administrative/organizational mechanism to provide regional treatment. It is expected that once these issues are resolved wastewater treatment will be available for properties in the identified Hollister Urban Area.

Planning and Zoning The site is located within an Area of Special Study identified in the County of San Benito 1998 General Plan Land Use Element, Policy 9. The general plan designation for the project site is “Rural” (5-acre minimum lot size) and the site is located in the “Rural” zone district. Other general plan land use designations in the immediate vicinity of the project site include Agricultural Rangeland to the northeast, Agricultural Productive to the east, Rural/Urban to the south, and Rural Residential to the west between the site and the City of Hollister. The County’s General Plan Policy 9 identifies the types of land uses envisioned for the site as “residential, agricultural and open-space. Trails, parks, and public facilities including schools and churches, may be allowed subject to use permits.”

Description of Project The proposed project is a specific plan that would amend the general plan and guide development, including road and utilities infrastructure, parks, and open space buffers, on the project site. County review and approval is required for the Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment and Zoning Change requests. The proposed project does not include a tentative map. To respond to market conditions when tentative map(s) are proposed and to coordinate residential development with the planned San Benito Campus on the adjoining parcel, the proposed project allows a range of residential uses that may vary from apartments and small lot cluster homes to single-family ranchettes. Regardless of the final lotting scheme, the maximum number of residential units would not exceed 220 units, excluding secondary dwelling units. The proposed project would be constructed in two or more phases, and the initial two phases may be divided into additional phases of up to four per phase, for a maximum of eight phases. Each phase is anticipated to be implemented over a period of about two years, with project buildout occurring in five to 16 years from the time of tentative map approval. The proposed project amends the San Benito County General Plan to allow development of uses described in the Specific Plan. Allowed uses would include detached single-family dwellings,

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

5

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

attached single, duet, duplex, triplex, fourplex dwellings, multi-family dwellings (five units), a guesthouse or other secondary residential units, not to exceed one per lot, and accessory buildings and uses. The proposed project also includes policies that allow a potential for up to five acres of neighborhood commercial uses near Fairvew Road. The minimum building site area for residential uses would be four-thousand (4,000) square feet. Proposed lot sizes range from 4,000 square feet to 5-acre lots to provide a variety of residential housing opportunities for ownership or rental adjacent to the San Benito Campus planned for by the Gavilan College District. The proposed project includes policies that require entering into an affordable housing agreement with the County of San Benito and requires the provision of an affordable housing program. The proposed project provides parkland and open space exceeding County standards through physical construction and/or the payment of in-lieu fees. Proposed open space and parkland opportunities include a building exclusion zone near the Tres Pinos fault, buffer zones near the project boundaries, pocket parks, and drainage basins. The proposed project includes provisions to connect on-site open space and parks through a series of trails and provides connectivity with the adjoining San Benito Campus site. The primary access to the site would be off of Fairview Road opposite Cielo Vista Drive, which would be extended along the southern edge of the plan area. Interior circulation is anticipated to be a loop pattern with access to and from Fairview Road. Conceptual circulation improvements illustrated in Figure 6, Land Use and Circulation Diagram, show the proposed land uses and conceptual circulation plan for the project site. Water service would be provided by SSCWD. Currently, there are no formal spheres of influence or service area boundaries for wastewater treatment for the project site. However, based on the MOU agreement described previously it is anticipated that the City of Hollister Sanitary Sewer District will provide wastewater treatment service to the project site, pending a formal application by the City of Hollister to the San Benito County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for annexation of the project site into the City of Hollister Sanitary Sewer District. Will serve letters have been received from each of these service providers. The proposed project includes provisions for the use of septic systems on lots of one acre or more, consistent with County design and performance standards, and in no case more than 22 lots serviced by septic systems. The proposed project includes provisions to install “purple pipe” to enable recycled water distribution on the site when it becomes available. On and off-site water, sewer and storm drain infrastructure improvements will be phased to coincide with project development.

6

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

Off-site Improvements. The proposed project includes an emergency vehicle access (EVA) road to Airline Highway, and a connection to the City of Hollister sanitary sewer system. A cultural resources analysis is required for the Caltrans encroachment permit for the emergency access point and the sanitary sewer line alternative on Airline Highway. The locations of possible off-site improvements are included in Figure 7, Off-site Improvements. The proposed EVA road extends from the southeastern corner of the site through the adjacent parcel to Airline Highway. The proposed roadway improvements would occur on the adjacent parcel and within the Caltrans right-of-way on Airline Highway. Two opportunities for connection to the City of Hollister sanitary sewer system are identified in the Specific Plan. The first requires the retrofitting and extension of existing mains within the Cielo Vista residential subdivision west of the site. This option (referred to in the Specific Plan as Alternative #1) would extend a new sewer main west from the site to the existing sewer mains in the Cielo Vista subdivision, and further extends the main west from the Cielo Vista pipe network to the existing sewer main on Enterprise Road. The second option (Alternative #2) is the construction of a new sewer main from Enterprise Road to the site along the north side of Airline Highway, and up Fairview Road to the project site. A portion of the Alternative #2 sewer main improvement construction would occur within the Caltrans right-of-way on Airline Highway. Alternative #2 would be implemented if the sewer main extension to and from the Cielo Vista subdivision is not feasible.

Project Background The project applicant originally owned 137 acres located at the northeast corner of Airline Highway and Fairview Road. In 2008, the applicant and the Gavilan Joint Community College District (hereinafter “Gavilan College District”) entered into a purchase and sale agreement for approximately 78-acre parcel between the project site and Airline Highway, upon which the Gavilan College District plans to construct a new full-service junior college campus (hereinafter “San Benito Campus”). The San Benito Campus is intended to serve the area, meet community needs, and prevent overcrowding at the existing Gavilan College Campus in Gilroy. The San Benito Campus project also includes a campus housing component of 70 dwelling units. The two entities have worked together to prepare and implement a development plan for sharing infrastructure and other development costs between the San Benito Campus and the Fairview Corners residential project.

Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required California Department of Fish and Game (Authorization of Incidental Take Permit for state protected species)

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

7

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

Caltrans District 5 (Encroachment Permit) City of Hollister (Authorization of sewer service connection) Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) Sunnyslope Water District (Authorization of water service connection) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Authorization of Incidental Take Permit for federally protected species)

8

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

Angels Camp 5 4

4

108

Oakdale

99

Tracy

580

Modesto

132 680

880

Waterford

Ceres

101 280

120

Escalon

Lathrop

Oakland

San Francisco

Sonora

Stockton

80

Hughson

Patterson Turlock

33

Palo Alto

1

San Jose

5

Newman

Livingston

99

Merced

85 85

1

Gustine

101

165 59 17

Morgan Hill 152

152

152

Gilroy

Santa Cruz

152

1

156

Hollister

Project Location

Pa

156

1

183

Los Banos

San Luis Reservoir

156

Chow

Dos Palos

Mad

5

Mendota

Salinas

ci

fic

Monterey 68

Carmel

Gonzales 101

Oc

Soledad

25

1

ea

Big Sur

Greenfield

n King City

Coalinga

Avenal

41 Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2009

Not to Scale

1

Figure 1

Regional Location Atascadero

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Initial Study 58 San Luis Obispo

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

This side intentionally left blank.

10

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

Santana Ranch Specific Plan Area

Fairview Road

City of Hollister

Approximate Project Boundary

Old Ranch Rd.

Harbern Way

Airlin Cielo Vista Subdivision

e Hw

College Campus Site

y (St

ate R

oute

25)

Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

0

2000 feet

City of Hollister City Limits City of Hollister Sphere of Influence City of Hollister Planning Area

Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2010, Google Earth Pro 2009

Figure 2

Project Vicinity Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Initial Study

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

This side intentionally left blank.

12

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

Fairvew Road

Old Ranch Rd.

Cielo Vista Subdivision

Harbern Road

Approximate Project Site Boundary

Airlin

e Hig

hway

/State

Route

25

Project site boundary

0

70 feet

City of Hollister Planning Area boundary

Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2009, Google Earth Pro 2010

Figure 3

Aerial Photograph Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Initial Study

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

This side intentionally left blank.

14

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

1

4

5

1 Looking east across the northern portion of the project site.

3

6

2 4 Looking southwest across the site towards the Cielo Vista subdivision.

Approximate Project Site Boundary 2 Looking southeast across the project site.

5 Looking east along the northern boundary of the project site.

3 Looking west along the northern boundary of the project site.

6 Looking south across project site from the northern boundary.

Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2009, Google Earth 2009

Figure 4

Site Photographs Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Initial Study

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

This side intentionally left blank.

16

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

495 525

505 510 515

515 525

520

500

505 490

520

Proposed Building Exclusion Zones

Proposed Fairview Corners Residential 530

535

525 525

Approximate Fault Zone & Building Exclusion Zones Provided by Terratech Inc. On January 18, 1990

520 515 500

525 535 530 525

535

Zone

495

510

Tres Pinos Fault

490

505

Building Exclusion Zone

525

Building Exclusion Zone

530

Future Gavilan San Benito Campus

525 530 535

Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2010, Kier & Wright Civil Engineers and Surveyors, Inc. 2008 Not to Scale

Approximate project site boundary

Figure 5

Topography and Proposed Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zones Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Initial Study

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

This side intentionally left blank.

18

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

Main Access Points (to Fairview Corners Residential ) Source: EMC Planning Group Inc. 2009

Figure 6

Land Use and Circulation Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Initial Study

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

This side intentionally left blank.

20

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

Fairview Road

Enterprise Road

Cielo Vista Subdivision

Fairview Corners Residential Project Site

Sewer Extension Impact Area = 3.2 AC

Future Gavilan College Campus

Airlin

e Hig

0

650 feet

Existing Sewer Alternative #1 Alternative #2 Emergency Vehicle Access (E.V.A.) Approximate Project Site Boundary

hway

/Stat

e Ro

ute 2

5

E.V.A Road Impact Area = 1.2 AC

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Google Earth 2010

Figure 7

Potential Off-site Improvements Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Initial Study

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

This side intentionally left blank.

22

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

B.

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 9 Aesthetics

9 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

9 Population/Housing

‰ Agriculture and Forestry Resources

‰ Hazards & Hazardous Materials

‰ Public Services

‰ Air quality

9 Hydrology/Water Quality

‰ Recreation

9 Biological Resources

‰ Land Use/Planning

9 Transportation/Traffic

‰ Cultural Resources

‰ Mineral Resources

9 Utilities/Service Systems

‰ Geology/Soils

9 Noise

9 Mandatory Findings of Significance

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

23

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

C.

DETERMINATION

On the basis of this initial evaluation: ‰

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

‰

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

‰

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

9

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

‰

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Lissette Knight, Senior Planner

24

July ____, 2010

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

D.

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Notes 1.

A brief explanation is provided for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources cited in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer is explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

2.

All answers take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as onsite, cumulative as well a project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

3.

Once it has been determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

4.

“Negative Declaration: Less-Than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less-Than-Significant Impact.” The mitigation measures are described, along with a brief explanation of how they reduce the effect to a less-than-significant level (mitigation measures from section XVII, “Earlier Analyses,” may be cross-referenced).

5.

Earlier analyses are used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document or negative declaration. [Section 15063(c)(3)(D)] In this case, a brief discussion would identify the following: a.

“Earlier Analysis Used” identifies and states where such document is available for review.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

25

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

b.

“Impact Adequately Addressed” identifies which effects from the checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and states whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.

c.

“Mitigation Measures”—For effects that are “Less-Than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” mitigation measures are described which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

6.

Checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances, etc.) are incorporated. Each reference to a previously prepared or outside document, where appropriate, includes a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

7.

“Supporting Information Sources”—A source list is attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted are cited in the discussion.

8.

This is the format recommended in the CEQA Guidelines as amended March 2010.

9.

The explanation of each issue identifies: a.

The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and

b.

The mitigation measure identified, if any to reduce the impact to less than significant.

26

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

1.

A ESTHETICS

Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (1,2,3)

‰

‰

‰

9

b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (1,2,3,4,5)

‰

‰

9

‰

c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (2,3,9)

9

‰

‰

‰

Comments: a.

The site is not identified as a scenic vista in the County of San Benito 1995 General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element.

b.

The project site is not located within a Scenic Highway zoning district identified in the San Benito 1995 General Plan Roads and Highways Element. Limited views of the site are available from Airline Highway and Fairview Road. Fairview Road and Airline Highway/State Route 25 are not identified as scenic roadways in the San Benito County General Plan Scenic Roads and Highways Element. State Route 25 is not officially designated as a State Scenic Highway, but is listed by the Caltrans mapping system as a candidate for state scenic highway status. The scenic characteristics of State Route 25 would be expected to be of higher quality in rural areas of the county as opposed to the more urbanized areas near the City of Hollister. As such, future development on the site would not detract substantially from the overall scenic quality of State Route 25, because site does not adjoin the highway and is adjacent to established urban development in proximity to the City of Hollister. No further analysis is required.

c.

The County of San Benito 1994 General Plan Environmental Resources and Constraints Inventory identifies the County’s overall rural landscape, framed by the Gabilan Mountains to the west and the Diablo Mountain range to the north and east, as important and character-defining visual resources (page 1). The project site is

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

27

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

undeveloped and consists of non-native grassland. The topography of the site undulates with an overall gradual change in elevation from west to east. From Fairview Road, the topography slopes gradually upward before dropping down toward the eastern portion of the site. These visual features of the project site contribute to the visual character of the rural landscape. There are no significant visual or aesthetic resources on the project site, except for the open space characteristic of the property itself. Existing views of the site from Fairview Road looking northeast are limited to only that portion of the site closest to the roadway, which is framed by distant views of the Mount Diablo mountain range. Existing views from Fairview Road looking east are limited by the gradual rise in the site topography, but also afford views of distant hills. The site is in the foreground of public views from Old Ranch Road, but public views of the site are not available from Harbern Way. The site, when viewed from Airline Highway, is visible as the crest of the hill above the Gavilan San Benito Campus property, which dominates the foreground view. The proposed project would interrupt public views of Mount Diablo from Fairview Road and public streets within the Cielo Vista residential subdivision to the west, as well as from public roadways within the new development itself. The planned Gavilan College San Benito Campus project would interrupt views of the site and distant mountains from Airline Highway; however, if the residential project is constructed prior to the campus project, the residential development would be within the line of sight from Airline Highway and would interrupt currently unimpeded views of the Diablo mountain range. The Gavilan EIR (pp 152-153) determined that construction of the project individually and combined with the Gavilan College San Benito Campus project would result in a significant impact to the overall scenic quality of the site and surroundings. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was made by the District Board in its consideration of the San Benito Campus project. Development of the proposed project site would result in a significant impact to the overall scenic quality of the site and its surroundings. The individual and cumulative effects of the proposed project’s impact to the scenic quality of the site and surroundings will be studied in the EIR. d.

The Gavilan EIR also found that the proposed project would introduce new sources of light and glare to the project site (pp 152-153). The Gavilan EIR noted in avoidance measure AM VIS-2, that the “residential project would be subject to County design review, County Architectural Site Approval process.” which would reduce the impact to less than significant. However, because the proposed project site is located in an area that has “unique nighttime viewing conditions” as identified in the County general plan, the individual and cumulative contribution of the proposed project’s impacts of light and glare will be reviewed further in the project EIR.

28

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

2.

A GRICULTURE

AND

F OREST R ESOURCES

In determining whether impacts on agricultural resources are significant environmental effects and in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? (5,7)

‰

‰

‰

9

b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (3,5,7)

‰

‰

‰

9

c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? (9)

‰

‰

‰

9

d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? (2,3)

‰

‰

‰

9

e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? (2,3,9)

‰

‰

‰

9

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

29

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

Comments: a.

According to the County of San Benito 1994 Environmental Resources and Constraints Inventory, the project site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. According to the analysis contained in the Gavilan FEIR (page 48), the project site does not have a high agricultural value and the adjacent surrounding properties are designated Urban and Built-up Land, Other Land, or Grazing Land, by the California Department of Conservation. Therefore the proposed project would not result in the loss of prime, unique, or important farmland. No further analysis is required.

b.

No portion of the project site is under a Williamson Act contract. The project site is currently unimproved rangeland and consists of an agricultural field of cultivated barely that is annually diced and periodically grazed by cattle.

c.

There are no trees on the project site and it is not located within an area zoned for Timberland Production. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing forest land zoning or cause the rezoning of forest or timberland.

d.

There are no forest lands on the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in any loss of forest land or result in the conversion of forest land to non-forest use.

e.

The proposed project would result in the conversion of the site from agricultural uses to residential uses; however, the proposed project would not result in the loss of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. As noted above in Items c and d, the proposed project would not result in the conversion of forest land to a non-forest use. The project would have a less than significant impact on agricultural resources and would have no impact on forest resources. No further analysis is required.

30

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

3.

A IR Q UALITY

Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (3,10,11,12)

‰

‰

‰

9

b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? (2,3,7,10)

‰

‰

9

‰

c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (2,3,7,10)

‰

‰

9

‰

d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (2,3,7,13,16)

‰

9

‰

‰

e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (2,3,7,10)

‰

‰

9

‰

Comments: a.

The Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) is responsible for monitoring air quality in the North Central Coast Air Basin (NCCAB). The NCCAB is designated, under state criteria, as a non-attainment area for particulate matter 10 microns in diameter or smaller (PM10) and is in non-attainment-transitional for the state 1-hour ozone (O3) standard. To achieve compliance with state air quality standards, the MBUAPCD adopted the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) in 1991 (latest revision August 2008). Conformity of population-related projects with the AQMP is assessed by comparing the projected population growth associated with the project to population forecasts adopted by Association of Monterey Bay Area Government (AMBAG). These population projections are used to generate emission forecasts upon which the AQMP is based. According to the California Department of Finance, the current population for unincorporated San Benito County is estimated to be 19,071, with an average persons

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

31

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

per household of 3.081 persons. The proposed project would result in a population increase of up to approximately 678 persons. The proposed Santana Ranch Specific Plan to the north and San Benito Campus residential projects are anticipated to include a combined total of 1,162 dwelling units, which would result in a population increase of approximately 3,580 people. These two projects, along with the proposed project, would contribute to a total increase in population of about 4,258 persons over a period of ten to 16 years. The AMBAG population forecast for the unincorporated San Benito County for 2020 is an estimated 24,720 persons, and for 2025 is estimated to be 26,671. Over the next 16 years, AMBAG forecasts indicate that the county population should grow by about 7,600 people. The proposed project’s individual and cumulative contribution to population growth is consistent with the forecast and would not conflict with the AQMP. b,c.

The project site is located in the NCCAB, which is currently in non-attainment status for PM10 and ozone. The MBUAPCD has developed criteria pollutant emissions thresholds, which meet or exceed state and federal air quality thresholds. State thresholds are enforced by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) as mandated by the California Clean Air Act. The thresholds are used to determine whether or not the proposed project would violate an air quality standard or contribute to an existing violation. An air quality analysis for the project was prepared for the Gavilan EIR by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. in May 2008, and is found in Appendix B of the Gavilan EIR. Operational Impacts. The proposed project could result in the development of the site with up to 220 single-family residential units. Table 5-4 in the MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines identifies indirect sources that could significantly affect regional air quality if not mitigated. Projects that exceed the thresholds listed in Table 5-4 would contribute to a significant cumulative impact. According to Table 5-4, the threshold of significance for single-family residential projects, is 810 dwelling units. The proposed project, with 220 dwelling units is below the nine ppm threshold. According to the MBUAPCD thresholds, the project’s contribution of indirect source ozone precursor and PM10 emissions to regional air quality impacts is not cumulatively considerable. Therefore the impact is less than significant. No further analysis is required. The air quality analysis prepared for the Gavilan EIR addresses the development of 220 residential units on the project site, and evaluated the project’s direct contribution to regional air quality. Emissions were predicted using the URBEMIS 2007 model (Version 9.2.4.). The analysis looked at emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC), also known as reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and PM10. The results of the URBEMIS analysis of the proposed project can be found in Table 1, Daily Project Emissions in Pounds Per Day.

32

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

Table 1

Daily Project Emissions in Pounds Per Day Modeled Daily Emissions in Pounds Per Day (lbs/day)

Scenario

Reactive Organic

Nitrogen Oxides

Gases (ROG) -

(NOx)

Summer

– Summer

Carbon

Respirable

Monoxide

Particulates

(CO) –

(PM10) -

Winter

Winter

Residential (2020) Area Source Emissions Operational Emissions Total MBUAPCD Thresholds Source:

14.9

2.9

11

27.8

14.4

23.1

--

--

29.3

26

11

28

137

5501

822

137

URBEMIS2007 Air Emissions From Land Use Ver. 9.2.4 in the year 2020 and 2035, David Powers & Associates Gavilan San Benito Campus/Fairview Corners AFEIR November 2008

Note:

1 For stationary sources only 2 Applies only to on-site emissions

According to the analysis, the proposed project would result in 29.3 pounds per day (lbs/day) of ROG, 26 lbs/day of NOx, 11 lbs/day of CO, and 28 lbs/day of PM10. NOx, ROG and CO emissions are predicted to be below MBUAPCD significance thresholds. The majority of NOx emissions (over 90 percent) would come from project traffic. The proposed project emissions does not exceed MBUAPCD thresholds and proposed impacts from project emissions are individually less than significant. The URBEMIS results are included in Appendix B of the Gavilan EIR. Based upon the MBUAPCD Thresholds, the proposed project ozone precursor and PM10 emissions would contribute to a cumulative impact on regional air quality; however, the project’s contribution to that impact would not be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, cumulative impacts to regional air quality would be less than significant. The air quality analysis prepared for the Gavilan EIR also analyzed the impacts of the proposed project on local air quality. Carbon monoxide emissions from traffic would be the pollutant of greatest concern at the local level. Congested intersections with a large volume of traffic have the greatest potential to cause high localized concentrations of carbon monoxide. The highest carbon monoxide concentrations typically occur during winter in areas where traffic congestion occurs. The California ambient air quality standard for mobile sources of carbon monoxide is nine (9) parts per million (ppm). The EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

33

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

highest carbon monoxide level measured in the air basin is one (1) ppm for an eight-hour exposure. The Gavilan EIR reported that the highest concentration of mobile source carbon monoxide would be 2.5 ppm, which would occur at the intersection of Fairview Road and Airline Highway (page 94). This level is well below state standards and the Gavilan EIR concluded that the impacts on local air quality resulting from the proposed project individually and in combination with the San Benito Campus project are less than significant. No further analysis is required. Short-Term Construction Emissions. The proposed project would result in potentially significant air quality impacts with regard to dust (PM10). The primary sources of construction-related dust include grading, excavation, building of roads, and travel on unpaved surfaces. Emissions produced during grading and construction activities are considered “short-term” as they occur only during the construction phase of the project. Construction emissions include mobile source exhaust emissions, emissions generated during the application of asphalt paving material and architectural coatings, as well as emissions of fugitive dust associated with earthmoving equipment. Short-term emissions include on- and off-site generation of fugitive dust, on-site generation of exhaust emissions from construction equipment, and off-site generation of mobile source emissions during the construction phase of the project. “Worst case” construction phase emissions typically occur during initial site preparation, including grading, and excavation, due to the increased amount of surface disturbance that can generate dust and to construction equipment emissions. Table 5-2 of the MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines identifies the level of construction activity that could result in significant impacts if not mitigated. Within the NCCAB, construction PM10 emission impacts on regional air quality are assessed based on the quantity of earth movement that would take place on a given day of construction. Grading in excess of 2.2 acres in a given day is considered to result in a potentially significant impact. Implementation of the Specific Plan will require grading and site contouring to accommodate the proposed improvements. A grading plan for the proposed project is not yet available; however, the proposed project’s construction emissions were studied in the air quality analysis prepared for the Gavilan EIR. That EIR determined that it is possible that more than 2.2 acres may be disturbed on the project site on any given day during construction, which would be a significant impact (page 95). The Gavilan EIR includes a mitigation measure (MM Air-2.1) to reduce PM10 emissions from grading and construction on each site. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce this impact to a less than significant level:

34

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

Mitigation Measure AQ-1. Prior to the start of construction, the project applicant shall provide a construction dust mitigation plan to San Benito County. The plan shall specify the methods of dust control that would be utilized, demonstrate the availability of needed equipment and personnel, use reclaimed water for dust control, and identify a responsible individual who, if needed, can authorize implementation of additional measures. The plan shall be included on all construction documents and plans. The construction dust mitigation plan shall, at a minimum, include the following measures: 1.

Limit grading activity to a maximum of 2.2 acres daily. As more detailed construction information becomes available, emissions from grading activities could be reassessed to determine if the area of grading could be increased. Such an assessment would be completed using appropriate assumptions and mitigation measures.

2.

Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods. Active areas adjacent to existing residences should be kept damp at all times. If necessary, during windy periods, watering is to occur on all days of the week regardless of onsite activities.

3.

Cover soil or maintain at least two feet of freeboard on all hauling trucks.

4.

Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.

5.

Sweep daily all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.

6.

Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is deposited onto the adjacent roads.

7.

Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more).

8.

Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles.

9.

Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.

10.

Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.

11.

Suspend excavation and grading activity when hourly-average winds exceed 15 mph and visible dust clouds cannot be contained within the site.

Use of the measures above and limiting size of areas to be graded during a single day would reduce the impacts of short term dust emissions to a less-than-significant level.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

35

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

d.

According to the MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines, a sensitive receptor is generically defined as a location where human populations, especially children, seniors, and sick persons, are located where there is reasonable expectation of continuous human exposure. These typically include residences, hospitals, and schools. The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are the single-family residences in the Cielo Vista subdivision on Fairview Road and the rural residential homes located to the north and the east. These homes would be about 100 to 150 feet or further from the closest construction activities. In addition, construction of the residential uses on the project site would occur in phases, meaning some of the residences will be completed and in use while construction is still occurring. Residents on the site also may be exposed to construction dust from ongoing construction activities as each phase of the proposed project is constructed. This is a potentially significant impact. The implementation of mitigation measure AQ-1 would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Diesel Emissions. The air quality analysis prepared for the Gavilan EIR also analyzed the air quality impacts of the proposed project in regard to Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs). Construction equipment and associated heavy-duty truck traffic generates diesel exhaust, which is a known TAC. Diesel engines emit a complex mix of pollutants including NOX, particulate matter, and TACs. The most visible constituents of diesel exhaust are very small carbon particles or "soot," known as diesel particulate matter (DPM). Diesel exhaust also contains over 40 cancer-causing substances, most of which are readily adsorbed on the soot particles. Among the TACs contained in diesel exhaust are dioxin, lead, polycyclic organic matter, and acrolein. Short-term exposure to DPM is associated with variable irritation and inflammatory symptoms. Diesel engine emissions are responsible for a majority of California's estimated cancer risk attributable to air pollution. In 2000, CARB identified an average potential cancer risk of 540 excess cases per million people, statewide, from DPM. In addition, DPM is a significant fraction of California’s particulate pollution. Assessments by CARB and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimate that DPM contributes to approximately 3,500 premature respiratory and cardiovascular deaths and thousands of hospital admissions annually in California. Diesel exhaust contains several chemicals detrimental to visibility and vegetation (OEHHA 2001). Based upon the information provided by the air quality analysis, the Gavilan EIR concludes that the proposed project could result in significant construction related air quality impacts from diesel exhaust. The Gavilan EIR includes a mitigation measure (MM Air-2.2) to reduce the impact to less than significant (pp 98-99). However, since the Gavilan EIR was prepared, the MBUAPCD has suspended the use of its recommended mitigation measures for diesel exhaust, in lieu of changes in diesel emissions thresholds and control measures at the state and federal level, and the increasing availability of low emissions diesel fuel.

36

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

EPA regulates diesel engine design and fuel composition at the federal level, and has implemented a series of measures since 1994 to reduce NOX and particulate emissions from off-road diesel equipment. EPA Tier 2 diesel engine standards were implemented from 2001 and 2006, Tier 3 standards from 2006-2008, and Tier 4 standards are being phased in through 2014. Ultralow sulfur off-road diesel fuel (15 ppm) will become standard in 2010, replacing the current 500 ppm fuel. The Tier 4 engines and ultralow sulfur fuels will reduce emissions by up to 65 percent compared to older engines and fuel (EPA 2004). CARB’s Regulation for In-use Off-road Diesel Vehicles establishes a state program to reduce emissions from older construction equipment. Although the implementation phasing for this regulation was delayed by budget legislation in early 2009, the regulation is in effect and will reduce construction equipment emissions over time. Although the project buildout is likely to occur in several phases over a period of five to 16 years, the duration of construction activities per phase would occur over relatively short periods of time. During the construction phases, the closest sensitive receptors would be about 100 to 150 feet from construction activities, and typically would be more than 500 feet away from active construction activities. Exposure of sensitive receptors to diesel emissions during construction would be limited and, combined with improvements in low emissions diesel fuel, is anticipated to be low. The impact is less than significant and no further analysis is required. e.

According to the MBUAPCD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, “Odors are objectionable emissions of one or more pollutants (sulfur compounds, methane, etc.) that are a nuisance to health persons and may trigger asthma episodes in people with sensitive airways.” Nuisance odors are commonly associated with refineries, landfills, sewage treatment, agriculture, etc. The proposed project may result in some short-term construction-related odors (e.g., asphalt during paving), but is not anticipated to produce offensive odors during operation. The impact would be less than significant. No additional analysis is necessary.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

37

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

4.

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES

Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (2,7,14)

9

‰

‰

‰

b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (2,7,14)

9

‰

‰

‰

c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands, as defined by section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.), through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? (2,7)

‰

‰

9

‰

d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? (2,7)

‰

‰

9

‰

e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (2,7)

‰

‰

‰

9

f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (2,7)

‰

‰

9

‰

Comments: a,b.

A biotic evaluation was prepared for the Gavilan EIR to document the results of wildlife and botanical surveys and to analyze potential impacts to biological resources at or

38

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

within the project vicinity as a result of the project. The report is titled Gavilan College/Fairview Corners ADEIR/DEIR Biotic Evaluation, City of Hollister, California (“Biological Report,” Live Oak Associates 2008). The report is found in Appendix G of the Gavilan EIR. The following analysis is based on the results contained in this report as well as subsequent research and investigation conducted by EMC Planning Group associated with preparation of a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the proposed project. A reconnaissance level field survey of the study area was conducted on October 23, 2007 by Live Oak Associates. Additional site visits were conducted by Live Oak Associates on February 5, 2008 to delineate aquatic features on and adjacent to the site and in April and May 2007 to survey for special status plant species. The project site primarily consists of a field of cultivated barley (Triticum aestivum) that is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. Common grasses and forbs observed throughout the field include, but are not limited to, soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), Mediterranean barley (Hordeum marinum ssp. gussoneanum), yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), vinegarweed (Trichostema lanceolatum), and field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis). Surrounding land uses include open space, agricultural, and low-density, rural residences to the north and east; a golf course to the south; and residential development to the west. The site itself is regularly disced, planted, and grazed and retains little of its natural character. Traces of a former stock pond persist within the northeast corner of the agricultural field. The remnant stock pond is a relict feature that is known to have held water as of 2000; the most recent occurrence of ponding is unknown. Under current land management practices (i.e., regular discing), this feature does not appear to pond water. It was dry at the time of the October 2007 survey and was only slightly moist (i.e., the soils were damp) at the time of the February 2008 survey within a week following a storm event in the region; however, surface water was not present. The vegetation that exists within the remains of this stock pond is comprised of the same species that occur on the rest of the site; however, it also features poison hemlock (Conium maculatum) and spiny cocklebur (Xanthium spinosum). EMC Planning Group also conducted site visits on June 15, 2007, April 30th, 2009, June 1, 2009, September 26, 2009, December 12, 2009, January 14, 2010, and February 1, 2010. At the time of these site visits, the stock pond also did not contain water. Special Status Species. Special status species generally occur in relatively undisturbed areas and are largely found within unique vegetation communities and/or habitats such as vernal pools or alkali flats. A table identifying the species known to occur within the

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

39

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

project vicinity and an assessment of their likelihood to occur within the project area is included in the Biological Report. The dominance of non-native annual and perennial plant species and frequent disturbance from maintenance activities likely preclude the presence of most special status species, however based on the field surveys suitable habitat for California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), American badger (Taxidea taxus), and nesting migratory birds and raptors was identified. California Tiger Salamander. California tiger salamander is federally listed as threatened and is currently designated as a “species of special concern” by the CDFG, although an increase to this listing is under review. California tiger salamanders typically occur in the California Central Valley and in surrounding foothills of both the Coast Range and Sierra Nevada mountains. Adult California tiger salamanders spend the majority of the year below ground in ground squirrel burrows or other rodent burrows. The salamanders are only above ground during the winter and spring rainy season when they feed and move to aquatic breeding sites, such as seasonal ponds, stock ponds, reservoirs, lakes, and occasionally stream pools that are devoid of fish. The larvae spend two to four months in the water before transforming to the adult form and seeking suitable terrestrial habitat. California tiger salamanders can migrate considerable distances (more than one mile) to aestivation (summer) habitat (typically ground squirrel burrows in open grasslands). Although California tiger salamanders do not currently breed on the site, salamander breeding was observed on the site in 2000 and the project site is located within USFWS-designated critical habitat. Without extensive surveys, it is not possible to conclude the absence of the species from the site. In the absence of such surveys, it is assumed that the proposed project would impact 78 acres of salamander aestivation habitat. If salamanders occur on the site, the proposed project could result in the loss of individuals, which would likely be considered a take under the state and federal endangered species acts. This is considered a potentially significant impact and additional analysis will be conducted in the EIR. San Joaquin Kit Fox. San Joaquin kit fox is federally listed as endangered and state listed as threatened. San Joaquin kit fox typically inhabits annual grasslands or grassy open spaces with scattered shrubby vegetation, but can also be found in some agricultural habitats and urban areas. San Joaquin kit foxes need loose-textured sandy soils for burrowing, and they also need areas that provide a suitable prey base, including blacktailed hare, desert cottontails, and California ground squirrels, as well as birds, reptiles, and carrion. No burrows possessing the dimensions suitable for the kit fox were observed on the project site. It is possible, though highly unlikely, that an individual kit fox could move onto the site incidentally prior to construction. Construction-related activities may result in harm or injury to individual kit foxes if they were to occur on the project site. 40

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

This is considered a potentially significant impact and additional analysis will be conducted in the EIR. Burrowing Owl. Burrowing owl is a CDFG “Species of Special Concern.” Burrowing owls live and breed in burrows in the ground, especially in abandoned ground squirrel burrows. Optimal habitat conditions include large open, dry and nearly level grasslands or prairies with short to moderate vegetation height and cover, areas of bare ground, and populations of burrowing mammals. Although no burrowing owls were seen during the surveys small mammal burrows present within the grassland areas are considered potential habitat. The project site provides marginally suitable nesting habitat for burrowing owls, however, if a burrowing owl were to occupy burrows on or near the project site prior to project-related development activities, these activities could result in the abandonment of active burrows or direct mortality to owls. Construction activities may adversely affect the nesting success of raptors or result in mortality of individual owls constitutes a violation of state and federal laws. This is considered a potentially significant impact and additional analysis will be conducted in the EIR. American Badger. The American badger is an uncommon, permanent resident found throughout most of the state, with the exception of the north coast. The American badger is listed as a species of special concern in California. The badger is most abundant in grassland and the drier, more open successional stages of shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats with friable soils. Although no American badgers were observed on the site, if a badger were to occupy burrows on or near the project site prior to projectrelated development activities, these activities could result in the abandonment of active burrows or direct mortality to badgers. Construction activities may result in harm or injury to individual badgers. This is considered a potentially significant impact and additional analysis will be conducted in the EIR. Nesting Raptors and Migratory Birds. Although no tree nests or ground nests were observed on or adjacent to the site, large trees immediately to the east and south of the site provide potential nesting habitat for tree-nesting raptors, such as merlin, Cooper’s hawk, whitetailed kite, prairie falcon, ferruginous hawk, and red-tailed hawk, which are known in the project vicinity. Grassland may also provide foraging habitat for these species. In addition, migratory birds may also nest within trees and vegetation present on the project site. Birds may nest in urban ornamental trees and shrubs or on the ground. A total of 836 bird species are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the CDFG (http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/ intrnltr/mbta/mbtandx.html). If a raptor were to

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

41

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

nest on or adjacent to the site prior to construction, construction activities could result in the abandonment of active nests or direct mortality. Construction activities that adversely affect the nesting success of raptors or other special status birds constitute a violation of state and federal law. This is considered a potentially significant impact and additional analysis will be conducted in the EIR. c.

Natural drainage channels and wetlands are considered Waters of the United States. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulates the filling or grading of such waters by authority of Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Potential waters of the U.S. and wetlands were assessed during the surveys. The only aquatic feature occurring on the site is the stock pond remnant in the site’s northeast corner. However, this appears to be a relict feature, as it does not appear to become inundated following major storm events. Additionally, the stock pond is hydrologically isolated from known Waters of the U.S. and their tributaries, does not replace the functions and values of historic waters, and does not meet the USACE’s technical criteria for jurisdictional wetlands. A Waters of the U.S. analysis was completed for the site, and the USACE determined that no waters, including the remnant stock pond, meet the definition of a Water of the U.S (Live Oak Associates 2008, USACE 2008). Therefore, no features on the site are subject to regulation by the USACE.

d.

Wildlife corridors provide connectivity between habitat areas, enhancing species richness and diversity. Impacts from development, such as habitat fragmentation and/or isolation, as well as the creation of impassable barriers can cause a significant impact to wildlife corridors. Impacts from the proposed project on wildlife corridors are expected to be minimal, as the project site is surrounded by rural and low density residences.

e.

The proposed project does not include tree removal and would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting trees.

f.

The project will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan. There are currently no adopted applicable plans affecting the County of San Benito. San Benito County adopted Ordinance 541 in 1988 to establish and collect fees for financing a county-wide HCP and for San Joaquin kit fox protection measures. These fees are paid by the applicant as a condition of the issuance of a building permit. Fees paid through this ordinance do not provide take authorization under the federal or state Endangered Species Acts. To obtain take authorization a draft Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) is currently being prepared for the proposed project and further analysis will be required in the EIR.

42

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

5.

C ULTURAL R ESOURCES

Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in section 15064.5? (2,3,7,19)

‰

9

‰

‰

b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5? (2,3,7,19)

‰

9

‰

‰

c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? (2,3,7,19)

‰

9

‰

‰

d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (2,3,7,19)

‰

9

‰

‰

Comments: a-d.

A cultural resource evaluation of the proposed project site and the adjacent San Benito Campus project site was prepared by Archaeological Resource Management in January 2008 for the Gavilan EIR. An archaeological literature review for both project sites was completed to search for evidence of recorded archaeological and/or historic sites in and around either project area. No recorded archaeological sites are located within the projects’ boundaries. A recorded historic site (CA-SBN-151H) is located approximately one-half mile east of the project site. This site is described as the Best Ranch Complex, a historic complex consisting of a residence constructed in the 1890’s, a large barn, five outbuildings, and several historic trees. On-site Improvements. A general surface reconnaissance was also completed by a field archaeologist on all open land surfaces on each project site. A “controlled intuitive reconnaissance” was completed in places where burrowing animals, exposed banks and inclines, and other activities have revealed subsurface indicators of cultural materials and soil contents. Traces of both prehistoric and historic cultural materials were noted on both sites during the surface reconnaissance. Historic cultural materials observed during the reconnaissance included whiteware fragments, thick aqua glass vessel fragments, large mammal bone fragments (bovine), a rusted horseshoe, a rusted metal ring, as well as concrete and asphalt fragments. Prehistoric cultural materials consisted of three

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

43

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

fragments of fire-cracked rock, two chipped lithic flakes, and a stone artifact which shows indication of long-term abrasion by narrow objects which may be associated with the preparation of basketry materials. A test excavation program was conducted on each site to determine the presence of a possible subsurface deposit within either project area. The test trenches revealed no indications of a subsurface prehistoric or historic deposit on either site. The results of the cultural evaluation reveal that the proposed project would not result in a significant impact to cultural resources. Nevertheless, the Gavilan EIR (pp 142-143) includes a n avoidance measure (AM CUL-1), applicable to the project site, that reduces potential impacts to unknown buried prehistoric resources, should they be encountered during site preparation activity. Implementation of the following mitigation measure (consistent with AM CUL-1) would reduce the impacts to previously unknown buried prehistoric resources on the project site to a less than significant level. No additional analysis of onsite cultural resources is required. Mitigation Measure C-1.

The following measures shall be completed in the event prehistoric traces (human remains, artifacts, concentrations of shell/bone/rock/ash) are encountered during construction: In the event that cultural artifacts are discovered, all construction within a 50meter radius of the find shall be stopped, the County Planning Department notified, and an archaeologist retained to examine the find and make appropriate recommendations. In the event that Native American human remains or funerary objects are discovered, the provisions of the California Health and Safety Code shall be followed. Section 7050.5(b) of the California Health and Safety Code states: In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered has determined, in accordance with Chapter 10 of Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code, that the remains are not subject to the provisions of Section 27492 of the Government Code or any other related provisions of law concerning investigation of the circumstances, manner and cause of death, and the recommendations concerning treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.

44

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

The County Coroner, upon recognizing the remains as being of Native American origin, is responsible to contact the Native American Heritage Commission within twenty-four hours. The Commission has various powers and duties to provide for the ultimate disposition of any Native American remains, as does the assigned Most Likely Descendant. Sections 5097.98 and 5097.99 of the Public Resources Code also call for “protection to Native American human burials and skeletal remains from vandalism and inadvertent destruction.” A combination of preconstruction worker training and intermittent construction monitoring by a qualified archaeologist will serve to achieve compliance with this requirement for protection of human remains. Worker training typically instructs workers as to the potential for discovery of cultural or human remains, and both the need for proper and timely reporting of such find, and the consequences of failure thereof. Once the find has been identified, the archaeologist will make the necessary places for treatment of the find(s) and for the evaluation and mitigation of impacts if the finds are found to be significant according to CEQA. Off-site Improvements. The proposed project includes improvements on Airline Highway/State Route 25 for the emergency access route and possibly sewer and water main extensions that were not analyzed in the cultural evaluation prepared for the Gavilan EIR. A cultural evaluation of these areas was conducted in 2010 by Archaeological Resource Management. A field investigation was undertaken and archival records reviewed. This secondary report confirmed that there are no records of known deposits on or near the project site other than the recorded historic Best Ranch Complex east of the project site. The field survey found no surface indicators or evidence of historic cultural resources along the Airline Highway right-of-way. The evaluation concluded that there is always a potential to unearth historic and/or prehistoric resources during excavation activity, which would be a significant impact and mitigation is required. Implementation of mitigation measure C-1, described previously, would reduce the impact to a less than significant level.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

45

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

6.

G EOLOGY

AND

S OILS

Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

(1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42? (2,3,7)

‰

9

‰

‰

(2) Strong seismic ground shaking? (2,3,7)

‰

9

‰

‰

(3) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? (2,3,7,17)

‰

‰

‰

9

(4) Landslides? (2,3,7,17)

‰

‰

‰

9

b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (2,3,7,17)

‰

‰

‰

9

c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? (2,3,7,17)

‰

‰

9

‰

d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (2,3,7,17)

‰

9

‰

‰

e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? (2,3,7,17)

‰

‰

‰

9

a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

46

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

Comments: a.(1)-(2). A Combined Geotechnical and Fault Investigation was prepared by Terratech, Inc. in November 1989, and a Geotechnical Investigation was prepared by Terrasearch, Inc. in January 2008 for the Gavilan EIR. These reports are found in Appendix E of the Gavilan EIR. The active San Andreas Fault lies approximately eight miles southwest of the project site. The Calaveras fault, a branch of the San Andreas Fault, bisects the City of Hollister and lies about 1.25 miles southwest of the project site. The project site is located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone due to the proximity of the Tres Pinos Fault, a branch of the Calaveras Fault that is generally considered to be potentially active. Based upon the 1989 fault investigation, which considered the results of several previously investigations, a trace of the Tres Pinos Fault was mapped on the project site. According to the geotechnical reports, future ground displacement would probably be confined to an area very close to the zone of fault-generated ground deformation as mapped in the 1989 investigation. Terratech recommended a 50-foot wide building setback on each side of the fault. Refer to Figure 5, Topography and Earthquake Fault Building Exclusion Zone, for the location of the proposed earthquake fault building exclusion zone on the project site. The project site is expected to experience destructive ground shaking during seismic events associated with the San Andreas and Calaveras faults. The 35-foot wide Tres Pinos Fault and the area immediately adjacent to the fault could be subject to ground displacement during a strong seismic event on this fault, which could expose people and structures to substantial adverse effects from seismic activity. This is a significant impact. The following mitigation measure would reduce the impact to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure GEO-1. Development of the project site will comply with the most recent California Building Code guidelines for Seismic Zone 4 to avoid or minimize potential damage from seismic ground shaking. All recommendations included in the 1989 fault investigation and in the 2008 geotechnical investigation prepared by Terrasearch, Inc. will be incorporated into the project design. a.(3).

Soil liquefaction is a condition where saturated granular soils near the ground surface undergo a substantial loss of strength during seismic events. Loose, water-saturated soils are transformed from a solid to a liquid state during ground shaking. Soils most susceptible to liquefaction are loose, uniformly graded, saturated, fine-grained soils that

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

47

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

lie close to the ground surface. There are three soils types on the project site: Rincon silty clay loam, two to nine percent slopes (RsC), Antioch loam, two to five percent slopes (AnB), and San Benito clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded (SbE2). These soils are moderate to highly expansive soils, but are not considered susceptible to liquefaction. No further analysis is required. a.(4).

The topography of the project site consists of undulating hills with a relative elevation change of about 45 feet. As indicated by Figure 5, the highest elevation is near the center of the site and the lowest points are in the southwest corner near Fairview Avenue and in the northeast corner in the vicinity of the old stock pond. The gradual slopes of the site topography are not prone to landslide or erosion activity. No further analysis is required.

b.

During construction, vegetation removal and grading would increase the potential for erosion on the site. The impacts associated with grading and erosion are analyzed in the Hydrology and Water Quality section of this document.

c.

Although the project is susceptible to expansive soils, seismic shaking, and fault rupture, the implementation of mitigation measure GEO-1, listed at the end of this section, would reduce the impact to a less than significant level. No further analysis is required.

d.

According to the Gavilan EIR geotechnical investigations, moderate to highly expansive soils are present on the site. Expansive soils can experience significant volume changes with variations in moisture content usually during seasonal wet and dry cycles. Expansive soils swell when wet, and shrink when dried. Such changes can cause distress to building foundations, slabs on grade, pavements, and other surface structures if not designed properly. Potential damage to structures on the site will be minimized through standard design and construction techniques as specified in the geotechnical report, and as stipulated in Mitigation Measure GEO-1. The impact of construction on expansive soils is reduced to less than significant by complying with the building code and County design and performance standards for construction on expansive soils.

e.

The proposed project allows the use of septic systems for residential development on lots that are greater than one acre in size consistent with County regulations. A maximum of 22 lots would be served by septic tanks. A hydrological report prepared by Schaaf and Wheeler for the Gavilan EIR analysis, determined that groundwater below the project site is located at depths of approximately 120 feet below ground surface and on-site soils have a low infiltration rate. Therefore, soils on the project site are capable of supporting septic systems; however, the design and placement of septic systems are subject to review and approval by the County Health Department and County Engineer. Compliance with the County’s design and constructions standards would reduce the effects of on-site septic systems and no additional mitigation is required.

48

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

7.

G REENHOUSE G AS E MISSIONS

Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

Comments: a,b.

The Gavilan EIR analyzed the impact of the project on global climate change, as well as the impacts of climate change on the project. The analysis concluded that globally, the impact of the proposed project on greenhouse gas emissions is relatively small and that the impact of climate change on the project would be primarily economic, rather than an environmental impact. The previous analysis includes an avoidance measure that calls for the residential development to include energy conserving design and construction techniques that meet or exceed Title 24 requirements and to incorporate Green Building Practices including pre-wiring and/or installing some houses with solar power. The analysis concludes that the impact of the project on global climate change is less than significant. However, the project’s impacts on climate change will need to be revaluated to reflect recently adopted changes to the CEQA Guidelines. The potential impacts of the project’s contribution to greenhouse gases that affect climate will be addressed in the EIR.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

49

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

8.

H AZARDS

AND

H AZARDOUS M ATERIALS

Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (2,3,7)

‰

‰

‰

9

b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? (2,3,7,18)

‰

‰

9

‰

c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (2,3,7)

‰

‰

‰

9

d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (15,18)

‰

‰

‰

9

e. For a project located within an airport landuse plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or a public-use airport, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (2,3)

‰

‰

‰

9

f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (2,3)

‰

‰

‰

9

g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (2,3,7)

‰

‰

‰

9

h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands area adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (5)

‰

‰

9

‰

50

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

Comments: a.

The proposed project includes the development of up to 220 residential units and would not result in a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

b.

The proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. However, a Caltrans encroachment permit is required for the proposed emergency access lane approach and possible sewer main extension infrastructure improvements along Airline Highway. Caltrans typically requires an Initial Site Assessment to provide preliminary investigation as to whether the improvements within the Caltrans right-of-way would result in a release of hazardous materials. The Initial Site Assessment: Proposed EVA Lane Driveway Approach on Airline Highway - Gavilan College San Benito Campus/Fairview Corners Residential Project was prepared by EMC Planning Group Inc. (2010) and is included in Appendix A. The assessment found that the proposed off-site improvements within the Caltrans right-of-way would not result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The before the risks associated with hazardous materials and their release into the environment are less than significant.

c.

The project site is not located within one-quarter mile of a school; however, the San Benito Campus project site is adjacent to the project site. The proposed Santana Ranch project includes a potential school site approximately two miles north of the project site. The proposed project is the development of residential units and would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

d.

The project site is not listed on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5.

e,f.

The proposed project is not located within two miles of a public airport or within the vicinity of a private airstrip.

g.

The proposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

h.

According to the San Benito County General Plan 1994 Environmental Constraints Inventory, the project site is located in a medium fire hazard zone (page 29). The proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

51

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

9.

H YDROLOGY

AND

W ATER Q UALITY

Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., would the production rate of preexisting nearby wells drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? (2,3,7)

‰

‰

9

‰

c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface run-off in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

e. Create or contribute run-off water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted run-off? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (7)

‰

‰

‰

9

52

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (7)

‰

‰

‰

9

i. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? (7)

‰

‰

‰

9

j. Cause inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? (2,7)

‰

‰

‰

9

Comments: a.

The project site drains into two drainage basins, the San Benito River tributary and the Santa Ana Creek tributary. Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Water Act requires the state to develop a list of water bodies that do not meet water quality standards. The San Benito River is listed as 303(d) impaired waters. The river is impaired by fecal coliform and sedimentation/siltation. The federal Clean Water Act and California’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act are the primary laws related to water quality. Regulations set forth by the U.S. EPA and the state Water Resources Control Board have been developed to fulfill the requirements of this legislation. EPA’s regulations include the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program, which controls sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States (e.g., streams, lakes, bays, etc.). These regulations are implemented at the regional level by water quality control boards, which for the project area is the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The

State

NPDES

General

Construction

Permit

requires

development

and

implementation of Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and uses storm water Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control runoff, erosion, and sedimentation from the site both during and after construction. The SWPPP has two major objectives: 1) the help identify the sources of sediments and other pollutants that affect the quality of storm water discharges; and 2) to describe and ensure the implementation of practices to reduce sediment and other pollutants in storm water discharges. The proposed project would alter existing drainage patterns on the site to discharge solely to the San Benito River tributary. A hydrological analysis was completed for the Gavilan EIR by Schaaf & Wheeler (2008) to determine if increased runoff from the

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

53

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

proposed project could result in substantial flooding, erosion and siltation impacts to the San Benito River tributary. The report is found in Appendix F of the Gavilan EIR. The report concluded that the project has the potential to impact water quality in the San Benito tributary from both construction (transport of eroded soils) and post-development (transport of urban pollutants). The report notes that on-site soils have slow infiltration rates and therefore, detention of storm water is not recommended. The Gavilan EIR found that the proposed project would increase impermeable surfaces on the site which have the potential to increase runoff and transport urban pollutants and sediments to drainage areas. The RWQCB, in their comments on the Gavilan EIR, identified concerns regarding potential impacts to the water quality of the already impacted San Benito River and the feasibility of mitigation measures proposed in the Gavilan EIR. A copy of the RWQCB comment letter is included in Section 15.0 of the Gavilan EIR. The Gavilan EIR included Mitigation Measure HYD-1, which was intended to reduce the impacts to water quality. The implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-1 would reduce the level of impact; however, based on the concerns raised by the RWQCB in their comments on the Gavilan EIR, revised and/or additional analysis and mitigation measures may be necessary to address storm water runoff and downstream water quality impacts. These issues and project-related impacts to water quality will be discussed in the project EIR. b.

According to the Gavilan EIR analysis, groundwater in the project area is located at depths of approximately 120 feet below ground surface. Due to the depth of groundwater and the low infiltration rates of soils on the site, the proposed project would not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge (page 120). The proposed project allows a limited number of septic systems on the site. As discussed in Section 6(d) of this initial study, soil and groundwater conditions indicate that the site can support septic systems without interfering with groundwater recharge, subject to compliance with standard County design and construction standards for septic systems. The project site is located within the service area for potable and recycled water service from the Sunnyslope County Water District (SSCWD) and the project would connect to the existing water distribution system. Water mains are present within Airline Highway and Fairview Road. The SSCWD obtains water from surface water sources and groundwater wells. According to the Gavilan EIR, the proposed project would require about 71,550 gallons per day (page 161). Recycled water is not yet available from SSCWD. State law requires the preparation of an SB 610 Water Supply Assessment for new residential projects that include 500 dwelling units or more. The proposed project is less than 500 dwelling units; however, to consider the combined water demand for the proposed project and the San

54

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

Benito Campus, the SSCWD prepared an SB 610 water supply assessment that assesses the combined needs of each project. The assessment determined that well improvements and new well construction already planned by SSCWD would ensure that the capacity requirements of both projects can be met during an extended drought. Therefore, the No additional analysis is required. The water supply assessment is found in Appendix H of the Gavilan EIR. c-e.

According to the Gavilan EIR, the removal of vegetation during construction would increase erosion potential on the site. The existing drainage pattern on the project site, as inferred from the site topography, is dispersed overland flow concentrating through areas of lower elevation. These drainage patterns would be altered by the project and would contribute to increased runoff in lower elevations on or near the site. As part of the hydrological report by Schaaf and Wheeler for the Gavilan EIR, models were set up to measure for both pre- and post-development conditions for the San Benito River tributary. According to the modeling results, the report concluded that runoff flows for a portion of the watershed would increase as a result of the increase in pavement and other impervious surfaces, and would make their way to the tributary prior to a peak flow condition. The report notes that the increase in flow from the combined projects’ watershed would reduce off-site erosion, siltation and flooding effects due to the more rapid runoff. As noted in item a, previously, the EIR will provide additional analysis focusing on the proposed project’s effects to the impacted San Benito River and will address related concerns raised by the RWQCB in their comments on the Gavilan EIR.

f.

Grading of the project site during construction will alter natural drainage patterns and result in increased runoff from the site into the San Benito River tributary. An increase in impervious surfaces would also increase the amount of runoff from the site. Storm water runoff from urban uses contains metals, pesticides, herbicides, and other contaminants such as oil, grease, lead, and animal waste. Pollutants and chemicals associated with urban development could be transported into the tributary from new roadways, sidewalks and driveways. These pollutants could include, but may not be limited to, heavy metals from automobile emissions, oil, grease, debris, and air pollution residue. Contaminated urban runoff that remains relatively untreated could result in incremental long-term degradation of water quality. Short-term adverse impacts to water quality would occur during construction of the project when areas of disturbed soils become susceptible to water erosion. Grading and vegetation removal could affect both water quality and could lead to downstream sedimentation in the tributary. These would be significant impacts.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

55

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

The Gavilan EIR analysis included mitigation measure HYD-1 to reduce constructionrelated impacts to a less than significant level; however, the mitigation measure may not be feasible to effectively mitigate impacts to water quality over the long term, as discussed in item a, above. Impacts to long term water quality will be discussed in the EIR. g-j.

According to the Gavilan EIR analysis, the project site is not located within a 100-year flood zone (page 122). The project site is not at risk of inundation by a dam, seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.

56

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

10. L AND U SE

AND

P LANNING

Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Physically divide an established community? (2,3,7,8)

‰

‰

‰

9

b. Conflict with any applicable land-use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (2,3,7,8)

‰

‰

‰

9

c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (7)

‰

‰

‰

9

Comments: a.

The proposed project is located on an undeveloped site adjacent to existing single-family uses (Cielo Vista single-family residential) in the County (Ridgemark Golf Course and Country Club gated residential community and the rural residential uses along Harbern Way and Old Ranch Road). The existing general plan land use designations in the immediate vicinity of the project site include Agricultural Rangeland to the northeast, Agricultural Productive to the east, Rural/Urban to the south, and Rural Residential to the west. The proposed project would not divide an existing community.

b.

The site is located within a designated Area of Special Study adjacent to an existing urban area and has been contemplated by the County for development because of its location near the eastern city limit line of the City of Hollister. The Specific Plan would guide development consistent with the envisioned residential, agricultural and/or open space uses allowed within the designated Area of Special Study. Allowed uses include detached single family dwellings, attached single, duet, duplex, triplex, fourplex dwellings, multi-family dwellings (ifive units or more), a guesthouse or other secondary residential units, not to exceed one per lot, and accessory buildings and uses. The minimum building site area would be four-thousand (4,000) square feet. Proposed lot sizes range from 4,000 square feet to 5-acre lots to provide a variety of residential housing opportunities for ownership or rental in proximity to the future college campus. The proposed project amends the County’s general plan and guides development on the

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

57

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

approximately 60-acre site. The proposed project would not conflict with any applicable land-use plan, policy, or regulation of any agency with jurisdiction over the site. c.

No Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans include the proposed project site, and therefore, the project would not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. San Benito County adopted Ordinance 541 in 1988 to establish and collect fees for financing a county-wide HCP and for San Joaquin kit fox protection measures. These fees are paid by the applicant as a condition of the issuance of a building permit. Fees paid through this ordinance do not provide take authorization under the federal or state Endangered Species Acts. To obtain take authorization a Habitat Conservation Plan is currently being jointly prepared by the applicant and the Gavilan Community College District. The EIR will include a discussion of the Habitat Conservation Plan as mitigation for impacts to biological resource habitat on the site.

58

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

11. M INERAL R ESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Result in loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (1)

‰

‰

‰

9

b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated in a local general plan, specific plan, or other land-use plan? (1)

‰

‰

‰

9

Comments: a,b.

According to the San Benito County General Plan 1995 Open Space and Conservation Element there are no known mineral resources on the project site. The proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resources or a locally important mineral resource recovery site. No further analysis is required.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

59

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

12. N OISE Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in applicable standards of other agencies? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

b. Result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? (2,3,7)

‰

‰

‰

9

c. Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

d. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

e. For a project located within an airport landuse plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public-use airport, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (2,3)

‰

‰

‰

9

f. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (2,3)

‰

‰

‰

9

Comments: a-d.

A noise analysis was prepared by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. (2008) for the combined San Benito Campus project and the proposed project for the Gavilan EIR. The noise analysis is found in Appendix C of the Gavilan EIR. The Gavilan EIR analysis concluded that the combined projects would expose new and existing residents to unacceptable noise levels, would increase the ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the site, and would result in new sources of construction noise. Noise generated by

60

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

construction typically does not involve the use of equipment that would create groundborne vibration or noise and the proposed project would not result in any ground-borne vibrations once developed. Noise generated by the residential units would be similar to nearby residential land uses; however, there would be an increase in traffic-related noise as a result of the project. The Gavilan EIR found that the increase in traffic noise would be a significant and unavoidable impact. A supplemental noise analysis will be prepared for the proposed project and will include an analysis of the required size of sound walls and off-site impacts to adjacent land uses. The supplemental noise analysis will be utilized in the EIR evaluation. e,f.

The project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or within the vicinity of a private airstrip. No further analysis is required.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

61

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

13. P OPULATION

AND

H OUSING

Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (2,3,11,12)

9

‰

‰

‰

b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (2,3)

‰

‰

‰

9

c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (2,3)

‰

‰

‰

9

Comments: a.

According to the California Department of Finance, the current population estimate for unincorporated San Benito County is estimated at 19,071, with an average persons per household of 3.081 persons. The proposed project would result in a population increase of up to approximately 678 persons. The proposed Santana Ranch Specific Plan to the north and San Benito Campus projects are anticipated to include a total of 1,162 dwelling units, which would result in a population increase of approximately 3,580. These two projects, along with the proposed project, would contribute to a total increase in population of about 4,258 persons from the three projects over a period of five to 16 years. The proposed project would contribute to population growth by constructing water and sewer infrastructure to the site. Growth-inducing impacts will be analyzed in the EIR.

b,c.

The project site is currently undeveloped grazing land and would not displace existing housing or residences. No further analysis is required.

62

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

14. P UBLIC S ERVICES Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Fire protection? (2,3,7)

‰

‰

9

‰

b. Police protection? (2,3,7)

‰

‰

9

‰

c. Schools? (2,3,7)

‰

‰

9

‰

d. Parks? (2,3,7)

‰

‰

9

‰

e. Other public facilities? (2,3,7)

‰

‰

9

‰

Comments: a.

Fire Protection: The project site is located within the San Benito County Fire Department Service Area 26. San Benito County Fire Department operates under contract with CAL-Fire and has a mutual aid agreement with the City of Hollister. The nearest CAL-Fire station is located on Fairview Road about two miles north of the project site and a Hollister Fire Department station is located about 3.4 miles west of the site on Union Road, off Airline Highway. According to the Gavilan EIR analysis (, the estimated response time to the site from the Fairview Road Station is about three to five minutes and San Benito County Fire Department facilities are sufficient to provide service to the site if staffing levels are increased (page 156). The construction of new facilities would not be required to meet these goals. Therefore the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services. The impact to fire protection services is less than significant and no further analysis is required.

b.

Police Protection: Police protection in unincorporated San Benito County is provided by the San Benito County Sheriff’s Department, which is headquartered in downtown Hollister, about four miles from the site. According to the public services analysis in the Gavilan EIR, the Department maintains an emergency response time of eight minutes,

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

63

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

and operates on a standard service ratio of one deputy for every 4,000 residents. The proposed project developer would participate in the County’s Law Enforcement Impact fee program to offset the costs of new facilities and equipment upgrades necessary to maintain adequate service to the site (page 156). No further analysis is required. c.

Schools: The proposed project would increase the number of school-age children within the Hollister Elementary School District and the San Benito High School District. According to the Gavilan EIR, the proposed project could generate about 124 kindergarten through eighth grade students and about 42 high school students. The project developer would participate in the state mandated school impact fee program to offset project-related increases in enrollment in the two school districts (page 157). Participation in the school impact fee program reduces the impacts to school facilities to less than significant. No further analysis is required.

d.

Parks: The proposed project includes open space and recreational amenities on the site and is anticipated to generate an increased demand for utilization of local and regional parks and recreational facilities. The County of San Benito operates five park facilities with the closest to the site being the Veterans Memorial Park, about 3.5 miles northwest of the project site. The closest City-operated park is the Cerra Vista School Park, located about two miles northwest of the site. The Gavilan EIR concluded that an increase in residents on the site would not substantially affect the demand for recreational amenities to the extent that new facilities would be required (page 157). The San Benito County Code Section 17-59(b) requires the provision of five acres of parkland for every 1,000 new residents. The proposed project would provide parkland consistent with County standards, or, if the open space and parkland standard is not met, the master developer would be responsible for the payment of in-lieu fees subject to county approval. No further analysis is required.

e.

Other Public Facilities: The City of Hollister is the nearest wastewater treatment provider to the site. The City is currently working with SSCWD and the County to provide regional wastewater treatment services with the City’s Urban Service Area, and nearby unincorporated areas in the vicinity. The proposed project would require connection to the City of Hollister sanitary sewer system. Sewer mains are not present near the site and extension of existing mains to the site, either through the Cielo Vista residential neighborhood, or along Airline Highway is necessary. These impacts of constructing infrastructure improvements will be discussed in the EIR.

64

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

15. R ECREATION Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (2,3,9)

‰

‰

9

‰

b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (2,3,9)

‰

‰

9

‰

Comments: a,b.

The proposed project would create housing for up to 678 residents; however, an increase in population from the project is not anticipated to substantially affect usage of existing local and regional parks. The San Benito County Code Section 17-59(b) requires the provision of five acres of parkland for every 1,000 new residents. The proposed project would be required to provide 3.4 acres of parkland. The proposed project includes open space and parkland consisting of a system of connected setback buffers, open space for habitat, open space for fault zone, pocket parks and retention basins for drainage. The proposed project includes provisions for connectivity of on-site park and recreational resources with the neighboring San Benito Campus recreational facilities. The proposed project intends to meet or exceed the County standard.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

65

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

16. T RANSPORTATION /T RAFFIC Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (2,3)

‰

‰

‰

9

d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (2,3)

‰

‰

‰

9

e. Result in inadequate emergency access? (2,3,7)

‰

‰

‰

9

f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? (2,3)

‰

‰

‰

9

g. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decreased the performance or safety of such facilities? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

66

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

Comments: a,b,g. Access to the project site is provided from Fairview Road and Airline Highway/State Route 25, which also provide regional access. The proposed primary access to the project site will be from Fairview Road opposite Cielo Vista Drive, which will be extended along the southern edge of the project site as part of the San Benito Campus project. Proposed internal circulation is a loop roadway network with cul-de-sacs. The onsite circulation network is designed to integrate pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular modes of transportation. An emergency vehicle access roadway is proposed between Airline Highway and the southeast corner of the site along the eastern boundary of the San Benito Campus site. A traffic impact analysis was prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants Inc. in July 2008 for the Gavilan EIR. The results of the analysis are presented in the report: Fairview Corners/Gavilan College Master Plan Transportation Impact Analysis, which is found in Appendix A of the Gavilan EIR. According to that analysis, the proposed project would contribute to significant traffic impacts on several adjacent and nearby intersections, signals, and roads. The Gavilan EIR determined that a number of off-site improvements will be necessary to accommodate development of both the San Benito Campus project and the proposed project, and maintain acceptable LOS at the intersection of Airline Highway and Fairview Road and other nearby intersections. Improvements to Fairview Road along the project frontage will include dedicating the necessary right-of-way along the Fairview Road frontage to allow for the future construction of a four-lane roadway. An updated traffic impact analysis is being prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants Inc for the proposed project. The traffic analysis will include site traffic projections, an evaluation of project and cumulative conditions, impacts on state highways, site access and on-site circulation, a signal warrant analysis, and a qualitative analysis of the project’s effect on transit service in the area and on bicycle and pedestrian circulation in the study area. The analysis will include a description of impacts and recommendations to mitigate significant project impacts. The results of this traffic impact analysis report will be analyzed in the EIR. c.

The proposed project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns.

d.

The proposed project includes the construction of new roads to accommodate residential uses on the site. Design and construction of the proposed roadways would be subject to the review and approval of the San Benito County Department of Public Works. No further analysis is required.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

67

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

e.

Emergency vehicle access from the project site would be provided from Airline Highway to the southeast corner of the college campus. The proposed project includes two access routes to the site and one emergency vehicle access route to Airline Highway and would not result in inadequate emergency access. No further analysis is required.

f.

The proposed project includes zoning provisions for off-street parking consistent with County of San Benito off-street parking requirements, which is two spaces per singlefamily dwelling. No further analysis is required.

68

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

17. U TILITIES

AND

S ERVICE S YSTEMS

Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (2,3,7,8)

‰

‰

‰

9

b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid-waste disposal needs? (7)

‰

‰

9

‰

g. Comply with federal, state, and local statues and regulations related to solid waste? (7)

‰

‰

9

‰

Comments: a.

The proposed project would connect to the City of Hollister sanitary sewer system and would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

69

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

b.

According to the Gavilan EIR, the City of Hollister, the San Benito County Water District, and the Sunnyslope County Water District have executed a MOU and a Statement of Intent (2005) to develop and maintain the Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Master Plan. The Hollister Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant is the primary wastewater treatment plant for the Hollister Urban Area including areas within the County, including the project site, that are designated to be served by that facility. The project will comply with the requirements of the Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Master Plan including the use of non-salt based water treatment systems. No additional analysis is required. The proposed project also includes provisions to allow limited use of septic systems on a maximum of 22 lots, consistent with County standards for minimum lot size, placement, design and construction. Review and approval by the Department of Health and County Engineer and compliance with standard conditions of approval is required for septic systems, prior to issuance of building permits. No additional analysis is required. Off-site infrastructure requirements for the proposed project will be discussed and further analyzed in the EIR.

c.

The proposed project will alter existing drainage patterns on the site and will increase paved surfaces that require the construction of new storm drain facilities. As discussed in Section D.9.c-e, previously, the RWQCB raised several concerns over proposed storm water infrastructure improvements including conveyance, detention and treatment. These issues will be further analyzed in the EIR.

d.

The project site is located within the SSCWD service area for domestic water and recycled water. An SB 610 Water Supply Assessment (WSA) was completed for the Gavilan EIR by the SSCWD in July 2008, which concluded that project water demand will be met once well improvements planned by SSCWD are made. These improvements insure that SSCWD has sufficient well capacity to meet the additional capacity requirements during and extended drought when surface water capacity is reduced. Therefore, SSCWD would be able to adequately supply the project site without substantial improvements to facilities or operations. Although recycled water is not currently available for the site, the project includes dual piping provisions to facilitate connection to a recycled water distribution system when it becomes available in the future. The WSA, as it relates specifically to the proposed project, will be discussed in the EIR.

e.

The project site is not located in a wastewater treatment service area. As noted above, the proposed project is anticipated to connect to the City of Hollister sanitary sewer system. Infrastructure improvements are proposed both on and off the site to provide

70

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

service to both the San Benito Campus project and the proposed project. Project-related impacts to treatment capacity and on and off-site infrastructure needs will be evaluated in the EIR. f,g.

Solid waste generated by the proposed project would be collected by Nor Cal Waste Systems and would be disposed of at the John Smith Road Landfill about two miles east of the project site. According to the Gavilan EIR, the landfill has an estimated 20 years of remaining capacity (page 159).

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

71

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

18. M ANDATORY F INDINGS

OF

S IGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Impact

Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated

Less-ThanSignificant Impact

No Impact

a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment; substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community; substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species; or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,14)

9

‰

‰

‰

b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects) (1,2,3,5,7,13)

9

‰

‰

‰

c. Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? (2,3,7)

9

‰

‰

‰

Comments: a.

The proposed project includes excavation on and off the site that could disrupt potentially significant subsurface cultural materials. Mitigation measures are included herein that reduce potentially significant impacts cultural resources to a less than significant level. The proposed project will permanently alter the visual characteristics of the site by introducing urban structures and new sources of light and glare. Potentially significant impacts to scenic quality of the project site, potentially significant light and glare impacts to the unique clarity of the night sky will be discussed within the EIR. The proposed project also has the potential to modify the habitat of a number of special status plant and animal species. Impacts to special status species and their habitat will be studied in the EIR.

72

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

b.

The proposed project would contribute cumulatively to impacts to the scenic qualities of the site and uninterrupted public views from Fairview Road. The proposed project would also contribute to the cumulative impacts of greenhouse gas emissions (energy consumption and direct emissions) that affect climate change, erosion and water quality impacts to the San Benito River, an increase in ambient noise levels, and unacceptable levels of service on area roadways. The project’s contributions to these potentially significant cumulative impacts may be cumulatively considerable and will be discussed in the EIR.

c.

The proposed project would expose sensitive receptors on and off the site to unacceptable levels of noise due to traffic and construction. This is a potentially significant impact that will be addressed in the EIR. The proposed project also has the potential to expose sensitive receptors to dust during construction. With implementation of mitigation measure AQ-1, exposure to dust emissions is reduced to less than significant. The proposed project also has the potential to expose people and property to significant seismic events. With incorporation of mitigation measure G-1, the risks of damage or harm from exposure to seismic events is reduced to a less than significant level.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

73

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

E. 1.

SOURCES County of San Benito. San Benito County General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element. 1995.

2.

Site Visit. EMC Planning Group. 2009.

3.

Project Application and Plans

4.

County of San Benito. San Benito County General Plan Scenic Roads and Highway Element. 1980.

5.

County of San Benito. San Benito County General Plan Environmental Resources and Constraints Analysis. 1994.

6.

State of California, Department of Transportation, California Scenic Highway System. Found November 19, 2009 at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/index.htm.

7.

David J. Powers and Associates, Gavilan San Benito Campus and Fairview Corners Projects Final EIR. November 2008. Available on the County of San Benito website: http://www.san-benito.ca.us/

8.

County of San Benito. San Benito County General Plan Land Use Element. 1998.

9.

County of San Benito. San San Benito County Code. 2008.

10.

Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District. Air Quality Management Plan & CEQA Guidelines. 2008.

11.

Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG), Monterey Bay Area 2008 Regional Forecast Population, Housing Unit and Employment Projections for Monterey, San Benito and Santa Cruz Counties to the Year 2035, June 11, 2008

12.

State of California, Department of Finance, Demographic. Found online on November 23, 2009 at http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/.

13.

Environmental Protection Agency. Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Rule (EPA420-F-04-032). May 2004.

14.

California Department of Fish and Game. California Natural Diversity Database for San Benito County. June 12, 2009.

74

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

15.

State of California, Department of Toxic Substances Control. Envirostor website. Found on December 1, 2009 at http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public.

16.

California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. OEHHA Lists 5 Toxic Air Contaminants of Concern for Children. September 18, 2001.

17.

United State Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey for San Benito County. 1969.

18.

EMC Planning Group Inc. Initial Site Assessment: Proposed EVA Lane Driveway Approach on Airline Highway - Gavilan College San Benito Campus/Fairview Corners Residential Project. 2010.

19.

Archaeological Resource Management. Archaeological Survey Report for the Fairview Corners Highway 25 Emergency Encroachment Permit Project. April 2010.

All documents indicated in bold are available for review at the San Benito County Planning and Building Inspection Services, 3224 Southside Road, Hollister, CA 95023, (831)637-5313 during normal business hours. All documents listed above are available for review at EMC Planning Group Inc., 301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C, Monterey, California 93940, (831) 649-1799 during normal business hours.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

75

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN I NITIAL S T UDY

This side intentionally left blank.

76

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

APPENDIX

I NITIAL S ITE A SSESSMENT : P ROPOSED EVA L ANE D RIVEWAY A PPROACH ON A IRLINE H IGHWAY - G AVILAN C OLLEGE S AN B ENITO C AMPUS /F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ESIDENTIAL P ROJECT

MEMORANDUM To:

Richard Oliver

From:

Sally Rideout, Senior Planner

Cc:

Steven M. Kinsella, David Rodriguez, John Noori

Date:

May 13, 2010

Re:

Initial Site Assessment: Proposed EVA Lane Driveway Approach on Airline Highway - Gavilan College San Benito Campus/Fairview Corners Residential Project

Message: To assess the proposed project for potential hazardous waste involvement an initial site assessment (ISA) has been prepared for the project following Caltrans guidelines as presented in Appendix DD – Preparation Guidelines for Initial Site Assessment (ISA) Checklist for Hazardous Waste of the Project Development Procedures Manual (Caltrans, July 1999). The ISA is based on information provided in the EIR for the development project. The proposed EVA lane driveway approach will require an encroachment permit from Caltrans, District 5, for construction of the driveway approach and access onto State Route 25. Attached is a completed Caltrans Initial Site Assessment Checklist for the above-referenced project. The results of the checklist indicate that there are no hazards or hazardous materials associated with the project site, and no further review is required. Therefore the project is in compliance with ASTM Standard E1527-05, and a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment will not be required. If you have any questions, please contact me at extension 210.

G AVILAN S AN B ENITO C AMPUS AND FAIRVIEW C ORNERS R ESIDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN P ROJECTS I NITIAL S ITE A SSESSMENT (ISA) C HECKLIST

This Initial Site Assessment was prepared using the format presented in the Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual (July 1999), Appendix DD, Hazardous Waste.

P ROJECT I NFORMATION District: Caltrans District 5 County: San Benito County Route: State Route 25 (Airline Highway) Kilometer Post (Post Mile): N/A EA: N/A Description: The proposed project is a new driveway approach on State Route 25 (Airline Highway) located approximately 2,700 feet east of the intersection of Airline Highway and Fairview Road in San Benito County (hereinafter “project site”). The project would affect approximately 1.2 acres within the Caltrans right-of-way. Use of the driveway and access road would be restricted to emergency vehicles only. The proposed driveway would accommodate the installation of an emergency vehicle access lane between the highway and the proposed Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan project site. The proposed emergency vehicle access (EVA) road would extend from the southeastern corner of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan site to

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

1-1

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL

Airline Highway along the east boundary of the Gavilan San Benito Campus site. Figure 1, Aerial Photograph, presents the location of the project site and identifies an area of potential impact. Project

Manager:

David

Rodriguez Phone #: 408-848-4800 (Gavilan College

[email protected]

District)

Steven M. Kinsella, Superintendant/President,

408-848-4800

Gavilan College Project Engineer: John Noori, Kier & Wright Phone #:

408-727-6665

Civil Engineers & Surveyors, Inc.

P ROJECT S CREENING 1. Project Features: New R/W? No. The proposed new driveway approach would be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Excavation? Yes. Minimal grading and excavation are required to construct the driveway and approach. Railroad Involvement? No. Structure demolition/modification? No. Subsurface utility relocation? No.

2. Project Setting Rural or Urban: Rural Current land uses: The project site is currently unimproved right-of-way on the north side of Airline Highway. The area of potential impact extends beyond the existing right-of-way onto adjacent rangeland, which consists of an agricultural field of cultivated barley that is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. Adjacent land uses (industrial, light industry, commercial, agricultural, residential, etc.): Unimproved rangeland is located to the north, east and west, with rural residential uses and grassland along

1-2

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

ISA C HECKLIST

Harbern Way further to the north. The Ridgemark Golf and Country Club, which includes a gated residential community, is located to the south across Airline Highway.

3. Check federal, State, and local environmental and health regulatory agency records as necessary, to see if any known hazardous waste site is in or near the project area. If a known site is identified, show its location on the attached map and attach additional sheets, as needed, to provide pertinent information for the proposed project. A check of the Department of Toxic Substance Control Envirostor website (www. envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/) reveals that there are no recorded local, state or federal hazardous waste sites or incidents recorded on or within one mile of the subject property (2010).

4. Conduct Field Inspection. Site visit date: January 14, 2010. Sally Rideout and Christine Bradley, EMC Planning Group Inc. No evidence of hazards was identified.

Storage Structures/Pipelines: Underground tanks? No.

Surface tanks? No.

Sumps? No.

Ponds? No

Drums? No.

Basins? No.

Transformers? No.

Landfill? No

Other? None

Contamination: (spills, leaks, illegal dumping, etc.) Surface staining? No.

Oil sheen? No.

Odors? No.

Vegetation damage? No.

Other? None

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

1-3

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL

Hazardous Materials: (asbestos, lead, etc.) Buildings? No.

Spray-on fireproofing? No.

Pipe wrap? No.

Friable tile? No.

Acoustical plaster? No.

Serpentine? No.

Paint? No.

Other? None

5. Additional record search, as necessary, of subsequent land uses that could have resulted in a hazardous waste site: Please see response to Number 3. 6. Other comments and/or observations: None.

ISA D ETERMINATION Does the project have potential hazardous waste involvement? No. If there is known or potential hazardous waste involvement, is additional ISA work needed before task orders can be prepared for the Investigation? No. If "YES," explain; then give an estimate of additional time required: N/A A brief memo should be prepared to transmit the ISA conclusions to the Project Manager and Project Engineer. ISA Conducted by: Christine Bradley, EMC Planning Group Inc. Date: April 30, 2010

1-4

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

ISA C HECKLIST

This side intentionally left blank.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

1-5

State of Califomia-Business, Transportation and Housing Agency

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL Hollister-Gilroy Area 740 Renz Lane Gilroy, CA 95020 (408) 848-2324 (800) 735-2929 (TIITDD) (800) 735-2922 (Voice)

August 24,2010 File No.: 725.10935.13678.ltr.lO 036.doc

Ms. Lissette Knight San Benito County 3224 Southside Road Hollister, CA 95023 Dear Ms. Knight: My office recently received a copy of the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Fairview Comers Residential Specific Plan (SCH#2010081009) draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The California Highway Patrol (CHP), Hollister-Gilroy Area, is the primary agency providing traffic law enforcement, safety and traffic management on Fairview Road within the unincorporated area of San Benito County. After a thorough review of the provided information, we find that there are a number of issues that should be considered prior to implementation of the project. The construction of up to 220 units will present a significant increase to the traffic patterns on Fairview Road and the proposed entrance to the Fairview Comers Residential Plan. We recommend the following considerations when planning the project: An overhead, 3-phase, signalized intersection A dedicated left-tum lane for southbound traffic on Fairview Road into the project A dedicated right-tum lane for northbound traffic on Fairview Road into the project We feel that these improvements would provide additional safety to the motoring public when entering, leaving, and passing by the proposed project location. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please call me or Officer A. Rodriguez at (408) 848-2324. Sincerely,

I / ! , .... 7 i

1_.'

;

./ I/:/~ <=,,"-4~· /

(~

f

T. D. SAXON, Captain Commander Hollister-Gilroy Area

cc:

State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit CHP, Special Projects Section CHP, Coastal Division

'/ /J! Safety, Service, and Security

L~

August 19, 2010 Lissette Knight Senior Planner San Benito County Planning and Building Dept. 3224 Southside Rd. Hollister, CA 95023 RE:

Comments on the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Fairview Comers Specific Plan

Dear Ms. Knight: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Fairview Corners Specific Plan. The Council of San Benito County Governments, offers the following comments: •

Overall, the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) should consider the

transportation goals and policies adopted by the Council of Governments in its

2010 Regional Transportation Plan. The Regional Transportation Plan expresses

short-term strategies as well as long-term goals to consistently improve the overall

efficiency of the transportation system.

•

This project is located adjacent to State Route 25 (Airline Highway), The Route

Concept Report for State Route 25 should be consulted during the development of

the EIR. You can find a copy of the report online at:

http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist05/planning/sys_plan_docs/tcr_factsheeccombo/sbc

sr25_tcrfs.pdf.

•

The EIR should carefully evaluate impacts to public transit. Given the significant

cuts to transit operations funding in California over the past several years, it is

unlikely that the San Benito County Local Transportation Authority will expand its

fixed route transit to the project in the next 5-10 years. The lack of fixed route

transit could lead to an impact on the general public Dial-a-Ride service.

•

The San Benito County Local Transportation Authority is currently developing

Transit Design Guidelines. The Guidelin~~ wiil set forth standards for public

transit amenities to ensure consistency with Local Transportation Authority

operations. Please coordinate with the Local Transportation Authority to ensure

that transit facilities within the project are located and designed in accordance with

these draft Guidelines, scheduled for approval in September.

Council ofGovernments. Measure A Authority _ Airport Land Use Commission. Service Authority for Freeways and Expressways 330 Tres Pinos Road, Suite C7. Hollister, CA 95023 • Phone: 831.637.7665 • Fax: 831.636.4160 www.sanbenitocog.org

..

Lissette Knight Fairview Corners EIR Page 2

•

Bicycle and pedestrian amenities, as well as allowance for transit facilities on site, may help mitigate the air quality impacts of additional car trips generated by the project. Recently adopted legislation, SB375 and AB32, require that California regions implement planning processes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Please address this issue in the draft EIR.

•

COG recommends that when residential areas are planned, the use of cul-de-sacs is discouraged. Cul-de-sacs can isolate neighborhoods and discourage the use of alternative modes of transportation (see attached paper). COG also recommends that neighborhood streets be designed as 'complete streets', pursuant to AB1038.

Again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on this Notice of Preparation. Should you have any questions, please contact Lisa Rheinheimer, COG Executive Director, at (831) 637-7665.

Encl. cc: Brandy Rider, Caltrans District 5 Regional Planning

Council ofGovernments +Measure A Authority

Airport Land Use Commission +Service Authorityfor Freeways and Expressways

330 Tres Pinos Road, Suite C7 +Hollister, CA 95023 +Phone: 831.637.7665 +Fax: 831.636.4160 www.sanbenitocog.org

August 31,2010 To: Lissette Knight, Senior Planner Re: Opposition to Fairview Corners NOP

I am in opposition to Fairview Corners Development on the east side of Fairview Road. This has

been zoned Rural all through the years. There is no need to change now and amend the General Plan.

This county corridor has outstanding visual quality; hence given the name "Fair view", meaning beautiful.

It affords unique Open Space from the roadside fields up onto hills to the ever-so-close

Mt. Diablo Mountains. Rural Zoning protects this view for everyone's benefit.

Air Quality will be affected with construction and maintenance of 220 houses + commercial. There will be additional traffic congestion. Paving over land and vegetation destroys the value of these natural resource for our health. Biological impacts are many; whereas, protected wetlands are affected. It's been said the natural pond has been tractored over since this project's inspections began. It no longer has water and can't be habitat for wildlife as before and has been labeled "remnant pond". True count of endangered and imperiled species needs years of restoration. The devastation caused by repeated discing and grading needs to be checked why this took place. " No burrows of Kit Fox seen?" Ask neighbors and look at pictures to validate such a statement and comments need to be on record in reference also to Burrowing Owl, Tiger Salamander, Migratory Birds, Raptors, etc. Hazardous materials are increased with chemicals used for each house, yard, park and street. Natural landscape, left as is, reduces pollution. Why would one pave over land and natural resources, use more toxic materials, add to GHG emissions; when not needed? Water is wasted in these processes and contaminated, degrading its quality. Drainage into Santa Ana Creek will add to the discharge from the 1,092 houses + commercial proposed one mile away. How will this affect the tributory with flooding, erosion, altering the natural waterway, wetlands locally and destination of Soap Lake? It needs analysis in totality, not alone. Land use is in conflict as zoned Rural, not multiuse There is no current need for change of Ordinance. With 1,000 homes in foreclosure, enough places are for resale and existing communities will be kept up. Many allocations are also available for building, when needed, and zoned for that use. Noise pollution is a serious factor. This matter is a problem now, without adequate code enforcement when residents need it. Maintaining a standard for safe levels of sound and times for restrictions are important for one's physical well-being. Rural and Open Space preserves the peace and quiet. Homes should be built wisely within correct zoning. This should promote using established businesses and supporting our towns. Fairview Corners does not benefit the health and welfare of San Benito County Residents. Changing the Rural east side of Fairview is not a good decision. Jeannette Langstaff 1~31 Tiburon Dr. Hollister

\ .

<-'6-/L/L£-tt.~;'--/). '9(' .~.7: '~"'-...·-f;l:>i()-

j.' 1\' i

Fairview Cor11ers Draft EIR

To: San Benito Pla11ni11g Department From: 180 Harbern Way, Hollister Ca. Subject: Fairview Corners Draft EIR' In opposition to the rezoning of 5 acre parcels to small subdivision parcels, we as adjacent property line occupants to tl1e proposed rezone/subdivisio11/apartment size parcels, would like to state the following; 1. Tl1is project would leave Harbern Way and adjacent property owners c011nected to a subdivision and apartll1ents of small parcels whose occupa11ts would 110t respect the ITIral nature of our properties and changes the rural way of life for adjace11t property owners to the proposed project. 2. As adjacent property owners, we n10ved l1ere some 15 years ago for tl1e rural setting and lifestyle that our families wanted. We had the llnderstanding at that time that the property adjacent to lIS was zoned 5 acre parcels(as disclosed) and that our rural lifestyle would be mai11tained, even if 5 acre ranches(similar to Ollr current hOlnes) were built. a. Why do we as adjacent property owners 11ave to lose our rural lifestyle/setting with the additio11 of subdivision/apartments on our bacl< door steps for a developers gain? This was not what was disclosed to us when we moved to the area. b. Who pays for our lower property values as adjacent property owners, as we can no 1011ger be valued as rural with developed subdivisions along the property lines? c. Wl1at protections do we have in protecting our family business as an Organic Farm, registered in our county, with subdivisio11 fertilizers, pesticides a11d SllCh adjace11t to our property? Whell we lose our organic status, we lose our organic busi11ess, and our future pla11s of growing more organic produce. d. What protections do we have as rural adjacent property owners against issues such as security, lighting, noise that comes fron1 subdivisions, again taking away from our rural setting, falnily business and lifestyle that we intentio11ally moved to 15 years ago. 3. Wildlife - altl10ugh the developer 11as bee11 busy discing/tractori11g and dry farming tIle property over the last few years (never done in years prior) the wildlife in the area still have access and the ability move about the property. In particular kit foxes and migratory birds/ducl
cllrre11tly being revised and updated, no project should proceed/discussed until that Gelleral Plall revision is completed and approved by the County Residents. 5. Cllrrent foreclosure properties in tIle County - Before considering rezoning 5 acre properties to bring ill more subdivisioll hOines and apartments, should the city and county be addressing the CUlTent high number of foreclosed homes in the coullty, instead of rezoning property to bring in more vacant homes. Issues of vacancy need to be addressed in our COllnty before adding to the problem with more homes.

We as adjacent property owners are opposed to the rezoning of the Fairview Corners property. Our current rural lifestyle, family businesses, rural setti11g, and propeliy values will all be-impacted. We as adjacellt property owners have seen no plans for or considerations ill helping maintain our rural lifestyles fronl the developer or the County witll tlleir plans. Future considerations with the use of opell space for adjacellt property OWllers and wildlife needs to be discussed prior to these discussions of rezoning, to evell see if all of these sllbdivision plans are feasible. It is us, the adjacent property owners tllat will most be affected by such a subdivision developn1ent, yet nothing has been discllssed with us on how our rural lifestyle is to be protected.

Rey and Jackie Mendizabal Foxll0110w Herb Farm 180 Harbern Way Hollister Ca.

---

-------

Robert Gilchrist Huenemann, M.S.E.E. IZO Barbera Way Hollister, CA 950Z3-9708 (8:5I) 6:55-0786 ft?~~~~~~((I~1ill-~~lli~~~~~.{ r-,-~ Er:~I~ P.i'e;:;~:'W~B@;:i!1g:J5tc£:'Gi

August 5, ZOIO

Gary Annstrong San Benito County Director of Planning 3224 Southside Road Hollister, CA 95023

Dear Mr. Armstrong;

In response to the Notice of Preparation for the Fairview Comers project, we would like to repeat our strong objection to this project and also to the Santana Ranch project. The issue here is very simple. The area east of Fairview Road is zoned for five acre parcels. Plans for development at urban density in this area make a mockery of the planning process. There is a general plan revision in process. Please allow that process to be completed. If it is determined that a zoning change east of Fairview Road is appropriate, then allow the planning for these projects to begin at that time and not sooner.

Sincerely,

f2o£W 1Y: ~"'Robert G. Huenemann

JViP+L ftftV~~

Holly P. Huenemann

Copies: San Benito County Board of Supervisors 481 Fourth Street Hollister, CA 95023 Hollister Free Lance

350 Sixth Street

Suite 101

Hollister, CA 95023

APPENDIX C

G EOTECHNICAL I NVESTIGATION OF THE T RES P INOS F AULT

APPENDIX D

G EOTECHNICAL I NVESTIGATION E VALUATING S URFACE AND S UBSURFACE S OIL C ONDITIONS

APPENDIX E

B IOLOGICAL R ESOURCES A NALYSIS AND USACE D ETERMINATION L ETTER

GAVILAN COLLEGE/FAIRVIEW CORNERS ADEIR/DEIR BIOTIC EVALUATION CITY OF HOLLISTER, CALIFORNIA

Prepared by

LIVE OAK ASSOCIATES, INC. Rick Hopkins, Ph.D., Principal and Senior Wildlife Ecologist Davinna Ohlson, M.S., Senior Project Manager and Plant/Wildlife Ecologist Nathan Hale, M.S. (Candidate), Staff Ecologist

Prepared for

David J. Powers & Associates Attn: Judy Shanley 1885 The Alameda, Suite 204 San Jose, CA 95126

August 19, 2008

PN 878-05

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Live Oak Associates, Inc., completed an investigation of the biological resources of an approximately 137-acre parcel in the City of Hollister, California, and evaluated likely impacts to such resources resulting from the development of the site into single-family residential units and a community college campus. The entire site consists of an agricultural field of cultivated barley (Triticum aestivum) that is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle, but which also supports other grassland species. LOA determined that special status plant species are absent from the site. Therefore, impacts from site development to special status plant species are less-than-significant. Although no special status animal species were observed on the site during the 2007 or 2008 surveys, several special status animal species may occur within the project boundaries. A number of special status animal species may regularly pass through or over the site during migration or may infrequently forage or roost on or adjacent to the site. For these species, the project would result in a less-than-significant impact on foraging or roosting habitat, as similar habitat is regionally abundant. Development on the site would result in the loss of aestivation habitat for the California tiger salamander and could result in the loss of individuals, which would be considered a significant impact. Mitigation for impacts to this species would include preservation and creation of habitat onsite or at a suitable offsite location. The burrowing owl and American badger could occur anywhere on the site where suitable burrows exist, as the project site features suitable, albeit extremely marginal, habitat for these species. Impacts to the burrowing owl and American badger may occur as a result of project buildout. Impacts to habitat for the burrowing owl and American badger would be less-thansignificant; however, impacts to individuals of these species may occur as a result of project build-out. Preconstruction surveys would be required for these species. Impacts to tree- and ground-nesting raptors may occur as a result of future ground disturbance activities. While the site itself does not contain suitable nesting habitat for tree-nesting birds, the site’s proximity to suitable habitat occurring on adjacent properties as well as the occurrence of suitable ground-nesting habitat may require that an appropriate construction-free buffer be maintained during the breeding season (February 1 to August 31). Pre-construction surveys would be required for special status bird species that occur on or within 250 feet of the project boundary. Implementation of proposed mitigation measures to ensure that future ground disturbance does not result in harm or injury to any of these species would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level. Jurisdictional waters are absent from the project site. Impacts to habitat for native wildlife and degradation of water quality in seasonal creeks, reservoirs, and downstream waters would be considered less-than-significant. ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. i

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. I TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................II 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS................................................................................................. 4 2.1 BIOTIC HABITATS ...................................................................................................... 5 2.1.1 Agricultural Field........................................................................................................ 6 2.2 BMOVEMENT CORRIDORS.......................................................................................... 9 2.3 SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS AND ANIMALS ......................................................... 10 2.4 ENDANGERED, THREATENED, OR SPECIAL STATUS PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES MERITING FURTHER DISCUSSION................................................................... 20 2.4.1 California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense). Federal Listing Status: Threatened; State Listing Status: Threatened. ...................................................................... 20 2.4.2 Western Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status: Species of Special Concern. ......................................................................... 22 2.4.3 San Joaquin Kit Fox (Vulpes macrotus mutica). Federal Listing Status: Endangered; State Listing Status: Threatened. .......................................................................................... 23 2.5 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS..................................................................................... 25 3.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS .................................................................................... 27 3.1 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ....................................................................................... 27 3.2 RELEVANT GOALS, POLICIES, AND LAWS......................................................... 28 3.2.1 Threatened and Endangered Species ........................................................................ 28 3.2.2 Migratory Birds......................................................................................................... 29 3.2.3 Birds of Prey ............................................................................................................. 29 3.2.4 Wetlands and Other Jurisdictional Waters................................................................ 29 3.2.5 BLocal Ordinances ...................................................................................................... 31 3.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS SPECIFIC TO THE PROJECT SITE.................... 31 3.3.1 Loss of Habitat for Special Status Plants.................................................................. 32 3.3.2 Loss of Habitat for Special Status Animals .............................................................. 32 3.3.3 Impacts to Individual California Tiger Salamanders and Their Habitat................... 33 3.3.4 Impacts to Burrowing Owls ...................................................................................... 35 3.3.5 Disturbance to Nesting Raptors ................................................................................ 37 3.3.6 Impacts to American Badgers................................................................................... 37 3.3.7 Impacts to San Joaquin Kit Foxes............................................................................. 38 3.3.8 Loss of Habitat for Native Wildlife .......................................................................... 39 3.3.9 Interference with the Movement of Native Wildlife................................................. 40 3.3.10 Disturbance to Waters of the United States or Riparian Habitats......................... 40 3.3.11 Degradation of Water Quality in Seasonal Drainages, Stock Ponds, and Downstream Waters.............................................................................................................. 40 3.3.12 BLocal Ordinances or Habitat Conservation Plans ................................................. 41 LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................. 42 APPENDIX A: VASCULAR PLANTS OF THE STUDY AREA .............................................. 44 APPENDIX B: TERRESTRIAL VERTEBRATE SPECIES THAT POTENTIALLY OCCUR ON THE STUDY AREA.............................................................................................................. 46 ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. ii

APPENDIX C: U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE STANDARDIZED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROTECTION OF THE SAN JOAQUIN KIT FOX PRIOR TO OR DURING GROUND DISTURBANCE ................................................................................. 49

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION Live Oak Associates, Inc. (LOA), has prepared the following report, which describes the biotic resources of a 137-acre property in the City of Hollister, California, and evaluates likely impacts to these resources resulting from the development of a community college campus and a lowdensity residential neighborhood. The project site is located in the northern portion of San Benito County, within the City of Hollister (Figure 1) in the Tres Pinos 7.5” U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle in the west half of section 7, township 13 south, range 6 east.

Development projects can damage or modify biotic habitats used by sensitive plant and wildlife species. In such cases, site development may be regulated by state or federal agencies, subject to provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and/or covered by policies and ordinances of the City of Hollister. This report addresses issues related to: 1) sensitive biotic resources occurring on the study area; 2) the federal, state, and local laws regulating such resources, and 3) mitigation measures that may be required to reduce the magnitude of anticipated impacts. As such, the objectives of this report are to: •

Summarize all site-specific information related to existing biological resources;

•

Make reasonable inferences about the biological resources that could occur onsite based on habitat suitability and the proximity of the site to a species’ known range;

•

Summarize all state and federal natural resource protection laws that may be relevant to possible future site development;

•

Identify and discuss project impacts to biological resources likely to occur on the site within the context of CEQA or any state or federal laws; and

•

Identify avoidance and mitigation measures that would reduce impacts to a less-thansignificant level as identified by CEQA and that are generally consistent with recommendations of the resource agencies for affected biological resources.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 1

S a n J o s e

S ite L o c a tio n M a p

S a n ta C la r a C o .

S a n ta C ru z

M

o n

t e r e y

P r o je c t s ite

B

a

S a n B e n ito C o .

y

5 m ile s 0

5 m ile s

M o n te re y C o .

a p p r o x im a te s c a le

R e g io n a l M a p

V ic in ity M a p

S a n F r a n c is c o

S e e V ic in ity M a p (le ft)

S a n J o s e

S e e S ite L o c a tio n M a p (a b o v e ) 101

P r o je c t lo c a tio n

L iv e O a k A s s o c ia t e s , In c . G a v ila n C o lle g e / F a ir v ie w N

V ic in it y

N o t to s c a le

D a te

P r o je c t # 1 1 /7 /0 7

8 7 8 -0 5

C o rn e rs

F ig u r e # 1

The analysis of impacts, as discussed in Section 3.0 of this report, is based on the known and potential biotic resources of the site, discussed in Section 2.0. Sources of information used in the preparation of this analysis included: 1) the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CDFG 2008), 2) the Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2001), and 3) manuals and references related to plants and animals of the region. A reconnaissancelevel field survey of the study area was conducted on October 23, 2007, by LOA ecologists Davinna Ohlson and Nathan Hale, at which time the principal biotic habitats and land uses of the site were identified, and the constituent plants and animals of each were noted. An additional site visit was conducted by Ms. Ohlson and Mr. Hale on February 5, 2008, to delineate aquatic features on and adjacent to the site. Rick Hopkins, Melissa Denena, and Ms. Ohlson conducted additional site surveys in April and May 2007.

The proposed project is the construction of 226 single-family residential units on approximately 53 acres of the site and a community college campus on approximately 72 acres of the site. Approximately 12 acres of the site will be dedicated for open space and parks.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 3

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is bounded by rural residential and agricultural fields to the north and east, Highway 25 to the south, and Fairview Road to the west. Topographically, the site ranges in elevation from approximately 465 ft. (142 m) National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) in the southwest corner of the site to approximately 550 ft. (168 m) NGVD in the northern half of the site. Surrounding land uses include residential development, agriculture, non-native grassland to the northeast, and Ridgemark Golf Course. The site itself consists of a grazed hay field.

Four soil types from three soil series—Antioch, Rincon, and San Benito—were identified on the project site (NRCS 2007) (Figure 2).

The Antioch series consists of moderately well to

somewhat poorly drained soils. The Rincon series consist of deep, well-drained soils that formed in alluvium from sedimentary rocks. The San Benito series consists of well-drained soils that formed in residuum weathered from shale and sandstone with strongly sloping to very steep slopes. None of these soil series are considered hydric, although hydric inclusions may occur. Antioch and Rincon soils are considered slightly acidic to moderately alkaline; therefore, the site may have, at one time, supported plant species adapted to such conditions.

San Benito County has a Mediterranean climate with warm to hot dry summers and cool winters. Annual precipitation in the general vicinity of the site averages 13.5 inches, most of which falls between November and April. Nearly all precipitation falls in the form of rain. Stormwater runoff readily infiltrates the site’s soils; when field capacity has been reached, gravitational water flows off the site into roadside ditches along Fairview Road and Highway 25.

Surrounding land uses include open space, agricultural, and low-density, rural residences to the north and east; a golf course to the south; and residential development to the west. The site itself is regularly farmed and grazed and, thus, retains little of its natural character.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 4

A p p r o x im a te P r o je c t B o u n d a r y

L E G E N D A n B

A n tio c h lo a m , 2 to 5 % s lo p e s

A o D 2

A n tio c h c la y lo a m , 9 t o 1 5 % s lo p e s

R s C

R in c o n s ilty c la y lo a m , 2 to 9 % s lo p e s

S b E 2

S a n B e n it o c la y lo a m , 1 5 t o 3 0 % s lo p e s

S o u r c e :

U . S . D . A . S o il C o n s e r v a t io n S e r v ic e

F a ir v ie w R o a d

A ir lin e H ig h w a y

L iv e O a k A s s o c ia t e s , In c . G a v ila n C o lle g e / F a ir v ie w S o ils

D a te

P r o je c t # 1 1 /7 /0 7

C o rn e rs

F ig u r e # 8 7 8 -0 5

0

5 0 0 '

2

a p p r o x im

5 0 0 a te

s c a le

fe e t

2.1 BIOTIC HABITATS Only one biotic habitat occurs onsite. For the purposes of this report, this habitat has been identified as “agricultural field” (Figure 3). No naturally occurring biotic habitats are present on the site. A list of the vascular plant species observed within the study area during the October 2007 and February 2008 field surveys and the terrestrial vertebrates using, or potentially using, the site are provided in Appendices A and B, respectively.

2.1.1 Agricultural Field The entire site consists of a field of cultivated barley (Triticum aestivum) that is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. Within the northeast corner of this agricultural field, traces of a former stock pond persist. While this remnant depressional feature is still visible, it lacks the hydrological and biological elements of an actual stock pond.

Common grasses and forbs observed throughout the field include, but are not limited to, soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), Mediterranean barley (Hordeum marinum ssp. gussoneanum), yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), vinegarweed (Trichostema lanceolatum), and field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis). The remnant stock pond is a relict feature that is known to have held water as of 2000; the most recent occurrence of ponding is unknown. Under current land management practices (i.e., regular discing), this feature does not appear to pond. It was dry at the time of the October 2007 survey and was only slightly moist (i.e., the soils were damp) at the time of February 2008 survey within a week following a storm event in the region; however, surface water was not present. The vegetation that exists within the remains of this stock pond is comprised of the same species that occur on the rest of the site; however, it also features poison hemlock (Conium maculatum) and spiny cocklebur (Xanthium spinosum).

Compared to more natural habitats, managed agricultural lands provide relatively low habitat value for wildlife due to the lack of understory vegetation that would typically provide food and cover for these species. Annual management practices for agricultural lands would eliminate breeding and foraging habitat for many small birds and mammals native to the region.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 6

L E G E N D

A p p r o x im a te P r o je c t B o u n d a r y

A g r ic u ltu r a l F ie ld

R e m a in s o f S to c k P o n d

F a ir v ie w R o a d

A ir lin e H ig h w a y

L iv e O a k A s s o c ia te s , In c . G a v ila n C o lle g e / F a ir v ie w B io t ic H a b ita t s

D a te

P r o je c t # 1 1 /7 /0 7

8 7 8 -0 5

C o rn e r s

F ig u r e # 3

5 0 0 '

0 a p p r o x im

5 0 0 a te

s c a le

fe e t

S o u r c e s : a e r ia l p h o to g r a p h c o u r te s y o f D ig ita l G lo b e

The absence of rock piles and woody debris suggests that the site is relatively poor habitat for reptiles and amphibians. The western toad (Bufo boreas), western fence lizards (Sceloporus occidentalis), and gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer) may occasionally occur within the project boundaries; however, the occurrence of these species would be limited. While unlikely, the fossorial mammal burrows occurring on the project site may provide suitable cover and aestivation habitat for amphibians.

Several avian species were observed perching on power lines that cross the southern half of the site in an east-west orientation. These include the American kestrel (Falco sparverius), rock pigeon (Columba livia), and Brewer’s blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus). Additionally, redtailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), a Say’s phoebe (Sayornis saya), a northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), western meadowlarks (Sturnella neglecta), and lesser goldfinches (Carduelis psaltria) were observed flying over or near the site. While the site itself was devoid of trees and shrubs, blue-gum eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus) and coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis) were observed along the margins of the neighboring parcels to the east and south. Several species of birds were observed utilizing these structures for perching before flying onto or over the project site. These include the golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) and the whitecrowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys). Other avian species that are expected to occur on the site include the turkey vultures (Cathartes aura), common snipe (Gallinago gallinago), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), and western scrub-jay (Aphelocoma californica).

Numerous ground squirrels (Spermophilus beecheyi) and their burrows were observed throughout the site. Botta’s pocket gopher (Thomonys bottae) burrows were also present on and adjacent to the site. While site management has reduced or eliminated the occurrence of most mammal species, some small mammals continue to occur on the site. Other mammal species that could also occur include the cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii), ornate shrew (Sorex ornatus), western harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys megalotis), and California meadow vole (Microtus californicus). Small mammals often attract predators, including reptiles and birds previously discussed. The occurrence of small mammals may also attract larger mammalian predators ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 8

known to occur in the region, including coyotes (Canis latrans), domestic dogs (Canis familiaris), and feral cats (Felis catus).

2.2 MOVEMENT CORRIDORS 1 0B

Many terrestrial animals need more than one biotic habitat in order to perform all of their biological activities.

With increasing encroachment of humans on wildlife habitats, it has

become important to establish and maintain linkages, or movement corridors, for animals to be able to access locations containing different biotic resources that are essential to maintaining their life cycles. Terrestrial animals use ridges, canyons, riparian areas, and open spaces to travel between their required habitats.

The importance of an area as a movement corridor depends on the species in question and its consistent use patterns. Animal movements generally can be divided into three major behavioral categories: •

Movements within a home range or territory;

•

Movements during migration; and

•

Movements during dispersal.

While no detailed study of animal movements has been conducted for the study area, knowledge of the site, its habitats, and the ecology of the species potentially occurring onsite permits sufficient predictions about the types of movements occurring in the region and whether or not proposed development would constitute a significant impact to animal movements.

As noted in Section 2.1, the intense agricultural use of this land limits the number of amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals that use the site. The more common species that occur have largely utilized the site as part of their home range and to disperse from and across the site. These animals would move through all portions of the site, as they would also do on surrounding agricultural lands and open spaces. Due to the low habitat value of the project site, it is likely only used in a limited way and does not provide a regionally unique corridor of movement. ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 9

Furthermore, the project site is expected to facilitate regional movements of only some wildlife species, as animals would have to travel through large areas of marginal to poor habitat (i.e., disturbed, developed, and agricultural lands) before reaching the site.

2.3 SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS AND ANIMALS Several species of plants and animals within the state of California have low populations and/or limited distributions. Such species may be considered “rare” and are vulnerable to extirpation as the state’s human population grows and the habitats these species occupy are converted to agricultural and urban uses. As described more fully in Section 3.2, state and federal laws have provided the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) with a mechanism for conserving and protecting the diversity of plant and animal species native to the state. A sizable number of native plants and animals have been formally designated as “threatened” or “endangered” under state and federal endangered species legislation. Others have been designated as candidates for such listing. Still others have been designated as “species of special concern” by the CDFG. The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) has developed its own set of lists of native plants considered rare, threatened, or endangered (CNPS 2001). Collectively, these plants and animals are referred to as “special status species.”

A number of special status plants and animals occur in the site’s vicinity. These species and their potential to occur in the study area are listed in Table 1 on the following pages. Sources of information for this table included California’s Wildlife, Volumes I, II, and III (Zeiner et. al 1988), California Natural Diversity Data Base (CDFG 2008), Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (USFWS 2007), State and Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Animals of California (CDFG 2007), and The California Native Plant Society’s Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (CNPS 2001). This information was used to evaluate the potential for special status plant and animal species that occur on the site. Figures 4 and 5 depict the location of special status species found by the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). It is important to note that the CNDDB is a volunteer database; therefore, it may not contain all known or gray literature records. ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 10

A search of published accounts for all relevant special status plant and animal species was conducted for the Tres Pinos USGS 7.5” quadrangle in which the project site occurs and for the eight surrounding quadrangles (Cherry Peak, Hollister, Mariposa Peak, Mt. Harlan, Paicines, Quien Sabe Valley, San Felipe, and Three Sisters) using the California Natural Diversity Data Base Rarefind (CDFG 2008). All species listed as occurring in these quadrangles on CNPS Lists 1A, 1B, 2, or 4 were also reviewed.

No federal or state threatened or endangered plant species appeared in a search of published biological data for these quadrangles.

Other plant species occur in habitats not present on the site (e.g., serpentine habitats, wetlands, marshes and swamps, coniferous forest, chaparral, coastal scrub, etc.) or at elevations well above or below those of the site; therefore, these species are also considered absent from the site. These species include the Gabilan Mountains manzanita (Arctostaphylos gabilanensis), Pajaro manzanita (Arctostaphylos pajaroensis), chaparral harebell (Campanula exigua), San Benito spineflower (Chorizanthe bilboa var. immemora), Pinnacles buckwheat (Eriogonum nortonii), Hoover’s button-celery (Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri), Indian Valley bush mallow (Malacothamnus aboriginum), and San Antonio Hills monardella (Monardella antonina ssp. antonina).

Similarly, one animal species not expected to occur on the site because habitat requirements are not met is the ringtail (Bassariscus astutus).

Species more likely to occur on the project site itself or in the surrounding vicinity are discussed further below.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 11

L E G E N D F iv e K ilo m e te r ( 3 .1 m ile ) ra d iu s

S p e c ia l s ta t u s s p e c ie s o b s e r v a tio n S o u r c e s :

C a lif o r n ia D e p . o f F is h & G a m e N a t u r a l D iv e r s it y D a t a b a s e

P r o je c t S ite

L iv e O a k A s s o c ia t e s , In c . G a v ila n C o lle g e / F a ir v ie w 2

S p e c ia l- s t a t u s S p e c ie s

m ile s 0 a p p r o x im

2 a te

s c a le

m ile s

D a te

P r o je c t # 1 1 /7 /0 7

8 7 8 -0 5

C o rn e rs

F ig u r e #

4 4

L E G E N D S a n J o a q u in K it F o x o b s e r v a tio n ( in c lu d in g y e a r o f s ig h t in g )  ' % 

S o u r c e s :

C a lif o r n ia D e p . o f F is h & G a m e N a t u r a l D iv e r s it y D a t a b a s e

T e n m ile

ra d i u

s

 ' % 

 ' % #

H o llis te r  ' '

 ' % 

 ' % #

P r o je c t S ite  ' % #

 ' % 

 ' % 

L iv e O a k A s s o c ia t e s , In c . G a v ila n C o lle g e / F a ir v ie w

S a n J o a q u in K it F o x

3 m ile s 0

a p p r o x im a te s c a le

3 m ile s

D a te

P r o je c t # 1 1 /7 /0 7

8 7 8 -0 5

C o rn e rs

F ig u r e # 5

TABLE 1. LIST OF SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT VICINITY PLANTS (adapted from CDFG 2008 and CNPS 2001) Special status plants listed by CNPS Species Alkali milk-vetch (Astragalus tener var. tener)

Status CNPS 1B

Habitat Alkaline soils of playas, adobe clay valley and foothill grasslands, and alkali vernal pools at elevations of up to 60 meters. Blooms March-May.

San Joaquin spearscale (Atriplex joaquiniana)

CNPS 1B

Chenopod scrub, meadows and seeps, playas, and valley and foothill grasslands on alkaline soils at elevations of up to 835 meters. Blooms April-October.

Round-leaved filaree (California macrophyllum)

CNPS 1B

Vernal barley (Hordeum intecedens)

CNPS 3

Woolly-headed lessingia (Lessingia hololeuca)

CNPS 3

Marsh microseris (Microseris paludosa)

CNPS 1B

Shining navarretia (Navarretia nigelliformis ssp. radians)

CNPS 1B

Clays of cismontane woodlands and valley and foothill grasslands at elevations between 15 and 1200 meters. Blooms MarchMay. Coastal dunes, coastal scrub, saline flats and depressions of valley and foothill grasslands, and vernal pools at elevations of between 5 and 1000 meters. Blooms March-June. Broadleafed upland forest, coastal scrub, lower montane coniferous forest, and valley and foothill grassland on clay or serpentinite at elevations between 15 and 305 meters. Blooms June-October. Closed-cone coniferous forest, cismontaine woodland, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland at elevations of between 5 and 300 meters. Blooms April-June and rarely in July. Cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools at elevations of between 76 and 1000 meters. Blooms May-July.

*Occurrence in the Study Area Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for agricultural purposes. While moderately alkaline soils may persist on the site, any suitable habitat that may have once been present has been eliminated from the site. Unlikely. The project site has been heavily managed for agricultural purposes. While moderately alkaline soils may persist, any suitable habitat that may have once been present has likely been eliminated from the site. However, this species was documented in 1995 approximately 5 miles southeast of the site. Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for agricultural purposes. Any suitable habitat that may have once been present has been eliminated from the site. Unlikely. The project site has been heavily managed for agricultural purposes. Any suitable habitat that may have once been present has likely been eliminated from the site. Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for agricultural purposes. Any suitable habitat that may have once been present has likely been eliminated from the site. Additionally, serpentine soils are absent from the site. Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for agricultural purposes. Any suitable habitat that may have once been present has been eliminated from the site.

Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for agricultural purposes. Any suitable habitat that may have once been present has likely been eliminated from the site.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 14

TABLE 1. LIST OF SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT VICINITY PLANTS – cont’d. Special status plants listed by CNPS Species Prostrate navarretia (Navarretia prostrata)

Status CNPS 1B

Hairless popcorn-flower (Plagiobothrys glaber)

CNPS 1A

Caper-fruited tropidocarpum (Trifolium depauperatum var. hydrophilum)

CNPS 1B

Habitat Mesic soils of coastal scrub, meadows and seeps, alkaline valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools at elevations of between 15 and 700 meters. Blooms April-July. Alkaline meadows and seeps and in salty marshes and swamps at elevations of between 15 to 180 meters. Blooms March-May. Marshes and swamps, vernal pools, and mesic, alkaline soils of valley and foothill grasslands at elevations of up to 300 meters. Blooms April June.

*Occurrence in the Study Area Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for agricultural purposes. While moderately alkaline soils may persist on the site, any suitable habitat that may have once been present has been eliminated from the site. Absent. The project site has been heavily managed for agricultural purposes. While moderately alkaline soils may persist on the site, any suitable habitat that may have once been present has been eliminated from the site. Unlikely. The project site has been heavily managed for agricultural purposes. Any suitable habitat that may have once been present has likely been eliminated. The nearest, documented occurrence of this species occurred in 1998, more than 9 miles from the site.

ANIMALS (adapted from CDFG 2008 and USFWS 2008) Species Listed as Threatened or Endangered under the State and/or Federal Endangered Species Act Species Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum)

Status CE

California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense)

FT, CSC

Habitat Individuals breed on cliffs in the Sierra or in coastal habitats; occurs in many habitats of the state during migration and winter. Breeds in vernal pools and stock ponds of central California; adults aestivate in grassland habitats adjacent to the breeding sites.

*Occurrence in the Study Area Unlikely. Peregrine falcons may occur incidentally on the site during migration or foraging. Suitable nesting habitat is absent from the site. Possible. This species was documented on the site in 2000 as occurring in the stock pond, when it used to hold water. Additionally, this species has been documented in at least four locations within two miles of the project site since 1999. Two of these offsite occurrences, occurring in 1999, include the presence of larvae in water features associated with the Ridgemark Golf Course approximately 0.25 miles south of the site, on the other side of Highway 25. Breeding habitat is currently absent from the project site and has been absent for several years due to the site having been regularly farmed and disced. The remains of the stock pond feature were dry during all site visits conducted by LOA in 2007 and 2008. The site provides potential aestivation habitat in the form of ground squirrel burrows and other ground surface crevices.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 15

TABLE 1. LIST OF SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT VICINITY ANIMALS – cont’d. Species Listed as Threatened or Endangered under the State and/or Federal Endangered Species Act Species California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii)

Status FT, CSC

Western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis)

FC, CE

San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica)

FE, CT

Habitat Rivers, creeks and stock ponds of the Sierra foothills and coast range, preferring pools with overhanging vegetation. May also be found in a variety of upland habitats. Nests in dense riparian forests. Inhabits broad, lower flood bottoms of larger river systems Frequents annual grasslands or grassy open stages with scattered shrubby vegetation. Needs loose-textured sandy soils for burrowing and suitable prey base. Utilizes enlarged (4 to 10 inches in diameter) ground squirrel burrows as denning habitat. May forage in adjacent agricultural habitats.

*Occurrence in the Study Area Absent. Suitable breeding habitat for this species is absent from the project site. This species was observed in 2005 in a detention pond and a Ridgemark Golf Course pond on the south side of Highway 25, approximately 0.1 miles south of the project site. Absent. This species has not been observed within San Benito county since 1899 in the vicinity of Paicines. Furthermore, suitable habitat for this species is absent from the project site. Unlikely. At best, marginally suitable onsite breeding and foraging habitat for this species occurs onsite. However, the nearest observation of this species was documented approximately 0.5 miles north of the project site in 1971. Since that sighting, only one occurrence, which took place in 1992, approximately 5 miles from the site, has been documented in the region. Numerous regional surveys, conducted before and since the date of the 1992 occurrence, have failed to detect this species. In total eight occurrences of this species have been recorded within ten miles of the project site over the past 37 years. In the off-chance that a migrating kit fox is found in the region, the marginal quality of the project site suggests that they would not choose this site for denning or breeding. The likelihood of this species occurring on the project site is extremely low.

California Species of Special Concern and Protected Species Species Coast Range newt (Taricha torosa torosa)

Status CSC

Habitat Breeds in ponds, reservoirs and slow moving water. May also occur in large streams and rivers.

*Occurrence in the Study Area Absent. Suitable habitat for this species is absent from the project site. The remnant stock pond feature no longer appears to hold water and is therefore unsuitable for this species. One regional occurrence of this species appears to have taken place approximately 5 miles to the west of the site in 1998, beyond many roadways and some urban development.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 16

TABLE 1. LIST OF SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT VICINITY ANIMALS – cont’d. California Species of Special Concern and Protected Species Species Western spadefoot (Spea hammondii)

Status CSC

Habitat Primarily occurs in grasslands, but also occurs in valley and foothill hardwood woodlands. Requires vernal pools or other temporary wetlands for breeding.

Foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) Western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata)

CSC

San Joaquin coachwhip (Masticophis flagellum ruddocki)

CSC

Found primarily in swiftly flowing creeks. Open slow-moving water of rivers and creeks of central California with rocks and logs for basking. Frequents chaparral habitats, specifically scrublands, rocky hillsides, gullies, canyons, and stream courses of the foothills.

Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos)

CSC

Typically frequents rolling foothills, mountain areas, woodland areas, sage-juniper flats, and desert habitats.

White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus)

CP

Northern harrier (Circus cyaneus)

CSC

Merlin (Falco columbarius)

CSC

Open grasslands and agricultural areas throughout central California. Frequents meadows, grasslands, open rangelands, freshwater emergent wetlands; uncommon in wooded habitats. Breeds in Canada but winters in a variety of California habitats, including grasslands, savannahs, and wetlands.

CSC

*Occurrence in the Study Area Unlikely. This species has been documented in three locations within two miles of the project site since 1978, including one documented occurrence on the northern portion of the site in 2000. This species is known to breed within the golf course ponds of Ridgemark Golf Course immediately south of the site. Individuals occurring on nearby lands could move onto the site, which provides potential, albeit marginal, aestivating habitat for the spadefoot. Breeding habitat is absent from the site, as the stock pond does not appear to hold water for a sufficient duration to support breeding populations. Absent. Suitable habitat for this species is absent from the project site. Absent. Suitable habitat for this species is absent from the project site.

Unlikely. Suitable habitat for this species is marginal to absent from the project site. While this species has been known to utilize farmland habitats, this site is heavily managed, which would preclude it from supporting a suitable prey base to attract or support this species. Likely. The trees on adjacent properties provide suitable perching and possible breeding habitat for this species. This species was observed perching in eucalyptus trees immediately east of the project site during the October 2007 survey. The site itself lacks suitable breeding habitat and provides a marginally suitable prey base for this species. Possible. Breeding habitat is absent from the site. This species would be expected to forage on and near the project site. Unlikely. Because it is so heavily managed through discing and grazing, breeding and foraging habitat is marginal to poor for this species. This species may occasionally pass through the site. Unlikely. Breeding habitat is absent from the site, and foraging habitat is marginal to absent. This species may occur as an occasional winter migrant.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 17

TABLE 1. LIST OF SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT VICINITY ANIMALS – cont’d. California Species of Special Concern and Protected Species Species Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia)

Status CSC

Habitat Open, dry grasslands, deserts and ruderal areas. Requires suitable burrows. This species is often associated with California ground squirrels.

Black swift (Cypseloides niger)

CSC

Vaux’s swift (Chaetura vauxi)

CSC

Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus)

CSC

Yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens)

CSC

Migrants and transients found throughout many habitats of state. Breeds on steep cliffs or ocean bluffs, or in cracks and crevasses of inland deep canyons. Migrants and transients move through the foothills of the western Sierra in spring and late summer. Breeds in coniferous forests. Frequents open habitats with sparse shrubs and trees, other suitable perches, bare ground, and low herbaceous cover. Often be found in cropland. Breeds in brushy tangles, briers, and stream thickets. May occur in overgrown pastures and upland thickets.

Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor)

CSC

Townsend’s big-eared bat (Plecotus townsendii townsendii)

CSC

Hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus)

CSC

Breeds near fresh water, primarily emergent wetlands, with tall thickets. Forages in nearby grassland and cropland habitats. Primarily a cave-dwelling bat that may also roost in buildings. Occurs in a variety of habitats of the state. Forages over many habitats. Roosts mainly in coniferous and deciduous trees.

*Occurrence in the Study Area Unlikely. LOA did not observe direct or indirect evidence of burrowing owls during site visits to this property conducted during the breeding and nonbreeding seasons in April, May, and October 2007 and February 2008. While ground squirrel burrows found on the site provide marginally suitable nesting habitat and there appears to be marginally suitable foraging habitat onsite, the present site management regime results in the site being functionally poor habitat for this species. This species was observed utilizing a burrow approximately 1 mile north of the project site in November 2000. Unlikely. Suitable breeding habitat and foraging habitats are absent from the site. However, this species may occasionally pass through the site.

Unlikely. Suitable breeding habitat and foraging habitats are absent from the site. However, this species may occasionally pass through the site Possible. Suitable breeding habitat is absent from the project site. Foraging habitat is marginal; however, this species could reasonably be expected to occasionally pass through the site. Unlikely. Suitable breeding habitat is absent from the site, and foraging habitat is marginal to absent. However, this species may occasionally pass through the site. Unlikely. Suitable breeding habitat is absent from the site, and foraging habitat is marginal. However, this species may occasionally pass through the site. Unlikely. While suitable roosting and breeding habitat is absent for this species, foraging habitat is marginal to absent. This species may occasionally pass through the site. Unlikely. While suitable roosting and breeding habitat is absent for this species, foraging habitat is marginal to absent. This species may occasionally pass through the site.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 18

TABLE 1. LIST OF SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES THAT COULD OCCUR IN THE PROJECT VICINITY ANIMALS – cont’d. California Species of Special Concern and Protected Species Species Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus)

Status CSC

American badger (Taxidea taxus)

CSC

Habitat Grasslands, chaparral, woodlands, and forests of California; most common in dry rocky open areas that provide roosting opportunities. Found in drier open stages of most shrub, forest and herbaceous habitats with friable soils.

*Occurrence in the Study Area Unlikely. While suitable roosting and breeding habitat is absent for this species, foraging habitat is marginal to absent. This species may occasionally pass through the site. Unlikely. Marginally suitable habitat is present on the project site for this species. This species was observed utilizing a burrow approximately 1.5 miles north of the project site in June 1993.

*Explanation of Occurrence Designations and Status Codes Present: Species observed on the sites at time of field surveys or during recent past. Likely: Species not observed on the site, but it may reasonably be expected to occur there on a regular basis. Possible: Species not observed on the sites, but it could occur there from time to time. Unlikely: Species not observed on the sites, and would not be expected to occur there except, perhaps, as a transient. Absent: Species not observed on the sites, and precluded from occurring there because habitat requirements not met. STATUS CODES FE FT FPE FC

Federally Endangered Federally Threatened Federally Endangered (Proposed) Federal Candidate

CNPS 1A 1B

California Native Plant Society Listing Plants Presumed Extinct in California Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere Plants Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere

2

CE CT CP CSC

California Endangered California Threatened California Protected California Species of Special Concern

3

Plants about which more information is needed – a review list Plants of limited distribution – a watch list

4

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 19

2.4 ENDANGERED, THREATENED, OR SPECIAL STATUS PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES MERITING FURTHER DISCUSSION Most of the special status animal species that have been documented in the region may occur rarely or occasionally on the site (Table 2). For these species, sufficient information exists to evaluate the potential imposed impacts future development may have on them. A few of the state- or federally-listed species require additional in-depth analysis.

Below are detailed

discussions that include an analysis of their legal status, ecology, and the suitability of the site to support them.

2.4.1

California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma californiense). Federal Listing Status: Threatened; State Listing Status: Threatened.

The USFWS listed the California tiger salamander as threatened on August 4, 2004 (69 Fed. Reg. 47212-47248). The California Department of Fish and Game has designated this species as a Species of Special Concern.

Life history and ecology. The California tiger salamander is a large terrestrial salamander, with adults attaining a total length of over 8 inches (203 millimeters) [Stebbins 1951]. Dorsally, the background color appears to be jet black--normally with an overlain pattern of white or yellow spots, or bars (Stebbins 1985; Petranka 1998). Adult California tiger salamanders breed from late November through February, following the onset of winter rains (Storer 1925; Barry and Shaffer 1994). Both males and females travel up to 1 mile (1.6 km) or more during nocturnal breeding migrations from subterranean refuge, or aestivation, sites (i.e., small mammal burrows) to egg deposition sites in long-lasting, rain-filled vernal pools (Twitty 1941; Loredo et al. 1961; Andersen 1968; Austin and Shaffer 1992;).

Embryos of California tiger salamanders hatch in approximately 14-28 days after being laid and the resulting gilled, aquatic larvae [0.41-0.43 inches (10.5-11 mm) in length] require a minimum of about 10-12 weeks to complete development through metamorphosis (Storer 1925; Twitty 1941). Following metamorphosis (normally from early May through July), juveniles emigrate en masse at night into small mammal burrows or deep cracks in the soil, which they use as refugia during the hot summer and fall months (Shaffer et al. 1993; Loredo et al. 1996). ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 20

Anecdotal evidence indicates that salamanders have a high degree of site fidelity to their breeding ponds and also to the small mammal burrows they use for refugia (Shaffer et al. 1993). Sites used for reproduction are typically natural pools that fill with rainwater and artificial stock ponds; however, salamanders have also been observed to breed in springs, wells, artificial reservoirs, quarry ponds, man-made canals, and rarely, in the slack waters of oxbows in small- to medium-sized streams. Such sites may, or may not contain dense amounts of aquatic and streamside vegetation. The highest numbers of larvae appear to occur in aquatic habitats that are largely devoid of any vegetation and contain very turbid water. Salamanders may also turn up in certain man-made structures (e.g. wet basements, wells, swimming pools, underground pipes, and septic tank drains), sometimes many years after their local breeding site has been destroyed by urbanization (Storer 1925; Pickwell 1947).

Juvenile and adult salamanders typically use the burrows of California ground squirrels and pocket gophers as underground refugia (Storer 1925; Jennings and Hayes 1994; Jennings 1996; Loredo et a1. 1996) but may use a variety of burrows including cracks within the soil that may extend up to 15 feet (4.6 m) deep from the soil surface (Jennings, unpub. data). Juvenile and adult salamanders are especially common in situations where piles of concrete, rock, or other rubble are mixed with dirt and are located near breeding sites (Jennings, unpub. data).

Potential to occur on the site. The site does not provide suitable breeding habitat for CTS. As indicated previously, the site has a remnant stock pond feature that appears to remain dry throughout the year. In 2000 the stock pond served as breeding habitat for this species (CDFG 2008); however, site management or some other factor has altered this feature significantly making the stock pond unsuitable for use as breeding habitat for CTS. During both the October 2007 and the February 2008 surveys this feature was dry. Considering that this time period experienced moderately high precipitation relative to the region, this provides substantial evidence that the stock pond no longer provides suitable breeding habitat for the CTS.

There are eleven documented occurrences of this species within three miles of the site. This includes four locations within two miles of the project site since 1999. As mentioned above, one documented occurrence was from 2000 in the remnant stock pond of the site. Two of the ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 21

remaining occurrences, occurring in 1999, include the presence of larvae in water features associated with the Ridgemark Golf Course approximately 0.1 miles and 0.25 miles, respectively, south of the site. For all intents and purposes, there is no evidence that suggests that these features do not presently function as breeding habitat for this species. Suitable, albeit marginal, aestivation habitat in the form of rodent burrows was observed within the site’s agricultural field. However, this presumes that CTS breed within some reasonable, unimpeded distance of the site. Findings from the limited research on the species suggest that 95% of the CTS population aestivates within 2,000 feet of a breeding pond and that 99% of the breeding population aestivates within 0.7 miles of a breeding pond. Highway 25, an approximately 40-ft.wide road supporting moderate to heavy vehicular traffic, would act as a significant barrier to aestivating CTS coming from the known breeding ponds to the south of the site. Regardless, aestivating CTS can utilize upland habitat in the absence of suitable aquatic breeding habitats for up to ten years before all cohorts from the last breeding event are expected to perish.

In summary, breeding habitat is absent from the agricultural field of the site and limited aestivation habitat occurs on the site, as this habitat is heavily managed for dry land farming.

2.4.2

Western Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia). Federal Listing Status: None; State Listing Status: Species of Special Concern.

The burrowing owl is a California species of special concern but is not currently protected under the state or federal Endangered Species Acts. This owl is a small, terrestrial owl of open prairie and grassland habitats. These owls inhabit relatively flat, dry, open grasslands where tree and shrub canopies provide less than 30% cover.

Life history and ecology. The burrowing owl is the only owl that routinely lives and nests underground. In the western United States burrowing owls do not dig their own burrows, but take over burrows dug by animals such as ground squirrels (Spermophilus spp.), prairie dogs (Cynomys spp.), and badgers (Taxida taxidus). In California, this species is found in close association with California ground squirrels, using their abandoned burrows for shelter, roosting, and nesting. Burrowing owls are colonially nesting raptors, and colony size is indicative of habitat quality. Owl populations have declined sharply in some portions of California during the ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 22

past two decades (i.e. the San Francisco Bay Area, Sacramento County, San Joaquin County, etc.), but they have increased greatly in some agricultural counties (particularly Imperial).

Potential to occur on the site. Ground squirrel burrows found on the site provide limited nesting habitat for burrowing owls. Given the current land use practices associated with dry land farming, it is highly unlikely that burrowing owls would breed onsite. If they breed or winter nearby, they could use the site for foraging, but no evidence (i.e., feathers and regurgitation pellets) was detected during any of our site visits in April, May, and October 2007 and February 2008 to indicate that they do so. Therefore, any benefit of this site for the regional population is speculative. This species was observed utilizing a burrow approximately 1 mile north of the project site in November 2000. Additionally, there appears to be a marginally suitable prey base for this species within the project site.

2.4.3

San Joaquin Kit Fox (Vulpes macrotus mutica). Federal Listing Status: Endangered; State Listing Status: Threatened.

By the time the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed it as an endangered species under the authority of the Federal Endangered Species Act on March 11, 1967, the San Joaquin kit fox had been extirpated from much of its historic range. In 1998, the USFWS adopted a final recovery plan for the San Joaquin kit fox. On June 27, 1971, the State of California listed the kit fox as a threatened species.

Life history and ecology. The San Joaquin kit fox, the smallest North American member of the dog family (Canidae), historically occupied the dry plains of the San Joaquin Valley, from San Joaquin County to southern Kern County (Grinnell et al. 1937). Critical habitat has yet to be established for the San Joaquin kit fox. Local surveys, research projects, and incidental sightings indicate that kit foxes currently occupy available habitat on the San Joaquin Valley floor and in the surrounding foothills.

Kit foxes prefer habitats of open or low vegetation with loose soils. In the northern portion of their range, they occupy grazed grasslands and, to a lesser extent, valley oak woodlands. In the southern and central portion of the Central Valley, kit foxes are found in valley sink scrub, valley ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 23

saltbrush scrub, upper Sonoran subshrub scrub, and annual grassland (USFWS 1998). Kit foxes may also be found in grazed grasslands, urban settings, and in areas adjacent to tilled or fallow fields (USFWS 1998).

Kit fox diets vary geographically, seasonally, and annually. In most of their range, which includes lands around the study area, known prey includes mice, insects, California ground squirrels, black-tailed hares, desert cottontails, and ground-nesting birds (Archon 1992; Jensen 1972).

The kit fox requires underground dens to raise pups, regulate body temperature, and avoid predators and other adverse environmental conditions (Golightly and Ohmart 1984). They usually occupy burrows excavated by small mammals, such as ground squirrels. Denning habitat consists of ground squirrel complexes in which some burrows have been enlarged to 4 to 10 inches in diameter for the length of a human arm (approximately 2 ft.).

Potential to occur onsite. While suitable onsite breeding and foraging habitat for this species is marginal, at best, this species would not reasonably be expected to occur on the site. Of primary interest for this project are kit fox records from the region. According to the CNDDB (CDFG 2008), there have been a total of eight direct and indirect sightings within ten miles of the site since 1971 (Figure 5). The nearest observation was documented approximately 0.5 miles north of the project site in 1971. The most recent documented occurrence of this species took place in 1992, approximately 5 miles west of the site. Numerous regional surveys conducted before and since the date of the 1992 occurrence have failed to detect this species.

While these occurrences suggest that it is possible that kit foxes may have traveled to the project site, the current marginal quality of the project site suggests that they would not choose this site for denning and/or breeding. The site is somewhat isolated from any extant subpopulations of kit fox. Based on the site’s location and the distribution of kit fox occurrences in its vicinity, the site is not essential to the regional movement of kit fox populations. For all intents and purposes, the site would tend to function more as a dispersal sink (i.e., a habitat in which a population is ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 24

expected to decline to extinction due to sub-optimal foraging and breeding conditions) than as an area that would facilitate movements or aid in successful breeding.

Most of the project site’s surrounding land uses consist of farmland, rangeland, residential development, and a golf course. These are land uses that are not generally suitable for the San Joaquin kit fox; however, rangelands can provide marginal foraging habitat for this species. The site itself has been heavily managed for agricultural uses rendering onsite habitat for this species marginal, at best. While some open space exists to the northeast of the site, the likelihood that a kit fox would travel through low-quality habitat to utilize the low-quality, managed agricultural field of the site is low. Any occurrence would be of an incidental nature.

Suitable denning habitat for kit foxes was not observed on the site during the October 2007 or February 2008 field surveys.

While a number of ground squirrel burrows were observed

throughout the agricultural field, none of these possessed the dimensions suitable for kit foxes. Having been modified for agricultural use, the study area provides a limited prey base and, therefore, marginal foraging habitat for kit foxes. Farming practices appear to have also limited the onsite occurrence of ground-nesting birds that sometimes constitute prey for this species.

In summary, kit foxes appear to no longer inhabit the region, the site has been heavily disturbed and modified for agricultural use, and lands surrounding the site include residential development and other unsuitable areas that present significant barriers to movement. Based on this evidence, the kit fox is considered absent from the site.

2.5 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS Jurisdictional waters include rivers, creeks, and drainages that have a defined bed and bank and which, at the very least, carry ephemeral flows. Jurisdictional waters also include lakes, ponds, reservoirs, and wetlands. Such waters may be subject to the regulatory authority of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). See Section 3.2.4 of this report for additional information. ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 25

The only aquatic feature occurring on the site is the stock pond remnant in the site’s northeast corner. However, this appears to be a relict feature, as it does not appear to become inundated following major storm events. Additionally, the stock pond is hydrologically isolated from known Waters of the U.S. and their tributaries, does not replace the functions and values of historic waters, and does not meet the USACE’s technical criteria for jurisdictional wetlands. A Waters of the U.S. analysis was completed for the site, and the USACE determined that no waters, including the remnant stock pond, meet the definition of a Water of the U.S (LOA 2008; USACE 2008). Therefore, no features on the site are subject to regulation by the USACE.

The CDFG and RWQCB would also be unlikely to regulate the remnant stock pond. Although jurisdictional waters are presumed to be absent, these agencies are the final arbiters and could claim jurisdiction over any aquatic resources they determine as present on the site.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 26

3.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS 3.1 SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA Approval of general plans, area plans, and specific projects is subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The purpose of CEQA is to assess the impacts of proposed projects on the environment before they are carried out. CEQA is concerned with the significance of a proposed project’s impacts. For example, a proposed development project may require the removal of some or all of a site’s existing vegetation. Animals associated with this vegetation could be destroyed or displaced. Animals adapted to humans, roads, buildings, pets, etc., may replace those species formerly occurring on the site. Plants and animals that are state and/or federally listed as threatened or endangered may be destroyed or displaced. Sensitive habitats such as wetlands and riparian woodlands may be altered or destroyed.

Whenever possible, public agencies are required to avoid or minimize environmental impacts by implementing practical alternatives or mitigation measures. According to Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant effect on the environment means a “substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic interest.”

Specific project impacts to biological resources may be considered “significant” if they would: •

Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;

•

Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;

•

Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means;

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 27

•

Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites;

•

Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance; or

•

Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

Furthermore, CEQA Guidelines Section 15065(a) states that a project may trigger the requirement to make a “mandatory findings of significance” if the project has the potential to Substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 3.2 RELEVANT GOALS, POLICIES, AND LAWS 3.2.1 Threatened and Endangered Species State and federal “endangered species” legislation has provided the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) with a mechanism for conserving and protecting plant and animal species of limited distribution and/or low or declining populations. Species listed as threatened or endangered under provisions of the state and federal endangered species acts, candidate species for such listing, state species of special concern, and some plants listed as endangered by the California Native Plant Society are collectively referred to as “species of special status.” Permits may be required from both the CDFG and USFWS if activities associated with a proposed project will result in the “take” of a listed species. “Take” is defined by the state of California as “to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture or kill” (California Fish and Game Code, Section 86). “Take” is more broadly defined by the federal Endangered Species Act to include “harm” (16 USC, Section 1532(19), 50 CFR, Section 17.3). Furthermore, the CDFG and the USFWS are responding agencies under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Both

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 28

agencies review CEQA documents in order to determine the adequacy of their treatment of endangered species issues and to make project-specific recommendations for their conservation.

3.2.2 Migratory Birds State and federal laws also protect most birds. The Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C., scc. 703, Supp. I, 1989) prohibits killing, possessing, or trading in migratory birds, except in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. This act encompasses whole birds, parts of birds, and bird nests and eggs.

3.2.3 Birds of Prey Birds of prey are also protected in California under provisions of the State Fish and Game Code, Section 3503.5, which states that it is “unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the order Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds of prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.” Construction disturbance during the breeding season could result in the incidental loss of fertile eggs or nestlings, or otherwise lead to nest abandonment. Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort is considered “taking” by the CDFG.

3.2.4 Wetlands and Other Jurisdictional Waters Natural drainage channels and adjacent wetlands may be considered “Waters of the United States” (hereafter referred to as “jurisdictional waters”) subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The extent of jurisdiction has been defined in the Code of Federal Regulations but has also been subject to interpretation of the federal courts. Jurisdictional waters generally include: •

All waters which are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;

•

All interstate waters including interstate wetlands:

•

All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 29

• •

lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce; All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under the definition; Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs (a)(1)-(4) (i.e. the bulleted items above).

As recently determined by the United States Supreme Court in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the SWANCC decision), channels and wetlands isolated from other jurisdictional waters cannot be considered jurisdictional on the basis of their use, hypothetical or observed, by migratory birds. However, the U.S Supreme Court decisions Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (referred together as the Rapanos decision) impose a "significant nexus" test for federal jurisdiction over wetlands. In June 2007, the USACE and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established guidelines for applying the significant nexus standard. This standard includes 1) a case-by-case analysis of the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary or wetland to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of downstream navigable waters and 2) consideration of hydrologic and ecologic factors (EPA and USACE 2007).

The USACE regulates the filling or grading of such waters under the authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The extent of jurisdiction within drainage channels is defined by “ordinary high water marks” on opposing channel banks. Wetlands are habitats with soils that are intermittently or permanently saturated, or inundated. The resulting anaerobic conditions select for plant species known as hydrophytes that show a high degree of fidelity to such soils. Wetlands are identified by the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils (soils saturated intermittently or permanently saturated by water), and wetland hydrology according to methodologies outlined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (USACE 1987).

All activities that involve the discharge of fill into jurisdictional waters are subject to the permit requirements of the USACE (Wetland Training Institute, Inc. 1991). Such permits are typically issued on the condition that the applicant agrees to provide mitigation that result in no net loss of wetland functions or values. No permit can be issued until the Regional Water Quality Control ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 30

Board (RWQCB) issues a certification (or waiver of such certification) that the proposed activity will meet state water quality standards. The filling of isolated wetlands, over which the USACE has disclaimed jurisdiction under the SWANCC decision, is regulated by the RWQCB. It is unlawful to fill isolated wetlands without filing a Notice of Intent with the RWQCB. The RWQCB is also responsible for enforcing National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, including the General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit. All projects requiring federal money must also comply with Executive Order 11990 (Protection of Wetlands).

The California Department of Fish and Game has jurisdiction over the bed and bank of natural drainages according to provisions of Section 1601 and 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code (2003). Activities that would disturb these drainages are regulated by the CDFG via a Streambed Alteration Agreement. Such an agreement typically stipulates that certain measures will be implemented which protect the habitat values of the drainage in question.

3.2.5

Local Ordinances

2 4B

No habitat conservation plans (HCP) or natural community conservation plans (NCCP) are in effect for this project. While a draft HCP had been underway in this region for some time, this effort is no longer moving forward. However, San Benito County adopted Ordinance 541 in 1988 to set and collect fees for financing the HCP and for San Joaquin kit fox protection measures. These fees are to be paid by the applicant as a condition of the issuance of a building permit. Monies paid through this ordinance do not provide take authorization under the federal or state Endangered Species Acts.

3.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATIONS SPECIFIC TO THE PROJECT SITE The proposed project is the construction of 226 single-family, one-and-two story residential units on approximately 56 acres of the northern portion of the site, as well as the construction of a community college campus on the remaining approximately 80 acres. These features will be accessed by both Fairview Road and Highway 25. The campus development has associated infrastructure, including parking spaces, athletic fields, open space, on-campus housing, campus facilities, and future campus expansion areas. ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 31

For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that any future proposal by the applicant will be consistent with the general locations of the construction sites as currently represented in the tentative site plan provided by EMC Planning Group Inc. (2008). Any appreciable difference in either scope or general location of the proposed project would require an additional impact assessment to ensure that unanticipated impacts to biotic resources are not likely to occur.

3.3.1 Loss of Habitat for Special Status Plants Potential Impacts. Ten special status vascular plant species are known to occur in the general project vicinity (Table 1). Site development would have no effect on regional populations of these species since the site provides no habitat for special status plants. Therefore, state and federal laws protecting special status plants would not be relevant to development of the site.

Mitigation. Mitigation measures are not warranted.

3.3.2 Loss of Habitat for Special Status Animals Potential Impacts.

Twenty-eight special status animal species occur, or once occurred,

regionally (Table 1). Of those, twenty would be absent or unlikely to occur on the site due to unsuitable habitat conditions. These include the coast range newt, California red-legged frog, foothill yellow-legged frog, western spadefoot, western pond turtle, San Joaquin coachwhip, peregrine falcon, burrowing owl, black swift, Vaux’s swift, western yellow-billed cuckoo, tricolored blackbird, yellow-breasted chat, Townsend’s big-eared bat, hoary bat, pallid bat, ringtail, American badger, and San Joaquin kit fox. Eventual project build-out would have no effect on these species because there is little or no likelihood that they are present.

Species that might rarely or occasionally occur on the site as transients, occasional foragers, or winter migrants include golden eagles, white-tailed kites, northern harriers, merlins, and loggerhead shrikes. The site does not provide regionally important foraging habitat for these species. Considerable habitat suitable for migratory movements will continue to be available regionally for these species following development. Migrant and transient species pass through ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 32

or over many types of habitats en route to breeding or wintering habitat. For a majority of these species, there is no suitable nesting or roosting habitat on the project site. Therefore, the loss of habitat for these six species would be considered less-than-significant.

The remaining special status animal species, the California tiger salamander, is considered potentially present onsite (section 2.4.1). Potential impacts to and mitigations for those impacts to this species is dealt with specifically below (section 3.3.3).

Mitigation. Mitigation measures are not warranted.

3.3.3

Impacts to Individual California Tiger Salamanders and Their Habitat

Potential Impacts. California tiger salamanders do not presently breed onsite. The closest breeding pond is approximately 0.1 miles south of the site and is separated from the site by development associated with the golf course and the major regional thoroughfare, Highway 25. A few adult CTS associated with onsite breeding events which took place during the early 2000s may continue to inhabit some of the rodent burrows and other ground surface crevices of the site. While this is somewhat unlikely given the intensive farming practices that are currently used to manage the site, it would not be possible to conclude absence without implementing extensive survey methods such as drift fences or scoping each burrow and crevice of the site.

The applicant could implement more extensive survey methodologies that are satisfactory to the resource agencies. If these surveys prove negative, then the project would result in a less-thansignificant impact to CTS individuals and their habitats. In the absence of these surveys, the proposed project would be presumed to impact 137 acres of aestivation habitat.

Should California tiger salamanders occur on the site, future site development could result in the loss of individuals, which would likely be considered a take under the state and federal Endangered Species Acts and would require consultation with the USFWS.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 33

We should note that the applicant should complete surveys in conformance to protocols acceptable to the USFWS that would establish the onsite status of the California tiger salamander. If such surveys are completed and California tiger salamanders are determined to be absent from the site, then the project would have no impact on them, and mitigation measures would not be warranted. If, however, the surveys establish that California tiger salamanders are on the site, or if the applicant chooses to forego conducting surveys and, instead, presume that this species is present, then the applicant would need to comply with provisions of the federal and state Endangered Species Acts and would need to seek take authorization from the USFWS and CDFG for project-related losses as required by law. To obtain a take permit, consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would need to be initiated either through a federal nexus (i.e., Section 7 consultation, usually through the USACE or the Bureau of Land Management) or through the HCP process (i.e., Section 10 consultation). Because a federal nexus has not been identified to date, it is likely that the applicant would engage in the Section 10 consultation process.

Mitigation. The following mitigations are designed to reduce project impacts to a less-thansignificant level under CEQA. These mitigations are designed to avoid and minimize impacts where possible and then compensate for any residual impacts.

Mitigation Alternative 1: Avoidance. Impacts to California tiger salamanders and their habitat should be avoided to the maximum extent practicable.

However, because the entire site

constitutes suitable aestivation habitat for this species, complete avoidance would not be feasible.

Mitigation Alternative 2: Minimization. Implementation of the following measures should be taken during site development to avoid take of individual California tiger salamanders. •

•

A qualified onsite monitor should be present during the initial site grading. The monitor would only need to monitor the site during the rough grading activities. Monitoring could cease once the build-out site has been completely denuded of habitats.

Exclusion fencing (e.g., silt fencing) should be erected around construction zones to minimize the potential of a CTS dispersing onto the site during construction and should remain in place for the duration of construction. Any CTS detected during these procedures will be moved to suitable habitat by a biologist possessing USFWS authorization to handle CTS. ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 34

Mitigation Alternative 3: Compensation. To offset impacts during the CEQA process, as well as to obtain federal and state take authorization for impacts to this species, compensation would be required. Because the entire site is being proposed for project build-out, onsite compensation would not be feasible. Therefore, compensation should occur at a suitable offsite location via the purchase of credits from a nearby conservation bank or by placing suitable habitat under a conservation easement. Because the existing conditions represent a non-sustaining situation, the loss of aestivation habitat should be compensated for at a replacement-to-removal ratio at a minimum of 1:1 (one acre of habitat created or preserved for each acre disturbed). The project applicant is considering potential mitigation options on ranchlands in the hills on the east side of San Benito County that have identified CTS source populations, including both breeding and aestivation habitat.

A management plan for these lands would need to be developed in

accordance with USFWS guidelines and should include a mechanism for managing these lands in perpetuity.

3.3.4

Impacts to Burrowing Owls

Potential Impacts.

Marginally suitable nesting habitat for burrowing owls was present

throughout the site in the form of California ground squirrel burrows. Given the current land use practices associated with dry land farming, it is highly unlikely that burrowing owls would breed onsite. Additionally, the site does not appear to be used as foraging habitat, as no evidence of foraging (i.e., feathers and regurgitation pellets) was detected during site visits conducted by LOA during the breeding and non-breeding seasons in 2007 and 2008. Therefore, impacts to burrowing owl habitat are considered less than significant.

While unlikely, the possibility of the burrowing owl’s occurrence on the project site warrants prudent protection measures, should any individuals move onto the site prior to or at the time of site development and associated construction activities. If a burrowing owl were to occupy burrows on or near the project site prior to project-related development activities, these activities could result in the abandonment of active burrows or direct mortality to owls. Construction activities that adversely affect the nesting success of raptors or result in mortality of individual ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 35

owls constitute a violation of state and federal laws (see Section 3.2.3) and would be considered a significant impact under CEQA.

Mitigation.

Site development could potentially result in the mortality of burrowing owls.

Mitigation measures that protect burrowing owls from possible direct mortality or nest failure would be warranted. Therefore, the project applicant should implement the following measures to ensure that adverse impacts to burrowing owls as a result of project construction are avoided. •

Mitigation Measure 3.3.4a: A pre-construction survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist for burrowing owls within 30 days of the onset of construction. This survey should be conducted according to methods described in the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (CDFG 1995). All suitable habitats of the project site should be covered during this survey.

•

Mitigation Measure 3.3.4b: If pre-construction surveys undertaken during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31) locate active nest burrows within or near construction zones, then these nests should not be disturbed, and a construction-free buffer of 250 feet (or as determined by a qualified biologist) should be established around all active owl burrows. The buffer area(s) should be enclosed with temporary fencing, and construction equipment and workers should not enter the enclosed setback areas. Buffers should remain in place for the duration of the breeding season or until it has been determined by a qualified biologist that chicks have fledged and are independent of their parents.

•

Mitigation Measure 3.3.4c: During the non-breeding season (September 1 through January 31), resident owls may be relocated to alternative habitat. The relocation of resident owls must be according to a relocation plan prepared by a qualified biologist. Passive relocation would be the preferred method of relocation. The relocation plan must provide for the owl’s relocation to nearby lands possessing available nesting and foraging habitat.

•

Mitigation Measure 3.3.4d: If burrowing owls are determined to either be breeding or over-wintering on the project site, compensation measures for the loss of habitat will be required in conjunction with CDFG standards (typically 6.5 acres per owl pair or unpaired resident owl).

Full implementation of the measures identified above would mitigate impacts to burrowing owls potentially occurring on the site.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 36

3.3.5

Disturbance to Nesting Raptors

Potential Impacts. Although no tree nests or ground nests were observed on or adjacent to the site during the October 2007 and February 2008 surveys, large trees immediately to the east and south of the site provide potential nesting habitat for tree-nesting raptors. If a raptor, regardless of its federal or state status, were to nest on or adjacent to the site prior to construction, construction activities could result in the abandonment of active nests or direct mortality to these birds. Construction activities that adversely affect the nesting success of raptors or other special status birds or result in mortality of individual birds constitute a violation of state and federal laws (see Section 3.2.3) and would be considered a significant impact under CEQA.

Mitigation. A qualified biologist should conduct a pre-construction survey for tree- and groundnesting raptors throughout the site and in all trees within 250 feet of the site no more than 30 days prior to the onset of ground disturbance, if such disturbance will occur during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31). Pre-construction surveys should be used to determine the presence or absence of nesting raptors. If nesting raptors are detected during the survey within 250 feet of proposed project-related development activities, a suitable construction-free buffer should be established around all active nests. The precise dimension of the buffer (up to 250 ft.) would be determined at that time and may vary depending on location and species. Buffers should remain in place for the duration of the breeding season or until it has been confirmed by a qualified biologist that all chicks have fledged and are independent of their parents. Pre-construction surveys during the non-breeding season are not necessary for most nesting raptors, including all tree-nesting raptors, as they are expected to abandon their roosts during construction.

Implementation of the above measures would mitigate impacts to tree- and ground-nesting raptors to a less-than-significant level.

3.3.6

Impacts to American Badgers

Potential Impacts. Impacts to the American badger would be similar to those for the burrowing owl. Conversion of the project site’s open agricultural land to housing and a college campus ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 37

would result in a less-than-significant loss of habitat for the American badger but may result in harm or injury to individuals of this species, which would constitute a significant adverse impact.

Mitigation. Pre-construction surveys conducted for raptors and specifically for burrowing owls should also be used to determine the presence or absence of badgers on individual project sites. In the unlikely event that an active badger den is identified during pre-construction surveys within or immediately adjacent to the construction envelope, a construction-free buffer of up to 300 ft. or a suitable distance specified by the resource agencies (i.e., CDFG) should be established around the den. Because badgers are known to use multiple burrows in a breeding burrow complex, a biological monitor should be present onsite during construction activities to ensure the buffer is adequate to avoid direct impact to individuals or nest abandonment. The onsite monitor would be necessary until it is determined that young are of an independent age and construction activities would not harm individual badgers. Once it has been determined that badgers have vacated the site, the burrows could be collapsed or excavated, and ground disturbance could proceed.

3.3.7

Impacts to San Joaquin Kit Foxes

Potential Impacts. The entire project site consists of agricultural habitat, and no ground squirrel burrows possessing the dimensions suitable for the San Joaquin kit fox were observed on the site during the October 2007 and February 2008 surveys, although protocol-level surveys including 100% visual coverage of the site were not conducted for this species.

As discussed in Section 3.3.2, project development would result in a less-than-significant loss of habitat for the San Joaquin kit fox. However, it is possible, though highly unlikely, that an individual kit fox could move onto the site incidentally prior to construction. Constructionrelated activities may result in harm or injury to individual kit foxes, should they occur on the site. This would be considered a significant adverse impact.

Mitigation. While unlikely, the possibility of the San Joaquin kit fox’s occurrence on the project site warrants prudent protection measures, should any individuals wander onto the site at ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 38

the time of site development and associated construction activities.

As such, the project

proponent should implement the protection measures outlined in the “U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service standardized recommendations for protection of the San Joaquin kit fox prior to or during ground disturbance,” provided in Appendix C and summarized below. While these recommendations were developed by the USFWS Sacramento office, they would be applicable to this project site as well. •

Pre-construction surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance, construction activities, and/or any project activity likely to impact the San Joaquin kit fox. The primary objective is to identify kit fox habitat features (e.g., potential dens and refugia) on the project site and evaluate their use by kit foxes. If an active kit fox den is detected within or immediately adjacent to the area of work, the USFWS shall be contacted immediately to determine the best course of action. If no kit fox activity is detected, a written report shall be submitted to the USFWS within five days after completion of the surveys.

•

Permanent and temporary construction activities and other types of projectrelated activities should be carried out in a manner that minimizes disturbance to kit foxes, should their presence be detected on the site during pre-construction surveys. Minimization measures include, but are not limited to: restriction of project-related vehicle traffic to established roads, construction areas, and other designated areas; inspection and covering of structures (e.g., pipes), as well as installation of escape structures, to prevent the inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes; restriction of rodenticide and herbicide use; and proper disposal of food items and trash.

•

The Ventura field office of the USFWS and the Fresno field office of the CDFG will be notified in writing within three working days in case of the accidental death or injury to a San Joaquin kit fox during project-related activities. Notification must include the date, time, location of the incident or of the finding of a dead or injured animal, and any other pertinent information.

Implementation of these measures would minimize the risk that construction activities during site development would result in mortality to individual kit foxes.

3.3.8

Loss of Habitat for Native Wildlife

Potential Impacts. The entire site is regularly managed for agricultural uses resulting in an open space that provides only low-quality habitat for species that occur regionally.

Only

disturbed habitats occur on the site. Due to the low-quality habitat that would be impacted by ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 39

project development, the loss of habitat for native wildlife resulting from the proposed project would constitute a less-than-significant impact.

Mitigation. Mitigation measures are not warranted.

3.3.9

Interference with the Movement of Native Wildlife

Potential Impacts. The project site itself provides minimal dispersal habitat for native wildlife and does not function as a significant movement corridor for native wildlife because it is not unique to the region and is bordered to the west and south by human development. Site development is not expected to have a significant effect on home range and dispersal movements of native wildlife that may occur in the region. Therefore, the project would result in a less-thansignificant impact on the movements of native wildlife.

Mitigation. Mitigation measures are not warranted.

3.3.10 Disturbance to Waters of the United States or Riparian Habitats Potential Impacts.

Pending a site verification by the USACE, no wetlands or other

jurisdictional waters presumably occur on the project site.

Therefore, state and federal

regulations protecting jurisdictional waters would not be relevant to development of the site. The project would also have no effect on riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities, as none of these occur on the project site.

Mitigation. Mitigation measures are not warranted.

3.3.11 Degradation of Water Quality in Seasonal Drainages, Stock Ponds, and Downstream Waters Potential Impacts. Extensive grading often leaves the soils of construction zones barren of vegetation and, therefore, vulnerable to erosion. Eroded soil can be carried as sediment in seasonal creeks to be deposited in creek beds and adjacent wetlands. The site itself and the surrounding areas are comprised of fairly level terrain. Therefore, the potential for erosion and the degradation of water quality in local creeks is negligible. ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 40

Furthermore, the applicant is expected to comply with the provisions of a City or County grading permit, including standard erosion control measures that employ best management practices (BMPs). Compliance with the above permit(s) should result in no impact to water quality in seasonal creeks, reservoirs, and downstream waters from the proposed project and should not result in the deposition of pollutants and sediments in sensitive riparian and wetland habitats.

Mitigation. Mitigation measures are not warranted.

3.3.12 Local Ordinances or Habitat Conservation Plans 3 6B

Potential Impacts. No local ordinances, HCPs, or NCCPs are in effect for this project. While a draft HCP had been underway in this region for some time, this effort is no longer moving forward and, as such, the project will not conflict with an HCP/NCCP. Therefore, the proposed project would not be impacted by any local policies related to biological resources.

Mitigation. Mitigation measures are not warranted.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 41

LITERATURE CITED California Department of Fish and Game. 2007. California fish and game code. Gould Publications. Binghamton, NY. ________. 2007. Annual report on the status of California state listed threatened and endangered animals and plants. The Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA. ________. 2008. California natural diversity database. The Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA. California Native Plant Society. 2001. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California (6th Edition). Rare Plant Scientific Advisory Committee, David P. Tibor, Convening Editor. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA. Coats Consulting. 1997. Special Status Species Assessment Including Surveys for San Joaquin Kit Fox and Burrowing Owl. Fairview Corners Specific Plan. Brian Mori Biological Consulting Services. Watsonville, CA. EPA and USACE. 2007. Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v. United States. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Washington, D.C. LOA. 2008. Investigation of Potential Waters of the United States: Gavilan College/Fairview Corners. Live Oak Associates, Inc. San Jose, CA. Natural Resource Conservation Service. 2007. Soil survey of San Benito County, California, USDA. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Department of the Army. ________. 2008. JD for File Number 2008-00215. Department of the Army. San Francisco, CA. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2008. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants. Wetland Training Insitute, Inc. 1991. Federal Wetland Regulation Reference Manual. B.N. Goode and R.J. Pierce (eds.) WTI 90-1. 281pp. Zeiner, David C., William F. Laudenslayer, Kenneth E. Mayer and Marshal White. Ed. 1988. California’s wildlife, volume I, amphibians and reptiles. Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. 272 pp. ________. 1988. California’s wildlife, volume II, birds. Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. 731 pp. ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 42

________. 1988. California’s wildlife, volume III, mammals. Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, CA. 407 pp.

