Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
05/04/2023 Planning Commission Regular Agenda Packet
May 4, 2023 | 6:00 PM Page 1 of 4 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Thursday, May 4, 2023 | 6:00 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL 7351 ROSANNA STREET, GILROY, CA 95020 Chair: Manny Bhandal: manny.bhandal@cityofgilroy.org Vice Chair: Annedore Kushner: annedore.kushner@cityofgilroy.org Commissioners: Stefanie Elle: stefanie.elle@cityofgilroy.org Adriana Leongardt: adriana.leongardt@cityofgilroy.org Joan Lewis: joan.lewis@cityofgilroy.org Kelly Ramirez kelly.ramirez@cityofgilroy.org Michelle Montez: michelle.montez@cityofgilroy.org Staff Liaison: Sharon Goei, Community Development Director | sharon.goei@cityofgilroy.org Written comments can be submitted by email to planningdivision@cityofgilroy.org Please note that written comments will not be read out loud, but will be part of the written record. Comments by the public will be taken on any agenda item before action is taken by the Planning Commission. Persons speaking on any matter are asked to state their name and address for the record. Public testimony is subject to reasonable regulations, including but not limited to time restrictions on particular issues and for each individual speaker. A minimum of 12 copies of materials should be provided to the Clerk for distribution to the Commission and Staff. Public comments are limited to no more than three-minutes, at the Chair’s discretion. Comments on any agenda item may be emailed to the Planning Division at planningdivision@cityofgilroy.org or mailed to the City of Gilroy, Community Development Department at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020. Comments received by the Planning Division by 1:00 pm on the day of a Planning Commission meeting will be distributed to the Planning Commissioners prior to or at the meeting and are available for public inspection at the Planning Division counter at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street. Any correspondence received will be incorporated into the meeting record. Items received after the 1:00 pm deadline will be provided to the Planning Commission as soon as practicable. In compliance with the American Disabilities Act (ADA), the City will make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk 72 hours prior to the meeting at (408) 846-0491. A sound enhancement system is available in the City Council Chambers. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda Page 2 of 4 May 4, 2023 | 6:00 PM If you challenge any planning or land use decision made at this meeting in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing held at this meeting, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. Please take notice that the time within which to seek judicial review of any final administrative determination reached at this meeting is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. Persons who wish to speak on matters set for Public Hearing will be heard when the presiding officer calls for comments from those persons who are in support of or in opposition thereto. After persons have spoken, the hearing is closed and brought to the Planning Commission level for discussion and action. There is no further comment permitted from the audience unless requested by the Planning Commission. A Closed Session may be called during this meeting pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)(1) if a point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the City on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City. Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Planning Commission after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection with the agenda packet in the lobby of Administration at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street during normal business hours. These materials are also available with the agenda packet on the City website at www.cityofgilroy.org KNOW YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE GILROY OPEN GOVERNMENT ORDINANCE. Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, task forces, councils and other agencies of the City exist to conduct the people's business. This ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the people's review. FOR MORE INFORMATION ON YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE OPEN GOVERNMENT ORDINANCE, TO RECEIVE A FREE COPY OF THE ORDINANCE OR TO REPORT A VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE, CONTACT THE OPEN GOVERNMENT COMMISSION STAFF AT (408) 846-0204 or by email at cityclerk@cityofgilroy.org. 1. OPENING 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. REPORT ON POSTING THE AGENDA AND ROLL CALL 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS (Three-minute time limit). This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons desiring to address the Planning Commission on matters not on the agenda. The law does not permit the Planning Commission action or extended discussion of any item not on the agenda except under special circumstances. Comments on any agenda item may be emailed to the Planning Division at planningdivision@cityofgilroy.org or mailed to Community Development Department at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020. Comments received by the Planning Division by 1:00pm on the day of a Planning Commission meeting will be distributed to the Planning Commission prior to or at the meeting and available for public inspection with the agenda packet located in the lobby of Planning Division at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street prior to the meeting. Any correspondences received will be incorporated into the meeting Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda Page 3 of 4 May 4, 2023 | 6:00 PM record. Items received after 1:00pm deadline will be provided to the Planning Commission as soon as practicable. All statements that require a response will be referred to staff for reply in writing. PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR RELATED PROJECT APPLICATIONS WILL BE HEARD CONCURRENTLY AND ACTION WILL BE TAKEN INDIVIDUALLY. COMPANION PROJECTS UNDER NEW BUSINESS WILL BE TAKEN UP FOR ACTION PRIOR TO, OR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE RELATED PUBLIC HEARING. THIS REQUIRES DEVIATION IN THE ORDER OF BUSINESS AS NOTED WITHIN THE AGENDA. 5. CONSENT AGENDA 5.1. April 6, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 5.2. April 20, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.1. Gilroy Square proposed Gilroy Crossings Phase II Planned Unit Development Zoning Amendment, Architectural and Site Plan Review, and Tentative Map for Property Located at 6970 Camino Arroyo (Z 22-01, AS 21- 13, TM 21-02). 1. Staff Report: Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner 2. Open Public Hearing 3. Close Public Hearing 4. Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications 5. Possible Action: Staff has analyzed the proposed project, and recommends that the Planning Commission: a) Consider and recommend that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, based on findings required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and b) Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the PUD Zoning Amendment Z 22-01 for Gilroy Crossings Phase II as requested; and c) Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the Architectural and Site Review AS 21-13 for the Planned Unit Development, subject to certain findings and conditions; and d) Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the Tentative Map TM 21-02, subject to certain findings and conditions. 7. NEW BUSINESS 7.1. Finding of Consistency for the Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 2024 through Fiscal Year 2028 to Determine its Consistency with the City’s General Plan and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 1. Staff Report: Daryl Jordan, Public Works Director 2. Open Public Comment Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda Page 4 of 4 May 4, 2023 | 6:00 PM 3. Close Public Comment 4. Possible Action: Staff has analyzed the proposed project, and recommends that the Planning Commission: a) Receive report on proposed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Fiscal Year 2024 through Fiscal Year 2028; and b) Adopt a Resolution to make a Finding of Consistency with the General Plan. (roll call vote) 7.2. Planning Commission Review of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Requesting the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission 1. Staff Report: Susana Ramirez, Engineer I 2. Open Public Comment 3. Close Public Comment 4. Possible Action: Receive report, provide feedback, and recommend City Council adopt a resolution to approve the Transportation Development Act Article 3 grant funding request from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for Fiscal Year 2024. 8. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 8.1. Planning Division Staff Approvals 9. PLANNING DIVISION REPORT 10. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT 11. ADJOURNMENT To the Next Meeting of June 1, 2023 at 6:00 PM Page 1 of 4 City of Gilroy Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes Thursday, April 6, 2023 | 6:00 PM 1.OPENING Tonight’s meeting was called to order by Chair Bhandal at 6:00 p.m. 2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Bhandal led the pledge of allegiance. 3.REPORT ON POSTING THE AGENDA AND ROLL CALL The agenda was posted on Wednesday, March 29, 2023 at 1:04 p.m. Attendance Attendee Name Present Stefanie Elle, Commissioner Adriana Leongardt, Commissioner Joan Lewis, Commissioner Kelly Ramirez, Commissioner Annedore Kushner, Vice Chair Manny Bhandal, Chair Absent Michelle Montez, Commissioner 4.PUBLIC COMMENTS Chair Bhandal opened public comment for items not on the agenda. There being no speakers, Chair Bhandal closed public comment for items not on the agenda. 5.CONSENT AGENDA 5.1.March 2, 2023 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Motion made by Commissioner Ramirez ; seconded by Commissioner Lewis to approve the consent agenda. RESULT: Pass [6 – 0] MOVER: Commissioner Ramirez SECONDER: Commissioner Lewis AYES: Commissioner Elle Leongardt, Lewis, Ramirez, Vice Chair Kushner, Chair Bhandal ABSENT: Commissioner Montez 6.PUBLIC HEARINGS No items. 7.NEW BUSINESS April 6, 2023 | 6:00 PM Page 2 of 4 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes 7.1.FY 2023-24 and FY 2024-25 Planning Commission Workplan, Training, and Budget 1. Staff Report: Sharon Goei, Community Development Director 2. Possible Action: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission establish and recommend for approval by the City Council the Fiscal Year 2023-24 and Fiscal Year 2024-25 Planning Commission Workplan, training requests, and budget requests. The Planning Commissioners completed the discussions initiated at the March 2, 2023 meeting. The Planning Commission voted to establish and submit for approval by the City Council the FY 2024 and 2025 proposed Planning Commission Workplan, training requests, and budget requests of $20,000 per year. RESULT: Pass [6 – 0] MOVER: Chair Bhandal SECONDER: Commissioner Elle AYES: Commissioner Elle, Leongardt, Lewis, Ramirez, Vice Chair Kushner, Chair Bhandal ABSENT: Commissioner Montez 7.2.Commission Input on the Update of the 2019 Board, Commission & Committee Member Handbook The Planning Commissioners continued to discuss the Commission’s input on the Handbook initiated at the March 2, 2023 Planning Commission meeting and completed the discussions at the April 6, 2023 meeting. Planning Commission input consists of the following recommendations: 1. Update the attendance policy. 2. Add page numbers to the Handbook. 3. Include hyperlinks in the table of contents for rapid access. 4. Add an index with hyperlinks. 8.INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 8.1.Planning Division Staff Approvals Senior Planner, Kraig Tambornini, presented the Planning Division staff approvals to the Planning Commission which consisted of two new architectural and site review applications, one for a new industrial project on Renz Lane and another for a sign program amendment. 9.PLANNING DIVISION REPORT April 6, 2023 | 6:00 PM Page 3 of 4 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes Community Development Director, Sharon Goei, reminded the Planning Commissioners that their Form 700 was due on April 3, 2023 and she sent an e-mail reminder to Commissioners last week. Community Development Director Goei informed the Planning Commission of the upcoming Planning Commission special meeting to be held on April 20, 2023 at 6:00 p.m. Items currently planned are the capital improvement plan, the Housing Element update, and a zoning code update on emergency shelters. Assistant City Attorney, Jolie Houston, added that the City is required to designate zoning for emergency shelters. Community Development Director Goei shared with the Planning Commission that the City Council had decided not to move forward with the billboard ordinance by denying the appeal. Community Development Director Goei reported that she had attended the League of California Cities Planning Commissioners conference and will share session presentations posted on the League’s website. Commissioner Ramirez reported that she also attended the League of California Cities Planning Commissioners conference and found the conference to be very informative. 10.ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY REPORT Assistant City Attorney, Jolie Houston, stated that it is encouraged that Planning Commissioners attend the planning academy as it serves many benefits such as networking, training opportunities, etc. Community Development Director Goei added that staff and the Assistant City Attorney Houston will work on providing internal training for the Planning Commissioners including training on zoning and the General Plan given that a zoning code update is underway. Senior Planner, Kraig Tambornini, stated that staff is reviewing the last section of the zoning code update before the draft is reviewed internally. Once internal review has been completed, the draft will be presented to the Planning Commission, City Council, and the public for review. The zoning code update draft will then be brought back for approval and adoption. Vice Chair Kushner asked what had triggered the zoning code update. Senior Planner Tambornini advised that part of the General Plan adoption included zoning code updates to address any new policies. Assistant City Attorney Houston added that the City Attorneys have been actively involved in the review process of the code update. Attorney Houston advised the Planning Commission that the zoning must be consistent with the General Plan. 11.ADJOURNMENT To the Next Special Meeting of Thursday, April 20, 2023 at 6:00 PM Chair Bhandal adjourned the meeting at 6:33 p.m. April 6, 2023 | 6:00 PM Page 4 of 4 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes Ariana Fabian Ariana Fabian, Planning Technician Page 1 of 4 City of Gilroy Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes Thursday, April 20, 2023 | 6:00 PM 1.OPENING Chair Bhandal called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. 2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Bhandal led the pledge of allegiance. 3.REPORT ON POSTING THE AGENDA AND ROLL CALL The agenda was posted on Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 8:00 p.m. Attendance Attendee Name Present Manny Bhandal, Chair Annedore Kushner, Vice Chair Stefanie Elle, Commissioner Joan Lewis, Commissioner Adriana Leongardt, Commissioner Kelly Ramirez, Commissioner Michelle Montez, Commissioner Absent None 4.PUBLIC COMMENTS Chair Bhandal opened public comment for items not on the agenda. There being no speakers, Chair Bhandal closed public comment for items not on the agenda. 5.CONSENT AGENDA No items. 6.PUBLIC HEARINGS 6.1.Emergency Shelters Zoning Amendment 1. Staff Report: Cindy McCormick, Customer Service Manager 2. Open Public Hearing 3. Close Public Hearing 4. Possible Action: Staff has analyzed the proposed project, and recommends that the Planning Commission: a) Recommend that the City Council, based on its independent analysis, find that approval of the Emergency Shelters Zoning Amendment is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) in that it can be seen with certainty that the Emergency Shelters Zoning Amendment would not result in a significant April 20, 2023 | 6:00 PM Page 2 of 4 Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes environmental effect, and none of the circumstances set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies; and b) Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance (Z 23-03), approving amendments to the Gilroy City Code, Chapter 30 (Zoning), Article XLI Section 30.41.32 (Specific Provisions—Emergency Shelters), Article II Section 30.2.20 (Definitions), and Article XI Section 30.11.10C (Residential Use Table) regarding Emergency Shelters Following McCormick’s presentation and commission discussion, Chair Bhandal opened public hearing. There being no speaker’s, Chair Bhandal closed public hearing. The City Attorney, Andy Faber, advised the Commission that if desired, both recommendation A and B could be done under one motion. Motion made by Chair Bhandal; seconded by Vice Chair Kushner to: a) Recommend that the City Council, based on its independent analysis, find that approval of the Emergency Shelters Zoning Amendment is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) in that it can be seen with certainty that the Emergency Shelters Zoning Amendment would not result in a significant environmental effect, and none of the circumstances set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies; and b) Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance (Z 23-03), approving amendments to the Gilroy City Code, Chapter 30 (Zoning), Article XLI Section 30.41.32 (Specific Provisions—Emergency Shelters), Article II Section 30.2.20 (Definitions), and Article XI Section 30.11.10C (Residential Use Table) regarding Emergency Shelters RESULT: Pass [6 – 0] MOVER: Chair Bhandal SECONDER: Vice Chair Kushner AYES: Commissioner Elle, Leongardt, Lewis, Montez, Vice Chair Kushner, Chair Bhandal 6.2.Adoption of Gilroy 2023 - 2031 Housing Element 1. Staff Report: Cindy McCormick, Customer Service Manager 2. Open Public Hearing 3. Close Public Hearing 4. Possible Action: Staff has analyzed the proposed project, and recommends that the Planning Commission: a) Recommend that the City Council, based on its independent analysis, find that the adoption of the Gilroy 2023-2031 Housing Element is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) in that it can be seen with certainty that the Gilroy 2023-2031 Housing Element would not result in a significant April 20, 2023 | 6:00 PM Page 3 of 4 Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes environmental effect, and none of the circumstances set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies; and b) Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution (GPA 22-01), adopting a general plan amendment to repeal the Gilroy 2015- 2023 Housing Element and adopt the Gilroy 2023-2031 Housing Element, in substantial compliance with State Housing Element Law. Cindy McCormick, Customer Services Manager, provided the commission with a presentation on the Housing Element draft that consisted of a brief overview of the different components of the Housing Element as well as the draft process which included community engagement and HCD review. McCormick advised that no public comment was received. Staff is looking to have a Housing Element completed in the summer. Following McCormick’s presentation, the Commissioners expressed their questions and concerns in which staff, the City Attorney, and consultant addressed. After the discussion among the commission came to an end, Chair Bhandal opened public hearing. There being no speaker’s, Chair Bhandal closed public hearing. The City Attorney, Andy Faber, advised the Commission that if desired, both recommendation A and B could be done under one motion. Motion made by Commissioner Ramirez; seconded by Vice Chair Kushner to: a) Recommend that the City Council, based on its independent analysis, find that the adoption of the Gilroy 2023-2031 Housing Element is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) in that it can be seen with certainty that the Gilroy 2023-2031 Housing Element would not result in a significant environmental effect, and none of the circumstances set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies; and b) Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt a Resolution (GPA 22-01), adopting a general plan amendment to repeal the Gilroy 2015- 2023 Housing Element and adopt the Gilroy 2023-2031 Housing Element, in substantial compliance with State Housing Element Law. RESULT: Pass [6 – 1] MOVER: Commissioner Ramirez SECONDER : Vice Chair Kushner AYES: Commissioner Elle, Lewis, Montez, Ramirez, Vice Chair Kushner, and Chair Bhandal NAYS: Commissioner Leongardt 7.NEW BUSINESS No items. 8.ADJOURNMENT To the Next Meeting of May 4, 2023 at 6:00 PM. April 20, 2023 | 6:00 PM Page 4 of 4 Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes Chair Bhandal adjourned the meeting at 7:23 p.m. Ariana Fabian Ariana Fabian, Planning Technician Community Development Department 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020-6197 Telephone: (408) 846-0451 | Fax: (408) 846-0429 cityofgilroy.org |planningdivision@cityofgilroy.org Sharon Goei DIRECTOR DATE: May 4, 2023 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Gilroy Square, Gilroy Crossings Phase II Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zoning Amendment, Architectural and Site Plan Review, and Tentative Map for property Located at 6970 Camino Arroyo (Z 22-01, AS 21-13, TM 21-02). RECOMMENDATION: Staff has analyzed the proposed project, and recommends that the Planning Commission: a) Consider and recommend that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, based on findings required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and b) Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the PUD Zoning Amendment Z 22-01 for Gilroy Crossings Phase II as requested; and c) Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the Architectural and Site Review AS 21-13 for the Planned Unit Development, subject to certain findings and conditions; and d) Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the Tentative Map TM 21-02, subject to certain findings and conditions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The applicant is requesting approval to develop 10.18 acres of vacant land in Phase II of Gilroy Crossings PUD, with a drive-through restaurant, gas station, two hotels and two future industrial buildings. The project requires zoning amendment, architectural and site review and tentative map entitlements. The PUD is located south of Highway 152 and east of Highway 101 along Camino Arroyo and allows for a mix of commercial and industrial development. The entire PUD encompasses approximately 68.34 net acres that, in addition to the subject site, includes Gilroy Crossing Shopping Center on the west side of Camino Arroyo and two small industrial parcels south of Holloway Road. 2 1 0 9 2 An updated environmental analysis (Mitigated Negative Declaration) has been completed for the project that analyzed traffic and other potential impacts. Staff has determined the project may be supported, with conditions requiring submittal of final plan details, payment of impact fees, among other items. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project proposes development of property on the east side of Camino Arroyo, between Highway 152 and Holloway Road (APN 841-70-049); located within an existing commercial/industrial C3-HC-M2 PUD zone district. The following development, and associated site improvements, are proposed: •A 2,600 square foot drive-through restaurant on a 0.826 acre lot; •A gasoline station with a 2,880 square foot convenience store, 1,152 square foot carwash and 6,679 square foot canopy on a 1.313 acre lot; •Two four-story hotels totaling 200 rooms (88 rooms in a 67,680 square foot building and 112 rooms in a 82,568 square foot building on 2.382 acre and 1.82 acre lots; and •Two lots for future industrial warehouse buildings totaling 45,500 square feet on separate 1.245 acre and 2.594 acre lots. The project also requires off-site roadway improvement to extend the left hand turn lane into the site from Camino Arroyo and right hand turn lane onto Hwy 152. BACKGROUND: Subject Property and Surrounding Land Uses: The Gilroy Crossings commercial/industrial planned development was formerly known as Regency Center PUD. The PUD permits a mix of commercial and industrial uses. The Pacheco Pass commercial/industrial planned development is located north of the site, across Highway 152, which includes Lowes, Costco, and Walmart (formerly known as Newman Center). The site and surrounding land uses are as follows: LOCATION EXISTING LAND USE GENERAL PLAN ZONING Project Site Vacant – Gilroy Crossings Phase II General Industrial C3/HC/M2 PUD North Pacheco Pass Shopping Center Complex General Services Commercial C3/M2 PUD South Vacant – Warehouse Under Construction General Industrial M2 East Vacant – Warehouse/Office General Services Commercial/ General Industrial HC/M2 3 1 0 9 2 LOCATION EXISTING LAND USE GENERAL PLAN ZONING West Gilroy Crossings Phase I Shopping Center General Services Commercial C3/HC/M2 PUD Background Information: The C3-M2-HC PUD overlay was established for retail, restaurant, hotel and industrial uses by Ordinance 2003-01 (Z 02-06). The PUD encompasses approximately 68.34 net acres, excluding public rights of way. Phase I has been substantially built out as Gilroy Crossings, with over 458,00 square feet of development. Pursuant to the original PUD approvals, Phase II of the PUD requires adoption of subsequent PUD development plan and updated traffic analysis. Environmental Assessment: Prior Project CEQA Review: Environmental review is required prior to City approval of discretionary development projects that do not qualify as exempt or that have unique impacts which were not fully assessed in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the City’s General Plan. The purpose of CEQA is to assure environmental impacts of a project are disclosed to the public. If impacts are identified, but can be mitigated below significance thresholds, then a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be adopted. Otherwise, an EIR would be prepared. The environmental determination is made to confirm impacts have been sufficiently identified, discussed and mitigated. After an environmental determination is made, the City can decide whether the project should be approved based on its own merit. An Environmental Impact Report was adopted for the original Regency Center PUD which included development of Phase 1; aka, Gilroy Crossings (City Council Resolution 2002-85). The Regency Center EIR included a preliminary assessment of traffic impacts anticipated for buildout of Phase II. At the time, an intersection level of service standard was used to analyze traffic impacts. The EIR included 57 mitigation measures, which included potential traffic improvements that would be required for buildout of Phase II. Alternative mitigation measures could be applied if supported by a subsequent traffic study (per approval TM 02-06, Condition 26). Phase II Project CEQA Review: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an updated environmental review has been prepared to assess the potential impacts of the proposed Phase II development. The initial study has included an updated traffic analysis for the project using current vehicle miles traveled (VMT) thresholds, and review of current site characteristics and setting. Based on the initial study a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared for this subsequent project. The conclusions of the MND are summarized as follows: ➢Air Quality: The study identifies that the project would generate air quality emission impacts during construction, which would be mitigated through standard and routine construction requirements and project conditions enforced by the City and the Air District. This includes ensuring vehicles maintain proper emissions control devices, and that site watering occurs routinely to control dust. 4 1 0 9 2 ➢Biological Resources: The study identifies that there is a potential for burrowing owls within the project site. Mitigation Measure Bio-1 is recommended to require conduct of a pre-construction survey prior to start of any work. Should there be any burrowing owls found to be present, the measure provides the steps that must be taken to avoid impact. Bio-2 is also recommended to protect any other potentially nesting birds. Typically, this is a concern where there are tall trees or structures on or near the site. This is a common measure imposed on most projects in the City. ➢Cultural Resources: The study does not anticipate any impacts to cultural resources. Regardless, a standard condition of approval is recommended in the event that cultural or archaeological resources are uncovered during grading and excavation. ➢Geology/soils: The site is relatively stable and has no unique characteristics or issues. However, soil erosion is a concern given that the project expects to excavate 6,605 cubic yards and fill 6,285 cubic yards of soil. Mitigation Geo-1 is recommended to ensure a plan is prepared with specific methods and details used to prevent or minimize erosion during construction. In addition, the project soils report recommendations have been included as Mitigation Geo-2; to confirm these would be undertaken during construction. The soils report is required to be submitted with the building permit application, and plans must be prepared to address the recommendations of the soils engineer. This would ensure site grading, preparation and foundations are specifically designed for site soils conditions. ➢Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The development project will generate new greenhouse gas emissions from resulting traffic, energy use, water and wastewater consumption, and solid waste disposal. This is a common development project related impact. Guidance from the Bay Area Air Quality District is used as a source for reducing GHG emissions. Table 6 on page 62 of the study identifies that the project will use natural gas for the restaurant component, and that electric vehicle infrastructure improvements are not shown. As a result, GHG-1 is recommended to exclude use of natural gas from the remainder of the project and to require installation of electric vehicle infrastructure consistent with state “CALGreen Tier 2” standards. This would be confirmed on plans submitted for building permit. GHG-2 is also included to require that the project offset the GHG emissions anticipated from natural gas consumption at the restaurant. This requires a minimum 28.9 metric tons to be mitigated. The measure specifies how this may be achieved and the plan would also be required to be addressed prior to construction. ➢Hydrology/Water Quality: The project is required to comply with Regional Water Quality Control Board standards for treatment of stormwater. Public works has reviewed and conditioned the project to ensure compliance is met with 5 1 0 9 2 pretreatment and control of stormwater on-site. A stormwater control plan is included in the application materials. Measure Hydro 1 is also recommended to confirm that the stormwater treatment measures will be included in the project and addressed. Hydro-2 is also included to confirm that the project implements erosion control plans, which are also required as a standard project condition. Finally, Hydro-3 is included to confirm the project will prepare and submit a storm water pollution prevention plan for ongoing operations at the site, which is also a standard condition and requirement enforced by the Public Works Department. ➢Noise: Hotel uses are subject to noise controls so that interior noise would not exceed 45 decibels. The site is in a high volume traffic and industrial setting where exterior noise levels are approximately 62 decibels. Standard building codes would assure interior noise levels would be reduced by at least 17 decibels to comply with the interior noise standards. However, Measure N-1 is included to ensure that the building plans include air conditioning or mechanical ventilation systems so that windows can be closed when desired to block exterior noise. ➢Traffic/Transportation: VMT analysis is used to measure traffic impacts. Currently, Gilroy has limited employment land uses which results in longer commutes. The Gilroy VMT rate is 18.79 miles traveled per employee (average). For projects that require VMT reduction, the project must reduce its VMT to 15- percent below the VMT per employee; i.e. 15.97 VMT per job. VMT is required to be assessed individually for each land use type. Land uses are only subject to VMT mitigation if they exceed specific screening thresholds. In this case, warehouse development would be subject to a VMT review if the use generated more than 110 daily trips. The warehouse portion of the project has been limited in size so that it would not generate more than 110 daily trips. The retail component of the project required a VMT review because it exceeds 50,000 square feet in size. The VMT analysis identified that new commercial development in this location would result in a decrease in vehicle miles traveled for shopping related trips, and that there would be a net decrease in VMT citywide as a result. Therefore, no further mitigation was required. See page 88 of the ISMND and the Hexagon analysis in the appendices for more detail. No other potentially significant effects were found. The applicant has agreed to incorporate all mitigation measures into the project. Therefore, the MND can be adopted for the Gilroy Square project with the MMRP included as conditions of development. Public Review and Comments: As required by CEQA, the Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated and made available for public review for 30 days, from January 27 through February 27, 2023. Comments on the draft environmental document were received from Caltrans, Valley Transportation Authority, and Sean Reedy for Gilroy bicycle pedestrian committee (advocacy group).These letters are included with the attached document from EMC Planning dated March 7, 2023. Although not required by CEQA, responses to these comments have been provided, and summarized as follows: 6 1 0 9 2 •A correction to the final MND is noted to clarify the height of the industrial buildings are both one-story. •Each of the comments from Sean Read (representing the “Bicycle Advisory Committee” organization) were acknowledged. Many of the comments are general with respect to how the project may respond to improve bicycle and pedestrian modes and address VMT. None of comments disagree with the environmental assessment and no changes to the document are required. Staff concludes that the discussion in the MND and this staff report, and recommended project conditions sufficiently evaluate and address the comments, suggestions and recommendations made in the letter. •The Comments from Caltrans are similarly general and acknowledged. The comments did not identify any new issues or concerns, thus require no changes to the environmental analysis. Staff concludes the discussion in the MND and this staff report, and project conditions sufficiently address comments provided in this letter. •The VTA letter recommends improvements of the existing bus stops along the project frontage, which does not raise new environmental issues. Staff has recommended conditions (Engineering) for accommodating bus stop needs in this area in accordance with VTA requirements. No significant adverse impacts are expected to result from the proposed development, and the Planning Commission can make findings to adopt the MND. A draft resolution has been prepared for consideration, recommending to the City Council adoption of the MND. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC): Project plans were routed to Engineering, Building, Police, and Fire representatives for internal review and comment. Conditions were requested and provided March 9, 2023. The applicant has reviewed and agrees with conditions. Recommendations of the TAC members have been incorporated into the project plans and/or are included as recommended conditions in attached resolution(s). ANALYSIS: General Plan Consistency: Staff has prepared a general plan consistency table for the project that is included as an exhibit to this report. As noted in this report, the PUD overlay adopted for the area anticipated potential retail, hotel and industrial uses. With adoption of the 2040 General Plan (November 2020), lands in Phase II were all designated General Industrial. Prior to this plan, the subject site maintained approximately 2.4 acres of land designated as commercial. The reasoning for this chance in land use is not explained in the 2040 General Plan. Regardless, the general plan consistency table attached to this report confirms the project remains substantial conformance with the General Plan 2040 goals and policies. 