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 43

APPENDIX A: VASCULAR PLANTS OF THE STUDY AREA The plants species listed below were observed on the Gavilan College/Fairview Corners site during the field survey conducted by Live Oak Associates in 2007 and 2008. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wetland indicator status of each plant has been shown following its common name. OBL - Obligate FACW - Facultative Wetland FAC - Facultative FACU - Facultative Upland UPL - Upland +/- - Higher/lower end of category NI - No investigation APIACEAE – Carrot Family Conium maculatum* Poison hemlock FACW ASTERACEAE - Sunflower Family Baccharis pilularis Coyote brush UPL Centaurea solstitialis* Yellow star thistle UPL Cirsium vulgare Bull thistle FACU Heterotheca grandiflora Telegraph weed UPL Xanthium spinosum Spiny cocklebur FAC+ BORAGINACEAE – Borage Family Amsinckia menziesii Small-flowered fiddleneck UPL BRASSICACEAE – Mustard Family Hirschfeldia incana* Summer mustard UPL CONVOLVULACEAE – Morning-Glory Family Convolvulus arvensis* Field bindweed UPL EUPHORBIACEAE – Spurge Family Eremocarpus setigerus Turkey mullein UPL FABACEAE – Legume Family Medicago polymorpha* Burclover UPL GERANIACEAE – Geranium Family Erodium botrys* Broadleaf filaree UPL Geranium dissectum* Wild geranium UPL LAMIACEAE – Mint Family Trichostema lanceolatum Vinegarweed UPL MALVACEAE – Mallow Family Malva sp.* Mallow UPL ONAGRACEAE – Evening Primrose Family Epilobium sp. Willowherb PAPAVERACEAE – Poppy Family Eschscholzia californica California poppy UPL PLANTAGINACEAE – Plantain Family Plantago lanceolata* English plantain FAC______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 44

POACEAE - Grass Family Avena sp. Bromus diandrus* Bromus hordeaceus* Hordeum marinum ssp. gussoneanum* Phalaris californica Triticum aestivum* POLYGONACEAE – Buckwheat Family Rumex crispus*

Wild oat Ripgut brome Soft chess Mediterranean barley Canary grass Common wheat

UPL FACUFAC FAC UPL

Curly dock

FACW-

* Introduced non-native species

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 45

APPENDIX B: TERRESTRIAL VERTEBRATE SPECIES THAT POTENTIALLY OCCUR ON THE STUDY AREA The species listed below are those that may reasonably be expected to use the habitats of the study area routinely from time to time. The list was not intended to include birds that are vagrants or occasional transients. Terrestrial vertebrate species observed in or adjacent to the study area in October 2007 and/or February 2008 have been noted with an asterisk. CLASS AMPHIBIA (Amphibians) ORDER CAUDATA (Salamanders) FAMILY: AMBYSTOMATIDAE (Mole Salamanders and Relatives) California tiger salamander Ambystoma californiense ORDER ANURA (Frogs and Toads) FAMILY: PELOBATIDAE (Spadefoot Toads) Western spadefoot Spea hammondii FAMILY: BUFONIDAE (True Toads) Western toad Bufo boreas FAMILY: HYLIDAE (Treefrogs and Relatives) Pacific treefrog Pseudacris regilla FAMILY: RANIDAE Bullfrog Rana catesbeiana California red-legged frog Rana aurora CLASS REPTILIA (Reptiles) ORDER SQUAMATA (Lizards and Snakes) SUBORDER SAURIA (Lizards) FAMILY: PHRYNOSOMATIDAE Western fence lizard Sceloporus occidentalis CLASS AVES (Birds) ORDER CICONIIFORMES (Herons, Storks, Ibises and Relatives) FAMILYL: CATHARTIDAE (New World Vultures) Turkey vulture Cathartes aura ORDER FALCONIFORMES (Vultures, Hawks and Falcons) FAMILY: ACCIPITRIDAE (Hawks, Old World Vultures and Harriers) Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus *Golden eagle Aquila chrystaetos Rough-legged hawk Buteo lagopus Ferruginous hawk Buteo regalis *Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis White-tailed kite Elanus leucurus Sharp-shinned hawk Accipiter striatus Northern harrier Circus cyaneus FAMILY: FALCONIDAE (Caracaras and Falcons) ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 46

Prairie falcon Falco mexicanus Merlin Falco columbarius FAMILY: FALCONIDAE (Caracaras and Falcons) *American kestrel Falco sparverius ORDER GALLIFORMES (Magapodes, Curassows, Pheasants and Relatives) FAMILY: ODONTOPHORIDAE (New World Quail) California quail Callipepla californica ORDER COLUMBIFORMES (Pigeons and Doves) FAMILY: COLUMBIDAE (Pigeons and Doves) *Rock dove Columba livia Band-tailed pigeon Columba fasciata *Mourning dove Zenaida macroura ORDER STRIGIFORMES (Owls) FAMILY: STRIGIDAE (Typical Owls) Western screech owl Otus kennicottii Great horned owl Bubo virginianus ORDER APODIFORMES (Swifts and Hummingbirds) FAMILY: TROCHILIDAE (Hummingbirds) Anna’s hummingbird Calypte anna Allen’s hummingbird Selasphorus sasin ORDER PICIFORMES (Woodpeckers and Relatives) FAMILY: PICIDAE (Woodpeckers and Wrynecks) Downy woodpecker Picoides pubescens ORDER PASSERIFORMES (Perching Birds) FAMILY: TYRANNIDAE (Tyrant Flycatchers) *Say’s phoebe Sayornis saya Black phoebe Sayornis nigricans FAMILY: CORVIDAE (Jays, Magpies and Crows) Steller’s jay Cyanocitta stelleri Western scrub-jay Aphelocoma californica American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos Common raven Corvus corax FAMILY: TROGLODYTIDAE (Wrens) House wren Troglodytes aedon FAMILY: TURDIDAE (Thrushes) American robin Turdus migratorius FAMILY: MIMIDAE (Mockingbirds and Thrashers) *Northern mockingbird Mimus polyglottos FAMILY: STURNIDAE (Starlings and Allies) European starling Sturnus vulgaris FAMILY: ICTERIDAE (Blackbirds, Orioles and Allies) Brown-headed cowbird Molothrus ater Red-winged blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus *Western meadowlark Sturnella neglecta *Brewer’s blackbird Euphagus cyanocephalus FAMILY: FRINGILLIDAE (Finches) ______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 47

Purple finch Carpodacus purpureus House finch Carpodacus mexicanus American goldfinch Carduelis tristis *Lesser goldfinch Carduelis psaltria FAMILY: PASSERIDAE (Old World Sparrows) House sparrow Passer domesticus CLASS MAMMALIA (Mammals) ORDER DIDELPHIMORPHIA (Marsupials) FAMILY: DIDELPHIDAE (Opossums) Virginia opossum Didelphis virginiana ORDER RODENTIA (Rodents) FAMILY: SCIURIDAE (Squirrels, Chipmunks, and Marmots) *California ground squirrel Spermophilus beecheyi FAMILY: GEOMYIDAE (Pocket Gophers) *Botta's pocket gopher Thomomys bottae FAMILY: MURIDAE (Mice, Rats and Voles) Norway rat Rattus norvegicus House mouse Mus musculus ORDER CARNIVORA (Carnivores) FAMILY: CANIDAE (Foxes, Wolves and Relatives) Domestic dog Canis familiaris Coyote Canis latrans Red Fox Vulpes vulpes Gray Fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus FAMILY: PROCYONIDAE (Raccoons and Relatives) Raccoon Procyon lotor FAMILY: MUSTELIDAE (Weasels and Relatives) Western Spotted Skunk Spilogale gracilis Striped Skunk Mephitis mephitis FAMILY: FELIDAE (Cats) Feral cat Felis catus

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 48

APPENDIX C: U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE STANDARDIZED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROTECTION OF THE SAN JOAQUIN KIT FOX PRIOR TO OR DURING GROUND DISTURBANCE Prepared by the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, June 1999 Contact information updated by LOA, April 2008

______________________________________________________________________________ Live Oak Associates, Inc. 49

U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE STANDARDIZED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROTECTION OF THE SAN JOAQUIN KIT FOX PRIOR TO OR DURING GROUND DISTURBANCE Prepared by the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office June 1999

INTRODUCTION The following document includes many of the San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) protection measures typically recommended by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), prior to and during ground disturbance activities. However, incorporating relevant sections of these guidelines into the proposed project is not the only action required under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Project applicants should contact the Service in Ventura to determine the full range of requirements that apply to your project; the address and telephone number are given at the end of this document. Formal authorization for the project may be required under either section 7 or section 10 of the Act. Implementation of the measures presented in this document may be necessary to avoid violating the provisions of the Act, including the prohibition against "take" (defined as killing, harming, or harassing a listed species, including actions that damage or destroy its habitat). Such protection measures may also be required under the terms of a biological opinion pursuant to section 7 of the Act resulting in incidental take authorization (authorization), or an incidental take permit (permit) pursuant to section 10 of the Act. The specific measures implemented to protect kit fox for any given project shall be determined by the Service based upon the applicant's consultation with the Service. The purpose of this document is to make information on kit fox protection strategies readily available and to help standardize the methods and definitions currently employed to achieve kit fox protection. The measures outlined in this document are subject to modification or revision at the discretion of the Service. All surveys, den destructions, and monitoring described in this document must be conducted by a qualified biologist. A qualified biologist (biologist) means any person who has completed at least four years of university training in wildlife biology or a related science and/or has demonstrated field experience in the identification and life history of the San Joaquin kit fox. In addition, biologist(s) must be able to identify coyote, red fox, gray fox, and kit fox tracks, and to have seen a kit fox in the wild, at a zoo, or as a museum mount.

SMALL PROJECTS Small projects are considered to be those projects with small foot prints such as an individual infill oil well, communication tower, or bridge repair. These projects must stand alone and not be part of, or in any way connected to larger projects (i.e., bridge repair or improvement to serve a

STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS

2

future urban development). The Service recommends that on these small projects, the biologist survey the proposed project boundary and a 200-foot area outside of the project footprint to identify habitat features, and make recommendations on situating the project to minimize or avoid impacts. If habitat features cannot be completely avoided, then preconstruction surveys should be conducted. Preconstruction/preactivity surveys shall be conducted no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance and/or construction activities or any project activity likely to impact the San Joaquin kit fox. Surveys should identify kit fox habitat features on the project site and evaluate use by kit fox and, if possible, and assess the potential impacts to the kit fox by the proposed activity. The status of all dens should be determined and mapped (see Survey Protocol). Written results of preconstruction/preactivity surveys must be received by the Service within five days after survey completion and prior to the start of ground disturbance and/or construction activities. If a natal/pupping den is discovered within the project area or within 200-feet of the project boundary, the Service shall be immediately notified. If the preconstruction/preactivity survey reveals an active natal pupping or new information, the project applicant should contact the Service immediately to obtain the necessary take authorization/permit. If take authorization/permit has already been issued, then the biologist may proceed with den destruction within the project boundary, except natal/pupping dens (active or inactive). Protective exclusion zones can be placed around all known and potential dens which occur outside the project footprint (conversely, the project boundary can be demarcated, see den destruction section). OTHER PROJECTS It is likely that all other projects occurring within kit fox habitat will require a take authorization/permit from the Service. This determination would be made by the Service during the early evaluation process (see Survey Protocol). These other projects would include, but are not limited to: linear projects; projects with large footprints such as urban development; and projects which in themselves may be small but have far reaching impacts (i.e., water storage or conveyance facilities that promote urban growth or agriculture, etc.). The take authorization/permit issued by the Service may incorporate some or all of the protection measures presented in this document. The take authorization/permit may include measures specific to the needs of the project, and those requirements supersede any requirements found in this document.

STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS

3

EXCLUSION ZONES The configuration of exclusion zones around the kit fox dens should have a radius measured outward from the entrance or cluster of entrances. The following radii are minimums, and if they cannot be followed the Service must be contacted: Potential den

50 feet

Known den

100 feet

Natal/pupping den (occupied and unoccupied)

Service must be contacted

Atypical den

50 feet

Known den: To ensure protection, the exclusion zone should be demarcated by fencing that encircles each den at the appropriate distance and does not prevent access to the den by kit foxes. Exclusion zone fencing should be maintained until all construction related or operational disturbances have been terminated. At that time, all fencing shall be removed to avoid attracting subsequent attention to the dens. Potential and Atypical dens: Placement of 4-5 flagged stakes 50 feet from the den entrance(s) will suffice to identify the den location; fencing will not be required, but the exclusion zone must be observed. Construction and other project activities should be prohibited or greatly restricted within these exclusion zones. Only essential vehicle operation on existing roads and foot traffic should be permitted. Otherwise, all construction, vehicle operation, material storage, or any other type of surface-disturbing activity should be prohibited within the exclusion zones. DESTRUCTION OF DENS Disturbance to all San Joaquin kit fox dens should be avoided to the maximum extent possible. Protection provided by kit fox dens for use as shelter, escape, cover, and reproduction is vital to the survival of the species. Limited destruction of kit fox dens may be allowed, if avoidance is not a reasonable alternative, provided the following procedures are observed. The value to kit foxes of potential, known, and natal/pupping dens differ and therefore, each den type needs a different level of protection. Destruction of any known or natal/pupping kit fox den requires take authorization/permit from the Service.

STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS

4

Natal/pupping dens: Natal or pupping dens which are occupied will not be destroyed until the pups and adults have vacated and then only after consultation with the Service. Therefore, project activities at some den sites may have to be postponed. Known Dens: Known dens occurring within the footprint of the activity must be monitored for three days with tracking medium or an infra-red beam camera to determine the current use. If no kit fox activity is observed during this period, the den should be destroyed immediately to preclude subsequent use. If kit fox activity is observed at the den during this period, the den should be monitored for at least five consecutive days from the time of the observation to allow any resident animal to move to another den during its normal activity. Use of the den can be discouraged during this period by partially plugging its entrances(s) with soil in such a manner that any resident animal can escape easily. Only when the den is determined to be unoccupied may the den be excavated under the direction of the biologist. If the animal is still present after five or more consecutive days of plugging and monitoring, the den may have to be excavated when, in the judgment of a biologist, it is temporarily vacant, for example during the animal's normal foraging activities. The Service encourages hand excavation, but realizes that soil conditions may necessitate the use of excavating equipment. However, extreme caution must be exercised. Destruction of the den should be accomplished by careful excavation until it is certain that no kit foxes are inside. The den should be fully excavated, filled with dirt and compacted to ensure that kit foxes cannot reenter or use the den during the construction period. If at any point during excavation a kit fox is discovered inside the den, the excavation activity shall cease immediately and monitoring of the den as described above should be resumed. Destruction of the den may be completed when in the judgement of the biologist, the animal has escaped from the partially destroyed den. Potential Dens: If a take authorization/permit has been obtained from the Service, den destruction may proceed without monitoring, unless other restrictions were issued with the take authorization/permit. If no take authorization/permit has been issued, then potential dens should be monitored as if they were known dens. If any den was considered to be a potential den, but is later determined during monitoring or destruction to be currently, or previously used by kit fox (e.g., if kit fox sign is found inside), then destruction shall cease and the Service shall be notified immediately. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS Habitat subject to permanent and temporary construction disturbances and other types of projectrelated disturbance should be minimized. Project designs should limit or cluster permanent project features to the smallest area possible while still permitting project goals to be achieved. To minimize temporary disturbances, all project-related vehicle traffic should be restricted to established roads, construction areas, and other designated areas. These areas should also be

STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS

5

included in preconstruction surveys and, to the extent possible, should be established in locations disturbed by previous activities to prevent further impacts. 1.

Project-related vehicles should observe a 20-mph speed limit in all project areas, except on county roads and State and Federal highways; this is particularly important at night when kit foxes are most active. To the extent possible, night-time construction should be minimized. Off-road traffic outside of designated project areas should be prohibited.

2.

To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes or other animals during the construction phase of a project, all excavated, steep-walled holes or trenches more than 2 feet deep should be covered at the close of each working day by plywood or similar materials, or provided with one or more escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden planks. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they should be thoroughly inspected for trapped animals. If at any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, the procedures under number 13 of this section must be followed.

3.

Kit foxes are attracted to den-like structures such as pipes and may enter stored pipe becoming trapped or injured. All construction pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of 4-inches or greater that are stored at a construction site for one or more overnight periods should be thoroughly inspected for kit foxes before the pipe is subsequently buried, capped, or otherwise used or moved in any way. If a kit fox is discovered inside a pipe, that section of pipe should not be moved until the Service has been consulted. If necessary, and under the direct supervision of the biologist, the pipe may be moved once to remove it from the path of construction activity, until the fox has escaped.

4.

All food-related trash items such as wrappers, cans, bottles, and food scraps should be disposed of in closed containers and removed at least once a week from a construction or project site.

5.

No firearms shall be allowed on the project site.

6.

To prevent harassment, mortality of kit foxes or destruction of dens by dogs or cats, no pets should be permitted on project sites.

7.

Use of rodenticides and herbicides in project areas should be restricted. This is necessary to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of kit foxes and the depletion of prey populations on which they depend. All uses of such compounds should observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, California Department of Food and Agriculture, and other State and Federal legislation, as well as additional project-related restrictions deemed necessary by the Service. If rodent control

STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS

6

must be conducted, zinc phosphide should be used because of proven lower risk to kit fox. 8.

A representative shall be appointed by the project proponent who will be the contact source for any employee or contractor who might inadvertently kill or injure a kit fox or who finds a dead, injured or entrapped individual. The representative will be identified during the employee education program. The representative's name and telephone number shall be provided to the Service.

9.

An employee education program should be conducted for any project that has expected impacts to kit fox or other endangered species. The program should consist of a brief presentation by persons knowledgeable in kit fox biology and legislative protection to explain endangered species concerns to contractors, their employees, and military and agency personnel involved in the project. The program should include the following: a description of the San Joaquin kit fox and its habitat needs; a report of the occurrence of kit fox in the project area; an explanation of the status of the species and its protection under the Endangered Species Act; and a list of measures being taken to reduce impacts to the species during project construction and implementation. A fact sheet conveying this information should be prepared for distribution to the above-mentioned people and anyone else who may enter the project site.

10.

Upon completion of the project, all areas subject to temporary ground disturbances, including storage and staging areas, temporary roads, pipeline corridors, etc. should be recontoured if necessary, and revegetated to promote restoration of the area to pre-project conditions. An area subject to "temporary" disturbance means any area that is disturbed during the project, but that after project completion will not be subject to further disturbance and has the potential to be revegetated. Appropriate methods and plant species used to revegetate such areas should be determined on a site-specific basis in consultation with the Service, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and revegetation experts.

11.

In the case of trapped animals, escape ramps or structures should be installed immediately to allow the animal(s) to escape, or the Service should be contacted for advice.

12.

Any contractor, employee, or military or agency personnel who inadvertently kills or injures a San Joaquin kit fox shall immediately report the incident to their representative. This representative shall contact the CDFG immediately in the case of a dead, injured or entrapped kit fox. The CDFG contact for immediate assistance is State Dispatch at (916) 445-0045. They will contact the local warden or biologist.

13.

The Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office and CDFG will be notified in writing within three working days of the accidental death or injury to a San Joaquin kit fox during

STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS

7

project related activities. Notification must include the date, time, and location of the incident or of the finding of a dead or injured animal and any other pertinent information. The Service contact is the Chief of the Division of Endangered Species, at the addresses and telephone numbers given below. The CDFG contact is Mr. Ron Schlorff at 1416 9th Street, Sacramento, California 95814, (916) 654-4262. Any project-related information required by the Service or questions concerning the above conditions or their implementation may be directed in writing to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at: 2493 Portola Road, Suite B Ventura, CA 93003 (805) 644-1766

STANDARD RECOMMENDATIONS

8

"Take" - Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) prohibits the "take" of any federally listed endangered species by any person (an individual, corporation, partnership, trust, association, etc.) subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. As defined in the Act, take means " . . . to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct." Thus, not only is a listed animal protected from activities such as hunting, but also from actions that damage or destroy its habitat. "Dens" - San Joaquin kit fox dens may be located in areas of low, moderate, or steep topography. Den characteristics are listed below, however, the specific characteristics of individual dens may vary and occupied dens may lack some or all of these features. Therefore, caution must be exercised in determining the status of any den. Typical dens may include the following: (1) one or more entrances that are approximately 5 to 8 inches in diameter; (2) dirt berms adjacent to the entrances; (3) kit fox tracks, scat, or prey remains in the vicinity of the den; (4) matted vegetation adjacent to the den entrances; and (5) manmade features such as culverts, pipes, and canal banks. "Known den" - Any existing natural den or manmade structure that is used or has been used at any time in the past by a San Joaquin kit fox. Evidence of use may include historical records, past or current radiotelemetry or spotlighting data, kit fox sign such as tracks, scat, and/or prey remains, or other reasonable proof that a given den is being or has been used by a kit fox. The Service discourages use of the terms ”active” and “inactive” when referring to any kit fox den because a great percentage of occupied dens show no evidence of use, and because kit foxes change dens often, with the result that the status of a given den may change frequently and abruptly. "Potential Den" - Any subterranean hole within the species’ range that has entrances of appropriate dimensions for which available evidence is insufficient to conclude that it is being used or has been used by a kit fox. Potential dens shall include the following: (1) any suitable subterranean hole; or (2) any den or burrow of another species (e.g., coyote, badger, red fox, or ground squirrel) that otherwise has appropriate characteristics for kit fox use. "Natal or Pupping Den" - Any den used by kit foxes to whelp and/or rear their pups. Natal/pupping dens may be larger with more numerous entrances than dens occupied exclusively by adults. These dens typically have more kit fox tracks, scat, and prey remains in the vicinity of the den, and may have a broader apron of matted dirt and/or vegetation at one or more entrances. A natal den, defined as a den in which kit fox pups are actually whelped but not necessarily reared, is a more restrictive version of the pupping den. In practice, however, it is difficult to distinguish between the two, therefore, for purposes of this definition either term applies. "Atypical Den" - Any manmade structure which has been or is being occupied by a San Joaquin kit fox. Atypical dens may include pipes, culverts, and diggings beneath concrete slabs and buildings.

APPENDIX F

A IR Q UALITY A NALYSIS

Fairview/Gavilan College Air Quality Study May 16, 2008 Revised August 19, 2008

●

●

●

Prepared for: Julie Mier David J. Powers Associates 1885 The Alameda, Suite 204 San Jose, CA 95126

Prepared by: James Reyff

505 Petaluma Boulevard South Petaluma, CA 94952 (707) 766-7700

Job No.: 07-199

Introduction The air quality impacts of the proposed Gavilan Campus/Fairview Corners Master Plan development in San Benito County, California are described in this report. The project site is located at the northeast corner of Fairview Road and Airline Highway, covering roughly 137 acres of vacant land. The project as proposed consists of a 3,500-student community college campus, 70 on-campus housing units, 35,000 square feet (s.f.) of retail space, and 220 singlefamily homes. The college campus and single-family homes will be constructed separately. The college campus would be constructed in two phases. The first phase would include limited site grading, placement of five modular buildings, a 415-car parking lot, and access roads. Full campus build out would occur over a 25-year period. The residential portion of the project would be built out in five phases over 10 years. Each phase would require grading and construction of infrastructure. This report describes existing air quality, temporary construction-related impacts, potential direct and indirect long-term emissions associated with the project build out scenario, and the impacts of these emissions on both the local and regional scale. Mitigation measures warranted to reduce or eliminate any identified significant impacts are described. This analysis was conducted following guidance provided by the Monterey Bay Air Pollution Control District (MBAPCD) CEQA Guidelines. Emissions, which are the quantity of pollutant that the project would emit both directly and indirectly, are measured in pounds per day. The amount of pollutant material measured per volumetric unit of air is referred to as the concentration and is typically measured in parts per million (ppm) or micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3). Stationary sources associated with the project, which could result in adverse air quality impacts that would contribute to air quality emissions, have not been identified.

Overall Regulatory Setting The Federal Clean Air Act governs air quality in the United States. In addition to being subject to federal requirements, air quality in California is also governed by more stringent regulations under the California Clean Air Act. At the federal level, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) administers the Clean Air Act (CAA). The California Clean Air Act is administered by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) at the State level and by the Air Quality Management Districts at the regional and local levels. The Monterey Bay Air Pollution Control District (MBAPCD) regulates air quality at the regional level. United States Environmental Protection Agency USEPA is responsible for enforcing the Federal CAA. USEPA is also responsible for establishing the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). NAAQS are required under the 1977 CAA and subsequent amendments. USEPA regulates emission sources that are under the exclusive authority of the federal government, such as aircraft, ships, and certain types of locomotives. The agency has jurisdiction over emission sources outside state waters (e.g., beyond the outer continental shelf) and establishes various emission standards, including those

for vehicles sold in states other than California. Automobiles sold in California must meet the stricter emission standards established by CARB. California Air Resources Board In California, CARB, which became part of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) in 1991, is responsible for meeting the state requirements of the Federal CAA, administering the California CAA, and establishing the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). The California CAA, as amended in 1992, requires all air districts in the State to endeavor to achieve and maintain the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). The CARB regulates mobile air pollution sources, such as motor vehicles. The agency is responsible for setting emission standards for vehicles sold in California and for other emission sources, such as consumer products and certain off-road equipment. CARB has established passenger vehicle fuel specifications. CARB oversees the functions of local air pollution control districts and air quality management districts, which in turn administer air quality activities at the regional and county level. Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District The Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBAPCD) is primarily responsible for assuring that the National and State ambient air quality standards are attained and maintained in the Monterey Bay Area. MBAPCD is also responsible for adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning air pollutant sources, issuing permits for stationary sources of air pollutants, inspecting stationary sources of air pollutants, responding to citizen complaints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, awarding grants to reduce motor vehicle emissions, conducting public education campaigns, as well as many other activities. National and State Ambient Air Quality Standards As required by the Federal Clean Air Act, NAAQS have been established for six major air pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), ozone (O3), respirable particulate matter (PM10), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), sulfur oxides, and lead. Pursuant to the California Clean Air Act, the State of California has also established ambient air quality standards. These standards are generally more stringent than the corresponding federal standards and incorporate additional standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride and visibility reducing particles. Both State and Federal standards are summarized in Table 1. The “primary” standards have been established to protect the public health. The “secondary” standards are intended to protect the nation’s welfare and account for air pollutant effects on soil, water, visibility, materials, vegetation and other aspects of the general welfare. CAAQS are more stringent than the NAAQS. Thus, CAAQS are used as the comparative standard in this analysis.

Table 1 Ambient Air Quality Standards Table 4.3-2 Federal and State Ambient Air Quality Standards

Pollutant Averaging Time

State Standard

Federal Standard Primary

Secondary

1-Hour 8-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour

0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3) 0.07 ppm (137 µg/m3) 9.0 ppm (10,000 µg/m3) 20 ppm (23,000 µg/m3)

-0.075 ppm (147 µg/m3) 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) 35.0 ppm (40 mg/m3)

Annual 1-Hour

0.030 ppm 0.18 ppm

0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3) --

Sulfur Dioxide

Annual 24-Hour 3-Hour 1-Hour

-0.04 ppm (105 µg/m3) -0.25 ppm (655 µg/m3)

0.03 ppm (80 µg/m3) 0.14 ppm (365 µg/m3) ---

PM10

Annual 24-Hour Annual 24-Hour Calendar quarter 30-day 24-Hour

20 µg/m3 50 µg/m3 12 µg/m3 no separate state standard

-150 µg/m3 15 µg/m3 35 µg/m3

----0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3) ---0.5 ppm (1,300 µg/m3) --150 µg/m3 ---

--

1.5 µg/m3

1.5 µg/m3

1.5 µg/m3 25 µg/m3

---

---

--

--

--

--

--

--

Ozone Carbon Monoxide Nitrogen Dioxide

PM2.5 Lead

Sulfate Hydrogen 0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3) 1-Hour Sulfide Vinyl 0.010 ppm (26 µg/m3) 24-Hour Chloride Extinction coefficient of 0.23 Visibility per km - visibility of ≥ 10 Reducing 8-hours (10 miles due to particles when am 6 pm) Particles relative humidity is < 70%.

mg/m3 = milligrams per Cubic Meter Annual = annual arithmetic mean 3 µg/m = micrograms per Cubic Meter ppm = parts per million Source: http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf

Air Pollutants and Effect Air quality studies generally focus on five pollutants that are most commonly measured and regulated: CO, O3, NO2, SO2, and suspended particulate, i.e., PM10 and PM2.5. These are referred to as “criteria “ air pollutants. In addition, there are toxic air contaminants (TACs), which are a broad class of compounds that can have a range of health effects. Ozone Ground-level ozone is the principal component of smog. Ozone is not directly emitted into the atmosphere, but instead forms through a photochemical reaction of reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides (NOX), which are known as ozone precursors. Ozone levels are highest from late spring through autumn when precursor emissions are high and meteorological conditions are warm and stagnant. Motor vehicles create the majority of reactive organic gas and nitrogen oxide emissions in the California. In April 2005, the California Air Resources Board approved a new eight-hour standard of 0.070 ppm and retained the one-hour ozone standard of 0.09 ppm after an extensive review of the scientific literature. The U.S. EPA revised the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone to 0.075 ppm in May 2008. Evidence from the reviewed studies indicate that significant harmful health effects could occur among both adults and children if exposed to levels above these standards. Exposure to levels of ozone above current ambient air quality standards can lead to human health effects such as lung inflammation and tissue damage and impaired lung functioning. Ozone exposure is also associated with symptoms such as coughing, chest tightness, shortness of breath, and the worsening of asthma symptoms. The greatest risk for harmful health effects belongs to outdoor workers, athletes, children and others who spend greater amounts of time outdoors during periods where ozone levels exceed air quality standards. Elevated ozone levels can reduce crop and timber yields, as well as damage native plants. Ozone can also damage materials such as rubber, fabrics and plastics. Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5) Particulate matter (PM) is a complex mixture of tiny particles that consists of dry solid fragments, solid cores with liquid coatings, and small droplets of liquid. These particles vary greatly in shape, size and chemical composition, and can be made up of many different materials such as metals, soot, soil, and dust. Particles 10 microns or less in diameter are defined as "respirable particulate matter" or "PM10 ". Fine particles are 2.5 microns or less in diameter (PM2.5) and can contribute significantly to regional haze and reduction of visibility. Inhalable particulates found in the region come from smoke, vehicle exhaust, and dust. Although particulates are found naturally in the air, most particulate matter found in the region are emitted either directly or indirectly by wood burning, motor vehicles, construction, agricultural activities, and wind erosion of disturbed areas. Most PM2.5 is comprised of combustion products such as smoke or vehicle exhaust. Respirable particulate matter, especially PM2.5, is unhealthy to breathe and has been associated with premature mortality and other serious health effects. PM10 poses a health concern because these particulates can be inhaled into and accumulate in the respiratory system. PM2.5 is believed to pose the greatest health risks. Because of their small size (approximately three percent of the average width of a human hair), fine particles can lodge deeply into the lungs. Extensive research reviewed by CARB indicates that exposure to outdoor PM10 and PM2.5 levels exceeding current ambient air quality standards is associated with

increased risk of hospitalization for lung and heart-related respiratory illness, including emergency room visits for asthma. PM exposure is also associated with increased risk of premature deaths, especially in the elderly and people with pre-existing cardiopulmonary disease. In children, studies have shown associations between PM exposure and reduced lung function and increased respiratory symptoms and illnesses. Besides reducing visibility, the acidic portion of PM (e.g., nitrates and sulfates) can harm crops, forests, aquatic and other ecosystems. The State of California regularly reviews scientific literature regarding the health effects of exposure to particulate matter and other pollutants. On July 5, 2003, CARB adopted new standard for particulate matter, lowering the level of the annual standard for PM10 and establishing a new annual standard for PM2.5. Carbon Monoxide. CO, a colorless and odorless gas, interferes with the transfer of oxygen to the brain. It can cause dizziness and fatigue, and can impair central nervous system functions. CO is emitted almost exclusively from the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels. Automobile exhausts release most of the CO in the area. A substantial amount also comes from burning wood in fireplaces and wood stoves. CO is a non-reactive air pollutant that dissipates relatively quickly, so ambient CO concentrations generally follows the spatial and temporal distributions of vehicular traffic. The highest CO concentrations measured in the Monterey Bay area are typically recorded during the winter. Nitrogen Dioxide. NO2, a reddish-brown gas, irritates the lungs. It can cause breathing difficulties at high concentrations. Like O3, NO2 is not directly emitted, but is formed through a reaction between nitric oxide (NO) and atmospheric oxygen. NO and NO2 are collectively referred to as nitrogen oxides (NOx) and are major contributors to O3 formation. NO2 also contributes to the formation of PM10 (see discussion of PM10 below). NO2 concentrations in the air basin have been well below ambient air quality standards; therefore, NO2 concentrations from land use projects are not a concern. In February 2007, the California Air Resources Board approved a new annual standard of 0.030 ppm and lowered the existing one-hour standard to 0.25 ppm. Sulfur Oxides. Sulfur oxides, primarily SO2, are a product of high-sulfur fuel combustion. The main sources of SO2 are coal and oil used in power stations, in industries, and for domestic heating. SO2 is an irritant gas that attacks the throat and lungs. It can cause acute respiratory symptoms and diminished ventilator function in children. SO2 concentrations have been reduced to levels well below the state and national standards, but further reductions in emissions are needed to attain compliance with standards for PM10, of which SO2 is a contributor. Regional SO2 concentrations have been well below ambient air quality standards; therefore, SO2 concentrations from land use projects are not a concern. Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC) TACs are a broad class of compounds known to cause morbidity or mortality (usually because they cause cancer) and include, but are not limited to, the criteria air pollutants listed above. TACs are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, fuel combustion, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). TACs are typically found in low concentrations, even near their source (e.g., benzene near a freeway). Because chronic

exposure can result in adverse health effects, TACs are regulated at the regional, state, and federal level. Diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about twothirds of the cancer risk from TACs (based on the statewide average). According to CARB, diesel exhaust is a complex mixture of gases, vapors and fine particles. This complexity makes the evaluation of health effects of diesel exhaust a complex scientific issue. Some of the chemicals in diesel exhaust, such as benzene and formaldehyde, have been previously identified as TACs by the ARB, and are listed as carcinogens either under the state's Proposition 65 or under the federal Hazardous Air Pollutants programs. California has adopted a comprehensive diesel risk reduction program. The U.S. EPA has adopted low sulfur diesel fuel standards that will reduce diesel particulate matter substantially. These went into effect in late 2006. In cooler weather, smoke from residential wood combustion can be a source of TACs. Localized high TAC concentrations can result when cold stagnant air traps smoke near the ground and, with no wind, the pollution can persist for many hours. This occurs in sheltered valleys during the winter. Wood smoke also contains a significant amount of PM10 and PM2.5. Wood smoke is an irritant and is implicated in worsening asthma and other chronic lung problems.

Air Quality Planning Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District The Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) is one of 35 districts established to protect air quality in California. Its jurisdiction is in the North Central Coast Air Basin (NCCAB), comprised of Monterey, Santa Cruz and San Benito counties. NCCAB does not meet the State Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone or inhalable particulate matter (PM10). The California Clean Air Act of 1988 required preparation of a 1991 plan showing how the State ozone standard would be met. Air quality plans addressing the California Clean Air Act are developed about every three years. The plans are meant to demonstrate progress toward meeting the more stringent 1-hour O3 CAAQS. The latest plan, which was adopted in September 2004, is called the 2004 Air Quality Management Plan for the Monterey Bay Region. This plan includes a comprehensive strategy to reduce emissions from stationary, area, and mobile sources. The plan objective is to indicate how the region would make progress toward attaining the stricter state air quality standards, as mandated by the California Clean Air Act. The plan is designed to achieve a region-wide reduction of O3 precursor pollutants through the expeditious implementation of all feasible measures. The clean air planning efforts for O3 will also reduce PM10 and PM2.5, since a substantial amount of this air pollutant comes from combustion emissions such as vehicle exhaust. In addition, attainment of the PM10 standard is addressed in the “1998 Report on Attainment of the California Particulate Matter Standards in the Monterey Bay Region.”

Physical Setting Climate and Topography The project site is located in an unincorporated area of San Benito County, southeast of the City of Hollister, which lies at the northern portion of the San Benito Valley. This valley is a southern extension of the Santa Clara Valley. Hollister is approximately 20 miles east of Monterey Bay. The Gablian Mountain Range lies to the west and the Diablo Range lies to the east. The Santa Cruz Mountains are to the northwest. A gap between the Santa Cruz Mountains and the Gablian Mountain Range along the Pajaro River allows the primary marine air penetration into the area. Winds from the west-northwest are most common, since terrain to the west is too low to prevent marine air from penetrating into the valley. Winds from the northwest are also common, since the Santa Clara Valley opens to the San Francisco Bay to the north. Northwest winds blowing down the Santa Clara Valley transport modified marine air as well as air pollutants from the urbanized areas of the southern Bay Area. In the winter, drainage winds tend to flow east or southeastward towards Monterey Bay, but these are generally weak and variable. In the spring, winds tend to blow from the westnorthwest (on-shore). In the summer, winds are primarily northwesterly. In the fall, winds flow from the southeast during the night, and at times switch to the west and northwest in the afternoon, but tend to remain light. Stormy periods in winter can bring brief periods of strong southerly winds. However, winds are variable throughout much of late fall and winter. The lightest winds are in fall and winter. Rainfall in the area averages about 15 inches per year, with almost all precipitation occurring between November and April. Although Hollister lies inland, temperatures are modified by the marine influence. Summer maximum temperatures are typically around 80 F. Mean maximum daily temperatures range from around 60 deg F in winter to 81 deg. F in summer. Minimum temperatures range from the high 30’s F in winter to the mid 50’s F in summer. Air Monitoring Data Air quality in the region is controlled by the rate of pollutant emissions and meteorological conditions. Meteorological conditions such as wind speed, atmospheric stability, and mixing height may all affect the atmosphere’s ability to mix and disperse pollutants. Certain weather patterns can transport air pollutants from urbanized areas in to the project area. Long-term variations in air quality typically result from changes in air pollutant emissions, while frequent, short-term variations result from changes in atmospheric conditions. While Hollister enjoys fairly good air quality that meets most State and Federal standards, other parts of the air basin does not. Surface winds often move pollutants from their emission source, so levels downwind are higher. This is especially the case for ozone. MBUAPCD and CARB operate a network of air quality monitoring stations throughout the air basin. The monitoring station at Fairview Avenue in Hollister monitors ozone and PM10. A summary of air pollutant concentrations measured in Hollister and the entire air basin are shown in Table 2.

Table 2

Highest Measured Air Pollutant Concentrations Average Time

Pollutant

Measured Air Pollutant Levels 2003 2004 2005

2006

2007

0.09 ppm 0.08 ppm 36 ug/m3 17 ug/m3 24 µg/m3 9 µg/m3

Hollister 1-Hour Ozone (O3) 8-Hour Fine Particulate Matter 24-Hour (PM10) Annual Respirable Particulate 24-Hour Matter (PM2.5) Annual

0.09 ppm 0.07 ppm 41 ug/m3 16 µg/m3 16 ug/m3 7 µg/m3

0.09 ppm 0.07 ppm 37 ug/m3 16ug/m3 22 ug/m3 7.3 ug/m3

0.10 ppm 0.09 ppm 46 ug/m3 16 ug/m3 16 ug/m3 7.0 ug/m3

0.09 ppm 0.07 ppm 40 ug/m3 17 ug/m3 13 ug/m3 --

North Central Coast Air Basin (Basin Summary) 0.111 ppm 1-Hour Ozone (O3) 0.088 ppm 8-Hour

0.093 ppm 0.083 ppm

0.107 ppm 0.085 ppm

0.105 ppm 0.085 ppm

0.100 ppm 0.085 ppm

Carbon Monoxide (CO)

1.2 ppm

0.9 ppm

1.0 ppm

1.2 ppm

8-Hour

1-Hour Annual Particulate 24-Hour Annual

1.1 ppm

0.05 ppm 0.14 ppm 0.05 ppm 0.07 ppm 0.05 ppm 0.006 ppm 0.007 ppm 0.006 ppm 0.006 ppm 0.006 ppm 90 µg/m3 83 µg/m3 65 µg/m3 51 µg/m3 69 µg/m3 Respirable 3 3 3 3 Matter (PM10) 28 ug/m 32 ug/m 25 µg/m3 26 µg/m 25 µg/m Source: California Air Resources Board Air Quality Data website http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/aqdpage.htm. Note: ppm = parts per million and ug/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter Values reported in bold exceed ambient air quality standard NA = data not available.

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

Table 3

Annual Number of Days Exceeding Ambient Air Quality Standards Monitoring Station

Days Exceeding Standard 2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

NAAQS 1-hr

Hollister NCCAB

0 0

0 0

X X

X X

X X

NAAQS 8-hr

Hollister NCCAB

0 2

0 0

0 1

1 2

0 1

CAAQS 1-hr

Hollister NCCAB

0 3

0 0

0 2

1 2

0 2

CAAQS 8-hr

Hollister NCCAB

X X

X X

1 7

5 20

2 17

NAAQS 24-hr

Hollister NCCAB

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

CAAQS 24-hr

Hollister NCCAB

0 7

0 7

0 2

0 3

0 1

Fine Particulate NAAQS 24-hr* Matter (PM2.5)

Hollister NCCAB

NA NA

NA NA

NA NA

NA NA

NA NA

All Other (CO, All Other NO2, Lead, SO2)

Hollister NCCAB

NA 0

NA 0

NA 0

NA 0

NA 0

Pollutant

Standard

Ozone (O3.)

Fine Particulate Matter (PM10)

* Based on standard of 65 µg/m3 that was in place until September 21, 2006. NA = data not available. X = no standard in place at that time.

Air pollutant monitoring data show that the Hollister station has exceeded ozone standards during the last 5 years. The 8-hour NAAQS for ozone was exceeded on one day in 2006. The State 1hour standard was exceeded that same day, but no other days during the 5-year period. The new State 8-hour standard was exceeded on one to five days per year over the last 3 years (the standard was not in place prior). During that same period, all stations in the air basin combined have exceeded the 8-hour ozone NAAQS on 0 to 2 days annually and the 1-hour CAAQS on 0 to 3 days annually. The new 8-hour CAAQS for ozone has been exceeded on 7 to 20 days per year. Most of these exceedances have occurred at the Pinnacles national Monument station, which lies downwind of this air basin. That station is also affected by transport of air pollutants from other basins, such as the San Joaquin Valley. CAAQS for PM10 was not exceeded on any of the measurement days in Hollister over the last 5 years. Throughout the air basin, PM10 CAAQS were exceeded on 1 to 7 measurement days annually. PM10 is measured every sixth day, so air-basin wide exceedances were estimated by CARB at 6 to 43 days.

Attainment Status Areas that do not violate ambient air quality standards are considered to have attained the standard. Violations of ambient air quality standards are based on air pollutant monitoring data and are judged differently for each air pollutant. NCCAB, as a whole, does not meet state ambient air quality standards for PM10 and is non-attainment-transitional for the state 1-hour O3 standard. The area has does not meet the State 8-hour O3 standard, but an attainment designation has not been formally made. The U.S. EPA considers the region to be a maintenance area since the 8-hour ozone standard has been attained. For all other standards, the U.S. EPA and the State have classified the region as attainment or unclassified/attainment. Sensitive Receptors Some groups of people are more affected by air pollution than others. CARB has identified the following people who are most likely to be affected by air pollution: children under 14, the elderly over 65, athletes, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. These groups are classified as sensitive receptors. Locations that may contain a high concentration of these sensitive population groups include residential areas, hospitals, daycare facilities, elder care facilities, elementary schools, and parks. Undeveloped, open grassland lies to the east of the project site and large rural residential parcels lie to the north of the project site. The Ridgemark Golf and Country Club is located to the south of the project across Airline Highway and the Cielo Vista subdivision is located to the west across Fairview Road.

Environmental Impacts and Mitigations Thresholds of Significance The project site is located within the jurisdictional boundary of the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD). Based on the CEQA Air Quality Guidelines adopted by the MBUAPCD, significant impacts would occur if the project: 1 • Conflicts with or obstructs implementation of the applicable air quality plan;

1

•

affects the attainment and maintenance of regional ozone levels by emitting 137 pounds per day (lb/day) or more of an ozone precursor air pollutant, which are VOC or NOx;

•

locally affects particulate matter levels by emitting greater than 82 lbs/day of PM10 on site and cause an exceedance of the State PM10 standard at an existing or reasonably foreseeable receptor as averaged over 24 hours;

•

causes or contributes to an exceedance of a CO standard as measured by Level of Service (LOS) degradation at a project-effected intersection and confirmed by dispersion modeling. This applies to project-affected intersections with substantial traffic that are degraded from a LOS of E or worse;

CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1995, with revisions through July 2004.

•

exposes sensitive receptors or the general public to substantial levels of toxic air contaminants; and

•

creates or exposes a substantial number of people to objectionable odors or nuisances.

For cumulative impacts, MBUAPCD recommends that the project be assessed for consistency with the 2004 Air Quality Management Plan for the North Central Coast Air Basin. This was done by requesting a formal consistency determination from AMBAG. The project does not include siting of sensitive receptors (e.g., residences) near roadways with sufficient volumes to expose sensitive receptors to unhealthy air pollution levels. CARB recommends a buffer of 500 feet between sensitive receptors and freeways or rural roads with an average of 50,000 vehicles or more per day 2 . Air Quality Impacts Impact AQ-1

Construction Period Impacts –PM10 from Fugitive Dust Construction activities, such as clearing, grading operations, construction vehicle traffic on unpaved ground, and wind blowing over exposed earth would generate dust and particulate matter. This would be a significant impact.

Construction activities would occur at times over a 10-year or longer period on the 137-acre undeveloped site. The college and residential portion of the site would be constructed separately, and possibly concurrently. The first phase of the college is likely to involve fairly minor grading to develop pads for the modular buildings, access roads and a parking lot. More grading would occur in the future as the site is developed into the college campus. About 40% of the site would be developed with single-family residences, open space/park/buffer and infrastructure such as roadways. This portion of the site would be developed in five separate phases over 10 years. Site grading would primarily be accomplished using diesel powered heavy equipment. Dust is generated from a variety of project construction activities that include grading, import/export of fill material, and vehicle travel on unpaved surfaces. Dust from construction includes PM10. Soil can also be tracked-out onto paved roads where it is entrained in the air by passing cars and trucks. Additionally, dust can be generated by wind erosion of exposed areas. The rate of dust emissions is related to the type and size of the disturbance, meteorological conditions, and soil conditions. Construction activities can result in localized high concentrations of PM10 and affect regional levels of PM10. High levels of PM10 can lead to adverse health effects, nuisance concerns, and reduced visibility. Detailed development plans or construction plans for these sites have not been developed. MBUAQMD CEQA Guidelines consider on-site emissions of 82 pounds per day or greater of PM10 from construction activity to be significant if the emissions would lead to exceedances of ambient air quality standards. The emissions threshold defines significance where specific 2

Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective, California Air Resources Board. April 2005.

construction activity is not known to conduct a detailed analysis to model PM10 concentrations. Due to the variables that affect construction emissions, quantification of construction period emissions is difficult. The initial phases of construction that generate the highest emissions of PM10 from fugitive dust would be of most concern. As previously mentioned, the site would be constructed phases, over the next 10 to 25 years. Grading and construction activities could begin in 2010 and continue to occur intermittently at various times out beyond the 2018-20 period. During other construction phases, additional material would be imported to the site. This would include base rock, select soil/gravel for trenches and building pads, concrete, and asphalt for paving. Building materials would also be imported to the site. Fugitive dust emissions would occur during each of the construction phases. The greatest amount of dust emissions would be generated during the initial grading phase where the soil disturbance activities would be the most intense (i.e., cut and fill activities involving scrapers and other equipment). The other construction phases would generate dust emissions, but of a lesser degree than grading since the intensity of soil disturbance activities would be reduced. Uncontrolled daily fugitive dust emissions can be approximated for grading construction activities using emission factors developed as part of a study conducted for the South Coast Air Quality Management District (MRI, 1996). This study developed fugitive dust (PM10) emission factors for construction activities at seven sites in Las Vegas, Coachella Valley, the South Coast area, and in the San Joaquin Valley. A general overall emission factor of 10 pounds per acre per day was found to represent typical daily emissions. On the most active days during grading, emissions would be higher. The identified a worst-case overall emission factor that would apply to the most intense construction sites was 38.2 pounds per acre per day. However, the worstcase overall rate for a California site was 4.1 pounds per acre per work hour, or 32.8 pounds per acre per day. These emission factors include emissions associated with general construction activities, as well as those from intensive earth-moving activities. The study developed specific emission factors that require specific construction information, such as the amount of earthwork and the detail of control measures. Since that type of information is generally not available, overall emission factors were used to estimate daily emissions. Using emission factors of 10 pounds per acre per day would result in significant emissions if over 8.2 acres were disturbed on a typical day. For very active periods (worst-case), emissions would be significant if over 2.5 acres were disturbed in one day. Grading activity that encompasses more than 2.5 acres in a single day could result in on-site PM10 emissions that would be significant. When specific project details and grading activities are known, better emission estimates could be made to refine construction plans and possibly remain below the 82 pound per day threshold with a larger area of disturbance. In addition, PM10 emissions would occur as a result of wind erosion over disturbed areas during dry windy conditions and from vehicle track out. These emissions are not accounted for in the emission factors applied to grading and construction activities. Ordinarily, these emissions would be considerably small in comparison with grading activities. Emissions from wind erosion are difficult to predict since one has to know the area that is disturbed enough so that wind could cause erosion and then a wind speed above a certain threshold has to occur for a known duration. Wind erosion emissions would vary considerably, but could be effectively controlled through active watering of the site or use of soil stabilization methods throughout the

construction period. To greatly reduce wind erosion, disturbed areas would have to also be controlled on weekends or holidays that construction is not occurring. The closest sensitive receptors to the site are the single-family residences Cielo Vista subdivision to the west across Fairview Road. These homes would be about 150 to 200 feet or further from the closest construction activities. Typically, winds blow from the west during the daytime, so these homes would be normally upwind of construction activities. This would especially be the case during spring and summer. Given the size of the project area to be graded, daily activity areas could exceed 2.5 acres per day. Onsite PM10 emissions, therefore, may exceed the MBUAPCD thresholds of 82 pounds per day. This would result in a significant impact to air quality. Mitigation Prior to start of construction, the project applicant or contractor shall submit to the County of San Benito Public Works Department a construction dust mitigation plan. This plan shall specify the methods of dust control that would be utilized, demonstrate the availability of needed equipment and personnel, use reclaimed water for dust control, and identify a responsible individual who, if needed, can authorize implementation of additional measures. The construction dust mitigation plan shall, at a minimum, include the following measures: •

•

• • • • • • • • •

Limit grading activity to a maximum of 2.5 acres daily. As more detailed construction information becomes available, emissions from grading activities could be reassessed to determine if the area of grading could be increased. Such an assessment would have to be conducted using appropriate assumptions and mitigation measures. Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods. Active areas adjacent to existing businesses should be kept damp at all times. If necessary, during windy periods, watering is to occur on all days of the week regardless of onsite activities. Cover all trucks hauling trucks or maintain at least two feet of freeboard. Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. Sweep daily all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites. Sweep streets daily if visible soil material is deposited onto the adjacent roads. Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more). Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles. Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. Suspend excavation and grading activity when hourly-average winds exceed 15 mph and visible dust clouds cannot be contained within the site.

The combined effect of the above measures, including the use of a dust suppressant, which represent Best Management Practices, and limiting the size of the grading area would reduce project impacts to a less-than-significant level only if emissions can be limited to 82 pounds per day or subsequent dispersion modeling of construction activities demonstrates that PM10 concentrations from construction activity would not cause an exceedance of the State ambient air quality standard, as averaged over 24 hours. Use of the measures above and limiting size of areas to be graded during a single day would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. Impact AQ-2

Heavy-Duty Off-Road Equipment Construction activities would involve use of the heavy-duty off-road equipment and large trucks that use diesel fuel resulting in emissions of diesel particulate matter that can cause health effects to nearby residences. This is a significant impact that can be reduced to a lessthan-significant level with implementation of the following mitigation.

The California Air Resources Board has identified diesel particulate matter as a toxic air contaminant. It is one of many toxic air contaminants; however, it is estimated to contribute about 70% to the overall potential inhalation cancer risk. Improved diesel engine technologies along with reformulated diesel fuel are expected to substantially lower the risk from diesel exhaust. In addition, CARB recently adopted an Air Toxics Control Measure that will require replacement or retrofit of existing construction equipment to reduce both diesel particulate matter and NOx. The heavy construction equipment utilized to construct this project would be diesel fueled. Grading of the site is expected to result in the highest emissions of diesel particulate matter during the construction period. Grading plans are not known at this time, therefore, the amount and types of equipment and their schedule cannot be determined. There are typically two different periods of grading: a “rough” grading phase that requires excavators, dozers and water trucks and then a “fine” grading phase that may include motor graders, rollers, scrapers, and loaders. This equipment is typically used from 4 to 8 hours per day. Other phases of construction use smaller sized equipment (e.g., some loaders, forklifts, etc.), but include numerous heavy-duty truck deliveries for cement, asphalt, building materials, and landscape materials. Construction equipment can emit substantial amounts of NOx that could have a small, but cumulative affect on ozone concentrations. MBUAPCD CEQA guidelines do not have thresholds that apply to these emissions. Therefore, the impact is considered less than significant if reasonable and feasible measures to reduce emissions are employed. Diesel exhaust includes air contaminants that can cause health effects. The increased health risk from these types of emissions (i.e., increased cancer risk) are calculated over a 70-year continuous exposure period at locations of sensitive receptors. Truck travel and construction equipment exhaust may result in elevated levels of diesel particulate matter for short time periods. However, these activities would occur for a relatively short period. In addition, the closest sensitive receptors would be 150 to 200 feet from the closest construction activities, and typically more than 500 feet away from active construction areas. New homes constructed by the project could be located closer to future construction phases, but future phases would likely have smaller construction sites and include newer construction equipment that has lower

emissions. As a result, the impact would be considered as less-than-significant provided that mitigation measures are implemented to minimize exposure to sensitive receptors. Mitigation Projects developed under the Master Plan should be evaluated for individual construction period air quality impacts. Project-specific mitigation measures would be identified at that time. However, the following mitigation measures should be implemented for all projects to reduce diesel particulate emissions from on-site construction equipment: •

• •

• •

The project shall reduce exhaust NOx and particulate matter emissions by implementing one of the following measures: o The project shall provide a plan, acceptable by the lead agency MBUAPCD, demonstrating that the heavy-duty (> 50 horsepower) off-road vehicles and equipment to be used in the construction project, including owned, leased and subcontractor vehicles, will achieve a project wide fleet-average 20 percent NOx reduction and 45 percent particulate reduction compared to the most recent CARB fleet average for the time of construction; or o All off-road construction vehicles/equipment greater than 50 horsepower that will be used on site for more than one week shall: 1) be manufactured during or after 1996, 2) shall meet the NOx emissions standard of 6.9 grams per brakehorsepower hour, and 3) shall be equipped with diesel particulate matter filters. The contractors shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g. compressors). Signs at the construction site shall be clearly visible to advise that that diesel equipment standing idle for more than 5 minutes shall be turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate or other bulk materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks may keep their engines running continuously if onsite and staged away from residential areas. Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions. Stage large diesel powered equipment at least 200 feet from any active land uses (e.g., residences).

The combined effect of the above measures would reduce project impacts to a less-thansignificant level.

Impact AQ-3:

Truck Emissions Associated with Export of Soil Prior to Construction A large volume of soil may be exported from the site and transported to another project location. This would result in ROG and NOx emissions that would not exceed significance thresholds established by the MBUAPCD. This represents a significant impact.

Prior to project construction, up to 450,000 cubic yards of soil may be exported from the project site by truck. There are no specific plans to export this soil, but preliminary estimates are that it would require several years. This assessment assumes that 100 truckloads of material would be

exported per day. This soil would be exported to Coyote Valley, about a 38-mile one way trip. The anticipated route for this soil export would cross two air basins: the North Central Coast Air Basin and the San Francisco Bay Area Basin. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) has jurisdiction over the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. Only about 17 miles of that trip would be within the North Central Coast Air Basin, while the remaining 21 miles would be in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. Each truckload would include two trips: a trip to export the material and a return trip. Emissions from these truck trips were computed using the URBEMIS2007 model. An emission rate for a Heavy Heavy Duty Diesel Truck was used, assuming a speed of 50 miles per hour. Emissions are reported in Table 4. Truck hauling was assumed to occur beginning 2012 and would last about 300 workdays.

Table 4 Truck Hauling Emissions Based on URBEMIS2007 Modeling Description - Hauling through SF Bay Area Air Basin - Hauling through North Central Coast Air Basin Air District Operational Thresholds MBAQMD/BAAQMD

Daily Emissions (lbs/day) ROG NOx 10

133

8

108

137 / 80

137 / 80

Temporary emissions from this activity would occur over two different air basins that have two different sets of significance thresholds for project emissions. Daily emissions of ROG and NOx from truck hauling through the North Central Coast Air Basin would be less than the significance thresholds established by the MBUAQMD. Therefore, the effect of these emissions to that air basin would be less than significant. Daily emissions of NOx from travel through the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin would be above the daily significance threshold for NOx. Traditionally, the BAAQMD has not applied these thresholds to construction emissions. However, these emissions would occur for 300 days and discussions with the BAAQMD indicate that they would be considered significant. The BAAQMD is now recommending that projects quantify construction period emissions and compare them to the significance thresholds 3 . As a result, hauling of export material would represent a significant impact.

Mitigation Measure: None Available, other than Mitigation Measures for Impacts AQ-1 and AQ-2. The applicant or the County cannot control emissions from independent trucks used to haul fill material.

3

Email exchange with Gregory Tholen, Senior Environmental Planner for the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and James Reyff of Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. August 19, 2008.

Impact AQ-4:

Plan Generated Operational Impacts Build out of the project would result in increases in long-term operational emissions of ozone precursor pollutants. These emissions of ROG and NOx would not exceed significance thresholds established by the MBUAPCD. This represents a less-than-significant impact.

The Master Plan proposes development of college campus, retail uses, student housing and 200 single-family homes. The college project would require at least 20 years for complete build out. The campus would be developed in two phases. The first phase could occur in the near term, where modular classrooms are placed on the site and infrastructure to support those classrooms are developed. The campus would be completely developed after reaching certain student enrollment goals. Development of the single-family homes could occur simultaneous with the campus. The homes would be built out in about 5 phases, so it would also require about 10 years or longer to fully develop the site. The Master Plan’s traffic analysis forecasts 7,433 new daily vehicle trips at full build out. This estimate includes reductions for trip internalization, applied by the Traffic Consultant. Emissions from these trips would affect regional air quality in terms of contributing to possible exceedances of ambient air quality standards for ozone. For emissions modeling purposes, full build out was assumed to be 2035 for the college and 2020 for the residential. Operational emissions associated with the Master Plan build out were predicted using URBEMIS2007 model (version 9.2.4). The model predicts direct and indirect emissions from projects. Direct emissions are from sources on site such as natural gas combustion for space and water heating, landscape equipment, evaporative emissions from consumer products, and wood burning. Indirect emissions are those produced off site from motor vehicle use. The model predicts daily emissions associated with land use developments. The model combines predicted daily traffic activity associated with the different land use types, with emission factors from the State’s mobile emission factor model (i.e., EMFAC2007). The project size and estimated traffic generation were input to the URBEMIS2007 model to predict daily emissions of ROG, NOx, CO, and PM10. The Master Plan traffic generation provided by Hexagon Transportation Consultants for the DEIR, was used in the model to provide daily traffic generation estimates based on selected land uses. URBEMIS2007 model default for passby trips was not used. Instead, trip reduction percentages provided by the traffic engineer based on the reduction of internal trips due to mixed uses were utilized. This was only applied to the conditions representing full build out of the campus and residential components of the project in 2035. URBEMIS2007 model also predicted area source emissions associated with build out of the project. Area source emissions of ROG and NOx were predicted for summer, and the area source emissions of CO and PM10 were predicted for winter in accordance with MBUAPCD CEQA Guidelines. This included wood smoke from potential fireplaces. The project emissions were predicted for a normal day representative of the traffic generation used for the traffic study. Daily emissions from the build out of the specific plan are reported in Table 4. Model output is provided in Attachment 1.

Table 5 Daily Master Plan Emissions Based on URBEMIS2007 Modeling Scenario

Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) Summer

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) - Summer

Carbon Monoxide (CO) - Winter

Respirable Particulates (PM10 ) - Winter

Residential Component (2020) Area Emissions

14.9 lbs

2.9 lbs

11 lbs

27.8 lbs

Operational Emissions

14.4 lbs

23.1 lbs

--

--

Total

29.3 lbs

26.0 lbs

11 lbs

28 lbs

Area Emissions

6.6 lbs

4.2 lbs

3 lbs

8.6 lbs

Operational Emissions

28.3 lbs

20.6 lbs

Total

35 lbs

25 lbs

3 lbs

9 lbs

Campus Component (2035)

Campus plus Residential Component (2035) Area Emissions

21.5 lbs

7.1 lbs

20 lbs

36.4 lbs

Operational Emissions

34.4 lbs

26.8 lbs

--

--

Total

56 lbs

34 lbs

20 lbs

36 lbs

MBUAPCD Significance Thresholds

137 lbs

137 lbs.

550 lbs*

82 lbs**

* For stationary sources only **Applies only to on-site emissions Source: URBEMIS2007 Air Emissions From Land Use Ver. 9.2.4 in the year 2020 and 2035

NOx and ROG emissions are predicted to be below MBUAPCD significance thresholds. The majority of NOx emissions (over 90%) would come from traffic. On the other hand, VOC emissions are affected

both by use of consumer products and new motor vehicle trips. VOC emissions would occur from increased emissions of consumer products associated with new residential development as well as increased automobile traffic. However, the project would have a less-than-significant impact to regional air quality, with respect to emissions of ozone precursors is predicted. MBUAPCD thresholds for PM10 only apply to onsite emissions of PM10. These would mostly include wood smoke emissions. The addition of new residences would result in less than significant emissions from wood burning in open-type fireplaces. Use of low-emitting wood burning devices should be encouraged to reduce the potential for the project to add wood smoke emissions on unhealthy air quality nights during winter.

Impact AQ-5

Local Carbon Monoxide Concentrations Development of the project would result in higher traffic volumes that could increase carbon monoxide concentrations. This would be a lessthan-significant impact.

Emissions thresholds established for carbon monoxide apply to direct or stationary sources. Emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) emitted from traffic generated by the project are first evaluated by assessing the impacts of specific plan-generated traffic on existing and future traffic conditions. MBUAPCD guidelines require CO hotspot analysis under the following project conditions: •

Intersections where the Level of Service (LOS) would degrade below D

•

Volume to capacity ratio increases by 0.05 at LOS E or F intersections

•

The delay at LOS E or F intersections increases by 10 seconds or more

•

Reserve capacity at unsignalized LOS E or F intersection decrease by 50 or more

Highest CO concentrations typically occur during the winter where there is traffic congestion occurs. Congested intersections with high volumes of traffic could cause CO “hot spots”, where localized high concentrations of CO occur. The highest CO level measured in the District, which is representative of more urban settings, is 1 ppm for 8-hour exposures. This level is well below the State standards. Modeling of CO concentrations associated with project related traffic conditions was conducted. The traffic study for the Master Plan evaluated operations at intersections in the area affected by the project. The intersection of Airline Highway and Union Road is predicted to have conditions in the future that meet the criteria for a possible CO hot spot. This signalized intersection is anticipated to operate at Level of Service F in the future with or without the Master Plan build out. Under future Master Plan build out conditions, vehicle delay would increase by up to 19 seconds. CO concentrations at and near this intersection were predicted using the Caline4 model following the Transportation Project Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol, developed by UC Davis. This assessment involved predicting CO emission rates from the EMFAC2007 model and using those along with peak-hour traffic and screening meteorological conditions in the Caline4 model to predict roadside CO levels. These levels were adjusted to 8-hour average levels using a persistence factor of 0.7 and added to the 1-hour background concentration of 1.0 parts per million (ppm). Modeling information is provided in Attachment 2. Under build out of the Master Plan and cumulative traffic conditions, the highest CO concentrations would be 2.5 ppm. This level would be well below the California ambient air quality standard of 9.0 ppm or the national ambient air quality standard of 9 ppm. As a result, the impact on local air quality resulting from the Master Plan is considered to be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure:

Impact:

None required.

Cumulative Air Quality Impacts The project consists of a junior college campus, some retail and residential uses that were found by AMBAG to be consistent with the 2004 regional forecasts and the Air Quality Management Plan; therefore, it would not conflict with regional efforts to attain and maintain ambient air quality standards. Temporary emissions from soil hauling to San Jose would result in a significant impact to the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. As a result, the proposed project would contribute significantly to a cumulative air quality impact.

Projects are evaluated for cumulative impacts both by determining the consistency of the proposed project with the applicable regional air quality plan and the specific project’s individual impacts to air quality. The MBUAPCD 2004 Air Quality Management Plan for the Monterey Bay Region (AQMP) addresses attainment of the State ozone standard. MBUAPCD has included emissions related to population growth in the AQMP using projections adopted by the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG). For this project, consistency with population forecasts is determined by comparing project build-out population at the year of project completion with the appropriate five-year forecast increment for the jurisdiction that the project is located (i.e., Monterey County). Projects or plans that would not cause the estimated cumulative population to exceed forecasts are considered consistent with air quality planning efforts. According to AMBAG, this project is consistent with the 2004 regional forecasts for Monterey County and the Air Quality Management Plan. A letter from AMBAG documenting the consistency determination is included in Attachment 3. As described in impact Air-3, the project direct and indirect emissions of ozone precursor pollutants would be below MBUAPCD significance thresholds. Therefore, project emissions are not anticipated to affect attainment and maintenance of ambient air quality standards for ozone. Short-term impacts to air quality from on site construction would be less-than-significant with mitigation. These impacts are anticipated to be localized and not cumulatively contribute to other air quality impacts in the project area. However, a significant, but temporary impact to air quality from hauling of soil was identified. This significant impact would occur for about one year. This significant impact would not occur within the project air basin.

Attachment 1 URBEMIS2007 MODEL OUTPUT See PDF attachment

Page: 1 8/18/2008 2:40:49 PM Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4

Combined Summer Emissions Reports (Pounds/Day) File Name: Z:\I&R Docs\07-199 Gavilan Hollister Campus\AQ\ResidentialFairviewGavilan.urb924 Project Name: Gavilan Fairview - Residential Project Location: San Benito County On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007

Page: 2 8/18/2008 2:40:49 PM Summary Report: CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10 Dust PM10 Exhaust

2007 TOTALS (lbs/day unmitigated)

15.59

84.71

44.92

0.01

376.66

2008 TOTALS (lbs/day unmitigated)

322.45

113.94

111.28

0.05

376.86

PM10

PM2.5 Dust

PM2.5 Exhaust

PM2.5

CO2

5.23

381.89

78.67

4.81

83.48

6,840.86

7.13

383.99

78.74

6.55

85.29

13,048.87

AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES

TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO2

14.91

2.94

11.30

0.00

0.04

0.04

3,631.30

ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO2

14.43

23.08

136.10

0.19

33.41

6.69

20,491.70

ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO2

29.34

26.02

147.40

0.19

33.45

6.73

24,123.00

OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES

TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES

TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

Page: 3 8/18/2008 2:40:49 PM Area Source Unmitigated Detail Report: AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source Natural Gas

ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO2

0.22

2.83

1.21

0.00

0.01

0.01

3,615.10

1.82

0.11

10.09

0.00

0.03

0.03

16.20

2.94

11.30

0.00

0.04

0.04

3,631.30

Hearth - No Summer Emissions Landscape Consumer Products Architectural Coatings TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

11.06 1.81 14.91

Area Source Changes to Defaults

Operational Unmitigated Detail Report: OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source

ROG

NOX

CO

SO2

PM10

PM25

CO2

Single family housing

14.43

23.08

136.10

0.19

33.41

6.69

20,491.70

TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

14.43

23.08

136.10

0.19

33.41

6.69

20,491.70

Operational Settings: Does not include correction for passby trips Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips Analysis Year: 2020 Temperature (F): 70 Season: Summer Emfac: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006

Page: 4 8/18/2008 2:40:49 PM Summary of Land Uses Land Use Type

Acreage

Single family housing

Trip Rate

75.33

Unit Type

No. Units

Total Trips

Total VMT

9.57 dwelling units

226.00

2,162.82

19,167.56

2,162.82

19,167.56

Vehicle Fleet Mix Vehicle Type

Percent Type

Non-Catalyst

Catalyst

Diesel

Light Auto

36.2

0.0

99.7

0.3

Light Truck < 3750 lbs

18.1

0.0

96.7

3.3

Light Truck 3751-5750 lbs

19.3

0.0

100.0

0.0

Med Truck 5751-8500 lbs

8.8

0.0

98.9

1.1

Lite-Heavy Truck 8501-10,000 lbs

2.0

0.0

75.0

25.0

Lite-Heavy Truck 10,001-14,000 lbs

1.2

0.0

50.0

50.0

Med-Heavy Truck 14,001-33,000 lbs

1.1

0.0

18.2

81.8

Heavy-Heavy Truck 33,001-60,000 lbs

4.3

0.0

2.3

97.7

Other Bus

0.1

0.0

0.0

100.0

Urban Bus

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Motorcycle

7.6

40.8

59.2

0.0

School Bus

0.1

0.0

0.0

100.0

Motor Home

1.2

0.0

83.3

16.7

Travel Conditions Residential

Urban Trip Length (miles)

Commercial

Home-Work

Home-Shop

Home-Other

Commute

Non-Work

Customer

11.8

8.3

7.1

11.8

4.4

4.4

Page: 5 8/18/2008 2:40:49 PM Travel Conditions Residential

Commercial

Home-Work

Home-Shop

Home-Other

Commute

Non-Work

Customer

Rural Trip Length (miles)

11.8

8.3

7.1

11.8

4.4

4.4

Trip speeds (mph)

30.0

30.0

30.0

30.0

30.0

30.0

% of Trips - Residential

32.9

18.0

49.1

% of Trips - Commercial (by land use)

Page: 1 8/18/2008 2:45:26 PM Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4

Combined Summer Emissions Reports (Pounds/Day) File Name: Z:\I&R Docs\07-199 Gavilan Hollister Campus\AQ\CampusFairviewGavilan.urb924 Project Name: Fairview CornersGavilan College Master Plan Project Location: San Benito County On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007

Page: 2 8/18/2008 2:45:26 PM Summary Report: CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10 Dust PM10 Exhaust

2007 TOTALS (lbs/day unmitigated)

9.57

61.07

34.88

0.01

107.23

2008 TOTALS (lbs/day unmitigated)

432.17

83.28

92.76

0.04

107.41

PM10

PM2.5 Dust

PM2.5 Exhaust

PM2.5

CO2

3.75

110.98

22.40

3.45

25.85

4,849.30

5.15

112.56

22.46

4.73

27.19

10,042.11

AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES

TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO2

6.55

4.18

8.06

0.00

0.02

0.02

4,997.37

ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO2

28.25

20.63

167.46

0.32

58.85

11.53

35,267.88

ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO2

34.80

24.81

175.52

0.32

58.87

11.55

40,265.25

OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES

TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES

TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

Page: 3 8/18/2008 2:45:26 PM Area Source Unmitigated Detail Report: AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source

ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO2

0.30

4.12

3.25

0.00

0.01

0.01

4,989.13

Landscape

0.39

0.06

4.81

0.00

0.01

0.01

8.24

Consumer Products

3.42

Architectural Coatings

2.44

TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

6.55

4.18

8.06

0.00

0.02

0.02

4,997.37

Natural Gas Hearth

Area Source Changes to Defaults

Operational Unmitigated Detail Report: OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source

ROG

NOX

CO

SO2

PM10

PM25

CO2

Apartments low rise

2.38

2.42

19.87

0.04

7.22

1.41

4,321.07

Junior college (2 yrs)

20.08

12.22

99.10

0.19

34.71

6.80

20,804.64

5.79

5.99

48.49

0.09

16.92

3.32

10,142.17

28.25

20.63

167.46

0.32

58.85

11.53

35,267.88

Strip mall TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

Operational Settings: Does not include correction for passby trips Does not include double counting adjustment for internal trips

Page: 4 8/18/2008 2:45:26 PM Analysis Year: 2035 Temperature (F): 70 Season: Summer Emfac: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Summary of Land Uses Land Use Type Apartments low rise

Acreage

Trip Rate

4.38

Junior college (2 yrs) Strip mall

Unit Type

No. Units

Total Trips

Total VMT

6.72 dwelling units

70.00

470.40

4,168.83

1.20

students

3,500.00

4,200.00

20,034.00

42.94

1000 sq ft

50.00

2,147.00

9,764.56

6,817.40

33,967.39

Vehicle Fleet Mix Vehicle Type

Percent Type

Non-Catalyst

Catalyst

Diesel

Light Auto

36.4

0.0

100.0

0.0

Light Truck < 3750 lbs

18.3

0.0

99.5

0.5

Light Truck 3751-5750 lbs

19.7

0.0

100.0

0.0

Med Truck 5751-8500 lbs

8.9

0.0

100.0

0.0

Lite-Heavy Truck 8501-10,000 lbs

2.1

0.0

81.0

19.0

Lite-Heavy Truck 10,001-14,000 lbs

1.2

0.0

58.3

41.7

Med-Heavy Truck 14,001-33,000 lbs

1.1

0.0

18.2

81.8

Heavy-Heavy Truck 33,001-60,000 lbs

3.3

0.0

3.0

97.0

Other Bus

0.1

0.0

0.0

100.0

Urban Bus

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Motorcycle

7.6

32.9

67.1

0.0

School Bus

0.1

0.0

0.0

100.0

Motor Home

1.2

0.0

91.7

8.3

Page: 5 8/18/2008 2:45:26 PM Travel Conditions Residential

Commercial

Home-Work

Home-Shop

Home-Other

Commute

Non-Work

Customer

Urban Trip Length (miles)

11.8

8.3

7.1

11.8

4.4

4.4

Rural Trip Length (miles)

11.8

8.3

7.1

11.8

4.4

4.4

Trip speeds (mph)

30.0

30.0

30.0

30.0

30.0

30.0

% of Trips - Residential

32.9

18.0

49.1

Junior college (2 yrs)

5.0

2.5

92.5

Strip mall

2.0

1.0

97.0

% of Trips - Commercial (by land use)

Page: 1 8/18/2008 3:45:10 PM Urbemis 2007 Version 9.2.4

Combined Summer Emissions Reports (Pounds/Day) File Name: Z:\I&R Docs\07-199 Gavilan Hollister Campus\AQ\Campus&ResidentialFairviewGavilan.urb924 Project Name: Fairview CornersGavilan College Master Plan Project Location: San Benito County On-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Off-Road Vehicle Emissions Based on: OFFROAD2007 Summary Report: AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES

TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO2

21.54

7.11

19.75

0.00

0.05

0.05

8,628.59

ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO2

34.40

26.84

218.75

0.43

77.68

15.23

46,536.67

ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO2

55.94

33.95

238.50

0.43

77.73

15.28

55,165.26

OPERATIONAL (VEHICLE) EMISSION ESTIMATES

TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

SUM OF AREA SOURCE AND OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES

TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

Page: 2 8/18/2008 3:45:10 PM Area Source Unmitigated Detail Report: AREA SOURCE EMISSION ESTIMATES Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source Natural Gas

ROG

NOx

CO

SO2

PM10

PM2.5

CO2

0.52

6.96

4.45

0.00

0.01

0.01

8,604.23

2.29

0.15

15.30

0.00

0.04

0.04

24.36

7.11

19.75

0.00

0.05

0.05

8,628.59

Hearth - No Summer Emissions Landscape Consumer Products Architectural Coatings TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

14.48 4.25 21.54

Area Source Changes to Defaults

Operational Unmitigated Detail Report: OPERATIONAL EMISSION ESTIMATES Summer Pounds Per Day, Unmitigated Source

ROG

NOX

CO

SO2

PM10

PM25

CO2

Single family housing

8.33

8.53

70.13

0.14

25.49

4.99

15,253.81

Apartments low rise

1.86

1.86

15.25

0.03

5.54

1.09

3,317.61

Junior college (2 yrs)

18.97

11.04

89.55

0.17

31.36

6.15

18,800.23

5.24

5.41

43.82

0.09

15.29

3.00

9,165.02

34.40

26.84

218.75

0.43

77.68

15.23

46,536.67

Strip mall TOTALS (lbs/day, unmitigated)

Operational Settings: Does not include correction for passby trips

Page: 3 8/18/2008 3:45:10 PM Includes the following double counting adjustment for internal trips: Residential Trip % Reduction: 23.22 Nonresidential Trip % Reduction: 9.63 Analysis Year: 2035 Temperature (F): 70 Season: Summer Emfac: Version : Emfac2007 V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Summary of Land Uses Land Use Type Single family housing Apartments low rise

Acreage

Trip Rate

Unit Type

No. Units

Total Trips

Total VMT

75.33

7.35 dwelling units

226.00

1,660.56

14,716.37

4.38

5.16 dwelling units

70.00

361.16

3,200.72

Junior college (2 yrs) Strip mall

1.08

students

3,500.00

3,795.35

18,103.83

38.80

1000 sq ft

50.00

1,940.15

8,823.79

7,757.22

44,844.71

Vehicle Fleet Mix Vehicle Type

Percent Type

Non-Catalyst

Catalyst

Diesel

Light Auto

36.4

0.0

100.0

0.0

Light Truck < 3750 lbs

18.3

0.0

99.5

0.5

Light Truck 3751-5750 lbs

19.7

0.0

100.0

0.0

Med Truck 5751-8500 lbs

8.9

0.0

100.0

0.0

Lite-Heavy Truck 8501-10,000 lbs

2.1

0.0

81.0

19.0

Lite-Heavy Truck 10,001-14,000 lbs

1.2

0.0

58.3

41.7

Med-Heavy Truck 14,001-33,000 lbs

1.1

0.0

18.2

81.8

Heavy-Heavy Truck 33,001-60,000 lbs

3.3

0.0

3.0

97.0

Other Bus

0.1

0.0

0.0

100.0

Urban Bus

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

Page: 4 8/18/2008 3:45:10 PM Vehicle Fleet Mix Vehicle Type

Percent Type

Non-Catalyst

Catalyst

Diesel

Motorcycle

7.6

32.9

67.1

0.0

School Bus

0.1

0.0

0.0

100.0

Motor Home

1.2

0.0

91.7

8.3

Travel Conditions Residential

Commercial

Home-Work

Home-Shop

Home-Other

Commute

Non-Work

Customer

Urban Trip Length (miles)

11.8

8.3

7.1

11.8

4.4

4.4

Rural Trip Length (miles)

11.8

8.3

7.1

11.8

4.4

4.4

Trip speeds (mph)

30.0

30.0

30.0

30.0

30.0

30.0

% of Trips - Residential

32.9

18.0

49.1

Junior college (2 yrs)

5.0

2.5

92.5

Strip mall

2.0

1.0

97.0

% of Trips - Commercial (by land use)

Attachment 2 Caline4 and EMFAC2007 Model Output See PDF attachment

C4$.OUT

CALINE4: CALIFORNIA LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL JUNE 1989 VERSION PAGE 1 JOB: Gavilan-Hollister 2020 RUN: Hour 1 (WORST CASE ANGLE) POLLUTANT: Carbon Monoxide I.

SITE VARIABLES U= .5 M/S BRG= WORST CASE CLAS= 7 (G) MIXH= 1000. M SIGTH= 10. DEGREES

II.

Z0= 100. CM VD= .0 CM/S VS= .0 CM/S AMB= .0 PPM TEMP= 4.0 DEGREE (C)

ALT=

0. (M)

LINK VARIABLES

LINK * LINK COORDINATES (M) * EF H W DESCRIPTION * X1 Y1 X2 Y2 * TYPE VPH (G/MI) (M) (M) ----------------*-------------------------*-----------------------------A. EB Cruise In * -1000 -2 -150 -2 * AG 833 4.5 .0 13.4 B. EB In * -150 -2 0 -2 * AG 833 4.5 .0 13.4 C. EB Out * 0 -2 150 -2 * AG 1117 4.5 .0 13.4 D. EB Cruise Ou * 150 -2 1000 -2 * AG 1117 4.5 .0 13.4 E. WB Cruise In * -1000 2 -150 2 * AG 1104 4.5 .0 13.4 F. WB In * -150 2 0 2 * AG 1104 4.5 .0 13.4 G. WB Out * 0 2 150 2 * AG 802 4.5 .0 13.4 H. WB Cruise Ou * 150 2 1000 2 * AG 802 4.5 .0 13.4 I. SB Cruise In * -2 -1000 -2 -150 * AG 1584 4.5 .0 13.4 J. SB In * -2 -150 -2 0 * AG 1584 4.5 .0 13.4 K. SB Out * -2 0 -2 150 * AG 1122 4.5 .0 13.4 L. SB Cruise Ou * -2 150 -2 1000 * AG 1122 4.5 .0 13.4 M. NB Cruise In * 2 -1000 2 -150 * AG 1018 4.5 .0 13.4 N. NB In * 2 -150 2 0 * AG 1018 4.5 .0 13.4 O. NB Out * 2 0 2 150 * AG 1448 4.5 .0 13.4 P. NB Cruise Ou * 2 150 2 1000 * AG 1448 4.5 .0 13.4

CALINE4: CALIFORNIA LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL JUNE 1989 VERSION PAGE 2 JOB: Gavilan-Hollister 2020 RUN: Hour 1 (WORST CASE ANGLE) POLLUTANT: Carbon Monoxide III.

RECEPTOR LOCATIONS

* COORDINATES (M) RECEPTOR * X Y Z ------------*--------------------1. Recpt 1 * 9 9 1.8 2. Recpt 2 * 9 50 1.8 3. Recpt 3 * 9 100 1.8 4. Recpt 4 * -9 9 1.8 5. Recpt 5 * -9 50 1.8 6. Recpt 6 * -9 100 1.8 7. Recpt 7 * 9 -9 1.8 8. Recpt 8 * 9 -50 1.8 9. Recpt 9 * 9 -100 1.8 10. Recpt 10 * -9 -9 1.8 11. Recpt 11 * -9 -50 1.8 12. Recpt 12 * -9 -100 1.8 13. Recpt 13 * 50 9 1.8 14. Recpt 14 * 100 9 1.8 15. Recpt 15 * 50 -9 1.8 16. Recpt 16 * 100 -9 1.8 17. Recpt 17 * -50 9 1.8 18. Recpt 18 * -100 9 1.8 19. Recpt 19 * -50 -9 1.8 20. Recpt 20 * -100 -9 1.8

CALINE4: CALIFORNIA LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL JUNE 1989 VERSION PAGE 3 JOB: Gavilan-Hollister 2020 RUN: Hour 1 (WORST CASE ANGLE) POLLUTANT: Carbon Monoxide IV.

MODEL RESULTS (WORST CASE WIND ANGLE )

* * PRED * CONC/LINK * BRG * CONC * (PPM) RECEPTOR * (DEG) * (PPM) * A B C D E F G H -------------*-------*-------*---------------------------------------1. Recpt 1 * 186. * 2.1 * .0 .0 .3 .0 .0 .0 .2 .0 2. Recpt 2 * 186. * 1.9 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 3. Recpt 3 * 186. * 1.9 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 4. Recpt 4 * 174. * 2.2 * .0 .2 .0 .0 .0 .3 .0 .0 5. Recpt 5 * 174. * 1.8 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 6. Recpt 6 * 174. * 1.8 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 7. Recpt 7 * 354. * 2.1 * .0 .0 .3 .0 .0 .0 .2 .0 8. Recpt 8 * 354. * 1.8 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 9. Recpt 9 * 354. * 1.7 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 10. Recpt 10 * 6. * 2.1 * .0 .2 .0 .0 .0 .3 .0 .0 11. Recpt 11 * 6. * 1.9 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 12. Recpt 12 * 6. * 1.9 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 13. Recpt 13 * 264. * 1.5 * .1 .2 .2 .0 .1 .3 .3 .0 14. Recpt 14 * 264. * 1.4 * .0 .1 .3 .0 .1 .1 .5 .0 15. Recpt 15 * 276. * 1.6 * .1 .2 .5 .0 .1 .3 .1 .0 16. Recpt 16 * 276. * 1.5 * .0 .1 .6 .0 .1 .2 .2 .0 17. Recpt 17 * 96. * 1.6 * .0 .1 .3 .1 .0 .5 .2 .1 18. Recpt 18 * 96. * 1.5 * .0 .2 .2 .1 .0 .6 .1 .0 19. Recpt 19 * 84. * 1.5 * .0 .4 .3 .1 .0 .2 .2 .1 20. Recpt 20 * 84. * 1.4 * .0 .5 .1 .1 .0 .3 .1 .0

CALINE4: CALIFORNIA LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL JUNE 1989 VERSION PAGE 4 JOB: Gavilan-Hollister 2020 RUN: Hour 1 (WORST CASE ANGLE) POLLUTANT: Carbon Monoxide Page 1

C4$.OUT IV.

MODEL RESULTS (WORST CASE WIND ANGLE)

(CONT.)

* CONC/LINK * (PPM) RECEPTOR * I J K L M N O P ------------*---------------------------------------1. Recpt 1 * .2 .5 .0 .0 .2 .6 .1 .0 2. Recpt 2 * .2 .4 .2 .0 .1 .3 .6 .0 3. Recpt 3 * .2 .2 .3 .0 .0 .1 .8 .0 4. Recpt 4 * .2 .8 .1 .0 .2 .4 .0 .0 5. Recpt 5 * .2 .4 .5 .0 .1 .3 .2 .0 6. Recpt 6 * .1 .2 .6 .0 .1 .2 .4 .0 7. Recpt 7 * .0 .0 .4 .2 .0 .0 .8 .2 8. Recpt 8 * .0 .2 .3 .1 .0 .4 .4 .2 9. Recpt 9 * .0 .4 .2 .1 .0 .6 .2 .1 10. Recpt 10 * .0 .2 .6 .2 .0 .0 .5 .2 11. Recpt 11 * .0 .6 .3 .1 .0 .1 .4 .2 12. Recpt 12 * .0 .9 .1 .1 .0 .3 .2 .1 13. Recpt 13 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .0 14. Recpt 14 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 15. Recpt 15 * .0 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 16. Recpt 16 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 17. Recpt 17 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .1 .0 18. Recpt 18 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 19. Recpt 19 * .0 .1 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 20. Recpt 20 * .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0

Page 2

Title : Gavilan-Hollister Version : Emfac2007V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 5/16/2008 9:33:50 Scen Year: 2020 -All model years in Season : Winter Area : San Benito ***************************************************************************************** Year: 2020 -Model Years 1976 to Emfac2007Emission Factors: V2.3 Nov 1 County

Average

San

Benito

Table

1:00 Running

County

Average

Exhaust

Emissions (grams/mile)

the

range

2020 Inclusive 2006

Pollutant

Name:

Total

Organic

Gases

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity:

Speed

LDA MPH

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 ALL

LDT1 CAT

LDT1 DSL

5

11.214

0.169

0.249

LDT1 NCAT 0.17

9.147

0.252

Pollutant

Name:

Carbon

Monoxide Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity:

Speed

LDA MPH

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDT1 NCAT

LDT1 CAT

5

149.416

LDA DSL 1.906

LDT1 ALL 2.182

1.914

240.341

3.231

0.22

LDT1 DSL 2.125

Oxides

of

Nitrogen

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity:

Speed

LDA MPH

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 ALL

LDT1 CAT

LDT1 DSL

3.171

0.228

2.258

0.23

2.909

0.394

ALL DSL

0.253

ALL 4.236

1.175

50%

Name:

5

50% LDT2 ALL

Pollutant

LDT1 NCAT

--

2.258

LDT2 ALL

ALL DSL

3.262

ALL 7.313

4.537

50% LDT2 ALL 0.431

ALL DSL 12.874

ALL 2.996

Pollutant

Name:

Carbon

Dioxide

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity:

Speed

LDA MPH

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 NCAT

LDT1 CAT

5 1313.986

932.827

LDT1 ALL

348.035

LDT1 DSL

932.22 1350.271 1172.517

Pollutant

Name:

Sulfur

Dioxide

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity:

Speed

LDA MPH

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 NCAT

LDT1 CAT

5

0.015

0.009

LDT1 ALL 0.003

0.009

0.017

Pollutant

Name:

PM10

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity:

Speed

LDA MPH

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDT1 ALL

LDT1 NCAT

5

0.104

LDA DSL 0.058

0.148

0.058

50% LDT2 ALL

50%

0.003

LDT2 ALL

ALL DSL

0.011

LDT1 CAT

0.077

0.068

LDT1 DSL

LDT2 ALL

0.123

0.07

PM10

-

Tire

Wear

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity:

Speed

LDA MPH

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 ALL

LDT1 NCAT

LDT1 DSL

LDT2 ALL

0.008

0.008

0.008

0.033

ALL DSL

Name:

0.008

ALL 0.016

50%

Pollutant

5

ALL

346.262 1156.584 3437.405 1622.216

LDT1 DSL

0.011

ALL DSL

LDT1 CAT

0.008

0.008

0.008

Name:

PM10

-

Brake

Wear

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity:

Speed

LDA MPH

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 ALL

LDT1 NCAT

LDT1 DSL

LDT2 ALL

LDT1 CAT

0.46

ALL DSL

0.008

Pollutant

ALL 0.166

ALL 0.032

ALL DSL

0.013

ALL

5

0.013

0.013

0.013

0.013

0.013

0.013

0.013

Pollutant

Name:

Gasoline

-

mi/gal

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity:

Speed

LDA MPH

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 ALL

LDT1 CAT

LDT1 DSL

5

5.6

9.464

0

LDT1 NCAT

9.464

5.048

7.52

0

Name:

Diesel

-

mi/gal

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity:

Speed

LDA MPH

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 ALL

LDT1 CAT

LDT1 DSL

5

0

0

28.962

28.962

0

Title : Gavilan-Hollister Version : Emfac2007V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 5/16/2008 9:33:50 Scen Year: 2020 -All model years in Season : Winter Area : San Benito ***************************************************************************************** Year: 2020 -Model Years 1976 to Emfac2007Emission Factors: V2.3 Nov 1 County

Average Table

San

Benito 2:00 Starting

County

Average

Emissions (grams/trip)

0

2020 Inclusive 2006

ALL DSL 7.52

0.015

ALL 0

8.38

50% LDT2 ALL

29.11

the

0.026

50% LDT2 ALL

Pollutant

LDT1 NCAT

0.013

29.11

range

--

ALL DSL

ALL 4.258

4.258

Pollutant

Name:

Total

Organic

Gases

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity: ALL

Time

LDA min

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 ALL

LDT1 CAT

LDT1 DSL

5 10 20 30 40 50 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720

5.079 5.036 5.084 5.312 5.721 6.31 6.561 3.479 3.787 4.095 4.404 4.712 5.02 5.328 5.636 5.944 6.252 6.56

0.043 0.085 0.163 0.234 0.297 0.354 0.404 0.516 0.261 0.277 0.292 0.307 0.322 0.336 0.351 0.364 0.378 0.391

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.044 0.085 0.163 0.234 0.297 0.354 0.404 0.516 0.261 0.277 0.292 0.307 0.322 0.336 0.35 0.364 0.378 0.391

LDT1 NCAT 4.111 4.076 4.115 4.3 4.631 5.108 5.31 2.816 3.066 3.315 3.564 3.814 4.063 4.313 4.562 4.811 5.061 5.31

0.074 0.144 0.275 0.393 0.498 0.59 0.669 0.723 0.408 0.431 0.455 0.477 0.5 0.521 0.542 0.563 0.583 0.602

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pollutant

Name:

Carbon

Monoxide Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity: ALL

Time

LDA min

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDT1 NCAT

LDT1 CAT

5 10 20 30 40 50

15.613 13.826 10.673 8.082 6.053 4.586

LDA DSL 0.533 1.049 2.033 2.951 3.805 4.593

LDT1 ALL 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.533 1.048 2.03 2.947 3.799 4.586

25.076 22.206 17.142 12.98 9.722 7.366

0.965 1.896 3.659 5.29 6.788 8.154

LDT2 ALL

LDT1 DSL

0.073 0.141 0.269 0.384 0.486 0.575 0.652 0.704 0.397 0.421 0.443 0.465 0.487 0.508 0.529 0.549 0.568 0.587

LDT2 ALL 0 0 0 0 0 0

ALL DSL

0.946 1.851 3.563 5.147 6.602 7.929

ALL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ALL DSL

0.124 0.205 0.356 0.495 0.622 0.736 0.833 0.882 0.556 0.59 0.623 0.655 0.687 0.718 0.749 0.779 0.809 0.838

ALL 0 0 0 0 0 0

1.389 2.648 5.036 7.248 9.284 11.144

60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720

3.682 14.778 23.351 31.014 37.77 43.617 48.555 52.585 55.706 57.919 59.223 59.619

5.316 7.353 3.789 4.044 4.274 4.48 4.661 4.818 4.95 5.057 5.14 5.198

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

5.308 7.343 3.785 4.04 4.27 4.476 4.657 4.814 4.946 5.053 5.136 5.194

5.914 23.735 37.504 49.813 60.663 70.054 77.985 84.457 89.471 93.024 95.119 95.755

9.387 11.112 6.361 6.71 7.034 7.331 7.603 7.849 8.068 8.262 8.43 8.572

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

9.127 10.811 6.196 6.54 6.859 7.151 7.418 7.659 7.874 8.064 8.228 8.367

Pollutant

Name:

Oxides

of

Nitrogen

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity: ALL

Time

LDA min

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 ALL

LDT1 CAT

LDT1 DSL

5 10 20 30 40 50 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720

1.02 1.109 1.27 1.41 1.528 1.625 1.7 1.79 1.747 1.69 1.62 1.536 1.438 1.326 1.2 1.06 0.907 0.739

0.137 0.151 0.175 0.196 0.213 0.225 0.234 0.251 0.278 0.276 0.273 0.269 0.264 0.257 0.249 0.24 0.23 0.219

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.137 0.151 0.175 0.196 0.213 0.225 0.234 0.251 0.278 0.276 0.273 0.269 0.263 0.257 0.249 0.24 0.23 0.219

LDT1 NCAT 0.935 1.017 1.165 1.293 1.401 1.49 1.559 1.641 1.602 1.55 1.485 1.408 1.318 1.216 1.1 0.972 0.831 0.678

0.179 0.205 0.25 0.287 0.316 0.338 0.352 0.379 0.414 0.411 0.406 0.401 0.393 0.384 0.374 0.362 0.348 0.333

LDT2 ALL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.175 0.199 0.243 0.279 0.308 0.329 0.343 0.369 0.403 0.4 0.396 0.39 0.383 0.374 0.364 0.352 0.339 0.324

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ALL DSL

12.828 12.77 7.231 7.69 8.109 8.489 8.83 9.131 9.393 9.615 9.798 9.942

ALL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.365 0.409 0.487 0.553 0.605 0.644 0.67 0.719 0.755 0.75 0.742 0.73 0.716 0.698 0.678 0.655 0.628 0.599

Pollutant

Name:

Carbon

Dioxide

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity: ALL

Time

LDA min

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 NCAT

LDT1 CAT

5 10 20 30 40 50 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720

111.902 121.432 139.927 157.671 174.663 190.904 206.393 279.289 279.509 279.728 279.948 280.167 280.387 280.606 280.826 281.045 281.265 281.484

11.723 13.353 17.08 21.431 26.405 32.002 38.223 87.453 99.469 111.421 123.308 135.13 146.888 158.581 170.209 181.773 193.273 204.707

LDT1 ALL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

11.712 13.341 17.064 21.409 26.377 31.966 38.179 87.339 99.337 111.271 123.14 134.945 146.684 158.36 169.971 181.517 192.999 204.417

114.997 124.79 143.797 162.031 179.493 196.183 212.1 287.013 287.238 287.464 287.689 287.915 288.141 288.366 288.592 288.817 289.043 289.268

LDT1 DSL

14.251 16.482 21.496 27.245 33.731 40.952 48.909 109.911 125.267 140.484 155.563 170.503 185.304 199.966 214.49 228.875 243.121 257.228

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pollutant

Name:

Sulfur

Dioxide

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity: ALL

Time

LDA min

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 NCAT

LDT1 CAT

5 10 20 30 40

0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002

0 0 0 0 0

LDT1 ALL 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002

LDT2 ALL

LDT1 DSL 0 0 0 0 0

ALL DSL

13.894 16.066 20.946 26.542 32.853 39.878 47.619 106.945 121.873 136.666 151.324 165.847 180.236 194.489 208.608 222.592 236.44 250.154

LDT2 ALL 0 0 0 0 0

ALL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ALL DSL 0 0 0 0 0

13.597 15.735 20.521 25.982 32.121 38.936 46.429 103.433 117.79 132.009 146.091 160.035 173.841 187.51 201.04 214.434 227.689 240.807

ALL 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

50 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720

0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004

0 0 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002

0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004

0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003

Pollutant

Name:

PM10

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity: ALL

Time

LDA min

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDT1 ALL

LDT1 NCAT

5 10 20 30 40 50 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660

0.011 0.01 0.008 0.006 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.007 0.011 0.015 0.018 0.021 0.023 0.025 0.027 0.028 0.029

LDA DSL 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.01 0.011 0.012 0.013 0.014 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.001 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.01 0.011 0.012 0.013 0.014 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015

0.008 0.007 0.006 0.004 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.005 0.008 0.011 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.019 0.02 0.021 0.021

LDT1 CAT 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.007 0.008 0.012 0.013 0.014 0.015 0.016 0.017 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.019

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

LDT1 DSL

0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003

LDT2 ALL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.001 0.001 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.012 0.013 0.014 0.015 0.016 0.016 0.017 0.018 0.018 0.018

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ALL DSL

0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002

ALL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.001 0.002 0.003 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.009 0.014 0.015 0.017 0.018 0.019 0.02 0.02 0.021 0.021 0.022

720

0.029

0.016

0

0.016

0.022

0.019

Title : Gavilan-Hollister Version : Emfac2007V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 5/16/2008 9:33:50 Scen Year: 2020 -All model years in Season : Winter Area : San Benito ***************************************************************************************** Year: 2020 -Model Years 1976 to Emfac2007Emission Factors: V2.3 Nov 1 County

Average

San

Benito

Table

4:00 Hot

County

Average

Soak

Emissions (grams/trip)

0

the

0.018

2020 Inclusive 2006

--

Name:

Total

Organic

Gases

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity: ALL

Time

LDA min

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 ALL

LDT1 CAT

LDT1 DSL

5 10 20 30 40 Hot

soak

0.432 0.801 1.378 1.787 1.944 results

0.037 0.068 0.116 0.149 0.161 are

0 0 0 0 0 scaled

0.037 0.068 0.116 0.149 0.161 to

0.777 1.43 2.427 3.099 3.342 reflect

0.046 0.084 0.144 0.184 0.199 zero

0.022

range

Pollutant

LDT1 NCAT

0

LDT2 ALL 0 0 0 0 0

emissions for

0.045 0.082 0.14 0.18 0.195

ALL DSL

ALL 0 0 0 0 0

0.036 0.066 0.113 0.145 0.156

Title : Gavilan-Hollister Version : Emfac2007V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 5/16/2008 9:33:50 Scen Year: 2020 -All model years in Season : Winter Area : San Benito ***************************************************************************************** Year: 2020 -Model Years 1976 to Emfac2007Emission Factors: V2.3 Nov 1 County

the

range

2020 Inclusive 2006

--

Average

San

Benito

County

Average

Table

5a:

Partial

Day

Diurnal

Pollutant

Name:

Total

Organic

Gases

Temperatu ALL

Relative

Humidity: ALL

Temp degF

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDA ALL

LDT1 NCAT

LDT1 DSL

LDT1 ALL

40

0

0

0

Loss

Emissions (grams/hour)

LDT1 CAT 0

0

Title : Gavilan-Hollister Version : Emfac2007V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 5/16/2008 9:33:50 Scen Year: 2020 -All model years in Season : Winter Area : San Benito ***************************************************************************************** Year: 2020 -Model Years 1976 to Emfac2007Emission Factors: V2.3 Nov 1

0

LDT2 NCAT 0

the

2020 Inclusive 2006

ALL ALL 0

range

--

0

0

County

Average

San

Benito

Table

5b:

Multi-Day Diurnal

Loss

Pollutant

Name:

Total

Organic

Gases

Temperatu ALL

Relative

Humidity: ALL

Temp degF

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDA ALL

LDT1 NCAT

LDT1 DSL

LDT1 ALL

40

0

County

0

Average

0

Emissions (grams/hour)

LDT1 CAT 0

0

0

Title : Gavilan-Hollister Version : Emfac2007V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 5/16/2008 9:33:50 Scen Year: 2020 -All model years in Season : Winter Area : San Benito ***************************************************************************************** Year: 2020 -Model Years 1976 to Emfac2007Emission Factors: V2.3 Nov 1 County

LDT2 NCAT 0

the

0

2020 Inclusive 2006

Benito

County

Average

Table

6a:

Partial

Day

Resting

Pollutant

Name:

Total

Organic

Gases

Temperatu ALL

Relative

Humidity: ALL

Temp degF

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDA ALL

LDT1 NCAT

LDT1 DSL

LDT1 ALL

0

0

0

0

0

Emissions (grams/hour)

LDT1 CAT 0

0

--

San

40

0

range

Average

Loss

ALL ALL

0

0

LDT2 NCAT 0

ALL ALL 0

Title : Gavilan-Hollister Version : Emfac2007V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 5/16/2008 9:33:50 Scen Year: 2020 -All model years in Season : Winter Area : San Benito ***************************************************************************************** Year: 2020 -Model Years 1976 to Emfac2007Emission Factors: V2.3 Nov 1 County

range

2020 Inclusive 2006

--

Average

San

Benito

Table

6b:

Multi-Day Resting

Loss

Pollutant

Name:

Total

Organic

Gases

Temperatu ALL

Relative

Humidity: ALL

Temp degF

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDA ALL

LDT1 NCAT

LDT1 DSL

LDT1 ALL

40

Title Version Run Scen Season

: : Date Year: :

0

County

the

0

Average

0

Gavilan-Hollister Emfac2007V2.3 Nov : 5/16/2008 9:33:50 2020 -All model Winter

Emissions (grams/hour)

LDT1 CAT 0

0

1

2006 years

0

in

LDT2 NCAT 0

the

ALL ALL 0

range

0

0

Area : San Benito ***************************************************************************************** Year: 2020 -Model Years 1976 to Emfac2007Emission Factors: V2.3 Nov 1 County

Average

San

Table Pollutant

Benito

County

7:00 Estimated Travel

Fractions

Temperatu ALL

Relative

Humidity: ALL

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA ALL

LDT1 NCAT

%VMT %TRIP %VEH

0 0 0

0.323 0.348 0.373

0 0.001 0.001

0.324 0.348 0.374

LDT1 CAT 0 0 0

LDT1 DSL

0.173 0.164 0.179

Title : Gavilan-Hollister Version : Emfac2007V2.3 Nov 1 2006 Run Date : 5/16/2008 9:33:50 Scen Year: 2020 -All model years in Season : Winter Area : San Benito ***************************************************************************************** Year: 2020 -Model Years 1976 to Emfac2007Emission Factors: V2.3 Nov 1 County

Average Table

San

Benito

County

8:00 Evaporativ Running

--

Average

Name:

LDA DSL

2020 Inclusive 2006

LDT1 ALL

0.003 0.005 0.005

0.176 0.169 0.184

the

2020 Inclusive 2006

Average Loss

LDT2 NCAT

Emissions (grams/minute)

ALL ALL 0 0 0

range

--

1 1 1

Pollutant

Name:

Total

Organic

Gases

Temperatu 40F

Relative

Humidity: ALL

Time

LDA min

LDA NCAT

LDA CAT

LDA DSL

LDT1 ALL

LDT1 CAT

LDT1 DSL

1 2 3 4 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60

1.291 0.96 0.851 0.797 0.766 0.708 0.695 0.692 0.694 0.702 0.709 0.716 0.723 0.698 0.66 0.629

0.012 0.011 0.013 0.016 0.017 0.023 0.025 0.027 0.029 0.03 0.031 0.032 0.033 0.034 0.035 0.035

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.012 0.011 0.013 0.016 0.018 0.023 0.025 0.027 0.029 0.03 0.031 0.032 0.033 0.034 0.035 0.035

LDT1 NCAT 1.555 0.878 0.653 0.541 0.474 0.344 0.304 0.286 0.277 0.285 0.293 0.3 0.307 0.313 0.32 0.326

0.358 0.187 0.132 0.107 0.092 0.064 0.058 0.057 0.058 0.061 0.064 0.066 0.069 0.071 0.073 0.075

LDT2 ALL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.352 0.184 0.13 0.105 0.09 0.063 0.057 0.056 0.057 0.06 0.062 0.065 0.067 0.069 0.072 0.074

ALL DSL

ALL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.158 0.085 0.062 0.053 0.047 0.037 0.036 0.036 0.038 0.039 0.041 0.043 0.044 0.045 0.047 0.048

Attachment 3 AMBAG CONSISTENCY LETTER

May 12, 2008

Julie Mier David J. Powers & Associates 1885 The Alameda, Suite 204 San Jose, CA 95126 Dear Ms. Mier: This letter is in response to your May 6, 2008 request for a determination of consistency of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus/Fairview Corners Master Plan project with the Air Quality Management Plan for the Monterey Bay Region (AQMP). Consistency of the commercial portion of this project is determined by comparing the estimated current population of the county in which the project is located with the applicable population forecast in the AQMP. If the estimated current population does not exceed the forecast, indirect emissions associated with the project are deemed to be consistent with the AQMP. The current population of San Benito County is 57,784 (1/1/08 Department of Finance estimate). The forecasted population of San Benito County in the year 2010, the next forecasted year, is 63,890. As the current population of San Benito County is less than the forecasted population, the retail portion of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus/Fairview Corners Master Plan project is consistent with the AQMP. AMBAG staff surveyed each jurisdiction in San Benito County to determine the number of housing units that have received a building permit since 1/1/08. A total of 5 housing units have received building permits between January 2008 and April 2008. The California Department of Finance estimates there are 17,769 dwelling units in San Benito County as of 1/01/08. Combined, there are 17,774 existing, and or permitted housing units in San Benito County.

The Gavilan College San Benito Campus/Fairview Corners Master Plan project consists of a total of 691 residential units phased at 40 units every two years over 10 years. Occupancy of the first housing units is estimated to take place by 2010. The 2004 Population, Housing Unit, and Employment Forecast forecasts there will be 19,455 housing units in San Benito County by the year 2010. The combination of the existing and permitted housing units in San Benito County (17,774) plus the 20 housing units in the Gavilan College San Benito Campus/Fairview Corners Master Plan project is less then the regional forecasts for San Benito County (19,455.) The continuing phases of construction out to 2018 are also under the regional forecasts for the intervening years. Therefore the Gavilan College San Benito Campus/Fairview Corners Master Plan project is consistent with the 2004 regional forecasts and the Air Quality Management Plan. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about this determination. Sincerely,

David Roemer Associate Planner

cc: Jean Getchell, MBUAPCD

APPENDIX G

C LIMATE C HANGE AND GHG E MISSIONS C ALCULATIONS

G REENHOUSE G AS E MISSIONS I NVENTORY C ALCULATIONS

M OBILE S OURCE AND A REA S OURCE E MISSIONS – URBEMIS R ESULTS A DJUSTMENTS Please refer to the URBMIS model results. These results, reported in tons of CO2 per year, were converted to CO2 equivalent emissions using standard conversion factors.

The converted

emissions volumes are reported in metric tons per year. The URBEMIS model does not provide estimates of other GHGs associated with combustion, namely CH4 and N2O.

Therefore, in order to account for emissions of these compounds,

adjustments were made to the URBEMIS results. The adjustments also provide reporting of mobile source and area source emissions in terms of CO2 equivalents and in metric tons per year rather than short tons. The following two tables illustrate the conversions made for mobile source and area source emissions reported by URBEMIS.

I NDIRECT S OURCE GHG E MISSIONS FROM E LECTRICITY G ENERATION Electricity Used by Project Residential Units The California Energy Consumption Data Management System (ECDMS) includes energy consumption data for individual counties. In 2008, ECDMS data shows that residential development in San Benito County consumed approximately 120,000,000 kilowatt hours (kWh) of energy. U.S. Census data for 2008 indicate that there were approximately 17,827 housing

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

G-1

GHG C ALCULATIONS

Table GHG-4 Operational Motor Vehicle GHG Emissions Emissions Scenario

ITE Code

Units

Base Trip Rate (ADT/unit)

Annual CO2 1

Emissions

CO2 to CO2e Ratio

2

Emissions (MTCO2e/yr)

(Tons CO2/Yr) Proposed Project

210

220.00 DU

9.57

3,627

Annual CO2e

0.95

3,464

Single Family Housing Sources: 1. 2.

Estimated CO2 emissions from URBEMIS2007 Environmental Management Software. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emission Facts - Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Typical Passenger Vehicle, (2005) 4. It is assumed that CO2 accounts for 95% of the greenhouse gas emissions, while CH4, N2O, and HFCs account for 5% of emissions.

Notes: ADT

Average daily trips

CO2

Carbon dioxide

CO2e

Carbon dioxide equivalent

G-2

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Area Source GHG Emissions Emissions Scenario

CO2 Emission

CH4 Emission

N2O Emission

Annual CO2 4

Annual CO2e

Factor

Factor

Factor

Emissions

Emissions

GWP = 1

GWP = 21

GWP = 310

(Tons CO2/yr)

(MTCO2e/yr)

(kg/MMBtu)

(kg/MMBtu)

(kg/MMBtu)

Proposed Project Natural Gas1

56.06

0.005

0.0001

642.24

584.04

Landscape Maintenance2

70.88

0.011

0.0006

1.42

1.30

Hearths (Natural Gas)1

56.06

0.005

0.0001

179.21

162.97

Hearths (Wood)3

93.87

0.316

0.0042

Subtotal

822.87

748.31

Sources: 1.

URBEMIS2007 uses a CO2 emission factor of 120,000 pounds per million cubic feet for natural gas. This value was converted to kg/MMBtu based on 1.03 therms per cubic feet.

2.

California Climate Action Registry, General Reporting Protocol: Reporting Entity-Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Version 3.1, (2009) 101, 103. Landscape maintenance equipment were assumed to be fueled with motor gasoline.

3.

California Climate Action Registry, General Reporting Protocol: Reporting Entity-Wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Version 3.1, (2009) 102, 103.

4.

Estimated CO2 emissions from URBEMIS2007 Environmental Management Software.

Notes: CH4

Methane

MMBtu

Million British thermal units

CO2

Carbon dioxide

MT

Metric ton

CO2e

Carbon dioxide equivalent

N2O

Nitrous oxide

GWP

Global warming potential

yr

Year

kg

Kilogram

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

G-3

GHG C ALCULATIONS

units in the County. This data can be used to estimate that a single dwelling unit in the County consumed an average of approximately 6,732 kWh of energy in 2008. Using this factor, the 220 proposed residential units would create a total average demand for approximately 1,481,040 KWh per year of electricity or approximately 1,481 megawatt hours (MWh) per year for on-site use.

Electricity Used To Transport and Treat Water and To Pump and Treat Wastewater Energy used in water pumping and wastewater treatment is a notable source of GHG emissions. Please refer to Section 3.12, Public Services, of the Draft EIR for information on project water demand and wastewater generation. The Local Government Operations Protocol (LGOP) energy use factor for off-site water pumping is 1,450 kilowatt hours (kWh) per 1,000,000 gallons of water consumed. Water demand for the project is estimated at 71,550 gallons per day. This equates to approximately 26.1 million gallons of water per year and the associated energy use is estimated at approximately, 37,845 kWh per year, or approximately 38 MWh per year. The proposed project is expected to generate approximately 60,818 gallons per day of wastewater. This equates to 22.2 million gallons per year. The LGOP energy demand factor for wastewater pumping and treatment is about 2,500 kWh per 1 million gallons of wastewater treated. Electricity demand from wastewater pumping and treatment would, therefore, be approximately 55,500 kWh per year or approximately 56 MWh per year.

Estimated Annual Electricity Demand Sources of Demand

Demand (MWh)/Year

On-Site Electricity Use

1,481

Water Supply Transport and Treatment

38

Wastewater Pumping and Treatment

56

Total

1,575

Source:

G-4

EMC Planning Group 2010

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

GHG Emissions from Electricity Generation Projected Electricity Demand from Future Development (MWh)

GHG Type

1,575

CO2

1,575 1,575

GHG Emissions Factor (lbs/MWh)1

Global Warming Potential

CO2e(metric tons/yr)2

559.0

1

399

CH4

0.029

21

1

N20

0.011

310

2

Total Source:

402 EMC Planning Group 2010

1. CO2 factor from PG&E 20011; CH4 and N2O factors from Local Government Operations Protocol, 2010. 2. CO2 Equivalent is calculated as (electricity use) x (emissions factor) x (warming potential) / (2,204.62 lb/metric ton). Figures shown are rounded to the nearest metric ton.

T OTAL P ROJECT U NMITIGATED GHG E MISSIONS Total Unmitigated GHG Operational Emissions (metric tons/year CO2e) GHG Emissions Source Mobile Sources

GHG Emissions Volume 3,464

Area Source

748

Electricity Demand

402

Solid Waste

------

Fugitive Emissions from

------

Heating/Cooling Systems Total Source:

4,614 EMC Planning Group 2010

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

G-5

GHG C ALCULATIONS

Climate Change Scoping Plan Measures AB 32 Scoping Plan Measures (SPMs), lists CARB’s preliminary recommendations for achieving GHG emissions reductions under AB 32 along with a brief description of the requirements and applicability.   AB 32 Scoping Plan Measures (SPMs)   

Scoping Plan Measure

Description

SPM‐1: California Cap‐and‐Trade Program  linked to Western Climate Initiative 

Implement  a  broad‐based  cap‐and‐trade  program  that  links  with  other  Western  Climate  Initiative  Partner  programs  to  create  a  regional  market  system. Ensure California’s program meets all applicable AB 32 requirements  for  market‐based  mechanisms.  Capped  sectors  include  transportation,  electricity,  natural  gas,  and  industry.  Projected  2020  business‐as‐usual  emissions  are  estimated  at  512  MTCO2e;  preliminary  2020  emissions  limit  under  cap‐and‐trade  program  are  estimated  at  365  MTCO2e  (29  percent  reduction).  

SPM‐2: California Light‐Duty Vehicle GHG  Standards   

Implement  adopted  Pavley  standards  and  planned  second  phase  of  the  program. AB 32 states that if the Pavley standards (AB 1493) do not remain in  effect, CARB shall implement equivalent or greater alternative regulations to  control mobile sources. 

SPM‐3: Energy Efficiency 

Maximize  energy  efficiency  building  and  appliance  standards,  and  pursue  additional  efficiency  efforts.  The  Scoping  Plan  considers  green  building  standards  as  a  framework  to  achieve  reductions  in  other  sectors,  such  as  electricity. 

SPM‐4: Renewables Portfolio Standard 

Achieve  33  percent  Renewables  Portfolio  Standard  by  both  investor‐owned  and publicly owned utilities. 

SPM‐5: Low Carbon Fuel Standard 

CARB  identified  the  Low  Carbon  Fuel  Standard  as  a  Discrete  Early  Action  item and the final regulation was adopted on April 23, 2009. In January 2007,  Governor  Schwarzenegger  issued  Executive  Order  S‐1‐07,  which  called  for  the reduction of the carbon intensity of Californiaʹs transportation fuels by at  least 10 percent by 2020. 

SPM‐6: Regional Transportation‐Related  Greenhouse Gas Targets 

Develop  regional  greenhouse  gas  emissions  reduction  targets  for  passenger  vehicles. SB 375 requires CARB to develop, in consultation with metropolitan  planning organizations (MPOs), passenger vehicle greenhouse gas emissions  reduction  targets  for  2020  and  2035  by  September  30,  2010.  SB  375  requires  MPOs  to  prepare  a  sustainable  communities  strategy  to  reach  the  regional  target provided by CARB. 

SPM‐7: Vehicle Efficiency Measures 

Implement  light‐duty  vehicle  efficiency  measures.  CARB  is  pursuing  fuel‐ efficient tire standards and measures to ensure properly inflated tires during  vehicle servicing. 

SPM‐8: Goods Movement 

Implement adopted regulations for port drayage trucks and the use of shore  power for ships at berth. Improve efficiency in goods movement operations. 

SPM‐9: Million Solar Roofs Program 

Install  3,000  MW  of  solar‐electric  capacity  under  California’s  existing  solar  programs. 

SPM‐10: Heavy/Medium‐Duty Vehicles 

Adopt  heavy‐  and  medium‐duty  vehicle  and  engine  measures  targeting  aerodynamic efficiency, vehicle hybridization, and engine efficiency. 

G-6

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN EIR

Scoping Plan Measure

Description

SPM‐11: Industrial Emissions 

Require  assessment  of  large  industrial  sources  to  determine  whether  individual sources within a facility can cost‐effectively reduce greenhouse gas  emissions  and  provide  other  pollution  reduction  co‐benefits.  Reduce  greenhouse gas emissions from fugitive emissions from oil and gas extraction  and  gas  transmission.  Adopt  and  implement  regulations  to  control  fugitive  methane emissions and reduce flaring at refineries. 

SPM‐12: High Speed Rail 

Support  implementation  of  a  high‐speed  rail  (HSR)  system.  This  measure  supports  implementation  of  plans  to  construct  and  operate  a  HSR  system  between  Northern  and  Southern  California  serving  major  metropolitan  centers. 

SPM‐13: Green Building Strategy 

Expand the use of green building practices to reduce the carbon footprint of  California’s new and existing inventory of buildings.  

SPM‐14: High GWP Gases 

Adopt measures to reduce high global warming potential gases. The Scoping  Plan  contains  6  measures  to  reduce  high‐GWP  gases  from  mobile  sources,  consumer products, stationary sources, and semiconductor manufacturing. 

SPM‐15: Recycling and Waste 

Reduce methane emissions at landfills. Increase waste diversion, composting,  and commercial recycling. Move toward zero‐waste. 

SPM‐16: Sustainable Forests 

Preserve  forest  sequestration  and  encourage  the  use  of  forest  biomass  for  sustainable  energy  generation.  The  federal  government  and  California’s  Board  of  Forestry  and  Fire  Protection  have  the  regulatory  authority  to  implement  the  Forest  Practice  Act  to  provide  for  sustainable  management  practices. This measure is expected to play a greater role in the 2050 goals. 

SPM‐17: Water 

Continue efficiency programs and use cleaner energy sources to move water.  California will also establish a public goods charge for funding investments in  water  efficiency  that  will  lead  to  as  yet  undetermined  reductions  in  greenhouse gases. 

SPM‐18: Agriculture 

In  the  near‐term,  encourage  investment  in  manure  digesters  and  at  the  five‐ year  Scoping  Plan  update  determine  if  the  program  should  be  made  mandatory  by  2020.  Increase  efficiency  and  encourage  use  of  agricultural  biomass  for  sustainable  energy  production.  CARB  has  begun  research  on  nitrogen fertilizers and will explore opportunities for emission reductions. 

      Source: California Air Resources Board, Climate Change Scoping Plan, (2008).   

COUNTY OF SAN BEN ITO

G-7

APPENDIX H

P HASE I E NVIRONMENTAL S ITE A SSESSMENT

APPENDIX I

I NITIAL S ITE A SSESSMENT

MEMORANDUM To:

Richard Oliver

From:

Sally Rideout, Senior Planner

Cc:

Steven M. Kinsella, David Rodriguez, John Noori

Date:

May 13, 2010

Re:

Initial Site Assessment: Proposed EVA Lane Driveway Approach on Airline Highway - Gavilan College San Benito Campus/Fairview Corners Residential Project

Message: To assess the proposed project for potential hazardous waste involvement an initial site assessment (ISA) has been prepared for the project following Caltrans guidelines as presented in Appendix DD – Preparation Guidelines for Initial Site Assessment (ISA) Checklist for Hazardous Waste of the Project Development Procedures Manual (Caltrans, July 1999). The ISA is based on information provided in the EIR for the development project. The proposed EVA lane driveway approach will require an encroachment permit from Caltrans, District 5, for construction of the driveway approach and access onto State Route 25. Attached is a completed Caltrans Initial Site Assessment Checklist for the above-referenced project. The results of the checklist indicate that there are no hazards or hazardous materials associated with the project site, and no further review is required. Therefore the project is in compliance with ASTM Standard E1527-05, and a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment will not be required. If you have any questions, please contact me at extension 210.

G AVILAN S AN B ENITO C AMPUS AND FAIRVIEW C ORNERS R ESIDENTIAL S PECIFIC P LAN P ROJECTS I NITIAL S ITE A SSESSMENT (ISA) C HECKLIST

This Initial Site Assessment was prepared using the format presented in the Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual (July 1999), Appendix DD, Hazardous Waste.

P ROJECT I NFORMATION District: Caltrans District 5 County: San Benito County Route: State Route 25 (Airline Highway) Kilometer Post (Post Mile): N/A EA: N/A Description: The proposed project is a new driveway approach on State Route 25 (Airline Highway) located approximately 2,700 feet east of the intersection of Airline Highway and Fairview Road in San Benito County (hereinafter “project site”). The project would affect approximately 1.2 acres within the Caltrans right-of-way. Use of the driveway and access road would be restricted to emergency vehicles only. The proposed driveway would accommodate the installation of an emergency vehicle access lane between the highway and the proposed Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan project site. The proposed emergency vehicle access (EVA) road would extend from the southeastern corner of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan site to

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

1-1

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL

Airline Highway along the east boundary of the Gavilan San Benito Campus site. Figure 1, Aerial Photograph, presents the location of the project site and identifies an area of potential impact. Project

Manager:

David

Rodriguez Phone #: 408-848-4800 (Gavilan College

[email protected]

District)

Steven M. Kinsella, Superintendant/President,

408-848-4800

Gavilan College Project Engineer: John Noori, Kier & Wright Phone #:

408-727-6665

Civil Engineers & Surveyors, Inc.

P ROJECT S CREENING 1. Project Features: New R/W? No. The proposed new driveway approach would be constructed within the existing right-of-way. Excavation? Yes. Minimal grading and excavation are required to construct the driveway and approach. Railroad Involvement? No. Structure demolition/modification? No. Subsurface utility relocation? No.

2. Project Setting Rural or Urban: Rural Current land uses: The project site is currently unimproved right-of-way on the north side of Airline Highway. The area of potential impact extends beyond the existing right-of-way onto adjacent rangeland, which consists of an agricultural field of cultivated barley that is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. Adjacent land uses (industrial, light industry, commercial, agricultural, residential, etc.): Unimproved rangeland is located to the north, east and west, with rural residential uses and grassland along

1-2

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

ISA C HECKLIST

Harbern Way further to the north. The Ridgemark Golf and Country Club, which includes a gated residential community, is located to the south across Airline Highway.

3. Check federal, State, and local environmental and health regulatory agency records as necessary, to see if any known hazardous waste site is in or near the project area. If a known site is identified, show its location on the attached map and attach additional sheets, as needed, to provide pertinent information for the proposed project. A check of the Department of Toxic Substance Control Envirostor website (www. envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/) reveals that there are no recorded local, state or federal hazardous waste sites or incidents recorded on or within one mile of the subject property (2010).

4. Conduct Field Inspection. Site visit date: January 14, 2010. Sally Rideout and Christine Bradley, EMC Planning Group Inc. No evidence of hazards was identified.

Storage Structures/Pipelines: Underground tanks? No.

Surface tanks? No.

Sumps? No.

Ponds? No

Drums? No.

Basins? No.

Transformers? No.

Landfill? No

Other? None

Contamination: (spills, leaks, illegal dumping, etc.) Surface staining? No.

Oil sheen? No.

Odors? No.

Vegetation damage? No.

Other? None

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

1-3

F AIRVIEW C ORNERS R ES IDENTIAL

Hazardous Materials: (asbestos, lead, etc.) Buildings? No.

Spray-on fireproofing? No.

Pipe wrap? No.

Friable tile? No.

Acoustical plaster? No.

Serpentine? No.

Paint? No.

Other? None

5. Additional record search, as necessary, of subsequent land uses that could have resulted in a hazardous waste site: Please see response to Number 3. 6. Other comments and/or observations: None.

ISA D ETERMINATION Does the project have potential hazardous waste involvement? No. If there is known or potential hazardous waste involvement, is additional ISA work needed before task orders can be prepared for the Investigation? No. If "YES," explain; then give an estimate of additional time required: N/A A brief memo should be prepared to transmit the ISA conclusions to the Project Manager and Project Engineer. ISA Conducted by: Christine Bradley, EMC Planning Group Inc. Date: April 30, 2010

1-4

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

ISA C HECKLIST

This side intentionally left blank.

EMC PL ANNING GROUP INC .

1-5

APPENDIX J

N OISE A NALYSIS AND S UPPLEMENTAL M EMORANDUM

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RESIDENTIAL PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE ASSESSMENT SAN BENITO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA September 21, 2010

♦

♦

♦

Prepared for: Fairview Corners LLC.

Prepared by:

Jared M. McDaniel

ILLINGWORTH & RODKIN, INC. Acoustics · Air Quality 505 Petaluma Boulevard South Petaluma, CA 94952 (707) 766-7700

Job No.: 09-128

INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of the environmental noise assessment of the proposed Fairview Corners Residential Project. The Project proposes development consisting of up to 220 dwelling units, and open space/walk path/park in unincorporated San Benito County, California north of Airline Highway and east of Fairview Road. The Setting section of the report presents a discussion of the fundamentals of environmental acoustics to assist those unfamiliar with acoustical terminology. A description of applicable state and local guidelines is presented to establish the significance criteria used in the noise impact assessment. The results of the noise measurements made in the site vicinity are then summarized. The Impact and Mitigation Measures section identifies project impacts including the compatibility of the proposed use with the on-site noise environment. Where future noise levels exceed the applicable significance thresholds, a significant noise impact is identified. Mitigation is presented to achieve a compatible development with respect to the noise environment. SETTING Fundamentals of Environmental Acoustics Noise may be defined as unwanted sound. Noise is usually objectionable because it is disturbing or annoying. The objectionable nature of sound could be caused by its pitch or its loudness. Pitch is the height or depth of a tone or sound, depending on the relative rapidity (frequency) of the vibrations by which it is produced. Higher pitched signals sound louder to humans than sounds with a lower pitch. Loudness is intensity of sound waves combined with the reception characteristics of the ear. Intensity may be compared with the height of an ocean wave in that it is a measure of the amplitude of the sound wave. In addition to the concepts of pitch and loudness, there are several noise measurement scales which are used to describe noise in a particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement which indicates the relative amplitude of a sound. The zero on the decibel scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Sound levels in decibels are calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 decibels represents a ten-fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 decibels is 100 times more intense, 30 decibels is 1,000 times more intense, etc. There is a relationship between the subjective noisiness or loudness of a sound and its intensity. Each 10 decibel increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness over a fairly wide range of intensities. Technical terms are defined in Table 1. There are several methods of characterizing sound. The most common in California is the Aweighted sound level or dBA. This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. Representative outdoor and indoor noise levels in units of dBA are shown in Table 2. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time, a method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statistical behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-varying events. This energy-equivalent sound/noise descriptor is called Leq. The most common averaging period is hourly, but Leq can describe any series of noise events of arbitrary duration.

1

The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters can accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about plus or minus 1 dBA. Various computer models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such as roadways and airports. The accuracy of the predicted models depends upon the distance the receptor is from the noise source. Close to the noise source, the models are accurate to within about plus or minus 1 to 2 dBA. Since the sensitivity to noise increases during the evening and at night -- because excessive noise interferes with the ability to sleep -- 24-hour descriptors have been developed that incorporate artificial noise penalties added to quiet-time noise events. The Community Noise Equivalent Level, CNEL, is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure in a community, with a 5 dB penalty added to evening (7:00 pm - 10:00 pm) and a 10 dB addition to nocturnal (10:00 pm - 7:00 am) noise levels. The Day/Night Average Sound Level, Ldn, is essentially the same as CNEL, with the exception that the evening time period is dropped and all occurrences during this three-hour period are grouped into the daytime period.

2

TABLE 1

Definitions of Acoustical Terms Used in this Report Definitions

Term Decibel, dB

A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure. The reference pressure for air is 20.

Sound Pressure Level

Sound pressure is the sound force per unit area, usually expressed in micro Pascals (or 20 micro Newtons per square meter), where 1 Pascal is the pressure resulting from a force of 1 Newton exerted over an area of 1 square meter. The sound pressure level is expressed in decibels as 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio between the pressures exerted by the sound to a reference sound pressure (e.g., 20 micro Pascals). Sound pressure level is the quantity that is directly measured by a sound level meter.

Frequency, Hz

The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below atmospheric pressure. Normal human hearing is between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz. Infrasonic sound are below 20 Hz and Ultrasonic sounds are above 20,000 Hz.

A-Weighted Sound Level, dBA

The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighting filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise.

Equivalent Noise Level, Leq

The average A-weighted noise level during the measurement period.

Lmax, Lmin

The maximum and minimum A-weighted noise level during the measurement period.

L01, L10, L50, L90

The A-weighted noise levels that are exceeded 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of the time during the measurement period.

Day/Night Noise Level, Ldn or DNL

The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 10 decibels to levels measured in the night between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 5 decibels in the evening from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and after addition of 10 decibels to sound levels measured in the night between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am. The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.

Community Noise Equivalent Level, CNEL

Ambient Noise Level

Intrusive

That noise which intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content as well as the prevailing ambient noise level.

Source: Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control, Harris, 1998.

3

TABLE 2

Typical Noise Levels in the Environment

Common Outdoor Noise Source

Noise Level (dBA)

110 dBA

Common Indoor Noise Source Rock band

Jet fly-over at 1,000 feet

100 dBA Gas lawn mower at 3 feet

90 dBA Diesel truck at 50 feet at 50 mph

Food blender at 3 feet

80 dBA

Garbage disposal at 3 feet

70 dBA

Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet

Noisy urban area, daytime Gas lawn mower, 100 feet Commercial area Heavy traffic at 300 feet

Normal speech at 3 feet

60 dBA Large business office

Quiet urban daytime

50 dBA

Dishwasher in next room

Quiet urban nighttime

40 dBA

Theater, large conference room

30 dBA

Library Bedroom at night, concert hall (background)

Quiet suburban nighttime

Quiet rural nighttime 20 dBA

Broadcast/recording studio 10 dBA 0 dBA

Source: Technical Noise Supplement (TeNS), Caltrans, November 2009.

4

Regulatory Background The State of California and San Benito County establish guidelines, plans, and policies designed to limit noise exposure at noise sensitive land uses. These include the State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G, and the County of San Benito General Plan, and the California Building Code. State CEQA Guidelines. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has established guidelines to evaluate the significance of environmental noise impacts attributable to a proposed project. A significant noise impact would be identified if a project results in: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

(6)

Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or groundborne noise levels. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

Items 1, 3, and 4 would be applicable to the proposed project. Item 2 is not applicable because the project is not located near sources of groundborne vibration (e.g., railroads) and would not generate perceptible groundborne vibration at off-site locations during construction or operation of the project. Items 5 and 6 are not applicable because the project site is not located within the vicinity of a public or private airport. Items 2, 5, and 6 are not carried forward in the analysis. County of San Benito General Plan. The County of San Benito is currently updating their General Plan. Since the update is not complete, the current General Plan is used in this assessment. San Benito County’s revised 1984 Plan identifies noise and land use compatibility standards for various land uses. The County’s goal is to, “…protect the health, safety and welfare of San Benito County residents through the elimination of annoying or harmful noise levels.” Figure 10, Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments, of the Noise Element indicates that residential uses are considered “Clearly Acceptable” up to 60 dBA Ldn and “Normally Acceptable” up to 65 dBA Ldn. 2007 California Building Code. Multi-family housing in the State of California is subject to the environmental noise limits set forth in the 2007 California Building Code (Chapter 12, Appendix Section 1207.11.2). The noise limit is a maximum interior noise level of 45 dBA Ldn. Where exterior noise levels exceed 60 dBA Ldn, a report must be submitted with the building plans describing the noise control measures that have been incorporated into the design of the project to meet the noise limit.

5

Existing Noise Environment The project site is located in unincorporated San Benito County north of Airline Highway and east of Fairview Road. Land uses in the vicinity include the Ridgemark Golf and Country Club to the south, the Cielo Vista Subdivision to the west, open grassland to the east (Figure 1 shows residences along Harbern Way), and five-acre ranchettes to the north. A noise monitoring survey was made from March 21, 2008 to March 26, 2008 to quantify the existing noise environment at the project site and in it’s vicinity. The noise monitoring survey included one 24-hour noise measurements (LT-1). Noise levels at the project site and at nearby sensitive land uses predominantly result from traffic along Airline Highway and Fairview Road. Measurement locations and the site vicinity are shown in Figure 1. Noise measurement site LT-1 was located approximately 33 feet from the centerline of Fairview Road, south of Cielo Vista Drive. Hourly average noise levels typically ranged from 68 to 70 dBA Leq during the day, and from 54 to 68 dBA Leq at night. The calculated day-night average noise level at this location ranged from 70 to 72 dBA Ldn. The daily trend in noise levels are shown in Appendix 1.

Figure 1: Measurement Locations and Site Vicinity

LT-1

Project Site

6

IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Significance Criteria

•

A significant impact would be identified if noise-sensitive receivers proposed by the project would be exposed to noise levels exceeding the County’s established guidelines for “Normally Acceptable” noise and land use compatibility (65 dBA Ldn or less). Satisfactory interior noise levels are defined as 45 dBA Ldn or less.

•

According to CEQA, a significant noise impact would result if noise levels increase substantially over a permanent basis at existing noise-sensitive land uses (e.g., residences) as a result of the project. A “substantial increase” would be an increase of 3 dBA Ldn or greater at noise-sensitive land uses where noise levels already exceed 65 dBA Ldn, or 5 dBA Ldn or greater where the noise level would remain below 65 dBA Ldn.

•

Significant noise impacts would result from construction if noise levels are sufficiently high to interfere with speech, sleep, or normal residential activities. Construction-related hourly average noise levels received at noise-sensitive land uses exceeding 60 dBA Leq(hr), and at least 5 dBA Leq(hr) above the ambient, would be considered significant if the construction activities substantially increased the noise environment for more than 12 months.

Impact:

Exposure of Persons to Excessive Noise Levels. The project would develop residential uses in a noise environment exceeding the “normally acceptable” noise and land use compatibility guidelines. This is a significant impact.

The proposed project proposes up to 220 dwelling units on the site. The Specific Plan for the project area also allows for neighborhood commercial uses and multi-family housing, although none are proposed as part of this residential project. Best assumptions would put future commercial uses near the intersection of Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista Drive extension. Additional noise studies may be necessary to evaluate any potential impacts on a project by project level once specific development is proposed. Exterior Noise Environment The Federal Highway Administration’s Traffic Noise Model (TNM) was used to calculate future traffic noise levels at the site. Cumulative traffic conditions, based on the volumes presented in the traffic analysis for the Fairview Corners Residential Project1, were input into the model to calculate the future noise environment expected at the site. Future traffic noise levels are calculated to be 67 dBA Ldn at a distance of 100 feet from the center of Fairview Road. Future 1

Fairview Corners Draft Transportation Impact Analysis, Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc, July 21, 2010.

7

noise levels at a distance of 70 feet from the centerline of the Cielo Vista Extension were calculated to be 57 dBA Ldn. Noise-sensitive uses proposed within 100 feet of the center of Fairview Road would include the first row of residences located along the western boundary of the site. This analysis assumes that the backyards of the single-family houses would adjoin Fairview Road. Noise levels in outdoor use areas that are affected by roadway noise are required to be maintained at or below 65 dBA Ldn to be considered normally acceptable for residential uses. The day-night average noise level in the outdoor use areas of residential units adjoining Fairview Road would be approximately 67 dBA Ldn and would exceed the County’s exterior noise standards by 2 dBA Ldn. This is a significant impact. Single-family residential uses are proposed approximately 70 feet from the center of the Cielo Vista Extension would be exposed to day-night average noise levels of approximately 57 dBA Ldn. Future noise levels in the rear yards of these residences would meet the County’s exterior noise standard. A noise barrier would be required to reduce noise levels in the rear yards of homes adjacent to Fairview Road. Preliminary barrier calculations indicate that a six-foot noise barrier, relative to the residential pad elevation, would be required to reduce exterior noise levels at residential outdoor use areas proposed adjacent to Fairview Road to “normally acceptable” levels. Table 3 summarizes the future exterior noise levels of homes along Fairview Road assuming noise barrier heights ranging between 6 feet and 10 feet. A preliminary barrier design is shown in Appendix 2. Table 3: Future Exterior Ldn Noise Levels (dBA) With Mitigation Noise Source

No Barrier

6 foot

7 foot

8 foot

9 foot

10 foot

Fairview Road

67

60

58

57

56

55

Athletic fields and athletic facilities that will be part of the Gavilan College are proposed southeast of the project site. Planned athletic fields include a soccer field, softball and baseball diamonds, and a football field surrounded by a track and bleachers. The athletic fields would include lighting and would be expected to generate noise in the late evening hours. Actively used playfields could potentially be a significant source of community noise at receivers in the site vicinity. Noise would primarily result from players, spectators, and public address systems. Noise levels resulting from the use from these athletic fields would be highest during highly attended football games. Most home football games are expected to occur on Saturday nights at 7:00 p.m. There would be five regularly scheduled home games and the possibility of an additional scrimmage game. The proposed bleachers would accommodate 2,000 to 5,000 spectators, however, average attendance is expected to range from 500 to 2,000 spectators.

8

A credible worst-case assessment of potential noise from sporting activities at the junior college campus was made using noise data from a high-school football game2. High-school sporting events are generally attended by more spectators than junior college events. Worst-case average noise levels resulting from a football game would be approximately 61 to 63 dBA Leq at a distance of 465 feet from the center of the field and would include noise sources such as the cheering of the crowd, referee’s whistles, the public address system, horns, bands, and other amplified music. Maximum noise levels generated by these individual sources would typically range from 60 to 74 dBA Lmax at a distance of 465 feet. Noise levels generated by baseball, softball, track and field, and swimming events would be lower than those generated by football events. The nearest noise-sensitive receiver is located about 620 feet northeast of the center of the football field. Worst-case average noise levels generated by a football game with about 500 spectators would range from about 51 to 53 dBA Leq at the nearest residences, and maximum noise levels would range from about 50 to 64 dBA Lmax. Worst-case average noise levels generated by a football game with about 2,000 spectators would range from about 57 to 59 dBA Leq at the nearest residences. Maximum noise levels would range from about 56 to 70 dBA Lmax. Noise levels generated by football would exceed ambient noise levels by 10 to 20 dBA Leq at nearby residential land uses. Noise levels generated by the use of the soccer field, softball and baseball diamonds, and track would be less given expected attendance at such events. Although the proposed project would substantially increase ambient noise levels during well attended football games, these events would occur on 5 nights a year or less for about 3 hours a night. This would be considered a less than significant impact.

Interior Noise Environment Future noise levels at the project site would require that interior noise levels within single-family residential units not exceed 45 dBA Ldn. Residential units proposed along Fairview Road would be exposed to exterior noise levels of about 67 dBA Ldn. In buildings of typical construction, with the windows partially open, interior noise levels are approximately 15 dBA lower than exterior noise levels. With the windows closed, standard residential construction typically provides 20 to 25 decibels of exterior to interior noise reduction. Interior noise levels would exceed 45 dBA Ldn assuming standard construction with the windows open for ventilation at potential second story residences. This is a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures would reduce the potentially significant impact to a less-thansignificant level: 

2

A minimum six-foot noise barrier shall be constructed to reduce noise levels at outdoor use areas along Fairview Road. To be effective, the barriers should be constructed solidly over the entire surface and the base. Openings or gaps between barrier materials

Santa Teresa High School Football Stadium Lighting Project, Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc., October 9, 2002.

9

or the ground decrease the reduction provided by a noise barrier. Suitable materials for barrier construction should have a minimum surface weight of 3 lbs./ft2. (such as oneinch thick wood, masonry block, concrete, or metal). A preliminary barrier design is shown in Appendix 2. The final design of noise barriers shall be completed during project-level review when detailed site plans and grading plans are available. 

Project-specific acoustical analyses are required by the County of San Benito to ensure that interior noise levels will be reduced to 45 dBA Ldn or lower at second story residences. Building sound insulation requirements would need to include the provision of forced-air mechanical ventilation for second story residential units adjacent to Fairview Road, satisfactory to the local building official, so that windows could be kept closed to control noise. Results of project specific analyses, including the description of the necessary noise control treatments, will be submitted to the County along with the building plans and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. Feasible construction techniques such as these would adequately reduce interior noise levels to 45 dBA Ldn or lower.

Impact:

Off-Site Project-Generated Traffic Noise. The proposed project traffic will generate an increase in volumes along area roadways. The calculated increase in traffic would not result in a substantial increase in traffic noise at nearby receivers. This is a less-than-significant impact.

Project generated traffic noise level increases were calculated by comparing project (existing plus project) to existing traffic volumes. A total of 19 intersections surrounding the project site were analyzed. A review of the project’s traffic study indicates that the proposed project will generate a slight increase in vehicular traffic on the local roadway network. The addition of project traffic would increase noise levels by 1 dBA Ldn or less. A traffic noise increase of less than 3 dBA Ldn is not typically perceptible and is not considered substantial. This is a less-than-significant impact. Mitigation Measures: Impact:

None Required

Cumulative Traffic Noise. The proposed project would not substantially contribute to cumulative noise levels anticipated with the build-out of the General Plan. This is a less-than-significant impact.

Cumulative traffic noise level increases were calculated by comparing cumulative plus project traffic volumes to cumulative no project volumes. The project’s contribution to cumulative noise level increases would be less than 1 dBA Ldn in the long-term. This increase in noise would not be substantial. The project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to increased noise levels resulting from the build-out of the area. Mitigation Measures: Impact:

None Required

Construction Noise.

10

The project site is bordered by existing residential land uses to the north, west, and east. Noise generated by construction on the site would substantially increase noise levels at residential land uses in the vicinity of the site. This is a potentially significant impact. Noise impacts resulting from construction depend on the noise generated by various pieces of construction equipment, the timing and duration of noise generating activities, and the distance between construction noise sources and noise sensitive receptors. Construction noise impacts primarily occur when construction activities occur during noise-sensitive times of the day (early morning, evening, or nighttime hours), the construction occurs in areas immediately adjoining noise sensitive land uses, or when construction noise lasts over extended periods of time. Where noise from construction activities exceeds 60 dBA Leq and exceeds the ambient noise environment by at least 5 dBA Leq at noise-sensitive uses in the project vicinity for a duration of one year or more, the impact would be considered significant. Construction activities generate considerable amounts of noise. Construction-related noise levels are normally highest during the construction of project infrastructure. The infrastructure phase of construction requires heavy equipment that generates the highest noise levels. Typical hourly average construction generated noise levels are about 81 dBA to 88 dBA measured at a distance of 50 feet from the center of the site during busy construction periods (e.g., earth moving equipment, impact tools, etc.). The highest maximum noise levels generated by project construction would typically range from about 90 to 98 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the noise source. Construction-related noise levels are normally less during building framing, finishing, and landscaping phases. There would be variations in construction noise levels on a day-to-day basis depending on the specific activities occurring at the site. Construction generated noise levels drop off at a rate of about 6 dBA per doubling of distance away from the source. Shielding by buildings or terrain often result in much lower construction noise levels at distant receptors. Ambient daytime noise levels at the nearest receivers (approximately 100 feet west of the Fairview Road centerline) typically range from dBA 59 to 63 dBA Leq during the day. Construction noise levels are anticipated to exceed 60 dBA Leq and the ambient by 5 dBA or more when intense construction activities occur within about 700 feet of the nearest receivers to the north, west, and east. Construction activities occurring on the portions of the site nearest these receivers may result in noise levels exceeding 60 dBA Leq and the ambient by 5 dBA Leq or more. The residential project is assumed to be constructed in two or more phases, and the initial two phases may be divided into additional phases of up to four per phase, for a maximum of eight phases. Each phase is anticipated to be implemented over a period of about two years, with project buildout occurring in 5 to 16 years. It is conceivable that a particular receiver or group of receivers would be subject to construction noise levels in excess of 60 dBA Leq and the ambient by 5 dBA Leq for a period of time exceeding one construction season. To reduce noise levels generated by construction, the following standard construction noise control measures shall be included in the project:

11



Restrict noise-generating activities at the construction site or in areas adjacent to the construction site to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. daily.



Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.



Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines should be strictly prohibited.



Locate stationary noise generating equipment such as air compressors or portable power generators as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Construct temporary noise barriers to screen stationary noise generating equipment when located near adjoining sensitive land uses. Temporary noise barriers could reduce construction noise levels by 5 dBA.



Utilize "quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists.



Route all construction traffic to and from the project site via designated truck routes where possible. Prohibit construction related heavy truck traffic in residential areas where feasible.



Control noise from construction workers’ radios to a point that they are not audible at existing residences bordering the project site.



The contractor shall prepare and submit to the County for approval a detailed construction plan identifying the schedule for major noise-generating construction activities.



Designate a "disturbance coordinator" who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule.

Significance After Mitigation: Although the above measures would reduce noise generated by the construction of the project, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable as a result of the extended period of time that adjacent receivers would be exposed to construction noise.

12

Appendix 1: Daily Trend in Noise Levels

13

Noise Levels at LT-1 ~33 feet from the centerline of Fairview Road March 21-22, 2008 95 90 85 80

Noise Level (dBA)

75 70 Leq

65

L(1) 60 L(10) 55

L(50)

50

L(90)

Ldn = 71 dBA

45 40 35 30 13:00

15:00

17:00

19:00

21:00

23:00

1:00

3:00

5:00

7:00

9:00

11:00

Hour Beginning

Noise Levels at LT-1 ~33 feet from the centerline of Fairview Road March 22-23, 2008 95 90 85 80

Noise Level (dBA)

75 70 Leq

65

L(1) 60 L(10) 55

L(50)

50

L(90)

Ldn = 70 dBA

45 40 35 30 13:00

15:00

17:00

19:00

21:00

23:00

1:00

3:00

Hour Beginning

14

5:00

7:00

9:00

11:00

Noise Levels at LT-1 ~33 feet from the centerline of Fairview Road March 23-24, 2008 95 90 85 80

Noise Level (dBA)

75 70 Leq

65

L(1) 60 L(10) 55

L(50)

50

L(90)

Ldn = 72 dBA

45 40 35 30 13:00

15:00

17:00

19:00

21:00

23:00

1:00

3:00

5:00

7:00

9:00

11:00

Hour Beginning

Noise Levels at LT-1 ~33 feet from the centerline of Fairview Road March 24-25, 2008 95 90 85 80

Noise Level (dBA)

75 70 Leq

65

L(1) 60 L(10) 55

L(50)

50

L(90)

Ldn = 71 dBA

45 40 35 30 13:00

15:00

17:00

19:00

21:00

23:00

1:00

3:00

Hour Beginning

15

5:00

7:00

9:00

11:00

Noise Levels at LT-1 ~33 feet from the centerline of Fairview Road March 25-26, 2008 95 90 85 80

Noise Level (dBA)

75 70 Leq

65

L(1) 60 L(10) 55

L(50)

50

L(90)

Ldn = 71 dBA

45 40 35 30 13:00

15:00

17:00

19:00

21:00

23:00

1:00

3:00

Hour Beginning

16

5:00

7:00

9:00

11:00

Appendix 2: Preliminary Noise Barrier Location for Receivers along Fairview Road

= Noise Barrier

17

505 Petaluma Boulevard South Petaluma, California 94952 Tel: 707-766-7700 www.Illingworthrodkin.com

Fax: 707-766-7790 [email protected]

MEMO Date:

May 26, 2011

To:

Sally Rideout EMC Planning Group, Inc.

From:

Jared McDaniel Illingworth and Rodkin, Inc.

Subject:

Response to Noise Comments

1. Noise associated with pumping facilities and ongoing agricultural operations surrounding the site are not anticipated to generate noise levels in excess of existing ambient noise levels generated by local traffic along Fairview Road. I & R has conducted numerous noise measurements of various types of pumps throughout the Bay Area and data in our files have shown that noise levels can range from about 60 to 70 dBA at 3 feet from the equipment. Sensitive receivers located at increased distances from these noise sources would experience much lower noise levels. Further, noises from these types of sources are intermittent in nature and do not occur frequently enough to significantly increase day-night average noise levels at adjacent residences. 2. Section 25.37.035 of the San Benito County Code of Ordinances contains acceptable noise standards for noise emanating from any source, as it affects surrounding properties. Residential land uses are acceptable up to 50 dBA Leq (hr) during the day and 40 dBA Leq (hr) at night. The proposed project would not introduce any significant source of noise that could exceed the County’s Noise Ordinance at nearby sensitive receivers. Based on our experience and data in our files, noise in residential areas would be generated by vehicles circulating project roadways, engine starts, door slams, and by the sound of human voices and children playing. The sound of a passing car at 15 mph typically ranges from 55 dBA to 65 dBA at 25 feet. The noise of an engine start is similar. Door slams and peoples voices create noise levels lower than engine starts. Once temporary construction (exempt from Section 25.37.035) is completed, singlefamily residential land uses generate little, if any noise that would be audible at nearby sensitive receivers. 3.

A construction impact would be identified when the noise from construction activities exceeds 60 dBA Leq and exceeds the ambient noise environment by at least 5 dBA Leq at

noise-sensitive uses in the project vicinity for a duration of one year or more. Worst-case hourly average construction source noise levels during busy construction periods would be 88 dBA Leq measured at a distance of 50 feet. The noise level standard used was 60 dBA Leq (Based on typical ambient noise levels measured at adjacent receivers). Therefore, 5 dBA Leq above the ambient would be 65 dBA. The source level (88 dBA) is subtracted by the 5 dBA above standard level (65 dBA) to get the reduction needed (23 dBA reduction). This number is then divided by the drop-off rate for construction noise (construction noise uses a 6 dBA per doubling or 20 Log). 23/20 = 1.15. The final calculation projects a distance construction noise will be greater than 65 dBA Leq. 10^1.15 X 50 (source distance) = 706.2687723 feet. We rounded and said within about 700 feet. 4. Active parks, ball fields, or sports complexes that have large numbers of participants or spectators can potentially be a significant source of community noise. Our experience with similar projects and data in our files show that for normal active park events such as soccer games, baseball games, dog parks, etc., average noise levels of about 55 to 60 dBA Leq could be expected at a distance of 150 feet from the center of activities. Passive public parks (as proposed for this project) could contain one or more of the following amenities that are part of most neighborhood parks: tot lot/playground, open turf area, picnic tables with barbeques, pathways, open space, etc. Typical sounds from these types of parks include people’s voices, kids playing, engine starts, door slams etc. Noise levels generated by passive parks are similar to those outlined in item 2 of this memo and would typically range from 55 to 65 dBA at 24 feet. It is not anticipated, given the activities outlined above, that noise from passive parks would cause any adverse noise impacts upon noise sensitive receptors in the area. . 5. In our discussion about exposure to campus-generated noise, the County’s General Plan noise and land use compatibility standard was used to determine significance upon adjacent residential receivers. 6. The proposed project would not require the use of heavy equipment that would result in groundborne vibration that would cause damage to adjacent buildings (i.e., pile drivers). It is possible, however, that construction activities occurring along the perimeter of the site could intermittently produce perceptible vibration levels at adjacent residences (i.e., graders, Dozers, tractors, etc). These anticipated groundborne vibration levels generated by demolition or construction activities would not be expected to result in cosmetic or structural damage to adjacent building. Table 1 identifies vibration source levels for various pieces of construction equipment anticipated at the site with the exception of vibratory rollers and crack and seat operations, which are not scheduled for this type of project. Vibration levels at sensitive receivers located approximately 50 feet or further away from construction activities are not anticipated to be greater than 0.04 in/sec PPV. Vibration levels at adjacent buildings would not be considered significant given the intermittent and short duration of the phases that have the highest potential of producing vibration. By use of administrative controls such as notifying neighbors of scheduled construction activities and scheduling construction activities with the highest potential to produce perceptible vibration to hours with the least potential to affect nearby residences,

perceptible vibration can be kept to a minimum and as such would not result in a significant impact with respect to perception and construction vibration thresholds put forth in the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Induced Vibration Guidance Manual. Table 1. Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment.

* Vibratory rollers and Crack-and-seat operations are not anticipated for this project.

APPENDIX K

T RAFFIC I MPACT A NALYSIS AND S UPPLEMENTAL L ETTER

 

Fairview Corners Residential FINAL Transportation Impact Analysis Prepared for:

Fairview Corners LLC April 29, 2011

Hexagon Office: 7888 Wren Avenue, Suite B-121 Gilroy, CA 95020 Hexagon Job Number: 09JE01 Phone: 408.846.7410 Client: Fairview Corners LLC Staff: JE, HT

Page | 1 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                               

April 29, 2011 

Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... iii  1. 

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

2. 

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

3. 

Project Conditions ......................................................................................................................... 19 

4. 

Cumulative Conditions .................................................................................................................. 33 

5. 

Conclusions .................................................................................................................................. 39 

Appendices Appendix A:

Traffic Count Data

Appendix B:

Volume Summary Tables

Appendix C:

Intersection Level of Service Calculations

Appendix D:

Peak-Hour Signal Warrant Checks

Appendix E:

Two-Lane Highway Level of Service Calculations

Appendix F:

Intersection Queuing Calculation Sheets

List of Tables Table ES 1 

Project Intersection Level of Service Summary ................................................................ v 

Table ES 2 

Project Signal Warrant Check Summary ..........................................................................vi 

Table ES 3 

Project Two-Lane Highway Level of Service Summary................................................... vii 

Table ES 4 

Project Intersection Queuing Analysis Results ................................................................ vii 

Table ES 5 

Cumulative Intersection Level of Service Summary .........................................................xi 

Table ES 6 

Cumulative with Project Conditions Signal Warrant Check Summary ............................ xii 

Table 1 

Signalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Control Delay ...................... 6 

Table 2 

Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Control Delay .................. 6 

Table 3 

Level of Service Criteria for Class II Two-Lane Highways ................................................... 8 

Table 4 

Existing Intersection Levels of Service ............................................................................... 16 

Table 5 

Existing Peak-Hour Traffic Signal Warrant Results ............................................................ 18 

Table 6 

Existing Two-Lane Highway Levels of Service ................................................................... 18 

Table 7 

Project Trip Generation Analysis ........................................................................................ 21 

Table 8 

Project Intersection Levels of Service ................................................................................ 26 

Table 9 

Project Signal Warrant Checks ........................................................................................... 27 

Table 10 

Project Two-Lane Highway Level of Service Results ......................................................... 28 

Page | i 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                               

April 29, 2011 

Table 11 

Project Intersection Queuing Analysis Results ................................................................... 32 

Table 12 

Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service.......................................................................... 37 

Table 13 

Cumulative Peak-Hour Signal Warrant Checks.................................................................. 38 

List of Figures Figure 1 

Site Location and Study Intersections .................................................................................. 2 

Figure 2 

Site Plan................................................................................................................................ 3 

Figure 3 

LOS Criteria for Class I Two-Lane Highways ....................................................................... 8 

Figure 4 

Existing Bicycle Facilities .................................................................................................... 13 

Figure 5 

Existing Lane Configurations .............................................................................................. 14 

Figure 6 

Existing Traffic Volumes ..................................................................................................... 15 

Figure 7 

Project Trip Distribution ...................................................................................................... 23 

Figure 8 

Project Trip Assignment ...................................................................................................... 24 

Figure 9 

Project Traffic Volumes....................................................................................................... 25 

Figure 10 

Cumulative With Project Traffic Volumes ........................................................................... 35 

Page | ii 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Executive Summary This report presents the results of the traffic impact analysis conducted for the proposed Fairview Corners residential development in Hollister, California. The project site is located at the vacant northeast corner of Fairview Road and Airline Highway and consists of the development of up to 220 single-family homes. Cielo Vista Drive would be extended onto the project site from Fairview Road and would serve as the only access point for the site. This traffic impact analysis documents the impacts to the surrounding transportation system associated with developing the proposed project. The potential impacts of the project were evaluated in accordance with the standards set forth by the City of Hollister, San Benito County, and Caltrans. The study included an analysis of nine signalized intersections, nine unsignalized intersections, one future intersection, and two highway segments. Traffic conditions were analyzed for the weekday AM and PM peak hours. The weekday AM peak hour of traffic generally falls within the 7:00 to 9:00 AM period and the weekday PM peak hour is typically in the 4:00 to 6:00 PM period. It is during these times that the most congested traffic conditions occur on an average day. The following study intersections and highway segments were evaluated:

Study Intersections 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway Enterprise Road and Airline Highway Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway Fairview Road and Union Road (future intersection) Valley View Road and Union Road Airline Highway and Union Road Southside Road and Union Road San Benito Street and Union Road Union Road/Mitchell Road and Highway 156 Airline Highway and Sunset Drive McCray Street/Highway 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Road/Tres Pinos Road Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road Fairview Road and Sunnyslope Road Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road Highway 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Road McCray Street and Hillcrest Road Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road

Page | iii 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  19. Fairview Road and McCloskey Road

Highway Segments 1. State Route 25, between US 101 and SR 156 2. State Route 156, between Union Road and The Alameda Scenario 1:

Existing Conditions. Existing conditions were represented by existing peak-hour traffic volumes on the existing roadway network. Existing traffic volumes were obtained from recent traffic counts.

Scenario 2:

Existing plus Project Conditions. Existing plus project conditions (also referred to as Project Conditions) were represented by traffic volumes, with the project, on the existing roadway network. Traffic volumes with the project (hereafter called project traffic volumes) were estimated by adding to existing traffic volumes the traffic generated by the project. Project conditions were evaluated relative to existing conditions in order to determine potential project impacts.

Scenario 3:

Cumulative Conditions. Cumulative conditions represent future traffic volumes on the longrange future transportation network that would result from traffic growth projected to occur under the City of Hollister and San Benito County General Plans (year 2023 conditions). This scenario also includes traffic associated with the Santana Ranch Specific Plan and Gavilan College projects as well as the Award Homes project. Project traffic was added to future traffic volumes to evaluate cumulative impacts.

Evaluation of Project Conditions The evaluation of impacts associated with the proposed project is described below.

Project Trips The magnitude of traffic generated by the proposed project was estimated by applying to the size of the project the appropriate trip generation rates, as published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), eighth edition. The project would generate 2,105 daily trips, with 165 trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 222 trips occurring during the PM peak hour.

Project Analyses The results of the level of service analyses under project conditions are summarized below.

Intersection Level of Service Analysis Traffic impacts at the study intersections were identified based on a level of service standard of C for all study intersections. The results of the intersection level of service analysis under project conditions are summarized in Table ES 1. The results indicate that none of the study intersections would be significantly impacted with the addition of project traffic. All study intersections would continue to operate at LOS C except for one, which would continue to operate at LOS D, but the addition of project traffic at this intersection would not significantly increase delay and the impact would be less than significant.

Page | iv 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Table ES 1 Project Intersection Level of Service Summary

Intersection Intersection Fairview Rd./Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy. Fairview Rd./Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy. Enterprise Rd. and Airline Hwy. Enterprise Rd. and Airline Hwy. Fairview Rd. and Cielo Vista Dr./ Fairview Rd. and Cielo Vista Dr./ Project Driveway Project Rd. Driveway Fairview and Union Rd. /d/ Fairview Rd. and Union Rd. /d/ Valley View Rd. and Union Rd. Valley View Rd. and Union Rd. Airline Hwy. and Union Rd. Airline Hwy. and Union Rd. Southside Rd. and Union Rd. Southside Rd. and Union Rd. San Benito St. and Union Rd. San Benito St. and Union Rd. Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156 Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156 Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr. Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr. McCray St/Hwy. 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope McCrayPinos St/Hwy. Rd./Tres Rd.25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd./Tres Pinos Rd.Sunnyslope Rd. Valley View Rd. and Valley View Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest Rd. Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest Rd. Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest Rd. Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest Rd. Hwy. 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd. Hwy. 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd. McCray St. and Hillcrest Rd. McCray St. and Hillcrest Rd. Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana Rd. Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana Rd. Fairview Rd. and McCloskey Rd. Fairview Rd. and McCloskey Rd.

Existing Int.Existing Control Int. Control

Peak Peak Hour Hour

All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Two-Way Two-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ Future Future Signal Signal Two-Way Two-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ Signal Signal

AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM

Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Signal Signal One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Signal Signal Signal Signal One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/

Existing Existing Avg. Avg. LOS Delay Delay LOS 10.5 10.5 11.4 11.4 15.9 15.9 21.7 21.7 9.8 9.8 10.5 10.5 --- --13.3 13.3 20.1 20.1 33.6 33.6 31.8 31.8 13.9 13.9 12.7 12.7 10.7 10.7 10.6 10.6 37.3 37.3 30.8 30.8 12.0 12.0 11.6 11.6 28.1 28.1 30.1 30.1 13.5 13.5 13.3 13.3 10.9 10.9 9.8 9.8 17.0 17.0 13.3 13.3 13.5 13.5 12.4 12.4 24.7 24.7 25.8 25.8 25.4 25.4 27.7 27.7 14.6 14.6 13.8 13.8 14.6 14.6 12.5 12.5

B BB CB CC AC BA -- B -- -B -CB CC CC BC BB BB BB DB CD BC BB CB CC BC BB BB AB CA BC B B BB CB CC CC CC BC BB BB BB B

Existing Plus Project Existing Plus Project Avg. Change in Avg. LOS Change Delay Delay /c/ in Delay LOS Delay /c/ 10.9 10.9 11.7 11.7 17.0 17.0 24.3 24.3 10.7 10.7 12.2 12.2 --- --13.4 13.4 20.3 20.3 34.7 34.7 32.7 32.7 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 10.7 10.7 10.6 10.6 37.9 37.9 31.0 31.0 11.9 11.9 11.5 11.5 28.1 28.1 30.1 30.1 14.1 14.1 13.9 13.9 11.4 11.4 10.0 10.0 18.8 18.8 13.6 13.6 14.2 14.2 13.1 13.1 24.9 24.9 26.0 26.0 25.3 25.3 27.9 27.9 14.9 14.9 14.0 14.0 14.8 14.8 12.7 12.7

B BB CB CC BC BB -- B -- -B -CB CC CC BC BB BB BB DB CD BC BB CB CC BC BB BB BB CB BC B B BB CB CC CC CC BC BB BB BB B

+0.4 +0.4 +0.3 +0.3 +1.1 +1.1 +2.6 +2.6 +0.9 +0.9 +1.7 +1.7 --- --+0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +1.1 +1.1 +0.9 +0.9 -0.1 -0.1 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.6 +0.6 +0.2 +0.2 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.6 +0.6 +0.6 +0.6 +0.5 +0.5 +0.2 +0.2 +1.8 +1.8 +0.3 +0.3 +0.7 +0.7 +0.7 +0.7 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 -0.1 -0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.3 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2

Notes: Notes: /a/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections are based on the stop-controlled /a/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections are based on the stop-controlled approach with the highest delay. approach with the highest delay. /b/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents the average delay for all /b/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents the average delay for all approaches at the intersection. approaches at the intersection. /c/ Change in delay is measured relative to background conditions for the analysis of project conditions impacts. /c/ Change in delay is measured relative to background conditions for the analysis of project conditions impacts. /d/ Future intersection. /d/ Future intersection. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the current level of service standard. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the current level of service standard. - Denotes Project impact - Denotes Project impact

Page | v 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Peak-Hour Signal Warrant Analysis The results of the peak-hour traffic signal warrant checks under project conditions are summarized on Table ES 2. The results indicate that the addition of project traffic would cause two intersections to meet the peak-hour signal warrant during one peak hour under project conditions where a signal is not warranted under existing conditions: Enterprise Road and Airline Highway (PM peak hour) Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road (PM peak hour) The addition of project traffic would not create the need to signalize any of the remaining unsignalized study intersections. Table ES 2 Project Signal Warrant Check Summary

Intersection Name Intersection Name

Warrant Met? Warrant Met? Existing Existing Plus Existing Existing Plus Conditions Project Conditions Project AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM

Existing Unsignalized Intersections Existing Unsignalized Intersections Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Enterprise Road and Airline Highway Enterprise Road and Airline Highway

No No

No No

No No

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway

No No

No No

No No

No No

Valley View Road and Union Road Valley View Road and Union Road

No No

No No

No No

No No

Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road

No No

No No

No No

No No

Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road

Yes Yes

No No

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road

No No

No No

No No

No No

Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and McCloskey Road Fairview Road and McCloskey Road

No No

No No

No No

No No

Notes: Notes: Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition. Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition.

Two-Lane Highway Level of Service Results Peak-hour highway segment levels of service were evaluated for the section of Highway 25 between US 101 and Highway 156 and the section of Highway 156 between The Alameda and Union Road. The results of the highway level of service analysis are summarized on Table ES 3. The results indicate that both study highway segments currently exceed Caltrans’ level of service standard during both peak hours

Page | vi 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  with operations in the LOS E range. The addition of project traffic on both Highways 156 and 25 would lead to a slight degradation in level of service on those facilities, expressed in terms of an increase in the percent-time-spent following, but the operations would remain in the LOS E range under project conditions. This is considered a significant impact by Caltrans’ standards. Table ES 3 Project Two-Lane Highway Level of Service Summary Existing Conditions Existing Plus Project Existing Conditions Existing Plus Project Peak % Time% TimePeak % Time% TimeHour Spent-Following LOS Spent-Following LOS Hour Spent-Following LOS Spent-Following LOS

Segment Segment SR 25 - Between US 101 and SR 156 SR 25 - Between US 101 and SR 156

AM AM PM PM

SR 156 - Between The Alameda and Union Rd SR 156 - Between The Alameda and Union Rd

AM AM PM PM

87.1% 87.1% 88.3% 88.3% 89.8% 89.8% 89.0% 89.0%

E E E E E E E E

87.3% 87.3% 88.6% 88.6% 90.1% 90.1% 89.2% 89.2%

E E E E E E E E

Notes: Notes: Based on the Two-Way-Two-Lane Highway Segment LOS Methodology from Chapter 20 of the Highway Capacity Manual. Based on the Two-Way-Two-Lane Highway Segment LOS Methodology from Chapter 20 of the Highway Capacity Manual. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed Caltrans' current level of service standard. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed Caltrans' current level of service standard.

Intersection Turn-Pocket Storage Analysis Results The intersection turn-pocket storage analysis is based on vehicle queuing for high-demand turning movements at key intersections. The results indicate that the storage space currently available for highdemand turning movements at the Fairview Road-Ridgemark Drive/Airline Highway intersection would accommodate the projected maximum peak-hour vehicle queues during both the AM and PM peak hours. Additionally, the storage analysis results indicate that the southbound left-turn movement at the Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway intersection needs to provide a minimum of 25 feet of storage space. The results of the intersection turn-pocket storage analysis are shown on Table ES 4. Table ES 4 Project Intersection Queuing Analysis Results

Intersection Intersection

Fairview Rd and Airline Hwy Fairview Rd and Airline Hwy

Existing Conditions Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing Peak Vehicle Req.Conditions Storage # of Storage # of Storage Peak Vehicle Req. Storage Mvmt. Lanes Per Lane (ft.) Hour Queue /a/ Per Lane (ft.) /b/ Mvmt. Lanes Per Lane (ft.) Hour Queue /a/ Per Lane (ft.) /b/

EBL EBL

SBL SBL

SBR SBR

Fairview Rd and Fairview and Cielo Vista Rd Dr/Project Driveway Cielo Vista Dr/Project Driveway

SBL SBL

380 380

1

1

380 380 380 380

1

1

380 380 380 380

1

1

1

1

380 380

AM AM

1

PM PM

1

AM AM

1

PM PM

1

AM AM

1

PM PM

1

See Note /c/ See Note /c/ AM AM See Note /c/ PM See Note /c/ PM

Exising Plus Project Conditions Plus Project Conditions Vehicle Exising Req. Storage Vehicle Req. Storage Queue /a/ Per Lane (ft.) /b/ Comments Queue /a/ Per Lane (ft.) /b/ Comments

25 25

1

1

25 25

1

1

1

1

25 25

1

1

25 25 25 25

1

1

25 25

1

1 N/A N/A

N/A N/A

1

N/A N/A

N/A N/A

1

1

25 25

1

25 25

1

25 25

1

25 25

1

25 25

1

25 25

1

25 25

1

25 25

Existing storage Existing storage adequate. adequate. Existing storage Existing storage adequate. adequate. Existing storage Existing storage adequate. adequate. Existing storage Existing storage adequate. adequate. Existing storage Existing storage adequate. adequate. Existing storage Existing storage adequate. adequate. Lane would need to beLane ~ 25 would feet. need to be ~ 25 feet. Lane would need to beLane ~ 25 would feet. need to be ~ 25 feet.

Notes: /a/Notes: Vehicle queue (# of vehicles) calculated using the Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence level. Vehiclestorage queue (# vehicles)based calculated using thevehicle Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence /b//a/ Required is of calculated on peak-hour queue calculation as follows: Vehicle queue x 25'. level. Required storage is calculated based on peak-hour vehicle queue calculation as follows: Vehicle queue x 25'. /c//b/ This turn pocket would be built with the project. /c/ This turn pocket would be built with the project.

Page | vii 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Project Conditions Mitigation Measures The mitigation measures are described below. Enterprise Road and Airline Highway – Signalization of this intersection may be needed to assign right-ofway and maintain the orderly flow of traffic. Prior to issuance of the building permit(s) for the 100th and 200th residential units in the project, the developer should conduct a monitoring study, which will consist of the analyses of all applicable traffic signal warrants based on field-measured data and prevailing traffic and roadway conditions. The results of the monitoring study should be submitted to the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, who, in coordination with Caltrans and the City of Hollister Engineering Department, will determine if and when a traffic signal should be installed. The developer will install the traffic signal when directed by the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, subject to potential partial reimbursement from other funding sources, such as the TIF program, an established benefit assessment area, or other developments. With implementation of this mitigation measure, this impact would be less-than-significant with mitigation incorporated. If it is determined, through the monitoring studies, that the signal is not warranted at the time of the issuance of the building permit for the 200th unit, but these improvements are covered in the TIF, then the developer should pay the applicable TIF fee as a fair-share contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the improvements are not covered in the TIF, then the developer should pay a fair-share contribution (based on the pro rata contribution of traffic) to the benefit assessment area toward improvements at this intersection. However, payment of a fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. Therefore, in the event that the developer makes a fair-share contribution rather than installing the traffic signal at this intersection, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road – Signalization of this intersection may be needed to assign right-ofway and maintain the orderly flow of traffic. Prior to issuance of the building permit(s) for the 100th and 200th residential units in the project, the developer should conduct a monitoring study, which will consist of the analyses of all applicable traffic signal warrants based on field-measured data and prevailing traffic and roadway conditions. The results of the monitoring study should be submitted to the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, who will determine if and when a traffic signal should be installed. The developer will install the traffic signal when directed by the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, subject to potential partial reimbursement from other funding sources, such as the TIF program, an established benefit assessment area, or other developments. With implementation of this mitigation measure, this impact would be less-than-significant with mitigation incorporated. If it is determined, through the monitoring studies, that the signal is not warranted at the time of the issuance of the building permit for the 200th unit, but these improvements are covered in the TIF, then the developer should pay the applicable TIF fee as a fair-share contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the improvements are not covered in the TIF, then the developer should pay a fair-share contribution (based on the pro rata contribution of traffic) to the benefit assessment area toward improvements at this intersection. However, payment of the fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. Therefore, in the event that the developer makes a fair-share contribution rather than installing the traffic signal at this intersection, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Hwy 156 (Union Road to The Alameda) – The operations on this highway could be restored to acceptable conditions by widening the highway to four lanes or by adding passing lanes at strategic locations. The County is currently updating its TIF program. The current draft version includes passing lanes at strategic locations on Highways 25 and 156. Therefore, if these improvements are included in the adopted TIF program, and the fee covers the complete cost for design and construction, the developer should pay the applicable TIF fee as a fair-share contribution towards the identified improvement, and such payment would mitigate the projects impact to the extent feasible. In the event the TIF program does not ultimately cover these improvements, there would be no feasible means for the project to mitigate its nominal impact. There would be no other plan or program in place

Page | viii 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  that could be reasonably expected to result in the timely construction of these improvements given the substantial cost associated therewith and the need for significant contributions from many additional development projects. In that event, the project impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. However, even if the TIF is paid, payment of the fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. This impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable. Hwy 25 (SR 156 and US 101) – The operations on this highway could be restored to acceptable conditions by widening the highway to four lanes or by adding passing lanes at strategic locations. The County is currently updating its TIF program. The current draft version includes passing lanes at strategic locations on Highways 25 and 156. Therefore, if these improvements are included in the adopted TIF program, and the fee covers the complete cost for design and construction, the developer should pay the applicable TIF fee as a fair-share contribution towards the identified improvement, and such payment would mitigate the projects impact to the extent feasible. In the event the TIF program does not ultimately cover these improvements, there would be no feasible means for the project to mitigate its nominal impact. There would be no other plan or program in place that could be reasonably expected to result in the timely construction of these improvements given the substantial cost associated therewith and the need for significant contributions from many additional development projects. In that event, the project impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. However, even if the TIF is paid, payment of the fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. This impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable. Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway. Based on the amount of traffic the proposed project would generate, the turn-pocket storage lengths were determined for the southbound left-turn movement at the Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive-Project Driveway intersection. The southbound left-turn pocket will need to have at least 25 feet of storage space to provide storage for left-turn traffic into the project site. Additionally, the turn pocket length should be designed, to the extent feasible, to include deceleration distance in the turn pocket based on the design speed of Fairview Road (60 mph). Based on Chapter 400 of Caltrans’ Highway Design Manual, the ideal design for the southbound left-turn lane would include a total length of 490 feet. This is based on a design speed of 60 mph on Fairview Road, a vehicle storage length of 50 feet (2 vehicles), no deceleration in the through lane, and a 90-foot bay taper length being included in the deceleration length, per Caltrans standards.

Other Transportation Modes Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Currently the project site is not served directly by any bicycle facilities. Bike lanes are provided on the following roadway segments: • • • •

Sunnyslope Road between Highway 25 Bypass and Fairview Road Highway 25 Bypass between San Felipe Road and Sunnyslope Road San Benito Street between Nash Road and Union Road Southside Road between north of Union Road and south of Enterprise Road

The project frontage on Fairview Road currently does not have sidewalks.

Recommended Improvements The frontage improvements on Fairview Road should be designed to be consistent with County Roadway Design Standards, which may include the provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities on Fairview Road. Additionally, sidewalks and pedestrian crossings should be provided at the Fairview Road and Cielo Vista

Page | ix 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Drive/Project Driveway intersection to connect the planned on-site pedestrian facilities to existing/future pedestrian facilities on Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive.

Transit Service There are currently no bus routes that operate in the vicinity of the project site, and the nearest bus stops are not located within walking distance of the project site.

Recommended Improvements The project site should be designed with the potential future extension of transit services onto the project site in mind. It is recommended that the project applicant work with the local transit agency to ensure that any planned extensions of fixed route transit service on to or adjacent to the project site are accommodated by the design of the site frontage and on-site roadway improvements.

Site Access A review of the project site plan was performed to determine if adequate site access would be provided. The site plan proposes one full-access driveway on Fairview Road, across the street from Cielo Vista Drive. Fairview Road is planned to be a four-lane major arterial, and the project should therefore allow sufficient right-of-way for the future widening of Fairview Road. The level of service analysis results, signal warrant analysis results and left-turn pocket storage analysis results presented above for the Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway intersection indicate that the proposed design would adequately handle projected traffic demands and that no operational or safety problems would occur. This intersection will operate satisfactorily without a traffic signal.

Recommended Site Access Improvements The project should be set back far enough from Fairview Road to accommodate for the widening of Fairview Road. Additionally, the intersection improvements on the project side of the intersection should be designed and built to facilitate the future installation of traffic signal equipment at the intersection for when the intersection will be signalized.

Analysis of Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service Cumulative conditions are defined as conditions expected in the study area at General Plan buildout of San Benito County (year 2023). Traffic volumes for cumulative conditions at most intersections were obtained from the City of Hollister and San Benito County 2023 traffic-forecasting model. At locations where model forecasts were not available, future traffic volumes were developed by applying a future growth factor of 1.5% per year to the existing counts. The results of the intersection level of service analysis under cumulative conditions indicate that with the development growth currently projected through 2023 and the proposed project, two study intersections would be significantly impacted by the addition of project traffic: Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway Memorial Street and Hillcrest Road The remaining study intersections would not be significantly impacted by the project under cumulative conditions. The improvements recommended to improve intersection operations to acceptable levels under cumulative conditions are discussed in a later section of this chapter. The level of service results under cumulative conditions are summarized on Table ES 5.

Page | x 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Cumulative Peak-Hour Signal Warrant Checks The results of the peak-hour traffic signal warrant checks under cumulative conditions indicate that the addition of project traffic would not create an additional need to signalize any of the unsignalized study intersections. The results of the peak-hour signal warrant checks are summarized on Table ES 6. Table ES 5 Cumulative Intersection Level of Service Summary

Intersection Intersection Fairview Rd./Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy. Fairview Rd./Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy. Enterprise Rd. and Airline Hwy. Enterprise Rd. and Airline Hwy. Fairview Rd. and Cielo Vista Dr./ Fairview Rd. and Cielo Vista Dr./ Project Driveway Project Driveway Fairview Rd. and Union Rd. /d/ Fairview Rd. and Union Rd. /d/ Valley View Rd. and Union Rd. Valley View Rd. and Union Rd. Airline Hwy. and Union Rd. Airline Hwy. and Union Rd. Southside Rd. and Union Rd. Southside Rd. and Union Rd. San Benito St. and Union Rd. San Benito St. and Union Rd. Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156 Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156 Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr. Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr. McCray St/Hwy. 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope McCrayPinos St/Hwy. Rd./Tres Rd.25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd./Tres Rd.Sunnyslope Rd. Valley ViewPinos Rd. and Valley View Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest Rd. /e/ Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest Rd. /e/ Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest Rd. Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest Rd. Hwy. 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd. Hwy. 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd. McCray St. and Hillcrest Rd. McCray St. and Hillcrest Rd. Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana Rd. Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana Rd. Fairview Rd. and McCloskey Rd. Fairview Rd. and McCloskey Rd.

Existing Int.Existing Control Int. Control

Peak Peak Hour Hour

All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Two-Way Two-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ Future Future Signal Signal Two-Way Two-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ Signal Signal

AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM

Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Signal Signal One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Signal Signal Signal Signal One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/

Cumulative w/ out Cumulative w/ out Project Project Avg. Avg. Delay LOS Delay LOS 37.1 37.1 80.7 80.7 28.5 28.5 25.2 25.2 21.8 21.8 51.1 51.1 12.3 12.3 12.0 12.0 17.1 17.1 62.6 62.6 36.6 36.6 59.6 59.6 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 10.9 10.9 11.6 11.6 25.6 25.6 33.8 33.8 9.2 9.2 10.8 10.8 30.5 30.5 35.0 35.0 16.7 16.7 21.7 21.7 19.2 19.2 18.7 18.7 17.6 17.6 18.0 18.0 57.7 57.7 112.8 112.8 38.7 38.7 63.4 63.4 37.6 37.6 57.2 57.2 17.4 17.4 18.8 18.8 20.5 20.5 23.2 23.2

E FE DF DD CD FC BF BB CB FC DF ED BE BB BB BB CB CC AC BA CB DC CD CC BC BB BB BB FB FF DF ED DE ED CE CC CC CC C

Cumulative w/ Project Cumulative w/ Project Avg. Change Avg. Change Delay LOS in Delay /c/ Delay LOS in Delay /c/ 40.2 40.2 85.1 85.1 30.1 30.1 27.4 27.4 29.6 29.6 177.9 177.9 12.1 12.1 12.0 12.0 17.3 17.3 65.4 65.4 37.2 37.2 61.9 61.9 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 10.8 10.8 11.5 11.5 25.8 25.8 33.8 33.8 9.1 9.1 10.8 10.8 30.6 30.6 35.3 35.3 17.2 17.2 22.8 22.8 19.4 19.4 18.8 18.8 17.7 17.7 18.1 18.1 65.0 65.0 124.0 124.0 40.5 40.5 66.7 66.7 38.3 38.3 59.4 59.4 17.8 17.8 19.3 19.3 20.9 20.9 24.0 24.0

E FE DF DD DD FD BF BB CB FC DF ED BE BB BB BB CB CC AC BA CB DC CD CC BC BB BB BB FB FF DF ED DE ED CE CC CC CC C

+3.1 +3.1 +4.4 +4.4 +1.6 +1.6 +2.2 +2.2 +7.8 +7.8 +126.8 +126.8 -0.2 -0.2 +0.0 +0.0 +0.2 +0.2 +2.8 +2.8 +0.6 +0.6 +2.3 +2.3 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.0 +0.0 -0.1 -0.1 +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.3 +0.3 +0.5 +0.5 +1.1 +1.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +7.3 +7.3 +11.2 +11.2 +1.8 +1.8 +3.3 +3.3 +0.7 +0.7 +2.2 +2.2 +0.4 +0.4 +0.5 +0.5 +0.4 +0.4 +0.8 +0.8

Notes: Notes: /a/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections are based on the stop-controlled /a/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections are based on the stop-controlled approach with the highest delay. approach with the highest delay. /b/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents the average delay for all /b/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents the average delay for all approaches at the intersection. approaches at the intersection. /c/ Change in delay measured relative to cumulative without project conditions. /c/ Change in delay measured relative to cumulative without project conditions. /d/ Future intersection. /d/ Future intersection. /e/ This intersection is planned to be signalized as part of the Santana Ranch Specific Plan. Thus, the LOS reported under cumulative conditions /e/ This intersection is planned to be signalized as part of the Santana Ranch Specific Plan. Thus, the LOS reported under cumulative conditions is based upon the signalization of the intersection. is denoted based upon the signalization of the that intersection. Entries in bold indicate conditions exceed the current level of service standard. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the current level of service standard. - Denotes Project impact - Denotes Project impact

Page | xi 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Table ES 6 Cumulative with Project Conditions Signal Warrant Check Summary

Intersection Name Intersection Name

Warrant Met? Warrant Met? Cumulative w/ out Cumulative w/ Cumulative w/ out Cumulative w/ Project Conditions Project Conditions Project Conditions Project Conditions AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM

Existing Unsignalized Intersections Existing Unsignalized Intersections Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Enterprise Road and Airline Highway Enterprise Road and Airline Highway

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Valley View Road and Union Road Valley View Road and Union Road

No No

No No

No No

No No

Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road

No No

Yes Yes

No No

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and McCloskey Road Fairview Road and McCloskey Road

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Notes: Notes: Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition. Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition.

Highway Operations under Cumulative Conditions Both Highways 25 and 156 would be widened to four lanes under cumulative conditions. As such, the two-lane highway level of service methodology would no longer be applicable to these highways. Therefore, highway levels of service were not calculated under cumulative conditions.

Recommended Improvements under Cumulative Conditions The results of the cumulative analysis show that the operations at two intersections would degrade to unacceptable levels under traffic conditions projected for the year 2023. This indicates that over the next 10 to 15 years, it is likely that improvements at these locations will be necessary in order to maintain the level of service standard. For the most part, these deficiencies are a result of development growth throughout the City and County. Described below are the intersections at which the project’s contribution toward the impact would be significant and the recommended improvements necessary to maintain the level of service standards under cumulative conditions.

Page | xii 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway. Signalization of this intersection will be needed in order to maintain acceptable traffic operations. The intersection should be monitored, and a signal should be installed when warranted. Note that both the Fairview Corners and Gavilan College projects should share the cost of the signal. Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road. Signalization of this intersection will be needed in order to maintain acceptable traffic operations. Additionally, dedicated left-turn lanes should be added on all four approaches and the traffic signal should be operated with protected left-turn phasing. If these improvements are covered in the TIF, then the developer shall pay the applicable TIF fee as a fair-share contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the improvements are not covered in the TIF, then the developer shall pay its fair-share contribution (based on its pro rata contribution of trips) to the benefit assessment area toward improvements at this intersection. However, payment of a fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. This impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable.

Page | xiii 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

1. Introduction This report presents the results of the traffic impact analysis conducted for the proposed Fairview Corners residential development in Hollister, California. The project site is located at the vacant northeast corner of Fairview Road and Airline Highway and consists of the development of up to 220 single-family homes. Cielo Vista Drive would be extended onto the project site from Fairview Road and would serve as the only access point for the site. This traffic impact analysis documents the impacts to the surrounding transportation system associated with developing the proposed project. The project site location and the surrounding study area are shown on Figure 1. The project site plan is shown on Figure 2.

Scope of Study The potential impacts of the project were evaluated in accordance with the standards set forth by the City of Hollister, San Benito County, and Caltrans. The study included an analysis of traffic conditions for nine signalized intersections, nine unsignalized intersections, one future intersection, and two highway segments. Traffic conditions were analyzed for the weekday AM and PM peak-hours of traffic. The weekday AM peak hour of traffic generally falls within the 7:00 to 9:00 AM period and the weekday PM peak hour is typically in the 4:00 to 6:00 PM period. It is during these times that the most congested traffic conditions occur on an average day. The study intersections are listed below and shown on Figure 1.

Study Intersections 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway Enterprise Road and Airline Highway Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway Fairview Road and Union Road (future intersection) Valley View Road and Union Road Airline Highway and Union Road Southside Road and Union Road San Benito Street and Union Road Union Road/Mitchell Road and Highway 156 Airline Highway and Sunset Drive

Page | 1 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.

McCray Street/Highway 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Road/Tres Pinos Road Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road Fairview Road and Sunnyslope Road Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road Highway 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Road McCray Street and Hillcrest Road Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road Fairview Road and McCloskey Road

Highway Segments 1. State Route 25, between US 101 and SR 156 2. State Route 156, between Union Road and The Alameda Traffic conditions were evaluated for the following scenarios: Scenario 1:

Existing Conditions. Existing conditions were represented by existing peak-hour traffic volumes on the existing roadway network. Existing traffic volumes were obtained from recent traffic counts.

Scenario 2:

Existing plus Project Conditions. Existing plus project conditions (also referred to as Project Conditions) were represented by traffic volumes, with the project, on the existing roadway network. Traffic volumes with the project (hereafter called project traffic volumes) were estimated by adding to existing traffic volumes the traffic generated by the project. Project conditions were evaluated relative to existing conditions in order to determine potential project impacts.

Scenario 3:

Cumulative Conditions. Cumulative conditions represent future traffic volumes on the longrange future transportation network that would result from traffic growth projected to occur under the City of Hollister and San Benito County General Plans (year 2023 conditions). This scenario also includes traffic associated with the Santana Ranch Specific Plan and Gavilan College projects as well as the Award Homes project. Project traffic was added to future traffic volumes to evaluate cumulative impacts.

Methodology This section presents 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.

Data Requirements The data required for the analysis were obtained from new traffic counts, previous traffic studies, the City of Hollister, and field observations. The following data were collected from these sources: • • • •

existing traffic volumes lane configurations and traffic control signal timing and phasing (for signalized intersections) approved developments (size, use, and location)

Page | 4 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Intersection Level of Service Standards and Analysis Methodologies Traffic conditions at the study intersections were evaluated using level of service (LOS). Level of Service is a qualitative description of operating conditions ranging from LOS A, or free-flow conditions with little or no delay, to LOS F, or jammed conditions with excessive delays. The various levels of service are based on the average amount of delay incurred by drivers traveling through the intersection. The intersection analysis methods are described below. All of the study intersections are located in the City of Hollister or in unincorporated San Benito County and are therefore subject to the City of Hollister and San Benito County Level of Service standards. The level of service standard for intersections in both agencies’ jurisdiction is LOS C. Additionally, some of the intersections are located within the Caltrans right-of-way (State Highway 25), and are therefore subject to Caltrans’ Level of Service standards. As stated in Caltrans’ Guidelines for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (June 2001), “Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS ‘C’ and LOS ‘D’ on State highway facilities; however, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not always be feasible and recommends that the lead agency consult with Caltrans to determine the appropriate target LOS.” Based on the information above, a level of service standard of C is used for this analysis.

Signalized Intersections The level of service methodology chosen for the analysis of signalized study intersections is TRAFFIX. TRAFFIX employs the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology for the evaluation of signalized intersection level of service. TRAFFIX evaluates signalized intersection operations based on average control delay time for all vehicles at the intersection. Control delay is the amount of delay that is attributed to the particular traffic control device at the intersection, and includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. The correlation between average delay and level of service for signalized intersections is shown in Table 1.

Unsignalized Intersections The methodology used to determine the level of service for unsignalized intersections also is TRAFFIX and the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology for unsignalized intersection analysis. This method is applicable for both two-way and all-way stop-controlled intersections. For the analysis of stop-controlled intersections, the 2000 HCM methodology evaluates intersection operations on the basis of average control delay time for all vehicles on the stop-controlled approaches. For the purpose of reporting level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections, the delay and corresponding level of service for the stop-controlled minor street approach with the highest delay is reported. For all-way stopcontrolled intersections, the reported average delay and corresponding level of service is the average for all approaches at the intersection. The correlation between average control delay and level of service for unsignalized intersections is shown in Table 2.

Signal Warrants The level of service analysis at unsignalized intersections is supplemented with an assessment of the need for signalization of the intersection. This assessment is made on the basis of signal warrant criteria adopted by Caltrans. For this study, the need for signalization is assessed on the basis of the peak-hour traffic signal warrant, Warrant #3 described in the 2010 California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD). This method provides an indication of whether traffic conditions and peak-hour traffic levels are, or would be, sufficient to justify installation of a traffic signal. Other traffic signal warrants are available, however, they cannot be checked under future conditions (project and cumulative) because they rely on data for which forecasts are not available (such as accidents, pedestrian volume, and four- or eight-hour vehicle volumes).

Page | 5 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Table 1 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Control Delay Level of Level of Service Service

Description Description

Average Control Delay Average Control Delay Per Vehicle (Sec.) Per Vehicle (Sec.)

A A

Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression and/or Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression and/or short cycle lengths. short cycle lengths.

B B

Operations with low delay occurring with good progression and/or short cycle Operations with low delay occurring with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. lengths.

10.1 to 20.0 10.1 to 20.0

C C

Operation with average delays resulting from fair progression and/or longer Operation with average delays resulting from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear. cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear.

20.1 to 35.0 20.1 to 35.0

D D

E

F

E

F

Up to 10.0 Up to 10.0

Operations with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable Operations with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths or high V/C rations. Many vehicles stop and progression, long cycle lengths or high V/C rations. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable. individual cycle failures are noticeable. Operations with high delay values indicating poor progression, long cycle Operations with high delay values indicating poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. Operations with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to over Operations with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to over saturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths. saturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths.

35.1 to 55.0 35.1 to 55.0

55.1 to 80.0 55.1 to 80.0 Greater than 80.0 Greater than 80.0

Source: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual , (Washington, D.C., 2000) Source: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual , (Washington, D.C., 2000)

Table 2 Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions Based on Control Delay Level of Level of Service Service

Description Description

Average Control Delay Average Control Delay Per Vehicle (Sec.) Per Vehicle (Sec.)

A A

Operations with very low delays occurring with favorable progression. Operations with very low delays occurring with favorable progression.

B B

Operations with low delays occurring with good progression. Operations with low delays occurring with good progression.

10.1 to 15.0 10.1 to 15.0

C C

Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression. Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression.

15.1 to 25.0 15.1 to 25.0

D D

Operation with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression Operation with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression of high V/C ratios. of high V/C ratios.

25.1 to 35.0 25.1 to 35.0

E

E

Operation with high delay values indicating poor progression and high V/C Operation with high delay values indicating poor progression and high V/C ratios. This is considered to be the limited of acceptable delay. ratios. This is considered to be the limited of acceptable delay.

35.1 to 50.0 35.1 to 50.0

F

Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to oversaturation and poor progression. oversaturation and poor progression.

F

Source: Source:

Up to 10.0 Up to 10.0

Greater than 50.0 Greater than 50.0

Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. (Washington, D.C., 2000) Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. (Washington, D.C., 2000)

Page | 6 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  The decision to install a traffic signal should not be based purely on the warrants alone. Instead, the installation of a signal should be considered and further analysis performed when one or more of the warrants are met. Additionally, engineering judgment is exercised on a case-by-case basis to evaluate the effect a traffic signal will have on certain types of accidents and traffic conditions at the subject intersection as well as at adjacent intersections.

Highway Segment Level of Service Standards and Methodologies As prescribed in Chapters 12 and 20 of the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, the level of service for twolane, two-way rural highway segments is determined based on two measures of effectiveness (MOE): (1) percent time-spent-following (PTSF) and (2) average travel speed. For two-lane highways, PTSF is a measure of the driver’s freedom to maneuver and to freely select the speed at which they wish to travel on the subject highway segment. PTSF also serves as an indicator of the comfort and convenience of travel on the subject highway segment. Average travel speed is a measure of the mobility of the highway segment. The two-lane, two-way highway level of service methodology categorizes highways into two categories for analysis: •

•

Class I highways are those on which motorists expect to travel at relatively high speeds. Class I highways are primary routes that often serve long trips or serve as connecting links between facilities that serve long trips. Typically, highways that are part of major commute routes would be Class I facilities. Class II highways are those on which motorists do not necessarily expect to travel at high speeds. Class II highways are not major arterials and often serve as scenic or recreational highways.

The primary determinant of a highway’s classification is the motorist’s expectation of travel speed, which may not coincide with the functional classification of that particular highway segment. The level of service methodology for two-lane, two-way highways accounts for a variety of factors associated with the study highway segment such as: peak-hour traffic volumes, the directional distribution of traffic, percentage of heavy vehicles, lane and shoulder widths, terrain type, percentage of no-passing zones, and density of access points. The level of service for a two-lane, two-way highway is determined based on the MOEs described above and on the highway’s classification. On Class I highways where mobility is critical, the level of service is defined in terms of both percent time-spent-following and average travel speed. On Class II highways where mobility is less critical, the level of service is based only on the percent time-spent-following, regardless of the average travel speed on the highway. The correlation between these MOEs and highway levels of service are shown on Table 3 and Figure 3. Caltrans defines an acceptable level of service for highway segments as LOS C or better. Both study highway segments are classified as Class I highways.

Intersection Operations The analysis of project intersection levels of service was supplemented with an analysis of intersection operations for selected intersections. The operations analysis is based on vehicle queuing for high-demand turning movements at intersections. The basis of the analysis is as follows: (1) the 95th percentile maximum number of queued vehicles per signal cycle is estimated for a particular movement using the HCM queuing equation; (2) the estimated maximum number of vehicles in the queue is translated into a queue length, assuming 25 feet per vehicle; and (3) the estimated maximum queue length is compared to the existing or planned available storage capacity for the movement. This analysis thus provides a basis for estimating future storage requirements at intersections.

Page | 7 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Figure 3 LOS Criteria for Class I Two-Lane Highways 100

Percent Time-Spent-Following (%)

90

LOS E

80 LOS D

70 60

LOS C 50 LOS B

40 30 20

LOS A

10 0 30

35

40

45 50 Average Travel Speed (mph)

55

60

65

Table 3 Level of Service Criteria for Class II Two-Lane Highways Level of Service Level of Service

Percent Time-Spent Following Percent Time-Spent Following

A A

Up to 40 Up to 40

B B

> 40-55 > 40-55

C C

> 55-70 > 55-70

D D

> 70-85 > 70-85

E E

> 85 > 85

F

F

When flow rate exceed capacity When flow rate exceed capacity

Source: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, Chapter 20 Source: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, Chapter 20

Page | 8 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  The queue length results should be interpreted with caution since they are the results of a statistical calculation. The 95th percentile value indicates that during the peak hour, a queue of this length or less would occur on 95 percent of the signal cycles. Or, a queue length larger than the 95th percentile queue would only occur on 5 percent of the signal cycles (about 3 cycle during the peak hour for a signal with a 60-second cycle length). Therefore, storage pocket designs based on the 95th percentile queue length would insure that storage space would be exceeded only 5 percent of the time. However, this also means that during a portion of the peak hours and during most of the rest of the day a portion of the storage space would be unused.

Report Organization The remainder of this report is divided into four chapters. Chapter 2 describes existing conditions in terms of the existing roadway network, transit service, and existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Chapter 3 describes the method used to estimate project traffic under project conditions and its impact on the existing transportation system and describes the recommended mitigation measures. Chapter 4 presents the traffic conditions in the study area under cumulative conditions at year 2023 General Plan levels with traffic from the proposed project. Chapter 5 presents the conclusions of the traffic impact analysis.

Page | 9 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

2. Existing Conditions This chapter describes the existing conditions for all of the major transportation facilities in the vicinity of the site, including the roadway network, transit service, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Existing Roadway Network Regional access to the project area is provided by State Routes 25 and 156 and local access to the project area is provided by a variety of local streets in the study area. These facilities are described below and shown on Figure 1. State Route 25 is a two-lane highway that carries regional traffic between Gilroy and Hollister. It begins at its junction with Highway 101 in Gilroy and extends south through Hollister towards Paicines. State Route 156 is a two-lane highway that carries regional traffic between Highway 101 and Highway 152. State Route 156 is a major roadway for trucks traveling between Highway 101 and Interstate 5. Between Hollister and San Juan Bautista, SR 156 is a two-lane highway. Between San Juan Bautista and US 101, SR 156 is a four-lane divided highway. Airline Highway is a two- to four-lane arterial roadway that runs through Hollister. Airline Highway begins at Tres Pinos Road/Sunnyslope Road where it changes designation from McCray Street. Airline Highway is also State Highway 25 in the south part of Hollister. Fairview Road is a two-lane north-south collector that is situated on the east edge of Hollister. Fairview Road provides access to Airline Highway to the south and to SR 25 and SR 156 to the north. Fairview Road forms the western boundary of the project site. Access to the project site would be provided by Cielo Vista Drive, adjacent to Fairview Road. Hillcrest Road is an east-west minor-arterial composed of a three-lane roadway segment (two eastbound and one westbound lane) from McCray Street to Memorial Drive, and a two-lane roadway segment from Memorial Drive to Fairview Road, where it terminates. West of McCray Street, Hillcrest Road changes designation to South Street. Sunnyslope Road is an east-west arterial that extends from Fairview Road to Airline Highway, where it changes designation to Tres Pinos Road. Between Fairview Road and El Toro Drive, Sunnyslope Road is a two-lane roadway, and between El Toro Drive and Airline Highway, it is a four-lane roadway. Union Road is a two-lane roadway in south Hollister that extends from Highway 156 to beyond Airline Highway, where it terminates.

Page | 10 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Bicycle facilities are divided into three classes of relative significance. Class I bikeways are bike paths that are physically separated from motor vehicles and offer two-way bicycle travel on a separate path. Class II bikeways are striped bike lanes on roadways that are marked by signage and pavement markings. Class III bikeways are bike routes and only have signs to help guide bicyclists on recommended routes to certain locations. The locations of existing bicycle facilities are show on Figure 4. The marked bike lanes found in the project study area are found on the following roadway segments: • • • •

Sunnyslope Road between Highway 25 Bypass and Fairview Road Highway 25 Bypass between San Felipe Road and Sunnyslope Road San Benito Street between Nash Road and Union Road Southside Road between north of Union road and south of Enterprise Road

Pedestrian facilities in the project area consist primarily of sidewalks along the streets. The project frontage on Fairview Road currently does not have sidewalks.

Existing Transit Service T The transit services provided in the City are described below.

Local Bus Service County Express operates several fixed-route buses in Hollister and San Benito County. However, none of those routes are within walking distance of the project site. The nearest bus stop to the project site is located near the intersection of Sunset Drive and Airline Highway, several miles away. Areas not served by fixed-route bus service are eligible for dial-a-ride service.

Dial-A-Ride Service County Express also provides Dial-a-Ride service to Northern San Benito County, including Hollister, San Juan Bautista, and Tres Pinos, on weekdays between 6 AM and 6 PM and on weekends between 9 AM and 3 PM. County Express Transit System provides two types of Dial-a-Ride service - general public and paratransit. General public Dial-a-Ride serves those persons whose trips begin or end in a location more than three-quarters of a mile from the fixed route. Paratransit service provides rides to persons who have been determined to be Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) eligible through the Local Transit Authority application process. Appointments for Dial-a-Ride service can be made up to 14 days in advance but no later than 24 hours in advance.

Inter-County Service County Express Transit System’s inter-county service includes service to the Gilroy Transit Center and Gavilan Community College. Shuttle service to the Gilroy Transit Center and Gavilan Community College (school year only) operates Monday through Friday from 6:40 AM to 6:10 PM and connects to six trains per day operating between Gilroy and San Jose.

Existing Intersection Lane Configurations and Traffic Controls The existing lane configurations and traffic controls at the study intersections were determined by observations in the field, and are shown on Figure 5.

Page | 11 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Existing Traffic Volumes Existing weekday AM and PM peak-hour traffic volumes were obtained from new intersection turning movement counts. Most new counts were conducted in May and June 2010. At one intersection, traffic count data from June 2006 were used. Existing traffic counts at four intersections were conducted during summer, after schools were out of session. A comparison of existing counts during the school year and summer period found that the AM peak-hour volumes was 21% higher when school was in session, and the PM peak-hour volumes were approximately the same. Therefore, the existing AM counts conducted after the normal school year session were factored up by 21%. The existing peak-hour intersection volumes are shown on Figure 6. The traffic count data are included in Appendix A. Peak-hour intersection turning movement volumes for all intersections and study scenarios are tabulated in Appendix B.

Existing Intersection Levels of Service The results of the level of service analysis under existing conditions are summarized in Table 4. The results indicate that the intersection of Union Road/Mitchell Road and Highway 156 is currently operating at LOS D during the AM peak hour. The remaining study intersections currently operate at an acceptable level of service during both the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection level of service calculation sheets are included in Appendix C.

Page | 12 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Table 4 Existing Intersection Levels of Service

Intersection Intersection Fairview Rd./Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy. Fairview Rd./Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy. Enterprise Rd. and Airline Hwy. Enterprise Rd. and Airline Hwy. Fairview Rd. and Cielo Vista Dr./ Fairview Rd. and Cielo Vista Dr./ Project Driveway Project Driveway Fairview Rd. and Union Rd. /c/ Fairview Rd. and Union Rd. /c/ Valley View Rd. and Union Rd. Valley View Rd. and Union Rd. Airline Hwy. and Union Rd. Airline Hwy. and Union Rd. Southside Rd. and Union Rd. Southside Rd. and Union Rd. San Benito St. and Union Rd. San Benito St. and Union Rd. Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156 Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156 Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr. Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr. McCray St/Hwy. 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope McCray St/Hwy. 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd./Tres Pinos Rd. Rd./Tres Pinos Rd. Valley View Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Valley View Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest Rd. Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest Rd. Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest Rd. Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest Rd. Hwy. 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd. Hwy. 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd. McCray St. and Hillcrest Rd. McCray St. and Hillcrest Rd. Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana Rd. Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana Rd. Fairview Rd. and McCloskey Rd. Fairview Rd. and McCloskey Rd.

Existing Existing Int. Control Int. Control

Peak Peak Hour Hour

Count Count Date Date

Avg. Avg. Delay Delay

LOS LOS

All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Two-Way Two-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ Future Future Signal Signal Two-Way Two-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ Signal Signal

AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM

5/12/10 5/12/10 5/12/10 5/12/10 5/20/10 5/20/10 5/20/10 5/20/10 5/20/10 5/20/10 5/20/10 5/20/10 ----6/10/10 6/10/10 6/2/10 6/2/10 5/13/10 5/13/10 5/13/10 5/13/10 5/19/10 5/19/10 5/19/10 5/19/10 6/6/06 6/6/06 6/6/06 6/6/06 6/8/10 6/8/10 6/8/10 6/8/10 5/27/10 5/27/10 6/3/10 6/3/10 6/9/10 6/9/10 6/9/10 6/9/10 5/25/10 5/25/10 5/27/10 5/27/10 5/19/10 5/19/10 5/19/10 5/19/10 5/18/10 5/18/10 5/18/10 5/18/10 5/26/10 5/26/10 5/26/10 5/26/10 6/8/10 6/8/10 6/8/10 6/8/10 6/3/10 6/3/10 6/9/10 6/9/10 5/13/10 5/13/10 5/13/10 5/13/10 5/12/10 5/12/10 5/12/10 5/12/10

10.5 10.5 11.4 11.4 15.9 15.9 21.7 21.7 9.8 9.8 10.5 10.5 ----13.3 13.3 20.1 20.1 33.6 33.6 31.8 31.8 13.9 13.9 12.7 12.7 10.7 10.7 10.6 10.6 37.3 37.3 30.8 30.8 12.0 12.0 11.6 11.6 28.1 28.1 30.1 30.1 13.5 13.5 13.3 13.3 10.9 10.9 9.8 9.8 17.0 17.0 13.3 13.3 13.5 13.5 12.4 12.4 24.7 24.7 25.8 25.8 25.4 25.4 27.7 27.7 14.6 14.6 13.8 13.8 14.6 14.6 12.5 12.5

B B B B C C C C A A B B ----B B C C C C C C B B B B B B B B D D C C B B B B C C C C B B B B B B A A C C B B B B B B C C C C C C C C B B B B B B B B

Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Signal Signal One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Signal Signal Signal Signal One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/

Notes: Notes: /a/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections /a/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections are based on the stop-controlled approach with the highest delay. are based on the stop-controlled approach with the highest delay. /b/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents /b/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents the average delay for all approaches at the intersection. the average delay for all approaches at the intersection. /c/ Future intersection. /c/ Future intersection. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the current level of service standard. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the current level of service standard.

Page | 16 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Existing Peak-Hour Traffic Signal Warrants The results of the peak-hour traffic signal warrant checks are summarized on Table 5. The results indicate that three of the study intersections currently have peak-hour traffic volumes high enough to satisfy the peak-hour signal warrant: Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road The remaining unsignalized study intersections currently have traffic conditions that fall below the thresholds that warrant signalization. The peak-hour signal warrant sheets are contained in Appendix D.

Two-Lane Highway Level of Service Results under Existing Conditions Peak-hour highway segment levels of service were evaluated for the section of Highway 25 between US 101 and Highway 156 and the section of Highway 156 between Union Road and The Alameda. Both study highway segments are classified as Class I highways. The existing peak-hour level of service results for the study highway segments are summarized on Table 6. The results indicate that both highway segments currently exceed Caltrans’ level of service standard during the AM and PM peak hours with operations in the LOS E range. The two-lane highway level of service calculation sheets are included in Appendix E.

Page | 17 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Table 5 Existing Peak-Hour Traffic Signal Warrant Results

Intersection Name Intersection Name

Warrant Met? Warrant Met? AM PM AM PM

Existing Unsignalized Intersections Existing Unsignalized Intersections Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Enterprise Road and Airline Highway Enterprise Road and Airline Highway

No No

No No

Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway

No No

No No

Valley View Road and Union Road Valley View Road and Union Road

No No

No No

Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road

No No

No No

Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road

Yes Yes

No No

Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road

No No

No No

Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and McCloskey Road Fairview Road and McCloskey Road

No No

No No

Notes: Notes: Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition. Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition.

Table 6 Existing Two-Lane Highway Levels of Service

Peak Peak Hour Hour

% Time% TimeSpent-Following Spent-Following

LOS LOS

SR 25 - Between US 101 and SR 156 SR 25 - Between US 101 and SR 156

AM AM PM PM

SR 156 - Between The Alameda and Union Rd SR 156 - Between The Alameda and Union Rd

AM AM PM PM

87.1% 87.1% 88.3% 88.3% 89.8% 89.8% 92.8% 92.8%

E E E E E E E E

Segment Segment

Notes: Notes: Based on the Two-Way-Two-Lane Highway Segment LOS Methodology from Chapter 20 Based on the Two-Way-Two-Lane Highway Segment LOS Methodology from Chapter 20 of the Highway Capacity Manual. of the Highway Capacity Manual. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed Caltrans' current level of service standard. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed Caltrans' current level of service standard.

Page | 18 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

3. Project Conditions This chapter describes project traffic conditions, significant project impacts, and measures that are recommended to mitigate project impacts under project conditions. Included are descriptions of the significance criteria that define an impact, estimates of project-generated traffic, identification of any impacts, and descriptions of any mitigation measures that may be necessary. Project conditions are represented by existing traffic conditions with the addition of traffic generated by the project.

Significant Impact Criteria Significance criteria are used to establish what constitutes an impact. The criteria for judging impacts on intersections are described below. Project impacts on other transportation facilities, such as bicycle facilities and transit, were determined based on engineering judgment.

Definition of Significant Intersection Level of Service Impacts Both the City of Hollister and San Benito County identify a level of service standard of LOS C for their respective facilities. Neither agency has specific criteria for determining project impacts. For the purpose of this traffic analysis, the project is said to create a significant adverse impact on traffic conditions at an intersection if for either peak hour: 1. The level of service at the intersection degrades from an acceptable LOS C or better under baseline conditions to an unacceptable LOS D or worse under project conditions, or 2. The level of service at the intersection is an unacceptable LOS D or worse under baseline conditions and the addition of project trips causes the average intersection delay to increase by five (5) or more seconds.

Page | 19 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Peak-Hour Signal Warrant Analysis The installation of a traffic signal should be considered at an unsignalized intersection if for either peak hour: 1. The addition of project traffic causes the traffic volume at an unsignalized intersection to increase such that it is sufficiently high to satisfy the peak-hour volume traffic signal warrant adopted by Caltrans, where it was not satisfied before the project, or 2. The intersection already meets the signal warrant under existing conditions and the addition of project traffic would cause a significant level of service impact at the intersection.

Two-Lane Highway Level of Service Impacts Caltrans identifies a level of service standard of LOS C for two-lane highways. According to Caltrans’ Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, if a state facility is operating at LOS D or worse, then the existing measure of effectiveness (MOE) that the level of service is based on must be maintained. Therefore, a project would have a significant impact on a two-lane highway if for either peak-hour: 1. The level of service on the highway degrades from an acceptable LOS C or better under baseline conditions to an unacceptable LOS D or worse under project conditions, or 2. The level of service on the highway is an unacceptable LOS D or worse under baseline conditions, and the addition of project traffic causes the percent time-spent following to increase or the average travel speed to decrease.

Transportation Network under Project Conditions Except for the improvements described below, it is assumed that no changes to the transportation network would occur with the development of the proposed project. Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway. With the construction of the project, the east leg would be built, a northbound shared through/right-turn lane would be added, a southbound left-turn lane would be added, and the eastbound right-turn lane would be restriped to a shared through/right-turn lane.

Project Traffic Estimates The magnitude of traffic produced by a new development and the locations where that traffic would appear are estimated using a three-step process: (1) trip generation, (2) trip distribution, and (3) trip assignment. In determining project trip generation, the magnitude of traffic entering and exiting the site is estimated for the weekday AM and PM peak-hours. As part of the project trip distribution step, an estimate is made of the directions to and from which the project trips would travel. In the project trip assignment step, the project trips are assigned to specific streets and intersections in the study area. These procedures are described further in the following sections.

Trip Generation The magnitude of traffic generated by the proposed project was estimated by applying to the size of the project the appropriate trip generation rates, as published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The trip generation estimates for the residential subdivision component of the project are based on ITE’s trip generation rates for single-family homes. Based on these rates, the project would generate 2,105 daily trips, with 165 trips occurring during the AM peak hour and 222 trips occurring during the PM peak hour. The trip generation analysis for the project is presented on Table 7.

Page | 20 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                                                                                                  April 29, 2011  Table 7 Project Trip Generation Analysis

Land Use Land Use

ITE ITE Land Use Land Use

Single-Family Detached Housing Single-Family Detached Housing

210 210

Size Size 220 220

units units

Daily Daily Daily Daily Trip Rates Trips Trip Rates Trips 9.57 9.57

2,105 2,105

AM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour Splits Trips Pk-Hr Splits Trips Pk-Hr Rate In Out In Out Total Rate In Out In Out Total 0.75 25% 75% 41 0.75 25% 75% 41

124 165 124 165

PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Splits Trips Pk-Hr Splits Trips Pk-Hr Rate In Out In Out Total Rate In Out In Out Total 1.01 63% 37% 140 1.01 63% 37% 140

82 82

222 222

Notes: Notes: Source: ITE Trip Generation, 8th Edition 2008. Source: ITE Trip Generation, 8th Edition 2008.

Page | 21 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Trip Distribution The project trip distribution pattern was estimated using the traffic forecasting model that is cooperatively maintained by both the City of Hollister and San Benito County. This model is currently configured to project the future traffic associated with development growth within the modeled study area (Northern San Benito County) up to the year 2023. As a basis for the 2023 traffic forecasts, the model also is calibrated to “existing conditions”, which represents the traffic volumes and roadway network development that existed when the model was last updated (2004). The project trip distribution pattern was developed based on the traffic patterns associated with trips traveling to and from the zone containing the project site. The trip assignments for the project zone were obtained from the existing conditions model (with the Highway 25 Bypass added). The project trip distribution pattern for the project is shown graphically on Figure 7.

Trip Assignment The peak-hour vehicle trips associated with the proposed project were added to the transportation network in accordance with the project trip distribution pattern discussed above. The assignment of project trips is presented graphically on Figure 8. A tabular summary of project traffic at each study intersection is contained in Appendix B.

Project Traffic Volumes Project trips, as represented in the above project trip assignments, were added to existing traffic volumes to obtain existing plus project traffic volumes. Existing traffic volumes plus project trips are referred to simply as project traffic volumes; this is contrasted with the term project trips, which is used to signify the traffic that is produced specifically by the project. The traffic volumes under project conditions are shown in Figure 9.

Project Intersection Level of Service Analysis Traffic impacts at the study intersections were identified based on a level of service standard of C for all study intersections. The results of the intersection level of service analysis under project conditions are summarized in Table 8. The results indicate that none of the study intersections would be significantly impacted with the addition of project traffic. All study intersections would continue to operate at LOS C except for one, which would continue to operate at LOS D, but the addition of project traffic at this intersection would not significantly increase delay and the impact would be less than significant. The intersection level of service calculation sheets are included in Appendix C.

Project Peak-Hour Signal Warrant Checks The results of the peak-hour traffic signal warrant checks under project conditions are summarized on Table 9. The results indicate that the addition of project traffic would cause two intersections to meet the peak-hour signal warrant during one peak hour under project conditions where a signal is not warranted under existing conditions: Enterprise Road and Airline Highway (PM peak hour) Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road (PM peak hour) The addition of project traffic would not create the need to signalize any of the remaining unsignalized study intersections. The peak-hour signal warrant sheets are contained in Appendix D.

 

 

                            2 2   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Table 8 Project Intersection Levels of Service

Intersection Intersection Fairview Rd./Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy. Fairview Rd./Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy. Enterprise Rd. and Airline Hwy. Enterprise Rd. and Airline Hwy. Fairview Rd. and Cielo Vista Dr./ Fairview Rd. and Cielo Vista Dr./ Project Driveway Project Rd. Driveway Fairview and Union Rd. /d/ Fairview Rd. and Union Rd. /d/ Valley View Rd. and Union Rd. Valley View Rd. and Union Rd. Airline Hwy. and Union Rd. Airline Hwy. and Union Rd. Southside Rd. and Union Rd. Southside Rd. and Union Rd. San Benito St. and Union Rd. San Benito St. and Union Rd. Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156 Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156 Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr. Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr. McCray St/Hwy. 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope McCrayPinos St/Hwy. Rd./Tres Rd.25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd./Tres Rd.Sunnyslope Rd. Valley ViewPinos Rd. and Valley View Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest Rd. Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest Rd. Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest Rd. Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest Rd. Hwy. 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd. Hwy. 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd. McCray St. and Hillcrest Rd. McCray St. and Hillcrest Rd. Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana Rd. Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana Rd. Fairview Rd. and McCloskey Rd. Fairview Rd. and McCloskey Rd.

Existing Int.Existing Control Int. Control

Peak Peak Hour Hour

All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Two-Way Two-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ Future Future Signal Signal Two-Way Two-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ Signal Signal

AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM

Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Signal Signal One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Signal Signal Signal Signal One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/

Existing Existing Avg. Avg. LOS Delay LOS Delay 10.5 10.5 11.4 11.4 15.9 15.9 21.7 21.7 9.8 9.8 10.5 10.5 --- --13.3 13.3 20.1 20.1 33.6 33.6 31.8 31.8 13.9 13.9 12.7 12.7 10.7 10.7 10.6 10.6 37.3 37.3 30.8 30.8 12.0 12.0 11.6 11.6 28.1 28.1 30.1 30.1 13.5 13.5 13.3 13.3 10.9 10.9 9.8 9.8 17.0 17.0 13.3 13.3 13.5 13.5 12.4 12.4 24.7 24.7 25.8 25.8 25.4 25.4 27.7 27.7 14.6 14.6 13.8 13.8 14.6 14.6 12.5 12.5

B BB CB CC AC BA -- B -- -B -CB CC CC BC BB BB BB DB CD BC BB CB CC BC BB BB AB CA BC B B BB CB CC CC CC BC BB BB BB B

Existing Plus Project Existing Plus Project Avg. Change in Avg. LOS Change Delay Delay /c/ in Delay LOS Delay /c/ 10.9 10.9 11.7 11.7 17.0 17.0 24.3 24.3 10.7 10.7 12.2 12.2 --- --13.4 13.4 20.3 20.3 34.7 34.7 32.7 32.7 13.8 13.8 12.7 12.7 10.7 10.7 10.6 10.6 37.9 37.9 31.0 31.0 11.9 11.9 11.5 11.5 28.1 28.1 30.1 30.1 14.1 14.1 13.9 13.9 11.4 11.4 10.0 10.0 18.8 18.8 13.6 13.6 14.2 14.2 13.1 13.1 24.9 24.9 26.0 26.0 25.3 25.3 27.9 27.9 14.9 14.9 14.0 14.0 14.8 14.8 12.7 12.7

B BB CB CC BC BB -- B -- -B -CB CC CC BC BB BB BB DB CD BC BB CB CC BC BB BB BB CB BC B B BB CB CC CC CC BC BB BB BB B

+0.4 +0.4 +0.3 +0.3 +1.1 +1.1 +2.6 +2.6 +0.9 +0.9 +1.7 +1.7 --- --+0.1 +0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +1.1 +1.1 +0.9 +0.9 -0.1 -0.1 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.6 +0.6 +0.2 +0.2 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.6 +0.6 +0.6 +0.6 +0.5 +0.5 +0.2 +0.2 +1.8 +1.8 +0.3 +0.3 +0.7 +0.7 +0.7 +0.7 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 -0.1 -0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.3 +0.3 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2 +0.2

Notes: Notes: /a/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections are based on the stop-controlled /a/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections are based on the stop-controlled approach with the highest delay. approach with the highest delay. /b/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents the average delay for all /b/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents the average delay for all approaches at the intersection. approaches at the intersection. /c/ Change in delay is measured relative to background conditions for the analysis of project conditions impacts. /c/ Change in delay is measured relative to background conditions for the analysis of project conditions impacts. /d/ Future intersection. /d/ Future intersection. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the current level of service standard. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the current level of service standard. - Denotes Project impact - Denotes Project impact

 

 

                            2 6   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Table 9 Project Signal Warrant Checks

Intersection Name Intersection Name

Warrant Met? Warrant Met? Existing Existing Plus Existing Existing Plus Conditions Project Conditions Project AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM

Existing Unsignalized Intersections Existing Unsignalized Intersections Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Enterprise Road and Airline Highway Enterprise Road and Airline Highway

No No

No No

No No

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway

No No

No No

No No

No No

Valley View Road and Union Road Valley View Road and Union Road

No No

No No

No No

No No

Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road

No No

No No

No No

No No

Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road

Yes Yes

No No

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road

No No

No No

No No

No No

Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and McCloskey Road Fairview Road and McCloskey Road

No No

No No

No No

No No

Notes: Notes: Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition. Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition.

Two-Lane Highway Level of Service Results under Project Conditions Peak-hour highway segment levels of service were evaluated for the section of Highway 25 between US 101 and Highway 156 and the section of Highway 156 between Union Road and The Alameda. Both study highway segments are classified as Class I highways. The project peak-hour level of service results for the study highway segments are summarized on Table 10. The results indicate that both study highway segments would continue to exceed Caltrans’ level of service standard during the peak hours with operations in the LOS E range. However, the addition of project traffic on both Highways 156 and 25 would lead to a slight degradation in level of service on those facilities, expressed in terms of an increase in the percent-time-spent following. This is considered a significant impact by Caltrans’ standards. The two-lane highway level of service calculation sheets are included in Appendix E.

 

 

                            2 7   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Table 10 Project Two-Lane Highway Level of Service Results Existing Conditions Existing Plus Project Existing Conditions Existing Plus Project Peak % Time% TimePeak % Time% TimeHour Spent-Following LOS Spent-Following LOS Hour Spent-Following LOS Spent-Following LOS

Segment Segment SR 25 - Between US 101 and SR 156 SR 25 - Between US 101 and SR 156

AM AM PM PM

SR 156 - Between The Alameda and Union Rd SR 156 - Between The Alameda and Union Rd

AM AM PM PM

87.1% 87.1% 88.3% 88.3% 89.8% 89.8% 89.0% 89.0%

E E E E E E E E

87.3% 87.3% 88.6% 88.6% 90.1% 90.1% 89.2% 89.2%

E E E E E E E E

Notes: Notes: Based on the Two-Way-Two-Lane Highway Segment LOS Methodology from Chapter 20 of the Highway Capacity Manual. Based on the Two-Way-Two-Lane Highway Segment LOS Methodology from Chapter 20 of the Highway Capacity Manual. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed Caltrans' current level of service standard. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed Caltrans' current level of service standard.

Project Impacts and Recommended Mitigation Measures Described below are the intersection and highway impacts under project conditions and recommended mitigation measures necessary to maintain the level of service standard and intersection operations.

Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road Impact:

This intersection does not meet the peak-hour signal warrant under existing conditions during the PM peak hour and the addition of project traffic would cause the signal warrant to be met during the PM peak hour.

Mitigation Measures. Signalization of this intersection may be needed to assign right-of-way and maintain the orderly flow of traffic. Prior to issuance of the building permit(s) for the 100th and 200th residential units in the project, the developer should conduct a monitoring study, which will consist of the analyses of all applicable traffic signal warrants based on field-measured data and prevailing traffic and roadway conditions. The results of the monitoring study should be submitted to the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, who will determine if and when a traffic signal should be installed. The developer will install the traffic signal when directed by the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, subject to potential partial reimbursement from other funding sources, such as the TIF program, an established benefit assessment area, or other developments. With implementation of this mitigation measure, this impact would be less-than-significant with mitigation incorporated. If it is determined, through the monitoring studies, that the signal is not warranted at the time of the issuance of the building permit for the 200th unit, but these improvements are covered in the TIF, then the developer should pay the applicable TIF fee as a fair-share contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the improvements are not covered in the TIF, then the developer should pay a fair-share contribution (based on the pro rata contribution of traffic) to the benefit assessment area toward improvements at this intersection. However, payment of a fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. Therefore, in the event that the developer makes a fair-share contribution rather than installing the traffic signal at this intersection, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.

Enterprise Road and Airline Highway Impact:

This intersection does not meet the peak-hour signal warrant under existing conditions and the addition of project traffic would cause the signal warrant to be met during the PM peak hour.

 

 

                            2 8   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Mitigation Measures. Signalization of this intersection may be needed to assign right-of-way and maintain the orderly flow of traffic. Prior to issuance of the building permit(s) for the 100th and 200th residential units in the project, the developer should conduct a monitoring study, which will consist of the analyses of all applicable traffic signal warrants based on field-measured data and prevailing traffic and roadway conditions. The results of the monitoring study should be submitted to the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, who, in coordination with Caltrans and the City of Hollister Engineering Department, will determine if and when a traffic signal should be installed. The developer will install the traffic signal when directed by the San Benito County Public Works Administrator, subject to potential partial reimbursement from other funding sources, such as the TIF program, an established benefit assessment area, or other developments. With implementation of this mitigation measure, this impact would be lessthan-significant with mitigation incorporated. If it is determined, through the monitoring studies, that the signal is not warranted at the time of the issuance of the building permit for the 200th unit, but these improvements are covered in the TIF, then the developer should pay the applicable TIF fee as a fair-share contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the improvements are not covered in the TIF, then the developer should pay a fair-share contribution (based on the pro rata contribution of traffic) to the benefit assessment area toward improvements at this intersection. However, payment of a fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. Therefore, in the event that the developer makes a fair-share contribution rather than installing the traffic signal at this intersection, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable.

Highway 156 (Union Road to The Alameda) Impact:

This highway segment is projected to operate at an unacceptable LOS E under existing conditions, and the addition of project traffic would cause the percent time-spent following to increase during both the AM and PM peak hours.

Mitigation Measures. The operations on this highway could be restored to acceptable conditions by widening the highway to 4 lanes or by adding passing lanes at strategic locations. The County is currently updating its TIF program. The current draft version includes passing lanes at strategic locations on Highways 25 and 156. Therefore, if these improvements are included in the adopted TIF program, and the fee covers the complete cost for design and construction, the developer should pay the applicable TIF fee as a fair-share contribution towards the identified improvement, and such payment would mitigate the projects impact to the extent feasible. In the event the TIF program does not ultimately cover these improvements, there would be no feasible means for the project to mitigate its nominal impact. There would be no other plan or program in place that could be reasonably expected to result in the timely construction of these improvements given the substantial cost associated therewith and the need for significant contributions from many additional development projects. In that event, the project impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. However, even if the TIF is paid, payment of the fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. This impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable.

Highway 25 (US 101 and Highway 156) Impact:

This highway segment is projected to operate at an unacceptable LOS E under existing conditions, and the addition of project traffic would cause the percent time-spent following to increase during both the AM and PM peak hours.

Mitigation Measures. The operations on this highway could be restored to acceptable conditions by widening the highway to 4 lanes or by adding passing lanes at strategic locations. The County is currently updating its TIF program. The current draft version includes passing lanes at strategic locations on Highways 25 and 156. Therefore, if these improvements are included in the adopted TIF program, and the fee covers the complete cost for design and construction, the developer should pay the applicable TIF

 

 

                            2 9   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  fee as a fair-share contribution towards the identified improvement, and such payment would mitigate the projects impact to the extent feasible. In the event the TIF program does not ultimately cover these improvements, there would be no feasible means for the project to mitigate its nominal impact. There would be no other plan or program in place that could be reasonably expected to result in the timely construction of these improvements given the substantial cost associated therewith and the need for significant contributions from many additional development projects. In that event, the project impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. However, even if the TIF is paid, payment of the fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. This impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable.

Other Transportation Modes Bicycle and Pedestrian Circulation Currently the project site is not served directly by any bicycle facilities. Bike lanes are provided on the following roadway segments: • • • •

Sunnyslope Road between Highway 25 Bypass and Fairview Road Highway 25 Bypass between San Felipe Road and Sunnyslope Road San Benito Street between Nash Road and Union Road Southside Road between north of Union road and south of Enterprise Road

The project frontage on Fairview Road currently does not have sidewalks.

Recommended Improvements The frontage improvements on Fairview Road should be designed to be consistent with County Roadway Design Standards, which may include the provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities on Fairview Road. Additionally, sidewalks and pedestrian crossings should be provided at the Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive-Project Driveway intersection to connect the planned on-site pedestrian facilities to existing/future pedestrian facilities on Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive.

Transit Service There are currently no bus routes that operate in the vicinity of the project site and the nearest bus stops are not located within walking distance of the project site. However, the project site is located within the County Express Dial-A-Ride service boundary. Therefore, the additional transit demand generated by the project will be served by the existing Dial-a-Ride service.

Recommended Improvements The project site should be designed with the potential future extension of transit services onto the project site in mind. It is recommended that the project applicant work with the local transit agency to ensure that any planned extensions of fixed route transit service on to or adjacent to the project site are accommodated by the design of the site frontage and on-site roadway improvements.

Intersection Turn-Pocket Storage Analysis Results The intersection turn-pocket storage analysis is based on vehicle queuing for high-demand turning movements at key intersections. The results indicate that the storage space currently available for highdemand turning movements at the Fairview Road-Ridgemark Drive/Airline Highway intersection would accommodate the projected maximum peak-hour vehicle queues during both the AM and PM peak hours.

 

 

                            3 0   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Additionally, the storage analysis results indicate that the southbound left-turn movement at the Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway intersection needs to provide at least 25 feet of storage space. The recommended turn-pocket storage lengths and the operational analysis results are summarized in Table 11. The intersection queuing calculation sheets are included in Appendix F.

Recommended Improvements Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway. Based on the amount of traffic the proposed project would generate, the turn-pocket storage length was determined for the southbound left-turn movement at the subject intersection. The southbound left-turn pocket will need to have at least 25 feet of storage space to provide storage for left-turn traffic into the project site. Additionally, the turn pocket length should be designed, to the extent feasible, to include deceleration distance in the turn pocket based on the design speed of Fairview Road. San Benito County Public Works Department specifies a design speed of 60 mph for Fairview Road. Based on Chapter 400 of Caltrans’ Highway Design Manual, the ideal design for the southbound left-turn lane would include a total length of 490 feet. This is based on a design speed of 60 mph on Fairview Road, a vehicle storage length of 50 feet (2 vehicles), no deceleration in the through lane, and a 90-foot bay taper length being included in the deceleration length, per Caltrans standards.

Site Access A review of the project site plan was performed to determine if adequate site access would be provided. The site plan proposes one full-access driveway on Fairview Road, across the street from Cielo Vista Drive. Fairview Road is planned to be a four-lane major arterial, and the project should therefore allow sufficient right-of-way for the future widening of Fairview Road. The level of service analysis results, signal warrant analysis results and left-turn pocket storage analysis results presented above for the Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway intersection indicate that the proposed design would adequately handle projected traffic demands and that no operational or safety problems would occur. This intersection will operate satisfactorily without a traffic signal.

Recommended Site Access Improvements The project should be set back far enough from Fairview Road to accommodate for the future widening of Fairview Road. Additionally, the intersection improvements on the project side of the intersection should be designed and built to facilitate the future installation of traffic signal equipment at the intersection for when the intersection will be signalized.

 

 

                            3 1   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Table 11 Project Intersection Queuing Analysis Results

Intersection Intersection

Fairview Rd and Airline Hwy Fairview Rd and Airline Hwy

Existing Conditions Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing Peak Vehicle Storage Req.Conditions Storage # of Storage Peak Vehicle Req. Storage # of Mvmt. Lanes Per Lane (ft.) Hour Queue /a/ Per Lane (ft.) /b/ Mvmt. Lanes Per Lane (ft.) Hour Queue /a/ Per Lane (ft.) /b/

EBL EBL

SBL SBL

SBR SBR

Fairview Rd and Fairview and Cielo Vista Rd Dr/Project Driveway Cielo Vista Dr/Project Driveway

SBL SBL

380 380

1 1

380 380 380 380

1 1

380 380 380 380

1 1

1 1

380 380

AM AM

1

PM PM

1

AM AM

1

PM PM

1

AM AM

1

PM PM

1

See Note /c/ See Note /c/ AM AM See Note /c/ See Note /c/ PM PM

Exising Plus Project Conditions Plus Project Conditions Vehicle Exising Req. Storage Vehicle Req. Storage Queue /a/ Per Lane (ft.) /b/ Comments Queue /a/ Per Lane (ft.) /b/ Comments 1

1

25 25

1

1

25 25

1

1

25 25

1

1

25 25 25 25

1

1

25 25

1

1 N/A N/A

N/A N/A

1

N/A N/A

N/A N/A

1

1

25 25

1

25 25

1

25 25

1

25 25

1

25 25

1

25 25

1

25 25

1

25 25

Existing storage Existing storage adequate. adequate. Existing storage Existing storage adequate. adequate. Existing storage Existing storage adequate. adequate. Existing storage Existing storage adequate. adequate. Existing storage Existing storage adequate. adequate. Existing storage Existing storage adequate. adequate. Lane would need to beLane ~ 25 would feet. need to be ~ 25 feet. Lane would need to beLane ~ 25 would feet. need to be ~ 25 feet.

Notes: /a/Notes: Vehicle queue (# of vehicles) calculated using the Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence level. Vehiclestorage queue (# vehicles)based calculated using thevehicle Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence /b//a/ Required is of calculated on peak-hour queue calculation as follows: Vehicle queue x 25'. level. Required storage is calculated based on peak-hour vehicle queue calculation as follows: Vehicle queue x 25'. /c//b/ This turn pocket would be built with the project. /c/ This turn pocket would be built with the project.

 

 

                            3 2   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

4. Cumulative Conditions This chapter presents a summary of the traffic conditions that would occur under cumulative conditions. Cumulative conditions are defined as conditions expected in the study area at General Plan buildout of Hollister and San Benito County (year 2023).This chapter describes the intersection and roadway improvements expected to be in place under cumulative conditions, the procedure used to determine cumulative traffic volumes, and the resulting traffic conditions.

Transportation Network under Cumulative Conditions The transportation network assumed under cumulative conditions includes various transportation network improvements in and around Hollister. The roadway improvements included in the City/County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program were assumed to be included under cumulative conditions. The TIF identifies roadway widenings that will need to occur in the future, throughout San Benito County, to accommodate projected growth in the County through 2023. Specific intersection improvements, however, are not identified in the TIF. For the study intersections situated along each improvement corridor, Hexagon identified likely lane geometry and traffic control improvements that would need to occur in order for the intersection geometry to be consistent with adjacent roadway widening projects. The likely intersection improvements were assumed to be in place under cumulative conditions. The following major transportation improvements are assumed under cumulative conditions: Highway Widenings. Both Highways 25 and 156 are assumed to be widened to four lanes. Fairview Road Widening. Fairview Road is assumed to be widened to four lanes from Airline Highway to McCloskey Road. Union Road Extension. Union Road will be extended from its current termination point, east of Airline Highway, eastward and connected to Fairview Road. This roadway improvement is assumed to be constructed as part of the Award Homes project. Union Road Widening. Union Road is assumed to be widened to four lanes from Fairview Road to SR 156. Airline Highway Widening. Airline Highway is assumed to be widened to four lanes from Fairview Road to Sunset Drive.

 

 

                            3 3   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Union Road and SR 156 Intersection. The intersection of Union Road/SR 156 is assumed to have a second northbound left-turn lane to improve the level of service. Sunnyslope Road Widening. Sunnyslope Road is assumed to be widened to four lanes from El Toro Drive to Fairview Road Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway Intersection. With the construction of the Gavilan College project, the east leg would be built, a northbound shared through/right-turn lane would be added, a southbound left-turn lane would be added, and the eastbound right-turn lane would be restriped to a shared through/right- turn lane. However, the same improvement would be built by the project. Therefore, under both cumulative with project and cumulative without project conditions, this improvement is assumed to be in place. Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road Intersection. This intersection is assumed to be signalized with the necessary improvements as part of the Santana Ranch Specific Plan. Fairview Road and Sunnyslope Road Intersection. This intersection is assumed to have the necessary improvements as part of the Santana Ranch Specific Plan.

Year 2023 Development Projections and Traffic Volumes Forecasts of future demand on the City’s transportation system were prepared using the San Benito County/Hollister travel demand model. This model uses widely accepted transportation planning formulas to convert forecasts of future land use into the number and distribution of future vehicle trips on the roadway network. The travel demand model uses the year 2023 as the long-range planning horizon for the Hollister General Plan. This planning horizon is based on a set of population, housing and employment projections that were developed based on the land-use designations shown on the Hollister General Plan Map, on other state and regional projections of population and employment growth, and on the constrained projections adopted by the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG).

Other Long-Range Development Projects There are two notable long-range development projects that are not covered entirely by the growth projections contained in the San Benito County/Hollister travel demand model. These are projects that have been proposed, but have not been approved and for which the General Plan has not been updated. The Santana Ranch Specific Plan and the Gavilan College projects are in close proximity to the Fairview Corners project and would affect most of the study intersections this report evaluates. At the time that this traffic study was initiated, detailed project descriptions were available for the both projects. As such, the traffic associated with these proposed projects was included in the cumulative scenario for this traffic study. Additionally, the City/County travel demand model includes development growth consistent with the Award Homes project west of Fairview Road. Therefore, the cumulative scenario includes traffic associated with Award Homes.

Cumulative Traffic Volumes Base cumulative traffic volumes at the study intersections were obtained from the 2023 travel demand model. Model volumes were not available for the intersections of Valley View Road/Sunnyslope Road and Valley View Road/Union Road. Therefore, a future growth of 1.5% per year was assumed to estimate the future year 2023 volumes for these intersections. Traffic from the proposed Santana Ranch Specific Plan and Gavilan College projects was added to base cumulative volumes to yield cumulative without project traffic volumes. The cumulative plus project peak-hour traffic volumes are shown on Figure 10.

 

 

                            3 4   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Intersection Levels of Service Under Cumulative Conditions The results of the intersection level of service analysis under cumulative conditions are summarized in Table 12. The results indicate that with the development growth currently projected through 2023 and the proposed project, two study intersections would be significantly impacted: Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway Memorial Street and Hillcrest Road The remaining study intersections would not be significantly impacted by the project under cumulative conditions. The intersection level of service calculation sheets are included in Appendix C.

Cumulative Peak-Hour Signal Warrant Checks The results of the peak-hour traffic signal warrant checks under cumulative with project conditions are summarized on Table 13. The results indicate that the addition of project traffic would not create an additional need to signalize any of the unsignalized study intersections. The peak-hour signal warrant sheets are contained in Appendix D.

Highway Operations under Cumulative Conditions As discussed above, both Highways 25 and 156 would be widened to four lanes under cumulative conditions. As such, the two-lane highway level of service methodology would no longer be applicable to these highways. Therefore, highway levels of service were not calculated under cumulative conditions.

Recommended Improvements under Cumulative Conditions The results of the cumulative analysis show that the operations at several intersections would degrade to unacceptable levels under traffic conditions projected for the year 2023. This indicates that over the next 10 to 15 years, it is likely that improvements at these locations will be necessary in order to maintain the level of service standard. For the most part, these deficiencies are a result of development growth throughout the City and County. Described below are the intersections at which the project’s contribution toward the impact would be significant and the recommended improvements necessary to maintain the level of service standards under cumulative conditions. Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway. Signalization of this intersection will be needed in order to maintain acceptable traffic operations. The intersection should be monitored, and a signal should be installed when warranted. Note that both the Fairview Corners and Gavilan College projects should share the cost of the signal. Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road. Signalization of this intersection will be needed in order to maintain acceptable traffic operations. Additionally, dedicated left-turn lanes should be added on all four approaches and the traffic signal should be operated with protected left-turn phasing. If these improvements are covered in the TIF, then the developer shall pay the applicable TIF fee as a fair-share contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the improvements are not covered in the TIF, then the developer shall pay its fair-share contribution (based on its pro rata contribution of trips) to the benefit assessment area toward improvements at this intersection. However, payment of the fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. This impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable.

 

 

                            3 6   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Table 12 Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service

Intersection Intersection Fairview Rd./Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy. Fairview Rd./Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy. Enterprise Rd. and Airline Hwy. Enterprise Rd. and Airline Hwy. Fairview Rd. and Cielo Vista Dr./ Fairview Rd. and Cielo Vista Dr./ Project Driveway Project Rd. Driveway Fairview and Union Rd. /d/ Fairview Rd. and Union Rd. /d/ Valley View Rd. and Union Rd. Valley View Rd. and Union Rd. Airline Hwy. and Union Rd. Airline Hwy. and Union Rd. Southside Rd. and Union Rd. Southside Rd. and Union Rd. San Benito St. and Union Rd. San Benito St. and Union Rd. Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156 Union Rd./Mitchell Rd. and Hwy. 156 Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr. Airline Hwy. and Sunset Dr. McCray St/Hwy. 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope McCrayPinos St/Hwy. Rd./Tres Rd.25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd./Tres Rd.Sunnyslope Rd. Valley ViewPinos Rd. and Valley View Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Sunnyslope Rd. Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest Rd. /e/ Fairview Rd. and Hillcrest Rd. /e/ Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest Rd. Memorial Dr. and Hillcrest Rd. Hwy. 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd. Hwy. 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd. McCray St. and Hillcrest Rd. McCray St. and Hillcrest Rd. Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana Rd. Fairview Rd. and Santa Ana Rd. Fairview Rd. and McCloskey Rd. Fairview Rd. and McCloskey Rd.

Existing Int.Existing Control Int. Control

Peak Peak Hour Hour

All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Two-Way Two-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ Future Future Signal Signal Two-Way Two-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ Signal Signal

AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM AM AM PM PM

Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal Signal All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Signal Signal One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ All-Way All-Way Stop /b/ Stop /b/ Signal Signal Signal Signal One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/ One-Way One-Way Stop /a/ Stop /a/

Cumulative w/ out Cumulative w/ out Project Project Avg. Avg. Delay LOS Delay LOS 37.1 37.1 80.7 80.7 28.5 28.5 25.2 25.2 21.8 21.8 51.1 51.1 12.3 12.3 12.0 12.0 17.1 17.1 62.6 62.6 36.6 36.6 59.6 59.6 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 10.9 10.9 11.6 11.6 25.6 25.6 33.8 33.8 9.2 9.2 10.8 10.8 30.5 30.5 35.0 35.0 16.7 16.7 21.7 21.7 19.2 19.2 18.7 18.7 17.6 17.6 18.0 18.0 57.7 57.7 112.8 112.8 38.7 38.7 63.4 63.4 37.6 37.6 57.2 57.2 17.4 17.4 18.8 18.8 20.5 20.5 23.2 23.2

E FE DF DD CD FC BF BB CB FC DF ED BE BB BB BB CB CC AC BA CB DC CD CC BC BB BB BB FB FF DF ED DE ED CE CC CC CC C

Cumulative w/ Project Cumulative w/ Project Avg. Change Avg. Change Delay LOS in Delay /c/ Delay LOS in Delay /c/ 40.2 40.2 85.1 85.1 30.1 30.1 27.4 27.4 29.6 29.6 177.9 177.9 12.1 12.1 12.0 12.0 17.3 17.3 65.4 65.4 37.2 37.2 61.9 61.9 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 10.8 10.8 11.5 11.5 25.8 25.8 33.8 33.8 9.1 9.1 10.8 10.8 30.6 30.6 35.3 35.3 17.2 17.2 22.8 22.8 19.4 19.4 18.8 18.8 17.7 17.7 18.1 18.1 65.0 65.0 124.0 124.0 40.5 40.5 66.7 66.7 38.3 38.3 59.4 59.4 17.8 17.8 19.3 19.3 20.9 20.9 24.0 24.0

E FE DF DD DD FD BF BB CB FC DF ED BE BB BB BB CB CC AC BA CB DC CD CC BC BB BB BB FB FF DF ED DE ED CE CC CC CC C

+3.1 +3.1 +4.4 +4.4 +1.6 +1.6 +2.2 +2.2 +7.8 +7.8 +126.8 +126.8 -0.2 -0.2 +0.0 +0.0 +0.2 +0.2 +2.8 +2.8 +0.6 +0.6 +2.3 +2.3 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 +0.0 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.0 +0.0 -0.1 -0.1 +0.0 +0.0 +0.1 +0.1 +0.3 +0.3 +0.5 +0.5 +1.1 +1.1 +0.2 +0.2 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +0.1 +7.3 +7.3 +11.2 +11.2 +1.8 +1.8 +3.3 +3.3 +0.7 +0.7 +2.2 +2.2 +0.4 +0.4 +0.5 +0.5 +0.4 +0.4 +0.8 +0.8

Notes: Notes: /a/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections are based on the stop-controlled /a/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections are based on the stop-controlled approach with the highest delay. approach with the highest delay. /b/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents the average delay for all /b/ The reported delay and corresponding level of service for all-way stop-controlled intersections represents the average delay for all approaches at the intersection. approaches at the intersection. /c/ Change in delay measured relative to cumulative without project conditions. /c/ Change in delay measured relative to cumulative without project conditions. /d/ Future intersection. /d/ Future intersection. /e/ This intersection is planned to be signalized as part of the Santana Ranch Specific Plan. Thus, the LOS reported under cumulative conditions /e/ This intersection is planned to be signalized as part of the Santana Ranch Specific Plan. Thus, the LOS reported under cumulative conditions is based upon the signalization of the intersection. is denoted based upon the signalization of the that intersection. Entries in bold indicate conditions exceed the current level of service standard. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the current level of service standard. - Denotes Project impact - Denotes Project impact

 

 

                            3 7   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  Table 13 Cumulative Peak-Hour Signal Warrant Checks Warrant Met? Warrant Met? Cumulative w/ out Cumulative w/ Cumulative w/ out Cumulative w/ Project Conditions Project Conditions Project Conditions Project Conditions AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM

Intersection Name Intersection Name Existing Unsignalized Intersections Existing Unsignalized Intersections Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Enterprise Road and Airline Highway Enterprise Road and Airline Highway

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Valley View Road and Union Road Valley View Road and Union Road

No No

No No

No No

No No

Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road

No No

Yes Yes

No No

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Fairview Road and McCloskey Road Fairview Road and McCloskey Road

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Yes Yes

Notes: Notes: Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition. Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition.

 

 

                            3 8   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

5. Conclusions The potential impacts of the project were evaluated in accordance with the standards set forth by San Benito County, the City of Hollister, and Caltrans. The study included an analysis of AM and PM peakhour traffic conditions for nine signalized intersections, nine unsignalized intersections, one future intersection, and two highway segments.

Project Impacts and Recommended Improvements The impacts of the project were identified based on the City of Hollister, San Benito County, and Caltrans level of service standards. Project impacts on other transportation facilities, such as bicycle facilities and transit, were determined based on engineering judgment.

Project Conditions Mitigation Measures The mitigation measures are described below: Enterprise Road and Airline Highway – Signalization of this intersection may be needed to assign right-ofway and maintain the orderly flow of traffic. Prior to issuance of the building permit(s) for the 100th and 200th residential units in the project, the developer should conduct a monitoring study, which will consist of the analyses of all applicable traffic signal warrants based on field-measured data and prevailing traffic and roadway conditions. The developer will install the traffic signal when directed by the San Benito County Public Works Administrator. With implementation of this mitigation measure, this impact would be less-than-significant with mitigation incorporated. If it is determined, through the monitoring studies, that the signal is not warranted at the time of the issuance of the building permit for the 200th unit, but these improvements are covered in the TIF, then the developer should pay the applicable TIF fee as a fairshare contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the improvements are not covered in the TIF, then the developer should pay a fair-share contribution (based on the pro rata contribution of traffic) to the benefit assessment area toward improvements at this intersection. However, payment of a fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. Therefore, in the event that the developer makes a fair-share contribution rather than installing the traffic signal at this intersection, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road – Signalization of this intersection may be needed to assign right-ofway and maintain the orderly flow of traffic. Prior to issuance of the building permit(s) for the 100th and 200th residential units in the project, the developer should conduct a monitoring study, which will consist of

 

 

                            3 9   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011  the analyses of all applicable traffic signal warrants based on field-measured data and prevailing traffic and roadway conditions. The developer will install the traffic signal when directed by the San Benito County Public Works Administrator. With implementation of this mitigation measure, this impact would be less-than-significant with mitigation incorporated. If it is determined, through the monitoring studies, that the signal is not warranted at the time of the issuance of the building permit for the 200th unit, but these improvements are covered in the TIF, then the developer should pay the applicable TIF fee as a fairshare contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the improvements are not covered in the TIF, then the developer should pay a fair-share contribution (based on the pro rata contribution of traffic) to the benefit assessment area toward improvements at this intersection. However, payment of a fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. Therefore, in the event that the developer makes a fair-share contribution rather than installing the traffic signal at this intersection, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Hwy 156 (Union Road to The Alameda) – The operations on this highway could be restored to acceptable conditions by widening the highway to four lanes or by adding passing lanes at strategic locations. The County is currently updating its TIF program. The current draft version includes passing lanes at strategic locations on Highways 25 and 156. Therefore, if these improvements are included in the adopted TIF program, and the fee covers the complete cost for design and construction, the developer should pay the applicable TIF fee as a fair-share contribution towards the identified improvement, and such payment would mitigate the projects impact to the extent feasible. In the event the TIF program does not ultimately cover these improvements, there would be no feasible means for the project to mitigate its nominal impact. In that event, the project impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. However, even if the TIF is paid, payment of the fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. The impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable. Hwy 25 (SR 156 and US 101) – The operations on this highway could be restored to acceptable conditions by widening the highway to four lanes or by adding passing lanes at strategic locations. The County is currently updating its TIF program. The current draft version includes passing lanes at strategic locations on Highways 25 and 156. Therefore, if these improvements are included in the adopted TIF program, and the fee covers the complete cost for design and construction, the developer should pay the applicable TIF fee as a fair-share contribution towards the identified improvement, and such payment would mitigate the projects impact to the extent feasible. In the event the TIF program does not ultimately cover these improvements, there would be no feasible means for the project to mitigate its nominal impact. In that event, the project impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. However, even if the TIF is paid, payment of the fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the project impact. The impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable.

Recommended Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Improvements The frontage improvements on Fairview Road should be designed to be consistent with County Roadway Design Standards, which may include the provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities on Fairview Road. Additionally, sidewalks and pedestrian crossings should be provided at the Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive-Project Driveway intersection to connect the planned on-site pedestrian facilities to existing/future pedestrian facilities on Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive.

Recommended Transit Service Improvements The project site should be designed with the potential future extension of transit services onto the project site in mind. It is recommended that the project applicant work with the local transit agency to ensure that any planned extensions of fixed route transit service on to or adjacent to the project site are accommodated by the design of the site frontage and on-site roadway improvements.

 

 

                            4 0   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential                                                                                                        April 29, 2011 

Intersection Turn-Pocket Storage Recommendations Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway. Based on the amount of traffic the proposed project would generate, the turn-pocket storage length was determined for the southbound left-turn movement at the subject intersection. The southbound left-turn pocket should provide at least 25 feet of vehicle storage space for left-turn traffic into the project site. Additionally, the turn pocket length should be designed, to the extent feasible, to include deceleration distance in the turn pocket based on the design speed of Fairview Road (60 mph). Based on Chapter 400 of Caltrans’ Highway Design Manual, the ideal design for the southbound left-turn lane would include a total length of 490 feet. This is based on a design speed of 60 mph on Fairview Road, a vehicle storage length of 50 feet (2 vehicles), no deceleration in the through lane, and a 90-foot bay taper length being included in the deceleration length, per Caltrans standards.

Recommended Site Access Improvements The project should be set back far enough from Fairview Road to accommodate for the future widening of Fairview Road. Additionally, the intersection improvements on the project side of the intersection should be designed and built to facilitate the future installation of traffic signal equipment at the intersection.

Cumulative Intersection Analyses The results of the cumulative analysis show that the operations at two intersections would degrade to unacceptable levels under traffic conditions projected for the year 2023. Described below are the intersection deficiencies and recommended improvements necessary to maintain the level of service standards under cumulative conditions. Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Project Driveway. Signalization of this intersection will be needed in order to maintain acceptable traffic operations. The intersection should be monitored, and a signal should be installed when warranted. Note that both the Fairview Corners and Gavilan College projects should share the cost of the signal. Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road. Signalization of this intersection will be needed in order to maintain acceptable traffic operations. Additionally, dedicated left-turn lanes should be added on all four approaches and the traffic signal should be operated with protected left-turn phasing. If these improvements are covered in the TIF, then the developer shall pay the applicable TIF fee as a fair-share contribution toward improvements at this intersection. If the improvements are not covered in the TIF, then the developer shall pay its fair-share contribution (based on its pro rata contribution of trips) to the benefit assessment area toward improvements at this intersection. However, payment of the fee alone will not guarantee the timely construction of the identified improvements to mitigate the impacts of the project. This impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable.

 

 

                            4 1   |   P a g e     

 

Fairview Corners Residential  Technical Appendices 

 

February 16, 2011

 

Appendix A  Traffic Count Data 

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 5/12/10 Weather: Clear

Fairview Road & Airline Highway AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Fairview Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 12 4 12 23 5 7 22 7 17 17 5 13 25 6 15 11 8 10 11 8 6 11 4 9 132 47 89

Airline Hwy Westbound WBR WBT WBL 41 20 1 32 16 0 41 20 1 25 22 3 34 12 3 32 14 2 44 22 0 26 14 0 275 140 10

Fairview Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 1 36 14 2 47 20 0 55 25 1 44 19 2 43 26 1 38 14 1 42 11 1 29 8 9 334 137

Airline Hwy Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 8 22 11 12 27 12 14 26 28 23 40 24 20 22 22 21 25 6 20 31 11 17 21 8 135 214 122

Int. Total 182 203 256 236 230 182 207 148 1644

Fairview Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 74 21 49 87 23 52 75 26 55 64 27 44 58 26 40

Airline Hwy Westbound Right Thru Left 139 78 5 132 70 7 132 68 9 135 70 8 136 62 5

Fairview Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 4 182 78 5 189 90 4 180 84 5 167 70 5 152 59

Airline Hwy Eastbound Right Thru Left 57 115 75 69 115 86 78 113 80 84 118 63 78 99 47

Int. Total 877 925 904 855 767

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 7:15 AM 87

132

70

7

5

189

90

69

115

86

925

0.821

0.765

0.805

0.795

0.583

0.625

0.859

0.865

0.750

0.719

0.768

0.903

Fairview Rd

Count Date Wed, 5/12/10

407

162

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

OUT

0.870

52

IN

NORTH

52

132 70 7

7:15 AM to 8:15 AM

OUT

270

86 115 69

OUT

PHF: 0.903

90

IN

172

189 5 284

IN

209

Airline Hwy

23

247

99

Airline Hwy

87

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

23

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Fairview Rd Fairview-Airline (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 5/12/10 Weather: Clear

Fairview Road & Airline Highway PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Fairview Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 15 12 8 17 13 15 18 10 17 7 11 15 14 17 25 14 22 23 16 11 14 10 13 16 111 109 133

Airline Hwy Westbound WBR WBT WBL 12 19 3 11 26 2 16 50 3 15 29 2 12 32 1 13 39 1 9 35 0 15 21 1 103 251 13

Fairview Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 1 8 27 0 8 16 2 19 26 1 7 18 2 8 43 3 14 27 2 10 21 1 11 27 12 85 205

Airline Hwy Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 43 27 13 50 40 22 44 71 10 33 34 6 70 53 19 68 54 9 51 49 12 31 30 9 390 358 100

Int. Total 188 220 286 178 296 287 230 185 1870

Fairview Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 57 46 55 56 51 72 53 60 80 51 61 77 54 63 78

Airline Hwy Westbound Right Thru Left 54 124 10 54 137 8 56 150 7 49 135 4 49 127 3

Fairview Rd Northbound Right Thru 4 42 5 42 8 48 8 39 8 43

Airline Hwy Eastbound Right Thru Left 170 172 51 197 198 57 215 212 44 222 190 46 220 186 49

Int. Total 872 980 1047 991 998

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 4:30 PM 53

56

150

7

8

48

114

215

212

44

1047

0.682

0.800

0.875

0.750

0.583

0.667

0.632

0.663

0.768

0.746

0.579

0.884

Fairview Rd

Count Date Wed, 5/12/10

148

193

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

OUT

0.736

80

IN

NORTH

80

56 150 7

4:30 PM to 5:30 PM

OUT

471

44 212 215

OUT

PHF: 0.884

114

48

IN

300

8 170

IN

213

Airline Hwy

60

317

282

Airline Hwy

53

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

Left 87 103 114 109 118

60

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Fairview Rd Fairview-Airline (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 5/20/10 Weather: overcast

Enterprise Road & Airline Highway AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Enterprise Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 18 3 4 29 0 7 8 0 4 12 2 15 10 1 4 7 0 5 9 2 2 4 0 1 97 8 42

Airline Hwy Westbound WBR WBT WBL 3 86 3 3 84 7 3 87 6 3 88 14 3 98 23 6 88 6 1 99 9 1 66 2 23 696 70

Enterprise Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 9 0 14 1 0 9 8 2 9 16 2 12 6 1 10 9 1 12 5 1 12 5 0 6 59 7 84

Airline Hwy Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 4 38 1 2 30 6 7 47 6 7 73 9 7 59 6 6 44 5 6 67 1 4 54 4 43 412 38

Int. Total 183 178 187 253 228 189 214 147 1579

Enterprise Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 67 5 30 59 3 30 37 3 28 38 5 26 30 3 12

Airline Hwy Westbound Right Thru Left 12 345 30 12 357 50 15 361 49 13 373 52 11 351 40

Enterprise Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 34 4 44 31 5 40 39 6 43 36 5 46 25 3 40

Airline Hwy Eastbound Right Thru Left 20 188 22 23 209 27 27 223 26 26 243 21 23 224 16

Int. Total 801 846 857 884 778

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 7:45 AM 38

13

373

52

36

5

46

26

243

21

884

0.625

0.433

0.542

0.942

0.565

0.563

0.625

0.958

0.929

0.832

0.583

0.874

Count Date Thu, 5/20/10

39

69

OUT

Enterprise Rd

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

IN

0.792

26

NORTH

26

13 373 52

457

7:45 AM to 8:45 AM

OUT

290

21 243 26

OUT

PHF: 0.874

46

5

IN

305

36 87

IN

438

Airline Hwy

5

IN

Airline Hwy

38

OUT

Peak-Hour Factor

5

83

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Enterprise Rd Enterprise-Airline (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 5/20/10 Weather: Clear

Enterprise Road & Airline Highway PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Enterprise Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 3 1 6 7 2 5 5 1 8 11 1 5 4 1 8 8 1 10 7 0 6 5 0 6 50 7 54

Airline Hwy Westbound WBR WBT WBL 5 72 4 4 71 5 6 65 6 6 80 6 4 51 11 9 73 15 9 62 12 11 45 10 54 519 69

Enterprise Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 9 1 8 10 0 7 6 0 5 4 1 10 9 0 9 9 1 15 10 0 6 5 2 10 62 5 70

Airline Hwy Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 16 105 15 9 88 8 10 91 9 20 103 14 12 115 11 23 162 16 10 144 17 16 133 22 116 941 112

Int. Total 245 216 212 261 235 342 283 265 2059

Enterprise Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 26 5 24 27 5 26 28 4 31 30 3 29 24 2 30

Airline Hwy Westbound Right Thru Left 21 288 21 20 267 28 25 269 38 28 266 44 33 231 48

Enterprise Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 29 2 30 29 1 31 28 2 39 32 2 40 33 3 40

Airline Hwy Eastbound Right Thru Left 55 387 46 51 397 42 65 471 50 65 524 58 61 554 66

Int. Total 934 924 1050 1121 1125

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 5:00 PM 24

33

231

48

33

3

40

61

554

66

1125

0.500

0.750

0.750

0.791

0.800

0.825

0.375

0.667

0.663

0.855

0.750

0.822

Count Date Thu, 5/20/10

102

56

OUT

Enterprise Rd

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

IN

0.750

30

NORTH

30

33 231 48

295

5:00 PM to 6:00 PM

OUT

681

66 554 61

OUT

PHF: 0.822

40

3

IN

617

33 76

IN

312

Airline Hwy

2

IN

Airline Hwy

24

OUT

Peak-Hour Factor

2

111

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Enterprise Rd Enterprise-Airline (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 5/20/10 Weather: overcast

Fairview Road & Cielo Vista Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Fairview Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 0 17 0 0 23 0 3 32 0 0 37 0 3 50 0 1 37 0 2 17 0 3 22 0 12 235 0

Westbound WBR WBT WBL 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

Fairview Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 40 3 0 52 2 0 47 3 0 59 2 0 59 5 0 39 3 0 38 3 0 29 1 0 363 22

Cielo Vista Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 6 0 4 10 0 5 8 0 4 4 0 4 6 0 4 7 0 4 6 0 2 4 0 2 51 0 29

Int. Total 70 92 97 106 127 91 68 61 712

Fairview Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 3 109 0 6 142 0 7 156 0 6 141 0 9 126 0

Westbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Fairview Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 0 198 10 0 217 12 0 204 13 0 195 13 0 165 12

Cielo Vista Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 28 0 17 28 0 17 25 0 16 23 0 14 23 0 12

Int. Total 365 422 421 392 347

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 7:15 AM

142

0

0

0

0

0

217

12

28

0

17

422

0.500

0.710

--

--

--

--

--

0.919

0.600

0.700

--

0.850

0.831

Count Date Thu, 5/20/10

234

148

OUT

Fairview Rd

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

IN

NORTH

142 0

0 0 0

18

7:15 AM to 8:15 AM

OUT

45

17 0 28

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.831

12

0

0

217 0 229

IN

170

Cielo Vista Rd

6

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

6

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Fairview Rd Fairview-Cielo Vista (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 5/20/10 Weather: clear

Fairview Road & Cielo Vista Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Fairview Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 3 37 0 5 39 0 7 42 0 5 43 0 5 50 0 1 85 0 5 63 0 3 66 0 34 425 0

Westbound WBR WBT WBL 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

Fairview Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 25 13 0 34 3 0 27 12 0 39 5 0 35 5 0 42 11 0 16 4 0 26 10 0 244 63

Cielo Vista Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 4 0 4 1 0 5 3 0 3 5 0 6 2 0 3 10 0 2 7 0 5 3 0 3 35 0 31

Int. Total 86 87 94 103 100 151 100 111 832

Fairview Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 20 161 0 22 174 0 18 220 0 16 241 0 14 264 0

Westbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Fairview Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 0 125 33 0 135 25 0 143 33 0 132 25 0 119 30

Cielo Vista Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 13 0 18 11 0 17 20 0 14 24 0 16 22 0 13

Int. Total 370 384 448 454 462

Hourly Volumes

0

0

0

0

119

30

22

0

13

462

0.776

--

--

--

--

--

0.708

0.682

0.550

--

0.650

0.765

Fairview Rd 278

IN

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

14

264 0

Count Date Thu, 5/20/10

132

0.700

0

0 0 0

44

5:00 PM to 6:00 PM

OUT

35

13 0 22

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.765

30

0

0

119 0 149

IN

286

Cielo Vista Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

264

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 5:00 PM 14

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Fairview Rd Fairview-Cielo Vista (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 6/10/10 Weather: overcast

Valley View Road & Union Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Valley View Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 28 0 1 20 1 0 15 1 1 26 7 0 13 0 2 11 1 1 5 0 2 14 0 0 132 10 7

Union Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 3 37 1 1 31 0 5 38 0 2 28 0 2 30 0 2 22 0 2 17 0 0 19 0 17 222 1

Valley View Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 2 17 1 1 18 2 1 17 0 6 26 0 2 17 0 0 12 1 2 16 0 2 14 4 16 137

Union Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 2 7 4 5 10 4 7 9 6 8 11 9 3 8 9 4 10 16 5 10 10 2 7 10 36 72 68

Int. Total 102 92 102 123 86 79 70 68 722

Valley View Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 89 9 2 74 9 3 65 9 4 55 8 5 43 1 5

Union Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 11 134 1 10 127 0 11 118 0 8 97 0 6 88 0

Valley View Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 3 10 78 3 10 78 2 9 72 1 10 71 1 6 59

Union Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 22 37 23 23 38 28 22 38 40 20 39 44 14 35 45

Int. Total 419 403 390 358 303

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 7:00 AM 89

11

134

1

3

10

78

22

37

23

419

0.321

0.500

0.550

0.882

0.250

0.375

0.417

0.750

0.688

0.841

0.639

0.852

Count Date Thu, 6/10/10

44

100

OUT

Valley View Rd

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

IN

0.795

2

NORTH

9

2

11 134 1

7:00 AM to 8:00 AM

OUT

82

23 37 22

10

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.852

78

146

42

3 91

IN

IN

Union Rd

301

Union Rd

89

OUT

Peak-Hour Factor

9

32

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Valley View Rd Valley View-Union (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 6/2/10 Weather: clear

Valley View Road & Union Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Valley View Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 12 8 2 13 6 3 9 7 6 19 5 2 13 5 6 12 4 5 9 9 0 8 2 1 95 46 25

Union Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 2 19 15 2 20 0 7 28 0 4 29 1 3 30 1 2 22 1 2 14 0 2 14 1 24 176 19

Valley View Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 3 15 2 2 10 1 4 22 0 5 20 1 5 22 2 2 21 0 6 15 0 9 19 6 36 144

Union Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 20 45 17 21 35 28 22 42 20 26 57 30 36 63 34 23 45 29 33 42 27 26 37 32 207 366 217

Int. Total 158 142 168 198 219 168 157 151 1361

Valley View Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 53 26 13 54 23 17 53 21 19 53 23 13 42 20 12

Union Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 15 96 16 16 107 2 16 109 3 11 95 3 9 80 3

Valley View Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 3 14 67 4 16 74 4 16 85 3 18 78 3 22 77

Union Rd Eastbound Right Thru 89 179 105 197 107 207 118 207 118 187

Left 95 112 113 120 122

Int. Total 666 727 753 742 695

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 4:30 PM 53

16

109

3

4

16

85

107

207

113

753

0.750

0.792

0.571

0.908

0.750

0.500

0.800

0.966

0.743

0.821

0.831

0.860

Count Date Wed, 6/2/10

145

93

OUT

Valley View Rd

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

IN

0.697

19

NORTH

21

19

16 109 3

4:30 PM to 5:30 PM

OUT

427

113 207 107

16

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.860

85

128

230

4 105

IN

IN

Union Rd

247

Union Rd

53

OUT

Peak-Hour Factor

21

131

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Valley View Rd Valley View-Union (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 5/13/10 Weather: Clear

Airline Highway & Union Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Airline Hwy Southbound SBR SBT SBL 16 18 10 50 29 19 31 41 47 42 44 25 27 23 15 30 33 12 29 37 18 24 48 18 249 273 164

Union Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 16 52 6 77 106 5 41 52 11 57 73 13 26 50 11 28 46 5 27 60 1 26 34 0 298 473 52

Airline Hwy Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 35 24 2 78 69 6 55 52 7 61 31 7 55 46 4 66 45 0 60 65 3 64 25 29 474 357

Union Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 7 8 18 23 21 24 22 45 23 28 24 30 26 26 21 28 28 19 30 21 26 23 23 14 187 196 175

Int. Total 210 503 426 435 333 344 374 302 2927

Airline Hwy Southbound Right Thru Left 139 132 101 150 137 106 130 141 99 128 137 70 110 141 63

Union Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 191 283 35 201 281 40 152 221 40 138 229 30 107 190 17

Airline Hwy Northbound Right Thru 15 229 22 249 24 237 18 242 14 245

Union Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 80 98 95 99 116 98 104 123 93 112 99 96 107 98 80

Int. Total 1574 1697 1538 1486 1353

Hourly Volumes

201

281

40

22

249

198

99

116

98

1697

0.778

0.564

0.653

0.663

0.769

0.786

0.798

0.717

0.884

0.644

0.817

0.843

Airline Hwy

Count Date Thu, 5/13/10

548

393

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

OUT

0.750

106

NORTH

137 106

201 281 40

7:15 AM to 8:15 AM

OUT

313

98 116 99

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.843

198

522

244

249 22 469

IN

276

Union Rd

629

Union Rd

150

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

Left 176 198 174 187 181

137

IN

Peak-Hour Volume 7:15 AM 150

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Airline Hwy Airline-Union (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 5/13/10 Weather: Clear

Airline Highway & Union Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Airline Hwy Southbound SBR SBT SBL 22 87 41 19 82 39 30 70 54 28 69 37 27 76 44 30 103 61 26 66 63 19 83 40 201 636 379

Union Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 23 16 4 20 22 3 17 23 4 20 17 9 34 22 6 35 24 11 25 27 3 24 20 4 198 171 44

Airline Hwy Northbound NBR NBT NBL 4 47 31 4 52 30 4 59 27 5 54 31 7 40 24 11 44 23 6 51 21 5 55 18 46 402 205

Union Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 47 41 22 42 50 40 25 44 32 32 46 33 42 56 31 39 60 36 35 55 34 34 69 38 296 421 266

Int. Total 385 403 389 381 409 477 412 409 3265

Airline Hwy Southbound Right Thru 99 308 104 297 115 318 111 314 102 328

Union Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 80 78 20 91 84 22 106 86 30 114 90 29 118 93 24

Airline Hwy Northbound Right Thru 17 212 20 205 27 197 29 189 29 190

Union Rd Eastbound Right Thru 146 181 141 196 138 206 148 217 150 240

Left 127 136 132 134 139

Int. Total 1558 1582 1656 1679 1707

Hourly Volumes

118

93

24

29

190

86

150

240

139

1707

0.796

0.825

0.843

0.861

0.545

0.659

0.864

0.896

0.893

0.870

0.914

0.895

Airline Hwy

Count Date Thu, 5/13/10

447

638

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

OUT

0.850

208

NORTH

328 208

118 93 24

5:00 PM to 6:00 PM

OUT

529

139 240 150

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.895

86

235

477

190 29 305

IN

502

Union Rd

281

Union Rd

102

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

Left 119 112 105 99 86

328

IN

Peak-Hour Volume 5:00 PM 102

Left 171 174 196 205 208

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Airline Hwy Airline-Union (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 5/19/10 Weather: Clear

Southside Road & Union Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Southside Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 12 1 0 10 3 2 10 5 4 7 8 5 10 17 3 18 6 8 17 11 9 13 4 5 97 55 36

Union Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 2 136 4 3 183 6 3 121 10 10 114 23 4 81 14 16 89 4 12 133 3 2 59 6 52 916 70

Southside Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 5 9 22 14 18 44 8 6 30 20 12 22 10 18 29 16 36 25 9 12 36 4 10 18 86 121 226

Union Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 8 22 3 8 41 5 15 78 2 23 59 6 17 39 1 18 55 15 16 65 12 17 50 9 122 409 53

Int. Total 224 337 292 309 243 306 335 197 2243

Southside Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 39 17 11 37 33 14 45 36 20 52 42 25 58 38 25

Union Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 18 554 43 20 499 53 33 405 51 42 417 44 34 362 27

Southside Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 47 45 118 52 54 125 54 72 106 55 78 112 39 76 108

Union Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 54 200 16 63 217 14 73 231 24 74 218 34 68 209 37

Int. Total 1162 1181 1150 1193 1081

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 7:45 AM 52

42

417

44

55

78

112

74

218

34

1193

0.618

0.694

0.656

0.784

0.478

0.688

0.542

0.778

0.804

0.838

0.567

0.890

Count Date Wed, 5/19/10

154

119

OUT

Southside Rd

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

IN

0.722

25

NORTH

42

25

42 417 44

7:45 AM to 8:45 AM

OUT

326

34 218 74

78

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.890

112

503

298

55 245

IN

IN

Union Rd

581

Union Rd

52

OUT

Peak-Hour Factor

42

160

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Southside Rd Southside-Union (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 5/19/10 Weather: overcast

Southside Road & Union Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Southside Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 5 12 9 9 9 5 5 11 6 7 8 13 11 10 10 9 12 8 4 10 6 6 16 7 56 88 64

Union Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 3 58 12 3 68 13 2 51 13 5 60 16 1 75 10 3 66 10 4 47 9 7 46 10 28 471 93

Southside Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 7 8 30 13 13 11 15 13 16 7 15 15 13 11 19 9 5 13 7 8 22 6 16 17 77 89 143

Union Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 24 114 11 21 119 13 20 97 16 20 114 11 25 103 14 18 90 13 23 110 10 25 97 16 176 844 104

Int. Total 293 297 265 291 302 256 260 269 2233

Southside Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 26 40 33 32 38 34 32 41 37 31 40 37 30 48 31

Union Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 13 237 54 11 254 52 11 252 49 13 248 45 15 234 39

Southside Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 42 49 72 48 52 61 44 44 63 36 39 69 35 40 71

Union Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 85 444 51 86 433 54 83 404 54 86 417 48 91 400 53

Int. Total 1146 1155 1114 1109 1087

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 4:15 PM 32

11

254

52

48

52

61

86

433

54

1155

0.864

0.654

0.550

0.847

0.813

0.800

0.867

0.803

0.860

0.910

0.844

0.956

Count Date Wed, 5/19/10

117

104

OUT

Southside Rd

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

IN

0.727

34

NORTH

38

34

11 254 52

4:15 PM to 5:15 PM

OUT

573

54 433 86

52

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.956

61

317

515

48 161

IN

IN

Union Rd

347

Union Rd

32

OUT

Peak-Hour Factor

38

176

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Southside Rd Southside-Union (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Union Rd. Bridge Count Date: Wed, 3/4/09 Weather: Overcast

San Benito Street & Union Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

San Benito St. Southbound SBR SBT SBL 43 0 14 50 0 32 38 0 58 30 0 29 21 0 25 24 0 12 30 0 24 26 0 28 262 0 222

Union Rd. Westbound WBR WBT WBL 31 124 0 112 131 0 94 91 0 54 90 0 48 76 0 69 54 0 120 55 0 33 59 0 561 680 0

Northbound NBR NBT NBL 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

Union Rd. Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 0 29 31 0 29 36 0 45 24 0 44 22 0 39 20 0 32 21 0 46 28 0 38 31 0 302 213

Int. Total 272 390 350 269 229 212 303 215 2240

San Benito St. Southbound Right Thru Left 161 0 133 139 0 144 113 0 124 105 0 90 101 0 89

Union Rd. Westbound Right Thru Left 291 436 0 308 388 0 265 311 0 291 275 0 270 244 0

Northbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Union Rd. Eastbound Right Thru 0 147 0 157 0 160 0 161 0 155

Left 113 102 87 91 100

Int. Total 1281 1238 1060 1013 959

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 7:00 AM 161 0.805

133

291

436

0

0

0

0

0

147

113

1281

--

0.573

0.650

0.832

--

--

--

--

--

0.817

0.785

0.821

Count Date Wed, 3/4/09

404

IN

294

OUT

San Benito St.

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

NORTH

0

133

291 436 0

7:00 AM to 8:00 AM

OUT

260

113 147 0

0

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.821

0

727

280

0 0

IN

IN

Union Rd.

597

Union Rd.

161

OUT

Peak-Hour Factor

0

0

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

San Benito - Union (3-2009 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Union Rd. Bridge Count Date: Wed, 3/4/09 Weather: overcast/clear

San Benito Street & Union Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

San Benito St. Southbound SBR SBT SBL 26 0 30 21 0 20 16 0 26 19 0 23 19 0 40 35 0 38 31 0 30 10 0 17 177 0 224

Union Rd. Westbound WBR WBT WBL 34 48 0 27 53 0 33 49 0 38 53 0 42 66 0 31 46 0 19 27 0 20 35 0 244 377 0

Northbound NBR NBT NBL 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

Union Rd. Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 0 82 28 0 84 38 0 100 42 0 99 36 0 96 48 0 100 26 0 114 32 0 95 25 0 770 275

Int. Total 248 243 266 268 311 276 253 202 2067

San Benito St. Southbound Right Thru Left 82 0 99 75 0 109 89 0 127 104 0 131 95 0 125

Union Rd. Westbound Right Thru Left 132 203 0 140 221 0 144 214 0 130 192 0 112 174 0

Northbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Union Rd. Eastbound Right Thru 0 365 0 379 0 395 0 409 0 405

Left 144 164 152 142 131

Int. Total 1025 1088 1121 1108 1042

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 4:30 PM 89 0.636

127

144

214

0

0

0

0

0

395

152

1121

--

0.794

0.857

0.811

--

--

--

--

--

0.988

0.792

0.901

Count Date Wed, 3/4/09

296

IN

216

OUT

San Benito St.

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

NORTH

0

127

144 214 0

4:30 PM to 5:30 PM

OUT

547

152 395 0

0

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.901

0

358

522

0 0

IN

IN

Union Rd.

303

Union Rd.

89

OUT

Peak-Hour Factor

0

0

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

San Benito - Union (3-2009 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Tue, 6/8/10 Weather: clear

Union Road/Mitchell Road & Highway 156 AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Mitchell Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 0 1 5 0 5 4 2 0 13 2 4 8 0 1 6 1 2 12 1 2 6 1 4 10 7 19 64

Hwy 156 Westbound WBR WBT WBL 3 167 10 5 208 11 7 160 9 8 116 6 5 119 7 6 143 2 2 98 2 2 128 0 38 1139 47

Union Rd Northbound NBR NBT 3 2 3 2 1 4 7 4 5 0 6 1 3 2 3 0 31 15

Mitchell Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 4 10 30 4 10 31 5 7 39 4 9 32 3 9 34

Hwy 156 Westbound Right Thru Left 23 651 36 25 603 33 26 538 24 21 476 17 15 488 11

Union Rd Northbound Right Thru 14 12 16 10 19 9 21 7 17 3

NBL 103 144 132 94 107 84 64 62 790

Hwy 156 Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 38 75 0 58 100 0 45 85 1 58 109 0 42 99 0 42 113 1 29 80 1 42 90 1 354 751 4

Int. Total 407 540 459 416 391 413 290 343 3259

Left 473 477 417 349 317

Hwy 156 Eastbound Right Thru Left 199 369 1 203 393 1 187 406 2 171 401 2 155 382 3

Int. Total 1822 1806 1679 1510 1437

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 7:00 AM

10

30

23

651

36

14

12

473

199

369

1

1822

0.500

0.500

0.577

0.719

0.782

0.818

0.500

0.750

0.821

0.858

0.846

0.250

0.844

Count Date Tue, 6/8/10 36

44

OUT

Mitchell Rd

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

IN

NORTH

10

30

23 651 36

7:00 AM to 8:00 AM

OUT

569

1 369 199

12

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.844

473

710

413

14 499

IN

245

Hwy 156

1,128

Hwy 156

4

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

4

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Union Rd Union-Hwy 156 (2010-06 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Tue, 6/8/10 Weather: clear

Union Road/Mitchell Road & Highway 156 PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Mitchell Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 0 11 22 1 15 28 3 18 38 0 11 26 0 22 34 0 13 21 1 7 20 3 15 21 8 112 210

Hwy 156 Westbound WBR WBT WBL 4 115 5 10 128 8 5 152 7 10 182 9 11 160 5 9 131 2 3 99 0 5 133 5 57 1100 41

Union Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 13 1 53 17 0 72 16 4 72 12 1 72 20 4 82 9 0 59 1 2 68 9 6 53 97 18 531

Hwy 156 Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 71 152 2 88 184 1 104 157 1 100 176 0 121 192 3 129 152 2 132 127 1 118 168 1 863 1308 11

Int. Total 449 552 577 599 654 527 461 537 4356

Mitchell Rd Southbound Right Thru 4 55 4 66 3 64 1 53 4 57

Hwy 156 Westbound Right Thru Left 29 577 29 36 622 29 35 625 23 33 572 16 28 523 12

Union Rd Northbound Right Thru 58 6 65 9 57 9 42 7 39 12

Hwy 156 Eastbound Right Thru Left 363 669 4 413 709 5 454 677 6 482 647 6 500 639 7

Int. Total 2177 2382 2357 2241 2179

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 4:15 PM

Left 269 298 285 281 262

4

66

126

36

622

29

65

9

298

413

709

5

2382

0.333

0.750

0.829

0.818

0.854

0.806

0.813

0.563

0.909

0.853

0.923

0.417

0.911

Count Date Tue, 6/8/10 50

196

OUT

Mitchell Rd

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

IN

NORTH

66

126

36 622 29

4:15 PM to 5:15 PM

OUT

1,127

5 709 413

9

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.911

298

687

900

65 372

IN

508

Hwy 156

924

Hwy 156

4

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

Left 114 126 119 101 96

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Union Rd Union-Hwy 156 (2010-06 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 5/27/10 Weather: Clear

Airline Highway & Sunset Drive AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Airline Hwy Southbound SBR SBT SBL 1 58 23 6 63 19 14 108 33 5 75 44 9 62 30 15 56 28 12 58 34 11 57 50 73 537 261

Sunset Dr Westbound WBR WBT WBL 20 4 8 32 16 9 41 10 8 71 31 4 25 14 6 30 24 4 28 30 4 31 14 1 278 143 44

Airline Hwy Northbound NBR NBT NBL 10 70 1 11 142 13 9 103 4 5 101 4 4 70 2 13 101 5 9 71 6 15 80 4 76 738 39

Sunset Dr Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 2 8 0 5 5 7 6 13 6 3 15 17 2 13 10 1 16 27 3 12 36 0 26 12 22 108 115

Int. Total 205 328 355 375 247 320 303 301 2434

Airline Hwy Southbound Right Thru 26 304 34 308 43 301 41 251 47 233

Sunset Dr Westbound Right Thru Left 164 61 29 169 71 27 167 79 22 154 99 18 114 82 15

Airline Hwy Northbound Right Thru Left 35 416 22 29 416 23 31 375 15 31 343 17 41 322 17

Sunset Dr Eastbound Right Thru Left 16 41 30 16 46 40 12 57 60 9 56 90 6 67 85

Int. Total 1263 1305 1297 1245 1171

Hourly Volumes

169

71

27

29

416

23

16

46

40

1305

0.713

0.716

0.595

0.573

0.750

0.659

0.732

0.442

0.667

0.767

0.588

0.870

Airline Hwy 468

IN

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

34

308 126

Count Date Thu, 5/27/10

625

0.607

126

7:15 AM to 8:15 AM

OUT

102

40 46 16

OUT

PHF: 0.870

23

IN

201

416 29 468

IN

267

Sunset Dr

169 71 27

128

351

Sunset Dr

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

308

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 7:15 AM 34

Left 119 126 135 136 142

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Airline Hwy Airline-Sunset (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 6/3/10 Weather: clear

Airline Highway & Sunset Drive PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Airline Hwy Southbound SBR SBT SBL 13 122 59 13 120 46 17 131 47 13 132 55 9 149 51 22 172 51 21 145 44 13 133 44 121 1104 397

Sunset Dr Westbound WBR WBT WBL 28 21 20 18 7 14 62 28 4 38 19 7 74 19 7 50 21 5 30 13 3 32 9 7 332 137 67

Airline Hwy Northbound NBR NBT NBL 11 102 10 12 113 9 4 142 9 6 158 15 12 150 5 8 99 9 11 81 8 7 82 5 71 927 70

Sunset Dr Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 12 10 14 5 18 8 4 11 10 5 22 12 5 16 6 7 10 15 6 18 12 4 14 7 48 119 84

Int. Total 422 383 469 482 503 469 392 357 3477

Airline Hwy Southbound Right Thru 56 505 52 532 61 584 65 598 65 599

Sunset Dr Westbound Right Thru Left 146 75 45 192 73 32 224 87 23 192 72 22 186 62 22

Airline Hwy Northbound Right Thru Left 33 515 43 34 563 38 30 549 38 37 488 37 38 412 27

Sunset Dr Eastbound Right Thru Left 26 61 44 19 67 36 21 59 43 23 66 45 22 58 40

Int. Total 1756 1837 1923 1846 1721

Hourly Volumes

224

87

23

30

549

38

21

59

43

1923

0.849

0.927

0.757

0.777

0.821

0.625

0.869

0.633

0.750

0.670

0.717

0.956

Airline Hwy 849

IN

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

61

584 204

Count Date Thu, 6/3/10

816

0.693

204

4:30 PM to 5:30 PM

OUT

123

43 59 21

OUT

PHF: 0.956

38

IN

293

549 30 617

IN

334

Sunset Dr

224 87 23

186

628

Sunset Dr

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

584

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 4:30 PM 61

Left 207 199 204 201 190

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Airline Hwy Airline-Sunset (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 6/9/10 Weather: overcast

Project ID:

Highway 25 Bypass & Sunnyslope Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Hwy 25 Southbound SBR SBT SBL 5 37 7 10 39 1 13 51 12 11 62 14 10 60 11 14 38 17 10 52 14 9 45 11 82 384 87

Sunnyslope Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 18 37 27 27 48 17 10 31 30 6 57 18 24 32 22 9 40 29 13 40 35 7 44 24 114 329 202

Hwy 25 Northbound NBR NBT NBL 10 50 20 4 77 14 7 111 21 13 110 14 4 66 42 5 74 34 12 84 24 7 81 25 62 653 194

Sunnyslope Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 13 11 20 20 16 17 28 22 21 37 32 27 30 23 27 27 35 19 25 23 20 23 23 20 203 185 171

Int. Total 255 290 357 401 351 341 352 319 2666

Hwy 25 Southbound Right Thru Left 39 189 34 44 212 38 48 211 54 45 212 56 43 195 53

Sunnyslope Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 61 173 92 67 168 87 49 160 99 52 169 104 53 156 110

Hwy 25 Northbound Right Thru 34 348 28 364 29 361 34 334 28 305

Sunnyslope Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 98 81 85 115 93 92 122 112 94 119 113 93 105 104 86

Int. Total 1303 1399 1450 1445 1363

Hourly Volumes

49

160

99

29

361

111

122

112

94

1450

0.851

0.794

0.510

0.702

0.825

0.558

0.813

0.661

0.824

0.800

0.870

0.904

Hwy 25 313

IN

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

48

211 54

Count Date Wed, 6/9/10

504

0.857

54

7:30 AM to 8:30 AM

OUT

328

94 112 122

OUT

PHF: 0.904

111

IN

195

361 29 501

IN

308

Sunnyslope Rd

49 160 99

319

432

Sunnyslope Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

Left 69 91 111 114 125

211

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 7:30 AM 48

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Hwy 25 Hwy 25-Sunnyslope (2010-06 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 6/9/10 Weather: clear

Project ID:

Highway 25 Bypass & Sunnyslope Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Hwy 25 Southbound SBR SBT SBL 42 148 29 27 143 36 22 125 36 23 115 42 32 180 46 35 122 21 23 97 25 29 96 36 233 1026 271

Sunnyslope Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 10 63 37 2 76 36 4 55 44 10 53 51 8 83 50 8 61 46 7 48 29 5 62 27 54 501 320

Hwy 25 Northbound NBR NBT NBL 21 93 54 23 95 74 26 84 45 31 97 40 31 119 73 22 72 45 21 69 37 26 68 46 201 697 414

Sunnyslope Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 41 77 39 54 98 37 51 66 23 47 71 34 70 119 30 31 78 42 38 65 28 31 66 33 363 640 266

Int. Total 654 701 581 614 841 583 487 525 4986

Hwy 25 Southbound Right Thru 114 531 104 563 112 542 113 514 119 495

Sunnyslope Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 26 247 168 24 267 181 30 252 191 33 245 176 28 254 152

Hwy 25 Northbound Right Thru 101 369 111 395 110 372 105 357 100 328

Sunnyslope Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 193 312 133 222 354 124 199 334 129 186 333 134 170 328 133

Int. Total 2550 2737 2619 2525 2436

Hourly Volumes

24

267

181

111

395

232

222

354

124

2737

0.782

0.870

0.600

0.804

0.887

0.895

0.830

0.784

0.793

0.744

0.838

0.814

Hwy 25

Count Date Wed, 6/9/10

543

827

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

OUT

0.813

160

NORTH

24 267 181

4:15 PM to 5:15 PM

OUT

700

124 354 222

OUT

PHF: 0.814

232

IN

625

395 111 738

IN

472

Sunnyslope Rd

563 160

603

966

Sunnyslope Rd

104

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

Left 213 232 203 195 201

563

IN

Peak-Hour Volume 4:15 PM 104

Left 143 160 145 134 128

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Hwy 25 Hwy 25-Sunnyslope (2010-06 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Tue, 5/25/10 Weather: overcast

Valley View Road & Sunnyslope Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Southbound SBR SBT SBL 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

Sunnyslope Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 0 76 13 0 152 15 0 119 13 0 78 15 0 105 12 0 126 23 0 79 8 0 76 10 0 811 109

Valley View Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 4 0 11 6 0 27 7 0 36 8 0 11 8 0 9 8 0 13 4 0 8 6 0 18 51 0 133

Sunnyslope Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 6 36 0 9 37 0 14 92 0 12 65 0 8 42 0 9 45 0 3 44 0 3 51 0 64 412 0

Int. Total 146 246 281 189 184 224 146 164 1580

Southbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sunnyslope Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 0 425 56 0 454 55 0 428 63 0 388 58 0 386 53

Valley View Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 25 0 85 29 0 83 31 0 69 28 0 41 26 0 48

Sunnyslope Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 41 230 0 43 236 0 43 244 0 32 196 0 23 182 0

Int. Total 862 900 878 743 718

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 7:15 AM Peak-Hour Factor

0

0

0

0

454

55

29

0

83

43

236

0

900

--

--

--

--

0.747

0.917

0.906

--

0.576

0.768

0.641

--

0.801

Count Date Tue, 5/25/10 0

OUT

IN

0

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

NORTH

0

0

0 454 55

537

7:15 AM to 8:15 AM

OUT

0

IN

265

29 112

83

509

OUT

PHF: 0.801

IN

279

0 236 43

OUT

IN

98

Sunnyslope Rd

0

Sunnyslope Rd

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Valley View Rd Valley View-Sunnyslope (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 5/27/10 Weather: overcast

Valley View Road & Sunnyslope Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Southbound SBR SBT SBL 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

Sunnyslope Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 0 88 7 0 75 9 0 58 10 0 91 8 0 62 8 0 69 8 0 76 8 0 77 5 0 596 63

Valley View Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 17 0 17 9 0 18 15 0 16 19 0 25 16 0 17 16 0 10 15 0 17 19 0 15 126 0 135

Sunnyslope Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 12 95 0 15 105 0 7 81 0 18 107 0 11 113 0 19 101 0 16 115 0 14 91 0 112 808 0

Int. Total 236 231 187 268 227 223 247 221 1840

Southbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sunnyslope Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 0 312 34 0 286 35 0 280 34 0 298 32 0 284 29

Valley View Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 60 0 76 59 0 76 66 0 68 66 0 69 66 0 59

Sunnyslope Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 52 388 0 51 406 0 55 402 0 64 436 0 60 420 0

Int. Total 922 913 905 965 918

Hourly Volumes

Peak-Hour Volume 4:45 PM Peak-Hour Factor

0

0

0

0

298

32

66

0

69

64

436

0

965

--

--

--

--

0.819

1.000

0.868

--

0.690

0.842

0.948

--

0.900

Count Date Thu, 5/27/10 0

OUT

IN

0

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

NORTH

0

0

0 298 32

367

4:45 PM to 5:45 PM

OUT

0

IN

502

66 135

69

330

OUT

PHF: 0.900

IN

500

0 436 64

OUT

IN

96

Sunnyslope Rd

0

Sunnyslope Rd

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Valley View Rd Valley View-Sunnyslope (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 5/19/10 Weather: clear

Fairview Road & Sunnyslope Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Fairview Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 15 16 0 43 25 0 34 33 0 36 36 0 33 27 0 35 37 0 23 20 0 27 22 0 246 216 0

Westbound WBR WBT WBL 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

Fairview Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 38 4 0 58 9 0 45 10 0 74 14 0 46 14 0 26 8 0 37 8 0 42 5 0 366 72

Sunnyslope Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 4 0 27 5 0 44 6 0 58 15 0 91 11 0 29 8 0 24 10 0 21 3 0 23 62 0 317

Int. Total 104 184 186 266 160 138 119 122 1279

Fairview Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 128 110 0 146 121 0 138 133 0 127 120 0 118 106 0

Westbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Fairview Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 0 215 37 0 223 47 0 191 46 0 183 44 0 151 35

Sunnyslope Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 30 0 220 37 0 222 40 0 202 44 0 165 32 0 97

Int. Total 740 796 750 683 539

Hourly Volumes

0

0

0

0

223

47

37

0

222

796

0.840

--

--

--

--

--

0.753

0.839

0.617

--

0.610

0.748

Fairview Rd

Count Date Wed, 5/19/10

445

267

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

OUT

0.849

0

NORTH

121 0

0 0 0

193

7:15 AM to 8:15 AM

OUT

259

222 0 37

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.748

47

0

0

223 0 270

IN

158

Sunnyslope Rd

146

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

121

IN

Peak-Hour Volume 7:15 AM 146

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Fairview Rd Fairview-Sunnyslope (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 5/19/10 Weather: overcast

Fairview Road & Sunnyslope Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Fairview Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 45 31 0 46 40 0 40 35 0 34 43 0 34 49 0 46 52 0 38 40 0 40 42 0 323 332 0

Westbound WBR WBT WBL 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

Fairview Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 33 11 0 29 14 0 20 11 0 27 14 0 27 10 0 31 15 0 28 9 0 19 12 0 214 96

Sunnyslope Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 12 0 25 14 0 35 17 0 27 7 0 26 8 0 31 6 0 28 11 0 28 12 0 26 87 0 226

Int. Total 157 178 150 151 159 178 154 151 1278

Fairview Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 165 149 0 154 167 0 154 179 0 152 184 0 158 183 0

Westbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Fairview Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 0 109 50 0 103 49 0 105 50 0 113 48 0 105 46

Sunnyslope Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 50 0 113 46 0 119 38 0 112 32 0 113 37 0 113

Int. Total 636 638 638 642 642

Hourly Volumes

0

0

0

0

113

48

32

0

113

642

0.885

--

--

--

--

--

0.911

0.800

0.727

--

0.911

0.902

Fairview Rd

Count Date Wed, 5/19/10

226

336

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

OUT

0.826

0

NORTH

184 0

0 0 0

200

4:45 PM to 5:45 PM

OUT

145

113 0 32

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.902

48

0

0

113 0 161

IN

216

Sunnyslope Rd

152

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

184

IN

Peak-Hour Volume 4:45 PM 152

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Fairview Rd Fairview-Sunnyslope (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Tue, 5/18/10 Weather: cloudy

Fairview Road & Hillcrest Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Fairview Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 9 26 0 16 52 0 22 71 0 15 59 0 12 78 0 46 70 0 14 52 0 14 30 0 148 438 0

Westbound WBR WBT WBL 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

Fairview Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 74 2 0 93 6 0 105 5 0 153 9 0 101 6 0 57 7 0 36 8 0 41 6 0 660 49

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 2 0 14 8 0 19 9 0 39 9 0 35 5 0 30 7 0 13 2 0 5 11 0 14 53 0 169

Int. Total 127 194 251 280 232 200 117 116 1517

Fairview Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 62 208 0 65 260 0 95 278 0 87 259 0 86 230 0

Westbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Fairview Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 0 425 22 0 452 26 0 416 27 0 347 30 0 235 27

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound Right Thru 28 0 31 0 30 0 23 0 25 0

Left 107 123 117 83 62

Int. Total 852 957 963 829 665

Hourly Volumes

0

0

0

0

416

27

30

0

117

963

0.891

--

--

--

--

--

0.680

0.750

0.833

--

0.750

0.860

Fairview Rd 373

IN

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

95

278 0

Count Date Tue, 5/18/10

533

0.516

0

0 0 0

122

7:30 AM to 8:30 AM

OUT

147

117 0 30

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.860

27

0

0

416 0 443

IN

308

Hillcrest Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

278

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 7:30 AM 95

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Fairview Rd Fairview-Hillcrest (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Tue, 5/18/10 Weather: clear

Fairview Road & Hillcrest Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Fairview Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 34 57 0 27 58 0 31 67 0 40 61 0 43 98 0 24 47 0 36 71 0 23 62 0 258 521 0

Westbound WBR WBT WBL 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

Fairview Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 43 10 0 48 11 0 57 9 0 34 6 0 56 15 0 45 7 0 44 5 0 46 6 0 373 69

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 11 0 13 6 0 22 4 0 19 10 0 22 6 0 29 3 0 12 11 0 23 5 0 17 56 0 157

Int. Total 168 172 187 173 247 138 190 159 1434

Fairview Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 132 243 0 141 284 0 138 273 0 143 277 0 126 278 0

Westbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Fairview Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 0 182 36 0 195 41 0 192 37 0 179 33 0 191 33

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 31 0 76 26 0 92 23 0 82 30 0 86 25 0 81

Int. Total 700 779 745 748 734

Hourly Volumes

0

0

0

0

195

41

26

0

92

779

0.724

--

--

--

--

--

0.855

0.683

0.650

--

0.793

0.788

Fairview Rd

Count Date Tue, 5/18/10

287

425

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

OUT

0.820

0

NORTH

284 0

0 0 0

182

4:15 PM to 5:15 PM

OUT

118

92 0 26

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.788

41

0

0

195 0 236

IN

310

Hillcrest Rd

141

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

284

IN

Peak-Hour Volume 4:15 PM 141

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Fairview Rd Fairview-Hillcrest (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 5/26/10 Weather: cloudy

Memorial Drive & Hillcrest Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Memorial Dr Southbound SBR SBT SBL 3 9 5 20 22 7 17 73 18 7 19 9 2 16 4 7 9 4 8 11 5 3 8 3 67 167 55

Hillcrest Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 14 54 7 30 82 12 40 58 21 23 70 8 5 65 8 10 53 6 8 85 9 9 30 4 139 497 75

Memorial Dr Northbound NBR NBT NBL 3 19 4 7 44 10 42 63 63 17 23 11 9 24 8 6 18 7 3 12 14 4 6 6 91 209 123

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 4 13 4 16 22 22 42 55 18 14 26 2 3 25 3 5 25 1 10 22 3 6 12 2 100 200 55

Int. Total 139 294 510 229 172 151 190 93 1778

Memorial Dr Southbound Right Thru Left 47 123 39 46 130 38 33 117 35 24 55 22 20 44 16

Hillcrest Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 107 264 48 98 275 49 78 246 43 46 273 31 32 233 27

Memorial Dr Northbound Right Thru Left 69 149 88 75 154 92 74 128 89 35 77 40 22 60 35

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 76 116 46 75 128 45 64 131 24 32 98 9 24 84 9

Int. Total 1172 1205 1062 742 606

Hourly Volumes

98

275

49

75

154

92

75

128

45

1205

0.445

0.528

0.613

0.838

0.583

0.446

0.611

0.365

0.446

0.582

0.511

0.591

Memorial Dr 214

IN

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

46

130 38

Count Date Wed, 5/26/10

297

0.575

38

7:15 AM to 8:15 AM

OUT

248

45 128 75

OUT

PHF: 0.591

92

IN

241

154 75 321

IN

422

Hillcrest Rd

98 275 49

413

254

Hillcrest Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

130

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 7:15 AM 46

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Memorial Dr Memorial-Hillcrest (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 5/26/10 Weather: clear

Memorial Drive & Hillcrest Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Memorial Dr Southbound SBR SBT SBL 1 22 6 6 28 8 4 31 11 2 22 9 4 31 24 3 27 17 6 25 19 8 20 16 34 206 110

Hillcrest Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 7 51 17 16 41 7 16 53 9 13 44 9 16 59 11 17 36 10 13 41 17 10 61 11 108 386 91

Memorial Dr Northbound NBR NBT NBL 15 28 18 18 41 10 13 28 16 13 19 13 16 18 9 8 25 10 10 26 15 20 29 12 113 214 103

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 30 52 7 28 61 9 37 81 4 30 54 3 50 89 5 22 68 5 29 58 8 32 53 9 258 516 50

Int. Total 254 273 303 231 332 248 267 281 2189

Memorial Dr Southbound Right Thru Left 13 103 34 16 112 52 13 111 61 15 105 69 21 103 76

Hillcrest Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 52 189 42 61 197 36 62 192 39 59 180 47 56 197 49

Memorial Dr Northbound Right Thru Left 59 116 57 60 106 48 50 90 48 47 88 47 54 98 46

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 125 248 23 145 285 21 139 292 17 131 269 21 133 268 27

Int. Total 1061 1139 1114 1078 1128

Hourly Volumes

61

197

36

60

106

48

145

285

21

1139

0.903

0.542

0.953

0.835

0.818

0.833

0.646

0.750

0.725

0.801

0.583

0.858

Memorial Dr 180

IN

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

16

112 52

Count Date Wed, 5/26/10

188

0.667

52

4:15 PM to 5:15 PM

OUT

451

21 285 145

OUT

PHF: 0.858

48

IN

397

106 60 214

IN

294

Hillcrest Rd

61 197 36

261

293

Hillcrest Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

112

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 4:15 PM 16

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Memorial Dr Memorial-Hillcrest (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Tue, 6/8/10 Weather: clear

Highway 25 Bypass & Hillcrest Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Hwy 25 Southbound SBR SBT SBL 2 19 9 2 31 7 3 36 2 2 58 13 8 60 24 7 49 15 13 34 13 12 58 4 49 345 87

Hillcrest Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 47 28 5 54 19 3 31 25 3 52 33 10 25 56 6 32 41 3 33 40 3 22 52 2 296 294 35

Hwy 25 Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 109 7 3 114 6 0 91 7 2 141 17 3 134 31 3 116 25 1 97 21 1 84 26 13 886 140

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 2 6 5 5 8 4 2 17 4 5 15 2 5 17 6 8 13 7 2 13 4 5 9 3 34 98 35

Int. Total 239 256 221 350 375 319 274 278 2312

Hwy 25 Southbound Right Thru Left 9 144 31 15 185 46 20 203 54 30 201 65 40 201 56

Hillcrest Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 184 105 21 162 133 22 140 155 22 142 170 22 112 189 14

Hwy 25 Northbound Right Thru Left 5 455 37 8 480 61 8 482 80 9 488 94 8 431 103

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 14 46 15 17 57 16 20 62 19 20 58 19 20 52 20

Int. Total 1066 1202 1265 1318 1246

Hourly Volumes

142

170

22

9

488

94

20

58

19

1318

0.838

0.677

0.683

0.759

0.550

0.750

0.865

0.758

0.625

0.853

0.679

0.879

Hwy 25 296

IN

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

30

201 65

Count Date Tue, 6/8/10

649

0.577

65

7:45 AM to 8:45 AM

OUT

97

19 58 20

OUT

PHF: 0.879

94

IN

132

488 9 591

IN

334

Hillcrest Rd

142 170 22

294

243

Hillcrest Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

201

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 7:45 AM 30

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Hwy 25 Hwy 25-Hillcrest (2010-06 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Tue, 6/8/10 Weather: clear

Highway 25 Bypass & Hillcrest Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Hwy 25 Southbound SBR SBT SBL 8 112 51 2 102 39 7 176 65 15 194 88 6 139 44 5 173 63 5 116 34 9 134 53 57 1146 437

Hillcrest Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 20 30 5 19 29 4 14 55 2 35 79 11 10 45 4 23 55 13 12 44 4 4 45 8 137 382 51

Hwy 25 Northbound NBR NBT NBL 4 108 14 2 79 16 8 118 32 22 150 39 7 80 27 8 82 33 7 94 12 12 79 21 70 790 194

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 21 59 5 9 30 1 6 41 8 23 92 12 16 99 13 9 64 3 6 44 6 10 48 7 100 477 55

Int. Total 437 332 532 760 490 531 384 430 3896

Hwy 25 Southbound Right Thru 32 584 30 611 33 682 31 622 25 562

Hillcrest Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 88 193 22 78 208 21 82 234 30 80 223 32 49 189 29

Hwy 25 Northbound Right Thru 36 455 39 427 45 430 44 406 34 335

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 59 222 26 54 262 34 54 296 36 54 299 34 41 255 29

Int. Total 2061 2114 2313 2165 1835

Hourly Volumes

82

234

30

45

430

131

54

296

36

2313

0.879

0.739

0.586

0.741

0.577

0.511

0.717

0.840

0.587

0.747

0.692

0.761

Hwy 25 975

IN

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

33

682 260

Count Date Tue, 6/8/10

548

0.550

260

4:30 PM to 5:30 PM

OUT

386

36 296 54

OUT

PHF: 0.761

131

IN

601

430 45 606

IN

346

Hillcrest Rd

82 234 30

398

766

Hillcrest Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

Left 101 114 131 111 93

682

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 4:30 PM 33

Left 243 236 260 229 194

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Hwy 25 Hwy 25-Hillcrest (2010-06 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 6/3/10 Weather: clear

McCray Street & Hillcrest Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

McCray St Southbound SBR SBT SBL 3 12 4 4 20 5 9 23 27 6 26 12 4 24 9 7 38 5 14 30 14 8 35 14 55 208 90

Hillcrest Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 9 23 0 16 28 1 21 57 1 27 55 0 20 46 2 14 51 1 16 96 0 25 50 1 148 406 6

McCray St Northbound NBR NBT NBL 3 5 1 1 17 1 2 15 1 2 9 3 1 8 2 1 11 5 3 18 5 1 14 3 14 97 21

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 1 18 3 1 21 5 0 51 13 2 24 5 1 29 4 0 25 14 3 34 11 4 40 10 12 242 65

Int. Total 82 120 220 171 150 172 244 205 1364

McCray St Southbound Right Thru Left 22 81 48 23 93 53 26 111 53 31 118 40 33 127 42

Hillcrest Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 73 163 2 84 186 4 82 209 4 77 248 3 75 243 4

McCray St Northbound Right Thru Left 8 46 6 6 49 7 6 43 11 7 46 15 6 51 15

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 4 114 26 4 125 27 3 129 36 6 112 34 8 128 39

Int. Total 593 661 713 737 771

Hourly Volumes

75

243

4

6

51

15

8

128

39

771

0.836

0.750

0.750

0.633

0.500

0.500

0.708

0.750

0.500

0.800

0.696

0.790

McCray St 202

IN

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

33

127 42

Count Date Thu, 6/3/10

165

0.589

42

8:00 AM to 9:00 AM

OUT

175

39 128 8

OUT

PHF: 0.790

15

51

IN

176

6 72

IN

322

Hillcrest Rd

75 243 4

291

139

Hillcrest Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

127

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 8:00 AM 33

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

McCray St McCray-Hillcrest (2010-06 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 6/9/10 Weather: clear

McCray Street & Hillcrest Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

McCray St Southbound SBR SBT SBL 13 43 27 20 69 20 11 57 28 14 63 27 23 46 32 9 46 25 20 31 22 11 41 24 121 396 205

Hillcrest Rd Westbound WBR WBT WBL 35 42 4 37 49 2 32 43 2 28 63 1 39 32 3 46 37 1 35 49 1 20 38 0 272 353 14

McCray St Northbound NBR NBT NBL 3 34 5 3 13 5 2 19 3 0 26 7 2 20 6 2 19 0 0 12 4 1 19 1 13 162 31

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 9 32 12 6 54 16 4 36 10 11 32 8 9 63 12 5 54 8 6 42 15 3 41 8 53 354 89

Int. Total 259 294 247 280 287 252 237 207 2063

McCray St Southbound Right Thru 58 232 68 235 57 212 66 186 63 164

Hillcrest Rd Westbound Right Thru Left 132 197 9 136 187 8 145 175 7 148 181 6 140 156 5

McCray St Northbound Right Thru Left 8 92 20 7 78 21 6 84 16 4 77 17 5 70 11

Hillcrest Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 30 154 46 30 185 46 29 185 38 31 191 43 23 200 43

Int. Total 1080 1108 1066 1056 983

Hourly Volumes

136

187

8

7

78

21

30

185

46

1108

0.851

0.836

0.872

0.742

0.667

0.583

0.750

0.750

0.682

0.734

0.719

0.942

McCray St 410

IN

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

68

235 107

Count Date Wed, 6/9/10

260

0.739

107

4:15 PM to 5:15 PM

OUT

261

46 185 30

OUT

PHF: 0.942

21

78

IN

299

7 106

IN

331

Hillcrest Rd

136 187 8

276

273

Hillcrest Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

235

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 4:15 PM 68

Left 102 107 112 106 103

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

McCray St McCray-Hillcrest (2010-06 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 5/13/10 Weather: Overcast

Fairview Road & Santa Ana Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Fairview Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 10 27 0 20 50 0 16 54 0 16 76 0 22 69 0 23 80 0 21 42 0 45 37 0 173 435 0

Westbound WBR WBT WBL 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

Fairview Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 43 32 0 75 28 0 91 26 0 65 37 0 186 18 0 50 11 0 46 11 0 54 8 0 610 171

Santa Ana Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 11 0 8 17 0 10 30 0 17 15 0 23 9 0 10 15 0 3 6 0 10 6 0 7 109 0 88

Int. Total 131 200 234 232 314 182 136 157 1586

Fairview Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 62 207 0 74 249 0 77 279 0 82 267 0 111 228 0

Westbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Fairview Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 0 274 123 0 417 109 0 392 92 0 347 77 0 336 48

Santa Ana Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 73 0 58 71 0 60 69 0 53 45 0 46 36 0 30

Int. Total 797 980 962 864 789

Hourly Volumes

0

0

0

0

417

109

71

0

60

980

0.819

--

--

--

--

--

0.560

0.736

0.592

--

0.652

0.780

Fairview Rd 323

IN

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

74

249 0

Count Date Thu, 5/13/10

477

0.841

0

0 0 0

183

7:15 AM to 8:15 AM

OUT

131

60 0 71

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.780

109

0

0

417 0 526

IN

320

Santa Ana Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

249

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 7:15 AM 74

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Fairview Rd Fairview-Santa Ana (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Thu, 5/13/10 Weather: Clear

Fairview Road & Santa Ana Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Fairview Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 17 96 0 10 59 0 19 63 0 22 107 0 12 71 0 23 86 0 24 78 0 24 81 0 151 641 0

Westbound WBR WBT WBL 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

Fairview Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 67 21 0 33 9 0 49 9 0 57 21 0 33 9 0 73 14 0 68 16 0 67 30 0 447 129

Santa Ana Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 17 0 21 11 0 7 15 0 12 16 0 25 17 0 16 10 0 18 20 0 19 15 0 19 121 0 137

Int. Total 239 129 167 248 158 224 225 236 1626

Fairview Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 68 325 0 63 300 0 76 327 0 81 342 0 83 316 0

Westbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Fairview Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 0 206 60 0 172 48 0 212 53 0 231 60 0 241 69

Santa Ana Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 59 0 65 59 0 60 58 0 71 63 0 78 62 0 72

Int. Total 783 702 797 855 843

Hourly Volumes

0

0

0

0

231

60

63

0

78

855

0.799

--

--

--

--

--

0.791

0.714

0.788

--

0.780

0.862

Fairview Rd 423

IN

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

81

342 0

Count Date Thu, 5/13/10

309

0.844

0

0 0 0

141

4:45 PM to 5:45 PM

OUT

141

78 0 63

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.862

60

0

0

231 0 291

IN

405

Santa Ana Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

342

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 4:45 PM 81

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Fairview Rd Fairview-Santa Ana (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 5/12/10 Weather: Clear

Fairview Road & McCloskey Road AM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 8:45 AM 2-Hr Total

Fairview Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 9 37 0 9 32 0 5 46 0 10 64 0 10 74 0 14 113 0 8 39 0 5 46 0 70 451 0

Westbound WBR WBT WBL 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

Fairview Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 37 41 0 44 9 0 76 23 0 154 39 0 114 24 0 38 12 0 53 20 0 42 13 0 558 181

McCloskey Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 9 0 13 8 0 6 19 0 7 8 0 6 4 0 9 6 0 10 8 0 7 6 0 8 68 0 66

Int. Total 146 108 176 281 235 193 135 120 1394

Fairview Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 33 179 0 34 216 0 39 297 0 42 290 0 37 272 0

Westbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Fairview Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 0 311 112 0 388 95 0 382 98 0 359 95 0 247 69

McCloskey Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 44 0 32 39 0 28 37 0 32 26 0 32 24 0 34

Int. Total 711 800 885 844 683

Hourly Volumes

0

0

0

0

382

98

37

0

32

885

0.657

--

--

--

--

--

0.620

0.628

0.487

--

0.800

0.787

Fairview Rd 336

IN

AM Peak-Hour Volumes

39

297 0

Count Date Wed, 5/12/10

414

0.696

0

0 0 0

137

7:30 AM to 8:30 AM

OUT

69

32 0 37

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.787

98

0

0

382 0 480

IN

334

McCloskey Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

297

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 7:30 AM 39

OUT

Start Time 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7:30 AM 7:45 AM 8:00 AM

Fairview Rd Fairview-McCloskey (2010-05 AM PM) 7-9 AM

[email protected] (408) 427-5275 Project ID:

Fairview Corners Count Date: Wed, 5/12/10 Weather: Clear

Fairview Road & McCloskey Road PM Peak-Hour Volumes 15-Minute Volumes

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM 5:15 PM 5:30 PM 5:45 PM 2-Hr Total

Fairview Rd Southbound SBR SBT SBL 6 60 0 7 73 0 1 89 0 1 58 0 17 93 0 6 82 0 6 81 0 4 58 0 48 594 0

Westbound WBR WBT WBL 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

Fairview Rd Northbound NBR NBT NBL 0 31 11 0 16 12 0 37 13 0 50 6 0 34 9 0 39 7 0 48 6 0 36 4 0 291 68

McCloskey Rd Eastbound EBR EBT EBL 20 0 10 20 0 7 17 0 13 22 0 15 38 0 11 19 0 11 20 0 15 17 0 8 173 0 90

Int. Total 138 135 170 152 202 164 176 127 1264

Fairview Rd Southbound Right Thru Left 15 280 0 26 313 0 25 322 0 30 314 0 33 314 0

Westbound Right Thru Left 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Fairview Rd Northbound Right Thru Left 0 134 42 0 137 40 0 160 35 0 171 28 0 157 26

McCloskey Rd Eastbound Right Thru Left 79 0 45 97 0 46 96 0 50 99 0 52 94 0 45

Int. Total 595 659 688 694 669

Hourly Volumes

0

0

0

0

171

28

99

0

52

694

0.844

--

--

--

--

--

0.855

0.778

0.651

--

0.867

0.859

Fairview Rd 344

IN

PM Peak-Hour Volumes

30

314 0

Count Date Wed, 5/12/10

223

0.441

0

0 0 0

58

4:45 PM to 5:45 PM

OUT

151

52 0 99

IN

OUT

PHF: 0.859

28

0

0

171 0 199

IN

413

McCloskey Rd

NORTH

IN

Peak-Hour Factor

314

OUT

Peak-Hour Volume 4:45 PM 30

OUT

Start Time 4:00 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:00 PM

Fairview Rd Fairview-McCloskey (2010-05 AM PM) 4-6 PM

Appendix B  Volume Summary Tables 

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 7-11-10 Summary

7/16/2010

Intersection Count Summary Inter. # 3337 2942 4370 1274 1550 3430 4031 2925 3072 2367 2331 1551 2347 2242 2218 1449 2210 2245 2248

N/S street Fairview Road/Ridgemark Dr Enterprise Road Fairview Road Fairview Road Valley View Road Airline Highway Southside Road San Benito Street Union Road/Mitchell Road Airline Highway McCray St/Highway 25 Bypass Valley View Road Fairview Road Fairview Road Memorial Drive Highway 25 Bypass McCray Street Fairview Road Fairview Road

E/W street Airline Highway Airline Highway Cielo Vista Drive/Fut Res Proj Entranc Union Road (future int.) Union Road Union Road Union Road Union Road Highway 156 Sunset Drive Sunnyslope Road/Tres Pinos Road Sunnyslope Road Sunnyslope Road Hillcrest Road Hillcrest Road Hillcrest Road Hillcrest Road Santa Ana Road McCloskey Road

AM PM Count Date Count Date 05/12/10 05/12/10 05/20/10 05/20/10 05/20/10 05/20/10 n/a n/a 06/10/10 06/02/10 05/13/10 05/13/10 05/19/10 05/19/10 06/06/06 06/06/06 06/08/10 06/08/10 05/27/10 06/03/10 06/09/10 06/09/10 05/25/10 05/27/10 05/19/10 05/19/10 05/18/10 05/18/10 05/26/10 05/26/10 06/08/10 06/08/10 06/03/10 06/09/10 05/13/10 05/13/10 05/12/10 05/12/10

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls AM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

1 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

3337 Fairview Road/Ridgemark Dr AM

2/15/2011

& Airline Highway Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/12/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

1.5% 13

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

87

23

52

132

70

7

5

189

90

69

115

86

925

0

4

21

7

19

0

0

2

13

13

32

0

111

Background Conditions

87

27

73

139

89

7

5

191

103

82

147

86

1036

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

33 44

1 1

6 6

2 2

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

11 15

53 68

Existing Plus Project Conditions

131

24

58

134

70

7

5

189

90

69

115

101

993

Background Plus Project Conditions

120

28

79

141

89

7

5

191

103

82

147

97

1089

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

23 +64 0 31

51 +0 8 4

95 +0 38 8

118 +21 19 36

346 +0 0 0

0 +7 0 0

0 +5 0 0

47 +144 4 18

214 +0 0 0

219 +0 0 0

340 +0 0 0

22 +64 0 134

1475 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

118

63

141

194

346

7

5

213

214

219

340

220

2080

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

151

64

147

196

346

7

5

213

214

219

340

231

2133

Existing Conditions

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

West Approach TH LT

Int. Totals

69 231

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

2 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2942 Enterprise Road AM

RT Existing Conditions

38

& Airline Highway Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/20/10

North Approach TH LT 5

26

RT 13

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach TH LT RT TH LT 373

52

36

5

46

RT 26

West Approach TH LT 243

21

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 884

0

0

1

0

32

0

0

0

0

0

44

0

77

38

5

27

13

405

52

36

5

46

26

287

21

961

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

33 44

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

11 15

0 0

44 59

Existing Plus Project Conditions

38

5

26

13

417

52

36

5

46

26

258

21

943

Background Plus Project Conditions

38

5

27

13

438

52

36

5

46

26

298

21

1005

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

0 +38 0 0

0 +5 0 0

0 +27 0 11

0 +13 0 2

583 +0 0 26

0 +52 0 2

0 +36 0 11

0 +5 0 0

0 +46 0 0

0 +26 0 0

581 +0 0 112

0 +21 0 0

1164 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

38

5

38

15

609

54

47

5

46

26

693

21

1597

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

38

5

38

15

642

54

47

5

46

26

704

21

1641

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

0 164

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls AM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

3 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

4370 Fairview Road AM

2/15/2011

& Cielo Vista Drive/Fut Res Proj Entrance Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/20/10

North Approach RT TH LT

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

West Approach TH LT

1.5% 13

Int. Totals

Existing Conditions

6

142

0

0

0

0

0

217

12

28

0

17

422

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

0

26

0

0

0

0

0

9

0

0

0

0

35

Background Conditions

6

168

0

0

0

0

0

226

12

28

0

17

457

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

0 0

0 0

27 24

82 71

0 0

41 51

13 17

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

163 163

Existing Plus Project Conditions

6

142

24

71

0

51

17

217

12

28

0

17

585

Background Plus Project Conditions

6

168

27

82

0

41

13

226

12

28

0

17

620

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

0 +6 0 0

315 +0 45 0

0 +0 0 173

0 +0 0 44

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 43

0 +0 0 187

333 +0 23 0

0 +12 0 0

0 +28 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +17 0 0

648 +0

68 447

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

6

360

173

44

0

43

187

356

12

28

0

17

1226

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

6

360

200

126

0

84

200

356

12

28

0

17

1389

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

4 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

1274 Fairview Road AM

RT Existing Conditions

0

& Union Road (future int.) Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: n/a

North Approach TH LT 148

0

RT 0

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach TH LT RT TH LT 0

0

0

234

0

RT 0

West Approach TH LT 0

0

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 382

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

54

2

0

0

0

0

0

1

8

23

0

154

242

Background Conditions

54

150

0

0

0

0

0

235

8

23

0

154

624

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

0 0

24 24

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

71 71

11 0

4 0

0 0

0 0

110 95

Existing Plus Project Conditions

0

172

0

0

0

0

0

305

0

0

0

0

477

Background Plus Project Conditions

54

174

0

0

0

0

0

306

19

27

0

154

734

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

79 +0 57 0

169 +0 45 161

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

207 +28 23 41

166 +0 0 4

169 +0 0 12

0 +0 0 0

74 +80 29 0

864 +0

154 218

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

136

375

0

0

0

0

0

299

170

181

0

183

1344

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

136

399

0

0

0

0

0

370

181

185

0

183

1454

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls AM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

5 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

1550 Valley View Road AM

2/15/2011

& Union Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/10/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

1.5% 13

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

108

11

2

13

162

1

4

12

94

27

45

28

507

4

0

2

1

163

0

0

0

0

0

66

2

238

112

11

4

14

325

1

4

12

94

27

111

30

745

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

7 1

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

2 4

0 0

9 5

Existing Plus Project Conditions

108

11

2

13

163

1

4

12

94

27

49

28

512

Background Plus Project Conditions

112

11

4

14

332

1

4

12

94

27

113

30

754

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

129 +0 0 0

13 +0 0 0

2 +2 0 0

16 +0 0 0

194 +131 34 14

1 +0 0 0

5 +0 0 0

14 +0 0 0

112 +0 0 0

32 +0 0 0

54 +57 17 14

33 +0 0 0

606 +139

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

129

13

4

16

373

1

5

14

112

32

142

33

875

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

129

13

4

16

380

1

5

14

112

32

144

33

884

Existing Conditions

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

West Approach TH LT

Int. Totals

51 28

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

6 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

3430 Airline Highway AM

RT Existing Conditions

150

& Union Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/13/10

North Approach TH LT 137

106

RT 201

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach TH LT RT TH LT 281

40

22

249

198

RT 99

West Approach TH LT 116

98

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 1697

21

37

43

104

62

2

1

29

2

5

25

12

343

171

174

149

305

343

42

23

278

200

104

141

110

2040

0 0

8 8

0 0

0 0

7 0

0 1

0 4

23 23

10 17

3 6

2 0

0 0

53 59

Existing Plus Project Conditions

150

145

106

201

281

41

26

272

215

105

116

98

1756

Background Plus Project Conditions

171

182

149

305

350

42

23

301

210

107

143

110

2093

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

175 +0 1 0

494 +0 0 57

341 +0 0 0

340 +0 0 0

225 +118 34 3

45 +0 0 11

40 +0 0 2

507 +0 0 14

173 +27 0 10

193 +0 0 44

209 +0 17 12

178 +0 0 0

2920 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

176

551

341

340

380

56

42

521

210

237

238

178

3270

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

176

559

341

340

387

56

42

544

220

240

240

178

3323

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

52 153

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls AM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

7 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

4031 Southside Road AM

2/15/2011

& Union Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/19/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

1.5% 13

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

52

42

25

42

417

44

55

78

112

74

218

34

1193

0

0

3

8

65

0

0

0

0

0

38

1

115

52

42

28

50

482

44

55

78

112

74

256

35

1308

0 0

0 0

1 1

4 4

11 11

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

4 4

0 0

20 20

Existing Plus Project Conditions

52

42

26

46

428

44

55

78

112

74

222

34

1213

Background Plus Project Conditions

52

42

29

54

493

44

55

78

112

74

260

35

1328

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

0 +52 0 0

25 +17 0 0

10 +18 0 9

16 +34 0 2

329 +153 20 7

221 +0 0 0

229 +0 0 0

19 +59 0 0

104 +8 0 0

93 +0 0 0

333 +0 10 29

0 +35 0 0

1379 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

52

42

37

52

509

221

229

78

112

93

372

35

1832

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

52

42

38

56

520

221

229

78

112

93

376

35

1852

Existing Conditions

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

West Approach TH LT

Int. Totals

30 47

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

8 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2925 San Benito Street AM

RT Existing Conditions

161

& Union Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/06/06

North Approach TH LT 0

133

RT 291

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach TH LT RT TH LT 436

0

0

0

0

RT 0

West Approach TH LT 147

113

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 1281

13

0

14

11

54

0

0

0

0

0

25

4

121

174

0

147

302

490

0

0

0

0

0

172

117

1402

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

11 11

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

4 4

0 0

15 15

Existing Plus Project Conditions

161

0

133

291

447

0

0

0

0

0

151

113

1296

Background Plus Project Conditions

174

0

147

302

501

0

0

0

0

0

176

117

1417

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

175 +0 41 0

0 +0 0 0

179 +0 0 0

178 +124 0 0

575 +0 20 7

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

573 +0 10 29

159 +0 21 0

1839 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

216

0

179

302

602

0

0

0

0

0

612

180

2091

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

216

0

179

302

613

0

0

0

0

0

616

180

2106

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

92 36

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls AM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

9 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

3072 Union Road/Mitchell Road AM

North Approach RT TH LT

2/15/2011

& Highway 156 Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/08/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

West Approach TH LT

1.5% 13

Int. Totals

Existing Conditions

5

12

36

28

788

44

17

15

572

241

446

1

2205

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

20

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

67

29

0

8

124

Background Conditions

25

12

36

28

788

44

17

15

639

270

446

9

2329

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

11 11

4 4

0 0

0 0

15 15

Existing Plus Project Conditions

5

12

36

28

788

44

17

15

583

245

446

1

2220

Background Plus Project Conditions

25

12

36

28

788

44

17

15

650

274

446

9

2344

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

0 +25 0 0

0 +12 0 0

0 +36 0 0

0 +28 0 0

1062 +0 7 0

19 +25 0 0

16 +1 0 0

0 +15 0 0

660 +0 61 7

611 +0 31 29

1009 +0 3 0

0 +9 0 0

3377 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

25

12

36

28

1069

44

17

15

728

671

1012

9

3666

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

25

12

36

28

1069

44

17

15

739

675

1012

9

3681

102 36

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

10 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2367 Airline Highway AM

RT Existing Conditions

34

& Sunset Drive Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/27/10

North Approach TH LT 308

126

RT 169

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach TH LT RT TH LT 71

27

29

416

23

RT 16

West Approach TH LT 46

40

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 1305

4

90

25

37

3

2

3

134

8

9

1

8

324

38

398

151

206

74

29

32

550

31

25

47

48

1629

0 0

8 8

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

23 23

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

31 31

Existing Plus Project Conditions

34

316

126

169

71

27

29

439

23

16

46

40

1336

Background Plus Project Conditions

38

406

151

206

74

29

32

573

31

25

47

48

1660

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

18 +20 0 0

1009 +0 0 57

130 +21 0 0

147 +59 0 0

15 +59 0 0

31 +0 0 0

32 +0 0 0

1017 +0 0 14

1 +30 1 0

1 +24 0 0

27 +20 0 0

18 +30 0 0

2446 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

38

1066

151

206

74

31

32

1031

32

25

47

48

2781

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

38

1074

151

206

74

31

32

1054

32

25

47

48

2812

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

1 71

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls AM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

11 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2/15/2011

2331 McCray St/Highway 25 Bypass & Sunnyslope Road/Tres Pinos Road AM Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/09/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

1.5% 13

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

Existing Conditions

58

255

65

59

194

120

35

437

134

148

136

114

1755

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

48

97

45

61

47

5

9

140

31

19

44

41

587

106

352

110

120

241

125

44

577

165

167

180

155

2342

0 0

4 4

1 1

2 2

11 11

0 0

0 0

11 11

9 9

3 3

4 4

0 0

45 45

Existing Plus Project Conditions

58

259

66

61

205

120

35

448

143

151

140

114

1800

Background Plus Project Conditions

106

356

111

122

252

125

44

588

174

170

184

155

2387

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

235 +0 34 0

1058 +0 0 31

432 +0 52 0

423 +0 102 0

329 +0 127 5

86 +39 15 0

79 +0 8 0

1058 +0 0 8

273 +0 0 6

245 +0 0 26

315 +0 65 18

226 +0 17 0

4759 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

269

1089

484

525

461

140

87

1066

279

271

398

243

5312

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

269

1093

485

527

472

140

87

1077

288

274

402

243

5357

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

West Approach TH LT

Int. Totals

420 94

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

12 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

1551 Valley View Road AM

RT Existing Conditions

0

& Sunnyslope Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/25/10

North Approach TH LT 0

0

RT 0

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach TH LT RT TH LT 454

55

29

0

83

RT 43

West Approach TH LT 236

0

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 900

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

0

0

0

0

98

0

0

0

0

0

75

0

173

Background Conditions

0

0

0

0

552

55

29

0

83

43

311

0

1073

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

17 17

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

6 6

0 0

23 23

Existing Plus Project Conditions

0

0

0

0

471

55

29

0

83

43

242

0

923

Background Plus Project Conditions

0

0

0

0

569

55

29

0

83

43

317

0

1096

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

543 +9 267 7

66 +0 0 0

35 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

99 +0 0 0

51 +0 0 0

282 +29 136 25

0 +0 0 0

1076 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

0

0

0

0

826

66

35

0

99

51

472

0

1549

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

0

0

0

0

843

66

35

0

99

51

478

0

1572

403 32

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls AM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