7 1 0 9 2 In consultation with the City Attorney, staff determined the PUD remains substantially consistent with the land use map, policies and intent of the general plan. Specifically, more than 75-percent of the PUD has been built-out with a mix of commercial and industrial uses, and public improvements have been constructed serving all properties. The project would result in 58.34 acres of land developed as commercial and 10 acres developed as industrial; whereas the General Plan 2040 designates 52 acres commercial and 16.34 acres industrial. The PUD zoning allows a 25-percent deviation from base land uses, which would permit up to 65 acres of commercial use. Land area calculations for the PUD are attached to this. Zoning Code Conformance: In accordance with Regency Center C3-HC-M2 PUD a development plan is proposed for this phase II. Consistent with Gilroy City Code (GCC) Section 30.26.30, the PUD amendment would establish the site development standards. The Planned Unit Development zoning overlay allows flexibility from the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, in exchange for creative project design and extra project amenities. The applicant has not requested any specific deviations from standard zoning regulations for phase II, other than use of the 25-percent land use deviation. Development would otherwise conform to City standards for parking, landscaping, signage, setback, height, and lot coverage. Consistent with action taken on other PUD’s, staff has included a condition for public art to be installed on site. This is typically applied to satisfy the PUD amenity requirement, and other City policies. Further, site specific design details would be established through the Architectural and Site Review Permit process, in accordance with GCC 30.50.50. The C3/HC standard zoning height and setback requirements have been applied to the commercial parcels, and M2 standards applied to the industrial parcels. The project conforms to the conventional zoning regulations, as follows: C3 STANDARD REQUIRED PROPOSED CONFORMS? Height 55 feet / 4 stories 49.5 feet/4 stories (max)Yes Front Setback 41 feet 41.25 feet (min)Yes Street Setback 31 feet n/a Yes Side Setback 0 12 feet (min)Yes Rear Setback 0 16.33 feet (min)Yes Lot Coverage n/a n/a n/a M2 STANDARD REQUIRED PROPOSED CONFORMS? Height 75 feet / 6 stories 29.83 feet/1 story Yes Front Setback 26 feet 70+ feet (min)Yes Street Setback 31 feet 55.5 feet (min)Yes Side Setback 0 10 feet (min)Yes Rear Setback 0 59 feet (min)Yes Lot Coverage 60%33.2% (max)Yes 8 1 0 9 2 Architectural and Site Review: The project has been evaluated for compliance with the review criteria applicable to the project pursuant to in GCC Section 30.50.43 (for AS review) and Section 30.50.50 (for planned development permit review). Based on this review staff has concluded the following: a) Traffic Safety and Efficiency: The site layout provides adequate circulation for vehicles, parking, and traffic as follows: •Circulation. The project has been reviewed for compliance with City standards including driveway and drive aisle dimensions, bicycle and vehicle parking, pedestrian access, emergency vehicle and truck circulation and access, and off-site traffic improvements. Conditions have been included as recommended by the City Engineer and consistent with those recommended in the project traffic report. The project also requires payment of traffic impact fees, and lengthening of a left turn lane queue lane into the site from Camino Arroyo. These conditions are detailed in the draft resolution for approval. As proposed and conditioned the project will provide safe and efficient traffic circulation. •Parking. Each building provides on-site standard parking, which will include required electric vehicle parking, as follows: Vehicle Parking: Use Required Proposed Restaurant 2600gsf +/-1000sf (dining) 4 Employees 1/3 seats (or) 1/100sf dining area = 10 1/employee =4 26 4 Gas Station C Store 2880 sf Car Wash 1152sf 1/250 = 12 1/employee = 3 12 12 Hotel 112 Rooms 6 Employees (shift) 1/room = 112 1/employee = 6 111 Hotel 88 Rooms 6 Employees (shift) 1/room = 88 1/employee = 6 97 Industrial 18ksf 1/350 sf (speculative) = 52 31 Industrial 27.5ksf 1/350 (speculative) = 79 99 TOTAL 372 392 Note: Total proposed parking would not exceed 10-percent above the standard vehicle parking requirement. Parking in excess of 10-percent requires additional landscaping Bicycle Parking: The project plans indicate areas for bicycle parking as follows: Restaurant Use: None identified Gas Station: 2 bike capacity rack Hotel 1: 4 long term lockers Hotel 2: 4 long term lockers Industrial 1: 2 long term lockers 9 1 0 9 2 Industrial2: Not identified Bicycle parking is regulated under building codes. In accordance with applicable codes, the project must provide the following: o Short -term bicycle parking. Permanently anchored bicycle racks within 200 feet of the visitor’s entrance, for 5 percent of new visitor parking spaces added, with a minimum of one two-bike capacity U-rack. The project has indicated locations for bicycle parking on plans including some long term lockers. o Long-term bicycle parking. Each use shall provide secure bicycle parking for 5 percent of the tenant-occupant parking spaces with a minimum of one bicycle parking facility. o Long-term bicycle parking for hotel buildings. Each use shall provide one on-site bicycle parking space for every 25 rooms (for employees and guests). Parking facilities shall be conveniently reached from the street. Based on the cited standards, the project (buildout of the hotel, gas station and restaurant) requires at least 20 short term and 18 long term bicycle parking spaces. Bicycle parking compliance has been included in conditions of approval for Planning, Building and Engineering. The site has adequate space to accommodate the spaces needed. Parking for the industrial uses will be required at time that site develops, based on tenant occupancy. Drive-Up Retail Vehicle Spaces: The car wash and fast food restaurant drive through lanes provide an aisle length that can accommodate at least 8 vehicles. GCC 30.31.25(a) requires 8 auto waiting spaces for exterior service windows. The vehicle queuing lanes satisfy this requirement. b) Signs: Signage requires a separate sign permit and would be reviewed for compliance with the Gilroy Crossings sign program (attached). c) Site Development (and Architectural Design): The project is compatible with Gilroy Crossings Phase I PUD and the Industrial Design policy. The project provides architectural design details addressing all sides of each building. This includes details on proposed colors, materials, building articulation and fenestration. The application also includes a list of design criteria and review standards for the buildings for the PUD. The conceptual industrial development conforms with the industrial design policy as follows: 10 1 0 9 2 i)Design Intent and Scale. High quality industrial land uses in scale with the site and area are encouraged. The building is in scale and character with adjacent industrial buildings and proposes an efficient use of the site. ii)Streetscape. The development proposes an attractive streetscape with the building facades articulated and entryways facing street frontages. Landscaping would be provided along all street frontages and project boundary that exceed minimum standards and match approved plans. iii)Circulation. The site has adequate driveway access from the street frontages that comply with minimum aisle and parking standards, and which would provide access to trash and loading areas. The site plan would not create any safety conflicts with vehicles or pedestrians at intersections. iv)Lighting and Utilities. Light fixtures would be directed downward, and shielded to avoid creating glare. The trash enclosure is also placed in a well-screened location and is well-designed. No outdoor uses are proposed or approved as a part of this project. d) Landscaping/Fencing: The landscaping concept includes stormwater treatment and water efficient landscaping requirements. The site complies with commercial landscaping standards with minimum 21 foot landscaping proposed along the street frontage; typical 5 foot minimum planters; street trees along the project frontage and perimeter, distributed throughout parking areas, and landscape islands at the ends of parking rows. As proposed, the industrial sites are reserved for future development. As such the sites would not be landscaped until development is pursued. e) Drainage: The site is designed to drain to bioswales and stormwater systems in compliance with City standards. f) Fire Protection: The building is designed to comply with fire access and service requirements including provision of fire sprinkler systems as required by code. g) Environmental Impacts: The infill site has no special or unique environmental constraints. The project would be subject to payment of fees in compliance with the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan. Commercial and industrial uses are not proposed that would create any potential objectionable noise, odors, or traffic impacts. h) PUD Development Permit: Staff has concluded the project satisfies findings for the PUD amendment, as follows: 1. Conforms to the Gilroy general plan in terms of general location and standards of development in that the project is recommended as consistent with the general plan and will conform to the standard C3/HC 11 1 0 9 2 commercial and M2 Industrial zoning building setback and height requirements. 2. Provides development which will fill a specific need of the surrounding area, in that it builds out the site with commercial and industrial uses as anticipated by the general plan and PUD. 3. Does not require urban services beyond those which are currently available, in that the project has been reviewed by appropriate city staff and has been confirmed as within the intensity of development on which sewer and water analyses were based, and sufficient capacity exists for site buildout. 4. Provides a harmonious, integrated plan which justifies exceptions, if such are required, to the normal requirements of this chapter. The applicant is proposing development that conforms to the base zoning regulations and as proposed and conditioned does not require exceptions. Further, the site provides internal connectivity between compatible uses as well as adjacent sites. 5. Reflects an economical and efficient pattern of land uses in that the proposed intensity of development accommodates allowed uses, including desired visitor accommodation, in compliance with city standards. 6. Includes greater provisions for landscaping and open space than would generally be required, in that the site utilizes predominately low water use plants as shown on plan sheet L1.00, incorporates bioretention areas in site landscaping, and provides more than 18% of the site in landscaping exceeding the 8% minimum standard required pursuant to section 30.38.60. 7. Utilizes creative, aesthetic design principles to create attractive buildings, open space and site design to blend with the character of surrounding areas; in that the design and architecture includes high quality materials, fully articulated facades, screening of exterior equipment and is compatible with the design in Gilroy Crossings Phase 1 shopping center. 8. Would not create traffic congestion, noise, odor, or other adverse effects on surrounding areas as the project has been conditioned to avoid any conflicts or issues and accommodate anticipated traffic flows. 9. Provides adequate access, parking, landscaping, trash areas and storage, as necessary, as proposed and conditioned as shown on plans. Tentative Map. The tentative map proposes lots in excess of the minimum 8,000 square foot size required for commercial sites, with large parcels proposed to accommodate industrial development. Each lot has street frontage and access. The 12 1 0 9 2 project would provide easements for shared use and maintenance of landscaping, parking and drive aisles, as well as cross-lot access to the property to the west. The map has been prepared accordance with Chapter 21 of the City Code regulating subdivisions. Existing roadway and infrastructure improvements have been installed to serve the property and lots comply with zoning standards. As proposed and conditioned, the tentative map is supported by City staff. A draft resolution for approval has been prepared to support the tentative map approval. Initial approval of a tentative map is valid for twenty-four (24) months and may be extended in accordance with the state Subdivision Map Act. PUBLIC NOTICING: Property owner information (i.e. list, labels, and map) within 500 feet of the subject site were generated by using current ownership data. On and before April 21, 2023, notices of this Planning Commission meeting were mailed to the property owners along within other interested parties. In addition, notice was published in the Gilroy Dispatch, the property has been posted with on-site signage notifying passers-by of pending development, and the Planning Commission public hearing packets are available through the City's webpage. APPEAL PROCEDURE: The Planning Commission's action is not final, but rather a recommendation. The City Council will take final action on whether the approve the project. Attachments (Exhibits) A. Vicinity Map B. Project Plans (Architectural, Civil, Landscape, Photometric, Tentative Map, Materials Boards, Renderings) C. CEQA Environmental Documents (Initial Study, revised MND and MMRP) D. General Plan Compliance Table E. PUD Land Use Evaluation F. Gilroy Crossings PUD Sign Program G. Recommended Resolutions (CEQA, Z, AS, TM) Note: Map is for reference purposes only. Exhibit A 17,712 City of Gilroy, GIS Services 2,952.1 1:NAD_1983_StatePlane_California_III_FIPS_0403_Feet 1,476.03 Feet2,952.10 Vicinity Map - Gilroy Square 36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYOUTDOOR POOLPATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F. 36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYOUTDOOR POOLPATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F. (PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C ) 02/09/2023 RK JS C1 01TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA“ ” 36" dia-side36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-side36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)07/26/2022PKDSC1 01TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA“” 36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F.STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C ) 02/09/2023 RK JS C2 02TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYOUTDOOR POOLPATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS88 ROOM - 4 STORYTRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDS FUTURE WAREHOUSE15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C )STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD12/28/2022 AS DS C4 04TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F.TITLEPROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA02/09/2023 RK JS C3 03 STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH CAMINO ARROYOSTATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C )STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD02/09/2023 RK JS C4 04TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F. (PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C ) 02/09/2023 RK JS C5 05TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYOUTDOOR POOLPATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F. (PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C )TITLEPROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA02/09/2023 RK JS C6 06 FFE=185.00 RESIDENCE INN HOTEL FFE=183.70 FUTURE WAREHOUSE FFE=184.50 HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS TITLEPROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-si d e 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYOUTDOOR POOLPATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F. (PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C ) 02/09/2023 RK JS C8 08TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-side 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)07/26/2022ASDSC808TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-si d e 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F.TITLEPROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA02/09/2023 RK JS C9 9 36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYOUTDOOR POOLPATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F. 36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYOUTDOOR POOLPATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F. (PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C ) 02/09/2023 RK JS C1 01TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA“ ” 36" dia-side36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-side36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)07/26/2022PKDSC1 01TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA“” 36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F.STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C ) 02/09/2023 RK JS C2 02TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYOUTDOOR POOLPATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS88 ROOM - 4 STORYTRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDS FUTURE WAREHOUSE15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C )STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD12/28/2022 AS DS C4 04TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F.TITLEPROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA02/09/2023 RK JS C3 03 STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH CAMINO ARROYOSTATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C )STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD02/09/2023 RK JS C4 04TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F. (PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C ) 02/09/2023 RK JS C5 05TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYOUTDOOR POOLPATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F. (PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C )TITLEPROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA02/09/2023 RK JS C6 06 FFE=185.00 RESIDENCE INN HOTEL FFE=183.70 FUTURE WAREHOUSE FFE=184.50 HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS TITLEPROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-si d e 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYOUTDOOR POOLPATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F. (PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)( P U B L I C ) 02/09/2023 RK JS C8 08TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-side 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)07/26/2022ASDSC808TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYO CAMINO ARROYO HOLLOWAY ROAD36" dia-side36" dia-side 36" dia-si d e 1 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORYBLDG.FOOTPRINT=18000 S.F.FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1TRASH TRASHTRASHTRASHTRASHTRASH 1 STORY1 STORY BLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F.TITLEPROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 956301024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCOF 09 19-43 GILROY SQUARE6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CA02/09/2023 RK JS C9 9 13111082LANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGCROSSACCESSCROSSACCESSVPVPVPVP1214736LANDSCAPING1178336" dia-side36" dia-side36" dia-side129103EVEVEVEVEVEVEVEV33L/SSIDE WALKSIDE WALKLANDSCAPINGFIRERISERROOMCAMINO ARROYO ROAD1VPVPVPVP2 10171 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYLANDSCAPINGMAINENTRYLANDSCAPINGOUTDOOR POOLLANDSCAPING16811023372PATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS88 ROOM - 4 STORY738LANDSCAPING10LANDSCAPINGEVEVEVEVLANDSCAPING4AREA:-57207 S.F. 4FIRE RISERROOMAREA:-35990 S.F. AREA:-84254 S.F.FIRE RISERROOMPARCEL-1(1.31 AC)(0.82 AC)AREA:-103765 S.F.(2.3 AC)(1.93 AC)EVVPEV VPVPEVEVEV(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYO13CAMINO ARROYO ROADHOLLOWAY ROAD17LANDSCAPINGAREA:-162217 S.F. (3.72 AC)VACANT FUTURE LOT FOROFFICE, WAREHOUSE, RETAIL& MEDICAL FACILITYHOLLOWAY ROADSCALE:080'6040'20'1" = 40'-0"SYMBOLDESCRIPTIONDETAILConcrete PavingCrosswalkADA ramp with detectable warningsAC Paving1234REFERENCE_NOTES_SCHEDULEIRRIGATION NARRATIVEThe Gilroy Square irrigation system will utilize high-efficiency irrigation equipment and best practices in design to create ahighly efficient and operator friendly irrigation system. The irrigation design will comply with the State's Model WaterEfficient Landscape Ordinance requirements.The new irrigation system will utilize municipal potable water and connect to new irrigation meter and reduced pressurebackflow preventer located along Camino Arroyo. A new master valve, flow sensor and manual shut off valve will belocated downstream of the RPBP. The irrigation system will be operated by a new 'Smart' Irrigation Controller whichutilizes automatic ETO data schedule adjustments and includes an automatic rain shut off sensor. The controller willcomply with MWELO requirements. Shrub and groundcover areas will be irrigated with a “Netafim” type sub-surface in-line drip irrigation system. Drip lineswill include built-in check valves and pressure compensating emitters. Lawn areas will not be included in the project.Trees will be irrigated with deep water tree bubblers, operated on a valve independent from those operating shrub andground cover irrigation. Additional irrigation equipment to be furnished will include quick coupling valves, gate valves,remote control valves, filters for drip irrigation valves, spare wire stubs, pressure regulators as required and drip systemindicators.234L1.00TYP.TYP.TYP.PRELIMINARY MWELO WATER USE CALCULATIONSMATCHLINE© Copyright 2018 QUADRIGA landscape architecture & planning, inc.Issuances & RevisionsKey Plan/Consultant StampStampGilroy Square Development Schematic Design 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy, CA 95020DescriptionNo.DateProject Number:Date:Scale:QUADRIGAlandscape architecture and planning, inc.SACRAMENTO | SANTA ROSA916.441.2129 | www.quadriga-inc.comSCHEMATIC SITE PLAN20-26502021/07/091"=40'-0"MATCHLINE1TYP.SITE PLANTINGCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMESIZEWATER USEACH M20Achillea millefolium `Moonshine` / Yarrow1 galLowCAL SPECalandrinia spectabilis / Pink Calandrinia1 galLowCAL DWACallistemon viminalis `Little John` / Dwarf Weeping Bottlebrush5 galLowCAR PR2Carex testacea `Prairie Fire` / Prairie Fire Sedge1 galMediumCHO TECChondropetalum tectorum / Cape Rush5 galLowDIA LRSDianella revoluta `Little Rev` / Little Rev Flax Lily1 galLowHES BR2Hesperaloe parviflora `Perpa` TM / Brakelights Red Yucca1 galLowLEY CANLeymus condensatus `Canyon Prince` / Canyon Prince Blue Rye1 galLowLOM IRALomandra longifolia `Breeze` TM / Breeze Mat Rush1 galLowMYR CO3Myrtus compacta / Compact Myrtle1 galLowOLE LITOlea europaea `Little Ollie` TM / Little Ollie Olive5 galLowPRU MONPrunus caroliniana `Monus` / Bright `N Tight Carolina Cherry Laurel5 galLowSAL BARSalvia leucantha `Santa Barbara` / Mexican Bush Sage1 galLowSED AN3Sedum x `Angelina` / Angelina Sedum1 galLowSEN SERSenecio serpens / Blue Chalksticks1 galLowVIB TINViburnum tinus / Laurustinus5 galMediumBIORETENTION PLANTINGSCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMESIZEWATER USEBAC PIGBaccharis pilularis `Pigeon Point` / Coyote Brush1 galLowCAR DIVCarex divulsa / Berkeley Sedge1 galLowJUN ELKJuncus patens `Elk Blue` / Spreading Rush1 galLowMIM CARMimulus cardinalis / Scarlet Monkey Flower1 galHighRUD CALRudbeckia californica / California Coneflower1 galMediumSIS BELSisyrinchium bellum / Blue Eyed Grass1 galVery LowLAG NAT lagerstroemia 'Natchez' / Natchez Crape Myrtle TREESCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMESIZECER DES Cercidium x `Desert Museum` / Thornless Palo Verde CER CMO Cercis canadensis texensis `Oklahoma` / Oklahoma Redbud PIS KEI Pistacia chinensis `Keith Davey` / Keith Davey Chinese Pistache PLA COL Platanus x acerifolia `Columbia` / London Plane Tree CED DEO Cedrus Deodarar / Deodar Cedar ULM DRA Ulmus parvifolia `Drake` / Drake Chinese Elm QUE SHU Quercus shumardii / Shumard Red Oak MEDIUM SHADE TREEARB MUL Arbutus x `Marina` / Arbutus Multi-Trunk EVERGREEN ACCENT TREESDECIDUOUS ACCENT TREESLARGE SHADE TREELARGE STREET TREENYS SYL Nyssa sylvatica / Sour Gum CANDIDATE TREE SCHEDULE24"boxGIN AUT Ginkgo 'Autumn Gold' / Autumn Gold Gingko MEDIUM STREET TREEKOU PAN Koulreuteria paniculata / Golden Rain Tree ZEL GRE Zelkova 'Green Vase` / Green Vase Zelkova ULM FRO Ulmus 'Frontier' / Frontier Elm 24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"boxCANDIDATE PLANT SCHEDULEWATER USELowLowMedLowLowMedLowMedMedMedLowMedMedMed STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHO L L O W A Y R O A D LOT 1LOT 2 L O T 3 L O T 4 L O T 5 L O T 6 0SCALE 1" = 60'6060301TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAPROSE'S ENGINEERING6970 CAMINO ARROYOCITY OF GIROY1" = 60'LEGEND:CABINETCONCRETECONTROL POINTCPTESTDETECTOR HANDHOLEDROP INLETDRIVEWAYELECTRICAL METEREDGE OF PAVEMENTELECTRICAL PULLBOXELECTRICAL VAULTFIRE HYDRANTGAS METERGUY ANCHORJOINT UTILITY POLENO PARKING ANY TIME SIGNPEDESTALPEDESTRIAN SIGNAL POLEPUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTPUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTRIGHT OF WAYSANITARY SEWER MANHOLESTORM DRAIN MANHOLESTREET LIGHTTELEPHONE MANHOLETELEPHONE VAULTTRAFFIC SIGNAL POLETRAFFIC SIGNAL PULLBOXUTILITYWATER MANHOLEWATER METERWATER VALVEWATER VAULTCABCONCCPCPTDHHDIDWYEMEPEPBEVLTFHGMGUYJPNPSPEDPSPP.S.E.P.U.E.R.O.W.SSMHSDMHSLTMHTVLTTSPTSPBUTILITYWMHWMWVWVLTSITE(800) 483-5000(800) 743-500111 ALMADEN BLVD. SAN JOSE, CA 95115(408) 846-04207351 ROSANNA STREET GILROY, CA 95020R-1Proposed Zoning:VACANTExisting Zoning:Water:Roads:Gas & Electric:Sewage:Proposed Use:Existing Improvements:Existing Sizes:Contour Interval:Source of Topo:F.E.M.A.Drainage:Telephone:Zone XVerizonPacific Gas & ElectricCity of GilroyCITY OF GILROY UTILITY DEPARTMENTCOMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL10.18 Net Acres1 FootField Survey6970 CAMINO ARROYOBhagirath Desai(916) 837 - 6058ELK GROVE, CA 956249612 KENT STREETROSE'S ENGINEERINGAll that certain real property situate in theCity of Gilroy, County of Santa Clara, Stateof California, being that property described incertificate of compliance no. 2004-12, filed asinstrument no. 18163081, official records ofsaid county, said property more particularlydescribed as follows:All of lots 7, 8, 9, and 10 as said lots areshown on the final map entitled “Tractno. 9487 Gilroy Crossing” filed in book 762 ofmaps, pages 20 through 25, Santa ClaraCounty Records.SUBDIVISION MAPTENTATIVE6970 CAMINO ARROYOAPN#: 841 - 070 - 049JULY 23, 2021Site Address:Submitted by:Owner/Applicants:Parcel Description:Date:NORTH(408) 846-04207351 ROSANNA STREET GILROY, CA 95020CITY OF GILROY UTILITY DEPARTMENT(866) 731-5420 Cable:CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS(408) 846-04207351 ROSANNA STREET GILROY, CA 95020CITY OF GILROY UTILITY DEPARTMENT527 Simas Dr., Milpitas CA 95035(408) 891-3503bkd784@gmail.com EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (C-STORE)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (BURGER KING)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (CANOPY)COLOR STUCCO STUCCO STUCCO STUCCO STUCCO STUCCO EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (HOLIDAY-INN EXPRESS & SUITE) NOTE: STUCCO COLORS BY PAREX PAREX TEXTURED,COLOR: PAREX MOONDANCE 3027L MULTI-TEXTURE SURFACE WITH STUCCO-2C, PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: PAREX MOONDANCE 3027L. STUCCO-3C PAREX MEDIUM, SAND FINE SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: PAREX TWIG 3021L. STUCCO-4C PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: SUN DRIED 3011L . STUCCO-5C PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: PAREX SNOWBALL 10400L. STUCCO-6C PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH COLOR:PAREX BASALT 3015L SHT MTL-WH, SHEET METAL GRAVEL STOP TYPE COPPING. PAC-CLAD CUSTOM FABRICATED ROOF EDGE FLASHING AND FASCIA. COLOR: BONE WHITE. SHT MTL-GR, ELEVATOR OVERRUN GRAVEL STOP TYPE COPPING, SCUPPER AND DOWNSPOUT. PAC-CLAD CUSTOM FABRICATED ROOF EDGE FLASHING AND FASCIA. COLOR: SLATE GRAY. COLOR LRV 66 LRV 21 LRV 17 LRV 75 LRV 29 COLOR: PAREX MOONDANCE 3027L. LRV 66 STONE CLADDING LEDGESTONE SOUTHWEST BLEND EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (RESIDENCE-INN)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (CAR WASH)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (C-STORE)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (BURGER KING)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (CANOPY)COLOR STUCCO STUCCO STUCCO STUCCO STUCCO STUCCO EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (HOLIDAY-INN EXPRESS & SUITE) NOTE: STUCCO COLORS BY PAREX PAREX TEXTURED,COLOR: PAREX MOONDANCE 3027L MULTI-TEXTURE SURFACE WITH STUCCO-2C, PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: PAREX MOONDANCE 3027L. STUCCO-3C PAREX MEDIUM, SAND FINE SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: PAREX TWIG 3021L. STUCCO-4C PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: SUN DRIED 3011L . STUCCO-5C PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: PAREX SNOWBALL 10400L. STUCCO-6C PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH COLOR:PAREX BASALT 3015L SHT MTL-WH, SHEET METAL GRAVEL STOP TYPE COPPING. PAC-CLAD CUSTOM FABRICATED ROOF EDGE FLASHING AND FASCIA. COLOR: BONE WHITE. SHT MTL-GR, ELEVATOR OVERRUN GRAVEL STOP TYPE COPPING, SCUPPER AND DOWNSPOUT. PAC-CLAD CUSTOM FABRICATED ROOF EDGE FLASHING AND FASCIA. COLOR: SLATE GRAY. COLOR LRV 66 LRV 21 LRV 17 LRV 75 LRV 29 COLOR: PAREX MOONDANCE 3027L. LRV 66 STONE CLADDING LEDGESTONE SOUTHWEST BLEND EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (RESIDENCE-INN)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (CAR WASH)COLOR Public Review Mitigated Negative Declaration Gilroy Square Project (TM 21-02, AS 21-13, Z 22-01) January 2023 Prepared by EMC Planning Group This document was produced on recycled paper. PUBLIC REVIEW MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION G ILROY S QUARE P ROJECT TM 21-02, AS 21-13, Z 22-01 PREPARED FOR City of Gilroy Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner 7351 Rosanna Street Gilroy, CA 95020 Tel 408.846.0440 Kraig.Tambornini@ci.gilroy.ca.us PREPARED BY EMC Planning Group Inc. 601 Abrego Street Monterey, CA 93940 Tel 831.649.1799 Fax 831.649.8399 Teri Wissler Adam, Senior Principal wissler@emcplanning.com www.emcplanning.com January 2023 Community Development Department Planning Division (408) 846-0440 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION City of Gilroy 7351 Rosanna St. Gilroy, CA 95020 City File Number: File No. Z 22-01, TM-21-02, and AS 21-13 Project Description: Name of Project: Gilroy Square Nature of Project: Application for a six-lot subdivision, and Architectural and Site Review to establish the development plan for Phase II of the PUD for development on four of the lots. The proposed project includes two, four-story hotels, a drive-through fast food restaurant, a convenience store, a four-story speculative industrial warehouse, and a one-story speculative warehouse building. The warehouse buildings are proposed as future development. Project Location: Location: 6970 Camino Arroyo in the city of Gilroy. Assessor's Parcel Number: 841-70-049 Entity or Person(s) Undertaking Project: Name: Jaspal Singh Sidhu Address: 1024 Iron Point Road, Folsom, CA 95630 Staff Planner: Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner Initial Study: An initial study of this project was undertaken and prepared for the purpose of ascertaining whether this project might have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of this study is attached. Gilroy Square 2 January 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration Findings & Reasons: The initial study identified potentially significant effects on the environment. However, this project has been mitigated (see Mitigation Measures below which avoid or mitigate the effects) to a point where no significant effects will occur. On the basis of the whole record, there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The following reasons will support these findings: The proposal is a logical component of the existing land use of this area. Identified adverse impacts are proposed to be mitigated on-site and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program have been prepared. The proposed project is consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the General Plan of the City of Gilroy. City staff independently reviewed the Initial Study, and this Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City of Gilroy. With the application of the following Mitigation Measures the proposed project will not have any significant impacts on the environment. The Gilroy Planning Division is the custodian of the documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based. Air Quality Refer to Mitigation Measure GHG-1. Biological Resources BIO-1 To avoid/minimize impacts to burrowing owls potentially occurring within the project site, the project applicant shall retain a biologist qualified in ornithology to conduct surveys for burrowing owl. The approved biologist shall conduct a two-visit (i.e., morning and evening) presence/absence survey at areas of suitable habitat on and adjacent to the project site boundary no less than 14 days prior to the start of construction or ground disturbance activities. Surveys shall be conducted according to methods described in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012). The applicant shall submit evidence of completion of the preconstruction survey to the City of Gilroy Planning Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. Because burrowing owls occupy habitat year-round, seasonal no-disturbance buffers, as outlined in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), shall be in place around occupied habitat prior to and during any ground disturbance activities. The following table includes buffer areas based on the time of year and level of disturbance (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), unless a qualified biologist approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife verifies through non-invasive measures that either: 1) birds have not begun egg laying and incubation; or Gilroy Square 3 January 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration 2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. LLooccaattiioonn TTiimmee ooff YYeeaarr LLeevveell ooff DDiissttuurrbbaannccee BBuuffffeerrss ((mmeetteerrss)) LLooww MMeedd HHiigghh NNeessttiinngg SSiitteess AApprriill 11 –– AAuugg 1155 220000 mm 550000 mm 550000 mm NNeessttiinngg SSiitteess AAuugg 1166 –– OOcctt 1155 220000 mm 220000 mm 550000 mm NNeessttiinngg SSiitteess OOcctt 1166 –– MMaarr 3311 5500 mm 110000 mm 550000 mm If burrowing owl is found and avoidance is not possible, burrow exclusion may be conducted by qualified biologists only during the non-breeding season, before breeding behavior is exhibited and after the burrow is confirmed empty through non-invasive methods, such as surveillance. Occupied burrows shall be replaced with artificial burrows at a ratio of one collapsed burrow to one constructed artificial burrow (1:1). Evicted burrowing owls may attempt to colonize or re-colonize an area that would be impacted, thus ongoing surveillance during project activities shall be conducted at a rate sufficient to detect burrowing owls if they return. If surveys locate occupied burrows in or near construction areas, consultation with the CDFW shall occur to interpret survey results and develop a project-specific avoidance and minimization approach. BIO-2 To avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), to the extent feasible, construction activities that include any vegetation removal or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) shall be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If construction activities commence during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project construction. If construction activities are scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. Two surveys for active nests of such birds shall occur within 10 days prior to start of construction, with the second survey conducted with 48 hours prior to start of construction. Appropriate minimum survey radius surrounding the work area is typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. If no nesting activity is observed, a report shall be submitted to the City of Gilroy and disturbance activities may comments. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, a minimum no-disturbance buffer of 250 feet around active nests of non-listed bird species and a 500-foot no-disturbance buffer around active nests of non-listed raptors shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer Gilroy Square 4 January 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily, or as otherwise required by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. This measure shall be implemented by the developer prior to start of construction activities. Geology and Soils GEO-1 The developer shall prepare an erosion control plan that details appropriate methods to prevent and/or minimize erosion. The erosion control plan is subject to the review and approval of the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. GEO-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall implement the recommendations outlined in the geotechnical report prepared for the proposed project including, but not limited to: Recompact the surface soils; Fill material to be excavated and stockpiled so that the native soils can be prepared properly, with inspection of the bottom of the excavation by a qualified geotechnical engineer to verify no additional removal is required; and Replace the upper 30 inches of soil within slab-on-grade and exterior flatwork areas with non-expansive fill to reduce the potential soil movement. Greenhouse Gas Emissions GHG-1 The proposed project shall be designed to meet the following performance standards: a. With exception of the planned fast-food use, no permanent natural gas infrastructure shall be permitted as part of the improvement plans for any other individual project uses. These uses shall be all electric; and b. Electric vehicle infrastructure (e.g., electric vehicle parking spaces, charging station infrastructure, chargers, etc.) consistent with CALGreen Tier 2 mandatory standards in effect at the time individual building permits are issued, shall be installed at each individual proposed use. GHG-2 The applicant shall: a. Prepare a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan which identifies one or more GHG reduction actions that will be taken to reduce GHG emissions from the proposed fast food use by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year to offset emissions produced by using natural gas. The GHG Reduction Plan shall prioritize on-site GHG reduction design features. Gilroy Square 5 January 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration In lieu of or in addition to one or more of the on-site measures above, the applicant may make direct investments in off-site GHG reduction activities/programs in the vicinity. Examples include building retrofit programs that pay for cool roofs, solar panels, solar water heaters, smart meters, energy efficient lighting energy efficient windows, and insulation. Other examples include financing programs for installing electric vehicle charging stations, electrifying school buses, or planting local urban forests. The applicant may retain a qualified air quality / GHG professional to quantify the GHG reductions from implementing the Reduction Plan using substantial evidence to be included in the Reduction Plan. If the applicant elects to quantify the GHG emissions reductions from on-site measures and/or investments in off-site reduction programs and the reductions are less than insufficient to reduce project emissions by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year, the applicant may secure the reduction balance by purchasing and retiring carbon offset credits. The carbon offset credits shall meet the following standards: Carbon offset credits shall be issued by a recognized, reputable and accredited registry that mandates the use of established protocols for quantifying and issuing the offset credits. Credits issued based on protocols approved by the California Air Resources Board should be prioritized. Examples of such registries include the Climate Action Reserve, American Carbon Registry, and Vierra. The carbon offset credits should be generated from projects developed in the United States. Credits from projects developed internationally should not be used unless the applicant demonstrates with substantial evidence that sufficient carbon offsets from projects in the United States are unavailable. International offsets must be quantified and issued using established protocols that are recognized in the United States and that are issued by recognized, reputable and accredited registries. All carbon offset credits purchased to reduce GHG emissions, must meet the criteria of being real, quantifiable, permanent, verifiable, enforceable, and additional, consistent with the standards set forth in Health and Safety Code section 38562, subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(2). Prior to the City issuing a building permit for the fast food use, the applicant shall submit the GHG Reduction Plan for review and approval of the City of Gilroy. If carbon offsets are proposed, prior to approval of a building permit, the applicant shall provide an executed contract or other certification to the City Planner that the requisite volume carbon offset credits have been purchased. b. The planned fast food use shall include all electricity pre-wiring necessary so that the building is ready for a future retrofit to all-electric supply infrastructure sufficient to replace natural gas use in the future. Prior to issuing a building Gilroy Square 6 January 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration permit for the fast food use, the City shall verify that project improvement plans meet the pre-wiring requirement. Hydrology and Water Quality HYDRO-1 All stormwater on the project site must be treated aboveground in an approved low-impact development treatment device prior to entering stormwater chambers. The proposed project must show proof of compliance with this requirement on the project plans prior to issuance of a grading permit with approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department. HYDRO-2 The project proponent shall prepare and submit Erosion Control Plans to the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The Erosion Control Plans shall illustrate how the project’s grading phases would prevent or minimize erosion and siltation on- and off-site, such as the inclusion of Best Management Practices. HYDRO-3 The project proponent shall prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for review and approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall identify construction and post-construction Best Management Practices to prevent water pollution at the source Noise N-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for the two proposed hotels, the building plans shall include air conditioning or mechanical ventilation, subject to review and approval by the building department. Date Prepared: January 2023 Review Period: January 27, 2023 – February 27, 2023 Date Adopted by City Council: Kraig Tambornini Senior Planner Kraig.Tambornini@ci.gilroy.ca.us PUBLIC REVIEW INITIAL STUDY GILROY S QUARE P ROJECT TM 21-02, AS 21-13, Z 22-01 PREPARED FOR City of Gilroy Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner 7351 Rosanna Street Gilroy, CA 95020 Tel 408.846.0440 Kraig.Tambornini@ci.gilroy.ca.us PREPARED BY EMC Planning Group Inc. 601 Abrego Street Monterey, CA 93940 Tel 831.649.1799 Fax 831.649.8399 Teri Wissler Adam, Senior Principal wissler@emcplanning.com www.emcplanning.com January 2023 This document was produced on recycled paper. TABLE OF CONTENTS A. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 1 B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED .............................................. 23 C. DETERMINATION ........................................................................................................ 24 D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................................ 25 1. Aesthetics .................................................................................................................. 27 2. Agriculture ................................................................................................................ 30 3. Air Quality ................................................................................................................ 32 4. Biological Resources ................................................................................................ 39 5. Cultural Resources................................................................................................... 49 6. Energy ....................................................................................................................... 52 7. Geology and Soils .................................................................................................... 55 8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................................................... 59 9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................... 66 10. Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................... 69 11. Land Use and Planning ........................................................................................... 76 12. Mineral Resources ................................................................................................... 78 13. Noise .......................................................................................................................... 79 14. Population and Housing ......................................................................................... 83 15. Public Services .......................................................................................................... 84 16. Transportation/Traffic ............................................................................................. 86 17. Tribal Cultural Resources ....................................................................................... 89 18. Utilities and Service Systems ................................................................................. 90 19. Wildfire ..................................................................................................................... 95 20. Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................................................................... 96 E. SOURCES ...................................................................................................................... 98 EMC Planning Group Inc. Appendices Appendix A Project Plans Appendix B CalEEMod Memo and Results Appendix C EMFAC Results Appendix D CNDDB Results Appendix E Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Appendix F Noise Assessment Appendix G Transportation Summary of Findings and Analysis Figures Figure 1 Location Map .................................................................................................... 5 Figure 2 Aerial Photograph ............................................................................................ 7 Figure 3 Site Photographs .............................................................................................. 9 Figure 4 Site Plan (Northern) ....................................................................................... 11 Figure 5 Site Plan (Southern) ....................................................................................... 13 Figure 6 Lot 1 Elevations .............................................................................................. 15 Figure 7 Lot 1a Elevations ............................................................................................ 17 Figure 8 Lot 2 Elevations .............................................................................................. 19 Figure 9 Lot 3 Elevations .............................................................................................. 21 Figure 10 Special-Status Species Recorded in the Project Vicinity ........................... 43 Tables Table 1 Development Summary .................................................................................. 3 Table 2 Potentially Applicable Control Measures (2017 Clean Air Plan) ............ 33 Table 3 San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin Attainment Status .............................. 35 Table 4 Thresholds of Significance for Criteria Air Pollutants ............................. 36 Table 5 Unmitigated Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions .................... 37 Table 6 Consistency with GHG Reduction Performance Standards .................... 62 Table 7 Wastewater Generation ................................................................................. 91 Table 8 Water Demand ............................................................................................... 92 EMC Planning Group Inc. 1 A. BACKGROUND Setting The 10.07-acre project site consists of APN 841-70-049 and is located at 6970 Camino Arroyo, within the city limits of Gilroy. Gilroy is located in the Santa Clara Valley, nestled between the Mount Diablo Mountain Ranges (approximately three miles east) and the Santa Cruz Mountain Ranges (approximately three miles west). The project site is surrounded by commercial to the northwest and west and industrial to the east and south. Northeast of the subject property, across Pacheco Pass Highway (APN 841- 18-082), the property has a general plan designation of General Industrial and the property is currently in agricultural production. The project site is currently vacant with a general plan land use designation of General Industrial and a zoning designation of Shopping Center Commercial/Highway Commercial/General Industrial Planned Unit Development. Project Title Gilroy Square Lead Agency Contact Person and Phone Number Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner City of Gilroy Community Development Department Planning Division (408) 846-0451 Date Prepared January 2023 Study Prepared by EMC Planning Group Inc. 601 Abrego Street Monterey, CA 93940 (831) 649-1799 Project Location 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy, CA 95020 Project Sponsor Name and Address Jaspal Singh Sidhu, PE 1024 Iron Point Road Folsom, CA 95630 General Plan Designation General Industrial Zoning Shopping Center Commercial/Highway Commercial/General Industrial Planned Unit Development (C3/HC/M2/PUD) 2 EMC Planning Group Inc. Gilroy Square Figure 1, Location Map, presents the regional location of the project site. Figure 2, Aerial Photograph, presents an aerial of the project site and its surrounding land uses. Figure 3, Site Photographs, illustrates the existing setting of the project site. Background The project site was included in the Regency Centers Project, for which an EIR was prepared and certified in December 2002. The current project site was identified as a Phase II parcel, with possible future development as hotel/retail/restaurant/industrial site. The City subsequently approved a development agreement, tentative map, zone change (Regency Center PUD), and architectural site review for the regional shopping center known as Gilroy Crossing, subsequently developed and located immediately west of the project site and Camino Arroyo. Although the 2002 EIR addressed environmental impacts associated with future development of the current project site, no development application was submitted and, therefore, considered. Description of Project The Gilroy Square project, File No. Z 22-01, TM-21-02, and AS 21-13 (“proposed project”) includes subdividing APN 841-070-049, 10.07 acres, into six (6) lots, and Architectural and Site Review to establish the development plan for Phase II of the PUD for development on four (4) of the lots. The proposed project includes two, four-story hotels, a drive-through fast food restaurant, a convenience store, a four-story speculative industrial warehouse, and a one-story speculative warehouse building. The warehouse buildings are proposed as future development. The project plans can be found in Appendix A. Tentative Subdivision Map The applicant proposes to subdivide APN 841-070-049 into the following parcels as identified on the tentative subdivision map: Parcel 1 0.82 acres Parcel 1a 1.31 acres Parcel 2 2.3 acres Parcel 3 1.81 acres Parcel 4 2.59 acres Parcel 5 1.24 acres Architectural and Site Review The applicant is proposing development of the five lots in three phases. Architectural and Site Review is not proposed for the last phase at this time; however, anticipated development of that phase will be evaluated in the initial study, as development of the third phase is reasonably foreseeable. Proposed development is summarized in Table 1, Development Summary. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 3 Table 1 Development Summary Phase/Lot Project Square Footage or Rooms Phase 1a 1 Drive-thru Burger King 2,600 square feet 1a Gas Station (8 pumps) Car Wash Convenience Store 8 pumps 1,152 square feet 2,880 square feet Phase 1b 2 Residence Inn (4-story) 112 rooms 82,568 square feet 3 Holiday Inn Express (4-story) 88 rooms 67,780 square feet Phase 2 (Future – No Architectural and Site Review Applications) 4 Future Industrial Warehouse 27,500 square feet 5 Future Industrial Warehouse 18,000 square feet SOURCE: Site Plan dated 2/16/2022 and 10/1/2022 Figure 4, Site Plan (Northern), and Figure 5, Site Plan (Southern), present the project’s full site plan. Figure 6, Lot 1 Elevations, and Figure 7, Lot 1a Elevations, illustrates the development involved in Phase 1a of the proposed project. The development involved in Phase 1b of the proposed project is depicted in Figure 8, Lot 2 Elevations, and Figure 9, Lot 3 Elevations. Infrastructure Improvements The proposed project will require various on-site infrastructure improvements as identified in the Hexagon Transportation Consultant’s summary of findings and transportation analysis (Appendix G) and include the following: Ensure that design features, such as the landscaping, signage, bus stop and other physical features along the project site frontage and at the project site driveways, in particular near Driveway 1, would not interfere with the sight distance at the proposed site driveways; Defined pedestrian connection should be provided between the north hotel (Residence Inn) building and the hotel parking spaces located next to the gas station; Provide a minimum of 18 long-term (Class I) and 21 short-term (Class II) bicycle parking spaces; Install 10-foot sidewalks in commercial areas along the entire project site frontage; Gilroy Square 4 EMC Planning Group Inc. Install ADA-compliant curb ramps at all corners of the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection; Widen Driveway 2 to provide two outbound lanes (as proposed) and two inbound lanes – Driveway 2 must also align with the west leg of the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection; Change the two inbound lanes at the first internal access point from Driveway 2 (approximately 125 feet east of the driveway) to a left-turn lane providing access to the gas station/fast-food restaurant and a shared right-and-through lane, providing access to the hotels and parking spaces; Align the Driveway 2 drive aisle lanes (in particular, the inbound lane); Remove the parking spaces along the south side of the driveway aisle so that the inbound through lane from Driveway 2 aligns with the eastbound lane along the rest of the drive aisle (if necessary); Provide uncontrolled inbound access at the first internal access point from Driveway 2, while stop-controlling the rest of the approaches; and Provide a connection extending the Driveway 2 to Silacci Way, via the adjacent undeveloped site (this would displace some of the northbound right-turning project trips at the intersection of Camino Arroyo /State Route 152 to Silacci Way, eliminating the project deficiency and need to extend the existing northbound right- turn pocked while enhancing the adjacent roadway network). Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required Regional Water Quality Control Board Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, has consultation begun? No California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1. Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality. k Project Site Source: ESRI 2014 Figure 1Location Map Gilroy Square Initial Study 0 8000 feet ProjectLocation £¤101 £¤101UV1 k Salinas UV152Gilroy San Jose San Francisco Modesto Santa Cruz Monterey §¨¦580 §¨¦5§¨¦280 §¨¦680 UV1 UV99 Regional Location £¤101 £¤101 £¤101 £¤101 UV152 Gilroy San Martin Not to Scale Gilroy Square 6 EMC Planning Group Inc. This side intentionally left blank. Aerial Photograph Gilroy Square Initial Study 0 250 feet Figure 2 Source: Santa Clara County GIS 2022, Google Earth 2022Project Site C am i n o A r r o y o Pacheco Pass Hwy. General Plan Designated General Industrial Holloway Rd.Si l a c c i W y . Commercial Uses Industrial Uses Vacant Vacant Truck Storage Lot Commercial Uses Gilroy Square 8 EMC Planning Group Inc. This side intentionally left blank. 4321On Holloway Road facing northwest across theproject site.4On Camino Arroyo facing northeast across the project site.3On Camino Arroyo at the northwest side of the projectsite facing north.2On Pacheco Pass Highway facing south across theproject site.1Photographs: EMC Planning Group 2022Source: Google Earth 2022Gilroy Square Initial StudySite PhotographsFigure 3Project Site Gilroy Square 10 EMC Planning Group Inc. This side intentionally left blank. A1.0.0 1 PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY: OF 39 19-43 GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CAPARKING FOR 88 ROOM 4 STORY HOTEL (1 SPACE:1 ROOM) = 97 SPACES PARKING ANALYSIS(HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES PROJECT DATA (HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES) HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS PROJECT DESCRIPTION:88 ROOMS 4 STORY HOTEL ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER : ADDRESS: JURISDICTION : R1 VA 47'-0" (TOP OF PARAPET) ALLOWABLE: ZONING : CODE ANALYSIS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: FIRE SPRINKLERS: HEIGHT (MAXIMUM) ACTUAL : 4ACTUAL : STORIES (MAXIMUM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. CITY OF GILROY 841-70-049 AREA:6. PARCEL-3 SITE AREA 6970 CAMINO ARROYO, GILROY, CA PORTE COCHERE AREA 692 S.F. BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN 16772 S.F. 1ST FLOOR AREA 16772 S.F. 2ND FLOOR AREA 16772 S.F. 3RD FLOOR AREA TOTAL BUILDING AREA 67780 S.F.. 16772 S.F. 4TH FLOOR AREA = 5 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED: (INCLUDING ONE VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACES) DESIGNATION :COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL 49'-6" (TOP OF PARAPET) PROJECT DATA (RESIDENCE INN) RESIDENCE INN PROJECT DESCRIPTION:112 ROOM 4 STORY HOTEL ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER : ADDRESS: JURISDICTION : R1 VA 40'-10"(TOP OF PARAPET) ALLOWABLE: ZONING : CODE ANALYSIS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: FIRE SPRINKLERS: HEIGHT (MAXIMUM) ACTUAL : 4ACTUAL : STORIES (MAXIMUM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. CITY OF GILROY 841-70-049 PARCEL-2 AREA:6. PARCEL-2 SITE AREA 6970 CAMINO ARROYO, GILROY, CA BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN 20642 S.F. 1ST FLOOR AREA 20642 S.F. 2ND FLOOR AREA 20642 S.F. 3RD FLOOR AREA TOTAL BUILDING AREA 82568 S.F.. 20642 S.F. 4TH FLOOR AREA DESIGNATION :COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL 47'-9" (TOP OF TOWER ) 5 TOTAL PAVED AREA BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA TOTAL PAVED AREA BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 69913 S.F. (67.37%) 20642 S.F. (19.90%) 13210 S.F. (12.73%) = 4 SPACES = 4 SPACES TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED: TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED: 70' R1, 70' A3 TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE: LOT COVERAGE (HOTEL)7. PARCEL-2 SITE AREA 15. PROVIDED: 9.EXIT FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 10. PROPOSED BUILDING USE: CODE YEAR/TYPE : SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: 13. 12. 11. 14. 2 EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR: REQUIRED: REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY NO (TABLE 602) YES YES HOTEL 7 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS) HOURS OF OPERATION: 70' R1, 70' A3 TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE: LOT COVERAGE (HOTEL)7. PARCEL-3 SITE AREA 8. 15. PROVIDED: 9.EXIT FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 10. PROPOSED BUILDING USE: CODE YEAR/TYPE : SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: 13. 12. 11. 14. 2 EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR: REQUIRED: REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY NO (TABLE 602) HOTEL NO HOURS OF OPERATION: = 4 SPACESTOTAL ELECTRICAL VEHICLE (EV) PARKING PROVIDED: VAN POOL PARKING PROVIDED = 4 SPACES LONG TERM BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED = 4 SPACES @ 2880 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREA PARKING REQUIRED FOR C-STORE: 1 SPACE PER 250 SQ FT AREA = 24 SPACESTOTAL PARKING PROVIDED PARKING ANALYSIS {(N)C-STORE} PROJECT DATA (C-STORE) C-STORE PROJECT DESCRIPTION:C-STORE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER : ADDRESS: JURISDICTION : M OCCUPANCY VA 19'-6" (TOP OF PARAPET) ALLOWABLE: ZONING : CODE ANALYSIS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: FIRE SPRINKLERS: HEIGHT (MAXIMUM) ACTUAL : 1ACTUAL : STORIES (MAXIMUM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. CITY OF GILROY 841-70-049 PARCEL-1A AREA:6. 6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CA BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN 2880 S.F. C-STORE FLOOR AREA DESIGNATION :COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL 4 = 2 SPACES = 2 SPACES TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED: TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED: LOT COVERAGE C-STORE7. TOTAL PAVED AREA BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 40811 S.F. (71.39%) 4242 S.F. (7.41%) 12154 S.F. (21.20%) PARCEL 1A SITE AREA 70' M TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE: 15. PROVIDED: 9.EXIT FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 10. PROPOSED BUILDING USE: CODE YEAR/TYPE : SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: 13. 12. 11. 14. 2 EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR: REQUIRED: REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY YES (TABLE 602) YES YES C-STORE 2 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS) 2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC, 2019 CEC, 2019 CFC, 2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, 2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72) 24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATION: = 30 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED PARKING REQUIRED FOR BURGER KING: 1 SPACE PER 100 SQ FT AREA PARKING ANALYSIS (DRIVE-THRU BURGER KING) = 2 SPACES = 2 SPACES TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED: TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED: = 30 SPACESTOTAL PARKING PROVIDED PARCEL-1A SITE AREA PROJECT DATA (DRIVE-THRU BURGER KING) DRIVE-THRU BURGER KING PROJECT DESCRIPTION:DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANT ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER : ADDRESS: JURISDICTION : A2 OCCUPANCY VA NO 19'-0" (TOP OF COPING) ALLOWABLE: ZONING : CODE ANALYSIS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: FIRE SPRINKLERS: HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL : 1ACTUAL : STORIES (MAXIMUM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. CITY OF GILROY 841-70-049 PARCEL-1 AREA:6. PARCEL-1 SITE AREA 35990 S.F.(0.82 AC) 6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CA BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN DESIGNATION :COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL 2 LOT COVERAGE BURGER KING7. TOTAL PAVED AREA BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA PARCEL-1 AREA 35990 S.F.(0.82 AC) 50' A2 TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE: 15. PROVIDED: 9.EXIT FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 10. PROPOSED BUILDING USE: CODE YEAR/TYPE : SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: 13. 12. 11. 14. 2 EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR: REQUIRED: REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY NO (TABLE 602) YES YES DRIVE-THRU' RESTAURANT 3 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS) 2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC, 2019 CEC, 2019 CFC, 2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, 2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72) HOURS OF OPERATION: 2600 S.F. BURGER KING FLOOR AREA 4 8 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS) NO (TABLE 602) CAR WASH AREA 1152 S.F. 1 PARKING PER EMPLOYEE @ 4 EMPLOYEES = 4 SPACES = 26 SPACES 24554 S.F.(68.3%) 2600 S.F. (7.2%) 8836 S.F. (24.5%) PARKING REQUIRED FOR CAR WASH: 1 SPACE PER 250 SQ FT AREA = 17 SPACESGROSS PARKING REQUIRED 103765 S.F. (2.3 AC) 103765 S.F. (2.3 AC) 57207 S.F. (1.31 AC) 57207 S.F. (1.31 AC) CANOPY AREA 6679 S.F. PARKING ANALYSIS(RESIDENCE INN) a) PARKING FOR 112 ROOMS 4 STORY HOTEL (1 SPACE:1 ROOM) = 112 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED = 118 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 1 PARKING PER EMPLOYEE @ 6 EMPLOYEES = 6 SPACES = 111 SPACESSTANDARD PARKING PROVIDED 21'-0" (TOP OF EXTENDED COPING)21'-10" (TOP OF PARAPET) 79264 S.F. (1.81 AC) TOTAL PAVED AREA BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 52487 S.F. (66.21%) 12592 S.F. (15.89%) 14185 S.F. (17.90%) PARCEL-3 SITE AREA 79264 S.F. (1.81 AC) F.A.R PROVIDED FOR BURGER KING: 16. GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA 2600/35990=0.072 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR C-STORE:GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA 2880/57207=0.05 F.A.R FOR RESIDENCE INN : 16. GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA 82568/103765=0.79 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES : 67780/79264=0.85 GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA PROPERTY LINE CENTER LINE PARKING STRIPS BLDG LINE ACCESSIBLE AISLE FIRE ACCESS ROUTE LIGHTING SINGLE HEAD POLE LIGHT FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFDC PROPOSED VAN POOL PARKING (SHALL BE MARKED WITH SIGNS RESTRICTING THEIR USE TO CLEAN AIR VAN POOL) VP ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING STATION EV TRUNCATED DOMES FIRE HYDRANT AS PER CIVIL PLANS BOLLARDTRUCK ROUTE VICINITY MAP ILLUMINATED MONUMENT SIGNAGE (35' HIGH) MIN. 100 SQ.FT OF SEASONAL COLOR AT BASE OF SIGN M SITE PLAN 1ST FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) 2ND FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) 4TH FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) ROOF PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) 1ST FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) 3RD FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) ROOF PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN) FLOOR PLAN C-STORE) EXTERIOR ELEVATION (CANOPY) A1.0.0 A1.1.0 A1.1.1 A1.1.2 A1.1.3 A1.1.4 A1.1.5 A1.1.6 A1.1.7 A2.1.0 A2.1.1 A2.1.2 A3.2.0 A4.1.0 A4.1.1 FLOOR & ROOF PLAN (BURGER KING) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (BURGER KING) A1.0.2 TRASH DETAILS A5.1.0 1ST FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER) A5.1.1 2ND FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER) A5.1.2 A5.1.3 A5.1.4 A5.1.5 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER) A6.1.0 1ST FLOOR PLAN ( FUTURE WAREHOUSE) A6.1.1 ROOF PLAN (FUTURE WAREHOUSE) A6.1.2 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (FUTURE WAREHOUSE) 3RD FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4TH FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER) ROOF PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER) SITE PLANA1.0.0A ROOF PLAN (C-STORE) A2.1.3 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (C-STORE) A2.1.4 FLOOR PLAN & EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (CAR WASH) A2.1.5 EQUPMENT PLAN (CAR WASH) A3.1.0 FLOOR PLAN (CANOPY) A3.1.2 ROOF PLAN (CAR WASH) A3.1.1 3RD FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) EXTERIOR VIEW (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) 2ND FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) 4TH FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN) A2.1.6 A3.2.1 A3.2.2 A3.3.0 A3.3.1 A7.0.0 SITE PHOTOS A7.0.1 SITE PHOTOS COVER SHEET GRADING PLAN UTILITY PLAN GRADING SECTIONS C1 PHASING PLAN CIVIL SITE PLAN STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN C2 SOLID WASTE HANDLING PLAN FIRE TRUCK CIRCULATION PLAN C4 C5 C7 C3 C6 C9 C8 YES(NFPA 13) YES(NFPA 13) YES(NFPA 13) TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED = 88 1 PARKING PER EMPLOYEE @ 6 EMPLOYEES = 6 SPACES = 94 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED @ 2600 GROSS FLOOR AREA = 12 SPACES @ 1152 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREA = 5 SPACES F.A.R REQUIRED FOR BURGER KING:F.A.R REQUIRED FOR C-STORE:16.2 F.A.R FOR RESIDENCE INN :4 F.A.R REQUIRED FOR HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES :16.4 Source: ACE Design 2022 Figure 4 Gilroy Square Initial Study Site Plan (Northern) 200 feet0 Gilroy Square 12 EMC Planning Group Inc. This side intentionally left blank. 1 3 1 9 . 0 ' 2 6 . 0 ' L A N D S C A P I N G 21.2' 1 1 19' 19.0' 26' C A M I N O A R R O Y O R O A D HOLLOWAY R O A D 1 7 2 PATIOOUTDOOR POOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 ST ORY 8.8' 199.3' 75.0' 3 8 LANDSCAP I N G LANDSCAPING LANDSCAPIN GFIRE RIS E R ROOM 9A1.0.25 . 0 ' 3 6 . 0 ' 2 7 1 . 3 ' ( N ) S I D E W A L K ( E ) L A N D S C A P I N G 15.3' 6 10.0'19.0'36.7' L A N D S C A P I N G 26.0' 1 1 BLDG.FO O TP R IN T =1 8 00 0 S . F. 6 FENCE8 5 . 1 ' 5 ' 3 0 . 0 ' 1 9 . 0 ' 1 4 . 6 ' 26.0' 19.0'5'5' 10' 6 6 S I D E W A L K S I D E W A L K SIDE WALK 2 5 2 5 . 5 ' P O R O U S P A V E M E N T R48.0'96 2 4 0 . 9 '108.2'5.0' 19.0' 13.3' S I D E W A L K SIDE W A LK SIDE W ALK L A N D S C A P I N G 19.0' 31.3' 2 9 . 8 ' 2 6 . 0 ' 26.0' 9 9 9 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 4 15.4'19.0' 5.0'26.2'2 6 . 0 ' 2 6 . 0 ' 28.1' 19.0' 5 . 0 ' 19.0' 121.8' 30.0' 121.4' 25.8' 3 . 8 '19.0'19.0' P O R O U S P A V E M E N T 22 1 1 EV EV EV EV EV 19.0' LANDSCAP I N G 10' 26.7' HOLLOWAY R O A D F U T U R E W A R E H O U S E - 2 FUTURE W A R EHOUSE - 1 5 . 5 ' 2 2 . 3 ' 5 . 0 ' 34.3' TRASH TRASH T R A S HR48.0'R28.0' 4 0 4 . 8 ' 1 STO R Y 1 S T O R Y B L D G . F O O T P R I N T = 2 7 5 0 0 S . F . L A N D S C A P I N G 3.1' 3.6' 212.6' S 3 1° 2 7 ' 0 2 " E 7 7 0 . 7 4 ' N58° 2 7 ' 0 3 " E 3 0 5 . 0 0 ' R=40.00' HOLL O WA Y R O A D L=62.90' S 3 1° 2 7 ' 0 2 " E 8 4 5 . 9 0 ' =90°05'55" 3 2 8 . 0 2 ' 3 2 8 . 0 2 ' 344.1 1 ' 344.7 5 ' 1 5 8 . 2 7 ' 1 1 8 . 1 2 ' 13 11 10 5 2 C R O S S AC C E S S CROSS ACCESS VPVPVPVP 12 14 7 3 6 11 7 8 3 12 9 10 3 EV EVEV EVEV EVEV EV 3 3 1 VPVPVPVP2 10 17 OUTDO O R P O O L 16 8 1 10 2 3 3 7 2 PATIO OUTDO O R POOL 7 3 8 10 EVEVEVEV 4 4 EVVP EVVPVPEV EV EV 6 11 6 6 6 2 5 9 6 9 9 9 1 1 10 10 14 22 11 EVEV EV EV EV TR A S H TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TR A S H L=31.00' R=19.00' R=408.42'N10°33'00"E 120.34'S31° 3 3 ' 4 7 " E 1 5 2 9 . 9 0 ' S3 1 ° 2 7 ' 0 2 " E 7 7 0 . 7 4 ' N58°27 ' 0 3 " E 3 0 5 . 0 0 ' CAM I NO AR RO YON06°11'39"E 188.73'R=937.00' =93°29'20"R=19.00' =92°52'38" L=30.80' 66 . 00'S20° 1 4'1 4 " E =13°29'29" L=96.17' R=40.00' L=97.43'N03°22'26"W 1 2 6 .82' =05°57'27"R=937.00' L=16.82'N06°11'39"E 120.00'=24°05'42"R=40.00' STATE HWY 152 =05°57'27"CAMINO ARROYOHOLLO W A Y R O A D L=97.43' L=62.90' S3 1 ° 2 7 ' 0 2 " E 8 4 5 . 9 0 ' =90°05'55" 32 8 . 0 2 ' 297 . 3 2 ' 31 1 . 7 8 ' 23 0 . 9 5 ' 203 . 5 5 '126.82' 94. 5 6 ' 230 . 0 4 ' 32 8 . 0 2 ' 343.66' 344.11' 183.78' 206.48' 38.80' 11.44' 80.07' 1.48' 95 .95' 344.75' =08°11'43"R=952.00'L=136.17' 158 . 2 7 ' 118 . 1 2 'PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCFolsom, CA 956301024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 39 19-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CAPROPOSED CAR PARKING SPACES 31 SPACES 52 SPACES @18000 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREA PROJECT DATA(FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1) FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: FUTURE WAREHOUSE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER : ADDRESS: JURISDICTION : M OCCUPANCY VA YES(NFPA 13) 29'-10" (TOP OF RIDGE) ALLOWABLE: ZONING : CODE ANALYSIS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: FIRE SPRINKLERS: HEIGHT (MAXIMUM) ACTUAL : 1ACTUAL : STORIES (MAXIMUM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. CITY OF GILROY 841-70-049 PARCEL-5 AREA:6. 6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CA BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN 18000 S.F. FUTURE WAREHOUSE FLOOR AREA DESIGNATION :COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL 4 LOT COVERAGE (FUTURE WAREHOUSE)7. TOTAL PAVED AREA BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 22591 S.F. (41.66%) 18000 S.F. (33.19%) 13637 S.F. (25.15%) PARCEL-5 SITE AREA 54228 S.F. (1.245 AC) 70' M TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE: 14. PROVIDED: 8.EXIT FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 9. PROPOSED BUILDING USE: CODE YEAR/TYPE : SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: 12. 11. 10. 13. 2 EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR: REQUIRED: REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY NO (TABLE 602) YES YES FUTURE WAREHOUSE 6 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS) 2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC, 2019 CEC, 2019 CFC, 2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, 2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72) 24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATION: PARCEL-5 SITE AREA 54228 S.F. (1.245 AC) PARCEL-4 AREA PROJECT DATA(FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2) PROJECT DESCRIPTION:FUTURE WAREHOUSE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER : JURISDICTION : M OCCUPANCY VA ALLOWABLE:4 EXISTING AND PROPOSED ZONING:COMMERCIAL CODE ANALYSIS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: FIRE SPRINKLERS: HEIGHT (MAXIMUM) ACTUAL : ALLOWABLE: 1ACTUAL : STORIES (MAXIMUM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:10. 9. 8.REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY YES YES NO CITY OF GILROY AREA BREAKDOWN6. 112979 S.F.(2.594 AC) 841-70-049 5422.8 SQ.FT.(10% OF PARCEL AREA) 26814 S.F.(23.73%) 27500 S.F.(24.32%) 58665 S.F.(51.95%) REQD. LANDSCAPE AREA PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA TOTAL BUILDING FOOTPRINT TOTAL PAVED AREA LOT COVERAGE 70' M TABLE 504.3 29'-10" (TOP OF RIDGE) FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2ADDRESS: 6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CA = 2 SPACES = 2 SPACES TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED: TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED: BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN 27500 S.F. FUTURE WAREHOUSE FLOOR AREA PROPOSED CAR PARKING SPACES 100 SPACES = 5 SPACES = 2 SPACES TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED: TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED: PARKING REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 : 15. GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA 18000/54228=0.33 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2: 14. GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA 27500/112979=0.24 A1.0.0A 1 PROPERTY LINE CENTER LINE PARKING STRIPS BLDG LINE ACCESSIBLE AISLE FIRE ACCESS ROUTE LIGHTING SINGLE HEAD POLE LIGHT FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFDC PROPOSED VAN POOL PARKING (SHALL BE MARKED WITH SIGNS RESTRICTING THEIR USE TO CLEAN AIR VAN POOL) VP ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONEV TRUNCATED DOMES PROPOSED ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL FIRE HYDRANT AS PER CIVIL PLANS BOLLARDTRUCK ROUTE VICINITY MAP NORTHILLUMINATED MONUMENT SIGNAGE (35' HIGH) MIN. 100 S.F.OF SEASONAL COLOR AT BASE OF SIGN M YES(NFPA 13) F.A.R REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 :2 F.A.R REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2:2 PARKING REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 : 1 SPACE PER 350 SQ FT AREA 1 SPACE PER 350 SQ FT AREA @ 27500 S.F.GROSS FLOOR AREA 79 SPACES 13. PROPOSED BUILDING USE: CODE YEAR/TYPE :11. 12.FUTURE WAREHOUSE 2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC, 2019 CEC, 2019 CFC, 2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, 2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72) 24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATION: Gilroy Square Initial Study Site Plan (Southern) Figure 5 Source: ACE Design 2022200 feet0 STATE HIGHWAYS State Route 1 State Route 68 State Route 156 U.S. HIGHWAYS U.S. Highway 101 INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS Interstate 5 or I-5 Gilroy Square 14 EMC Planning Group Inc. This side intentionally left blank. Source: ACE Design 2022 Figure 6 Gilroy Square Initial Study Lot 1 Elevations Gilroy Square 16 EMC Planning Group Inc. This side intentionally left blank. Gilroy Square Initial Study Lot 1a Elevations Figure 7 Source: ACE Design 2022 Gilroy Square 18 EMC Planning Group Inc. This side intentionally left blank. 