13 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2347 Fairview Road AM

& Sunnyslope Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/19/10

North Approach RT TH LT Existing Conditions

2/15/2011

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

West Approach TH LT

1.5% 13

Int. Totals

146

121

0

0

0

0

0

223

47

37

0

222

796

10

44

0

0

0

0

0

107

45

19

0

27

252

156

165

0

0

0

0

0

330

92

56

0

249

1048

0 0

15 15

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

45 45

24 24

8 8

0 0

0 0

92 92

Existing Plus Project Conditions

146

136

0

0

0

0

0

268

71

45

0

222

888

Background Plus Project Conditions

156

180

0

0

0

0

0

375

116

64

0

249

1140

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

70 +86 80 0

176 +0 59 114

0 +0 38 0

0 +0 75 0

0 +0 224 0

0 +0 59 0

0 +0 30 0

208 +122 30 28

162 +0 0 12

164 +0 0 47

0 +0 114 0

58 +191 41 0

838 +210

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

236

349

38

75

224

59

30

388

174

211

114

290

2188

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

236

364

38

75

224

59

30

433

198

219

114

290

2280

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

750 201

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

14 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2242 Fairview Road AM

RT Existing Conditions

95

& Hillcrest Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/18/10

North Approach TH LT 278

0

RT 0

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach TH LT RT TH LT 0

0

0

416

27

RT 30

West Approach TH LT 0

117

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 963

11

31

0

0

0

0

0

84

49

24

0

17

216

106

309

0

0

0

0

0

500

76

54

0

134

1179

0 0

7 7

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

20 20

26 26

8 8

0 0

0 0

61 61

Existing Plus Project Conditions

95

285

0

0

0

0

0

436

53

38

0

117

1024

Background Plus Project Conditions

106

316

0

0

0

0

0

520

102

62

0

134

1240

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

28 +78 0 0

249 +60 33 53

0 +0 53 0

0 +0 105 0

0 +0 149 0

0 +0 139 0

0 +0 71 0

273 +227 64 13

21 +55 11 15

22 +32 6 61

0 +0 76 0

26 +108 0 0

619 +560

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

106

395

53

105

149

139

71

577

102

121

76

134

2028

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

106

402

53

105

149

139

71

597

128

129

76

134

2089

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

707 142

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls AM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

15 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2218 Memorial Drive AM

2/15/2011

& Hillcrest Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/26/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

1.5% 13

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

46

130

38

98

275

49

75

154

92

75

128

45

1205

0

6

4

1

66

1

4

3

1

0

53

0

139

46

136

42

99

341

50

79

157

93

75

181

45

1344

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

22 22

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

7 7

0 0

29 29

Existing Plus Project Conditions

46

130

38

98

297

49

75

154

92

75

135

45

1234

Background Plus Project Conditions

46

136

42

99

363

50

79

157

93

75

188

45

1373

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

36 +10 0 0

163 +0 0 0

244 +0 0 0

230 +0 0 0

167 +174 130 13

22 +28 8 0

29 +50 4 0

134 +23 0 0

46 +47 0 0

38 +37 0 0

152 +29 66 51

44 +1 0 0

1305 +39

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

46

163

244

230

484

58

83

157

93

75

298

45

1976

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

46

163

244

230

506

58

83

157

93

75

305

45

2005

Existing Conditions

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

West Approach TH LT

Int. Totals

208 64

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

16 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

1449 Highway 25 Bypass AM

RT Existing Conditions

36

& Hillcrest Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/08/10

North Approach TH LT 243

79

RT 172

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach TH LT RT TH LT 206

27

11

590

114

RT 24

West Approach TH LT 70

23

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 1595

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

35

103

16

19

49

19

7

131

104

67

30

28

608

Background Conditions

71

346

95

191

255

46

18

721

218

91

100

51

2203

0 0

3 3

1 1

2 2

20 20

0 0

0 0

10 10

1 1

0 0

7 7

0 0

44 44

Existing Plus Project Conditions

36

246

80

174

226

27

11

600

115

24

77

23

1639

Background Plus Project Conditions

71

349

96

193

275

46

18

731

219

91

107

51

2247

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

24 +47 0 0

1088 +0 16 26

39 +56 9 7

38 +153 18 2

161 +94 78 11

104 +0 34 0

94 +0 17 0

1098 +0 31 6

143 +75 61 1

130 +0 31 5

152 +0 40 43

36 +15 0 0

3107 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

71

1130

111

211

344

138

111

1135

280

166

235

51

3983

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

71

1133

112

213

364

138

111

1145

281

166

242

51

4027

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

335 101

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls AM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

17 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2210 McCray Street AM

2/15/2011

& Hillcrest Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/03/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

1.5% 13

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

33

127

42

75

243

4

6

51

15

8

128

39

771

1

0

8

8

82

0

0

0

1

0

45

0

145

34

127

50

83

325

4

6

51

16

8

173

39

916

0 0

0 0

1 1

4 4

14 14

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

5 5

0 0

24 24

Existing Plus Project Conditions

33

127

43

79

257

4

6

51

15

8

133

39

795

Background Plus Project Conditions

34

127

51

87

339

4

6

51

16

8

178

39

940

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

3 +31 0 0

58 +69 0 0

16 +34 11 14

19 +64 23 3

172 +153 94 6

11 +0 0 0

17 +0 0 0

97 +0 0 0

244 +0 7 0

292 +0 3 0

162 +11 48 24

1 +38 0 0

1092 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

34

127

75

109

425

11

17

97

251

295

245

39

1725

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

34

127

76

113

439

11

17

97

251

295

250

39

1749

Existing Conditions

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

RT

West Approach TH LT

Int. Totals

186 47

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

18 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2245 Fairview Road AM

RT Existing Conditions

74

& Santa Ana Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/13/10

North Approach TH LT 249

0

RT 0

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach TH LT RT TH LT 0

0

0

417

109

RT 71

West Approach TH LT 0

60

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 980

5

24

0

0

0

0

0

69

9

9

0

12

128

79

273

0

0

0

0

0

486

118

80

0

72

1108

0 0

4 4

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

11 11

5 5

2 2

0 0

0 0

22 22

Existing Plus Project Conditions

74

253

0

0

0

0

0

428

114

73

0

60

1002

Background Plus Project Conditions

79

277

0

0

0

0

0

497

123

82

0

72

1130

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

24 +55 0 0

237 +36 47 35

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

223 +263 93 8

54 +64 54 4

26 +54 27 18

0 +0 0 0

29 +43 0 0

593 +515

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

79

355

0

0

0

0

0

587

176

125

0

72

1394

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

79

359

0

0

0

0

0

598

181

127

0

72

1416

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

221 65

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls AM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

19 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2248 Fairview Road AM

& McCloskey Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/12/10

North Approach RT TH LT Existing Conditions

2/15/2011

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

West Approach TH LT

1.5% 13

Int. Totals

39

297

0

0

0

0

0

382

98

37

0

32

885

4

23

0

0

0

0

0

62

19

6

0

12

126

43

320

0

0

0

0

0

444

117

43

0

44

1011

0 0

3 3

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

10 10

1 1

0 0

0 0

0 0

14 14

Existing Plus Project Conditions

39

300

0

0

0

0

0

392

99

37

0

32

899

Background Plus Project Conditions

43

323

0

0

0

0

0

454

118

43

0

44

1025

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

32 +11 0 0

203 +117 31 29

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

190 +254 60 7

92 +25 33 1

72 +0 17 6

0 +0 0 0

23 +21 0 0

612 +399

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

43

380

0

0

0

0

0

511

151

95

0

44

1224

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

43

383

0

0

0

0

0

521

152

95

0

44

1238

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

141 43

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

20 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2243 Fairview Road AM

RT Existing Conditions

95

& Hillcrest Road (Signalized) Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: #N/A

North Approach TH LT 278

0

RT 0

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach TH LT RT TH LT 0

0

0

416

27

RT 30

West Approach TH LT 0

117

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 963

11

31

0

0

0

0

0

84

49

24

0

17

216

106

309

0

0

0

0

0

500

76

54

0

134

1179

0 0

7 5

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

20 16

26 4

8 1

0 0

0 0

61 26

Existing Plus Project Conditions

95

283

0

0

0

0

0

432

31

31

0

117

989

Background Plus Project Conditions

106

316

0

0

0

0

0

520

102

62

0

134

1240

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

28 +78 0 0

249 +60 33 53

0 +0 53 0

0 +0 105 0

0 +0 149 0

0 +0 139 0

0 +0 71 0

273 +227 64 13

21 +55 11 15

22 +32 6 61

0 +0 76 0

26 +108 0 0

619 +560

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

106

395

53

105

149

139

71

577

102

121

76

134

2028

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

106

402

53

105

149

139

71

597

128

129

76

134

2089

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

707 142

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls PM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

1 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

Existing Conditions

3337 Fairview Road/Ridgemark Dr & Airline Highway PM

2/15/2011

Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/12/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

53

56

215

60

80

150

7

8

48

114

West Approach TH LT 212

44

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 1047

0

3

14

24

40

0

0

5

20

21

32

0

159

Background Conditions

53

63

94

80

190

7

8

53

134

236

244

44

1206

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

22 29

1 1

4 4

7 7

0 0

0 0

0 0

1 1

0 0

0 0

0 0

38 50

73 92

Existing Plus Project Conditions

82

61

84

63

150

7

8

49

114

215

212

94

1139

Background Plus Project Conditions

75

64

98

87

190

7

8

54

134

236

244

82

1279

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

26 +27 0 74

58 +5 6 10

119 +0 30 20

137 +0 43 31

440 +0 0 0

0 +7 0 0

0 +8 0 0

64 +0 9 15

281 +0 0 0

271 +0 0 0

454 +0 0 0

30 +14 0 116

1880 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

127

79

169

211

440

7

8

88

281

271

454

160

2295

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

149

80

173

218

440

7

8

89

281

271

454

198

2368

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

88 266

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

2 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2942 Enterprise Road PM

& Airline Highway Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/20/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

1.5% 13

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

24

2

30

33

231

48

33

3

40

61

554

66

1125

0

0

0

1

59

0

0

0

0

0

52

0

112

24

2

30

34

290

48

33

3

40

61

606

66

1237

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

22 29

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

38 50

0 0

60 79

Existing Plus Project Conditions

24

2

30

33

260

48

33

3

40

61

604

66

1204

Background Plus Project Conditions

24

2

30

34

312

48

33

3

40

61

644

66

1297

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

0 +24 0 0

0 +2 0 0

0 +30 0 9

0 +34 0 6

0 +290 0 62

0 +48 0 6

0 +33 0 9

0 +3 0 0

0 +40 0 0

0 +61 0 0

0 +606 0 98

0 +66 0 0

0 +1237

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

24

2

39

40

352

54

42

3

40

61

704

66

1427

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

24

2

39

40

374

54

42

3

40

61

742

66

1487

Existing Conditions

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

West Approach TH LT

Int. Totals

0 190

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls PM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

3 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

4370 Fairview Road PM

& Cielo Vista Drive/Fut Res Proj Entrance Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/20/10

North Approach RT TH LT Existing Conditions

14

2/15/2011

264

0

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT 0

0

0

0

119

30

RT 22

West Approach TH LT 0

13

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 462

0

17

0

0

0

0

0

29

0

0

0

0

46

14

281

0

0

0

0

0

148

30

22

0

13

508

0 0

0 0

93 81

54 47

0 0

27 34

46 58

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

220 220

Existing Plus Project Conditions

14

264

81

47

0

34

58

119

30

22

0

13

682

Background Plus Project Conditions

14

281

93

54

0

27

46

148

30

22

0

13

728

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

0 +14 0 0

390 +0 36 0

0 +0 0 154

0 +0 0 97

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 104

0 +0 0 162

413 +0 51 0

0 +30 0 0

0 +22 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +13 0 0

803 +0

87 517

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

14

426

154

97

0

104

162

464

30

22

0

13

1486

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

14

426

247

151

0

131

208

464

30

22

0

13

1706

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

4 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

1274 Fairview Road PM

& Union Road (future int.) Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: n/a

North Approach RT TH LT Existing Conditions

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

West Approach TH LT

1.5% 13

Int. Totals

0

278

0

0

0

0

0

132

0

0

0

0

410

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

174

2

0

0

0

0

0

3

26

15

0

105

325

Background Conditions

174

280

0

0

0

0

0

135

26

15

0

105

735

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

0 0

81 81

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

47 47

7 0

12 0

0 0

0 0

147 128

Existing Plus Project Conditions

0

359

0

0

0

0

0

179

0

0

0

0

538

Background Plus Project Conditions

174

361

0

0

0

0

0

182

33

27

0

105

882

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

112 +62 45 0

221 +59 36 143

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

241 +0 51 91

234 +0 0 7

237 +0 0 11

0 +0 0 0

107 +0 65 0

1152 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

219

459

0

0

0

0

0

383

241

248

0

172

1722

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

219

540

0

0

0

0

0

430

248

260

0

172

1869

197 252

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls PM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

5 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

Existing Conditions

1550 Valley View Road PM

2/15/2011

& Union Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/02/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

53

16

107

21

19

109

3

4

16

85

West Approach TH LT 207

113

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 753

3

0

2

2

119

0

0

0

0

0

185

5

316

56

21

21

18

228

3

4

16

85

107

392

118

1069

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

5 4

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

8 2

0 0

13 6

Existing Plus Project Conditions

53

21

19

16

113

3

4

16

85

107

209

113

759

Background Plus Project Conditions

56

21

21

18

233

3

4

16

85

107

400

118

1082

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

63 +0 0 0

25 +0 0 0

23 +0 0 0

19 +0 0 0

130 +98 27 16

4 +0 0 0

5 +0 0 0

19 +0 0 0

102 +0 0 0

128 +0 0 0

247 +145 39 16

135 +0 0 0

900 +169

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

63

25

23

19

271

4

5

19

102

128

447

135

1240

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

63

25

23

19

276

4

5

19

102

128

455

135

1253

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

66 32

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

6 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

3430 Airline Highway PM

& Union Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/13/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

1.5% 13

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

102

328

208

118

93

24

29

190

86

150

240

139

1707

23

47

118

76

44

1

2

52

6

4

70

28

471

125

375

326

194

137

25

31

242

92

154

310

167

2178

0 0

26 26

0 0

0 0

5 0

0 4

0 2

15 15

7 11

12 20

8 0

0 0

73 78

Existing Plus Project Conditions

102

354

208

118

93

28

31

205

97

170

240

139

1785

Background Plus Project Conditions

125

401

326

194

142

25

31

257

99

166

318

167

2251

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

154 +0 1 0

682 +0 0 51

454 +0 0 0

446 +0 0 0

334 +0 27 7

64 +0 0 9

67 +0 0 6

654 +0 0 32

207 +0 0 24

218 +0 0 38

314 +0 39 10

205 +0 1 0

3799 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

155

733

454

446

368

73

73

686

231

256

363

206

4044

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

155

759

454

446

373

73

73

701

238

268

371

206

4117

Existing Conditions

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

West Approach TH LT

Int. Totals

68 177

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls PM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

7 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

Existing Conditions

4031 Southside Road PM

2/15/2011

& Union Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/19/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

32

11

86

38

34

254

52

48

52

61

West Approach TH LT 433

54

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 1155

2

0

9

6

62

0

0

0

0

0

80

1

160

34

38

43

17

316

52

48

52

61

86

513

55

1315

0 0

0 0

4 4

2 2

7 7

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

13 13

0 0

26 26

Existing Plus Project Conditions

32

38

38

13

261

52

48

52

61

86

446

54

1181

Background Plus Project Conditions

34

38

47

19

323

52

48

52

61

86

526

55

1341

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

0 +34 0 0

96 +0 0 0

18 +25 0 8

254 +0 0 5

418 +0 16 16

15 +37 0 0

297 +0 0 0

41 +11 0 0

127 +0 0 0

127 +0 0 0

416 +97 23 25

0 +55 0 0

1809 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

34

96

51

259

450

52

297

52

127

127

561

55

2161

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

34

96

55

261

457

52

297

52

127

127

574

55

2187

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

39 54

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

8 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2925 San Benito Street PM

& Union Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/06/06

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

1.5% 13

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

89

0

127

144

214

0

0

0

0

0

395

152

1121

8

0

15

18

46

0

0

0

0

0

65

14

166

97

0

142

162

260

0

0

0

0

0

460

166

1287

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

7 7

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

13 13

0 0

20 20

Existing Plus Project Conditions

89

0

127

144

221

0

0

0

0

0

408

152

1141

Background Plus Project Conditions

97

0

142

162

267

0

0

0

0

0

473

166

1307

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

137 +0 32 0

0 +0 0 0

211 +0 0 0

208 +0 0 0

723 +0 16 16

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

697 +0 23 25

170 +0 46 0

2146 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

169

0

211

208

755

0

0

0

0

0

745

216

2304

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

169

0

211

208

762

0

0

0

0

0

758

216

2324

Existing Conditions

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

RT

West Approach TH LT

Int. Totals

117 41

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls PM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

9 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

3072 Union Road/Mitchell Road PM

North Approach RT TH LT Existing Conditions

4

66

126

2/15/2011

& Highway 156 Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/08/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

36

413

622

29

65

9

298

West Approach TH LT 709

5

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 2382

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

13

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

54

79

0

22

168

Background Conditions

17

66

126

36

622

29

65

9

352

492

709

27

2550

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

7 7

13 13

0 0

0 0

20 20

Existing Plus Project Conditions

4

66

126

36

622

29

65

9

305

426

709

5

2402

Background Plus Project Conditions

17

66

126

36

622

29

65

9

359

505

709

27

2570

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

0 +17 0 0

0 +66 0 0

0 +126 0 0

0 +36 0 0

1097 +0 5 0

23 +6 0 0

17 +48 0 0

0 +9 0 0

807 +0 48 16

828 +0 69 25

1085 +0 8 0

0 +27 0 0

3857 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

17

66

126

36

1102

29

65

9

871

922

1093

27

4363

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

17

66

126

36

1102

29

65

9

878

935

1093

27

4383

130 41

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

10 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2367 Airline Highway PM

& Sunset Drive Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/03/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

1.5% 13

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

Existing Conditions

61

584

204

224

87

23

30

549

38

21

59

43

1923

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

10

173

50

41

2

3

3

141

12

11

3

6

455

Background Conditions

71

757

254

265

89

26

33

690

50

32

62

49

2378

0 0

26 26

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

15 15

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

41 41

Existing Plus Project Conditions

61

610

204

224

87

23

30

564

38

21

59

43

1964

Background Plus Project Conditions

71

783

254

265

89

26

33

705

50

32

62

49

2419

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

100 +0 0 0

1284 +0 0 51

181 +73 0 0

187 +78 0 0

37 +52 0 0

43 +0 0 0

45 +0 0 0

1293 +0 0 32

4 +46 2 0

30 +2 0 0

30 +32 0 0

43 +6 0 0

3277 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

100

1335

254

265

89

43

45

1325

52

32

62

49

3651

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

100

1361

254

265

89

43

45

1340

52

32

62

49

3692

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

West Approach TH LT

Int. Totals

2 83

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls PM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

11 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

Existing Conditions

2/15/2011

2331 McCray St/Highway 25 Bypass& Sunnyslope Road/Tres Pinos Road PM Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/09/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

104

24

222

563

160

267

181

111

395

232

West Approach TH LT 354

124

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 2737

60

186

86

73

57

11

8

154

29

38

62

66

830

164

749

246

97

324

192

119

549

261

260

416

190

3567

0 0

13 13

3 3

2 2

7 7

0 0

0 0

8 8

6 6

10 10

13 13

0 0

62 62

Existing Plus Project Conditions

104

576

163

26

274

181

111

403

238

232

367

124

2799

Background Plus Project Conditions

164

762

249

99

331

192

119

557

267

270

429

190

3629

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

279 +0 27 0

1371 +0 0 27

565 +0 117 0

519 +0 81 0

508 +0 100 10

126 +66 12 0

134 +0 18 0

1334 +0 1 17

368 +0 0 15

379 +0 0 23

504 +0 144 16

281 +0 38 0

6368 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

306

1398

682

600

618

204

152

1352

383

402

664

319

7080

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

306

1411

685

602

625

204

152

1360

389

412

677

319

7142

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

538 108

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

12 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

1551 Valley View Road PM

& Sunnyslope Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/27/10

North Approach RT TH LT

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

West Approach TH LT

1.5% 13

Int. Totals

Existing Conditions

0

0

0

0

298

32

66

0

69

64

436

0

965

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

0

0

0

0

110

0

0

0

0

0

129

0

239

Background Conditions

0

0

0

0

408

32

66

0

69

64

565

0

1204

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

11 11

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

20 20

0 0

31 31

Existing Plus Project Conditions

0

0

0

0

309

32

66

0

69

64

456

0

996

Background Plus Project Conditions

0

0

0

0

419

32

66

0

69

64

585

0

1235

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

356 +52 211 15

38 +0 0 0

79 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

82 +0 0 0

76 +0 0 0

521 +44 304 23

0 +0 0 0

1153 +51

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

0

0

0

0

634

38

79

0

82

76

892

0

1802

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

0

0

0

0

645

38

79

0

82

76

912

0

1833

515 38

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls PM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

13 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2347 Fairview Road PM

& Sunnyslope Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/19/10

North Approach RT TH LT Existing Conditions

152

184

2/15/2011

0

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT 0

0

0

0

113

48

RT 32

West Approach TH LT 0

113

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 642

30

123

0

0

0

0

0

80

36

54

0

19

342

182

307

0

0

0

0

0

193

84

86

0

132

984

0 0

51 51

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

30 30

16 16

27 27

0 0

0 0

124 124

Existing Plus Project Conditions

152

235

0

0

0

0

0

143

64

59

0

113

766

Background Plus Project Conditions

182

358

0

0

0

0

0

223

100

113

0

132

1108

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

86 +96 64 0

232 +75 46 101

0 +0 86 0

0 +0 60 0

0 +0 178 0

0 +0 46 0

0 +0 67 0

247 +0 67 64

206 +0 0 27

203 +0 0 42

0 +0 256 0

94 +38 91 0

1068 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

246

454

86

60

178

46

67

378

233

245

256

223

2472

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

246

505

86

60

178

46

67

408

249

272

256

223

2596

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

961 234

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

14 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2242 Fairview Road PM

& Hillcrest Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/18/10

North Approach RT TH LT Existing Conditions

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

West Approach TH LT

1.5% 13

Int. Totals

141

284

0

0

0

0

0

195

41

26

0

92

779

24

94

0

0

0

0

0

58

41

59

0

20

296

165

378

0

0

0

0

0

253

82

85

0

112

1075

0 0

22 22

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

13 13

17 17

29 29

0 0

0 0

81 81

Existing Plus Project Conditions

141

306

0

0

0

0

0

208

58

55

0

92

860

Background Plus Project Conditions

165

400

0

0

0

0

0

266

99

114

0

112

1156

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

46 +119 0 0

319 +59 73 46

0 +0 119 0

0 +0 83 0

0 +0 118 0

0 +0 110 0

0 +0 158 0

344 +0 51 29

28 +54 9 34

26 +59 13 54

0 +0 169 0

52 +60 0 0

815 +260

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

165

497

119

83

118

110

158

424

125

152

169

112

2232

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

165

519

119

83

118

110

158

437

142

181

169

112

2313

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

903 163

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls PM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

15 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

Existing Conditions

2218 Memorial Drive PM

2/15/2011

& Hillcrest Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/26/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

16

61

145

112

52

197

36

60

106

48

West Approach TH LT 285

21

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 1139

0

5

3

5

81

4

2

7

1

1

91

0

200

16

117

55

66

278

40

62

113

49

146

376

21

1339

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

14 14

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

25 25

0 0

39 39

Existing Plus Project Conditions

16

112

52

61

211

36

60

106

48

145

310

21

1178

Background Plus Project Conditions

16

117

55

66

292

40

62

113

49

146

401

21

1378

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

45 +0 0 0

267 +0 0 0

298 +0 0 0

289 +0 0 0

201 +77 103 28

53 +0 6 0

53 +9 9 0

268 +0 0 0

60 +0 0 0

57 +89 0 0

204 +172 148 45

39 +0 0 0

1834 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

45

267

298

289

409

59

71

268

60

146

569

39

2520

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

45

267

298

289

423

59

71

268

60

146

594

39

2559

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

266 73

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

16 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

1449 Highway 25 Bypass PM

& Hillcrest Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/08/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

1.5% 13

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

Existing Conditions

33

682

260

82

234

30

45

430

131

54

296

36

2313

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

48

171

26

24

51

12

19

153

120

149

65

54

892

Background Conditions

81

853

286

106

285

42

64

583

251

203

361

90

3205

0 0

12 12

2 2

1 1

13 13

0 0

0 0

7 7

1 1

1 1

23 23

0 0

60 60

Existing Plus Project Conditions

33

694

262

83

247

30

45

437

132

55

319

36

2373

Background Plus Project Conditions

81

865

288

107

298

42

64

590

252

204

384

90

3265

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

58 +23 0 0

1299 +0 35 23

45 +241 20 6

46 +60 14 4

232 +53 62 24

96 +0 27 0

90 +0 39 0

1361 +0 25 14

170 +81 48 3

263 +0 69 5

243 +118 89 39

67 +23 0 0

3970 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

81

1357

312

124

371

123

129

1400

302

337

489

90

5115

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

81

1369

314

125

384

123

129

1407

303

338

512

90

5175

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

West Approach TH LT

Int. Totals

428 118

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls PM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

17 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

Existing Conditions

2210 McCray Street PM

2/15/2011

& Hillcrest Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 06/09/10

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

North Approach RT TH LT

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

68

136

30

235

107

187

8

7

78

21

West Approach TH LT 185

46

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 1108

1

0

13

13

75

0

0

0

1

1

100

1

205

69

235

120

149

262

8

7

78

22

31

285

47

1313

0 0

0 0

4 4

2 2

9 9

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

16 16

0 0

31 31

Existing Plus Project Conditions

68

235

111

138

196

8

7

78

21

30

201

46

1139

Background Plus Project Conditions

69

235

124

151

271

8

7

78

22

31

301

47

1344

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

18 +51 0 0

224 +11 0 0

56 +64 26 13

24 +125 18 8

265 +0 74 13

18 +0 0 0

30 +0 0 0

139 +0 0 0

329 +0 5 0

263 +0 8 0

332 +0 107 21

14 +33 0 0

1712 +0

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

69

235

159

175

352

18

30

139

334

271

460

47

2289

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

69

235

163

177

361

18

30

139

334

271

476

47

2320

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

238 55

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

18 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2245 Fairview Road PM

& Santa Ana Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/13/10

North Approach RT TH LT

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

West Approach TH LT

1.5% 13

Int. Totals

Existing Conditions

81

342

0

0

0

0

0

231

60

63

0

78

855

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

14

77

0

0

0

0

0

46

12

12

0

9

170

Background Conditions

95

419

0

0

0

0

0

277

72

75

0

87

1025

0 0

13 13

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

7 7

3 3

6 6

0 0

0 0

29 29

Existing Plus Project Conditions

81

355

0

0

0

0

0

238

63

69

0

78

884

Background Plus Project Conditions

95

432

0

0

0

0

0

284

75

81

0

87

1054

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

45 +50 0 0

283 +136 106 30

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

301 +0 73 19

68 +4 42 10

47 +28 61 16

0 +0 0 0

51 +36 0 0

795 +230

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

95

555

0

0

0

0

0

393

124

152

0

87

1406

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

95

568

0

0

0

0

0

400

127

158

0

87

1435

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

282 75

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Fairview Corners Residential Vol Sheets 2-4-11.xls PM

Fairview Corners Residential - Hollister

19 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2248 Fairview Road PM

& McCloskey Road Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: 05/12/10

North Approach RT TH LT Existing Conditions

30

314

2/15/2011

0

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT 0

0

0

0

171

28

RT 99

West Approach TH LT 0

52

1.5% 13

Int. Totals 694

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

12

70

0

0

0

0

0

44

11

21

0

7

165

Background Conditions

42

384

0

0

0

0

0

215

39

120

0

59

859

0 0

11 11

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

7 7

1 1

1 1

0 0

0 0

20 20

Existing Plus Project Conditions

30

325

0

0

0

0

0

178

29

100

0

52

714

Background Plus Project Conditions

42

395

0

0

0

0

0

222

40

121

0

59

879

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

42 +0 0 0

256 +128 68 25

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

0 +0 0 0

254 +0 48 16

102 +0 26 3

90 +30 37 5

0 +0 0 0

25 +34 0 0

179 49

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

42

477

0

0

0

0

0

318

131

162

0

59

1189

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

42

488

0

0

0

0

0

325

132

163

0

59

1209

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

769 +90

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

20 Intersection Name: Peak Hour:

2243 Fairview Road PM

& Hillcrest Road (Signalized) Date of Analysis: 7/20/10 Count Date: #N/A

North Approach RT TH LT Existing Conditions

Future Growth % Per Year: Number of Years to Buildout:

Movements East Approach South Approach RT TH LT RT TH LT

RT

West Approach TH LT

1.5% 13

Int. Totals

141

284

0

0

0

0

0

195

41

26

0

92

779

24

94

0

0

0

0

0

58

41

59

0

20

296

165

378

0

0

0

0

0

253

82

85

0

112

1075

0 0

22 18

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

13 11

17 2

29 4

0 0

0 0

81 35

Existing Plus Project Conditions

141

302

0

0

0

0

0

206

43

30

0

92

814

Background Plus Project Conditions

165

400

0

0

0

0

0

266

99

114

0

112

1156

Year 2023 Model Forecasts** Cumulative Model Vol. Adjustments Santana Ranch Project Trips Gavilan Collage Project Trips

46 +119 0 0

319 +59 73 46

0 +0 119 0

0 +0 83 0

0 +0 118 0

0 +0 110 0

0 +0 158 0

344 +0 51 29

28 +54 9 34

26 +59 13 54

0 +0 169 0

52 +60 0 0

815 +260

General Plan w/o Project Conditions

165

497

119

83

118

110

158

424

125

152

169

112

2232

General Plan w/ Project Buildout Conditions

165

519

119

83

118

110

158

437

142

181

169

112

2313

Approved Trips from TRAFFIX

Background Conditions

Project Trips (with Union Connection) Project Trips (No Union Connection)

903 163

**From Hollister Travel Demand Model with 2023 volumes and all roadway network improvements, including Highway 25 Bypass. Values in red indicate turning movements where hand adjustments were made.

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Count Comparisons Southside Rd and Union Rd AM Peak-Hour

New Count (Summer Count) Old Count (School-Year Count) Movement Factor (School / Summer) Approach Factor (School / Summer) Intersection Factor (School / Summer)

RT 24 49 2.04

North Approach TH LT 35 88 20 21 0.57 0.61

0.24

RT 9 27 3.00

East Approach TH 382 533 1.40 1.41

LT 33 36

RT 30 37

1.09

1.23

South Approach TH LT 9 10 38 111 4.22 3.80

11.10

RT 53 61 1.15

West Approach TH LT 156 16 258 22 1.65 1.52

845 1213

1.38 1.44

PM Peak-Hour

New Count (Summer Count) Old Count (School-Year Count) Movement Factor (School / Summer) Approach Factor (School / Summer) Intersection Factor (School / Summer)

RT 37 28 0.76

North Approach TH LT 38 64 41 31 1.08 0.72

0.48

RT 13 26 2.00

East Approach TH 218 242 1.11 1.15

LT 39 43

RT 20 26

1.10

1.30

South Approach TH LT 51 35 41 70 0.80 1.29

2.00

RT 97 94 0.97

West Approach TH LT 457 52 458 53 1.00 1.00

1121 1153

1.02 1.03

Highway 25 and Highway 156 AM Peak-Hour

New Count (Summer Count) Old Count (School-Year Count) Movement Factor (School / Summer) Approach Factor (School / Summer) Intersection Factor (School / Summer)

RT 62 32 0.52

North Approach TH LT 301 13 313 20 1.04 0.97

1.54

RT 18 15 0.83

East Approach TH 202 192 0.95 0.90

LT 13 2

RT 8 2

0.15

0.25

South Approach TH LT 981 23 1104 14 1.13 1.11

0.61

RT 30 31 1.03

West Approach TH LT 151 182 118 223 0.78 1.02

1984 2066

1.23 1.04

PM Peak-Hour

New Count (Summer Count) Old Count (School-Year Count) Movement Factor (School / Summer) Approach Factor (School / Summer) Intersection Factor (School / Summer)

RT 225 167 0.74

North Approach TH LT 1043 8 1170 14 1.12 1.06

1.75

RT 7 8 1.14

East Approach TH 314 177 0.56 0.57

LT 3 1

RT 4 1

0.33

0.25

South Approach TH LT 332 40 391 34 1.18 1.13

0.85

RT 14 14 1.00

West Approach TH LT 317 81 242 71 0.76 0.79

2388 2290

0.88 0.96

Fairview Rd and McCloskey Rd AM Peak-Hour

New Count (Summer Count) Old Count (School-Year Count) Movement Factor (School / Summer) Approach Factor (School / Summer) Intersection Factor (School / Summer)

RT 32 42 1.31

North Approach TH LT 179 0 202 0

RT 0 0

East Approach TH 0 0

LT 0 0

RT 0 0

1.13 1.16

South Approach TH LT 283 178 366 168 1.29 1.16

0.94

RT 42 46

West Approach TH LT 0 25 0 35

1.10

739 859

1.40 1.21 1.16

PM Peak-Hour

New Count (Summer Count) Old Count (School-Year Count) Movement Factor (School / Summer) Approach Factor (School / Summer) Intersection Factor (School / Summer) 3-Intersection Average

RT 25 27 1.08

North Approach LT TH 354 0 389 0 1.10 1.10

RT 0 0

East Approach TH 0 0

LT 0 0

RT 0 0

South Approach TH LT 219 49 211 47 0.96 0.96

0.96

RT 199 135

West Approach TH LT 0 46 0 39

0.68

892 848

0.85 0.71 0.95 AM PM

1.21 0.98

Appendix C  Intersection Level of Service Calculations 

Existing Conditions 

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-3

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #1449: Hwy 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 23***

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 36 243 79*** 1 0 2 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/8/2010 85

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

70

24

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

172

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.505

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

23.6

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

24.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

206***

27

C

1 0 2 0 1 114 590*** 11 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Hwy 25 Bypass Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 114 590 11 79 243 36 23 70 24 27 206 172 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 114 590 11 79 243 36 23 70 24 27 206 172 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 114 590 11 79 243 36 23 70 24 27 206 172 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 114 590 11 79 243 36 23 70 24 27 206 172 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 114 590 11 79 243 36 23 70 24 27 206 172 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 114 590 11 79 243 36 23 70 24 27 206 172 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.95 0.93 0.93 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.49 0.51 1.00 0.54 0.46 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 2586 887 1805 965 806 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.16 0.01 0.04 0.07 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.21 0.21 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 16.9 27.5 41.1 7.4 18.0 20.2 2.1 24.5 24.5 13.6 36.0 36.0 Volume/Cap: 0.32 0.50 0.01 0.50 0.32 0.09 0.50 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.50 0.50 Delay/Veh: 29.6 23.6 11.4 39.7 28.5 25.4 49.7 22.1 22.1 30.6 18.5 18.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 29.6 23.6 11.4 39.7 28.5 25.4 49.7 22.1 22.1 30.6 18.5 18.5 LOS by Move: C C B D C C D C C C B B HCM2kAvgQ: 2 6 0 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 8 8 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-4

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #1449: Hwy 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 36***

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 33 682 260*** 1 0 2 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/8/2010 85

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

296

54

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

82

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.531

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

28.1

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

25.8

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

234***

30

C

1 0 2 0 1 131 430*** 45 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Hwy 25 Bypass Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 131 430 45 260 682 33 36 296 54 30 234 82 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 131 430 45 260 682 33 36 296 54 30 234 82 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 131 430 45 260 682 33 36 296 54 30 234 82 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 131 430 45 260 682 33 36 296 54 30 234 82 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 131 430 45 260 682 33 36 296 54 30 234 82 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 131 430 45 260 682 33 36 296 54 30 234 82 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.96 0.96 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.69 0.31 1.00 0.74 0.26 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 2983 544 1805 1352 474 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.12 0.03 0.14 0.19 0.02 0.02 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.17 0.17 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 11.7 19.1 23.5 23.1 30.4 33.6 3.2 26.5 26.5 4.4 27.7 27.7 Volume/Cap: 0.53 0.53 0.10 0.53 0.53 0.05 0.53 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.53 0.53 Delay/Veh: 36.2 29.7 23.0 27.5 22.0 15.9 48.0 22.6 22.6 40.8 24.3 24.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 36.2 29.7 23.0 27.5 22.0 15.9 48.0 22.6 22.6 40.8 24.3 24.3 LOS by Move: D C C C C B D C C D C C HCM2kAvgQ: 3 5 1 6 7 1 2 4 4 1 7 7 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-5

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #1550: Valleyview Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 28

108 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 11 2 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/10/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

45

27

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

13

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.180

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

5.7

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

5.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 94

162

1

B

0

1! 0 0 12 4 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 10 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 94 12 4 2 11 108 28 45 27 1 162 13 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 94 12 4 2 11 108 28 45 27 1 162 13 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 94 12 4 2 11 108 28 45 27 1 162 13 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 94 12 4 2 11 108 28 45 27 1 162 13 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 94 12 4 2 11 108 28 45 27 1 162 13 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 345 292 36 249 292 162 175 xxxx xxxxx 72 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 614 622 1042 709 622 888 1414 xxxx xxxxx 1541 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 523 610 1042 685 609 888 1414 xxxx xxxxx 1541 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.18 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.12 0.02 xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx 7.3 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 541 xxxxx xxxx 849 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 0.8 xxxxx xxxxx 0.5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx 13.3 xxxxx xxxxx 9.9 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * B * * A * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 13.3 9.9 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B A * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-6

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #1550: Valleyview Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 113

53 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 21 19 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/2/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

207

107

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

16

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.259

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

5.5

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

5.5

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 85

109

3

C

0

1! 0 0 16 4 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 2 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 85 16 4 19 21 53 113 207 107 3 109 16 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 85 16 4 19 21 53 113 207 107 3 109 16 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 85 16 4 19 21 53 113 207 107 3 109 16 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 85 16 4 19 21 53 113 207 107 3 109 16 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 85 16 4 19 21 53 113 207 107 3 109 16 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 647 618 157 453 655 109 125 xxxx xxxxx 314 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 387 408 894 521 388 950 1474 xxxx xxxxx 1258 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 328 376 894 472 358 950 1474 xxxx xxxxx 1258 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.26 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.08 xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx 7.9 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 343 xxxxx xxxx 601 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 1.3 xxxxx xxxxx 0.5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx 20.1 xxxxx xxxxx 12.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * C * * B * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 20.1 12.1 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C B * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-7

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #1551: Valley View Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 0

0 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 0 0 0 0 0 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/25/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

236***

43

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.666

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

13.5

1

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

13.5

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 83***

454

55***

B

0

1! 0 0 0 29 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 25 May 2010 << Base Vol: 83 0 29 0 0 0 0 236 43 55 454 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 83 0 29 0 0 0 0 236 43 55 454 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 83 0 29 0 0 0 0 236 43 55 454 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 83 0 29 0 0 0 0 236 43 55 454 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 83 0 29 0 0 0 0 236 43 55 454 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 83 0 29 0 0 0 0 236 43 55 454 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.74 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.11 0.89 0.00 Final Sat.: 436 0 152 0 0 0 0 676 778 83 682 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.19 xxxx 0.19 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.35 0.06 0.67 0.67 xxxx Crit Moves: **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 9.7 0.0 9.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.6 7.5 16.2 16.2 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 9.7 0.0 9.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.6 7.5 16.2 16.2 0.0 LOS by Move: A * A * * * * B A C C * ApproachDel: 9.7 xxxxxx 10.1 16.2 Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 9.7 xxxxxx 10.1 16.2 LOS by Appr: A * B C AllWayAvgQ: 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 1.8 1.8 1.8 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-8

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #1551: Valley View Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 0

0 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 0 0 0 0 0 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/27/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

436***

64

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.632

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

13.3

1

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

13.3

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 69***

298

32***

B

0

1! 0 0 0 66 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 27 May 2010 << Base Vol: 69 0 66 0 0 0 0 436 64 32 298 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 69 0 66 0 0 0 0 436 64 32 298 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 69 0 66 0 0 0 0 436 64 32 298 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 69 0 66 0 0 0 0 436 64 32 298 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 69 0 66 0 0 0 0 436 64 32 298 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 69 0 66 0 0 0 0 436 64 32 298 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.51 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.10 0.90 0.00 Final Sat.: 307 0 293 0 0 0 0 689 795 69 643 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.22 xxxx 0.22 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.63 0.08 0.46 0.46 xxxx Crit Moves: **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 9.9 0.0 9.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.1 7.5 12.0 12.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 9.9 0.0 9.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.1 7.5 12.0 12.0 0.0 LOS by Move: A * A * * * * C A B B * ApproachDel: 9.9 xxxxxx 15.0 12.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 9.9 xxxxxx 15.0 12.0 LOS by Appr: A * B B AllWayAvgQ: 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.1 0.8 0.8 0.8 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-9

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #2210: McCray St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 39

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 33 127*** 42 1 0 1 0 1

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/3/2010 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

0 1

128

8***

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

75

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.344

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

24.0

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

25.4

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 15***

243***

4

C

0

1 1 0 51 6 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: McCray St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 3 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 15 51 6 42 127 33 39 128 8 4 243 75 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 15 51 6 42 127 33 39 128 8 4 243 75 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 15 51 6 42 127 33 39 128 8 4 243 75 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 15 51 6 42 127 33 39 128 8 4 243 75 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 15 51 6 42 127 33 39 128 8 4 243 75 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 15 51 6 42 127 33 39 128 8 4 243 75 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.97 0.97 Lanes: 1.00 1.79 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.45 1.46 0.09 1.00 0.76 0.24 Final Sat.: 1805 3178 374 1805 1900 1615 790 2593 162 1805 1401 432 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.17 0.17 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 2.2 8.0 8.0 11.6 17.5 30.4 12.9 12.9 12.9 45.4 45.4 45.4 Volume/Cap: 0.34 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.34 0.06 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.00 0.34 0.34 Delay/Veh: 47.9 38.2 38.2 35.3 31.9 20.2 35.1 35.1 35.1 11.1 13.6 13.6 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 47.9 38.2 38.2 35.3 31.9 20.2 35.1 35.1 35.1 11.1 13.6 13.6 LOS by Move: D D D D C C D D D B B B HCM2kAvgQ: 0 1 1 1 3 1 3 3 3 0 5 5 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-10

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #2210: McCray St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 46***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 68 235*** 107 1 0 1 0 1

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/9/2010 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

0 1

185

30

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

136

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.451

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

27.4

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

27.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 21***

187***

8

C

0

1 1 0 78 7 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: McCray St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 9 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 21 78 7 107 235 68 46 185 30 8 187 136 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 21 78 7 107 235 68 46 185 30 8 187 136 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 21 78 7 107 235 68 46 185 30 8 187 136 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 21 78 7 107 235 68 46 185 30 8 187 136 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 21 78 7 107 235 68 46 185 30 8 187 136 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 21 78 7 107 235 68 46 185 30 8 187 136 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.94 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 1.84 0.16 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.35 1.42 0.23 1.00 0.58 0.42 Final Sat.: 1805 3273 294 1805 1900 1615 620 2493 404 1805 1031 750 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.12 0.04 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.18 0.18 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 2.3 7.7 7.7 19.3 24.7 39.5 14.8 14.8 14.8 36.2 36.2 36.2 Volume/Cap: 0.45 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.45 0.10 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.01 0.45 0.45 Delay/Veh: 50.0 39.0 39.0 29.9 27.7 14.9 34.5 34.5 34.5 16.2 20.1 20.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 50.0 39.0 39.0 29.9 27.7 14.9 34.5 34.5 34.5 16.2 20.1 20.1 LOS by Move: D D D C C B C C C B C C HCM2kAvgQ: 1 1 1 3 6 1 4 4 4 0 7 7 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-11

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #2218: Memorial St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 45***

46 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 130 38*** 1 0 1 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/26/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 1

128

75

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

98

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.607

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

13.5

1

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

13.5

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 92***

275***

49

B

1

0 1 0 154 75 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Memorial St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 26 May 2010 << Base Vol: 92 154 75 38 130 46 45 128 75 49 275 98 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 92 154 75 38 130 46 45 128 75 49 275 98 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 92 154 75 38 130 46 45 128 75 49 275 98 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 92 154 75 38 130 46 45 128 75 49 275 98 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 92 154 75 38 130 46 45 128 75 49 275 98 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 92 154 75 38 130 46 45 128 75 49 275 98 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.57 0.96 0.47 0.36 1.21 0.43 0.26 0.74 1.00 0.15 0.85 1.00 Final Sat.: 279 491 248 169 595 218 130 369 560 81 453 596 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.33 0.31 0.30 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.35 0.35 0.13 0.61 0.61 0.16 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 13.0 12.3 11.7 11.7 11.4 11.0 12.9 12.9 9.6 18.3 18.3 9.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 13.0 12.3 11.7 11.7 11.4 11.0 12.9 12.9 9.6 18.3 18.3 9.6 LOS by Move: B B B B B B B B A C C A ApproachDel: 12.3 11.4 11.9 16.3 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 12.3 11.4 11.9 16.3 LOS by Appr: B B B C AllWayAvgQ: 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.1 1.3 1.3 0.2 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-12

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #2218: Memorial St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 21

16 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 112 52*** 1 0 1 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/26/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 1

285***

145

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

61

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.538

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

12.4

1

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

12.4

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 48***

197***

36

B

1

0 1 0 106 60 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Memorial St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 26 May 2010 << Base Vol: 48 106 60 52 112 16 21 285 145 36 197 61 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 48 106 60 52 112 16 21 285 145 36 197 61 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 48 106 60 52 112 16 21 285 145 36 197 61 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 48 106 60 52 112 16 21 285 145 36 197 61 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 48 106 60 52 112 16 21 285 145 36 197 61 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 48 106 60 52 112 16 21 285 145 36 197 61 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.45 0.99 0.56 0.58 1.24 0.18 0.07 0.93 1.00 0.15 0.85 1.00 Final Sat.: 217 499 296 274 613 89 39 529 638 84 458 608 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.22 0.21 0.20 0.19 0.18 0.18 0.54 0.54 0.23 0.43 0.43 0.10 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 11.5 11.1 10.5 11.3 10.9 10.7 15.5 15.5 9.7 13.6 13.6 8.9 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 11.5 11.1 10.5 11.3 10.9 10.7 15.5 15.5 9.7 13.6 13.6 8.9 LOS by Move: B B B B B B C C A B B A ApproachDel: 11.0 11.0 13.6 12.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11.0 11.0 13.6 12.6 LOS by Appr: B B B B AllWayAvgQ: 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.0 1.0 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-13

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #2242: Fairview Rd and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 117

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 95 278 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/18/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

30

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.311

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

2.8

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

2.8

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

C

1 0 1 0 0 27 416 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 18 May 2010 << Base Vol: 27 416 0 0 278 95 117 0 30 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 27 416 0 0 278 95 117 0 30 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 27 416 0 0 278 95 117 0 30 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 27 416 0 0 278 95 117 0 30 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 27 416 0 0 278 95 117 0 30 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 373 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 748 xxxx 278 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1197 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 383 xxxx 766 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1197 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 376 xxxx 766 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.02 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.31 xxxx 0.04 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.3 xxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 18.8 xxxx 9.9 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * C * A * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 17.0 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * C * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-14

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #2242: Fairview Rd and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 92

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 141 284 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/18/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

26

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.192

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

2.5

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

2.5

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

B

1 0 1 0 0 41 195 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 18 May 2010 << Base Vol: 41 195 0 0 284 141 92 0 26 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 41 195 0 0 284 141 92 0 26 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 41 195 0 0 284 141 92 0 26 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 41 195 0 0 284 141 92 0 26 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 41 195 0 0 284 141 92 0 26 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 425 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 561 xxxx 284 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1145 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 492 xxxx 760 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1145 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 479 xxxx 760 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.04 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.19 xxxx 0.03 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.7 xxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 14.3 xxxx 9.9 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * B * A * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 13.3 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-15

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #2245: Fairview Rd and Santa Ana Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 60

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 74 249 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/13/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

71

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.202

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

2.9

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

2.9

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

B

1 0 1 0 0 109 417 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Santa Ana Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 13 May 2010 << Base Vol: 109 417 0 0 249 74 60 0 71 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 109 417 0 0 249 74 60 0 71 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 109 417 0 0 249 74 60 0 71 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 109 417 0 0 249 74 60 0 71 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 109 417 0 0 249 74 60 0 71 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 323 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 884 xxxx 249 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1248 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 318 xxxx 795 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1248 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 297 xxxx 795 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.09 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.20 xxxx 0.09 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.7 xxxx 0.3 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 20.2 xxxx 10.0 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * C * A * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.6 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-16

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #2245: Fairview Rd and Santa Ana Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 78

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 81 342 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/13/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

63

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.197

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

2.9

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

2.9

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

B

1 0 1 0 0 60 231 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Santa Ana Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 13 May 2010 << Base Vol: 60 231 0 0 342 81 78 0 63 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 60 231 0 0 342 81 78 0 63 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 60 231 0 0 342 81 78 0 63 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 60 231 0 0 342 81 78 0 63 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 60 231 0 0 342 81 78 0 63 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 423 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 693 xxxx 342 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1147 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 412 xxxx 705 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1147 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 396 xxxx 705 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.05 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.20 xxxx 0.09 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.7 xxxx 0.3 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 16.3 xxxx 10.6 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * C * B * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 13.8 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-17

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #2248: Fairview Rd and McCloskey Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 32

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 39 297 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/12/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

0

37

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1!

Critical V/C:

0.106

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

2.0

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

2.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

B

1 0 1 0 0 98 382 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd McCloskey Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 12 May 2010 << Base Vol: 98 382 0 0 297 39 32 0 37 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 98 382 0 0 297 39 32 0 37 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 98 382 0 0 297 39 32 0 37 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 98 382 0 0 297 39 32 0 37 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 98 382 0 0 297 39 32 0 37 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 336 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 875 875 297 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1235 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 322 290 747 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1235 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 303 267 747 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.08 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.11 0.00 0.05 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 445 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 14.6 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * B * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.6 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-18

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #2248: Fairview Rd and McCloskey Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 52

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 30 314 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/12/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

0

99

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1!

Critical V/C:

0.135

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.0

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

B

1 0 1 0 0 28 171 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd McCloskey Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 12 May 2010 << Base Vol: 28 171 0 0 314 30 52 0 99 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 28 171 0 0 314 30 52 0 99 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 28 171 0 0 314 30 52 0 99 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 28 171 0 0 314 30 52 0 99 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 28 171 0 0 314 30 52 0 99 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 344 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 541 541 314 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1226 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 506 451 731 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1226 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 497 441 731 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.02 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.10 0.00 0.14 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 629 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.9 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 12.5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * B * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 12.5 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-19

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #2331: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 114

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 58 255 65*** 1 0 3 0 2

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/9/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

2 0

136

148***

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

59

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.245

2

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

26.6

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

28.1

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

194

120***

C

2 0 3 0 1 134 437*** 35 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 9 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 134 437 35 65 255 58 114 136 148 120 194 59 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 134 437 35 65 255 58 114 136 148 120 194 59 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 134 437 35 65 255 58 114 136 148 120 194 59 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 134 437 35 65 255 58 114 136 148 120 194 59 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 134 437 35 65 255 58 114 136 148 120 194 59 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 134 437 35 65 255 58 114 136 148 120 194 59 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 3610 5700 1615 3610 5700 1615 3610 3800 1615 1805 3800 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.09 0.07 0.05 0.04 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 17.5 31.3 58.4 7.3 21.1 40.0 18.9 22.2 39.8 27.1 30.5 37.9 Volume/Cap: 0.21 0.25 0.04 0.25 0.21 0.09 0.17 0.16 0.23 0.25 0.17 0.10 Delay/Veh: 35.5 25.6 8.9 44.2 32.7 18.7 34.1 31.4 20.2 28.7 25.5 20.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 35.5 25.6 8.9 44.2 32.7 18.7 34.1 31.4 20.2 28.7 25.5 20.1 LOS by Move: D C A D C B C C C C C C HCM2kAvgQ: 2 3 0 1 2 1 1 2 3 3 2 1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-20

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #2331: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 124

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 104 563*** 160 1 0 3 0 2

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/9/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

2 0

354***

222

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

24

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.405

2

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

33.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

30.1

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

267

181***

C

2 0 3 0 1 232*** 395 111 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 9 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 232 395 111 160 563 104 124 354 222 181 267 24 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 232 395 111 160 563 104 124 354 222 181 267 24 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 232 395 111 160 563 104 124 354 222 181 267 24 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 232 395 111 160 563 104 124 354 222 181 267 24 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 232 395 111 160 563 104 124 354 222 181 267 24 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 232 395 111 160 563 104 124 354 222 181 267 24 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 3610 5700 1615 3610 5700 1615 3610 3800 1615 1805 3800 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.10 0.06 0.03 0.09 0.14 0.10 0.07 0.01 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 15.9 24.5 49.3 15.7 24.4 40.1 15.7 23.0 38.9 24.8 32.1 47.8 Volume/Cap: 0.41 0.28 0.14 0.28 0.41 0.16 0.22 0.41 0.35 0.41 0.22 0.03 Delay/Veh: 38.3 30.7 13.9 37.5 31.9 19.3 37.0 33.0 22.0 32.1 24.9 13.9 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 38.3 30.7 13.9 37.5 31.9 19.3 37.0 33.0 22.0 32.1 24.9 13.9 LOS by Move: D C B D C B D C C C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 4 3 2 2 5 2 2 4 5 5 3 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-21

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #2347: Fairview Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 222***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 146 121 0*** 1 0 1 0 0

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/19/2010 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

0

37

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.276

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

11.4

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

10.9

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 47

0

0

B

0

1 0 0 223*** 0 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 19 May 2010 << Base Vol: 47 223 0 0 121 146 222 0 37 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 47 223 0 0 121 146 222 0 37 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 47 223 0 0 121 146 222 0 37 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 47 223 0 0 121 146 222 0 37 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 47 223 0 0 121 146 222 0 37 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 47 223 0 0 121 146 222 0 37 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1900 1900 0 0 1900 1900 1900 0 1900 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.08 0.12 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 7.1 25.6 0.0 0.0 18.4 43.9 25.4 0.0 32.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.21 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.11 0.28 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 24.3 11.4 0.0 0.0 15.6 2.4 11.5 0.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 24.3 11.4 0.0 0.0 15.6 2.4 11.5 0.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: C B A A B A B A A A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 1 3 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-22

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #2347: Fairview Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 113***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 152 184*** 0 1 0 1 0 0

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/19/2010 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

0

32

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.214

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

14.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

9.8

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 48***

0

0

A

0

1 0 0 113 0 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 19 May 2010 << Base Vol: 48 113 0 0 184 152 113 0 32 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 48 113 0 0 184 152 113 0 32 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 48 113 0 0 184 152 113 0 32 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 48 113 0 0 184 152 113 0 32 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 48 113 0 0 184 152 113 0 32 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 48 113 0 0 184 152 113 0 32 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1900 1900 0 0 1900 1900 1900 0 1900 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 7.1 34.3 0.0 0.0 27.2 43.9 16.7 0.0 23.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.21 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.11 0.21 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 24.4 5.9 0.0 0.0 10.1 2.4 16.8 0.0 11.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 24.4 5.9 0.0 0.0 10.1 2.4 16.8 0.0 11.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: C A A A B A B A B A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 1 1 0 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-23

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #2367: Airline Hwy and Sunset Dr Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 40

34 1

Signal=Protect/Rights=Include 308 126*** 0 2 0 1

Signal=Permit Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/27/2010 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Permit Rights=Overlap

1 0

46

16

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

169

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.260

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

13.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

12.0

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 23

71***

27

B

0

1 1 0 416*** 29 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Airline Hwy Sunset Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 27 May 2010 << Base Vol: 23 416 29 126 308 34 40 46 16 27 71 169 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 23 416 29 126 308 34 40 46 16 27 71 169 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 23 416 29 126 308 34 40 46 16 27 71 169 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 23 416 29 126 308 34 40 46 16 27 71 169 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 23 416 29 126 308 34 40 46 16 27 71 169 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 23 416 29 126 308 34 40 46 16 27 71 169 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.87 0.13 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1900 3552 248 1900 3800 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.12 0.12 0.07 0.08 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.09 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 5.5 27.1 27.1 15.3 36.9 36.9 8.6 8.6 14.1 8.6 8.6 23.9 Volume/Cap: 0.13 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.13 0.03 0.15 0.17 0.04 0.10 0.26 0.22 Delay/Veh: 25.4 10.3 10.3 18.1 4.9 4.6 22.7 22.8 17.7 22.5 23.4 12.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 25.4 10.3 10.3 18.1 4.9 4.6 22.7 22.8 17.7 22.5 23.4 12.0 LOS by Move: C B B B A A C C B C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 1 3 3 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-24

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #2367: Airline Hwy and Sunset Dr Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 43

61 1

Signal=Protect/Rights=Include 584 204*** 0 2 0 1

Signal=Permit Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/3/2010 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Permit Rights=Overlap

1 0

59

21

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

224

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.359

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

14.4

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

11.6

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 38

87***

23

B

0

1 1 0 549*** 30 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Airline Hwy Sunset Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 3 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 38 549 30 204 584 61 43 59 21 23 87 224 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 38 549 30 204 584 61 43 59 21 23 87 224 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 38 549 30 204 584 61 43 59 21 23 87 224 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 38 549 30 204 584 61 43 59 21 23 87 224 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 38 549 30 204 584 61 43 59 21 23 87 224 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 38 549 30 204 584 61 43 59 21 23 87 224 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.90 0.10 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1900 3603 197 1900 3800 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.15 0.15 0.11 0.15 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.12 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 5.0 25.4 25.4 17.9 38.4 38.4 7.6 7.6 12.6 7.6 7.6 25.6 Volume/Cap: 0.24 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.24 0.05 0.18 0.24 0.05 0.10 0.36 0.28 Delay/Veh: 26.5 11.9 11.9 16.9 4.7 4.0 23.7 24.1 19.0 23.3 24.9 11.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 26.5 11.9 11.9 16.9 4.7 4.0 23.7 24.1 19.0 23.3 24.9 11.4 LOS by Move: C B B B A A C C B C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 1 4 4 3 2 0 1 1 0 0 2 3 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-25

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #2925: San Benito St and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 113***

161 1

Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap 0 133*** 0 0 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

3/4/2009 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

147

0

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

291

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.430

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

14.2

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

10.7

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 0

436***

0

B

0

0 0 0 0 0 Signal=Split/Rights=Include

Street Name: San Benito St Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 4 Mar 2009 << Base Vol: 0 0 0 133 0 161 113 147 0 0 436 291 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 133 0 161 113 147 0 0 436 291 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 133 0 161 113 147 0 0 436 291 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 133 0 161 113 147 0 0 436 291 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 133 0 161 113 147 0 0 436 291 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 133 0 161 113 147 0 0 436 291 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 1805 1900 0 0 1900 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.10 0.06 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.18 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3 0.0 19.0 8.7 40.7 0.0 0.0 32.0 42.3 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.31 0.43 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.26 Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.2 0.0 15.9 24.5 3.4 0.0 0.0 8.8 3.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.2 0.0 15.9 24.5 3.4 0.0 0.0 8.8 3.3 LOS by Move: A A A C A B C A A A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 0 0 0 3 0 2 2 1 0 0 5 2 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-26

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #2925: San Benito St and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 152

89 1

Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap 0 127*** 0 0 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

3/4/2009 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

395***

0

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

144

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.327

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

8.9

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

10.6

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 0

214

0***

B

0

0 0 0 0 0 Signal=Split/Rights=Include

Street Name: San Benito St Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 4 Mar 2009 << Base Vol: 0 0 0 127 0 89 152 395 0 0 214 144 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 127 0 89 152 395 0 0 214 144 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 127 0 89 152 395 0 0 214 144 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 127 0 89 152 395 0 0 214 144 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 127 0 89 152 395 0 0 214 144 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 127 0 89 152 395 0 0 214 144 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 1805 1900 0 0 1900 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.08 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.09 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.9 0.0 29.2 16.3 38.1 0.0 0.0 21.8 34.7 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.00 0.11 0.31 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.15 Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 8.4 17.7 5.2 0.0 0.0 14.0 5.9 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 8.4 17.7 5.2 0.0 0.0 14.0 5.9 LOS by Move: A A A C A A B A A A B A HCM2kAvgQ: 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 4 0 0 3 1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-27

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #2942: Enterprise Rd and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 21

38 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 5 26 0 1 0 1

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/20/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

243

26

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

13

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.166

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.3

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 46

373

52

C

0

1 0 1 5 36 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Enterprise Rd Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 20 May 2010 << Base Vol: 46 5 36 26 5 38 21 243 26 52 373 13 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 46 5 36 26 5 38 21 243 26 52 373 13 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 46 5 36 26 5 38 21 243 26 52 373 13 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 46 5 36 26 5 38 21 243 26 52 373 13 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 46 5 36 26 5 38 21 243 26 52 373 13 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 790 775 243 796 788 373 386 xxxx xxxxx 269 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 310 331 801 308 326 678 1184 xxxx xxxxx 1306 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 277 312 801 278 307 678 1184 xxxx xxxxx 1306 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.17 0.02 0.04 0.09 0.02 0.06 0.02 xxxx xxxx 0.04 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 20.6 16.7 9.7 19.3 16.9 10.6 8.1 xxxx xxxxx 7.9 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: C C A C C B A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 15.9 14.4 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C B * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-28

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #2942: Enterprise Rd and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 66

24 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 2 30 0 1 0 1

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/20/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

554

61

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

33

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.214

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.3

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 40

231

48

C

0

1 0 1 3 33 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Enterprise Rd Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 20 May 2010 << Base Vol: 40 3 33 30 2 24 66 554 61 48 231 33 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 40 3 33 30 2 24 66 554 61 48 231 33 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 40 3 33 30 2 24 66 554 61 48 231 33 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 40 3 33 30 2 24 66 554 61 48 231 33 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 40 3 33 30 2 24 66 554 61 48 231 33 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1043 1046 554 1062 1074 231 264 xxxx xxxxx 615 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 209 230 536 203 222 813 1312 xxxx xxxxx 974 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 187 208 536 175 200 813 1312 xxxx xxxxx 974 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.21 0.01 0.06 0.17 0.01 0.03 0.05 xxxx xxxx 0.05 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.8 0.0 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.2 xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 29.5 22.6 12.2 29.8 23.2 9.6 7.9 xxxx xxxxx 8.9 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: D C B D C A A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 21.7 20.9 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C C * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-29

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #3072: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd and Hwy 156 Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 1***

5 0

Signal=Split/Rights=Include 12*** 36 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/8/2010 130

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

446

241

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

28

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.865

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

45.8

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

37.3

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 572***

788***

44

D

1

0 0 1 15 17 Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd Hwy 156 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 572 15 17 36 12 5 1 446 241 44 788 28 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 572 15 17 36 12 5 1 446 241 44 788 28 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 572 15 17 36 12 5 1 446 241 44 788 28 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 572 15 17 36 12 5 1 446 241 44 788 28 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 572 15 17 36 12 5 1 446 241 44 788 28 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 572 15 17 36 12 5 1 446 241 44 788 28 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.97 0.03 1.00 0.68 0.23 0.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.03 Final Sat.: 1766 46 1615 1232 411 171 1805 1900 1615 1805 1826 65 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.32 0.32 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.23 0.15 0.02 0.43 0.43 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 48.7 48.7 54.8 4.4 4.4 4.4 0.1 58.8 107.5 6.1 64.9 64.9 Volume/Cap: 0.87 0.87 0.02 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.52 0.18 0.52 0.87 0.87 Delay/Veh: 48.9 48.9 22.0 131.6 132 131.6 724.8 26.0 2.4 66.1 37.1 37.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 48.9 48.9 22.0 131.6 132 131.6 724.8 26.0 2.4 66.1 37.1 37.1 LOS by Move: D D C F F F F C A E D D HCM2kAvgQ: 24 24 0 4 4 4 0 12 2 2 31 31 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-30

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #3072: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd and Hwy 156 Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 5

4 0

Signal=Split/Rights=Include 66 126*** 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/8/2010 130

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

709***

413

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

36

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.733

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

41.7

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

30.8

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 298

622

29***

C

1

0 0 1 9*** 65 Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd Hwy 156 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 298 9 65 126 66 4 5 709 413 29 622 36 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 298 9 65 126 66 4 5 709 413 29 622 36 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 298 9 65 126 66 4 5 709 413 29 622 36 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 298 9 65 126 66 4 5 709 413 29 622 36 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 298 9 65 126 66 4 5 709 413 29 622 36 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 298 9 65 126 66 4 5 709 413 29 622 36 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.99 Lanes: 0.97 0.03 1.00 0.64 0.34 0.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.05 Final Sat.: 1759 53 1615 1180 618 37 1805 1900 1615 1805 1782 103 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.17 0.17 0.04 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.37 0.26 0.02 0.35 0.35 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 30.0 30.0 32.9 18.9 18.9 18.9 0.5 66.2 96.2 2.8 68.5 68.5 Volume/Cap: 0.73 0.73 0.16 0.73 0.73 0.73 0.66 0.73 0.35 0.73 0.66 0.66 Delay/Veh: 52.8 52.8 38.0 63.1 63.1 63.1 188.6 27.9 6.1 114.5 24.1 24.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 52.8 52.8 38.0 63.1 63.1 63.1 188.6 27.9 6.1 114.5 24.1 24.1 LOS by Move: D D D E E E F C A F C C HCM2kAvgQ: 13 13 2 9 9 9 0 22 6 2 19 19 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-31

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #3337: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 86

87*** 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 23 52 0 1 0 1

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/12/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

115***

69

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

132***

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.341

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

10.5

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

10.5

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 90

70

7

B

0

0 1 0 189 5*** Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 12 May 2010 << Base Vol: 90 189 5 52 23 87 86 115 69 7 70 132 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 90 189 5 52 23 87 86 115 69 7 70 132 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 90 189 5 52 23 87 86 115 69 7 70 132 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 90 189 5 52 23 87 86 115 69 7 70 132 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 90 189 5 52 23 87 86 115 69 7 70 132 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 90 189 5 52 23 87 86 115 69 7 70 132 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.97 0.03 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 524 555 15 476 507 565 496 534 593 481 518 578 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.17 0.34 0.34 0.11 0.05 0.15 0.17 0.22 0.12 0.01 0.14 0.23 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 10.5 11.6 11.6 10.6 9.6 9.6 10.9 10.7 9.1 9.8 10.2 10.1 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 10.5 11.6 11.6 10.6 9.6 9.6 10.9 10.7 9.1 9.8 10.2 10.1 LOS by Move: B B B B A A B B A A B B ApproachDel: 11.3 10.0 10.4 10.1 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11.3 10.0 10.4 10.1 LOS by Appr: B A B B AllWayAvgQ: 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-32

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #3337: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 44

53 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 60 80*** 0 1 0 1

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/12/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

212***

215

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

56

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.384

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

11.4

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

11.4

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 114***

150***

7

B

0

0 1 0 48 8 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 12 May 2010 << Base Vol: 114 48 8 80 60 53 44 212 215 7 150 56 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 114 48 8 80 60 53 44 212 215 7 150 56 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 114 48 8 80 60 53 44 212 215 7 150 56 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 114 48 8 80 60 53 44 212 215 7 150 56 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 114 48 8 80 60 53 44 212 215 7 150 56 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 114 48 8 80 60 53 44 212 215 7 150 56 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.86 0.14 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 478 443 74 455 486 535 508 551 617 466 503 554 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.24 0.11 0.11 0.18 0.12 0.10 0.09 0.38 0.35 0.02 0.30 0.10 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 11.8 9.9 9.9 11.6 10.5 9.6 10.1 12.7 11.1 10.1 12.1 9.4 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 11.8 9.9 9.9 11.6 10.5 9.6 10.1 12.7 11.1 10.1 12.1 9.4 LOS by Move: B A A B B A B B B B B A ApproachDel: 11.2 10.7 11.7 11.3 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11.2 10.7 11.7 11.3 LOS by Appr: B B B B AllWayAvgQ: 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.0 0.4 0.1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-33

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #3430: Airline Hwy and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 98

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 150 137 106*** 1 0 1 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/13/2010 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

116

99***

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

201***

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.672

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

33.5

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

33.6

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

281

40

C

1 0 1 0 1 198 249*** 22 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 13 May 2010 << Base Vol: 198 249 22 106 137 150 98 116 99 40 281 201 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 198 249 22 106 137 150 98 116 99 40 281 201 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 198 249 22 106 137 150 98 116 99 40 281 201 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 198 249 22 106 137 150 98 116 99 40 281 201 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 198 249 22 106 137 150 98 116 99 40 281 201 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 198 249 22 106 137 150 98 116 99 40 281 201 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.94 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.54 0.46 1.00 0.58 0.42 Final Sat.: 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 1805 954 815 1805 1038 742 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.11 0.13 0.01 0.06 0.07 0.09 0.05 0.12 0.12 0.02 0.27 0.27 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 15.3 17.6 53.8 7.9 10.1 26.4 16.3 16.3 16.3 36.3 36.3 36.3 Volume/Cap: 0.64 0.67 0.02 0.67 0.64 0.32 0.30 0.67 0.67 0.05 0.67 0.67 Delay/Veh: 39.4 38.3 7.4 50.6 44.8 25.2 32.4 39.8 39.8 16.4 24.5 24.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 39.4 38.3 7.4 50.6 44.8 25.2 32.4 39.8 39.8 16.4 24.5 24.5 LOS by Move: D D A D D C C D D B C C HCM2kAvgQ: 5 7 0 4 5 3 3 7 7 1 12 12 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-34

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #3430: Airline Hwy and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 139

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 102 328*** 208 1 0 1 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/13/2010 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

240***

150

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

118

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.645

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

33.2

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

31.8

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

93***

24

C

1 0 1 0 1 86*** 190 29 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 13 May 2010 << Base Vol: 86 190 29 208 328 102 139 240 150 24 93 118 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 86 190 29 208 328 102 139 240 150 24 93 118 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 86 190 29 208 328 102 139 240 150 24 93 118 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 86 190 29 208 328 102 139 240 150 24 93 118 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 86 190 29 208 328 102 139 240 150 24 93 118 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 86 190 29 208 328 102 139 240 150 24 93 118 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.92 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.62 0.38 1.00 0.44 0.56 Final Sat.: 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 1805 1101 688 1805 767 973 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.10 0.02 0.12 0.17 0.06 0.08 0.22 0.22 0.01 0.12 0.12 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 6.6 14.3 31.2 16.4 24.1 54.5 30.4 30.4 30.4 16.9 16.9 16.9 Volume/Cap: 0.65 0.63 0.05 0.63 0.65 0.10 0.23 0.65 0.65 0.07 0.65 0.65 Delay/Veh: 51.0 39.7 19.6 37.9 32.1 7.5 21.6 27.7 27.7 30.2 38.2 38.2 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 51.0 39.7 19.6 37.9 32.1 7.5 21.6 27.7 27.7 30.2 38.2 38.2 LOS by Move: D D B D C A C C C C D D HCM2kAvgQ: 2 5 1 6 9 1 3 10 10 1 7 7 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-35

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #4031: Southside Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 34***

52 0

Signal=Permit/Rights=Include 42 25 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/19/2010 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

218

74

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

42

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.502

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

14.0

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

13.9

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 112

417***

44

B

0

1! 0 0 78*** 55 Signal=Permit/Rights=Include

Street Name: Southside Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 19 May 2010 << Base Vol: 112 78 55 25 42 52 34 218 74 44 417 42 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 112 78 55 25 42 52 34 218 74 44 417 42 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 112 78 55 25 42 52 34 218 74 44 417 42 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 112 78 55 25 42 52 34 218 74 44 417 42 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 112 78 55 25 42 52 34 218 74 44 417 42 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 112 78 55 25 42 52 34 218 74 44 417 42 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.99 0.99 Lanes: 0.46 0.32 0.22 0.21 0.35 0.44 1.00 0.75 0.25 1.00 0.91 0.09 Final Sat.: 689 480 338 345 579 717 1805 1365 463 1805 1702 171 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.02 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.25 0.25 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 19.4 19.4 19.4 19.4 19.4 19.4 2.3 27.4 27.4 4.2 29.3 29.3 Volume/Cap: 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.50 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.50 0.50 Delay/Veh: 17.2 17.2 17.2 15.0 15.0 15.0 34.1 10.8 10.8 28.3 10.8 10.8 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 17.2 17.2 17.2 15.0 15.0 15.0 34.1 10.8 10.8 28.3 10.8 10.8 LOS by Move: B B B B B B C B B C B B HCM2kAvgQ: 4 4 4 2 2 2 1 3 3 1 6 6 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-36

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #4031: Southside Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 54

32 0

Signal=Permit/Rights=Include 38 34 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/19/2010 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

433***

86

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

11

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.484

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

12.5

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

12.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 61

254

52***

B

0

1! 0 0 52*** 48 Signal=Permit/Rights=Include

Street Name: Southside Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 19 May 2010 << Base Vol: 61 52 48 34 38 32 54 433 86 52 254 11 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 61 52 48 34 38 32 54 433 86 52 254 11 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 61 52 48 34 38 32 54 433 86 52 254 11 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 61 52 48 34 38 32 54 433 86 52 254 11 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 61 52 48 34 38 32 54 433 86 52 254 11 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 61 52 48 34 38 32 54 433 86 52 254 11 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.98 0.98 0.95 0.99 0.99 Lanes: 0.38 0.32 0.30 0.33 0.36 0.31 1.00 0.83 0.17 1.00 0.96 0.04 Final Sat.: 598 510 470 534 597 502 1805 1546 307 1805 1810 78 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.28 0.28 0.03 0.14 0.14 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 12.7 6.7 34.8 34.8 3.6 31.6 31.6 Volume/Cap: 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.27 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.27 0.27 Delay/Veh: 21.9 21.9 21.9 20.4 20.4 20.4 25.1 7.7 7.7 30.7 8.0 8.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 21.9 21.9 21.9 20.4 20.4 20.4 25.1 7.7 7.7 30.7 8.0 8.0 LOS by Move: C C C C C C C A A C A A HCM2kAvgQ: 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 6 6 2 3 3 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-37

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (AM)

Intersection #4370: Fairview Rd and Cielo Vista Dr/ Proj Entrance (Signalized) Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 17

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 6 142 0 0 1 0 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/20/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

28

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.031

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

1.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

1.3

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

A

1 0 1 0 0 12 217 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Cielo Vista Dr/Proj Entrance (Sig Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 20 May 2010 << Base Vol: 12 217 0 0 142 6 17 0 28 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 12 217 0 0 142 6 17 0 28 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 12 217 0 0 142 6 17 0 28 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 12 217 0 0 142 6 17 0 28 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 12 217 0 0 142 6 17 0 28 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 148 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 386 xxxx 145 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1446 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 621 xxxx 908 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1446 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 617 xxxx 908 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.01 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.03 xxxx 0.03 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 7.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 11.0 xxxx 9.1 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * B * A * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 9.8 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * A * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 21:52:59 2010

Page 61-38

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Existing (PM)

Intersection #4370: Fairview Rd and Cielo Vista Dr/ Proj Entrance (Signalized) Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 13

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 14 264 0 0 1 0 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/20/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

22

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.028

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

1.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

1.3

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

B

1 0 1 0 0 30 119 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Cielo Vista Dr/Proj Entrance (Sig Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 20 May 2010 << Base Vol: 30 119 0 0 264 14 13 0 22 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 30 119 0 0 264 14 13 0 22 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 30 119 0 0 264 14 13 0 22 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 30 119 0 0 264 14 13 0 22 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 30 119 0 0 264 14 13 0 22 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 278 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 450 xxxx 271 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1296 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 571 xxxx 773 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1296 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 561 xxxx 773 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.02 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.02 xxxx 0.03 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 7.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 11.6 xxxx 9.8 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * B * A * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 10.5 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

 Project Conditions 

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-1

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #1274: Fairview Rd and Union Rd ext. [Future Intersection] Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 0

0 0

Signal=Protect/Rights=Include 172 0*** 0 1 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

0 0

0

0

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.161

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

0.0

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

0.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 0

0

0

A

0

1 0 0 305*** 0 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Union Rd ext. Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 234 0 0 148 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 234 0 0 148 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 71 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 305 0 0 172 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 305 0 0 172 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 305 0 0 172 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 305 0 0 172 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 0 1900 0 0 1900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** Green Time: 0.0 100 0.0 0.0 xxxx 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: A A A A A A A A A A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-2

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #1274: Fairview Rd and Union Rd ext. [Future Intersection] Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 0

0 0

Signal=Protect/Rights=Include 359*** 0 0 1 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

0 0

0

0

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.189

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

0.0

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

0.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 0***

0

0

A

0

1 0 0 179 0 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Union Rd ext. Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 132 0 0 278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 132 0 0 278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 47 0 0 81 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 179 0 0 359 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 179 0 0 359 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 179 0 0 359 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 179 0 0 359 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 0 1900 0 0 1900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** Green Time: 0.0 xxxx 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: A A A A A A A A A A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-3

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #1449: Hwy 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 23***

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 36 246 80*** 1 0 2 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/8/2010 85

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

77

24

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

174

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.522

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

23.8

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

24.9

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

226***

27

C

1 0 2 0 1 115 600*** 11 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Hwy 25 Bypass Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 114 590 11 79 243 36 23 70 24 27 206 172 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 114 590 11 79 243 36 23 70 24 27 206 172 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 1 10 0 1 3 0 0 7 0 0 20 2 Initial Fut: 115 600 11 80 246 36 23 77 24 27 226 174 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 115 600 11 80 246 36 23 77 24 27 226 174 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 115 600 11 80 246 36 23 77 24 27 226 174 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 115 600 11 80 246 36 23 77 24 27 226 174 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.95 0.94 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.52 0.48 1.00 0.56 0.44 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 2653 827 1805 1004 773 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.17 0.01 0.04 0.07 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.23 0.23 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 16.6 27.1 40.2 7.2 17.7 19.8 2.1 25.6 25.6 13.2 36.7 36.7 Volume/Cap: 0.33 0.52 0.01 0.52 0.33 0.10 0.52 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.52 0.52 Delay/Veh: 30.0 24.1 11.9 40.5 28.8 25.7 51.8 21.4 21.4 31.0 18.4 18.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 30.0 24.1 11.9 40.5 28.8 25.7 51.8 21.4 21.4 31.0 18.4 18.4 LOS by Move: C C B D C C D C C C B B HCM2kAvgQ: 3 7 0 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 8 8 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-4

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #1449: Hwy 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 36***

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 33 694 262*** 1 0 2 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/8/2010 85

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

319

55

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

83

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.543

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

28.3

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

26.0

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

247***

30

C

1 0 2 0 1 132 437*** 45 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Hwy 25 Bypass Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 131 430 45 260 682 33 36 296 54 30 234 82 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 131 430 45 260 682 33 36 296 54 30 234 82 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 1 7 0 2 12 0 0 23 1 0 13 1 Initial Fut: 132 437 45 262 694 33 36 319 55 30 247 83 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 132 437 45 262 694 33 36 319 55 30 247 83 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 132 437 45 262 694 33 36 319 55 30 247 83 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 132 437 45 262 694 33 36 319 55 30 247 83 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.96 0.96 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.71 0.29 1.00 0.75 0.25 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 3011 519 1805 1368 460 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.12 0.03 0.15 0.19 0.02 0.02 0.11 0.11 0.02 0.18 0.18 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 11.5 18.9 23.2 22.7 30.2 33.3 3.1 27.1 27.1 4.3 28.2 28.2 Volume/Cap: 0.54 0.54 0.10 0.54 0.54 0.05 0.54 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.54 0.54 Delay/Veh: 36.8 30.0 23.2 28.0 22.4 16.1 49.2 22.2 22.2 41.2 24.1 24.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 36.8 30.0 23.2 28.0 22.4 16.1 49.2 22.2 22.2 41.2 24.1 24.1 LOS by Move: D C C C C B D C C D C C HCM2kAvgQ: 3 5 1 6 8 1 2 4 4 1 8 8 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-5

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #1550: Valleyview Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 28

108 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 11 2 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/10/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

49

27

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

13

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.181

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

5.7

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

5.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 94

163

1

B

0

1! 0 0 12 4 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 10 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 94 12 4 2 11 108 28 45 27 1 162 13 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 94 12 4 2 11 108 28 45 27 1 162 13 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 Initial Fut: 94 12 4 2 11 108 28 49 27 1 163 13 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 94 12 4 2 11 108 28 49 27 1 163 13 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 94 12 4 2 11 108 28 49 27 1 163 13 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 350 297 38 252 297 163 176 xxxx xxxxx 76 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 609 618 1040 706 618 887 1412 xxxx xxxxx 1536 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 519 606 1040 682 605 887 1412 xxxx xxxxx 1536 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.18 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.12 0.02 xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx 7.3 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 537 xxxxx xxxx 847 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 0.8 xxxxx xxxxx 0.5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx 13.4 xxxxx xxxxx 10.0 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * B * * A * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 13.4 10.0 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: B A * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-6

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #1550: Valleyview Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 113

53 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 21 19 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/2/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

209

107

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

16

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.262

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

5.5

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

5.5

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 85

113

3

C

0

1! 0 0 16 4 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 2 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 85 16 4 19 21 53 113 207 107 3 109 16 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 85 16 4 19 21 53 113 207 107 3 109 16 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 0 Initial Fut: 85 16 4 19 21 53 113 209 107 3 113 16 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 85 16 4 19 21 53 113 209 107 3 113 16 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 85 16 4 19 21 53 113 209 107 3 113 16 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 653 624 158 458 661 113 129 xxxx xxxxx 316 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 384 405 893 517 385 945 1469 xxxx xxxxx 1256 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 325 373 893 468 355 945 1469 xxxx xxxxx 1256 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.26 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.08 xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 7.7 xxxx xxxxx 7.9 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 340 xxxxx xxxx 597 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 1.3 xxxxx xxxxx 0.5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx 20.3 xxxxx xxxxx 12.1 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * C * * B * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 20.3 12.1 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C B * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-7

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #1551: Valley View Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 0

0 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 0 0 0 0 0 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/25/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

242***

43

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.689

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

14.1

1

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

14.1

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 83***

471

55***

B

0

1! 0 0 0 29 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 25 May 2010 << Base Vol: 83 0 29 0 0 0 0 236 43 55 454 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 83 0 29 0 0 0 0 236 43 55 454 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 17 0 Initial Fut: 83 0 29 0 0 0 0 242 43 55 471 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 83 0 29 0 0 0 0 242 43 55 471 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 83 0 29 0 0 0 0 242 43 55 471 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 83 0 29 0 0 0 0 242 43 55 471 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.74 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.10 0.90 0.00 Final Sat.: 432 0 151 0 0 0 0 674 775 80 683 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.19 xxxx 0.19 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.36 0.06 0.69 0.69 xxxx Crit Moves: **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 9.8 0.0 9.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.7 7.5 17.1 17.1 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 9.8 0.0 9.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.7 7.5 17.1 17.1 0.0 LOS by Move: A * A * * * * B A C C * ApproachDel: 9.8 xxxxxx 10.3 17.1 Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 9.8 xxxxxx 10.3 17.1 LOS by Appr: A * B C AllWayAvgQ: 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.1 2.0 2.0 2.0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-8

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #1551: Valley View Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 0

0 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 0 0 0 0 0 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/27/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

456***

64

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.663

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

13.9

1

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

13.9

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 69***

309

32***

B

0

1! 0 0 0 66 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 27 May 2010 << Base Vol: 69 0 66 0 0 0 0 436 64 32 298 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 69 0 66 0 0 0 0 436 64 32 298 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 11 0 Initial Fut: 69 0 66 0 0 0 0 456 64 32 309 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 69 0 66 0 0 0 0 456 64 32 309 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 69 0 66 0 0 0 0 456 64 32 309 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 69 0 66 0 0 0 0 456 64 32 309 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.51 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.09 0.91 0.00 Final Sat.: 303 0 290 0 0 0 0 688 794 66 642 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.23 xxxx 0.23 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.66 0.08 0.48 0.48 xxxx Crit Moves: **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 10.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.2 7.6 12.4 12.4 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 10.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.2 7.6 12.4 12.4 0.0 LOS by Move: B * B * * * * C A B B * ApproachDel: 10.0 xxxxxx 16.0 12.4 Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 10.0 xxxxxx 16.0 12.4 LOS by Appr: B * C B AllWayAvgQ: 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.9 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-9

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #2210: McCray St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 39***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 33 127*** 43 1 0 1 0 1

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/3/2010 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

0 1

133

8

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

79***

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.357

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

23.8

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

25.3

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 15***

257

4

C

0

1 1 0 51 6 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: McCray St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 3 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 15 51 6 42 127 33 39 128 8 4 243 75 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 15 51 6 42 127 33 39 128 8 4 243 75 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 14 4 Initial Fut: 15 51 6 43 127 33 39 133 8 4 257 79 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 15 51 6 43 127 33 39 133 8 4 257 79 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 15 51 6 43 127 33 39 133 8 4 257 79 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 15 51 6 43 127 33 39 133 8 4 257 79 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.97 0.97 Lanes: 1.00 1.79 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.43 1.48 0.09 1.00 0.76 0.24 Final Sat.: 1805 3178 374 1805 1900 1615 768 2620 158 1805 1402 431 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.00 0.18 0.18 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 2.1 7.6 7.6 11.3 16.9 29.7 12.8 12.8 12.8 46.2 46.2 46.2 Volume/Cap: 0.36 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.36 0.06 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.00 0.36 0.36 Delay/Veh: 48.4 38.6 38.6 35.6 32.5 20.7 35.3 35.3 35.3 10.7 13.3 13.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 48.4 38.6 38.6 35.6 32.5 20.7 35.3 35.3 35.3 10.7 13.3 13.3 LOS by Move: D D D D C C D D D B B B HCM2kAvgQ: 0 1 1 1 3 1 3 3 3 0 6 6 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-10

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #2210: McCray St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 46

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 68 235*** 111 1 0 1 0 1

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/9/2010 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

0 1

201

30***

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

138***

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.463

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

27.6

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

27.9

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 21***

196

8

C

0

1 1 0 78 7 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: McCray St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 9 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 21 78 7 107 235 68 46 185 30 8 187 136 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 21 78 7 107 235 68 46 185 30 8 187 136 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 16 0 0 9 2 Initial Fut: 21 78 7 111 235 68 46 201 30 8 196 138 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 21 78 7 111 235 68 46 201 30 8 196 138 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 21 78 7 111 235 68 46 201 30 8 196 138 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 21 78 7 111 235 68 46 201 30 8 196 138 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.94 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 1.84 0.16 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.33 1.45 0.22 1.00 0.59 0.41 Final Sat.: 1805 3273 294 1805 1900 1615 585 2557 382 1805 1046 736 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.12 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.19 0.19 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 2.3 7.3 7.3 19.0 24.0 39.3 15.3 15.3 15.3 36.4 36.4 36.4 Volume/Cap: 0.46 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.46 0.10 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.01 0.46 0.46 Delay/Veh: 50.6 39.4 39.4 30.3 28.3 15.0 34.2 34.2 34.2 16.0 20.1 20.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 50.6 39.4 39.4 30.3 28.3 15.0 34.2 34.2 34.2 16.0 20.1 20.1 LOS by Move: D D D C C B C C C B C C HCM2kAvgQ: 1 1 1 3 6 1 4 4 4 0 7 7 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-11

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #2218: Memorial St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 45

46 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 130 38*** 1 0 1 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/26/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 1

135***

75

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

98

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.650

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

14.2

1

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

14.2

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 92***

297***

49

B

1

0 1 0 154 75 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Memorial St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 26 May 2010 << Base Vol: 92 154 75 38 130 46 45 128 75 49 275 98 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 92 154 75 38 130 46 45 128 75 49 275 98 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 22 0 Initial Fut: 92 154 75 38 130 46 45 135 75 49 297 98 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 92 154 75 38 130 46 45 135 75 49 297 98 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 92 154 75 38 130 46 45 135 75 49 297 98 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 92 154 75 38 130 46 45 135 75 49 297 98 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.57 0.96 0.47 0.36 1.21 0.43 0.25 0.75 1.00 0.14 0.86 1.00 Final Sat.: 275 483 244 166 585 214 124 371 555 75 457 594 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.33 0.32 0.31 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.36 0.36 0.14 0.65 0.65 0.17 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 13.2 12.5 11.9 11.9 11.5 11.1 13.3 13.3 9.7 20.0 20.0 9.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 13.2 12.5 11.9 11.9 11.5 11.1 13.3 13.3 9.7 20.0 20.0 9.6 LOS by Move: B B B B B B B B A C C A ApproachDel: 12.5 11.5 12.2 17.7 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 12.5 11.5 12.2 17.7 LOS by Appr: B B B C AllWayAvgQ: 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.1 1.6 1.6 0.2 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-12

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #2218: Memorial St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 21

16 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 112 52*** 1 0 1 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/26/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 1

310***

145

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

61

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.585

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

13.1

1

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

13.1

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 48***

211***

36

B

1

0 1 0 106 60 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Memorial St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 26 May 2010 << Base Vol: 48 106 60 52 112 16 21 285 145 36 197 61 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 48 106 60 52 112 16 21 285 145 36 197 61 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 14 0 Initial Fut: 48 106 60 52 112 16 21 310 145 36 211 61 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 48 106 60 52 112 16 21 310 145 36 211 61 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 48 106 60 52 112 16 21 310 145 36 211 61 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 48 106 60 52 112 16 21 310 145 36 211 61 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.45 0.99 0.56 0.58 1.24 0.18 0.06 0.94 1.00 0.15 0.85 1.00 Final Sat.: 214 490 291 270 602 88 36 530 633 78 460 602 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.22 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.58 0.58 0.23 0.46 0.46 0.10 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 11.7 11.2 10.7 11.5 11.1 10.9 16.9 16.9 9.7 14.2 14.2 9.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 11.7 11.2 10.7 11.5 11.1 10.9 16.9 16.9 9.7 14.2 14.2 9.0 LOS by Move: B B B B B B C C A B B A ApproachDel: 11.2 11.2 14.7 13.2 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11.2 11.2 14.7 13.2 LOS by Appr: B B B B AllWayAvgQ: 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.2 1.2 0.3 0.8 0.8 0.1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-13

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #2242: Fairview Rd and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 117

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 95 285 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/18/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

38

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.352

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.3

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

C

1 0 1 0 0 53 436 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 18 May 2010 << Base Vol: 27 416 0 0 278 95 117 0 30 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 27 416 0 0 278 95 117 0 30 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 26 20 0 0 7 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 53 436 0 0 285 95 117 0 38 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 53 436 0 0 285 95 117 0 38 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 53 436 0 0 285 95 117 0 38 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 380 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 827 xxxx 285 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1190 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 344 xxxx 759 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1190 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 332 xxxx 759 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.04 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.35 xxxx 0.05 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.5 xxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 21.6 xxxx 10.0 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * C * A * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 18.8 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * C * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-14

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #2242: Fairview Rd and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 92

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 141 306 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/18/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

55

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.213

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

2.9

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

2.9

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

B

1 0 1 0 0 58 208 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 18 May 2010 << Base Vol: 41 195 0 0 284 141 92 0 26 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 41 195 0 0 284 141 92 0 26 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 17 13 0 0 22 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 58 208 0 0 306 141 92 0 55 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 58 208 0 0 306 141 92 0 55 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 58 208 0 0 306 141 92 0 55 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 447 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 630 xxxx 306 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1124 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 449 xxxx 739 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1124 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 431 xxxx 739 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.05 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.21 xxxx 0.07 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.8 xxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.4 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 15.6 xxxx 10.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * C * B * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 13.6 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-15

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #2243: Fairview Rd and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 117***

95 1

Signal=Protect/Rights=Include 283 0*** 0 1 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/18/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

0

31

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.292

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

9.6

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

9.7

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 31

0

0

A

0

1 0 0 432*** 0 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 18 May 2010 << Base Vol: 27 416 0 0 278 95 117 0 30 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 27 416 0 0 278 95 117 0 30 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 4 16 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 31 432 0 0 283 95 117 0 31 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 31 432 0 0 283 95 117 0 31 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 31 432 0 0 283 95 117 0 31 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 31 432 0 0 283 95 117 0 31 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1805 1900 0 0 1900 1615 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 8.0 77.8 0.0 0.0 69.8 69.8 22.2 0.0 22.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.21 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.08 0.29 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 43.8 3.3 0.0 0.0 5.4 4.9 32.8 0.0 31.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 43.8 3.3 0.0 0.0 5.4 4.9 32.8 0.0 31.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: D A A A A A C A C A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 1 4 0 0 3 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-16

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #2243: Fairview Rd and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 92***

141 1

Signal=Protect/Rights=Include 302*** 0 0 1 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/18/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

0

30

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.234

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

15.2

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

11.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 43***

0

0

B

0

1 0 0 206 0 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 18 May 2010 << Base Vol: 41 195 0 0 284 141 92 0 26 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 41 195 0 0 284 141 92 0 26 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 2 11 0 0 18 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 43 206 0 0 302 141 92 0 30 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 43 206 0 0 302 141 92 0 30 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 43 206 0 0 302 141 92 0 30 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 43 206 0 0 302 141 92 0 30 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1805 1900 0 0 1900 1615 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.09 0.05 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 10.2 78.2 0.0 0.0 68.0 68.0 21.8 0.0 21.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.23 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.13 0.23 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 42.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 6.2 5.7 32.5 0.0 31.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 42.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 6.2 5.7 32.5 0.0 31.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: D A A A A A C A C A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 1 2 0 0 3 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-17

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #2245: Fairview Rd and Santa Ana Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 60

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 74 253 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/13/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

73

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.210

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

2.9

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

2.9

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

B

1 0 1 0 0 114 428 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Santa Ana Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 13 May 2010 << Base Vol: 109 417 0 0 249 74 60 0 71 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 109 417 0 0 249 74 60 0 71 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 5 11 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 114 428 0 0 253 74 60 0 73 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 114 428 0 0 253 74 60 0 73 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 114 428 0 0 253 74 60 0 73 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 327 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 909 xxxx 253 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1244 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 308 xxxx 791 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1244 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 286 xxxx 791 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.09 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.21 xxxx 0.09 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.8 xxxx 0.3 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 20.9 xxxx 10.0 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * C * B * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.9 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-18

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #2245: Fairview Rd and Santa Ana Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 78

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 81 355 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/13/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

69

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.205

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

2.9

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

2.9

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

B

1 0 1 0 0 63 238 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Santa Ana Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 13 May 2010 << Base Vol: 60 231 0 0 342 81 78 0 63 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 60 231 0 0 342 81 78 0 63 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 3 7 0 0 13 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 63 238 0 0 355 81 78 0 69 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 63 238 0 0 355 81 78 0 69 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 63 238 0 0 355 81 78 0 69 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 436 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 719 xxxx 355 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1134 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 398 xxxx 693 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1134 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 381 xxxx 693 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.06 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.20 xxxx 0.10 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.8 xxxx 0.3 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.4 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 16.9 xxxx 10.8 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * C * B * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.0 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-19

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #2248: Fairview Rd and McCloskey Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 32

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 39 300 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/12/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

0

37

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1!

Critical V/C:

0.108

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

2.0

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

2.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

B

1 0 1 0 0 99 392 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd McCloskey Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 12 May 2010 << Base Vol: 98 382 0 0 297 39 32 0 37 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 98 382 0 0 297 39 32 0 37 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 1 10 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 99 392 0 0 300 39 32 0 37 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 99 392 0 0 300 39 32 0 37 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 99 392 0 0 300 39 32 0 37 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 339 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 890 890 300 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1231 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 316 284 744 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1231 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 296 261 744 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.08 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.11 0.00 0.05 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.3 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 438 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 0.6 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 14.8 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * B * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.8 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-20

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #2248: Fairview Rd and McCloskey Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 52

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 30 325 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/12/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

0

100

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1!

Critical V/C:

0.139

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.0

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

B

1 0 1 0 0 29 178 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd McCloskey Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 12 May 2010 << Base Vol: 28 171 0 0 314 30 52 0 99 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 28 171 0 0 314 30 52 0 99 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 1 7 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 29 178 0 0 325 30 52 0 100 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 29 178 0 0 325 30 52 0 100 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 29 178 0 0 325 30 52 0 100 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 355 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 561 561 325 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1215 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 492 439 721 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1215 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 483 429 721 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.02 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.11 0.00 0.14 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.0 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 617 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 1.0 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 12.7 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * B * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 12.7 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-21

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #2331: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 114

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 58 259 66*** 1 0 3 0 2

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/9/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

2 0

140

151***

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

61

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.247

2

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

26.4

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

28.1

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

205

120***

C

2 0 3 0 1 143 448*** 35 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 9 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 134 437 35 65 255 58 114 136 148 120 194 59 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 134 437 35 65 255 58 114 136 148 120 194 59 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 9 11 0 1 4 0 0 4 3 0 11 2 Initial Fut: 143 448 35 66 259 58 114 140 151 120 205 61 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 143 448 35 66 259 58 114 140 151 120 205 61 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 143 448 35 66 259 58 114 140 151 120 205 61 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 143 448 35 66 259 58 114 140 151 120 205 61 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 3610 5700 1615 3610 5700 1615 3610 3800 1615 1805 3800 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.04 0.09 0.07 0.05 0.04 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 18.3 31.8 58.8 7.4 21.0 39.0 18.0 21.8 40.1 26.9 30.8 38.2 Volume/Cap: 0.22 0.25 0.04 0.25 0.22 0.09 0.18 0.17 0.23 0.25 0.18 0.10 Delay/Veh: 34.9 25.3 8.7 44.2 32.8 19.4 34.8 31.8 20.0 28.9 25.4 19.9 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 34.9 25.3 8.7 44.2 32.8 19.4 34.8 31.8 20.0 28.9 25.4 19.9 LOS by Move: C C A D C B C C B C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 2 3 0 1 2 1 1 2 3 3 2 1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-22

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #2331: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 124

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 104 576*** 163 1 0 3 0 2

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/9/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

2 0

367***

232

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

26

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.413

2

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

33.4

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

30.1

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

274

181***

C

2 0 3 0 1 238*** 403 111 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 9 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 232 395 111 160 563 104 124 354 222 181 267 24 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 232 395 111 160 563 104 124 354 222 181 267 24 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 6 8 0 3 13 0 0 13 10 0 7 2 Initial Fut: 238 403 111 163 576 104 124 367 232 181 274 26 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 238 403 111 163 576 104 124 367 232 181 274 26 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 238 403 111 163 576 104 124 367 232 181 274 26 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 238 403 111 163 576 104 124 367 232 181 274 26 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 3610 5700 1615 3610 5700 1615 3610 3800 1615 1805 3800 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.10 0.06 0.03 0.10 0.14 0.10 0.07 0.02 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 15.9 24.6 48.9 15.7 24.4 39.8 15.4 23.4 39.3 24.3 32.2 48.0 Volume/Cap: 0.41 0.29 0.14 0.29 0.41 0.16 0.22 0.41 0.37 0.41 0.22 0.03 Delay/Veh: 38.3 30.7 14.1 37.5 32.0 19.5 37.3 32.8 21.9 32.5 24.8 13.8 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 38.3 30.7 14.1 37.5 32.0 19.5 37.3 32.8 21.9 32.5 24.8 13.8 LOS by Move: D C B D C B D C C C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 4 3 2 2 5 2 2 5 5 5 3 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-23

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #2347: Fairview Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 222***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 146 136 0*** 1 0 1 0 0

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/19/2010 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

0

45

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.303

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

11.5

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

11.4

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 71

0

0

B

0

1 0 0 268*** 0 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 19 May 2010 << Base Vol: 47 223 0 0 121 146 222 0 37 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 47 223 0 0 121 146 222 0 37 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 24 45 0 0 15 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 71 268 0 0 136 146 222 0 45 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 71 268 0 0 136 146 222 0 45 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 71 268 0 0 136 146 222 0 45 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 71 268 0 0 136 146 222 0 45 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1900 1900 0 0 1900 1900 1900 0 1900 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.04 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.08 0.12 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 9.6 27.9 0.0 0.0 18.3 41.4 23.1 0.0 32.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.23 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.11 0.30 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 22.4 10.2 0.0 0.0 15.8 3.1 13.1 0.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 22.4 10.2 0.0 0.0 15.8 3.1 13.1 0.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: C B A A B A B A A A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 1 3 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-24

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #2347: Fairview Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 113***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 152 235*** 0 1 0 1 0 0

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/19/2010 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

0

59

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.255

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

14.2

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

10.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 64***

0

0

B

0

1 0 0 143 0 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 19 May 2010 << Base Vol: 48 113 0 0 184 152 113 0 32 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 48 113 0 0 184 152 113 0 32 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 16 30 0 0 51 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 64 143 0 0 235 152 113 0 59 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 64 143 0 0 235 152 113 0 59 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 64 143 0 0 235 152 113 0 59 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 64 143 0 0 235 152 113 0 59 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1900 1900 0 0 1900 1900 1900 0 1900 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.08 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 7.9 37.0 0.0 0.0 29.1 43.1 14.0 0.0 21.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.26 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.11 0.26 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 23.9 4.8 0.0 0.0 9.2 2.6 19.1 0.0 12.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 23.9 4.8 0.0 0.0 9.2 2.6 19.1 0.0 12.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: C A A A A A B A B A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 1 1 0 0 2 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-25

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #2367: Airline Hwy and Sunset Dr Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 40

34 1

Signal=Protect/Rights=Include 316 126*** 0 2 0 1

Signal=Permit Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/27/2010 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Permit Rights=Overlap

1 0

46

16

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

169

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.267

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

13.1

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

11.9

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 23

71***

27

B

0

1 1 0 439*** 29 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Airline Hwy Sunset Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 27 May 2010 << Base Vol: 23 416 29 126 308 34 40 46 16 27 71 169 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 23 416 29 126 308 34 40 46 16 27 71 169 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 23 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 23 439 29 126 316 34 40 46 16 27 71 169 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 23 439 29 126 316 34 40 46 16 27 71 169 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 23 439 29 126 316 34 40 46 16 27 71 169 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 23 439 29 126 316 34 40 46 16 27 71 169 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.88 0.12 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1900 3565 235 1900 3800 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.01 0.12 0.12 0.07 0.08 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.09 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 5.4 27.7 27.7 14.9 37.2 37.2 8.4 8.4 13.8 8.4 8.4 23.3 Volume/Cap: 0.13 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.13 0.03 0.15 0.17 0.04 0.10 0.27 0.23 Delay/Veh: 25.5 10.0 10.0 18.5 4.8 4.4 22.9 23.0 18.0 22.7 23.6 12.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 25.5 10.0 10.0 18.5 4.8 4.4 22.9 23.0 18.0 22.7 23.6 12.5 LOS by Move: C B B B A A C C B C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 1 3 3 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-26

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #2367: Airline Hwy and Sunset Dr Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 43

61 1

Signal=Protect/Rights=Include 610 204*** 0 2 0 1

Signal=Permit Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/3/2010 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Permit Rights=Overlap

1 0

59

21

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

224

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.364

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

14.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

11.5

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 38

87***

23

B

0

1 1 0 564*** 30 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Airline Hwy Sunset Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 3 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 38 549 30 204 584 61 43 59 21 23 87 224 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 38 549 30 204 584 61 43 59 21 23 87 224 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 15 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 38 564 30 204 610 61 43 59 21 23 87 224 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 38 564 30 204 610 61 43 59 21 23 87 224 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 38 564 30 204 610 61 43 59 21 23 87 224 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 38 564 30 204 610 61 43 59 21 23 87 224 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.90 0.10 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1900 3608 192 1900 3800 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.16 0.16 0.11 0.16 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.12 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 4.8 25.8 25.8 17.7 38.6 38.6 7.5 7.5 12.4 7.5 7.5 25.2 Volume/Cap: 0.25 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.25 0.05 0.18 0.25 0.05 0.10 0.36 0.28 Delay/Veh: 26.8 11.7 11.7 17.1 4.6 3.9 23.8 24.2 19.2 23.4 25.0 11.6 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 26.8 11.7 11.7 17.1 4.6 3.9 23.8 24.2 19.2 23.4 25.0 11.6 LOS by Move: C B B B A A C C B C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 1 4 4 3 2 0 1 1 0 0 2 3 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-27

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #2925: San Benito St and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 113***

161 1

Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap 0 133*** 0 0 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

3/4/2009 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

151

0

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

291

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.437

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

14.1

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

10.7

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 0

447***

0

B

0

0 0 0 0 0 Signal=Split/Rights=Include

Street Name: San Benito St Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 4 Mar 2009 << Base Vol: 0 0 0 133 0 161 113 147 0 0 436 291 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 133 0 161 113 147 0 0 436 291 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 11 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 133 0 161 113 151 0 0 447 291 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 133 0 161 113 151 0 0 447 291 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 133 0 161 113 151 0 0 447 291 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 133 0 161 113 151 0 0 447 291 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 1805 1900 0 0 1900 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.10 0.06 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.18 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.1 0.0 18.7 8.6 40.9 0.0 0.0 32.3 42.4 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.32 0.44 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.25 Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.4 0.0 16.2 24.7 3.3 0.0 0.0 8.7 3.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.4 0.0 16.2 24.7 3.3 0.0 0.0 8.7 3.3 LOS by Move: A A A C A B C A A A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 0 0 0 3 0 3 2 1 0 0 5 2 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-28

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #2925: San Benito St and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 152

89 1

Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap 0 127*** 0 0 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

3/4/2009 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

408***

0

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

144

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.335

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

8.8

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

10.6

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 0

221

0***

B

0

0 0 0 0 0 Signal=Split/Rights=Include

Street Name: San Benito St Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 4 Mar 2009 << Base Vol: 0 0 0 127 0 89 152 395 0 0 214 144 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 127 0 89 152 395 0 0 214 144 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 7 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 127 0 89 152 408 0 0 221 144 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 127 0 89 152 408 0 0 221 144 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 127 0 89 152 408 0 0 221 144 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 127 0 89 152 408 0 0 221 144 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 1805 1900 0 0 1900 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.06 0.08 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.09 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.6 0.0 28.7 16.1 38.4 0.0 0.0 22.3 34.9 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.00 0.12 0.31 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.15 Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.7 0.0 8.7 17.9 5.1 0.0 0.0 13.7 5.9 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.7 0.0 8.7 17.9 5.1 0.0 0.0 13.7 5.9 LOS by Move: A A A C A A B A A A B A HCM2kAvgQ: 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 4 0 0 3 1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-29

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #2942: Enterprise Rd and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 21

38 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 5 26 0 1 0 1

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/20/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

258

26

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

13

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.183

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.3

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 46

417

52

C

0

1 0 1 5 36 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Enterprise Rd Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 20 May 2010 << Base Vol: 46 5 36 26 5 38 21 243 26 52 373 13 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 46 5 36 26 5 38 21 243 26 52 373 13 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 44 0 Initial Fut: 46 5 36 26 5 38 21 258 26 52 417 13 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 46 5 36 26 5 38 21 258 26 52 417 13 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 46 5 36 26 5 38 21 258 26 52 417 13 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 849 834 258 855 847 417 430 xxxx xxxxx 284 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 283 306 786 281 301 640 1140 xxxx xxxxx 1290 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 251 288 786 253 284 640 1140 xxxx xxxxx 1290 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.18 0.02 0.05 0.10 0.02 0.06 0.02 xxxx xxxx 0.04 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 22.5 17.7 9.8 20.9 17.9 11.0 8.2 xxxx xxxxx 7.9 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: C C A C C B A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 17.0 15.2 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C C * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-30

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #2942: Enterprise Rd and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 66

24 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 2 30 0 1 0 1

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/20/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

604

61

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

33

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.244

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.4

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.4

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 40

260

48

C

0

1 0 1 3 33 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Enterprise Rd Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 20 May 2010 << Base Vol: 40 3 33 30 2 24 66 554 61 48 231 33 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 40 3 33 30 2 24 66 554 61 48 231 33 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 29 0 Initial Fut: 40 3 33 30 2 24 66 604 61 48 260 33 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 40 3 33 30 2 24 66 604 61 48 260 33 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 40 3 33 30 2 24 66 604 61 48 260 33 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1122 1125 604 1141 1153 260 293 xxxx xxxxx 665 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 185 207 502 180 199 784 1280 xxxx xxxxx 934 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 164 186 502 153 179 784 1280 xxxx xxxxx 934 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.24 0.02 0.07 0.20 0.01 0.03 0.05 xxxx xxxx 0.05 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.9 0.0 0.2 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.2 xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 33.9 24.7 12.7 34.2 25.3 9.7 8.0 xxxx xxxxx 9.1 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: D C B D D A A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 24.3 23.4 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C C * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-31

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #3072: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd and Hwy 156 Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 1***

5 0

Signal=Split/Rights=Include 12*** 36 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/8/2010 130

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

446

245

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

28

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.872

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

46.6

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

37.9

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 583***

788***

44

D

1

0 0 1 15 17 Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd Hwy 156 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 572 15 17 36 12 5 1 446 241 44 788 28 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 572 15 17 36 12 5 1 446 241 44 788 28 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 583 15 17 36 12 5 1 446 245 44 788 28 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 583 15 17 36 12 5 1 446 245 44 788 28 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 583 15 17 36 12 5 1 446 245 44 788 28 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 583 15 17 36 12 5 1 446 245 44 788 28 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.97 0.03 1.00 0.68 0.23 0.09 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.03 Final Sat.: 1767 45 1615 1232 411 171 1805 1900 1615 1805 1826 65 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.33 0.33 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.23 0.15 0.02 0.43 0.43 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 49.2 49.2 55.3 4.4 4.4 4.4 0.1 58.4 107.6 6.1 64.4 64.4 Volume/Cap: 0.87 0.87 0.02 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.52 0.18 0.52 0.87 0.87 Delay/Veh: 49.3 49.3 21.7 134.0 134 134.0 736.2 26.4 2.3 66.4 38.1 38.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 49.3 49.3 21.7 134.0 134 134.0 736.2 26.4 2.3 66.4 38.1 38.1 LOS by Move: D D C F F F F C A E D D HCM2kAvgQ: 25 25 0 4 4 4 0 12 2 2 31 31 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-32

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #3072: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd and Hwy 156 Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 5

4 0

Signal=Split/Rights=Include 66 126*** 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

6/8/2010 130

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

709***

426

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

36

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.737

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

42.0

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

31.0

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 305

622

29***

C

1

0 0 1 9*** 65 Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd Hwy 156 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 8 Jun 2010 << Base Vol: 298 9 65 126 66 4 5 709 413 29 622 36 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 298 9 65 126 66 4 5 709 413 29 622 36 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 305 9 65 126 66 4 5 709 426 29 622 36 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 305 9 65 126 66 4 5 709 426 29 622 36 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 305 9 65 126 66 4 5 709 426 29 622 36 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 305 9 65 126 66 4 5 709 426 29 622 36 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.99 0.99 Lanes: 0.97 0.03 1.00 0.64 0.34 0.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.05 Final Sat.: 1761 52 1615 1180 618 37 1805 1900 1615 1805 1782 103 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.17 0.17 0.04 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.37 0.26 0.02 0.35 0.35 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 30.5 30.5 33.4 18.8 18.8 18.8 0.5 65.8 96.3 2.8 68.1 68.1 Volume/Cap: 0.74 0.74 0.16 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.67 0.74 0.36 0.74 0.67 0.67 Delay/Veh: 52.7 52.7 37.6 63.6 63.6 63.6 191.2 28.3 6.1 115.8 24.4 24.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 52.7 52.7 37.6 63.6 63.6 63.6 191.2 28.3 6.1 115.8 24.4 24.4 LOS by Move: D D D E E E F C A F C C HCM2kAvgQ: 13 13 2 9 9 9 0 22 6 2 19 19 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-33

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #3337: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 101

131*** 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 24 58 0 1 0 1

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/12/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

115***

69

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

134***

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.351

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

10.9

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

10.9

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 90

70

7

B

0

0 1 0 189*** 5 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 12 May 2010 << Base Vol: 90 189 5 52 23 87 86 115 69 7 70 132 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 90 189 5 52 23 87 86 115 69 7 70 132 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 6 1 44 15 0 0 0 0 2 Initial Fut: 90 189 5 58 24 131 101 115 69 7 70 134 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 90 189 5 58 24 131 101 115 69 7 70 134 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 90 189 5 58 24 131 101 115 69 7 70 134 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 90 189 5 58 24 131 101 115 69 7 70 134 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.97 0.03 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 510 539 14 470 501 559 483 518 573 465 499 555 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.18 0.35 0.35 0.12 0.05 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.12 0.02 0.14 0.24 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 10.8 12.0 12.0 10.9 9.8 10.4 11.5 11.0 9.3 10.1 10.5 10.5 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 10.8 12.0 12.0 10.9 9.8 10.4 11.5 11.0 9.3 10.1 10.5 10.5 LOS by Move: B B B B A B B B A B B B ApproachDel: 11.6 10.5 10.8 10.5 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11.6 10.5 10.8 10.5 LOS by Appr: B B B B AllWayAvgQ: 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-34

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #3337: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 94

82 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 61 84*** 0 1 0 1

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/12/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

212***

215

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

63

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.394

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

11.7

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

11.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 114***

150***

7

B

0

0 1 0 49 8 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 12 May 2010 << Base Vol: 114 48 8 80 60 53 44 212 215 7 150 56 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 114 48 8 80 60 53 44 212 215 7 150 56 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 1 0 4 1 29 50 0 0 0 0 7 Initial Fut: 114 49 8 84 61 82 94 212 215 7 150 63 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 114 49 8 84 61 82 94 212 215 7 150 63 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 114 49 8 84 61 82 94 212 215 7 150 63 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 114 49 8 84 61 82 94 212 215 7 150 63 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.86 0.14 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 464 430 70 445 473 521 497 538 600 448 484 530 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.25 0.11 0.11 0.19 0.13 0.16 0.19 0.39 0.36 0.02 0.31 0.12 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 12.2 10.2 10.2 12.0 10.8 10.2 11.2 13.1 11.5 10.3 12.6 9.8 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 12.2 10.2 10.2 12.0 10.8 10.2 11.2 13.1 11.5 10.3 12.6 9.8 LOS by Move: B B B B B B B B B B B A ApproachDel: 11.6 11.0 12.1 11.8 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11.6 11.0 12.1 11.8 LOS by Appr: B B B B AllWayAvgQ: 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.5 0.0 0.4 0.1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-35

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #3430: Airline Hwy and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 98

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 150 145*** 106 1 0 1 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/13/2010 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

116

105***

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

201***

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.682

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

34.5

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

34.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

281

41

C

1 0 1 0 1 215*** 272 26 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 13 May 2010 << Base Vol: 198 249 22 106 137 150 98 116 99 40 281 201 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 198 249 22 106 137 150 98 116 99 40 281 201 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 17 23 4 0 8 0 0 0 6 1 0 0 Initial Fut: 215 272 26 106 145 150 98 116 105 41 281 201 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 215 272 26 106 145 150 98 116 105 41 281 201 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 215 272 26 106 145 150 98 116 105 41 281 201 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 215 272 26 106 145 150 98 116 105 41 281 201 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.94 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.52 0.48 1.00 0.58 0.42 Final Sat.: 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 1805 926 839 1805 1038 742 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.12 0.14 0.02 0.06 0.08 0.09 0.05 0.13 0.13 0.02 0.27 0.27 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 15.7 18.3 54.0 7.5 10.1 26.6 16.5 16.5 16.5 35.7 35.7 35.7 Volume/Cap: 0.68 0.70 0.03 0.70 0.68 0.31 0.30 0.68 0.68 0.06 0.68 0.68 Delay/Veh: 40.8 39.2 7.3 54.3 47.2 25.0 32.2 40.2 40.2 16.8 25.2 25.2 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 40.8 39.2 7.3 54.3 47.2 25.0 32.2 40.2 40.2 16.8 25.2 25.2 LOS by Move: D D A D D C C D D B C C HCM2kAvgQ: 6 7 0 4 5 3 3 7 7 1 12 12 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-36

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #3430: Airline Hwy and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 139

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 102 354*** 208 1 0 1 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/13/2010 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

240***

170

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

118

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.682

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

34.8

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

32.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

93***

28

C

1 0 1 0 1 97*** 205 31 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 13 May 2010 << Base Vol: 86 190 29 208 328 102 139 240 150 24 93 118 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 86 190 29 208 328 102 139 240 150 24 93 118 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 11 15 2 0 26 0 0 0 20 4 0 0 Initial Fut: 97 205 31 208 354 102 139 240 170 28 93 118 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 97 205 31 208 354 102 139 240 170 28 93 118 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 97 205 31 208 354 102 139 240 170 28 93 118 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 97 205 31 208 354 102 139 240 170 28 93 118 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.95 0.92 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.59 0.41 1.00 0.44 0.56 Final Sat.: 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 1805 1043 739 1805 767 973 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.05 0.11 0.02 0.12 0.19 0.06 0.08 0.23 0.23 0.02 0.12 0.12 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 7.1 15.3 31.3 16.4 24.6 54.9 30.3 30.3 30.3 16.0 16.0 16.0 Volume/Cap: 0.68 0.63 0.06 0.63 0.68 0.10 0.23 0.68 0.68 0.09 0.68 0.68 Delay/Veh: 53.1 38.8 19.6 38.1 32.9 7.3 21.6 28.9 28.9 31.0 40.8 40.8 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 53.1 38.8 19.6 38.1 32.9 7.3 21.6 28.9 28.9 31.0 40.8 40.8 LOS by Move: D D B D C A C C C C D D HCM2kAvgQ: 3 5 1 6 10 1 3 11 11 1 7 7 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-37

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #4031: Southside Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 34***

52 0

Signal=Permit/Rights=Include 42 26 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/19/2010 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

222

74

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

46

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.511

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

14.0

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

13.8

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 112

428***

44

B

0

1! 0 0 78*** 55 Signal=Permit/Rights=Include

Street Name: Southside Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 19 May 2010 << Base Vol: 112 78 55 25 42 52 34 218 74 44 417 42 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 112 78 55 25 42 52 34 218 74 44 417 42 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 11 4 Initial Fut: 112 78 55 26 42 52 34 222 74 44 428 46 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 112 78 55 26 42 52 34 222 74 44 428 46 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 112 78 55 26 42 52 34 222 74 44 428 46 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 112 78 55 26 42 52 34 222 74 44 428 46 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.99 0.99 Lanes: 0.46 0.32 0.22 0.22 0.35 0.43 1.00 0.75 0.25 1.00 0.90 0.10 Final Sat.: 690 481 339 354 573 709 1805 1372 457 1805 1690 182 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.02 0.16 0.16 0.02 0.25 0.25 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 19.1 19.1 19.1 19.1 19.1 19.1 2.2 27.8 27.8 4.2 29.7 29.7 Volume/Cap: 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.51 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.51 0.51 Delay/Veh: 17.6 17.6 17.6 15.3 15.3 15.3 34.9 10.6 10.6 28.3 10.7 10.7 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 17.6 17.6 17.6 15.3 15.3 15.3 34.9 10.6 10.6 28.3 10.7 10.7 LOS by Move: B B B B B B C B B C B B HCM2kAvgQ: 4 4 4 2 2 2 1 3 3 1 6 6 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-38

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #4031: Southside Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 54

32 0

Signal=Permit/Rights=Include 38 38 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/19/2010 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

446***

86

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

13

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.491

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

12.4

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

12.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 61

261

52***

B

0

1! 0 0 52*** 48 Signal=Permit/Rights=Include

Street Name: Southside Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 19 May 2010 << Base Vol: 61 52 48 34 38 32 54 433 86 52 254 11 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 61 52 48 34 38 32 54 433 86 52 254 11 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 13 0 0 7 2 Initial Fut: 61 52 48 38 38 32 54 446 86 52 261 13 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 61 52 48 38 38 32 54 446 86 52 261 13 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 61 52 48 38 38 32 54 446 86 52 261 13 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 61 52 48 38 38 32 54 446 86 52 261 13 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.95 0.98 0.98 0.95 0.99 0.99 Lanes: 0.38 0.32 0.30 0.35 0.35 0.30 1.00 0.84 0.16 1.00 0.95 0.05 Final Sat.: 599 511 471 570 570 480 1805 1555 300 1805 1797 90 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.03 0.29 0.29 0.03 0.15 0.15 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 12.4 12.4 12.4 12.4 12.4 12.4 6.6 35.0 35.0 3.5 32.0 32.0 Volume/Cap: 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.27 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.27 0.27 Delay/Veh: 22.1 22.1 22.1 20.8 20.8 20.8 25.3 7.6 7.6 30.9 7.8 7.8 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 22.1 22.1 22.1 20.8 20.8 20.8 25.3 7.6 7.6 30.9 7.8 7.8 LOS by Move: C C C C C C C A A C A A HCM2kAvgQ: 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 6 6 2 3 3 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-39

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (AM)

Intersection #4370: Fairview Rd and Cielo Vista Dr/ Proj Entrance (Signalized) Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 17

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 6 142 24 0 1 0 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/20/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

28

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

71

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.104

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

1.6

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

1.6

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

51

B

1 0 1 0 0 12 217 17 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Cielo Vista Dr/Proj Entrance (Sig Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 20 May 2010 << Base Vol: 12 217 0 0 142 6 17 0 28 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 12 217 0 0 142 6 17 0 28 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 17 24 0 0 0 0 0 51 0 71 Initial Fut: 12 217 17 24 142 6 17 0 28 51 0 71 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 12 217 17 24 142 6 17 0 28 51 0 71 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 12 217 17 24 142 6 17 0 28 51 0 71 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 7.1 xxxx 6.2 7.1 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 3.5 xxxx 3.3 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 148 xxxx xxxxx 234 xxxx xxxxx 478 xxxx 145 457 xxxx 226 Potent Cap.: 1446 xxxx xxxxx 1345 xxxx xxxxx 501 xxxx 908 518 xxxx 819 Move Cap.: 1446 xxxx xxxxx 1345 xxxx xxxxx 448 xxxx 908 492 xxxx 819 Volume/Cap: 0.01 xxxx xxxx 0.02 xxxx xxxx 0.04 xxxx 0.03 0.10 xxxx 0.09 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.0 xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 7.5 xxxx xxxxx 7.7 xxxx xxxxx 13.3 xxxx 9.1 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * A * * B * A * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 10.7 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Feb 15 16:20:14 2011

Page 64-40

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) ExistingPlusProject (PM)

Intersection #4370: Fairview Rd and Cielo Vista Dr/ Proj Entrance (Signalized) Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 13

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 14 264 81 0 1 0 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

5/20/2010 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

22

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

47

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.097

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

2.1

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

2.1

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

34

B

1 0 1 0 0 30 119 58 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Cielo Vista Dr/Proj Entrance (Sig Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: >> Count Date: 20 May 2010 << Base Vol: 30 119 0 0 264 14 13 0 22 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 30 119 0 0 264 14 13 0 22 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ProjectTrip: 0 0 58 81 0 0 0 0 0 34 0 47 Initial Fut: 30 119 58 81 264 14 13 0 22 34 0 47 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 30 119 58 81 264 14 13 0 22 34 0 47 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 30 119 58 81 264 14 13 0 22 34 0 47 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 7.1 xxxx 6.2 7.1 xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 3.5 xxxx 3.3 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 278 xxxx xxxxx 177 xxxx xxxxx 665 xxxx 271 652 xxxx 148 Potent Cap.: 1296 xxxx xxxxx 1411 xxxx xxxxx 377 xxxx 773 384 xxxx 904 Move Cap.: 1296 xxxx xxxxx 1411 xxxx xxxxx 335 xxxx 773 350 xxxx 904 Volume/Cap: 0.02 xxxx xxxx 0.06 xxxx xxxx 0.04 xxxx 0.03 0.10 xxxx 0.05 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 7.8 xxxx xxxxx 7.7 xxxx xxxxx 16.2 xxxx 9.8 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * A * * C * A * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 12.2 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

Cumulative without Project Conditions 

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-1

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #1274: Fairview Rd and Union Rd ext. [Future Intersection] Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 183***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 136 375*** 0 1 0 2 0 0

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

0

181

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.352

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

17.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

12.3

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 170***

0

0

B

0

2 0 0 299 0 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Union Rd ext. Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 170 299 0 0 375 136 183 0 181 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 170 299 0 0 375 136 183 0 181 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 170 299 0 0 375 136 183 0 181 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 170 299 0 0 375 136 183 0 181 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 170 299 0 0 375 136 183 0 181 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 170 299 0 0 375 136 183 0 181 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 0 0 3610 1615 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.09 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 16.0 33.7 0.0 0.0 17.7 35.0 17.3 0.0 33.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.35 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.14 0.35 0.00 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 18.2 6.3 0.0 0.0 16.8 5.8 17.3 0.0 6.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 18.2 6.3 0.0 0.0 16.8 5.8 17.3 0.0 6.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: B A A A B A B A A A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 3 1 0 0 3 1 3 0 2 0 0 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-2

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #1274: Fairview Rd and Union Rd ext. [Future Intersection] Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 172***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 219 459*** 0 1 0 2 0 0

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

0

248

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.419

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

17.5

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

12.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 241***

0

0

B

0

2 0 0 383 0 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Union Rd ext. Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 241 383 0 0 459 219 172 0 248 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 241 383 0 0 459 219 172 0 248 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 241 383 0 0 459 219 172 0 248 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 241 383 0 0 459 219 172 0 248 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 241 383 0 0 459 219 172 0 248 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 241 383 0 0 459 219 172 0 248 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 0 0 3610 1615 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.14 0.10 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 19.1 37.3 0.0 0.0 18.2 31.9 13.7 0.0 32.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.42 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.26 0.42 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 16.6 4.8 0.0 0.0 16.9 7.8 20.5 0.0 7.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 16.6 4.8 0.0 0.0 16.9 7.8 20.5 0.0 7.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: B A A A B A C A A A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 4 2 0 0 4 2 3 0 3 0 0 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-3

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #1449: Hwy 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 51***

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 71 1130*** 111 1 0 2 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 85

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

235

166

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

211

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.939

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

50.5

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

38.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

344***

138

D

1 0 2 0 1 280*** 1135 111 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Hwy 25 Bypass Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 280 1135 111 111 1130 71 51 235 166 138 344 211 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 280 1135 111 111 1130 71 51 235 166 138 344 211 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 280 1135 111 111 1130 71 51 235 166 138 344 211 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 280 1135 111 111 1130 71 51 235 166 138 344 211 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 280 1135 111 111 1130 71 51 235 166 138 344 211 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 280 1135 111 111 1130 71 51 235 166 138 344 211 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.89 0.89 0.95 0.94 0.94 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.17 0.83 1.00 0.62 0.38 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 1984 1402 1805 1111 681 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.16 0.31 0.07 0.06 0.31 0.04 0.03 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.31 0.31 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 14.0 35.5 47.5 6.9 28.3 30.9 2.6 18.6 18.6 12.0 28.0 28.0 Volume/Cap: 0.94 0.75 0.12 0.75 0.94 0.12 0.94 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.94 0.94 Delay/Veh: 71.1 23.3 9.0 57.8 41.3 18.1 140.5 30.2 30.2 36.3 50.6 50.6 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 71.1 23.3 9.0 57.8 41.3 18.1 140.5 30.2 30.2 36.3 50.6 50.6 LOS by Move: E C A E D B F C C D D D HCM2kAvgQ: 9 14 1 3 18 1 4 6 6 4 19 19 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-4

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #1449: Hwy 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 90***

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 81 1357 312*** 1 0 2 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 85

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

489

337

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

124

1

1

Critical V/C:

1.026

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

70.6

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

63.4

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

371***

123

E

1 0 2 0 1 302 1400*** 129 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Hwy 25 Bypass Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 302 1400 129 312 1357 81 90 489 337 123 371 124 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 302 1400 129 312 1357 81 90 489 337 123 371 124 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 302 1400 129 312 1357 81 90 489 337 123 371 124 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 302 1400 129 312 1357 81 90 489 337 123 371 124 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 302 1400 129 312 1357 81 90 489 337 123 371 124 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 302 1400 129 312 1357 81 90 489 337 123 371 124 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.89 0.89 0.95 0.96 0.96 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.18 0.82 1.00 0.75 0.25 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 2007 1383 1805 1370 458 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.17 0.39 0.08 0.17 0.38 0.05 0.05 0.24 0.24 0.07 0.27 0.27 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 14.3 32.1 37.9 14.3 32.1 36.3 4.1 20.8 20.8 5.8 22.4 22.4 Volume/Cap: 0.99 1.03 0.18 1.03 0.99 0.12 1.03 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.03 1.03 Delay/Veh: 85.3 57.7 14.3 93.9 49.3 14.8 143.9 62.8 62.8 120.0 79.1 79.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 85.3 57.7 14.3 93.9 49.3 14.8 143.9 62.8 62.8 120.0 79.1 79.1 LOS by Move: F E B F D B F E E F E E HCM2kAvgQ: 11 26 2 11 24 1 6 18 18 7 20 20 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-5

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #1550: Valleyview Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 33

129 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 13 4 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

142

32

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

16

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.266

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

4.7

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

4.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 112

373

1

C

0

1! 0 0 14 5 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 112 14 5 4 13 129 33 142 32 1 373 16 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 112 14 5 4 13 129 33 142 32 1 373 16 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 112 14 5 4 13 129 33 142 32 1 373 16 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 112 14 5 4 13 129 33 142 32 1 373 16 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 112 14 5 4 13 129 33 142 32 1 373 16 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 419 615 87 527 623 195 389 xxxx xxxxx 174 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 523 409 961 438 405 820 1181 xxxx xxxxx 1415 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 420 398 961 415 393 820 1181 xxxx xxxxx 1415 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.27 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.16 0.03 xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.1 xxxx xxxxx 7.5 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 427 xxxxx xxxx 730 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 1.3 xxxxx xxxxx 0.7 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx 17.1 xxxxx xxxxx 11.2 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * C * * B * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 17.1 11.2 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C B * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-6

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #1550: Valleyview Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 135

63 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 25 23 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

447

128

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

19

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.601

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

9.0

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

9.0

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 102

271

4

F

0

1! 0 0 19 5 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 102 19 5 23 25 63 135 447 128 4 271 19 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 102 19 5 23 25 63 135 447 128 4 271 19 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 102 19 5 23 25 63 135 447 128 4 271 19 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 102 19 5 23 25 63 135 447 128 4 271 19 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 102 19 5 23 25 63 135 447 128 4 271 19 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 937 1079 288 792 1134 145 290 xxxx xxxxx 575 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 223 220 715 283 204 882 1283 xxxx xxxxx 1008 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 170 196 715 239 182 882 1283 xxxx xxxxx 1008 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.60 0.10 0.01 0.10 0.14 0.07 0.11 xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.4 xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.1 xxxx xxxxx 8.6 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 179 xxxxx xxxx 364 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 4.3 xxxxx xxxxx 1.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx 62.6 xxxxx xxxxx 19.2 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * F * * C * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 62.6 19.2 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: F C * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-7

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #1551: Valley View Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 0

0 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 0 0 0 0 0 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

472***

51

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.700

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

16.7

1

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

16.7

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 99

826

66***

C

0

1! 0 0 0 35*** Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 99 0 35 0 0 0 0 472 51 66 826 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 99 0 35 0 0 0 0 472 51 66 826 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 99 0 35 0 0 0 0 472 51 66 826 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 99 0 35 0 0 0 0 472 51 66 826 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 99 0 35 0 0 0 0 472 51 66 826 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 99 0 35 0 0 0 0 472 51 66 826 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.74 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.80 0.20 0.15 1.85 0.00 Final Sat.: 408 0 144 0 0 0 0 1077 118 94 1189 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.24 xxxx 0.24 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.44 0.43 0.70 0.69 xxxx Crit Moves: **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 11.2 0.0 11.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.0 12.7 20.1 19.7 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 11.2 0.0 11.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.0 12.7 20.1 19.7 0.0 LOS by Move: B * B * * * * B B C C * ApproachDel: 11.2 xxxxxx 12.9 19.7 Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11.2 xxxxxx 12.9 19.7 LOS by Appr: B * B C AllWayAvgQ: 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.7 2.1 2.0 0.0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-8

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #1551: Valley View Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 0

0 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 0 0 0 0 0 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

892***

76

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.789

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

21.7

1

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

21.7

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 82***

634

38***

C

0

1! 0 0 0 79 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 82 0 79 0 0 0 0 892 76 38 634 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 82 0 79 0 0 0 0 892 76 38 634 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 82 0 79 0 0 0 0 892 76 38 634 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 82 0 79 0 0 0 0 892 76 38 634 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 82 0 79 0 0 0 0 892 76 38 634 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 82 0 79 0 0 0 0 892 76 38 634 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.51 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.84 0.16 0.11 1.89 0.00 Final Sat.: 283 0 273 0 0 0 0 1130 97 64 1070 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.29 xxxx 0.29 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.79 0.78 0.60 0.59 xxxx Crit Moves: **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 11.8 0.0 11.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.4 25.6 17.5 17.3 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 11.8 0.0 11.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.4 25.6 17.5 17.3 0.0 LOS by Move: B * B * * * * D D C C * ApproachDel: 11.8 xxxxxx 26.4 17.3 Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11.8 xxxxxx 26.4 17.3 LOS by Appr: B * D C AllWayAvgQ: 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 2.9 1.3 1.3 0.0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-9

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #2210: McCray St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 39

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 34 127*** 75 1 0 1 0 1

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

0 1

245

295***

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

109

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.777

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

38.6

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

37.6

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 251***

425***

11

D

0

1 1 0 97 17 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: McCray St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 251 97 17 75 127 34 39 245 295 11 425 109 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 251 97 17 75 127 34 39 245 295 11 425 109 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 251 97 17 75 127 34 39 245 295 11 425 109 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 251 97 17 75 127 34 39 245 295 11 425 109 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 251 97 17 75 127 34 39 245 295 11 425 109 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 251 97 17 75 127 34 39 245 295 11 425 109 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.95 0.97 0.97 Lanes: 1.00 1.70 0.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.14 0.86 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.20 Final Sat.: 1805 3004 526 1805 1900 1615 228 1434 1663 1805 1465 376 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.14 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.02 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.01 0.29 0.29 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 16.1 10.4 10.4 13.4 7.7 28.3 20.6 20.6 20.6 33.6 33.6 33.6 Volume/Cap: 0.78 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.78 0.07 0.75 0.75 0.78 0.02 0.78 0.78 Delay/Veh: 46.5 36.7 36.7 34.6 60.9 21.7 36.4 36.4 37.8 17.8 30.5 30.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 46.5 36.7 36.7 34.6 60.9 21.7 36.4 36.4 37.8 17.8 30.5 30.5 LOS by Move: D D D C E C D D D B C C HCM2kAvgQ: 7 1 1 2 5 1 9 9 10 0 15 15 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-10

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #2210: McCray St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 47

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 69 235*** 159 1 0 1 0 1

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

0 1

460***

271

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

175***

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.956

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

62.8

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

57.2

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 334***

352

18

E

0

1 1 0 139 30 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: McCray St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 334 139 30 159 235 69 47 460 271 18 352 175 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 334 139 30 159 235 69 47 460 271 18 352 175 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 334 139 30 159 235 69 47 460 271 18 352 175 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 334 139 30 159 235 69 47 460 271 18 352 175 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 334 139 30 159 235 69 47 460 271 18 352 175 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 334 139 30 159 235 69 47 460 271 18 352 175 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 1.00 1.64 0.36 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.12 1.18 0.70 1.00 0.67 0.33 Final Sat.: 1805 2889 624 1805 1900 1615 206 2017 1189 1805 1206 599 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.19 0.05 0.05 0.09 0.12 0.04 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.01 0.29 0.29 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 17.4 10.3 10.3 18.8 11.6 33.1 21.5 21.5 21.5 27.5 27.5 27.5 Volume/Cap: 0.96 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.96 0.12 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.03 0.96 0.96 Delay/Veh: 72.5 37.8 37.8 31.7 84.1 18.9 55.3 55.3 55.3 22.0 58.3 58.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 72.5 37.8 37.8 31.7 84.1 18.9 55.3 55.3 55.3 22.0 58.3 58.3 LOS by Move: E D D C F B E E E C E E HCM2kAvgQ: 11 2 2 4 11 1 16 16 16 0 20 20 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-11

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #2218: Memorial St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 45

46 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 163 244*** 1 0 1 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 1

298***

75

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

230

0

0

Critical V/C:

1.231

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

57.7

1

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

57.7

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 93***

484

58***

F

1

0 1 0 157 83 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Memorial St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 93 157 83 244 163 46 45 298 75 58 484 230 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 93 157 83 244 163 46 45 298 75 58 484 230 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 93 157 83 244 163 46 45 298 75 58 484 230 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 93 157 83 244 163 46 45 298 75 58 484 230 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 93 157 83 244 163 46 45 298 75 58 484 230 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 93 157 83 244 163 46 45 298 75 58 484 230 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.56 0.94 0.50 1.00 0.80 0.20 0.13 0.87 1.00 0.11 0.89 1.00 Final Sat.: 217 380 207 394 337 86 55 363 453 47 393 480 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.43 0.41 0.40 0.62 0.48 0.54 0.82 0.82 0.17 1.23 1.23 0.48 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 18.2 17.3 16.5 25.0 18.8 18.8 39.1 39.1 12.0 147.8 148 16.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 18.2 17.3 16.5 25.0 18.8 18.8 39.1 39.1 12.0 147.8 148 16.6 LOS by Move: C C C C C C E E B F F C ApproachDel: 17.4 22.1 34.3 108.7 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 17.4 22.1 34.3 108.7 LOS by Appr: C C D F AllWayAvgQ: 0.7 0.6 0.6 1.4 0.9 0.9 3.2 3.2 0.2 16.7 16.7 0.9 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-12

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #2218: Memorial St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 39

45 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 267 298*** 1 0 1 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 1

569***

146

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

289

0

0

Critical V/C:

1.570

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

112.8

1

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

112.8

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 60***

409***

59

F

1

0 1 0 268 71 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Memorial St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 60 268 71 298 267 45 39 569 146 59 409 289 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 60 268 71 298 267 45 39 569 146 59 409 289 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 60 268 71 298 267 45 39 569 146 59 409 289 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 60 268 71 298 267 45 39 569 146 59 409 289 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 60 268 71 298 267 45 39 569 146 59 409 289 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 60 268 71 298 267 45 39 569 146 59 409 289 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.30 1.34 0.36 0.98 0.87 0.15 0.06 0.94 1.00 0.13 0.87 1.00 Final Sat.: 110 501 135 364 346 58 25 362 412 50 344 428 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.55 0.54 0.52 0.82 0.77 0.77 1.57 1.57 0.35 1.19 1.19 0.68 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 23.3 22.5 21.7 43.6 36.2 36.0 291.9 292 15.8 135.6 136 26.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 23.3 22.5 21.7 43.6 36.2 36.0 291.9 292 15.8 135.6 136 26.6 LOS by Move: C C C E E E F F C F F D ApproachDel: 22.5 39.8 238.5 94.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 22.5 39.8 238.5 94.0 LOS by Appr: C E F F AllWayAvgQ: 1.1 1.0 1.0 3.2 2.7 2.7 30.1 30.1 0.5 13.5 13.5 1.8 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-13

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #2243: Fairview Rd and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 134***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 106 395 53*** 1 0 2 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

76

121

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

105

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.456

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

17.2

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

17.6

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 102

149***

139

B

0

1 1 0 577*** 71 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 102 577 71 53 395 106 134 76 121 139 149 105 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 102 577 71 53 395 106 134 76 121 139 149 105 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 102 577 71 53 395 106 134 76 121 139 149 105 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 102 577 71 53 395 106 134 76 121 139 149 105 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 102 577 71 53 395 106 134 76 121 139 149 105 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 102 577 71 53 395 106 134 76 121 139 149 105 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.78 0.22 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3163 389 1805 3610 1615 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.06 0.18 0.18 0.03 0.11 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.07 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 9.5 24.0 24.0 3.9 18.4 28.2 9.8 6.9 16.4 13.2 10.3 14.2 Volume/Cap: 0.36 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.36 0.14 0.46 0.35 0.27 0.35 0.46 0.27 Delay/Veh: 23.3 13.4 13.4 29.9 16.4 9.1 23.8 25.5 17.5 20.3 23.3 19.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 23.3 13.4 13.4 29.9 16.4 9.1 23.8 25.5 17.5 20.3 23.3 19.1 LOS by Move: C B B C B A C C B C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 2 5 5 2 3 1 3 2 2 2 3 2 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-14

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #2243: Fairview Rd and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 112

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 165 497 119*** 1 0 2 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

169***

152

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

83

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.480

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

19.2

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

18.0

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 125

118

110***

B

0

1 1 0 424*** 158 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 125 424 158 119 497 165 112 169 152 110 118 83 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 125 424 158 119 497 165 112 169 152 110 118 83 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 125 424 158 119 497 165 112 169 152 110 118 83 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 125 424 158 119 497 165 112 169 152 110 118 83 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 125 424 158 119 497 165 112 169 152 110 118 83 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 125 424 158 119 497 165 112 169 152 110 118 83 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.46 0.54 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 2522 940 1805 3610 1615 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.17 0.17 0.07 0.14 0.10 0.06 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.06 0.05 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 9.8 21.0 21.0 8.2 19.5 28.8 9.4 11.1 20.9 7.6 9.4 17.6 Volume/Cap: 0.42 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.42 0.21 0.40 0.48 0.27 0.48 0.40 0.18 Delay/Veh: 23.6 15.5 15.5 25.4 16.1 9.2 23.7 22.9 14.3 25.9 23.6 16.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 23.6 15.5 15.5 25.4 16.1 9.2 23.7 22.9 14.3 25.9 23.6 16.0 LOS by Move: C B B C B A C C B C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 3 5 5 3 4 2 2 3 2 3 2 1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-15

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #2245: Fairview Rd and Santa Ana Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 72

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 79 355 0 1 0 2 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

125

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.336

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.6

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.6

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

C

1 0 2 0 0 176 587 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Santa Ana Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 176 587 0 0 355 79 72 0 125 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 176 587 0 0 355 79 72 0 125 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 176 587 0 0 355 79 72 0 125 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 176 587 0 0 355 79 72 0 125 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 176 587 0 0 355 79 72 0 125 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx 6.9 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 434 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1001 xxxx 178 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1136 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 243 xxxx 841 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1136 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 214 xxxx 841 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.15 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.34 xxxx 0.15 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.4 xxxx 0.5 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.7 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 30.1 xxxx 10.0 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * D * B * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 17.4 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * C * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-16

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #2245: Fairview Rd and Santa Ana Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 87

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 95 555 0 1 0 2 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

152

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.397

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

4.0

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

4.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

C

1 0 2 0 0 124 393 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Santa Ana Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 124 393 0 0 555 95 87 0 152 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 124 393 0 0 555 95 87 0 152 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 124 393 0 0 555 95 87 0 152 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 124 393 0 0 555 95 87 0 152 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 124 393 0 0 555 95 87 0 152 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx 6.9 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 650 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1000 xxxx 278 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 946 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 243 xxxx 726 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 946 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 219 xxxx 726 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.13 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.40 xxxx 0.21 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.8 xxxx 0.8 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 9.4 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 31.9 xxxx 11.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * D * B * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 18.8 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * C * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-17

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #2248: Fairview Rd and McCloskey Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 44

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 43 380 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

0

95

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1!

Critical V/C:

0.235

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.4

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.4

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

C

1 0 1 0 0 151 511 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd McCloskey Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 151 511 0 0 380 43 44 0 95 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 151 511 0 0 380 43 44 0 95 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 151 511 0 0 380 43 44 0 95 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 151 511 0 0 380 43 44 0 95 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 151 511 0 0 380 43 44 0 95 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 423 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1193 1193 380 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1147 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 208 188 671 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1147 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 187 164 671 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.13 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.23 0.00 0.14 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 369 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 1.7 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 20.5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * C * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 20.5 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * C * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-18

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #2248: Fairview Rd and McCloskey Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 59

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 42 477 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

0

162

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1!

Critical V/C:

0.274

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

5.3

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

5.3

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

C

1 0 1 0 0 131 318 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd McCloskey Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 131 318 0 0 477 42 59 0 162 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 131 318 0 0 477 42 59 0 162 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 131 318 0 0 477 42 59 0 162 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 131 318 0 0 477 42 59 0 162 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 131 318 0 0 477 42 59 0 162 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 519 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1057 1057 477 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1057 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 251 227 592 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1057 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 228 199 592 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.12 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.26 0.00 0.27 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.4 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 415 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 3.0 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 23.2 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * C * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 23.2 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * C * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-19

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #2331: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 243***

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 269 1089 484*** 1 0 3 0 2

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

2 0

398

271

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

525***

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.658

2

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

32.8

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

30.5

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

461

140

C

2 0 3 0 1 279 1066*** 87 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 279 1066 87 484 1089 269 243 398 271 140 461 525 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 279 1066 87 484 1089 269 243 398 271 140 461 525 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 279 1066 87 484 1089 269 243 398 271 140 461 525 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 279 1066 87 484 1089 269 243 398 271 140 461 525 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 279 1066 87 484 1089 269 243 398 271 140 461 525 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 279 1066 87 484 1089 269 243 398 271 140 461 525 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 3610 5700 1615 3610 5700 1615 3610 3800 1615 1805 3800 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.19 0.05 0.13 0.19 0.17 0.07 0.10 0.17 0.08 0.12 0.33 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 14.0 28.4 45.1 20.4 34.7 44.9 10.2 22.5 36.6 16.7 29.0 49.4 Volume/Cap: 0.55 0.66 0.12 0.66 0.55 0.37 0.66 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.42 0.66 Delay/Veh: 41.3 32.5 16.0 38.8 26.7 18.5 47.5 33.9 24.7 38.8 28.9 21.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 41.3 32.5 16.0 38.8 26.7 18.5 47.5 33.9 24.7 38.8 28.9 21.0 LOS by Move: D C B D C B D C C D C C HCM2kAvgQ: 5 10 2 8 9 6 4 5 6 4 6 13 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-20

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #2331: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 319

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 306 1398 682*** 1 0 3 0 2

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

2 0

664***

402

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

600

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.811

2

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

40.8

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

35.0

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

618

204***

D

2 0 3 0 1 383 1352*** 152 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 383 1352 152 682 1398 306 319 664 402 204 618 600 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 383 1352 152 682 1398 306 319 664 402 204 618 600 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 383 1352 152 682 1398 306 319 664 402 204 618 600 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 383 1352 152 682 1398 306 319 664 402 204 618 600 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 383 1352 152 682 1398 306 319 664 402 204 618 600 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 383 1352 152 682 1398 306 319 664 402 204 618 600 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 3610 5700 1615 3610 5700 1615 3610 3800 1615 1805 3800 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.11 0.24 0.09 0.19 0.25 0.19 0.09 0.17 0.25 0.11 0.16 0.37 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 15.9 29.2 43.2 23.3 36.7 48.2 11.6 21.5 37.4 13.9 23.9 47.2 Volume/Cap: 0.67 0.81 0.22 0.81 0.67 0.39 0.76 0.81 0.67 0.81 0.68 0.79 Delay/Veh: 42.6 35.9 18.0 42.3 27.4 16.9 51.0 43.4 28.9 59.5 36.7 27.7 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 42.6 35.9 18.0 42.3 27.4 16.9 51.0 43.4 28.9 59.5 36.7 27.7 LOS by Move: D D B D C B D D C E D C HCM2kAvgQ: 7 15 3 12 13 6 5 10 10 8 10 17 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-21

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #2347: Fairview Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 290***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 236 349*** 38 1 0 2 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

114

211

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

75

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.573

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

23.4

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

19.2

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 174***

224***

59

B

0

1 1 0 388 30 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 174 388 30 38 349 236 290 114 211 59 224 75 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 174 388 30 38 349 236 290 114 211 59 224 75 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 174 388 30 38 349 236 290 114 211 59 224 75 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 174 388 30 38 349 236 290 114 211 59 224 75 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 174 388 30 38 349 236 290 114 211 59 224 75 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 174 388 30 38 349 236 290 114 211 59 224 75 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.86 0.14 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1900 3351 259 1900 3610 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.09 0.12 0.12 0.02 0.10 0.12 0.15 0.06 0.11 0.03 0.12 0.04 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 9.6 16.8 16.8 2.9 10.1 26.1 16.0 18.7 28.2 9.7 12.3 15.2 Volume/Cap: 0.57 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.57 0.29 0.57 0.19 0.24 0.19 0.57 0.16 Delay/Veh: 26.0 17.9 17.9 30.7 24.3 11.1 20.7 15.3 9.6 22.1 23.5 17.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 26.0 17.9 17.9 30.7 24.3 11.1 20.7 15.3 9.6 22.1 23.5 17.5 LOS by Move: C B B C C B C B A C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 4 4 4 1 3 3 5 2 2 1 4 1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-22

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #2347: Fairview Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 223***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 246 454*** 86 1 0 2 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

256

245

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

60

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.574

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

23.2

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

18.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 233***

178***

46

B

0

1 1 0 378 67 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 233 378 67 86 454 246 223 256 245 46 178 60 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 233 378 67 86 454 246 223 256 245 46 178 60 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 233 378 67 86 454 246 223 256 245 46 178 60 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 233 378 67 86 454 246 223 256 245 46 178 60 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 233 378 67 86 454 246 223 256 245 46 178 60 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 233 378 67 86 454 246 223 256 245 46 178 60 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.70 0.30 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1900 3066 544 1900 3610 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.05 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.02 0.09 0.03 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 12.8 19.0 19.0 7.0 13.1 25.4 12.3 18.7 31.5 3.4 9.8 16.8 Volume/Cap: 0.57 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.57 0.31 0.57 0.43 0.25 0.43 0.57 0.11 Delay/Veh: 23.2 16.2 16.2 25.7 22.0 11.7 23.6 16.9 7.9 30.2 25.8 16.2 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 23.2 16.2 16.2 25.7 22.0 11.7 23.6 16.9 7.9 30.2 25.8 16.2 LOS by Move: C B B C C B C B A C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 5 4 4 1 4 3 5 4 3 1 3 1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-23

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #2367: Airline Hwy and Sunset Dr Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 48

38 1

Signal=Protect/Rights=Include 1066 151*** 0 2 0 1

Signal=Permit Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Permit Rights=Overlap

1 0

47

25

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

206

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.468

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

10.1

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

9.2

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 32

74***

31

A

0

1 1 0 1031*** 32 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Airline Hwy Sunset Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 32 1031 32 151 1066 38 48 47 25 31 74 206 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 32 1031 32 151 1066 38 48 47 25 31 74 206 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 32 1031 32 151 1066 38 48 47 25 31 74 206 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 32 1031 32 151 1066 38 48 47 25 31 74 206 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 32 1031 32 151 1066 38 48 47 25 31 74 206 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 32 1031 32 151 1066 38 48 47 25 31 74 206 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.94 0.06 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1900 3686 114 1900 3800 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.28 0.28 0.08 0.28 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.11 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 2.6 35.8 35.8 10.2 43.4 43.4 5.0 5.0 7.6 5.0 5.0 15.2 Volume/Cap: 0.39 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.39 0.03 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.20 0.47 0.43 Delay/Veh: 30.9 6.9 6.9 23.5 3.3 2.3 27.0 26.9 23.4 26.2 28.4 19.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 30.9 6.9 6.9 23.5 3.3 2.3 27.0 26.9 23.4 26.2 28.4 19.4 LOS by Move: C A A C A A C C C C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 1 6 6 3 4 0 1 1 0 1 2 4 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-24

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #2367: Airline Hwy and Sunset Dr Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 49

100 1

Signal=Protect/Rights=Include 1335 254*** 0 2 0 1

Signal=Permit Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Permit Rights=Overlap

1 0

62

32

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

265

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.637

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

13.2

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

10.8

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 52

89***

43

B

0

1 1 0 1325*** 45 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Airline Hwy Sunset Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 52 1325 45 254 1335 100 49 62 32 43 89 265 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 52 1325 45 254 1335 100 49 62 32 43 89 265 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 52 1325 45 254 1335 100 49 62 32 43 89 265 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 52 1325 45 254 1335 100 49 62 32 43 89 265 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 52 1325 45 254 1335 100 49 62 32 43 89 265 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 52 1325 45 254 1335 100 49 62 32 43 89 265 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.93 0.07 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1900 3675 125 1900 3800 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.36 0.36 0.13 0.35 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.14 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 3.4 34.0 34.0 12.6 43.2 43.2 4.4 4.4 7.8 4.4 4.4 17.0 Volume/Cap: 0.49 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.49 0.07 0.35 0.44 0.13 0.31 0.64 0.49 Delay/Veh: 31.0 9.5 9.5 25.0 3.8 2.5 27.9 28.9 23.4 27.6 36.4 18.6 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 31.0 9.5 9.5 25.0 3.8 2.5 27.9 28.9 23.4 27.6 36.4 18.6 LOS by Move: C A A C A A C C C C D B HCM2kAvgQ: 2 9 9 5 6 1 1 2 1 1 3 5 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-25

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #2925: San Benito St and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 180***

216 1

Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap 0 179*** 0 0 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

612

0

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

302

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.430

2

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

16.2

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

10.9

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 0

602***

0

B

0

0 0 0 0 0 Signal=Split/Rights=Include

Street Name: San Benito St Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 179 0 216 180 612 0 0 602 302 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 179 0 216 180 612 0 0 602 302 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 179 0 216 180 612 0 0 602 302 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 179 0 216 180 612 0 0 602 302 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 179 0 216 180 612 0 0 602 302 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 179 0 216 180 612 0 0 602 302 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 1805 3610 0 0 3610 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.13 0.10 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.19 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.8 0.0 27.7 13.9 37.2 0.0 0.0 23.3 37.1 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.29 0.43 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.30 Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 10.2 20.4 5.3 0.0 0.0 13.7 5.6 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 10.2 20.4 5.3 0.0 0.0 13.7 5.6 LOS by Move: A A A C A B C A A A B A HCM2kAvgQ: 0 0 0 3 0 3 3 3 0 0 4 3 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-26

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #2925: San Benito St and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 216***

169 1

Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap 0 211*** 0 0 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

745

0

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

208

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.524

2

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

16.8

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

11.6

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 0

755***

0

B

0

0 0 0 0 0 Signal=Split/Rights=Include

Street Name: San Benito St Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 211 0 169 216 745 0 0 755 208 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 211 0 169 216 745 0 0 755 208 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 211 0 169 216 745 0 0 755 208 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 211 0 169 216 745 0 0 755 208 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 211 0 169 216 745 0 0 755 208 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 211 0 169 216 745 0 0 755 208 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 1805 3610 0 0 3610 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.10 0.12 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.13 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.4 0.0 27.1 13.7 37.6 0.0 0.0 23.9 37.3 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.00 0.23 0.52 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.52 0.21 Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.8 0.0 10.3 21.5 5.3 0.0 0.0 14.1 5.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.8 0.0 10.3 21.5 5.3 0.0 0.0 14.1 5.0 LOS by Move: A A A C A B C A A A B A HCM2kAvgQ: 0 0 0 4 0 2 4 4 0 0 5 2 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-27

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #2942: Enterprise Rd and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 21

38 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 5 38 0 1 0 1

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

693

26

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

15

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.344

0

2

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.5

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.5

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 46

609

54

D

0

1 0 1 5 47 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Enterprise Rd Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 46 5 47 38 5 38 21 693 26 54 609 15 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 46 5 47 38 5 38 21 693 26 54 609 15 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 46 5 47 38 5 38 21 693 26 54 609 15 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 46 5 47 38 5 38 21 693 26 54 609 15 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 46 5 47 38 5 38 21 693 26 54 609 15 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1150 1467 347 1108 1478 305 624 xxxx xxxxx 719 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 156 129 655 167 127 697 967 xxxx xxxxx 892 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 134 119 655 141 117 697 967 xxxx xxxxx 892 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.34 0.04 0.07 0.27 0.04 0.05 0.02 xxxx xxxx 0.06 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 1.4 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 45.5 36.7 10.9 39.7 37.2 10.5 8.8 xxxx xxxxx 9.3 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: E E B E E B A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 28.5 25.8 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: D D * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-28

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #2942: Enterprise Rd and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 66

24 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 2 39 0 1 0 1

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

704

61

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

40

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.280

0

2

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.3

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 40

352

54

D

0

1 0 1 3 42 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Enterprise Rd Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 40 3 42 39 2 24 66 704 61 54 352 40 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 40 3 42 39 2 24 66 704 61 54 352 40 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 40 3 42 39 2 24 66 704 61 54 352 40 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 40 3 42 39 2 24 66 704 61 54 352 40 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 40 3 42 39 2 24 66 704 61 54 352 40 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1121 1336 352 946 1357 176 392 xxxx xxxxx 765 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 163 155 650 219 150 843 1178 xxxx xxxxx 857 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 143 137 650 184 133 843 1178 xxxx xxxxx 857 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.28 0.02 0.06 0.21 0.02 0.03 0.06 xxxx xxxx 0.06 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 1.1 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.2 xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 39.6 31.9 10.9 29.8 32.5 9.4 8.2 xxxx xxxxx 9.5 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: E D B D D A A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 25.2 22.3 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: D C * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-29

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #3072: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd and Hwy 156 Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 9***

25 0

Signal=Split/Rights=Include 12*** 36 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 130

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

1012

671

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

28

1

2

Critical V/C:

0.613

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

31.4

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

25.6

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 728

1069***

44

C

1

0 0 1 15*** 17 Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd Hwy 156 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 728 15 17 36 12 25 9 1012 671 44 1069 28 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 728 15 17 36 12 25 9 1012 671 44 1069 28 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 728 15 17 36 12 25 9 1012 671 44 1069 28 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 728 15 17 36 12 25 9 1012 671 44 1069 28 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 728 15 17 36 12 25 9 1012 671 44 1069 28 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 728 15 17 36 12 25 9 1012 671 44 1069 28 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 1.96 0.04 1.00 0.50 0.16 0.34 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.95 0.05 Final Sat.: 3548 73 1615 872 291 606 1805 3610 1615 1805 3504 92 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.21 0.21 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.28 0.42 0.02 0.31 0.31 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 43.5 43.5 48.8 8.7 8.7 8.7 1.1 60.5 104.0 5.3 64.7 64.7 Volume/Cap: 0.61 0.61 0.03 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.60 0.52 0.60 0.61 0.61 Delay/Veh: 37.1 37.1 25.7 68.1 68.1 68.1 122.6 26.4 4.8 74.7 24.2 24.2 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 37.1 37.1 25.7 68.1 68.1 68.1 122.6 26.4 4.8 74.7 24.2 24.2 LOS by Move: D D C E E E F C A E C C HCM2kAvgQ: 13 13 0 4 4 4 0 15 9 3 17 17 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-30

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #3072: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd and Hwy 156 Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 27

17 0

Signal=Split/Rights=Include 66 126*** 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 130

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

1093

922***

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

36

1

2

Critical V/C:

0.773

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

33.6

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

33.8

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 871***

1102

29***

C

1

0 0 1 9 65 Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd Hwy 156 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 871 9 65 126 66 17 27 1093 922 29 1102 36 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 871 9 65 126 66 17 27 1093 922 29 1102 36 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 871 9 65 126 66 17 27 1093 922 29 1102 36 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 871 9 65 126 66 17 27 1093 922 29 1102 36 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 871 9 65 126 66 17 27 1093 922 29 1102 36 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 871 9 65 126 66 17 27 1093 922 29 1102 36 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 1.98 0.02 1.00 0.60 0.32 0.08 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.94 0.06 Final Sat.: 3584 37 1615 1100 576 148 1805 3610 1615 1805 3478 114 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.24 0.24 0.04 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.30 0.57 0.02 0.32 0.32 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 40.9 40.9 43.6 19.3 19.3 19.3 2.6 55.2 96.0 2.7 55.2 55.2 Volume/Cap: 0.77 0.77 0.12 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.75 0.71 0.77 0.77 0.75 0.75 Delay/Veh: 43.7 43.7 30.0 66.2 66.2 66.2 121.6 32.5 13.5 127.7 33.5 33.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 43.7 43.7 30.0 66.2 66.2 66.2 121.6 32.5 13.5 127.7 33.5 33.5 LOS by Move: D D C E E E F C B F C C HCM2kAvgQ: 17 17 2 10 10 10 1 19 23 2 21 21 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-31

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #3337: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 220

118 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 63 141*** 0 1 0 1

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

340***

219

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

194

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.977

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

37.1

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

37.1

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 214***

346***

7

E

0

0 1 0 213 5 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 214 213 5 141 63 118 220 340 219 7 346 194 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 214 213 5 141 63 118 220 340 219 7 346 194 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 214 213 5 141 63 118 220 340 219 7 346 194 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 214 213 5 141 63 118 220 340 219 7 346 194 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 214 213 5 141 63 118 220 340 219 7 346 194 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 214 213 5 141 63 118 220 340 219 7 346 194 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.98 0.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 357 368 9 305 316 338 351 373 396 321 354 369 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.60 0.58 0.58 0.46 0.20 0.35 0.63 0.91 0.55 0.02 0.98 0.53 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 25.6 23.5 23.5 22.9 16.1 17.9 27.8 57.3 21.6 13.6 74.3 21.5 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 25.6 23.5 23.5 22.9 16.1 17.9 27.8 57.3 21.6 13.6 74.3 21.5 LOS by Move: D C C C C C D F C B F C ApproachDel: 24.5 19.7 38.9 54.8 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 24.5 19.7 38.9 54.8 LOS by Appr: C C E F AllWayAvgQ: 1.3 1.2 1.2 0.7 0.2 0.5 1.5 4.7 1.1 0.0 6.0 1.0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-32

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #3337: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 160

127 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 79 169*** 0 1 0 1

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

454***

271

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

211

0

1

Critical V/C:

1.266

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

80.7

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

80.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 281***

440***

7

F

0

0 1 0 88 8 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 281 88 8 169 79 127 160 454 271 7 440 211 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 281 88 8 169 79 127 160 454 271 7 440 211 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 281 88 8 169 79 127 160 454 271 7 440 211 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 281 88 8 169 79 127 160 454 271 7 440 211 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 281 88 8 169 79 127 160 454 271 7 440 211 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 281 88 8 169 79 127 160 454 271 7 440 211 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.92 0.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 352 336 31 308 319 341 342 366 389 319 347 366 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.80 0.26 0.26 0.55 0.25 0.37 0.47 1.24 0.70 0.02 1.27 0.58 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 42.2 15.5 15.5 26.8 17.1 18.7 21.5 158 29.7 13.8 170 24.2 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 42.2 15.5 15.5 26.8 17.1 18.7 21.5 158 29.7 13.8 170 24.2 LOS by Move: E C C D C C C F D B F C ApproachDel: 35.4 22.0 94.2 121.9 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 35.4 22.0 94.2 121.9 LOS by Appr: E C F F AllWayAvgQ: 2.9 0.3 0.3 1.1 0.3 0.5 0.8 14.8 1.9 0.0 15.2 1.2 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-33

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #3430: Airline Hwy and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 178

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 176 551 341*** 1 0 2 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

238

237***

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

340***

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.796

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

40.0

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

36.6

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

380

56

D

1 0 2 0 1 210 521*** 42 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 210 521 42 341 551 176 178 238 237 56 380 340 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 210 521 42 341 551 176 178 238 237 56 380 340 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 210 521 42 341 551 176 178 238 237 56 380 340 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 210 521 42 341 551 176 178 238 237 56 380 340 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 210 521 42 341 551 176 178 238 237 56 380 340 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 210 521 42 341 551 176 178 238 237 56 380 340 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.88 0.88 0.95 0.88 0.88 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 0.94 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 1673 1666 1805 1770 1584 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.12 0.14 0.03 0.19 0.15 0.11 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.03 0.21 0.21 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 16.3 16.3 40.6 21.4 21.4 37.4 16.1 16.1 16.1 24.3 24.3 24.3 Volume/Cap: 0.64 0.80 0.06 0.80 0.64 0.26 0.55 0.80 0.80 0.12 0.80 0.80 Delay/Veh: 38.5 42.0 14.0 42.3 32.6 17.4 35.7 42.8 42.8 24.9 35.6 35.6 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 38.5 42.0 14.0 42.3 32.6 17.4 35.7 42.8 42.8 24.9 35.6 35.6 LOS by Move: D D B D C B D D D C D D HCM2kAvgQ: 5 8 1 11 8 3 5 9 9 1 12 12 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-34

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #3430: Airline Hwy and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 206

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 155 733 454*** 1 0 2 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

363

256***

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

446***

1

1

Critical V/C:

1.031

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

79.2

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

59.6

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

368

73

E

1 0 2 0 1 231 686*** 73 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 231 686 73 454 733 155 206 363 256 73 368 446 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 231 686 73 454 733 155 206 363 256 73 368 446 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 231 686 73 454 733 155 206 363 256 73 368 446 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 231 686 73 454 733 155 206 363 256 73 368 446 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 231 686 73 454 733 155 206 363 256 73 368 446 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 231 686 73 454 733 155 206 363 256 73 368 446 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.89 0.89 0.95 0.87 0.87 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.17 0.83 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 1986 1400 1805 1657 1657 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.19 0.05 0.25 0.20 0.10 0.11 0.18 0.18 0.04 0.22 0.27 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 14.9 16.6 40.1 22.0 23.6 39.6 16.0 16.0 16.0 23.5 23.5 23.5 Volume/Cap: 0.77 1.03 0.10 1.03 0.77 0.22 0.64 1.03 1.03 0.15 0.85 1.03 Delay/Veh: 47.7 79.8 14.6 85.1 34.7 15.8 38.8 81.9 81.9 25.8 38.9 73.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 47.7 79.8 14.6 85.1 34.7 15.8 38.8 81.9 81.9 25.8 38.9 73.5 LOS by Move: D E B F C B D F F C D E HCM2kAvgQ: 7 14 1 20 12 3 6 15 15 2 13 20 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-35

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #4031: Southside Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 35

52 0

Signal=Permit/Rights=Include 42 37 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

372***

93

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

52

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.617

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

20.3

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

18.0

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 112

509

221***

B

0

1! 0 0 78*** 229 Signal=Permit/Rights=Include

Street Name: Southside Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 112 78 229 37 42 52 35 372 93 221 509 52 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 112 78 229 37 42 52 35 372 93 221 509 52 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 112 78 229 37 42 52 35 372 93 221 509 52 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 112 78 229 37 42 52 35 372 93 221 509 52 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 112 78 229 37 42 52 35 372 93 221 509 52 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 112 78 229 37 42 52 35 372 93 221 509 52 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.95 0.94 0.94 Lanes: 0.27 0.18 0.55 0.28 0.32 0.40 1.00 1.60 0.40 1.00 1.81 0.19 Final Sat.: 416 290 850 433 492 609 1805 2801 700 1805 3230 330 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.02 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.16 0.16 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 26.2 2.7 12.9 12.9 11.9 22.1 22.1 Volume/Cap: 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.43 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.43 0.43 Delay/Veh: 14.8 14.8 14.8 10.6 10.6 10.6 31.5 22.9 22.9 25.2 14.4 14.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 14.8 14.8 14.8 10.6 10.6 10.6 31.5 22.9 22.9 25.2 14.4 14.4 LOS by Move: B B B B B B C C C C B B HCM2kAvgQ: 7 7 7 2 2 2 1 4 4 5 4 4 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-36

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #4031: Southside Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 55***

34 0

Signal=Permit/Rights=Include 96 51 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

561

127

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

259

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.651

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

18.1

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

18.0

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 127

450***

52

B

0

1! 0 0 52*** 297 Signal=Permit/Rights=Include

Street Name: Southside Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 127 52 297 51 96 34 55 561 127 52 450 259 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 127 52 297 51 96 34 55 561 127 52 450 259 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 127 52 297 51 96 34 55 561 127 52 450 259 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 127 52 297 51 96 34 55 561 127 52 450 259 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 127 52 297 51 96 34 55 561 127 52 450 259 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 127 52 297 51 96 34 55 561 127 52 450 259 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.95 0.90 0.90 Lanes: 0.27 0.11 0.62 0.28 0.53 0.19 1.00 1.63 0.37 1.00 1.27 0.73 Final Sat.: 404 165 944 432 814 288 1805 2861 648 1805 2165 1246 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.03 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.21 0.21 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 2.8 19.2 19.2 2.8 19.2 19.2 Volume/Cap: 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.65 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.65 0.65 Delay/Veh: 13.8 13.8 13.8 9.2 9.2 9.2 44.7 18.3 18.3 40.7 18.9 18.9 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 13.8 13.8 13.8 9.2 9.2 9.2 44.7 18.3 18.3 40.7 18.9 18.9 LOS by Move: B B B A A A D B B D B B HCM2kAvgQ: 8 8 8 2 2 2 1 6 6 2 7 7 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-37

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (AM)

Intersection #4370: Fairview Rd and Cielo Vista Dr/ Proj Entrance (Signalized) Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 17

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 6 360 173 0 1 1 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

28

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

44

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.257

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.5

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.5

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

43

C

1 0 1 1 0 12 356 187 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Cielo Vista Dr/Proj Entrance (Sig Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 12 356 187 173 360 6 17 0 28 43 0 44 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 12 356 187 173 360 6 17 0 28 43 0 44 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 12 356 187 173 360 6 17 0 28 43 0 44 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 12 356 187 173 360 6 17 0 28 43 0 44 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 12 356 187 173 360 6 17 0 28 43 0 44 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 366 xxxx xxxxx 543 xxxx xxxxx 911 1276 183 1000 1186 272 Potent Cap.: 1204 xxxx xxxxx 1036 xxxx xxxxx 232 168 834 200 190 732 Move Cap.: 1204 xxxx xxxxx 1036 xxxx xxxxx 189 139 834 168 157 732 Volume/Cap: 0.01 xxxx xxxx 0.17 xxxx xxxx 0.09 0.00 0.03 0.26 0.00 0.06 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.0 xxxx xxxxx 0.6 xxxx xxxxx 0.3 xxxx xxxxx 1.0 xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.0 xxxx xxxxx 9.2 xxxx xxxxx 25.9 xxxx xxxxx 33.7 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * A * * D * * D * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 834 xxxx xxxx 732 SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 0.1 xxxxx xxxx 0.2 Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 9.5 xxxxx xxxx 10.2 Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * A * * B ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 15.7 21.8 ApproachLOS: * * C C Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:49:02 2010

Page 61-38

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cuml w/o Proj (PM)

Intersection #4370: Fairview Rd and Cielo Vista Dr/ Proj Entrance (Signalized) Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 13

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 14 426 154 0 1 1 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

22

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

97

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.767

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

8.5

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

8.5

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

104

F

1 0 1 1 0 30 464 162 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Cielo Vista Dr/Proj Entrance (Sig Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 30 464 162 154 426 14 13 0 22 104 0 97 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 30 464 162 154 426 14 13 0 22 104 0 97 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PasserByVol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 30 464 162 154 426 14 13 0 22 104 0 97 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 30 464 162 154 426 14 13 0 22 104 0 97 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 30 464 162 154 426 14 13 0 22 104 0 97 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 440 xxxx xxxxx 626 xxxx xxxxx 1033 1427 220 1126 1353 313 Potent Cap.: 1131 xxxx xxxxx 965 xxxx xxxxx 189 136 790 162 151 689 Move Cap.: 1131 xxxx xxxxx 965 xxxx xxxxx 140 112 790 136 124 689 Volume/Cap: 0.03 xxxx xxxx 0.16 xxxx xxxx 0.09 0.00 0.03 0.77 0.00 0.14 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 0.6 xxxx xxxxx 0.3 xxxx xxxxx 4.6 xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.3 xxxx xxxxx 9.4 xxxx xxxxx 33.3 xxxx xxxxx 88.4 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * A * * D * * F * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 790 xxxx xxxx 689 SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 0.1 xxxxx xxxx 0.5 Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 9.7 xxxxx xxxx 11.1 Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * A * * B ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 18.5 51.1 ApproachLOS: * * C F Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

Cumulative with Project Conditions 

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-1

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #1274: Fairview Rd and Union Rd ext. [Future Intersection] Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 183***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 136 399*** 0 1 0 2 0 0

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

0

185

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.367

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

17.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

12.1

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 181***

0

0

B

0

2 0 0 370 0 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Union Rd ext. Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 170 299 0 0 375 136 183 0 181 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 170 299 0 0 375 136 183 0 181 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 11 71 0 0 24 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 181 370 0 0 399 136 183 0 185 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 181 370 0 0 399 136 183 0 185 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 181 370 0 0 399 136 183 0 185 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 181 370 0 0 399 136 183 0 185 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 0 0 3610 1615 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.08 0.10 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 16.4 34.4 0.0 0.0 18.1 34.6 16.6 0.0 32.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.37 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.37 0.15 0.37 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Del: 17.6 6.1 0.0 0.0 16.5 5.9 17.5 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 IncremntDel: 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 18.1 6.1 0.0 0.0 16.7 5.9 18.0 0.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 18.1 6.1 0.0 0.0 16.7 5.9 18.0 0.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: B A A A B A B A A A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 3 2 0 0 3 1 3 0 2 0 0 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-2

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #1274: Fairview Rd and Union Rd ext. [Future Intersection] Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 172***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 219 540*** 0 1 0 2 0 0

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

0

260

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.450

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

17.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

12.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 248***

0

0

B

0

2 0 0 430 0 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Union Rd ext. Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 241 383 0 0 459 219 172 0 248 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 241 383 0 0 459 219 172 0 248 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 7 47 0 0 81 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 248 430 0 0 540 219 172 0 260 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 248 430 0 0 540 219 172 0 260 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 248 430 0 0 540 219 172 0 260 0 0 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 248 430 0 0 540 219 172 0 260 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 0 0 3610 1615 1805 0 1615 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.14 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.14 0.10 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 18.3 38.3 0.0 0.0 20.0 32.7 12.7 0.0 31.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.45 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.25 0.45 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Del: 16.8 4.5 0.0 0.0 15.7 7.2 20.6 0.0 8.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 IncremntDel: 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.8 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 17.4 4.5 0.0 0.0 16.0 7.4 21.4 0.0 8.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 17.4 4.5 0.0 0.0 16.0 7.4 21.4 0.0 8.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 LOS by Move: B A A A B A C A A A A A HCM2kAvgQ: 4 2 0 0 5 2 3 0 3 0 0 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-3

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #1449: Hwy 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 51***

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 71 1133*** 112 1 0 2 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 85

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

242

166

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

213

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.954

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

53.5

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

40.5

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

364***

138

D

1 0 2 0 1 281*** 1145 111 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Hwy 25 Bypass Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 280 1135 111 111 1130 71 51 235 166 138 344 211 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 280 1135 111 111 1130 71 51 235 166 138 344 211 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 1 10 0 1 3 0 0 7 0 0 20 2 Initial Fut: 281 1145 111 112 1133 71 51 242 166 138 364 213 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 281 1145 111 112 1133 71 51 242 166 138 364 213 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 281 1145 111 112 1133 71 51 242 166 138 364 213 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 281 1145 111 112 1133 71 51 242 166 138 364 213 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.89 0.89 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.19 0.81 1.00 0.63 0.37 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 2011 1379 1805 1133 663 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.16 0.32 0.07 0.06 0.31 0.04 0.03 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.32 0.32 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 13.9 35.0 47.1 6.8 28.0 30.5 2.5 19.1 19.1 12.1 28.6 28.6 Volume/Cap: 0.95 0.77 0.12 0.77 0.95 0.12 0.95 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.95 0.95 Uniform Del: 35.2 21.5 9.1 38.3 27.9 18.3 41.2 29.1 29.1 33.8 27.5 27.5 IncremntDel: 40.0 2.5 0.1 21.9 16.3 0.1 105.7 0.8 0.8 2.2 25.5 25.5 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 75.2 24.1 9.1 60.2 44.1 18.4 146.9 29.8 29.8 36.1 53.1 53.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 75.2 24.1 9.1 60.2 44.1 18.4 146.9 29.8 29.8 36.1 53.1 53.1 LOS by Move: E C A E D B F C C D D D HCM2kAvgQ: 9 14 1 3 18 1 4 6 6 4 20 20 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-4

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #1449: Hwy 25 Bypass and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 90***

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 81 1369 314*** 1 0 2 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 85

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

512

338

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

125

1

1

Critical V/C:

1.038

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

74.3

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

66.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

384***

123

E

1 0 2 0 1 303 1407*** 129 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Hwy 25 Bypass Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 302 1400 129 312 1357 81 90 489 337 123 371 124 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 302 1400 129 312 1357 81 90 489 337 123 371 124 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 1 7 0 2 12 0 0 23 1 0 13 1 Initial Fut: 303 1407 129 314 1369 81 90 512 338 123 384 125 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 303 1407 129 314 1369 81 90 512 338 123 384 125 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 303 1407 129 314 1369 81 90 512 338 123 384 125 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 303 1407 129 314 1369 81 90 512 338 123 384 125 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.89 0.89 0.95 0.96 0.96 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.20 0.80 1.00 0.75 0.25 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 2044 1349 1805 1380 449 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.17 0.39 0.08 0.17 0.38 0.05 0.05 0.25 0.25 0.07 0.28 0.28 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 14.2 31.9 37.6 14.2 32.0 36.1 4.1 21.1 21.1 5.7 22.8 22.8 Volume/Cap: 1.01 1.04 0.18 1.04 1.01 0.12 1.04 1.01 1.01 1.01 1.04 1.04 Uniform Del: 35.4 26.5 14.3 35.4 26.5 14.8 40.5 31.9 31.9 39.6 31.1 31.1 IncremntDel: 53.9 35.0 0.1 62.1 26.3 0.1 107.5 33.1 33.1 83.8 50.9 50.9 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 89.3 61.5 14.5 97.4 52.8 14.9 148.0 65.1 65.1 123.4 82.1 82.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 89.3 61.5 14.5 97.4 52.8 14.9 148.0 65.1 65.1 123.4 82.1 82.1 LOS by Move: F E B F D B F E E F F F HCM2kAvgQ: 11 26 2 12 24 1 6 18 18 7 21 21 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-5

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #1550: Valleyview Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 33

129 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 13 4 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

144

32

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

16

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.269

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

4.7

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

4.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 112

380

1

C

0

1! 0 0 14 5 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 112 14 5 4 13 129 33 142 32 1 373 16 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 112 14 5 4 13 129 33 142 32 1 373 16 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 7 0 Initial Fut: 112 14 5 4 13 129 33 144 32 1 380 16 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 112 14 5 4 13 129 33 144 32 1 380 16 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 112 14 5 4 13 129 33 144 32 1 380 16 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 425 624 88 535 632 198 396 xxxx xxxxx 176 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 518 404 959 433 400 816 1174 xxxx xxxxx 1412 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 416 393 959 410 389 816 1174 xxxx xxxxx 1412 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.27 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.16 0.03 xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.2 xxxx xxxxx 7.6 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 423 xxxxx xxxx 725 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 1.3 xxxxx xxxxx 0.7 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx 17.3 xxxxx xxxxx 11.2 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * C * * B * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 17.3 11.2 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: C B * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-6

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #1550: Valleyview Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 135

63 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 25 23 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

455

128

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

19

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.613

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

9.2

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

9.2

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 102

276

4

F

0

1! 0 0 19 5 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 102 19 5 23 25 63 135 447 128 4 271 19 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 102 19 5 23 25 63 135 447 128 4 271 19 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 5 0 Initial Fut: 102 19 5 23 25 63 135 455 128 4 276 19 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 102 19 5 23 25 63 135 455 128 4 276 19 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 102 19 5 23 25 63 135 455 128 4 276 19 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 948 1092 292 801 1147 148 295 xxxx xxxxx 583 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 219 216 711 279 201 879 1278 xxxx xxxxx 1001 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 166 193 711 235 179 879 1278 xxxx xxxxx 1001 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.61 0.10 0.01 0.10 0.14 0.07 0.11 xxxx xxxx 0.00 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 0.4 xxxx xxxxx 0.0 xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 8.1 xxxx xxxxx 8.6 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx 175 xxxxx xxxx 359 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx 4.4 xxxxx xxxxx 1.3 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx 65.4 xxxxx xxxxx 19.5 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * F * * C * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 65.4 19.5 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: F C * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-7

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #1551: Valley View Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 0

0 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 0 0 0 0 0 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

478***

51

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.714

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

17.2

1

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

17.2

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 99

843

66***

C

0

1! 0 0 0 35*** Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 99 0 35 0 0 0 0 472 51 66 826 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 99 0 35 0 0 0 0 472 51 66 826 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 17 0 Initial Fut: 99 0 35 0 0 0 0 478 51 66 843 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 99 0 35 0 0 0 0 478 51 66 843 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 99 0 35 0 0 0 0 478 51 66 843 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 99 0 35 0 0 0 0 478 51 66 843 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.74 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.81 0.19 0.15 1.85 0.00 Final Sat.: 407 0 144 0 0 0 0 1073 116 92 1188 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.24 xxxx 0.24 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.45 0.44 0.71 0.71 xxxx Crit Moves: **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 11.2 0.0 11.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.1 12.9 20.8 20.5 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 11.2 0.0 11.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.1 12.9 20.8 20.5 0.0 LOS by Move: B * B * * * * B B C C * ApproachDel: 11.2 xxxxxx 13.1 20.5 Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11.2 xxxxxx 13.1 20.5 LOS by Appr: B * B C AllWayAvgQ: 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.7 2.2 2.1 0.0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-8

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #1551: Valley View Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 0

0 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 0 0 0 0 0 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

912***

76

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.808

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

22.8

1

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

22.8

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 82***

645

38***

C

0

1! 0 0 0 79 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Valley View Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 82 0 79 0 0 0 0 892 76 38 634 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 82 0 79 0 0 0 0 892 76 38 634 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 11 0 Initial Fut: 82 0 79 0 0 0 0 912 76 38 645 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 82 0 79 0 0 0 0 912 76 38 645 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 82 0 79 0 0 0 0 912 76 38 645 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 82 0 79 0 0 0 0 912 76 38 645 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.51 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.85 0.15 0.11 1.89 0.00 Final Sat.: 282 0 272 0 0 0 0 1128 95 63 1066 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.29 xxxx 0.29 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.81 0.80 0.61 0.61 xxxx Crit Moves: **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 11.8 0.0 11.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.2 27.2 18.0 17.8 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 11.8 0.0 11.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.2 27.2 18.0 17.8 0.0 LOS by Move: B * B * * * * D D C C * ApproachDel: 11.8 xxxxxx 28.1 17.8 Delay Adj: 1.00 xxxxx 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 11.8 xxxxxx 28.1 17.8 LOS by Appr: B * D C AllWayAvgQ: 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 3.2 1.4 1.4 0.0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-9

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #2210: McCray St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 39

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 34 127*** 76 1 0 1 0 1

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

0 1

250

295***

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

113

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.788

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

39.2

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

38.3

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 251***

439***

11

D

0

1 1 0 97 17 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: McCray St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 251 97 17 75 127 34 39 245 295 11 425 109 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 251 97 17 75 127 34 39 245 295 11 425 109 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 14 4 Initial Fut: 251 97 17 76 127 34 39 250 295 11 439 113 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 251 97 17 76 127 34 39 250 295 11 439 113 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 251 97 17 76 127 34 39 250 295 11 439 113 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 251 97 17 76 127 34 39 250 295 11 439 113 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.95 0.97 0.97 Lanes: 1.00 1.70 0.30 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.13 0.87 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.20 Final Sat.: 1805 3004 526 1805 1900 1615 224 1438 1663 1805 1464 377 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.14 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.02 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.01 0.30 0.30 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 15.9 10.2 10.2 13.3 7.6 27.9 20.3 20.3 20.3 34.2 34.2 34.2 Volume/Cap: 0.79 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.79 0.07 0.77 0.77 0.79 0.02 0.79 0.79 Uniform Del: 35.5 36.6 36.6 34.1 40.4 21.9 32.7 32.7 32.9 17.4 24.7 24.7 IncremntDel: 12.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 22.3 0.1 4.9 4.9 5.7 0.0 6.0 6.0 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 47.8 36.9 36.9 34.7 62.7 22.0 37.6 37.6 38.5 17.4 30.6 30.6 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 47.8 36.9 36.9 34.7 62.7 22.0 37.6 37.6 38.5 17.4 30.6 30.6 LOS by Move: D D D C E C D D D B C C HCM2kAvgQ: 7 1 1 2 6 1 10 10 10 0 15 15 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-10

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #2210: McCray St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 47***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 69 235*** 163 1 0 1 0 1

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

0 1

476

271

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

177***

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.968

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

65.5

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

59.4

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 334***

361

18

E

0

1 1 0 139 30 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: McCray St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 334 139 30 159 235 69 47 460 271 18 352 175 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 334 139 30 159 235 69 47 460 271 18 352 175 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 16 0 0 9 2 Initial Fut: 334 139 30 163 235 69 47 476 271 18 361 177 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 334 139 30 163 235 69 47 476 271 18 361 177 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 334 139 30 163 235 69 47 476 271 18 361 177 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 334 139 30 163 235 69 47 476 271 18 361 177 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 1.00 1.64 0.36 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.12 1.20 0.68 1.00 0.67 0.33 Final Sat.: 1805 2889 624 1805 1900 1615 202 2048 1166 1805 1212 594 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.19 0.05 0.05 0.09 0.12 0.04 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.01 0.30 0.30 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 17.2 10.0 10.0 18.7 11.5 33.1 21.6 21.6 21.6 27.7 27.7 27.7 Volume/Cap: 0.97 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.97 0.12 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.03 0.97 0.97 Uniform Del: 36.1 37.4 37.4 31.0 39.1 18.8 33.9 33.9 33.9 21.8 30.7 30.7 IncremntDel: 39.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 48.6 0.1 23.8 23.8 23.8 0.0 30.1 30.1 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 75.9 38.2 38.2 31.8 87.7 18.9 57.6 57.6 57.6 21.8 60.8 60.8 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 75.9 38.2 38.2 31.8 87.7 18.9 57.6 57.6 57.6 21.8 60.8 60.8 LOS by Move: E D D C F B E E E C E E HCM2kAvgQ: 12 2 2 4 11 1 17 17 17 0 20 20 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-11

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #2218: Memorial St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 45

46 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 163 244*** 1 0 1 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 1

305***

75

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

230

0

0

Critical V/C:

1.284

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

65.0

1

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

65.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 93***

506***

58

F

1

0 1 0 157 83 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Memorial St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 93 157 83 244 163 46 45 298 75 58 484 230 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 93 157 83 244 163 46 45 298 75 58 484 230 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 22 0 Initial Fut: 93 157 83 244 163 46 45 305 75 58 506 230 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 93 157 83 244 163 46 45 305 75 58 506 230 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 93 157 83 244 163 46 45 305 75 58 506 230 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 93 157 83 244 163 46 45 305 75 58 506 230 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.56 0.94 0.50 1.00 0.80 0.20 0.13 0.87 1.00 0.10 0.90 1.00 Final Sat.: 216 378 206 393 336 86 54 364 454 45 394 479 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.43 0.41 0.40 0.62 0.48 0.54 0.84 0.84 0.17 1.28 1.28 0.48 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 18.3 17.4 16.6 25.1 18.9 18.9 41.2 41.2 12.0 168.8 169 16.7 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 18.3 17.4 16.6 25.1 18.9 18.9 41.2 41.2 12.0 168.8 169 16.7 LOS by Move: C C C D C C E E B F F C ApproachDel: 17.4 22.2 36.1 124.7 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 17.4 22.2 36.1 124.7 LOS by Appr: C C E F AllWayAvgQ: 0.7 0.6 0.6 1.5 0.9 0.9 3.5 3.5 0.2 19.3 19.3 0.9 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-12

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #2218: Memorial St and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 39***

45 0

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 267 298*** 1 0 1 0

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 1

594

146

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

289

0

0

Critical V/C:

1.634

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

124.0

1

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

124.0

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 60***

423***

59

F

1

0 1 0 268 71 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Memorial St Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 60 268 71 298 267 45 39 569 146 59 409 289 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 60 268 71 298 267 45 39 569 146 59 409 289 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 14 0 Initial Fut: 60 268 71 298 267 45 39 594 146 59 423 289 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 60 268 71 298 267 45 39 594 146 59 423 289 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 60 268 71 298 267 45 39 594 146 59 423 289 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 60 268 71 298 267 45 39 594 146 59 423 289 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 0.30 1.34 0.36 0.98 0.87 0.15 0.06 0.94 1.00 0.12 0.88 1.00 Final Sat.: 110 501 135 364 346 58 24 363 412 48 346 428 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.55 0.54 0.52 0.82 0.77 0.77 1.63 1.63 0.35 1.22 1.22 0.68 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 23.3 22.5 21.7 43.6 36.2 36.0 319.6 320 15.8 148.7 149 26.6 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 23.3 22.5 21.7 43.6 36.2 36.0 319.6 320 15.8 148.7 149 26.6 LOS by Move: C C C E E E F F C F F D ApproachDel: 22.5 39.8 262.7 102.9 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 22.5 39.8 262.7 102.9 LOS by Appr: C E F F AllWayAvgQ: 1.1 1.0 1.0 3.2 2.7 2.7 33.1 33.1 0.5 15.0 15.0 1.8 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-13

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #2243: Fairview Rd and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 134***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 106 402 53*** 1 0 2 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

76

129

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

105

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.463

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

17.1

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

17.7

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 128

149***

139

B

0

1 1 0 597*** 71 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 102 577 71 53 395 106 134 76 121 139 149 105 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 102 577 71 53 395 106 134 76 121 139 149 105 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 26 20 0 0 7 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 128 597 71 53 402 106 134 76 129 139 149 105 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 128 597 71 53 402 106 134 76 129 139 149 105 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 128 597 71 53 402 106 134 76 129 139 149 105 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 128 597 71 53 402 106 134 76 129 139 149 105 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.79 0.21 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3175 378 1805 3610 1615 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.19 0.19 0.03 0.11 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.07 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 11.0 24.4 24.4 3.8 17.2 26.9 9.6 6.8 17.7 13.0 10.2 14.0 Volume/Cap: 0.39 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.39 0.15 0.46 0.35 0.27 0.35 0.46 0.28 Uniform Del: 21.6 13.0 13.0 27.1 17.2 9.8 22.8 24.6 16.2 19.9 22.5 18.9 IncremntDel: 0.8 0.2 0.2 2.9 0.2 0.1 1.2 1.0 0.3 0.6 1.1 0.4 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 22.3 13.2 13.2 30.0 17.4 9.9 24.0 25.6 16.5 20.5 23.5 19.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 22.3 13.2 13.2 30.0 17.4 9.9 24.0 25.6 16.5 20.5 23.5 19.3 LOS by Move: C B B C B A C C B C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 2 5 5 2 3 1 3 2 2 3 3 2 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-14

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #2243: Fairview Rd and Hillcrest Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 112

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 165 519 119*** 1 0 2 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

169***

181

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

83

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.484

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

19.1

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

18.1

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 142

118

110***

B

0

1 1 0 437*** 158 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Hillcrest Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 125 424 158 119 497 165 112 169 152 110 118 83 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 125 424 158 119 497 165 112 169 152 110 118 83 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 17 13 0 0 22 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 142 437 158 119 519 165 112 169 181 110 118 83 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 142 437 158 119 519 165 112 169 181 110 118 83 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 142 437 158 119 519 165 112 169 181 110 118 83 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 142 437 158 119 519 165 112 169 181 110 118 83 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.91 0.91 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.47 0.53 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 2545 920 1805 3610 1615 1805 1900 1615 1805 1900 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.17 0.17 0.07 0.14 0.10 0.06 0.09 0.11 0.06 0.06 0.05 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 10.4 21.3 21.3 8.2 19.0 28.3 9.3 11.0 21.4 7.5 9.3 17.5 Volume/Cap: 0.45 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.45 0.22 0.40 0.48 0.31 0.48 0.40 0.18 Uniform Del: 22.2 15.1 15.1 24.0 16.3 9.3 22.9 21.9 14.0 24.4 22.9 15.9 IncremntDel: 1.0 0.3 0.3 1.5 0.3 0.1 0.9 1.1 0.3 1.6 0.9 0.2 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 23.3 15.4 15.4 25.5 16.6 9.5 23.8 23.0 14.3 26.0 23.7 16.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 23.3 15.4 15.4 25.5 16.6 9.5 23.8 23.0 14.3 26.0 23.7 16.1 LOS by Move: C B B C B A C C B C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 3 5 5 3 4 2 2 3 3 3 2 1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-15

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #2245: Fairview Rd and Santa Ana Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 72

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 79 359 0 1 0 2 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

127

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.348

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.6

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.6

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

C

1 0 2 0 0 181 598 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Santa Ana Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 176 587 0 0 355 79 72 0 125 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 176 587 0 0 355 79 72 0 125 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 5 11 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 181 598 0 0 359 79 72 0 127 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 181 598 0 0 359 79 72 0 127 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 181 598 0 0 359 79 72 0 127 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx 6.9 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 438 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1020 xxxx 180 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1133 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 236 xxxx 839 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1133 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 207 xxxx 839 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.16 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.35 xxxx 0.15 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.5 xxxx 0.5 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.8 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 31.4 xxxx 10.1 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * D * B * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 17.8 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * C * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-16

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #2245: Fairview Rd and Santa Ana Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 87

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 95 568 0 1 0 2 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

158

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

0

Critical V/C:

0.412

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

4.1

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

4.1

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

C

1 0 2 0 0 127 400 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Santa Ana Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 124 393 0 0 555 95 87 0 152 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 124 393 0 0 555 95 87 0 152 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 3 7 0 0 13 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 127 400 0 0 568 95 87 0 158 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 127 400 0 0 568 95 87 0 158 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 127 400 0 0 568 95 87 0 158 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.8 xxxx 6.9 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 663 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1022 xxxx 284 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 935 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 235 xxxx 719 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 935 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 211 xxxx 719 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.14 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.41 xxxx 0.22 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1.9 xxxx 0.8 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 9.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 33.5 xxxx 11.4 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * D * B * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 19.3 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * C * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-17

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #2248: Fairview Rd and McCloskey Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 44

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 43 383 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

0

95

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1!

Critical V/C:

0.240

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.4

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.4

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

C

1 0 1 0 0 152 521 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd McCloskey Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 151 511 0 0 380 43 44 0 95 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 151 511 0 0 380 43 44 0 95 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 1 10 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 152 521 0 0 383 43 44 0 95 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 152 521 0 0 383 43 44 0 95 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 152 521 0 0 383 43 44 0 95 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 426 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1208 1208 383 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1144 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 204 185 669 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1144 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 183 160 669 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.13 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.24 0.00 0.14 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.5 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.6 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 364 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 1.7 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 20.9 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * C * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 20.9 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * C * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-18

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #2248: Fairview Rd and McCloskey Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 59

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 42 488 0 1 0 1 0 0

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

0 0

0

163

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

0

0

1!

Critical V/C:

0.279

0

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

5.4

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

5.4

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

0

C

1 0 1 0 0 132 325 0 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd McCloskey Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 131 318 0 0 477 42 59 0 162 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 131 318 0 0 477 42 59 0 162 0 0 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 1 7 0 0 11 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 132 325 0 0 488 42 59 0 163 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 132 325 0 0 488 42 59 0 163 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 132 325 0 0 488 42 59 0 163 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 6.4 6.5 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 530 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 1077 1077 488 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 1048 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 245 221 584 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 1048 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx 221 193 584 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.13 xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.27 0.00 0.28 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.4 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.9 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * * * * * * * * * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx 406 xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 3.2 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx 24.0 xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * C * * * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 24.0 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * C * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-19

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #2331: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 243***

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 269 1093 485*** 1 0 3 0 2

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

2 0

402

274

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

527***

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.662

2

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

32.9

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

30.6

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

472

140

C

2 0 3 0 1 288 1077*** 87 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 279 1066 87 484 1089 269 243 398 271 140 461 525 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 279 1066 87 484 1089 269 243 398 271 140 461 525 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 9 11 0 1 4 0 0 4 3 0 11 2 Initial Fut: 288 1077 87 485 1093 269 243 402 274 140 472 527 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 288 1077 87 485 1093 269 243 402 274 140 472 527 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 288 1077 87 485 1093 269 243 402 274 140 472 527 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 288 1077 87 485 1093 269 243 402 274 140 472 527 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 3610 5700 1615 3610 5700 1615 3610 3800 1615 1805 3800 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.08 0.19 0.05 0.13 0.19 0.17 0.07 0.11 0.17 0.08 0.12 0.33 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 14.3 28.5 45.1 20.3 34.5 44.7 10.2 22.6 36.9 16.6 29.0 49.3 Volume/Cap: 0.56 0.66 0.12 0.66 0.56 0.37 0.66 0.47 0.46 0.47 0.43 0.66 Uniform Del: 39.9 31.5 15.9 36.7 26.6 18.4 43.3 33.5 23.9 37.7 28.8 19.1 IncremntDel: 1.3 1.0 0.1 2.3 0.4 0.3 4.5 0.4 0.6 1.2 0.3 2.1 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 41.2 32.5 16.0 39.0 26.9 18.7 47.7 33.9 24.5 38.9 29.1 21.2 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 41.2 32.5 16.0 39.0 26.9 18.7 47.7 33.9 24.5 38.9 29.1 21.2 LOS by Move: D C B D C B D C C D C C HCM2kAvgQ: 5 11 2 8 9 6 4 5 6 4 6 13 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-20

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #2331: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass and Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 319

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 306 1411 685*** 1 0 3 0 2

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

2 0

677***

412

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

602

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.818

2

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

41.2

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

35.3

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

625

204***

D

2 0 3 0 1 389 1360*** 152 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy/Future 25 Bypass Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 383 1352 152 682 1398 306 319 664 402 204 618 600 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 383 1352 152 682 1398 306 319 664 402 204 618 600 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 6 8 0 3 13 0 0 13 10 0 7 2 Initial Fut: 389 1360 152 685 1411 306 319 677 412 204 625 602 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 389 1360 152 685 1411 306 319 677 412 204 625 602 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 389 1360 152 685 1411 306 319 677 412 204 625 602 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 389 1360 152 685 1411 306 319 677 412 204 625 602 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 3610 5700 1615 3610 5700 1615 3610 3800 1615 1805 3800 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.11 0.24 0.09 0.19 0.25 0.19 0.09 0.18 0.26 0.11 0.16 0.37 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 15.9 29.2 43.0 23.2 36.5 48.1 11.6 21.8 37.7 13.8 24.0 47.2 Volume/Cap: 0.68 0.82 0.22 0.82 0.68 0.39 0.76 0.82 0.68 0.82 0.68 0.79 Uniform Del: 39.6 32.9 17.9 36.4 26.8 16.6 42.9 37.2 26.1 41.9 34.6 22.2 IncremntDel: 3.3 3.3 0.2 6.3 0.9 0.3 8.0 6.4 3.1 18.7 2.2 5.6 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 42.9 36.2 18.1 42.7 27.7 17.0 50.9 43.6 29.1 60.5 36.7 27.8 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 42.9 36.2 18.1 42.7 27.7 17.0 50.9 43.6 29.1 60.5 36.7 27.8 LOS by Move: D D B D C B D D C E D C HCM2kAvgQ: 7 15 3 12 13 6 5 11 11 8 10 17 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-21

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #2347: Fairview Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 290***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 236 364*** 38 1 0 2 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

114

219

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

75

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.594

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

23.9

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

19.4

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 198***

224***

59

B

0

1 1 0 433 30 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 174 388 30 38 349 236 290 114 211 59 224 75 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 174 388 30 38 349 236 290 114 211 59 224 75 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 24 45 0 0 15 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 198 433 30 38 364 236 290 114 219 59 224 75 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 198 433 30 38 364 236 290 114 219 59 224 75 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 198 433 30 38 364 236 290 114 219 59 224 75 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 198 433 30 38 364 236 290 114 219 59 224 75 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.87 0.13 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1900 3376 234 1900 3610 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.10 0.13 0.13 0.02 0.10 0.12 0.15 0.06 0.12 0.03 0.12 0.04 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 10.5 17.9 17.9 2.8 10.2 25.6 15.4 18.0 28.5 9.3 11.9 14.7 Volume/Cap: 0.59 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.59 0.29 0.59 0.20 0.24 0.20 0.59 0.16 Uniform Del: 22.8 16.9 16.9 27.8 23.0 11.3 19.6 15.6 9.3 22.1 21.9 17.8 IncremntDel: 2.9 0.3 0.3 3.3 1.6 0.2 2.0 0.2 0.1 0.3 2.6 0.2 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 25.7 17.2 17.2 31.2 24.6 11.5 21.5 15.8 9.5 22.4 24.4 18.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 25.7 17.2 17.2 31.2 24.6 11.5 21.5 15.8 9.5 22.4 24.4 18.0 LOS by Move: C B B C C B C B A C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 4 4 4 1 3 3 6 2 2 1 4 1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-22

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #2347: Fairview Rd and Sunnyslope Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 223***

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 246 505*** 86 1 0 2 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

256

272

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

60

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.602

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

23.6

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

18.8

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 249***

178***

46

B

0

1 1 0 408 67 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Sunnyslope Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 233 378 67 86 454 246 223 256 245 46 178 60 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 233 378 67 86 454 246 223 256 245 46 178 60 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 16 30 0 0 51 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 249 408 67 86 505 246 223 256 272 46 178 60 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 249 408 67 86 505 246 223 256 272 46 178 60 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 249 408 67 86 505 246 223 256 272 46 178 60 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 249 408 67 86 505 246 223 256 272 46 178 60 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.72 0.28 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1900 3101 509 1900 3610 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.05 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.02 0.09 0.03 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 13.1 20.1 20.1 6.9 13.9 25.6 11.7 17.8 30.9 3.2 9.3 16.2 Volume/Cap: 0.60 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.60 0.30 0.60 0.45 0.28 0.45 0.60 0.12 Uniform Del: 21.1 15.3 15.3 24.6 20.6 11.3 22.0 17.1 8.3 27.6 23.6 16.5 IncremntDel: 2.5 0.2 0.2 1.2 1.2 0.2 2.8 0.6 0.2 3.2 3.5 0.1 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 23.6 15.5 15.5 25.8 21.8 11.5 24.8 17.7 8.4 30.8 27.1 16.6 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 23.6 15.5 15.5 25.8 21.8 11.5 24.8 17.7 8.4 30.8 27.1 16.6 LOS by Move: C B B C C B C B A C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 5 4 4 1 4 3 5 4 3 1 3 1 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-23

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #2367: Airline Hwy and Sunset Dr Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 48

38 1

Signal=Protect/Rights=Include 1074 151*** 0 2 0 1

Signal=Permit Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Permit Rights=Overlap

1 0

47

25

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

206

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.476

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

10.0

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

9.1

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 32

74***

31

A

0

1 1 0 1054*** 32 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Airline Hwy Sunset Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 32 1031 32 151 1066 38 48 47 25 31 74 206 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 32 1031 32 151 1066 38 48 47 25 31 74 206 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 23 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 32 1054 32 151 1074 38 48 47 25 31 74 206 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 32 1054 32 151 1074 38 48 47 25 31 74 206 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 32 1054 32 151 1074 38 48 47 25 31 74 206 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 32 1054 32 151 1074 38 48 47 25 31 74 206 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.94 0.06 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1900 3688 112 1900 3800 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.02 0.29 0.29 0.08 0.28 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.11 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 2.6 36.1 36.1 10.0 43.5 43.5 4.9 4.9 7.5 4.9 4.9 14.9 Volume/Cap: 0.39 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.39 0.03 0.31 0.30 0.11 0.20 0.48 0.44 Uniform Del: 27.9 6.7 6.7 22.6 3.2 2.3 25.9 25.9 23.3 25.7 26.3 19.0 IncremntDel: 3.0 0.2 0.2 1.1 0.1 0.0 1.1 1.1 0.2 0.6 2.3 0.6 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 31.0 6.8 6.8 23.7 3.3 2.3 27.1 27.0 23.5 26.3 28.6 19.6 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 31.0 6.8 6.8 23.7 3.3 2.3 27.1 27.0 23.5 26.3 28.6 19.6 LOS by Move: C A A C A A C C C C C B HCM2kAvgQ: 1 6 6 3 4 0 1 1 0 1 2 4 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-24

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #2367: Airline Hwy and Sunset Dr Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 49

100 1

Signal=Protect/Rights=Include 1361 254*** 0 2 0 1

Signal=Permit Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Permit Rights=Overlap

1 0

62

32

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

265

0

1

Critical V/C:

0.641

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

13.2

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

10.8

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 52

89***

43

B

0

1 1 0 1340*** 45 Signal=Protect/Rights=Include

Street Name: Airline Hwy Sunset Dr Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 52 1325 45 254 1335 100 49 62 32 43 89 265 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 52 1325 45 254 1335 100 49 62 32 43 89 265 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 15 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 52 1340 45 254 1361 100 49 62 32 43 89 265 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 52 1340 45 254 1361 100 49 62 32 43 89 265 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 52 1340 45 254 1361 100 49 62 32 43 89 265 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 52 1340 45 254 1361 100 49 62 32 43 89 265 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 1.94 0.06 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1900 3677 123 1900 3800 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.03 0.36 0.36 0.13 0.36 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.05 0.14 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 3.3 34.1 34.1 12.5 43.3 43.3 4.4 4.4 7.7 4.4 4.4 16.9 Volume/Cap: 0.50 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.50 0.07 0.35 0.45 0.13 0.31 0.64 0.50 Uniform Del: 27.5 8.8 8.8 21.7 3.6 2.5 26.5 26.6 23.2 26.4 27.0 18.0 IncremntDel: 3.7 0.7 0.7 3.5 0.1 0.0 1.5 2.3 0.2 1.3 9.7 0.7 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 31.2 9.5 9.5 25.2 3.8 2.5 28.0 28.9 23.4 27.6 36.8 18.7 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 31.2 9.5 9.5 25.2 3.8 2.5 28.0 28.9 23.4 27.6 36.8 18.7 LOS by Move: C A A C A A C C C C D B HCM2kAvgQ: 2 10 10 6 6 1 1 2 1 1 3 5 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-25

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #2925: San Benito St and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 180***

216 1

Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap 0 179*** 0 0 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

616

0

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

302

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.434

2

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

16.2

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

10.8

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 0

613***

0

B

0

0 0 0 0 0 Signal=Split/Rights=Include

Street Name: San Benito St Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 179 0 216 180 612 0 0 602 302 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 179 0 216 180 612 0 0 602 302 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 11 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 179 0 216 180 616 0 0 613 302 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 179 0 216 180 616 0 0 613 302 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 179 0 216 180 616 0 0 613 302 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 179 0 216 180 616 0 0 613 302 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 1805 3610 0 0 3610 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.13 0.10 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.19 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.7 0.0 27.5 13.8 37.3 0.0 0.0 23.5 37.2 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.00 0.29 0.43 0.27 0.00 0.00 0.43 0.30 Uniform Del: 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.8 0.0 10.2 19.8 5.2 0.0 0.0 13.4 5.3 IncremntDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.5 0.0 10.4 20.5 5.3 0.0 0.0 13.6 5.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.5 0.0 10.4 20.5 5.3 0.0 0.0 13.6 5.5 LOS by Move: A A A C A B C A A A B A HCM2kAvgQ: 0 0 0 3 0 3 3 3 0 0 4 3 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-26

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #2925: San Benito St and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 216***

169 1

Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap 0 211*** 0 0 0 1

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Overlap

1 0

758

0

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

208

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.527

2

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

16.8

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

11.5

0

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 0

762***

0

B

0

0 0 0 0 0 Signal=Split/Rights=Include

Street Name: San Benito St Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 211 0 169 216 745 0 0 755 208 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 211 0 169 216 745 0 0 755 208 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 7 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 211 0 169 216 758 0 0 762 208 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 211 0 169 216 758 0 0 762 208 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 211 0 169 216 758 0 0 762 208 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 211 0 169 216 758 0 0 762 208 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.85 0.95 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.85 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1805 0 1615 1805 3610 0 0 3610 1615 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.10 0.12 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.13 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.3 0.0 27.0 13.6 37.7 0.0 0.0 24.0 37.4 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.23 0.53 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.21 Uniform Del: 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.6 0.0 10.2 20.4 5.3 0.0 0.0 13.7 4.9 IncremntDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.2 1.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.1 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.9 0.0 10.3 21.6 5.3 0.0 0.0 14.0 5.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.9 0.0 10.3 21.6 5.3 0.0 0.0 14.0 5.0 LOS by Move: A A A C A B C A A A B A HCM2kAvgQ: 0 0 0 4 0 2 4 4 0 0 5 2 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-27

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #2942: Enterprise Rd and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 21

38 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 5 38 0 1 0 1

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

704

26

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

15

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.362

0

2

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.6

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.6

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 46

642

54

D

0

1 0 1 5 47 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Enterprise Rd Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 46 5 47 38 5 38 21 693 26 54 609 15 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 46 5 47 38 5 38 21 693 26 54 609 15 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 33 0 Initial Fut: 46 5 47 38 5 38 21 704 26 54 642 15 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 46 5 47 38 5 38 21 704 26 54 642 15 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 46 5 47 38 5 38 21 704 26 54 642 15 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1178 1511 352 1147 1522 321 657 xxxx xxxxx 730 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 149 121 650 157 120 681 940 xxxx xxxxx 883 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 127 111 650 132 110 681 940 xxxx xxxxx 883 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.36 0.04 0.07 0.29 0.05 0.06 0.02 xxxx xxxx 0.06 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 1.5 0.1 0.2 1.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 48.6 38.8 11.0 43.1 39.4 10.6 8.9 xxxx xxxxx 9.3 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: E E B E E B A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 30.1 27.6 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: D D * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-28

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #2942: Enterprise Rd and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 66

24 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 2 39 0 1 0 1

Signal=Uncontrol Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Uncontrol Rights=Include

1 0

742

61

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

40

0

2

Critical V/C:

0.305

0

2

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

3.3

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

3.3

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 40

374

54

D

0

1 0 1 3 42 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Enterprise Rd Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 40 3 42 39 2 24 66 704 61 54 352 40 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 40 3 42 39 2 24 66 704 61 54 352 40 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 22 0 Initial Fut: 40 3 42 39 2 24 66 742 61 54 374 40 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 40 3 42 39 2 24 66 742 61 54 374 40 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 40 3 42 39 2 24 66 742 61 54 374 40 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim: 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 1170 1396 371 987 1417 187 414 xxxx xxxxx 803 xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: 150 142 632 205 138 830 1156 xxxx xxxxx 830 xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: 131 126 632 171 122 830 1156 xxxx xxxxx 830 xxxx xxxxx Volume/Cap: 0.30 0.02 0.07 0.23 0.02 0.03 0.06 xxxx xxxx 0.07 xxxx xxxx ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 1.2 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.2 xxxx xxxxx 0.2 xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 44.0 34.4 11.1 32.2 35.0 9.5 8.3 xxxx xxxxx 9.6 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: E D B D E A A * * A * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * * * * * ApproachDel: 27.4 23.9 xxxxxx xxxxxx ApproachLOS: D C * * Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-29

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #3072: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd and Hwy 156 Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 9***

25 0

Signal=Split/Rights=Include 12*** 36 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 130

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

1012

675

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

28

1

2

Critical V/C:

0.616

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

31.5

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

25.8

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 739***

1069***

44

C

1

0 0 1 15 17 Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd Hwy 156 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 728 15 17 36 12 25 9 1012 671 44 1069 28 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 728 15 17 36 12 25 9 1012 671 44 1069 28 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 739 15 17 36 12 25 9 1012 675 44 1069 28 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 739 15 17 36 12 25 9 1012 675 44 1069 28 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 739 15 17 36 12 25 9 1012 675 44 1069 28 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 739 15 17 36 12 25 9 1012 675 44 1069 28 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 1.96 0.04 1.00 0.50 0.16 0.34 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.95 0.05 Final Sat.: 3549 72 1615 872 291 606 1805 3610 1615 1805 3504 92 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.21 0.21 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.28 0.42 0.02 0.31 0.31 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 43.9 43.9 49.1 8.7 8.7 8.7 1.1 60.2 104.1 5.2 64.3 64.3 Volume/Cap: 0.62 0.62 0.03 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.61 0.52 0.61 0.62 0.62 Uniform Del: 36.0 36.0 25.4 59.0 59.0 59.0 64.3 26.1 4.4 61.4 23.9 23.9 IncremntDel: 1.0 1.0 0.0 9.4 9.4 9.4 59.8 0.6 0.4 13.8 0.7 0.7 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 37.0 37.0 25.4 68.4 68.4 68.4 124.1 26.7 4.8 75.1 24.5 24.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 37.0 37.0 25.4 68.4 68.4 68.4 124.1 26.7 4.8 75.1 24.5 24.5 LOS by Move: D D C E E E F C A E C C HCM2kAvgQ: 13 13 0 4 4 4 0 16 9 3 17 17 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-30

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #3072: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd and Hwy 156 Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 27

17 0

Signal=Split/Rights=Include 66 126*** 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Overlap

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 130

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

1093

935***

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

36

1

2

Critical V/C:

0.782

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

34.0

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

33.8

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 878***

1102

29***

C

1

0 0 1 9 65 Signal=Split/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Union Rd/Mitchell Rd Hwy 156 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 871 9 65 126 66 17 27 1093 922 29 1102 36 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 871 9 65 126 66 17 27 1093 922 29 1102 36 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 878 9 65 126 66 17 27 1093 935 29 1102 36 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 878 9 65 126 66 17 27 1093 935 29 1102 36 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 878 9 65 126 66 17 27 1093 935 29 1102 36 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 878 9 65 126 66 17 27 1093 935 29 1102 36 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.95 Lanes: 1.98 0.02 1.00 0.60 0.32 0.08 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.94 0.06 Final Sat.: 3585 37 1615 1100 576 148 1805 3610 1615 1805 3478 114 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.24 0.24 0.04 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.01 0.30 0.58 0.02 0.32 0.32 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 40.7 40.7 43.4 19.0 19.0 19.0 2.6 55.5 96.3 2.7 55.6 55.6 Volume/Cap: 0.78 0.78 0.12 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.74 0.71 0.78 0.78 0.74 0.74 Uniform Del: 40.6 40.6 30.1 53.5 53.5 53.5 63.3 30.6 10.4 63.4 31.2 31.2 IncremntDel: 3.6 3.6 0.1 13.8 13.8 13.8 56.7 1.5 3.4 67.4 2.0 2.0 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 44.2 44.2 30.2 67.3 67.3 67.3 120.1 32.1 13.8 130.8 33.1 33.1 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 44.2 44.2 30.2 67.3 67.3 67.3 120.1 32.1 13.8 130.8 33.1 33.1 LOS by Move: D D C E E E F C B F C C HCM2kAvgQ: 18 18 2 10 10 10 1 19 24 3 21 21 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-31

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #3337: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 231

151 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 64 147*** 0 1 0 1

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

340***

219

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

196

0

1

Critical V/C:

1.006

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

40.2

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

40.2

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 214***

346***

7

E

0

0 1 0 213 5 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 214 213 5 141 63 118 220 340 219 7 346 194 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 214 213 5 141 63 118 220 340 219 7 346 194 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 6 1 33 11 0 0 0 0 2 Initial Fut: 214 213 5 147 64 151 231 340 219 7 346 196 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 214 213 5 147 64 151 231 340 219 7 346 196 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 214 213 5 147 64 151 231 340 219 7 346 196 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 214 213 5 147 64 151 231 340 219 7 346 196 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.98 0.02 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 350 360 8 303 313 336 344 365 387 314 344 359 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.61 0.59 0.59 0.49 0.20 0.45 0.67 0.93 0.57 0.02 1.01 0.55 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 26.8 24.6 24.6 24.2 16.4 20.8 31.3 63.0 22.8 13.9 82.7 22.9 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 26.8 24.6 24.6 24.2 16.4 20.8 31.3 63.0 22.8 13.9 82.7 22.9 LOS by Move: D C C C C C D F C B F C ApproachDel: 25.7 21.4 42.6 60.5 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 25.7 21.4 42.6 60.5 LOS by Appr: D C E F AllWayAvgQ: 1.4 1.3 1.3 0.8 0.2 0.7 1.7 5.1 1.2 0.0 6.6 1.0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-32

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM 4-Way Stop (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #3337: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr and Airline Hwy Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 198

149 1

Signal=Stop/Rights=Include 80 173*** 0 1 0 1

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

454***

271

Lanes:

Final Vol:

1

218

0

1

Critical V/C:

1.303

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

85.1

0

1

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

85.1

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

1 281***

440***

7

F

0

0 1 0 89 8 Signal=Stop/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd/Ridgemark Dr Airline Hwy Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 281 88 8 169 79 127 160 454 271 7 440 211 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 281 88 8 169 79 127 160 454 271 7 440 211 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 1 0 4 1 22 38 0 0 0 0 7 Initial Fut: 281 89 8 173 80 149 198 454 271 7 440 218 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 281 89 8 173 80 149 198 454 271 7 440 218 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 281 89 8 173 80 149 198 454 271 7 440 218 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 281 89 8 173 80 149 198 454 271 7 440 218 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Adjustment: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lanes: 1.00 0.92 0.08 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 345 329 30 303 313 335 337 359 382 312 338 355 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.81 0.27 0.27 0.57 0.26 0.44 0.59 1.26 0.71 0.02 1.30 0.61 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Delay/Veh: 44.9 16.0 16.0 28.4 17.5 21.0 26.7 168 31.2 14.1 186 26.7 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 44.9 16.0 16.0 28.4 17.5 21.0 26.7 168 31.2 14.1 186 26.7 LOS by Move: E C C D C C D F D B F D ApproachDel: 37.5 23.5 97.7 131.8 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ApprAdjDel: 37.5 23.5 97.7 131.8 LOS by Appr: E C F F AllWayAvgQ: 3.1 0.3 0.3 1.2 0.3 0.7 1.3 15.5 2.0 0.0 16.2 1.4 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-33

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #3430: Airline Hwy and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 178

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 176 559 341*** 1 0 2 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

240***

240

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

340

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.808

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

40.7

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

37.2

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

387***

56

D

1 0 2 0 1 220 544*** 42 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 210 521 42 341 551 176 178 238 237 56 380 340 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 210 521 42 341 551 176 178 238 237 56 380 340 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 10 23 0 0 8 0 0 2 3 0 7 0 Initial Fut: 220 544 42 341 559 176 178 240 240 56 387 340 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 220 544 42 341 559 176 178 240 240 56 387 340 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 220 544 42 341 559 176 178 240 240 56 387 340 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 220 544 42 341 559 176 178 240 240 56 387 340 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.88 0.88 0.95 0.88 0.88 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.06 0.94 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 1670 1670 1805 1787 1570 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.12 0.15 0.03 0.19 0.15 0.11 0.10 0.14 0.14 0.03 0.22 0.22 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 16.7 16.8 40.9 21.1 21.2 37.2 16.0 16.0 16.0 24.1 24.1 24.1 Volume/Cap: 0.66 0.81 0.06 0.81 0.66 0.26 0.55 0.81 0.81 0.12 0.81 0.81 Uniform Del: 34.0 35.1 13.7 32.6 31.1 17.4 33.7 35.5 35.5 24.9 30.8 30.8 IncremntDel: 4.8 7.2 0.0 11.0 1.9 0.2 2.1 8.0 8.0 0.1 5.5 5.5 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 38.8 42.2 13.8 43.5 33.0 17.6 35.8 43.6 43.6 25.0 36.2 36.2 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 38.8 42.2 13.8 43.5 33.0 17.6 35.8 43.6 43.6 25.0 36.2 36.2 LOS by Move: D D B D C B D D D C D D HCM2kAvgQ: 6 8 1 11 8 3 5 9 9 1 12 12 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-34

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #3430: Airline Hwy and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 206

Signal=Split Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap 155 759 454*** 1 0 2 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 90

Loss Time (sec):

12

Signal=Split Rights=Include

1 0

371***

268

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

446***

1

1

Critical V/C:

1.043

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

82.6

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

61.9

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

373

73

E

1 0 2 0 1 238 701*** 73 Signal=Protect/Rights=Overlap

Street Name: Airline Hwy Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 231 686 73 454 733 155 206 363 256 73 368 446 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 231 686 73 454 733 155 206 363 256 73 368 446 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 7 15 0 0 26 0 0 8 12 0 5 0 Initial Fut: 238 701 73 454 759 155 206 371 268 73 373 446 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 238 701 73 454 759 155 206 371 268 73 373 446 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 238 701 73 454 759 155 206 371 268 73 373 446 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 238 701 73 454 759 155 206 371 268 73 373 446 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.95 0.85 0.95 0.89 0.89 0.95 0.87 0.87 Lanes: 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.16 0.84 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 1805 3610 1615 1805 3610 1615 1805 1964 1419 1805 1657 1657 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.19 0.05 0.25 0.21 0.10 0.11 0.19 0.19 0.04 0.23 0.27 Crit Moves: **** **** **** **** Green Time: 14.8 16.8 40.0 21.7 23.6 39.9 16.3 16.3 16.3 23.2 23.2 23.2 Volume/Cap: 0.80 1.04 0.10 1.04 0.80 0.22 0.63 1.04 1.04 0.16 0.87 1.04 Uniform Del: 36.2 36.6 14.6 34.1 31.0 15.4 34.1 36.8 36.8 25.8 32.0 33.4 IncremntDel: 14.3 46.4 0.1 54.7 4.9 0.2 3.9 48.0 48.0 0.2 9.0 43.8 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 50.4 83.0 14.6 88.9 35.9 15.6 38.0 84.8 84.8 26.0 41.0 77.2 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 50.4 83.0 14.6 88.9 35.9 15.6 38.0 84.8 84.8 26.0 41.0 77.2 LOS by Move: D F B F D B D F F C D E HCM2kAvgQ: 7 14 1 20 13 3 6 16 16 2 14 21 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-35

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #4031: Southside Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 35

52 0

Signal=Permit/Rights=Include 42 38 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

376***

93

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

56

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.619

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

20.3

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

18.0

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 112

520

221***

B

0

1! 0 0 78*** 229 Signal=Permit/Rights=Include

Street Name: Southside Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 112 78 229 37 42 52 35 372 93 221 509 52 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 112 78 229 37 42 52 35 372 93 221 509 52 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 11 4 Initial Fut: 112 78 229 38 42 52 35 376 93 221 520 56 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 112 78 229 38 42 52 35 376 93 221 520 56 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 112 78 229 38 42 52 35 376 93 221 520 56 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 112 78 229 38 42 52 35 376 93 221 520 56 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.95 0.94 0.94 Lanes: 0.27 0.18 0.55 0.29 0.32 0.39 1.00 1.60 0.40 1.00 1.81 0.19 Final Sat.: 416 290 850 440 486 602 1805 2807 694 1805 3210 346 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.02 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.16 0.16 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.1 26.1 2.7 13.0 13.0 11.9 22.2 22.2 Volume/Cap: 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.44 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.44 0.44 Uniform Del: 13.1 13.1 13.1 10.5 10.5 10.5 27.9 21.3 21.3 22.0 14.2 14.2 IncremntDel: 1.7 1.7 1.7 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.8 1.6 1.6 3.3 0.2 0.2 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 14.8 14.8 14.8 10.6 10.6 10.6 31.7 22.8 22.8 25.3 14.4 14.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 14.8 14.8 14.8 10.6 10.6 10.6 31.7 22.8 22.8 25.3 14.4 14.4 LOS by Move: B B B B B B C C C C B B HCM2kAvgQ: 7 7 7 2 2 2 1 4 4 5 5 5 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-36

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #4031: Southside Rd and Union Rd Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 55***

34 0

Signal=Permit/Rights=Include 96 55 0 1! 0 0

Signal=Protect Lanes: Rights=Include

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 60

Loss Time (sec):

9

Signal=Protect Rights=Include

1 0

574

127

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

261

1

1

Critical V/C:

0.654

1

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

18.2

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

18.0

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0 127

457***

52

B

0

1! 0 0 52*** 297 Signal=Permit/Rights=Include

Street Name: Southside Rd Union Rd Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y+R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 127 52 297 51 96 34 55 561 127 52 450 259 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 127 52 297 51 96 34 55 561 127 52 450 259 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 13 0 0 7 2 Initial Fut: 127 52 297 55 96 34 55 574 127 52 457 261 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 127 52 297 55 96 34 55 574 127 52 457 261 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 127 52 297 55 96 34 55 574 127 52 457 261 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 127 52 297 55 96 34 55 574 127 52 457 261 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.95 0.90 0.90 Lanes: 0.27 0.11 0.62 0.30 0.52 0.18 1.00 1.64 0.36 1.00 1.27 0.73 Final Sat.: 403 165 943 450 785 278 1805 2876 636 1805 2171 1240 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.03 0.20 0.20 0.03 0.21 0.21 Crit Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 28.9 28.9 28.9 28.9 28.9 28.9 2.8 19.3 19.3 2.8 19.3 19.3 Volume/Cap: 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.65 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.65 0.65 Uniform Del: 11.8 11.8 11.8 9.2 9.2 9.2 28.1 17.2 17.2 28.1 17.5 17.5 IncremntDel: 2.2 2.2 2.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 17.0 1.1 1.1 13.4 1.4 1.4 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay/Veh: 13.9 13.9 13.9 9.4 9.4 9.4 45.2 18.3 18.3 41.5 18.9 18.9 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 13.9 13.9 13.9 9.4 9.4 9.4 45.2 18.3 18.3 41.5 18.9 18.9 LOS by Move: B B B A A A D B B D B B HCM2kAvgQ: 8 8 8 2 2 2 1 6 6 2 7 7 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-37

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (AM)

Intersection #4370: Fairview Rd and Cielo Vista Dr/ Proj Entrance (Signalized) Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 17

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 6 360 200 0 1 1 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

28

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

126

1

0

Critical V/C:

0.569

1

0

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

6.5

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

6.5

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

84

D

1 0 1 1 0 12 356 200 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Cielo Vista Dr/Proj Entrance (Sig Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 12 356 187 173 360 6 17 0 28 43 0 44 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 12 356 187 173 360 6 17 0 28 43 0 44 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 13 27 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 82 Initial Fut: 12 356 200 200 360 6 17 0 28 84 0 126 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 12 356 200 200 360 6 17 0 28 84 0 126 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 12 356 200 200 360 6 17 0 28 84 0 126 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 366 xxxx xxxxx 556 xxxx xxxxx 965 1343 183 1060 1246 278 Potent Cap.: 1204 xxxx xxxxx 1025 xxxx xxxxx 212 153 834 181 175 725 Move Cap.: 1204 xxxx xxxxx 1025 xxxx xxxxx 148 122 834 148 140 725 Volume/Cap: 0.01 xxxx xxxx 0.20 xxxx xxxx 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.57 0.00 0.17 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.0 xxxx xxxxx 0.7 xxxx xxxxx 0.4 xxxx xxxxx 2.9 xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.0 xxxx xxxxx 9.4 xxxx xxxxx 32.5 xxxx xxxxx 57.5 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * A * * D * * F * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 834 xxxx xxxx 725 SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 0.1 xxxxx xxxx 0.6 Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 9.5 xxxxx xxxx 11.0 Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * A * * B ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 18.1 29.6 ApproachLOS: * * C D Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

COMPARE

Tue Jul 20 22:36:37 2010

Page 61-38

Fairview Corners Residential Hollister, CA Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized (Future Volume Alternative) Cumul wProj (PM)

Intersection #4370: Fairview Rd and Cielo Vista Dr/ Proj Entrance (Signalized) Final Vol: Lanes:

Final Vol: 13

Signal=Stop Lanes: Rights=Include

Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include 14 426 247 0 1 1 0 1

Vol Cnt Date: Cycle Time (sec):

n/a 100

Loss Time (sec):

0

Signal=Stop Rights=Include

1 0

0

22

Lanes:

Final Vol:

0

151

1

0

Critical V/C:

1.520

0

1

Avg Crit Del (sec/veh):

31.6

0

0

Avg Delay (sec/veh):

31.6

1

LOS:

Lanes: Final Vol:

0

131

F

1 0 1 1 0 30 464 208 Signal=Uncontrol/Rights=Include

Street Name: Fairview Rd Cielo Vista Dr/Proj Entrance (Sig Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R L - T - R ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Volume Module: Base Vol: 30 464 162 154 426 14 13 0 22 104 0 97 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 30 464 162 154 426 14 13 0 22 104 0 97 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Prject Trip: 0 0 46 93 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 54 Initial Fut: 30 464 208 247 426 14 13 0 22 131 0 151 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 30 464 208 247 426 14 13 0 22 131 0 151 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 30 464 208 247 426 14 13 0 22 131 0 151 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp: 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 4.1 xxxx xxxxx 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.9 FollowUpTim: 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 2.2 xxxx xxxxx 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: 440 xxxx xxxxx 672 xxxx xxxxx 1219 1659 220 1335 1562 336 Potent Cap.: 1131 xxxx xxxxx 928 xxxx xxxxx 139 99 790 114 113 666 Move Cap.: 1131 xxxx xxxxx 928 xxxx xxxxx 83 70 790 86 81 666 Volume/Cap: 0.03 xxxx xxxx 0.27 xxxx xxxx 0.16 0.00 0.03 1.52 0.00 0.23 ------------|---------------||---------------||---------------||---------------| Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: 0.1 xxxx xxxxx 1.1 xxxx xxxxx 0.5 xxxx xxxxx 10.3 xxxx xxxxx Control Del: 8.3 xxxx xxxxx 10.3 xxxx xxxxx 55.9 xxxx xxxxx 369.2 xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: A * * B * * F * * F * * Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 790 xxxx xxxx 666 SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 0.1 xxxxx xxxx 0.9 Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 9.7 xxxxx xxxx 12.0 Shared LOS: * * * * * * * * A * * B ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 26.9 177.9 ApproachLOS: * * D F Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane.

Traffix 8.0.0715

Copyright (c) 2008 Dowling Associates, Inc.

Licensed to Hexagon Trans., Gilroy

Appendix D  Peak-Hour  Signal Warrant Checks 

Signal Warrant Analysis Summary Warrant Met? Existing Conditions AM PM

Existing Plus Project AM PM

Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline Highway

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Enterprise Road and Airline Highway

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive/Fut Proj Entrance

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Valley View Road and Union Road

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

No

Valley View Road and Sunnyslope Road

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Fairview Road and Hillcrest Road

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Memorial Drive and Hillcrest Road

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Fairview Road and Santa Ana Road

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Fairview Road and McCloskey Road

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Intersection Name

Cumulative w/ out Project Conditions AM PM

Cumulative w/ Project Conditions AM PM

Existing Unsignalized Intersections

Notes: Signal warrant analysis based on the Peak Hour Signal Warrant #3, Figure 4C CAMUTCD, 2010 Edition.

2/15/2011

Fairview Corners Residential 1

. Fairview Road/Ridgemark Dr & Airline Highway

MINOR STREET - HIGHER-VOLUME APPROACH (VPH)

MUTCD PEAK-HOUR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANT - WARRANT 3 (70% Factor) (Community Less Than 10,000 Population or Above 40 mph on Major Street) 600

Existing AM

Background AM

2 or morel lanes (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

500

Background Plus Project AM

2 or more lanes (major) & 1 lane (minor) or 1 lane (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

400

Existing PM

Background PM

1 lane (major) & 1 lane (minor)

300

Background Plus Project PM

200 Cumulative w/ out Project AM

100

Cumulative w/ Project AM Cumulative w/ out Project PM

1300

1200

1100

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

0

Cumulative w/ Project PM Existing Plus Project PM

MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH) Source: Figure 4C-4 of the Manual on Unifrom Traffic Control and Devices (MUTCD) 2010 Edition from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

Background AM

Existing Plus Project AM

Background Plus Project AM

Cumulative w/ out Project AM

479

550

496

563

1326 1339

X

284

299

284

299

432

432

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Cumulative w/ Project PM

Existing Approach Lanes

Major Street - Both Approaches

Airline Highway

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Fairview Road/Ridgemark Dr

Warrant Met?

Cumulative w/ Project AM

2 or One More X

Existing AM

AM Peak Hour

Background Plus Project PM

Cumulative w/ out Project PM

Fairview Road/Ridgemark Dr

Existing Plus Project PM

Airline Highway

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Background PM

Major Street - Both Approaches

Existing Approach Lanes 2 or One More X

Existing PM

PM Peak Hour

684

801

741

846

1543 1588

X

193

210

227

237

377

402

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Warrant Met?

2/15/2011

Fairview Corners Residential 2

. Enterprise Road & Airline Highway

MINOR STREET - HIGHER-VOLUME APPROACH (VPH)

MUTCD PEAK-HOUR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANT - WARRANT 3 (70% Factor) (Community Less Than 10,000 Population or Above 40 mph on Major Street) 600

Existing AM

Background AM

2 or morel lanes (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

500

Background Plus Project AM

2 or more lanes (major) & 1 lane (minor) or 1 lane (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

400

Existing PM

Background PM

1 lane (major) & 1 lane (minor)

300

Background Plus Project PM Cumulative w/ out Project AM

200

Cumulative w/ Project AM

100 Cumulative w/ out Project PM Cumulative w/ Project PM

1300

1200

1100

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

0

Existing Plus Project AM Existing Plus Project PM

MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH) Source: Figure 4C-4 of the Manual on Unifrom Traffic Control and Devices (MUTCD) 2010 Edition from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

804

787

848

1418 1462

87

87

87

87

98

98

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Cumulative w/ Project AM

728

Cumulative w/ Project PM

Warrant Met?

Cumulative w/ out Project AM

X

Cumulative w/ out Project PM

Enterprise Road

Background Plus Project AM

Airline Highway

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Existing Plus Project AM

Major Street - Both Approaches

2 or One More X

Background AM

Existing Approach Lanes

Existing AM

AM Peak Hour

X Warrant Met?

Background Plus Project PM

Enterprise Road

Existing Plus Project PM

Airline Highway

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Background PM

Major Street - Both Approaches

Existing Approach Lanes 2 or One More X

Existing PM

PM Peak Hour

993 76

1105 1072 1165 1277 1337 76

76

76

85

85

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

2/15/2011

Fairview Corners Residential 3

. Fairview Road & Cielo Vista Drive/Fut Proj Entrance

MINOR STREET - HIGHER-VOLUME APPROACH (VPH)

MUTCD PEAK-HOUR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANT - WARRANT 3 (70% Factor) (Community Less Than 10,000 Population or Above 40 mph on Major Street) 600

Existing AM

Background AM

2 or morel lanes (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

500

Background Plus Project AM

2 or more lanes (major) & 1 lane (minor) or 1 lane (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

400

Existing PM

Background PM

1 lane (major) & 1 lane (minor)

300

Background Plus Project PM Cumulative w/ out Project AM

200

Cumulative w/ Project AM

100 Cumulative w/ out Project PM Cumulative w/ Project PM

1300

1200

1100

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

0

Existing Plus Project AM Existing Plus Project PM

MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH) Source: Figure 4C-4 of the Manual on Unifrom Traffic Control and Devices (MUTCD) 2010 Edition from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

Background AM

Existing Plus Project AM

Background Plus Project AM

Cumulative w/ out Project AM

377

412

418

452

1094 1134

X

45

45

122

123

87

210

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Cumulative w/ Project PM

Existing Approach Lanes

Major Street - Both Approaches

Fairview Road

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Cielo Vista Drive/Fut Res Proj Entrance

Warrant Met?

Cumulative w/ Project AM

2 or One More X

Existing AM

AM Peak Hour

Background Plus Project PM

Cumulative w/ out Project PM

Cielo Vista Drive/Fut Res Proj Entrance

Existing Plus Project PM

Fairview Road

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Background PM

Major Street - Both Approaches

Existing Approach Lanes 2 or One More X

Existing PM

PM Peak Hour

427

473

566

612

1250 1389

X

35

35

81

81

201

282

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Warrant Met?

2/15/2011

Fairview Corners Residential 5

. Valley View Road & Union Road

MINOR STREET - HIGHER-VOLUME APPROACH (VPH)

MUTCD PEAK-HOUR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANT - WARRANT 3 (Urban Areas) 800

Cumulative w/ out Project AM

2 or morel lanes (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

700

Cumulative w/ Project AM Cumulative w/ out Project PM

2 or more lanes (major) & 1 lane (minor) or 1 lane (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

600

Cumulative w/ Project PM

500

1 lane (major) & 1 lane (minor)

Existing AM

400 Background AM

300

Background Plus Project AM

200

Existing PM

100

Background PM

Background Plus Project PM

1800

1700

1600

1500

1400

1300

1200

1100

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

0

Existing Plus Project AM Existing Plus Project PM

MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH) Source: Figure 4C-3 of the Manual on Unifrom Traffic Control and Devices (MUTCD) 2010 Edition from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

Background Plus Project AM

Cumulative w/ out Project AM

Cumulative w/ Project AM

Valley View Road

Existing Plus Project AM

Union Road

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Background AM

Major Street - Both Approaches

Existing Approach Lanes 2 or One More X

Existing AM

AM Peak Hour

276

508

281

517

597

606

X

121

127

121

127

146

146

No

No

No

No

No

No

Warrant Met?

2 or One More X

Existing PM

Background PM

Existing Plus Project PM

Background Plus Project PM

Cumulative w/ out Project PM

Cumulative w/ Project PM

PM Peak Hour

555

866

561

879

1004

1017

X

105

105

105

105

125

125

No

No

No

No

No

No

Existing Approach Lanes

Major Street - Both Approaches

Union Road

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Valley View Road

Warrant Met?

Fairview Corners Residential 12 . Valley View Road & Sunnyslope Road

MINOR STREET - HIGHER-VOLUME APPROACH (VPH)

MUTCD PEAK-HOUR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANT - WARRANT 3 (Urban Areas) 800

Cumulative w/ out Project AM

2 or morel lanes (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

700

Cumulative w/ Project AM Cumulative w/ out Project PM

2 or more lanes (major) & 1 lane (minor) or 1 lane (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

600

Cumulative w/ Project PM

500

1 lane (major) & 1 lane (minor)

Existing AM

400 Background AM

300

Background Plus Project AM

200

Existing PM

100

Background PM

Background Plus Project PM

1800

1700

1600

1500

1400

1300

1200

1100

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

0

Existing Plus Project AM Existing Plus Project PM

MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH) Source: Figure 4C-3 of the Manual on Unifrom Traffic Control and Devices (MUTCD) 2010 Edition from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

961

811

984

1415 1438

112

112

112

134

134

No

No

No

No

No

No

Cumulative w/ Project AM

788 112

Cumulative w/ Project PM

Warrant Met?

Cumulative w/ out Project AM

X

Cumulative w/ out Project PM

Valley View Road

Background Plus Project AM

Sunnyslope Road

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Existing Plus Project AM

Major Street - Both Approaches

2 or One More X

Existing AM

Existing Approach Lanes

Background AM

AM Peak Hour

X Warrant Met?

Background Plus Project PM

Valley View Road

Existing Plus Project PM

Sunnyslope Road

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Background PM

Major Street - Both Approaches

Existing Approach Lanes 2 or One More X

Existing PM

PM Peak Hour

830

1069

861

1100 1641 1672

135

135

135

135

161

161

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Fairview Corners Residential 14

. Fairview Road & Hillcrest Road

MINOR STREET - HIGHER-VOLUME APPROACH (VPH)

MUTCD PEAK-HOUR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANT - WARRANT 3 (70% Factor) (Community Less Than 10,000 Population or Above 40 mph on Major Street) 600

Existing AM

Background AM

2 or morel lanes (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

500

Background Plus Project AM

2 or more lanes (major) & 1 lane (minor) or 1 lane (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

400

Existing PM

Background PM

1 lane (major) & 1 lane (minor)

300

Background Plus Project PM Cumulative w/ out Project AM

200

Cumulative Project AM

w/

100 Cumulative w/ out Project PM Cumulative Project PM

1300

1200

1100

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

0

w/

Existing Plus Project AM Existing Plus Project PM

MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH) Source: Figure 4C-4 of the Manual on Unifrom Traffic Control and Devices (MUTCD) 2010 Edition from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

Warrant Met?

991

869

1044 1304 1357

147

188

155

196

393

393

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Cumulative w/ Project AM

816

Cumulative w/ Project PM

X

Cumulative w/ out Project AM

Hillcrest Road

Background Plus Project AM

Fairview Road

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Existing Plus Project AM

Major Street - Both Approaches

2 or One More X

Background AM

Existing Approach Lanes

Existing AM

AM Peak Hour

Warrant Met?

Cumulative w/ out Project PM

X

Background Plus Project PM

Hillcrest Road

Existing Plus Project PM

Fairview Road

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Background PM

Major Street - Both Approaches

Existing Approach Lanes 2 or One More X

Existing PM

PM Peak Hour

661

878

713

930

1488 1540

118

197

147

226

433

462

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

2/15/2011

Fairview Corners Residential 15 . Memorial Drive & Hillcrest Road

MINOR STREET - HIGHER-VOLUME APPROACH (VPH)

MUTCD PEAK-HOUR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANT - WARRANT 3 (Urban Areas) 800

Cumulative w/ out Project AM

2 or morel lanes (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

700

Cumulative w/ Project AM Cumulative w/ out Project PM

2 or more lanes (major) & 1 lane (minor) or 1 lane (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

600

Cumulative w/ Project PM

500

1 lane (major) & 1 lane (minor)

Existing AM

400 Background AM

300

Background Plus Project AM

200

Existing PM

100

Background PM

Background Plus Project PM

1800

1700

1600

1500

1400

1300

1200

1100

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

0

Existing Plus Project AM Existing Plus Project PM

MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH) Source: Figure 4C-3 of the Manual on Unifrom Traffic Control and Devices (MUTCD) 2010 Edition from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

670

791

699

820

1190 1219

X

321

329

321

329

453

453

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Cumulative w/ Project PM

Warrant Met?

Cumulative w/ Project AM

Cumulative w/ out Project AM

Hillcrest Road Memorial Drive

Existing Plus Project AM

Background Plus Project AM

Major Street - Both Approaches

Existing AM

2 or One More X

Existing Approach Lanes

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Background AM

AM Peak Hour

Hillcrest Road Memorial Drive

784

966

1511 1550

224

214

224

610

610

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Warrant Met?

Existing Plus Project PM

927

214

Background PM

745

X

Existing PM

Cumulative w/ out Project PM

Major Street - Both Approaches Minor Street - Highest Approach

Existing Approach Lanes 2 or One More X

Background Plus Project PM

PM Peak Hour

Fairview Corners Residential 18

. Fairview Road & Santa Ana Road

MINOR STREET - HIGHER-VOLUME APPROACH (VPH)

MUTCD PEAK-HOUR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANT - WARRANT 3 (70% Factor) (Community Less Than 10,000 Population or Above 40 mph on Major Street) 600

Existing AM

Background AM

2 or morel lanes (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

500

Background Plus Project AM

2 or more lanes (major) & 1 lane (minor) or 1 lane (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

400

Existing PM

Background PM

1 lane (major) & 1 lane (minor)

300

Background Plus Project PM Cumulative w/ out Project AM

200

Cumulative Project AM

w/

100 Cumulative w/ out Project PM Cumulative Project PM

1300

1200

1100

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

0

w/

Existing Plus Project AM Existing Plus Project PM

MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH) Source: Figure 4C-4 of the Manual on Unifrom Traffic Control and Devices (MUTCD) 2010 Edition from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

Background AM

Existing Plus Project AM

Background Plus Project AM

Cumulative w/ out Project AM

849

956

869

976

1197 1217

X

131

152

133

154

197

199

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Cumulative w/ Project PM

Approach Lanes

Major Street - Both Approaches

Fairview Road

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Santa Ana Road

Warrant Met?

Cumulative w/ Project AM

2 or One More X

Existing AM

AM Peak Hour

Background Plus Project PM

Cumulative w/ out Project PM

Santa Ana Road

Existing Plus Project PM

Fairview Road

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Background PM

Major Street - Both Approaches

Approach Lanes 2 or One More X

Existing PM

PM Peak Hour

714

863

737

886

1167 1190

X

141

162

147

168

239

245

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Warrant Met?

2/15/2011

Fairview Corners Residential 19

. Fairview Road & McCloskey Road

MINOR STREET - HIGHER-VOLUME APPROACH (VPH)

MUTCD PEAK-HOUR VOLUME SIGNAL WARRANT - WARRANT 3 (70% Factor) (Community Less Than 10,000 Population or Above 40 mph on Major Street) 600

Existing AM

Background AM

2 or morel lanes (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

500

Background Plus Project AM

2 or more lanes (major) & 1 lane (minor) or 1 lane (major) & 2 or more lanes (minor)

400

Existing PM

Background PM

1 lane (major) & 1 lane (minor)

300

Background Plus Project PM Cumulative w/ out Project AM

200

Cumulative Project AM

w/

100 Cumulative w/ out Project PM Cumulative Project PM

1300

1200

1100

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

0

w/

Existing Plus Project AM Existing Plus Project PM

MAJOR STREET - TOTAL OF BOTH APPROACHES (VPH) Source: Figure 4C-4 of the Manual on Unifrom Traffic Control and Devices (MUTCD) 2010 Edition from California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

Background AM

Existing Plus Project AM

Background Plus Project AM

Cumulative w/ out Project AM

816

924

830

938

1085 1099

X

69

87

69

87

139

139

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Approach Lanes

Major Street - Both Approaches

Fairview Road

Minor Street - Highest Approach

McCloskey Road

Warrant Met?

Cumulative w/ Project AM

2 or One More X

Existing AM

AM Peak Hour

Background Plus Project PM

Cumulative w/ out Project PM

Cumulative w/ Project PM

McCloskey Road

Existing Plus Project PM

Fairview Road

Minor Street - Highest Approach

Background PM

Major Street - Both Approaches

Approach Lanes 2 or One More X

Existing PM

PM Peak Hour

543

680

562

699

968

987

X

151

179

152

180

221

222

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Warrant Met?

2/15/2011

Appendix E  Two-Lane Highway Level of Service Calculations  

Table ES 3 Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Levels of Service Summary Segment

Peak Hour

Existing Conditions % TimeSpent-Following LOS

Existing Plus Project % TimeSpent-Following LOS

SR 25 - Between US 101 and SR 156

AM PM

87.1% 88.3%

E E

87.3% 88.6%

E E

SR 156 - Between The Alameda and Union Rd

AM PM

89.8% 89.0%

E E

90.1% 89.2%

E E

Notes: Based on the Two-Way-Two-Lane Highway Segment LOS Methodology from Chapter 20 of the Highway Capacity Manual. Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed Caltrans' current level of service standard.

2/15/2011

HCS2000: Two-Lane Highways Release 4.1d Huy Tran Hexagon Transportation Consultants

Phone: E-Mail:

Fax:

___________________Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis__________________ Analyst HT Agency/Co. Date Performed 7-6-10 Analysis Time Period Existing AM Highway SR 25 From/To US 101 and SR 156 Jurisdiction Caltrans Analysis Year 2010 Description Fairview Corners Residential ___________________________________Input Data_________________________________ Highway class Class Shoulder width Lane width Segment length Terrain type Grade: Length Up/down

1 8.0 12.0 8.5 Level

Two-way hourly volume, V Directional split 79

ft ft mi mi % 1707 / 21

Peak-hour factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Recreational vehicles % No-passing zones Access points/mi

0.88 10 0 100 0

% % % /mi

veh/h %

____________________________Average Travel Speed______________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG PCE for trucks, ET PCE for RVs, ER Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp Highest directional split proportion (note-2)

1.00 1.1 1.0 0.990 1959 1548

pc/h pc/h

Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM Observed volume, Vf Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS Adj. for access points, fA

60.0 0.4* 0.0*

mi/h mi/h mi/h

Free-flow speed, FFS

59.6

mi/h

Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp Average travel speed, ATS

1.3* 43.1

mi/h mi/h

-

mi/h veh/h

__________________________Percent Time-Spent-Following________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 1940 Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 1533 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 81.8 Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 5.3 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 87.1

pc/h % %

________________Level of Service and Other Performance Measures_______________ Level of service, LOS E Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.61 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 4122 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 14510 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 95.6 veh-h ______________________________________________________________________________ Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value

HCS2000: Two-Lane Highways Release 4.1d Huy Tran Hexagon Transportation Consultants

Phone: E-Mail:

Fax:

___________________Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis__________________ Analyst HT Agency/Co. Date Performed 2-4-11 Analysis Time Period Existing Plus Project AM Highway SR 25 From/To US 101 and SR 156 Jurisdiction Caltrans Analysis Year 2011 Description Fairview Corners Residential ___________________________________Input Data_________________________________ Highway class Class Shoulder width Lane width Segment length Terrain type Grade: Length Up/down

1 8.0 12.0 8.5 Level

Two-way hourly volume, V Directional split 79

ft ft mi mi % 1723 / 21

Peak-hour factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Recreational vehicles % No-passing zones Access points/mi

0.88 10 0 100 0

% % % /mi

veh/h %

____________________________Average Travel Speed______________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG PCE for trucks, ET PCE for RVs, ER Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp Highest directional split proportion (note-2)

1.00 1.1 1.0 0.990 1978 1563

pc/h pc/h

Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM Observed volume, Vf Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS Adj. for access points, fA

60.0 0.4* 0.0*

mi/h mi/h mi/h

Free-flow speed, FFS

59.6

mi/h

Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp Average travel speed, ATS

1.3* 43.0

mi/h mi/h

-

mi/h veh/h

__________________________Percent Time-Spent-Following________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 1958 Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 1547 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 82.1 Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 5.1 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 87.3

pc/h % %

________________Level of Service and Other Performance Measures_______________ Level of service, LOS E Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.62 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 4161 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 14646 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 96.9 veh-h ______________________________________________________________________________ Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value

HCS2000: Two-Lane Highways Release 4.1d Huy Tran Hexagon Transportation Consultants

Phone: E-Mail:

Fax:

___________________Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis__________________ Analyst HT Agency/Co. Date Performed 7-6-10 Analysis Time Period Existing PM Highway SR 25 From/To US 101 and SR 156 Jurisdiction Caltrans Analysis Year 2010 Description Fairview Corners Residential ___________________________________Input Data_________________________________ Highway class Class Shoulder width Lane width Segment length Terrain type Grade: Length Up/down

1 8.0 12.0 8.5 Level

Two-way hourly volume, V Directional split 74

ft ft mi mi % 1821 / 26

Peak-hour factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Recreational vehicles % No-passing zones Access points/mi

0.88 10 0 100 0

% % % /mi

veh/h %

____________________________Average Travel Speed______________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG PCE for trucks, ET PCE for RVs, ER Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp Highest directional split proportion (note-2)

1.00 1.1 1.0 0.990 2090 1547

pc/h pc/h

Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM Observed volume, Vf Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS Adj. for access points, fA

60.0 0.4* 0.0*

mi/h mi/h mi/h

Free-flow speed, FFS

59.6

mi/h

Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp Average travel speed, ATS

1.3* 42.1

mi/h mi/h

-

mi/h veh/h

__________________________Percent Time-Spent-Following________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 2069 Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 1531 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 83.8 Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 4.5 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 88.3

pc/h % %

________________Level of Service and Other Performance Measures_______________ Level of service, LOS E Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.65 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 4397 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 15479 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 104.5 veh-h ______________________________________________________________________________ Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value

HCS2000: Two-Lane Highways Release 4.1d Huy Tran Hexagon Transportation Consultants

Phone: E-Mail:

Fax:

___________________Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis__________________ Analyst HT Agency/Co. Date Performed 2-4-11 Analysis Time Period Existing Plus Project PM Highway SR 25 From/To US 101 and SR 156 Jurisdiction Caltrans Analysis Year 2011 Description Fairview Corners Residential ___________________________________Input Data_________________________________ Highway class Class Shoulder width Lane width Segment length Terrain type Grade: Length Up/down

1 8.0 12.0 8.5 Level

Two-way hourly volume, V Directional split 74

ft ft mi mi % 1843 / 26

Peak-hour factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Recreational vehicles % No-passing zones Access points/mi

0.88 10 0 100 0

% % % /mi

veh/h %

____________________________Average Travel Speed______________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG PCE for trucks, ET PCE for RVs, ER Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp Highest directional split proportion (note-2)

1.00 1.1 1.0 0.990 2115 1565

pc/h pc/h

Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM Observed volume, Vf Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS Adj. for access points, fA

60.0 0.4* 0.0*

mi/h mi/h mi/h

Free-flow speed, FFS

59.6

mi/h

Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp Average travel speed, ATS

1.3* 41.9

mi/h mi/h

-

mi/h veh/h

__________________________Percent Time-Spent-Following________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 2094 Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 1550 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 84.1 Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 4.5 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 88.6

pc/h % %

________________Level of Service and Other Performance Measures_______________ Level of service, LOS E Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.66 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 4450 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 15666 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 106.2 veh-h ______________________________________________________________________________ Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value

HCS2000: Two-Lane Highways Release 4.1d Huy Tran Hexagon Transportation Consultants

Phone: E-Mail:

Fax:

___________________Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis__________________ Analyst HT Agency/Co. Date Performed 7-6-10 Analysis Time Period Existing AM Highway SR 156 From/To The Alameda to Union Rd Jurisdiction Caltrans Analysis Year 2010 Description Fairview Corners Residential ___________________________________Input Data_________________________________ Highway class Class Shoulder width Lane width Segment length Terrain type Grade: Length Up/down

1 5.0 12.0 4.3 Level

Two-way hourly volume, V Directional split 66

ft ft mi mi % 2053 / 34

Peak-hour factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Recreational vehicles % No-passing zones Access points/mi

0.88 14 0 30 1

% % % /mi

veh/h %

____________________________Average Travel Speed______________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG PCE for trucks, ET PCE for RVs, ER Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp Highest directional split proportion (note-2)

1.00 1.1 1.0 0.986 2366 1562

pc/h pc/h

Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM Observed volume, Vf Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS Adj. for access points, fA

60.0 1.7* 0.3*

mi/h mi/h mi/h

Free-flow speed, FFS

58.0

mi/h

Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp Average travel speed, ATS

0.6* 39.1

mi/h mi/h

-

mi/h veh/h

__________________________Percent Time-Spent-Following________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 2333 Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 1540 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 87.1 Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 2.7 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 89.8

pc/h % %

________________Level of Service and Other Performance Measures_______________ Level of service, LOS E Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.74 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 2479 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 8725 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 63.3 veh-h ______________________________________________________________________________ Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value

HCS2000: Two-Lane Highways Release 4.1d Huy Tran Hexagon Transportation Consultants

Phone: E-Mail:

Fax:

___________________Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis__________________ Analyst HT Agency/Co. Date Performed 2-4-11 Analysis Time Period Existing Plus Project AM Highway SR 156 From/To The Alameda to Union Rd Jurisdiction Caltrans Analysis Year 2011 Description Fairview Corners Residential ___________________________________Input Data_________________________________ Highway class Class Shoulder width Lane width Segment length Terrain type Grade: Length Up/down

1 5.0 12.0 4.3 Level

Two-way hourly volume, V Directional split 67

ft ft mi mi % 2068 / 33

Peak-hour factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Recreational vehicles % No-passing zones Access points/mi

0.88 14 0 30 1

% % % /mi

veh/h %

____________________________Average Travel Speed______________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG PCE for trucks, ET PCE for RVs, ER Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp Highest directional split proportion (note-2)

1.00 1.1 1.0 0.986 2383 1597

pc/h pc/h

Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM Observed volume, Vf Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS Adj. for access points, fA

60.0 1.7* 0.3*

mi/h mi/h mi/h

Free-flow speed, FFS

58.0

mi/h

Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp Average travel speed, ATS

0.6* 39.0

mi/h mi/h

-

mi/h veh/h

__________________________Percent Time-Spent-Following________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 2350 Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 1575 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 87.3 Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 2.8 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 90.1

pc/h % %

________________Level of Service and Other Performance Measures_______________ Level of service, LOS E Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.74 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 2497 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 8789 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 64.0 veh-h ______________________________________________________________________________ Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value

HCS2000: Two-Lane Highways Release 4.1d Huy Tran Hexagon Transportation Consultants

Phone: E-Mail:

Fax:

___________________Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis__________________ Analyst HT Agency/Co. Date Performed 7-6-10 Analysis Time Period Existing PM Highway SR 156 From/To The Alameda to Union Rd Jurisdiction Caltrans Analysis Year 2010 Description Fairview Corners Residential ___________________________________Input Data_________________________________ Highway class Class Shoulder width Lane width Segment length Terrain type Grade: Length Up/down

1 5.0 12.0 4.3 Level

Two-way hourly volume, V Directional split 55

ft ft mi mi % 2051 / 45

Peak-hour factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Recreational vehicles % No-passing zones Access points/mi

0.88 14 0 30 1

% % % /mi

veh/h %

____________________________Average Travel Speed______________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG PCE for trucks, ET PCE for RVs, ER Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp Highest directional split proportion (note-2)

1.00 1.1 1.0 0.986 2363 1300

pc/h pc/h

Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM Observed volume, Vf Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS Adj. for access points, fA

60.0 1.7* 0.3*

mi/h mi/h mi/h

Free-flow speed, FFS

58.0

mi/h

Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp Average travel speed, ATS

0.6* 39.2

mi/h mi/h

-

mi/h veh/h

__________________________Percent Time-Spent-Following________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 2331 Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 1282 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 87.1 Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 1.9 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 89.0

pc/h % %

________________Level of Service and Other Performance Measures_______________ Level of service, LOS E Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.74 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 2476 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 8717 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 63.2 veh-h ______________________________________________________________________________ Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value

HCS2000: Two-Lane Highways Release 4.1d Huy Tran Hexagon Transportation Consultants

Phone: E-Mail:

Fax:

___________________Two-Way Two-Lane Highway Segment Analysis__________________ Analyst HT Agency/Co. Date Performed 2-4-11 Analysis Time Period Existing Plus Project PM Highway SR 156 From/To The Alameda to Union Rd Jurisdiction Caltrans Analysis Year 2011 Description Fairview Corners Residential ___________________________________Input Data_________________________________ Highway class Class Shoulder width Lane width Segment length Terrain type Grade: Length Up/down

1 5.0 12.0 4.3 Level

Two-way hourly volume, V Directional split 55

ft ft mi mi % 2071 / 45

Peak-hour factor, PHF % Trucks and buses % Recreational vehicles % No-passing zones Access points/mi

0.88 14 0 30 1

% % % /mi

veh/h %

____________________________Average Travel Speed______________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG PCE for trucks, ET PCE for RVs, ER Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp Highest directional split proportion (note-2)

1.00 1.1 1.0 0.986 2386 1312

pc/h pc/h

Free-Flow Speed from Field Measurement: Field measured speed, SFM Observed volume, Vf Estimated Free-Flow Speed: Base free-flow speed, BFFS Adj. for lane and shoulder width, fLS Adj. for access points, fA

60.0 1.7* 0.3*

mi/h mi/h mi/h

Free-flow speed, FFS

58.0

mi/h

Adjustment for no-passing zones, fnp Average travel speed, ATS

0.6* 39.0

mi/h mi/h

-

mi/h veh/h

__________________________Percent Time-Spent-Following________________________ Grade adjustment factor, fG 1.00 PCE for trucks, ET 1.0 PCE for RVs, ER 1.0 Heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, fHV 1.000 Two-way flow rate,(note-1) vp 2353 Highest directional split proportion (note-2) 1294 Base percent time-spent-following, BPTSF 87.4 Adj.for directional distribution and no-passing zones, fd/np 1.8 Percent time-spent-following, PTSF 89.2

pc/h % %

________________Level of Service and Other Performance Measures_______________ Level of service, LOS E Volume to capacity ratio, v/c 0.75 Peak 15-min vehicle-miles of travel, VMT15 2500 veh-mi Peak-hour vehicle-miles of travel, VMT60 8802 veh-mi Peak 15-min total travel time, TT15 64.1 veh-h ______________________________________________________________________________ Notes: 1. If vp >= 3200 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. 2. If highest directional split vp >= 1700 pc/h, terminate analysis-the LOS is F. * These items have been entered or edited to override calculated value

Appendix F  Intersection Queuing Calculation Sheets 

Intersection Vehicle Queuing Analysis Existing # of Intersection

Mvmt.

Peak

Lanes

Hour Queue /a/ Per Lane (ft.) /b/ 380

Fairview Rd and Airline Hwy

EBL

1 380

380 SBL

1 380

380 SBR

1 380

Fairview Rd and Cielo Vista Dr/Project Driveway

See Note /c/ SBL

Existing Conditions Vehicle Req. Storage

1 See Note /c/

Vehicle

Exising Plus Project Conditions Req. Storage

Queue /a/ Per Lane (ft.) /b/

Comments

AM

1

25

1

25

PM

1

25

1

25

Existing storage adequate. Existing storage adequate.

AM

1

25

1

25

Existing storage adequate.

PM

1

25

1

25

Existing storage adequate.

AM

1

25

1

25

PM

1

25

1

25

Existing storage adequate. Existing storage adequate.

AM

N/A

N/A

1

25

Lane would need to be ~ 25 feet.

PM

N/A

N/A

1

25

Lane would need to be ~ 25 feet.

Notes: /a/ Vehicle queue (# of vehicles) calculated using the Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence level. /b/ Required storage is calculated based on peak-hour vehicle queue calculation as follows: Vehicle queue x 25'. /c/ This turn pocket would be built with the project.

Fairview_ProjDwy_SBL_PM

2/15/2011

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH INTERSECTION: Fariview Road and Project Driveway DIRECTION: SB LT (PM Peak Hour - Background Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

1411

vx

81

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.391944444

vx / Cm,x 0.057406095

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.9425939

0.88848327

0.146464877

0.000976433

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.943111713

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.1826565963

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / C m,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 = 0.18

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH INTERSECTION: Fariview Road and Project Driveway DIRECTION: SB LT (PM Peak Hour - Background Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

1391

vx

93

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.386388889

vx / Cm,x 0.066858375

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.9331416

0.870753292

0.173033897

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / C m,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 = 0.21

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

1 Cars in queue.

0.001153559

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.933759525

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.2148749288

Fairview_ProjDwy_SBL_AM

2/15/2011

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH INTERSECTION: Fariview Road and Project Driveway DIRECTION: SB LT (AM Peak Hour - Existing Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

1345

vx

24

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.373611111

vx / Cm,x 0.017843866

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.9821561

0.964630671

0.047760534

0.000318404

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.982318215

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.0544996666

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / C m,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 = 0.05

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH INTERSECTION: Fariview Road and Project Driveway DIRECTION: SB LT (AM Peak Hour - Background Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

1340

vx

27

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.372222222

vx / Cm,x 0.020149254

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.9798507

0.960107485

0.054132323

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / C m,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 = 0.06

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

1 Cars in queue.

0.000360882

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.980034881

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.0616849885

Fairview_Airline_SBR_PM

2/15/2011

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway SB R (PM Peak Hour - Existing Conditions)

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

Cm,x

535

vx

53

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.148611111

vx / Cm,x 0.099065421

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.90093458

0.811683116

0.666608437

0.004444056

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.903397572

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.3294252242

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.33

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH INTERSECTION: Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway DIRECTION:

SB R (PM Peak Hour - Background Conditions)

Cm,x

495

vx

53

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.1375

vx / Cm,x 0.107070707

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.89292929

0.797322722

0.778696051

0.005191307

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.895831474

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.3591448641

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.36

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

SB R (PM Peak Hour - Existing Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

521

vx

82

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.144722222

vx / Cm,x 0.157389635

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.84261036

0.709992227

1.08752915

0.007250194

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.84690166

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.5589411607

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.56

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

SB R (PM Peak Hour - Background Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

485

vx

75

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.134722222

vx / Cm,x 0.154639175

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.84536082

0.714634924

1.147837177

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.55

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

1 Cars in queue.

0.007652248

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.849874798

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.5473192276

Fairview_Airline_SBR_AM

2/15/2011

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway SB R (AM Peak Hour - Existing Conditions)

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

Cm,x

565

vx

87

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.156944444

vx / Cm,x 0.153982301

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.8460177

0.715745947

0.981126165

0.006540841

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.849874572

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.5447833102

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.54

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH INTERSECTION: Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway DIRECTION:

SB R (AM Peak Hour - Background Conditions)

Cm,x

537

vx

87

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.149166667

vx / Cm,x 0.162011173

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.83798883

0.702225274

1.086108424

0.007240723

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.842298045

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.5785125477

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.58

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

SB R (AM Peak Hour - Existing Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

559

vx

131

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.155277778

vx / Cm,x 0.234347048

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.76565295

0.586224442

1.50921176

0.010061412

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.772195477

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.9143178638

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.91

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

SB R (AM Peak Hour - Background Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

532

vx

120

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.147777778

vx / Cm,x 0.22556391

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.77443609

0.599751258

1.526372322

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.87

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

1 Cars in queue.

0.010175815

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.78097828

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.8701111966

Fairview_Airline_SBL_PM

2/15/2011

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway SB LT (PM Peak Hour - Existing Conditions)

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

Cm,x

455

vx

80

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.126388889

vx / Cm,x

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] /

0.175824176

-0.82417582

0.679265789

1.391136336

0.009274242

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.829783123

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.6378302537

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.64

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH INTERSECTION: Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway DIRECTION:

SB LT (PM Peak Hour - Background Conditions)

Cm,x

426

vx

94

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.118333333

vx / Cm,x

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] /

0.220657277

-0.77934272

0.60737508

1.864709383

0.012431396

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.78727789

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.8450952650

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.85

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

SB LT (PM Peak Hour - Existing Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

445

vx

84

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.123611111

vx / Cm,x 0.188764045

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.81123596

0.658103775

1.527079914

0.010180533

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.817486579

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.6953819608

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.70

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

SB LT (PM Peak Hour - Background Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

419

vx

98

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.116388889

vx / Cm,x 0.233890215

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.76610979

0.586924203

2.009557931

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.91

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

1 Cars in queue.

0.013397053

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.774804011

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.9107201792

Fairview_Airline_SBL_AM

2/15/2011

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway SB LT (AM Peak Hour - Existing Conditions)

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

Cm,x

476

vx

52

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.132222222

vx / Cm,x

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] /

0.109243697

-0.8907563

0.79344679

0.826212838

0.005508086

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.893842758

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.3672882046

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.37

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH INTERSECTION: Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway DIRECTION:

SB LT (AM Peak Hour - Background Conditions)

Cm,x

456

vx

73

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.126666667

vx / Cm,x

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] /

0.160087719

-0.83991228

0.705452639

1.263850416

0.008425669

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.844913196

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.5701043396

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.57

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

SB LT (AM Peak Hour - Existing Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

470

vx

58

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.130555556

vx / Cm,x 0.123404255

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.87659574

0.7684201

0.945224083

0.006301494

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.880182705

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.4214677908

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.42

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

SB LT (AM Peak Hour - Background Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

452

vx

79

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.125555556

vx / Cm,x 0.174778761

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.82522124

0.680990093

1.39204323

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.63

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

1 Cars in queue.

0.009280288

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.830825121

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.6332386531

Fairview_Airline_EBL_PM

2/15/2011

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway EB LT (PM Peak Hour - Existing Conditions)

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

Cm,x

508

vx

44

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.141111111

vx / Cm,x

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] /

0.086614173

-0.91338583

0.834273669

0.613801228

0.004092008

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.915623108

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.2841347734

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.28

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH INTERSECTION: Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway DIRECTION:

EB LT (PM Peak Hour - Background Conditions)

Cm,x

480

vx

44

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.133333333

vx / Cm,x

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] /

0.091666667

-0.90833333

0.825069444

0.6875

0.004583333

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.910852775

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.3023330035

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.30

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

EB LT (PM Peak Hour - Existing Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

497

vx

94

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.138055556

vx / Cm,x 0.189134809

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.81086519

0.657502358

1.369990567

0.00913327

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.816477574

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.6973385555

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.70

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

EB LT (PM Peak Hour - Background Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

471

vx

82

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.130833333

vx / Cm,x 0.174097665

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.82590234

0.682114668

1.330682786

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.63

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

1 Cars in queue.

0.008871219

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.831255608

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.6303478743

Fairview_Airline_EBL_AM

2/15/2011

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway EB LT (AM Peak Hour - Existing Conditions)

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

Cm,x

496

vx

86

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.137777778

vx / Cm,x

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] /

0.173387097

-0.8266129

0.683288892

1.258454735

0.008389698

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.831672165

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.6273484581

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.63

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH INTERSECTION: Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway DIRECTION:

EB LT (AM Peak Hour - Background Conditions)

Cm,x

479

vx

86

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.133055556

vx / Cm,x

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] /

0.17954071

-0.82045929

0.673153447

1.349366504

0.008995777

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.825923255

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.6543098151

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.65

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

EB LT (AM Peak Hour - Existing Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

483

vx

101

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.134166667

vx / Cm,x 0.209109731

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.79089027

0.625507418

1.558581845

0.010390546

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.797432106

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.7899267836

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.79

1 Cars in queue.

95th PERCENTILE QUEUE LENGTH Fairview Road/Ridgemark Drive and Airline HIghway

INTERSECTION:

DIRECTION:

EB LT (AM Peak Hour - Background Plus Project Conditions)

Cm,x

469

vx

97

T

1

Cm,x / 3600 0.130277778

vx / Cm,x 0.206823028

(vx / Cm,x)-1 [(vx / Cm,x)-1]^2 (3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / -0.79317697

0.629129709

1.587554157

Q95 = 900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 Q95 =

0.78

Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

1 Cars in queue.

0.010583694

{[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)] / 150 * T}^1/2 0.799820857

900T{ [(vx / Cm,x) - 1] + {[vx / Cm,x -1]^2 + [(3600 / Cm,x)(vx/ Cm,x)]/ 150 * T} ^1/2}* Cm,x/ 3600 0.7789955161

   

June 13, 2011 Sally Rideout EMC Planning Group, Inc. 301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C Monterey, California 93940 Re: Additional Clarification of the Traffic Impact Study for the Fairview Corners Residential Project Dear Ms. Rideout: This letter provides additional clarification for the traffic study for the Fairview Corners Residential project. There were 5 intersections counted during the summer near schools, but only 4 needed to have the volumes adjusted to account for summer versus normal school year traffic patterns. The text of the traffic study incorrectly describes the number of summer counts. The peak-hour intersection counts that were conducted during the summer are identified below. •

Valley View Rd & Union Rd – AM peak hour only

•

Union Rd/Mitchell Rd & Hwy 156 – AM and PM peak hours

•

McCray St/Hwy 25 Bypass & Sunnyslope Rd/Tres Pinos Rd – AM and PM peak hours

•

Hwy 25 Bypass & Hillcrest Rd – AM and PM peak hours

•

McCray St & Hillcrest Rd – PM peak hour only

The four counts that were adjusted, as referenced in the traffic study, are identified in bold underline above. The intersections of Airline Highway (State Route 25)/Fairview Road-Ridgemark Drive and Cielo Vista Drive/Fairview Road were studied for queuing impacts because the project is anticipated to significantly increase demand in critical turn movements at these locations and these locations are the most likely to experience queuing impacts due to the project. At other intersections further from the site, traffic demand in critical turn movements is much lower and queuing impacts would not occur. To clarify transit demand information for the project; according to the Council of San Benito County Governments, all Local Transportation Authority operations in San Benito County had a total of 141,424 riders in 2010 (roughly 388 riders per day, on average). This includes all services offered by County Express (fixed routes, dial-a-ride service, and Intercounty service), as well as the Jovenes De Antano specialized transportation service. According to the State Department of Finance, the population of San Benito County was 58,388 people in 2010. This equates to an average transit demand per resident of 0.0066 daily riders per resident. The maximum estimated population for the project at buildout is 678 residents, based upon 220 residential units. Therefore, the total transit demand for the project site, at buildout, could be about 5 daily riders. Although no fixed-route transit lines currently serve the project site, some level of future service is likely by the time the project is fully built out. Until fixed-route service is provided, the site will be within the service area of the current dial-a-ride service. As the transit

Ms. Sally Rideout  June 13, 2011 

 

demand at the project site would be low, the dial-a-ride service should be sufficient to serve the site until fixed-route service can be added. The two intersections of Valley View Drive/Sunnyslope Road and Valley View Drive/Union Road were not studied in the original Fairview Corners/Gavilan Master Plan traffic study. Because of this, future model forecast were not available. A new travel demand model run was not conducted when the Fairview Corners Residential updated traffic study was prepared. Instead, a growth rate was used to estimate the traffic volumes under cumulative conditions. Population growth rates in San Benito County have been very low since 2003 (less than 1% per year) due to the housing moratorium, slow economy, and growth ordinance. For a conservative analysis, we used a growth rate of 1.5% per year to estimate cumulative traffic volumes at these two locations. The results of the cumulative conditions queuing analysis with a traffic signal in place for the southbound left-turn movement at the Cielo Vista Drive/Project Entrance and Fairview Road intersection indicate that the maximum peak-hour vehicle queue would be 8 vehicles, or about 200 feet. To meet the County’s design standards the turn pocket would need to accommodate 200 feet of vehicle storage, 440 feet for deceleration space, and a 90-foot bay taper. This length of pocket could be accommodated on the project frontage. If you have any questions or would like to discuss these issues, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you. Sincerely, Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc.

Jeffrey A. Elia, P.E. Principal Associate

2 | Page 

APPENDIX L

W ATER S UPPLY A SSESSMENT

Water Supply Assessment Report For Gavilan College & Fairview Corners Residential Development

Prepared for:

Sunnyslope County Water District

Prepared by:

Kenneth Girouard, District Engineer, PE 34704 Sunnyslope County Water District

July 2008

1

Table of Contents List of Tables................................................................................................................................. 3 List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... 4 Section 1:

Introduction .................................................................................. 5

Section 2:

Sunnyslope County Water District Population Estimates ........... 6

Section 3:

Project Description ...................................................................... 6

Section 4:

Gavilan College Water Demand Forecast .................................... 6

Section 5:

Conceptual Overall Supply ........................................................... 7

Section 6:

Potable Water Demand Forecast ................................................. 8

Section 7:

Supply Reliability........................................................................ 12

Section 8:

Conclusion .................................................................................. 22

References.................................................................................................................................. 23

2

List of Tables

Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4. Table 5. Table 6.

Historical Population Figures in the Hollister Area. ....................................................... Population Projections for the Hollister Area. ............................................................... Summary of Water Use Estimates For Gavilan College & Fairview Corners................ Estimated Potable Water Demand For Santana Ranch. .............................................. City of Hollister Build out Schedule Post RWQCB Cease and Desist Order. ............... Sunnyslope portion of City of Hollister Build out Schedule Post RWQCB Ceast and Desist Order ............................................................................................................ Table 7. Unincorporated San Benito County Requests for water service outside of the City of Hollister ................................................................................................................... Table 8. Supply Reliability During Average/Normal Water Year ................................................. Table 9. Supply Reliability During a Single Dry Water Year ....................................................... Table 10. Summary of USBR Deliveries During Last Major California Drought............................ Table 11. Supply Reliability During Multiple Dry Water Years ......................................................

List of Figures

Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5.

Map of Gavilan College and Fairview Corners Residential Development……………. Hydrograph of Simulated Water Levels in Hollister .................................................... Hydrographs of Average Groundwater Elevations, Hollister. ...................................... Hydrograph of Simulated Water Levels In Hollister. .................................................... Hydrograph of Water Levels In Sunnyslope County Water District’s Wells .................

3

1.

Introduction

Gavilan College and Fairview Corners propose to develop the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the Fairview Corners Residential Development, on two parcels (APNs 025190-046 and 025-190-49). Both parcels have a total area of approximately 136 acres. Gavilan College will occupy the southernmost 80 acres of the project with the remaining northernmost 56 acres being devoted to residential development of Fairview Corners. Gavilan College will be located east of Fairview Drive, north of Airline Hwy. The Hollister City limits are located to the northwest of the project. The entire project is located within the service area boundaries of Sunnyslope County Water District and the entire project is located within the Sunnyslope Sphere of Influence. The residential development is expected to have approximately 220 single family residences and 4.2 acres of parks. At full campus, the college is anticipated to serve 3500 full time equivalent students and 200 full time equivalent faculty. Athletic fields, open space, supporting retail, and on-campus housing are proposed on the campus site. The primary access to the project site will be off Fairview Road, opposite Cielo Vista Drive, providing access to both the project. (Kinsella, 2008) Under the requirements of SB 610, and in accordance with Section 10912(a) of the California Water Code (CWC), Sunnyslope County Water District (SSCWD) as the designated water supplier must prepare an assessment of whether the projected water demands of the proposed project can be met by the proposed water supply. The proposed project falls within the definition of projects requiring a water supply assessment. Since a portion of the project falls outside of Sunnyslope’s existing service boundaries and the Revised Draft of the Hollister Area 2007 Urban Water Management Plan (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006) has not been accepted as a final report, Sunnyslope County Water District is preparing this report with excerpts from the Revised Draft. This report presents a brief description of the project, its projected water demands, a description and assessment of the proposed water supply as to its adequacy to meet those demands in accordance with the requirements of CWC 10912 to10915, and implementation requirements on the part of Gavilan College, Sunnyslope County Water District and other parties. Sunnyslope’s District encompasses much of the eastern and southern portions of the Hollister urban area. Hollister is primarily a residential community supported by an agricultural economy. The major transportation route in the area is State Highways 25 and 156; the Southern Pacific Railroad also serves the area. The Hollister Municipal Airport is located in the northern portion of the city. Sunnyslope’s District serves the residents of the City of Hollister located in the southern and eastern portion of the City limits and those of the unincorporated communities of Ridgemark Estates. The potable water distribution system provides potable water service to the City of Hollister and Ridgemark Estates. Ridgemark Estates is on a higher water pressure zone supplied by the Ridgemark tanks. The City of Hollister and Sunnyslope both provide potable water service to residents inside and outside the City boundary in a middle pressure zone supplied by the Fairview tanks. Finally, the City of Hollister supplies a lower pressure zone on the northern and western portions of the City with potable water tanks located on Park Hill. SB 610 requires an assessment of whether the proposed water supply for the Gavilan College plan development and for the Sunnyslope County Water District will meet the combined

4

water demands during normal, single dry and multiple dry water years for the next 20 years. Following are a brief description of the project, the projected water demands for the Gavilan College plan development, the projected water demands for the Sunnyslope County Water District, the combined water demands and a description and assessment of the proposed water supply as to its adequacy to meet those demands in accordance with the requirements of CWC 10912 to 10915, and implementation requirements on the part of the Sunnyslope County Water District and other parties.

2.

Sunnyslope County Water District Population Estimates

Community Population Estimate The population of the City of Hollister has increased significantly over the past 50 years as shown from U.S. Census Bureau historical population estimates. Population projections from AMBAG are shown in Table 1. (Kennedy/JENKS, 2006) Both San Benito County and the City of Hollister have experienced their most rapid growth since the late 1990’s, mainly due to economic growth in Silicon Valley and the high priced housing market in the Santa Clara County. Many employees from Santa Clara County, who cannot afford homes close to work, are choosing to buy homes in San Benito County and commuting to work. The County experienced a more than 8% growth in population since the 2000 Urban Water Master Plan, and the City grew by nearly an equal amount. The City of Hollister and San Benito County have implemented limited growth ordinances to curb the rapid growth experienced in recent years. Table 1. Historical Population Figures in the Hollister Area. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

Year

City of Hollister Population

San Benito County Population

1950

4,903

14,370

1960

6,071

15,306

1970

7,663

18,226

1980

11,488

25,005

1990

19,212

36,697

2000

34,424

53,234

Population Projections

Population projections for the Hollister area are shown in Table 2, and are based on figures published by the CA Department of Finance (DOF) and the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG). Population ordinances in effect in the City of Hollister and County of San Benito are also incorporated in these projections. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

5

Table 2. Population Projections for the Hollister Area. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

Year: 2005 2010 City of 38,280 44,423 Hollister Population(a) San Benito 58,411 63,890 County Population(a) (a) AMBAG Projections

2015 48,954

2020 53,485

2025 56,594

2030 59,703

69,533

75,176

79,484

83,791

Specific population projections for the Gavilan College would include approximately 220 single family residential units at 3.17 persons per unit or 697 persons in the residential development (Kier & Wright, 2008). There would be additional persons living in on 70 on multifamily on campus housing units (Kier & Wright, 2008). At two persons per unit, on campus housing would contain a population of 140 persons. The total residential population of Gavilan College and Fairview Corners Residential Development is projected to be 837 residents. There would also be additional students, faculty, and staff utilizing the campus during daytime hours, but these persons would not be considered full time residents for population purposes. However, the water use of students, faculty, and staff is calculated in the water demand portion of this water supply assessment

3.

Project Description

Gavilan College is proposing to develop a campus on 80 acres of a 136-acre parcel at the corner of Airline Highway and Fairview Road as shown in Figure 1. A private residential development has been proposed for the remainder of the parcel. Although the two developments are independent of one another, they will eventually share roadways, infrastructure, and open space.

6

Figure 1. Map of Gavilan College and Fairview Corners Residential Development

4.

Gavilan College Water Demand Forecast

The estimated water use for Gavilan College and the adjoining residential development are shown in Table 3 (Kier & Wright, 2008). The total estimated potable water demand for

Figure 1. Map of Gavilan College and Fairview Corners Residential Development

7

Table 3 shows the total demand for Gavilan College and Fairview Corners Residential Development to be 246.7 acre-feet per year, which includes 35.6 acre-feet per year for irrigation.

Table 3 – Summary of Water Use Estimates for Gavilan College and Fairview Corners (Kier & Wright, 2008)

Residential Single-Family Residential

Units

Area (acres)

220

GPD/DU

GPD/SF

300

WU Coefficient (AFY/unit)

Water Use Estimate (AFY)

0.33604

73.9

Open Space/Park*

4.20

0.0195

.095147

4.0

Landscape Buffer*

2.42

0.0195

0.95147

2.3

Residential Subtotal

80.2 GPD/SF

WU Coefficient (AFY/unit)

Water Use Estimate (AFY)

0.80

0.4530

22.10344

17.8

6.85

0.3130

15.27236

104.7

0.21171

14.8

College Campus

Square Feet

Area (acres)

Retail

35,000

Campus Facilities

298,600

On-Campus Housing

70

GPD/DU

189

Landscape Buffer*

220,414

5.06

0.0195

0.95147

4.8

Open Space/Park*

323,215

7.42

0.0195

0.95147

7.1

Athletic Fields/Facilities

794,970

18.25

0.0195

0.95147

17.4

Campus Subtotal

166.5

Project Total Potable Water Demand

246.7

Possible Reclaimed Water Allocation (currently included in Total Potable Demand)

35.6

*Athletic fields, open space, parks and landscape buffers are all assumed to be xeriscape or artificial turf; supplied by reclaimed water.

In the near future, Sunnyslope County Water District will also be required to serve Santana Ranch. Estimated water use for Santana Ranch is detailed below. The estimated water demand for the project is presented in the Table 4 (RJA, 2007). The expected Average Day Demand for the project is 342,225 Gallons/Day with an expected Maximum Day Demand of 2.0 times Average Day Demand. Annual demand for Santana Ranch is expected to be 383 acre-feet per year.

8

Table 4.

Estimated Potable Water Demand for Santana Ranch (Dobbins, 2007) Size Description Water Land Use (acres) Demand Average Factor Day Demand (gallons/day) (gallons/day) Single Family Residential 741 188.9 300 222,300 DUs Multi-Family Residential 351 57.9 225 78,975 (indoor) DUs Commercial (indoor) 6.0 65,000 SF 0.269 17,500 (retail, office and mixed use) Elementary School (indoor) 8.0 800 students 30 24,000 Detention Basins

7.9

0

Total Demand = (1 acre-foot of water equals 325,900 gallons)

0

342,775 gallons per day or 1.05 acre-feet per day

Note: Water use factors are from the 2005 Marina Coast Water District Urban Water Management Plan. The water demand for the 6.0 acre Commercial Parcel assumes 25 percent building floor area-to-gross area (FAR) coverage. Therefore the water demand calculation for commercial development is: (6.0 acres x 43,560 sq ft/acre x 0.25 FAR x0.0003 ac-ft/year x 325,900 gallons/ac-ft) /365 days/year = 17,500 gallons per day.

With annual demand for Gavilan College and Fairview Corners Residential Development at 247 acre-feet per year, and annual demand at Santana Ranch at 383 acre-feet per year, the total additional demand from both developments will be 630 acre-feet per year at build out of both developments.

5.

Conceptual Overall Supply

Sunnyslope County Water District (SSCWD) is the expected water purveyor for the Gavilan College Project since the project lies entirely with the SSCWD Sphere of Influence. SSCWD provides domestic water services to approximately 5,200 accounts in the neighborhoods to the north, south and west of the project. SSCWD’s firm water supply is generated from four existing wells, which produce approximately 3,450 Gallons/Minute. Sunnyslope also receives half the potable water production of the LESSALT Water Treatment Plant (jointly owned with the City of Hollister) which produces approximately 1,000 Gallons/Minute. The LESSALT capacity is considered to be an enhanced water supply for water quality enhancement for salinity reduction. The LESSALT Plant treats surface water from the Central Valley Project-San Felipe Division for distribution to the Sunnyslope County Water District and the City of Hollister. The LESSALT surface water treatment plant must be upgraded to meet new stricter requirements for the disinfection of by-products. The LESSALT treatment

9

plant will also have additional pumps added to the discharge side of the treatment plant to boost the current 1000 gpm operating capacity to a minimum of 2100 gpm capacity, which it is currently rated. Due to changes in the membrane filtering units, the modified LESSALT treatment plant could have a future operating capacity in excess of 2100 gpm. A portion of this future operating capacity could be utilized as firm water capacity even during a long extended drought. Other major SSCWD facilities include three storage tanks, a booster station, and approximately 29 miles of pipelines. The existing SSCWD supply, storage and distribution systems must be supplemented to serve the proposed development. This project would require either additional well capacity, additional treated surface water capacity, or a combination of the two. Currently, SSCWD will be supplemented by two additional wells: well #11, and well #12. Well #11 is expected to produce approximately 1300 gpm. Well #12 would probably produce approximately 2100 gpm. The LESSALT production capacity could be increased to treat additional CVP water if CVP was available from San Benito County Water District which is the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) contract agency for CVP water.

Projected Gavilan College Water Supply For the purpose of this report, the Gavilan College Project is assuming all water is being provided by Sunnyslope County Water District. Initially, the 247 acre-feet of total water demand will be provided by groundwater wells and supplemental water from the Lessalt Treatment Plant when surface water is available to the Lessalt Treatment Plant. When Sunnyslope’s proposed reclaimed water treatment plant is constructed in the Ridgemark area in approximately 2010, reclaimed water will become available to supplement existing water supply and provide for a portion of the 46 acre-feet of irrigation demand. However, for the purposes of this report, it is assumed that the entire 247 acre-feet per year of water demand (including irrigation demand) for Gavilan College and Fairview Corners Residential Development will initially come from groundwater. In order to meet this need Sunnyslope will need to construct additional groundwater wells to increase production capacity.

6.

Potable Water Demand Forecast

Assuming that Gavilan College and Santana Ranch would be built in beginning in approximately 2010, population increases, from 2005 to 2010, in the City of Hollister would be approximately 16% and population increases in the entire County would be approximately 9.4%. As Sunnyslope serves much of the expansion of the City of Hollister to the south and east of the current city limits, the overall growth rate for Sunnyslope will be closer to the City of Hollister expansion rate as opposed to the slower expansion rate of the overall County of San Benito. For the purposes of this report, it is assumed that the customer base of Sunnyslope Water District will increase by 15% by 2010, and that Gavilan College and Santana Ranch would be built in approximately 2010. Should Gavilan College and Santana Ranch be built at a time frame significantly different from this time frame, this report would need to be updated with more current water supply and demand data. The forecast in this report will assume that Sunnyslope demand will expand by 15% plus the addition of Santana Ranch by the time Gavilan College is built. Sunnyslope 2006 Annual Drinking Water Quality Report states that Sunnyslope has 5290 customers. A 15% increase to the current customer base of 5290, would result in a customer base

10

of approximately 6084 customers, or an increase of approximately 794 accounts prior to the construction of Gavilan College and Santana Ranch.

Year 2010 City of Hollister Water Demand Forecast for Sunnyslope Water District For the City of Hollister, the projected build out schedule after the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s Cease and Desist Order is lifted is shown in table 5. (Lenoir, 2007) . Table 5. City of Hollister Build out Schedule Post RWQCB Cease and Desist Order

Project

CY2008

CY2009

CY2010

CY2011

CY2012

Award Homes Anderson Homes Palmtag Intravia Duplex Westside Apt. Valley View 3 Valley View 6 Hillock Ranch Walnut Park A Walnut Park B La Baig Brigantino Las Brisas 7 Las Brisas 8 Cerra Vista Eden West Vista Meadows Annotti (MillerFerrara) Hillview

125 units 6 units

125 units -

70 units -

75 units -

75 units -

75 units -

75units -

57 units -

2 units 2 units

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

11 units 9 units 5 units 41 units 5 units 27 units 45 units 15 units 3 units 14 units 20 units 20 units -

35 units 72 units

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

93 units

77 units

-

-

-

-

-

-

25 units

-

-

-

-

0

0

203 units

240 units

240 units

240 units

240 units

240 units

350

350

350

315

315

315

315

315

Remaining

Total

CY2013 CY2014 CY2015

(Personal communication by email from Carol Lenoir [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 3:12 PM) Sunnyslope’s portion of the projected build out schedule within the City of Hollister is shown in table 6. This is the portion of the City of Hollister which Sunnyslope can expect to serve after the RWQCB’s Cease and Desist Order is lifted. .

11

Table 6. Sunnyslope’s Portion of City of Hollister Build out Schedule Post RWQCB Cease and Desist Order

Project

CY2008

CY2009

CY2010

CY2011

CY2012

CY2013

CY2014

CY2015

Award Homes Anderson Homes Valley View 3 Valley View 6 Walnut Park A Walnut Park B La Baig Brigantino Las Brisas 7 Las Brisas 8 Cerra Vista Annotti (MillerFerrara)

125 units 6 units

125 units -

70 units -

75 units -

75 units -

75 units -

75units -

57 units -

9 units 5 units 5 units 27 units 45 units 15 units 3 units 14 units 20 units -

93 units

77 units

-

-

-

-

-

274

218

147

75

75

75

75

57

Total

Grand Total for City of Hollister from 2008 to 2010 = 639 New Residential Units Inside City

Year 2010 Unincorporated County of Hollister Water Demand Forecast for Sunnyslope Water District Outside of the City Limits Sunnyslope has a current backlog for water meters service as shown in table 7. Table 7. Unincorporated San Benito County Requests for water service outside of the City of Hollister Project Church of Latter Day Saints Tyler Knoll Walnut Park Gavilan Acres 605 RMK Drive Lico Water Mutual Co Kane Drive Rosebud Drive Nader Javid Senior Center Rick Pennington Creekside Village RG&CC, Inc Venture Estates

Total

# of Units 1 units 1 units 27 units 4 units 6 units 14 units 16 units 64 units 1 units 100 Units 2 units 18 units

253

The unincorporated County has a growth restriction of 1% growth which would correspond to a maximum of 84 units per year pursuant to telephone communication in September of 2007 with Chuck Ortwein, Senior Planner, County of San Benito. Once the

12

RWQCB Cease and Desist Order lifts, the County could permit development up to 84 units per year as a maximum. Development would more likely be in the range from 47 to 85 units per year. Some of these units would require water from Sunnyslope while others could rely upon private wells or private water mutual companies. For the purposes of this study, it is assumed that Sunnyslope will need to supply 89 units in the unincorporated County by 2010 when construction of Gavilan College begins. This figure would represent the 253 outstanding requests for water service minus the 64 units for Nader Javid and the 100 units for Creekside Village. These two developments will probably be built after 2010.

Year 2010 Total Unincorporated County & City of Hollister Water Demand for Sunnyslope Water District By the year 2010 water demand should increase approximately 15% prior to the construction of Gavilan College and Santana Ranch. Currently, Sunnyslope has 5290 customers. With the addition of 89 units in the unincorporated county and 639 units in the City of Hollister, total connections should be approximately 6018 connections. The addition of 89 units in the unincorporated county and 639 units in the City adds 14% to the customer base, which is consistent with expected 15% increase in population. For the purposes of this study, it is assumed that Sunnyslope County Water District will need to supply its existing water demand, plus 15% for growth by the year 2010, and the additional demands of Gavilan College and Santana Ranch. Santana Ranch will need a total of 383 acre-feet per year. Gavilan College and Fairview Corners Residential Development will need a total of 247 acre-feet of water. Together, Santana Ranch and Gavilan College will need an additional 630 acre-feet of water per year. Sunnyslope’s 2006 Annual Drinking Water Quality Report estimates annual water demand as 2950 acre-feet per year. The 2004 Report estimated the annual water demand at 3409 acre-feet per year. Assuming a 15% increase above the higher 3409 acre-feet per year water demand, plus the addition of the Gavilan College demand of 247 acre-feet per year, plus the demand from Santana Ranch for 383 acre-feet per year, Sunnyslope would need to supply 4550 acre-feet per year by 2010. If Sunnyslope were to supply 4550 acre-feet per year, it would need to increase its present production capacity by approximately 33% if it was to maintain the same level of reliability of service to it’s current customer demand of 3409 acre-feet per year.

Year 2010 Total Unincorporated County & City of Hollister Water Supply by Sunnyslope Water Currently, Sunnyslope has well production capacity of 3450 gpm and a supplemental 500 gpm of treated water supply which is used solely for water quality improvement. By the year 2010, Sunnyslope County Water District will have constructed two new wells: well #11, and well #12. Well #11 is expected be completed in 2008, and will supply 1300 gpm. The addition of well #11’s 1300 gpm will increase Sunnyslope groundwater supply by 38% over 2007 supply levels. Well #12 is expected to be completed in 2009 and will supply approximately 2100 gpm. The addition of well #12’s 2100 gpm in addition with well #11’s supply of 1300 gpm will increase Sunnyslope’s groundwater supply by 98%. As Sunnyslope’s demand is expected to

13

increase 33% by 2010, the 38% increase in groundwater supply provided by well #11 and the 98% increase by well #11 and well #12 will be more than adequate to supply new customers, Gavilan College, and Santana Ranch by the year 2010. The additional water supplied by the LESSALT treatment plant would be considered as water quality improvement, but would not be considered a reliable supply unless future improvements were made to the LESSALT treatment plant. These improvements in Lessalt should take place in approximately 2012.

7.

Supply Reliability

Supply Reliability Average/Normal Water Year Assessment (Entire Region) In past single-year and multi-year droughts, the City’s and Sunnyslope’s groundwater supplies have proven reliable to meet both agricultural and M&I demands. From 2000 – 2005, agricultural groundwater demand represented approximately 40% of overall groundwater withdrawals. Total groundwater withdrawals are considerably less than the believed sustainable yield of 16,000 AFY. During times of drought, both agricultural and M&I demands are likely to increase due to reduced CVP deliveries. However, groundwater can be allocated to both agricultural and M&I uses at levels required to maintain a satisfactory supply reliability. The groundwater basin currently has a large volume of groundwater in storage that can serve as a reserve for future droughts. Water level declines in the past have not interfered with pumping efficiency and water levels have eventually recovered following the drought. It is anticipated that similar future droughts will not impact the reliability of the groundwater supply. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006) Table 8 provides a summary of the average water year reliability for the three sub basins included in this study. Demand estimates are described in Sections 4.3 to 4.6. Both agricultural and M&I CVP water deliveries were assumed to be the average proportion of full USBR contract entitlements for the entire Zone 6 that are delivered to the three sub basins of interest. These values represent the average volume of water allocated to the three sub basins between 2000 and 2004. Groundwater pumping is assumed to equal the 16,000 AFY sustainable yields of the underlying Tres Pinos, Hollister East, and Hollister West aquifers. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

14

Table 8. Supply Reliability during Average/Normal Water Year For Entire Region (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006) % of Normal

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

M&I for City(a)

100

6,174

6,880

7,752

8,624

9,445

10,265

M&I for Sunnyslope’s unincorporated areas(a)

100

1,261

1,330

1,399

1,472

1,544

1,621

M&I for County’s unincorporated areas(b)

100

1,632

1,715

1,799

1,886

1,973

2,065

9,067

9,925

10,950

11,982

12,962

13,951

12,761

11,812

10,011

7,096

6,559

5,583

21,828

21,737

20,961

19,078

19,521

19,534

100

10,913

10,913

10,913

10,913

10,913

10,913

100

3,124

3,124

3,124

3,124

3,124

3,124

100

16,000

16,000

16,000

16,000

16,000

16,000

100

0

0

0

0

0

0

30,037

30,037

30,037

30,037

30,037

30,037

8,209

8,300

9,076

10,959

10,516

10,503

Difference as % of Supply

27.33%

27.63%

30.22%

36.48%

35.01%

34.97%

Difference as % of Demand

37.61%

38.18%

43.30%

57.44%

53.87%

53.77%

Water Demands

M&I Demand Sub-total (c)

Agricultural

100 Demand Total

Available Water Supplies CVP Ag Deliveries(d) (d)

CVP M&I Deliveries Groundwater

(e)

Recycled Water

(f)

Supply Total Difference (Supply minus Demand)

(a) M&I water demand for City and Sunnyslope were estimated using the service connection method as described in Section 4.4. (b) M&I water demand for unincorporated County were estimated using annual groundwater reports and increased at 1% per year as described in Section 4-6. (c) Agricultural demand data was extracted from Annual Groundwater Reports and reduced for conversion to M&I within the HSA as described in Appendix F. (d) The values shown for CVP agricultural and M&I deliveries are the average proportion of full USBR contract entitlements (35,500 and 8,250 AFY, respectively) for the entire Zone 6 that are delivered to the three sub basins of interest. These values represent the average volume of water allocated to the three sub basins between 2000 and 2004. The M&I values may change pending the outcome of USBR contract negotiations. (e) See Section 3.4 for discussion of groundwater allocation to M&I and agricultural purposes. (f) All recycled water is proposed for reuse in the San Juan Groundwater Basin and is therefore not used in the Hollister Service Area.

Table 8 shows that water supplies are sufficient during an average/normal water year to satisfy both agricultural and M&I demands through 2030. Groundwater withdrawals between 2000 and 2004 (normal to wet years) averaged 12,000 AFY, with approximately 40% withdrawn for agricultural uses and 60% for M&I. This is significantly less than the sustainable yield of the underlying aquifers, resulting in a net recharge of the underlying aquifers. Sufficient

15

groundwater is available to satisfy both agricultural and M&I demands above and beyond those demands satisfied by imported CVP water. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

Supply Reliability Single Dry Water Year Assessment (Entire Region) Although precipitation data in the Hollister area before 1983 are incomplete, an extreme single year drought occurred in WY 1976 (Creegan and D’Angelo 1993), when rainfall was approximately 9.9 inches or 70 percent of normal (data from the nearby Panoche station) average annual precipitation of about 13.8 inches (based on a representative period from 1983-2004). In 1976, the basin was receiving no imported water and was considered to be in overdraft. The groundwater levels in the Hollister East sub basin were at their lowest elevation in the period of record, approximately 50 feet below mean sea level. Although this scenario is unlikely to be repeated today, municipal wells would still be able to produce groundwater, given that they were able to provide sufficient supply during that drought despite the fact that portions of the screened intervals of wells could be above the water table. In addition, the effects of future droughts are likely to be less severe then past impacts, because of the large amount of groundwater in storage, decreased reliance on groundwater, and additional supplies of imported of water. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006) In addition, San Benito County Water District has developed a numerical model that has been applied to future drought scenarios, including single-year droughts. Historic recharge (1974-2003) was repeated using the current conditions as initial conditions and assuming future increases in groundwater demand and the continuation of imported water. The model simulates the basin into the future by using the actual recharge that occurred in the past. This model was used to simulate what would occur if a drought similar to the one that occurred in WY 1976 occurs again in the future. Figure 2 shows the model output for simulated and actual historic water levels in Hollister West. Although the actual groundwater level data are not shown, the simulated water levels indicate that the WY 1976 drought would result in a decline in water levels in the HSA of only 25 feet (to about 215 feet mean sea level) with subsequent rapid recovery. Although the drought simulated is equal to the WY 1976 drought, the operating conditions of the basin have changed. The basin’s large amount of storage and decreased reliance on ground water lessens the impact on the basin of a drought and hastens the basin’s recovery. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

16

Figure 2. Hydrograph of Simulated Water Levels in Hollister. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

Table 9 provides a summary of the single dry water year reliability for the three sub basins. The analysis assumes CVP cutbacks, such that the District only receives 25% of its agricultural entitlement and 75% of its M&I entitlement, based on the 3-year historic use. This amounts to reduced deliveries of 2,728 AF/year and 2,343 AF/year for agricultural and M&I deliveries, respectively. Ground water pumping is assumed to equal the 16,000 AF/yr sustainable yields of the underlying aquifers as described in Appendix E of the 2000 UWMP by Jones and Stokes. Demands were assumed to remain the same as those developed for the normal/average water year. This is assumed to be a conservative estimate. In reality, demand may decrease for interior M&I uses, but exterior M&I and agricultural demands may in fact increase due to increased evapo-transpiration that is likely to occur during drought conditions. The effects of these changes in demand are assumed to offset each other. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

17

Table 9. Supply Reliability During a Single Dry Water Year For Entire Region (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006) % of Normal

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

M&I for City(a)

100

6,174

6,880

7,752

8,624

9,445

10,265

M&I for Sunnyslope’s unincorporated areas(a)

100

1,261

1,330

1,399

1,472

1,544

1,621

M&I for County’s unincorporated areas(b)

100

1,632

1,715

1,799

1,886

1,973

2,065

9,067

9,925

10,950

11,982

12,962

13,951

12,761

11,812

10,011

7,096

6,559

5,583

21,828

21,737

20,961

19,078

19,521

19,534

25

2,728

2,728

2,728

2,728

2,728

2,728

75

2,343

2,343

2,343

2,343

2,343

2,343

100

16,000

16,000

16,000

16,000

16,000

16,000

100

0

0

0

0

0

90

21,071

21,071

21,071

21,071

21,071

21,071

-757

-666

111

1,993

1,550

1,537

Difference as % of Supply

-3.59%

-3.16%

0.53%

9.46%

7.36%

7.29%

Difference as % of Demand

-3.47%

-3.06%

0.53%

10.45%

7.94%

7.87%

Water Demands

M&I Demand Sub-total (c)

Agricultural

100 Demand Total

Available Water Supplies CVP Ag Deliveries(d) (d)

CVP M&I Deliveries Groundwater

(e)

Recycled Water

(f)

Supply Total Difference (Supply minus Demand)

(a) M&I water demand for City and Sunnyslope were estimated using the service connection method as described in Section 4.4. (b) M&I water demand for unincorporated County were estimated using annual groundwater reports and increased at 1% per year as described in Section 4-6. (c) Agricultural demand data was extracted from Annual Ground water Reports and reduced for conversion to M&I within the HSA as described in Appendix F. (d) The values shown for CVP agricultural and M&I deliveries are the average proportion of full USBR contract entitlements (35,500 and 8,250 AFY, respectively) for the entire Zone 6 that are delivered to the three sub basins of interest. These values represent the average volume of water allocated to the three sub basins between 2000 and 2004. The M&I values may change pending the outcome of USBR contract negotiations. (e) See above in Section 3.4 for discussion of groundwater allocation to M&I and agricultural purposes. (f) All recycled water is proposed for reuse in the San Juan Groundwater Basin and is therefore not used in the Hollister Service Area.

Table 9 shows that available supplies may be insufficient to meet demands during a single dry water year in the near future. Increased ground water pumping could be used to supplement the lack of available M&I and agricultural supplies during single dry years. It is assumed that pumping in excess of the sustainable yield of the aquifer is acceptable in single dry years as this excess pumping will be restored in years with above normal rainfall. Additionally, ground water levels in the Hollister East, Hollister West, and Tres Pinos groundwater sub basins are currently at near record levels indicating significant water in storage. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

18

Sunnyslope will have additional well pumping capacities to pump enough ground water to make up for significant supply deficiencies with the addition of well #11 and well #12. Sunnyslope total well production capacity of 3,450 gallons per minute (gpm) would be increased to 6850 gpm, a 98% increase in production capacity. The addition of well #11 and well #12 additional supplies would easily be able to meet the 33% increase the existing water demand of 3409 acre-feet per year to meet 2010 water demand of 4550 acre-feet per year demand.

Supply Reliability Multiple Dry Water Year Assessment (Entire Region) A multiple-year drought occurred in the basin between WY 1987 and 1990. During these four years the average annual precipitation was 8.7 inches, 63 percent of normal rainfall. Although imported water was brought to the basin in 1987, deliveries were small for the first few years. The drought effects were more noticeable in the Hollister West sub basin than in the eastern portion of the HSA. As shown in Figure 3, water levels in Hollister West were already declining slightly before the drought and continued to drop another 40 feet during the multiple year drought. Water levels in the basin did not recover until WY 1997. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

Figure 3. Hydrographs of Average Ground water Elevations, Hollister. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

19

Actual declines in water levels in the Sunnyslope County Water District’s portion of Hollister West are shown in figure 4. Existing wells #1 & #2, shown in the orange line near the bottom of the graph in figure 4, are in the same aquifer as the proposed wells #11 and #12. Wells #1 and #2 declined 90 feet from the 240 foot elevation to the 150 foot elevation from 1987 to 1994. Wells #1 and #2 then staged a dramatic recovery after simultaneous end of the drought and the beginning of recharge of the ground water basin by the importation of CVP water.

Standing Well Water Level Above Sea Level

500 490 480 470 460 450 440 430 420 410 400 390 380 370 360 350 340 330 320 310 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50

Well 8 Standing

Well 5 Standing

Well 1 Standing

Feb08

Sep02 Jan04 May05 Oct-0 6

Dec99 Apr-0 1

Mar97 Jul-9 8

Jun94 Oct-9 5

Dec88 May90 Sep91 Jan93

Jul-8 3 Nov84 Mar86 Aug87

Oct-8 0 Feb82

Well 2 Standing Jan78 May79

Apr-7 5 Aug76

Feet Above Sea Level

The 90 foot decline in the groundwater basin over a seven year period represents the worst historical decline for Sunnyslope’s wells, which were not only experiencing the effects of a prolonged 3 year drought, but were also suffering from the effects of previous decades of groundwater overdraft. Actual recovery of the aquifer was began in 1994 from the 150 foot elevation and ended at the 260 foot elevation in 2001 resulting in a 110 foot recovery of the groundwater basin. This equilibrium in the groundwater aquifer has been maintained since 2001.

Date

Figure 4. Hydrograph of Water Levels In Sunnyslope County Water District’s Wells (Kennedy/Jenks, 2006)

20

Hollister East water levels did not show a decline during the drought; but continued to recover from the overdraft of the 1970’s. Like the single year drought, water levels did not drop sufficiently to impact the municipal wells, and if the drought occurred today, groundwater levels would respond differently. The numerical mode l output in Figure 5 indicates that ground water levels would decline up to 30 feet during the multiple year droughts, but would recover quickly. Again the current increased storage in the basin allows for a faster recovery from droughts. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

Figure 5. Hydrograph of Simulated Water Levels in Hollister East. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

An analysis was performed to determine the supply reliability during a period of prolonged drought. A series of three consecutive years of low imported water deliveries is evaluated. The first series analyzed occurs within the next three years, 2006 – 2008. The second series looks at a three year drought occurring at the end of the time horizon between 2028 and 2030. There have been significant changes to the USBR’s M&I Water Shortage Policy since the last major consecutive year drought occurred in California in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s. During this drought, water cutbacks were not initiated until 1990. Table 10 lists South of Delta CVP cutbacks to agricultural and M&I users under the old policy.

21

Table 10. Summary of USBR Deliveries during Last Major California Drought (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006) Water Deliveries (% of contract entitlements) Year

Agricultural

M&I

1990

50

50-75

1991

25

25-50

1992

25

75

However, these cutbacks might have been different under the 2001 M&I Shortage Policy as adopted by the USBR. Due to the uncertainty surrounding the level of cutbacks that would have been realized under the current policy, a set of conservative assumptions were made for the purposes of the Urban Water Management Plan. During the first year of the consecutive year drought, agricultural and M&I deliveries were assumed to be 25% and 75% of contract entitlements, respectively. During the second and third years of the consecutive year drought, agricultural and M&I deliveries are assumed to be further reduced to 15% and 65% of contract entitlements, respectively. These cutbacks are realistic under the adopted 2001 M&I Shortage Policy. Demands were assumed to remain the same as those developed for the normal/average water year. Again, the effects of indoor changes in demand are assumed to be offset by increased agricultural and outdoor demands. Table 11 provides a summary of the multiple dry water year reliability for the study area for the two time periods analyzed. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006)

22

Table 11. Supply Reliability during Multiple Dry Water Years For Entire Region (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006) % of Normal

2006

2007

2008

2028

2029

2030

Water Demands M&I for City(a)

100

6,249

6,324

6,509

9,937

10,101

10,265

M&I for Sunnyslope’s unincorporated areas(a)

100

1,274

1,288

1,302

1,590

1,605

1,621

M&I for County’s unincorporated areas(b)

100

1,648

1,665

1,682

2,028

2,046

2,065

9,171

9,277

9,493

13,555

13,752

13,951

12,571

12,381

12,191

5,973

5,778

5,583

21,743

21,658

21,684

19,528

19,530

19,534

25;15

2,728

1,637

1,637

2,728

1,637

1,637

75; 65

2,343

2,031

2,031

2,343

2,031

2,031

100

16,000

16,000

16,000

16,000

16,000

16,000

100

0

0

0

0

0

0

21,071

19,668

19,668

21,071

19,668

19,668

-672

-1,990

-2,016

1,543

138

134

Difference as % of Supply

-3.19%

-10.12%

-10.25%

7.32%

0.70%

0.68%

Difference as % of Demand

-3.09%

-9.19%

-9.30%

7.90%

0.70%

0.69%

M&I Demand Sub-total (c)

Agricultural

100 Demand Total

Available Water Supplies CVP Ag Deliveries(d) (e)

CVP M&I Deliveries Groundwater

(f)

Recycled Water

(g)

Supply Total Difference (Supply minus Demand)

(a) M&I water demand for City and Sunnyslope were estimated using the service connection method as described in Section 4.4. (b) M&I water demand for unincorporated County were estimated using annual groundwater reports and increased at 1% per year as described in Section 4-6. (c) Agricultural demand data was extracted from Annual Groundwater Reports and reduced for conversion to M&I within the HSA as described in Appendix F. (d) CVP agricultural deliveries are 25% of the average proportion received by the three sub basins of interest during the 1st year and are reduced to 15% during the 2nd and 3rd years of the drought. st (e) CVP M&I deliveries are 75% of the average proportion received by the three sub basins of interest during the 1 nd rd year and are reduced to 65% during the 2 and 3 years of the drought. (f) See above in Section 3.4 for discussion of groundwater allocation to M&I and agricultural purposes. (g) All recycled water is proposed for reuse in the San Juan Groundwater Basin and is therefore not used in the Hollister Service Area.

As shown by the comparison, the districts will face water shortages under the first three year drought scenario occurring between 2006 and 2008. Under the second scenario from 2028 to 2030, no water shortages occur mainly due to projected conversions of agricultural to urban land uses and associated reductions in overall demand within the planning area. (KENNEDY/JENKS, 2006) Historically the City, the District, and Sunnyslope have used additional groundwater during the dry years to make up for the reductions in CVP deliveries. As discussed earlier, Sunnyslope will be increasing its well pumping capacity from the current 3,450 gallons per

23

minute (gpm) to 6850 gpm by the addition of well #11 and well #12 which will allow Sunnyslope to meet the shortfall between supply and demand during consecutive dry water years by utilizing groundwater storage during an extended drought, and replenishing the aquifer during normal rainfall periods after the drought. During a prolonged drought with a probable 30 foot drawdown in the aquifer well production capacity would be reduced by approximately 6% if the existing pumps and motors were left in the wells. In the unlikely case, that Sunnyslope were to repeat the 90 foot drawdown in the aquifer during a 3 year drought when there was zero CVP water to import well production capacity would be reduced by approximately 18% if the existing pumps and motors were left in the wells. With an 18% reduction in capacity, Sunnyslope would still have well pumping capacity of 5617 gpm, which still represents a 63% increase from the 1987 capacity of 3450 gpm, with the addition of wells #11 and #12. A 63% increase in well pumping capacity from the current 3450 gpm to 5617 gpm, during a three year drought, would be sufficient to meet the 33% increase in demand from the current 3409 acre-feet per year supply to meet the 2010 demand of 4550 acre-feet needed to meet the combined demands from new customers, Gavilan College, and Santana Ranch. The maximum combined 33% increase in demand from new customers, Gavilan College, and Santana Ranch would more than adequately be met by a 63% increase in well production capacity provided by wells #11 and #12, during a three year drought, if Gavilan College and Santana Ranch were built in approximately 2010. The future use of recycled water should also provide an additional supplemental supply when this water becomes available.

8.

Conclusion

Sunnyslope County Water District will be able to meet the immediate demands of new customers, Gavilan College and Fairview Corners Residential Development in the year 2010 by the anticipated construction of well #11 which will add 1300 gpm to the existing capacity of 3450 gpm. The additional construction of well #12, with a capacity of approximately 2100 gpm, subsequent to the construction of well #11, will insure that Sunnyslope has sufficient well capacity sufficiently to reliably meet the additional capacity requirements needed during an extended drought when surface water capacity is curtailed, and each ground water well produces up to 18% less water due to draw down of the aquifer. In general, the ground water basin operates as a ground water bank where Central Valley Project water is recharged during wet and normal years, and water is withdrawn during dry years. Since the introduction of the CVP surface water recharge to the Hollister area, the groundwater basin has been restored to equilibrium and is a reliable source of groundwater when surface water is curtailed during droughts.

24

References Creegan & D’Angelo, 1992-1993 Water Year Groundwater Report 1994, prepared for San Benito County Water District, March 1994. Creegan & D’Angelo, 1991-1992 Water Year Groundwater Report 1993, prepared for San Benito County Water District, March 1993. Creegan & D’Angelo, Groundwater Report 1990, prepared for San Benito County Water District, March 12, 1990. Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Groundwater Management Plan Update for the San Benito County Part of the Gilroy-Hollister Groundwater Basin, Draft Final Report, prepared for the Water Resources Association of San Benito County, California, July 2003. Kennedy/Jenks Consultants, Hollister Urban Area Urban Water Management Plan Revised Draft Report, prepared for the City of Hollister, Sunnyslope County Water District, San Benito County Water District, August 2006.

Kier & Wright, Memorandum entitled Fairview/Gavilan Master Plan EIR - Water Demand Estimate, prepared for Judy Shanley of David Powers and Associates by John Noori of Kier & Wright, April 15, 2008. Kinsella, Steven, Notice of Preparation and EIR Scoping Meeting of an Environmental Impact Report for the Gavilan San Benito Campus and Fairview Corners Master Plan, Gavilan College North Campus, June 2, 2008. Lenoir, Carol, personal communication, E-mail, May 18, 2007. Pacific Municipal Consultants, Draft Environmental Impact Report for Northeast Fairview Specific Plan General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, State Clearinghouse No. 97011008, prepared for County of San Benito, File No. 93-01, GPA 93-11; April 1998. RJA, Engineering Report For Development Of Santana Ranch, prepared for Santana Ranch Property Owners, June 2007. San Benito County Water District, Water Supply Assessment for Northeast Fairview Specific Plan Draft, Prepared for Sunnyslope County Water District and San Benito County Water District, February 1999.

25

p u b l i c re v i e w d r a f t

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan A

P l a n n e d

C o m m u n i t y

O C T O B E R

2 0 1 1

public revi ew draft

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan a planned community

PREPARED FOR

San Benito County Planning and Building Inspection Services 3224 Southside Road Hollister, CA 95023 Tel 831.637.5313

PREPARED BY

EMC Planning Group Inc. 301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C Monterey, CA 93940 Tel 831.649.1799 Fax 831.649.8399 [email protected] www.emcplanning.com

October 2011

Prepared for Consideration by: San Benito County, California Board of Supervisors Margie Barrios District 1 Anthony Botelho District 2 Robert Rivas District 3 Jerry Muenzer District 4 Jaime De La Cruz District 5 Planning Commission Jeff Culler District 1 Daniel DeVries District 2 Richard Vasquez District 3 Ray Pierce District 4 Ignacio Velazquez District 5 Planning Staff Gary Armstrong Director Byron Turner Assistant Director Lissette Knight Senior Planner Ann Dolmage Assistant Planner

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

administrative draft fairview corners residential specific plan

table of Contents

Article 1.0 Introduction................................................................ 1-1 Section 1.1

Content and Purpose......................................................................... 1-1

Section 1.2

Project Setting (Location)............................................................... 1-3

Section 1.3

Objectives........................................................................................... 1-8

Section 1.4

Relationship of the Specific Plan to the San Benito County General Plan and Zoning Code, and Hollister General Plan....1-11

Section 1.5

Consistency of the Specific Plan with the San Benito County and City of Hollister General Plans.............................................1-19

Article 2.0 Land Use Plan and Development Standards............. 2-1 Section 2.1

Land Use Objectives........................................................................... 2-1

Section 2.2

Land Use Concept.............................................................................. 2-1

Section 2.3

Land Use Goals and Policies............................................................. 2-8

Section 2.4

Development Standards...................................................................2-22

Article 3.0 Circulation Plan.......................................................... 3-1 Section 3.1

Circulation Plan Objectives............................................................ 3-1

Section 3.2

Existing Roadways.............................................................................. 3-1

Section 3.3

Road Circulation . ........................................................................... 3-2

Section 3.4

Bicycle and Pedestrian Circulation...............................................3-10

Section 3.5

Public Transit...................................................................................3-19

Section 3.6

Circulation Plan Goals and Policies..............................................3-19

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Article 4.0 Community Design........................................................ 4-1 Section 4.1

Design Objectives.............................................................................. 4-1

Section 4.2

Community Design Goals and Policies............................................ 4-1

Article 5.0 Resource Management................................................. 5-1 Section 5.1

Resource Conservation and Management Objectives.................... 5-1

Section 5.2

Existing Conditions ......................................................................... 5-1

Section 5.3

Resource Management Goals and Policies...................................... 5-6

Article 6.0 Public Facilities and Services..................................... 6-1 Section 6.1

Public Facilities and Services Objectives........................................ 6-1

Section 6.2

Water, Wastewater, and Drainage Infrastructure Plan............... 6-1

Section 6.3

Public Utilities and Communications.............................................6-10

Section 6.4

Public Safety, Schools, Parks, and Solid Waste Collection........6-19

Section 6.5

Public Facilities and Services Goals and Policies.........................6-21

Article 7.0 Plan Implementation................................................... 7-1 Section 7.1

Plan Administration.......................................................................... 7-1

Section 7.2

Plan Responsibilities and Obligations............................................7-11

APPENDICES Appendix A

Goals and Policy Implementation

Appendix B

Lotting Program Examples A-C

Appendix C

Open Space Categories

Appendix D

U.S. Green Building Council LEED Criteria

Appendix E

SSCWD Intent to Serve Letter

Appendix F

Draft Capital Improvements Cost Study

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Figures Figure 1

Regional Location...........................................................................1-3

Figure 2

Specific Plan Area Vicinity.............................................................1-4

Figure 3

Parcel Map.......................................................................................1-5

Figure 4 Specific Plan Area Aerial Photograph..........................................1-7 Figure 5

Planning Areas..............................................................................1-13

Figure 6

San Benito County Land Use Designations................................1-17

Figure 7

Constraints Diagram......................................................................2-3

Figure 8

Land Use Diagram...........................................................................2-5

Figure 9

Open Space Diagram........................................................................2-9

Figure 10

Plan Area Context with Adjoining Open Space.........................2-11

Figure 11

Circulation Diagram......................................................................3-3

Figure 12

Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Sections...................3-5

Figure 13

Emergency Vehicle Access Route...................................................3-7

Figure 14

Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Road Section.......3-11

Figure 15

Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections..........................................................................................3-13

Figure 16

Traffic Calming Diagram..............................................................3-15

Figure 17

Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Plan.................................3-17

Figure 18

SSCWD Service Area and SOI Boundaries....................................6-3

Figure 19

Potable Water System Layout.........................................................6-5

Figure 20

Future Recycled Wastewater Route..............................................6-7

Figure 21

Wastewater Conveyance Alternatives.........................................6-11

Figure 22

Existing Drainage..........................................................................6-13

Figure 23

Conceptual Drainage Plan...........................................................6-15

Figure 24

Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram..............................................6-17

Figure 25

Conceptual Development Phasing plan......................................7-12

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Tables Table 1

Area of Special Study Existing and Proposed San Benito County Land Use and Zoning Designation ...............................1-19

Table 2

Land Use Summary...........................................................................2-2

Table 3

Residential Dwelling Units and Lot Sizes...................................2-8

Table 4

Minimum Residential Lot Size.....................................................2-22

Table 5

Permitted and Conditional Land Uses.......................................2-23

Table 6

Accessory Dwelling Standards....................................................2-24

Table 7

Lot Coverage.................................................................................2-24

Table 8

Minimum Yard Space......................................................................2-24

Table 9

Compact Development Setbacks...................................................2-25

Table 10

Standard Development Setbacks..................................................2-25

Table 11

Large Lot Development Setbacks.................................................2-25

Table 12

Multifamily Development Setbacks.............................................2-26

Table 13

Special Setback Requirements and Exceptions...........................2-26

Table 14

Height Limits.................................................................................2-26

Table 15

Height Limits at Plan Area Boundaries......................................2-27

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

TERMS and Acronyms AFUE Annual Fuel Use Efficiency AFY/du acre-feet per year/dwelling unit AHO Affordable Housing Ordinance AHP Affordable Housing Program BMPs Best Management Practices CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CFD Community Facilities District “Mello-Roos” COG San Benito County Council of Governments CSA Community Services Area CSD Community Services District CFD Community Facilities District CTS California Tiger Salamander DA Development Agreement du/ac dwelling unit/acre DWTP Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant EA Energy and Atmosphere EIR Environmental Impact Report EMS Emergency Medical Services EVA Emergency Vehicle Access FVC LLC Fairview Corners LLC FVC-SP

Fairview Corners-Specific Plan

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

GHAD Geologic Hazards Abatement District GIB

Green Infrastructure and Buildings

GMO

Growth Management Ordinance

GPA General Plan Amendment GPD/du gallons per day/dwelling unit HFD City of Hollister Fire Department HOA Homeowners’ Association HSD Hollister School District HUD U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development LAFCO Local Agency Formation Commission LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LID Low Impact Development LL Locations and Linkages LLD Landscape and Lighting District MLD Most Likely Descendent MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MOU Memorandum of Understanding ND Neighborhood Development NOX Nitrogen Oxide NPD Neighborhood Patterns and Design NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System PG&E Pacific Gas & Electric

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Plan Area Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Area PM10 Particles Measuring 10µm or less PRGI Potential Residential Growth Increase Designation RWQCB

Regional Water Quality Control Board

SBC Southwestern Bell Corporation SBCFD San Benito County Fire Department SBCWD San Benito County Water District SBHSD San Benito High School District sf square feet SJKF San Joaquin Kit Fox SLL Smart Locations and Linkages SOI Sphere of Influence Specific Plan Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan SS Sustainable Sites SSCWD Sunnyslope County Water District SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGBC U.S. Green Building Council WE Water Efficiency WSA Water Supply Assessment

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

This side intentionally left blank.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

F Article 1.0

Introduction Article 1.0 provides the context for the Specific Plan by describing the purpose, historical background of the East Fairview Area of Special Study, and relationship to the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus. It includes the location and context of the parcels, as well as the physical characteristics and surrounding land uses. The relationship and the conformance of Specific Plan with the San Benito County General Plan policies and Zoning Code is discussed. A summary of the content of the Specific Plan and preparation process is also provided.

Introduction

F Article 1.0

Introduction

The Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan (“Specific Plan” or “Plan”) provides the land use planning and regulatory guidance for the development of approximately 60-acres of unincorporated land (“Plan Area”) located southeast of the City of Hollister in unincorporated San Benito County. In 1989, the Plan Area was designated by the San Benito County Board of Supervisors and in the County’s General Plan as an “Area of Special Study” (with an anticipated density of approximately four dwelling units per acre), which is an area where growth is encouraged to occur upon completion and adoption of a “Specific Plan” pursuant to California Government code Section 64550.

Section 1.1 Content and Purpose The purpose of this Specific Plan is to create a flexible planned residential community, with a variety of residential lot and unit sizes, and the possibility for complementary accessory uses (e.g. recreational, open space, secondary units, etc). Commercial uses are not presently contemplated or allowed under this Specific Plan, but would not be inconsistent with its purpose and intent. However, an amendment to



the Specific Plan would be required in order to provide for the types of commercial uses and applicable standards.

State Law Requirements California law requires cities and counties to prepare a general plan, which describes what the city or county (and its residents) desire for their community, both now and in the future. General plans are required to address land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety. Specific plans provide comprehensive guidelines for a more defined and localized area within a jurisdiction’s boundaries. They offer more specific information and guidance than what is available in a general plan. This Specific Plan has been prepared consistent with the specific plan content requirements identified in California Government Code Section 65451 as follows: (a) A specific plan shall include a text and a diagram or diagrams which specify all of the following in detail: (1) The distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the specific plan.

article 1.0 introduction

1-

F Introduction

(2) The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the specific plan and needed to support the land uses described in the specific plan.

Specific Plan, specific development standards, the permitted and conditionally permitted uses, and other development regulations are provided.

(3) Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable.

Goals, Policies, and Policy Implementation

(4) A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out paragraphs (1), (2), and (3). (b) The specific plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the specific plan to the general plan. A statement of the Specific Plan’s relationship to the San Benito County General Plan is described below, and an evaluation of the Specific Plan’s consistency with general plan goals is contained in Section 1.5.

Organization The Specific Plan is organized into seven Articles and six Appendices.

How to Use this Plan The Specific Plan is arranged with sets of goals, policies, and policy implementation actions addressing land use, circulation, design, natural resources, and public facilities and services. As part of the

1-

In context with the aforementioned goals, policies and implementation actions, these development regulations shall comprise the Fairview Corners— Specific Plan (FVC-SP) zoning.

Goals provide the context for the specific policies and policy implementation discussed in the Specific Plan. A policy is a statement that provides direction to guide decision-making about future development within the Plan Area. Policy Implementation is a specific action by a specific party or parties that must be taken to implement the policy direction within the Specific Plan. Each of the five major articles in the Specific Plan (Land Use Plan and Development Standards, Circulation Plan, Community Design, Resource Management, and Public Facilities and Services) contain goals, policies, and policy implementation, which are summarized in Appendix A for ease of access. The implementation actions often refer to a “master developer” and/or “individual neighborhood developer(s).” In general, the master developer would be responsible for designing, financing, and constructing the major backbone infrastructure needed to support development throughout the Plan Area. The master developer may also construct all or portions of the Plan Area. Individual developers may purchase land within the Plan Area boundary from the master developer and construct some or all of the individual development in-lieu of the master developer.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Green Building Guidelines This Specific Plan includes green building design guidelines, which are meant to function as guiding framework for development of the Plan Area, to the extent feasible. The master developer and/or the individual neighborhood developer(s) of each phase of development are strongly encouraged to work with County staff in developing and implementing these, and other, feasible guidelines for sustainable development within the Plan Area. Policies meeting specific U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) criteria are noted with bracketed references following the policy implementation. These are summarized in Appendix D. It should be recognized that LEED criteria may evolve over time, and the cited criteria are not meant to be locked in place. [Insert logo]

Article 7.0 addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state, County and local agency standards and requirements on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 also summarizes the phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements, and the application of the Plan Area Affordable Housing Program.

Section 1.2 Project Setting (Location) The Plan Area is located southeast of the City of Hollister, in unincorporated San Benito County, north of Airline Highway (State Route 25) and east of Fairview Road. Figure 1, Regional Location, presents the regional location of the Plan Area. The property is bounded by rural residential ranchettes to the north; rural residential ranchettes, an organic farm and undeveloped open grassland to the east; the 78-acre parcel of vacant land owned by the Gavilan Joint Community College District (hereafter Gavilan College District) to the south (planned for a future community college campus); and the Figure 1

Regional Location

Plan Implementation Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the administration of the Specific Plan, describing the initial approvals and entitlements necessary to authorize the Specific Plan, as well as the application of subsequent entitlements on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 further describes the roles, responsibilities and obligations of the County and Developers for implementing the Specific Plan, involving compliance with the initial and subsequent entitlements. The Specific Plan land use goals, policies and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area.



article 1.0 introduction

1-

F Introduction

Article 2.0, Land Use Plan and Development Standards, contains a series of tables that describe acceptable land uses and development intensities.

F Introduction

existing Cielo Vista single-family residential subdivision to the west across Fairview Road. Ridgemark Golf and Country Club is located to the south of the Plan Area on the other side of Airline Highway. Figure 2, Specific Plan Area Vicinity, presents the Plan Area boundary in relationship to the vicinity land and road network, and in context to the East Fairview Area of Special Study. Figure 2

Specific Plan Area Vicinity View west on Cielo Vista Dr. at entrance to Cielo Vista development

View west on Harbern Way at entrance to rural residential development

According to the San Benito County Housing Element Update 2007-2014, the County has 0.7 jobs for each housing unit, well below the desired 1.5:1 ratio. Housing growth has outpaced job growth in San Benito County for the past 30 years, with the percent of out-of-County jobs increasing from 24 percent in 1980 to 49 percent by 2000.

Physical Characteristics

View south on Ridgemark Dr. at entrance to Ridgemark Country Club

1-

The Plan Area is approximately 60-acres and includes one parcel of land, Assessor’s parcel 025190-068. Figure 3, Parcel Map, presents the boundary of the Plan Area. The Plan Area is currently undeveloped land that is used to cultivate barley.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Area Boundary

Gavilan Community College San Benito Campus

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright Civil Engineers & Surveyors, Inc. 2008

Figure 3

Parcel Map Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

F Introduction This side intentionally left blank.

1-

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

View east across Plan Area & water pump station along northern boundary

View southeast across Plan Area from northern boundary

Fairview Corners Specific Plan This Specific Plan, as required by County Resolution No. 89-92, governs the Plan Area. Since the residential development described within the Specific Plan requires a County General Plan Amendment



(GPA), this Specific Plan constitutes that amendment. The development regulations contained or otherwise referenced in the Specific Plan establish the FVC-SP zoning regulations, which constitute the zoning for the Plan Area. This Plan will be adopted by ordinance, and any future amendments thereto will also need to be adopted by ordinance. The Plan Area is located within the designated “Area of Special Study”. This is an interim designation pending completion and adoption of a specific plan pursuant to California Government Code Section 65450. The Specific Plan ensures consistency between the Plan Area development and the General Plan (as required by Government Code sections 65450 through 65457), and will implement the goals and policies of the General Plan. This Specific Plan establishes the uses, and the development and design standards and other regulations for the Plan Area. Upon adoption of the Specific Plan, the Plan Area shall be designated under the General Plan as The Fairview Corners Specific Plan Area and the Fairview Corners—Specific Plan (FVC-SP) zoning regulations shall govern development of the Plan Area. To the extent any standard or other provision in the Specific Plan conflicts with the County Code, including the County’s Zoning Ordinance, the standard or zoning provision set forth in this Specific Plan shall govern development of the Plan Area. However, to the extent there are any conflicts between this Specific Plan and the Fairview Corners Development Agreement, the provisions of the Development Agreement shall prevail. San Benito County has worked with Fairview Corners LLC (hereinafter FVC LLC) to prepare the Fairview Corners Development Agreement (Development Agreement) to specify owner and/or future developer obligations, rights, cooperation

article 1.0 introduction

1-

F Introduction

The land is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. There are no trails, roads or other development on the property. There is currently a fence along the western, northern and eastern edge of the property. The property has no overhead lines, poles, or underground utilities. A former stock pond is located in the northeast corner of the property. The former stock pond is dry. Figure 4, Specific Plan Area Aerial Photograph, presents an aerial view of the area with the Plan Area outlined.

F Introduction

between parties and terms of the agreement (i.e., among other things, financing of infrastructure improvements, which improvements will be made and when, cost sharing/recovery, payment of impact fees, project phasing, conditions of development, and dedication of land for public uses). San Benito County is the lead agency under CEQA and is the first agency to consider and approve applicable entitlement requests. This Specific Plan and development plans for the area reflect FVC LLC consultations with a range of public agencies and interest groups who assisted in identifying issues, needs, opportunities and solutions for developing the Plan Area. FVC LLC goal has been to design a planned community adjacent to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus that considers the needs of the community, the opportunities and constraints of the property, regulatory requirements of various agencies, and the financial viability of the residential development.

objectives used in development of the Specific Plan include the following:  Implement the intention of the San Benito County Board of Supervisors when the Board designated the Plan Area an Area of Special Study to allow higher density development.  Create a mutually supportive relationship between the Plan Area and the adjoining future Gavilan College San Benito Campus site that integrates connections, shares facilities and infrastructure, and collaborates on mitigation where appropriate.  Provide a maximum residential unit count of 220 for the creation of housing opportunities in proximity to existing utilities and infrastructure improvements.  Provide for a mix of housing types close to potential employment opportunities and students at the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus, public transportation, public facilities, and goods and services that will meet the needs of a variety of households.  Provide for an Affordable Housing Program that encourages secondary units, and collaborates, where feasible, with the Gavilan College San Benito Campus.

View southwest across Plan Area towards Cielo Vista development

Section 1.3 Objectives The Plan Area will provide, through planned cooperation with the Gavilan College District, diverse and integrated housing, expanded public access to park and open space opportunities, efficient use of land, improved jobs/housing balance, and creation of distinct neighborhood centers that bring together commercial, residential, and recreational uses. The 1-

 Provide a range of potentially mixed residential housing opportunities that will meet the needs of a variety of households with lot sizes ranging from 4,000 square feet to five acres, with a range of housing types and square footages.  Provide convenient pedestrian connections and recreational opportunities through the provision of pocket parks, open space area, corridors, and connections with the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus site.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Old Ranch Road

Approximate Plan Area Boundary

Cielo Vista Development

Harbern Way

e Hig

hway

Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

750 feet

(Stat

e Ro

ute 2

5)

Private Driveway

Airlin

0

Rural Residential

Gavilan Community College San Benito Campus

Dan Drive

Fairview Road

Cielo Vista Drive

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Google Earth 2008

Figure 4

Specific Plan Area Aerial Photograph Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

F Introduction This side intentionally left blank.

1-10

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Fairview Corners property, which has long been contemplated for development by San Benito County.

 Provide employment opportunities resulting from infrastructure improvements and residential construction.  Create a revenue neutral planned community where long term operation and maintenance costs are paid for by one or more of several potential funding options or appropriate financing district mechanisms.

Section 1.4 Relationship of the Specific Plan to the San Benito County General Plan and Zoning Code, and Hollister General Plan This section provides the context and purpose for the Specific Plan and its relationship to the San Benito County General Plan and Zoning Code and City of Hollister General Plan.

View northeast from Cielo Vista Drive & Fairview Road (Plan Area on right)

Policy 9 of the San Benito County General Plan Land Use Element also identifies the types of land uses envisioned for the property as “residential, agricultural, and open-space. Trails, parks, and public facilities, including schools and churches, may be allowed subject to use permits.” Policy 9 Implementing Action b) also called for the designation of “the area immediately east of Fairview Road, bound by State Route 25 to the south and Mansfield Road to the north, as an Area of Special Study.” The Fairview Corners property is located at the southern end of the Area of Special Study, Assessor’s parcel 025-190-068.

Area of Special Study In 1989, the San Benito County Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 89-92, which identified the entire area east of Fairview Road, from Airline Highway to a point north of Hillcrest Road, as an interim Area of Special Study. The 1989 East Fairview Area of Special Study is indicated as an asterisk on the General Plan Land Use Designations, San Benito County, North County Inset (August 1993) as amended by GPA 00-21 and 00-22. Since 1989, FVC LLC has pursued development of approximately 138-acres in the East Fairview Area of Special Study, known as the



East Fairview Specific Plan After the adoption of Resolution No. 89-92, the property owners within the overall Area of Special Study prepared the 1990 East Fairview Specific Plan to guide the development within the Area of Special Study. Figure 5, Planning Areas, provides an aerial view of the Area of Special Study and identifies its three main components: the Northeast Fairview Specific Plan Area, the Central Fairview Study Area, and the Fairview Corners Specific Plan Area.

article 1.0 introduction

F Introduction

 Minimize the noise and speed of traffic to ensure the safety of residents through the design of cul-de-sacs and curvilinear streets.

1-11

F Introduction

In the early 1990s, review of the East Fairview Specific Plan was interrupted, as several property owners within the Central Study Area reconsidered their participation in the project. In 1993, the owners of the Northeast Fairview Area, encompassing about 290-acres at the north end of the Area of Special Study, began processing a specific plan for their portion of the original Area of Special Study. That area is referred to as the Santana Ranch Specific Plan.

Fairview Corners Residential In 1995, the Fairview Corners property owners also requested and received affirmation from the Board of Supervisors to continue developing and processing a specific plan for the approximately 138-acre Fairview Corners property, located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Airline Highway and Fairview Road. Following the direction of the Board and consistent with the General Plan, the applicants developed and submitted the 1999 Draft Fairview Corners Specific Plan for the development of 624 residential units, commercial uses and a middle school. With input from County staff and officials between 1999 and 2009, the application has evolved into the approximately 78-acre future Gavilan College San Benito Campus (approved by

View northeast of Plan Area from Fairview Road & Airline Highway

1-12

the Gavilan College Board of Trustees in December 2008) and the approximately 60-acre and maximum 220-lot and/or dwelling unit Fairview Corners Specific Plan Area. In recent years FVC LLC has been engaged in a collaborative process with the Gavilan Joint Community College District and San Benito County to create a community plan for development of the area. FVC LLC has prepared a number of technical studies over time. The technical studies have addressed a range of planning and development topics, including natural resources, hazards, geology and soils, archaeological resources, biological resources, hydrology and storm drainage, and traffic and circulation. In July 2008, EMC Planning Group prepared and submitted a development application for the Fairview Corners Residential Project on behalf of Fairview Corners LLC that included a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Zone Change.

Gavilan College San Benito Campus Since 2004, the Gavilan College District had been engaged in a search for property in the City of Hollister and San Benito County areas for a new full-service junior college campus to serve the area,

View south across Plan Area from northern boundary

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Fairview Road

Northeast Fairview Specific Plan Area

Central Fairview Study Area

Award Homes

Cielo Vista Development

Fairview Corners Specific Plan Area (as of 1989)

ne

rli

Ai y

Hw

Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

te

ta

(S te

u Ro )

25

2500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Google Earth 2009

Figure 5

Planning Areas Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

F Introduction This side intentionally left blank.

1-14

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

View west across future Gavilan San Benito Campus along Airline Highway

View northeast across Plan Area from Fairview Road



not limited to, infrastructure improvements such as roads, water, and sewer, habitat mitigation, and various fees associated with development. In November 2008, a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared by David J. Powers & Associates, Inc., entitled Gavilan San Benito Campus and Fairview Corners Projects, and provided environmental review for both the proposed Gavilan College San Benito Campus project and for the Fairview Corners residential development project. The EIR addressed both projects on the 138-acre property, because they have been planned concurrently and have a relationship of shared roadways, infrastructure, and mitigation requirements. The EIR addressed both the individual effect of each project, as well as the combined effect of developing the approximately 138-acre property. In December 2008, the Final EIR was certified by the Gavilan College District Board of Trustees, acting as the lead agency under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As a state agency, the Gavilan College District is exempt from the San Benito County planning process for development of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus. The Gavilan College District Board of Trustees certified the Final EIR, but has no approval authority for the Plan Area. San Benito County retains full control and review of the CEQA and entitlement process, as Lead Agency, for the approximately

Concept rendering of future Gavilan San Benito Campus

article 1.0 introduction

1-15

F Introduction

meet community needs, and prevent overcrowding at the existing Gavilan College Campus in Gilroy. In 2007, the Gavilan College District entered into a letter of intent and then a sales contract with Fairview Corners LLC. They also entered into a cost sharing agreement to prepare technical studies, prepare an environmental document, and pursue habitat mitigation. In December 2008, Gavilan College District acquired from Fairview Corners LLC approximately 78-acres of the southern portion of the 138-acre Fairview Corners Property. The two entities have worked together to implement a community plan for the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the Plan Area. The two entities have entered into a cost sharing agreement for habitat mitigation and provision of public services and infrastructure, both outside and within the Plan Area. This cost sharing includes, but is

F Introduction

60-acre Plan Area. The County staff reviewed and commented on the Final EIR as a responsible agency. The Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR addresses the potential environmental effects of development described in the Specific Plan, and sets forth the informational document required for compliance with CEQA.

San Benito County General Plan The proposed residential development is located in unincorporated San Benito County adjacent to the eastern edge of the City of Hollister. The San Benito County General Plan guides land use, growth, economic, transportation, infrastructure, agricultural, resource, environmental, and other decisions. The General Plan is intended to provide for orderly growth and convey the community’s values and expectations for the future. The General Plan is a comprehensive policy plan which sets forth a series of written statements (goals and objectives) defining the direction, character and composition of future land use development, and establishes guidelines (policies and actions) necessary to attain conformance with the plan. The General Plan identifies physical development of the policies necessary to protect and enhance those features and services, which contribute to the quality of life enjoyed by County citizens. The goals and policies are contained in its ten major elements, Land Use, Transportation, Housing, Open Space and Conservation, Scenic Roads and Highways, Environmental Resources and Constraints Inventory, Noise, Seismic Safety, and Safety. In March 2009 the County began the process to comprehensively update the General Plan. The Plan Area is designated Rural (R) in the San Benito County General Plan Land Use Map, with an asterisk to denote it as an Area of Special Study requiring a Specific Plan and higher density residential development. Figure 6, San Benito County 1-16

Land Use Designations, presents the San Benito County General Plan land use designations for the Plan Area. The proposed land use designation for this planned community is Fairview Corners Residential-Specific Plan (FVC-SP).

San Benito County Zoning The Plan Area is located in the “Rural” zone district. As described more fully in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses (Article 2.0, Land Use Plan and Development Standards) uses allowed by the FVC-SP zoning regulations include detached single family dwellings, duet, duplex, triplex, fourplex dwellings, multi-family dwellings, a guesthouse or other secondary residential units, not to exceed one per lot, and accessory buildings and limited complementary uses. The minimum building site area allowed by the FVC-SP zoning regulations is four-thousand (4,000) square feet. Lot sizes range from 4,000 square feet up to five acres (with a conditional use permit for single-family residential uses on lots greater than one acre) and will provide a variety of residential housing opportunities for ownership or rental units in proximity and adjacent to the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Table 1, Area of Special Study Existing and Proposed San Benito County Land Use and Zoning Designations, depicts the current and proposed land use designations and zoning for the Specific Plan Area.

City of Hollister General Plan The Hollister General Plan was adopted in 2005. The Plan Area is located outside the Hollister city limits and Sphere of Influence (SOI), but within the City’s Planning Area. Refer to Figure 6 for City limit and SOI lines in relation to the Plan Area.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

RT AP

Santana Ranch

Fairview Road

R

RR

Approximate Plan Area Boundary

Ai

Award Homes rlin

e

Hw

y

Cielo Vista Development (S ta

te

Ro

ut

e

25

Harbern Way

)

Gavilan Community College

AP

R/URB Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

(R)

Rural

(RT)

(AP)

Agricultural Productive

(R/URB)

2000 feet

Rural Transitional Rural/Urban

(RR)

Rural Residential

Hollister SOI

Hollister City Limit

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Google Earth 2009

Figure 6

San Benito County Land Use Designations Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

F Introduction This side intentionally left blank.

1-18

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Existing

Proposed

General Plan Land Use Designation

Rural (R)

Fairview Corners--Specific Plan (FVC-SP)

Zoning Designation

Rural (R)

Fairview Corners--Specific Plan (FVC-SP)

Source:

F

Area of Special Study Existing and Proposed San Benito County Land Use and Zoning Designations

Introduction

Table 1

San Benito County General Plan (1998), San Benito County Zoning Ordinance (2006), EMC Planning Group (2010)

Section 1.5 Consistency of the Specific Plan with the San Benito County and City of Hollister General Plans The Specific Plan, and the proposed land use and zoning designations therein, have been designed to be consistent with the San Benito County General Plan through the Area of Special Study, as adopted by County Resolution No. 89-92. This resolution designates the Plan Area for higher density development through preparation of a Specific Plan. The Plan Area is not within the Hollister city limits or SOI. The San Benito County and City of Hollister general plans contain planning principles that provide the basis for providing appropriate land use, infrastructure and community design principles for specific areas of the County and City, including the Plan Area. The Specific Plan helps achieve the visions established by the San Benito County and City of



Hollister general plans, by providing diversified and integrated housing, expanding public access to park and open space opportunities, making efficient use of land, improving the jobs/housing balance, and creating distinct neighborhood centers that bring together institutional, residential, and recreational uses. These principles are articulated as framework goals that provide the overall direction necessary to ensure that the County and City, as they grow, will be well-functioning and attractive, will balance the needs of residents and businesses, and will make appropriate use of natural, human and economic resources. These framework goals are elucidated and advanced by specific policies contained in the Specific Plan’s five major Articles: Land Use Plan and Development Standards; Circulation Plan; Community Design; Resource Management; Public Facilities and Services, and implemented through specific measures contained in each Article. The Specific Plan will help achieve the vision established by the policies and implementation programs of the San Benito County and City of Hollister general plans.

article 1.0 introduction

1-19

F Introduction This side intentionally left blank.

1-20

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Article 2.0

LAND USE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Article 2.0 identifies the land uses, development densities, organization of land uses, and other development regulations used to meet the objectives of the Specific Plan. The land uses proposed for the area, although flexible in use type and intensity, are principally a mix of residential units, not to exceed 220. Direction for conserving areas of open space and natural resources, as well as for providing park and recreational land uses are also presented.

LAND USE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

Article 2.0 presents the Specific Plan’s land use direction, including the Specific Plan’s emphasis on a planned residential community with opportunities for a variety of housing types and lot sizes, ample and inter-connected park and open space areas.

Section 2.1 Land Use Objectives The following land use objectives have been established for the Specific Plan: 

A planned residential community that allows up to 220 residential units and provides the opportunity for a wide range of housing types, including secondary units, multifamily, and affordable housing;



A community that is integrated with and supports the Gavilan College San Benito Campus; and



Interlinked open space and park areas to provide both active and passive recreational choices for residents and connections to adjacent areas.

Section 2.2 Land Use Concept Diverse Residential Opportunities The Specific Plan envisions a diverse planned residential community with a variety of lot sizes and housing choices. Lots may vary from 4,000 square feet up to five acres (with a conditional use permit for single-family residential lots greater than 1.5 acres). Housing may vary from apartments and small lot cluster homes to single-family estates. To further diversify housing choices within the Plan Area, accessory dwelling units are allowed on most lots, with the allowable size of the units increasing with the lot size. The proposed variety of lot sizes and square footage is intended to provide a range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of a wide array of households, including students, faculty, and campus employees of the future adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, as well as San Benito County community members and the general public. A variety of typical residential non-habitable accessory uses are allowed. Complementary uses may be developed in limited areas. The

 .      

-

L U P  D S

Article 2.0

L U P  D S

Specific Plan land use plan takes into consideration the key elements and planning principles of the San Benito County and City of Hollister general plans. Land use choices were affected by physical property constraints such as topography and fault line building exclusion zones, and the potential creation of on-site mitigation for California tiger salamander (CTS). Plan Area constraints are illustrated in Figure 7, Constraints Diagram. CTS mitigation is further described in Article 5.0, Resource Management. This Article provides the selected land use designations and distribution within the Plan Area. Figure 8, Land Use Diagram and Lotting Program Examples A-C in Appendix B, presents the conceptual land use plan for the Plan Area. The Plan Area is restricted to a maximum of 220 principal dwelling units, consistent with the Fairview Corners-Specific Plan (FVC-SP) zoning contained herein. The unit count excludes secondary dwelling units. Table 2, Land Use Summary, provides a summary of the maximum build-out of the Specific Plan. The parameters for an Affordable Housing Program that conforms to the County’s General Plan Housing Element and County Code will be included within the project Development Agreement or a separate Affordable Housing Agreement.

Table 2

Affordable Housing and Secondary Units Housing that addresses the community needs and is affordable will be provided in the Plan Area and/ or on the adjacent Gavilan College property. The Plan Area will contain affordable housing units that are achieved by building a variety of housing types, including secondary units. If affordable housing is provided on the adjacent Gavilan College property, it shall include no more than fifty percent of the required affordable housing and shall be located consistent with the Gavilan College Campus Plan and approved by the Board of Trustees. The affordable housing units shall combine both moderateand low-income units in an amount and under terms prescribed in an Affordable Housing Program. If the developer(s) wants to include a local builder preference, then a certain percentage of the units that go to local builders may be excluded from the

Land Use Summary Land Use

Approximate Acres

Residential

35.0 – 42.0

Roads

10.0

Parks

3.4

Open Space

0 – 7.0 *

* If on-site mitigation is required, the maximum open space would be approximately 7 acres.

-

       

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 7

Constraints Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

L U P  D S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Note: Refer also to the Lotting Program Examples A-C located in Appendix B.

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 8

Land Use Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

L U P  D S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Secondary units, such as apartment flats over a garage and detached accessory units on a singlefamily lot, are encouraged and shall be permitted in the Plan Area as a means to achieve affordable housing units to the extent provided for in the project’s Affordable Housing Program. Secondary and caretaker’s units are separately defined herein under Accessory Dwellings, because secondary and caretaker’s units are permitted with a full kitchen or cooking facilities. These types of units may be allowed to count for up to fifty percent of the affordable housing requirement, or as otherwise set forth in the project’s Affordable Housing Program.

Sustainability and Open Space The Specific Plan will be a leading example of sustainable planned community design, with many special features of a green community. Examples of water and energy conservation and walkability are found throughout the Specific Plan. Future development of the Plan Area will generate an additional demand for open space resources and recreational amenities in the area. The Specific Plan addresses this need through policies and implementation measures that promote sensitivity to open space

and natural resources. In addition to the residential development, open space and parks will be provided in the Plan Area. Open space set asides may include a geologic fault area, habitat conservation area, Plan Area buffers from surrounding uses, and connectivity within the Plan Area and to areas outside the Plan Area. The San Benito County Code Section 23.15.009(b) requires the provision of five acres of land for parks and recreational uses for every 1,000 new residents. The Plan Area, with a maximum residential unit count of 220, is estimated to create housing for approximately 678 residents and will be required to provide approximately 3.4-acres of parks. If the residential unit count is less than 220, the park requirement will be based on the residential unit count that is built in accordance with the calculation method required in the County Code. The intention for development of the Plan Area is to meet the County standard for parks, or otherwise meet this standard by paying fees in lieu of on-site parks. The open space and parks are made up of a system of connected setback buffers, open space for habitat, open space for a fault zone, pocket parks and retention basins for drainage as illustrated in Figure 9, Open Space Diagram. The open space areas are intended to provide recreational use and to be connected within the Plan Area by a series of trails, and further connected outside the Plan Area

 .      

-

L U P  D S

affordable housing requirements of the County, or as otherwise set forth in the project’s Affordable Housing Program.

Section 2.3 Land Use Goals and Policies

L U P  D S

to the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus as illustrated in Figure 10, Plan Area Context with Adjoining Open Space. The applicant and the Gavilan College District intend to develop a mutually acceptable Open Space and Parks Master Plan.

The following land use goals, policies, and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area. Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state and local standards and requirements, on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 also provides guidance on phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements.

Potential Lotting Programs Preliminary development plans that reflect different land use scenarios serve as examples of how the Plan Area could be developed. Three such lotting program examples are presented in Appendix B. Table 3, Residential Dwelling Units and Lot Sizes, presents a summary of the proposed number of residential dwelling units for each example and the corresponding lot sizes. These are intended as example lot programs only. The final lotting program will be determined by subsequent entitlements as approved by the County in accordance with the Specific Plan and all other applicable standards and requirements. See Article 7.0, Plan Implementation.

Table 3

Residential Dwelling Units and Lot Sizes per Appendix B

Example A

Example B

Example C

Lot Sizes

7

39

38

10,000 – 12,000 sf

18

34

54

8,000 – 10,000 sf

17

42

29

7,000 – 8,000 sf

95

25

46

6,000 – 7,000 sf

83

5

12

5,000 – 6,000 sf

220

220*

179

-

Source:

EMC Planning Group Inc. (2010)

Note:

*Example B includes 145 single-family lots and 75 multi-family dwelling units (based on 5.4 acres and 14 du/ac) for a total of 220 dwelling units.

-

       

Note: Refer also to the Lotting Program Examples A-C located in Appendix B.

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 9

Open Space Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

L U P  D S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010 (Figure 17)

Figure 10

Plan Area Context with Adjoining Open Space Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

L U P  D S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Goal LU-1: A Land Use Plan that implements the intent of San Benito County by designating land uses for this property that are appropriate to the Area of Special Study. Policy LU-1.1: Implement County Resolution No. 89-92 and the General Plan Land Use Element by planning appropriate uses for this designated Area of Special Study, including higher density residential uses than are currently allowed by existing zoning. Policy Implementation

1. The County’s adoption by resolution of a general plan amendment and the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan, and by ordinance: the “Fairview Corners Specific Plan” zoning regulations, which constitute the land use designation and zoning for the Plan Area, will implement Resolution No. 89-92 and the County General Plan Land Use Element and will regulate the future development within the Plan Area. Goal LU-2: Land use patterns responsive to the physical characteristics of the land, as well as to environmental, economic, and social concerns of the residents. Policy LU-2.1: Recognize the fault line and potential habitat constraints on the Plan Area and designate land to provide a mix of residential uses and product types, and recreational and open space amenities to meet the needs of residents. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall implement development in accordance with the land use

designations shown on the Land Use Diagram (Figure 8), and with the policies and implementation measures contained within this Specific Plan. Modifications to the land uses or zoning regulations identified in this Specific Plan are subject to the County’s discretionary review. 2. The low density and medium density residential uses offer opportunities to provide a variety of housing types. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall provide a range of housing products as described herein and/or by the separate Affordable Housing Program. 3. The master developer shall prepare an Affordable Housing Program, which shall be part of the Development Agreement or separate affordable housing agreement with the County of San Benito. The program shall specify the manner in which the Plan Area will comply with the affordable housing requirements of San Benito County and address inclusionary obligations, if any, number, location and type or level of units, timing for development of the affordable units, financing options, and specific monitoring and enforcement procedures. The location for the affordable housing units may be partially or entirely within the Plan Area and/or located off-site on the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus. The Affordable Housing Program shall also address the use of secondary units to meet the affordability obligation of the Plan Area. 4. Development of the project site shall comply with the most recent California Building Code requirements for Seismic Zone 4 to avoid or minimize potential damage from seismic ground shaking. All recommendations included in the

 .      

-

L U P  D S

Land Use Pattern Policies

L U P  D S

1989 fault investigation and in the 2008 geotechnical investigation prepared by Terrasearch, Inc. which includes a 50-foot wide building setback on each side of the fault and any updated geotechnical reports, shall be incorporated into the project design. Policy LU-2.2: Allow residential land uses in the proposed open space resource conservation area if habitat concerns are fully mitigated off-site. Policy Implementation

1

It is proposed as a part of this Plan to allow the inclusion of a habitat conservation area at the northeast corner of the Plan Area if required by the CDFG or USFWS as partial mitigation of CTS habitat, with primary mitigation off-site.

2. Optionally, the northeast corner of the Plan Area can be developed with residential uses or used as active park land if habitat concerns are fully mitigated off-site by agreement with appropriate regulatory agencies.

within the Plan Area. The lot and unit count shall exclude secondary dwelling units (which are encouraged within the Plan Area). In order to develop the Plan Area, the developer(s) shall submit one or more subdivision maps and/or parcel maps for approval by San Benito County that are in accordance with the development standards, zoning regulations, community design guidelines. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4] 2. Residential lots shall be subdivided in accordance with the lot size requirements prescribed by Table 4, Minimum Residential Lot Size. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4] 3. The purpose of lots created for other than residential uses shall be specifically described on the subdivision map. Policy LU-3.2. Allow a variety of residential uses and supporting uses

Related Policies are contained in Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3) and Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Residential Use Policies Goal LU-3: A diverse residential community. Policy LU-3.1. Allow a varied density and a variety of lot sizes, not to exceed 220 dwelling units (excluding secondary dwelling units, which are encouraged). Policy Implementation

1. When tentative and final maps are submitted to the County for review, the maximum unit count cannot exceed 220 dwelling units -

       

1. A variety of housing types shall be allowed, including single family homes, duplexes and duets, triplexes and fourplexes, courtyard and zero lot-line homes, and condominiums, townhouses, and apartments. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4] 2. Principal uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are permitted or conditionally permitted on a residential lot subject to the applicable development standards. 3. Complementary uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are permitted or conditionally permitted only on lots subdivided for the specific purpose(s) as noted on the subdivision map or other recorded document subject to the applicable development standards. Policy LU-3.3. Allow accessory uses suitable to a residential area. Policy Implementation

1. Accessory uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are permitted or conditionally permitted on a residential lot in conjunction with a principal use, subject to the applicable development standards. Policy LU-3.4. Conditionally allow additional uses if determined suitable for a residential area on a case-by-case basis and in accordance with this Specific Plan.

 .      

-

L U P  D S

Policy Implementation

Policy Implementation

L U P  D S

1. Conditional uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are allowed on a residential lot upon obtaining a conditional use permit, and subject to the applicable development standards and conditions of use permit approval. Related Policies are contained in Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Accessory Dwellings and Affordable Housing Policies Goal LU-4: Accessory dwelling units as an additional housing choice. Policy LU-4.1. Define appropriate types of accessory dwelling units (such as detached, above garage, etc.) and encourage these units as a part of or complementary to the Affordable Housing Program. Policy Implementation

1. Accessory dwelling units may be guesthouses, secondary dwelling units, or caretaker units. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

2. Accessory dwelling units shall be located on an owner-occupied residential lot. 3. A guesthouse shall be without kitchen facilities, clearly subordinate and incidental to the main building on the same lot, and not to be rented, let, or leased, whether compensation be direct or indirect. 4. A secondary dwelling unit is a full residential unit that may be occupied full time, and is clearly subordinate and incidental to the main building on the same lot. 5. A caretaker unit is a full residential unit that may be occupied full time and is specifically for the purpose of housing a caretaker for the same lot. 6. Secondary dwelling units and caretaker units may include a kitchen and up to two bedrooms, subject to square footage and other standards set forth in Table 6, Accessory Dwelling Standards. 7. Encourage accessory dwelling units to be built within the Plan Area to provide affordable housing for the community. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4] Policy LU-4.2. Establish appropriate location, size, and number of accessory dwelling units dependent on the development density and lot size. Policy Implementation

1. Accessory dwelling units shall be limited to the residential lot sizes, configurations, and square footage standards in Table 6, Accessory Dwelling Standards. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

-

       

Goal LU-5: Create affordable housing as a part of Plan Area Development. Policy LU-5.1. Affordable housing shall be governed by an Affordable Houding Program, which may be a separate Affordable Housing Agreement or incorporated into the Fairview Corners Development Agreement (Development Agreement). Affordable housing shall be located within the Plan Area and/or on the adjacent Gavilan College Campus property, with no more than fifty percent of the required units being located on the Gavilan property or as otherwise specified in the project’s Affordable Housing Program. Policy LU-5.2. Up to ten percent of the lots offered to local builders may be excluded from the County’s affordable housing requirements, or as otherwise set forth in the project’s Affordable Housing Program. Policy LU-5.3. Secondary and caretaker’s units are encouraged and allowed to meet up to fifty percent of the County’s required affordable housing for the Plan Area, or as otherwise set forth in the project’s Affordable Housing Program.

Program shall be imposed by the County as a condition of approval of the first subdivision map within the Plan Area. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4] 2. The Affordable Housing Program may include the appropriate provisions for local builder preference exclusions and use of accessory units (secondary and caretaker’s units) in meeting the county’s affordable housing regulations. 3. Implementation of the Affordable Housing Program may include financial assistance from a variety of sources, including contractual arrangements with a non-profit organization responsible for building the affordable housing.

Parks and Open Space Policies Goal LU-6: A coordinated system of open space and parks to meet the needs of the Plan Area residents. Policy LU-6.1. Provide passive and active open space on-site or off-site, or by paying in lieu fees commensurate with park requirements.

Policy Implementation

1. An Affordable Housing Program, which shall be part of the Development Agreement or separate affordable housing agreement with the County, shall specify the manner in which affordable housing obligations, under the applicable County regulations, are met by the master developer and/or individual developers within the Plan Area. The Affordable Housing

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or neighborhood developer(s) shall provide land for passive and active open space, consistent with the Specific Plan and in accordance with County standards

 .      

-

L U P  D S

2. No more than one accessory dwelling unit may be constructed on any lot.

L U P  D S

for the provision of parkland. The master developer shall conceptually design the open space and park areas, and the connections within the Plan Area by creating an Open Space and Parks Master Plan for the County’s approval. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL-6] 2. The master developer and/or neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare final designs, finance, and construct the open space and park areas within the Plan Area concurrently with the development of the neighborhood phase in which they are located (prior to the issuance of a building permit for the last home in the neighborhood phase), and in accordance with the applicable County standards, and the approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan. Parks shall be designed to facilitate surveillance by adjoining residents and police services. If the number of residential dwelling units is less than the maximum of 220, the open space and park area requirement for the Plan Area will be based on the number of residential dwelling units built, to be calculated as required under the County Code. 3. If the open space and park area standard is not met within the Plan Area and/or on the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, in lieu of the development of on-site parks and open space, the master developer shall pay fees to the County as allowed under the County Code, and in accordance with the Development Agreement.

-

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

Goal LU-7: Integrated open space and park areas. Policy LU-7.1. Interconnect open space and park areas. Policy Implementation

1. The open space and park trail system will consist of a loop configuration around or within the Plan Area that interconnects with the residential neighborhood and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus recreational facilities. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL- 6] 2. Development plans for the open space and park trail system shall be included in the Open Space and Parks Master Plan, prepared by the master developer and approved by the appropriate County staff in accordance with Article 7.0 (Plan Implementation). 3. Anticipated open space improvements and the cost for those improvements are estimated in Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, and are illustrated in Appendix C, Open Space Categories (Lotting Program Example C). Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6), Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2), and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

       

Goal LU-8: Adequate open space to allow for recreation and privacy. Policy LU-8.1. Limit lot coverage dependent on the development density and lot size.

Goal LU-9: Adequate separation between development and adjacent roads and lots. Policy LU-9.1. Set development back from roads and lots dependent on development density and lot size.

Policy Implementation

1. Lot coverage shall be determined by lot size and use in accordance with Table 7, Lot Coverage. 2. Coverage calculations shall include all principal residential and accessory buildings, including garage space. Policy LU-8.2. Provide minimum yard areas for all residences. Policy Implementation Policy Implementation

1. A minimum rear or side yard area clear of structures or driveways shall be provided as prescribed in Table 8, Minimum Yard Space (Rear or Side Yard). 2. For multi-family dwellings of nine or more units, interior common rooms may substitute for up to half of the yard requirement. 3. No additional yard area shall be required for a secondary dwelling unit, but the required yard area for the principal dwelling unit shall be provided.

1. Compact development, including attached and detached single family dwellings or two to three unit attached dwellings on lots of less than 5,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 9, Compact Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1] 2. Standard development, including detached single family dwellings or two to four unit attached dwellings on lots of 4,000 to 12,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 10, Standard Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

3. Large lot development, including detached single family dwellings or two to four unit attached dwellings on lots of greater than

 .      

-

L U P  D S

Intensity and Arrangement of Development Policies

L U P  D S

12,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 11, Large Lot Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1] 4. Apartments, condominiums, and other multifamily dwellings of five or more units shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 12, Multifamily Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1] 5. Two-story residences within 100 feet of the Fairview Road center line will require acoustical analyses, pursuant to the requirements of the San Benito County Code, and the project’s conditions of approval to ensure that interior noise levels on the second floor will be reduced to 45 dBA Ldn or lower. Building design shall include provisions for forced-air mechanical ventilation so that windows can be kept closed to control noise. The conclusions and recommendations of the specific analyses, including the description of the necessary noise control treatments, shall be submitted to the County along with the building plans for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Policy LU-9.2. Establish specific set-backs and exceptions for special circumstances. Policy Implementation

1. Additional setback requirements shall be observed in accordance with Table 13, Special Setback Requirements and Exceptions. Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

-

Goal LU-10: Protection for neighboring properties from excessive shading and visual domination. Policy LU-10.1. Limit building and fence height dependent on the type of dwelling unit and characteristics of adjacent development. Policy Implementation

1. Buildings and fences shall be limited to the maximum heights as prescribed in Table 14, Height Limits. 2. Structures near a shared boundary between the Plan Area and private property outside the Plan Area shall adhere to the additional height requirements in Table 15, Height Limits at Plan Area Boundaries. These requirements shall not apply to Plan Area boundaries within or adjacent to a road, except that any multi-family uses or other structures adjacent to the project site boundary (e.g., Fairview Road) shall adhere to the height requirements in Table 15. Policy LU-10.2. Limit the location of fences and vegetation to ensure visibility at roads. Policy Implementation

1. Vegetation deemed to block visibility of vehicles entering or exiting the road shall be subject to the visibility triangle restrictions of San Benito County Code section 25.29.013. 2. Avoid fence, wall or streetscape designs that create hiding places. 3. Fencing, vegetation, and other landscape features shall not obscure the view between the front of the house and the road. Except along Fairview Road, where a minimum six-foot

       

2. One of the required parking spaces for residences on lots under 5,000 square feet may be provided within a common parking lot within 250 feet of the residential lot it serves.

4. On lots at the intersection of a road and pedestrian path, no fence or hedge over three feet high shall be allowed in the yard adjoining the path.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

Parking Policies Goal LU-11: Adequate parking for residents and guests. Policy LU-11.1. Provide at least 1.5 automobile parking spaces for each principal dwelling unit, and at least one automobile parking space for each secondary dwelling unit.

3. One additional parking space shall be provided for each secondary dwelling unit or caretaker unit. The required parking space for secondary units on lots under 9,000 square feet may be provided within a common parking lot within 250 feet of the residential lot it serves. Policy LU-11.2. Provide parking for a variety of vehicles.

Policy Implementation

Policy Implementation

1. Residential parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with San Benito County Code section 25.31.020, except as otherwise provided herein.

1. Provide optional electric car charging pre-wiring receptacles within reach of at least one garage parking space per unit or centrally located within carports or shared parking facilities.

 .      

-

L U P  D S

sound barrier may be required, solid fences and gates over three feet high are prohibited fronting public roads. Prune front yard tree canopies to at least seven feet from the ground, and maintain plantings near walkways and building entries to under three feet tall.

L U P  D S

2. Multi-family developments shall provide secure visitor bicycle parking. Multi-family development shall provide one visitor bicycle parking space per five units. [LEED ND SLL Credit 4; LEED ND NPD Credit 5]

Section 2.4 Development Standards The Specific Plan regulates development in the subdivision of lots, arrangement of neighborhoods, and the size, placement, and appearance of structures. The Specific Plan provides development standards suitable for a wide range of housing types within a planned residential community. The development standards are set forth by lot size and dwelling type. The greatest amount of lot coverage is allowed for

multifamily dwellings and for development on small lots. Larger lots are allowed less lot coverage to maintain a more open character in the lower density developments. To allow useful recreational areas within private lots, a minimum open space area is required. The building set-backs allow flexible design of small lot and cluster housing designs, and the set back requirements increase with lot size. Building heights are limited to protect neighboring properties from the shading and visual intrusion of structures significantly taller than their own. Special height/set back requirements are included where the Plan Area shares a border with other private property. Tables 4 through 15 set forth specific standards for the development of the Plan Area.

Subdivision and Lot Size Standards Table 4

Minimum Residential Lot Size

Lots Served by Sewer

Lots Served by Public or Community Water and Individual Septic

4,000 square feet

One acre (43,560 square feet)

-

       

Land Use Standards Permitted and Conditional Land Uses

Classification Principle Uses Permitted on Residential Lots

Acceptable Uses a. Detached single family dwelling; b. Attached single, duet, duplex, triplex, fourplex dwelling; c. Other uses (prescribed by State law as required to be permitted uses in residential districts; i.e. pre-emptive uses).

Complementary Uses Permitted on Lots Designated on the Subdivision Map for a Specific Use

a. Multi-family dwelling(s); b. Common area landscaping and open space; c. Utility(ies) or service facility(ies) serving the residential development; d. Private road(s), driveway(s), parking lot(s), or trail(s).

Accessory Uses Permitted on Residential Lots

a. Guesthouse (as the term is defined in Policy LU-4.1 #3) or secondary dwelling unit, not to exceed one per lot and as further specified herein; b. Detached garage, carport, workshop, storage building, pool house, patio cover, deck, trellis, gazebo, play structure, or greenhouse; c. Non-commercial garden, orchard, or other horticulture; d. Home occupation meeting the standards of San Benito County Code section 25.29.090 et sec.; e. Personal recreational vehicle or boat storage, but not within front yards and road side yards.

Conditional Uses

a. Single-family residential lots of 1.5 acres or larger; b. Caretaker units; c. Day cares, elderly care homes, group homes and similar uses serving over six persons; d

Park, recreational community building(s) or facility(ies);

e. Non-commercial garden, orchard, or other horticulture in the absence of a principal use; f. Non-habitable accessory building in the absence of a principal use; g. Other uses (prescribed by State law) conditionally permitted in residential districts. See also Item c.

 .      

-

L U P  D S

Table 5

Table 6

Accessory Dwelling Standards

L U P  D S

Lot Size (Square Feet)

Configuration

Types Allowed

Maximum Size (Square Feet)

7,000 to 8,999

Integrated within house or detached garage

Guesthouse Secondary

400

9,000 to 12,000

Integrated or freestanding

Guesthouse Secondary

640

Larger than 12,000

Integrated or freestanding

Guesthouse Secondary

Guesthouse: 640

One acre or larger

Integrated or freestanding

Guesthouse Secondary Caretaker

Secondary or Caretaker: 800

Standards for Intensity and Arrangement of Development Table 7

Lot Coverage Lot Size (Square Feet)

Primary Use

Maximum Building Coverage

Condominiums, apartments, attached houses

Any

55 percent

Detached House

Less than 5,000

55 percent

Detached House

5,000 to 7,999

50 percent

Detached House

8,000 to 12,000

40 percent

Detached House

Greater than 12,000

30 percent

Table 8

Minimum Yard Space (Rear or Side Yard)

Single Family Dwelling

Multi-Family Dwelling

15 feet by 30 feet

15 feet by 30 feet plus 50 square feet per each unit

-

       

Compact Development Setbacks (lots of less than 5,000 square feet)

Setback

Minimum Requirements

Front

To house: 12 feet To porch: Six feet

L U P  D S

Table 9

To front-facing garage door from road right-of-way: 18 feet Road Side

Six feet

Side and Rear

Zero at up to two property lines for clustered homes or duets; three feet at private driveway; otherwise five feet.

Table 10

Standard Development Setbacks (lots of 5,000 to 12,000 square feet)

Setback

Minimum Requirements

Front

To house from road right-of-way: 15 feet To porch from road right-of-way: 12 feet To front-facing garage door from road right-of-way: 18 feet

Road Side

12 feet

Side

10% of lot width; no less than six feet; need not exceed 15 feet; three feet at shared driveway

Rear

20% of lot depth; no less than 15 feet; need not exceed 25 feet; To detached garage from alley: three feet.

Table 11

Large Lot Development Setbacks (lots of greater than 12,000 square feet)

Setback

Minimum Requirements

Front

To house from road right-of-way: 20 feet To porch from road right-of-way: 15 feet To front-facing garage door from road right-of-way: 24 feet

Road Side

20 feet

Side

10% of lot width; no less than 10 feet; need not exceed 30 feet.

Rear

20% of lot depth; no less than 20 feet; need not exceed 35 feet; To detached garage from alley: five feet.

 .      

-

Table 12

Multifamily Development Setbacks (multifamily dwellings of five or more units)

L U P  D S

Setback

Minimum Requirements

Front

18 feet

Road Side

18 feet

Side

10% of lot width; no less than 10 feet; need not exceed 20 feet; carports and accessory structures need not exceed 10 feet. Three-story buildings must be set back no less than 15 feet.

Rear

20% of lot depth; no less than 20 feet; need not exceed 35 feet; carports and accessory structures need not exceed 10 feet.

Table 13

Special Setback Requirements and Exceptions

Item

Setback Requirements/Exceptions

Non-habitable accessory structures not exceeding either 140 square feet or eight feet in height

Minimum of five feet from lot line

Non-habitable accessory structures exceeding either 140 square feet or eight feet in height

Must meet regular building setback requirements for the lot

Projections, including exterior stairways, chimneys, bay windows, and balconies

May extend to within five feet of side or rear lot line

Adjacent buildings

Based on the requirements of the California Building Code

In-ground pools

Minimum of five feet from lot line May occupy required yard space

Table 14

Height Limits

Structure

Height Limit

Detached houses

2.5 stories and 30 feet

Condominiums, apartments, and attached houses

Three stories and 35 feet

Fences in front or road side yards

Three feet

Fences in rear yards

Seven feet

-

       

Height Limits at Plan Area Boundaries

Distance from Plan Area Boundary

Height Limit

Within 15 feet

Eight feet

From 15 up to 25 feet

14 feet

From 25 up to 50 feet

22 feet

From 50 feet up to 75 feet

30 feet

 .      

L U P  D S

Table 15

-

L U P  D S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Article 3.0

CIRCULATION PLAN Article 3.0 discusses the location and classifications of roadways and the circulation infrastructure needed to link the Plan Area to the vicinity road network. A number of contemplated improvements outside the Plan Area are also identified.

C P

Article 3.0

CIRCULATION PLAN

Article 3.0 of the Specific Plan describes the circulation system within the Plan Area which is designed to integrate pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular modes of transportation. The circulation routes connect neighborhoods, parks, recreational trails and facilities, and a transit stop at the Cielo Vista Drive extension to support future public transit service along Fairview Road.

Section 3.1 Circulation Plan Objectives The following objectives in the design of the roadway, pedestrian and bicycle systems are incorporated into the Plan Area: 

Access to the Plan Area and between the Neighborhoods within the Plan Area;



A safe and convenient roadway circulation system;



Pedestrian and bicycle access to the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus; and



Support public transportation.

Section 3.2 Existing Roadways Fairview Road is the primary existing roadway adjacent to the Plan Area. The primary access into the Plan Area will be off of Fairview Road opposite Cielo Vista Drive, which will be extended eastward along the southern edge of the Plan Area as the major collector road. Other primary existing roadways in the vicinity include Airline Highway (State Route 25), Sunnyslope Road and John Smith Road. Fairview Road is a major north-south connector on the east side of Hollister linking Airline Highway with State Route 156 and State Route 152 to the northeast. Figure 11, Circulation Diagram, presents the conceptual circulation for the Plan Area.

Circulation Improvements A number of circulation improvements outside the Plan Area have been identified as necessary to accommodate the potential development within the Plan Area. Street improvements to Fairview Road along the Plan Area frontage will include dedicating the necessary right-of-way along the Fairview Road frontage to allow for the future construction of a widened two to four-lane roadway. In addition, the

 .  

-

C P

developer would also construct frontage improvements on Fairview Road, concurrent with the first phase of development as follows: two 12-foot northbound lanes, two 12-foot southbound lanes, appropriate turn lanes, a 6-foot bicycle lane in each direction, a 14-foot raised median, as well as sidewalks, shoulders, a meandering pedestrian/bicycle path, and curbs and gutters on Fairview Road. The existing Fairview Road section and typical improved section for Fairview Road are illustrated in Figure 12, Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Section. The intersection of Cielo Vista Drive and Fairview Road will be built out and signalized if and when development warrants this improvement. Emergency Vehicle Access Because the western extension of Cielo Vista Drive will form a closed loop roadway system, an emergency vehicle access (EVA) will be provided as a secondary means of ingress and egress during emergencies. The Specific Plan intends to utilize the Gavilan College San Benito Campus secondary access currently planned off of Airline Highway, extending from the southeast corner of the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus along the eastern boundary and connecting to the Cielo Vista Drive extension. Due to the proximity of Phase I to Fairview Road and the far distance to reasonable locations for an EVA, construction of the permanent EVA access is not necessary for Phase I, though temporary EVA access will be required. Temporary access could be installed along the northern boundary of the site to Fairview Road. A cross-section of a typical EVA route is illustrated in Figure 13, Emergency Vehicle Access Route. If the EVA road will be located on the Gavilan College San Benito Campus property the EVA would be intended to serve both the Plan Area and the campus for emergency access purposes.

-

Section 3.3 Road Circulation The Plan Area includes two (2) classes of public roads, collector roads and local or residential roads. The road system provides simple and direct access to the Plan Area.

Access The primary access to the Plan Area will be off of Fairview Road opposite Cielo Vista Drive, which will be extended eastward along the southern edge of the Plan Area as the major collector road. The Cielo Vista Drive extension will be a public road and include curb and gutters, separated sidewalks, street lighting, utilities, street trees, and additional landscape strips and medians consistent with all applicable standards and requirements. Cielo Vista Drive will be constructed by either the Fairview Corners developer or Gavilan College District, depending on which area develops first. One-half of the required improvements for this street extension may be constructed as development proceeds within the Plan Area or adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus. The Circulation Diagram, (Figure 11) presents the extent of the shared roadway system on the project site. This diagram assumes full buildout of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the proposed project. Should all or a portion of the proposed project commence construction prior to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus, the Fairview Corners master/individual developers would be required to take the lead in constructing the portion of the Cielo Vista Drive extension to serve the Plan Area on a phase by phase basis, as set forth in the Development Agreement and Project Conditions of Approval.

       

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 11

Circulation Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Sections

EXISTING FAIRVIEW ROAD SECTION

1.5’

1.5’

110’

TYPICAL FUTURE FAIRVIEW ROAD SECTION

Not to scale

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2008

Figure 12

Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Sections Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

(OUTSIDE PLAN AREA BOUNDARY)

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RESIDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AREA

(OUTSIDE PLAN AREA BOUNDARY)

MAIN ACCESS POINTS TO FAIRVIEW CORNERS RESIDENTIAL PLAN AREA

GAVILAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE SAN BENITO CAMPUS

0

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2010

Figure 13

Emergency Vehicle Access Route Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

The internal road extension of Cielo Vista Drive will consist of two twelve foot travel lanes in each direction, with a six foot Class II bike lane in each direction, a twelve foot center median, four to six foot landscaping (planter) strips on each side of and seven foot sidewalk on each side. These improvements will be phased and scaled based upon construction of the Plan Area and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus. This road section is illustrated in Figure 14, Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Road Section.

The closed loop roadway network, extending along the Plan Area to serve the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the Fairview Corners Residential, will have three access points to the residential Plan Area along the Cielo Vista Drive extension. These “new” collector entry roads will be two lane roads with a 14-foot travel lane, nine-foot bio-swale, five-foot separated sidewalks, and 10- to 12-foot landscape strips on both sides of the road. The entry road extending from the Cielo Vista Drive extension may include design features that incorporate best management practices (BMPs) for storm drain systems. These features may be incorporated into the design subject to approval by the County Public Works Department, and would transition to standard residential roads at appropriate locations. At build-out of the project, these internal roads would be two-lane roads with a 12foot travel lane, eight-foot parking lanes, curbs, gutters, five-foot separated sidewalks and landscape strips on both sides of the road. Figure 15, Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections, presents examples of a typical collector entry road section and a typical residential road section. The “new” collector entry road section may integrate grassy swales for bio-filtration purposes and does not include parking lanes. The use of swales as a storm water mitigation technique is further discussed in Article 5.0, Resource Management. The standard residential road section will include parking lanes.

 .  

-

C P

The Cielo Vista Drive extension would be a public street serving the Plan Area and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus, and at full buildout, would include curbs, gutters, separated sidewalks, street lighting, utilities, street trees, and additional landscape strips and medians in accordance with applicable County standards and requirements as set forth in the Specific Plan. If completed to serve both projects, the median would straddle the property line shared by these projects. The Cielo Vista extension is expected to be constructed in at least three (3) stages, commencing from the western portion of the site (near Fairview Road) and progressing east. The first phase will include construction of the Cielo Vista Drive extension to the first collector entry road within both the Plan Area and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus entry cul-de-sac as illustrated in the Circulation Diagram (Figure 11). The second segment will extend the road to at least the second collector entry road to the Plan Area, and so on.

Traffic Calming

C P

The residential traffic calming goals are to improve the quality of life, reduce impacts of motor vehicles on local roads, create safe and attractive roads, and create a friendly environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. The objectives are to reduce vehicle traffic speeds and noise, improve safety and convenience for all users, enhance roadway appearance and maintain and enhance neighborhood livability. Figure 16, Traffic Calming Diagram, illustrates the traffic calming features that may be considered in the Plan Area. The use of bulb-outs, neck-downs, or some other traffic calming technique along the Cielo Vista Drive extension, is important for pedestrian safety and walkability particularly at the Gavilan entry road cul-de-sac and the first main access point to Fairview Corners Residential. Enhanced streetscape and landscaped medians include planting trees along Cielo Vista Drive to create a sense of enclosure and improve the pedestrian environment.

Entry features such as landscaping, monumentation, and signage that defines the theme and image of Fairview Corners Residential will improve aesthetics and heighten the sense of arrival at Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive, and the three main access points into the Plan Area.

-

Section 3.4 Bicycle and Pedestrian Circulation The Plan Area includes a series of roads with bicycle lanes and pedestrian walkways that connect to multiple destinations. An open space trail system in a loop configuration is included around the Plan Area that connects to the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, and in particular the buffer/green areas and the athletic fields. Figure 17, Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Plan, illustrates the bicycle circulation and walking trails proposed in the Plan Area. These open space areas are intended to be connected by a series of trails within the Plan Area, and further connected outside the Plan Area to the future adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus. These open space areas, once interconnected, become an opportunity for recreational activities (e.g. walking

       

Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Road Section

Not to scale

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2008

Figure 14

Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Road Section Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Typical Collector Entry and Residential Street Sections

10’-12’

10’-12’

60’ ROW TYPICAL “NEW” COLLECTOR ENTRY ROAD SECTION

TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL ROAD SECTION Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

Not to scale

Figure 15

Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

500 feet

Figure 16

Traffic Calming Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 17

Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Plan Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Section 3.6 Circulation Plan Goals and Policies The following circulation plan goals, policies, and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area. Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state and local standards and requirements, on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 also provides guidance on phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements.

Section 3.5 Public Transit The Plan Area master developer will work cooperatively with Caltrans, San Benito County, and Gavilan College to develop, implement and maintain public transit services for the Plan Area. In addition, the Cielo Vista Drive extension has been sized to allow for a transit stop at the intersection of Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista Drive extension. The Council of San Benito County Governments (COG) is currently working on development of the San Benito County Transit Design Guidelines to better integrate public transit into future developments. The Plan Area master developer and/or independent developer(s) will provide input to help facilitate public transit services in the vicinity of the Plan Area.

Goal CP-1: Provide adequate access to the Plan Area. Policy CP-1.1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) within the Plan Area shall be responsible to pay a proportional fair share or provide circulation improvements outside the Plan Area when those circulation improvements outside the Plan Area are warranted, in accordance with the Specific Plan certified EIR. Policy CP-1.2. The proportional fair share contribution for circulation improvements specified by the Specific Plan certified EIR outside the Plan Area will be based on the number of lots and/or dwelling units built within the Plan Area. Policy Implementation

1. The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for contributing a proportional fair share to intersection improvements and traffic signals.

 .  

-

C P

trails, parcourse (fitness trail), interpretive signage, bird watching etc.) within the connected open space system. All bicycle and pedestrian facilities shall be consistent with Article 4.0, Community Design.

C P

2. The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for dedication of right-of-way within the Plan Area for Fairview Road widening improvements.

Goal CP-2: Adequate connections to adjoining areas and uses.

3. The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for construction of Fairview Road frontage improvements along the Plan Area frontage on Fairview Road, and parking shall be prohibited along this frontage.

Policy Implementation

4. The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for contributing a proportional fair share to the Cielo Vista Drive extension shared entry road.

Policy CP-2.1. Provide road, pathway, and emergency vehicle connections to adjacent areas.

1. Integrate circulation within the Plan Area and with adjoining land uses, including the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Lots and roads shall be arranged to facilitate convenient pedestrian circulation within the Plan Area and to adjacent locations. 2. Street and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections shall be provided to adjoining properties along the southern, western, and northern Plan Area boundaries.

5. Any physical improvements that are made by the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) that benefit the Gavilan College San Benito Campus or other future development projects in the area may be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement, as set forth in the Fairview Corners Development Agreement. 6. The following off-site improvements to the intersection of Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Road shall be constructed by the developer: •

•

•

-

a northbound shared through/right-turn lane will be added to Fairview Road at this intersection, a southbound left-turn lane will be added to Fairview Road at this intersection, and the west leg of Cielo Vista Drive eastbound will be re-striped to provide a left-turn lane and a shared through/rightturn lane.

3. Include an emergency vehicle access that provides adequate secondary emergency access to the Plan Area. 4. Ensure that roads are designed to accommodate emergency vehicle turning movements. Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use Plan and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

       

Goal CP-4: Quiet and Safe Residential Roads.

Policy CP-3.1. Provide a system of neighborhood roads that facilitate internal circulation.

Policy CP-4.1. Promote a pleasant and conducive walking environment through implementation of traffic calming.

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual project developer(s) shall construct neighborhood entry minor collector entry roads and standard residential roads as shown in the Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections (Figure 15). Final improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department. Grading plans may be issued prior to approval of the improvement plans. 2. The integration of cul-de-sacs is encouraged when the residential development is designed, as illustrated in Appendix B, Lotting Program Example B, to provide pedestrian connections to open space or trail systems at the end of culde-sacs. 3. Residential roads adjacent to parks and open space within the Plan Area shall be singleloaded with residences facing the road wherever feasible. 4. Alternative road configurations within the subdivision tracts may be considered, subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department. Those alternative designs include, but are not limited to, one-way roads, parking restricted roads with dedicated parking bays, alley designs, and roads designed to calm traffic and allow an abundance of street trees. Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

1. Use the narrowest feasible travel lane widths on residential roads, designing these roads to be no wider than required to accommodate fire apparatus. 2. Amenities to enhance the pedestrian environment, including entry features (landscaping, monumentation, and signage etc.), traffic calming, and street trees shall be included on the improvement plans. 3. Consider the use of traffic calming techniques as illustrated in the Traffic Calming Diagram (Figure 16), to slow traffic, such as bulb-outs and neck-downs. Use of traffic calming shall be considered on all roads where they intersect with Cielo Vista Drive, and on Cielo Vista Drive at the Gavilan College San Benito Campus retail area.

 .  

-

C P

Goal CP-3: Plan Area circulation system that facilitates mobility.

C P

Planning and Design Section of the California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual, the San Benito County Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan, and in accordance with Article 4.0, Community Design.

4. Radii of corners (measured at face of curb) at intersections shall not exceed 25 feet for collector roads. Where residential roads and collector roads intersect, street corner radii shall not exceed 15 feet. Provide roll-over curbs if necessary to meet emergency vehicle turning requirements.

2. Bicycle path or lane improvements shall be provided as a part of the frontage improvements to Fairview Road along the Plan Area frontage, and shall be designed to connect to regional bikeways as identified in City and County Plans.

5. Roads shall have nighttime lighting that meets the minimum illumination standards contained in Article 4.0, Community Design. 6. The perimeter trail shall be designed to permit as many openings and viewpoints from other areas within the Plan Area as practical, in accordance with the design standards in Article 4.0, Community Design. Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

Goal CP-5: Safe and convenient nonmotorized transportation. Policy CP-5.1. Design the circulation system to provide appropriate bicycle facilities. Policy Implementation

1. Bicycle paths or lanes shall be constructed according to standards set forth in the Bikeway

-

3. Class II bicycle lanes shall be provided on the entire length of Cielo Vista Drive. 4. Utilize the emergency vehicle access between the end of Cielo Vista Drive and Airline Highway if the Airline Highway Route is constructed on the Gavilan College San Benito Campus property. 5. Signal light traffic sensors shall be set to detect bicycles and detector loop locations shall be marked for bicycles. Policy CP-5.2. Facilitate pedestrian circulation by providing clearly identifiable pedestrian circulation routes that connect neighborhoods, parks, recreational trails and facilities, and transit stops.

       

Policy Implementation

1. Pedestrian circulation routes shall be separated from vehicular traffic on all roads, and shall contain sidewalks or pedestrian paths consistent with the cross-section specifications shown in the Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Road Section (Figure 14) and the Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections (Figure 15). 2. A continuous pedestrian system shall be provided along all roads and shall be in accordance with Article 4.0, Community Design. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1] 3. Sidewalks shall be provided on both sides of the road in areas with lots of 12,000 square feet or smaller, and on at least one side of the road if all fronting lots are over 12,000 square feet. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

6. Handicap accessible routes shall be provided, except where existing gradients make such access unfeasible. At a minimum, at least one handicap accessible route shall be provided to connect the residential area to the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus, Plan Area parks, and adjacent property to the north. 7. Utilize short-cut paths, if needed, to avoid circuitous pedestrian and bicycle routes, and to keep walking and bicycling distances between destinations as short as possible. Cul-de-sacs shall include pedestrian connections to open space areas whenever possible.

4. Sidewalks shall be a minimum of four feet wide, and shall be a minimum of five feet wide adjacent to the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1] 5. The appropriate County staff shall review the master developer’s circulation improvement

 .  

-

C P

plans to ensure traffic calming features are included, such as enhanced crosswalks (e.g. bulb-outs, raised crosswalk, stamped concrete etc.) and/or road (speed) bumps.

Goal CP-6: Access to public transit.

C P

Policy CP-6.1. Facilitate future transit service at or adjacent to the Plan Area.

8. Utilize emergency vehicle access routes for pedestrian circulation.

Policy Implementation

1. Work with Caltrans, COG, San Benito County, and Gavilan College District to develop, implement and maintain public transit services for the Plan Area.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3), Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2), and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

-

2. Reserve an appropriate location or locations for a bus stop on Cielo Vista Drive for future development of a bus stop, particularly adjacent to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

       

Article 4.0

COMMUNITY DESIGN Article 4.0 establishes the standards that guide the aesthetic and visual design aspects of development, as well as open space and other amenities.

COMMUNITY DESIGN

Article 4.0 of the Specific Plan establishes the design parameters for development within the Plan Area. Green and sustainable designs will be incorporated into the development of the Plan Area. A summary of policies meeting specific LEED criteria is presented in Appendix D, but it should be recognized that LEED criteria may evolve over time, and the cited criteria are not meant to be locked in place.

Section 4.1 Design Objectives The community design objectives of the Specific Plan are: 

A distinctive design theme that respects the Plan Area’s rural surroundings and establishes visual continuity within the planned residential community;



A planned residential community that presents a pleasant and well-connected walking environment for both recreation and utility; and



Harmonious architectural styles drawn from attributes of the regional landscape and deriving variation in distinctive detailing from one building to the next.

Section 4.2 Community Design Goals and Policies The following Community Design goals, policies, and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area. Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state and local standards and requirements, on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 also provides guidance on phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements.

 .  

-

C D

Article 4.0

Neighborhood and Streetscape Character

C D

The community will be designed to achieve a visual character that complements the existing environs, including the surrounding ranchland and open space. A coordinated landscape and streetscape theme will be developed to provide attractive design with visual continuity throughout the Plan Area. The streetscape and landscape theme will draw from characteristics of the natural San Benito County landscape and historic landscape features. Neighborhoods are the building blocks of the community. They establish the “location factor” in real estate. Neighborhoods with unique, memorable qualities that are differentiated from other neighborhoods add value to private property and increase the likelihood of long-term investment in maintenance and improvements. Convenient walking to destinations within and adjacent to the Plan Area will be ensured through the provision of multiple street connections, sidewalks and pathways. The community will be designed with eyes on the street and traffic safety considerations. Goal CD-1: Distinguishing streetscape features. Policy CD-1.1. Ensure that streetscape improvements enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood. Policy Implementation

1. Carry a consistent landscape and streetscape character throughout the Plan Area. If custom homes will be individually designed, additional -

emphasis should be placed on a consistent streetscape design. The master developer shall prepare a Road Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan to ensure consistency within the Plan Area. 2. Coordinate streetscape, landscape, signage, and lighting to ensure a consistent visual character. 3. Deciduous shade trees shall be planted along roads at no less than 40-foot spacing, and at an average spacing of no less than 30 feet. Street trees must be planted at least 15 feet from street lights and five feet from driveways. Street trees shall be allowed to grow to full natural size. [LEED ND NPD Credit 14]

4. If relatively fewer and larger lots are subdivided, a design theme for the collector roads shall be developed to include a consistent fencing and entry gate theme. Policy CD-1.2. Ensure that infrastructure improvements do not compromise the visual quality of the neighborhood. 1. Screen for visual privacy or noise attenuation with berms and landscaping and minimize solid fences or walls. If walls over six feet facing the public view are necessary, such as when a rear yard is adjacent to a road, screen with vegetation.

       

Policy Implementation

1. Access to all lots shall be provided by roads internal to the Plan Area. No access to lots shall be allowed directly from Fairview Road or State Route 25. No direct access to single family lots shall be allowed from Cielo Vista Drive.

2. Use decorative poles and luminaries for street lighting. 3. Position light poles and sign posts at lot lines, intersections, or multifamily dwelling/courtyard home driveways.

2. Roads within the Plan Area shall be designed for traffic moving no faster than 25 miles per hour. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1] 3. Traffic calming features shall be designed as needed to slow traffic and provide a safe and convenient pedestrian environment.

Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6) and Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Goal CD-2: A walkable and environmentally sustainable community. Policy CD-2.1. Provide a comfortable and convenient walking environment. Policy Implementation

1. Prioritize pedestrians and bicyclists in the design of residential roads. 2. Ensure direct pedestrian connections between roads, and the community walking path network, parking lots, and entries to multifamily development. 3. Maintain a minimum four-foot clear passageway when bollards, poles, hydrants, etc. are placed in or adjacent to sidewalks.

Policy CD-2.3. Protect privacy and prevent annoyance from neighboring properties. Policy Implementation

1. To the extent practical, houses that overlook common open space or private yards of adjacent residences shall be designed to protect the privacy of the adjacent residences, particularly when the house is located close to the property line on that side.

 .  

-

C D

Policy CD-2.2. Design roads to avoid conflicts with higher traffic volumes or speeds.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6).

C D

Architecture The Specific Plan emphasizes high quality building and site design in order to achieve an attractive built environment. The architecture of buildings can affect the quality of public space nearby, and significantly affects perceptions of the quality of a neighborhood. It can encourage the presence of people on the public roadways and create opportunities for interaction between neighbors. Elements such as porches, balconies (or even false balconies), and windows with flower boxes located near the public way create the impression that people in the houses may be observing the roads and can result in a neighborhood that is more comfortable and secure. Although no particular architectural style is mandated within the Specific Plan, an architectural continuity will be established that draws from traditional regional styles. Goal CD-3: Carefully detailed architecture. Policy CD-3.1. Maintain architectural continuity within developments and neighborhoods. Policy Implementation

2. Detached garages, and attached carports, workshops, storage buildings, pool houses, porches, and patio covers shall be architecturally consistent with the principal structure. 3. Match the design of multifamily development parking canopies, trash enclosures, and other accessory structures to the architecture of the main building. Integrate signs and information systems into the overall design of multifamily residential developments. Relate signs to the architecture of the main building. 4. Design multifamily dwellings, community buildings, and utility and service facilities to blend and harmonize with single-family dwellings and neighborhoods by using mass, detailing, and roof lines that express a scale similar to and drawn on elements of traditional singlefamily homes.

1. Obtain a consistent neighborhood character by using a consistent architectural style for residential buildings; architecture should feature variation within a style, rather than through the use of several different styles. Architecture shall feature selected details drawn from traditional regional styles. The master developer shall prepare an Architectural Style Master Plan to ensure consistency of architectural style within the Plan Area.

-

       

6. Design utility structures to complement residential development in scale and style. 7. Use exterior color schemes that reflect the natural landscape and historic landscape features. Policy CD-3.2. Design dwellings with appropriate façade detailing. Policy Implementation

1. Arrange windows, doors, and other façade elements in balance on each elevation. 2. Face entryways toward the road and make them a prominent part of the house design. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1] 3. Provide depth to the façade by employing recessed and projecting elements, including prominent features such as bay windows and porches, and subtle features such as recessed window planes and raised trim.

4. Extensive blank, solid walls (overly long or overly tall) are discouraged on all elevations and are not permitted on elevations facing roads. If such walls are necessary for interior or structural reasons, provide some form of variation or decoration such as false windows and balconies, wainscoting, stringcourse, corbelsupported arcade roof, and/or trellis plantings. 5. Garage doors/carport openings facing a road may not constitute more than 50 percent of the width of any ground floor elevation. Where the garage door/carport opening constitutes more than 40 percent of the width of any ground floor elevation, special design treatment, such as an arbor or portico, shall be required at the garage/carport.

 .  

-

C D

5. Arrange multifamily dwellings to front on the public right-of-way. Organize the property to place buildings adjacent to the road, and locate off-street parking behind buildings or in the interior of the property. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

C D

Policy CD-3.4. Ensure that property improvements enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood. Policy Implementation

1. Retaining walls facing the road shall have a decorative finish that is consistent with the streetscape theme.

Policy CD-3.3. Design dwellings to complement their lot position. Policy Implementation

1. Design houses for corner lots (including lots fronting on pedestrian paths) to present equally important elevations to both frontages.

2. Fences or walls facing roads or other public areas shall be designed to blend with the landscaping, be consistent with the streetscape theme, and should be at least partially screened by landscaping. 3. Locate air conditioning; mechanical equipment; antennae and television receiver dishes; and vents on sides of the roof that are not visible from the road, whenever possible. 4. Screen utility boxes from view of the road. 5. Position gas meters and electric meters to minimize their visibility from roads, or provide screening.

2. Orient front elevations of courtyard corner homes to face the roas from which the courtyard gains access. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

-

6. Provide landscaping and/or decorative paving or paving accents within courtyard and alley vehicular accesses. Garages should generally be set back of living areas, but not so much as to encourage parking that would encroach into

       

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

Goal CD-4: A safe community. Policy CD-4.1. Design dwelling units to face public spaces to promote interactions and neighborhood safety.

4. Entryways for multiple units in cluster arrangements should face the road, pedestrian access, or parking court, with doors readily visible. Provide a porch or patio area transition from adjacent walkways, roads, or vehicular accesses. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1] 5. Multi-unit dwellings arranged as flats shall provide a secured interior stairway or an exterior stairway designed to enhance building architecture and provide visibility and security for residents. 6. Design pedestrian paths to be as open to view as possible. Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land

Policy Implementation

1. Design building entries and configurations that provide residents with a view from their home onto roads, pedestrian pathways, and other public areas. Front doors should be readily visible from the road to provide a welcome appearance and provide visibility and security. 2. Any dwelling adjacent to a pedestrian path may front on the path. Secondary dwelling units may front on alleys or parks. 3. Porches shall be covered, but substantially open (i.e. railings are acceptable) on the front and sides. Seating areas should be a minimum of six feet square.

Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

Lighting Goal CD-5 Prevention of Light Intrusion and Glare while Maintaining Safety Policy CD-5.1. Design parking lot lighting and street lighting to prevent light spill onto adjacent properties. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall prepare a Lighting Master Plan to ensure consistency of lighting treatment within the Plan Area. 2. Use full or three-quarter cut-off luminaires for all parking lot and street lighting. 3. Limit lighting standards to a height of 25 feet. 4. Design parking lots so that peripheral landscaping filters direct views of luminaires from adjacent residences.

 .  

-

C D

the courtyard vehicular access area. Vary courtyard building height and/or setbacks, and place garages so that they do not dominate the view into the courtyard or alley. Design courtyard vehicular access so that the terminating vista features enhanced landscaping or a building element other than a garage.

C D

5. Set subdued street lighting levels that maintain a rural ambiance.

Policy CD-5.3. Use minimal lighting in peripheral areas.

6. Design street lighting so that streetlights are placed at side lot lines.

Policy Implementation

Policy CD-5.2. Design building lighting to prevent light spill onto adjacent residential properties.

1. Illuminated monument signs shall use the lowest practical level of lighting.

Policy Implementation

2. Illuminated monument signs shall use the concealed up-lighting or down-lighting.

1. Shield exterior lighting from shining directly onto adjacent residential properties.

3. No lighting shall be provided on peripheral pedestrian paths. Policy CD-5.4. Plan lighting to maximize safety and security and conserve energy. Policy Implementation

1. Set roadway lighting levels that adequately provide for safety and security. 2. Position street lights at the beginning of pedestrian paths to provide maximum illumination within the pathways. 2. Locate exterior lights on the sides of houses below the top of the fence or shield the light from direct view of neighboring property.

3. Use low levels of lighting in multifamily residential developments to eliminate dark corners near areas of pedestrian movement. 4. When feasible use lighting technologies with higher efficiencies such as low voltage or LED lighting. Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

-

       

Goal CD-6: Attractive and harmonious signage. Policy CD-6.1. Design multifamily residential signage to blend with the residential character of the Specific Plan.

1. Monument or wall signs shall be used to identify the Plan Area and Plan Area neighborhoods. 2. Provide ornamental monuments/decorative landscape wall to provide a distinguishing entry to the Plan Area at the intersection of Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive.

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall prepare a Signage Master Plan to ensure consistency of sign designs within the Plan Area. 2. Multi-family residential development building signage shall be made of wood, metal, stone, or other natural or simulated natural material. Signs may be painted, stained, or tinted. Plastic signs are not permitted. 3. Signs shall be consistent with the architecture of the building and in scale with the property and building.

3. Provide complementary ornamental monuments at the intersection of Cielo Vista Drive and three collector entry roads.

4. Illumination of signs shall be by focused lighting that is not directly visible from locations outside the Plan Area.

4. Entry signs shall be constructed of durable materials, such as stone, textured concrete, heavy timber, or metal.

5. Internally lit and flashing or animated signs shall not be used in exterior locations.

5. Entry sign materials shall be non-reflective.

Policy CD-6.2. Entry signage shall be distinctive and attractive.

6. Entry signs shall generally be no taller than four feet, although some related features such as corner towers, arbors, etc. may exceed this height. 7. Painted surfaces shall utilize graffiti-resistant paint. 8. A consistent design theme should be carried throughout the entry signs, with distinctive features to set apart each sign and create unique identities for each neighborhood.

 .  

-

C D

Signage

C D

9. Water features shall use re-circulated water and be designed to minimize water loss from evaporation or splashing. Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

-

       

Article 5.0

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Article 5.0 summarizes the existing resources of the Plan Area and the resource conservation and management objectives and policies.

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Article 5.0 of the Specific Plan summarizes the existing resources of the Plan Area and the resource conservation and management objectives, goals and policies. Resources addressed in this Article include biological, geology and soils, water quality and conservation, air quality, cultural, and energy conservation.

Section 5.1 Resource Conservation and Management Objectives The resource conservation and management objectives are to minimize negative effects on air quality, water quality, energy demand, and the natural resources in the area. The Specific Plan objectives for land use, circulation, community design, and public facilities and services are all considered to be consistent with and facilitate attainment of the Resource Conservation and Management Objectives.

Section 5.2 Existing Conditions The Plan Area currently is designated grazing land on the California Department of Conservation’s Important Farmlands Map. The Plan Area is currently undeveloped land that is used to cultivate barley. The land is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. The Plan Area is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Topography of the Plan Area consists of undulating hills, with an overall relative elevation change of about 45 feet from east to west. There is an agricultural water line (blue valve) that runs parallel and is immediately adjacent to the northerly and easterly property lines. At the northerly property line along Fairview Road there is an agricultural water pump station on the property that serves this line. The line then runs to the easterly property line before turning south along that property line (refer to Article 6.0, Figure 19).

 .  

-

R M

Article 5.0

Biological Resources

R M

A biotic resources evaluation of the Plan Area was prepared by Live Oak Associates in 2008 to document the results of wildlife and botanical surveys and to analyze potential impacts to biological resources at or within the Plan Area vicinity as a result of the proposed development. Additional reconnaissance-level surveys were conducted in 2009, and additional site visits were made in 2010 and 2011. Traces of a former stock pond persist within a low topographic point in the northeast corner of the agricultural field. The remnant stock pond is a relict feature that is not known to have held water since 2000. Under current land management practices (e.g., regular discing), this feature does not regularly pond water. Natural drainage channels and wetlands are considered Waters of the United States and impacts are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. A Waters of the U.S. analysis was completed within the Plan Area and submitted for review by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers determined that no waters that meet the definition of a Water of the U.S., including the remnant stock pond, are present in the Plan Area. The dominance of non-native annual and perennial plant species and frequent disturbance from maintenance activities precludes the presence of most special status plant and wildlife species. Based on surveys, habitat suitability, previous recorded occurrences and professional expertise, no specialstatus plant species have the potential to occur on the Plan Area. However, based on the field surveys, suitable habitat was identified for California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), western spadefoot toad

-

(Spea hamondii), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), American badger (Taxidea taxus), and nesting migratory birds and raptors. California Tiger Salamander. California tiger salamander (CTS) is federally listed as threatened and has recently been listed as threatened by the state. Although California tiger salamanders do not currently breed in the Plan Area, salamanders were observed on the Plan Area in 2000 and the Plan Area is located within federally designated critical habitat. San Joaquin Kit Fox. San Joaquin kit fox (SJKF) is federally listed as endangered and state listed as threatened. No burrows possessing the dimensions suitable for the kit fox were observed in the Plan Area. However, they are known to occur in the vicinity, and it is possible that an individual kit fox could move onto the Plan Area incidentally prior to construction. Burrowing Owl. Burrowing owl is a state listed “species of special concern.” Although burrowing owl has not been observed within the Plan Area to date, marginally suitable nesting habitat for burrowing owls is present. American Badger. American badger is listed as a state listed “species of special concern”. Although no American badgers were observed in the Plan Area, they are known to occur in the vicinity and it is possible a badger may occupy burrows on or near the Plan Area. Nesting Raptors and Migratory Birds. Nesting raptors and migratory birds are protected by state and federal regulations. Although no tree nests or ground nests were observed on or adjacent to the Plan Area and no trees are present within the Plan Area, large trees immediately to the east and south

       

Geology and Soils The eastern third of the Plan Area is located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone for the Tres Pinos fault, a fault generally considered to be potentially active. Terratech, Inc. prepared a Combined Geotechnical and Fault Investigation for the Plan Area in 1989, and a subsequent geotechnical report in 2008. Based upon the investigation, a 35-foot wide trace of the Tres Pinos fault was mapped within the Plan Area. The Plan Area is located within the Coast Ranges geomorphic province, in an alluvial valley and is underlain by recent alluvium and older uplifted alluvial deposits. Plan Area soils are silty clay and sandy clay in the upper horizon. Groundwater is found about 120 feet below the surface. Water Quality Currently, storm water drains within and off of the Plan Area by way of natural drainage areas. The site rises from Fairview Road to the crest of a hill located approximately 1,100 feet east of Fairview Road. Existing drainage generally flows in three directions: west of the crest of the hill, the site drains toward Fairview Road; to the east, the site drains to a low

point in the northwestern corner (near the former stock pond); and along the southern boundary, the hill is interrupted by a saddle, which causes drainage to flow toward the adjacent property. There are no significant existing pollutant sources within the Plan Area. Storm water discharges are regulated under the Federal Clean Water Act through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The NPDES program describes how storm water discharges are to be managed to reduce water pollution. Prior to construction, a developer must obtain a permit from the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. Urban developments typically increase the load of pollutants; such as sediment, nutrients, bacteria, oil and grease, heavy metals and debris carried in storm water runoff. A variety of storm water facilities can be used to ensure the quality of downstream waters. Drainage basins, in addition to accepting and delaying the outbound flow of storm water discharge, can be designed to successfully remove high levels of particulates and dissolved pollutants. Storm water mitigation techniques may also include the use of swales for bio-filtration purposes, such as vegetated, grassy or street swales. Swales with a gentle slope (less than four percent average) are the most effective at treating storm water. The use of bio-swales can result in a decrease in runoff entering the storm water system and reduce pollution, thereby improving the water quality. Vegetated Swale Vegetated swales are long, narrow, landscaped channels that filter and infiltrate storm water runoff from parking lots, sidewalks, streets, and other impervious surfaces.

 .  

-

R M

provide potential nesting habitat for tree-nesting raptors such as merlin, Cooper’s hawk, white-tailed kite, northern harrier, loggerhead shrike, prairie falcon, ferruginous hawk, and red-tailed hawk, which are known to exist in the vicinity of the Plan Area. Grassland may also provide foraging habitat for these species. In addition, migratory birds may also nest within trees or vegetation present on or near the Plan Area.

R M

Source: City of Portland. Stormwater Management Manual Manual. 2004.

Street Swale For street swales, steeper side slopes (maximum of 2:1) and a narrower total width are allowed. Impermeable fabric is required along the street edge to the bottom of the swale, and slopes are to drain away from the street.

Source: City of Portland. Stormwater Management Manual Manual. 2004.

Grassy Swale Grassy swales are like vegetated swales except are landscaped solely with a grass seed mix, and may be mown occasionally, depending on aesthetic and storm water filtering requirements.

-

       

Cultural Resources

Source: City of Portland. Stormwater Management Manual. 2004.

Water Conservation The San Benito County Water Conservation Plan adopted by the Board of Supervisors in July, 1992 by Resolution 92-82, will substantially reduce water demand in new development compared to historic residential water use. The County Water Conservation Plan includes specific measures for installation of water saving devices and water efficient landscaping required for all new construction. Water conservation is a significant factor in the future use of water within the Plan Area.

The first people to inhabit the vicinity of the Plan Area were the Costanoan tribes, who occupied the region from the Golden Gate south to Monterey. The Costanoan were gatherers and hunters who utilized primarily native flora and fauna. The abundance and high quality of natural resources in the region allowed them to settle in semi-permanent villages. The first Europeans to settle in the vicinity were the Spanish, who established Mission San Juan Bautista in 1797. Following secularization of the missions, the region was settled by ranchers of mostly European descent. Energy Conservation Energy conservation can be achieved by providing alternative energy sources, such as solar power, and through implementing energy conserving design techniques. The State of California provides incentives. The California Energy Commission also offers solar power rebates available to utility customers in California. In addition to this, individuals are entitled to a tax credit on the cost of a system after rebates.

Air Quality The Plan Area is within the San Benito Valley, which is essentially a southern extension of the Santa Clara Valley. Prevailing northwesterly winds blowing through the Santa Clara Valley transport modified marine air from the coast, as well as pollutants from urbanized areas of the Bay Area, into San  .  

-

R M

Benito County. The Plan Area is within the jurisdiction of the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District. The region experiences ozone and particles measuring 10 µm or less (PM10) levels that exceed state air quality standards.

R M

Section 5.3 Resource Management Goals and Policies The following resource management goals, policies, and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area. Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state and local standards and requirements, on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 also provides guidance on phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements.

Biological Resource Policies Goal RM-1: Promote conservation of natural resources. Policy RM-1.1. Minimize the impact to special status species and their habitat in accordance with federal and state regulatory requirements. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall obtain Incidental Take Authorization from the USFWS (if required) by preparing an acceptable Habitat Conservation Plan that identifies adequate measures to avoid, minimize or compensate for the loss of protected species and habitat. Mitigation may occur off-site, on-site, through payment of in-lieu fees, or any combination as approved by USFWS. [LEED ND SLL Credit 9] Mitigation is intended to occur off-site, and land may be acquired for purposes of species protection through a conservation easement, the details of which would be finalized

-

in consultation with the USFWS as part of the Habitat Conservation Process. To the extent on-site mitigation is proposed, it may include provisions required by USFWS, including without limitation, the following: 

A biological conservation easement of not less than a 100-meter radius shall be provided around the former stock pond. No development other than stormwater runoff and filtering, interpretive signage, fencing and unpaved trails shall take place within the easement. Fencing shall be suitable for protection of the aquatic resources.



Use fencing and low level lighting adjacent to the biological conservation area, with the type of fencing being suitable to allow the passage of animals while still marking the area to be protected from intrusion, and the lighting screened to prevent direct light penetration into the area.

2. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall comply with mitigation measures required by the State Department of Fish and Game regarding the protection of state listed special status species and their habitat. Policy RM-1.2. Allow potential for localized grading in the on-site habitat conservation area. Policy Implementation

1. If a habitat set-aside area is retained on-site, localized grading is allowed within the 100meter radius around the existing dry pond for the purposes of expanding storm water storage within the Plan Area. The amount of grading

       

2. Use vegetated areas within the 100-meter radius area for natural filtration. Prepare a grading plan for the planned habitat set-aside area, if retained on-site, in accordance with the approved Habitat Conservation Plan and with appropriate agency approvals and/or permits prior to grading activities within this area. 3. If all CTS mitigation is conducted outside the Plan Area, grading may occur as needed within the area identified for habitat conservation. Policy RM-1.3. Minimize adverse changes to natural habitats.

Geologic Protection Policies Goal RM-2: Provide a safe and habitable community. Policy RM-2.1. Protect habitats and structures in the vicinity of known fault zones. Policy Implementation

1. Ensure a 135-foot “building exclusion zone” in all plan sets as illustrated in the Constraints Diagram (Figure 7). 2. Limit future use of the “building exclusion zone” to non-habitable improvements (e.g. roadway improvements, park, open space, buffers, trails, etc.). Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land

Policy Implementation

Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

1. Within the Plan Area avoid planting species listed in the California Invasive Plant Council’s inventory as having a Moderate or High rating and affecting the Central West region, or included in the Exotic Pest Plant Council’s “Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern in California” list. [LEED Homes SS-2] 2. Lots and roads shall be arranged to minimize the use of retaining walls. Taper the edge of cut and fill slopes to blend with existing topography or contours on adjacent development or roadways. Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

 .  

-

R M

will be based on the need to collect and store water. This effort is intended to expand the storm water collection and percolation area, but may also enhance habitat, and should be designed with the intent to achieve both purposes.

Soil Protection Policies Goal RM-3: Soil conservation.

R M

Policy RM-3.1. Minimize soil erosion. Policy Implementation

1. Erosion Control Plans shall be submitted to the County Public Works Department for review and approval when submitting subdivision improvement plans. Specific erosion control measures shall be included to protect drainage courses and the on-site habitat conservation area (should it be preserved on-site) from eroded soils and debris during construction. Soil exposed during grading that is no longer under active construction shall be stabilized. 2. Slope stabilization and erosion control (during both the construction and post-construction phases) shall only utilize mesh products that are made of biodegradable natural fiber materials. Plastic materials (such as silt fencing) may only be used if they are relatively solid (cannot entrap wildlife) and are removed from the site following use.

Water Quality Protection Policies Goal RM-4: Adequate disposal, retention and percolation of storm water and protection of storm water quality. Policy RM-4.1. Construct a stormwater collection and disposal system that retains and encourages percolation of stormwater generated within the Plan Area to pre-development levels. Policy RM-4.2. Allow alternative conceptual grading and drainage plans that direct drainage to shared retention basins with the adjacent Gavilan

-

College San Benito Campus, only if the Gavilan College Campus design and construction plans include retention basins with the capacity and water quality treatment measures to accommodate the Fairview Corners Plan Area, or that portion of the Plan Area to be served, so that the Plan Area’s stormwater discharge off-site is maintained at predevelopment levels. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall prepare a storm drainage master plan in accordance with San Benito County design standards, which identifies backbone collection and retention infrastructure needed to serve development within the Plan Area, in accordance with the timing requirements set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. Any improvement plans shall conform to the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan and shall incorporate use of structural and institutional best management practices and low impact development designs for storm water quality management and to minimize soil erosion for the Plan Area and adjacent properties outside the Plan Area. The improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department in accordance with the timing set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. The master developer shall finance and construct the backbone storm drainage collection and retention infrastructure. [LEED ND GIB Credit 8] 2. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall design, finance, and construct subdivision storm drainage collection improvements, which tie into the backbone storm drainage infrastructure system. Stormwater collection system improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval

       

3. Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Low Impact Development (LID) principles when designing storm water runoff facilities. Policy RM-4.3. Utilize best management practices and low impact development designs to minimize surface water quality degradation from discharge of storm drainage. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall prepare and submit a storm water pollution prevention program [SWPPP] application to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the County Public Works Department to secure a NPDES General Construction Permit for the entire Plan Area. The master developer and/or individual developer shall incorporate the structural and institutional best management practices and low impact development designs identified in the storm water management plan in improvement plans for their respective projects. The County Public Works Department must review these plans to ensure inclusion of the practices prior to approval of a grading or building permit for that phase. [GIB Prerequisite 4; Homes SS-4]

2. Prior to construction, contractors and their personnel shall be trained in appropriate best management practices to ensure water quality is protected. Those construction practices shall include erosion control, sediment transfer reduction, and dust control measures. A construction manager familiar with NPDES permit requirements must monitor the construction activities to protect water quality. This provision shall be included as a note on construction improvement plans. [GIB Prerequisite 4; Homes SS-4] 3. No chemical pesticides shall be utilized in the maintenance of common landscaped areas, open space areas, or parks. Fertilizers shall be applied sparingly, and shall be derived from natural sources, such as fish emulsion or manure. 4. The master developer shall cooperate with the County to create a public education program for future residents to increase their understanding of water quality protection, which should include but not be limited to: 

Hazardous material use controls



Hazardous material exposure controls



Hazardous material disposal and recycling

5. Hazardous materials could consist of cleaning products, paint, oil, fertilizers, weed killers etc. The education materials shall encourage the use of alternative methods, and prohibit the dumping of hazardous materials in open space areas

 .  

-

R M

of the County Public Works Department in accordance with the timing set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan.

R M

or the storm drain system. Further, the master developer shall require that all storm drain catch basins are labeled to discourage illegal dumping of hazardous materials. 6. Where feasible, direct roof drainage to pervious surfaces for infiltration. 7. On larger lots (12,000 square feet or above) consider the capture of roof drainage for reuse as irrigation water. 8. To the extent feasible, direct stormwater runoff to percolation swale and basin areas rather than directing stormwater to storm drain pipes.

9. Use biotreatment (natural pollutant filtering) where stormwater runs off paved surfaces onto pervious surfaces. 10. Utilize sediment traps, evaporation basins, flow dissipaters, and other methods to reduce the volume and speed of stormwater run-off and reduce pollutant loads. [LEED ND GIB Credit 8] Related Policies are contained in Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

-

Water Conservation Policies Goal RM-5: Promote conservation of water resources. Policy RM-5.1. Reduce potable water consumption. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall prepare a detailed master recycled water distribution plan that identifies backbone collection infrastructure needed to serve front yards of residential lots, public parks, landscape strips, monument locations, and other open space/landscape areas within the Plan Area. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1] 2. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall comply with the San Benito County Water Conservation Plan in the design of landscape material, irrigation systems, and calculating the allowable water budget for landscape irrigation in the Plan Area. Additional water conservation methods should also be considered for implementation within the Plan Area, such as cisterns to catch and store runoff water for landscape irrigation, the use of native vegetation in landscape materials, and the use of ultra low-flow or dual flush toilets, shower heads and faucets in all residential units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1] Policy RM-5.2. Facilitate water conservation.

       

1. In public spaces and residential front yards less than one acre, the master developer and individual developer(s) shall install drought-tolerant landscaping prior to delivery of residential dwelling units to buyers. On lots of one acre or larger, perimeter drought-tolerant planting shall be provided along the street frontage. Homeowners shall maintain yards in weed-free condition and assure that soil erosion is prevented. 2. Use drought-tolerant landscaping for at least 50 percent of planted yard area, and limit turf to areas of active use, and in no case more than 50 percent of planted yard area. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1; Homes WE-2] 3. Utilize only drought-tolerant landscaping along roads and in public landscaped areas. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1; Homes WE-2]

5. Equip dwellings with low water use washing machines and dishwashers, and dual-flush toilets. [LEED Homes EA-9] 6. Pre-plumb dwellings to accommodate gray water and rainwater recovery and irrigation systems, if feasible and legally permissible. [LEED Homes SS-4; Homes WE-2] 7. Multi-family residential buildings shall include a roof rainwater recovery system for storing irrigation water. 8. Use recycled water for park, streetscape, singlefamily residential front yard and multi-family residential common area irrigation, if available adjacent to the Plan Area at time of construction and permitted under applicable law and regulations. Encourage pre-plumbing to facilitate conversion to recycled water if recycled water is not available at the time of development, but will become available in the future. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes WE-1] Related Policies are contained in Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Air Quality Protection Policies Goal RM-6: Reduced Air Emissions. Policy RM-6.1. Minimize impacts to air quality. Policy Implementation

4. Design irrigation systems to minimize water use, including installation of ground moisture sensor controls, and temporary irrigation systems for drought tolerant plantings to be removed, where feasible, when plantings are established. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4]

1. The use of wood-burning stoves is prohibited; only natural gas stoves are permitted. Require stoves or fireplaces to exceed EPA emissions reductions regulations.

 .  

-

R M

Policy Implementation

R M

2. Prior to the start of construction, the project contractor shall provide a construction dust mitigation plan. The plan shall specify the methods of dust control that would be utilized, demonstrate the availability of needed equipment and personnel, use reclaimed water for dust control, and identify a responsible individual who, if needed, can authorize implementation of additional measures. The plan requirements shall be included on all construction documents and plans, where appropriate. The construction dust mitigation plan shall, at a minimum, include the following measures: 



Limit grading activity to a maximum of 2.2 acres daily. As more detailed construction information becomes available, emissions from grading activities could be reassessed to determine if the area of grading could be increased. Such an assessment would be completed using appropriate assumptions and mitigation measures. Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods. Active areas adjacent to existing businesses should be kept damp at all times. If necessary, during windy periods, watering is to occur on all days of the week regardless of on-site activities.



Cover soil or maintain at least two feet of freeboard on all hauling trucks.



Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.



Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles.

-



Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.



Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.



Suspend excavation and grading activity when hourly-average winds exceed 15 mph and visible dust clouds cannot be contained within the site.

3. The developer shall reduce Nitrogen Oxide (NOX) exhaust and particulate matter emissions by implementing one of the following measures prior to the start of construction: 

Provide a plan, acceptable by the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, demonstrating that the heavy-duty (> 50 horsepower) off-road vehicles and equipment to be used in the construction project, including owned, leased and subcontractor vehicles, will achieve a project wide fleet-average 20 percent NOX reduction and 45 percent particulate reduction compared to the most recent California Air Resources Board fleet average for the time of construction; or



The developer shall provide a plan, acceptable by the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, that all off-road construction vehicles/equipment greater than 50 horsepower that will be used on site for more than one week shall: 1) be manufactured during or after 1996, 2) shall meet the NOX emissions standard of 6.9 grams per brake horsepower hour, and 3) shall be equipped with diesel particulate matter filters.

       

The contractors shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g. compressors).



Signs at the construction site shall be clearly visible to advise that that diesel equipment standing idle for more than five minutes shall be turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate or other bulk materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks may keep their engines running continuously if onsite and staged away from residential areas.



Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions.



Stage large diesel powered equipment at least 200 feet from any active land uses (e.g., residences).

4. Divert a minimum of 25 percent of total materials taken off the construction site from landfills or incinerators. [LEED Homes MR-3] Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6), Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2), and Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Cultural Resources Protection Policies Goal RM-7: Respectful treatment of cultural resources. Policy RM-7.1. Protect archaeological resources. Policy Implementation

1. If midden soil, cultural features or potentially significant cultural resources, or human remains

are discovered during construction, work shall be halted within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find until a qualified professional archaeologist can evaluate the find. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated and implemented. 2. If cultural resources are located, mitigation shall include, at a minimum, recovery of significant cultural materials and professional analysis based on the types and quantities of those materials recovered, which might include analysis of lithic artifacts and materials, radiocarbon dating of shell fragments, bead analysis, faunal analysis, etc. Cultural materials recovered during monitoring and/or mitigation, other than those directly associated with Native American burials, should be curated in the public domain at a suitable research facility. 3. If human remains are found during construction there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of San Benito County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendent (MLD) from the deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human  .  

-

R M



R M

remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner, consistent with Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.

Energy Conservation Policies

2. If the Gavilan College San Benito Campus develops a community geothermal heat pump energy or heating system, extension of the system into the Plan Area shall be considered. [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10]

Source: Geothermal Education Office 2000. Introduction to Geothermal Energy-Geothermal Power Plant, Slide 37 of 122.

Goal RM-8: An environmentally sustainable community.

Policy RM-8.2. Facilitate energy conservation through design techniques.

Policy RM-8.1. Facilitate alternative energy sources.

Policy Implementation

1. Design houses to facilitate passive solar heating during the winter, and use cool roofs and thermal window coverings to reduce solar heat gain during the summer.

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall pre-plumb/pre-wire at least one-third of units for solar power and shall offer solar power as an option on all units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10] -

2. Design lots and houses to maximize rooftop solar energy output potential. Where feasible, roof pitches and roof orientation should be designed to maximize solar exposure to rooftop energy panels (minimum 300 square feet of unobstructed roof area facing within 30 degrees of south). [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10] 3. The developer shall make photovoltaic electrical systems and solar hot water or tankless water heaters available for at least one-third of dwelling units. Photovoltaic pre-wiring/conduit shall be installed and photovoltaic electrical systems

       

4. Equip dwellings with energy efficient water heaters and heat recovery drain systems. 5. Vegetation within 10 feet of a property line that is deemed to interfere with solar access at an adjoining lot shall be subject to height restrictions as necessary to protect such solar access. 6. Porches shall be placed only on the east, south, or west side of houses to provide shading in the summer, and to maximize northern light exposure to the interior of houses. 7. South and west-facing elevations shall be designed with roof overhangs that block summer sun from windows and allow penetration of winter sun. 8. Design residences to minimize the need for artificial lighting. Provide ample windows; light towers; light wells; dormers; skylights; or other features to enhance natural lighting.

10. Landscaping should include deciduous trees to shade south and west-facing walls in the summer and allow sunlight penetration in the winter. 11. Provide communications wiring within all dwelling units to facilitate telecommuting. 12. Provide programmable thermostats for all heating systems. 13. Use heating systems with an Annual Fuel Use Efficiency (AFUE) of 95% or greater, seal all ducts, and insulate ducts in unconditioned spaces. 14. Equip all garages/carports with a 240-volt 40amp circuit suitable for electric vehicle charging. 15. If multi-family uses are developed, the parking lot shall be shaded by either high albedo (reflective) roofs), roofs with solar panels, or trees that provide a minimum of 50 percent shade within 10 years of planting. Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

9. To increase natural light to small residential lots, consideration should be given to the orientation of roof gables and the effect of the roof line on yard shading.

 .  

-

R M

and solar hot water or tankless water heaters shall be offered as an option on all dwelling units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10]

R M This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Article 6.0

PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES Article 6.0 identifies the public facilities and service needs for the Plan Area and provides a framework for expansion of infrastructure systems.

Article 6.0

PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES Article 6.0 identifies the public facilities and service needs for the Plan Area and provides a framework for expansion of infrastructure systems.

PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES

Article 6.0 of the Specific Plan describes the existing infrastructure available to support the new development within the Plan Area, the necessary upgrades to that existing infrastructure, and the proposed infrastructure plan for the Plan Area.

Section 6.1 Public Facilities and Services Objectives The public facilities and services objectives are to extend public infrastructure to serve the future residents within the Plan Area and install the infrastructure to coincide with phased development.

Section 6.2 Water, Wastewater, and Drainage Infrastructure Plan Public facilities and services refers to water supply, treatment, and distribution; recycled water supply, mixing, and distribution; wastewater collection and treatment; and storm water collection and disposal.

Water Domestic Water Supply and Demand The Plan Area is located within the Sunnyslope County Water District’s (SSCWD) Service Area boundary for potable water as illustrated in Figure 18, SSCWD Service Area. Water service in the area is provided by SSCWD. A Water Supply Assessment (WSA) was completed by the SSCWD in July 2008. SSCWD determined that with its existing water supply and planned well improvements and new well construction, SSCWD has sufficient water to serve current and planned developments, including the Plan Area. The water would be delivered to the Plan Area via extension of SSCWD existing water mains. An “Intent to Serve” letter from SSCWD dated March 18, 2010 is presented in Appendix E. Domestic Water Distribution Domestic water is available to the Plan Area via the existing 12-inch water main that runs along the west side of Fairview Road. A new domestic water

 .    

-

P F  S

Article 6.0

P F  S

line would tie-in at the intersection of Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista Drive entry road. The new public system would run along the Cielo Vista Drive extension and distribute water throughout the residential streets. The pipes would be sized to accommodate the project in accordance with the applicable requirements of the County and Sunnyslope. At the eastern boundary of the Plan Area, the line would be extended outside the Plan Area and be connected to the end of the existing 6-inch potable water main at the head of the Harbern Way cul-de-sac. This potable water connection will provide the Plan Area with a redundant connection point as required by County standards. Figure 19, Potable Water System Layout, shows the existing and proposed water mains for the Plan Area. Recycled Water Use Recycled wastewater is not available at this time; however, the use of tertiary-treated wastewater is planned to be available in the future from the planned Sunnyslope Recycled Water System. In anticipation of this potential system, this Specific Plan includes policy provisions for the installation of purple pipe infrastructure to enable recycled water distribution through the Plan Area once available. Figure 20, Future Recycled Wastewater Route, shows the future recycled wastewater route to the Plan Area. Based upon currently available information, it is anticipated thzat the recycled water would be available in the future from the planned system near

-

the intersection of Ridgemark Drive and Marks Drive on the Ridgemark Golf and Country Club property. (Sunnyslope Well # 8) It is anticipated that, once available, the extension of purple piping within the Plan Area streets may serve front yards of residential lots, public parks, landscape strips and medians, monument locations, and other open space/landscape areas within the Plan Area.

Wastewater Wastewater Treatment The City of Hollister’s Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant (DWTP) is the primary wastewater treatment plant for the Hollister Urban Area, which are the areas within the County that are designated to be served by that facility. The Plan Area falls within this Hollister Urban Area. The City of Hollister, the San Benito County Water District, San Benito County and Sunnyslope entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and a Statement of Intent to develop the Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Master Plan. This master plan provides a long-term vision to guide water and wastewater improvements in the Hollister urban area, which includes the City of Hollister and adjacent unincorporated areas of San Benito County designated for urban development, including the project site. This master plan designates the City’s DWTP as the Regional Wastewater Treatment provider to the Hollister Urban Area, which includes the Plan Area. One of the key objectives of the MOU, as agreed to by the three agencies, is for the City of Hollister’s recently expanded DWTP to provide regional wastewater treatment for land within the Hollister Urban Area. The Plan Area will comply with the applicable requirements of the Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Master Plan.

       

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RESIDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AREA FAIRVIEW CORNERS DEVELOPMENT AREA OF SPECIAL STUDY

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Sunnyslope County Water District-SSCWD 2010

Figure 18

SSCWD Service Area and SOI Boundaries Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

GAVILAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE SAN BENITO CAMPUS

0

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2010

Figure 19

Potable Water System Layout Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Area

A

Rid

ge

ma

rk

Dr

.

Fairview Rd.

Gavilan Community College San Benito Campus

irl in e Hi gh w

Mixing Pond

ay

Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

Well 8

1100 feet

Tertiary - Treated Recycled Wastewater Chlorinated Well Water (No Restrictions) Fairview Corners Development Area of Special Study Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Area

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Google Earth 2009

Figure 20

Future Recycled Wastewater Route Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Wastewater Conveyance Wastewater generated within the Project Area would receive tertiary treatment as required by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. It is anticipated that project wastewater would be treated through a connection to the DWTP in accordance with the adopted Hollister Water and Wastewater Master Plan. Parcels within the Project Area which are a minimum of one acre in size may use septic systems, if otherwise consistent with County and City of Hollister regulations and design criteria, However, it is intended that the Plan Area homes will connect to the DWTP. There are two possible options for connecting to the existing City of Hollister wastewater conveyance system and associated improvements, as illustrated in Figure 21, Wastewater Conveyance Alternatives. Option 1 would construct a new sewer main across Fairview Road and connect to the existing system at the intersection of Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive. This connection would discharge the proposed Plan Area sewage through the existing 8-inch main to the western end of the Cielo Vista subdivision. From Enterprise Road, wastewater would flow within the existing DWTP lines to

Option 2 would construct a new sewer main within Fairview Road running south to Airline Highway, which would be solely for the Plan Area. From here, a new main would be constructed within Airline Highway and Enterprise Road to serve the Plan Area, as well as other existing and approved development in the vicinity. A new main solely for the Plan Area would then be constructed within Enterprise Road. From Enterprise Road, the wastewater will flow within the City of Hollister’s existing wastewater lines to the Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant, located on San Juan Road (State Route 156) approximately 5.5 miles northwest of the Plan Area. Both options are gravity-fed systems that would connect to the existing sewer main on Enterprise Road, west of the Plan Area. Neither option requires the construction of pumping or lift stations to convey the wastewater to existing wastewater infrastructure.

Storm Drainage Existing Drainage Existing topography consists of undulating hills, with a relative overall elevation change of about 45 feet from east to west across the site. Existing drainage generally flows in three directions. The site rises from Fairview Road to the crest of a hill located approximately 1,100 feet east of Fairview Road. Existing drainage generally flows in three directions: west of the crest of the hill, the site drains toward Fairview Road; to the

 .    

-

P F  S

the DWTP. This main contains sufficient capacity to serve the Plan Area and the existing Cielo Vista subdivision.

P F  S

east, the site drains to a low point in the northwestern corner (near the former stock pond); and along the southern boundary, the hill is interrupted by a saddle, which causes drainage to flow toward the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, as shown in Figure 22, Existing Drainage.

the habitat set aside area, if this area is set aside for habitat mitigation. A general depiction of where cut and fill will be balanced across the Plan Area is illustrated in Figure 24, Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram.

About one-third of the Plan Area site drains generally to the northeast toward a Santa Ana Creek tributary. The remainder of the Plan Area site drains west and south toward an unnamed tributary of the San Benito River.

Section 6.3 Public Utilities and Communications

Proposed Storm Water Drainage and Collection Infrastructure Figure 23, Conceptual Drainage Plan, presents the generalized flow patterns and potential storm water collection areas for the Plan Area. The Plan Area would substantially maintain the existing drainage patterns on site. It is anticipated that stormwater flows for these drainage areas would be collected by a network of curbs and gutters, storm drains, bioswales and retention basins, with a primary retention pond placed in the location of the former stock pond, subject to the requirements of USFWS AND CDFG. Specific Plan policies also provide for the sharing of drainage capacities between the Plan Area and the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus, so long as certain conditions are satisfied. In any event the Plan Area project would design the capacity of its stormwater retention facilities based on a 100-year storm event and be adequately sized to retain and infiltrate stormwater on the site at or below pre-development levels. To expand storm water storage capacity within the Plan Area as cut and fill is balanced across the Plan Area, grading may be allowed in the former stock pond area, if not prohibited by USFWS and CDFG. The grading within this area can also be used to enhance

-

The Plan Area requires the extension of public utilities and communications to serve the future residents. Public utilities refer to electricity and gas; communications refer to telephone and cable television.

Public Utilities Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) supplies electricity and natural gas services to the unincorporated County. Distribution of electric power is accomplished primarily through overhead systems extending from various electrical transmission lines in the area. Natural gas is distributed through a series of gas distribution lines located within roadway rightsof-way. Electric and gas utilities are available in the vicinity and can be extended to the Plan Area. All new utility lines will be located underground in the Plan Area as required by County standards.

Telephone & Cable Services Telephone and cable services are available through various providers. Residents may want a landline installed in the home, cellular service, or internet telephone service. Traditional phone service in the unincorporated county is provided by AT&T.

       

LEGEND ALTERNATE #1 ALTERNATE #2

0Not to scale

? feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2009

Figure 21

Wastewater Conveyance Alternatives Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

GAVILAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE SAN BENITO CAMPUS

PLAN AREA BOUNDARY

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

EXISTING DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY

Figure 22

Existing Drainage Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

GAVILAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE SAN BENITO CAMPUS

PLAN AREA BOUNDARY

0

300 feet PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

Figure 23

Conceptual Drainage Plan Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

GAVILAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE SAN BENITO CAMPUS

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2010

Figure 24

Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Section 6.4 Public Safety, Schools, Parks, and Solid Waste Collection This section describes the public services available to support the new development within the Plan Area. These public services include public safety, schools, parks, and solid waste collection.

Police, Fire, and Emergency Medical Services The San Benito County Sheriff’s Department provides law enforcement throughout the unincorporated areas of the county, and provides police support to the City of Hollister as needed. The Department’s adopted target ratio is one officer per 800 residents, although the actual service ratio currently is approximately one deputy for every 4,000 residents. The department headquarters is located at 451 Fourth Street in Hollister, approximately four (4) miles northwest of the Plan Area. The Department consists of eight (8) units and divisions and is staffed by twenty-nine (29) sworn officers operating thirteen (13) marked patrol cars.

eight (8) minutes for emergencies and fifteen (15) minutes for non-emergencies. Between the hours of 12:00 AM and 6:00 AM, response times are reduced to an average of five (5) minutes for emergencies and twelve (12) minutes for non-emergencies. The San Benito County Fire Department (SBCFD) provides fire protection for the Plan Area, which is operated under contract with CAL Fire. The Plan Area is presently part of San Benito County’s Service Area 26 (CSA 26). This service area includes most of northern San Benito County, except properties within Hollister and San Juan Bautista. County Fire funds a Fire Marshal position with a vehicle and five (5) firefighting personnel to achieve two (2) firefighters on one engine per day.

Despite the lower than optimal staffing ratio, the Department has been able to provide adequate law enforcement services to the County, typically responding within ten (10) minutes. The Department maintains an average response time of

 .    

-

P F  S

Residents have the option to choose between numerous cell phone service providers. Charter Communications provides cable television service to the Plan Area, as well as cable access to the internet. Other internet providers are available for dialup, cable or network service. The services of both companies would be extended to meet the needs of the Plan Area.

P F  S

The nearest fire station is located at 1979 Fairview Road, approximately two miles north of the Plan Area. Current staffing levels at the San Benito County Fire Department (SBCFD) are five (5) fulltime firefighters and twenty-one (21) volunteer firefighters. Recognized standards are to employ one firefighter per every 1,500 residents. The County maintains a service goal of six (6) minutes for fire and medical response. Although the SBCFD is supplemented by volunteer paid-call firefighters, the above objective is rarely met. It is estimated that the SBCFD would have a five to six (5-6) minute response time to the Plan Area. The SBCFG operates on an Auto-Aid agreement with the City of Hollister Fire Department (HFD). As part of the agreement, the nearest fire engine to an emergency call is the first to respond, the nearest HFD station to the Plan Area is Station 2, located at 1000 Union Road, approximately 3.4 miles west of the Plan Area. Station 2 consists of three (3) firefighters and one (1) engine. The San Benito County Department of Emergency Services oversees emergency medical response services (EMS) to ensure that emergency medical care is available and consistent at the emergency scene, during transport, and in the emergency room. The EMS system includes fire departments, ambulance companies, hospitals, police departments, the American Red Cross and the American Heart Association. The nearest hospital is the Hazel Hawkins Medical Center located about two miles to the northwest.

Elementary School The Hollister School District (HSD) serves a student population of 5,533 students from kindergarten through eighth grade (K-8). The HSD consists of eight (8) elementary schools, including two (2) magnet schools, within six (6) elementary school campuses. Of the non-magnet schools, four (4) are kindergarten through sixth grade (K-6) and two (2) kindergarten through eighth grade (K-8). HSD also operates two (2) middle schools, grades seventh through eighth (7-8). The nearest elementary school to the Plan Area is Cerra Vista Elementary School, located at 2151 Cerra Vista Drive in Hollister, approximately 2.0 miles to the northwest. HSD will provide school bus service for an elementary student residing more than 1.5 miles from school. Approximately 3.0 miles to the northwest of the Plan Area is Rancho San Justo Middle School, located at 1201 Rancho Drive in Hollister. HSD will provide school bus service for a middle school student residing more than 2.0 miles from school. Based on the HSD’s student generation rate, the total anticipated K-8 maximum enrollment is 124 students. High School The San Benito High School District (SBHSD) consists of one (1) high school, San Benito High School serving 2,940 students from ninth to twelfth grade

Schools The Plan Area is located within the boundaries of the Hollister School District (HSD) and the San Benito High School District (SBHSD). The unincorporated areas of San Benito County and the City of Hollister are served by both districts. -

       

In the future, it is anticipated that the SBHSD will need to construct another high school to accommodate growth in the County, including the Plan Area. It is anticipated that high school students from the Plan Area will attend that new high school. The Plan Area is adjacent to the planned Gavilan College San Benito Campus.

Parks Article 2.0 Land Use Plan and Development Standards establishes the general location and arrangement of parks and open space lands within the Plan Area. The San Benito County Code requirement for open space and parks is discussed in Article 2.0. The maximum requirement of 3.4 acres is based on 220 units and will be satisfied by the provision of open space and parks phased with Plan Area development, or as otherwise allowed in accordance with County standards. Article 5.0 Resource Management includes policies that address conservation of resources, including within park or open space areas. This Article provides direction on the types and designs of park facilities to serve Plan Area residents, and funding for maintenance of the parks.

The parks will be provided for the use of residents during daylight hours. Parks facilities will focus on play equipment and walking paths.

Solid Waste Collection Solid waste generated at the Plan Area would be sent to the John Smith Landfill, located at 2650 John Smith Road, approximately two miles east of the Plan Area. The San Benito County Integrated Waste Management Department is responsible for oversight of landfill operations in the unincorporated San Benito County. Recology San Benito provides solid waste, recycling and yard waste collection in the unincorporated county, including the Plan Area. The Plan Area would generate approximately 326 tons per year of solid waste. The John Smith Landfill has been in operation for approximately 30 years, and has an estimated remaining capacity of an additional 17 years. A site adjacent to the existing landfill has been identified as a future landfill site, and it is anticipated that this additional site will be utilized to fulfill the obligation of the County and its incorporated cities to maintain the required disposal capacity for the County as a whole. The County is also researching alternatives to landfill of waste, in keeping with greenhouse gas reduction measures.

Section 6.5 Public Facilities and Services Goals and Policies The following public facilities and services goals, policies, and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area. Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state and local standards and requirements, on Plan Area

 .    

-

P F  S

(9-12). San Benito High School, located at 1220 Monterey Street in Hollister is approximately 3.0 miles to the northwest of the Plan Area. The SBHSD estimates future enrollment on the basis of 0.23 high school students per dwelling unit. Based on a maximum planned development of 220 dwelling units in the Plan Area, the total anticipated 9-12 enrollment is 42 students. San Benito High School is currently at capacity.

P F  S

development. Article 7.0 also provides guidance on phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements. Goal PF-1: Adequate water supply and water infrastructure to meet the demands of the Plan Area. Policy PF-1.1. Ensure sufficient water supply for the build-out of the Plan Area. Policy Implementation

1. The Sunnyslope County Water District has prepared a Water Supply Assessment, and determined that there is an adequate water supply to serve the Plan Area. Continue to work with SSCWD to formalize the “will serve” letter provided (see Appendix E) into a service agreement for the Plan Area. Policy PF-1.2. Construct a water supply system that expands on and is integrated with the existing system, meets the needs of future development, and, where appropriate, subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall install water supply system improvements that tie into the backbone infrastructure system, which shall be installed by the master developer. Water supply improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Sunnyslope County Water District (SSCWD) for consistency with the approved Potable Water Master Plan and Recycled Water Master Plan, as well as related SSCWD requirements, in accordance with Article 7.0.

-

2. Where water infrastructure is built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, these improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with Article 7.0, and may be set forth in greater detail in the Development Agreement. 3. As a condition of approval for each tentative map, the developer shall grant easements for the SSCWD to maintain water supply mains to be located in the Plan Area. Policy PF-1.3. Encourage the development of a reclaimed water distribution system, including purple piping that expands on and is integrated with the existing system, and meets the needs of future development. Policy Implementation

1. To the extent if is feasible for the developer to include a reclaimed a reclaimed water distribution system in the Plan Area, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for the construction of the reclaimed water distribution system, including purple piping within Plan Area streets to pipe connect to the future recycled wastewater pipeline along Fairview Road, in phases consistent with the build-out of the Plan Area.

       

Related Policies are contained in Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

Goal PF-2: Adequate wastewater collection and treatment infrastructure to meet the demands of the Plan Area. Policy PF-2.1. Construct a wastewater collection system that expands on and is integrated with the existing system that connects to the City of Hollister’s Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant (DWTP), meets the needs of future development within the Plan Area, and, where appropriate, subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement. Policy PF-2.2. The demand for wastewater collection and treatment may be provided for by septic systems on lots not less than one acre in size. Lots less than one acre in size, and where the number of lots within the Plan Area exceeds 45, shall not be served by the use of septic systems, but shall be served by the City of Hollister DWTP.

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall work with the City of Hollister to ensure a “will serve” commitment, and prepare a master wastewater collection plan that identifies backbone collection infrastructure needed to serve new development within the Plan Area. Backbone infrastructure improvement plans for development within the Plan Area must be reviewed and approved by the City of Hollister for consistency with City standards prior to or concurrent with the approval by the County Public Works Department. The timing of approval shall occur in accordance with Article 7.0. 2. Where wastewater infrastructure is built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, those improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with Article 7.0 and as set forth in the Development Agreement.

3. Individual project developer(s) shall install wastewater collection improvements within the boundaries of their individual projects that tie into the backbone wastewater collection system. Wastewater collection system improvement plans for individual projects shall be subject to review and approval of the City of Hollister for consistency with the master wastewater collection plan and related City standards prior to or concurrent with County staff approval. The timing of the required approval shall occur in accordance with Article 7.0 of any individual subdivision phase final map or commercial development within the Plan Area.  .    

-

P F  S

2. Where the recycled wastewater distribution system or other associated improvements are built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, those improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with applicable standards and criteria, in accordance with Article 7.0 and as set forth in the Development Agreement.

P F  S

4. As a part of the final map and improvement plans, the developer shall grant easements to allow for maintenance of wastewater collection improvements to be located in the Plan Area. 5. Septic systems provided to serve the Plan Area shall meet County design, construction and maintenance standards. Designs shall be submitted prior to approval of tentative maps. Goal, Policies, and Policy Implementation for Storm Drainage and Water Quality Management are contained in Article 5.0, Resource Management. Goal PF-3: Adequate public utilities and communications infrastructure. Policy PF-3.1. Provide electrical, gas, and communications infrastructure that serves the needs of the Plan Area, and, where appropriate, is subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement.

underground communications infrastructure, which will assist in promoting telecommuting and home occupations. 2. Where public utilities and communications infrastructure are built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, these improvements shall be subject to the criteria provided by the County. Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

Goal PF-4: Adequate essential public safety services to meet the needs of future residents. Policy PF-4.1. Provide and maintain public safety services that are adequate in equipment and resources to respond to emergencies and calls for service within the Plan Area, and that meet the response time of the San Benito County Sheriff and Fire Departments.

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct all new electrical, gas, and communications lines underground within the Plan Area, in coordination with the service providers. Existing lines and cables within the Plan Area shall also be placed underground. The master developer shall work with the telephone and cable service providers to provide the most technically advanced

-

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall pay the public safety impact fees to the County, consistent with the County’s fee program and/or the development agreement. Fees shall be paid prior to receiving a building permit for each residential unit, or as otherwise stipulated in the fee ordinance or Development Agreement.

       

Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3), Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6), and

2. Provide a small park/tot lot within 1,500 feet of each residential lot, if possible. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL-6]

Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

Goal PF-5: Adequate school services to meet the needs of future residents. Policy PF-5.1. Ensure access to adequate education. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall pay the state mandated school impact fees to the County/School Districts, consistent with the state required development fees. Fees shall be paid prior to receiving a building permit for each residential unit, or as otherwise stipulated in the fee ordinance or Development Agreement.

3. Each park/tot lot shall have trash and recycling receptacles, seating, and shade trees. 4. To the extent feasible, pathways and trails shall be constructed with a smooth surface that is at least partly pervious to water, such as decomposed granite. 5. Pathways will be landscaped with shade trees to facilitate use on hot days. 6. Parks shall be open from dawn until dusk. Policy PF-6.2. Park Maintenance shall be selffunded. Policy Implementation

Goal PF-6: Adequate park facilities to allow for recreation. Policy PF-6.1. Provide on-site parks and open spaces. Policy Implementation

1. Utilize areas adjacent to any on-site biological conservation easement to provide opportunities for enjoyment of the open space.

1. Park development will be phased to occur concurrently with the development of the Plan Area, each individual neighborhood developer shall construct those components of the park system that is within its neighborhood or adjacent street frontage in accordance with the Parks Master Plan. 2. The master developer shall establish a funding mechanism or district, such as a CSA, CSD, CFD, or some other entity, to ensure that parks remain public and long-term park maintenance is funded without use of County general funds or parks funds. If park maintenance is funded by a private homeowner’s association, the parks will be private. Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

 .    

-

P F  S

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land

P F  S

Goal PF-7: Adequate solid waste services to meet the needs of future residents. Policy PF-7.1. Ensure adequate availability of solid waste disposal services and reduction, reuse, and recycling programs. Policy Implementation

1. As a condition of approval of any subdivision tentative or parcel map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain verification from Recology San Benito that it can provide solid waste collection services to meet demand from build out of the Plan Area. Waste collection services shall be financed through the most recently adopted fee program of Recology San Benito.

-

2. It is anticipated that Recology San Benito will provide curbside recycling service to residential neighborhoods. Where curbside pick-up is not practical, conveniently located centralized recycling collection and storage facilities will be provided by the developers. 3. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall distribute, to all home buyers, the educational program provided by the service providers as part of a countywide waste reduction, reuse and recycling effort. 4. Require all construction contracts to include construction waste reduction and recycling clauses. 5. Require public-use recycling cans at all locations where public-use refuse cans are provided.

       

Article 7.0

Plan implementation and financing Article 7.0 summarizes the administration, and responsibilities and obligations for implementing the Specific Plan. This Article addresses collectively, the implementation of goals and policies within each Article. It includes a summary of capital improvements and identifies methods by which development within the Plan Area may be financed.

Plan Implementation

Article 7.0 addresses the implementation of the Specific Plan, specifically Plan Administration and Plan Responsibilities and Obligations. Section 7.1, Plan Administration, describes the initial approvals and entitlements necessary to authorize the Specific Plan, as well as the subsequent entitlements, in substantial compliance with the provisions of the Specific Plan that will further guide the development of the Plan Area. Section 7.2, Plan Responsibilities and Obligations describes the roles of the County and Developers for implementing the Specific Plan, involving compliance with the provisions of the Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, conditions of approval, mitigation requirements, Plan Area phasing, financing, and long-term maintenance, as well as implementing an Affordable Housing Program.

Section 7.1 Plan Administration In general, references to the Specific Plan in this Article are referring to the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan. In the event and to the extent there is any conflict between the Development



Agreement and any other project approvals, including, without limitation, the Specific Plan, the Affordable Housing Program, Tentative, Final or Parcel Maps, or the Project Conditions of Approval, then the Development Agreement shall prevail. The initial project entitlements, including certification of a Final EIR, Specific Plan and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMRP) adoption, adoption of an Affordable Housing Program and of a Development Agreement, and the subsequent approval of the other required entitlements for the project, will establish the framework within which development will occur. It is intended that all subsequent development entitlements will fit within the framework established by the initial project approvals, to provide consistent, detailed guidance for development of the Plan Area in compliance with the specific requirements, goals and policies contained in the initial project approval documents. These subsequent entitlements and approvals include:  Project Area Master Plans;  Large Lot Parcel Map(s), Tentative Map(s), and Parcel Map(s) or Final Map(s), as required

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-

Plan Implementation and Financing

Article 7.0

Plan Implementation and Financing

under San Benito County Code Sections 23.03.002(A) and 23.03.003(A), for all or a portion of the Plan Area, including the Project Conditions of Approval for each such Plan Area tentative map; and  Other subsequent entitlements and administrative approvals (both discretionary and ministerial) including, without limitation, conditional use permits, design review, permits and building permits.

the zoning for the Plan Area. As set forth more fully in the Fairview Corners Development Agreement, to the extent any standard or other provision in this Specific Plan conflicts with the County Code, including, without limitation, the County’s Zoning Ordinance, the standard or other provision set forth herein shall control. Unless expressly modified herein, the provisions of the San Benito County Code shall remain in full force and effect and shall continue to apply to the Plan Area. Project Conditions of Approval

Relationship of Specific Plan with Other Regulations Concurrently with the adoption of this Specific Plan, the San Benito County General Plan and certain provisions of the San Benito County Code will be amended to include language recognizing the existence of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan. The Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan, along with the Fairview Corners Residential Development Agreement, Affordable Housing Program and other required approvals and entitlements, shall govern development of the Plan Area. General Plan and Zoning The General Plan will be amended to reflect the adoption of the Specific Plan to recognize this Specific Plan in the County’s Area of Special Study and the County’s General Plan. Once the Specific Plan is adopted, the General Plan Amendments will recognize the Specific Plan as establishing general plan direction within the Plan Area. County Code The Specific Plan establishes a set of goals, policies, implementation standards, and guidelines for development within the Plan Area, and shall constitute

7-

The implementation of the Specific Plan will require developer actions to obtain subsequent entitlements in compliance with the applicable provisions contained in the Specific Plan, Development Agreement and other project approvals, and developer compliance with Project Conditions of Approval (as defined below). “Project Conditions of Approval” are defined as (i) County’s standard conditions of approval for any permit, approval or entitlement which are not inconsistent with the Specific Plan, and (ii) County’s project-specific conditions of approval imposed in connection with the County’s future approval of tentative map(s) covering all or a portion of the Plan Area, conditional use permit(s), and/or design review. The Project Conditions of Approval must be consistent with the applicable provisions set forth in the Specific Plan, Development Agreement and other project approvals. Applicable Federal, State and Local Law Subsequent project approvals relating to the permitting and construction of all improvements within or serving the Plan Area, including, without limitation, large-lot parcel maps, tentative maps and parcel maps and/or final maps, grading permits, improvement plan approval, building permits, and conditional

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Initial County Approvals There are a number of County actions required for initial entitlement of the Fairview Corners Residential Plan Area. The following entitlement actions taken by San Benito County will ensure that mitigation measures, policy implementation, zoning development standards, and Development Agreement provisions serve as the governing regulations for the Plan Area:  Certification of the Specific Plan Final EIR;  Adoption by Resolution of a General Plan Amendment to recognize this Specific Plan in the Area of Special Study and the County’s General Plan, along with General Plan consistency findings;  Adoption by Resolution of the Specific Plan incorporating all conditions of approval imposed on the Plan Area by the Board of Supervisors;  Adoption by Ordinance of amendments to the County’s zoning map to reflect the new Fairview Corners Specific Plan designation and other conforming amendments, as needed, to the County Code;



 Adoption by Ordinance of the zoning ordinance text amendments to reflect the Fairview Corners Specific Plan provisions as the zoning for the Plan Area.  Adoption by Ordinance of the Development Agreement between the County of San Benito and the master developer (and successors and assigns) that specifies the obligations and rights of the parties involved in implementing development with the Plan Area, including within or by separate agreement an Affordable Housing Program;  Adoption by Resolution of the required CEQA findings, including a statement of overriding considerations, as appropriate, and adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP). EIR Certification Certification of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR, including findings that identify the Project’s significant environmental impacts and mitigation measures that must be implemented as part of the Specific Plan, is the first County action. The mitigation measures shall be reflected in the Project’s MMRP and imposed as conditions of approval on initial and subsequent discretionary approvals. General Plan Amendment Amendment of the County General Plan to: 1) change the General Plan Land Use Map to show the Plan Area as Fairview Corners Residential-Specific Plan (FVC-SP); and 2) make other specific conforming amendments (as needed) to the General Plan to ensure consistency between the General Plan and the Specific Plan (collectively, General Plan

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-

Plan Implementation and Financing

use permits, shall be subject to the uniform codes, regulations and requirements imposed on all development under applicable federal, state and local law, as well as all other County codes, regulations and requirements which are consistent with the applicable provisions in the Specific Plan, Development Agreement, and other project approvals, including Project Conditions of Approval. The term “applicable standards and requirements” shall refer to all of the foregoing described applicable federal, state and local codes, regulations and requirements.

Plan Implementation and Financing

Amendments). The General Plan Amendments will recognize the Specific Plan as establishing general plan direction within the Plan Area. Specific Plan The Specific Plan, adopted by resolution, establishes land use and development regulations, policy guidance and other applicable standards and requirements which will be incorporated into the County’s zoning code for the Plan Area. Zoning Amendments Approval of County Code and Zoning Amendments, including approval of this Specific Plan as the applicable zoning for the Plan Area, by: 1) changing the text to reflect the new zoning designation of Fairview Corners Residential--Specific Plan (FVC--SP); and 2) changing the County’s Zoning Map to show the Plan Area as zoned FVC--SP. Development Agreement The County and the Fairview Corners’ applicant will enter into a Development Agreement, which will set out the parties’ respective rights and obligations in connection with development of the Plan Area. CEQA Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Program In approving the Specific Plan and related implementing actions, the County will make CEQA findings and adopt a MMRP as well as a Statement of Overriding Considerations, as appropriate.

development of the Plan Area, including, without limitation, Tentative Subdivision Maps, Final Maps and/or Parcel Maps, Conditional Use Permits, Design Review, Grading Permits, Building Permits, and approval of Subdivision Improvement Agreements. The Plan Area’s map review and approval process, as well as design review, are described further below. The County shall not issue any entitlement, permit or approval in connection with the Plan Area unless said entitlement, permit or approval is in substantial compliance with the Specific Plan, the Development Agreement and other project approvals. In addition, subsequent entitlements for the Plan Area may be subject to other applicable standards and requirements, as described in this Specific Plan. Subdivision Maps Development of the Plan Area will require the subdivision of the Plan Area to allow development in multiple phases, which is governed by the Subdivision Map Act (Gov’t Code §§ 66410 et seq.) and the County’s Subdivision Ordinance. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) proposing to subdivide and develop any portion of the Plan Area shall comply with the Subdivision Map Act, the County’s Subdivision Ordinance, and all applicable aspects of the Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, and other project approvals, as well as all other applicable standards and requirements. Proposed subdivisions shall be submitted to and approved by the County of San Benito prior to development of the Plan Area. Large-Lot Parcel Maps

Subsequent County Approvals and Compliance Following the County Board of Supervisors’ actions on the initial County approvals, subsequent entitlement steps must occur to implement the proposed 7-

A large-lot parcel map for purposes of financing or parcelization only (which will not propose any improvements or allow any development) may be filed to divide the Plan Area into separate legal parcels. This type of map may be used to create Plan

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

properties, general roadway alignment to indicate adequacy for vehicle turns, including those owned or operated by residents, services, and especially emergency response equipment, and proposed street names.

Tentative (Major and Minor Subdivision) Maps

Design Guidelines and Visual Impacts: general building heights and bulk of structures shall be provided to demonstrate the visual impact or appearance of the finished project from several surrounding viewpoints.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall include all information required under the Subdivision Map Act and the County’s Subdivision Ordinance (San Benito County Code §§ 23.03.002(A), 23.03.003(A)) in connection with the application for each tentative map to develop a portion of the Plan Area including, without limitation, the following: Utilities (both existing and proposed): information regarding the location and sizing of water pipelines (domestic and fire suppression), sewer lines, gas, electric and communications lines shall be shown, including the available capacity of existing lines to indicate adequate service to the Plan Area, and demonstrating the coordination and efficient construction of utility lines to serve the Plan Area and the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus, as studied in the Fairview Corners Specific Plan EIR and in the Gavilan College San Benito Campus EIR. It is intended that utility lines are sized to provide service capacity to the entire Plan Area, and that the infrastructure only be built once (i.e., a relatively new street will not need to be torn up to add utilities or utility capacity). Circulation: an inner circulation plan shall be provided, showing roadway widths and number of dwelling units to be served by each road, including possible extensions into adjoining and adjacent

Grading: sufficient existing and proposed contours/elevations shall be provided, to confirm the amount and volumes of earthwork required.

Drainage: existing storm flows and projected increased volumes or direction of flow, due to greater impervious areas or re-grading of the area, shall be provided to demonstrate compliance with post-project runoff requirements as set forth in the Project Conditions of Approval. Soils: the developer shall provide preliminary soils report (may be limited to a letter of opinion as to the suitability of the area for this type of project), map of any known earthquake fault zones, suspected fault traces or unstable zones, and areas for which the soils engineer recommends the need for more extensive investigations prior to issuance of building permits. Parks: neighborhood or regional parks and trails, with any intended continuity to adjacent and adjoining parcels, shall be indicated. As part of the application process for the first tentative map which seeks entitlements for Plan Area uses or development, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare for the County’s approval a Conceptual Site Plan, which shall be consistent with the project’s Conceptual Master Plans and shall include (at minimum) the article 7.0 plan implementation

7-

Plan Implementation and Financing

Area phases or individual neighborhood areas. These types of maps are not intended for development and are often created to obtain financing or convey title. For purposes of the Fairview Corners project, the requirement for dedications and improvements in connection with this type of large-lot parcel map shall be governed by the Subdivision Map Act and the County’s Subdivision Ordinance.

Plan Implementation and Financing

following information: a diagram and table, describing and depicting the locations, types, densities and acreages of all proposed land use categories, and the general location of the roadway system, utilities systems and parks. In addition to the Conceptual Site Plan, as part of the application process for the first tentative map which seeks entitlements for Plan Area uses or development, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare for the County’s approval the following conceptual Master Plans, which shall govern subsequent development of the Plan Area. The Master Plans shall assume maximum build-out of 220 units and shall include (at minimum) the information referenced above (as appropriate), all information regarding the area proposed for development at the level of detail required by the Subdivision Map Act and the County’s Subdivision Ordinance, and at a conceptual level of detail for the remainder of the Plan Area. As subsequent areas are proposed for development, the Master Plans shall be revised, as appropriate, to provide all information regarding the area subsequently proposed for development at the level of detail required by the Subdivision Map Act and the County’s Subdivision Ordinance. The Master Plans also shall provide the following: 1. Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan: The Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all major infrastructure facilities proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements.

7-

2. Potable Water Master Plan: The Potable Water Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all potable water infrastructure facilities proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements. The plan shall provide details regarding the design and sizing of infrastructure to serve the area proposed for development, including back-bone stubs to individual building sites, to demonstrate the infrastructure is adequate to accommodate the proposed development. For the remainder of the Plan Area, the Master Plan shall describe the backbone infrastructure and utilities, including looping, in sufficient detail to demonstrate the proposed infrastructure is sized to adequately serve future phases. 3. Recycled Water Master Plan: The Recycled Water Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all recycled water infrastructure facilities proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements. The plan shall provide details regarding the design and sizing of infrastructure to serve the area proposed for development, including back-bone stubs to individual building sites, to demonstrate the infrastructure is adequate to accommodate the proposed development. For the remainder of the Plan Area, the Master Plan shall describe the backbone infrastructure and utilities, including looping, in sufficient detail to demonstrate the proposed infrastructure is sized to adequately serve future phases.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

5. Storm Drainage Master Plan: The Storm Drainage Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all major drainage facilities proposed for the Plan Area relative to drainage impacts, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements, including all of the following:  The storm system shall be designed for a 100 year storm event and utilize best management practices (BMPs) and in compliance with Clean Water requirements, as set forth in the Project Conditions of Approval; and  The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) may contour grade the area intended for development,



in accordance with the approved Master Grading Plan, and temporary/interim facilities may be graded and constructed on other portions of the Plan Area to achieve drainage and the efficient construction of water, sewer and underground utilities, consistent with the Master Plan. 6. Street Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan: The Street Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all roadway infrastructure facilities proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements. The intent of the plan is to identify and direct the major backbone street circulation pattern and to provide an approach for a consistent plan of streetscape improvements (e.g., landscape, monuments, signage, lighting, street furniture, etc.). The plan shall provide details regarding the design and sizing of infrastructure to serve the area proposed for development, including back-bone stubs to individual building sites, to demonstrate the infrastructure is adequate to accommodate the proposed development. For the remainder of the Plan Area, the Master Plan shall describe the backbone infrastructure in sufficient detail to demonstrate the proposed infrastructure is designed to adequately serve future phases. 7. Grading Master Plan: The Grading Master Plan shall describe the intended grading of the area to be developed, with transitional phasing to the remainder of the Plan Area, and shall include best management practices (BMP’s) to minimize erosion and sedimentation.

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-

Plan Implementation and Financing

4. Wastewater Master Plan: The Wastewater Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all wastewater infrastructure facilities proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements. The plan shall provide details regarding the design and sizing of infrastructure to serve the area proposed for development, including back-bone stubs to individual building sites, to demonstrate the infrastructure is adequate to accommodate the proposed development. For the remainder of the Plan Area, the Master Plan shall describe the backbone infrastructure and utilities, including looping, in sufficient detail to demonstrate the proposed infrastructure is sized to adequately serve future phases.

Plan Implementation and Financing

8. Open Space and Parks Master Plan: The Open Space and Parks Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all open space and parks proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Open Space and Parks Master Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements. Master Plans shall cover the identified portion(s) of the Specific Plan and include the information set forth above. Master Plans may be consolidated as appropriate, and may be prepared for a larger portion of the Plan Area than currently proposed for subdivision, at the discretion of the developer, and with the approval of County Public Works Department staff. The Master Plans are intended to provide a preliminary plan for services, facilities, financing and site grading. More precise engineering and detail will be provided in the subdivision improvement plans submitted as a condition of approval of the applicable tentative subdivision map. The Master Plans shall be reviewed for compliance with the Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, and all other applicable standards and requirements, and shall be subject to approval of the San Benito County Department of Public Works. The Conceptual Site Plan and the Conceptual Master Plans may be amended by the developer with approval of the County Public Works Department. A tentative map may be submitted and processed concurrently with a Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, or other discretionary entitlement(s) for the land that is the subject of the requested map. The Planning Commission shall approve a tentative map for development of any portion of the Plan Area, unless the Planning Commission makes written findings, supported by substantial evidence, regarding any one of the following: 7-

 The applicant failed to demonstrate that the requested map complies with the applicable provisions of the Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, the Conceptual Site Plan, relevant conceptual Master Plans, and other project approvals, as well as all other applicable standards and requirements;  Any of the findings requiring denial under the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Sections 66474, 66474.4 and 66474.6);  The applicant failed to demonstrate that approval of the requested map will not result in new significant, unmitigated environmental impacts or a significant increase in previously identified impacts; or  The applicant failed to demonstrate that approval of the requested map will not result in conditions that would jeopardize the public health, safety, and general welfare. In approving a tentative map, the Planning Commission may impose Project Conditions of Approval in accordance with applicable state and local law, this Specific Plan and the Development Agreement. Final Maps and Parcel Maps Final maps shall be filed and processed in accordance with the San Benito County Subdivision Ordinance (San Benito County Code Title 23), and the Subdivision Map Act subject to the Development Agreement, but no earlier than the day following approval of a tentative map for the subject land. The following conceptual Master Plans, which shall govern subsequent development of the Plan Area, shall be required to be submitted and approved by the County Planning Department and Public Works Department:

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

 Architectural Style Master Plan consistent with the Specific Plan Design Guidelines, by phase, for the area to be developed  Signage Master Plan for the entire Plan Area  Infrastructure Financing Master Plan for the entire Plan Area Master Plans may be consolidated as appropriate, and may be prepared for a larger portion of the Plan Area than the subject map, at the discretion of the developer, and with the approval of the County Public Works Department. These Master Plans are intended to provide conceptual plans for the portions of the Plan Area to be subdivided and developed under the proposed final or parcel map. More precise detail, if required by the County, shall be provided prior to the commencement of construction or as part of the applicable building permit or sign permit application. The Master Plans shall be reviewed for compliance with the Specific Plan, the Development Agreement and other project approvals (including Project Conditions of Approval), as well as all other applicable standards and requirements, and shall be subject to approval of the San Benito County Public Works Department. A final or parcel map (excluding large-lot parcel maps for financing purposes) may only be submitted for an area on which a prior tentative map has been approved by the Planning Commission. The Board of Supervisors and County Engineer shall approve a final map, pursuant to Sections 23.09.007 and 23.09.008 of the San Benito County Code, or the County Engineer shall approve a parcel map pursuant to Section 23.11.005 of the County Code, for development of any portion of the Plan Area, unless the Board of Supervisors or the County Engineer,



as appropriate, make written findings, supported by substantial evidence, regarding any one of the following:  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the requested map substantially complies with the approved tentative map;  The applicant failed to satisfy all applicable Project Conditions of Approval;  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the infrastructure, services, facilities and amenities required to serve the land uses within the requested map will be completed prior to occupancy of those uses; or  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the final map application has been timely filed as defined in the Subdivision Map Act and the County’s Subdivision Ordinance, subject to the Development Agreement.

Grading Grading permits may be issued within the Plan Area independent of final or parcel map approvals. Grading plans shall be reviewed for compliance with the Specific Plan, and the approved Grading Master Plan, and shall be subject to review and approval of the San Benito County Planning and Public Works Departments, in accordance with the applicable standards and requirements in compliance with this Specific Plan, the MMRP, and the Development Agreement.

Design Review Prior to issuance of the first building permit for a residential unit within a Plan Area phase, all development within such Plan Area phase shall be reviewed by the County Planning Director for compliance with the development and design article 7.0 plan implementation

7-

Plan Implementation and Financing

 Lighting Master Plan for the area to be developed

Plan Implementation and Financing

standards described in Articles 2.0 and 4.0 of this Specific Plan, as well as the applicable approved Master Plans, the Development Agreement and other applicable standards and requirements. This Design Review may occur concurrently with the processing of other application(s) such as a tentative or final or parcel map. The Planning Director shall approve a design review application for development of a “permitted use” (as defined by the land uses described in this Specific Pan), in any portion of the Plan Area, unless the Planning Director makes written findings, based on substantial evidence, regarding any one of the following:  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the proposed development is in substantial compliance with all applicable aspects of the Specific Plan, including applicable development and design standards described in Articles 2.0 and 4.0, applicable Master Plans developed for the Plan Area, the Development Agreement and other applicable standards and requirements; or  The applicant failed to demonstrate that approval of the requested application will not result in any new, significant unmitigated environmental impacts or a significant increase in previously identified impacts. If the County Planning Director makes either of the above findings, appeal of the Planning Director’s decision may be made to the Planning Commission.

Conditional Use Permits Application to develop a conditionally permitted use in the Plan Area shall be considered by San Benito County in accordance with the applicable provisions of this Specific Plan, the Development

7-10

Agreement, and other applicable standards and requirements, including, without limitation, those set forth in the San Benito County Code Chapter 25.43. In order to develop any residential units on lots that are larger than 1.5 acres in size, the applicant shall submit an application for a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the requirements set forth in County Code Chapter 25.43. Such application shall be reviewed and approved, conditionally approved, or denied, in accordance with the requirements set forth in San Benito County Code Chapter 25.43. In order to develop any uses listed as “conditionally permitted” as described in Article 2.0 of this Specific Plan other than residential units on lots that are larger than 1.5 acresF in size, the applicant shall submit an application for a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the requirements set forth in County Code Chapter 25.43, as may be modified or supplemented by this Specific Plan. The Planning Commission shall approve an application for a Conditional Use Permit for development of any conditionally permitted uses in the Plan Area, unless the Planning Commission makes written findings, based on substantial evidence, regarding any one of the following:  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the requested Conditional Use Permit substantially complies with the applicable zoning of the Specific Plan, the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, and all other applicable standards and requirements;  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the requested Conditional Use Permit is in substantial compliance with all applicable aspects of the Specific Plan, including without limita-

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

 The applicant failed to demonstrate that approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit will not result in new significant, unmitigated environmental impacts or a significant increase in previously identified impacts;  The applicant failed to demonstrate that approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit will not result in conditions that would jeopardize the public health, safety, and general welfare; or  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the required findings under San Benito County Code section 25.43.004 can be made.

Specific Plan Amendment Process A request for a Specific Plan amendment shall be processed in accordance with California Government Code requirements for specific plans and any County application requirements, including Chapter 19.29 of the San Benito County Code. Future amendments to this Specific Plan require a detailed Plan Area request for amendments to the Specific Plan, a determination by County staff if new technical reports and environmental review are needed, and shall require a recommendation from the Planning Commission and final action by the Board of Supervisors in the same manner as the Fairview Corners’ Specific Plan was originally adopted. A request to make a minor modification to the Specific Plan is distinct from a request to amend the Specific Plan. A finding of substantial compli-



ance with this Specific Plan shall be required for entitlements that reflect minor modifications to the Specific Plan. Thus, if an entitlement reflects certain changes to this Specific Plan, substantial compliance may be found provided the Planning Director finds that the changes constitute a “minor modification” that is intended to clarify, interpret and/or implement this Specific Plan in a manner that is consistent with the purpose and intent of this Specific Plan. In the event and to the extent the Planning Director makes written findings, based on substantial evidence in the record, that the requested change constitutes a minor modification, the subsequent entitlement shall not be deemed an amendment to the Specific Plan. Disagreement with the Planning Director’s findings in this regard may be appealed to the Planning Commission.

Section 7.2 Plan Responsibilities and Obligations Substantial Compliance The Plan Administration section of this Article describes subsequent County entitlements and compliance, and the method by which substantial compliance with the Specific Plan and Development Agreement may be achieved. The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) are obligated to substantially conform with (i) the Specific Plan, Development Agreement and other project approvals including the Final EIR and MMRP, (ii) the subsequent project approvals, including Tentative Maps and Project Conditions of Approval, Conditional Use Permits, Design Review, Final Maps and/or Parcel Maps, Grading Permits, Building Permits, and Subdivision Improvement Agreements, and (iii) all

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-11

Plan Implementation and Financing

tion, the applicable development and design standards as described in Articles 2.0 and 4.0 of this Specific Plan;

Plan Implementation and Financing

other applicable standards and requirements. The Plan Area is limited to a maximum of 220 principal dwelling units, excluding secondary units and accessory uses.

Development Schedule/Phasing The Plan Area will be built out in at least two (2) major phases (Phase I and Phase II), to accommodate grading and infrastructure construction: Phase I west of the residential street extending from the second access point, and Phase II east of that street, as illustrated in Figure 25, Conceptual Development Phasing Plan. These two phases are anticipated to be divided in up to four (4) residential construction sub-phases for each segment, for a maximum of eight (8) sub-phases within the Plan Area, each of which may last approximately two years, with up to four sub-phases within each major phase (Phase I (A-D) and Phase II (A-D)). Specific Plan build-out is expected to occur over five to sixteen years based on market demands. The development phases are expected to occur sequentially (Phase I, then Phase II) although the phases may occur concurrently. Development of each phase shall include all infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities, both public and private, needed to serve the uses and structures within that phase. Development would occur first near Fairview Road, with successive phases progressing eastward across the site. This project is intended to build a residential community that is integrated with and supports the recently approved Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Circulation improvements between or benefitting the Plan Area and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus are intended to be shared by both projects, and phased as the respective projects are constructed. Specifically, the costs of constructing the Cielo Vista Drive extension to its intended

buildout are anticipated to be shared between Fairview Corners and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus projects and both projects have responsibility to ensure adequate access in connection with their respective projects. Accordingly, in addition to the project phasing discussed above, if the Plan Area is developed before full buildout of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus, circulation improvements will be scaled appropriately in accordance with the Development Agreement. An Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan shall be prepared for County approval as part of the application process for the first tentative map that implements the Plan uses or development. The Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan is intended to be conceptual in nature and may be refined and revised by the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) from time to time throughout the development of the Plan Area with approval from the County Public Works Department or as part of the approval of specific improvement plans. Revised phasing plans must demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the San Benito County Public Works Department, the provision of adequate infrastructure to support each phase in accordance with this Specific Plan, the relevant Master Plan(s), the Development Agreement, and all other applicable standards and requirements. Figure 25 Conceptual Development Phasing Plan

LEGEND Phase A Phase B Conceptual Phasing Boundary (8 possible phases) For illustrative purposes only

7-12

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

The Plan Area infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities shall be fiscally self-sufficient through the use of revenue sources including, without limitation, those described below. In approving a final or parcel map for any portion of the Plan Area, the applicant shall demonstrate the availability of adequate financing to ensure that all Plan Area infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities needed to serve the uses and structures covered by the requested map will be completed prior to occupancy of any structure on any lot described in such map, and will remain operational with adequate maintenance throughout the life of the Plan Area, in accordance with applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. The determination that the Plan Area infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities are fiscally self-sufficient shall be determined on a phase by phase basis. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall develop the Plan Area in accordance with this Specific Plan, the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, and all other applicable standards and requirements. Roads, water distribution infrastructure, wastewater collection facilities, storm drainage infrastructure, parks, open space and trails, monumentation/ signage, and other public landscaping and lighting are critical elements of the Plan Area that must be constructed and then maintained over time. Master Plans, in substantial compliance with this Specific Plan and the Development Agreement and other project approvals, as well as all other applicable standards and requirements, shall be developed to guide each of these elements.



The Plan Area improvements will generate increased property tax revenue to the County General Fund. However, it is not anticipated that the property tax shall be enough to construct, operate, and maintain all of the required infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities. Any gap between the cost of infrastructure maintenance and the tax revenue being generated will be financed through a CSD, or other appropriate financing mechanism, in order to achieve revenue neutrality in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s), or subsequent owner or operator will be responsible for construction of backbone infrastructure improvements within the Plan Area, as well as the neighborhood infrastructure improvements needed to connect to the backbone infrastructure systems. Improvements shall be offered for dedication as appropriate on each applicable final or parcel map, to the appropriate public entity, with ongoing operation and maintenance of Plan Area improvements to be funded through a CSD, CFD, or equivalent as discussed below, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. Public and Private Funding All backbone improvements within the Plan Area, (specifically sewer, water, reclaimed water, utilities, storm drainage facilities, collector roads, and open space and parks) are intended to be designed, constructed and financed using private equity and/or debt funding, a public financing mechanism, or any combination of the foregoing. In addition, some infrastructure improvements may be subject to fair share reimbursement or County funding via development impact fees or as otherwise set forth in the Development Agreement.

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-13

Plan Implementation and Financing

Capital Facilities Funding, Financing, and Maintenance

Plan Implementation and Financing

It is anticipated that the long-term maintenance of circulation improvements outside of the Plan Area and the public backbone infrastructure connecting from outside the Plan Area into the Plan Area boundaries for water, recycled water, and wastewater shall be addressed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, with the costs of maintenance and operation financed through a CSD or other appropriate financing mechanism in order to achieve revenue neutrality. Other utilities brought from outside the Plan Area to the Plan Area boundary to service the Plan Area will be maintained by the particular utility provider. Subject to the Development Agreement, the Project Conditions of Approval will set forth the terms and conditions upon which the County will accept completed improvements. As described in Assessments for Capital Improvements and Long-term Maintenance, the Plan Area improvements, made as a part of constructing backbone infrastructure or in-tract improvements and maintenance, may be funded by a financing district as approved by the County.  Taxes It is anticipated that monies collected as property taxes (ad valorem), and real property transfer taxes, would be utilized by the County for capital improvements, operations, and maintenance as determined by the County in its sole discretion through its establishment of annual budgets and programs and in accordance with applicable law. In addition, the Development Agreement may identify alternate sources of County revenue which may be applied toward these costs.  County Development Impact Fees

7-14

Development Impact Fees imposed by the County could be utilized to construct certain infrastructure improvements necessary to serve the Plan Area. These are typically improvements outside the Plan Area that provide service to the Plan Area development. The County uses these fees to improve capital facilities. If the Plan Area developer(s) constructs an improvement that is a part of the impact fee program, any reimbursement or credit related to such action shall be in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement.  Assessments for Capital Improvements and Long-term Maintenance Special district(s) could be created for the Plan Area to provide funding for capital improvements and long-term maintenance of public infrastructure. Through several potential financing district options, such as a Landscape and Lighting District (LLD), Community Services Area (CSA), Community Services District (CSD), Community Facilities District (CFD) “Mello-Roos,” Geologic Hazards Abatement District (GHAD), maintenance annuity fund, or some other entity, revenue could be generated to construct and maintain public infrastructure within the Plan Area. A financing mechanism, such as a LLD, CSD, CFD, or other appropriate funding source is proposed, in accordance with applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, to be established as part of the Plan Area for the purposes of both capital funding and long-term maintenance of public infrastructure. Once a financing district(s) is established, in accordance with the applicable law, the district would be authorized to impose assessments on Plan Area residents only for the purpose of funding, operating and maintaining the following Plan Area improvements: the public roadways; drainage facilities; street lighting and landscaping;

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

 Homeowners’ Assessments Collected through master or neighborhood homeowners’ associations (HOA), fees may be collected for purposes of short-term maintenance and longterm capital accounts (reserves) for repairs to infrastructure improvements required to be privately maintained.  Reimbursements Reimbursement of funds may be collected through a variety of mechanisms in the event and to the extent the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) construct improvements that directly benefit other property owners outside of the Plan Area. Any such reimbursement shall be in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. A detailed Infrastructure Financing Master Plan shall be submitted for County approval as a condition of approval of the first tentative map that implements the Plan uses or development. Responsibility for Construction and Infrastructure Improvements All backbone improvements (specifically, sewer, water, reclaimed water, waste water, dry utilities, storm drainage facilities, collector roads, Fairview Road improvements, open space and parks) shall be constructed with private financing, or a public financing mechanism, subject to reimbursement as described in this Specific Plan and the Development Agreement.



It is anticipated that portions of the Plan Area may be sold by the property owner/master developer to other individual neighborhood developer(s) for purposes of developing specific uses or phases of the Plan Area. All public and private infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities needed to serve each neighborhood (in-tract improvements) shall be the responsibility of the developer for that portion of the Plan Area as determined during the Tentative and Final (or Parcel) Map process. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) may enter into private cost sharing agreements that specify, among other things, financing for the construction of improvements, easements and rightsof-way for such improvements, and terms for cost sharing and reimbursement among the beneficiaries. A Final Map or Parcel Map (with “buildable” lots) shall not be recorded for any portion of the Plan Area until the developer of that portion of the Plan Area demonstrates the ability to fulfill its identified obligations with respect to in-tract improvements and connection to backbone improvements in accordance with applicable provisions of this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, and the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements.

Plan Area Circulation Improvements Collector and Residential Roads As a Project Condition of Approval of each tentative map that implements the Specific Plan uses or development, the developer shall be responsible for constructing the collector roads and internal residential roads needed to provide access (both emergency and non-emergency) to the Plan Area development proposed under the requested Tentative Map or subsequent Final Map or Parcel Map.

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-15

Plan Implementation and Financing

public infrastructure (e.g. water, reclaimed water, wastewater); other public facilities; utilities; and open space, parks and recreational facilities.

Plan Implementation and Financing

Actual construction may occur after the recordation of the Final or Parcel Map and shall relate to the Plan Area described in such Final Map or Parcel Map, and shall be in compliance with any improvement agreement approved by the County Engineer that relates to the portion of the Plan Area shown on said Final Map or Parcel Map. The major collector, Cielo Vista Drive extension (Plan Area entry road) shall be built in accordance with the applicable timing and other requirements set forth in the Specific Plan, MMRP and Project Conditions of Approval for the Plan Area described in the applicable Final Map or Parcel Map, subject to the Development Agreement. Cielo Vista Drive is intended to be a public roadway, and, in connection with construction, the required improvements shall be offered for dedication to the County with ongoing operation and maintenance to be funded through a CSD, CFD, or equivalent as discussed above. The construction of Cielo Vista Drive will be constructed in at least three (3) phases, and in compliance with the Specific Plan, MMRP, Project Conditions of Approval for the Plan Area described in the applicable final or parcel map, and the Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan, subject to the Development Agreement. If the Plan Area is developed before full buildout of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus, circulation improvements will be scaled appropriately in accordance with the Development Agreement. The closed loop roadway network, extending along the Plan Area to serve the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the Plan Area, will have three access points to the residential Plan Area along the Cielo Vista Drive extension. The collector and residential roads are intended to be public roads, and, in connection with construction, these roadway

7-16

improvements shall be offered for dedication to the County, with ongoing operation and maintenance to be funded through a CSD, CFD, or equivalent as discussed above. If for any reason the internal residential roads are not made public, the master developer shall establish a HOA maintenance district to provide funding for road maintenance, repair and replacement as needed. Minor collector entry roads and internal residential roads shall adhere to the standards set forth herein, as well as those in the Conceptual Site Plan, the relevant Conceptual Master Plans, and the Project Conditions of Approval. See Article 3.0, Circulation Plan, for typical collector entry and typical residential road sections and construction sequence and phasing of the Cielo Vista Drive extension and Plan Area minor collector entry roads.

Outside of Plan Area Circulation Improvements Fairview Road Improvements The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) of any portion of the Plan Area that abuts Fairview Road shall be responsible for constructing its property frontage improvements as specified further herein and in the Development Agreement and as determined during the subdivision map process. The frontage improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the applicable provisions of this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements. In order to provide complete road segments for public safety on Fairview Road, the required frontage improvements for Fairview Road shall be constructed concurrent with the development of any

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Required frontage improvements along Fairview Road may include travel lane(s), a bicycle lane, curb, gutter, drainage, sidewalk or pathway, landscaping, and street lighting, at the direction of the Public Works Department. Right-of-way dedications for road and frontage improvements as required and consistent with improvement plans may be required in accordance with the Specific Plan and Development Agreement, and as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval. Right-of-way dedications shall be included on appropriate Final Maps or Parcel Maps. Intersection Improvements With the development of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the Plan Area, it is expected that signalized intersection improvements will be required at the Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension into the Plan Area and at Airline

Highway/Fairview Road. The timing of these improvements shall be determined based upon the acceptable level of service and other factors affecting the need for signalization at these intersections, as detailed in the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR and MMRP, subject to the Development Agreement, and as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval. Any reimbursements and/or credits in connection with improvements identified in the County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) program shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. If other developments, not a part of the Plan Area, have already constructed or agreed to construct the intersection improvements (subject to any reimbursement), any remaining improvements such as pavement widening, signing and striping, curb, gutter and sidewalk, streetlights, and installation of landscaping shall be the responsibility of the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) of that portion of the Plan Area. If the intersection improvements are built by another entity, the master developer shall be required to provide a fair share and any reimbursement shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. Signalization of the intersection of Cielo Vista Drive and Fairview Road is expected with the development of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the Plan Area. Construction of the intersection improvements, including signalization, shall be completed in accordance with the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR and MMRP, subject to the Development Agreement, and as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval. Any reimbursement and/or credits in connection with these intersection improvements shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement.

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-17

Plan Implementation and Financing

subdivision containing Plan Area uses fronting on Fairview Road. If, consistent with the Specific Plan and MMRP, the County determines that the widening and paving of Fairview Road’s Plan Area frontage is required before occupancy of any phase within the Plan Area, the master developer and/ or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be required to construct the abutting travel lane and bicycle lane, and the curb, gutter and street lighting improvements, subject to any future reimbursement in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. Construction of the sidewalk, pathways, and landscaping along Fairview Road may be deferred until occupancy of the adjacent development phase. In the event and the extent other property owners outside the Plan Area directly benefit from the construction of Fairview Road frontage improvements, then any reimbursement for such costs shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement.

Traffic Impact Fees

Plan Implementation and Financing

In order to mitigate to the extent feasible the impacts identified in the EIR, and subject to this Specific Plan and the Development Agreement, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for contributing funding in the form of Traffic Impact Fees (TIF) for the purpose of facilitating the construction of certain circulation improvements outside the Plan Area to accommodate new development in the County, including the Plan Area. The priority of improvements funded by the TIF from development of the Plan Area, and timing for construction of those improvements, shall be determined by the County in accordance with the County’s Traffic Mitigation Fee Update Study (as may be amended).

Public Infrastructure Improvements Potable Water The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare a Potable Water Master Plan for the County’s approval, as part of the application process for the first tentative map. As a Tentative Map Condition of Approval, each developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) within the Plan Area shall be responsible for constructing the water delivery system infrastructure needed to deliver potable water to the development being proposed under the requested map. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall enter into an improvement agreement with the County and post a bond or other security acceptable to the County for the improvements proposed for that phase of development, to the extent not already completed.

7-18

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct the backbone infrastructure needed for the Plan Area’s potable water delivery system in accordance with the approved Potable Water Master Plan, other relevant Master Plan(s), this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements. The construction of the improvements proposed for each phase of development shall occur prior to or concurrently with the development of the phase, and the necessary connection to the potable water system shall be available prior to occupancy of that phase of development. Plan Area infrastructure identified in the Potable Water Master Plan may be constructed in advance of any particular Project phase and prior to final map approval of the phase for which such improvements are required. As indicated above, development of the Plan Area shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Potable Water Master Plan, as may be amended from time to time with approval from the County Public Works Department. Once the water delivery system is constructed and an offer of dedication is accepted, it is anticipated that SSCWD would own, operate, and maintain the water system. All water system infrastructure improvements shall be reviewed by the County and the SSCWD during the Master Plan and tentative map review process for the applicable Plan Area phase for compliance with this Specific Plan and all other applicable standards and requirements, and improvement plans will be reviewed by the County and SSCWD as a Project Condition of Approval to ensure compliance with applicable County and SSCWD standards. Where potable water infrastructure is built that benefits other future development

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Recycled Water (Non-potable Water) The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare a Recycled Water Master Plan for the County’s approval, as part of the application process for the first tentative map. As a Tentative Map Condition of Approval, each developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) within the Plan Area shall be responsible for constructing the Plan Area recycled water system infrastructure necessary to service the area within each Final Map or Parcel Map.. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall enter into an improvement agreement with the County and post a bond or other security acceptable to the County for the improvements proposed for that phase of development, to the extent not already completed. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct the backbone infrastructure needed for the Plan Area’s recycled water delivery system in accordance with the approved Recycled Water Master Plan, other relevant Master Plan(s), this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements. Points of future connection will be provided along Fairview Road for use when the City’s recycled water infrastructure is extended to the Plan Area. The recycled water system will be designed for irrigating common area landscaping, such as the parks, open space, and other common areas within the Plan Area, including the landscaped area along Fairview



Road. Recycled water use may be extended for use in private front yard landscaping, if financially feasible and permitted under the applicable law and regulations. The recycled water system shall be offered for dedication to San Benito County Water District (SBCWD), SSCWD and/or the City, as appropriate on each applicable Final Map or Parcel Map. Upon acceptance, it is anticipated that the agency accepting such improvements would maintain the improvements with the costs of maintenance being funded by a CSD or other appropriate financing mechanism in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. All system infrastructure improvements shall be reviewed by the appropriate agency during the Master Plan and tentative map review process for the applicable Plan Area phase for compliance with the Specific Plan to ensure that the design and construction meet the applicable standards and requirements. Where recycled water infrastructure is built that benefits other future development projects outside of the Plan Area, any reimbursement in connection with those improvements shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. Wastewater Collection and Treatment The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare a Wastewater Master Plan for the County’s approval, as part of the application process for the first tentative map. As a Tentative Map Condition of Approval, each developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) within the Plan Area shall be responsible for constructing the backbone wastewater collection and treatment system infrastructure needed to treat and/ or convey wastewater from the development being

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-19

Plan Implementation and Financing

projects outside of the Plan Area, any reimbursement in connection with those improvements shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement.

Plan Implementation and Financing

proposed under the requested map. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall enter into an improvement agreement with the County and post a bond or other security acceptable to the County for the improvements proposed for that phase of development, to the extent not already completed. It is anticipated that wastewater collection and treatment will be provided to the Plan Area by the City of Hollister’s DWTP. No occupancy permit shall be issued for any use in the Plan Area until the necessary treatment system connections are made for the Plan Area phase under development. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct, prior to approval of each Plan Area Final Map or Parcel Map, for that phase of development, the backbone wastewater infrastructure needed for the Plan Area’s chosen wastewater collection and treatment system in accordance with the approved Wastewater Master Plan, this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements. As a Project Condition of Approval for each Plan Area tentative map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for constructing, following recordation of the final or parcel map, the in-tract subdivision wastewater collection system infrastructure needed to serve the development for the applicable Plan Area phase. All system infrastructure improvement plans shall comply with the approved Wastewater Master Plan, and other relevant approved Master Plan(s), and shall be reviewed by the County and the City, and any other applicable agency, during the Final Map or Parcel Map review process for

7-20

the applicable Plan Area phase for compliance with the Specific Plan, and to ensure that the design and construction meet all applicable standards and requirements. The construction of the improvements proposed for each phase of development shall occur prior to or concurrently with the development of the phase, and the necessary connection to the chosen wastewater system shall be available prior to occupancy of that phase of development. Plan Area infrastructure identified in the Wastewater Master Plan may be constructed in advance of any particular Project phase and prior to final map approval of the phase for which such improvements are required. As indicated above, development of the Plan Area shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Wastewater Master Plan and other related approved Master Plan(s), as may be amended from time to time, with approval from the County Public Works Department. If wastewater collection and treatment is in fact provided by the City’s DWTP, following the City’s acceptance of the improvements, it is anticipated that the City would maintain the improvements with the costs of maintenance being funded by a CSD or other appropriate financing mechanism in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. The City will have access to subsurface piping systems within Plan Area roads and in other Plan Area locations through easements. Where wastewater infrastructure is built that benefits other future development projects outside of the Plan Area, any reimbursement in connection with those improvements shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Storm Drainage The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare a Storm Drainage Master Plan for the County’s approval, as part of the application process for the first tentative map. As a Tentative Map Condition of Approval, each developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) within the Plan Area shall be responsible for constructing the backbone infrastructure needed for the Plan Area’s storm drainage system fort the development being proposed under the requested map, in accordance with the approved Storm Drainage Water Master Plan, other relevant approved Master Plan(s), this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall enter into an improvement agreement with the County and post a bond or other security acceptable to the County for the improvements proposed for that phase of development, to the extent not already completed. Storm drainage and retention facilities shall be designed to accommodate the full build-out of the Plan Area, as required in the Project Conditions of Approval. As a Project Condition of Approval for



each Plan Area tentative map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for constructing the storm drainage system infrastructure needed to serve the development being proposed under the requested tentative map. All system infrastructure improvements shall be reviewed by the County during the Master Plan and tentative map review process for the applicable Plan Area phase for compliance with the Specific Plan, and to ensure that the design and construction meets all of the applicable standards and requirements. The construction of the improvements proposed for each phase of development shall occur prior to or concurrently with the development of the phase, and the necessary connection to the chosen wastewater system shall be available prior to occupancy of that phase of development. Plan Area infrastructure identified in the Storm Drainage Master Plan may be constructed in advance of any particular Project phase and prior to final map approval of the phase for which such improvements are required. As indicated above, development of the Plan Area shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan, as may be amended from time to time, with approval from the County Public Works Department. The Storm Drainage Master Plan shall include the information as required above. Prior to construction of development shown in each Final Map, or improvement plans, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain, at its expense, all necessary permits and agreements as required by other agencies having jurisdiction over surface water drainage and water quality, including, but not limited to, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). In addition, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-21

Plan Implementation and Financing

If development of the Plan Area meets the lot size requirements presented in Article 2.0 and all other applicable standards and requirements, septic systems may be installed. Septic systems shall be privately maintained by either the individual homeowner, whose property the septic system serves, or in the case of a community septic system, by the HOA or similar mechanism. Septic systems shall be installed and inspected in accordance with all applicable standards and requirements.

Plan Implementation and Financing

developer(s) shall prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and shall design, implement, and maintain the SWPPP with BMPs as required by San Benito County and as set forth in the Project Conditions of Approval. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain a permit from San Benito County for the General Construction Storm Water Compliance Program, as required by their SWPPP, prior to the start of any grading or construction. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct storm drain mains and laterals in accordance with the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan and all other applicable standards and requirements. Storm drain laterals shall be constructed to the property line concurrently with the construction of connecting open channels or storm drain mains. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct the required retention basin(s) in accordance with the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan and the Project Conditions of Approval. Retention basins shall be improved for the purpose of providing open space and/or recreational uses where feasible. The retention basins illustrated in Article 6.0 are conceptual and shall be defined by the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan, as amended from time to time and the Tentative, Final and/or Parcel Maps for each Plan Area phase. These drainage facilities shall be constructed by the master developer and/ or individual neighborhood developer(s) when the affected subdivision phase begins development. Following construction (as appropriate) storm drainage infrastructure within the Plan Area shall be offered to the County for dedication, and such offer

7-22

shall be included on each applicable Final or Parcel Map. Once the offer(s) is accepted, it is anticipated that the County would maintain the system, with the costs of maintenance to be financed through a CSD, or other appropriate financing mechanisms. If any portion of the storm drainage infrastructure is not dedicated to the County, ongoing maintenance shall be funded through a HOA or other private financing mechanism. Development of each phase of the Plan Area shall be subject to payment of the County’s adopted fees for regional drainage improvements in the Santa Ana basin, if applicable to the Plan Area, in accordance with the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR and MMRP, the provisions of the Specific Plan, Project Conditions of Approval, and the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement.

Summary of Major Capital Improvements The major Plan Area backbone capital infrastructure improvements are identified in the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR and MMRP, subject to the Development Agreement, and will be further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval. These improvements include:  Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive Extension Intersection Improvements  Fairview Road (Frontage) Improvements  Cielo Vista Drive Extension (Entry Road to the Plan Area)  Potable water distribution connection from the existing water main on Fairview Road, construction of potable water backbone infrastructure within the Plan Area, and in-tract subdivision distribution line improvements by phase.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

 Recycled water distribution system construction, by phase, within the Plan Area, so that the system is available to accept public recycled water from SSCWD when a recycled water main is installed in the Fairview Road ROW adjacent to the Plan Area.  In-tract subdivision improvements by Phase  Storm Drain Facilities

Open Space and Parks Open Space and Parks and Related Master Plans As part of the application process for the first tentative map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare for the County’s approval an Open Space and Parks Master Plan. The Open Space and Parks Master Plan shall demonstrate how the Plan Area will meet the County’s requirement of five acres of park area per 1,000 residents, or 3.4 acres for 220 units and otherwise will satisfy the Project Conditions of Approval. The Plan Area’s open space and park system is divided into three categories: active parks, habitat area, and passive parks as follows:  Active Parks: The active park areas in the Plan Area include tot lots, par course, or similar improvements within pocket parks, including a linear pocket park (0-3.4 acres);  Passive Parks: The passive park areas in the Plan Area include open space with trails and/ or walkways (0-3.4 acres) that integrate access



to Gavilan College San Benito Campus open space and recreational areas; and  Habitat Area: The Specific Plan intends to provide off-site mitigation for CTS habitat. However, an on-site open space resource conservation area may be set aside for CTS, dependent upon the requirements of the CDFG and USFWS, which, together with the off-site conservation easements, are intended to mitigate the impact to the species habitat. Should these agencies require conservation on-site, the Specific Plan provides a seven-acre habitat set-aside within the Plan Area for this purpose. Should these agencies not require on-site mitigation this resource conservation area may be put to other purposes as set forth herein, including development of residential uses or passive open space (seven-acres) in accordance with the Specific Plan. A conceptual example of open space improvements is illustrated in Lotting Program Example C contained in Appendix B. Although the open space at Gavilan College San Benito Campus does not contribute toward fulfilling Plan Area open space or park requirements, the proximity of the open space and recreational facilities on the Gavilan College San Benito Campus will provide a benefit for Plan Area residents. Park Improvements and Dedication Development of the Plan Area shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan and related approved Master Plans, as may be amended from time to time with approval from the County Public Works Department. All open space/park infrastructure improvements shall be reviewed by the County

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-23

Plan Implementation and Financing

 Extension of Sanitary Sewer Collection Lines to the Plan Area (two alternative routes, only one to be chosen to serve the Plan Area)

Plan Implementation and Financing

during the tentative map review process and constructed in compliance with the Specific Plan and to ensure that the design and construction meet all applicable standards and requirements. The open space and parks within the Plan Area shall be offered to the County for dedication following construction, as appropriate, on each applicable Final Map or Parcel Map. Once the offer(s) is accepted, it is anticipated that the County would maintain the system, with the costs of maintenance to be financed through a CSD or other potential financing mechanisms, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. Open space and park facilities, including pocket parks, landscaped areas, private recreational amenities, pedestrian and bikeway systems, and retention basins, shall be constructed to benefit the surrounding residential development. The master developer and/or neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare final designs, finance, and construct the open space and park areas within the Plan Area concurrently with the development of the neighborhood phase in which they are located (prior to the issuance of a building permit for the last home in the neighborhood phase) in accordance with the approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan, other applicable Master Plan(s), this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable design standards and performance requirements. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall provide rough grading for open space and park sites adjacent to residential subdivisions. The open space and park sites shall be graded concurrent with grading of the adjacent residential subdivisions. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall provide finish grading, turf, trees, and irrigation frontage improvements as indicated in Article 4.0.

7-24

The linear pocket park, including all improvements, shall be constructed in accordance with the provisions of the Development Agreement or as otherwise required in the Project Conditions of Approval. The timing for construction of the other Plan Area park and recreational facilities shall be as follows:  All additional landscaped areas, private recreational amenities, pedestrian and bikeway systems, and landscaping for each phase that is approved in connection with each final map shall be constructed in accordance with the timing set forth in the Project’s Conditions of Approval, consistent with the approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan, other applicable Master Plan(s), this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements.  Any recreational facilities (e.g., par course fitness trail) planned in connection with retention basins shall be constructed at the same time the basins themselves are constructed. It is anticipated that funding for ongoing operation and maintenance of this open space and park system will be provided by assessments collected through one of several potential financing districts, such as a LLD, CSD, CFD or other appropriate financing mechanism. Alternatively, any open space area or parks that may be designated as private, would be maintained by a HOA or other appropriate financing mechanism. Each developer shall, at the time of building permit issuance, pay a park dedication fee in accordance with applicable local and state law, this Specific Plan, and the Development Agreement, or alternatively, provide park land and improvements as specified therein in lieu of park fees.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

As a Project Condition of Approval for the first tentative map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare conceptual Landscape, Lighting, and Signage Master Plans in substantial compliance with the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR, MMRP, and this Specific Plan, subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department. The Landscape Master Plan shall identify the size and species of primary and secondary street trees, shrubs and ground cover to be used, location and timing of all landscape components proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Landscape Master Plan will satisfy all applicable design standards and performance requirements. The Lighting Master Plan shall specify the type, location, and intensity for all streetlights, monument sign lights, and decorative lights within the common portions of the Plan Area, including multifamily residential parking lots and common areas. The Signage Master Plan shall specify design parameters and style for entry signs for multifamily development identity signs. Development of the Plan Area shall be in substantial compliance with the Landscape, Lighting, and Signage Master Plans, as may be amended from time to time with approval from the County as well as all other applicable requirements and standards.

Affordable Housing Program (AHP) prepared by the master developer. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) may construct affordable units in the amount determined by the AHP, or they may be constructed by one or more non-profit affordable housing builders. The AHP shall be consistent with the County’s AHO, and may be included as part of the Development Agreement or as a separate agreement approved by the County Board of Supervisors. The percentage income levels and mix for very low, low, and moderate income housing, as well as the possibility of work force housing, to meet the requirements of the AHO shall be as set forth in the AHP. The rent and prices for the affordable housing units, whether as rental or for-sale, will be based on the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published average median household income for San Benito County. Second units, such as apartment flats over a garage and attached or detached units on a single-family lot, are encouraged as a part of the Affordable Housing Program. Encouraging secondary units as part of the affordable housing stock provided within the Plan Area, furthers the intent of the Specific Plan to provide a broad range of housing for the community and the future adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Secondary units may be built as provided in Article 2.0, Land Use Plan and Development Standards and in accordance with all other applicable standards and requirements.

Affordable Housing Program The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developers within the Plan Area shall provide affordable housing to satisfy affordable housing needs within the Plan Area, and/or outside the Plan Area, or a combination thereof as set forth in an



article 7.0 plan implementation

7-25

Plan Implementation and Financing

Landscaping, Lighting and Signage Master Plans

Plan Implementation and Financing

This side intentionally left blank.

7-26

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Appendices

Appendix A, Goals and Policy Implementation. This appendix lists all of the goals, policies, and policy implementation contained in the Specific Plan for the Plan Area by article. Appendix B, Lotting Program Examples A-C. This appendix presents three lotting program examples of how various lot sizes could be located throughout the Plan Area. Appendix C, Open Space Categories illustrates the open space improvements for the Plan Area based on Lotting Program Example C. Appendix D, U.S. Green Building Council LEED Criteria summarizes the policy implementation presented in the Specific Plan that meets specific U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) criteria. Appendix E, SSCWD Intent to Serve letter presents the “Intent to Serve” letter from Sunnyslope County Water District (SSCWD) dated March 18, 2010 for water service within the Plan Area. Appendix F, Draft Capital Improvements Cost Study presents the itemized costs, unit prices and notes for the major backbone capital infrastructure improvements for the Plan Area.

Appendix A

goals and policy implementation

G OALS AND P OLICY I MPLEMENTATION

The following Specific Plan goals, policies, and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area. Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state and local standards and requirements, on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 also provides guidance on phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements.

A RTICLE 2.0 L AND U SE P LAN AND D EVELOPMENT S TANDARDS G OALS AND P OLICIES Land Use Pattern Policies Goal LU-1: A Land Use Plan that implements the intent of San Benito County by designating land uses for this property that are appropriate to the Area of Special Study. Policy LU-1.1: Implement County Resolution No. 89-92 and the General Plan Land Use Element by planning appropriate uses for this designated Area of Special Study, including higher density residential uses than are currently allowed by existing zoning.

Policy Implementation 1.

The County’s adoption by resolution of a general plan amendment and the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan, and by ordinance: the “Fairview Corners Specific Plan” zoning regulations, which constitute the land use designation and zoning for the Plan Area, will implement Resolution No. 89-92 and the County General Plan Land Use Element and will regulate the future development within the Plan Area.

Goal LU-2: Land use patterns responsive to the physical characteristics of the land, as well as to environmental, economic, and social concerns of the residents. Policy LU-2.1: Recognize the fault line and potential habitat constraints on the Plan Area and designate land to provide a mix of residential uses and product types, and recreational and open space amenities to meet the needs of residents.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall implement development in accordance with the land use designations shown on the Land Use Diagram (Figure 8), and with the policies and implementation measures contained within this Specific Plan. Modifications to the land uses or zoning regulations identified in this Specific Plan are subject to the County’s discretionary review.

2.

The low density and medium density residential uses offer opportunities to provide a variety of housing types.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood

developer(s) shall provide a range of housing products as described herein and/or by the separate Affordable Housing Program. 3.

The master developer shall prepare an Affordable Housing Program, which shall be part of the Development Agreement or separate affordable housing agreement with the County of San Benito. The program shall specify the manner in which the Plan Area will comply with the affordable housing requirements of San Benito County and address inclusionary obligations, if any, number, location and type or level of units, timing for development of the affordable units, financing options, and specific monitoring and enforcement procedures. The location for the affordable housing units may be partially or entirely within the Plan Area and/or located off-site on the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus. The Affordable Housing Program shall also address the use of secondary units to meet the affordability obligation of the Plan Area.

4.

Development of the project site shall comply with the most recent California Building Code requirements for Seismic Zone 4 to avoid or minimize potential damage from seismic ground shaking. All recommendations included in the 1989 fault investigation and in the 2008 geotechnical investigation prepared by Terrasearch, Inc. which includes a 50foot wide building setback on each side of the fault and any updated geotechnical reports, shall be incorporated into the project design.

Policy LU-2.2: Allow residential land uses in the proposed open space resource conservation area if habitat concerns are fully mitigated off-site.

Policy Implementation 1

It is proposed as a part of this Plan to allow the inclusion of a habitat conservation area at the northeast corner of the Plan Area if required by the CDFG or USFWS as partial mitigation of CTS habitat, with primary mitigation off-site.

2.

Optionally, the northeast corner of the Plan Area can be developed with residential uses or used as active park land if habitat concerns are fully mitigated off-site by agreement with appropriate regulatory agencies.

Related Policies are contained in Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3) and Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Residential Use Policies Goal LU-3: A diverse residential community. Policy LU-3.1. Allow a varied density and a variety of lot sizes, not to exceed 220 dwelling units (excluding secondary dwelling units, which are encouraged).

Policy Implementation 1.

When tentative and final maps are submitted to the County for review, the maximum unit count cannot exceed 220 dwelling units within the Plan Area. The lot and unit count shall exclude secondary dwelling units (which are encouraged within the Plan Area). In order to develop the Plan Area, the developer(s) shall submit one or more subdivision maps and/or parcel maps for approval by San Benito County that are in accordance with the development standards, zoning regulations, community design guidelines. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

2.

Residential lots shall be subdivided in accordance with the lot size requirements prescribed by Table 4, Minimum Residential Lot Size. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

3.

The purpose of lots created for other than residential uses shall be specifically described on the subdivision map.

Policy LU-3.2. Allow a variety of residential uses and supporting uses

Policy Implementation 1.

A variety of housing types shall be allowed, including single family homes, duplexes and duets, triplexes and fourplexes, courtyard and zero lot-line homes, and condominiums, townhouses, and apartments. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

2.

Principal uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are permitted or conditionally permitted on a residential lot subject to the applicable development standards.

3.

Complementary uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are permitted or conditionally permitted only on lots subdivided for the specific purpose(s) as noted on the subdivision map or other recorded document subject to the applicable development standards.

Policy LU-3.3. Allow accessory uses suitable to a residential area.

Policy Implementation 1.

Accessory uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are permitted or conditionally permitted on a residential lot in conjunction with a principal use, subject to the applicable development standards.

Policy LU-3.4. Conditionally allow additional uses if determined suitable for a residential area on a case-by-case basis and in accordance with this Specific Plan.

Policy Implementation 1.

Conditional uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are allowed on a residential lot upon obtaining a conditional use permit, and subject to the applicable development standards and conditions of use permit approval.

Related Policies are contained in Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Accessory Dwellings and Affordable Housing Policies Goal LU-4: Accessory dwelling units as an additional housing choice. Policy LU-4.1. Define appropriate types of accessory dwelling units (such as detached, above garage, etc.) and encourage these units as a part of or complementary to the Affordable Housing Program.

Policy Implementation 1.

Accessory dwelling units may be guesthouses, secondary dwelling units, or caretaker units. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

2.

Accessory dwelling units shall be located on an owner-occupied residential lot.

3.

A guesthouse shall be without kitchen facilities, clearly subordinate and incidental to the main building on the same lot, and not to be rented, let, or leased, whether compensation be direct or indirect.

4.

A secondary dwelling unit is a full residential unit that may be occupied full time, and is clearly subordinate and incidental to the main building on the same lot.

5.

A caretaker unit is a full residential unit that may be occupied full time and is specifically for the purpose of housing a caretaker for the same lot.

6.

Secondary dwelling units and caretaker units may include a kitchen and up to two bedrooms, subject to square footage and other standards set forth in Table 6, Accessory Dwelling Standards.

7.

Encourage accessory dwelling units to be built within the Plan Area to provide affordable housing for the community. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

Policy LU-4.2. Establish appropriate location, size, and number of accessory dwelling units dependent on the development density and lot size.

Policy Implementation 1.

Accessory dwelling units shall be limited to the residential lot sizes, configurations, and square footage standards in Table 6, Accessory Dwelling Standards. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

2.

No more than one accessory dwelling unit may be constructed on any lot.

Goal LU-5: Create affordable housing as a part of Plan Area Development. Policy LU-5.1. Affordable housing shall be governed by an Affordable Houding Program, which may be a separate Affordable Housing Agreement or incorporated into the Fairview Corners Development Agreement (Development Agreement). Affordable housing shall be located within the Plan Area and/or on the adjacent Gavilan College Campus property, with no more than fifty percent of the required units being located on the Gavilan property or as otherwise specified in the project’s Affordable Housing Program. Policy LU-5.2. Up to ten percent of the lots offered to local builders may be excluded from the County’s affordable housing requirements, or as otherwise set forth in the project’s Affordable Housing Program. Policy LU-5.3. Secondary and caretaker’s units are encouraged and allowed to meet up to fifty percent of the County’s required affordable housing for the Plan Area, or as otherwise set forth in the project’s Affordable Housing Program.

Policy Implementation 1.

An Affordable Housing Program, which shall be part of the Development Agreement or separate affordable housing agreement with the County, shall specify the manner in which affordable housing obligations, under the applicable County regulations, are met by the master developer and/or individual developers within the Plan Area. The Affordable Housing Program shall be imposed by the County as a condition of approval of the first subdivision map within the Plan Area. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

2.

The Affordable Housing Program may include the appropriate provisions for local builder preference exclusions and use of accessory units (secondary and caretaker’s units) in meeting the county’s affordable housing regulations.

3.

Implementation of the Affordable Housing Program may include financial assistance from a variety of sources, including contractual arrangements with a non-profit organization responsible for building the affordable housing.

Parks and Open Space Policies Goal LU-6: A coordinated system of open space and parks to meet the needs of the Plan Area residents. Policy LU-6.1. Provide passive and active open space on-site or off-site, or by paying in lieu fees commensurate with park requirements.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or neighborhood developer(s) shall provide land for passive and active open space, consistent with the Specific Plan and in accordance with County standards for the provision of parkland. The master developer shall conceptually design the open space and park areas, and the connections within the Plan Area by creating an Open Space and Parks Master Plan for the County’s approval. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL-6]

2.

The master developer and/or neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare final designs, finance, and construct the open space and park areas within the Plan Area concurrently with the development of the neighborhood phase in which they are located (prior to the issuance of a building permit for the last home in the neighborhood phase), and in accordance with the applicable County standards, and the approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan. Parks shall be designed to facilitate surveillance by adjoining residents and police services. If the number of residential dwelling units is less than the maximum of 220, the open space and park area requirement for the Plan Area will be based on the number of residential dwelling units built, to be calculated as required under the County Code.

3.

If the open space and park area standard is not met within the Plan Area and/or on the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, in lieu of the development of on-site parks and open space, the master developer shall pay fees to the County as allowed under the County Code, and in accordance with the Development Agreement.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal LU-7: Integrated open space and park areas. Policy LU-7.1 Interconnect open space and park areas.

Policy Implementation 1.

The open space and park trail system will consist of a loop configuration around or within the Plan Area that interconnects with the residential neighborhood and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus recreational facilities. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes

LL- 6] 2.

Development plans for the open space and park trail system shall be included in the Open Space and Parks Master Plan, prepared by the master developer and approved by the appropriate County staff in accordance with Article 7.0 (Plan Implementation).

3.

Anticipated open space improvements and the cost for those improvements are estimated in Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, and are illustrated in Appendix C, Open Space Categories (Lotting Program Example C).

Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6), Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2), and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

Intensity and Arrangement of Development Policies Goal LU-8: Adequate open space to allow for recreation and privacy. Policy LU-8.1. Limit lot coverage dependent on the development density and lot size.

Policy Implementation 1.

Lot coverage shall be determined by lot size and use in accordance with Table 7, Lot Coverage.

2.

Coverage calculations shall include all principal residential and accessory buildings, including garage space.

Policy LU-8.2. Provide minimum yard areas for all residences.

Policy Implementation 1.

A minimum rear or side yard area clear of structures or driveways shall be provided as prescribed in Table 8, Minimum Yard Space (Rear or Side Yard).

2.

For multi-family dwellings of nine or more units, interior common rooms may substitute for up to half of the yard requirement.

3.

No additional yard area shall be required for a secondary dwelling unit, but the required yard area for the principal dwelling unit shall be provided.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal LU-9: Adequate separation between development and adjacent roads and lots. Policy LU-9.1. Set development back from roads and lots dependent on development density and lot size.

Policy Implementation 1.

Compact development, including attached and detached single family dwellings or two to three unit attached dwellings on lots of less than 5,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 9, Compact Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

2.

Standard development, including detached single family dwellings or two to four unit attached dwellings on lots of 4,000 to 12,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 10, Standard Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

3.

Large lot development, including detached single family dwellings or two to four unit attached dwellings on lots of greater than 12,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 11, Large Lot Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

4.

Apartments, condominiums, and other multifamily dwellings of five or more units shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 12, Multifamily Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

5.

Two-story residences within 100 feet of the Fairview Road center line will require acoustical analyses, pursuant to the requirements of the San Benito County Code, and the project’s conditions of approval to ensure that interior noise levels on the second floor will be reduced to 45 dBA Ldn or lower. Building design shall include provisions for forced-air mechanical ventilation so that windows can be kept closed to control noise. The

conclusions and recommendations of the specific analyses, including the description of the necessary noise control treatments, shall be submitted to the County along with the building plans for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Policy LU-9.2. Establish specific set-backs and exceptions for special circumstances.

Policy Implementation 1.

Additional setback requirements shall be observed in accordance with Table 13, Special Setback Requirements and Exceptions.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2). Goal LU-10: Protection for neighboring properties from excessive shading and visual domination. Policy LU-10.1. Limit building and fence height dependent on the type of dwelling unit and characteristics of adjacent development.

Policy Implementation 1.

Buildings and fences shall be limited to the maximum heights as prescribed in Table 14, Height Limits.

2.

Structures near a shared boundary between the Plan Area and private property outside the Plan Area shall adhere to the additional height requirements in Table 15, Height Limits at Plan Area Boundaries. These requirements shall not apply to Plan Area boundaries within or adjacent to a road, except that any multi-family uses or other structures adjacent to the project site boundary (e.g., Fairview Road) shall adhere to the height requirements in Table 15.

Policy LU-10.2. Limit the location of fences and vegetation to ensure visibility at roads.

Policy Implementation 1.

Vegetation deemed to block visibility of vehicles entering or exiting the road shall be subject to the visibility triangle restrictions of San Benito County Code section 25.29.013.

2.

Avoid fence, wall or streetscape designs that create hiding places.

3.

Fencing, vegetation, and other landscape features shall not obscure the view between the front of the house and the road. Except along Fairview Road, where a minimum six-foot

sound barrier may be required, solid fences and gates over three feet high are prohibited fronting public roads. Prune front yard tree canopies to at least seven feet from the ground, and maintain plantings near walkways and building entries to under three feet tall. 4.

On lots at the intersection of a road and pedestrian path, no fence or hedge over three feet high shall be allowed in the yard adjoining the path.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

Parking Policies Goal LU-11: Adequate parking for residents and guests. Policy LU-11.1. Provide at least 1.5 automobile parking spaces for each principal dwelling unit, and at least one automobile parking space for each secondary dwelling unit.

Policy Implementation 1.

Residential parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with San Benito County Code section 25.31.020, except as otherwise provided herein.

2.

One of the required parking spaces for residences on lots under 5,000 square feet may be provided within a common parking lot within 250 feet of the residential lot it serves.

3.

One additional parking space shall be provided for each secondary dwelling unit or caretaker unit. The required parking space for secondary units on lots under 9,000 square feet may be provided within a common parking lot within 250 feet of the residential lot it serves.

Policy LU-11.2. Provide parking for a variety of vehicles.

Policy Implementation 1.

Provide optional electric car charging pre-wiring receptacles within reach of at least one garage parking space per unit or centrally located within carports or shared parking facilities.

2.

Multi-family developments shall provide secure visitor bicycle parking. Multi-family development shall provide one visitor bicycle parking space per five units. [LEED ND SLL Credit 4; LEED ND NPD Credit 5]

A RTICLE 3.0 C IRCULATION P LAN G OALS AND P OLICIES Goal CP-1: Provide adequate access to the Plan Area. Policy CP-1.1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) within the Plan Area shall be responsible to pay a proportional fair share or provide circulation improvements outside the Plan Area when those circulation improvements outside the Plan Area are warranted, in accordance with the Specific Plan certified EIR. Policy CP-1.2. The proportional fair share contribution for circulation improvements specified by the Specific Plan certified EIR outside the Plan Area will be based on the number of lots and/or dwelling units built within the Plan Area.

Policy Implementation 1.

The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for contributing a proportional fair share to intersection improvements and traffic signals.

2.

The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for dedication of right-of-way within the Plan Area for Fairview Road widening improvements.

3.

The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for construction of Fairview Road frontage improvements along the Plan Area frontage on Fairview Road, and parking shall be prohibited along this frontage.

4.

The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for contributing a proportional fair share to the Cielo Vista Drive extension shared entry road.

5.

Any physical improvements that are made by the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) that benefit the Gavilan College San Benito Campus or other future development projects in the area may be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement, as set forth in the Fairview Corners Development Agreement.

6.

The following off-site improvements to the intersection of Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Road shall be constructed by the developer:

•

a northbound shared through/right-turn lane will be added to Fairview Road at this intersection,

•

a southbound left-turn lane will be added to Fairview Road at this intersection,

•

and the west leg of Cielo Vista Drive eastbound will be re-striped to provide a leftturn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane.

Goal CP-2: Adequate connections to adjoining areas and uses. Policy CP-2.1. Provide road, pathway, and emergency vehicle connections to adjacent areas.

Policy Implementation 1.

Integrate circulation within the Plan Area and with adjoining land uses, including the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Lots and roads shall be arranged to facilitate convenient pedestrian circulation within the Plan Area and to adjacent locations.

2.

Street and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections shall be provided to adjoining properties along the southern, western, and northern Plan Area boundaries.

3.

Include an emergency vehicle access that provides adequate secondary emergency access to the Plan Area.

4.

Ensure that roads are designed to accommodate emergency vehicle turning movements.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use Plan and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2). Goal CP-3: Plan Area circulation system that facilitates mobility. Policy CP-3.1. Provide a system of neighborhood roads that facilitate internal circulation.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or individual project developer(s) shall construct neighborhood entry minor collector entry roads and standard residential roads as shown in the Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections (Figure 15). Final improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department. Grading plans may be issued prior to approval of the improvement plans.

2.

The integration of cul-de-sacs is encouraged when the residential development is designed, as illustrated in Appendix B, Lotting Program Example B, to provide pedestrian connections to open space or trail systems at the end of cul-de-sacs.

3.

Residential roads adjacent to parks and open space within the Plan Area shall be singleloaded with residences facing the road wherever feasible.

4.

Alternative road configurations within the subdivision tracts may be considered, subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department. Those alternative designs include, but are not limited to, one-way roads, parking restricted roads with dedicated parking bays, alley designs, and roads designed to calm traffic and allow an abundance of street trees.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2). Goal CP-4: Quiet and Safe Residential Roads. Policy

CP-4.1.

Promote

a

pleasant

and

conducive

walking

environment

through

implementation of traffic calming. 1.

Use the narrowest feasible travel lane widths on residential roads, designing these roads to be no wider than required to accommodate fire apparatus.

2.

Amenities to enhance the pedestrian environment, including entry features (landscaping, monumentation, and signage etc.), traffic calming, and street trees shall be included on the improvement plans.

3.

Consider the use of traffic calming techniques as illustrated in the Traffic Calming Diagram (Figure 16), to slow traffic, such as bulb-outs and neck-downs. Use of traffic calming shall be considered on all roads where they intersect with Cielo Vista Drive, and on Cielo Vista Drive at the Gavilan College San Benito Campus retail area.

4.

Radii of corners (measured at face of curb) at intersections shall not exceed 25 feet for collector roads. Where residential roads and collector roads intersect, street corner radii shall not exceed 15 feet. Provide roll-over curbs if necessary to meet emergency vehicle turning requirements.

5.

Roads shall have nighttime lighting that meets the minimum illumination standards contained in Article 4.0, Community Design.

6.

The perimeter trail shall be designed to permit as many openings and viewpoints from other areas within the Plan Area as practical, in accordance with the design standards in Article 4.0, Community Design.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2). Goal CP-5: Safe and convenient non-motorized transportation. Policy CP-5.1. Design the circulation system to provide appropriate bicycle facilities.

Policy Implementation 1.

Bicycle paths or lanes shall be constructed according to standards set forth in the Bikeway Planning and Design Section of the California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual, the San Benito County Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan, and in accordance with Article 4.0, Community Design.

2.

Bicycle path or lane improvements shall be provided as a part of the frontage improvements to Fairview Road along the Plan Area frontage, and shall be designed to connect to regional bikeways as identified in City and County Plans. 3. Class

II

bicycle

lanes shall be provided on the entire length of Cielo Vista Drive. 4.

Utilize the emergency vehicle access between the end of Cielo Vista Drive and Airline Highway if the Airline Highway Route is constructed on the Gavilan College San Benito Campus property.

5.

Signal light traffic sensors shall be set to detect bicycles and detector loop locations shall be marked for bicycles.

Policy CP-5.2. Facilitate pedestrian circulation by providing clearly identifiable pedestrian circulation routes that connect neighborhoods, parks, recreational trails and facilities, and transit stops.

Policy Implementation 1.

Pedestrian circulation routes shall be separated from vehicular traffic on all roads, and shall contain sidewalks or pedestrian paths consistent with the cross-section specifications shown in the Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Road Section (Figure 14) and the Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections (Figure 15).

2.

A continuous pedestrian system shall be provided along all roads and shall be in accordance with Article 4.0, Community Design. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

3.

Sidewalks shall be provided on both sides of the road in areas with lots of 12,000 square feet or smaller, and on at least one side of the road if all fronting lots are over 12,000 square feet. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

4.

Sidewalks shall be a minimum of four feet wide, and shall be a minimum of five feet wide adjacent to the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

5.

The appropriate County staff shall review the master developer’s circulation improvement plans to ensure traffic calming features are included, such as enhanced crosswalks (e.g. bulb-outs, raised crosswalk, stamped concrete etc.) and/or road (speed) bumps.

6.

Handicap accessible routes shall be provided, except where existing gradients make such access unfeasible. At a minimum, at least one handicap accessible route shall be provided to connect the residential area to the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus, Plan Area parks, and adjacent property to the north.

7.

Utilize short-cut paths, if needed, to avoid circuitous pedestrian and bicycle routes, and to keep walking and bicycling distances between destinations as short as possible. Cul-de-sacs shall include pedestrian connections to open space areas whenever possible.

8.

Utilize emergency vehicle access routes for pedestrian circulation.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3), Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2), and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal CP-6: Access to public transit. Policy CP-6.1. Facilitate future transit service at or adjacent to the Plan Area.

Policy Implementation 1.

Work with Caltrans, COG, San Benito County, and Gavilan College District to develop, implement and maintain public transit services for the Plan Area.

2.

Reserve an appropriate location or locations for a bus stop on Cielo Vista Drive for future development of a bus stop, particularly adjacent to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal CP-6: Access to public transit. Policy CP-6.1. Facilitate future transit service at or adjacent to the Plan Area.

Policy Implementation 1.

Work with Caltrans, COG, San Benito County, and Gavilan College District to develop, implement and maintain public transit services for the Plan Area.

2.

Reserve an appropriate location or locations for a bus stop on Cielo Vista Drive for future development of a bus stop, particularly adjacent to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

A RTICLE 4.0 C OMMUNITY D ESIGN G OALS AND P OLICIES Neighborhood and Streetscape Character Goal CD-1: Distinguishing streetscape features. Policy CD-1.1. Ensure that streetscape improvements enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood.

Policy Implementation 1.

Carry a consistent landscape and streetscape character throughout the Plan Area. If custom homes will be individually designed, additional emphasis should be placed on a consistent streetscape design. The master developer shall prepare a Road Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan to ensure consistency within the Plan Area.

2.

Coordinate streetscape, landscape, signage, and lighting to ensure a consistent visual character.

3.

Deciduous shade trees shall be planted along roads at no less than 40-foot spacing, and at an average spacing of no less than 30 feet. Street trees must be planted at least 15 feet from street lights and five feet from driveways. Street trees shall be allowed to grow to full natural size. [LEED ND NPD Credit 14]

4.

If relatively fewer and larger lots are subdivided, a design theme for the collector roads shall be developed to include a consistent fencing and entry gate theme.

Policy CD-1.2. Ensure that infrastructure improvements do not compromise the visual quality of the neighborhood. 1.

Screen for visual privacy or noise attenuation with berms and landscaping and minimize solid fences or walls. If walls over six feet facing the public view are necessary, such as when a rear yard is adjacent to a road, screen with vegetation.

2.

Use decorative poles and luminaries for street lighting.

3.

Position light poles and sign posts at lot lines, intersections, or multifamily dwelling/courtyard home driveways.

Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6) and Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5). Goal CD-2: A walkable and environmentally sustainable community. Policy CD-2.1. Provide a comfortable and convenient walking environment.

Policy Implementation 1.

Prioritize pedestrians and bicyclists in the design of residential roads.

2.

Ensure direct pedestrian connections between roads, and the community walking path network, parking lots, and entries to multifamily development.

3.

Maintain a minimum four-foot clear passageway when bollards, poles, hydrants, etc. are placed in or adjacent to sidewalks.

Policy CD-2.2. Design roads to avoid conflicts with higher traffic volumes or speeds.

Policy Implementation 1.

Access to all lots shall be provided by roads internal to the Plan Area. No access to lots shall be allowed directly from Fairview Road or State Route 25. No direct access to single family lots shall be allowed from Cielo Vista Drive.

2.

Roads within the Plan Area shall be designed for traffic moving no faster than 25 miles per hour. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

3.

Traffic calming features shall be designed as needed to slow traffic and provide a safe and convenient pedestrian environment.

Policy CD-2.3. Protect privacy and prevent annoyance from neighboring properties.

Policy Implementation 1.

To the extent practical, houses that overlook common open space or private yards of adjacent residences shall be designed to protect the privacy of the adjacent residences, particularly when the house is located close to the property line on that side.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6).

Architecture Goal CD-3: Carefully detailed architecture. Policy CD-3.1. Maintain architectural continuity within developments and neighborhoods.

Policy Implementation 1.

Obtain a consistent neighborhood character by using a consistent architectural style for residential buildings; architecture should feature variation within a style, rather than through the use of several different styles. Architecture shall feature selected details drawn from traditional regional styles. The master developer shall prepare an Architectural Style Master Plan to ensure consistency of architectural style within the Plan Area.

2.

Detached garages, and attached carports, workshops, storage buildings, pool houses, porches, and patio covers shall be architecturally consistent with the principal structure.

3.

Match the design of multifamily development parking canopies, trash enclosures, and other accessory structures to the architecture of the main building. Integrate signs and information systems into the overall design of multifamily residential developments. Relate signs to the architecture of the main building.

4.

Design multifamily dwellings, community buildings, and utility and service facilities to blend and harmonize with single-family dwellings and neighborhoods by using mass, detailing, and roof lines that express a scale similar to and drawn on elements of traditional single-family homes.

5.

Arrange multifamily dwellings to front on the public right-of-way. Organize the property to place buildings adjacent to the road, and locate off-street parking behind buildings or in the interior of the property. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

6.

Design utility structures to complement residential development in scale and style.

7.

Use exterior color schemes that reflect the natural landscape and historic landscape features.

Policy CD-3.2. Design dwellings with appropriate façade detailing.

Policy Implementation 1.

Arrange windows, doors, and other façade elements in balance on each elevation.

2.

Face entryways toward the road and make them a prominent part of the house design. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

3.

Provide depth to the façade by employing recessed and projecting elements, including prominent features such as bay windows and porches, and subtle features such as recessed window planes and raised trim.

4.

Extensive blank, solid walls (overly long or overly tall) are discouraged on all elevations and are not permitted on elevations facing roads. If such walls are necessary for interior or structural reasons, provide some form of variation or decoration such as false windows and balconies, wainscoting, stringcourse, corbel-supported arcade roof, and/or trellis plantings.

5.

Garage doors/carport openings facing a road may not constitute more than 50 percent of the width of any ground floor elevation. Where the garage door/carport opening constitutes more than 40 percent of the width of any ground floor elevation, special design treatment, such as an arbor or portico, shall be required at the garage/carport.

Policy CD-3.3. Design dwellings to complement their lot position.

Policy Implementation 1.

Design houses for corner lots (including lots fronting on pedestrian paths) to present equally important elevations to both frontages.

2.

Orient front elevations of courtyard corner homes to face the roads from which the courtyard gains access. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

Policy CD-3.4. Ensure that property improvements enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood.

Policy Implementation 1.

Retaining walls facing the road shall have a decorative finish that is consistent with the streetscape theme.

2.

Fences or walls facing roads or other public areas shall be designed to blend with the landscaping, be consistent with the streetscape theme, and should be at least partially screened by landscaping.

3.

Locate air conditioning; mechanical equipment; antennae and television receiver dishes; and vents on sides of the roof that are not visible from the road, whenever possible.

4.

Screen utility boxes from view of the road.

5.

Position gas meters and electric meters to minimize their visibility from roads, or provide screening.

6.

Provide landscaping and/or decorative paving or paving accents within courtyard and alley vehicular accesses. Garages should generally be set back of living areas, but not so much as to encourage parking that would encroach into the courtyard vehicular access area. Vary courtyard building height and/or setbacks, and place garages so that they do not dominate the view into the courtyard or alley. Design courtyard vehicular access so that the terminating vista features enhanced landscaping or a building element other than a garage.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3). Goal CD-4: A safe community. Policy CD-4.1. Design dwelling units to face public spaces to promote interactions and neighborhood safety.

Policy Implementation 1.

Design building entries and configurations that provide residents with a view from their home onto roads, pedestrian pathways, and other public areas. Front doors should be readily visible from the road to provide a welcome appearance and provide visibility and security.

2.

Any dwelling adjacent to a pedestrian path may front on the path. Secondary dwelling units may front on alleys or parks.

3.

Porches shall be covered, but substantially open (i.e. railings are acceptable) on the front and sides. Seating areas should be a minimum of six feet square.

4.

Entryways for multiple units in cluster arrangements should face the road, pedestrian access, or parking court, with doors readily visible. Provide a porch or patio area transition from adjacent walkways, roads, or vehicular accesses. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

5.

Multi-unit dwellings arranged as flats shall provide a secured interior stairway or an exterior stairway designed to enhance building architecture and provide visibility and security for residents.

6.

Design pedestrian paths to be as open to view as possible.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

Lighting Goal CD-5 Prevention of Light Intrusion and Glare while Maintaining Safety Policy CD-5.1. Design parking lot lighting and street lighting to prevent light spill onto adjacent properties.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall prepare a Lighting Master Plan to ensure consistency of lighting treatment within the Plan Area.

2.

Use full or three-quarter cut-off luminaires for all parking lot and street lighting.

3.

Limit lighting standards to a height of 25 feet.

4.

Design parking lots so that peripheral landscaping filters direct views of luminaires from adjacent residences.

5.

Set subdued street lighting levels that maintain a rural ambiance.

6.

Design street lighting so that streetlights are placed at side lot lines.

Policy CD-5.2. Design building lighting to prevent light spill onto adjacent residential properties.

Policy Implementation 1.

Shield exterior lighting from shining directly onto adjacent residential properties.

2.

Locate exterior lights on the sides of houses below the top of the fence or shield the light from direct view of neighboring property.

Policy CD-5.3. Use minimal lighting in peripheral areas.

Policy Implementation 1.

Illuminated monument signs shall use the lowest practical level of lighting.

2.

Illuminated monument signs shall use the concealed up-lighting or down-lighting.

3.

No lighting shall be provided on peripheral pedestrian paths.

Policy CD-5.4. Plan lighting to maximize safety and security and conserve energy.

Policy Implementation 1.

Set roadway lighting levels that adequately provide for safety and security.

2.

Position street lights at the beginning of pedestrian paths to provide maximum illumination within the pathways.

3.

Use low levels of lighting in multifamily residential developments to eliminate dark corners near areas of pedestrian movement.

4.

When feasible use lighting technologies with higher efficiencies such as low voltage or LED lighting.

Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

Signage Goal CD-6: Attractive and harmonious signage. Policy CD-6.1. Design multifamily residential signage to blend with the residential character of the Specific Plan.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall prepare a Signage Master Plan to ensure consistency of sign designs within the Plan Area.

2.

Multi-family residential development building signage shall be made of wood, metal, stone, or other natural or simulated natural material. Signs may be painted, stained, or tinted. Plastic signs are not permitted.

3.

Signs shall be consistent with the architecture of the building and in scale with the property and building.

4.

Illumination of signs shall be by focused lighting that is not directly visible from locations outside the Plan Area.

5.

Internally lit and flashing or animated signs shall not be used in exterior locations.

Policy CD-6.2. Entry signage shall be distinctive and attractive. 1.

Monument or wall signs shall be used to identify the Plan Area and Plan Area neighborhoods.

2.

Provide ornamental monuments/decorative landscape wall to provide a distinguishing entry to the Plan Area at the intersection of Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive.

3.

Provide complementary ornamental monuments at the intersection of Cielo Vista Drive and three collector entry roads.

4.

Entry signs shall be constructed of durable materials, such as stone, textured concrete, heavy timber, or metal.

5.

Entry sign materials shall be non-reflective.

6.

Entry signs shall generally be no taller than four feet, although some related features such as corner towers, arbors, etc. may exceed this height.

7.

Painted surfaces shall utilize graffiti-resistant paint.

8.

A consistent design theme should be carried throughout the entry signs, with distinctive features to set apart each sign and create unique identities for each neighborhood.

9.

Water features shall use re-circulated water and be designed to minimize water loss from evaporation or splashing.

Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

A RTICLE 5.0 R ESOURCE M ANAGEMENT G OALS AND P OLICIES Biological Resource Policies Goal RM-1: Promote conservation of natural resources. Policy RM-1.1. Minimize the impact to special status species and their habitat in accordance with federal and state regulatory requirements.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall obtain Incidental Take Authorization from the USFWS (if

required) by preparing an acceptable Habitat Conservation Plan that identifies adequate measures to avoid, minimize or compensate for the loss of protected species and habitat. Mitigation may occur off-site, on-site, through payment of in-lieu fees, or any combination as approved by USFWS. [LEED ND SLL Credit 9] Mitigation is intended to occur off-site, and land may be acquired for purposes of species protection through a conservation easement, the details of which would be finalized in consultation with the USFWS as part of the Habitat Conservation Process. To the extent on-site mitigation is proposed, it may include provisions required by USFWS, including without limitation, the following: ƒ

A biological conservation easement of not less than a 100-meter radius shall be provided around the former stock pond. No development other than stormwater runoff and filtering, interpretive signage, fencing and unpaved trails shall take place within the easement. Fencing shall be suitable for protection of the aquatic resources.

ƒ

Use fencing and low level lighting adjacent to the biological conservation area, with the type of fencing being suitable to allow the passage of animals while still marking the area to be protected from intrusion, and the lighting screened to prevent direct light penetration into the area.

2.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall comply with mitigation measures required by the State Department of Fish and Game regarding the protection of state listed special status species and their habitat.

Policy RM-1.2. Allow potential for localized grading in the on-site habitat conservation area.

Policy Implementation 1.

If a habitat set-aside area is retained on-site, localized grading is allowed within the 100meter radius around the existing dry pond for the purposes of expanding storm water storage within the Plan Area. The amount of grading will be based on the need to collect and store water. This effort is intended to expand the storm water collection and percolation area, but may also enhance habitat, and should be designed with the intent to achieve both purposes.

2.

Use vegetated areas within the 100-meter radius area for natural filtration. Prepare a grading plan for the planned habitat set-aside area, if retained on-site, in accordance with the approved Habitat Conservation Plan and with appropriate agency approvals and/or permits prior to grading activities within this area.

3.

If all CTS mitigation is conducted outside the Plan Area, grading may occur as needed within the area identified for habitat conservation.

Policy RM-1.3. Minimize adverse changes to natural habitats.

Policy Implementation 1.

Within the Plan Area avoid planting species listed in the California Invasive Plant Council’s inventory as having a Moderate or High rating and affecting the Central West region, or included in the Exotic Pest Plant Council’s “Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern in California” list. [LEED Homes SS-2]

2.

Lots and roads shall be arranged to minimize the use of retaining walls. Taper the edge of cut and fill slopes to blend with existing topography or contours on adjacent development or roadways.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

Geologic Protection Policies Goal RM-2: Provide a safe and habitable community. Policy RM-2.1. Protect habitats and structures in the vicinity of known fault zones.

Policy Implementation 1.

Ensure a 135-foot “building exclusion zone” in all plan sets as illustrated in the Constraints Diagram (Figure 7).

2.

Limit future use of the “building exclusion zone” to non-habitable improvements (e.g. roadway improvements, park, open space, buffers, trails, etc.).

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

Soil Protection Policies Goal RM-3: Soil conservation. Policy RM-3.1. Minimize soil erosion.

Policy Implementation 1.

Erosion Control Plans shall be submitted to the County Public Works Department for review and approval when submitting subdivision improvement plans. Specific erosion control measures shall be included to protect drainage courses and the on-site habitat conservation area (should it be preserved on-site) from eroded soils and debris during construction. Soil exposed during grading that is no longer under active construction shall be stabilized.

2.

Slope stabilization and erosion control (during both the construction and postconstruction phases) shall only utilize mesh products that are made of biodegradable natural fiber materials. Plastic materials (such as silt fencing) may only be used if they are relatively solid (cannot entrap wildlife) and are removed from the site following use.

Water Quality Protection Policies Goal RM-4: Adequate disposal, retention and percolation of storm water and protection of storm water quality. Policy RM-4.1. Construct a stormwater collection and disposal system that retains and encourages percolation of stormwater generated within the Plan Area to pre-development levels.

Policy RM-4.2. Allow alternative conceptual grading and drainage plans that direct drainage to shared retention basins with the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, only if the Gavilan College Campus design and construction plans include retention basins with the capacity and water quality treatment measures to accommodate the Fairview Corners Plan Area, or that portion of the Plan Area to be served, so that the Plan Area’s stormwater discharge off-site is maintained at pre-development levels.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall prepare a storm drainage master plan in accordance with San Benito County design standards, which identifies backbone collection and retention infrastructure needed to serve development within the Plan Area, in accordance with the timing requirements set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. Any improvement plans shall conform to the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan and shall incorporate use of structural and institutional best management practices and low impact development designs for storm water quality management and to minimize soil erosion for the Plan Area and adjacent properties outside the Plan Area. The improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department in accordance with the timing set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. The master developer shall finance and construct the backbone storm drainage collection and retention infrastructure. [LEED ND GIB Credit 8]

2.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall design, finance, and construct subdivision storm drainage collection improvements, which tie into the backbone

storm

drainage

infrastructure

system.

Stormwater

collection

system

improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department in accordance with the timing set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. 3.

Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Low Impact Development (LID) principles when designing storm water runoff facilities.

Policy RM-4.3. Utilize best management practices and low impact development designs to minimize surface water quality degradation from discharge of storm drainage.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall prepare and submit a storm water pollution prevention program [SWPPP] application to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the County Public Works Department to secure a NPDES General Construction Permit for the entire Plan Area. The master developer and/or individual developer shall incorporate the structural and institutional best management practices and low impact development

designs identified in the storm water management plan in improvement plans for their respective projects. The County Public Works Department must review these plans to ensure inclusion of the practices prior to approval of a grading or building permit for that phase. [GIB Prerequisite 4; Homes SS-4] 2.

Prior to construction, contractors and their personnel shall be trained in appropriate best management practices to ensure water quality is protected. Those construction practices shall include erosion control, sediment transfer reduction, and dust control measures. A construction manager familiar with NPDES permit requirements must monitor the construction activities to protect water quality. This provision shall be included as a note on construction improvement plans. [GIB Prerequisite 4; Homes SS-4]

3.

No chemical pesticides shall be utilized in the maintenance of common landscaped areas, open space areas, or parks. Fertilizers shall be applied sparingly, and shall be derived from natural sources, such as fish emulsion or manure.

4.

The master developer shall cooperate with the County to create a public education program for future residents to increase their understanding of water quality protection, which should include but not be limited to:

5.

ƒ

Hazardous material use controls

ƒ

Hazardous material exposure controls

ƒ

Hazardous material disposal and recycling

Hazardous materials could consist of cleaning products, paint, oil, fertilizers, weed killers etc. The education materials shall encourage the use of alternative methods, and prohibit the dumping of hazardous materials in open space areas or the storm drain system. Further, the master developer shall require that all storm drain catch basins are labeled to discourage illegal dumping of hazardous materials.

6.

Where feasible, direct roof drainage to pervious surfaces for infiltration.

7.

On larger lots (12,000 square feet or above) consider the capture of roof drainage for reuse as irrigation water.

8.

To the extent feasible, direct stormwater run-off to percolation swale and basin areas rather than directing stormwater to storm drain pipes.

9.

Use biotreatment (natural pollutant filtering) where stormwater runs off paved surfaces onto pervious surfaces.

10.

Utilize sediment traps, evaporation basins, flow dissipaters, and other methods to reduce the volume and speed of stormwater run-off and reduce pollutant loads. [LEED ND GIB Credit 8]

Related Policies are contained in Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Water Conservation Policies Goal RM-5: Promote conservation of water resources. Policy RM-5.1. Reduce potable water consumption.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall prepare a detailed master recycled water distribution plan that identifies backbone collection infrastructure needed to serve front yards of residential lots, public parks, landscape strips, monument locations, and other open space/landscape areas within the Plan Area. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1]

2.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall comply with the San Benito County Water Conservation Plan in the design of landscape material, irrigation systems, and calculating the allowable water budget for landscape irrigation in the Plan Area. Additional water conservation methods should also be considered for implementation within the Plan Area, such as cisterns to catch and store runoff water for landscape irrigation, the use of native vegetation in landscape materials, and the use of ultra low-flow or dual flush toilets, shower heads and faucets in all residential units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1]

Policy RM-5.2. Facilitate water conservation.

Policy Implementation 1.

In public spaces and residential front yards less than one acre, the master developer and individual developer(s) shall install drought-tolerant landscaping prior to delivery of residential dwelling units to buyers. On lots of one acre or larger, perimeter droughttolerant planting shall be provided along the street frontage. Homeowners shall maintain yards in weed-free condition and assure that soil erosion is prevented.

2.

Use drought-tolerant landscaping for at least 50 percent of planted yard area, and limit turf to areas of active use, and in no case more than 50 percent of planted yard area. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1; Homes WE-2]

3.

Utilize only drought-tolerant landscaping along roads and in public landscaped areas. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1; Homes WE-2]

4.

Design irrigation systems to minimize water use, including installation of ground moisture sensor controls, and temporary irrigation systems for drought tolerant plantings to be removed, where feasible, when plantings are established. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4]

5.

Equip dwellings with low water use washing machines and dishwashers, and dual-flush toilets. [LEED Homes EA-9]

6.

Pre-plumb dwellings to accommodate gray water and rainwater recovery and irrigation systems, if feasible and legally permissible. [LEED Homes SS-4; Homes WE-2]

7.

Multi-family residential buildings shall include a roof rainwater recovery system for storing irrigation water.

8.

Use recycled water for park, streetscape, single-family residential front yard and multifamily residential common area irrigation, if available adjacent to the Plan Area at time of construction and permitted under applicable law and regulations. Encourage pre-plumbing to facilitate conversion to recycled water if recycled water is not available at the time of development, but will become available in the future. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes WE1]

Related Policies are contained in Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Air Quality Protection Policies Goal RM-6: Reduced Air Emissions. Policy RM-6.1. Minimize impacts to air quality.

Policy Implementation 1.

The use of wood-burning stoves is prohibited; only natural gas stoves are permitted. Require stoves or fireplaces to exceed EPA emissions reductions regulations.

2.

Prior to the start of construction, the project contractor shall provide a construction dust mitigation plan. The plan shall specify the methods of dust control that would be utilized, demonstrate the availability of needed equipment and personnel, use reclaimed water for dust control, and identify a responsible individual who, if needed, can authorize implementation of additional measures. The plan requirements shall be included on all construction documents and plans, where appropriate. The construction dust mitigation plan shall, at a minimum, include the following measures: ƒ

Limit grading activity to a maximum of 2.2 acres daily. As more detailed construction information becomes available, emissions from grading activities could be reassessed to determine if the area of grading could be increased. Such an assessment would be completed using appropriate assumptions and mitigation measures.

ƒ

Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods. Active areas adjacent to existing businesses should be kept damp at all times. If necessary, during windy periods, watering is to occur on all days of the week regardless of on-site activities.

ƒ

Cover soil or maintain at least two feet of freeboard on all hauling trucks.

ƒ

Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.

ƒ

Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles.

ƒ

Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.

ƒ

Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.

ƒ

Suspend excavation and grading activity when hourly-average winds exceed 15 mph and visible dust clouds cannot be contained within the site.

3.

The developer shall reduce Nitrogen Oxide (NOX) exhaust and particulate matter emissions by implementing one of the following measures prior to the start of construction: ƒ

Provide a plan, acceptable by the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, demonstrating that the heavy-duty (> 50 horsepower) off-road vehicles and equipment to be used in the construction project, including owned, leased and subcontractor vehicles, will achieve a project wide fleet-average 20 percent NOX reduction and 45 percent particulate reduction compared to the most recent California Air Resources Board fleet average for the time of construction; or

ƒ

The developer shall provide a plan, acceptable by the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, that all off-road construction vehicles/equipment greater than 50 horsepower that will be used on site for more than one week shall: 1) be manufactured during or after 1996, 2) shall meet the NOX emissions standard of 6.9 grams per brake horsepower hour, and 3) shall be equipped with diesel particulate matter filters.

ƒ

The contractors shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g. compressors).

ƒ

Signs at the construction site shall be clearly visible to advise that that diesel equipment standing idle for more than five minutes shall be turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate or other bulk materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks may keep their engines running continuously if onsite and staged away from residential areas.

ƒ

Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions.

ƒ

Stage large diesel powered equipment at least 200 feet from any active land uses (e.g., residences).

4.

Divert a minimum of 25 percent of total materials taken off the construction site from landfills or incinerators. [LEED Homes MR-3]

Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6), Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2), and Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Cultural Resources Protection Policies Goal RM-7: Respectful treatment of cultural resources. Policy RM-7.1. Protect archaeological resources.

Policy Implementation 1.

If midden soil, cultural features or potentially significant cultural resources, or human remains are discovered during construction, work shall be halted within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find until a qualified professional archaeologist can evaluate the find. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated and implemented.

2.

If cultural resources are located, mitigation shall include, at a minimum, recovery of significant cultural materials and professional analysis based on the types and quantities of those materials recovered, which might include analysis of lithic artifacts and materials, radiocarbon dating of shell fragments, bead analysis, faunal analysis, etc. Cultural materials recovered during monitoring and/or mitigation, other than those directly associated with Native American burials, should be curated in the public domain at a suitable research facility.

3.

If human remains are found during construction there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of San Benito County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendent (MLD) from the deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner, consistent with Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.

Energy Conservation Policies Goal RM-8: An environmentally sustainable community. Policy RM-8.1. Facilitate alternative energy sources.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall pre-plumb/prewire at least one-third of units for solar power and shall offer solar power as an option on all units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10]

2.

If the Gavilan College San Benito Campus develops a community geothermal heat pump energy or heating system, extension of the system into the Plan Area shall be considered. [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10]

Policy RM-8.2. Facilitate energy conservation through design techniques.

Policy Implementation 1.

Design houses to facilitate passive solar heating during the winter, and use cool roofs and thermal window coverings to reduce solar heat gain during the summer.

2.

Design lots and houses to maximize rooftop solar energy output potential. Where feasible, roof pitches and roof orientation should be designed to maximize solar exposure to rooftop energy panels (minimum 300 square feet of unobstructed roof area facing within 30 degrees of south). [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10]

3.

The developer shall make photovoltaic electrical systems and solar hot water or tankless water heaters available for at least one-third of dwelling units. Photovoltaic prewiring/conduit shall be installed and photovoltaic electrical systems and solar hot water or tankless water heaters shall be offered as an option on all dwelling units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10]

4.

Equip dwellings with energy efficient water heaters and heat recovery drain systems.

5.

Vegetation within 10 feet of a property line that is deemed to interfere with solar access at an adjoining lot shall be subject to height restrictions as necessary to protect such solar access.

6.

Porches shall be placed only on the east, south, or west side of houses to provide shading in the summer, and to maximize northern light exposure to the interior of houses.

7.

South and west-facing elevations shall be designed with roof overhangs that block summer sun from windows and allow penetration of winter sun.

8.

Design residences to minimize the need for artificial lighting. Provide ample windows; light towers; light wells; dormers; skylights; or other features to enhance natural lighting. [Insert new photo]

9.

To increase natural light to small residential lots, consideration should be given to the orientation of roof gables and the effect of the roof line on yard shading.

10.

Landscaping should include deciduous trees to shade south and west-facing walls in the summer and allow sunlight penetration in the winter.

11.

Provide communications wiring within all dwelling units to facilitate telecommuting.

12.

Provide programmable thermostats for all heating systems.

13.

Use heating systems with an Annual Fuel Use Efficiency (AFUE) of 95% or greater, seal all ducts, and insulate ducts in unconditioned spaces.

14.

Equip all garages/carports with a 240-volt 40-amp circuit suitable for electric vehicle charging.

15.

If multi-family uses are developed, the parking lot shall be shaded by either high albedo (reflective) roofs), roofs with solar panels, or trees that provide a minimum of 50 percent shade within 10 years of planting.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

A RTICLE 6.0 P UBLIC F ACILITIES AND S ERVICES G OALS AND P OLICIES Goal PF-1: Adequate water supply and water infrastructure to meet the demands of the Plan Area. Policy PF-1.1. Ensure sufficient water supply for the build-out of the Plan Area.

Policy Implementation 1.

The Sunnyslope County Water District has prepared a Water Supply Assessment, and determined that there is an adequate water supply to serve the Plan Area. Continue to work with SSCWD to formalize the “will serve” letter provided (see Appendix E) into a service agreement for the Plan Area.

Policy PF-1.2. Construct a water supply system that expands on and is integrated with the existing system, meets the needs of future development, and, where appropriate, subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall install water supply system improvements that tie into the backbone infrastructure system, which shall be installed by the master developer. Water supply improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Sunnyslope County Water District (SSCWD) for consistency with the approved Potable Water Master Plan and Recycled Water Master Plan, as well as related SSCWD requirements, in accordance with Article 7.0.

2.

Where water infrastructure is built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, these improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with Article 7.0, and may be set forth in greater detail in the Development Agreement.

3.

As a condition of approval for each tentative map, the developer shall grant easements for the SSCWD to maintain water supply mains to be located in the Plan Area.

Policy PF-1.3. Encourage the development of a reclaimed water distribution system, including purple piping that expands on and is integrated with the existing system, and meets the needs of future development.

1.

The following (Article ) goals, policies, 1. To the extent if is feasible for the developer to include a reclaimed a reclaimed water distribution system in the Plan Area, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for the construction of the reclaimed water distribution system, including purple piping within Plan Area streets to connect to the future recycled wastewater pipeline along Fairview Road, in phases consistent with the build-out of the Plan Area.

2.

Where the recycled wastewater distribution system or other associated improvements are built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, those improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with applicable standards and criteria, in accordance with Article 7.0 and as set forth in the Development Agreement.

Related Policies are contained in Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal PF-2: Adequate wastewater collection and treatment infrastructure to meet the demands of the Plan Area. Policy PF-2.1. Construct a wastewater collection system that expands on and is integrated with the existing system that connects to the City of Hollister’s Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant (DWTP), meets the needs of future development within the Plan Area, and, where appropriate, subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement. Policy PF-2.2. The demand for wastewater collection and treatment may be provided for by septic systems on lots not less than one acre in size. Lots less than one acre in size, and where the number of lots within the Plan Area exceeds 45, shall not be served by the use of septic systems, but shall be served by the City of Hollister DWTP.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall work with the City of Hollister to ensure a “will serve” commitment, and prepare a master wastewater collection plan that identifies backbone collection infrastructure needed to serve new development within the Plan Area. Backbone infrastructure improvement plans for development within the Plan Area must be reviewed and approved by the City of Hollister for consistency with City standards prior to or concurrent with the approval by the County Public Works Department. The timing of approval shall occur in accordance with Article 7.0.

2.

Where wastewater infrastructure is built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, those improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with Artcle 7.0 and as set forth in the Development Agreement.

3.

Individual project developer(s) shall install wastewater collection improvements within the boundaries of their individual projects that tie into the backbone wastewater collection system. Wastewater collection system improvement plans for individual projects shall be subject to review and approval of the City of Hollister for consistency with the master wastewater collection plan and related City standards prior to or concurrent with County staff approval. The timing of the required approval shall occur in accordance with Article 7.0 of any individual subdivision phase final map or commercial development within the Plan Area.

4.

As a part of the final map and improvement plans, the developer shall grant easements to allow for maintenance of wastewater collection improvements to be located in the Plan Area.

5

Septic systems provided to serve the Plan Area shall meet County design, construction and maintenance standards. Designs shall be submitted prior to approval of tentative maps.

Goal, Policies, and Policy Implementation for Storm Drainage and Water Quality Management are contained in Article 5.0, Resource Management. Goal PF-3: Adequate public utilities and communications infrastructure. Policy PF-3.1. Provide electrical, gas, and communications infrastructure that serves the needs of the Plan Area, and, where appropriate, is subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement.

Policy Implementation 1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct all new electrical, gas, and communications lines underground within the Plan Area, in coordination with the service providers. Existing lines and cables within the Plan Area shall also be placed underground. The master developer shall work with the telephone and cable service providers to provide the most technically advanced underground communications infrastructure, which will assist in promoting telecommuting and home occupations.

2. Where public utilities and communications infrastructure are built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, these improvements shall be subject to the criteria provided by the County.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal PF-4: Adequate essential public safety services to meet the needs of future residents. Policy PF-4.1. Provide and maintain public safety services that are adequate in equipment and resources to respond to emergencies and calls for service within the Plan Area, and that meet the response time of the San Benito County Sheriff and Fire Departments.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall pay the public safety impact fees to the County, consistent with the County’s fee program and/or the development agreement. Fees shall be paid prior to receiving a building permit for each residential unit, or as otherwise stipulated in the fee ordinance or Development Agreement.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3), Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6), and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal PF-5: Adequate school services to meet the needs of future residents. Policy PF-5.1. Ensure access to adequate education.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall pay the state mandated school impact fees to the County/School Districts, consistent with the state required development fees. Fees shall be paid prior to receiving a building permit for each residential unit, or as otherwise stipulated in the fee ordinance or Development Agreement.

Goal PF-6: Adequate park facilities to allow for recreation. Policy PF-6.1. Provide on-site parks and open spaces.

Policy Implementation 1.

Utilize areas adjacent to any on-site biological conservation easement to provide opportunities for enjoyment of the open space.

2.

Provide a small park/tot lot within 1,500 feet of each residential lot, if possible. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL-6]

3.

Each park/tot lot shall have trash and recycling receptacles, seating, and shade trees.

4.

To the extent feasible, pathways and trails shall be constructed with a smooth surface that is at least partly pervious to water, such as decomposed granite.

5.

Pathways will be landscaped with shade trees to facilitate use on hot days.

6.

Parks shall be open from dawn until dusk.

Policy PF-6.2. Park Maintenance shall be self-funded.

Policy Implementation 1.

Park development will be phased to occur concurrently with the development of the Plan Area, each individual neighborhood developer shall construct those components of the park system that is within its neighborhood or adjacent street frontage in accordance with the Parks Master Plan.

2.

The master developer shall establish a funding mechanism or district, such as a CSA, CSD, CFD, or some other entity, to ensure that parks remain public and long-term park maintenance is funded without use of County general funds or parks funds. If park maintenance is funded by a private homeowner’s association, the parks will be private.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal PF-7: residents.

Adequate solid waste services to meet the needs of future

Policy PF-7.1. Ensure adequate availability of solid waste disposal services and reduction, reuse, and recycling programs.

Policy Implementation 1.

As a condition of approval of any subdivision tentative or parcel map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain verification from Recology San Benito that it can provide solid waste collection services to meet demand from build out of the Plan Area. Waste collection services shall be financed through the most recently adopted fee program of Recology San Benito.

2.

It is anticipated that Recology San Benito will provide curbside recycling service to residential neighborhoods. Where curbside pick-up is not practical, conveniently located centralized recycling collection and storage facilities will be provided by the developers.

3.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall distribute, to all home buyers, the educational program provided by the service providers as part of a countywide waste reduction, reuse and recycling effort.

4.

Require all construction contracts to include construction waste reduction and recycling clauses.

5.

Require public-use recycling cans at all locations where public-use refuse cans are provided.

This side intentionally left blank.

Appendix B

Lotting Program Examples a-c

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Lotting Program Example A Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Lotting Program Example B Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

Lotting Program Example C Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

Appendix C

Open space categories

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2010

Open Space Categories (Lotting Program Example C) Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

Appendix D

U.S. Green Building council leed criteria

U.S. G REEN B UILDING C OUNCIL LEED C RITERIA Sustainable Development Strategy Sustainable communities that incorporate the principles of smart growth and green building technologies better serve the needs and desires of today's residents and the needs of future residents. Green and sustainable designs will be incorporated into the development of the Plan Area. A number of goals, policies, and policy implementation actions presented in the Specific Plan are targeted at achieving sustainable development within the Plan Area. The following table summarizes those policies that meet specific U.S. Green Building Council LEED criteria. LEED Reference

Policies

Policy Subject

ND SLL Credit 4

LU-11.2

Multi-family residential /commercial visitor bicycle racks

ND SLL Credit 7

RM-1.1

Habitat management

ND SLL Credit 9

RM-1.1

Habitat management

ND NPD Prerequisite 1

CD-3.1

Front buildings on street with parking to rear

CD-3.2

Home entryways facing street

CD-3.3

Courtyard home entryways facing street

CD-4.1

Building to street orientation

CP-5.2

Sidewalks

LU-9.1

18-foot street set-backs

CD-2.2

25 miles per hour street design

CP-5.2

Sidewalks

LU-3.1

Varied density

LU-4.1

Accessory dwelling units

LU-4.2

Accessory dwelling unit standards

LU-5.1

Affordable housing program

LU-5.3

Accessory dwellings as affordable units

LU-11.1

Commercial parking maximum 20 percent of site

ND NPD Credit 1

ND NPD Credit 4

ND NPD Credit 5

(partially met)

LU-11.2

Multi-family residential/commercial visitor bicycle racks

ND NPD Credit 9

LU-6.1

Park areas

LU-7.1

Recreation

PF-6.1

Park areas

LU-6.1

Park areas

LU-7.1

Recreation

PF-6.1

Park areas

ND NPD Credit 14

CD-1.1

Deciduous shade trees

GIB Prerequisite 4

RM-4.3

Storm water quality

ND GIB Credit 4

RM-5.1

Reduce potable water use

RM-5.2

Facilitate water conservation

ND NPD Credit 10

Low water use appliances [LEED ND GIB Credit

RM-4.2

Storm water retention and percolation

RM-8.1

Maximize rooftop solar exposure

RM-8.2

Pre-wire for solar/offer solar roofs

8] ND GIB Credit 10

Community geothermal heat ND GIB Credit 11

RM-8.1

Maximize rooftop solar exposure

RM-8.2

Pre-wire for solar/offer solar roofs Community geothermal heat

ND GIB Credit 12

RM-8.1

Maximize rooftop solar exposure

RM-8.2

Pre-wire for solar/offer solar roofs Community geothermal heat

Homes LL-6

Homes SS-2

LU-6.1

Park areas

LU-7.1

Recreation

PF-6.1

Park areas

RM-1.3

No invasive plant species

RM-5.1

Reduce potable water use

RM-5.2

Facilitate water conservation Low water use appliances

Homes SS-4

RM-4.2

Gray water and rainwater catchment

RM-5.2

Facilitate water conservation Low water use appliances

Homes WE-1

RM-5.1

Reduce potable water use

RM-5.2

Facilitate water conservation Low water use appliances

Homes WE-2

RM-5.2

Facilitate water conservation Low water use appliances

Homes EA-9

RM-5.2

Facilitate water conservation Low water use appliances

Homes EA-10

RM-8.1

Maximize rooftop solar exposure

RM-8.2

Pre-wire for solar/offer solar roofs Community geothermal heat

Note:

Criteria taken from 2009 LEED ND and 2008 (rev 2010) LEED for Homes; buildings will qualify for additional LEED criteria (not reflected in the Specific Plan policies) through compliance with California Title 24 energy code requirements. Acronyms used: EA – Energy and Atmosphere GIB – Green Infrastructure and Buildings LEED – Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LL – Locations and Linkages ND – Neighborhood Development NPD – Neighborhood Patterns and Design SLL – Smart Locations and Linkages SS – Sustainable Sites WE – Water Efficiency

Appendix E

sscwd intent to serve letter

Appendix F

draft capital improvements cost study

p u b l i c re v i e w d r a f t

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan A

P l a n n e d

C o m m u n i t y

O C T O B E R

2 0 1 1

public revi ew draft

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan a planned community

PREPARED FOR

San Benito County Planning and Building Inspection Services 3224 Southside Road Hollister, CA 95023 Tel 831.637.5313

PREPARED BY

EMC Planning Group Inc. 301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C Monterey, CA 93940 Tel 831.649.1799 Fax 831.649.8399 [email protected] www.emcplanning.com

October 2011

Prepared for Consideration by: San Benito County, California Board of Supervisors Margie Barrios District 1 Anthony Botelho District 2 Robert Rivas District 3 Jerry Muenzer District 4 Jaime De La Cruz District 5 Planning Commission Jeff Culler District 1 Daniel DeVries District 2 Richard Vasquez District 3 Ray Pierce District 4 Ignacio Velazquez District 5 Planning Staff Gary Armstrong Director Byron Turner Assistant Director Lissette Knight Senior Planner Ann Dolmage Assistant Planner

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

administrative draft fairview corners residential specific plan

table of Contents

Article 1.0 Introduction................................................................ 1-1 Section 1.1

Content and Purpose......................................................................... 1-1

Section 1.2

Project Setting (Location)............................................................... 1-3

Section 1.3

Objectives........................................................................................... 1-8

Section 1.4

Relationship of the Specific Plan to the San Benito County General Plan and Zoning Code, and Hollister General Plan....1-11

Section 1.5

Consistency of the Specific Plan with the San Benito County and City of Hollister General Plans.............................................1-19

Article 2.0 Land Use Plan and Development Standards............. 2-1 Section 2.1

Land Use Objectives........................................................................... 2-1

Section 2.2

Land Use Concept.............................................................................. 2-1

Section 2.3

Land Use Goals and Policies............................................................. 2-8

Section 2.4

Development Standards...................................................................2-22

Article 3.0 Circulation Plan.......................................................... 3-1 Section 3.1

Circulation Plan Objectives............................................................ 3-1

Section 3.2

Existing Roadways.............................................................................. 3-1

Section 3.3

Road Circulation . ........................................................................... 3-2

Section 3.4

Bicycle and Pedestrian Circulation...............................................3-10

Section 3.5

Public Transit...................................................................................3-19

Section 3.6

Circulation Plan Goals and Policies..............................................3-19

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Article 4.0 Community Design........................................................ 4-1 Section 4.1

Design Objectives.............................................................................. 4-1

Section 4.2

Community Design Goals and Policies............................................ 4-1

Article 5.0 Resource Management................................................. 5-1 Section 5.1

Resource Conservation and Management Objectives.................... 5-1

Section 5.2

Existing Conditions ......................................................................... 5-1

Section 5.3

Resource Management Goals and Policies...................................... 5-6

Article 6.0 Public Facilities and Services..................................... 6-1 Section 6.1

Public Facilities and Services Objectives........................................ 6-1

Section 6.2

Water, Wastewater, and Drainage Infrastructure Plan............... 6-1

Section 6.3

Public Utilities and Communications.............................................6-10

Section 6.4

Public Safety, Schools, Parks, and Solid Waste Collection........6-19

Section 6.5

Public Facilities and Services Goals and Policies.........................6-21

Article 7.0 Plan Implementation................................................... 7-1 Section 7.1

Plan Administration.......................................................................... 7-1

Section 7.2

Plan Responsibilities and Obligations............................................7-11

APPENDICES Appendix A

Goals and Policy Implementation

Appendix B

Lotting Program Examples A-C

Appendix C

Open Space Categories

Appendix D

U.S. Green Building Council LEED Criteria

Appendix E

SSCWD Intent to Serve Letter

Appendix F

Draft Capital Improvements Cost Study

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Figures Figure 1

Regional Location...........................................................................1-3

Figure 2

Specific Plan Area Vicinity.............................................................1-4

Figure 3

Parcel Map.......................................................................................1-5

Figure 4 Specific Plan Area Aerial Photograph..........................................1-7 Figure 5

Planning Areas..............................................................................1-13

Figure 6

San Benito County Land Use Designations................................1-17

Figure 7

Constraints Diagram......................................................................2-3

Figure 8

Land Use Diagram...........................................................................2-5

Figure 9

Open Space Diagram........................................................................2-9

Figure 10

Plan Area Context with Adjoining Open Space.........................2-11

Figure 11

Circulation Diagram......................................................................3-3

Figure 12

Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Sections...................3-5

Figure 13

Emergency Vehicle Access Route...................................................3-7

Figure 14

Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Road Section.......3-11

Figure 15

Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections..........................................................................................3-13

Figure 16

Traffic Calming Diagram..............................................................3-15

Figure 17

Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Plan.................................3-17

Figure 18

SSCWD Service Area and SOI Boundaries....................................6-3

Figure 19

Potable Water System Layout.........................................................6-5

Figure 20

Future Recycled Wastewater Route..............................................6-7

Figure 21

Wastewater Conveyance Alternatives.........................................6-11

Figure 22

Existing Drainage..........................................................................6-13

Figure 23

Conceptual Drainage Plan...........................................................6-15

Figure 24

Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram..............................................6-17

Figure 25

Conceptual Development Phasing plan......................................7-12

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Tables Table 1

Area of Special Study Existing and Proposed San Benito County Land Use and Zoning Designation ...............................1-19

Table 2

Land Use Summary...........................................................................2-2

Table 3

Residential Dwelling Units and Lot Sizes...................................2-8

Table 4

Minimum Residential Lot Size.....................................................2-22

Table 5

Permitted and Conditional Land Uses.......................................2-23

Table 6

Accessory Dwelling Standards....................................................2-24

Table 7

Lot Coverage.................................................................................2-24

Table 8

Minimum Yard Space......................................................................2-24

Table 9

Compact Development Setbacks...................................................2-25

Table 10

Standard Development Setbacks..................................................2-25

Table 11

Large Lot Development Setbacks.................................................2-25

Table 12

Multifamily Development Setbacks.............................................2-26

Table 13

Special Setback Requirements and Exceptions...........................2-26

Table 14

Height Limits.................................................................................2-26

Table 15

Height Limits at Plan Area Boundaries......................................2-27

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

TERMS and Acronyms AFUE Annual Fuel Use Efficiency AFY/du acre-feet per year/dwelling unit AHO Affordable Housing Ordinance AHP Affordable Housing Program BMPs Best Management Practices CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CFD Community Facilities District “Mello-Roos” COG San Benito County Council of Governments CSA Community Services Area CSD Community Services District CFD Community Facilities District CTS California Tiger Salamander DA Development Agreement du/ac dwelling unit/acre DWTP Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant EA Energy and Atmosphere EIR Environmental Impact Report EMS Emergency Medical Services EVA Emergency Vehicle Access FVC LLC Fairview Corners LLC FVC-SP

Fairview Corners-Specific Plan

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

GHAD Geologic Hazards Abatement District GIB

Green Infrastructure and Buildings

GMO

Growth Management Ordinance

GPA General Plan Amendment GPD/du gallons per day/dwelling unit HFD City of Hollister Fire Department HOA Homeowners’ Association HSD Hollister School District HUD U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development LAFCO Local Agency Formation Commission LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LID Low Impact Development LL Locations and Linkages LLD Landscape and Lighting District MLD Most Likely Descendent MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MOU Memorandum of Understanding ND Neighborhood Development NOX Nitrogen Oxide NPD Neighborhood Patterns and Design NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System PG&E Pacific Gas & Electric

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Plan Area Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Area PM10 Particles Measuring 10µm or less PRGI Potential Residential Growth Increase Designation RWQCB

Regional Water Quality Control Board

SBC Southwestern Bell Corporation SBCFD San Benito County Fire Department SBCWD San Benito County Water District SBHSD San Benito High School District sf square feet SJKF San Joaquin Kit Fox SLL Smart Locations and Linkages SOI Sphere of Influence Specific Plan Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan SS Sustainable Sites SSCWD Sunnyslope County Water District SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGBC U.S. Green Building Council WE Water Efficiency WSA Water Supply Assessment

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

This side intentionally left blank.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

F Article 1.0

Introduction Article 1.0 provides the context for the Specific Plan by describing the purpose, historical background of the East Fairview Area of Special Study, and relationship to the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus. It includes the location and context of the parcels, as well as the physical characteristics and surrounding land uses. The relationship and the conformance of Specific Plan with the San Benito County General Plan policies and Zoning Code is discussed. A summary of the content of the Specific Plan and preparation process is also provided.

Introduction

F Article 1.0

Introduction

The Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan (“Specific Plan” or “Plan”) provides the land use planning and regulatory guidance for the development of approximately 60-acres of unincorporated land (“Plan Area”) located southeast of the City of Hollister in unincorporated San Benito County. In 1989, the Plan Area was designated by the San Benito County Board of Supervisors and in the County’s General Plan as an “Area of Special Study” (with an anticipated density of approximately four dwelling units per acre), which is an area where growth is encouraged to occur upon completion and adoption of a “Specific Plan” pursuant to California Government code Section 64550.

Section 1.1 Content and Purpose The purpose of this Specific Plan is to create a flexible planned residential community, with a variety of residential lot and unit sizes, and the possibility for complementary accessory uses (e.g. recreational, open space, secondary units, etc). Commercial uses are not presently contemplated or allowed under this Specific Plan, but would not be inconsistent with its purpose and intent. However, an amendment to



the Specific Plan would be required in order to provide for the types of commercial uses and applicable standards.

State Law Requirements California law requires cities and counties to prepare a general plan, which describes what the city or county (and its residents) desire for their community, both now and in the future. General plans are required to address land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety. Specific plans provide comprehensive guidelines for a more defined and localized area within a jurisdiction’s boundaries. They offer more specific information and guidance than what is available in a general plan. This Specific Plan has been prepared consistent with the specific plan content requirements identified in California Government Code Section 65451 as follows: (a) A specific plan shall include a text and a diagram or diagrams which specify all of the following in detail: (1) The distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the specific plan.

article 1.0 introduction

1-

F Introduction

(2) The proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the specific plan and needed to support the land uses described in the specific plan.

Specific Plan, specific development standards, the permitted and conditionally permitted uses, and other development regulations are provided.

(3) Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable.

Goals, Policies, and Policy Implementation

(4) A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out paragraphs (1), (2), and (3). (b) The specific plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the specific plan to the general plan. A statement of the Specific Plan’s relationship to the San Benito County General Plan is described below, and an evaluation of the Specific Plan’s consistency with general plan goals is contained in Section 1.5.

Organization The Specific Plan is organized into seven Articles and six Appendices.

How to Use this Plan The Specific Plan is arranged with sets of goals, policies, and policy implementation actions addressing land use, circulation, design, natural resources, and public facilities and services. As part of the

1-

In context with the aforementioned goals, policies and implementation actions, these development regulations shall comprise the Fairview Corners— Specific Plan (FVC-SP) zoning.

Goals provide the context for the specific policies and policy implementation discussed in the Specific Plan. A policy is a statement that provides direction to guide decision-making about future development within the Plan Area. Policy Implementation is a specific action by a specific party or parties that must be taken to implement the policy direction within the Specific Plan. Each of the five major articles in the Specific Plan (Land Use Plan and Development Standards, Circulation Plan, Community Design, Resource Management, and Public Facilities and Services) contain goals, policies, and policy implementation, which are summarized in Appendix A for ease of access. The implementation actions often refer to a “master developer” and/or “individual neighborhood developer(s).” In general, the master developer would be responsible for designing, financing, and constructing the major backbone infrastructure needed to support development throughout the Plan Area. The master developer may also construct all or portions of the Plan Area. Individual developers may purchase land within the Plan Area boundary from the master developer and construct some or all of the individual development in-lieu of the master developer.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Green Building Guidelines This Specific Plan includes green building design guidelines, which are meant to function as guiding framework for development of the Plan Area, to the extent feasible. The master developer and/or the individual neighborhood developer(s) of each phase of development are strongly encouraged to work with County staff in developing and implementing these, and other, feasible guidelines for sustainable development within the Plan Area. Policies meeting specific U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) criteria are noted with bracketed references following the policy implementation. These are summarized in Appendix D. It should be recognized that LEED criteria may evolve over time, and the cited criteria are not meant to be locked in place. [Insert logo]

Article 7.0 addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state, County and local agency standards and requirements on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 also summarizes the phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements, and the application of the Plan Area Affordable Housing Program.

Section 1.2 Project Setting (Location) The Plan Area is located southeast of the City of Hollister, in unincorporated San Benito County, north of Airline Highway (State Route 25) and east of Fairview Road. Figure 1, Regional Location, presents the regional location of the Plan Area. The property is bounded by rural residential ranchettes to the north; rural residential ranchettes, an organic farm and undeveloped open grassland to the east; the 78-acre parcel of vacant land owned by the Gavilan Joint Community College District (hereafter Gavilan College District) to the south (planned for a future community college campus); and the Figure 1

Regional Location

Plan Implementation Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the administration of the Specific Plan, describing the initial approvals and entitlements necessary to authorize the Specific Plan, as well as the application of subsequent entitlements on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 further describes the roles, responsibilities and obligations of the County and Developers for implementing the Specific Plan, involving compliance with the initial and subsequent entitlements. The Specific Plan land use goals, policies and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area.



article 1.0 introduction

1-

F Introduction

Article 2.0, Land Use Plan and Development Standards, contains a series of tables that describe acceptable land uses and development intensities.

F Introduction

existing Cielo Vista single-family residential subdivision to the west across Fairview Road. Ridgemark Golf and Country Club is located to the south of the Plan Area on the other side of Airline Highway. Figure 2, Specific Plan Area Vicinity, presents the Plan Area boundary in relationship to the vicinity land and road network, and in context to the East Fairview Area of Special Study. Figure 2

Specific Plan Area Vicinity View west on Cielo Vista Dr. at entrance to Cielo Vista development

View west on Harbern Way at entrance to rural residential development

According to the San Benito County Housing Element Update 2007-2014, the County has 0.7 jobs for each housing unit, well below the desired 1.5:1 ratio. Housing growth has outpaced job growth in San Benito County for the past 30 years, with the percent of out-of-County jobs increasing from 24 percent in 1980 to 49 percent by 2000.

Physical Characteristics

View south on Ridgemark Dr. at entrance to Ridgemark Country Club

1-

The Plan Area is approximately 60-acres and includes one parcel of land, Assessor’s parcel 025190-068. Figure 3, Parcel Map, presents the boundary of the Plan Area. The Plan Area is currently undeveloped land that is used to cultivate barley.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Area Boundary

Gavilan Community College San Benito Campus

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright Civil Engineers & Surveyors, Inc. 2008

Figure 3

Parcel Map Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

F Introduction This side intentionally left blank.

1-

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

View east across Plan Area & water pump station along northern boundary

View southeast across Plan Area from northern boundary

Fairview Corners Specific Plan This Specific Plan, as required by County Resolution No. 89-92, governs the Plan Area. Since the residential development described within the Specific Plan requires a County General Plan Amendment



(GPA), this Specific Plan constitutes that amendment. The development regulations contained or otherwise referenced in the Specific Plan establish the FVC-SP zoning regulations, which constitute the zoning for the Plan Area. This Plan will be adopted by ordinance, and any future amendments thereto will also need to be adopted by ordinance. The Plan Area is located within the designated “Area of Special Study”. This is an interim designation pending completion and adoption of a specific plan pursuant to California Government Code Section 65450. The Specific Plan ensures consistency between the Plan Area development and the General Plan (as required by Government Code sections 65450 through 65457), and will implement the goals and policies of the General Plan. This Specific Plan establishes the uses, and the development and design standards and other regulations for the Plan Area. Upon adoption of the Specific Plan, the Plan Area shall be designated under the General Plan as The Fairview Corners Specific Plan Area and the Fairview Corners—Specific Plan (FVC-SP) zoning regulations shall govern development of the Plan Area. To the extent any standard or other provision in the Specific Plan conflicts with the County Code, including the County’s Zoning Ordinance, the standard or zoning provision set forth in this Specific Plan shall govern development of the Plan Area. However, to the extent there are any conflicts between this Specific Plan and the Fairview Corners Development Agreement, the provisions of the Development Agreement shall prevail. San Benito County has worked with Fairview Corners LLC (hereinafter FVC LLC) to prepare the Fairview Corners Development Agreement (Development Agreement) to specify owner and/or future developer obligations, rights, cooperation

article 1.0 introduction

1-

F Introduction

The land is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. There are no trails, roads or other development on the property. There is currently a fence along the western, northern and eastern edge of the property. The property has no overhead lines, poles, or underground utilities. A former stock pond is located in the northeast corner of the property. The former stock pond is dry. Figure 4, Specific Plan Area Aerial Photograph, presents an aerial view of the area with the Plan Area outlined.

F Introduction

between parties and terms of the agreement (i.e., among other things, financing of infrastructure improvements, which improvements will be made and when, cost sharing/recovery, payment of impact fees, project phasing, conditions of development, and dedication of land for public uses). San Benito County is the lead agency under CEQA and is the first agency to consider and approve applicable entitlement requests. This Specific Plan and development plans for the area reflect FVC LLC consultations with a range of public agencies and interest groups who assisted in identifying issues, needs, opportunities and solutions for developing the Plan Area. FVC LLC goal has been to design a planned community adjacent to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus that considers the needs of the community, the opportunities and constraints of the property, regulatory requirements of various agencies, and the financial viability of the residential development.

objectives used in development of the Specific Plan include the following:  Implement the intention of the San Benito County Board of Supervisors when the Board designated the Plan Area an Area of Special Study to allow higher density development.  Create a mutually supportive relationship between the Plan Area and the adjoining future Gavilan College San Benito Campus site that integrates connections, shares facilities and infrastructure, and collaborates on mitigation where appropriate.  Provide a maximum residential unit count of 220 for the creation of housing opportunities in proximity to existing utilities and infrastructure improvements.  Provide for a mix of housing types close to potential employment opportunities and students at the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus, public transportation, public facilities, and goods and services that will meet the needs of a variety of households.  Provide for an Affordable Housing Program that encourages secondary units, and collaborates, where feasible, with the Gavilan College San Benito Campus.

View southwest across Plan Area towards Cielo Vista development

Section 1.3 Objectives The Plan Area will provide, through planned cooperation with the Gavilan College District, diverse and integrated housing, expanded public access to park and open space opportunities, efficient use of land, improved jobs/housing balance, and creation of distinct neighborhood centers that bring together commercial, residential, and recreational uses. The 1-

 Provide a range of potentially mixed residential housing opportunities that will meet the needs of a variety of households with lot sizes ranging from 4,000 square feet to five acres, with a range of housing types and square footages.  Provide convenient pedestrian connections and recreational opportunities through the provision of pocket parks, open space area, corridors, and connections with the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus site.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Old Ranch Road

Approximate Plan Area Boundary

Cielo Vista Development

Harbern Way

e Hig

hway

Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

750 feet

(Stat

e Ro

ute 2

5)

Private Driveway

Airlin

0

Rural Residential

Gavilan Community College San Benito Campus

Dan Drive

Fairview Road

Cielo Vista Drive

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Google Earth 2008

Figure 4

Specific Plan Area Aerial Photograph Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

F Introduction This side intentionally left blank.

1-10

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Fairview Corners property, which has long been contemplated for development by San Benito County.

 Provide employment opportunities resulting from infrastructure improvements and residential construction.  Create a revenue neutral planned community where long term operation and maintenance costs are paid for by one or more of several potential funding options or appropriate financing district mechanisms.

Section 1.4 Relationship of the Specific Plan to the San Benito County General Plan and Zoning Code, and Hollister General Plan This section provides the context and purpose for the Specific Plan and its relationship to the San Benito County General Plan and Zoning Code and City of Hollister General Plan.

View northeast from Cielo Vista Drive & Fairview Road (Plan Area on right)

Policy 9 of the San Benito County General Plan Land Use Element also identifies the types of land uses envisioned for the property as “residential, agricultural, and open-space. Trails, parks, and public facilities, including schools and churches, may be allowed subject to use permits.” Policy 9 Implementing Action b) also called for the designation of “the area immediately east of Fairview Road, bound by State Route 25 to the south and Mansfield Road to the north, as an Area of Special Study.” The Fairview Corners property is located at the southern end of the Area of Special Study, Assessor’s parcel 025-190-068.

Area of Special Study In 1989, the San Benito County Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution No. 89-92, which identified the entire area east of Fairview Road, from Airline Highway to a point north of Hillcrest Road, as an interim Area of Special Study. The 1989 East Fairview Area of Special Study is indicated as an asterisk on the General Plan Land Use Designations, San Benito County, North County Inset (August 1993) as amended by GPA 00-21 and 00-22. Since 1989, FVC LLC has pursued development of approximately 138-acres in the East Fairview Area of Special Study, known as the



East Fairview Specific Plan After the adoption of Resolution No. 89-92, the property owners within the overall Area of Special Study prepared the 1990 East Fairview Specific Plan to guide the development within the Area of Special Study. Figure 5, Planning Areas, provides an aerial view of the Area of Special Study and identifies its three main components: the Northeast Fairview Specific Plan Area, the Central Fairview Study Area, and the Fairview Corners Specific Plan Area.

article 1.0 introduction

F Introduction

 Minimize the noise and speed of traffic to ensure the safety of residents through the design of cul-de-sacs and curvilinear streets.

1-11

F Introduction

In the early 1990s, review of the East Fairview Specific Plan was interrupted, as several property owners within the Central Study Area reconsidered their participation in the project. In 1993, the owners of the Northeast Fairview Area, encompassing about 290-acres at the north end of the Area of Special Study, began processing a specific plan for their portion of the original Area of Special Study. That area is referred to as the Santana Ranch Specific Plan.

Fairview Corners Residential In 1995, the Fairview Corners property owners also requested and received affirmation from the Board of Supervisors to continue developing and processing a specific plan for the approximately 138-acre Fairview Corners property, located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Airline Highway and Fairview Road. Following the direction of the Board and consistent with the General Plan, the applicants developed and submitted the 1999 Draft Fairview Corners Specific Plan for the development of 624 residential units, commercial uses and a middle school. With input from County staff and officials between 1999 and 2009, the application has evolved into the approximately 78-acre future Gavilan College San Benito Campus (approved by

View northeast of Plan Area from Fairview Road & Airline Highway

1-12

the Gavilan College Board of Trustees in December 2008) and the approximately 60-acre and maximum 220-lot and/or dwelling unit Fairview Corners Specific Plan Area. In recent years FVC LLC has been engaged in a collaborative process with the Gavilan Joint Community College District and San Benito County to create a community plan for development of the area. FVC LLC has prepared a number of technical studies over time. The technical studies have addressed a range of planning and development topics, including natural resources, hazards, geology and soils, archaeological resources, biological resources, hydrology and storm drainage, and traffic and circulation. In July 2008, EMC Planning Group prepared and submitted a development application for the Fairview Corners Residential Project on behalf of Fairview Corners LLC that included a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Zone Change.

Gavilan College San Benito Campus Since 2004, the Gavilan College District had been engaged in a search for property in the City of Hollister and San Benito County areas for a new full-service junior college campus to serve the area,

View south across Plan Area from northern boundary

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Fairview Road

Northeast Fairview Specific Plan Area

Central Fairview Study Area

Award Homes

Cielo Vista Development

Fairview Corners Specific Plan Area (as of 1989)

ne

rli

Ai y

Hw

Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

te

ta

(S te

u Ro )

25

2500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Google Earth 2009

Figure 5

Planning Areas Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

F Introduction This side intentionally left blank.

1-14

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

View west across future Gavilan San Benito Campus along Airline Highway

View northeast across Plan Area from Fairview Road



not limited to, infrastructure improvements such as roads, water, and sewer, habitat mitigation, and various fees associated with development. In November 2008, a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared by David J. Powers & Associates, Inc., entitled Gavilan San Benito Campus and Fairview Corners Projects, and provided environmental review for both the proposed Gavilan College San Benito Campus project and for the Fairview Corners residential development project. The EIR addressed both projects on the 138-acre property, because they have been planned concurrently and have a relationship of shared roadways, infrastructure, and mitigation requirements. The EIR addressed both the individual effect of each project, as well as the combined effect of developing the approximately 138-acre property. In December 2008, the Final EIR was certified by the Gavilan College District Board of Trustees, acting as the lead agency under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As a state agency, the Gavilan College District is exempt from the San Benito County planning process for development of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus. The Gavilan College District Board of Trustees certified the Final EIR, but has no approval authority for the Plan Area. San Benito County retains full control and review of the CEQA and entitlement process, as Lead Agency, for the approximately

Concept rendering of future Gavilan San Benito Campus

article 1.0 introduction

1-15

F Introduction

meet community needs, and prevent overcrowding at the existing Gavilan College Campus in Gilroy. In 2007, the Gavilan College District entered into a letter of intent and then a sales contract with Fairview Corners LLC. They also entered into a cost sharing agreement to prepare technical studies, prepare an environmental document, and pursue habitat mitigation. In December 2008, Gavilan College District acquired from Fairview Corners LLC approximately 78-acres of the southern portion of the 138-acre Fairview Corners Property. The two entities have worked together to implement a community plan for the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the Plan Area. The two entities have entered into a cost sharing agreement for habitat mitigation and provision of public services and infrastructure, both outside and within the Plan Area. This cost sharing includes, but is

F Introduction

60-acre Plan Area. The County staff reviewed and commented on the Final EIR as a responsible agency. The Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR addresses the potential environmental effects of development described in the Specific Plan, and sets forth the informational document required for compliance with CEQA.

San Benito County General Plan The proposed residential development is located in unincorporated San Benito County adjacent to the eastern edge of the City of Hollister. The San Benito County General Plan guides land use, growth, economic, transportation, infrastructure, agricultural, resource, environmental, and other decisions. The General Plan is intended to provide for orderly growth and convey the community’s values and expectations for the future. The General Plan is a comprehensive policy plan which sets forth a series of written statements (goals and objectives) defining the direction, character and composition of future land use development, and establishes guidelines (policies and actions) necessary to attain conformance with the plan. The General Plan identifies physical development of the policies necessary to protect and enhance those features and services, which contribute to the quality of life enjoyed by County citizens. The goals and policies are contained in its ten major elements, Land Use, Transportation, Housing, Open Space and Conservation, Scenic Roads and Highways, Environmental Resources and Constraints Inventory, Noise, Seismic Safety, and Safety. In March 2009 the County began the process to comprehensively update the General Plan. The Plan Area is designated Rural (R) in the San Benito County General Plan Land Use Map, with an asterisk to denote it as an Area of Special Study requiring a Specific Plan and higher density residential development. Figure 6, San Benito County 1-16

Land Use Designations, presents the San Benito County General Plan land use designations for the Plan Area. The proposed land use designation for this planned community is Fairview Corners Residential-Specific Plan (FVC-SP).

San Benito County Zoning The Plan Area is located in the “Rural” zone district. As described more fully in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses (Article 2.0, Land Use Plan and Development Standards) uses allowed by the FVC-SP zoning regulations include detached single family dwellings, duet, duplex, triplex, fourplex dwellings, multi-family dwellings, a guesthouse or other secondary residential units, not to exceed one per lot, and accessory buildings and limited complementary uses. The minimum building site area allowed by the FVC-SP zoning regulations is four-thousand (4,000) square feet. Lot sizes range from 4,000 square feet up to five acres (with a conditional use permit for single-family residential uses on lots greater than one acre) and will provide a variety of residential housing opportunities for ownership or rental units in proximity and adjacent to the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Table 1, Area of Special Study Existing and Proposed San Benito County Land Use and Zoning Designations, depicts the current and proposed land use designations and zoning for the Specific Plan Area.

City of Hollister General Plan The Hollister General Plan was adopted in 2005. The Plan Area is located outside the Hollister city limits and Sphere of Influence (SOI), but within the City’s Planning Area. Refer to Figure 6 for City limit and SOI lines in relation to the Plan Area.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

RT AP

Santana Ranch

Fairview Road

R

RR

Approximate Plan Area Boundary

Ai

Award Homes rlin

e

Hw

y

Cielo Vista Development (S ta

te

Ro

ut

e

25

Harbern Way

)

Gavilan Community College

AP

R/URB Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

(R)

Rural

(RT)

(AP)

Agricultural Productive

(R/URB)

2000 feet

Rural Transitional Rural/Urban

(RR)

Rural Residential

Hollister SOI

Hollister City Limit

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Google Earth 2009

Figure 6

San Benito County Land Use Designations Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

F Introduction This side intentionally left blank.

1-18

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Existing

Proposed

General Plan Land Use Designation

Rural (R)

Fairview Corners--Specific Plan (FVC-SP)

Zoning Designation

Rural (R)

Fairview Corners--Specific Plan (FVC-SP)

Source:

F

Area of Special Study Existing and Proposed San Benito County Land Use and Zoning Designations

Introduction

Table 1

San Benito County General Plan (1998), San Benito County Zoning Ordinance (2006), EMC Planning Group (2010)

Section 1.5 Consistency of the Specific Plan with the San Benito County and City of Hollister General Plans The Specific Plan, and the proposed land use and zoning designations therein, have been designed to be consistent with the San Benito County General Plan through the Area of Special Study, as adopted by County Resolution No. 89-92. This resolution designates the Plan Area for higher density development through preparation of a Specific Plan. The Plan Area is not within the Hollister city limits or SOI. The San Benito County and City of Hollister general plans contain planning principles that provide the basis for providing appropriate land use, infrastructure and community design principles for specific areas of the County and City, including the Plan Area. The Specific Plan helps achieve the visions established by the San Benito County and City of



Hollister general plans, by providing diversified and integrated housing, expanding public access to park and open space opportunities, making efficient use of land, improving the jobs/housing balance, and creating distinct neighborhood centers that bring together institutional, residential, and recreational uses. These principles are articulated as framework goals that provide the overall direction necessary to ensure that the County and City, as they grow, will be well-functioning and attractive, will balance the needs of residents and businesses, and will make appropriate use of natural, human and economic resources. These framework goals are elucidated and advanced by specific policies contained in the Specific Plan’s five major Articles: Land Use Plan and Development Standards; Circulation Plan; Community Design; Resource Management; Public Facilities and Services, and implemented through specific measures contained in each Article. The Specific Plan will help achieve the vision established by the policies and implementation programs of the San Benito County and City of Hollister general plans.

article 1.0 introduction

1-19

F Introduction This side intentionally left blank.

1-20

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Article 2.0

LAND USE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Article 2.0 identifies the land uses, development densities, organization of land uses, and other development regulations used to meet the objectives of the Specific Plan. The land uses proposed for the area, although flexible in use type and intensity, are principally a mix of residential units, not to exceed 220. Direction for conserving areas of open space and natural resources, as well as for providing park and recreational land uses are also presented.

LAND USE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

Article 2.0 presents the Specific Plan’s land use direction, including the Specific Plan’s emphasis on a planned residential community with opportunities for a variety of housing types and lot sizes, ample and inter-connected park and open space areas.

Section 2.1 Land Use Objectives The following land use objectives have been established for the Specific Plan: 

A planned residential community that allows up to 220 residential units and provides the opportunity for a wide range of housing types, including secondary units, multifamily, and affordable housing;



A community that is integrated with and supports the Gavilan College San Benito Campus; and



Interlinked open space and park areas to provide both active and passive recreational choices for residents and connections to adjacent areas.

Section 2.2 Land Use Concept Diverse Residential Opportunities The Specific Plan envisions a diverse planned residential community with a variety of lot sizes and housing choices. Lots may vary from 4,000 square feet up to five acres (with a conditional use permit for single-family residential lots greater than 1.5 acres). Housing may vary from apartments and small lot cluster homes to single-family estates. To further diversify housing choices within the Plan Area, accessory dwelling units are allowed on most lots, with the allowable size of the units increasing with the lot size. The proposed variety of lot sizes and square footage is intended to provide a range of housing opportunities to meet the needs of a wide array of households, including students, faculty, and campus employees of the future adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, as well as San Benito County community members and the general public. A variety of typical residential non-habitable accessory uses are allowed. Complementary uses may be developed in limited areas. The

 .      

-

L U P  D S

Article 2.0

L U P  D S

Specific Plan land use plan takes into consideration the key elements and planning principles of the San Benito County and City of Hollister general plans. Land use choices were affected by physical property constraints such as topography and fault line building exclusion zones, and the potential creation of on-site mitigation for California tiger salamander (CTS). Plan Area constraints are illustrated in Figure 7, Constraints Diagram. CTS mitigation is further described in Article 5.0, Resource Management. This Article provides the selected land use designations and distribution within the Plan Area. Figure 8, Land Use Diagram and Lotting Program Examples A-C in Appendix B, presents the conceptual land use plan for the Plan Area. The Plan Area is restricted to a maximum of 220 principal dwelling units, consistent with the Fairview Corners-Specific Plan (FVC-SP) zoning contained herein. The unit count excludes secondary dwelling units. Table 2, Land Use Summary, provides a summary of the maximum build-out of the Specific Plan. The parameters for an Affordable Housing Program that conforms to the County’s General Plan Housing Element and County Code will be included within the project Development Agreement or a separate Affordable Housing Agreement.

Table 2

Affordable Housing and Secondary Units Housing that addresses the community needs and is affordable will be provided in the Plan Area and/ or on the adjacent Gavilan College property. The Plan Area will contain affordable housing units that are achieved by building a variety of housing types, including secondary units. If affordable housing is provided on the adjacent Gavilan College property, it shall include no more than fifty percent of the required affordable housing and shall be located consistent with the Gavilan College Campus Plan and approved by the Board of Trustees. The affordable housing units shall combine both moderateand low-income units in an amount and under terms prescribed in an Affordable Housing Program. If the developer(s) wants to include a local builder preference, then a certain percentage of the units that go to local builders may be excluded from the

Land Use Summary Land Use

Approximate Acres

Residential

35.0 – 42.0

Roads

10.0

Parks

3.4

Open Space

0 – 7.0 *

* If on-site mitigation is required, the maximum open space would be approximately 7 acres.

-

       

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 7

Constraints Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

L U P  D S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Note: Refer also to the Lotting Program Examples A-C located in Appendix B.

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 8

Land Use Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

L U P  D S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Secondary units, such as apartment flats over a garage and detached accessory units on a singlefamily lot, are encouraged and shall be permitted in the Plan Area as a means to achieve affordable housing units to the extent provided for in the project’s Affordable Housing Program. Secondary and caretaker’s units are separately defined herein under Accessory Dwellings, because secondary and caretaker’s units are permitted with a full kitchen or cooking facilities. These types of units may be allowed to count for up to fifty percent of the affordable housing requirement, or as otherwise set forth in the project’s Affordable Housing Program.

Sustainability and Open Space The Specific Plan will be a leading example of sustainable planned community design, with many special features of a green community. Examples of water and energy conservation and walkability are found throughout the Specific Plan. Future development of the Plan Area will generate an additional demand for open space resources and recreational amenities in the area. The Specific Plan addresses this need through policies and implementation measures that promote sensitivity to open space

and natural resources. In addition to the residential development, open space and parks will be provided in the Plan Area. Open space set asides may include a geologic fault area, habitat conservation area, Plan Area buffers from surrounding uses, and connectivity within the Plan Area and to areas outside the Plan Area. The San Benito County Code Section 23.15.009(b) requires the provision of five acres of land for parks and recreational uses for every 1,000 new residents. The Plan Area, with a maximum residential unit count of 220, is estimated to create housing for approximately 678 residents and will be required to provide approximately 3.4-acres of parks. If the residential unit count is less than 220, the park requirement will be based on the residential unit count that is built in accordance with the calculation method required in the County Code. The intention for development of the Plan Area is to meet the County standard for parks, or otherwise meet this standard by paying fees in lieu of on-site parks. The open space and parks are made up of a system of connected setback buffers, open space for habitat, open space for a fault zone, pocket parks and retention basins for drainage as illustrated in Figure 9, Open Space Diagram. The open space areas are intended to provide recreational use and to be connected within the Plan Area by a series of trails, and further connected outside the Plan Area

 .      

-

L U P  D S

affordable housing requirements of the County, or as otherwise set forth in the project’s Affordable Housing Program.

Section 2.3 Land Use Goals and Policies

L U P  D S

to the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus as illustrated in Figure 10, Plan Area Context with Adjoining Open Space. The applicant and the Gavilan College District intend to develop a mutually acceptable Open Space and Parks Master Plan.

The following land use goals, policies, and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area. Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state and local standards and requirements, on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 also provides guidance on phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements.

Potential Lotting Programs Preliminary development plans that reflect different land use scenarios serve as examples of how the Plan Area could be developed. Three such lotting program examples are presented in Appendix B. Table 3, Residential Dwelling Units and Lot Sizes, presents a summary of the proposed number of residential dwelling units for each example and the corresponding lot sizes. These are intended as example lot programs only. The final lotting program will be determined by subsequent entitlements as approved by the County in accordance with the Specific Plan and all other applicable standards and requirements. See Article 7.0, Plan Implementation.

Table 3

Residential Dwelling Units and Lot Sizes per Appendix B

Example A

Example B

Example C

Lot Sizes

7

39

38

10,000 – 12,000 sf

18

34

54

8,000 – 10,000 sf

17

42

29

7,000 – 8,000 sf

95

25

46

6,000 – 7,000 sf

83

5

12

5,000 – 6,000 sf

220

220*

179

-

Source:

EMC Planning Group Inc. (2010)

Note:

*Example B includes 145 single-family lots and 75 multi-family dwelling units (based on 5.4 acres and 14 du/ac) for a total of 220 dwelling units.

-

       

Note: Refer also to the Lotting Program Examples A-C located in Appendix B.

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 9

Open Space Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

L U P  D S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010 (Figure 17)

Figure 10

Plan Area Context with Adjoining Open Space Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

L U P  D S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Goal LU-1: A Land Use Plan that implements the intent of San Benito County by designating land uses for this property that are appropriate to the Area of Special Study. Policy LU-1.1: Implement County Resolution No. 89-92 and the General Plan Land Use Element by planning appropriate uses for this designated Area of Special Study, including higher density residential uses than are currently allowed by existing zoning. Policy Implementation

1. The County’s adoption by resolution of a general plan amendment and the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan, and by ordinance: the “Fairview Corners Specific Plan” zoning regulations, which constitute the land use designation and zoning for the Plan Area, will implement Resolution No. 89-92 and the County General Plan Land Use Element and will regulate the future development within the Plan Area. Goal LU-2: Land use patterns responsive to the physical characteristics of the land, as well as to environmental, economic, and social concerns of the residents. Policy LU-2.1: Recognize the fault line and potential habitat constraints on the Plan Area and designate land to provide a mix of residential uses and product types, and recreational and open space amenities to meet the needs of residents. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall implement development in accordance with the land use

designations shown on the Land Use Diagram (Figure 8), and with the policies and implementation measures contained within this Specific Plan. Modifications to the land uses or zoning regulations identified in this Specific Plan are subject to the County’s discretionary review. 2. The low density and medium density residential uses offer opportunities to provide a variety of housing types. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall provide a range of housing products as described herein and/or by the separate Affordable Housing Program. 3. The master developer shall prepare an Affordable Housing Program, which shall be part of the Development Agreement or separate affordable housing agreement with the County of San Benito. The program shall specify the manner in which the Plan Area will comply with the affordable housing requirements of San Benito County and address inclusionary obligations, if any, number, location and type or level of units, timing for development of the affordable units, financing options, and specific monitoring and enforcement procedures. The location for the affordable housing units may be partially or entirely within the Plan Area and/or located off-site on the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus. The Affordable Housing Program shall also address the use of secondary units to meet the affordability obligation of the Plan Area. 4. Development of the project site shall comply with the most recent California Building Code requirements for Seismic Zone 4 to avoid or minimize potential damage from seismic ground shaking. All recommendations included in the

 .      

-

L U P  D S

Land Use Pattern Policies

L U P  D S

1989 fault investigation and in the 2008 geotechnical investigation prepared by Terrasearch, Inc. which includes a 50-foot wide building setback on each side of the fault and any updated geotechnical reports, shall be incorporated into the project design. Policy LU-2.2: Allow residential land uses in the proposed open space resource conservation area if habitat concerns are fully mitigated off-site. Policy Implementation

1

It is proposed as a part of this Plan to allow the inclusion of a habitat conservation area at the northeast corner of the Plan Area if required by the CDFG or USFWS as partial mitigation of CTS habitat, with primary mitigation off-site.

2. Optionally, the northeast corner of the Plan Area can be developed with residential uses or used as active park land if habitat concerns are fully mitigated off-site by agreement with appropriate regulatory agencies.

within the Plan Area. The lot and unit count shall exclude secondary dwelling units (which are encouraged within the Plan Area). In order to develop the Plan Area, the developer(s) shall submit one or more subdivision maps and/or parcel maps for approval by San Benito County that are in accordance with the development standards, zoning regulations, community design guidelines. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4] 2. Residential lots shall be subdivided in accordance with the lot size requirements prescribed by Table 4, Minimum Residential Lot Size. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4] 3. The purpose of lots created for other than residential uses shall be specifically described on the subdivision map. Policy LU-3.2. Allow a variety of residential uses and supporting uses

Related Policies are contained in Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3) and Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Residential Use Policies Goal LU-3: A diverse residential community. Policy LU-3.1. Allow a varied density and a variety of lot sizes, not to exceed 220 dwelling units (excluding secondary dwelling units, which are encouraged). Policy Implementation

1. When tentative and final maps are submitted to the County for review, the maximum unit count cannot exceed 220 dwelling units -

       

1. A variety of housing types shall be allowed, including single family homes, duplexes and duets, triplexes and fourplexes, courtyard and zero lot-line homes, and condominiums, townhouses, and apartments. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4] 2. Principal uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are permitted or conditionally permitted on a residential lot subject to the applicable development standards. 3. Complementary uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are permitted or conditionally permitted only on lots subdivided for the specific purpose(s) as noted on the subdivision map or other recorded document subject to the applicable development standards. Policy LU-3.3. Allow accessory uses suitable to a residential area. Policy Implementation

1. Accessory uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are permitted or conditionally permitted on a residential lot in conjunction with a principal use, subject to the applicable development standards. Policy LU-3.4. Conditionally allow additional uses if determined suitable for a residential area on a case-by-case basis and in accordance with this Specific Plan.

 .      

-

L U P  D S

Policy Implementation

Policy Implementation

L U P  D S

1. Conditional uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are allowed on a residential lot upon obtaining a conditional use permit, and subject to the applicable development standards and conditions of use permit approval. Related Policies are contained in Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Accessory Dwellings and Affordable Housing Policies Goal LU-4: Accessory dwelling units as an additional housing choice. Policy LU-4.1. Define appropriate types of accessory dwelling units (such as detached, above garage, etc.) and encourage these units as a part of or complementary to the Affordable Housing Program. Policy Implementation

1. Accessory dwelling units may be guesthouses, secondary dwelling units, or caretaker units. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

2. Accessory dwelling units shall be located on an owner-occupied residential lot. 3. A guesthouse shall be without kitchen facilities, clearly subordinate and incidental to the main building on the same lot, and not to be rented, let, or leased, whether compensation be direct or indirect. 4. A secondary dwelling unit is a full residential unit that may be occupied full time, and is clearly subordinate and incidental to the main building on the same lot. 5. A caretaker unit is a full residential unit that may be occupied full time and is specifically for the purpose of housing a caretaker for the same lot. 6. Secondary dwelling units and caretaker units may include a kitchen and up to two bedrooms, subject to square footage and other standards set forth in Table 6, Accessory Dwelling Standards. 7. Encourage accessory dwelling units to be built within the Plan Area to provide affordable housing for the community. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4] Policy LU-4.2. Establish appropriate location, size, and number of accessory dwelling units dependent on the development density and lot size. Policy Implementation

1. Accessory dwelling units shall be limited to the residential lot sizes, configurations, and square footage standards in Table 6, Accessory Dwelling Standards. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

-

       

Goal LU-5: Create affordable housing as a part of Plan Area Development. Policy LU-5.1. Affordable housing shall be governed by an Affordable Houding Program, which may be a separate Affordable Housing Agreement or incorporated into the Fairview Corners Development Agreement (Development Agreement). Affordable housing shall be located within the Plan Area and/or on the adjacent Gavilan College Campus property, with no more than fifty percent of the required units being located on the Gavilan property or as otherwise specified in the project’s Affordable Housing Program. Policy LU-5.2. Up to ten percent of the lots offered to local builders may be excluded from the County’s affordable housing requirements, or as otherwise set forth in the project’s Affordable Housing Program. Policy LU-5.3. Secondary and caretaker’s units are encouraged and allowed to meet up to fifty percent of the County’s required affordable housing for the Plan Area, or as otherwise set forth in the project’s Affordable Housing Program.

Program shall be imposed by the County as a condition of approval of the first subdivision map within the Plan Area. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4] 2. The Affordable Housing Program may include the appropriate provisions for local builder preference exclusions and use of accessory units (secondary and caretaker’s units) in meeting the county’s affordable housing regulations. 3. Implementation of the Affordable Housing Program may include financial assistance from a variety of sources, including contractual arrangements with a non-profit organization responsible for building the affordable housing.

Parks and Open Space Policies Goal LU-6: A coordinated system of open space and parks to meet the needs of the Plan Area residents. Policy LU-6.1. Provide passive and active open space on-site or off-site, or by paying in lieu fees commensurate with park requirements.

Policy Implementation

1. An Affordable Housing Program, which shall be part of the Development Agreement or separate affordable housing agreement with the County, shall specify the manner in which affordable housing obligations, under the applicable County regulations, are met by the master developer and/or individual developers within the Plan Area. The Affordable Housing

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or neighborhood developer(s) shall provide land for passive and active open space, consistent with the Specific Plan and in accordance with County standards

 .      

-

L U P  D S

2. No more than one accessory dwelling unit may be constructed on any lot.

L U P  D S

for the provision of parkland. The master developer shall conceptually design the open space and park areas, and the connections within the Plan Area by creating an Open Space and Parks Master Plan for the County’s approval. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL-6] 2. The master developer and/or neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare final designs, finance, and construct the open space and park areas within the Plan Area concurrently with the development of the neighborhood phase in which they are located (prior to the issuance of a building permit for the last home in the neighborhood phase), and in accordance with the applicable County standards, and the approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan. Parks shall be designed to facilitate surveillance by adjoining residents and police services. If the number of residential dwelling units is less than the maximum of 220, the open space and park area requirement for the Plan Area will be based on the number of residential dwelling units built, to be calculated as required under the County Code. 3. If the open space and park area standard is not met within the Plan Area and/or on the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, in lieu of the development of on-site parks and open space, the master developer shall pay fees to the County as allowed under the County Code, and in accordance with the Development Agreement.

-

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

Goal LU-7: Integrated open space and park areas. Policy LU-7.1. Interconnect open space and park areas. Policy Implementation

1. The open space and park trail system will consist of a loop configuration around or within the Plan Area that interconnects with the residential neighborhood and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus recreational facilities. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL- 6] 2. Development plans for the open space and park trail system shall be included in the Open Space and Parks Master Plan, prepared by the master developer and approved by the appropriate County staff in accordance with Article 7.0 (Plan Implementation). 3. Anticipated open space improvements and the cost for those improvements are estimated in Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, and are illustrated in Appendix C, Open Space Categories (Lotting Program Example C). Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6), Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2), and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

       

Goal LU-8: Adequate open space to allow for recreation and privacy. Policy LU-8.1. Limit lot coverage dependent on the development density and lot size.

Goal LU-9: Adequate separation between development and adjacent roads and lots. Policy LU-9.1. Set development back from roads and lots dependent on development density and lot size.

Policy Implementation

1. Lot coverage shall be determined by lot size and use in accordance with Table 7, Lot Coverage. 2. Coverage calculations shall include all principal residential and accessory buildings, including garage space. Policy LU-8.2. Provide minimum yard areas for all residences. Policy Implementation Policy Implementation

1. A minimum rear or side yard area clear of structures or driveways shall be provided as prescribed in Table 8, Minimum Yard Space (Rear or Side Yard). 2. For multi-family dwellings of nine or more units, interior common rooms may substitute for up to half of the yard requirement. 3. No additional yard area shall be required for a secondary dwelling unit, but the required yard area for the principal dwelling unit shall be provided.

1. Compact development, including attached and detached single family dwellings or two to three unit attached dwellings on lots of less than 5,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 9, Compact Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1] 2. Standard development, including detached single family dwellings or two to four unit attached dwellings on lots of 4,000 to 12,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 10, Standard Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

3. Large lot development, including detached single family dwellings or two to four unit attached dwellings on lots of greater than

 .      

-

L U P  D S

Intensity and Arrangement of Development Policies

L U P  D S

12,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 11, Large Lot Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1] 4. Apartments, condominiums, and other multifamily dwellings of five or more units shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 12, Multifamily Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1] 5. Two-story residences within 100 feet of the Fairview Road center line will require acoustical analyses, pursuant to the requirements of the San Benito County Code, and the project’s conditions of approval to ensure that interior noise levels on the second floor will be reduced to 45 dBA Ldn or lower. Building design shall include provisions for forced-air mechanical ventilation so that windows can be kept closed to control noise. The conclusions and recommendations of the specific analyses, including the description of the necessary noise control treatments, shall be submitted to the County along with the building plans for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Policy LU-9.2. Establish specific set-backs and exceptions for special circumstances. Policy Implementation

1. Additional setback requirements shall be observed in accordance with Table 13, Special Setback Requirements and Exceptions. Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

-

Goal LU-10: Protection for neighboring properties from excessive shading and visual domination. Policy LU-10.1. Limit building and fence height dependent on the type of dwelling unit and characteristics of adjacent development. Policy Implementation

1. Buildings and fences shall be limited to the maximum heights as prescribed in Table 14, Height Limits. 2. Structures near a shared boundary between the Plan Area and private property outside the Plan Area shall adhere to the additional height requirements in Table 15, Height Limits at Plan Area Boundaries. These requirements shall not apply to Plan Area boundaries within or adjacent to a road, except that any multi-family uses or other structures adjacent to the project site boundary (e.g., Fairview Road) shall adhere to the height requirements in Table 15. Policy LU-10.2. Limit the location of fences and vegetation to ensure visibility at roads. Policy Implementation

1. Vegetation deemed to block visibility of vehicles entering or exiting the road shall be subject to the visibility triangle restrictions of San Benito County Code section 25.29.013. 2. Avoid fence, wall or streetscape designs that create hiding places. 3. Fencing, vegetation, and other landscape features shall not obscure the view between the front of the house and the road. Except along Fairview Road, where a minimum six-foot

       

2. One of the required parking spaces for residences on lots under 5,000 square feet may be provided within a common parking lot within 250 feet of the residential lot it serves.

4. On lots at the intersection of a road and pedestrian path, no fence or hedge over three feet high shall be allowed in the yard adjoining the path.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

Parking Policies Goal LU-11: Adequate parking for residents and guests. Policy LU-11.1. Provide at least 1.5 automobile parking spaces for each principal dwelling unit, and at least one automobile parking space for each secondary dwelling unit.

3. One additional parking space shall be provided for each secondary dwelling unit or caretaker unit. The required parking space for secondary units on lots under 9,000 square feet may be provided within a common parking lot within 250 feet of the residential lot it serves. Policy LU-11.2. Provide parking for a variety of vehicles.

Policy Implementation

Policy Implementation

1. Residential parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with San Benito County Code section 25.31.020, except as otherwise provided herein.

1. Provide optional electric car charging pre-wiring receptacles within reach of at least one garage parking space per unit or centrally located within carports or shared parking facilities.

 .      

-

L U P  D S

sound barrier may be required, solid fences and gates over three feet high are prohibited fronting public roads. Prune front yard tree canopies to at least seven feet from the ground, and maintain plantings near walkways and building entries to under three feet tall.

L U P  D S

2. Multi-family developments shall provide secure visitor bicycle parking. Multi-family development shall provide one visitor bicycle parking space per five units. [LEED ND SLL Credit 4; LEED ND NPD Credit 5]

Section 2.4 Development Standards The Specific Plan regulates development in the subdivision of lots, arrangement of neighborhoods, and the size, placement, and appearance of structures. The Specific Plan provides development standards suitable for a wide range of housing types within a planned residential community. The development standards are set forth by lot size and dwelling type. The greatest amount of lot coverage is allowed for

multifamily dwellings and for development on small lots. Larger lots are allowed less lot coverage to maintain a more open character in the lower density developments. To allow useful recreational areas within private lots, a minimum open space area is required. The building set-backs allow flexible design of small lot and cluster housing designs, and the set back requirements increase with lot size. Building heights are limited to protect neighboring properties from the shading and visual intrusion of structures significantly taller than their own. Special height/set back requirements are included where the Plan Area shares a border with other private property. Tables 4 through 15 set forth specific standards for the development of the Plan Area.

Subdivision and Lot Size Standards Table 4

Minimum Residential Lot Size

Lots Served by Sewer

Lots Served by Public or Community Water and Individual Septic

4,000 square feet

One acre (43,560 square feet)

-

       

Land Use Standards Permitted and Conditional Land Uses

Classification Principle Uses Permitted on Residential Lots

Acceptable Uses a. Detached single family dwelling; b. Attached single, duet, duplex, triplex, fourplex dwelling; c. Other uses (prescribed by State law as required to be permitted uses in residential districts; i.e. pre-emptive uses).

Complementary Uses Permitted on Lots Designated on the Subdivision Map for a Specific Use

a. Multi-family dwelling(s); b. Common area landscaping and open space; c. Utility(ies) or service facility(ies) serving the residential development; d. Private road(s), driveway(s), parking lot(s), or trail(s).

Accessory Uses Permitted on Residential Lots

a. Guesthouse (as the term is defined in Policy LU-4.1 #3) or secondary dwelling unit, not to exceed one per lot and as further specified herein; b. Detached garage, carport, workshop, storage building, pool house, patio cover, deck, trellis, gazebo, play structure, or greenhouse; c. Non-commercial garden, orchard, or other horticulture; d. Home occupation meeting the standards of San Benito County Code section 25.29.090 et sec.; e. Personal recreational vehicle or boat storage, but not within front yards and road side yards.

Conditional Uses

a. Single-family residential lots of 1.5 acres or larger; b. Caretaker units; c. Day cares, elderly care homes, group homes and similar uses serving over six persons; d

Park, recreational community building(s) or facility(ies);

e. Non-commercial garden, orchard, or other horticulture in the absence of a principal use; f. Non-habitable accessory building in the absence of a principal use; g. Other uses (prescribed by State law) conditionally permitted in residential districts. See also Item c.

 .      

-

L U P  D S

Table 5

Table 6

Accessory Dwelling Standards

L U P  D S

Lot Size (Square Feet)

Configuration

Types Allowed

Maximum Size (Square Feet)

7,000 to 8,999

Integrated within house or detached garage

Guesthouse Secondary

400

9,000 to 12,000

Integrated or freestanding

Guesthouse Secondary

640

Larger than 12,000

Integrated or freestanding

Guesthouse Secondary

Guesthouse: 640

One acre or larger

Integrated or freestanding

Guesthouse Secondary Caretaker

Secondary or Caretaker: 800

Standards for Intensity and Arrangement of Development Table 7

Lot Coverage Lot Size (Square Feet)

Primary Use

Maximum Building Coverage

Condominiums, apartments, attached houses

Any

55 percent

Detached House

Less than 5,000

55 percent

Detached House

5,000 to 7,999

50 percent

Detached House

8,000 to 12,000

40 percent

Detached House

Greater than 12,000

30 percent

Table 8

Minimum Yard Space (Rear or Side Yard)

Single Family Dwelling

Multi-Family Dwelling

15 feet by 30 feet

15 feet by 30 feet plus 50 square feet per each unit

-

       

Compact Development Setbacks (lots of less than 5,000 square feet)

Setback

Minimum Requirements

Front

To house: 12 feet To porch: Six feet

L U P  D S

Table 9

To front-facing garage door from road right-of-way: 18 feet Road Side

Six feet

Side and Rear

Zero at up to two property lines for clustered homes or duets; three feet at private driveway; otherwise five feet.

Table 10

Standard Development Setbacks (lots of 5,000 to 12,000 square feet)

Setback

Minimum Requirements

Front

To house from road right-of-way: 15 feet To porch from road right-of-way: 12 feet To front-facing garage door from road right-of-way: 18 feet

Road Side

12 feet

Side

10% of lot width; no less than six feet; need not exceed 15 feet; three feet at shared driveway

Rear

20% of lot depth; no less than 15 feet; need not exceed 25 feet; To detached garage from alley: three feet.

Table 11

Large Lot Development Setbacks (lots of greater than 12,000 square feet)

Setback

Minimum Requirements

Front

To house from road right-of-way: 20 feet To porch from road right-of-way: 15 feet To front-facing garage door from road right-of-way: 24 feet

Road Side

20 feet

Side

10% of lot width; no less than 10 feet; need not exceed 30 feet.

Rear

20% of lot depth; no less than 20 feet; need not exceed 35 feet; To detached garage from alley: five feet.

 .      

-

Table 12

Multifamily Development Setbacks (multifamily dwellings of five or more units)

L U P  D S

Setback

Minimum Requirements

Front

18 feet

Road Side

18 feet

Side

10% of lot width; no less than 10 feet; need not exceed 20 feet; carports and accessory structures need not exceed 10 feet. Three-story buildings must be set back no less than 15 feet.

Rear

20% of lot depth; no less than 20 feet; need not exceed 35 feet; carports and accessory structures need not exceed 10 feet.

Table 13

Special Setback Requirements and Exceptions

Item

Setback Requirements/Exceptions

Non-habitable accessory structures not exceeding either 140 square feet or eight feet in height

Minimum of five feet from lot line

Non-habitable accessory structures exceeding either 140 square feet or eight feet in height

Must meet regular building setback requirements for the lot

Projections, including exterior stairways, chimneys, bay windows, and balconies

May extend to within five feet of side or rear lot line

Adjacent buildings

Based on the requirements of the California Building Code

In-ground pools

Minimum of five feet from lot line May occupy required yard space

Table 14

Height Limits

Structure

Height Limit

Detached houses

2.5 stories and 30 feet

Condominiums, apartments, and attached houses

Three stories and 35 feet

Fences in front or road side yards

Three feet

Fences in rear yards

Seven feet

-

       

Height Limits at Plan Area Boundaries

Distance from Plan Area Boundary

Height Limit

Within 15 feet

Eight feet

From 15 up to 25 feet

14 feet

From 25 up to 50 feet

22 feet

From 50 feet up to 75 feet

30 feet

 .      

L U P  D S

Table 15

-

L U P  D S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Article 3.0

CIRCULATION PLAN Article 3.0 discusses the location and classifications of roadways and the circulation infrastructure needed to link the Plan Area to the vicinity road network. A number of contemplated improvements outside the Plan Area are also identified.

C P

Article 3.0

CIRCULATION PLAN

Article 3.0 of the Specific Plan describes the circulation system within the Plan Area which is designed to integrate pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular modes of transportation. The circulation routes connect neighborhoods, parks, recreational trails and facilities, and a transit stop at the Cielo Vista Drive extension to support future public transit service along Fairview Road.

Section 3.1 Circulation Plan Objectives The following objectives in the design of the roadway, pedestrian and bicycle systems are incorporated into the Plan Area: 

Access to the Plan Area and between the Neighborhoods within the Plan Area;



A safe and convenient roadway circulation system;



Pedestrian and bicycle access to the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus; and



Support public transportation.

Section 3.2 Existing Roadways Fairview Road is the primary existing roadway adjacent to the Plan Area. The primary access into the Plan Area will be off of Fairview Road opposite Cielo Vista Drive, which will be extended eastward along the southern edge of the Plan Area as the major collector road. Other primary existing roadways in the vicinity include Airline Highway (State Route 25), Sunnyslope Road and John Smith Road. Fairview Road is a major north-south connector on the east side of Hollister linking Airline Highway with State Route 156 and State Route 152 to the northeast. Figure 11, Circulation Diagram, presents the conceptual circulation for the Plan Area.

Circulation Improvements A number of circulation improvements outside the Plan Area have been identified as necessary to accommodate the potential development within the Plan Area. Street improvements to Fairview Road along the Plan Area frontage will include dedicating the necessary right-of-way along the Fairview Road frontage to allow for the future construction of a widened two to four-lane roadway. In addition, the

 .  

-

C P

developer would also construct frontage improvements on Fairview Road, concurrent with the first phase of development as follows: two 12-foot northbound lanes, two 12-foot southbound lanes, appropriate turn lanes, a 6-foot bicycle lane in each direction, a 14-foot raised median, as well as sidewalks, shoulders, a meandering pedestrian/bicycle path, and curbs and gutters on Fairview Road. The existing Fairview Road section and typical improved section for Fairview Road are illustrated in Figure 12, Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Section. The intersection of Cielo Vista Drive and Fairview Road will be built out and signalized if and when development warrants this improvement. Emergency Vehicle Access Because the western extension of Cielo Vista Drive will form a closed loop roadway system, an emergency vehicle access (EVA) will be provided as a secondary means of ingress and egress during emergencies. The Specific Plan intends to utilize the Gavilan College San Benito Campus secondary access currently planned off of Airline Highway, extending from the southeast corner of the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus along the eastern boundary and connecting to the Cielo Vista Drive extension. Due to the proximity of Phase I to Fairview Road and the far distance to reasonable locations for an EVA, construction of the permanent EVA access is not necessary for Phase I, though temporary EVA access will be required. Temporary access could be installed along the northern boundary of the site to Fairview Road. A cross-section of a typical EVA route is illustrated in Figure 13, Emergency Vehicle Access Route. If the EVA road will be located on the Gavilan College San Benito Campus property the EVA would be intended to serve both the Plan Area and the campus for emergency access purposes.

-

Section 3.3 Road Circulation The Plan Area includes two (2) classes of public roads, collector roads and local or residential roads. The road system provides simple and direct access to the Plan Area.

Access The primary access to the Plan Area will be off of Fairview Road opposite Cielo Vista Drive, which will be extended eastward along the southern edge of the Plan Area as the major collector road. The Cielo Vista Drive extension will be a public road and include curb and gutters, separated sidewalks, street lighting, utilities, street trees, and additional landscape strips and medians consistent with all applicable standards and requirements. Cielo Vista Drive will be constructed by either the Fairview Corners developer or Gavilan College District, depending on which area develops first. One-half of the required improvements for this street extension may be constructed as development proceeds within the Plan Area or adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus. The Circulation Diagram, (Figure 11) presents the extent of the shared roadway system on the project site. This diagram assumes full buildout of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the proposed project. Should all or a portion of the proposed project commence construction prior to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus, the Fairview Corners master/individual developers would be required to take the lead in constructing the portion of the Cielo Vista Drive extension to serve the Plan Area on a phase by phase basis, as set forth in the Development Agreement and Project Conditions of Approval.

       

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 11

Circulation Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Sections

EXISTING FAIRVIEW ROAD SECTION

1.5’

1.5’

110’

TYPICAL FUTURE FAIRVIEW ROAD SECTION

Not to scale

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2008

Figure 12

Existing and Typical Future Fairview Road Sections Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

(OUTSIDE PLAN AREA BOUNDARY)

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RESIDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AREA

(OUTSIDE PLAN AREA BOUNDARY)

MAIN ACCESS POINTS TO FAIRVIEW CORNERS RESIDENTIAL PLAN AREA

GAVILAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE SAN BENITO CAMPUS

0

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2010

Figure 13

Emergency Vehicle Access Route Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

The internal road extension of Cielo Vista Drive will consist of two twelve foot travel lanes in each direction, with a six foot Class II bike lane in each direction, a twelve foot center median, four to six foot landscaping (planter) strips on each side of and seven foot sidewalk on each side. These improvements will be phased and scaled based upon construction of the Plan Area and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus. This road section is illustrated in Figure 14, Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Road Section.

The closed loop roadway network, extending along the Plan Area to serve the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the Fairview Corners Residential, will have three access points to the residential Plan Area along the Cielo Vista Drive extension. These “new” collector entry roads will be two lane roads with a 14-foot travel lane, nine-foot bio-swale, five-foot separated sidewalks, and 10- to 12-foot landscape strips on both sides of the road. The entry road extending from the Cielo Vista Drive extension may include design features that incorporate best management practices (BMPs) for storm drain systems. These features may be incorporated into the design subject to approval by the County Public Works Department, and would transition to standard residential roads at appropriate locations. At build-out of the project, these internal roads would be two-lane roads with a 12foot travel lane, eight-foot parking lanes, curbs, gutters, five-foot separated sidewalks and landscape strips on both sides of the road. Figure 15, Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections, presents examples of a typical collector entry road section and a typical residential road section. The “new” collector entry road section may integrate grassy swales for bio-filtration purposes and does not include parking lanes. The use of swales as a storm water mitigation technique is further discussed in Article 5.0, Resource Management. The standard residential road section will include parking lanes.

 .  

-

C P

The Cielo Vista Drive extension would be a public street serving the Plan Area and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus, and at full buildout, would include curbs, gutters, separated sidewalks, street lighting, utilities, street trees, and additional landscape strips and medians in accordance with applicable County standards and requirements as set forth in the Specific Plan. If completed to serve both projects, the median would straddle the property line shared by these projects. The Cielo Vista extension is expected to be constructed in at least three (3) stages, commencing from the western portion of the site (near Fairview Road) and progressing east. The first phase will include construction of the Cielo Vista Drive extension to the first collector entry road within both the Plan Area and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus entry cul-de-sac as illustrated in the Circulation Diagram (Figure 11). The second segment will extend the road to at least the second collector entry road to the Plan Area, and so on.

Traffic Calming

C P

The residential traffic calming goals are to improve the quality of life, reduce impacts of motor vehicles on local roads, create safe and attractive roads, and create a friendly environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. The objectives are to reduce vehicle traffic speeds and noise, improve safety and convenience for all users, enhance roadway appearance and maintain and enhance neighborhood livability. Figure 16, Traffic Calming Diagram, illustrates the traffic calming features that may be considered in the Plan Area. The use of bulb-outs, neck-downs, or some other traffic calming technique along the Cielo Vista Drive extension, is important for pedestrian safety and walkability particularly at the Gavilan entry road cul-de-sac and the first main access point to Fairview Corners Residential. Enhanced streetscape and landscaped medians include planting trees along Cielo Vista Drive to create a sense of enclosure and improve the pedestrian environment.

Entry features such as landscaping, monumentation, and signage that defines the theme and image of Fairview Corners Residential will improve aesthetics and heighten the sense of arrival at Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive, and the three main access points into the Plan Area.

-

Section 3.4 Bicycle and Pedestrian Circulation The Plan Area includes a series of roads with bicycle lanes and pedestrian walkways that connect to multiple destinations. An open space trail system in a loop configuration is included around the Plan Area that connects to the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, and in particular the buffer/green areas and the athletic fields. Figure 17, Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Plan, illustrates the bicycle circulation and walking trails proposed in the Plan Area. These open space areas are intended to be connected by a series of trails within the Plan Area, and further connected outside the Plan Area to the future adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus. These open space areas, once interconnected, become an opportunity for recreational activities (e.g. walking

       

Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Road Section

Not to scale

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2008

Figure 14

Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Road Section Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Typical Collector Entry and Residential Street Sections

10’-12’

10’-12’

60’ ROW TYPICAL “NEW” COLLECTOR ENTRY ROAD SECTION

TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL ROAD SECTION Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

Not to scale

Figure 15

Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

500 feet

Figure 16

Traffic Calming Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Figure 17

Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Plan Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

C P This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Section 3.6 Circulation Plan Goals and Policies The following circulation plan goals, policies, and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area. Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state and local standards and requirements, on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 also provides guidance on phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements.

Section 3.5 Public Transit The Plan Area master developer will work cooperatively with Caltrans, San Benito County, and Gavilan College to develop, implement and maintain public transit services for the Plan Area. In addition, the Cielo Vista Drive extension has been sized to allow for a transit stop at the intersection of Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista Drive extension. The Council of San Benito County Governments (COG) is currently working on development of the San Benito County Transit Design Guidelines to better integrate public transit into future developments. The Plan Area master developer and/or independent developer(s) will provide input to help facilitate public transit services in the vicinity of the Plan Area.

Goal CP-1: Provide adequate access to the Plan Area. Policy CP-1.1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) within the Plan Area shall be responsible to pay a proportional fair share or provide circulation improvements outside the Plan Area when those circulation improvements outside the Plan Area are warranted, in accordance with the Specific Plan certified EIR. Policy CP-1.2. The proportional fair share contribution for circulation improvements specified by the Specific Plan certified EIR outside the Plan Area will be based on the number of lots and/or dwelling units built within the Plan Area. Policy Implementation

1. The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for contributing a proportional fair share to intersection improvements and traffic signals.

 .  

-

C P

trails, parcourse (fitness trail), interpretive signage, bird watching etc.) within the connected open space system. All bicycle and pedestrian facilities shall be consistent with Article 4.0, Community Design.

C P

2. The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for dedication of right-of-way within the Plan Area for Fairview Road widening improvements.

Goal CP-2: Adequate connections to adjoining areas and uses.

3. The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for construction of Fairview Road frontage improvements along the Plan Area frontage on Fairview Road, and parking shall be prohibited along this frontage.

Policy Implementation

4. The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for contributing a proportional fair share to the Cielo Vista Drive extension shared entry road.

Policy CP-2.1. Provide road, pathway, and emergency vehicle connections to adjacent areas.

1. Integrate circulation within the Plan Area and with adjoining land uses, including the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Lots and roads shall be arranged to facilitate convenient pedestrian circulation within the Plan Area and to adjacent locations. 2. Street and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections shall be provided to adjoining properties along the southern, western, and northern Plan Area boundaries.

5. Any physical improvements that are made by the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) that benefit the Gavilan College San Benito Campus or other future development projects in the area may be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement, as set forth in the Fairview Corners Development Agreement. 6. The following off-site improvements to the intersection of Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Road shall be constructed by the developer: •

•

a northbound shared through/right-turn lane will be added to Fairview Road at this intersection, a southbound left-turn lane will be added to Fairview Road at this intersection,

3. Include an emergency vehicle access that provides adequate secondary emergency access to the Plan Area. 4. Ensure that roads are designed to accommodate emergency vehicle turning movements. Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use Plan and Development Standards

•

-

and the west leg of Cielo Vista Drive eastbound will be re-striped to provide a left-turn lane and a shared through/rightturn lane.

(Section 2.3) and Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

       

Goal CP-4: Quiet and Safe Residential Roads.

Policy CP-3.1. Provide a system of neighborhood roads that facilitate internal circulation.

Policy CP-4.1. Promote a pleasant and conducive walking environment through implementation of traffic calming.

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual project developer(s) shall construct neighborhood entry minor collector entry roads and standard residential roads as shown in the Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections (Figure 15). Final improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department. Grading plans may be issued prior to approval of the improvement plans. 2. The integration of cul-de-sacs is encouraged when the residential development is designed, as illustrated in Appendix B, Lotting Program Example B, to provide pedestrian connections to open space or trail systems at the end of culde-sacs. 3. Residential roads adjacent to parks and open space within the Plan Area shall be singleloaded with residences facing the road wherever feasible. 4. Alternative road configurations within the subdivision tracts may be considered, subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department. Those alternative designs include, but are not limited to, one-way roads, parking restricted roads with dedicated parking bays, alley designs, and roads designed to calm traffic and allow an abundance of street trees. Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

1. Use the narrowest feasible travel lane widths on residential roads, designing these roads to be no wider than required to accommodate fire apparatus. 2. Amenities to enhance the pedestrian environment, including entry features (landscaping, monumentation, and signage etc.), traffic calming, and street trees shall be included on the improvement plans. 3. Consider the use of traffic calming techniques as illustrated in the Traffic Calming Diagram (Figure 16), to slow traffic, such as bulb-outs and neck-downs. Use of traffic calming shall be considered on all roads where they intersect with Cielo Vista Drive, and on Cielo Vista Drive at the Gavilan College San Benito Campus retail area.

 .  

-

C P

Goal CP-3: Plan Area circulation system that facilitates mobility.

C P

Planning and Design Section of the California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual, the San Benito County Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan, and in accordance with Article 4.0, Community Design.

4. Radii of corners (measured at face of curb) at intersections shall not exceed 25 feet for collector roads. Where residential roads and collector roads intersect, street corner radii shall not exceed 15 feet. Provide roll-over curbs if necessary to meet emergency vehicle turning requirements.

2. Bicycle path or lane improvements shall be provided as a part of the frontage improvements to Fairview Road along the Plan Area frontage, and shall be designed to connect to regional bikeways as identified in City and County Plans.

5. Roads shall have nighttime lighting that meets the minimum illumination standards contained in Article 4.0, Community Design. 6. The perimeter trail shall be designed to permit as many openings and viewpoints from other areas within the Plan Area as practical, in accordance with the design standards in Article 4.0, Community Design. Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

Goal CP-5: Safe and convenient nonmotorized transportation. Policy CP-5.1. Design the circulation system to provide appropriate bicycle facilities. Policy Implementation

1. Bicycle paths or lanes shall be constructed according to standards set forth in the Bikeway

-

3. Class II bicycle lanes shall be provided on the entire length of Cielo Vista Drive. 4. Utilize the emergency vehicle access between the end of Cielo Vista Drive and Airline Highway if the Airline Highway Route is constructed on the Gavilan College San Benito Campus property. 5. Signal light traffic sensors shall be set to detect bicycles and detector loop locations shall be marked for bicycles. Policy CP-5.2. Facilitate pedestrian circulation by providing clearly identifiable pedestrian circulation routes that connect neighborhoods, parks, recreational trails and facilities, and transit stops.

       

Policy Implementation

1. Pedestrian circulation routes shall be separated from vehicular traffic on all roads, and shall contain sidewalks or pedestrian paths consistent with the cross-section specifications shown in the Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Road Section (Figure 14) and the Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections (Figure 15). 2. A continuous pedestrian system shall be provided along all roads and shall be in accordance with Article 4.0, Community Design. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1] 3. Sidewalks shall be provided on both sides of the road in areas with lots of 12,000 square feet or smaller, and on at least one side of the road if all fronting lots are over 12,000 square feet. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

6. Handicap accessible routes shall be provided, except where existing gradients make such access unfeasible. At a minimum, at least one handicap accessible route shall be provided to connect the residential area to the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus, Plan Area parks, and adjacent property to the north. 7. Utilize short-cut paths, if needed, to avoid circuitous pedestrian and bicycle routes, and to keep walking and bicycling distances between destinations as short as possible. Cul-de-sacs shall include pedestrian connections to open space areas whenever possible.

4. Sidewalks shall be a minimum of four feet wide, and shall be a minimum of five feet wide adjacent to the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1] 5. The appropriate County staff shall review the master developer’s circulation improvement

 .  

-

C P

plans to ensure traffic calming features are included, such as enhanced crosswalks (e.g. bulb-outs, raised crosswalk, stamped concrete etc.) and/or road (speed) bumps.

Goal CP-6: Access to public transit.

C P

Policy CP-6.1. Facilitate future transit service at or adjacent to the Plan Area.

8. Utilize emergency vehicle access routes for pedestrian circulation.

Policy Implementation

1. Work with Caltrans, COG, San Benito County, and Gavilan College District to develop, implement and maintain public transit services for the Plan Area.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3), Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2), and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

-

2. Reserve an appropriate location or locations for a bus stop on Cielo Vista Drive for future development of a bus stop, particularly adjacent to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

       

Article 4.0

COMMUNITY DESIGN Article 4.0 establishes the standards that guide the aesthetic and visual design aspects of development, as well as open space and other amenities.

COMMUNITY DESIGN

Article 4.0 of the Specific Plan establishes the design parameters for development within the Plan Area. Green and sustainable designs will be incorporated into the development of the Plan Area. A summary of policies meeting specific LEED criteria is presented in Appendix D, but it should be recognized that LEED criteria may evolve over time, and the cited criteria are not meant to be locked in place.

Section 4.1 Design Objectives The community design objectives of the Specific Plan are: 

A distinctive design theme that respects the Plan Area’s rural surroundings and establishes visual continuity within the planned residential community;



A planned residential community that presents a pleasant and well-connected walking environment for both recreation and utility; and



Harmonious architectural styles drawn from attributes of the regional landscape and deriving variation in distinctive detailing from one building to the next.

Section 4.2 Community Design Goals and Policies The following Community Design goals, policies, and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area. Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state and local standards and requirements, on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 also provides guidance on phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements.

 .  

-

C D

Article 4.0

Neighborhood and Streetscape Character

C D

The community will be designed to achieve a visual character that complements the existing environs, including the surrounding ranchland and open space. A coordinated landscape and streetscape theme will be developed to provide attractive design with visual continuity throughout the Plan Area. The streetscape and landscape theme will draw from characteristics of the natural San Benito County landscape and historic landscape features. Neighborhoods are the building blocks of the community. They establish the “location factor” in real estate. Neighborhoods with unique, memorable qualities that are differentiated from other neighborhoods add value to private property and increase the likelihood of long-term investment in maintenance and improvements. Convenient walking to destinations within and adjacent to the Plan Area will be ensured through the provision of multiple street connections, sidewalks and pathways. The community will be designed with eyes on the street and traffic safety considerations. Goal CD-1: Distinguishing streetscape features. Policy CD-1.1. Ensure that streetscape improvements enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood. Policy Implementation

1. Carry a consistent landscape and streetscape character throughout the Plan Area. If custom homes will be individually designed, additional -

emphasis should be placed on a consistent streetscape design. The master developer shall prepare a Road Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan to ensure consistency within the Plan Area. 2. Coordinate streetscape, landscape, signage, and lighting to ensure a consistent visual character. 3. Deciduous shade trees shall be planted along roads at no less than 40-foot spacing, and at an average spacing of no less than 30 feet. Street trees must be planted at least 15 feet from street lights and five feet from driveways. Street trees shall be allowed to grow to full natural size. [LEED ND NPD Credit 14]

4. If relatively fewer and larger lots are subdivided, a design theme for the collector roads shall be developed to include a consistent fencing and entry gate theme. Policy CD-1.2. Ensure that infrastructure improvements do not compromise the visual quality of the neighborhood. 1. Screen for visual privacy or noise attenuation with berms and landscaping and minimize solid fences or walls. If walls over six feet facing the public view are necessary, such as when a rear yard is adjacent to a road, screen with vegetation.

       

Policy Implementation

1. Access to all lots shall be provided by roads internal to the Plan Area. No access to lots shall be allowed directly from Fairview Road or State Route 25. No direct access to single family lots shall be allowed from Cielo Vista Drive.

2. Use decorative poles and luminaries for street lighting. 3. Position light poles and sign posts at lot lines, intersections, or multifamily dwelling/courtyard home driveways.

2. Roads within the Plan Area shall be designed for traffic moving no faster than 25 miles per hour. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1] 3. Traffic calming features shall be designed as needed to slow traffic and provide a safe and convenient pedestrian environment.

Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6) and Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Goal CD-2: A walkable and environmentally sustainable community. Policy CD-2.1. Provide a comfortable and convenient walking environment. Policy Implementation

1. Prioritize pedestrians and bicyclists in the design of residential roads. 2. Ensure direct pedestrian connections between roads, and the community walking path network, parking lots, and entries to multifamily development. 3. Maintain a minimum four-foot clear passageway when bollards, poles, hydrants, etc. are placed in or adjacent to sidewalks.

Policy CD-2.3. Protect privacy and prevent annoyance from neighboring properties. Policy Implementation

1. To the extent practical, houses that overlook common open space or private yards of adjacent residences shall be designed to protect the privacy of the adjacent residences, particularly when the house is located close to the property line on that side.

 .  

-

C D

Policy CD-2.2. Design roads to avoid conflicts with higher traffic volumes or speeds.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6).

C D

Architecture The Specific Plan emphasizes high quality building and site design in order to achieve an attractive built environment. The architecture of buildings can affect the quality of public space nearby, and significantly affects perceptions of the quality of a neighborhood. It can encourage the presence of people on the public roadways and create opportunities for interaction between neighbors. Elements such as porches, balconies (or even false balconies), and windows with flower boxes located near the public way create the impression that people in the houses may be observing the roads and can result in a neighborhood that is more comfortable and secure. Although no particular architectural style is mandated within the Specific Plan, an architectural continuity will be established that draws from traditional regional styles. Goal CD-3: Carefully detailed architecture. Policy CD-3.1. Maintain architectural continuity within developments and neighborhoods. Policy Implementation

2. Detached garages, and attached carports, workshops, storage buildings, pool houses, porches, and patio covers shall be architecturally consistent with the principal structure. 3. Match the design of multifamily development parking canopies, trash enclosures, and other accessory structures to the architecture of the main building. Integrate signs and information systems into the overall design of multifamily residential developments. Relate signs to the architecture of the main building. 4. Design multifamily dwellings, community buildings, and utility and service facilities to blend and harmonize with single-family dwellings and neighborhoods by using mass, detailing, and roof lines that express a scale similar to and drawn on elements of traditional singlefamily homes.

1. Obtain a consistent neighborhood character by using a consistent architectural style for residential buildings; architecture should feature variation within a style, rather than through the use of several different styles. Architecture shall feature selected details drawn from traditional regional styles. The master developer shall prepare an Architectural Style Master Plan to ensure consistency of architectural style within the Plan Area.

-

       

6. Design utility structures to complement residential development in scale and style. 7. Use exterior color schemes that reflect the natural landscape and historic landscape features. Policy CD-3.2. Design dwellings with appropriate façade detailing. Policy Implementation

1. Arrange windows, doors, and other façade elements in balance on each elevation. 2. Face entryways toward the road and make them a prominent part of the house design. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1] 3. Provide depth to the façade by employing recessed and projecting elements, including prominent features such as bay windows and porches, and subtle features such as recessed window planes and raised trim.

4. Extensive blank, solid walls (overly long or overly tall) are discouraged on all elevations and are not permitted on elevations facing roads. If such walls are necessary for interior or structural reasons, provide some form of variation or decoration such as false windows and balconies, wainscoting, stringcourse, corbelsupported arcade roof, and/or trellis plantings. 5. Garage doors/carport openings facing a road may not constitute more than 50 percent of the width of any ground floor elevation. Where the garage door/carport opening constitutes more than 40 percent of the width of any ground floor elevation, special design treatment, such as an arbor or portico, shall be required at the garage/carport.

 .  

-

C D

5. Arrange multifamily dwellings to front on the public right-of-way. Organize the property to place buildings adjacent to the road, and locate off-street parking behind buildings or in the interior of the property. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

C D

Policy CD-3.4. Ensure that property improvements enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood. Policy Implementation

1. Retaining walls facing the road shall have a decorative finish that is consistent with the streetscape theme.

Policy CD-3.3. Design dwellings to complement their lot position. Policy Implementation

1. Design houses for corner lots (including lots fronting on pedestrian paths) to present equally important elevations to both frontages.

2. Fences or walls facing roads or other public areas shall be designed to blend with the landscaping, be consistent with the streetscape theme, and should be at least partially screened by landscaping. 3. Locate air conditioning; mechanical equipment; antennae and television receiver dishes; and vents on sides of the roof that are not visible from the road, whenever possible. 4. Screen utility boxes from view of the road. 5. Position gas meters and electric meters to minimize their visibility from roads, or provide screening.

2. Orient front elevations of courtyard corner homes to face the roas from which the courtyard gains access. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

-

6. Provide landscaping and/or decorative paving or paving accents within courtyard and alley vehicular accesses. Garages should generally be set back of living areas, but not so much as to encourage parking that would encroach into

       

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

Goal CD-4: A safe community. Policy CD-4.1. Design dwelling units to face public spaces to promote interactions and neighborhood safety.

4. Entryways for multiple units in cluster arrangements should face the road, pedestrian access, or parking court, with doors readily visible. Provide a porch or patio area transition from adjacent walkways, roads, or vehicular accesses. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1] 5. Multi-unit dwellings arranged as flats shall provide a secured interior stairway or an exterior stairway designed to enhance building architecture and provide visibility and security for residents. 6. Design pedestrian paths to be as open to view as possible. Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land

Policy Implementation

1. Design building entries and configurations that provide residents with a view from their home onto roads, pedestrian pathways, and other public areas. Front doors should be readily visible from the road to provide a welcome appearance and provide visibility and security. 2. Any dwelling adjacent to a pedestrian path may front on the path. Secondary dwelling units may front on alleys or parks. 3. Porches shall be covered, but substantially open (i.e. railings are acceptable) on the front and sides. Seating areas should be a minimum of six feet square.

Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

Lighting Goal CD-5 Prevention of Light Intrusion and Glare while Maintaining Safety Policy CD-5.1. Design parking lot lighting and street lighting to prevent light spill onto adjacent properties. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall prepare a Lighting Master Plan to ensure consistency of lighting treatment within the Plan Area. 2. Use full or three-quarter cut-off luminaires for all parking lot and street lighting. 3. Limit lighting standards to a height of 25 feet. 4. Design parking lots so that peripheral landscaping filters direct views of luminaires from adjacent residences.

 .  

-

C D

the courtyard vehicular access area. Vary courtyard building height and/or setbacks, and place garages so that they do not dominate the view into the courtyard or alley. Design courtyard vehicular access so that the terminating vista features enhanced landscaping or a building element other than a garage.

C D

5. Set subdued street lighting levels that maintain a rural ambiance.

Policy CD-5.3. Use minimal lighting in peripheral areas.

6. Design street lighting so that streetlights are placed at side lot lines.

Policy Implementation

Policy CD-5.2. Design building lighting to prevent light spill onto adjacent residential properties.

1. Illuminated monument signs shall use the lowest practical level of lighting.

Policy Implementation

2. Illuminated monument signs shall use the concealed up-lighting or down-lighting.

1. Shield exterior lighting from shining directly onto adjacent residential properties.

3. No lighting shall be provided on peripheral pedestrian paths. Policy CD-5.4. Plan lighting to maximize safety and security and conserve energy. Policy Implementation

1. Set roadway lighting levels that adequately provide for safety and security. 2. Position street lights at the beginning of pedestrian paths to provide maximum illumination within the pathways. 2. Locate exterior lights on the sides of houses below the top of the fence or shield the light from direct view of neighboring property.

3. Use low levels of lighting in multifamily residential developments to eliminate dark corners near areas of pedestrian movement. 4. When feasible use lighting technologies with higher efficiencies such as low voltage or LED lighting. Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

-

       

Goal CD-6: Attractive and harmonious signage. Policy CD-6.1. Design multifamily residential signage to blend with the residential character of the Specific Plan.

1. Monument or wall signs shall be used to identify the Plan Area and Plan Area neighborhoods. 2. Provide ornamental monuments/decorative landscape wall to provide a distinguishing entry to the Plan Area at the intersection of Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive.

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall prepare a Signage Master Plan to ensure consistency of sign designs within the Plan Area. 2. Multi-family residential development building signage shall be made of wood, metal, stone, or other natural or simulated natural material. Signs may be painted, stained, or tinted. Plastic signs are not permitted. 3. Signs shall be consistent with the architecture of the building and in scale with the property and building.

3. Provide complementary ornamental monuments at the intersection of Cielo Vista Drive and three collector entry roads.

4. Illumination of signs shall be by focused lighting that is not directly visible from locations outside the Plan Area.

4. Entry signs shall be constructed of durable materials, such as stone, textured concrete, heavy timber, or metal.

5. Internally lit and flashing or animated signs shall not be used in exterior locations.

5. Entry sign materials shall be non-reflective.

Policy CD-6.2. Entry signage shall be distinctive and attractive.

6. Entry signs shall generally be no taller than four feet, although some related features such as corner towers, arbors, etc. may exceed this height. 7. Painted surfaces shall utilize graffiti-resistant paint. 8. A consistent design theme should be carried throughout the entry signs, with distinctive features to set apart each sign and create unique identities for each neighborhood.

 .  

-

C D

Signage

C D

9. Water features shall use re-circulated water and be designed to minimize water loss from evaporation or splashing. Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

-

       

Article 5.0

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Article 5.0 summarizes the existing resources of the Plan Area and the resource conservation and management objectives and policies.

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Article 5.0 of the Specific Plan summarizes the existing resources of the Plan Area and the resource conservation and management objectives, goals and policies. Resources addressed in this Article include biological, geology and soils, water quality and conservation, air quality, cultural, and energy conservation.

Section 5.1 Resource Conservation and Management Objectives The resource conservation and management objectives are to minimize negative effects on air quality, water quality, energy demand, and the natural resources in the area. The Specific Plan objectives for land use, circulation, community design, and public facilities and services are all considered to be consistent with and facilitate attainment of the Resource Conservation and Management Objectives.

Section 5.2 Existing Conditions The Plan Area currently is designated grazing land on the California Department of Conservation’s Important Farmlands Map. The Plan Area is currently undeveloped land that is used to cultivate barley. The land is annually disced and periodically grazed by cattle. The Plan Area is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Topography of the Plan Area consists of undulating hills, with an overall relative elevation change of about 45 feet from east to west. There is an agricultural water line (blue valve) that runs parallel and is immediately adjacent to the northerly and easterly property lines. At the northerly property line along Fairview Road there is an agricultural water pump station on the property that serves this line. The line then runs to the easterly property line before turning south along that property line (refer to Article 6.0, Figure 19).

 .  

-

R M

Article 5.0

Biological Resources

R M

A biotic resources evaluation of the Plan Area was prepared by Live Oak Associates in 2008 to document the results of wildlife and botanical surveys and to analyze potential impacts to biological resources at or within the Plan Area vicinity as a result of the proposed development. Additional reconnaissance-level surveys were conducted in 2009, and additional site visits were made in 2010 and 2011. Traces of a former stock pond persist within a low topographic point in the northeast corner of the agricultural field. The remnant stock pond is a relict feature that is not known to have held water since 2000. Under current land management practices (e.g., regular discing), this feature does not regularly pond water. Natural drainage channels and wetlands are considered Waters of the United States and impacts are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. A Waters of the U.S. analysis was completed within the Plan Area and submitted for review by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers determined that no waters that meet the definition of a Water of the U.S., including the remnant stock pond, are present in the Plan Area. The dominance of non-native annual and perennial plant species and frequent disturbance from maintenance activities precludes the presence of most special status plant and wildlife species. Based on surveys, habitat suitability, previous recorded occurrences and professional expertise, no specialstatus plant species have the potential to occur on the Plan Area. However, based on the field surveys, suitable habitat was identified for California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), western spadefoot toad

-

(Spea hamondii), burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), American badger (Taxidea taxus), and nesting migratory birds and raptors. California Tiger Salamander. California tiger salamander (CTS) is federally listed as threatened and has recently been listed as threatened by the state. Although California tiger salamanders do not currently breed in the Plan Area, salamanders were observed on the Plan Area in 2000 and the Plan Area is located within federally designated critical habitat. San Joaquin Kit Fox. San Joaquin kit fox (SJKF) is federally listed as endangered and state listed as threatened. No burrows possessing the dimensions suitable for the kit fox were observed in the Plan Area. However, they are known to occur in the vicinity, and it is possible that an individual kit fox could move onto the Plan Area incidentally prior to construction. Burrowing Owl. Burrowing owl is a state listed “species of special concern.” Although burrowing owl has not been observed within the Plan Area to date, marginally suitable nesting habitat for burrowing owls is present. American Badger. American badger is listed as a state listed “species of special concern”. Although no American badgers were observed in the Plan Area, they are known to occur in the vicinity and it is possible a badger may occupy burrows on or near the Plan Area. Nesting Raptors and Migratory Birds. Nesting raptors and migratory birds are protected by state and federal regulations. Although no tree nests or ground nests were observed on or adjacent to the Plan Area and no trees are present within the Plan Area, large trees immediately to the east and south

       

Geology and Soils The eastern third of the Plan Area is located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone for the Tres Pinos fault, a fault generally considered to be potentially active. Terratech, Inc. prepared a Combined Geotechnical and Fault Investigation for the Plan Area in 1989, and a subsequent geotechnical report in 2008. Based upon the investigation, a 35-foot wide trace of the Tres Pinos fault was mapped within the Plan Area. The Plan Area is located within the Coast Ranges geomorphic province, in an alluvial valley and is underlain by recent alluvium and older uplifted alluvial deposits. Plan Area soils are silty clay and sandy clay in the upper horizon. Groundwater is found about 120 feet below the surface. Water Quality Currently, storm water drains within and off of the Plan Area by way of natural drainage areas. The site rises from Fairview Road to the crest of a hill located approximately 1,100 feet east of Fairview Road. Existing drainage generally flows in three directions: west of the crest of the hill, the site drains toward Fairview Road; to the east, the site drains to a low

point in the northwestern corner (near the former stock pond); and along the southern boundary, the hill is interrupted by a saddle, which causes drainage to flow toward the adjacent property. There are no significant existing pollutant sources within the Plan Area. Storm water discharges are regulated under the Federal Clean Water Act through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The NPDES program describes how storm water discharges are to be managed to reduce water pollution. Prior to construction, a developer must obtain a permit from the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. Urban developments typically increase the load of pollutants; such as sediment, nutrients, bacteria, oil and grease, heavy metals and debris carried in storm water runoff. A variety of storm water facilities can be used to ensure the quality of downstream waters. Drainage basins, in addition to accepting and delaying the outbound flow of storm water discharge, can be designed to successfully remove high levels of particulates and dissolved pollutants. Storm water mitigation techniques may also include the use of swales for bio-filtration purposes, such as vegetated, grassy or street swales. Swales with a gentle slope (less than four percent average) are the most effective at treating storm water. The use of bio-swales can result in a decrease in runoff entering the storm water system and reduce pollution, thereby improving the water quality. Vegetated Swale Vegetated swales are long, narrow, landscaped channels that filter and infiltrate storm water runoff from parking lots, sidewalks, streets, and other impervious surfaces.

 .  

-

R M

provide potential nesting habitat for tree-nesting raptors such as merlin, Cooper’s hawk, white-tailed kite, northern harrier, loggerhead shrike, prairie falcon, ferruginous hawk, and red-tailed hawk, which are known to exist in the vicinity of the Plan Area. Grassland may also provide foraging habitat for these species. In addition, migratory birds may also nest within trees or vegetation present on or near the Plan Area.

R M

Source: City of Portland. Stormwater Management Manual Manual. 2004.

Street Swale For street swales, steeper side slopes (maximum of 2:1) and a narrower total width are allowed. Impermeable fabric is required along the street edge to the bottom of the swale, and slopes are to drain away from the street.

Source: City of Portland. Stormwater Management Manual Manual. 2004.

Grassy Swale Grassy swales are like vegetated swales except are landscaped solely with a grass seed mix, and may be mown occasionally, depending on aesthetic and storm water filtering requirements.

-

       

Cultural Resources

Source: City of Portland. Stormwater Management Manual. 2004.

Water Conservation The San Benito County Water Conservation Plan adopted by the Board of Supervisors in July, 1992 by Resolution 92-82, will substantially reduce water demand in new development compared to historic residential water use. The County Water Conservation Plan includes specific measures for installation of water saving devices and water efficient landscaping required for all new construction. Water conservation is a significant factor in the future use of water within the Plan Area.

The first people to inhabit the vicinity of the Plan Area were the Costanoan tribes, who occupied the region from the Golden Gate south to Monterey. The Costanoan were gatherers and hunters who utilized primarily native flora and fauna. The abundance and high quality of natural resources in the region allowed them to settle in semi-permanent villages. The first Europeans to settle in the vicinity were the Spanish, who established Mission San Juan Bautista in 1797. Following secularization of the missions, the region was settled by ranchers of mostly European descent. Energy Conservation Energy conservation can be achieved by providing alternative energy sources, such as solar power, and through implementing energy conserving design techniques. The State of California provides incentives. The California Energy Commission also offers solar power rebates available to utility customers in California. In addition to this, individuals are entitled to a tax credit on the cost of a system after rebates.

Air Quality The Plan Area is within the San Benito Valley, which is essentially a southern extension of the Santa Clara Valley. Prevailing northwesterly winds blowing through the Santa Clara Valley transport modified marine air from the coast, as well as pollutants from urbanized areas of the Bay Area, into San  .  

-

R M

Benito County. The Plan Area is within the jurisdiction of the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District. The region experiences ozone and particles measuring 10 µm or less (PM10) levels that exceed state air quality standards.

R M

Section 5.3 Resource Management Goals and Policies The following resource management goals, policies, and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area. Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state and local standards and requirements, on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 also provides guidance on phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements.

Biological Resource Policies Goal RM-1: Promote conservation of natural resources. Policy RM-1.1. Minimize the impact to special status species and their habitat in accordance with federal and state regulatory requirements. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall obtain Incidental Take Authorization from the USFWS (if required) by preparing an acceptable Habitat Conservation Plan that identifies adequate measures to avoid, minimize or compensate for the loss of protected species and habitat. Mitigation may occur off-site, on-site, through payment of in-lieu fees, or any combination as approved by USFWS. [LEED ND SLL Credit 9] Mitigation is intended to occur off-site, and land may be acquired for purposes of species protection through a conservation easement, the details of which would be finalized

-

in consultation with the USFWS as part of the Habitat Conservation Process. To the extent on-site mitigation is proposed, it may include provisions required by USFWS, including without limitation, the following: 

A biological conservation easement of not less than a 100-meter radius shall be provided around the former stock pond. No development other than stormwater runoff and filtering, interpretive signage, fencing and unpaved trails shall take place within the easement. Fencing shall be suitable for protection of the aquatic resources.



Use fencing and low level lighting adjacent to the biological conservation area, with the type of fencing being suitable to allow the passage of animals while still marking the area to be protected from intrusion, and the lighting screened to prevent direct light penetration into the area.

2. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall comply with mitigation measures required by the State Department of Fish and Game regarding the protection of state listed special status species and their habitat. Policy RM-1.2. Allow potential for localized grading in the on-site habitat conservation area. Policy Implementation

1. If a habitat set-aside area is retained on-site, localized grading is allowed within the 100meter radius around the existing dry pond for the purposes of expanding storm water storage within the Plan Area. The amount of grading

       

2. Use vegetated areas within the 100-meter radius area for natural filtration. Prepare a grading plan for the planned habitat set-aside area, if retained on-site, in accordance with the approved Habitat Conservation Plan and with appropriate agency approvals and/or permits prior to grading activities within this area. 3. If all CTS mitigation is conducted outside the Plan Area, grading may occur as needed within the area identified for habitat conservation. Policy RM-1.3. Minimize adverse changes to natural habitats.

Geologic Protection Policies Goal RM-2: Provide a safe and habitable community. Policy RM-2.1. Protect habitats and structures in the vicinity of known fault zones. Policy Implementation

1. Ensure a 135-foot “building exclusion zone” in all plan sets as illustrated in the Constraints Diagram (Figure 7). 2. Limit future use of the “building exclusion zone” to non-habitable improvements (e.g. roadway improvements, park, open space, buffers, trails, etc.). Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land

Policy Implementation

Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

1. Within the Plan Area avoid planting species listed in the California Invasive Plant Council’s inventory as having a Moderate or High rating and affecting the Central West region, or included in the Exotic Pest Plant Council’s “Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern in California” list. [LEED Homes SS-2] 2. Lots and roads shall be arranged to minimize the use of retaining walls. Taper the edge of cut and fill slopes to blend with existing topography or contours on adjacent development or roadways. Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

 .  

-

R M

will be based on the need to collect and store water. This effort is intended to expand the storm water collection and percolation area, but may also enhance habitat, and should be designed with the intent to achieve both purposes.

Soil Protection Policies Goal RM-3: Soil conservation.

R M

Policy RM-3.1. Minimize soil erosion. Policy Implementation

1. Erosion Control Plans shall be submitted to the County Public Works Department for review and approval when submitting subdivision improvement plans. Specific erosion control measures shall be included to protect drainage courses and the on-site habitat conservation area (should it be preserved on-site) from eroded soils and debris during construction. Soil exposed during grading that is no longer under active construction shall be stabilized. 2. Slope stabilization and erosion control (during both the construction and post-construction phases) shall only utilize mesh products that are made of biodegradable natural fiber materials. Plastic materials (such as silt fencing) may only be used if they are relatively solid (cannot entrap wildlife) and are removed from the site following use.

Water Quality Protection Policies Goal RM-4: Adequate disposal, retention and percolation of storm water and protection of storm water quality. Policy RM-4.1. Construct a stormwater collection and disposal system that retains and encourages percolation of stormwater generated within the Plan Area to pre-development levels. Policy RM-4.2. Allow alternative conceptual grading and drainage plans that direct drainage to shared retention basins with the adjacent Gavilan

-

College San Benito Campus, only if the Gavilan College Campus design and construction plans include retention basins with the capacity and water quality treatment measures to accommodate the Fairview Corners Plan Area, or that portion of the Plan Area to be served, so that the Plan Area’s stormwater discharge off-site is maintained at predevelopment levels. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall prepare a storm drainage master plan in accordance with San Benito County design standards, which identifies backbone collection and retention infrastructure needed to serve development within the Plan Area, in accordance with the timing requirements set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. Any improvement plans shall conform to the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan and shall incorporate use of structural and institutional best management practices and low impact development designs for storm water quality management and to minimize soil erosion for the Plan Area and adjacent properties outside the Plan Area. The improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department in accordance with the timing set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. The master developer shall finance and construct the backbone storm drainage collection and retention infrastructure. [LEED ND GIB Credit 8] 2. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall design, finance, and construct subdivision storm drainage collection improvements, which tie into the backbone storm drainage infrastructure system. Stormwater collection system improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval

       

3. Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Low Impact Development (LID) principles when designing storm water runoff facilities. Policy RM-4.3. Utilize best management practices and low impact development designs to minimize surface water quality degradation from discharge of storm drainage. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall prepare and submit a storm water pollution prevention program [SWPPP] application to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the County Public Works Department to secure a NPDES General Construction Permit for the entire Plan Area. The master developer and/or individual developer shall incorporate the structural and institutional best management practices and low impact development designs identified in the storm water management plan in improvement plans for their respective projects. The County Public Works Department must review these plans to ensure inclusion of the practices prior to approval of a grading or building permit for that phase. [GIB Prerequisite 4; Homes SS-4]

2. Prior to construction, contractors and their personnel shall be trained in appropriate best management practices to ensure water quality is protected. Those construction practices shall include erosion control, sediment transfer reduction, and dust control measures. A construction manager familiar with NPDES permit requirements must monitor the construction activities to protect water quality. This provision shall be included as a note on construction improvement plans. [GIB Prerequisite 4; Homes SS-4] 3. No chemical pesticides shall be utilized in the maintenance of common landscaped areas, open space areas, or parks. Fertilizers shall be applied sparingly, and shall be derived from natural sources, such as fish emulsion or manure. 4. The master developer shall cooperate with the County to create a public education program for future residents to increase their understanding of water quality protection, which should include but not be limited to: 

Hazardous material use controls



Hazardous material exposure controls



Hazardous material disposal and recycling

5. Hazardous materials could consist of cleaning products, paint, oil, fertilizers, weed killers etc. The education materials shall encourage the use of alternative methods, and prohibit the dumping of hazardous materials in open space areas

 .  

-

R M

of the County Public Works Department in accordance with the timing set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan.

R M

or the storm drain system. Further, the master developer shall require that all storm drain catch basins are labeled to discourage illegal dumping of hazardous materials. 6. Where feasible, direct roof drainage to pervious surfaces for infiltration. 7. On larger lots (12,000 square feet or above) consider the capture of roof drainage for reuse as irrigation water. 8. To the extent feasible, direct stormwater runoff to percolation swale and basin areas rather than directing stormwater to storm drain pipes.

9. Use biotreatment (natural pollutant filtering) where stormwater runs off paved surfaces onto pervious surfaces. 10. Utilize sediment traps, evaporation basins, flow dissipaters, and other methods to reduce the volume and speed of stormwater run-off and reduce pollutant loads. [LEED ND GIB Credit 8] Related Policies are contained in Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

-

Water Conservation Policies Goal RM-5: Promote conservation of water resources. Policy RM-5.1. Reduce potable water consumption. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall prepare a detailed master recycled water distribution plan that identifies backbone collection infrastructure needed to serve front yards of residential lots, public parks, landscape strips, monument locations, and other open space/landscape areas within the Plan Area. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1] 2. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall comply with the San Benito County Water Conservation Plan in the design of landscape material, irrigation systems, and calculating the allowable water budget for landscape irrigation in the Plan Area. Additional water conservation methods should also be considered for implementation within the Plan Area, such as cisterns to catch and store runoff water for landscape irrigation, the use of native vegetation in landscape materials, and the use of ultra low-flow or dual flush toilets, shower heads and faucets in all residential units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1] Policy RM-5.2. Facilitate water conservation.

       

1. In public spaces and residential front yards less than one acre, the master developer and individual developer(s) shall install drought-tolerant landscaping prior to delivery of residential dwelling units to buyers. On lots of one acre or larger, perimeter drought-tolerant planting shall be provided along the street frontage. Homeowners shall maintain yards in weed-free condition and assure that soil erosion is prevented. 2. Use drought-tolerant landscaping for at least 50 percent of planted yard area, and limit turf to areas of active use, and in no case more than 50 percent of planted yard area. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1; Homes WE-2] 3. Utilize only drought-tolerant landscaping along roads and in public landscaped areas. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1; Homes WE-2]

5. Equip dwellings with low water use washing machines and dishwashers, and dual-flush toilets. [LEED Homes EA-9] 6. Pre-plumb dwellings to accommodate gray water and rainwater recovery and irrigation systems, if feasible and legally permissible. [LEED Homes SS-4; Homes WE-2] 7. Multi-family residential buildings shall include a roof rainwater recovery system for storing irrigation water. 8. Use recycled water for park, streetscape, singlefamily residential front yard and multi-family residential common area irrigation, if available adjacent to the Plan Area at time of construction and permitted under applicable law and regulations. Encourage pre-plumbing to facilitate conversion to recycled water if recycled water is not available at the time of development, but will become available in the future. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes WE-1] Related Policies are contained in Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Air Quality Protection Policies Goal RM-6: Reduced Air Emissions. Policy RM-6.1. Minimize impacts to air quality. Policy Implementation

4. Design irrigation systems to minimize water use, including installation of ground moisture sensor controls, and temporary irrigation systems for drought tolerant plantings to be removed, where feasible, when plantings are established. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4]

1. The use of wood-burning stoves is prohibited; only natural gas stoves are permitted. Require stoves or fireplaces to exceed EPA emissions reductions regulations.

 .  

-

R M

Policy Implementation

R M

2. Prior to the start of construction, the project contractor shall provide a construction dust mitigation plan. The plan shall specify the methods of dust control that would be utilized, demonstrate the availability of needed equipment and personnel, use reclaimed water for dust control, and identify a responsible individual who, if needed, can authorize implementation of additional measures. The plan requirements shall be included on all construction documents and plans, where appropriate. The construction dust mitigation plan shall, at a minimum, include the following measures: 



Limit grading activity to a maximum of 2.2 acres daily. As more detailed construction information becomes available, emissions from grading activities could be reassessed to determine if the area of grading could be increased. Such an assessment would be completed using appropriate assumptions and mitigation measures. Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods. Active areas adjacent to existing businesses should be kept damp at all times. If necessary, during windy periods, watering is to occur on all days of the week regardless of on-site activities.



Cover soil or maintain at least two feet of freeboard on all hauling trucks.



Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.



Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles.

-



Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.



Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.



Suspend excavation and grading activity when hourly-average winds exceed 15 mph and visible dust clouds cannot be contained within the site.

3. The developer shall reduce Nitrogen Oxide (NOX) exhaust and particulate matter emissions by implementing one of the following measures prior to the start of construction: 

Provide a plan, acceptable by the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, demonstrating that the heavy-duty (> 50 horsepower) off-road vehicles and equipment to be used in the construction project, including owned, leased and subcontractor vehicles, will achieve a project wide fleet-average 20 percent NOX reduction and 45 percent particulate reduction compared to the most recent California Air Resources Board fleet average for the time of construction; or



The developer shall provide a plan, acceptable by the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, that all off-road construction vehicles/equipment greater than 50 horsepower that will be used on site for more than one week shall: 1) be manufactured during or after 1996, 2) shall meet the NOX emissions standard of 6.9 grams per brake horsepower hour, and 3) shall be equipped with diesel particulate matter filters.

       

The contractors shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g. compressors).



Signs at the construction site shall be clearly visible to advise that that diesel equipment standing idle for more than five minutes shall be turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate or other bulk materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks may keep their engines running continuously if onsite and staged away from residential areas.



Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions.



Stage large diesel powered equipment at least 200 feet from any active land uses (e.g., residences).

4. Divert a minimum of 25 percent of total materials taken off the construction site from landfills or incinerators. [LEED Homes MR-3] Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6), Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2), and Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Cultural Resources Protection Policies Goal RM-7: Respectful treatment of cultural resources. Policy RM-7.1. Protect archaeological resources. Policy Implementation

1. If midden soil, cultural features or potentially significant cultural resources, or human remains

are discovered during construction, work shall be halted within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find until a qualified professional archaeologist can evaluate the find. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated and implemented. 2. If cultural resources are located, mitigation shall include, at a minimum, recovery of significant cultural materials and professional analysis based on the types and quantities of those materials recovered, which might include analysis of lithic artifacts and materials, radiocarbon dating of shell fragments, bead analysis, faunal analysis, etc. Cultural materials recovered during monitoring and/or mitigation, other than those directly associated with Native American burials, should be curated in the public domain at a suitable research facility. 3. If human remains are found during construction there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of San Benito County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendent (MLD) from the deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human  .  

-

R M



R M

remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner, consistent with Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.

Energy Conservation Policies

2. If the Gavilan College San Benito Campus develops a community geothermal heat pump energy or heating system, extension of the system into the Plan Area shall be considered. [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10]

Source: Geothermal Education Office 2000. Introduction to Geothermal Energy-Geothermal Power Plant, Slide 37 of 122.

Goal RM-8: An environmentally sustainable community.

Policy RM-8.2. Facilitate energy conservation through design techniques.

Policy RM-8.1. Facilitate alternative energy sources.

Policy Implementation

1. Design houses to facilitate passive solar heating during the winter, and use cool roofs and thermal window coverings to reduce solar heat gain during the summer.

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall pre-plumb/pre-wire at least one-third of units for solar power and shall offer solar power as an option on all units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10] -

2. Design lots and houses to maximize rooftop solar energy output potential. Where feasible, roof pitches and roof orientation should be designed to maximize solar exposure to rooftop energy panels (minimum 300 square feet of unobstructed roof area facing within 30 degrees of south). [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10] 3. The developer shall make photovoltaic electrical systems and solar hot water or tankless water heaters available for at least one-third of dwelling units. Photovoltaic pre-wiring/conduit shall be installed and photovoltaic electrical systems

       

4. Equip dwellings with energy efficient water heaters and heat recovery drain systems. 5. Vegetation within 10 feet of a property line that is deemed to interfere with solar access at an adjoining lot shall be subject to height restrictions as necessary to protect such solar access. 6. Porches shall be placed only on the east, south, or west side of houses to provide shading in the summer, and to maximize northern light exposure to the interior of houses. 7. South and west-facing elevations shall be designed with roof overhangs that block summer sun from windows and allow penetration of winter sun. 8. Design residences to minimize the need for artificial lighting. Provide ample windows; light towers; light wells; dormers; skylights; or other features to enhance natural lighting.

10. Landscaping should include deciduous trees to shade south and west-facing walls in the summer and allow sunlight penetration in the winter. 11. Provide communications wiring within all dwelling units to facilitate telecommuting. 12. Provide programmable thermostats for all heating systems. 13. Use heating systems with an Annual Fuel Use Efficiency (AFUE) of 95% or greater, seal all ducts, and insulate ducts in unconditioned spaces. 14. Equip all garages/carports with a 240-volt 40amp circuit suitable for electric vehicle charging. 15. If multi-family uses are developed, the parking lot shall be shaded by either high albedo (reflective) roofs), roofs with solar panels, or trees that provide a minimum of 50 percent shade within 10 years of planting. Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

9. To increase natural light to small residential lots, consideration should be given to the orientation of roof gables and the effect of the roof line on yard shading.

 .  

-

R M

and solar hot water or tankless water heaters shall be offered as an option on all dwelling units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10]

R M This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Article 6.0

PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES Article 6.0 identifies the public facilities and service needs for the Plan Area and provides a framework for expansion of infrastructure systems.

Article 6.0

PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES Article 6.0 identifies the public facilities and service needs for the Plan Area and provides a framework for expansion of infrastructure systems.

PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES

Article 6.0 of the Specific Plan describes the existing infrastructure available to support the new development within the Plan Area, the necessary upgrades to that existing infrastructure, and the proposed infrastructure plan for the Plan Area.

Section 6.1 Public Facilities and Services Objectives The public facilities and services objectives are to extend public infrastructure to serve the future residents within the Plan Area and install the infrastructure to coincide with phased development.

Section 6.2 Water, Wastewater, and Drainage Infrastructure Plan Public facilities and services refers to water supply, treatment, and distribution; recycled water supply, mixing, and distribution; wastewater collection and treatment; and storm water collection and disposal.

Water Domestic Water Supply and Demand The Plan Area is located within the Sunnyslope County Water District’s (SSCWD) Service Area boundary for potable water as illustrated in Figure 18, SSCWD Service Area. Water service in the area is provided by SSCWD. A Water Supply Assessment (WSA) was completed by the SSCWD in July 2008. SSCWD determined that with its existing water supply and planned well improvements and new well construction, SSCWD has sufficient water to serve current and planned developments, including the Plan Area. The water would be delivered to the Plan Area via extension of SSCWD existing water mains. An “Intent to Serve” letter from SSCWD dated March 18, 2010 is presented in Appendix E. Domestic Water Distribution Domestic water is available to the Plan Area via the existing 12-inch water main that runs along the west side of Fairview Road. A new domestic water

 .    

-

P F  S

Article 6.0

P F  S

line would tie-in at the intersection of Fairview Road and the Cielo Vista Drive entry road. The new public system would run along the Cielo Vista Drive extension and distribute water throughout the residential streets. The pipes would be sized to accommodate the project in accordance with the applicable requirements of the County and Sunnyslope. At the eastern boundary of the Plan Area, the line would be extended outside the Plan Area and be connected to the end of the existing 6-inch potable water main at the head of the Harbern Way cul-de-sac. This potable water connection will provide the Plan Area with a redundant connection point as required by County standards. Figure 19, Potable Water System Layout, shows the existing and proposed water mains for the Plan Area. Recycled Water Use Recycled wastewater is not available at this time; however, the use of tertiary-treated wastewater is planned to be available in the future from the planned Sunnyslope Recycled Water System. In anticipation of this potential system, this Specific Plan includes policy provisions for the installation of purple pipe infrastructure to enable recycled water distribution through the Plan Area once available. Figure 20, Future Recycled Wastewater Route, shows the future recycled wastewater route to the Plan Area. Based upon currently available information, it is anticipated thzat the recycled water would be available in the future from the planned system near

-

the intersection of Ridgemark Drive and Marks Drive on the Ridgemark Golf and Country Club property. (Sunnyslope Well # 8) It is anticipated that, once available, the extension of purple piping within the Plan Area streets may serve front yards of residential lots, public parks, landscape strips and medians, monument locations, and other open space/landscape areas within the Plan Area.

Wastewater Wastewater Treatment The City of Hollister’s Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant (DWTP) is the primary wastewater treatment plant for the Hollister Urban Area, which are the areas within the County that are designated to be served by that facility. The Plan Area falls within this Hollister Urban Area. The City of Hollister, the San Benito County Water District, San Benito County and Sunnyslope entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and a Statement of Intent to develop the Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Master Plan. This master plan provides a long-term vision to guide water and wastewater improvements in the Hollister urban area, which includes the City of Hollister and adjacent unincorporated areas of San Benito County designated for urban development, including the project site. This master plan designates the City’s DWTP as the Regional Wastewater Treatment provider to the Hollister Urban Area, which includes the Plan Area. One of the key objectives of the MOU, as agreed to by the three agencies, is for the City of Hollister’s recently expanded DWTP to provide regional wastewater treatment for land within the Hollister Urban Area. The Plan Area will comply with the applicable requirements of the Hollister Urban Area Water and Wastewater Master Plan.

       

FAIRVIEW CORNERS RESIDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AREA FAIRVIEW CORNERS DEVELOPMENT AREA OF SPECIAL STUDY

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Sunnyslope County Water District-SSCWD 2010

Figure 18

SSCWD Service Area and SOI Boundaries Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

GAVILAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE SAN BENITO CAMPUS

0

500 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2010

Figure 19

Potable Water System Layout Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Area

A

Rid

ge

ma

rk

Dr

.

Fairview Rd.

Gavilan Community College San Benito Campus

irl in e Hi gh w

Mixing Pond

ay

Ridgemark Golf and Country Club

Well 8

1100 feet

Tertiary - Treated Recycled Wastewater Chlorinated Well Water (No Restrictions) Fairview Corners Development Area of Special Study Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan Area

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Google Earth 2009

Figure 20

Future Recycled Wastewater Route Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Wastewater Conveyance Wastewater generated within the Project Area would receive tertiary treatment as required by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. It is anticipated that project wastewater would be treated through a connection to the DWTP in accordance with the adopted Hollister Water and Wastewater Master Plan. Parcels within the Project Area which are a minimum of one acre in size may use septic systems, if otherwise consistent with County and City of Hollister regulations and design criteria, However, it is intended that the Plan Area homes will connect to the DWTP. There are two possible options for connecting to the existing City of Hollister wastewater conveyance system and associated improvements, as illustrated in Figure 21, Wastewater Conveyance Alternatives. Option 1 would construct a new sewer main across Fairview Road and connect to the existing system at the intersection of Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive. This connection would discharge the proposed Plan Area sewage through the existing 8-inch main to the western end of the Cielo Vista subdivision. From Enterprise Road, wastewater would flow within the existing DWTP lines to

Option 2 would construct a new sewer main within Fairview Road running south to Airline Highway, which would be solely for the Plan Area. From here, a new main would be constructed within Airline Highway and Enterprise Road to serve the Plan Area, as well as other existing and approved development in the vicinity. A new main solely for the Plan Area would then be constructed within Enterprise Road. From Enterprise Road, the wastewater will flow within the City of Hollister’s existing wastewater lines to the Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant, located on San Juan Road (State Route 156) approximately 5.5 miles northwest of the Plan Area. Both options are gravity-fed systems that would connect to the existing sewer main on Enterprise Road, west of the Plan Area. Neither option requires the construction of pumping or lift stations to convey the wastewater to existing wastewater infrastructure.

Storm Drainage Existing Drainage Existing topography consists of undulating hills, with a relative overall elevation change of about 45 feet from east to west across the site. Existing drainage generally flows in three directions. The site rises from Fairview Road to the crest of a hill located approximately 1,100 feet east of Fairview Road. Existing drainage generally flows in three directions: west of the crest of the hill, the site drains toward Fairview Road; to the

 .    

-

P F  S

the DWTP. This main contains sufficient capacity to serve the Plan Area and the existing Cielo Vista subdivision.

P F  S

east, the site drains to a low point in the northwestern corner (near the former stock pond); and along the southern boundary, the hill is interrupted by a saddle, which causes drainage to flow toward the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, as shown in Figure 22, Existing Drainage.

the habitat set aside area, if this area is set aside for habitat mitigation. A general depiction of where cut and fill will be balanced across the Plan Area is illustrated in Figure 24, Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram.

About one-third of the Plan Area site drains generally to the northeast toward a Santa Ana Creek tributary. The remainder of the Plan Area site drains west and south toward an unnamed tributary of the San Benito River.

Section 6.3 Public Utilities and Communications

Proposed Storm Water Drainage and Collection Infrastructure Figure 23, Conceptual Drainage Plan, presents the generalized flow patterns and potential storm water collection areas for the Plan Area. The Plan Area would substantially maintain the existing drainage patterns on site. It is anticipated that stormwater flows for these drainage areas would be collected by a network of curbs and gutters, storm drains, bioswales and retention basins, with a primary retention pond placed in the location of the former stock pond, subject to the requirements of USFWS AND CDFG. Specific Plan policies also provide for the sharing of drainage capacities between the Plan Area and the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus, so long as certain conditions are satisfied. In any event the Plan Area project would design the capacity of its stormwater retention facilities based on a 100-year storm event and be adequately sized to retain and infiltrate stormwater on the site at or below pre-development levels. To expand storm water storage capacity within the Plan Area as cut and fill is balanced across the Plan Area, grading may be allowed in the former stock pond area, if not prohibited by USFWS and CDFG. The grading within this area can also be used to enhance

-

The Plan Area requires the extension of public utilities and communications to serve the future residents. Public utilities refer to electricity and gas; communications refer to telephone and cable television.

Public Utilities Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) supplies electricity and natural gas services to the unincorporated County. Distribution of electric power is accomplished primarily through overhead systems extending from various electrical transmission lines in the area. Natural gas is distributed through a series of gas distribution lines located within roadway rightsof-way. Electric and gas utilities are available in the vicinity and can be extended to the Plan Area. All new utility lines will be located underground in the Plan Area as required by County standards.

Telephone & Cable Services Telephone and cable services are available through various providers. Residents may want a landline installed in the home, cellular service, or internet telephone service. Traditional phone service in the unincorporated county is provided by AT&T.

       

LEGEND ALTERNATE #1 ALTERNATE #2

0Not to scale

? feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Kier & Wright 2009

Figure 21

Wastewater Conveyance Alternatives Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

GAVILAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE SAN BENITO CAMPUS

PLAN AREA BOUNDARY

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

EXISTING DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY

Figure 22

Existing Drainage Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

GAVILAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE SAN BENITO CAMPUS

PLAN AREA BOUNDARY

0

300 feet PROPOSED DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

Figure 23

Conceptual Drainage Plan Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

GAVILAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE SAN BENITO CAMPUS

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2010

Figure 24

Conceptual Cut and Fill Diagram Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

P F  S

This side intentionally left blank.

-

       

Section 6.4 Public Safety, Schools, Parks, and Solid Waste Collection This section describes the public services available to support the new development within the Plan Area. These public services include public safety, schools, parks, and solid waste collection.

Police, Fire, and Emergency Medical Services The San Benito County Sheriff’s Department provides law enforcement throughout the unincorporated areas of the county, and provides police support to the City of Hollister as needed. The Department’s adopted target ratio is one officer per 800 residents, although the actual service ratio currently is approximately one deputy for every 4,000 residents. The department headquarters is located at 451 Fourth Street in Hollister, approximately four (4) miles northwest of the Plan Area. The Department consists of eight (8) units and divisions and is staffed by twenty-nine (29) sworn officers operating thirteen (13) marked patrol cars.

eight (8) minutes for emergencies and fifteen (15) minutes for non-emergencies. Between the hours of 12:00 AM and 6:00 AM, response times are reduced to an average of five (5) minutes for emergencies and twelve (12) minutes for non-emergencies. The San Benito County Fire Department (SBCFD) provides fire protection for the Plan Area, which is operated under contract with CAL Fire. The Plan Area is presently part of San Benito County’s Service Area 26 (CSA 26). This service area includes most of northern San Benito County, except properties within Hollister and San Juan Bautista. County Fire funds a Fire Marshal position with a vehicle and five (5) firefighting personnel to achieve two (2) firefighters on one engine per day.

Despite the lower than optimal staffing ratio, the Department has been able to provide adequate law enforcement services to the County, typically responding within ten (10) minutes. The Department maintains an average response time of

 .    

-

P F  S

Residents have the option to choose between numerous cell phone service providers. Charter Communications provides cable television service to the Plan Area, as well as cable access to the internet. Other internet providers are available for dialup, cable or network service. The services of both companies would be extended to meet the needs of the Plan Area.

P F  S

The nearest fire station is located at 1979 Fairview Road, approximately two miles north of the Plan Area. Current staffing levels at the San Benito County Fire Department (SBCFD) are five (5) fulltime firefighters and twenty-one (21) volunteer firefighters. Recognized standards are to employ one firefighter per every 1,500 residents. The County maintains a service goal of six (6) minutes for fire and medical response. Although the SBCFD is supplemented by volunteer paid-call firefighters, the above objective is rarely met. It is estimated that the SBCFD would have a five to six (5-6) minute response time to the Plan Area. The SBCFG operates on an Auto-Aid agreement with the City of Hollister Fire Department (HFD). As part of the agreement, the nearest fire engine to an emergency call is the first to respond, the nearest HFD station to the Plan Area is Station 2, located at 1000 Union Road, approximately 3.4 miles west of the Plan Area. Station 2 consists of three (3) firefighters and one (1) engine. The San Benito County Department of Emergency Services oversees emergency medical response services (EMS) to ensure that emergency medical care is available and consistent at the emergency scene, during transport, and in the emergency room. The EMS system includes fire departments, ambulance companies, hospitals, police departments, the American Red Cross and the American Heart Association. The nearest hospital is the Hazel Hawkins Medical Center located about two miles to the northwest.

Elementary School The Hollister School District (HSD) serves a student population of 5,533 students from kindergarten through eighth grade (K-8). The HSD consists of eight (8) elementary schools, including two (2) magnet schools, within six (6) elementary school campuses. Of the non-magnet schools, four (4) are kindergarten through sixth grade (K-6) and two (2) kindergarten through eighth grade (K-8). HSD also operates two (2) middle schools, grades seventh through eighth (7-8). The nearest elementary school to the Plan Area is Cerra Vista Elementary School, located at 2151 Cerra Vista Drive in Hollister, approximately 2.0 miles to the northwest. HSD will provide school bus service for an elementary student residing more than 1.5 miles from school. Approximately 3.0 miles to the northwest of the Plan Area is Rancho San Justo Middle School, located at 1201 Rancho Drive in Hollister. HSD will provide school bus service for a middle school student residing more than 2.0 miles from school. Based on the HSD’s student generation rate, the total anticipated K-8 maximum enrollment is 124 students. High School The San Benito High School District (SBHSD) consists of one (1) high school, San Benito High School serving 2,940 students from ninth to twelfth grade

Schools The Plan Area is located within the boundaries of the Hollister School District (HSD) and the San Benito High School District (SBHSD). The unincorporated areas of San Benito County and the City of Hollister are served by both districts. -

       

In the future, it is anticipated that the SBHSD will need to construct another high school to accommodate growth in the County, including the Plan Area. It is anticipated that high school students from the Plan Area will attend that new high school. The Plan Area is adjacent to the planned Gavilan College San Benito Campus.

Parks Article 2.0 Land Use Plan and Development Standards establishes the general location and arrangement of parks and open space lands within the Plan Area. The San Benito County Code requirement for open space and parks is discussed in Article 2.0. The maximum requirement of 3.4 acres is based on 220 units and will be satisfied by the provision of open space and parks phased with Plan Area development, or as otherwise allowed in accordance with County standards. Article 5.0 Resource Management includes policies that address conservation of resources, including within park or open space areas. This Article provides direction on the types and designs of park facilities to serve Plan Area residents, and funding for maintenance of the parks.

The parks will be provided for the use of residents during daylight hours. Parks facilities will focus on play equipment and walking paths.

Solid Waste Collection Solid waste generated at the Plan Area would be sent to the John Smith Landfill, located at 2650 John Smith Road, approximately two miles east of the Plan Area. The San Benito County Integrated Waste Management Department is responsible for oversight of landfill operations in the unincorporated San Benito County. Recology San Benito provides solid waste, recycling and yard waste collection in the unincorporated county, including the Plan Area. The Plan Area would generate approximately 326 tons per year of solid waste. The John Smith Landfill has been in operation for approximately 30 years, and has an estimated remaining capacity of an additional 17 years. A site adjacent to the existing landfill has been identified as a future landfill site, and it is anticipated that this additional site will be utilized to fulfill the obligation of the County and its incorporated cities to maintain the required disposal capacity for the County as a whole. The County is also researching alternatives to landfill of waste, in keeping with greenhouse gas reduction measures.

Section 6.5 Public Facilities and Services Goals and Policies The following public facilities and services goals, policies, and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area. Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state and local standards and requirements, on Plan Area

 .    

-

P F  S

(9-12). San Benito High School, located at 1220 Monterey Street in Hollister is approximately 3.0 miles to the northwest of the Plan Area. The SBHSD estimates future enrollment on the basis of 0.23 high school students per dwelling unit. Based on a maximum planned development of 220 dwelling units in the Plan Area, the total anticipated 9-12 enrollment is 42 students. San Benito High School is currently at capacity.

P F  S

development. Article 7.0 also provides guidance on phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements. Goal PF-1: Adequate water supply and water infrastructure to meet the demands of the Plan Area. Policy PF-1.1. Ensure sufficient water supply for the build-out of the Plan Area. Policy Implementation

1. The Sunnyslope County Water District has prepared a Water Supply Assessment, and determined that there is an adequate water supply to serve the Plan Area. Continue to work with SSCWD to formalize the “will serve” letter provided (see Appendix E) into a service agreement for the Plan Area. Policy PF-1.2. Construct a water supply system that expands on and is integrated with the existing system, meets the needs of future development, and, where appropriate, subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall install water supply system improvements that tie into the backbone infrastructure system, which shall be installed by the master developer. Water supply improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Sunnyslope County Water District (SSCWD) for consistency with the approved Potable Water Master Plan and Recycled Water Master Plan, as well as related SSCWD requirements, in accordance with Article 7.0.

-

2. Where water infrastructure is built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, these improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with Article 7.0, and may be set forth in greater detail in the Development Agreement. 3. As a condition of approval for each tentative map, the developer shall grant easements for the SSCWD to maintain water supply mains to be located in the Plan Area. Policy PF-1.3. Encourage the development of a reclaimed water distribution system, including purple piping that expands on and is integrated with the existing system, and meets the needs of future development. Policy Implementation

1. To the extent if is feasible for the developer to include a reclaimed a reclaimed water distribution system in the Plan Area, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for the construction of the reclaimed water distribution system, including purple piping within Plan Area streets to pipe connect to the future recycled wastewater pipeline along Fairview Road, in phases consistent with the build-out of the Plan Area.

       

Related Policies are contained in Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

Goal PF-2: Adequate wastewater collection and treatment infrastructure to meet the demands of the Plan Area. Policy PF-2.1. Construct a wastewater collection system that expands on and is integrated with the existing system that connects to the City of Hollister’s Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant (DWTP), meets the needs of future development within the Plan Area, and, where appropriate, subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement. Policy PF-2.2. The demand for wastewater collection and treatment may be provided for by septic systems on lots not less than one acre in size. Lots less than one acre in size, and where the number of lots within the Plan Area exceeds 45, shall not be served by the use of septic systems, but shall be served by the City of Hollister DWTP.

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer shall work with the City of Hollister to ensure a “will serve” commitment, and prepare a master wastewater collection plan that identifies backbone collection infrastructure needed to serve new development within the Plan Area. Backbone infrastructure improvement plans for development within the Plan Area must be reviewed and approved by the City of Hollister for consistency with City standards prior to or concurrent with the approval by the County Public Works Department. The timing of approval shall occur in accordance with Article 7.0. 2. Where wastewater infrastructure is built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, those improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with Article 7.0 and as set forth in the Development Agreement.

3. Individual project developer(s) shall install wastewater collection improvements within the boundaries of their individual projects that tie into the backbone wastewater collection system. Wastewater collection system improvement plans for individual projects shall be subject to review and approval of the City of Hollister for consistency with the master wastewater collection plan and related City standards prior to or concurrent with County staff approval. The timing of the required approval shall occur in accordance with Article 7.0 of any individual subdivision phase final map or commercial development within the Plan Area.  .    

-

P F  S

2. Where the recycled wastewater distribution system or other associated improvements are built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, those improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with applicable standards and criteria, in accordance with Article 7.0 and as set forth in the Development Agreement.

P F  S

4. As a part of the final map and improvement plans, the developer shall grant easements to allow for maintenance of wastewater collection improvements to be located in the Plan Area. 5. Septic systems provided to serve the Plan Area shall meet County design, construction and maintenance standards. Designs shall be submitted prior to approval of tentative maps. Goal, Policies, and Policy Implementation for Storm Drainage and Water Quality Management are contained in Article 5.0, Resource Management. Goal PF-3: Adequate public utilities and communications infrastructure. Policy PF-3.1. Provide electrical, gas, and communications infrastructure that serves the needs of the Plan Area, and, where appropriate, is subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement.

underground communications infrastructure, which will assist in promoting telecommuting and home occupations. 2. Where public utilities and communications infrastructure are built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, these improvements shall be subject to the criteria provided by the County. Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

Goal PF-4: Adequate essential public safety services to meet the needs of future residents. Policy PF-4.1. Provide and maintain public safety services that are adequate in equipment and resources to respond to emergencies and calls for service within the Plan Area, and that meet the response time of the San Benito County Sheriff and Fire Departments.

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct all new electrical, gas, and communications lines underground within the Plan Area, in coordination with the service providers. Existing lines and cables within the Plan Area shall also be placed underground. The master developer shall work with the telephone and cable service providers to provide the most technically advanced

-

Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall pay the public safety impact fees to the County, consistent with the County’s fee program and/or the development agreement. Fees shall be paid prior to receiving a building permit for each residential unit, or as otherwise stipulated in the fee ordinance or Development Agreement.

       

Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3), Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6), and

2. Provide a small park/tot lot within 1,500 feet of each residential lot, if possible. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL-6]

Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

Goal PF-5: Adequate school services to meet the needs of future residents. Policy PF-5.1. Ensure access to adequate education. Policy Implementation

1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall pay the state mandated school impact fees to the County/School Districts, consistent with the state required development fees. Fees shall be paid prior to receiving a building permit for each residential unit, or as otherwise stipulated in the fee ordinance or Development Agreement.

3. Each park/tot lot shall have trash and recycling receptacles, seating, and shade trees. 4. To the extent feasible, pathways and trails shall be constructed with a smooth surface that is at least partly pervious to water, such as decomposed granite. 5. Pathways will be landscaped with shade trees to facilitate use on hot days. 6. Parks shall be open from dawn until dusk. Policy PF-6.2. Park Maintenance shall be selffunded. Policy Implementation

Goal PF-6: Adequate park facilities to allow for recreation. Policy PF-6.1. Provide on-site parks and open spaces. Policy Implementation

1. Utilize areas adjacent to any on-site biological conservation easement to provide opportunities for enjoyment of the open space.

1. Park development will be phased to occur concurrently with the development of the Plan Area, each individual neighborhood developer shall construct those components of the park system that is within its neighborhood or adjacent street frontage in accordance with the Parks Master Plan. 2. The master developer shall establish a funding mechanism or district, such as a CSA, CSD, CFD, or some other entity, to ensure that parks remain public and long-term park maintenance is funded without use of County general funds or parks funds. If park maintenance is funded by a private homeowner’s association, the parks will be private. Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

 .    

-

P F  S

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land

P F  S

Goal PF-7: Adequate solid waste services to meet the needs of future residents. Policy PF-7.1. Ensure adequate availability of solid waste disposal services and reduction, reuse, and recycling programs. Policy Implementation

1. As a condition of approval of any subdivision tentative or parcel map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain verification from Recology San Benito that it can provide solid waste collection services to meet demand from build out of the Plan Area. Waste collection services shall be financed through the most recently adopted fee program of Recology San Benito.

-

2. It is anticipated that Recology San Benito will provide curbside recycling service to residential neighborhoods. Where curbside pick-up is not practical, conveniently located centralized recycling collection and storage facilities will be provided by the developers. 3. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall distribute, to all home buyers, the educational program provided by the service providers as part of a countywide waste reduction, reuse and recycling effort. 4. Require all construction contracts to include construction waste reduction and recycling clauses. 5. Require public-use recycling cans at all locations where public-use refuse cans are provided.

       

Article 7.0

Plan implementation and financing Article 7.0 summarizes the administration, and responsibilities and obligations for implementing the Specific Plan. This Article addresses collectively, the implementation of goals and policies within each Article. It includes a summary of capital improvements and identifies methods by which development within the Plan Area may be financed.

Plan Implementation

Article 7.0 addresses the implementation of the Specific Plan, specifically Plan Administration and Plan Responsibilities and Obligations. Section 7.1, Plan Administration, describes the initial approvals and entitlements necessary to authorize the Specific Plan, as well as the subsequent entitlements, in substantial compliance with the provisions of the Specific Plan that will further guide the development of the Plan Area. Section 7.2, Plan Responsibilities and Obligations describes the roles of the County and Developers for implementing the Specific Plan, involving compliance with the provisions of the Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, conditions of approval, mitigation requirements, Plan Area phasing, financing, and long-term maintenance, as well as implementing an Affordable Housing Program.

Section 7.1 Plan Administration In general, references to the Specific Plan in this Article are referring to the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan. In the event and to the extent there is any conflict between the Development



Agreement and any other project approvals, including, without limitation, the Specific Plan, the Affordable Housing Program, Tentative, Final or Parcel Maps, or the Project Conditions of Approval, then the Development Agreement shall prevail. The initial project entitlements, including certification of a Final EIR, Specific Plan and Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMRP) adoption, adoption of an Affordable Housing Program and of a Development Agreement, and the subsequent approval of the other required entitlements for the project, will establish the framework within which development will occur. It is intended that all subsequent development entitlements will fit within the framework established by the initial project approvals, to provide consistent, detailed guidance for development of the Plan Area in compliance with the specific requirements, goals and policies contained in the initial project approval documents. These subsequent entitlements and approvals include:  Project Area Master Plans;  Large Lot Parcel Map(s), Tentative Map(s), and Parcel Map(s) or Final Map(s), as required

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-

Plan Implementation and Financing

Article 7.0

Plan Implementation and Financing

under San Benito County Code Sections 23.03.002(A) and 23.03.003(A), for all or a portion of the Plan Area, including the Project Conditions of Approval for each such Plan Area tentative map; and  Other subsequent entitlements and administrative approvals (both discretionary and ministerial) including, without limitation, conditional use permits, design review, permits and building permits.

the zoning for the Plan Area. As set forth more fully in the Fairview Corners Development Agreement, to the extent any standard or other provision in this Specific Plan conflicts with the County Code, including, without limitation, the County’s Zoning Ordinance, the standard or other provision set forth herein shall control. Unless expressly modified herein, the provisions of the San Benito County Code shall remain in full force and effect and shall continue to apply to the Plan Area. Project Conditions of Approval

Relationship of Specific Plan with Other Regulations Concurrently with the adoption of this Specific Plan, the San Benito County General Plan and certain provisions of the San Benito County Code will be amended to include language recognizing the existence of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan. The Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan, along with the Fairview Corners Residential Development Agreement, Affordable Housing Program and other required approvals and entitlements, shall govern development of the Plan Area. General Plan and Zoning The General Plan will be amended to reflect the adoption of the Specific Plan to recognize this Specific Plan in the County’s Area of Special Study and the County’s General Plan. Once the Specific Plan is adopted, the General Plan Amendments will recognize the Specific Plan as establishing general plan direction within the Plan Area. County Code The Specific Plan establishes a set of goals, policies, implementation standards, and guidelines for development within the Plan Area, and shall constitute

7-

The implementation of the Specific Plan will require developer actions to obtain subsequent entitlements in compliance with the applicable provisions contained in the Specific Plan, Development Agreement and other project approvals, and developer compliance with Project Conditions of Approval (as defined below). “Project Conditions of Approval” are defined as (i) County’s standard conditions of approval for any permit, approval or entitlement which are not inconsistent with the Specific Plan, and (ii) County’s project-specific conditions of approval imposed in connection with the County’s future approval of tentative map(s) covering all or a portion of the Plan Area, conditional use permit(s), and/or design review. The Project Conditions of Approval must be consistent with the applicable provisions set forth in the Specific Plan, Development Agreement and other project approvals. Applicable Federal, State and Local Law Subsequent project approvals relating to the permitting and construction of all improvements within or serving the Plan Area, including, without limitation, large-lot parcel maps, tentative maps and parcel maps and/or final maps, grading permits, improvement plan approval, building permits, and conditional

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Initial County Approvals There are a number of County actions required for initial entitlement of the Fairview Corners Residential Plan Area. The following entitlement actions taken by San Benito County will ensure that mitigation measures, policy implementation, zoning development standards, and Development Agreement provisions serve as the governing regulations for the Plan Area:  Certification of the Specific Plan Final EIR;  Adoption by Resolution of a General Plan Amendment to recognize this Specific Plan in the Area of Special Study and the County’s General Plan, along with General Plan consistency findings;  Adoption by Resolution of the Specific Plan incorporating all conditions of approval imposed on the Plan Area by the Board of Supervisors;  Adoption by Ordinance of amendments to the County’s zoning map to reflect the new Fairview Corners Specific Plan designation and other conforming amendments, as needed, to the County Code;



 Adoption by Ordinance of the zoning ordinance text amendments to reflect the Fairview Corners Specific Plan provisions as the zoning for the Plan Area.  Adoption by Ordinance of the Development Agreement between the County of San Benito and the master developer (and successors and assigns) that specifies the obligations and rights of the parties involved in implementing development with the Plan Area, including within or by separate agreement an Affordable Housing Program;  Adoption by Resolution of the required CEQA findings, including a statement of overriding considerations, as appropriate, and adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP). EIR Certification Certification of the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR, including findings that identify the Project’s significant environmental impacts and mitigation measures that must be implemented as part of the Specific Plan, is the first County action. The mitigation measures shall be reflected in the Project’s MMRP and imposed as conditions of approval on initial and subsequent discretionary approvals. General Plan Amendment Amendment of the County General Plan to: 1) change the General Plan Land Use Map to show the Plan Area as Fairview Corners Residential-Specific Plan (FVC-SP); and 2) make other specific conforming amendments (as needed) to the General Plan to ensure consistency between the General Plan and the Specific Plan (collectively, General Plan

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-

Plan Implementation and Financing

use permits, shall be subject to the uniform codes, regulations and requirements imposed on all development under applicable federal, state and local law, as well as all other County codes, regulations and requirements which are consistent with the applicable provisions in the Specific Plan, Development Agreement, and other project approvals, including Project Conditions of Approval. The term “applicable standards and requirements” shall refer to all of the foregoing described applicable federal, state and local codes, regulations and requirements.

Plan Implementation and Financing

Amendments). The General Plan Amendments will recognize the Specific Plan as establishing general plan direction within the Plan Area. Specific Plan The Specific Plan, adopted by resolution, establishes land use and development regulations, policy guidance and other applicable standards and requirements which will be incorporated into the County’s zoning code for the Plan Area. Zoning Amendments Approval of County Code and Zoning Amendments, including approval of this Specific Plan as the applicable zoning for the Plan Area, by: 1) changing the text to reflect the new zoning designation of Fairview Corners Residential--Specific Plan (FVC--SP); and 2) changing the County’s Zoning Map to show the Plan Area as zoned FVC--SP. Development Agreement The County and the Fairview Corners’ applicant will enter into a Development Agreement, which will set out the parties’ respective rights and obligations in connection with development of the Plan Area. CEQA Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Program In approving the Specific Plan and related implementing actions, the County will make CEQA findings and adopt a MMRP as well as a Statement of Overriding Considerations, as appropriate.

development of the Plan Area, including, without limitation, Tentative Subdivision Maps, Final Maps and/or Parcel Maps, Conditional Use Permits, Design Review, Grading Permits, Building Permits, and approval of Subdivision Improvement Agreements. The Plan Area’s map review and approval process, as well as design review, are described further below. The County shall not issue any entitlement, permit or approval in connection with the Plan Area unless said entitlement, permit or approval is in substantial compliance with the Specific Plan, the Development Agreement and other project approvals. In addition, subsequent entitlements for the Plan Area may be subject to other applicable standards and requirements, as described in this Specific Plan. Subdivision Maps Development of the Plan Area will require the subdivision of the Plan Area to allow development in multiple phases, which is governed by the Subdivision Map Act (Gov’t Code §§ 66410 et seq.) and the County’s Subdivision Ordinance. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) proposing to subdivide and develop any portion of the Plan Area shall comply with the Subdivision Map Act, the County’s Subdivision Ordinance, and all applicable aspects of the Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, and other project approvals, as well as all other applicable standards and requirements. Proposed subdivisions shall be submitted to and approved by the County of San Benito prior to development of the Plan Area. Large-Lot Parcel Maps

Subsequent County Approvals and Compliance Following the County Board of Supervisors’ actions on the initial County approvals, subsequent entitlement steps must occur to implement the proposed 7-

A large-lot parcel map for purposes of financing or parcelization only (which will not propose any improvements or allow any development) may be filed to divide the Plan Area into separate legal parcels. This type of map may be used to create Plan

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

properties, general roadway alignment to indicate adequacy for vehicle turns, including those owned or operated by residents, services, and especially emergency response equipment, and proposed street names.

Tentative (Major and Minor Subdivision) Maps

Design Guidelines and Visual Impacts: general building heights and bulk of structures shall be provided to demonstrate the visual impact or appearance of the finished project from several surrounding viewpoints.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall include all information required under the Subdivision Map Act and the County’s Subdivision Ordinance (San Benito County Code §§ 23.03.002(A), 23.03.003(A)) in connection with the application for each tentative map to develop a portion of the Plan Area including, without limitation, the following: Utilities (both existing and proposed): information regarding the location and sizing of water pipelines (domestic and fire suppression), sewer lines, gas, electric and communications lines shall be shown, including the available capacity of existing lines to indicate adequate service to the Plan Area, and demonstrating the coordination and efficient construction of utility lines to serve the Plan Area and the adjoining Gavilan College San Benito Campus, as studied in the Fairview Corners Specific Plan EIR and in the Gavilan College San Benito Campus EIR. It is intended that utility lines are sized to provide service capacity to the entire Plan Area, and that the infrastructure only be built once (i.e., a relatively new street will not need to be torn up to add utilities or utility capacity). Circulation: an inner circulation plan shall be provided, showing roadway widths and number of dwelling units to be served by each road, including possible extensions into adjoining and adjacent

Grading: sufficient existing and proposed contours/elevations shall be provided, to confirm the amount and volumes of earthwork required.

Drainage: existing storm flows and projected increased volumes or direction of flow, due to greater impervious areas or re-grading of the area, shall be provided to demonstrate compliance with post-project runoff requirements as set forth in the Project Conditions of Approval. Soils: the developer shall provide preliminary soils report (may be limited to a letter of opinion as to the suitability of the area for this type of project), map of any known earthquake fault zones, suspected fault traces or unstable zones, and areas for which the soils engineer recommends the need for more extensive investigations prior to issuance of building permits. Parks: neighborhood or regional parks and trails, with any intended continuity to adjacent and adjoining parcels, shall be indicated. As part of the application process for the first tentative map which seeks entitlements for Plan Area uses or development, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare for the County’s approval a Conceptual Site Plan, which shall be consistent with the project’s Conceptual Master Plans and shall include (at minimum) the article 7.0 plan implementation

7-

Plan Implementation and Financing

Area phases or individual neighborhood areas. These types of maps are not intended for development and are often created to obtain financing or convey title. For purposes of the Fairview Corners project, the requirement for dedications and improvements in connection with this type of large-lot parcel map shall be governed by the Subdivision Map Act and the County’s Subdivision Ordinance.

Plan Implementation and Financing

following information: a diagram and table, describing and depicting the locations, types, densities and acreages of all proposed land use categories, and the general location of the roadway system, utilities systems and parks. In addition to the Conceptual Site Plan, as part of the application process for the first tentative map which seeks entitlements for Plan Area uses or development, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare for the County’s approval the following conceptual Master Plans, which shall govern subsequent development of the Plan Area. The Master Plans shall assume maximum build-out of 220 units and shall include (at minimum) the information referenced above (as appropriate), all information regarding the area proposed for development at the level of detail required by the Subdivision Map Act and the County’s Subdivision Ordinance, and at a conceptual level of detail for the remainder of the Plan Area. As subsequent areas are proposed for development, the Master Plans shall be revised, as appropriate, to provide all information regarding the area subsequently proposed for development at the level of detail required by the Subdivision Map Act and the County’s Subdivision Ordinance. The Master Plans also shall provide the following: 1. Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan: The Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all major infrastructure facilities proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements.

7-

2. Potable Water Master Plan: The Potable Water Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all potable water infrastructure facilities proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements. The plan shall provide details regarding the design and sizing of infrastructure to serve the area proposed for development, including back-bone stubs to individual building sites, to demonstrate the infrastructure is adequate to accommodate the proposed development. For the remainder of the Plan Area, the Master Plan shall describe the backbone infrastructure and utilities, including looping, in sufficient detail to demonstrate the proposed infrastructure is sized to adequately serve future phases. 3. Recycled Water Master Plan: The Recycled Water Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all recycled water infrastructure facilities proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements. The plan shall provide details regarding the design and sizing of infrastructure to serve the area proposed for development, including back-bone stubs to individual building sites, to demonstrate the infrastructure is adequate to accommodate the proposed development. For the remainder of the Plan Area, the Master Plan shall describe the backbone infrastructure and utilities, including looping, in sufficient detail to demonstrate the proposed infrastructure is sized to adequately serve future phases.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

5. Storm Drainage Master Plan: The Storm Drainage Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all major drainage facilities proposed for the Plan Area relative to drainage impacts, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements, including all of the following:  The storm system shall be designed for a 100 year storm event and utilize best management practices (BMPs) and in compliance with Clean Water requirements, as set forth in the Project Conditions of Approval; and  The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) may contour grade the area intended for development,



in accordance with the approved Master Grading Plan, and temporary/interim facilities may be graded and constructed on other portions of the Plan Area to achieve drainage and the efficient construction of water, sewer and underground utilities, consistent with the Master Plan. 6. Street Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan: The Street Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all roadway infrastructure facilities proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements. The intent of the plan is to identify and direct the major backbone street circulation pattern and to provide an approach for a consistent plan of streetscape improvements (e.g., landscape, monuments, signage, lighting, street furniture, etc.). The plan shall provide details regarding the design and sizing of infrastructure to serve the area proposed for development, including back-bone stubs to individual building sites, to demonstrate the infrastructure is adequate to accommodate the proposed development. For the remainder of the Plan Area, the Master Plan shall describe the backbone infrastructure in sufficient detail to demonstrate the proposed infrastructure is designed to adequately serve future phases. 7. Grading Master Plan: The Grading Master Plan shall describe the intended grading of the area to be developed, with transitional phasing to the remainder of the Plan Area, and shall include best management practices (BMP’s) to minimize erosion and sedimentation.

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-

Plan Implementation and Financing

4. Wastewater Master Plan: The Wastewater Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all wastewater infrastructure facilities proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements. The plan shall provide details regarding the design and sizing of infrastructure to serve the area proposed for development, including back-bone stubs to individual building sites, to demonstrate the infrastructure is adequate to accommodate the proposed development. For the remainder of the Plan Area, the Master Plan shall describe the backbone infrastructure and utilities, including looping, in sufficient detail to demonstrate the proposed infrastructure is sized to adequately serve future phases.

Plan Implementation and Financing

8. Open Space and Parks Master Plan: The Open Space and Parks Master Plan shall identify the size, location and timing of all open space and parks proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Open Space and Parks Master Plan shall satisfy all applicable standards and requirements. Master Plans shall cover the identified portion(s) of the Specific Plan and include the information set forth above. Master Plans may be consolidated as appropriate, and may be prepared for a larger portion of the Plan Area than currently proposed for subdivision, at the discretion of the developer, and with the approval of County Public Works Department staff. The Master Plans are intended to provide a preliminary plan for services, facilities, financing and site grading. More precise engineering and detail will be provided in the subdivision improvement plans submitted as a condition of approval of the applicable tentative subdivision map. The Master Plans shall be reviewed for compliance with the Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, and all other applicable standards and requirements, and shall be subject to approval of the San Benito County Department of Public Works. The Conceptual Site Plan and the Conceptual Master Plans may be amended by the developer with approval of the County Public Works Department. A tentative map may be submitted and processed concurrently with a Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, or other discretionary entitlement(s) for the land that is the subject of the requested map. The Planning Commission shall approve a tentative map for development of any portion of the Plan Area, unless the Planning Commission makes written findings, supported by substantial evidence, regarding any one of the following: 7-

 The applicant failed to demonstrate that the requested map complies with the applicable provisions of the Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, the Conceptual Site Plan, relevant conceptual Master Plans, and other project approvals, as well as all other applicable standards and requirements;  Any of the findings requiring denial under the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Sections 66474, 66474.4 and 66474.6);  The applicant failed to demonstrate that approval of the requested map will not result in new significant, unmitigated environmental impacts or a significant increase in previously identified impacts; or  The applicant failed to demonstrate that approval of the requested map will not result in conditions that would jeopardize the public health, safety, and general welfare. In approving a tentative map, the Planning Commission may impose Project Conditions of Approval in accordance with applicable state and local law, this Specific Plan and the Development Agreement. Final Maps and Parcel Maps Final maps shall be filed and processed in accordance with the San Benito County Subdivision Ordinance (San Benito County Code Title 23), and the Subdivision Map Act subject to the Development Agreement, but no earlier than the day following approval of a tentative map for the subject land. The following conceptual Master Plans, which shall govern subsequent development of the Plan Area, shall be required to be submitted and approved by the County Planning Department and Public Works Department:

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

 Architectural Style Master Plan consistent with the Specific Plan Design Guidelines, by phase, for the area to be developed  Signage Master Plan for the entire Plan Area  Infrastructure Financing Master Plan for the entire Plan Area Master Plans may be consolidated as appropriate, and may be prepared for a larger portion of the Plan Area than the subject map, at the discretion of the developer, and with the approval of the County Public Works Department. These Master Plans are intended to provide conceptual plans for the portions of the Plan Area to be subdivided and developed under the proposed final or parcel map. More precise detail, if required by the County, shall be provided prior to the commencement of construction or as part of the applicable building permit or sign permit application. The Master Plans shall be reviewed for compliance with the Specific Plan, the Development Agreement and other project approvals (including Project Conditions of Approval), as well as all other applicable standards and requirements, and shall be subject to approval of the San Benito County Public Works Department. A final or parcel map (excluding large-lot parcel maps for financing purposes) may only be submitted for an area on which a prior tentative map has been approved by the Planning Commission. The Board of Supervisors and County Engineer shall approve a final map, pursuant to Sections 23.09.007 and 23.09.008 of the San Benito County Code, or the County Engineer shall approve a parcel map pursuant to Section 23.11.005 of the County Code, for development of any portion of the Plan Area, unless the Board of Supervisors or the County Engineer,



as appropriate, make written findings, supported by substantial evidence, regarding any one of the following:  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the requested map substantially complies with the approved tentative map;  The applicant failed to satisfy all applicable Project Conditions of Approval;  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the infrastructure, services, facilities and amenities required to serve the land uses within the requested map will be completed prior to occupancy of those uses; or  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the final map application has been timely filed as defined in the Subdivision Map Act and the County’s Subdivision Ordinance, subject to the Development Agreement.

Grading Grading permits may be issued within the Plan Area independent of final or parcel map approvals. Grading plans shall be reviewed for compliance with the Specific Plan, and the approved Grading Master Plan, and shall be subject to review and approval of the San Benito County Planning and Public Works Departments, in accordance with the applicable standards and requirements in compliance with this Specific Plan, the MMRP, and the Development Agreement.

Design Review Prior to issuance of the first building permit for a residential unit within a Plan Area phase, all development within such Plan Area phase shall be reviewed by the County Planning Director for compliance with the development and design article 7.0 plan implementation

7-

Plan Implementation and Financing

 Lighting Master Plan for the area to be developed

Plan Implementation and Financing

standards described in Articles 2.0 and 4.0 of this Specific Plan, as well as the applicable approved Master Plans, the Development Agreement and other applicable standards and requirements. This Design Review may occur concurrently with the processing of other application(s) such as a tentative or final or parcel map. The Planning Director shall approve a design review application for development of a “permitted use” (as defined by the land uses described in this Specific Pan), in any portion of the Plan Area, unless the Planning Director makes written findings, based on substantial evidence, regarding any one of the following:  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the proposed development is in substantial compliance with all applicable aspects of the Specific Plan, including applicable development and design standards described in Articles 2.0 and 4.0, applicable Master Plans developed for the Plan Area, the Development Agreement and other applicable standards and requirements; or  The applicant failed to demonstrate that approval of the requested application will not result in any new, significant unmitigated environmental impacts or a significant increase in previously identified impacts. If the County Planning Director makes either of the above findings, appeal of the Planning Director’s decision may be made to the Planning Commission.

Conditional Use Permits Application to develop a conditionally permitted use in the Plan Area shall be considered by San Benito County in accordance with the applicable provisions of this Specific Plan, the Development

7-10

Agreement, and other applicable standards and requirements, including, without limitation, those set forth in the San Benito County Code Chapter 25.43. In order to develop any residential units on lots that are larger than 1.5 acres in size, the applicant shall submit an application for a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the requirements set forth in County Code Chapter 25.43. Such application shall be reviewed and approved, conditionally approved, or denied, in accordance with the requirements set forth in San Benito County Code Chapter 25.43. In order to develop any uses listed as “conditionally permitted” as described in Article 2.0 of this Specific Plan other than residential units on lots that are larger than 1.5 acresF in size, the applicant shall submit an application for a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the requirements set forth in County Code Chapter 25.43, as may be modified or supplemented by this Specific Plan. The Planning Commission shall approve an application for a Conditional Use Permit for development of any conditionally permitted uses in the Plan Area, unless the Planning Commission makes written findings, based on substantial evidence, regarding any one of the following:  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the requested Conditional Use Permit substantially complies with the applicable zoning of the Specific Plan, the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, and all other applicable standards and requirements;  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the requested Conditional Use Permit is in substantial compliance with all applicable aspects of the Specific Plan, including without limita-

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

 The applicant failed to demonstrate that approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit will not result in new significant, unmitigated environmental impacts or a significant increase in previously identified impacts;  The applicant failed to demonstrate that approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit will not result in conditions that would jeopardize the public health, safety, and general welfare; or  The applicant failed to demonstrate that the required findings under San Benito County Code section 25.43.004 can be made.

Specific Plan Amendment Process A request for a Specific Plan amendment shall be processed in accordance with California Government Code requirements for specific plans and any County application requirements, including Chapter 19.29 of the San Benito County Code. Future amendments to this Specific Plan require a detailed Plan Area request for amendments to the Specific Plan, a determination by County staff if new technical reports and environmental review are needed, and shall require a recommendation from the Planning Commission and final action by the Board of Supervisors in the same manner as the Fairview Corners’ Specific Plan was originally adopted. A request to make a minor modification to the Specific Plan is distinct from a request to amend the Specific Plan. A finding of substantial compli-



ance with this Specific Plan shall be required for entitlements that reflect minor modifications to the Specific Plan. Thus, if an entitlement reflects certain changes to this Specific Plan, substantial compliance may be found provided the Planning Director finds that the changes constitute a “minor modification” that is intended to clarify, interpret and/or implement this Specific Plan in a manner that is consistent with the purpose and intent of this Specific Plan. In the event and to the extent the Planning Director makes written findings, based on substantial evidence in the record, that the requested change constitutes a minor modification, the subsequent entitlement shall not be deemed an amendment to the Specific Plan. Disagreement with the Planning Director’s findings in this regard may be appealed to the Planning Commission.

Section 7.2 Plan Responsibilities and Obligations Substantial Compliance The Plan Administration section of this Article describes subsequent County entitlements and compliance, and the method by which substantial compliance with the Specific Plan and Development Agreement may be achieved. The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) are obligated to substantially conform with (i) the Specific Plan, Development Agreement and other project approvals including the Final EIR and MMRP, (ii) the subsequent project approvals, including Tentative Maps and Project Conditions of Approval, Conditional Use Permits, Design Review, Final Maps and/or Parcel Maps, Grading Permits, Building Permits, and Subdivision Improvement Agreements, and (iii) all

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-11

Plan Implementation and Financing

tion, the applicable development and design standards as described in Articles 2.0 and 4.0 of this Specific Plan;

Plan Implementation and Financing

other applicable standards and requirements. The Plan Area is limited to a maximum of 220 principal dwelling units, excluding secondary units and accessory uses.

Development Schedule/Phasing The Plan Area will be built out in at least two (2) major phases (Phase I and Phase II), to accommodate grading and infrastructure construction: Phase I west of the residential street extending from the second access point, and Phase II east of that street, as illustrated in Figure 25, Conceptual Development Phasing Plan. These two phases are anticipated to be divided in up to four (4) residential construction sub-phases for each segment, for a maximum of eight (8) sub-phases within the Plan Area, each of which may last approximately two years, with up to four sub-phases within each major phase (Phase I (A-D) and Phase II (A-D)). Specific Plan build-out is expected to occur over five to sixteen years based on market demands. The development phases are expected to occur sequentially (Phase I, then Phase II) although the phases may occur concurrently. Development of each phase shall include all infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities, both public and private, needed to serve the uses and structures within that phase. Development would occur first near Fairview Road, with successive phases progressing eastward across the site. This project is intended to build a residential community that is integrated with and supports the recently approved Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Circulation improvements between or benefitting the Plan Area and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus are intended to be shared by both projects, and phased as the respective projects are constructed. Specifically, the costs of constructing the Cielo Vista Drive extension to its intended

buildout are anticipated to be shared between Fairview Corners and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus projects and both projects have responsibility to ensure adequate access in connection with their respective projects. Accordingly, in addition to the project phasing discussed above, if the Plan Area is developed before full buildout of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus, circulation improvements will be scaled appropriately in accordance with the Development Agreement. An Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan shall be prepared for County approval as part of the application process for the first tentative map that implements the Plan uses or development. The Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan is intended to be conceptual in nature and may be refined and revised by the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) from time to time throughout the development of the Plan Area with approval from the County Public Works Department or as part of the approval of specific improvement plans. Revised phasing plans must demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the San Benito County Public Works Department, the provision of adequate infrastructure to support each phase in accordance with this Specific Plan, the relevant Master Plan(s), the Development Agreement, and all other applicable standards and requirements. Figure 25 Conceptual Development Phasing Plan

LEGEND Phase A Phase B Conceptual Phasing Boundary (8 possible phases) For illustrative purposes only

7-12

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

The Plan Area infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities shall be fiscally self-sufficient through the use of revenue sources including, without limitation, those described below. In approving a final or parcel map for any portion of the Plan Area, the applicant shall demonstrate the availability of adequate financing to ensure that all Plan Area infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities needed to serve the uses and structures covered by the requested map will be completed prior to occupancy of any structure on any lot described in such map, and will remain operational with adequate maintenance throughout the life of the Plan Area, in accordance with applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. The determination that the Plan Area infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities are fiscally self-sufficient shall be determined on a phase by phase basis. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall develop the Plan Area in accordance with this Specific Plan, the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, and all other applicable standards and requirements. Roads, water distribution infrastructure, wastewater collection facilities, storm drainage infrastructure, parks, open space and trails, monumentation/ signage, and other public landscaping and lighting are critical elements of the Plan Area that must be constructed and then maintained over time. Master Plans, in substantial compliance with this Specific Plan and the Development Agreement and other project approvals, as well as all other applicable standards and requirements, shall be developed to guide each of these elements.



The Plan Area improvements will generate increased property tax revenue to the County General Fund. However, it is not anticipated that the property tax shall be enough to construct, operate, and maintain all of the required infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities. Any gap between the cost of infrastructure maintenance and the tax revenue being generated will be financed through a CSD, or other appropriate financing mechanism, in order to achieve revenue neutrality in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s), or subsequent owner or operator will be responsible for construction of backbone infrastructure improvements within the Plan Area, as well as the neighborhood infrastructure improvements needed to connect to the backbone infrastructure systems. Improvements shall be offered for dedication as appropriate on each applicable final or parcel map, to the appropriate public entity, with ongoing operation and maintenance of Plan Area improvements to be funded through a CSD, CFD, or equivalent as discussed below, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. Public and Private Funding All backbone improvements within the Plan Area, (specifically sewer, water, reclaimed water, utilities, storm drainage facilities, collector roads, and open space and parks) are intended to be designed, constructed and financed using private equity and/or debt funding, a public financing mechanism, or any combination of the foregoing. In addition, some infrastructure improvements may be subject to fair share reimbursement or County funding via development impact fees or as otherwise set forth in the Development Agreement.

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-13

Plan Implementation and Financing

Capital Facilities Funding, Financing, and Maintenance

Plan Implementation and Financing

It is anticipated that the long-term maintenance of circulation improvements outside of the Plan Area and the public backbone infrastructure connecting from outside the Plan Area into the Plan Area boundaries for water, recycled water, and wastewater shall be addressed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, with the costs of maintenance and operation financed through a CSD or other appropriate financing mechanism in order to achieve revenue neutrality. Other utilities brought from outside the Plan Area to the Plan Area boundary to service the Plan Area will be maintained by the particular utility provider. Subject to the Development Agreement, the Project Conditions of Approval will set forth the terms and conditions upon which the County will accept completed improvements. As described in Assessments for Capital Improvements and Long-term Maintenance, the Plan Area improvements, made as a part of constructing backbone infrastructure or in-tract improvements and maintenance, may be funded by a financing district as approved by the County.  Taxes It is anticipated that monies collected as property taxes (ad valorem), and real property transfer taxes, would be utilized by the County for capital improvements, operations, and maintenance as determined by the County in its sole discretion through its establishment of annual budgets and programs and in accordance with applicable law. In addition, the Development Agreement may identify alternate sources of County revenue which may be applied toward these costs.  County Development Impact Fees

7-14

Development Impact Fees imposed by the County could be utilized to construct certain infrastructure improvements necessary to serve the Plan Area. These are typically improvements outside the Plan Area that provide service to the Plan Area development. The County uses these fees to improve capital facilities. If the Plan Area developer(s) constructs an improvement that is a part of the impact fee program, any reimbursement or credit related to such action shall be in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement.  Assessments for Capital Improvements and Long-term Maintenance Special district(s) could be created for the Plan Area to provide funding for capital improvements and long-term maintenance of public infrastructure. Through several potential financing district options, such as a Landscape and Lighting District (LLD), Community Services Area (CSA), Community Services District (CSD), Community Facilities District (CFD) “Mello-Roos,” Geologic Hazards Abatement District (GHAD), maintenance annuity fund, or some other entity, revenue could be generated to construct and maintain public infrastructure within the Plan Area. A financing mechanism, such as a LLD, CSD, CFD, or other appropriate funding source is proposed, in accordance with applicable provisions of the Development Agreement, to be established as part of the Plan Area for the purposes of both capital funding and long-term maintenance of public infrastructure. Once a financing district(s) is established, in accordance with the applicable law, the district would be authorized to impose assessments on Plan Area residents only for the purpose of funding, operating and maintaining the following Plan Area improvements: the public roadways; drainage facilities; street lighting and landscaping;

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

 Homeowners’ Assessments Collected through master or neighborhood homeowners’ associations (HOA), fees may be collected for purposes of short-term maintenance and longterm capital accounts (reserves) for repairs to infrastructure improvements required to be privately maintained.  Reimbursements Reimbursement of funds may be collected through a variety of mechanisms in the event and to the extent the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) construct improvements that directly benefit other property owners outside of the Plan Area. Any such reimbursement shall be in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. A detailed Infrastructure Financing Master Plan shall be submitted for County approval as a condition of approval of the first tentative map that implements the Plan uses or development. Responsibility for Construction and Infrastructure Improvements All backbone improvements (specifically, sewer, water, reclaimed water, waste water, dry utilities, storm drainage facilities, collector roads, Fairview Road improvements, open space and parks) shall be constructed with private financing, or a public financing mechanism, subject to reimbursement as described in this Specific Plan and the Development Agreement.



It is anticipated that portions of the Plan Area may be sold by the property owner/master developer to other individual neighborhood developer(s) for purposes of developing specific uses or phases of the Plan Area. All public and private infrastructure, services, facilities, and amenities needed to serve each neighborhood (in-tract improvements) shall be the responsibility of the developer for that portion of the Plan Area as determined during the Tentative and Final (or Parcel) Map process. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) may enter into private cost sharing agreements that specify, among other things, financing for the construction of improvements, easements and rightsof-way for such improvements, and terms for cost sharing and reimbursement among the beneficiaries. A Final Map or Parcel Map (with “buildable” lots) shall not be recorded for any portion of the Plan Area until the developer of that portion of the Plan Area demonstrates the ability to fulfill its identified obligations with respect to in-tract improvements and connection to backbone improvements in accordance with applicable provisions of this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, and the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements.

Plan Area Circulation Improvements Collector and Residential Roads As a Project Condition of Approval of each tentative map that implements the Specific Plan uses or development, the developer shall be responsible for constructing the collector roads and internal residential roads needed to provide access (both emergency and non-emergency) to the Plan Area development proposed under the requested Tentative Map or subsequent Final Map or Parcel Map.

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-15

Plan Implementation and Financing

public infrastructure (e.g. water, reclaimed water, wastewater); other public facilities; utilities; and open space, parks and recreational facilities.

Plan Implementation and Financing

Actual construction may occur after the recordation of the Final or Parcel Map and shall relate to the Plan Area described in such Final Map or Parcel Map, and shall be in compliance with any improvement agreement approved by the County Engineer that relates to the portion of the Plan Area shown on said Final Map or Parcel Map. The major collector, Cielo Vista Drive extension (Plan Area entry road) shall be built in accordance with the applicable timing and other requirements set forth in the Specific Plan, MMRP and Project Conditions of Approval for the Plan Area described in the applicable Final Map or Parcel Map, subject to the Development Agreement. Cielo Vista Drive is intended to be a public roadway, and, in connection with construction, the required improvements shall be offered for dedication to the County with ongoing operation and maintenance to be funded through a CSD, CFD, or equivalent as discussed above. The construction of Cielo Vista Drive will be constructed in at least three (3) phases, and in compliance with the Specific Plan, MMRP, Project Conditions of Approval for the Plan Area described in the applicable final or parcel map, and the Infrastructure Phasing Master Plan, subject to the Development Agreement. If the Plan Area is developed before full buildout of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus, circulation improvements will be scaled appropriately in accordance with the Development Agreement. The closed loop roadway network, extending along the Plan Area to serve the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the Plan Area, will have three access points to the residential Plan Area along the Cielo Vista Drive extension. The collector and residential roads are intended to be public roads, and, in connection with construction, these roadway

7-16

improvements shall be offered for dedication to the County, with ongoing operation and maintenance to be funded through a CSD, CFD, or equivalent as discussed above. If for any reason the internal residential roads are not made public, the master developer shall establish a HOA maintenance district to provide funding for road maintenance, repair and replacement as needed. Minor collector entry roads and internal residential roads shall adhere to the standards set forth herein, as well as those in the Conceptual Site Plan, the relevant Conceptual Master Plans, and the Project Conditions of Approval. See Article 3.0, Circulation Plan, for typical collector entry and typical residential road sections and construction sequence and phasing of the Cielo Vista Drive extension and Plan Area minor collector entry roads.

Outside of Plan Area Circulation Improvements Fairview Road Improvements The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) of any portion of the Plan Area that abuts Fairview Road shall be responsible for constructing its property frontage improvements as specified further herein and in the Development Agreement and as determined during the subdivision map process. The frontage improvements shall be constructed in accordance with the applicable provisions of this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements. In order to provide complete road segments for public safety on Fairview Road, the required frontage improvements for Fairview Road shall be constructed concurrent with the development of any

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Required frontage improvements along Fairview Road may include travel lane(s), a bicycle lane, curb, gutter, drainage, sidewalk or pathway, landscaping, and street lighting, at the direction of the Public Works Department. Right-of-way dedications for road and frontage improvements as required and consistent with improvement plans may be required in accordance with the Specific Plan and Development Agreement, and as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval. Right-of-way dedications shall be included on appropriate Final Maps or Parcel Maps. Intersection Improvements With the development of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the Plan Area, it is expected that signalized intersection improvements will be required at the Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive extension into the Plan Area and at Airline

Highway/Fairview Road. The timing of these improvements shall be determined based upon the acceptable level of service and other factors affecting the need for signalization at these intersections, as detailed in the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR and MMRP, subject to the Development Agreement, and as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval. Any reimbursements and/or credits in connection with improvements identified in the County Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) program shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. If other developments, not a part of the Plan Area, have already constructed or agreed to construct the intersection improvements (subject to any reimbursement), any remaining improvements such as pavement widening, signing and striping, curb, gutter and sidewalk, streetlights, and installation of landscaping shall be the responsibility of the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) of that portion of the Plan Area. If the intersection improvements are built by another entity, the master developer shall be required to provide a fair share and any reimbursement shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. Signalization of the intersection of Cielo Vista Drive and Fairview Road is expected with the development of the Gavilan College San Benito Campus and the Plan Area. Construction of the intersection improvements, including signalization, shall be completed in accordance with the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR and MMRP, subject to the Development Agreement, and as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval. Any reimbursement and/or credits in connection with these intersection improvements shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement.

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-17

Plan Implementation and Financing

subdivision containing Plan Area uses fronting on Fairview Road. If, consistent with the Specific Plan and MMRP, the County determines that the widening and paving of Fairview Road’s Plan Area frontage is required before occupancy of any phase within the Plan Area, the master developer and/ or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be required to construct the abutting travel lane and bicycle lane, and the curb, gutter and street lighting improvements, subject to any future reimbursement in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. Construction of the sidewalk, pathways, and landscaping along Fairview Road may be deferred until occupancy of the adjacent development phase. In the event and the extent other property owners outside the Plan Area directly benefit from the construction of Fairview Road frontage improvements, then any reimbursement for such costs shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement.

Traffic Impact Fees

Plan Implementation and Financing

In order to mitigate to the extent feasible the impacts identified in the EIR, and subject to this Specific Plan and the Development Agreement, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for contributing funding in the form of Traffic Impact Fees (TIF) for the purpose of facilitating the construction of certain circulation improvements outside the Plan Area to accommodate new development in the County, including the Plan Area. The priority of improvements funded by the TIF from development of the Plan Area, and timing for construction of those improvements, shall be determined by the County in accordance with the County’s Traffic Mitigation Fee Update Study (as may be amended).

Public Infrastructure Improvements Potable Water The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare a Potable Water Master Plan for the County’s approval, as part of the application process for the first tentative map. As a Tentative Map Condition of Approval, each developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) within the Plan Area shall be responsible for constructing the water delivery system infrastructure needed to deliver potable water to the development being proposed under the requested map. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall enter into an improvement agreement with the County and post a bond or other security acceptable to the County for the improvements proposed for that phase of development, to the extent not already completed.

7-18

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct the backbone infrastructure needed for the Plan Area’s potable water delivery system in accordance with the approved Potable Water Master Plan, other relevant Master Plan(s), this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements. The construction of the improvements proposed for each phase of development shall occur prior to or concurrently with the development of the phase, and the necessary connection to the potable water system shall be available prior to occupancy of that phase of development. Plan Area infrastructure identified in the Potable Water Master Plan may be constructed in advance of any particular Project phase and prior to final map approval of the phase for which such improvements are required. As indicated above, development of the Plan Area shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Potable Water Master Plan, as may be amended from time to time with approval from the County Public Works Department. Once the water delivery system is constructed and an offer of dedication is accepted, it is anticipated that SSCWD would own, operate, and maintain the water system. All water system infrastructure improvements shall be reviewed by the County and the SSCWD during the Master Plan and tentative map review process for the applicable Plan Area phase for compliance with this Specific Plan and all other applicable standards and requirements, and improvement plans will be reviewed by the County and SSCWD as a Project Condition of Approval to ensure compliance with applicable County and SSCWD standards. Where potable water infrastructure is built that benefits other future development

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Recycled Water (Non-potable Water) The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare a Recycled Water Master Plan for the County’s approval, as part of the application process for the first tentative map. As a Tentative Map Condition of Approval, each developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) within the Plan Area shall be responsible for constructing the Plan Area recycled water system infrastructure necessary to service the area within each Final Map or Parcel Map.. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall enter into an improvement agreement with the County and post a bond or other security acceptable to the County for the improvements proposed for that phase of development, to the extent not already completed. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct the backbone infrastructure needed for the Plan Area’s recycled water delivery system in accordance with the approved Recycled Water Master Plan, other relevant Master Plan(s), this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements. Points of future connection will be provided along Fairview Road for use when the City’s recycled water infrastructure is extended to the Plan Area. The recycled water system will be designed for irrigating common area landscaping, such as the parks, open space, and other common areas within the Plan Area, including the landscaped area along Fairview



Road. Recycled water use may be extended for use in private front yard landscaping, if financially feasible and permitted under the applicable law and regulations. The recycled water system shall be offered for dedication to San Benito County Water District (SBCWD), SSCWD and/or the City, as appropriate on each applicable Final Map or Parcel Map. Upon acceptance, it is anticipated that the agency accepting such improvements would maintain the improvements with the costs of maintenance being funded by a CSD or other appropriate financing mechanism in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. All system infrastructure improvements shall be reviewed by the appropriate agency during the Master Plan and tentative map review process for the applicable Plan Area phase for compliance with the Specific Plan to ensure that the design and construction meet the applicable standards and requirements. Where recycled water infrastructure is built that benefits other future development projects outside of the Plan Area, any reimbursement in connection with those improvements shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. Wastewater Collection and Treatment The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare a Wastewater Master Plan for the County’s approval, as part of the application process for the first tentative map. As a Tentative Map Condition of Approval, each developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) within the Plan Area shall be responsible for constructing the backbone wastewater collection and treatment system infrastructure needed to treat and/ or convey wastewater from the development being

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-19

Plan Implementation and Financing

projects outside of the Plan Area, any reimbursement in connection with those improvements shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement.

Plan Implementation and Financing

proposed under the requested map. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall enter into an improvement agreement with the County and post a bond or other security acceptable to the County for the improvements proposed for that phase of development, to the extent not already completed. It is anticipated that wastewater collection and treatment will be provided to the Plan Area by the City of Hollister’s DWTP. No occupancy permit shall be issued for any use in the Plan Area until the necessary treatment system connections are made for the Plan Area phase under development. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct, prior to approval of each Plan Area Final Map or Parcel Map, for that phase of development, the backbone wastewater infrastructure needed for the Plan Area’s chosen wastewater collection and treatment system in accordance with the approved Wastewater Master Plan, this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements. As a Project Condition of Approval for each Plan Area tentative map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for constructing, following recordation of the final or parcel map, the in-tract subdivision wastewater collection system infrastructure needed to serve the development for the applicable Plan Area phase. All system infrastructure improvement plans shall comply with the approved Wastewater Master Plan, and other relevant approved Master Plan(s), and shall be reviewed by the County and the City, and any other applicable agency, during the Final Map or Parcel Map review process for

7-20

the applicable Plan Area phase for compliance with the Specific Plan, and to ensure that the design and construction meet all applicable standards and requirements. The construction of the improvements proposed for each phase of development shall occur prior to or concurrently with the development of the phase, and the necessary connection to the chosen wastewater system shall be available prior to occupancy of that phase of development. Plan Area infrastructure identified in the Wastewater Master Plan may be constructed in advance of any particular Project phase and prior to final map approval of the phase for which such improvements are required. As indicated above, development of the Plan Area shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Wastewater Master Plan and other related approved Master Plan(s), as may be amended from time to time, with approval from the County Public Works Department. If wastewater collection and treatment is in fact provided by the City’s DWTP, following the City’s acceptance of the improvements, it is anticipated that the City would maintain the improvements with the costs of maintenance being funded by a CSD or other appropriate financing mechanism in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. The City will have access to subsurface piping systems within Plan Area roads and in other Plan Area locations through easements. Where wastewater infrastructure is built that benefits other future development projects outside of the Plan Area, any reimbursement in connection with those improvements shall occur in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Storm Drainage The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare a Storm Drainage Master Plan for the County’s approval, as part of the application process for the first tentative map. As a Tentative Map Condition of Approval, each developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) within the Plan Area shall be responsible for constructing the backbone infrastructure needed for the Plan Area’s storm drainage system fort the development being proposed under the requested map, in accordance with the approved Storm Drainage Water Master Plan, other relevant approved Master Plan(s), this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall enter into an improvement agreement with the County and post a bond or other security acceptable to the County for the improvements proposed for that phase of development, to the extent not already completed. Storm drainage and retention facilities shall be designed to accommodate the full build-out of the Plan Area, as required in the Project Conditions of Approval. As a Project Condition of Approval for



each Plan Area tentative map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for constructing the storm drainage system infrastructure needed to serve the development being proposed under the requested tentative map. All system infrastructure improvements shall be reviewed by the County during the Master Plan and tentative map review process for the applicable Plan Area phase for compliance with the Specific Plan, and to ensure that the design and construction meets all of the applicable standards and requirements. The construction of the improvements proposed for each phase of development shall occur prior to or concurrently with the development of the phase, and the necessary connection to the chosen wastewater system shall be available prior to occupancy of that phase of development. Plan Area infrastructure identified in the Storm Drainage Master Plan may be constructed in advance of any particular Project phase and prior to final map approval of the phase for which such improvements are required. As indicated above, development of the Plan Area shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan, as may be amended from time to time, with approval from the County Public Works Department. The Storm Drainage Master Plan shall include the information as required above. Prior to construction of development shown in each Final Map, or improvement plans, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain, at its expense, all necessary permits and agreements as required by other agencies having jurisdiction over surface water drainage and water quality, including, but not limited to, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). In addition, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-21

Plan Implementation and Financing

If development of the Plan Area meets the lot size requirements presented in Article 2.0 and all other applicable standards and requirements, septic systems may be installed. Septic systems shall be privately maintained by either the individual homeowner, whose property the septic system serves, or in the case of a community septic system, by the HOA or similar mechanism. Septic systems shall be installed and inspected in accordance with all applicable standards and requirements.

Plan Implementation and Financing

developer(s) shall prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and shall design, implement, and maintain the SWPPP with BMPs as required by San Benito County and as set forth in the Project Conditions of Approval. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain a permit from San Benito County for the General Construction Storm Water Compliance Program, as required by their SWPPP, prior to the start of any grading or construction. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct storm drain mains and laterals in accordance with the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan and all other applicable standards and requirements. Storm drain laterals shall be constructed to the property line concurrently with the construction of connecting open channels or storm drain mains. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct the required retention basin(s) in accordance with the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan and the Project Conditions of Approval. Retention basins shall be improved for the purpose of providing open space and/or recreational uses where feasible. The retention basins illustrated in Article 6.0 are conceptual and shall be defined by the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan, as amended from time to time and the Tentative, Final and/or Parcel Maps for each Plan Area phase. These drainage facilities shall be constructed by the master developer and/ or individual neighborhood developer(s) when the affected subdivision phase begins development. Following construction (as appropriate) storm drainage infrastructure within the Plan Area shall be offered to the County for dedication, and such offer

7-22

shall be included on each applicable Final or Parcel Map. Once the offer(s) is accepted, it is anticipated that the County would maintain the system, with the costs of maintenance to be financed through a CSD, or other appropriate financing mechanisms. If any portion of the storm drainage infrastructure is not dedicated to the County, ongoing maintenance shall be funded through a HOA or other private financing mechanism. Development of each phase of the Plan Area shall be subject to payment of the County’s adopted fees for regional drainage improvements in the Santa Ana basin, if applicable to the Plan Area, in accordance with the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR and MMRP, the provisions of the Specific Plan, Project Conditions of Approval, and the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement.

Summary of Major Capital Improvements The major Plan Area backbone capital infrastructure improvements are identified in the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR and MMRP, subject to the Development Agreement, and will be further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval. These improvements include:  Fairview Road/Cielo Vista Drive Extension Intersection Improvements  Fairview Road (Frontage) Improvements  Cielo Vista Drive Extension (Entry Road to the Plan Area)  Potable water distribution connection from the existing water main on Fairview Road, construction of potable water backbone infrastructure within the Plan Area, and in-tract subdivision distribution line improvements by phase.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

 Recycled water distribution system construction, by phase, within the Plan Area, so that the system is available to accept public recycled water from SSCWD when a recycled water main is installed in the Fairview Road ROW adjacent to the Plan Area.  In-tract subdivision improvements by Phase  Storm Drain Facilities

Open Space and Parks Open Space and Parks and Related Master Plans As part of the application process for the first tentative map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare for the County’s approval an Open Space and Parks Master Plan. The Open Space and Parks Master Plan shall demonstrate how the Plan Area will meet the County’s requirement of five acres of park area per 1,000 residents, or 3.4 acres for 220 units and otherwise will satisfy the Project Conditions of Approval. The Plan Area’s open space and park system is divided into three categories: active parks, habitat area, and passive parks as follows:  Active Parks: The active park areas in the Plan Area include tot lots, par course, or similar improvements within pocket parks, including a linear pocket park (0-3.4 acres);  Passive Parks: The passive park areas in the Plan Area include open space with trails and/ or walkways (0-3.4 acres) that integrate access



to Gavilan College San Benito Campus open space and recreational areas; and  Habitat Area: The Specific Plan intends to provide off-site mitigation for CTS habitat. However, an on-site open space resource conservation area may be set aside for CTS, dependent upon the requirements of the CDFG and USFWS, which, together with the off-site conservation easements, are intended to mitigate the impact to the species habitat. Should these agencies require conservation on-site, the Specific Plan provides a seven-acre habitat set-aside within the Plan Area for this purpose. Should these agencies not require on-site mitigation this resource conservation area may be put to other purposes as set forth herein, including development of residential uses or passive open space (seven-acres) in accordance with the Specific Plan. A conceptual example of open space improvements is illustrated in Lotting Program Example C contained in Appendix B. Although the open space at Gavilan College San Benito Campus does not contribute toward fulfilling Plan Area open space or park requirements, the proximity of the open space and recreational facilities on the Gavilan College San Benito Campus will provide a benefit for Plan Area residents. Park Improvements and Dedication Development of the Plan Area shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan and related approved Master Plans, as may be amended from time to time with approval from the County Public Works Department. All open space/park infrastructure improvements shall be reviewed by the County

article 7.0 plan implementation

7-23

Plan Implementation and Financing

 Extension of Sanitary Sewer Collection Lines to the Plan Area (two alternative routes, only one to be chosen to serve the Plan Area)

Plan Implementation and Financing

during the tentative map review process and constructed in compliance with the Specific Plan and to ensure that the design and construction meet all applicable standards and requirements. The open space and parks within the Plan Area shall be offered to the County for dedication following construction, as appropriate, on each applicable Final Map or Parcel Map. Once the offer(s) is accepted, it is anticipated that the County would maintain the system, with the costs of maintenance to be financed through a CSD or other potential financing mechanisms, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Development Agreement. Open space and park facilities, including pocket parks, landscaped areas, private recreational amenities, pedestrian and bikeway systems, and retention basins, shall be constructed to benefit the surrounding residential development. The master developer and/or neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare final designs, finance, and construct the open space and park areas within the Plan Area concurrently with the development of the neighborhood phase in which they are located (prior to the issuance of a building permit for the last home in the neighborhood phase) in accordance with the approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan, other applicable Master Plan(s), this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable design standards and performance requirements. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall provide rough grading for open space and park sites adjacent to residential subdivisions. The open space and park sites shall be graded concurrent with grading of the adjacent residential subdivisions. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall provide finish grading, turf, trees, and irrigation frontage improvements as indicated in Article 4.0.

7-24

The linear pocket park, including all improvements, shall be constructed in accordance with the provisions of the Development Agreement or as otherwise required in the Project Conditions of Approval. The timing for construction of the other Plan Area park and recreational facilities shall be as follows:  All additional landscaped areas, private recreational amenities, pedestrian and bikeway systems, and landscaping for each phase that is approved in connection with each final map shall be constructed in accordance with the timing set forth in the Project’s Conditions of Approval, consistent with the approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan, other applicable Master Plan(s), this Specific Plan, the Development Agreement, as further detailed in the Project Conditions of Approval, and all other applicable standards and requirements.  Any recreational facilities (e.g., par course fitness trail) planned in connection with retention basins shall be constructed at the same time the basins themselves are constructed. It is anticipated that funding for ongoing operation and maintenance of this open space and park system will be provided by assessments collected through one of several potential financing districts, such as a LLD, CSD, CFD or other appropriate financing mechanism. Alternatively, any open space area or parks that may be designated as private, would be maintained by a HOA or other appropriate financing mechanism. Each developer shall, at the time of building permit issuance, pay a park dedication fee in accordance with applicable local and state law, this Specific Plan, and the Development Agreement, or alternatively, provide park land and improvements as specified therein in lieu of park fees.

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

As a Project Condition of Approval for the first tentative map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare conceptual Landscape, Lighting, and Signage Master Plans in substantial compliance with the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan EIR, MMRP, and this Specific Plan, subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department. The Landscape Master Plan shall identify the size and species of primary and secondary street trees, shrubs and ground cover to be used, location and timing of all landscape components proposed for the Plan Area, and shall be accompanied by all supporting technical information and calculations to demonstrate that implementation of the Landscape Master Plan will satisfy all applicable design standards and performance requirements. The Lighting Master Plan shall specify the type, location, and intensity for all streetlights, monument sign lights, and decorative lights within the common portions of the Plan Area, including multifamily residential parking lots and common areas. The Signage Master Plan shall specify design parameters and style for entry signs for multifamily development identity signs. Development of the Plan Area shall be in substantial compliance with the Landscape, Lighting, and Signage Master Plans, as may be amended from time to time with approval from the County as well as all other applicable requirements and standards.

Affordable Housing Program (AHP) prepared by the master developer. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) may construct affordable units in the amount determined by the AHP, or they may be constructed by one or more non-profit affordable housing builders. The AHP shall be consistent with the County’s AHO, and may be included as part of the Development Agreement or as a separate agreement approved by the County Board of Supervisors. The percentage income levels and mix for very low, low, and moderate income housing, as well as the possibility of work force housing, to meet the requirements of the AHO shall be as set forth in the AHP. The rent and prices for the affordable housing units, whether as rental or for-sale, will be based on the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published average median household income for San Benito County. Second units, such as apartment flats over a garage and attached or detached units on a single-family lot, are encouraged as a part of the Affordable Housing Program. Encouraging secondary units as part of the affordable housing stock provided within the Plan Area, furthers the intent of the Specific Plan to provide a broad range of housing for the community and the future adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Secondary units may be built as provided in Article 2.0, Land Use Plan and Development Standards and in accordance with all other applicable standards and requirements.

Affordable Housing Program The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developers within the Plan Area shall provide affordable housing to satisfy affordable housing needs within the Plan Area, and/or outside the Plan Area, or a combination thereof as set forth in an



article 7.0 plan implementation

7-25

Plan Implementation and Financing

Landscaping, Lighting and Signage Master Plans

Plan Implementation and Financing

This side intentionally left blank.

7-26

public review draft fairview corners residential specific plan

Appendices

Appendix A, Goals and Policy Implementation. This appendix lists all of the goals, policies, and policy implementation contained in the Specific Plan for the Plan Area by article. Appendix B, Lotting Program Examples A-C. This appendix presents three lotting program examples of how various lot sizes could be located throughout the Plan Area. Appendix C, Open Space Categories illustrates the open space improvements for the Plan Area based on Lotting Program Example C. Appendix D, U.S. Green Building Council LEED Criteria summarizes the policy implementation presented in the Specific Plan that meets specific U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) criteria. Appendix E, SSCWD Intent to Serve letter presents the “Intent to Serve” letter from Sunnyslope County Water District (SSCWD) dated March 18, 2010 for water service within the Plan Area. Appendix F, Draft Capital Improvements Cost Study presents the itemized costs, unit prices and notes for the major backbone capital infrastructure improvements for the Plan Area.

Appendix A

goals and policy implementation

G OALS AND P OLICY I MPLEMENTATION

The following Specific Plan goals, policies, and implementation actions shall be imposed on all development within the Plan Area. Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, addresses the integration of these goals, policies and implementation, and the application of other federal, state and local standards and requirements, on Plan Area development. Article 7.0 also provides guidance on phasing, financing and long-term maintenance of Plan Area related improvements.

A RTICLE 2.0 L AND U SE P LAN AND D EVELOPMENT S TANDARDS G OALS AND P OLICIES Land Use Pattern Policies Goal LU-1: A Land Use Plan that implements the intent of San Benito County by designating land uses for this property that are appropriate to the Area of Special Study. Policy LU-1.1: Implement County Resolution No. 89-92 and the General Plan Land Use Element by planning appropriate uses for this designated Area of Special Study, including higher density residential uses than are currently allowed by existing zoning.

Policy Implementation 1.

The County’s adoption by resolution of a general plan amendment and the Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan, and by ordinance: the “Fairview Corners Specific Plan” zoning regulations, which constitute the land use designation and zoning for the Plan Area, will implement Resolution No. 89-92 and the County General Plan Land Use Element and will regulate the future development within the Plan Area.

Goal LU-2: Land use patterns responsive to the physical characteristics of the land, as well as to environmental, economic, and social concerns of the residents. Policy LU-2.1: Recognize the fault line and potential habitat constraints on the Plan Area and designate land to provide a mix of residential uses and product types, and recreational and open space amenities to meet the needs of residents.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall implement development in accordance with the land use designations shown on the Land Use Diagram (Figure 8), and with the policies and implementation measures contained within this Specific Plan. Modifications to the land uses or zoning regulations identified in this Specific Plan are subject to the County’s discretionary review.

2.

The low density and medium density residential uses offer opportunities to provide a variety of housing types.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood

developer(s) shall provide a range of housing products as described herein and/or by the separate Affordable Housing Program. 3.

The master developer shall prepare an Affordable Housing Program, which shall be part of the Development Agreement or separate affordable housing agreement with the County of San Benito. The program shall specify the manner in which the Plan Area will comply with the affordable housing requirements of San Benito County and address inclusionary obligations, if any, number, location and type or level of units, timing for development of the affordable units, financing options, and specific monitoring and enforcement procedures. The location for the affordable housing units may be partially or entirely within the Plan Area and/or located off-site on the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus. The Affordable Housing Program shall also address the use of secondary units to meet the affordability obligation of the Plan Area.

4.

Development of the project site shall comply with the most recent California Building Code requirements for Seismic Zone 4 to avoid or minimize potential damage from seismic ground shaking. All recommendations included in the 1989 fault investigation and in the 2008 geotechnical investigation prepared by Terrasearch, Inc. which includes a 50foot wide building setback on each side of the fault and any updated geotechnical reports, shall be incorporated into the project design.

Policy LU-2.2: Allow residential land uses in the proposed open space resource conservation area if habitat concerns are fully mitigated off-site.

Policy Implementation 1

It is proposed as a part of this Plan to allow the inclusion of a habitat conservation area at the northeast corner of the Plan Area if required by the CDFG or USFWS as partial mitigation of CTS habitat, with primary mitigation off-site.

2.

Optionally, the northeast corner of the Plan Area can be developed with residential uses or used as active park land if habitat concerns are fully mitigated off-site by agreement with appropriate regulatory agencies.

Related Policies are contained in Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3) and Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Residential Use Policies Goal LU-3: A diverse residential community. Policy LU-3.1. Allow a varied density and a variety of lot sizes, not to exceed 220 dwelling units (excluding secondary dwelling units, which are encouraged).

Policy Implementation 1.

When tentative and final maps are submitted to the County for review, the maximum unit count cannot exceed 220 dwelling units within the Plan Area. The lot and unit count shall exclude secondary dwelling units (which are encouraged within the Plan Area). In order to develop the Plan Area, the developer(s) shall submit one or more subdivision maps and/or parcel maps for approval by San Benito County that are in accordance with the development standards, zoning regulations, community design guidelines. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

2.

Residential lots shall be subdivided in accordance with the lot size requirements prescribed by Table 4, Minimum Residential Lot Size. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

3.

The purpose of lots created for other than residential uses shall be specifically described on the subdivision map.

Policy LU-3.2. Allow a variety of residential uses and supporting uses

Policy Implementation 1.

A variety of housing types shall be allowed, including single family homes, duplexes and duets, triplexes and fourplexes, courtyard and zero lot-line homes, and condominiums, townhouses, and apartments. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

2.

Principal uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are permitted or conditionally permitted on a residential lot subject to the applicable development standards.

3.

Complementary uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are permitted or conditionally permitted only on lots subdivided for the specific purpose(s) as noted on the subdivision map or other recorded document subject to the applicable development standards.

Policy LU-3.3. Allow accessory uses suitable to a residential area.

Policy Implementation 1.

Accessory uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are permitted or conditionally permitted on a residential lot in conjunction with a principal use, subject to the applicable development standards.

Policy LU-3.4. Conditionally allow additional uses if determined suitable for a residential area on a case-by-case basis and in accordance with this Specific Plan.

Policy Implementation 1.

Conditional uses as listed in Table 5, Permitted and Conditional Land Uses, are allowed on a residential lot upon obtaining a conditional use permit, and subject to the applicable development standards and conditions of use permit approval.

Related Policies are contained in Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Accessory Dwellings and Affordable Housing Policies Goal LU-4: Accessory dwelling units as an additional housing choice. Policy LU-4.1. Define appropriate types of accessory dwelling units (such as detached, above garage, etc.) and encourage these units as a part of or complementary to the Affordable Housing Program.

Policy Implementation 1.

Accessory dwelling units may be guesthouses, secondary dwelling units, or caretaker units. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

2.

Accessory dwelling units shall be located on an owner-occupied residential lot.

3.

A guesthouse shall be without kitchen facilities, clearly subordinate and incidental to the main building on the same lot, and not to be rented, let, or leased, whether compensation be direct or indirect.

4.

A secondary dwelling unit is a full residential unit that may be occupied full time, and is clearly subordinate and incidental to the main building on the same lot.

5.

A caretaker unit is a full residential unit that may be occupied full time and is specifically for the purpose of housing a caretaker for the same lot.

6.

Secondary dwelling units and caretaker units may include a kitchen and up to two bedrooms, subject to square footage and other standards set forth in Table 6, Accessory Dwelling Standards.

7.

Encourage accessory dwelling units to be built within the Plan Area to provide affordable housing for the community. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

Policy LU-4.2. Establish appropriate location, size, and number of accessory dwelling units dependent on the development density and lot size.

Policy Implementation 1.

Accessory dwelling units shall be limited to the residential lot sizes, configurations, and square footage standards in Table 6, Accessory Dwelling Standards. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

2.

No more than one accessory dwelling unit may be constructed on any lot.

Goal LU-5: Create affordable housing as a part of Plan Area Development. Policy LU-5.1. Affordable housing shall be governed by an Affordable Houding Program, which may be a separate Affordable Housing Agreement or incorporated into the Fairview Corners Development Agreement (Development Agreement). Affordable housing shall be located within the Plan Area and/or on the adjacent Gavilan College Campus property, with no more than fifty percent of the required units being located on the Gavilan property or as otherwise specified in the project’s Affordable Housing Program. Policy LU-5.2. Up to ten percent of the lots offered to local builders may be excluded from the County’s affordable housing requirements, or as otherwise set forth in the project’s Affordable Housing Program. Policy LU-5.3. Secondary and caretaker’s units are encouraged and allowed to meet up to fifty percent of the County’s required affordable housing for the Plan Area, or as otherwise set forth in the project’s Affordable Housing Program.

Policy Implementation 1.

An Affordable Housing Program, which shall be part of the Development Agreement or separate affordable housing agreement with the County, shall specify the manner in which affordable housing obligations, under the applicable County regulations, are met by the master developer and/or individual developers within the Plan Area. The Affordable Housing Program shall be imposed by the County as a condition of approval of the first subdivision map within the Plan Area. [LEED ND NPD Credit 4]

2.

The Affordable Housing Program may include the appropriate provisions for local builder preference exclusions and use of accessory units (secondary and caretaker’s units) in meeting the county’s affordable housing regulations.

3.

Implementation of the Affordable Housing Program may include financial assistance from a variety of sources, including contractual arrangements with a non-profit organization responsible for building the affordable housing.

Parks and Open Space Policies Goal LU-6: A coordinated system of open space and parks to meet the needs of the Plan Area residents. Policy LU-6.1. Provide passive and active open space on-site or off-site, or by paying in lieu fees commensurate with park requirements.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or neighborhood developer(s) shall provide land for passive and active open space, consistent with the Specific Plan and in accordance with County standards for the provision of parkland. The master developer shall conceptually design the open space and park areas, and the connections within the Plan Area by creating an Open Space and Parks Master Plan for the County’s approval. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL-6]

2.

The master developer and/or neighborhood developer(s) shall prepare final designs, finance, and construct the open space and park areas within the Plan Area concurrently with the development of the neighborhood phase in which they are located (prior to the issuance of a building permit for the last home in the neighborhood phase), and in accordance with the applicable County standards, and the approved Open Space and Parks Master Plan. Parks shall be designed to facilitate surveillance by adjoining residents and police services. If the number of residential dwelling units is less than the maximum of 220, the open space and park area requirement for the Plan Area will be based on the number of residential dwelling units built, to be calculated as required under the County Code.

3.

If the open space and park area standard is not met within the Plan Area and/or on the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, in lieu of the development of on-site parks and open space, the master developer shall pay fees to the County as allowed under the County Code, and in accordance with the Development Agreement.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal LU-7: Integrated open space and park areas. Policy LU-7.1 Interconnect open space and park areas.

Policy Implementation 1.

The open space and park trail system will consist of a loop configuration around or within the Plan Area that interconnects with the residential neighborhood and the Gavilan College San Benito Campus recreational facilities. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes

LL- 6] 2.

Development plans for the open space and park trail system shall be included in the Open Space and Parks Master Plan, prepared by the master developer and approved by the appropriate County staff in accordance with Article 7.0 (Plan Implementation).

3.

Anticipated open space improvements and the cost for those improvements are estimated in Article 7.0, Plan Implementation, and are illustrated in Appendix C, Open Space Categories (Lotting Program Example C).

Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6), Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2), and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

Intensity and Arrangement of Development Policies Goal LU-8: Adequate open space to allow for recreation and privacy. Policy LU-8.1. Limit lot coverage dependent on the development density and lot size.

Policy Implementation 1.

Lot coverage shall be determined by lot size and use in accordance with Table 7, Lot Coverage.

2.

Coverage calculations shall include all principal residential and accessory buildings, including garage space.

Policy LU-8.2. Provide minimum yard areas for all residences.

Policy Implementation 1.

A minimum rear or side yard area clear of structures or driveways shall be provided as prescribed in Table 8, Minimum Yard Space (Rear or Side Yard).

2.

For multi-family dwellings of nine or more units, interior common rooms may substitute for up to half of the yard requirement.

3.

No additional yard area shall be required for a secondary dwelling unit, but the required yard area for the principal dwelling unit shall be provided.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal LU-9: Adequate separation between development and adjacent roads and lots. Policy LU-9.1. Set development back from roads and lots dependent on development density and lot size.

Policy Implementation 1.

Compact development, including attached and detached single family dwellings or two to three unit attached dwellings on lots of less than 5,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 9, Compact Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

2.

Standard development, including detached single family dwellings or two to four unit attached dwellings on lots of 4,000 to 12,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 10, Standard Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

3.

Large lot development, including detached single family dwellings or two to four unit attached dwellings on lots of greater than 12,000 square feet, shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 11, Large Lot Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

4.

Apartments, condominiums, and other multifamily dwellings of five or more units shall be set back from property lines in accordance with Table 12, Multifamily Development Setbacks. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

5.

Two-story residences within 100 feet of the Fairview Road center line will require acoustical analyses, pursuant to the requirements of the San Benito County Code, and the project’s conditions of approval to ensure that interior noise levels on the second floor will be reduced to 45 dBA Ldn or lower. Building design shall include provisions for forced-air mechanical ventilation so that windows can be kept closed to control noise. The

conclusions and recommendations of the specific analyses, including the description of the necessary noise control treatments, shall be submitted to the County along with the building plans for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Policy LU-9.2. Establish specific set-backs and exceptions for special circumstances.

Policy Implementation 1.

Additional setback requirements shall be observed in accordance with Table 13, Special Setback Requirements and Exceptions.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2). Goal LU-10: Protection for neighboring properties from excessive shading and visual domination. Policy LU-10.1. Limit building and fence height dependent on the type of dwelling unit and characteristics of adjacent development.

Policy Implementation 1.

Buildings and fences shall be limited to the maximum heights as prescribed in Table 14, Height Limits.

2.

Structures near a shared boundary between the Plan Area and private property outside the Plan Area shall adhere to the additional height requirements in Table 15, Height Limits at Plan Area Boundaries. These requirements shall not apply to Plan Area boundaries within or adjacent to a road, except that any multi-family uses or other structures adjacent to the project site boundary (e.g., Fairview Road) shall adhere to the height requirements in Table 15.

Policy LU-10.2. Limit the location of fences and vegetation to ensure visibility at roads.

Policy Implementation 1.

Vegetation deemed to block visibility of vehicles entering or exiting the road shall be subject to the visibility triangle restrictions of San Benito County Code section 25.29.013.

2.

Avoid fence, wall or streetscape designs that create hiding places.

3.

Fencing, vegetation, and other landscape features shall not obscure the view between the front of the house and the road. Except along Fairview Road, where a minimum six-foot

sound barrier may be required, solid fences and gates over three feet high are prohibited fronting public roads. Prune front yard tree canopies to at least seven feet from the ground, and maintain plantings near walkways and building entries to under three feet tall. 4.

On lots at the intersection of a road and pedestrian path, no fence or hedge over three feet high shall be allowed in the yard adjoining the path.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

Parking Policies Goal LU-11: Adequate parking for residents and guests. Policy LU-11.1. Provide at least 1.5 automobile parking spaces for each principal dwelling unit, and at least one automobile parking space for each secondary dwelling unit.

Policy Implementation 1.

Residential parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with San Benito County Code section 25.31.020, except as otherwise provided herein.

2.

One of the required parking spaces for residences on lots under 5,000 square feet may be provided within a common parking lot within 250 feet of the residential lot it serves.

3.

One additional parking space shall be provided for each secondary dwelling unit or caretaker unit. The required parking space for secondary units on lots under 9,000 square feet may be provided within a common parking lot within 250 feet of the residential lot it serves.

Policy LU-11.2. Provide parking for a variety of vehicles.

Policy Implementation 1.

Provide optional electric car charging pre-wiring receptacles within reach of at least one garage parking space per unit or centrally located within carports or shared parking facilities.

2.

Multi-family developments shall provide secure visitor bicycle parking. Multi-family development shall provide one visitor bicycle parking space per five units. [LEED ND SLL Credit 4; LEED ND NPD Credit 5]

A RTICLE 3.0 C IRCULATION P LAN G OALS AND P OLICIES Goal CP-1: Provide adequate access to the Plan Area. Policy CP-1.1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) within the Plan Area shall be responsible to pay a proportional fair share or provide circulation improvements outside the Plan Area when those circulation improvements outside the Plan Area are warranted, in accordance with the Specific Plan certified EIR. Policy CP-1.2. The proportional fair share contribution for circulation improvements specified by the Specific Plan certified EIR outside the Plan Area will be based on the number of lots and/or dwelling units built within the Plan Area.

Policy Implementation 1.

The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for contributing a proportional fair share to intersection improvements and traffic signals.

2.

The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for dedication of right-of-way within the Plan Area for Fairview Road widening improvements.

3.

The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for construction of Fairview Road frontage improvements along the Plan Area frontage on Fairview Road, and parking shall be prohibited along this frontage.

4.

The Plan Area master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for contributing a proportional fair share to the Cielo Vista Drive extension shared entry road.

5.

Any physical improvements that are made by the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) that benefit the Gavilan College San Benito Campus or other future development projects in the area may be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement, as set forth in the Fairview Corners Development Agreement.

6.

The following off-site improvements to the intersection of Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Road shall be constructed by the developer:

•

a northbound shared through/right-turn lane will be added to Fairview Road at this intersection,

•

a southbound left-turn lane will be added to Fairview Road at this intersection,

•

and the west leg of Cielo Vista Drive eastbound will be re-striped to provide a leftturn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane.

Goal CP-2: Adequate connections to adjoining areas and uses. Policy CP-2.1. Provide road, pathway, and emergency vehicle connections to adjacent areas.

Policy Implementation 1.

Integrate circulation within the Plan Area and with adjoining land uses, including the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus. Lots and roads shall be arranged to facilitate convenient pedestrian circulation within the Plan Area and to adjacent locations.

2.

Street and/or bicycle and pedestrian connections shall be provided to adjoining properties along the southern, western, and northern Plan Area boundaries.

3.

Include an emergency vehicle access that provides adequate secondary emergency access to the Plan Area.

4.

Ensure that roads are designed to accommodate emergency vehicle turning movements.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use Plan and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2). Goal CP-3: Plan Area circulation system that facilitates mobility. Policy CP-3.1. Provide a system of neighborhood roads that facilitate internal circulation.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or individual project developer(s) shall construct neighborhood entry minor collector entry roads and standard residential roads as shown in the Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections (Figure 15). Final improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department. Grading plans may be issued prior to approval of the improvement plans.

2.

The integration of cul-de-sacs is encouraged when the residential development is designed, as illustrated in Appendix B, Lotting Program Example B, to provide pedestrian connections to open space or trail systems at the end of cul-de-sacs.

3.

Residential roads adjacent to parks and open space within the Plan Area shall be singleloaded with residences facing the road wherever feasible.

4.

Alternative road configurations within the subdivision tracts may be considered, subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department. Those alternative designs include, but are not limited to, one-way roads, parking restricted roads with dedicated parking bays, alley designs, and roads designed to calm traffic and allow an abundance of street trees.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2). Goal CP-4: Quiet and Safe Residential Roads. Policy

CP-4.1.

Promote

a

pleasant

and

conducive

walking

environment

through

implementation of traffic calming. 1.

Use the narrowest feasible travel lane widths on residential roads, designing these roads to be no wider than required to accommodate fire apparatus.

2.

Amenities to enhance the pedestrian environment, including entry features (landscaping, monumentation, and signage etc.), traffic calming, and street trees shall be included on the improvement plans.

3.

Consider the use of traffic calming techniques as illustrated in the Traffic Calming Diagram (Figure 16), to slow traffic, such as bulb-outs and neck-downs. Use of traffic calming shall be considered on all roads where they intersect with Cielo Vista Drive, and on Cielo Vista Drive at the Gavilan College San Benito Campus retail area.

4.

Radii of corners (measured at face of curb) at intersections shall not exceed 25 feet for collector roads. Where residential roads and collector roads intersect, street corner radii shall not exceed 15 feet. Provide roll-over curbs if necessary to meet emergency vehicle turning requirements.

5.

Roads shall have nighttime lighting that meets the minimum illumination standards contained in Article 4.0, Community Design.

6.

The perimeter trail shall be designed to permit as many openings and viewpoints from other areas within the Plan Area as practical, in accordance with the design standards in Article 4.0, Community Design.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2). Goal CP-5: Safe and convenient non-motorized transportation. Policy CP-5.1. Design the circulation system to provide appropriate bicycle facilities.

Policy Implementation 1.

Bicycle paths or lanes shall be constructed according to standards set forth in the Bikeway Planning and Design Section of the California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual, the San Benito County Bikeway and Pedestrian Master Plan, and in accordance with Article 4.0, Community Design.

2.

Bicycle path or lane improvements shall be provided as a part of the frontage improvements to Fairview Road along the Plan Area frontage, and shall be designed to connect to regional bikeways as identified in City and County Plans. 3. Class

II

bicycle

lanes shall be provided on the entire length of Cielo Vista Drive. 4.

Utilize the emergency vehicle access between the end of Cielo Vista Drive and Airline Highway if the Airline Highway Route is constructed on the Gavilan College San Benito Campus property.

5.

Signal light traffic sensors shall be set to detect bicycles and detector loop locations shall be marked for bicycles.

Policy CP-5.2. Facilitate pedestrian circulation by providing clearly identifiable pedestrian circulation routes that connect neighborhoods, parks, recreational trails and facilities, and transit stops.

Policy Implementation 1.

Pedestrian circulation routes shall be separated from vehicular traffic on all roads, and shall contain sidewalks or pedestrian paths consistent with the cross-section specifications shown in the Typical Future Cielo Vista Drive Extension Road Section (Figure 14) and the Typical “New” Collector Entry Road and Residential Road Sections (Figure 15).

2.

A continuous pedestrian system shall be provided along all roads and shall be in accordance with Article 4.0, Community Design. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

3.

Sidewalks shall be provided on both sides of the road in areas with lots of 12,000 square feet or smaller, and on at least one side of the road if all fronting lots are over 12,000 square feet. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

4.

Sidewalks shall be a minimum of four feet wide, and shall be a minimum of five feet wide adjacent to the future Gavilan College San Benito Campus. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

5.

The appropriate County staff shall review the master developer’s circulation improvement plans to ensure traffic calming features are included, such as enhanced crosswalks (e.g. bulb-outs, raised crosswalk, stamped concrete etc.) and/or road (speed) bumps.

6.

Handicap accessible routes shall be provided, except where existing gradients make such access unfeasible. At a minimum, at least one handicap accessible route shall be provided to connect the residential area to the adjacent future Gavilan College San Benito Campus, Plan Area parks, and adjacent property to the north.

7.

Utilize short-cut paths, if needed, to avoid circuitous pedestrian and bicycle routes, and to keep walking and bicycling distances between destinations as short as possible. Cul-de-sacs shall include pedestrian connections to open space areas whenever possible.

8.

Utilize emergency vehicle access routes for pedestrian circulation.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3), Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2), and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal CP-6: Access to public transit. Policy CP-6.1. Facilitate future transit service at or adjacent to the Plan Area.

Policy Implementation 1.

Work with Caltrans, COG, San Benito County, and Gavilan College District to develop, implement and maintain public transit services for the Plan Area.

2.

Reserve an appropriate location or locations for a bus stop on Cielo Vista Drive for future development of a bus stop, particularly adjacent to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal CP-6: Access to public transit. Policy CP-6.1. Facilitate future transit service at or adjacent to the Plan Area.

Policy Implementation 1.

Work with Caltrans, COG, San Benito County, and Gavilan College District to develop, implement and maintain public transit services for the Plan Area.

2.

Reserve an appropriate location or locations for a bus stop on Cielo Vista Drive for future development of a bus stop, particularly adjacent to the Gavilan College San Benito Campus.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

A RTICLE 4.0 C OMMUNITY D ESIGN G OALS AND P OLICIES Neighborhood and Streetscape Character Goal CD-1: Distinguishing streetscape features. Policy CD-1.1. Ensure that streetscape improvements enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood.

Policy Implementation 1.

Carry a consistent landscape and streetscape character throughout the Plan Area. If custom homes will be individually designed, additional emphasis should be placed on a consistent streetscape design. The master developer shall prepare a Road Improvement and Streetscape Master Plan to ensure consistency within the Plan Area.

2.

Coordinate streetscape, landscape, signage, and lighting to ensure a consistent visual character.

3.

Deciduous shade trees shall be planted along roads at no less than 40-foot spacing, and at an average spacing of no less than 30 feet. Street trees must be planted at least 15 feet from street lights and five feet from driveways. Street trees shall be allowed to grow to full natural size. [LEED ND NPD Credit 14]

4.

If relatively fewer and larger lots are subdivided, a design theme for the collector roads shall be developed to include a consistent fencing and entry gate theme.

Policy CD-1.2. Ensure that infrastructure improvements do not compromise the visual quality of the neighborhood. 1.

Screen for visual privacy or noise attenuation with berms and landscaping and minimize solid fences or walls. If walls over six feet facing the public view are necessary, such as when a rear yard is adjacent to a road, screen with vegetation.

2.

Use decorative poles and luminaries for street lighting.

3.

Position light poles and sign posts at lot lines, intersections, or multifamily dwelling/courtyard home driveways.

Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6) and Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5). Goal CD-2: A walkable and environmentally sustainable community. Policy CD-2.1. Provide a comfortable and convenient walking environment.

Policy Implementation 1.

Prioritize pedestrians and bicyclists in the design of residential roads.

2.

Ensure direct pedestrian connections between roads, and the community walking path network, parking lots, and entries to multifamily development.

3.

Maintain a minimum four-foot clear passageway when bollards, poles, hydrants, etc. are placed in or adjacent to sidewalks.

Policy CD-2.2. Design roads to avoid conflicts with higher traffic volumes or speeds.

Policy Implementation 1.

Access to all lots shall be provided by roads internal to the Plan Area. No access to lots shall be allowed directly from Fairview Road or State Route 25. No direct access to single family lots shall be allowed from Cielo Vista Drive.

2.

Roads within the Plan Area shall be designed for traffic moving no faster than 25 miles per hour. [LEED ND NPD Credit 1]

3.

Traffic calming features shall be designed as needed to slow traffic and provide a safe and convenient pedestrian environment.

Policy CD-2.3. Protect privacy and prevent annoyance from neighboring properties.

Policy Implementation 1.

To the extent practical, houses that overlook common open space or private yards of adjacent residences shall be designed to protect the privacy of the adjacent residences, particularly when the house is located close to the property line on that side.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6).

Architecture Goal CD-3: Carefully detailed architecture. Policy CD-3.1. Maintain architectural continuity within developments and neighborhoods.

Policy Implementation 1.

Obtain a consistent neighborhood character by using a consistent architectural style for residential buildings; architecture should feature variation within a style, rather than through the use of several different styles. Architecture shall feature selected details drawn from traditional regional styles. The master developer shall prepare an Architectural Style Master Plan to ensure consistency of architectural style within the Plan Area.

2.

Detached garages, and attached carports, workshops, storage buildings, pool houses, porches, and patio covers shall be architecturally consistent with the principal structure.

3.

Match the design of multifamily development parking canopies, trash enclosures, and other accessory structures to the architecture of the main building. Integrate signs and information systems into the overall design of multifamily residential developments. Relate signs to the architecture of the main building.

4.

Design multifamily dwellings, community buildings, and utility and service facilities to blend and harmonize with single-family dwellings and neighborhoods by using mass, detailing, and roof lines that express a scale similar to and drawn on elements of traditional single-family homes.

5.

Arrange multifamily dwellings to front on the public right-of-way. Organize the property to place buildings adjacent to the road, and locate off-street parking behind buildings or in the interior of the property. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

6.

Design utility structures to complement residential development in scale and style.

7.

Use exterior color schemes that reflect the natural landscape and historic landscape features.

Policy CD-3.2. Design dwellings with appropriate façade detailing.

Policy Implementation 1.

Arrange windows, doors, and other façade elements in balance on each elevation.

2.

Face entryways toward the road and make them a prominent part of the house design. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

3.

Provide depth to the façade by employing recessed and projecting elements, including prominent features such as bay windows and porches, and subtle features such as recessed window planes and raised trim.

4.

Extensive blank, solid walls (overly long or overly tall) are discouraged on all elevations and are not permitted on elevations facing roads. If such walls are necessary for interior or structural reasons, provide some form of variation or decoration such as false windows and balconies, wainscoting, stringcourse, corbel-supported arcade roof, and/or trellis plantings.

5.

Garage doors/carport openings facing a road may not constitute more than 50 percent of the width of any ground floor elevation. Where the garage door/carport opening constitutes more than 40 percent of the width of any ground floor elevation, special design treatment, such as an arbor or portico, shall be required at the garage/carport.

Policy CD-3.3. Design dwellings to complement their lot position.

Policy Implementation 1.

Design houses for corner lots (including lots fronting on pedestrian paths) to present equally important elevations to both frontages.

2.

Orient front elevations of courtyard corner homes to face the roads from which the courtyard gains access. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

Policy CD-3.4. Ensure that property improvements enhance the visual quality of the neighborhood.

Policy Implementation 1.

Retaining walls facing the road shall have a decorative finish that is consistent with the streetscape theme.

2.

Fences or walls facing roads or other public areas shall be designed to blend with the landscaping, be consistent with the streetscape theme, and should be at least partially screened by landscaping.

3.

Locate air conditioning; mechanical equipment; antennae and television receiver dishes; and vents on sides of the roof that are not visible from the road, whenever possible.

4.

Screen utility boxes from view of the road.

5.

Position gas meters and electric meters to minimize their visibility from roads, or provide screening.

6.

Provide landscaping and/or decorative paving or paving accents within courtyard and alley vehicular accesses. Garages should generally be set back of living areas, but not so much as to encourage parking that would encroach into the courtyard vehicular access area. Vary courtyard building height and/or setbacks, and place garages so that they do not dominate the view into the courtyard or alley. Design courtyard vehicular access so that the terminating vista features enhanced landscaping or a building element other than a garage.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3). Goal CD-4: A safe community. Policy CD-4.1. Design dwelling units to face public spaces to promote interactions and neighborhood safety.

Policy Implementation 1.

Design building entries and configurations that provide residents with a view from their home onto roads, pedestrian pathways, and other public areas. Front doors should be readily visible from the road to provide a welcome appearance and provide visibility and security.

2.

Any dwelling adjacent to a pedestrian path may front on the path. Secondary dwelling units may front on alleys or parks.

3.

Porches shall be covered, but substantially open (i.e. railings are acceptable) on the front and sides. Seating areas should be a minimum of six feet square.

4.

Entryways for multiple units in cluster arrangements should face the road, pedestrian access, or parking court, with doors readily visible. Provide a porch or patio area transition from adjacent walkways, roads, or vehicular accesses. [LEED ND NPD Prerequisite 1]

5.

Multi-unit dwellings arranged as flats shall provide a secured interior stairway or an exterior stairway designed to enhance building architecture and provide visibility and security for residents.

6.

Design pedestrian paths to be as open to view as possible.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

Lighting Goal CD-5 Prevention of Light Intrusion and Glare while Maintaining Safety Policy CD-5.1. Design parking lot lighting and street lighting to prevent light spill onto adjacent properties.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall prepare a Lighting Master Plan to ensure consistency of lighting treatment within the Plan Area.

2.

Use full or three-quarter cut-off luminaires for all parking lot and street lighting.

3.

Limit lighting standards to a height of 25 feet.

4.

Design parking lots so that peripheral landscaping filters direct views of luminaires from adjacent residences.

5.

Set subdued street lighting levels that maintain a rural ambiance.

6.

Design street lighting so that streetlights are placed at side lot lines.

Policy CD-5.2. Design building lighting to prevent light spill onto adjacent residential properties.

Policy Implementation 1.

Shield exterior lighting from shining directly onto adjacent residential properties.

2.

Locate exterior lights on the sides of houses below the top of the fence or shield the light from direct view of neighboring property.

Policy CD-5.3. Use minimal lighting in peripheral areas.

Policy Implementation 1.

Illuminated monument signs shall use the lowest practical level of lighting.

2.

Illuminated monument signs shall use the concealed up-lighting or down-lighting.

3.

No lighting shall be provided on peripheral pedestrian paths.

Policy CD-5.4. Plan lighting to maximize safety and security and conserve energy.

Policy Implementation 1.

Set roadway lighting levels that adequately provide for safety and security.

2.

Position street lights at the beginning of pedestrian paths to provide maximum illumination within the pathways.

3.

Use low levels of lighting in multifamily residential developments to eliminate dark corners near areas of pedestrian movement.

4.

When feasible use lighting technologies with higher efficiencies such as low voltage or LED lighting.

Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

Signage Goal CD-6: Attractive and harmonious signage. Policy CD-6.1. Design multifamily residential signage to blend with the residential character of the Specific Plan.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall prepare a Signage Master Plan to ensure consistency of sign designs within the Plan Area.

2.

Multi-family residential development building signage shall be made of wood, metal, stone, or other natural or simulated natural material. Signs may be painted, stained, or tinted. Plastic signs are not permitted.

3.

Signs shall be consistent with the architecture of the building and in scale with the property and building.

4.

Illumination of signs shall be by focused lighting that is not directly visible from locations outside the Plan Area.

5.

Internally lit and flashing or animated signs shall not be used in exterior locations.

Policy CD-6.2. Entry signage shall be distinctive and attractive. 1.

Monument or wall signs shall be used to identify the Plan Area and Plan Area neighborhoods.

2.

Provide ornamental monuments/decorative landscape wall to provide a distinguishing entry to the Plan Area at the intersection of Fairview Road and Cielo Vista Drive.

3.

Provide complementary ornamental monuments at the intersection of Cielo Vista Drive and three collector entry roads.

4.

Entry signs shall be constructed of durable materials, such as stone, textured concrete, heavy timber, or metal.

5.

Entry sign materials shall be non-reflective.

6.

Entry signs shall generally be no taller than four feet, although some related features such as corner towers, arbors, etc. may exceed this height.

7.

Painted surfaces shall utilize graffiti-resistant paint.

8.

A consistent design theme should be carried throughout the entry signs, with distinctive features to set apart each sign and create unique identities for each neighborhood.

9.

Water features shall use re-circulated water and be designed to minimize water loss from evaporation or splashing.

Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3).

A RTICLE 5.0 R ESOURCE M ANAGEMENT G OALS AND P OLICIES Biological Resource Policies Goal RM-1: Promote conservation of natural resources. Policy RM-1.1. Minimize the impact to special status species and their habitat in accordance with federal and state regulatory requirements.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall obtain Incidental Take Authorization from the USFWS (if

required) by preparing an acceptable Habitat Conservation Plan that identifies adequate measures to avoid, minimize or compensate for the loss of protected species and habitat. Mitigation may occur off-site, on-site, through payment of in-lieu fees, or any combination as approved by USFWS. [LEED ND SLL Credit 9] Mitigation is intended to occur off-site, and land may be acquired for purposes of species protection through a conservation easement, the details of which would be finalized in consultation with the USFWS as part of the Habitat Conservation Process. To the extent on-site mitigation is proposed, it may include provisions required by USFWS, including without limitation, the following: ƒ

A biological conservation easement of not less than a 100-meter radius shall be provided around the former stock pond. No development other than stormwater runoff and filtering, interpretive signage, fencing and unpaved trails shall take place within the easement. Fencing shall be suitable for protection of the aquatic resources.

ƒ

Use fencing and low level lighting adjacent to the biological conservation area, with the type of fencing being suitable to allow the passage of animals while still marking the area to be protected from intrusion, and the lighting screened to prevent direct light penetration into the area.

2.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall comply with mitigation measures required by the State Department of Fish and Game regarding the protection of state listed special status species and their habitat.

Policy RM-1.2. Allow potential for localized grading in the on-site habitat conservation area.

Policy Implementation 1.

If a habitat set-aside area is retained on-site, localized grading is allowed within the 100meter radius around the existing dry pond for the purposes of expanding storm water storage within the Plan Area. The amount of grading will be based on the need to collect and store water. This effort is intended to expand the storm water collection and percolation area, but may also enhance habitat, and should be designed with the intent to achieve both purposes.

2.

Use vegetated areas within the 100-meter radius area for natural filtration. Prepare a grading plan for the planned habitat set-aside area, if retained on-site, in accordance with the approved Habitat Conservation Plan and with appropriate agency approvals and/or permits prior to grading activities within this area.

3.

If all CTS mitigation is conducted outside the Plan Area, grading may occur as needed within the area identified for habitat conservation.

Policy RM-1.3. Minimize adverse changes to natural habitats.

Policy Implementation 1.

Within the Plan Area avoid planting species listed in the California Invasive Plant Council’s inventory as having a Moderate or High rating and affecting the Central West region, or included in the Exotic Pest Plant Council’s “Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern in California” list. [LEED Homes SS-2]

2.

Lots and roads shall be arranged to minimize the use of retaining walls. Taper the edge of cut and fill slopes to blend with existing topography or contours on adjacent development or roadways.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

Geologic Protection Policies Goal RM-2: Provide a safe and habitable community. Policy RM-2.1. Protect habitats and structures in the vicinity of known fault zones.

Policy Implementation 1.

Ensure a 135-foot “building exclusion zone” in all plan sets as illustrated in the Constraints Diagram (Figure 7).

2.

Limit future use of the “building exclusion zone” to non-habitable improvements (e.g. roadway improvements, park, open space, buffers, trails, etc.).

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3).

Soil Protection Policies Goal RM-3: Soil conservation. Policy RM-3.1. Minimize soil erosion.

Policy Implementation 1.

Erosion Control Plans shall be submitted to the County Public Works Department for review and approval when submitting subdivision improvement plans. Specific erosion control measures shall be included to protect drainage courses and the on-site habitat conservation area (should it be preserved on-site) from eroded soils and debris during construction. Soil exposed during grading that is no longer under active construction shall be stabilized.

2.

Slope stabilization and erosion control (during both the construction and postconstruction phases) shall only utilize mesh products that are made of biodegradable natural fiber materials. Plastic materials (such as silt fencing) may only be used if they are relatively solid (cannot entrap wildlife) and are removed from the site following use.

Water Quality Protection Policies Goal RM-4: Adequate disposal, retention and percolation of storm water and protection of storm water quality. Policy RM-4.1. Construct a stormwater collection and disposal system that retains and encourages percolation of stormwater generated within the Plan Area to pre-development levels.

Policy RM-4.2. Allow alternative conceptual grading and drainage plans that direct drainage to shared retention basins with the adjacent Gavilan College San Benito Campus, only if the Gavilan College Campus design and construction plans include retention basins with the capacity and water quality treatment measures to accommodate the Fairview Corners Plan Area, or that portion of the Plan Area to be served, so that the Plan Area’s stormwater discharge off-site is maintained at pre-development levels.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall prepare a storm drainage master plan in accordance with San Benito County design standards, which identifies backbone collection and retention infrastructure needed to serve development within the Plan Area, in accordance with the timing requirements set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. Any improvement plans shall conform to the approved Storm Drainage Master Plan and shall incorporate use of structural and institutional best management practices and low impact development designs for storm water quality management and to minimize soil erosion for the Plan Area and adjacent properties outside the Plan Area. The improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department in accordance with the timing set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. The master developer shall finance and construct the backbone storm drainage collection and retention infrastructure. [LEED ND GIB Credit 8]

2.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall design, finance, and construct subdivision storm drainage collection improvements, which tie into the backbone

storm

drainage

infrastructure

system.

Stormwater

collection

system

improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the County Public Works Department in accordance with the timing set forth in Article 7.0 of the Specific Plan. 3.

Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Low Impact Development (LID) principles when designing storm water runoff facilities.

Policy RM-4.3. Utilize best management practices and low impact development designs to minimize surface water quality degradation from discharge of storm drainage.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall prepare and submit a storm water pollution prevention program [SWPPP] application to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the County Public Works Department to secure a NPDES General Construction Permit for the entire Plan Area. The master developer and/or individual developer shall incorporate the structural and institutional best management practices and low impact development

designs identified in the storm water management plan in improvement plans for their respective projects. The County Public Works Department must review these plans to ensure inclusion of the practices prior to approval of a grading or building permit for that phase. [GIB Prerequisite 4; Homes SS-4] 2.

Prior to construction, contractors and their personnel shall be trained in appropriate best management practices to ensure water quality is protected. Those construction practices shall include erosion control, sediment transfer reduction, and dust control measures. A construction manager familiar with NPDES permit requirements must monitor the construction activities to protect water quality. This provision shall be included as a note on construction improvement plans. [GIB Prerequisite 4; Homes SS-4]

3.

No chemical pesticides shall be utilized in the maintenance of common landscaped areas, open space areas, or parks. Fertilizers shall be applied sparingly, and shall be derived from natural sources, such as fish emulsion or manure.

4.

The master developer shall cooperate with the County to create a public education program for future residents to increase their understanding of water quality protection, which should include but not be limited to:

5.

ƒ

Hazardous material use controls

ƒ

Hazardous material exposure controls

ƒ

Hazardous material disposal and recycling

Hazardous materials could consist of cleaning products, paint, oil, fertilizers, weed killers etc. The education materials shall encourage the use of alternative methods, and prohibit the dumping of hazardous materials in open space areas or the storm drain system. Further, the master developer shall require that all storm drain catch basins are labeled to discourage illegal dumping of hazardous materials.

6.

Where feasible, direct roof drainage to pervious surfaces for infiltration.

7.

On larger lots (12,000 square feet or above) consider the capture of roof drainage for reuse as irrigation water.

8.

To the extent feasible, direct stormwater run-off to percolation swale and basin areas rather than directing stormwater to storm drain pipes.

9.

Use biotreatment (natural pollutant filtering) where stormwater runs off paved surfaces onto pervious surfaces.

10.

Utilize sediment traps, evaporation basins, flow dissipaters, and other methods to reduce the volume and speed of stormwater run-off and reduce pollutant loads. [LEED ND GIB Credit 8]

Related Policies are contained in Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Water Conservation Policies Goal RM-5: Promote conservation of water resources. Policy RM-5.1. Reduce potable water consumption.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall prepare a detailed master recycled water distribution plan that identifies backbone collection infrastructure needed to serve front yards of residential lots, public parks, landscape strips, monument locations, and other open space/landscape areas within the Plan Area. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1]

2.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall comply with the San Benito County Water Conservation Plan in the design of landscape material, irrigation systems, and calculating the allowable water budget for landscape irrigation in the Plan Area. Additional water conservation methods should also be considered for implementation within the Plan Area, such as cisterns to catch and store runoff water for landscape irrigation, the use of native vegetation in landscape materials, and the use of ultra low-flow or dual flush toilets, shower heads and faucets in all residential units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1]

Policy RM-5.2. Facilitate water conservation.

Policy Implementation 1.

In public spaces and residential front yards less than one acre, the master developer and individual developer(s) shall install drought-tolerant landscaping prior to delivery of residential dwelling units to buyers. On lots of one acre or larger, perimeter droughttolerant planting shall be provided along the street frontage. Homeowners shall maintain yards in weed-free condition and assure that soil erosion is prevented.

2.

Use drought-tolerant landscaping for at least 50 percent of planted yard area, and limit turf to areas of active use, and in no case more than 50 percent of planted yard area. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1; Homes WE-2]

3.

Utilize only drought-tolerant landscaping along roads and in public landscaped areas. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes SS-2; Homes WE-1; Homes WE-2]

4.

Design irrigation systems to minimize water use, including installation of ground moisture sensor controls, and temporary irrigation systems for drought tolerant plantings to be removed, where feasible, when plantings are established. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4]

5.

Equip dwellings with low water use washing machines and dishwashers, and dual-flush toilets. [LEED Homes EA-9]

6.

Pre-plumb dwellings to accommodate gray water and rainwater recovery and irrigation systems, if feasible and legally permissible. [LEED Homes SS-4; Homes WE-2]

7.

Multi-family residential buildings shall include a roof rainwater recovery system for storing irrigation water.

8.

Use recycled water for park, streetscape, single-family residential front yard and multifamily residential common area irrigation, if available adjacent to the Plan Area at time of construction and permitted under applicable law and regulations. Encourage pre-plumbing to facilitate conversion to recycled water if recycled water is not available at the time of development, but will become available in the future. [LEED ND GIB Credit 4; Homes WE1]

Related Policies are contained in Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Air Quality Protection Policies Goal RM-6: Reduced Air Emissions. Policy RM-6.1. Minimize impacts to air quality.

Policy Implementation 1.

The use of wood-burning stoves is prohibited; only natural gas stoves are permitted. Require stoves or fireplaces to exceed EPA emissions reductions regulations.

2.

Prior to the start of construction, the project contractor shall provide a construction dust mitigation plan. The plan shall specify the methods of dust control that would be utilized, demonstrate the availability of needed equipment and personnel, use reclaimed water for dust control, and identify a responsible individual who, if needed, can authorize implementation of additional measures. The plan requirements shall be included on all construction documents and plans, where appropriate. The construction dust mitigation plan shall, at a minimum, include the following measures: ƒ

Limit grading activity to a maximum of 2.2 acres daily. As more detailed construction information becomes available, emissions from grading activities could be reassessed to determine if the area of grading could be increased. Such an assessment would be completed using appropriate assumptions and mitigation measures.

ƒ

Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods. Active areas adjacent to existing businesses should be kept damp at all times. If necessary, during windy periods, watering is to occur on all days of the week regardless of on-site activities.

ƒ

Cover soil or maintain at least two feet of freeboard on all hauling trucks.

ƒ

Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas and staging areas at construction sites.

ƒ

Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles.

ƒ

Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph.

ƒ

Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.

ƒ

Suspend excavation and grading activity when hourly-average winds exceed 15 mph and visible dust clouds cannot be contained within the site.

3.

The developer shall reduce Nitrogen Oxide (NOX) exhaust and particulate matter emissions by implementing one of the following measures prior to the start of construction: ƒ

Provide a plan, acceptable by the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, demonstrating that the heavy-duty (> 50 horsepower) off-road vehicles and equipment to be used in the construction project, including owned, leased and subcontractor vehicles, will achieve a project wide fleet-average 20 percent NOX reduction and 45 percent particulate reduction compared to the most recent California Air Resources Board fleet average for the time of construction; or

ƒ

The developer shall provide a plan, acceptable by the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, that all off-road construction vehicles/equipment greater than 50 horsepower that will be used on site for more than one week shall: 1) be manufactured during or after 1996, 2) shall meet the NOX emissions standard of 6.9 grams per brake horsepower hour, and 3) shall be equipped with diesel particulate matter filters.

ƒ

The contractors shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g. compressors).

ƒ

Signs at the construction site shall be clearly visible to advise that that diesel equipment standing idle for more than five minutes shall be turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate or other bulk materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks may keep their engines running continuously if onsite and staged away from residential areas.

ƒ

Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions.

ƒ

Stage large diesel powered equipment at least 200 feet from any active land uses (e.g., residences).

4.

Divert a minimum of 25 percent of total materials taken off the construction site from landfills or incinerators. [LEED Homes MR-3]

Related Policies are contained in Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6), Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2), and Article 6.0, Public Facilities and Services (Section 6.5).

Cultural Resources Protection Policies Goal RM-7: Respectful treatment of cultural resources. Policy RM-7.1. Protect archaeological resources.

Policy Implementation 1.

If midden soil, cultural features or potentially significant cultural resources, or human remains are discovered during construction, work shall be halted within 50 meters (165 feet) of the find until a qualified professional archaeologist can evaluate the find. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated and implemented.

2.

If cultural resources are located, mitigation shall include, at a minimum, recovery of significant cultural materials and professional analysis based on the types and quantities of those materials recovered, which might include analysis of lithic artifacts and materials, radiocarbon dating of shell fragments, bead analysis, faunal analysis, etc. Cultural materials recovered during monitoring and/or mitigation, other than those directly associated with Native American burials, should be curated in the public domain at a suitable research facility.

3.

If human remains are found during construction there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of San Benito County is contacted to determine that no investigation of the cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American the coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendent (MLD) from the deceased Native American. The MLD may then make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance if: a) the Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a MLD or the MLD failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the commission; b) the descendent identified fails to make a recommendation; or c) the landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendent, and the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner, consistent with Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.

Energy Conservation Policies Goal RM-8: An environmentally sustainable community. Policy RM-8.1. Facilitate alternative energy sources.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall pre-plumb/prewire at least one-third of units for solar power and shall offer solar power as an option on all units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10]

2.

If the Gavilan College San Benito Campus develops a community geothermal heat pump energy or heating system, extension of the system into the Plan Area shall be considered. [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10]

Policy RM-8.2. Facilitate energy conservation through design techniques.

Policy Implementation 1.

Design houses to facilitate passive solar heating during the winter, and use cool roofs and thermal window coverings to reduce solar heat gain during the summer.

2.

Design lots and houses to maximize rooftop solar energy output potential. Where feasible, roof pitches and roof orientation should be designed to maximize solar exposure to rooftop energy panels (minimum 300 square feet of unobstructed roof area facing within 30 degrees of south). [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10]

3.

The developer shall make photovoltaic electrical systems and solar hot water or tankless water heaters available for at least one-third of dwelling units. Photovoltaic prewiring/conduit shall be installed and photovoltaic electrical systems and solar hot water or tankless water heaters shall be offered as an option on all dwelling units. [LEED ND GIB Credit 10; Credit 11; Credit 12; Homes EA-10]

4.

Equip dwellings with energy efficient water heaters and heat recovery drain systems.

5.

Vegetation within 10 feet of a property line that is deemed to interfere with solar access at an adjoining lot shall be subject to height restrictions as necessary to protect such solar access.

6.

Porches shall be placed only on the east, south, or west side of houses to provide shading in the summer, and to maximize northern light exposure to the interior of houses.

7.

South and west-facing elevations shall be designed with roof overhangs that block summer sun from windows and allow penetration of winter sun.

8.

Design residences to minimize the need for artificial lighting. Provide ample windows; light towers; light wells; dormers; skylights; or other features to enhance natural lighting. [Insert new photo]

9.

To increase natural light to small residential lots, consideration should be given to the orientation of roof gables and the effect of the roof line on yard shading.

10.

Landscaping should include deciduous trees to shade south and west-facing walls in the summer and allow sunlight penetration in the winter.

11.

Provide communications wiring within all dwelling units to facilitate telecommuting.

12.

Provide programmable thermostats for all heating systems.

13.

Use heating systems with an Annual Fuel Use Efficiency (AFUE) of 95% or greater, seal all ducts, and insulate ducts in unconditioned spaces.

14.

Equip all garages/carports with a 240-volt 40-amp circuit suitable for electric vehicle charging.

15.

If multi-family uses are developed, the parking lot shall be shaded by either high albedo (reflective) roofs), roofs with solar panels, or trees that provide a minimum of 50 percent shade within 10 years of planting.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2).

A RTICLE 6.0 P UBLIC F ACILITIES AND S ERVICES G OALS AND P OLICIES Goal PF-1: Adequate water supply and water infrastructure to meet the demands of the Plan Area. Policy PF-1.1. Ensure sufficient water supply for the build-out of the Plan Area.

Policy Implementation 1.

The Sunnyslope County Water District has prepared a Water Supply Assessment, and determined that there is an adequate water supply to serve the Plan Area. Continue to work with SSCWD to formalize the “will serve” letter provided (see Appendix E) into a service agreement for the Plan Area.

Policy PF-1.2. Construct a water supply system that expands on and is integrated with the existing system, meets the needs of future development, and, where appropriate, subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall install water supply system improvements that tie into the backbone infrastructure system, which shall be installed by the master developer. Water supply improvement plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Sunnyslope County Water District (SSCWD) for consistency with the approved Potable Water Master Plan and Recycled Water Master Plan, as well as related SSCWD requirements, in accordance with Article 7.0.

2.

Where water infrastructure is built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, these improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with Article 7.0, and may be set forth in greater detail in the Development Agreement.

3.

As a condition of approval for each tentative map, the developer shall grant easements for the SSCWD to maintain water supply mains to be located in the Plan Area.

Policy PF-1.3. Encourage the development of a reclaimed water distribution system, including purple piping that expands on and is integrated with the existing system, and meets the needs of future development.

1.

The following (Article ) goals, policies, 1. To the extent if is feasible for the developer to include a reclaimed a reclaimed water distribution system in the Plan Area, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall be responsible for the construction of the reclaimed water distribution system, including purple piping within Plan Area streets to connect to the future recycled wastewater pipeline along Fairview Road, in phases consistent with the build-out of the Plan Area.

2.

Where the recycled wastewater distribution system or other associated improvements are built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, those improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with applicable standards and criteria, in accordance with Article 7.0 and as set forth in the Development Agreement.

Related Policies are contained in Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal PF-2: Adequate wastewater collection and treatment infrastructure to meet the demands of the Plan Area. Policy PF-2.1. Construct a wastewater collection system that expands on and is integrated with the existing system that connects to the City of Hollister’s Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant (DWTP), meets the needs of future development within the Plan Area, and, where appropriate, subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement. Policy PF-2.2. The demand for wastewater collection and treatment may be provided for by septic systems on lots not less than one acre in size. Lots less than one acre in size, and where the number of lots within the Plan Area exceeds 45, shall not be served by the use of septic systems, but shall be served by the City of Hollister DWTP.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer shall work with the City of Hollister to ensure a “will serve” commitment, and prepare a master wastewater collection plan that identifies backbone collection infrastructure needed to serve new development within the Plan Area. Backbone infrastructure improvement plans for development within the Plan Area must be reviewed and approved by the City of Hollister for consistency with City standards prior to or concurrent with the approval by the County Public Works Department. The timing of approval shall occur in accordance with Article 7.0.

2.

Where wastewater infrastructure is built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, those improvements shall be subject to the proportional fair share and reimbursement in accordance with Artcle 7.0 and as set forth in the Development Agreement.

3.

Individual project developer(s) shall install wastewater collection improvements within the boundaries of their individual projects that tie into the backbone wastewater collection system. Wastewater collection system improvement plans for individual projects shall be subject to review and approval of the City of Hollister for consistency with the master wastewater collection plan and related City standards prior to or concurrent with County staff approval. The timing of the required approval shall occur in accordance with Article 7.0 of any individual subdivision phase final map or commercial development within the Plan Area.

4.

As a part of the final map and improvement plans, the developer shall grant easements to allow for maintenance of wastewater collection improvements to be located in the Plan Area.

5

Septic systems provided to serve the Plan Area shall meet County design, construction and maintenance standards. Designs shall be submitted prior to approval of tentative maps.

Goal, Policies, and Policy Implementation for Storm Drainage and Water Quality Management are contained in Article 5.0, Resource Management. Goal PF-3: Adequate public utilities and communications infrastructure. Policy PF-3.1. Provide electrical, gas, and communications infrastructure that serves the needs of the Plan Area, and, where appropriate, is subject to proportional fair share and reimbursement.

Policy Implementation 1. The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall construct all new electrical, gas, and communications lines underground within the Plan Area, in coordination with the service providers. Existing lines and cables within the Plan Area shall also be placed underground. The master developer shall work with the telephone and cable service providers to provide the most technically advanced underground communications infrastructure, which will assist in promoting telecommuting and home occupations.

2. Where public utilities and communications infrastructure are built outside the Plan Area that benefits other future development projects, these improvements shall be subject to the criteria provided by the County.

Related Policies are contained in Article 4.0, Community Design (Section 4.2) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal PF-4: Adequate essential public safety services to meet the needs of future residents. Policy PF-4.1. Provide and maintain public safety services that are adequate in equipment and resources to respond to emergencies and calls for service within the Plan Area, and that meet the response time of the San Benito County Sheriff and Fire Departments.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall pay the public safety impact fees to the County, consistent with the County’s fee program and/or the development agreement. Fees shall be paid prior to receiving a building permit for each residential unit, or as otherwise stipulated in the fee ordinance or Development Agreement.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3), Article 3.0, Circulation Plan (Section 3.6), and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal PF-5: Adequate school services to meet the needs of future residents. Policy PF-5.1. Ensure access to adequate education.

Policy Implementation 1.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall pay the state mandated school impact fees to the County/School Districts, consistent with the state required development fees. Fees shall be paid prior to receiving a building permit for each residential unit, or as otherwise stipulated in the fee ordinance or Development Agreement.

Goal PF-6: Adequate park facilities to allow for recreation. Policy PF-6.1. Provide on-site parks and open spaces.

Policy Implementation 1.

Utilize areas adjacent to any on-site biological conservation easement to provide opportunities for enjoyment of the open space.

2.

Provide a small park/tot lot within 1,500 feet of each residential lot, if possible. [LEED ND NPD Credit 9/10; Homes LL-6]

3.

Each park/tot lot shall have trash and recycling receptacles, seating, and shade trees.

4.

To the extent feasible, pathways and trails shall be constructed with a smooth surface that is at least partly pervious to water, such as decomposed granite.

5.

Pathways will be landscaped with shade trees to facilitate use on hot days.

6.

Parks shall be open from dawn until dusk.

Policy PF-6.2. Park Maintenance shall be self-funded.

Policy Implementation 1.

Park development will be phased to occur concurrently with the development of the Plan Area, each individual neighborhood developer shall construct those components of the park system that is within its neighborhood or adjacent street frontage in accordance with the Parks Master Plan.

2.

The master developer shall establish a funding mechanism or district, such as a CSA, CSD, CFD, or some other entity, to ensure that parks remain public and long-term park maintenance is funded without use of County general funds or parks funds. If park maintenance is funded by a private homeowner’s association, the parks will be private.

Related Policies are contained in Article 2.0, Land Use and Development Standards (Section 2.3) and Article 5.0, Resource Management (Section 5.3). Goal PF-7: residents.

Adequate solid waste services to meet the needs of future

Policy PF-7.1. Ensure adequate availability of solid waste disposal services and reduction, reuse, and recycling programs.

Policy Implementation 1.

As a condition of approval of any subdivision tentative or parcel map, the master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall obtain verification from Recology San Benito that it can provide solid waste collection services to meet demand from build out of the Plan Area. Waste collection services shall be financed through the most recently adopted fee program of Recology San Benito.

2.

It is anticipated that Recology San Benito will provide curbside recycling service to residential neighborhoods. Where curbside pick-up is not practical, conveniently located centralized recycling collection and storage facilities will be provided by the developers.

3.

The master developer and/or individual neighborhood developer(s) shall distribute, to all home buyers, the educational program provided by the service providers as part of a countywide waste reduction, reuse and recycling effort.

4.

Require all construction contracts to include construction waste reduction and recycling clauses.

5.

Require public-use recycling cans at all locations where public-use refuse cans are provided.

This side intentionally left blank.

Appendix B

Lotting Program Examples a-c

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Lotting Program Example A Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010

Lotting Program Example B Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

0

300 feet

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2009

Lotting Program Example C Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

Appendix C

Open space categories

Source: EMC Planning Group 2010, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar 2010

Open Space Categories (Lotting Program Example C) Fairview Corners Residential Specific Plan

Appendix D

U.S. Green Building council leed criteria

U.S. G REEN B UILDING C OUNCIL LEED C RITERIA Sustainable Development Strategy Sustainable communities that incorporate the principles of smart growth and green building technologies better serve the needs and desires of today's residents and the needs of future residents. Green and sustainable designs will be incorporated into the development of the Plan Area. A number of goals, policies, and policy implementation actions presented in the Specific Plan are targeted at achieving sustainable development within the Plan Area. The following table summarizes those policies that meet specific U.S. Green Building Council LEED criteria. LEED Reference

Policies

Policy Subject

ND SLL Credit 4

LU-11.2

Multi-family residential /commercial visitor bicycle racks

ND SLL Credit 7

RM-1.1

Habitat management

ND SLL Credit 9

RM-1.1

Habitat management

ND NPD Prerequisite 1

CD-3.1

Front buildings on street with parking to rear

CD-3.2

Home entryways facing street

CD-3.3

Courtyard home entryways facing street

CD-4.1

Building to street orientation

CP-5.2

Sidewalks

LU-9.1

18-foot street set-backs

CD-2.2

25 miles per hour street design

CP-5.2

Sidewalks

LU-3.1

Varied density

LU-4.1

Accessory dwelling units

LU-4.2

Accessory dwelling unit standards

LU-5.1

Affordable housing program

LU-5.3

Accessory dwellings as affordable units

LU-11.1

Commercial parking maximum 20 percent of site

ND NPD Credit 1

ND NPD Credit 4

ND NPD Credit 5

(partially met)

LU-11.2

Multi-family residential/commercial visitor bicycle racks

ND NPD Credit 9

LU-6.1

Park areas

LU-7.1

Recreation

PF-6.1

Park areas

LU-6.1

Park areas

LU-7.1

Recreation

PF-6.1

Park areas

ND NPD Credit 14

CD-1.1

Deciduous shade trees

GIB Prerequisite 4

RM-4.3

Storm water quality

ND GIB Credit 4

RM-5.1

Reduce potable water use

RM-5.2

Facilitate water conservation

ND NPD Credit 10

Low water use appliances [LEED ND GIB Credit

RM-4.2

Storm water retention and percolation

RM-8.1

Maximize rooftop solar exposure

RM-8.2

Pre-wire for solar/offer solar roofs

8] ND GIB Credit 10

Community geothermal heat ND GIB Credit 11

RM-8.1

Maximize rooftop solar exposure

RM-8.2

Pre-wire for solar/offer solar roofs Community geothermal heat

ND GIB Credit 12

RM-8.1

Maximize rooftop solar exposure

RM-8.2

Pre-wire for solar/offer solar roofs Community geothermal heat

Homes LL-6

Homes SS-2

LU-6.1

Park areas

LU-7.1

Recreation

PF-6.1

Park areas

RM-1.3

No invasive plant species

RM-5.1

Reduce potable water use

RM-5.2

Facilitate water conservation Low water use appliances

Homes SS-4

RM-4.2

Gray water and rainwater catchment

RM-5.2

Facilitate water conservation Low water use appliances

Homes WE-1

RM-5.1

Reduce potable water use

RM-5.2

Facilitate water conservation Low water use appliances

Homes WE-2

RM-5.2

Facilitate water conservation Low water use appliances

Homes EA-9

RM-5.2

Facilitate water conservation Low water use appliances

Homes EA-10

RM-8.1

Maximize rooftop solar exposure

RM-8.2

Pre-wire for solar/offer solar roofs Community geothermal heat

Note:

Criteria taken from 2009 LEED ND and 2008 (rev 2010) LEED for Homes; buildings will qualify for additional LEED criteria (not reflected in the Specific Plan policies) through compliance with California Title 24 energy code requirements. Acronyms used: EA – Energy and Atmosphere GIB – Green Infrastructure and Buildings LEED – Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design LL – Locations and Linkages ND – Neighborhood Development NPD – Neighborhood Patterns and Design SLL – Smart Locations and Linkages SS – Sustainable Sites WE – Water Efficiency

Appendix E

sscwd intent to serve letter

Appendix F

draft capital improvements cost study