0'-0" A.F.F. +10'-2" T.O SHEATHING SECOND FLOOR +19'-3"THIRD FLOOR FIRST FLOOR +46'-11" TOP OF ROOF +40'-10" TOP OF PARAPET +47'-9"TOP OF ROOF +37'-7" T.0 PLATE +28'-5" T.O SHEATHING FOURTH FLOOR 0'-0" A.F.F. +10'-2" T.O SHEATHING SECOND FLOOR +19'-3" T.O SHEATHING THIRD FLOOR FIRST FLOOR +28'-5" T.O SHEATHING FOURTH FLOOR TOP OF ROOF TOP OF PARAPET +37'-7" T.O PLATE TOP OF ROOF+47'-9" +46'-11" +40'-10"EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022 HS MG A2.1.5 17 FINISH LEGEND NOTE: STREET NUMBERS OF THE BUILDINGS SHALL BE EASILY VISIBLE FROM THE STREET AT ALL TIMES, DAY & NITE.PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCFolsom, CA 956301024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 39 19-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CAGilroy Square Initial Study Lot 2 Elevations Figure 8 Source: ACE Design 2022 STATE HIGHWAYS State Route 1 State Route 68 State Route 156 U.S. HIGHWAYS U.S. Highway 101 INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS Interstate 5 or I-5 Gilroy Square 20 EMC Planning Group Inc. This side intentionally left blank. LEVEL 1 13' - 2 5/8" LEVEL 2 T.0 SHEATHING GRADE -6" LEVEL 3 T.0 SHEATHING 23' - 5 7/8" ROOF 45' - 0" PARAPET 47'- 0" LEVEL 4 T.0 SHEATHING 33' - 9 1/8" SF4 SF1 2 1 59 0'-0" T.O. PLATE 42'-11 3/8" PARAPET 49'- 6" 9'-0" T.O.SUN SCREEN 10 10 GRADE -6" 47'- 0"10'-0"SF6 GRADE 0'- 0" LEVEL 2 T.0 SHEATHING 13'- 2 5/8" LEVEL 3 T.0 SHEATHING 23'- 5 7/8" LEVEL 4 T.0 SHEATHING 33'- 9 1/8" ROOF 45'- 0" PARAPET 2 1 5 T.O. PLATE 42'- 11 3/8" 49'- 6" PARAPET 9'-0" T.O.SUN SCREEN 10 1010 LEGENDS:(STUCCO COLORS BY PAREX) ABBREVATIONS HM :- HOLLOW METAL DR :- DOOR FR :- FRAME PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY: OF 39 19-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CAGilroy Square Initial Study Lot 3 Elevations Figure 9 Source: ACE Design 2022 STATE HIGHWAYS State Route 1 State Route 68 State Route 156 U.S. HIGHWAYS U.S. Highway 101 INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS Interstate 5 or I-5 Gilroy Square 22 EMC Planning Group Inc. This side intentionally left blank. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 23 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. ☐Aesthetics ☐Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐Population/Housing ☐Agriculture and Forestry Resources ☐Hazards & Hazardous Materials ☐Public Services ☐Air Quality ☐Hydrology/Water Quality ☐Transportation/Traffic ☐Biological Resources ☐Land Use/Planning ☐Tribal Cultural Resources ☐Cultural Resources ☐Mineral Resources ☐Utilities/Service Systems ☐Geology/Soils ☐Noise ☐Mandatory Findings of Significance ☐None Gilroy Square 24 EMC Planning Group Inc. 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. ☐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. Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner Date 1-25-23 Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 25 D.EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The evaluation of the potential impacts of the proposed project is contained in the following series of checklists and accompanying narratives. The following notes apply to this section. 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 on-site, cumulative as well as 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. 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. Gilroy Square 26 EMC Planning Group Inc. 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 included in Section E, Sources, at the end of this initial study, and other sources used or individuals contacted are cited in the discussion. 8. 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. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 27 1. AESTHETICS Would the project: Comments: a. According to the City’s Public Review Draft Gilroy 2040 General Plan EIR SCH#2015082014 (General Plan EIR) (City of Gilroy 2020, p. 3-3), neither the City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan (General Plan) (City of Gilroy 2020) nor the Santa Clara County General Plan designate specific scenic vistas within Gilroy or in the immediate unincorporated areas adjacent to Gilroy. The site is not located within or adjacent to Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista or degrade the existing visual character in the Hecker Pass Specific Plan Area or the hillside areas? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b. Substantially damage scenic resources viewed from Hecker Pass Highway or Pacheco Pass Highway? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c. Substantially damage scenic resources viewed from Uvas Park Drive, Santa Teresa Boulevard, or Miller Avenue from First Street to Mesa Road? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ d. Substantially damage scenic resources (farmland and surrounding hills) viewed from Highway 101? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ e. Result in unattractive entrances at the principal gateways to the City (north and south Monterey Street, Highway 152/Hecker Pass Highway, Highway 152/Pacheco Pass, north and south Santa Teresa Boulevard, and at the Highway 101 interchanges at Masten, Buena Vista, Leavesley, and Tenth Street)? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ f. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ g. Include or require a wall or fence higher than seven feet above the existing grade at the property line? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Gilroy Square 28 EMC Planning Group Inc. hillside areas and is approximately three miles east of the Hecker Pass Specific Plan area (Santa Clara County 2022). Therefore, the proposed project would not have an adverse effect on a scenic vista or degrade the existing visual character in the Hecker Pass Specific Plan Area or hillside areas. b. According to the General Plan EIR (p. 3-3), scenic resources of aesthetic value include the views from Hecker Pass Highway, and views of agricultural lands, riparian areas, and the hillsides that surround much of Gilroy. The project site is adjacent to Pacheco Pass Highway to the north and the proposed project would interrupt views of the distant hillsides to the northeast and east (refer to the photo images 2 and 3 within Figure 3, Site Photographs). However, the surrounding uses of the project site include the commercial uses (Gilroy Crossing) to the west and northwest across Pacheco Pass Highway and industrial uses to the east. Therefore, the proposed project would be nearly surrounded by similar development in its use and structural appearance. The proposed project would also comply with the General Plan Policy LU 1.1, which calls for orderly, contiguous pattern of development that prioritizes infill development, phases new development, and encourages compactness and efficiency and General Plan Policy LU 8.8, which calls for clustered development patterns that will minimize impacts to scenic resources. Refer back to Figures 6 through 9 for elevations of the commercial structures proposed on the project site. Therefore, the proposed project’s visual impacts from Pacheco Pass Highway would be less than significant for the following reasons: The project is consistent with the approved Regency Center PUD; and The project is adjacent to existing commercial and industrial development on three sides. c. The project site is not located within the vicinity of Uvas Park Drive, Santa Teresa Boulevard, or Miller Avenue from First Street to Mesa Road. Therefore, the proposed development would not substantially damage scenic resources viewed from these rights-of-way. d. The project site is located approximately 0.35 miles east of US Highway 101. Commercial and industrial development and vegetation blocks existing views of the project site from the highway. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a visual impact from US Highway 101 (Google Earth 2022). e. The proposed project is not visible from Gilroy’s principal gateways and, therefore, would not result in an unattractive entrance at those locations. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 29 f. Existing commercial and industrial development to the west, northwest, and east provide night time lighting in the immediate vicinity. Development of the project site from its vacant state to commercial uses would add to the existing light and glare. The lighting proposed on the project site would be required to comply with General Plan Policy NCR-1.10, which encourages the use of measures to limit exterior light pollution and requires that outdoor lighting is directed downward; General Plan Policy PFS-8.10, which requires compatibility with the neighborhood context (i.e., commercial and industrial); General Plan Policy LU-8.12 addressing outdoor lighting fixtures and utilizing LED to provide maximum energy efficiency as well as effective lighting; and Municipal Code Section 30.50.44(c), which states that no unobstructed beam of exterior lighting shall be directed outward from the site toward any residential use or public right-of-way. The proposed project’s lighting would be constructed or located so that only the intended area is illuminated and off-site glare is fully controlled. Compliance with the policies and City code section above would reduce the potential for light pollution associated with the proposed project to a less-than-significant level. g. The proposed project does not include or require a wall or fence higher than seven feet above the existing grade at the property line. Gilroy Square 30 EMC Planning Group Inc. 2. AGRICULTURE 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 (LESA) (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: Comments: a. The California Department of Conservation identifies the project site as Other Land (California Department of Conservation 2018). Therefore, the project would not convert Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance to an urban use. b. The project site is zoned Shopping Center Commercial/Highway Commercial/General Industrial Planned Unit Development and land within the City’s urban growth boundary does not include any Williamson Act contracted lands (City of Gilroy 2020). Therefore, the project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. c. The project site is designated as Other Land by the California Department of Conservation and is surrounded by additional land designated as Other Land and Urban and Built-Up Land. The farmland located approximately 530 feet southwest of the site is designated as General Industrial in the General Plan and zoned Shopping Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a. Convert prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to an urban use (projects requiring a legislative act, such as zoning changes, annexation to the City, urban service area amendments, etc.)? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b. Conflict with a Williamson Act contract? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ c. 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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 31 Center Commercial/Highway Commercial/General Industrial Planned Unit Development. Therefore, the potential conversion of this nearby agricultural land to non-agricultural use has been evaluated by the General Plan EIR and the General Plan anticipates its conversion to non-agricultural uses. The farmland to the southwest is separated from the project site by Camino Arroyo and a vacant property and is adjacent to other non-agricultural uses. Therefore, the proposed project itself would not involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use. 32 EMC Planning Group Inc. Gilroy Square 3. AIR QUALITY 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: The emissions modeling used for this section was based on the original site plan for the proposed project, which was updated October 2022 and reduced in size. For the purposes of CEQA, it is not necessary for the modeling and analysis in this section to be updated due to the reduced size of the project. Comments: a.The City of Gilroy is located within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin and the boundary of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (air district). The air district adopted the current version of the Clean Air Plan in 2017 (Clean Air Plan). Consistency with the Clean Air Plan is based on conformance with air quality control measures presented in the Clean Air Plan. The air district’s Air Quality CEQA Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a.Conflict with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Clean Air Plan? ☐☒☐ ☐ b.Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? BAAQMD indicates that any project that would individually have a significant air quality impact would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality impact. ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c.Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d.Expose sensitive receptors (residential areas, schools, hospitals, nursing homes) to substantial pollutant concentrations (CO and PM10), as determined in b. above? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ e.Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 33 Guidelines (2017) (“air district CEQA guidelines”) Section 9.1 provides guidance on determining if a development project is consistent with the Clean Air Plan. For consistency a project should meet three criteria: 1) support the primary goals of the Clean Air Plan; 2) include applicable Clean Air Plan control measures; and 3) not disrupt or hinder implementation of any Clean Air Plan control measures. The primary goals of the Clean Air Plan are to attain air quality standards; to reduce population exposure to pollutants and protect public health in the Bay Area; and to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and protect the climate. This is considered to have been accomplished if there are no project-level significant impacts, or if significant impacts are mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Clean Air Plan Control measures potentially applicable to the proposed project are presented below in Table 2, Potentially Applicable Control Measures (2017 Clean Air Plan) along with a brief consistency analysis to determine how the project either does or does not implement the measure. Table 2 Potentially Applicable Control Measures (2017 Clean Air Plan) Control Measure Number and Name Consistency Analysis SS21 – New Source Review for Toxics Consistent. This policy is implemented by the air district as part of its permitting procedures for stationary sources of emissions. The proposed project’s operations may create new stationary sources, such as emergency back-up generators, which emit PM2.5 emissions and are subject to compliance with air district regulations for permitted stationary sources. SS32 Consistent. This policy reduces emissions of diesel PM and black carbon from BUGs through Draft Rule 11-18, resulting in reduced health risks to impacted individuals, and in climate protection benefits. See the response to Control Measure SS21, previous. SS36 – Particulate Matter from Trackout Consistent. This measure addresses mud/dirt and other solid track-out from construction, landfills, quarries and other bulk material sites, that result in particulate emissions. The proposed project shall implement dust control measures, which are standard conditions of approval for the city. Implementation of this standard condition will address mud and dirt that could be “tracked out” from the project construction site. SS38 – Fugitive Dust Consistent. This measure addresses particulate matter emissions from construction, landfills, quarries and other bulk material sites. Compliance with the city’s standard conditions of approval regarding dust control measures is required. TR8 – Ridesharing and Last-Mile Connections Consistent. This measure will reduce motor vehicle emissions of key ozone precursors, ROG and NOx, particulate matter, air toxics, and greenhouse gases by reducing single occupancy vehicle trips through the promotion of rideshare services and incentives. The project site is located within 500 feet of three bus stops for Route 84 operated by the Valley Transportation Authority. To promote further reductions in single-occupancy commuter trips to the site the project proponents of each proposed use could also provide rideshare program information and participate in the Santa Clara County EcoPass annual transit pass on South Bay transit systems. TR14 – Cars and Light Trucks Consistent with Mitigation. This measure promotes the use of electric vehicles or alternative fuels in commercial or industrial fleets to reduce emissions. In addition to vehicle buy-back programs and other funding incentives, the air district continues to partner with private, local, state and federal Gilroy Square 34 EMC Planning Group Inc. Control Measure Number and Name Consistency Analysis programs to install and expand public charging infrastructure, and promote existing charging infrastructure. The proposed project plans do not include charging stations for electric or hybrid vehicles. Mitigation measure GHG-1 in Section 8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, requires the inclusion of electric vehicle infrastructure (e.g., electric vehicle parking spaces, charging station infrastructure, chargers, etc.) consistent with CALGreen Tier 2 mandatory standards to be installed for each individual proposed use. TR18 – Goods Movement Consistent. This is a voluntary program for which the industrial use may qualify. This policy seeks to reduce emissions and exposures to them from freight movement. The measure includes incentive programs offered through the district to provide emission reductions that go beyond reductions required by CARB. Since 2009, the air district has invested approximately $100 million to reduce air pollution emissions and health risk from freight movement along California’s priority trade corridors. These funds have reduced truck emissions from thousands of heavy-duty diesel trucks (via retrofit or replacement) (BAAQMD 2017a), This measure reduces emissions of ROG and NOx, and diesel particulate matter associated with goods movement by providing incentive funding for diesel equipment owners to purchase cleaner‐than‐required vehicles and equipment. In addition, some projects implemented through this measure will reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. Regulations require upgrades to equipment in future years; the air district incentive programs offer funds for engine owners to upgrade equipment in advance of these regulations, thereby funding emission reductions that are not yet mandated. Incentive programs can also offer funds for reduction of pollutants that are not required, for example, NOx and ROG reductions, when only PM reductions are required. Best practices for increasing fleet efficiencies and emissions reductions include purchasing low emission vehicles, properly maintaining vehicles, minimizing fleet size, reducing reliance on petroleum-based transportation fuels, increasing use of locally produced renewable fuels, and encouraging efficient driving habits. This policy targets public and private vehicle fleets that include on-road light, medium and heavy-duty vehicles. Voluntary conformance with this policy would result in co-benefit reductions in mobile sources of ozone precursors and diesel particulate matter. Details on whether the proposed project would implement green fleet operations are not known at this time. This measure could be implemented by the proposed industrial project operator to the extent that it contracts with certified green fleets, and with other certified businesses that implement green fleets. The proposed industrial projects may qualify for these incentive programs. TR19 – Medium and Heavy-Duty Trucks Consistent. This is a voluntary program for which the industrial use may qualify. This policy includes incentive programs offered through the air district to provide emission reductions that go beyond reductions required by CARB. This measure will reduce emissions of ROG and NOx, and diesel particulate matter associated with goods movement by providing incentive funding for diesel equipment owners to purchase cleaner‐than‐required vehicles and equipment. In addition, some projects implemented through this measure will reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. Regulations require upgrades to equipment in future years; the air district incentive programs offer funds for engine owners to upgrade equipment in advance of these regulations, thereby funding emission reductions that are not yet mandated. Incentive programs can also offer funds for reduction of pollutants that are not required, for example, NOx and ROG reductions, when only PM reductions are required. This policy includes an air district program for the direct provision of incentives for the purchase of new trucks that meet CARB emission standards for heavy‐duty engines. This policy also meets CARB’s 2008 adopted regulation that requires truck fleets to meet progressively more stringent emission limits as calculated on a fleet-average basis. The proposed industrial project operators may qualify for these incentive programs. If the project operator qualifies for and participates in the incentive program, ozone precursor and diesel particulate matter emissions from truck fleets would be further reduced. BL1 – Green Buildings Consistent. Individual proposed uses would be required to meet standards in the most current version of the California Green Building Code Standards for Nonresidential Buildings (CalGreen, Title 24, Part 11). SOURCE: BAAQMD 2017, CalGreen 2022 Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 35 The proposed project would generate criteria air pollutant emissions, but not to the extent that significant impacts would occur (refer to the discussion in section b/c, below). The proposed project would generate toxic air contaminant emissions during construction, but not to the extent that the significant impacts couldn’t be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in significant air quality impacts, and supports the primary goals of the Clean Air Plan. The proposed project would create jobs and introduce new mobile sources of criteria pollutant and GHG emissions from employee vehicles. Mitigation Measure GHG-1 in Section 8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, requires the inclusion of electric vehicle infrastructure (e.g., electric vehicle parking spaces, charging station infrastructure, chargers, etc.) consistent with CALGreen Tier 2 mandatory standards to be installed for each individual proposed use. Therefore, the project is considered to be consistent with the Clean Air Plan and have a less-than-significant impact with the incorporation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1. b,c. The six most common and widespread air pollutants of concern, or “criteria pollutants,” are ground-level ozone, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and lead. In addition, reactive organic gases are a key contributor to the criteria air pollutants because they react with other substances to form ground-level ozone. Health effects of criteria air pollutants include asthma, bronchitis, chest pain, coughing, and heart diseases. The air district is the agency with the primary responsibility for assuring that national and state ambient air quality standards are attained and maintained in the air basin. Depending on whether or not the standards are met or exceeded, the air basin is classified as being in “attainment” or “nonattainment.” Table 3, San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin Attainment Status, identifies the current attainment status within the air basin for each criteria pollutant. Table 3 San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin Attainment Status Criteria Air Pollutants State Standards National Standards Ozone Non-attainment Non-attainment Respirable Particulate Matter Non-attainment Unclassified Fine Particulate Matter Non-attainment Non-attainment Carbon Monoxide Attainment Attainment Nitrogen Dioxide Attainment Attainment Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Unclassified/Attainment Lead - Attainment SOURCE: Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2017a Gilroy Square 36 EMC Planning Group Inc. The air district has developed thresholds of significance that are used to determine whether or not the proposed project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria air pollutants. The thresholds of significance for determining air quality impacts are contained in the 2017 CEQA Guidelines and are presented in Table 4, Thresholds of Significance for Criteria Air Pollutants. Table 4 Thresholds of Significance for Criteria Air Pollutants Criteria Air Pollutants Construction Thresholds Operational Thresholds Average Daily Emissions (lb./day) Average Daily Emissions (lb./day) Annual Emissions (tons/year) Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) 54 54 10 Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) 54 54 10 Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) 82 (exhaust)1 82 15 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 54 (exhaust)1 54 10 SOURCE: Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2017b NOTE: 1 -The thresholds of significance for particulate matter emissions from project construction apply to exhaust emissions only. The air district recommends implementation of best management practices to reduce construction fugitive dust emissions. Criteria air pollutant emissions generated by construction and operations of the three phases were modeled using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2020.4. Assumptions, methodology and results are included in Appendix B. Construction emissions include equipment exhaust emissions, emissions generated during the application of asphalt paving material and architectural coatings, as well as emissions of fugitive dust during demolition and grading. Proposed project operations would generate criteria air pollutant emissions. Operational emissions were estimated on an annual basis (tons per year). Unmitigated operational criteria air pollutant emissions in tons per year and pounds per day (365 days per year) are summarized in Table 5, Unmitigated Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions. Operational emissions would contribute to regional air quality but would not exceed the air district thresholds. Therefore, the project’s contribution of operational criteria air pollutant emissions to regional air quality conditions is less than cumulatively considerable. d. Toxic air contaminants (TACs) are pollutants that may be expected to result in an increase in mortality or serious illness or may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. Health effects include cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, damage to the body's natural defense system, and diseases that lead to death. TACs Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 37 are found in ambient air, especially in urban areas, and are caused by industry, agriculture, fuel combustion, and commercial operations (e.g., dry cleaners). Diesel exhaust is the predominant TAC in urban air and is estimated to represent about two- thirds of the cancer risk from TACs. Table 5 Unmitigated Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Emissions ROG NOX Total PM10 Total PM2.5 Phase 1a Total Annual Emissions (tons/year)1 .90 0.67 0.85 0.24 Average Daily Emissions (pounds/day)1,2 4.93 3.67 4.66 1.32 Phase 1b Total Annual Emissions (tons/year)1 1.29 0.91 1.21 0.35 Average Daily Emissions (pounds/day)1,2 7.07 4.99 6.63 1.92 Phase 2 Total Annual Emissions (tons/year)1 0.28 0.09 0.21 0.06 Average Daily Emissions (pounds/day)1,2 1.53 0.49 1.15 0.33 Total Annual Emissions (tons/year)1 2.47 1.67 2.27 0.65 Total Average Daily Emissions (pounds/day) 1,2 13.53 9.15 12.44 3.57 Exceeds Annual or Daily Threshold? NO NO NO NO SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2022 NOTES: 1. Results may vary due to rounding. 2. CalEEMod estimates operational criteria air pollutant emissions in tons per year. A U.S. ton is equal to 2,000 pounds. The emissions estimates in ton per year are multiped by 2,000 pounds to arrive at emissions volume in pounds per year. Average daily emissions (in pounds per day) are computed by dividing the annual operational emissions (in pounds per year) by the number of operational days (conservatively assuming 365 days of operation). Although air pollution can affect all segments of the population, certain groups are more susceptible to its adverse effects than others. Children, the elderly, and the chronically or acutely ill are the most sensitive population groups. These sensitive receptors are commonly associated with specific land uses such as residential areas, schools, retirement homes, and hospitals. In addition, certain air pollutants, such as carbon monoxide, only have significant effects if they directly affect a sensitive population. There are no sensitive receptors located within 1,000 feet of the project site. Therefore, construction and operations of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptor to CO and PM10 and is considered to have a less than significant impact. Gilroy Square 38 EMC Planning Group Inc. e. Land uses creating objectionable odors include heavy industrial and some agricultural practices. The proposed project is a commercial and industrial development consisting of a fast-food restaurant, two hotels, and two industrial warehouses, and therefore, would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 39 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: Comments: A reconnaissance‐level biological field survey was conducted by EMC Planning Group biologist Patrick Furtado on June 24, 2022, to verify conditions described in the biological reports, document existing plant communities/wildlife habitats and evaluate the potential for Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant 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 Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ 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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 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, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ 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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Gilroy Square 40 EMC Planning Group Inc. special‐status species to occur on the project site. Biological resources were documented in field notes, including species observed, dominant plant communities, and significant wildlife habitat characteristics. Qualitative estimations of plant cover, structure, and spatial changes in species composition were used to determine plant communities and wildlife habitats, and habitat quality and disturbance level were described. Prior to conducting the survey, Mr. Furtado reviewed site plans, aerial photographs, natural resource database accounts, and other relevant scientific literature. This included searching the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Endangered Species Database (USFWS 2022a), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2022), and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (CNPS 2022) to identify special-status plants, wildlife, and habitats known to occur in the vicinity of the project site. Special-status species in this report are those listed as Endangered, Threatened, or Rare, or as Candidates for listing by the USFWS and/or CDFW; as Species of Special Concern or Fully Protected species by the CDFW; or as Rare Plant Rank 1B or 2B species by the CNPS. The project site is located within the city of Gilroy approximately 0.3 miles east of U.S. Highway 101 along Camino Arroyo. Pacheco Pass Highway (State Route 152) is immediately north of the project site, vacant land to the northeast, southeast, and south, industrial development to the east, and commercial development to the west. Elevation is approximately 180 feet. According to historical aerial photographs, the site was used for row crop agriculture until approximately 2002. The site is currently vacant with one tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima) located in the center of the parcel. Paved and non-paved access roads crisscross the site and illegal dumping has occurred in a few locations. Signs of grading and/or vegetation management were visible throughout the site. Wildlife habitat quality on the project site is considered low due to previous disturbance from agricultural activities and ongoing vegetation management. The site is dominated by scattered ruderal (weedy) plants, such as non-native wild oat (Avena sp.), cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), and native narrowleaf milkweed (Asclepias fascicularis). Striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis) was observed during the survey, as well as scattered California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi) burrows. Other common mammal species that could possibly occur include raccoon (Procyon lotor), and Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana); common reptiles may include western fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis) and common garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis). Species of small rodents including mice (Mus musculus, Reithrodontomys megalotis, and Peromyscus maniculatus) and California vole (Microtus californicus) may also occur. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 41 a. Special-Status Species. A search of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) was conducted for the Mount Madonna, Gilroy, Gilroy Hot Springs, Watsonville East, Chittenden, San Felipe, Prunedale, San Juan Bautista, and Hollister USGS quadrangles to generate a list of potentially occurring special-status species in the project vicinity (CDFW 2022). Records of occurrence for special-status plants were reviewed for those nine USGS quadrangles in the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (CNPS 2022). A U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Endangered Species Program threatened and endangered species list was also generated for Santa Clara County (USFWS 2022). Appendix D includes tables with CNDDB results, which list special-status species documented within the project vicinity, their listing status and suitable habitat description, and their potential to occur on the site. Figure 10, Special-Status Species Recorded in the Project Vicinity, presents a map with CNDDB results. Critical habitat is a designation used by the USFWS for specific geographic areas that contain features essential to the conservation of an endangered or threatened species and that may require special management and protection. The project site is not within a critical habitat area. No special-status plant species were observed during surveys conducted during the reconnaissance-level survey conducted in June 2022. Given the existing level of disturbance on the project site, special-status plants are not expected to occur on the site due to lack of suitable habitat. Special-status wildlife species recorded as occurring in the vicinity of the project site but are not likely to occur due to lack of suitable habitat include San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica), California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense), California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor), least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus), and hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus). Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), a California Species of Special Concern, and nesting birds protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the California Fish and Game Code have low potential to occur on the project site and are discussed further below. Burrowing Owl. Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) is a California Species of Special Concern. Burrowing owls live and breed in burrows in the ground, especially in abandoned California 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. This species is known to occur approximately 5.0 miles southeast of the site (CNDDB 2022). Gilroy Square 42 EMC Planning Group Inc. Signs of burrowing owl were not observed during surveys conducted during the reconnaissance-level survey. However, this species is highly mobile, and the project site contains open fields that provide marginally suitable foraging habitat for burrowing owl, and a few scattered small mammal burrows could be utilized for nesting habitat. If burrowing owl is present on or adjacent to the project site, construction activities could result in the loss or disturbance of individual animals. This would be a significant adverse environmental impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce this potential, significant impact to less than significant. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 To avoid/minimize impacts to burrowing owls potentially occurring within the project site, the project applicant shall retain a biologist qualified in ornithology to conduct surveys for burrowing owl. The approved biologist shall conduct a two- visit (i.e., morning and evening) presence/absence survey at areas of suitable habitat on and adjacent to the project site boundary no less than 14 days prior to the start of construction or ground disturbance activities. Surveys shall be conducted according to methods described in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012). The applicant shall submit evidence of completion of the preconstruction survey to the City of Gilroy Planning Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. Because burrowing owls occupy habitat year-round, seasonal no-disturbance buffers, as outlined in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), shall be in place around occupied habitat prior to and during any ground disturbance activities. The following table includes buffer areas based on the time of year and level of disturbance (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), unless a qualified biologist approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife verifies through non-invasive measures that either: 1) birds have not begun egg laying and incubation; or 2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. Location Time of Year Level of Disturbance Buffers (meters) Low Med High Nesting Sites April 1 – Aug 15 200 m 500 m 500 m Nesting Sites Aug 16 – Oct 15 200 m 200 m 500 m Nesting Sites Oct 16 – Mar 31 50 m 100 m 500 m Gilroy Square 44 EMC Planning Group Inc. This side intentionally left blank. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 45 If burrowing owl is found and avoidance is not possible, burrow exclusion may be conducted by qualified biologists only during the non-breeding season, before breeding behavior is exhibited and after the burrow is confirmed empty through non-invasive methods, such as surveillance. Occupied burrows shall be replaced with artificial burrows at a ratio of one collapsed burrow to one constructed artificial burrow (1:1). Evicted burrowing owls may attempt to colonize or re- colonize an area that would be impacted, thus ongoing surveillance during project activities shall be conducted at a rate sufficient to detect burrowing owls if they return. If surveys locate occupied burrows in or near construction areas, consultation with the CDFW shall occur to interpret survey results and develop a project- specific avoidance and minimization approach. Nesting Birds. Nesting birds could occur on the ground on the project site, the tree located on the site, or within trees adjacent to the site. Species of special concern white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) and/or loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) may forage in open fields on the site. Future construction activities may impact nesting birds protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code, should nesting birds be present during construction. If protected bird species are nesting adjacent to the project site during the bird nesting season (January 15 through September 15), then noise-generating construction activities could result in the loss of fertile eggs, nestlings, or otherwise lead to the abandonment of nests. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce potential, significant impacts to nesting birds to less than significant. Mitigation Measure BIO-2 To avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), to the extent feasible, construction activities that include any vegetation removal or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) shall be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If construction activities commence during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project construction. If construction activities are scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. Two surveys for active nests of such birds shall occur within 10 days prior to start of construction, with the second survey Gilroy Square 46 EMC Planning Group Inc. conducted with 48 hours prior to start of construction. Appropriate minimum survey radius surrounding the work area is typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. If no nesting activity is observed, a report shall be submitted to the City of Gilroy and disturbance activities may comments. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, a minimum no- disturbance buffer of 250 feet around active nests of non-listed bird species and a 500-foot no-disturbance buffer around active nests of non-listed raptors shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily, or as otherwise required by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. This measure shall be implemented by the developer prior to start of construction activities. b. Riparian Habitat or Sensitive Natural Communities. There were no riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities observed at the project site. Impacts to riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities within the project site are not anticipated. c. Wetlands and Waters of the U.S. A review of the National Wetlands Inventory online database was conducted to identify the closest jurisdictional aquatic features on or adjacent to the project site (USFWS 2022). No features were shown in the National Wetlands Inventory for the site and no potentially jurisdictional aquatic features were observed during the June 2022 surveys. d. Wildlife Movement. Terrestrial species must navigate a habitat landscape that meets their needs for breeding, feeding and shelter. Natural and semi-natural components of the landscape must be large enough and connected enough to meet the needs of all species that use them. Wildlife movement corridors provide connectivity between habitat areas, enhancing species richness and diversity, and usually also provide cover, water, food, and breeding sites. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 47 Large scale habitat linkages have been identified throughout California. Habitat linkages/corridors facilitate wildlife movement between populations located in discrete locales. Habitat fragmentation due to development and the creation of human-made impassable barriers can impede wildlife movement. The CDFW and California Department of Transportation commissioned the California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project to produce a statewide assessment of essential habitat connectivity using the best available science, data sets, spatial analyses and modeling techniques. The subject parcel has not been designated within a corridor. Therefore, impacts to wildlife movement as a result the of the proposed project are considered negligible. e. Local Biological Resource Policies/Ordinances. The City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan has goals in place for conserving natural resources. The Natural and Cultural Resources Element establishes goals, policies, and programs to preserve and enhance Gilroy’s natural areas, plant and wildlife habitats, wetlands and streams, scenic views, and historic or culturally significant resources. Mitigation measures contained in this section will mitigate impacts to biological resources to a less than significant level. With these considerations, the proposed project would not conflict with local regulations related to biological resources. Trees. Chapter 26 of the Gilroy Municipal Code includes the regulations for tree removal. A permit is required for the removal of a tree 38 inches in circumference or larger of following species; all species of oaks, California bay, big leaf maple, madrone, California sycamore, California buckeye and alder. In addition, removal of any type of tree 90 inches in circumference or larger requires a tree removal permit. The proposed project would remove one non-native tree of heaven. This species is not identified as requiring a permit for removal; therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with local regulations related to protected trees. f. Conservation Plans. The Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan (SCVHP) is a 50-year regional plan to protect endangered species and natural resources while allowing for future development in southern Santa Clara Valley. It is both a habitat conservation plan and natural community conservation plan, or HCP/NCCP. The SCVHP is a regional partnership between six local partners (the County of Santa Clara, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, Santa Clara Valley Water District, and the cities of San Jose, Gilroy, and Morgan Hill) and two Wildlife Agencies (the CDFW and the USFWS). Gilroy Square 48 EMC Planning Group Inc. According to the Geobrowser (Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency 2022), a portion of the project site is located within the Habitat Plan permit area, Fee Zone B (agricultural and valley floor lands), and is designated “California annual grassland and urban - suburban”. The project site is not located within a designated area requiring additional plant or wildlife surveys. A SCVHP permit application and associated fees will be processed at the time of application for planning approvals and grading and/or building permits from the City of Gilroy. Obtaining the permit will comply with the requirements of the SCVHP and no further measures are necessary. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 49 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: Comments: This section is based on the Cultural Resource Evaluation of Lands for the Gilroy Shopping Center Project off Pacheco Pass Highway in the City of Gilroy (archaeological report) prepared by Archaeological Resource Management in May 2000 as well as an updated Northwest Information Central archival search July 28, 2022. The archaeological report noted that non- significant historic ceramics and glass were recorded within the project boundaries and that the existing abandoned agricultural building and barn structures, less than fifty-years-old, were present. The Cultural Resource Evaluation report revealed that while no prehistoric cultural resources were discovered during the reconnaissance survey, there is a possible site located within the project area’s boundaries. The archaeological report’s, Northwest Information Center (NWIC) archival search revealed that there is a presence of a possible site, and it was originally noted on the Cabrillo College maps, yet there was no written description of the site on file at the Northwest Information Center. In addition, the archaeological report noted that the, “lands in the Santa Clara Valley have frequently revealed prehistoric deposits buried beneath alluvial soils.” This makes Santa Clara Valley an archaeologically sensitive area. According to the updated NWIC archival search there are no resources within the project area. There are three resources within a ¼ mile of the radius area. The first resource is a fruit stand that does not meet the significance criteria for the National Register of Historic Places. The second resource is a commercial building built in the 1940s and due to the building’s lack of historic associations and architectural significance, the building does not appear to meet the criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The third resource is a toll road built in 1857. Although this route has been used since prehistoric times through the Spanish, Mexican, and American eras the road does not retain any integrity to any of the Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in section 15064.5? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to section 15064.5? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Gilroy Square 50 EMC Planning Group Inc. historic eras. In addition, the road itself as an engineering structure is also not likely to yield information important to history. The updated NWIC search did include the informal resource, the possible site at Cabrillo College, which is mentioned in the 2000 report. But, the NWIC could not find the record and the report has been missing from its database since 2016. There are four reports located within the project area. The properties evaluated in report S- 026048 do not meet the significance criteria for the National Register of Historic Places. Reports S-024117 and S-027657 did not find any cultural materials during the archaeological reconnaissance survey. Report S-044039 is the Historic Building Study Volume 1. None of the properties mentioned in the study will be impacted by the proposed project. There are six reports located within a ¼ mile radius of the project area. Report S-006355 did identify groundstone fragments, a shaped pestle- like stone object, two flakes, and ecofacts. The ecofacts were two pieces of marine or estuarine shell, oyster, and clam. The authors of the 1984 report called these artifacts isolates instead of determining it to be an archaeological site. The authors believed that the artifacts had been brought to the surface by agricultural activities and that the artifacts did not appear to represent larger sites with integrity and scientific importance. Report S-014475 survey noted a scattering of a few fragments of pismo clam shell and an abalone fragment throughout the parcel of land. The reported noted that the shell fragments observed were both species that have been utilized historically and that there was no clear concentration of the shells. The remaining reports did not uncover any prehistoric or historic materials. a,b. While the known historic resources either lack integrity to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places or are at a distance that the resources will not be impacted by the project, unknown buried historic or unique archaeological resources could be present at the project site and could be damaged or destroyed by ground-disturbing construction activities (e.g., site preparation, grading, excavation, and trenching) associated with the proposed construction. This would be considered a significant impact. The following City of Gilroy Standard Condition of Approval would reduce the potential impact to a less-than-significant level. Standard Condition of Approval In the event of an accidental discovery of archaeological resources during grading or construction activities, Developer shall include the following language on any grading, site work, and construction plans issued for the project site: “If archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during earth-moving, grading, or construction activities, all work shall be halted within at least 50 meters (165 feet) of the find and the area shall be staked off immediately. The monitoring professional Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 51 archaeologist, if one is onsite, shall be notified and evaluate the find. If a monitoring professional archaeologist is not onsite, the City shall be notified immediately and a qualified professional archaeologist shall be retained (at Developer’s expense) to evaluate the find and report to the City. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated by the professional archaeologist and implemented by the responsible party.” c. Although, none of the reports recorded human remains, there remains the possibility that ground disturbing activities associated with the proposed project could damage or destroy previously undiscovered Native American human remains. Disturbance of Native American human remains is considered a significant impact. The following Standard Condition of Approval would reduce this potential impact to a less-than- significant level. Standard Condition of Approval In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, Developer shall include the following language in all grading, site work, and construction plans: “If human remains are found during earth-moving, grading, or construction activities, 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 Santa Clara 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.” 52 EMC Planning Group Inc. Gilroy Square 6. ENERGY Would the project: Comments: The analysis in this section was based on the original site plan for the proposed project, which was updated October 2022 and reduced in size. For the purposes of CEQA, it is not necessary for the information herein to be updated due to the reduced size of the project. a.Energy impacts are assessed based on the proposed project energy demand profile and on its relationship to the state’s energy efficiency regulations and the Town’s land use planning regulations. Both are summarized below. Projected Energy Use. The proposed project would increase demand for electricity, natural gas and transportation fuel. A summary of projected energy demand is provided below. Regarding electricity demand, according to the California Energy Commission Energy Consumption Data Management System, in 2020, total electricity consumption in Santa Clara County was 16,435,721,919 kilowatt-hours (kWh). Section 5.3, Energy by Land Use – Electricity, in the project CalEEMod results included in Appendix B show projected electricity demand would be approximately 1,456,311 kWh per year. Projected electricity demand would be less than 0.01 percent of countywide demand in 2020. Regarding natural gas, the Energy Consumption Data Management System database shows that in 2020, total natural gas consumption in Stanislaus County was 418,684,416 therms. Section 5.2, Energy by Land Use – Natural Gas, in the project CalEEMod results included in Appendix B show that projected natural gas demand would be about 11,473,310 BTU per year or approximately 11.4 therms per year. This is less .00001 percent of countywide demand in 2020. As described in Section 8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this initial study, a mitigation measure has been Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a.Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b.Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 53 included that would prohibit use of natural gas in all but the planned fast food use. Per the CalEEMod results in Appendix B, natural gas consumption for the entire project is projected at 11.5 therms (the sum of natural gas consumption for all three project phases as modeled). Natural gas demand from the fast-food use is projected at 0.5 therms. Total project demand would, therefore, be reduced from 11.5 therms to 11 therms, a decline of about 95 percent. The proposed project would generate traffic trips. With increased traffic volume and vehicle miles traveled relative to an undeveloped site, transportation fuel consumption would increase. The sum of VMT calculated for each of the project phases as reported in Appendix B is approximately 6,027,447 miles per year. The Emissions Factor Model was used to calculate fuel demand based on the vehicle miles traveled. The model uses vehicle miles traveled as an input, with one of the outputs being transportation fuel demand. The results, included in Appendix C, show that annual fuel demand would be about 224,847 gallons. The analysis in Section 17, Transportation, concludes that the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact from vehicle miles traveled. This suggests that transportation fuel demand may be lower than would be expected for a project whose vehicle miles traveled impact is significant. Regulatory Requirements. A multitude of state regulations and legislative acts are aimed at improving vehicle fuel efficiency, energy efficiency, and enhancing energy conservation. For example, the Pavley I standards focus on transportation fuel efficiency. The gradual increased use of electric cars powered with cleaner electricity will reduce consumption of fossil fuel. Vehicle miles traveled are expected to decline with the continuing implementation of Senate Bill 743, resulting in less vehicle travel and less fuel consumption. In the renewable energy use sector, representative legislation for the use of renewable energy includes, but is not limited to, Senate Bill 350 and Executive Order B-16-12. In the building energy use sector, representative legislation and standards for reducing natural gas and electricity consumption include, but are not limited to, Assembly Bill 2021, CALGreen, and the California Building Standards Code. The California Building Standards Code is enforceable at the project level. The California Energy Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6), which is incorporated into the California Building Standards Code, was first established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The California Energy Code is updated every three years by the California Energy Commission as the Building Energy Efficiency Standards to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and construction Gilroy Square 54 EMC Planning Group Inc. methods. The most recent version of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards was approved in 2022 and is scheduled to become effective on January 1, 2023. The Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), which requires all new buildings in the state to be more energy efficient and environmentally responsible, was also most recently updated in July 2022 and scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2023. These comprehensive regulations are intended to achieve major reductions in interior and exterior building energy consumption. A project could be considered to result in significant environmental effects due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy if its energy demand is extraordinary relative to common land use types, its gross energy demand is excessive relative to total demand in Santa Clara County, and/or it fails to comply with energy efficiency/conservation regulations that are within the applicant’s control. The project is a common land use type. The project energy demand would not be excessive relative to total countywide demand or relative to other land use projects and would not inherently be a source of wasteful energy demand. The project applicant would be required to comply with Title 24 of the current California Building Code standards and with CALGreen standards that reduce energy demand. The City of Gilroy enforces these standards through the development review process and building permit process. That enforcement is the primary mechanism through which the applicant would be required to implement energy efficiency/conservation measures. The proposed project would consume energy, but it would not be inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant. b. There are no regulations at the local level that would mandate that the proposed project must include on-site renewable energy sources. The California Building Standards Code requires the proposed project to be built to the Building Energy Efficiency Standards in effect at the time the building permit is issued. Section 140.10 – Prescriptive Requirements for Photovoltaic and Battery Storage Systems of the standards identify that all use types included in the proposed project must install solar photovoltaic and battery energy storage systems. By incorporating renewable energy systems and meeting energy efficiency standards the project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 55 7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: Comments: The analysis presented below has been written against the backdrop of CEQA case law addressing the scope of analysis required for potential impacts resulting from existing environmental hazards found at the site or in the vicinity of a site for a proposed project. In California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369, 377, the California Supreme Court held that “agencies subject to CEQA generally are not required to analyze the impact of existing environmental conditions on a Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a.Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: (1)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 Publication 42. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ (2)Strong seismic ground shaking?☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ (3)Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ (4)Landslides?☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b.Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ☐☒☐ ☐ 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? ☐☒☐ ☐ d.Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the California Building Code (2001), creating substantial risks to life or property? ☐☒☐☐ Gilroy Square 56 EMC Planning Group Inc. project’s future users or residents” (italics added). The court reasoned that “ordinary CEQA analysis is concerned with a project’s impact on the environment, rather than with the environment’s impact on a project and its users or residents” (Id. at p. 378). The court did not hold, however, that CEQA never requires consideration of the effects of existing environmental conditions on the future occupants or users of a proposed project. But the circumstances in which such conditions may be considered are narrow: “when a proposed project risks exacerbating those environmental hazards or conditions that already exist, an agency must analyze the potential impact of such hazards on future residents or users. In those specific instances, it is the project’s impact on the environment—and not the environment’s impact on the project—that compels an evaluation of how future residents or users could be affected by exacerbated conditions” (Id. at pp. 377-378, italics added). The information provided in this section largely comes from the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation - Proposed Staybridge Suites and Springhill Suites, 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy, California Project No. 042-19041 (“geotechnical report”) prepared for a portion of the project by Krazan and Associates on January 30, 2020. The remaining southern portion of the project site (roughly four acres) consists of similar soils as those evaluated in the geotechnical report as all soils on the project site are silty clay soils. Therefore, the geotechnical report generally addresses the soils associated with all of the project site. a. Fault Rupture. No known fault crosses the subject site, and that site is not located in a Fault-Rupture Hazard Zone as established by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zoning Act (Krazan and Associates 2020). The nearest fault zone is approximately three miles northeast of the project site. Therefore, the proposed project is not expected to expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving a known earthquake fault. Seismic Ground Shaking. The General Plan EIR states that existing and future development associated with buildout of the General Plan would be exposed to seismic ground shaking to the extent that human harm and/or property damage could occur, which would be considered a significant, adverse environmental impact. Further, the geotechnical report states that the project site may be subject to strong ground shaking. Therefore, the proposed project would be required to comply with the seismic design provisions outlined in the California Building Code to ensure that impacts related to seismic ground shaking would be less than significant. Liquefaction. The proposed project is not located within a liquefaction hazard zone, the nearest being approximately 11 miles northwest (California Department of Conservation 2021). Further, the geotechnical report indicates that based on the soil profile of the project site, there is a very low risk of liquefaction occurring at the site Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 57 during a design level earthquake (Krazan and Associates 2020, p. 4). Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects associated with liquefaction. Landslides. The proposed project is not located within a landslide hazard zone, the nearest being approximately 11 miles northwest (California Department of Conservation 2021). In addition, the geotechnical report states that due to the relatively level nature of the site and vicinity, the site would not be subject to landslide hazards (p. 4). Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects associated with a landslide. b. The General Plan EIR states that the potential for soil erosion within the northern, central, and eastern portions of the Urban Growth Boundary varies from none to slight in areas with slopes of less than ten percent. The project site is in the eastern portion of the Urban Growth Boundary and city limits and is relatively flat. The General Plan EIR determines that the majority of construction activities, consistent with the General Plan, will likely occur on relatively flat slopes where soil erosion potential ranges from none to slight and, therefore, impacts from soil erosion will likely be limited. The grading plan, Sheet C4 of the project plans, indicates that grading will consist of 7,405 cubic yards of cut and 5,485 cubic yards of fill, for a net cut (soil export) of 1,920 cubic yards. Development of the proposed project has the potential to result in soil erosion, which could be a significant impact. Due to the amount of disturbance on the site (10.07 acres) during grading activities, soil erosion could be considered a significant impact. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce this potential impact to a less-than- significant level. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 The developer shall prepare an erosion control plan that details appropriate methods to prevent and/or minimize erosion. The erosion control plan is subject to the review and approval of the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. In addition to the mitigation above, the proposed project would be required to comply with the General Plan Policy PH 2.6 with its Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan, which requires all new development proposals to include a site plan detailing appropriate methods of erosion and deposition control during site development and subsequent use; and General Plan Policy PH 3.6, which requires new development to include landscaped areas for reducing runoff and increasing Gilroy Square 58 EMC Planning Group Inc. runoff absorption capacities and encourages the use of permeable paving materials, which would minimize the erosive effects of storm water (refer to Sheet C6 of the project plans illustrating the drainage management areas proposed on the site). c,d. According to the geotechnical report, the soil profile on the project site results in a very low risk of liquefaction or seismic settlement occurring at the project site during a design level earthquake. However, the geotechnical report indicates that the site’s soils are disturbed, have low strength characteristics, and are highly compressible when saturated resulting in the recommendation that the surface soils be recompacted. The compaction effort should stabilize the surface soils and locate any unsuitable or pliant areas not found during the geotechnical report’s field investigation (p. 7). The onsite clayey soils also appear to have a moderate to high swell potential that may cause movement affecting slabs and brittle exterior finishes. To reduce this potential soil movement, the geotechnical report recommends that the upper 30 inches of soil be replaced with non-expansive fill. Therefore, in order to reduce potential impacts related to the instability of the site soils, the proposed project would be required to implement the mitigation presented below. Mitigation Measure GEO-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall implement the recommendations outlined in the geotechnical report prepared for the proposed project including, but not limited to: Recompact the surface soils; Fill material to be excavated and stockpiled so that the native soils can be prepared properly, with inspection of the bottom of the excavation by a qualified geotechnical engineer to verify no additional removal is required; and Replace the upper 30 inches of soil within slab-on-grade and exterior flatwork areas with non-expansive fill to reduce the potential soil movement. Implementation of the recommendations outlined in the geotechnical report, as required by Mitigation Measure GEO-2, would reduce the risk associated with unstable soils located on the site to result in exposure of people or structures to potential risk of loss, injury, or death. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 59 8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: Comments: The emissions modeling used for this section was based on the original site plan for the proposed project, which was updated October 2022 and reduced in size. For the purposes of CEQA, it is not necessary for the modeling and analysis in this section to be updated due to the reduced size of the project. a. The proposed project will generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions primarily from transportation, energy use, water and wastewater, and solid waste disposal sources. The project will contribute to the cumulative accumulation of GHG emissions in the atmosphere. Human activity has increased the intensity of the greenhouse effect by releasing increasing amounts of GHGs into the atmosphere. GHG emissions that are already in the atmosphere will continue to cause climate change for years, just as warming being experienced now is the result of emissions produced in the past. GHGs in the atmosphere result in increased air, surface, and ocean temperatures. Many of the effects and impacts of climate change stem from resulting changes in temperature and meteorological responses to those changes. Effects of climate change include: reduced snowpack, more frequent and extreme storm events, sea level rise, reduced water supply availability, diminished air quality, increased wildfire hazards, increased public health concerns, and ecosystem changes. These effects are global and cumulative. That is, the contribution of any single land use development project to any one or more of these effects cannot be isolated. Federal, state, and local governments have adopted statutes, regulations, and plans to reduce GHG emissions from land use projects like the proposed project. California has been at the forefront of addressing climate change and employs a suite of statutes, regulations and guidance to implement the statutes, and executive orders for this purpose. The statutes can be categorized into four broad categories: (i) statutes Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ Gilroy Square 60 EMC Planning Group Inc. setting numerical statewide targets for GHG reductions, and authorizing California Air Resources Board to enact regulations to achieve such targets; (ii) statutes setting separate targets for increasing the use of renewable energy for the generation of electricity throughout the state; (iii) statutes addressing the carbon intensity of vehicle fuels, which prompted the adoption of regulations by California Air Resources Board; and (iv) statutes intended to facilitate land use planning consistent with statewide climate objectives. Projected Project GHG Emissions. GHG emissions from the project have been estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model. Please refer to Appendix B, which includes a memorandum that summarizes the modeling process, assumptions and results. Once completely built out, the project is projected to generate 2,513.76 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (MT CO2e) from operations of all proposed uses. Projected emissions are reported here for informational purposes only. As described below, analysis of the project’s GHG impact significance is based on project design performance standards rather than the volume of emissions it produces. Thresholds of Significance. The City of Gilroy has not adopted a plan for reducing GHGs, nor has the City adopted a threshold of significance for GHGs. Local agencies that have not adopted their own plans or other guidance commonly refer to guidance from regional air districts for assessing the impacts of GHGs. Such GHG reduction plans are commonly adopted to guide local agencies in reducing their fair share of GHG emissions to help meet statewide GHG reduction targets. The city is located within boundary of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (“air district”). The air district manages air quality in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin within which the city is located. To analyze GHG impacts of the project, the City is referencing the air district’s guidance regarding GHG thresholds of significance. That guidance is found in the Justification Report: CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts from Land Use Projects and Plans (Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2022). The thresholds of significance have been crafted to apply to land use development projects, including residential, commercial and office developments. The thresholds are performance-based project design standards. Individual projects that incorporate the design standards are deemed to contribute their fair share towards reducing GHG emissions consistent with California Senate Bill 32 and with California Executive Order B-55-18. Senate Bill 32 establishes a statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The executive order, for which the California Air Resources Board has recently adopted implementing regulations, establishes a goal of achieving statewide carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The air district guidance includes the substantial evidence to support the thresholds. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 61 The air district analyzed what will be required of new land use development projects to achieve California’s carbon neutrality goal. New land use development projects must be designed to achieve either A or B as listed below: A. Projects must include, at a minimum, the following project design elements: 1. Buildings: a. The project will not include natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing (in both residential and nonresidential development). b. The project will not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy usage as determined by the analysis required under CEQA Section 21100(b)(3) and Section 15126.2(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines. 2. Transportation: a. The project will achieve a reduction in project-generated VMT below the regional average consistent with the current version of the California Climate Change Scoping Plan (currently 15 percent) or meet a locally adopted Senate Bill 743 VMT target, reflecting the recommendations provided in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research's Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA: i. Residential projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per capita. ii. Office projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per employee. iii. Retail projects: no net increase in existing VMT. b. The project will achieve compliance with off-street electric vehicle requirements in the most recently adopted version of CALGreen Tier 2. (Note: The CALGreen Tier 2 EV requirements address design elements that include designating EV charging parking spaces, installing EV charging station electrical infrastructure, and installing EV charging stations). OR B. Projects must be consistent with a local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b). Gilroy Square 62 EMC Planning Group Inc. The air district concludes that if a project is designed and built to meet the design standards, a lead agency can conclude that the project will not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change. The City has determined that while it will reference the air district guidance as a framework plan for reducing GHG emissions, there may be individual project circumstances where exceptions may be needed. Such exceptions could occur, for example, when one or more of the performance standards is not deemed functionally or financially feasible such that requiring strict conformance could inhibit the City’s broad social and/or economic development goals. Project Conformance with GHG Performance Standards and Impact Significance. To date, the project applicant has not identified specific features that would be included in the project for GHG reduction purposes. The status of project consistency with the noted performance standards is summarized in Table 6, Consistency with GHG Reduction Performance Standards. The project is not consistent with two of the four GHG performance standards. Consequently, the project would have a significant impact from generating GHG emissions. Table 6 Consistency with GHG Reduction Performance Standards Performance Standard Project Status Consistent? Buildings No Natural Gas Appliances or Plumbing Project as proposed does not include prohibition on natural gas use. Proposed fast-food component of project would include natural gas infrastructure No No wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary energy use Energy use will be minimal and not wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary (see Section 6 of this initial study) Yes Transportation VMT Impact is Less than Significant Transportation analysis concludes VMT impact is less than significant with mitigation (Section 12 of this initial study). Yes Comply with CALGreen Tier 2 EV Standards Project as proposed does not include electric vehicle infrastructure improvements No Source: EMC Planning Group 2022 The following mitigation measures require planned individual project uses to meet the no natural gas and electric vehicle infrastructure performance standards. The fast- food use is an exception to meeting the natural gas performance standard. The City Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 63 has determined that this performance standard is functionally infeasible for the fast food use. However, mitigation is included which requires the use to mitigate for the GHG emissions it generates, and to install electricity supply wiring to enable converting its natural gas-powered equipment to electricity-powered equipment in the future. As shown in Table 5.2, Energy by Land Use – Natural Gas of the CalEEMod results for phase 1a of the project found in Appendix B, the fast-food use would generate approximately 28.9 MT CO2e of GHGs per year from natural gas use (approximately 25 percent of the total project natural gas demand). This is this volume of GHG emissions that must be mitigated. The following mitigation measures are proposed to reduce the significant GHG impact to less than significant. Mitigation Measures GHG-1 The proposed project shall be designed to meet the following performance standards: a. With exception of the planned fast-food use, no permanent natural gas infrastructure shall be permitted as part of the improvement plans for any other individual project uses. These uses shall be all electric; and b. Electric vehicle infrastructure (e.g., electric vehicle parking spaces, charging station infrastructure, chargers, etc.) consistent with CALGreen Tier 2 mandatory standards in effect at the time individual building permits are issued, shall be installed at each individual proposed use. GHG-2 The applicant shall: a. Prepare a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan which identifies one or more GHG reduction actions that will be taken to reduce GHG emissions from the proposed fast food use by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year to offset emissions produced by using natural gas. The GHG Reduction Plan shall prioritize on-site GHG reduction design features. In lieu of or in addition to one or more of the on-site measures above, the applicant may make direct investments in off-site GHG reduction activities/programs in the vicinity. Examples include building retrofit programs that pay for cool roofs, solar panels, solar water heaters, smart meters, energy efficient lighting energy efficient windows, and insulation. Other examples include financing programs for installing electric vehicle charging stations, electrifying school buses, or planting local urban forests. Gilroy Square 64 EMC Planning Group Inc. The applicant may retain a qualified air quality / GHG professional to quantify the GHG reductions from implementing the Reduction Plan using substantial evidence to be included in the Reduction Plan. If the applicant elects to quantify the GHG emissions reductions from on-site measures and/or investments in off-site reduction programs and the reductions are less than insufficient to reduce project emissions by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year, the applicant may secure the reduction balance by purchasing and retiring carbon offset credits. The carbon offset credits shall meet the following standards: Carbon offset credits shall be issued by a recognized, reputable and accredited registry that mandates the use of established protocols for quantifying and issuing the offset credits. Credits issued based on protocols approved by the California Air Resources Board should be prioritized. Examples of such registries include the Climate Action Reserve, American Carbon Registry, and Vierra. The carbon offset credits should be generated from projects developed in the United States. Credits from projects developed internationally should not be used unless the applicant demonstrates with substantial evidence that sufficient carbon offsets from projects in the United States are unavailable. International offsets must be quantified and issued using established protocols that are recognized in the United States and that are issued by recognized, reputable and accredited registries. All carbon offset credits purchased to reduce GHG emissions, must meet the criteria of being real, quantifiable, permanent, verifiable, enforceable, and additional, consistent with the standards set forth in Health and Safety Code section 38562, subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(2). Prior to the City issuing a building permit for the fast food use, the applicant shall submit the GHG Reduction Plan for review and approval of the City of Gilroy. If carbon offsets are proposed, prior to approval of a building permit, the applicant shall provide an executed contract or other certification to the City Planner that the requisite volume carbon offset credits have been purchased. b. The planned fast food use shall include all electricity pre-wiring necessary so that the building is ready for a future retrofit to all-electric supply infrastructure sufficient to replace natural gas use in the future. Prior to issuing a building permit for the fast food use, the City shall verify that project improvement plans meet the pre-wiring requirement. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 65 Implementation of mitigation measures GHG-1 and GHG-2 would reduce the significant project impact to less-than-significant by: 1) requiring that the project include GHG reduction measures designed to ensure the project provides its fair- share of GHG emissions reductions needed to meet the 2030 statewide GHG reduction goal; and 2) making a substantial contribution to meeting the 2045 statewide carbon neutrality goal by: a) requiring that about 75 percent of the overall project natural gas demand be eliminated in favor of limiting building energy use to electricity, the statewide supply of which is anticipated to be from all renewable energy sources by 2045; and b) requiring that the fast food use be constructed to enable natural gas equipment to be switched to all electricity equipment should natural gas availability be curtailed or prohibited as a building energy source over time. b. Given that the City does not have an adopted plan for reducing GHG emissions, the air district’s guidance for assessing GHG emissions is considered by the City to be the applicable framework plan for reducing GHG emissions. That guidance is based in significant part on requiring individual land use development project to contribute to meeting the state GHG reduction targets for 2030 and 2045 as codified in Senate Bill 32 and Executive Order B-55-18, respectively. Where the project is not entirely consistent with the air district’s GHG reduction performance standards, mitigation measures are proposed to ensure feasible GHG reduction measures are required that reduce conflicts with the plan to a less-than-significant level. 66 EMC Planning Group Inc. Gilroy Square 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: Comments: a.The proposed project includes the development of a gas station and gasoline is a listed hazardous material in the table found within Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 172.101. According to the General Plan EIR, implementation of the General Plan goals and policies, in addition to compliance with regulatory requirements for the treatment of hazardous materials and wastes, minimizes the risks to the people and environment Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a.Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c.Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ d.Be located on a site which is included on 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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ e.Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ f.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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 67 resources from the increase use, storage, transport and disposal of hazardous materials at buildout of the General Plan to less than significant. The proposed project would be required to comply with Policy PH 5.1 (calls for the provision of inspections to ensure compliance with local, State, and Federal regulations and to reduce the risks associated with the use, handling, and storage of hazardous materials and wastes) and Policy PH 5.4 (calls for continued routine inspections of activities that store and/or use hazardous materials, including above- ground and underground storage tanks and related equipment, to ensure compliance with the city’s Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinance). The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and compliance with the above-mentioned General Plan policies would ensure that impacts related to the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. b. The General Plan EIR concluded that implementation of the General Plan goals and policies, in addition to compliance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations for hazardous materials and their waste, minimizes the risks to humans and the environment from hazardous materials at buildout of the General Plan. According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy, California 95020 ERAS Project Number 18136 (Phase I ESA) (ERAS Environmental 2018), the northwest portion of the project site was used for agricultural land in 1993- 2003, the only development was the farm complex adjacent to the southwest and a commercial building across Holloway to the southeast (p. 14). However, the Phase I ESA concluded that no recognized environmental conditions, historical recognized environmental conditions, controlled recognized environmental conditions, or de minimis conditions were identified on the property. No evidence was discovered during the preparation of the Phase I ESA to indicate that activities currently conducted on or near the project site have contributed contamination to soil or groundwater in the surrounding area (p. 19). The Phase I ESA can be found in Appendix E. Therefore, it is not anticipated that hazardous materials are present within the site soils that could be accidentally released during construction activities and create a hazard to the public or the environment. However, accidental release of hazardous materials during the operation of the proposed project, associated with the underground storage tanks storing fuel for the gas station, could occur. The project would be required to comply with Policy PH 5.1 (which calls for the provision of inspections to ensure compliance with local, State, and Federal regulations and to reduce the risks associated with the use, handling, and storage of hazardous Gilroy Square 68 EMC Planning Group Inc. materials and wastes) and Policy PH 5.4 (which calls for continued routine inspections of activities that store and/or use hazardous materials, including above- ground and underground storage tanks and related equipment, to ensure compliance with the city’s Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinance). Compliance with General Plan policies PH 5.1 and 5.4 would ensure that the impacts related to the potential release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant. c. Eliot Elementary, located approximately 0.6 miles northwest of the project site, is the closest school. Therefore, the proposed project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of a school. d. The proposed project is not located on a site included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 (California Department of Toxic Substances Control 2022a); it is not on the list of leaking underground storage tank sites from the State Water Board’s GeoTracker database (California State Water Board 2022a); it is not on the list of sites identified with waste constituents above hazardous waste levels outside the waste management unit (California Department of Toxic Substances Control 2022b); and is not identified on a list of “active” Cease and Desist Orders or Cleanup and Abatement Orders from the State Water Board (California State Water Boards 2022b). Therefore, the proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. e. The adopted Santa Clara County Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan serves the City of Gilroy and the Regional Catastrophic Earthquake Mass Transportation/Evacuation Plan contains the evacuation maps within the region. The General Plan EIR concludes that future development associated with buildout of the General Plan would not impact implementation of or physically interfere with the adopted local and regional emergency response plans and evacuation plans. Development of the project site with commercial uses is consistent with the General Plan and does not involve any changes to the street system. Therefore, the proposed project would result in no impact to the implementation of an adopted emergency plan or evacuation plan. f. The project site is not located within or near a state responsibility area (CalFire 2022). The General Plan EIR Figure 3.8-1 identifies the project site as being within a “non- wildland/non-urban” zone. The nearest “high fire hazard zone” is located approximately 3.5 miles west of the project site (Santa Clara County 2022). Therefore, it is not likely that the proposed project would expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 69 10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a.Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ☐☒☐ ☐ 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)? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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 that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ☐☒☐ ☐ 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 that would result in flooding on- or off-site? ☐☒☐ ☐ 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? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ f.Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?☐☒☐ ☐ 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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ h.Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Gilroy Square 70 EMC Planning Group Inc. Comments: a,f. According to the project’s Stormwater Quality Control and Peak Management Report for Gilroy Square 6970 Camino Arroyo City of Gilroy, CA (ACE Design LLC 2022), the project site is subject to all four Regional Water Quality Control Board Performance Requirements because the new impervious area proposed to be added by the project is more than 22,500 square feet. The Performance Requirements are as follows: PR-1 is met through implementing multiple site design measures, minimizing the runoff generated from the project site; PR-3 is met through the prevention of offsite discharge from events up to the 95th percentile rainfall – 1.45 inches for the project site; and PR-4 is met through the proposed bioretention basins and underground StormTech chambers, which have adequate retention capacity to mitigate post development flows in the 2- and 10-year storm event (ACE Design LLC 2022). The proposed project’s current stormwater management design does not meet the PR-2 design standards because the proposed bioretention basins and underground StormTech chambers are not acceptable as a PR-2 treatment device. This system is acceptable to comply with PR-3 and PR-4 standards, but there is not a Regional Water Quality Control Board-approved underground treatment device to satisfy PR-2 standards (Jose Cedano III, email message, May 26, 2022). Therefore, the proposed project is required to implement Mitigation Measure HYDRO-1 in order to meet the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s standards for PR-2 stormwater treatment. Mitigation Measure HYDRO-1 All stormwater on the project site must be treated aboveground in an approved low-impact development treatment device prior to entering stormwater chambers. The proposed project must show proof of compliance with this requirement on the project plans prior to issuance of a grading permit with approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HYDRO-1 would ensure that no water quality standards are violated. See also the responses in checklist questions “c” through “e” described below. Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact 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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 71 b. Groundwater Supplies. The site is currently vacant and, therefore, does not demand the use of water. The proposed project’s commercial and industrial uses would result in a water demand increase of 0.008 million gallons per day (mgd) compared to the site’s existing, vacant condition; refer to Section 18.0, Utilities and Service Systems, checklist question “a” for more details. However, based upon information in the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, this demand represents less than one percent of the total projected water supply of the Llagas Subbasin through 2045 (City of Gilroy 2021, Table 6-9) (0.008 mgd = 8,056 gpd; 8,056 gpd = 9 acre-feet per year; 9 acre-feet per year/22,000 acre-feet per year = 0.0004; 0.0004 x 100 = 0.04 percent). In addition, the City’s supply firm capacity, designated as the total capacity less the largest unit out of service, for their nine groundwater wells is 15.5 mgd. The proposed project would use less than one percent of this capacity (0.008 mgd/15.5 mgd = 0.0005, or 0.05 percent). Therefore, the proposed project would result in an increased demand on groundwater supplies compared to existing conditions, but would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies. Groundwater Recharge. For successful groundwater recharge, soils must be able to transmit water into the aquifer below. Deep percolation, root zone residence time, chemical limitations, topographic limitations, and surface conditions are all factors in determining if a soil can successfully recharge groundwater. Development of the proposed project could potentially interfere with groundwater recharge by increasing the area covered by impervious surfaces. Further, the project site contains soils that are poor and moderately poor for groundwater recharge (UC Davis 2022). The proposed project would include approximately 2.3 acres of pervious areas (landscape and porous pavement) and bioretention cells, which would detain stormwater runoff onsite, thereby complying with General Plan Policy NCR 4.8 (requires the protection of natural drainage systems through site design, source controls, runoff reduction measures, best management practices, and low impact development). These practices encourage groundwater recharge for new development and would reduce the project’s potential impacts on interfering with groundwater recharge to a less-than-significant level. c. The General Plan EIR analyzed the impact associated with build out of the General Plan on water quality from future construction, grading, and excavation that would cause temporary disturbances to surface soil and removal of vegetative cover. The exposure of disturbed soil to runoff would cause erosion and sediment in the runoff. The General Plan EIR concludes that without appropriate controls, the volume of storm water runoff generated by buildout conditions would substantially increase (p. 3-295), which is considered a significant, adverse environmental impact. To Gilroy Square 72 EMC Planning Group Inc. control erosion during grading and construction phases of a project, developers are required to prepare erosion control plans that detail appropriate methods to prevent and/or minimize erosion. (City of Gilroy 2020, p. 3-191). During Construction. The project site does not contain any streams or rivers. The project site is currently vacant where stormwater percolates into the soil onsite. According to the project plans, the proposed project proposes to replace the existing pervious surfaces with approximately 7.8 acres of impervious surfaces. As a result, development of the site may lead to siltation and/or erosion on- and offsite during construction activities. Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce this potential impact to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measure HYDRO-2 The project proponent shall prepare and submit Erosion Control Plans to the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The Erosion Control Plans shall illustrate how the project’s grading phases would prevent or minimize erosion and siltation on- and off-site, such as the inclusion of Best Management Practices. Post-construction. Erosion impacts could also occur post-construction as well. The City is located in Regional Water Quality Control Board Region 3 (Central Coast Region) and is subject to the Central Coast Post-Construction Requirements per Provision E.12.k of the Phase II Permit (also known as California’s Phase II Small MS4 General Permit). The Central Coast Post-Construction Requirements were adopted in Resolution R3-2013-0032 and are specific to the Central Coast Region (City of Gilroy, City of Morgan Hill and County of Santa Clara 2015). The project would create more than 2,500 square feet of impervious surfaces on the project site and, therefore, the proposed project is subject to the Central Coast Post-Construction Requirements. The project is also required to comply with the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 30.38, which discusses soil erosion control, enhancing onsite stormwater management, and ensuring the ongoing maintenance of landscaped areas. Further, the project would be required to comply with General Plan Policy PH 2.6, which requires all new development proposals to include a site plan detailing appropriate methods of erosion and deposition control during site development and subsequent use. With compliance of the City’s General Plan policies, City Municipal Code, and the Central Coast Post-Construction Requirements, the project would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite post-construction. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 73 d. Development of the site, consistent with commercial zoning, would result in an increase in impervious surface areas. As a result, stormwater runoff volume from the site would increase relative to existing conditions. The proposed project would be required to comply with General Plan Policies PFS-5.3 and PFS-5.5, which requires new development to incorporate green infrastructure and low impact development techniques to reduce stormwater runoff. The project also includes a Stormwater Quality Control Plan (refer to Sheet C6 of the project plans), which identifies the eight drainage management areas located throughout the site. The site design measures implemented for the project would minimize runoff by conveying runoff to the self-treating areas. The project is also required to implement a Storm Water Management Program to prevent the pollution in storm water and urban runoff from entering the storm drain system. All new qualifying development, such as the proposed project, must submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP must identify construction and post-construction Best Management Practices to prevent water pollution at the source. Pursuant to the mitigation presented below, the project proponent would be required to submit a SWPPP for review and approval of the City of Gilroy Public Works Department to demonstrate that best management practices are incorporated into the project. Implementation of this mitigation would ensure that impacts on surface water quality would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure HYDRO-3 The project proponent shall prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for review and approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall identify construction and post-construction Best Management Practices to prevent water pollution at the source. The proposed site discharges to Lower Miller Slough, a tributary to Llagas Creek. Valley Water staff have noted that downstream of the site, Llagas Creek currently only has approximate capacity to contain the ten-year flood. The proposed project has been reviewed by the City of Gilroy Engineering staff and accounts for the storm events. The details will be demonstrated by the applicant at final design stage and the proposed project is required to be consistent with City review requirements. This will be a condition of approval that would occur prior to project entitlement and include consultation with Valley Water staff to demonstrate storage capacity on site that will address the site drainage requirements (Kraig Tambornini, email message, December 8, 2022). Gilroy Square 74 EMC Planning Group Inc. Compliance with Mitigation Measure HYDRO-3 in addition to the abovementioned condition of approval and a site design that implements best management practices for storm water treatment would ensure that the project site would not increase the rate or amount of surface run-off in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off- site. e. The project’s Stormwater Quality Control Plan (Sheet C6 of the project plans) indicates that stormwater from the proposed project would drain into the drainage management areas (eight of which are proposed at the site), which direct the stormwater into the nearest bioretention areas scattered around the project site. Storm drainage pipes are placed in each of the bioretention areas directing the storm water to the existing City storm drain system located in Camino Arroyo. The proposed project would use various onsite measures such as limiting impervious area, minimizing compaction of green/landscape areas, and using porous pavement in parking lots to reduce and treat runoff while overflow would be directed to the drainage treatment areas, which flow into the City’s existing storm drain system. These identified site design and runoff reduction measures would reduce the potential for the project’s contribution to runoff water that could exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff to a less-than-significant level. g. The proposed project does not involve housing and, therefore, would not 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. h. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) panels 060850756H and 06085C0643H, both effective May 18, 2009, the site of the proposed development is within FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area “Zone AE,” and is subject to approximate Base Flood Elevations (BFEs) between 177 feet and 178 feet. However, the BFEs provided in the currently published FIRM panels are incorrect, and the Letter of Map Change (LOMC), effective November 10, 1998, for Panel 0603400004E, has the correct BFEs. According to the 1998 LOMC, the site of the proposed development is within “Zone A3” (now identified as “Zone AE” in the current digital FIRMs) and is subject to much higher BFEs. The project is required to construct at least one foot higher than the BFE, which is the greater of the effective FIRM or the 1998 LOMC. A 1995 flood study for the south east portion of Gilroy, prepared by Schaaf & Wheeler, addresses the flood requirements for the area. The City routinely requires third party review by Schaaf and Wheeler to verify plans satisfy flood zone requirements (Kraig Tambornini, email message, December 8, 2022). This would be completed by the project proponent prior to project entitlement Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 75 to demonstrate that no issue or substantial change in site planning is required (Kraig Tambornini, email message, December 5, 2022). The General Plan EIR concludes that implementation of the General Plan policies and compliance with the City Municipal Code would ensure that potential flood hazards within the Urban Growth Boundary would be prevented and/or minimized. The proposed project would comply with Policy PH 1.3, which requires appropriate studies as part of the development review process to assess potential hazards and assure that potentially significant impacts are adequately mitigated, and Policies PH 3.1 and PH 3.7, which require new development in areas prone to flooding to incorporate uniform enforceable measures to reduce losses due to flood related hazards to an acceptable level of risk. The proposed project would also be required to comply with City Municipal Code Chapter 27A, which contains guidelines and performance standards and ensures that new development does not create flood impacts. Therefore, with implementation of the above-mentioned General Plan Policies and City Municipal Code, the potential to expose people or structures to significant flooding risks within a 100-year flood hazard area would be considered a less than significant impact. i. According to the General Plan EIR’s Figure 3.9-2, the project site is located within the Anderson Dam Flood Inundation Area 2009. However, the General Plan EIR concludes that the overall risk of dam failure from the Anderson Dam is low and, therefore, risks to future development within the Urban Growth Boundary would likewise be low (City of Gilroy 2020, p. 3-300). Therefore, the proposed 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. Gilroy Square 76 EMC Planning Group Inc. 11. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: Comments: a. The proposed project is commercial-industrial project, located within a commercial/industrial area of Gilroy, and would not physically divide an established community. b. The project proposes commercial uses at a site zoned (Shopping Center Commercial/Highway Commercial/General Industrial Planned Unit Development) and designated (General Industrial) that allows for commercial uses; therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with applicable regulations governing the site for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. As discussed in Section 3.0, Air Quality, the project is considered to be consistent with the Clean Air Plan and have a less-than-significant impact with the incorporation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1. As discussed in Section 4.0, Biological Resources, a Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan permit application and associated fees will be processed at the time of application for planning approvals and grading and/or building permits from the City of Gilroy. Obtaining the permit will comply with the requirements of the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan. Further, the project, as mitigated, would reduce the potential adverse impact on burrowing owls and nesting birds during construction of the proposed project. The mitigation presented within Section 4.0 would also mitigate impacts that may conflict with the local biological resource policies/ordinances to a less-than- significant level. Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a. Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b. Conflict with any applicable land-use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 77 As discussed in Section 13.0, Noise, the proposed project, as mitigated, would not conflict with general plan policies or municipal code requirements for reducing exposures to unacceptable noise due to construction and reducing interior noise levels to the City’s acceptable interior noise standard. As discussed in Section 16.0, Transportation, as mitigated, the proposed project would not conflict with the City’s adopted policies or plans regarding the roadway network, public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. For these reasons, the proposed project would not result in significant physical environmental impacts due to conflicts with land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Gilroy Square 78 EMC Planning Group Inc. 12. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: Comments: a. Development of the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state because no mineral resource area of importance is located within the City’s urban growth boundary (City of Gilroy 2020, p. 322). Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant 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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 79 13. NOISE Would the project: Comments: The information in this section is taken primarily from the Environmental Noise Assessment Gilroy Square Development – Gilroy, California (“noise assessment”) (WJV Acoustics 2022) prepared by WJV Acoustics on September 28, 2022. The noise assessment was prepared for the project to determine if significant noise impacts would be produced by the project and to describe mitigation measures for noise if significant impacts are determined. The full noise assessment can be found in Appendix F. The proposed project’s site plan was updated to replace the use of a substance usage disorder facility (i.e., outpatient treatment facility) with an industrial warehouse that was also reduced by 500 square feet, after preparation of the noise assessment. The noise assessment (and, therefore, the analysis below) evaluates the previous site plan. Because the updated project is smaller than the original project, it is not necessary, for the purposes of CEQA, that the noise assessment be updated. a,c. The General Plan establishes land use compatibility criteria in terms of the Day-Night Average Level (DNL or Ldn). The Ldn represents cumulative exposure to noise over an extended period of time and, therefore, is calculated based upon annual average conditions. The General Plan provides an interior noise level standard of 61 dB Ldn within commercial land uses and an exterior noise level of 65 dB Ldn. Existing ambient noise levels in the project vicinity are dominated by traffic noise along Pacheco Pass (State Route 152) (adjacent to the north), Camino Arroyo (adjacent to the west), and U.S. Highway 101 (approximately 0.35 miles west). Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a. Result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the general plan? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ b. Result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐ Gilroy Square 80 EMC Planning Group Inc. Additional sources of noise observed during site inspection included aircraft overflights and noise associated with nearby commercial/retail land uses. There are no residential land uses proposed on the project site and the nearest residential land uses are one-half mile west of the site. Therefore, the term "sensitive land uses," for the purpose of this assessment, will also include transient lodging (i.e., the proposed hotels), where appropriate. Operational Activities The proposed project includes two hotels to be located in the southern portion of the project site. Transient lodging facilities, such as hotels and motels, are typically considered noise-sensitive land uses. Exterior noise level standards for transient lodging are applied to outdoor common areas. Typical interior noise level standards state that interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dB Ldn within residential land uses, including transient lodging. Exterior Hotel Noise. The proposed project includes outdoor pool areas for both hotels, each located along the south side where the hotel building would provide acoustical shielding from traffic noise associated with State Route 152 to the north (the dominant source of project site noise). The noise assessment determined that the ambient noise level in the vicinity of the proposed hotels is 62 dB Ldn. With acoustical shielding provided by the hotel buildings, noise levels in the vicinity of the two pools at both hotels would be below 60 dB Ldn, which is below the 65 dB Ldn noise level standard. Interior Hotel Noise. The interior noise exposure is determined by subtracting the outdoor-to-indoor noise level reduction (NLR) performance that will be provided by the building construction from the assumed exterior noise exposure for the site. Hotel exterior noise exposure would be expected to be approximately 62 dB Ldn, or less. Therefore, a minimum NLR of 17 dB will be required for compliance with the assumed 45 dBA Ldn interior noise level standard (62-45=17). A specific analysis of interior noise levels was not performed by the noise assessment. However, it may be assumed that construction methods complying with current building code requirements would reduce exterior noise levels by approximately 25 dB or more if windows and doors are closed. This would be sufficient for compliance with the City’s 45 dB Ldn interior standard at all proposed rooms for the two hotels. Requiring that it be possible for windows and doors to remain closed for sound insulation means that air conditioning or mechanical ventilation would be required. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 would ensure that the interior noise level standards identified in the General Plan would be met. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 81 Mitigation Measure N-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for the two proposed hotels, the building plans shall include air conditioning or mechanical ventilation, subject to review and approval by the building department. Traffic Noise. This discussion focuses on the project’s traffic noise impacts on existing noise-sensitive land uses (such as residences) outside of the project site. The nearest residences are one-half mile west of the project site. Refer to the noise assessment’s Figure 4 in Appendix F for the locations of the noise measurements for the purpose of this discussion. Significant project-related traffic noise impacts would occur if an increase in traffic noise would result in levels exceeding the City’s applicable noise level standards at the location of sensitive receptors. The noise assessment also included the increase of traffic noise by three dB at sensitive receptor locations, where existing noise levels are already exceeding the City’s applicable noise level standards, to be considered a significant impact. Three dB generally represents the threshold of perception in change for the human ear. The noise assessment used the City’s residential land use noise level standard of 60 dB Ldn because it represents the most restrictive noise level criteria by land use type provided in the General Plan. Traffic noise was modeled for the noise assessment it was determined that project- related traffic is not expected to result in noise levels that exceed the City’s noise level standards at any sensitive receptors. Further, project-related traffic would not result in an increase of three dB in any sensitive receptor locations where noise levels already exceed the City’s noise level standard without implementation of the project. According to the noise assessment, project-related increases in traffic are not expected to result in an increase in noise levels at any sensitive receptor locations and, therefore, would be considered a less than significant impact. Onsite Noise Sources. The proposed project includes a variety of commercial land uses. A wide variety of noise sources can be associated with these types of uses and the noise levels produced by these uses can be highly variable. The noise assessment discusses the following onsite noise sources and their respective noise levels qualitatively (p. 12-14): HVAC/Mechanical equipment; Truck deliveries and movements; Loading dock activities; Parking lot activities (closing of car doors and trunks, stereos, alarms, etc.); Gilroy Square 82 EMC Planning Group Inc. Drive-Through operations; and Car wash operations. The closest sensitive receptors are located approximately 0.5 miles or greater from the project site. At these distances, noise levels associated with these noise-producing activities would not be audible. Construction Activities The project’s construction activities would result in a temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Construction noise would occur at various locations within and near the project site through the buildout period. However, construction noise is not considered a significant impact if construction is limited to daytime hours and construction equipment is adequately maintained and muffled. The City provides a restriction on the hours that construction activities may occur: from 7am to 7pm Monday through Friday, and 9am to 7pm on Saturdays. With implementation of the following standard condition of approval, the project’s temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels as a result of construction would remain less than significant. Standard Condition of Approval Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project plans shall indicate that project construction would only occur from 7am to 7pm Monday through Friday, and 9am to 7pm on Saturdays, consistent with the City’s Municipal Code Section 30.41.31, and that the construction equipment will be adequately maintained and muffled. b. The dominant sources of man-made vibration during construction are sonic booms, blasting, pile driving, pavement breaking, demolition, diesel locomotives, and rail-car coupling. The levels of vibration that would occur during construction of the proposed project would not be expected to exceed any significant threshold levels for annoyance or damage as discussed in the noise assessment from Caltrans (Table II and III in the noise assessment). At buildout of the project, it is not expected that ongoing operational activities that produce vibration impacts would be felt at nearby on- or offsite sensitive uses (those staying in the hotels onsite or the residential uses one-half mile west of the site). Therefore, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts associated with exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground borne noise levels. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 83 14. POPULATION AND H OUSING Would the project: Comments: a. The proposed project does not increase population or propose new homes, and is consistent with the general plan and zoning ordinance. Therefore, the proposed project would not induce population growth directly or indirectly. b. The project site does not include any residences. Therefore, the project would not displace existing housing or people necessitating the construction of replace housing elsewhere. Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant 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)? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Gilroy Square 84 EMC Planning Group Inc. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES 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: Comments: a,b. The proposed project involves commercial uses at the site and would not result in adverse environmental impacts associated with the need for construction of new, or alteration of the existing, fire or police protection facilities in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. However, General Plan Policy PFS 1.11 requires applicants for new developments to pay development impact fees for public facilities to offset its cumulative impact and costs of expanding its facilities. Therefore, the project is required to pay its fair share of the development impact fees for public facilities, which mitigates the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts to public service facilities. As a result, the proposed project would not result in the need to construct new police or fire facilities. c. The proposed project does not involve residential uses and would not result in the addition of student-age children to Gilroy. Therefore, the proposed commercial uses would not result in adverse environmental impacts associated with the need for construction of new or alteration of the existing school facilities. However, commercial projects are considered to indirectly result in an increase in new school-aged children through new job creation. Senate Bill 50 established standard fees for mitigation of impacts on schools. The payment of the development fees authorized by Education Code section 17620 fully mitigates the impacts of providing adequate school facilities resulting from any legislative or adjudicative act. Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a. Fire protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b. Police protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ c. Schools? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d. Parks? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ e. Other Public Facilities? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 85 California Education Code section 17620 et seq. authorizes the collection of developer fees, California Government Code section 65995 et seq. establishes the types of fees and rates, California Government Code section 66000 sets the process for justifying fees and appealing or challenging fees. California Government Code sections 65995.5 – 65995.7 establishes the procedures for the adoption of Level 2 fees. The proposed project would be required to pay the applicable development fees to the school district, to mitigate the project’s cumulative impact on school facilities and the environmental impacts associated with them. d,e. The proposed project involves commercial uses at the site and, therefore, would not result in adverse environmental impacts associated with the need for construction of new or alteration of the existing parks or other public facilities. However, the project is required to pay into the City of Gilroy’s development impact fees for public facilities, which mitigates the project’s contribution to cumulative impacts to public service facilities (such as parks and recreational facilities). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the need to construct new parks or any other type of recreational facilities. Gilroy Square 86 EMC Planning Group Inc. 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: Comments: This section was prepared based on the Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis – Summary of Findings (summary memo) and the Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis (transportation analysis) that were both prepared for the proposed project in October and December 2022, respectively, by Hexagon Transportation Consultants. The full transportation summary memo and analysis can be found in Appendix G. a. The transportation analysis includes an evaluation to determine if the proposed project would conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The onsite physical improvements recommended by Hexagon Transportation Consultants are considered part of the project description and, therefore, are included in the evaluation throughout the initial study. With implementation of these improvements, the proposed project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. b. The transportation analysis also included an evaluation of vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ d. Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 87 VMT Thresholds Employment Use Impact Thresholds. According to the transportation analysis, for office projects, the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) recommends an impact threshold of 15 percent below the existing regional VMT per employee. OPR also states that in cases where the region is substantially larger than the geography over which most workers would be expected to live, it might be appropriate to refer to a smaller geography that includes the area over which most workers would be expected to live. Currently, the City of Gilroy has limited employment land uses, which results in longer commute trips as a large number of Gilroy residents are required to travel outside of Gilroy for employment. This is reflected in the average VMT per employee for the City (18.79 miles per employee) compared to the regional VMT (15.33) and the County VMT (16.64). According to the transportation analysis, providing employment opportunities in Gilroy will likely attract most employees from within the City. Therefore, for the purpose of the transportation analysis, the impact threshold for the evaluation of the employment uses was assumed to be 15 percent below the citywide employment VMT per job. The citywide employment VMT threshold is also consistent with the General Plan EIR, which utilized 15 percent below the citywide VMT as the impact threshold for employment (per-job) VMT. The transportation analysis states that the existing citywide average VMT per job is currently 18.79. Therefore, the OPR recommended impact threshold of 15 percent below the existing average VMT per job equates to 15.97 VMT per job. Retail Use Impact Thresholds. The VMT analysis for the proposed retail uses considers OPR’s recommendation of a net increase in total VMT from baseline conditions as the threshold to identify potential VMT impacts for commercial/retail projects. Local-Serving Threshold for Retail Projects. OPR does not specify screening criteria for the presumption of less than significant VMT impacts for retail projects, but does recognize that the addition of new local-serving retail development tends to shorten trips, and consequently reduce VMT, by improving retail destination proximity. In other words, new local-serving retail projects would provide an alternative to other similar uses located farther away. Generally, retail development less than 50,000 square feet in size might be considered local-serving and should be considered to have a less-than-significant VMT impact. Screening Thresholds for Small Projects. The OPR guidelines state that projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day, have no substantial evidence Gilroy Square 88 EMC Planning Group Inc. indicating that the project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, and are consistent with the adopted General Plan, generally may be assumed to cause a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Typical land uses that would generate 110 or fewer daily trips include up to 10,000 square feet of office space. VMT Evaluation Small Project - Warehouse. The proposed warehouse land use is estimated to generate a total of 110 daily trips. Based on OPR’s small project screening threshold, the proposed warehouse buildings would have a less than significant impact on VMT and, therefore, a detailed VMT analysis for this portion of the proposed project is not required. Local-Serving Retail – Gas Station, Fast-Food Restaurant, and Hotels. The combined size of all three proposed retail-considered uses (i.e., gas station, fast-food restaurant, and the hotel uses) would exceed the 50,000 square-foot local-serving retail size threshold identified by OPR and, therefore, required a VMT evaluation. The transportation analysis determined that the retail component of the proposed project would cause a net decrease of 1,334 citywide VMT per day. The work trips would account for an increase of 1,908 daily VMT, but the shopping trips would account for a decrease in 3,241 daily VMT (i.e., 1,908 – 3,241 = -1,334). Therefore, the proposed retail uses onsite would not result in a significant VMT impact. c. With implementation of the infrastructure improvements described in the Project Description, the proposed project would not increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. d. With implementation of the infrastructure improvements described in the Project Description, the proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 89 17. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: Comments: a. No tribes have contacted the City pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1. Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, or cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: (1) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources code section 5020.1(k), or ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ (2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 90 EMC Planning Group Inc. Gilroy Square 18. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a.Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? ☐☐☒☐ 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? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ 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? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ d.Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ 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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ f.Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid-waste disposal needs? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Comments: a,b. Wastewater Treatment Facilities (Less than Significant). Wastewater generated onsite would be collected via the City’s existing system located in Camino Arroyo and conveyed to the treatment plant south of Gilroy. The General Plan EIR determined that development consistent with the General Plan, such as the proposed project, could result in an increase in the demand for wastewater services that exceeds the capacity of the existing and planned sanitary sewer system and treatment plant, and result in the need for new infrastructure, the construction of which could result in significant environmental impacts. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 91 Table 7, Wastewater Generation, provides a breakdown of the wastewater generated by the proposed project by phase of construction in comparison to existing conditions. The City’s wastewater is collected and conveyed to the South County Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, which is shared with the City of Morgan Hill. Gilroy’s share of the current capacity is 4.9 million gallons per day (mgd) (City of Gilroy 2020, p. 3-446). Table 7 Wastewater Generation Commercial Acres Industrial Acres Factor Wastewater Generation Existing 0 - 300 gpd/ac 0 gpd Proposed Project Phase 1a 2.13 - 639 gpd Phase 1b 4.11 - 1,233 gpd Phase 2 - 3.83 500 gpd/acre 1,915 gpd Increase of 3,787 gpd SOURCE: (ACE Design LLC 2022), (City of Gilroy 2004, Table 3.5) As shown in the table above, the proposed project would increase the amount of wastewater generated at the project site by 3,787 gallons per day (gpd), or 0.004 mgd. The proposed project would comply with General Plan Policy PFS 1.11, which requires that applicants for new development to pay Development Impact Fees for traffic circulation, water, wastewater, storm water and public facilities to offset the costs of expanding these as detailed by the impact fee nexus study; Policies PFS 4.1 and 4.2, which states that the City will provide ongoing maintenance of the wastewater collection and treatment system to accommodate wastewater generated through buildout conditions consistent with the city’s sewer master plan, as it is periodically amended or updated; Policy PFS 4.3, which requires that adequate wastewater treatment capacity is funded and in place prior to approval of new development; and Policies PFS 4.4 - PFS 4.7, which require continued provision of effective wastewater treatment consistent with state and federal standards, coordination with Santa Clara Valley Water District for the production of recycled water, and maintenance of adequate wastewater treatment capacity and infrastructure to keep pace with increased demand generated by implementation of the General Plan. Further, the proposed project would make up less than one percent of the City’s share of the South County Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant’s capacity. Gilroy Square 92 EMC Planning Group Inc. Based on the project’s amount of wastewater generated and the implementation of the above-mentioned General Plan policies, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts in relation to the demand on wastewater facilities and would not require the expansion or new City wastewater facilities. With implementation of the above-mentioned General Plan policies, the project also would not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Pursuant to City correspondence, there are no potential future users identified on the project site for recycled water. There is a private recycled water line in the nearby McCarthy Business Park and if the project site decides to use recycled water it would make arrangements with the McCarthy Business Park (Kraig Tambornini, email message, December 5, 2022). Water Facilities (No Impact). Table 8, Water Demand, provides a breakdown of the water demand for the proposed project by phase of construction in comparison to existing conditions using the City of Gilroy Water System Master Plan’s (water master plan) (City of Gilroy 2004) 800 gallons per day (gpd) per acre demand factor for both commercial and industrial uses. The CalEEMod Memo and Results (Appendix B) use a different set of default water demand factors for the proposed uses. The defaults used in the emissions modeling were developed using a methodology that can be applied statewide rather than the methodology used herein sourced from the City’s water master plan. Table 8 Water Demand Land Use Acreage Factor Water Existing Vacant 0 acres 800 gpd/ac 0 gpd Proposed Project Phase 1a - Commercial 2.13 acres 1,704 gpd Phase 1b - Commercial 4.11 acres 3,288 gpd Phase 2 – Industrial Warehouse 3.83 acres 3,064 gpd Increase 8,056 gpd SOURCE: (ACE Design LLC 2022), (City of Gilroy 2004, Table ES.2) As shown in the table above, the proposed project’s commercial and industrial uses would increase the demand of water compared to the existing, vacant conditions at the project site by 8,056 gallons per day (gpd), or 0.008 mgd. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 93 The General Plan EIR concludes that implementation of the General Plan may require new or expanded water facilities to serve development within the Urban Growth Boundary, but not beyond those identified in the water master plan. Any increase in water demand resulting from buildout of the General Plan would be less than required in the water master plan (City of Gilroy 2020, p. 3-443). The water master plan planned for 14.8 mgd of projected water demand by the City in 2040 (p. 5-3, Table 5.1). The proposed project makes up less than one percent of that demand. In addition, as a condition of approval for the project, the proposed car wash component of the project will be required to be designed to use an internal recycled water use in compliance with existing regulations. Therefore, the project would not result in the need for new or expanded water facilities as a result of its development. c. The project includes site design measures to reduce the runoff generated from the site, such as minimizing runoff by conveying runoff to self-treating areas. Due to the relatively flat topography of the site, the proposed development would introduce a series of low points onsite; runoff would be captured and conveyed into several drainage management areas (eight proposed) located throughout the project site (ACE Designs LLC 2022) (refer to Sheet C6 of the project plans for the Stormwater Quality Control Plan). The proposed project would comply with General Plan Policies PFS 5.3 and PFS 5.5, which require new development or modifications to existing improvements to incorporate green infrastructure and low impact development techniques to reduce storm water runoff which may result in flooding within and downstream from the Urban Growth Boundary. The project site is proposed for commercial and industrial uses, consistent with the General Plan designations of the site. Based on this consistency and compliance with the above General Plan policies, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts in relation to the demand on the City’s storm drainage facilities, but would not require the expansion or new City storm drainage facilities. d. Refer to Section 10.0, Hydrology and Water Quality, checklist question “b” for additional discussions on sufficiency of water supplies. According to the City’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (City of Gilroy 2021), the Llagas Subbasin is projected to have a supply of 22,000 acre-feet of water through 2045 (Table 6-9). The proposed project would result in a water demand of 0.008 mgd, which represents less than one percent of the subbasin’s total supply through 2045. Moreover, the project will be required to implement water-conserving fixtures and landscaping in order to reduce its water use impacts on the Llagas Subbasin. Gilroy Square 94 EMC Planning Group Inc. For these reasons, the City of Gilroy would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources. e. According to the City of Gilroy Sewer System Master Plan, the commercial and general industrial land use categories use the coefficient of 300 gallons per day per acre of wastewater and 500 gallons per day per acre of wastewater, respectively (p. ES-9). Therefore, development of the approximately 10-acre commercial and industrial development would result in generation of approximately 3,800 gallons per day of wastewater (refer back to checklist question “a” for a more detailed breakdown). If the proposed project were to be only general industrial uses (as was anticipated for the site by the City of Gilroy Sewer System Master Plan), the project would result in the generation of approximately 5,000 gallons per day of wastewater. Therefore, development of the project with commercial uses generates less wastewater than was anticipated by the City of Gilroy Sewer System Master Plan. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and would not require the construction of wastewater infrastructure beyond that identified in the City of Gilroy Sewer System Master Plan. f. According to the applicant’s Environmental Questionnaire, the proposed project would result in a total of 37 employees. The City of Gilroy generated approximately 47,404 tons of solid waste that was disposed of in landfills in 2020 (CalRecycle 2022a). Historically, the City has utilized the John Smith Road Landfill; however, it is no longer accepting waste from outside of San Benito County (John Smith Road Landfill 2022). Solid waste collection services in Gilroy are provided by Recology South Valley. After garbage is dropped off at the San Martin Transfer Station, it is transported to the Monterey Peninsula Landfill (formerly called the “Marina Landfill”) located in unincorporated Salinas (Recology South Valley, personal conversation, October 17, 2022). The Monterey Peninsula Landfill has a maximum permitted capacity of 49.7 million cubic yards and a maximum permitted tonnage per day at the landfill is 3,500 tons (CalRecycle 2022b). According to California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, the City’s average disposal rate is 14.4 pounds per day per employee (CalRecycle 2022a). The proposed project would involve 37 employees; therefore, the proposed project could generate approximately 533 pounds of employee solid waste per day (14.4 pounds per employee per day x 37 employees) or 0.27 tons of employee solid waste per day. The proposed project’s contribution of 0.27 tons of solid waste per day would make up a small amount of the landfill’s total capacity and a small amount of the landfill’s maximum permitted daily tonnage. Therefore, the proposed project would not generate solid waste that would exceed landfill capacity. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 95 19. WILDFIRE If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant Impact No Impact a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Comments: a-d. The project site is not located within or near a state responsibility area (CalFire 2022). The General Plan EIR Figure 3.8-1 identifies the project site as being within a “non- wildland/non-urban” zone. The nearest “high fire hazard zone” is located approximately 3.5 miles west of the project site (Santa Clara County 2022). Therefore, analysis for this section is not necessary. 96 EMC Planning Group Inc. Gilroy Square 20. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Impact Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated Less-Than- Significant 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? ☐☒☐☐ 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.) ☐☒☐ ☐ c.Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ☐☒☐ ☐ Comments: a. As discussed in Section 4.0, Biological Resources, special-status species are not expected to occur on the site due to lack of suitable habitat. However, the project site contains open fields and a tree onsite as well as trees adjacent to the site that provide marginally suitable foraging habitat for burrowing owls and nesting birds that could be utilized for nesting habitat protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2 would protect burrowing owls and nesting birds during construction activities and reduce the impact to a less- than-significant level. As described in Section 5.0, Cultural Resources, the project site does not consist of historic structures onsite and is not known to contain any historic or prehistoric resources. However, it is possible that these resources could be accidentally uncovered during grading and construction activities. In the event this should occur, standard permit conditions would ensure that the potential impacts would not be significant. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 97 b. Proposed project impacts that contribute to cumulative project impacts are required to be mitigated per the measures presented in this initial study. With implementation of the mitigation measures and standard conditions of approval identified herein, the project’s contribution to cumulative project impacts would not be considerable. c. Based on the analysis provided in this initial study, the proposed project could indirectly cause substantial adverse effects to human beings through greenhouse gas emissions, soil erosion, soil instability and expansivity, and flooding. However, with implementation of the mitigation measures and standard conditions of approval presented in this initial study, the proposed project would not result in environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Gilroy Square 98 EMC Planning Group Inc. E. SOURCES Environmental Setting ACE Design LLC. Site Plans. February 16 and October 1, 2022. Project Description ACE Design LLC. Site Plans. February 16 and October 1, 2022. Aesthetics City of Gilroy. June 2020. Public Review Draft Gilroy 2040 General Plan EIR SCH#2015082014. Gilroy, CA. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/11308/Draft-EIR--- Gilroy-2040-General-Plan-?bidId= EMC Planning Group. Site Visit on June 24, 2020. Google Earth. 2022. Santa Clara County. “SCCMap.” Accessed on June 21, 2022. https://ges.sccgov.org/discovergis/sccmap Agriculture California Department of Conservation. 2018. “California Important Farmland Finder.” Accessed on March 7, 2022. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ City of Gilroy. June 2020. Public Review Draft Gilroy 2040 General Plan EIR SCH#2015082014. Gilroy, CA. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/11308/Draft-EIR--- Gilroy-2040-General-Plan-?bidId= Air Quality Breeze Software, a Division of Trinity Consultants. May 2021. California Emissions Estimator (CalEEMod) Version 2020.4. May 2021. Available online at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home Breeze Software, a Division of Trinity Consultants. May 2021. CalEEMod User’s Guide (Version 2020.4). Available online at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2017a. 2017 Clean Air Plan: Spare the Air, Cool the Climate. Accessed October 5, 2022. https://www.baaqmd.gov/plans-and- climate/air-quality-plans/current-plans. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 99 BAAQMD. May 2017b. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. Accessed October 5, 2022. https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en. BAAQMD. January 2017. Air Quality Standards and Attainment Status. Accessed October 5, 2022. http://www.baaqmd.gov/research-and-data/air-quality-standards- and-attainment-status EMC Planning Group. 2022. Camino Arroyo Development Project – Emissions Modeling Methodology, Assumptions, and Results. EMC Planning Group. 2022. EMFAC2021 Gilroy Square – 2028 Fuel Demand. Hexagon Transportation Consultants. July 2022. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis. Biological Resources California Burrowing Owl Consortium. 1993. Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2022. Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS) online database. https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/bios/?al=ds85 CDFW. 2022. California Natural Diversity Database. Records of occurrence for the Mount Madonna, Gilroy, Gilroy Hot Springs, Watsonville East, Chittenden, San Felipe, Prunedale, San Juan Bautista, and Hollister USGS quadrangle maps. Sacramento, CA. https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx# CDFW. 2012. Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. CDFW and the California Department of Transportation. 2010. California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project. California Native Plant Society. 2022. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. Records of occurrence for the Mount Madonna, Gilroy, Gilroy Hot Springs, Watsonville East, Chittenden, San Felipe, Prunedale, San Juan Bautista, and Hollister USGS quadrangle maps. Sacramento, CA. http://www.cnps.org/inventory. City of Gilroy. 2022. Code of Ordinances. https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Gilroy/html/Gilroy30/Gilroy3038.html#30.38. 270 Gilroy Square 100 EMC Planning Group Inc. Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency. 2012. Final Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan. https://www.scv-habitatagency.org/178/Santa-Clara-Valley-Habitat-Plan. Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency. 2022. Geobrowser. http://www.hcpmaps.com/habitat/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2022. Endangered Species Program. Washington, D.C. http://www.fws.gov/endangered/. USFWS. 2022. National Wetlands Inventory. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/. Cultural Resources Archaeological Resource Management. 2000. Cultural Resource Evaluation of Lands for the Gilroy Shopping Center Project off Pacheco Pass Highway in the City of Gilroy. Northwest Information Center 2022. File Number 22-0177. Energy California Energy Commission. 2021. 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Accessed September 2, 2022 at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and- topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022-building-energy- efficiency. . 2022. Electricity Consumption by County. Accessed September 28, 2022 at: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx. . 2022a. Gas Consumption by County. Accessed September 28, 2022 at: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx. EMC Planning Group. 2022. Camino Arroyo Development Project – Emissions Modeling Methodology, Assumptions, and Results. Geology and Soils California Department of Conservation. “Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation.” Last updated on September 23, 2021. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/ Krazan and Associates, Inc. January 2020. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation - Proposed Staybridge Suites and Springhill Suites, 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy, California Project No. 042-19041. Pleasanton, California. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 101 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022. Justification Report: CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts from Land Use Projects and Plans. Accessed August 2022 at: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and- research/ceqa/ceqa-thresholds-2022/justification-report-pdf.pdf?la=en EMC Planning Group. 2022. Camino Arroyo Development Project – Emissions Modeling Methodology, Assumptions, and Results. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ACE Design LLC. Site Plans. February 16, 2022. CalFire. “FHSZ Viewer.” Accessed on April 5, 2022. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ California Department of Toxic Substances Control. EnviroStor Database. Accessed on May 20, 2022a. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search?CMD=search&city=gilroy&zip=& county=Santa+Clara&case_number=&business_name=&FEDERAL_SUPERFUND=T rue&STATE_RESPONSE=True&VOLUNTARY_CLEANUP=True&SCHOOL_CLEA NUP=True&CORRECTIVE_ACTION=True&tiered_permit=True&evaluation=True &operating=True&post_closure=True&non_operating=True&inspections=True&ins pectionsother=True California Department of Toxic Substances Control. “Sites identified with waste constituents above hazardous waste levels outside of the waste management unit.” Accessed on October 5, 2022b. https://calepa.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/sites/6/2016/10/SiteCleanup-CorteseList-CurrentList.pdf California State Water Boards. “List of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks from the State Water Board’s GeoTracker darabase.” Accessed on October 5, 2022a. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/search?page=218&cmd=search&business_na me=&main_street_name=&city=&zip=&county=&status=&branch=&site_type=LUFT &npl=&funding=&reporttitle=PROJECT+SEARCH+RESULTS&reporttype=&federal _superfund=&state_response=&voluntary_cleanup=&school_cleanup=&permitted= &corrective_action=&spec_prog=&national_priority_list=&senate=&assembly=&criti cal_pol=&business_type=&case_type=&searchtype=&hwmp_site_type=&cleanup_ty pe=&watershed=&gwbasin=&excludenc=False&orderby=city Gilroy Square 102 EMC Planning Group Inc. California State Water Boards. “List of ‘active’ CDO and CAO from Water Board (MS Excel, 1,453 KB).” Accessed on October 5, 2022b. https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/ City of Gilroy. June 2020. Public Review Draft Gilroy 2040 General Plan EIR SCH#2015082014. Gilroy, CA. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/11308/Draft-EIR--- Gilroy-2040-General-Plan-?bidId= ERAS Environmental, Inc. October 2018. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy, California 95020 ERAS Project Number 18136. Hayward, CA. Santa Clara County. “SCC Map.” Accessed on April 5, 2022. https://ges.sccgov.org/discovergis/sccmap Hydrology and Water Quality ACE Design LLC. Site Plans. February 16 and October 1, 2022. ACE Design LLC. February 2022. Stormwater Quality Control and Peak Management Report for Gilroy Square 6970 Camino Arroyo City of Gilroy, CA. Folsom, CA. Cedano III, Jose, City of Gilroy Public Works Department Engineer. Email to Kraig Tambornini, City of Gilroy Senior Planner, subject: RE: Application Resubmittal AS 21-13 _Camino Arroyo Subdivision CEQA - Applicant Responses, dated 26 May 2022. City of Gilroy, City of Morgan Hill and County of Santa Clara. June 2015. Stormwater Management Guidance Manual for Low Impact Development & Post‐Construction Requirements. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/5186/Guidance- Manual-for-Low-Impact-Development--Post-Construction-Requirements?bidId= City of Gilroy. June 2020. Public Review Draft Gilroy 2040 General Plan EIR SCH#2015082014. Gilroy, CA. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/11308/Draft-EIR--- Gilroy-2040-General-Plan-?bidId= City of Gilroy. November 2020. City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan. http://cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/11309/Gilroy-2040-General-Plan-39- MB?bidId= City of Gilroy. October 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/12538/FINAL-2020-Urban- Water-Management-Plan?bidId= City of Gilroy. Gilroy City Code. https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Gilroy/ Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 103 FEMA. Flood Map Service Center. Accessed on June 20, 2022. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search#searchresultsanchor Tambornini, Kraig, Senior Planner, City of Gilroy. Email message to consultant, 8 December 2022. UC Davis. “Soil Agricultural Groundwater Banking Index.” Accessed on October 17, 2022. https://casoilresource.lawr.ucdavis.edu/sagbi/ Land Use and Planning ACE Design LLC. Site Plans. February 16 and October 1, 2022. Mineral Resources City of Gilroy. June 2020. Public Review Draft Gilroy 2040 General Plan EIR SCH#2015082014. Gilroy, CA. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/11308/Draft-EIR--- Gilroy-2040-General-Plan-?bidId= Noise WJV Acoustics. September 2022. Environmental Noise Assessment Gilroy Square Development – Gilroy, California. Visalia, CA. Population and Housing ACE Design LLC. Site Plans. February 16 and October 1, 2022. Public Services ACE Design LLC. Site Plans. February 16 and October 1, 2022. City of Gilroy. November 2020. City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan. http://cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/11309/Gilroy-2040-General-Plan-39- MB?bidId= Transportation/Traffic Hexagon Transportation Consultants. December 2022. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis – Summary of Findings. Gilroy, CA. Hexagon Transportation Consultants. October 2022. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis. Gilroy, CA. Gilroy Square 104 EMC Planning Group Inc. Tribal Cultural Resource Archaeological Resource Management. 2000. Cultural Resource Evaluation of Lands for the Gilroy Shopping Center Project off Pacheco Pass Highway in the City of Gilroy. Northwest Information Center 2022. File Number 22-0177. Utilities and Service Systems ACE Design LLC. Site Plans. February 16 and October 1, 2022. CalRecycle. “Jurisdiction Review Reports – Jurisdiction Per Capita Disposal Trends.” Accessed October 17, 2022a. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/AnnualReporting/ReviewReports CalRecycle. SWIS Facility Detail, Monterey Peninsula Landfill (27-AA-0010). Accessed October 17, 2022b. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2151?siteID=2583 CEQANet. Accessed August 1, 2020. https://files.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/267775- 2/attachment/vzylwv1xu9Xn9Ksc5o2l6oxfC9NaijysTOksXPwYTYi7nTGcy0RuaHoQ LtdesIjmpIiWATUGhjQA-XYT0 City of Gilroy. October 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Gilroy, CA. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/12538/FINAL-2020-Urban- Water-Management-Plan?bidId= City of Gilroy. June 2020. Public Review Draft Gilroy 2040 General Plan EIR SCH#2015082014. Gilroy, CA. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/11308/Draft-EIR--- Gilroy-2040-General-Plan-?bidId= City of Gilroy. May 2004. City of Gilroy Sewer System Master Plan. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/5254/Sanitary-Sewer-Master- Plan---May-2004 City of Gilroy. May 2004. City of Gilroy Water System Master Plan. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/5257/Water-System-Master- Plan---May-2004 John Smith Road Landfill. “John Smith Road Landfill.” Accessed on October 17, 2022. https://www.johnsmithroadlandfill.com/ Recology South Valley, Customer Service Representative. Personal conversation with consultant, 17 October 2022. Tambornini, Kraig, Senior Planner, City of Gilroy. Email message to consultant, 5 December 2022. Gilroy Square EMC Planning Group Inc. 105 Wildfire CalFire. “FHSZ Viewer.” Accessed on April 5, 2022. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/ City of Gilroy. June 2020. Public Review Draft Gilroy 2040 General Plan EIR SCH#2015082014. Gilroy, CA. https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/11308/Draft-EIR--- Gilroy-2040-General-Plan-?bidId= Santa Clara County. “SCC Map.” Accessed on April 5, 2022. https://ges.sccgov.org/discovergis/sccmap Gilroy Square 106 EMC Planning Group Inc. This side intentionally left blank. Project Plans A APPENDIX STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHO L L O W A Y R O A D LOT 1LOT 2 L O T 3 L O T 4 L O T 5 L O T 6 0SCALE 1" = 60'6060301TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAPROSE'S ENGINEERING6970 CAMINO ARROYOCITY OF GIROY1" = 60'LEGEND:CABINETCONCRETECONTROL POINTCPTESTDETECTOR HANDHOLEDROP INLETDRIVEWAYELECTRICAL METEREDGE OF PAVEMENTELECTRICAL PULLBOXELECTRICAL VAULTFIRE HYDRANTGAS METERGUY ANCHORJOINT UTILITY POLENO PARKING ANY TIME SIGNPEDESTALPEDESTRIAN SIGNAL POLEPUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTPUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTRIGHT OF WAYSANITARY SEWER MANHOLESTORM DRAIN MANHOLESTREET LIGHTTELEPHONE MANHOLETELEPHONE VAULTTRAFFIC SIGNAL POLETRAFFIC SIGNAL PULLBOXUTILITYWATER MANHOLEWATER METERWATER VALVEWATER VAULTCABCONCCPCPTDHHDIDWYEMEPEPBEVLTFHGMGUYJPNPSPEDPSPP.S.E.P.U.E.R.O.W.SSMHSDMHSLTMHTVLTTSPTSPBUTILITYWMHWMWVWVLTSITE(800) 483-5000(800) 743-500111 ALMADEN BLVD. SAN JOSE, CA 95115(408) 846-04207351 ROSANNA STREET GILROY, CA 95020R-1Proposed Zoning:VACANTExisting Zoning:Water:Roads:Gas & Electric:Sewage:Proposed Use:Existing Improvements:Existing Sizes:Contour Interval:Source of Topo:F.E.M.A.Drainage:Telephone:Zone XVerizonPacific Gas & ElectricCity of GilroyCITY OF GILROY UTILITY DEPARTMENTCOMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL10.18 Net Acres1 FootField Survey6970 CAMINO ARROYOBhagirath Desai(916) 837 - 6058ELK GROVE, CA 956249612 KENT STREETROSE'S ENGINEERINGAll that certain real property situate in theCity of Gilroy, County of Santa Clara, Stateof California, being that property described incertificate of compliance no. 2004-12, filed asinstrument no. 18163081, official records ofsaid county, said property more particularlydescribed as follows:All of lots 7, 8, 9, and 10 as said lots areshown on the final map entitled “Tractno. 9487 Gilroy Crossing” filed in book 762 ofmaps, pages 20 through 25, Santa ClaraCounty Records.SUBDIVISION MAPTENTATIVE6970 CAMINO ARROYOAPN#: 841 - 070 - 049JULY 17, 2021Site Address:Submitted by:Owner/Applicants:Parcel Description:Date:NORTH(408) 846-04207351 ROSANNA STREET GILROY, CA 95020CITY OF GILROY UTILITY DEPARTMENT(866) 731-5420 Cable:CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS(408) 846-04207351 ROSANNA STREET GILROY, CA 95020CITY OF GILROY UTILITY DEPARTMENT527 Simas Dr., Milpitas CA 95035(408) 891-3503bkd784@gmail.com 1319.0'26.0'LANDSCAPING21.2'1119'19.0'26'CAMINO ARROYO ROADH O L L O W A Y R O A D 172PATIO OUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORY8.8'199.3'75.0'38LANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGFIRE RISERROOM 9A1.0.25.0'36.0'271.3'(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING15.3'61 0 . 0 ' 19.0' 3 6 . 7 'LANDSCAPING26.0'11B L D G . F O O T P R I N T = 1 8 0 0 0 S . F .6F E N C E 85.1'5'30.0'19.0'14.6'2 6 . 0 ' 1 9 . 0 ' 5 ' 5'10'66SIDE WALKSIDE WALKS I D E W A L K25 25.5'POROUSPAVEMENTR48.0'9 6 240.9'1 0 8 . 2 ' 5 . 0 ' 19.0'13.3'SIDE WALKS I D E W A L K SIDE WALKLANDSCAPING19.0'31.3'29.8'26.0'26.0'9991110101415.4'19.0'5.0'26.2'26.0'26.0'28.1'19.0'5.0'19.0'121.8' 3 0 . 0 ' 1 2 1 . 4 ' 25.8'3.8'19.0'19.0'POROUSPAVEMENT22 11EVEVEVEVEV1 9 . 0 ' L A N D S C A P I N G 1 0 ' 26.7' H O L L O W A Y R O A D FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2F U T U R E W A R E H O U S E - 1 5.5'22.3'5.0'34.3'T R A S H T R A S H TRASHR48.0'R28.0'404.8'1 S T O R Y 1 STORYBLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F.LANDSCAPING3.1' 3 . 6 ' 2 1 2 . 6 'S31°27'02"E 770.74'N 5 8 ° 2 7 ' 0 3 " E 3 0 5 . 0 0 'R=40.00'H O L L O W A Y R O A DL=62.90'S31°27'02"E 845.90'=90°05'55"328.02'328.02'344.11' 3 4 4 . 7 5 '158.27'118.12'13111052CROSSACCESSC R O S S A C C E S S VPVPVPVP12147361178336" dia-side 36" dia-side36" dia-side129103EVEVEVEVEVEVEVEV331VP VP VP VP210 17OUTDOOR POOL16811023372P A T IO OUTDOOR POO L7 3810EVEVEVEV4 4 EVVP EVVPVP EVEVEV611666259 6 999111010142211EVEVEVEVEVTRASHTRASHT R A S H T R A S H T R A S H TRASHL=31.00'R=19.00'R=408.42'N10°33'00"E 120.34'S31°33'47"E 1529.90'S31°27'02"E 770.74'N5 8 ° 2 7 ' 0 3 " E 3 0 5 . 0 0 'CAMINO ARROYON06°11'39"E 188.73'R=937.00'=93°29'20"R=19.00'=92°52'38"L=30.80'66.00'S20°14'14"E=13°29'29"L=96.17'R=40.00'L=97.43'N03°22'26"W 126.82'=05°57'27"R=937.00'L=16.82'N06°11'39"E 120.00'=24°05'42"R=40.00'STATE HWY 152=05°57'27"CAMINO ARROYOH O L L O W A Y R O A D L=97.43'L=62.90'S31°27'02"E 845.90'=90°05'55"328.02'297.32'311.78'230.95'203.55'126.82'94.56'230.04'328.02'34 3 . 6 6 ' 34 4 . 1 1 ' 18 3 . 7 8 ' 20 6 . 4 8 '38.80'11 . 4 4 ' 80 . 0 7 '1.48'95.95'34 4 . 7 5 '=08°11'43"R=952.00'L=136.17'158.27'118.12'PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROPOSED CAR PARKING SPACES31 SPACES52 SPACES@18000 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREAPROJECT DATA(FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1) FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1PROJECT DESCRIPTION: FUTURE WAREHOUSEASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURISDICTION :M OCCUPANCY VAYES(NFPA 13) 29'-10" (TOP OF RIDGE)ALLOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSISOCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:FIRE SPRINKLERS:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL :1ACTUAL :STORIES (MAXIMUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841-70-049PARCEL-5 AREA:6.6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN18000 S.F. FUTURE WAREHOUSE FLOOR AREADESIGNATION :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL4LOT COVERAGE (FUTURE WAREHOUSE)7.TOTAL PAVED AREABUILDINGS FOOTPRINTPROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 22591 S.F. (41.66%)18000 S.F. (33.19%)13637 S.F. (25.15%)PARCEL-5 SITE AREA54228 S.F. (1.245 AC) 70' M TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE:14.PROVIDED:8.EXITFIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS9.PROPOSED BUILDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:12.11.10.13.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUIRED:REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATION ON PROPERTYNO (TABLE 602)YES YESFUTURE WAREHOUSE6 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC,2019 CEC, 2019 CFC,2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE,2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDSCODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTIONSYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72)24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATION:PARCEL-5 SITE AREA54228 S.F. (1.245 AC) PARCEL-4 AREAPROJECT DATA(FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2)PROJECT DESCRIPTION:FUTURE WAREHOUSEASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :JURISDICTION :M OCCUPANCY VAALLOWABLE:4EXISTING AND PROPOSED ZONING:COMMERCIALCODE ANALYSISOCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:FIRE SPRINKLERS:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL :ALLOWABLE:1ACTUAL :STORIES (MAXIMUM)1.2.3.4.5.FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTSSPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:10.9.8.REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS ANDPROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTYYESYESNOCITY OF GILROYAREA BREAKDOWN6.112979 S.F.(2.594 AC)841-70-0495422.8 SQ.FT.(10% OF PARCEL AREA)26814 S.F.(23.73%)27500 S.F.(24.32%)58665 S.F.(51.95%) REQD. LANDSCAPE AREA PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA TOTAL BUILDING FOOTPRINTTOTAL PAVED AREALOT COVERAGE70' M TABLE 504.329'-10" (TOP OF RIDGE)FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2ADDRESS:6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CA= 2 SPACES= 2 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED:BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN27500 S.F. FUTURE WAREHOUSE FLOOR AREAPROPOSED CAR PARKING SPACES100 SPACES= 5 SPACES= 2 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED:PARKING REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 :15.GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA18000/54228=0.33F.A.R PROVIDED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2:14.GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA27500/112979=0.24A1.0.0A1PROPERTY LINECENTER LINEPARKING STRIPSBLDG LINEACCESSIBLE AISLEFIRE ACCESS ROUTELIGHTING SINGLE HEAD POLE LIGHTFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFDCPROPOSED VAN POOL PARKING (SHALLBE MARKED WITH SIGNS RESTRICTINGTHEIR USE TO CLEAN AIR VAN POOL)VPELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGINGSTATIONEVTRUNCATED DOMESPROPOSED ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVELFIRE HYDRANT AS PER CIVIL PLANSBOLLARDTRUCK ROUTEVICINITY MAPNORTHILLUMINATED MONUMENT SIGNAGE (35'HIGH) MIN. 100 S.F.OF SEASONALCOLOR AT BASE OF SIGNMYES(NFPA 13) F.A.R REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 :2F.A.R REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2:2PARKING REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 : 1 SPACE PER 350 SQ FT AREA1 SPACE PER 350 SQ FT AREA @ 27500 S.F.GROSS FLOOR AREA79 SPACES13.PROPOSED BUILDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :11.12.FUTURE WAREHOUSE2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC,2019 CEC, 2019 CFC,2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE,2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDSCODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTIONSYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72)24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATION: A1.0.01PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CAPARKING FOR 88 ROOM 4 STORY HOTEL (1 SPACE:1 ROOM) = 97 SPACESPARKING ANALYSIS(HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES PROJECT DATA (HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES)HOLIDAY INN EXPRESSPROJECT DESCRIPTION:88 ROOMS 4 STORY HOTELASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURISDICTION :R1VA47'-0" (TOP OF PARAPET)ALLOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSISOCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:FIRE SPRINKLERS:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL :4ACTUAL :STORIES (MAXIMUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841-70-049AREA:6.PARCEL-3 SITE AREA6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CAPORTE COCHERE AREA692 S.F. BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN16772 S.F. 1ST FLOOR AREA16772 S.F. 2ND FLOOR AREA16772 S.F. 3RD FLOOR AREATOTAL BUILDING AREA67780 S.F..16772 S.F. 4TH FLOOR AREA= 5 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED:(INCLUDING ONE VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACES)DESIGNATION :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL49'-6" (TOP OF PARAPET)PROJECT DATA (RESIDENCE INN) RESIDENCE INN PROJECT DESCRIPTION:112 ROOM 4 STORY HOTELASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURISDICTION :R1VA40'-10"(TOP OF PARAPET)ALLOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSISOCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:FIRE SPRINKLERS:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL :4ACTUAL :STORIES (MAXIMUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841-70-049PARCEL-2 AREA:6.PARCEL-2 SITE AREA6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN20642 S.F. 1ST FLOOR AREA20642 S.F. 2ND FLOOR AREA20642 S.F. 3RD FLOOR AREATOTAL BUILDING AREA82568 S.F..20642 S.F. 4TH FLOOR AREADESIGNATION :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL47'-9" (TOP OF TOWER )5TOTAL PAVED AREABUILDINGS FOOTPRINTPROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA TOTAL PAVED AREABUILDINGS FOOTPRINTPROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 69913 S.F. (67.37%)20642 S.F. (19.90%)13210 S.F. (12.73%)= 4 SPACES= 4 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED:70' R1, 70' A3 TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE:LOT COVERAGE (HOTEL)7.PARCEL-2 SITE AREA15.PROVIDED:9.EXITFIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUILDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUIRED:REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATION ON PROPERTYNO (TABLE 602)YES YESHOTEL7 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)HOURS OF OPERATION:70' R1, 70' A3 TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE:LOT COVERAGE (HOTEL)7.PARCEL-3 SITE AREA8.15.PROVIDED:9.EXITFIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUILDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUIRED:REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATION ON PROPERTYNO (TABLE 602)HOTELNOHOURS OF OPERATION:= 4 SPACESTOTAL ELECTRICAL VEHICLE (EV) PARKING PROVIDED:VAN POOL PARKING PROVIDED= 4 SPACES LONG TERM BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED= 4 SPACES @ 2880 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREAPARKING REQUIRED FOR C-STORE: 1 SPACE PER 250 SQ FT AREA = 24 SPACESTOTAL PARKING PROVIDEDPARKING ANALYSIS {(N)C-STORE}PROJECT DATA (C-STORE)C-STOREPROJECT DESCRIPTION:C-STOREASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURISDICTION :M OCCUPANCY VA19'-6" (TOP OF PARAPET)ALLOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSISOCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:FIRE SPRINKLERS:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL :1ACTUAL :STORIES (MAXIMUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841-70-049PARCEL-1A AREA:6.6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN2880 S.F. C-STORE FLOOR AREADESIGNATION :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL4= 2 SPACES= 2 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED:LOT COVERAGE C-STORE7.TOTAL PAVED AREABUILDINGS FOOTPRINTPROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 40811 S.F. (71.39%)4242 S.F. (7.41%)12154 S.F. (21.20%)PARCEL 1A SITE AREA70' M TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE:15.PROVIDED:9.EXITFIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUILDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUIRED:REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATION ON PROPERTYYES (TABLE 602)YES YESC-STORE2 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC,2019 CEC, 2019 CFC,2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE,2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE& ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMSTANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72)24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATION:= 30 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIREDPARKING REQUIRED FOR BURGER KING: 1 SPACE PER 100 SQ FT AREA PARKING ANALYSIS (DRIVE-THRU BURGER KING)= 2 SPACES= 2 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED:= 30 SPACESTOTAL PARKING PROVIDEDPARCEL-1A SITE AREAPROJECT DATA (DRIVE-THRU BURGER KING)DRIVE-THRU BURGER KINGPROJECT DESCRIPTION:DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANTASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURISDICTION :A2 OCCUPANCYVANO19'-0" (TOP OF COPING)ALLOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSISOCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:FIRE SPRINKLERS:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL :1ACTUAL :STORIES (MAXIMUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841-70-049PARCEL-1 AREA:6.PARCEL-1 SITE AREA35990 S.F.(0.82 AC)6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUILDING AREA BREAKDOWNDESIGNATION :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL2LOT COVERAGE BURGER KING7.TOTAL PAVED AREABUILDINGS FOOTPRINTPROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA PARCEL-1 AREA35990 S.F.(0.82 AC)50' A2 TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE:15.PROVIDED:9.EXITFIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUILDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUIRED:REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATION ON PROPERTYNO (TABLE 602)YES YESDRIVE-THRU' RESTAURANT3 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC,2019 CEC, 2019 CFC,2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE,2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDINGSTANDARDS CODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIREPROTECTION SYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA13,20,24,72)HOURS OF OPERATION:2600 S.F. BURGER KING FLOOR AREA48 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)NO (TABLE 602)CAR WASH AREA1152 S.F. 1 PARKING PER EMPLOYEE @ 4 EMPLOYEES = 4 SPACES= 26 SPACES24554 S.F.(68.3%)2600 S.F. (7.2%)8836 S.F. (24.5%)PARKING REQUIRED FOR CAR WASH: 1 SPACE PER 250 SQ FT AREA = 17 SPACESGROSS PARKING REQUIRED103765 S.F. (2.3 AC) 103765 S.F. (2.3 AC) 57207 S.F. (1.31 AC)57207 S.F. (1.31 AC)CANOPY AREA6679 S.F. PARKING ANALYSIS(RESIDENCE INN)a) PARKING FOR 112 ROOMS 4 STORY HOTEL (1 SPACE:1 ROOM)= 112 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED= 118 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED1 PARKING PER EMPLOYEE @ 6 EMPLOYEES = 6 SPACES= 111 SPACESSTANDARD PARKING PROVIDED21'-0" (TOP OF EXTENDED COPING)21'-10" (TOP OF PARAPET)79264 S.F. (1.81 AC) TOTAL PAVED AREABUILDINGS FOOTPRINTPROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 52487 S.F. (66.21%)12592 S.F. (15.89%)14185 S.F. (17.90%)PARCEL-3 SITE AREA79264 S.F. (1.81 AC) F.A.R PROVIDED FOR BURGER KING:16.GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA2600/35990=0.072 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR C-STORE:GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA2880/57207=0.05 F.A.R FOR RESIDENCE INN :16.GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA82568/103765=0.79 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES :67780/79264=0.85 GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREAPROPERTY LINECENTER LINEPARKING STRIPSBLDG LINEACCESSIBLE AISLEFIRE ACCESS ROUTELIGHTING SINGLE HEAD POLE LIGHTFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFDCPROPOSED VAN POOL PARKING (SHALLBE MARKED WITH SIGNS RESTRICTINGTHEIR USE TO CLEAN AIR VAN POOL)VPELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGINGSTATIONEVTRUNCATED DOMESFIRE HYDRANT AS PER CIVIL PLANSBOLLARDTRUCK ROUTEVICINITY MAPILLUMINATED MONUMENT SIGNAGE (35'HIGH) MIN. 100 SQ.FT OF SEASONALCOLOR AT BASE OF SIGNMSITE PLAN1ST FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)2ND FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)4TH FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)ROOF PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)1ST FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) 3RD FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) ROOF PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN) FLOOR PLAN C-STORE)EXTERIOR ELEVATION (CANOPY)A1.0.0A1.1.0A1.1.1A1.1.2A1.1.3A1.1.4A1.1.5A1.1.6A1.1.7A2.1.0A2.1.1A2.1.2A3.2.0A4.1.0A4.1.1FLOOR & ROOF PLAN (BURGER KING)EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (BURGER KING)A1.0.2TRASH DETAILSA5.1.01ST FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER)A5.1.12ND FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER)A5.1.2A5.1.3A5.1.4A5.1.5EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER)A6.1.01ST FLOOR PLAN ( FUTURE WAREHOUSE)A6.1.1ROOF PLAN (FUTURE WAREHOUSE)A6.1.2EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (FUTURE WAREHOUSE)3RD FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER4TH FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER)ROOF PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER)SITE PLANA1.0.0AROOF PLAN (C-STORE)A2.1.3EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (C-STORE)A2.1.4FLOOR PLAN & EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (CAR WASH)A2.1.5EQUPMENT PLAN (CAR WASH)A3.1.0FLOOR PLAN (CANOPY)A3.1.2ROOF PLAN (CAR WASH)A3.1.13RD FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)EXTERIOR VIEW (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)2ND FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) 4TH FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN) A2.1.6A3.2.1A3.2.2A3.3.0A3.3.1A7.0.0SITE PHOTOSA7.0.1SITE PHOTOSCOVER SHEETGRADING PLANUTILITY PLANGRADING SECTIONSC1PHASING PLANCIVIL SITE PLANSTORMWATER CONTROL PLANC2SOLID WASTE HANDLING PLANFIRE TRUCK CIRCULATION PLANC4C5C7C3C6C9C8YES(NFPA 13) YES(NFPA 13) YES(NFPA 13) TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED = 881 PARKING PER EMPLOYEE @ 6 EMPLOYEES = 6 SPACES= 94 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED@ 2600 GROSS FLOOR AREA= 12 SPACES@ 1152 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREA= 5 SPACESF.A.R REQUIRED FOR BURGER KING:F.A.R REQUIRED FOR C-STORE:16.2F.A.R FOR RESIDENCE INN :4F.A.R REQUIRED FOR HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES :16.4 2" CAP BLOCK TYP.PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA 14'-9"4'-2"27'-6"6'-0"27'-6"4'-2"13'-2"13'-5"61'-0"FEFEFEFEFE13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-3"13'-412"13'-2"13'-2"13'-112"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"3'-5"10'-4"69'-4"VESTIBULE027'-912"1'-1112"3'-0"21'-4"19'-8"23" 23" 23"12" 4'-0"9'-4"9'-4"12" 23"7'-0"EMERGENCYESCAPE &RESCUE WINDOW3'-6" 4'-6"HI-LOW DRINKINGFOUNTAIN4'4'-0"4'4'-0"2% MAX. SLOPE @ AT ACCESS AISLE (MARKED WITH APAINTED BORDERLINE AROUND THEIR PERIMETER. THE AREAWITHIN THE BORDERLINE SHALL BE MARKED WITH HATCHEDLINES A MAXIMUM OF 36" ON CENTER IN A COLORCONTRASTING WITH THAT OF THE AISLE SURFACE)9'-0"x20'-0" DROP-OFF/LOADING ZONEPORTE COCHEREFLOORING PATTERNMAIN ENTRANCE2' 2 ' - 0 "14'-0"6'-0"5'-0"FE450 S.F.10'-312"13'-9"199'-1"Ω ΩΩΩΩ3'-01 2"MIN.CLEARANCEWHEN DOORFULLY OPENS FIREANNUNCIATIONPANEL19'-3"ELEV.222KING132KING130KING128KING126KING124KING122KING120STORELOBBY03WORK AREA34CHECKINLAUNDRY09GENERALMANAGEROFFICE05STAIR #127BREAK ROOM09AUNISEX08SALESOFFICE06LUGGAGE32SRVER09BCORRIDOR31MECH.17MAINT.33PANTRY26ABREAKFAST25GREATROOM26MEETINGROOM24ELEVATORLOBBY23ELEV.122ELEVATOREQUIPMENT13WOMEN'SRESTROOM19GUESTLAUNDRY10MEN'SRESTROOM15CORRIDOR31POOL VEST35POOL EQUIP.16FITNESS ROOM11STAIR #228CORRIDOR31OUTDOOR POOL12PORTE COCHERE01FIRE RISER30ELECT.17BPATIOTE5TE2CHUTE09CMOLTE5TE2MOLTE2TE5TE5TE2TE5TE2TE1 TE4TE4 TE1 SISEMOL TE5 TE2 MOL TE5 TE2 MOL TE2 TE5 TE4TE1TE4TE1TE1TE4TE1TE4 TE1TE4SESI MOL TE2 TE5 TE1TE4LOBBY & GUESTROOMS10,329 SFCORRIDOR31LOBBY/GREAT ROOMRAISEDSLAB38'-0"4'-0"7'-112"6'-5"40'-0"53'-0"14'-6"5'-4"10'-8"16'-6"14'-3"11'-10"24'-1112"13'-5"10'-112"16'-0"13'-2"13'-9"6'-3"7'-912"11'-112"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"ACC.KINGX-WIDE1291245678910111213151617ABCDEF143ONE HR. FIRE RATED WALL WITHINMIN. 4' OF FIRE WALL (45 MIN.OPENIING PROTECTION) COMPLIESW/CBC 706.5 EXP.18'-7"8'-7"7'-012"8'-0"32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.UPUPPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CASCALE:FIRST FLOOR PLAN- 1/8" = 1'-0"P.H.-TE1- INDICATES TACTILE 'EXIT' SIGNTE2- INDICATES TACTILE 'EXIT ROUTE' SIGNTE4- INDICATES LOW LEVEL TACTILE 'EXIT' SIGNTE5- INDICATES LOW LEVEL TACTILE 'EXIT ROUTE' SIGNFS-INDICATES FLOOR SINK. LOCATION PER PLUMBING PLANS.INDICATES PANIC HARDWARE REQUIRED MOUNTBETWEEN 34 INCHES & 44 INCHES ABOVE THEFINISH FLOOR.SI - STAIRWAY IDENTIFICATION TACTILE SIGNGUEST ROOMS WITH COMMUNICATIONS FEATURES TE3- INDICATES TACTILE 'EXIT STAIR DOWN' SIGN. (INCLUDING LOW LEVEL SIGN)GUEST ROOMS WITH MOBILITY FEATURES ANDCOMMUNICATION FEATURESFIRE EXTINGUISHERFE1.THE EXTINGUISHER SHALL BE RATED 2-A: 10-B:C-RATED FIRE EXTINGUISHERSWITH CURRENT STATE FIRE MARSHAL CERTIFICATION TAGS. TRAVEL DISTANCETO FIRE EXTINGUISHERS CANNOT EXCEED 75'. FIRE EXTINGUISHERS SHALL BEMOUNTED NEAR THE EXITS AT 48" ELEVATIONS TO THE TOP OF THEEXTINGUISHERS IN VISIBLE LOCATION IN EGRESS PATHS.FIRE EXTINGUISHERS-HANGERS AND BRACKETS:-NOTE:THE BUILDING SHALL HAVE APPROVED RADIO COVERAGE FOREMERGENCY RESPONDERS WITHIN THE BUILDING BASED UPON THEEXISTING COVERAGE LEVELS OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONSYSTEMS OF THE JURISDICTION AT THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDINGFIRE ALARMS & DETECTION SYSTEMS (CFC SECTION 907):ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, WIRING AND HAZARDSABATEMENT OF ELECTRICAL HAZARDS: IDENTIFIED ELECTRICAL HAZARDS SHALL BE ABATED. ELECTRICAL WIRING, DEVICES, APPLIANCESAND OTHER EQUIPMENT THAT IS MODIFIED OR DAMAGED AND CONSTITUTES AN ELECTRICAL SHOCK OR FIRE HAZARD SHALL NOT BE USED.ILLUMINATION: ILLUMINATION SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR SERVICE EQUIPMENT AREAS, MOTOR CONTROL CENTERS AND ELECTRICAL PANELBOARDS.WORKING SPACE AND CLEARANCE: A WORKING SPACE OF NOT LESS THAN 30 INCHES IN WIDTH, 36 INCHES IN DEPTH AND 78 INCHES INHEIGHT SHALL BE PROVIDED IN FRONT OF ELECTRICAL SERVICE EQUIPMENT. THE WORKING SPACE SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN THE WIDTHOF THE EQUIPMENT. NO STORAGE OF ANY MATERIALS SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN THE DESIGNATED WORKING SPACE.LABELING: DOORS INTO ELECTRICAL CONTROL PANEL ROOMS SHALL BE MARKED WITH A PLAINLY VISIBLE AND LEGIBLE SIGN STATINGELECTRICAL ROOM OR SIMILAR APPROVED WORDING. THE DISCONNECTING MEANS FOR EACH SERVICE, FEEDER OR BRANCH CIRCUITORIGINATING ON A SWITCHBOARD OR PANELBOARD SHALL BE LEGIBLY AND DURABLY MARKED TO INDICATE ITS PURPOSE UNLESS SUCHPURPOSE IS CLEARLY EVIDENT.MULTIPLUG ADAPTERS: MULTIPLUG ADAPTERS, SUCH AS CUBE ADAPTERS, UNFUSED PLUG STRIPS OR ANY OTHER DEVICE NOT COMPLYINGWITH NFPA 70 SHALL BE PROHIBITED.SWIMMING POOL NOTES:FITNESS ROOM NOTES:SAFETY GLAZING ADJACENT TO DOORS:SE - STAIR EXIT SIGN. REFER A4.2.0 SHEET.(GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE FOLLOWING FACILITIES)RECEIVER JACKS: RECEIVERS REQUIRED FOR USE WITH AN ASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEM SHALL INCLUDEA 18" STANDARD MONO JACK.receiver HEARING-AID COMPATIBILITY: RECEIVERS REQUIRED TO BE HEARING-AID COMPATIBLE SHALLINTERFACE WITH TELECOILS IN HEARING AIDS THROUGH THE PROVISION OF NECKLOOPS.SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL: ASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEMS SHALL BE CAPABLE OF PROVIDING A SOUNDPRESSURE LEVEL OF 110 dB MINIMUM AND 118 dB MAXIMUM WITH A DYNAMIC RANGE ON THE VOLUMECONTROL OF 50 dB.SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO: THE SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO FOR INTERNALLY GENERATED NOISE INASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEMS SHALL BE 18 dB MINIMUM.PEAK CLIPPING LEVEL: PEAK CLIPPING SHALL NOT EXCEED 18 dB OF CLIPPING RELATIVE TO THE PEAKSOF SPEECH.REQUIREMENTS FOR ASSISTIVELISTENING SYSTEMNOTE:ASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEM IS TO BE OPERABLE AT THE TIME OF FINAL INSPECTION.1.A FIRE COMMUNICATION AND CONTROL CIRCUIT IS NEEDED AT THE LOBBY, EACH ELEVATOR LOBBY AND STAIRWELL FLOOR LANDING FOREMERGENCY OPERATIONS.2.A FIRE ALARM ENUNCIATOR PANEL SHALL BE LOCATED NEAR THE FRONT ENTRANCE. THIS PANEL WILL CONNECT AND INDICATE ALARMFUNCTIONS, ZONE INDICATIONS, AND FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM STATUS WITH ALPHA/NUMERIC MESSAGING TO INDICATE SPECIFICZONES, LOCATIONS, OR ALARMS3.A RADIO SIGNAL BOOSTER SYSTEM FOR FIRE AND PD RADIOS SHALL BE INSTALLED FOR SEND AND RECEIVE. A BDA (BI-DIRECTIONALAMPLIFIER) SYSTEM IS AN IN-BUILDING COMMUNICATION SYSTEM THAT BRINGS WIRELESS SIGNALS INTO A STRUCTURE FROM OUTSIDE,AMPLIFIES THOSE SIGNALS WITH A SIGNAL BOOSTER, AND THEN EVENLY DISTRIBUTES THE AMPLIFIED SIGNALS THROUGHOUT ASTRUCTURE VIA A DISTRIBUTED ANTENNA SYSTEM (DAS). CA FIRE CODE 907.2.13.2 DIGITAL ANTENNA SYSTEM(DAS)/BI-DIRECTIONAL AMPLIFICATION (BDA). SYSTEMS.INITIATION:- INITIATION OF THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM SHALL BE BY AUTOMATIC MEANS. APPROVED AUTOMATIC FIRE DETECTORSSHALL BE PROVIDED IN BOILER AND FURNACE ROOMS, SHOPS, LAUNDRY ROOMS, MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL ROOMS,TRASH-COLLECTION ROOMS, STORAGE ROOMS, GIFT SHOPS, LOCKER ROOMS AND SIMILAR AREAS. AUTOMATIC SMOKE DETECTORS SHALLBE PROVIDED IN ALL COMMON AREAS AND INTERIOR CORRIDORS SERVING SLEEPING UNITS AS REQUIRED MEANS OF EGRESS.NOTIFICATION:- ACTIVATION OF THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM OR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM SHALL INITIATE A GENERALEVACUATION SIGNAL.1. 27.12.190 TOP OF FORM HEIGHT & HORIZONTAL LOCATION CERTIFICATIONNO INSPECTION OR APPROVAL ON THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURES FOUNDATION SYSTEM SHALL BE GIVEN BY THE BUILDINGOFFICIAL UNTIL THE CITY ENGINEER HAS RECEIVED, REVIEWED & APPROVED A CERTIFICATION THAT THE PROPOSED TOP OFFORM HEIGHT & HORIZONTAL LOCATION CONFORM TO THE APPROVED GRADING PLAN. THE REQUIRED TOP OF FORM HEIGHT &HORIZONTAL LOCATION CERTIFICATIONS SHALL BE PREPARED & SUBMITTED BY A LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR OR CIVILENGINEER.2. THERE WILL BE NO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STORED AND/OR USED WITHIN THE BUILDING, AS A CONDITION OFOCCUPANCY. IF SO, PERMITTEE WILL BE REQUIRED TO REGISTER WITHIN THE HAZMAT PROGRAM COORDINATOR IN THE FIREDEPT. PRIOR TO BEING ISSUED THE PERMIT.3. FRONTAGE USED FOR ALLOWABLE AREA INCREASES PER CBC SECTION 506.3 SHALL BE PERMANENTLY MAINTAINED.4. FIRE WALLS, FIRE PARTITIONS, SIRE BARRIERS, SMOKE BARRIERS & SMOKE PARTITIONS OR ANY OTHER WALL REQUIREDTO HAVE PROTECTED OPENINGS OR PENETRATIONS SHALL BE EFFECTIVELY & PERMANENTLY IDENTIFIED WITH SIGNS &STENCILING. SUCH IDENTIFICATION SHALL:A. BE LOCATED IN ACCESSIBLE CONCEALED FLOOR, FLOOR-CEILING OR ATTIC SPACES.B. BE LOCATED WITHIN 15' OF THE END OF EACH WALL & AT INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 30'(914MM) MEASUREDHORIZONTALLY ALONG THE WALL OR PARTITION.C. INCLUDE LETTERING NOT LESS 3" IN HEIGHT WITH A MINIMUM 3/8-INCH STROKEIN CONTRASTING COLOR INCORPORATING THE SUGGESTED WORDING. "FIRE AND/OR SMOKE BARRIER-PROTECT ALL OPENINGS",OR OTHER WORDING.Notes to contractor:MOL- MAXIMUM OCCUPANT LOADRADIO COVERAGE FOR EMERGENCY RESPONDERS:-A1.1.0402/16/2022FIRST FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITES)PROVIDE STAND PIPE PER CBC SEC SECTION 905.1 PERFIRE DEPT. APPROVALLEGEND90 MIN. FIRE RATED W/SELF CLOSING DOORA SIGN SHALL BE POSTED INDICATING “”Ω 13'-9"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-412"13'-412"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"3'-5"10'-4"4'-2" 27'-6"6'-0"27'-6"FEFEFEFE199'-1"69'-4" 23"12"23"12" 23" 12" 12" 23"9'-4"4'-6"9'-4"4'-4"FEICE 3'-1"MIN. CLEARANCEWHEN DOOR FULLY OPENS 4'-0"4'-0"ONE HR. FIRE RATED WALL WITHINMIN. 4' OF FIRE WALL (45 MIN.OPENIING PROTECTION) COMPLIESW/CBC 706.5 EXP.1ONE HR. FIRE RATED WALL WITHIN MIN. 4'OF FIRE WALL (45 MIN. OPENIINGPROTECTION) COMPLIES W/CBC 706.5 EXP.1KING328KING326KING324KING322KING320KING318KING316KINGSUITE314KINGSUITE312KINGSUITE310KING308KING306ACC.KINGX-WIDE304KINGX-WIDE325QQ323QQ321ACC.QQSUITE319QQSUITE311QQSUITE313QQSUITE309QQ307QQ305QQ303QQ301HSKPELEV.2ELEV.1CLOSETTE5TE2TE2TE5TE2 TE5 TE5TE2TE2TE5SETE3TE3SI13'-2"32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.8'-7"8'-7"7'-012"8'-0"UPDNDNUPSTAIR #2STAIR #1A1.1.2602/16/2022SCALE:THIRD FLOOR PLAN- 1/8" = 1'-0"P.H.-FS-INDICATES FLOOR SINK. LOCATION PER PLUMBING PLANS.INDICATES PANIC HARDWARE REQUIRED MOUNTBETWEEN 34 INCHES & 44 INCHES ABOVE THEFINISH FLOOR.TE3- INDICATES TACTILE 'EXIT STAIR DOWN' SIGN. (INCLUDING LOW LEVEL SIGN)FIRE EXTINGUISHER1.THE EXTINGUISHER SHALL BE RATED 2-A: 10-B:C-RATED FIREEXTINGUISHERS WITH CURRENT STATE FIRE MARSHAL CERTIFICATION TAGS.TRAVEL DISTANCE TO FIRE EXTINGUISHERS CANNOT EXCEED 75'. FIREEXTINGUISHERS SHALL BE MOUNTED NEAR THE EXITS AT 48" ELEVATIONS TOTHE TOP OF THE EXTINGUISHERS IN VISIBLE LOCATION IN EGRESS PATHS.FIRE EXTINGUISHERS-HANGERS AND BRACKETS:-NOTE:THE BUILDING SHALL HAVE APPROVED RADIO COVERAGE FOR EMERGENCYRESPONDERS WITHIN THE BUILDING BASED UPON THE EXISTING COVERAGE LEVELSOF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS OF THE JURISDICTION AT THEEXTERIOR OF THE BUILDINGPROVIDE STAND PIPE PER CBC SEC SECTION 905.1 PERFIRE DEPT. APPROVALLEGEND90 MIN. FIRE RATED W/SELF CLOSING DOORPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA 13'-9"4'-2"FEFEFEFE13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-412"13'-412"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-9"199'-1"4'-2"27'-6"6'-0"27'-6"69'-4"12"23"4'-4"12" 12" 23" 12" 4'-6"8'-1"9'-9"9'-4"ICE 3'-01 2"MIN. CLEARANCEWHEN DOOR FULLY OPENS 3'-6" 4'-6"4'-0"4'4'ONE HR. FIRE RATED WALL WITHINMIN. 4' OF FIRE WALL (45 MIN.OPENIING PROTECTION) COMPLIESW/CBC 706.5 EXP.1ONE HR. FIRE RATEDWALL WITHIN MIN. 4' OF FIRE WALL(45 MIN. OPENIING PROTECTION)COMPLIES W/CBC 706.5 EXP.1KING427KING426KING424KING422KING420KING418KING416KINGSUITE414KINGSUITE412KINGSUITE410KING408KINGX-WIDE404QQ401QQ403QQ407QQSUITE409QQSUITE411QQSUITE413HSKGACCQQ419ELEV.2ELEV.1QQ421QQ423KINGX-WIDE425TE5TE2TE3SETE5TE2TE5 TE2 TE5TE2TE5TE2TE3IS13'-2"QQ423KING42613'-2"DN32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.8'-0"8'-7"8'-7"7'-012"DNPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CAA1.1.3702/16/2022SCALE:FOURTH FLOOR PLAN- 1/8" = 1'-0"P.H.-FS-INDICATES FLOOR SINK. LOCATION PER PLUMBING PLANS.INDICATES PANIC HARDWARE REQUIRED MOUNTBETWEEN 34 INCHES & 44 INCHES ABOVE THEFINISH FLOOR.TE3- INDICATES TACTILE 'EXIT STAIR DOWN' SIGN. (INCLUDING LOW LEVEL SIGN)GUEST ROOMS WITH MOBILITY FEATURES ANDCOMMUNICATION FEATURESFIRE EXTINGUISHER1.THE EXTINGUISHER SHALL BE RATED 2-A: 10-B:C-RATED FIREEXTINGUISHERS WITH CURRENT STATE FIRE MARSHAL CERTIFICATION TAGS.TRAVEL DISTANCE TO FIRE EXTINGUISHERS CANNOT EXCEED 75'. FIREEXTINGUISHERS SHALL BE MOUNTED NEAR THE EXITS AT 48" ELEVATIONS TOTHE TOP OF THE EXTINGUISHERS IN VISIBLE LOCATION IN EGRESS PATHS.FIRE EXTINGUISHERS-HANGERS AND BRACKETS:-NOTE:THE BUILDING SHALL HAVE APPROVED RADIO COVERAGE FOR EMERGENCYRESPONDERS WITHIN THE BUILDING BASED UPON THE EXISTING COVERAGE LEVELSOF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS OF THE JURISDICTION AT THEEXTERIOR OF THE BUILDINGPOST & COLUMNS PER STR. PLANSPROVIDE STAND PIPE PER CBC SEC SECTION 905.1 PERFIRE DEPT. APPROVALLEGEND90 MIN. FIRE RATED W/SELF CLOSING DOORGUEST ROOMS WITH COMMUNICATION FEATURES FRT. WD. PARAPETFRAMING S.S.D.PRE-FAB SPM WALLFLASHING2-LAYERS OF 5/8"TYPE 'X' GYP. SHTG.1/4" DURO-GUARD DENSDECK PRIMEMIN. 60 MILULTRAPLY TPOTJI ROOF JOISTS S.S.D.MIN. 0.5" ISOGARD HD.(MIN. R-20 VALUE COMPLYINGPER TABLE 1203.3)MIN. 19/32" PLYWOOD ATMAX.24" SPANSVAPOR BARRIERFULL WIDTH ACOUSTICINSULATION TO FILL ALLVOIDSFIELD WELDPLATE & FASTENERFACTORY WELD5/8"TYPE 'X' GYP.SHTG.LY AT 2-HR.EXT.BEARING WALL.WD.NAILER AS REQD.7/8"CEM.PLASTER O/METALLATH BACKED W/2-LAYERSOF GRADE-D 60-MIN.BLDG. PAPERSOLID BLKG.,S.S.DPRE-FAB SPM WALLFLASHINGMIN. 60 MIL ULTRAPLY TPO5/8" TYPE 'X' GYP. SHTG.1/4" DURO-GUARDDENSDECK PRIMEVAPOR BARRIERFIELD WELDSTANDING SEAMMETAL ROOFRDRDSOLAR ZONE INSTALLEDSEPARATELY UNDERFUTURE CONTACT (BYOWNER)SOLAR ZONE INSTALLEDSEPARATELY UNDER FUTURECONTACT (BY OWNER)543RD38RD998RD299RDRDSLOPE 1:48 SLOPE 1:48 SLOPE 1:48 SLOPE 1:48 SLOPE 1:48 SLOPE 1:48 1:48SLOPE 1:48SLOPE 1:48SLOPE1:48SLOPE1:48SLOPE 1:48SLOPE 1:48 SLOPE 1:48 SLOPERD SLOPE:1"=1'-0"SLOPE:1"=1'-0"SLOPE:1"=1'-0"RDRD PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CASCALE:ROOF PLAN1/8" = 1'-0"SCALE:DOWN SPOUTNTS.SCALE:ROOF PARAPET FLASHINGNTS.SCALE:CRICKET FLASHINGNTS.SCALE:ROOF DRAIN/OVERFLOWNTS.SCALE:MECH. EQUIPMENT SUPPORTNTS.KEY NOTES LEVEL 113' - 2 5/8"LEVEL 2 T.0 SHEATHINGGRADE-6"LEVEL 3 T.0 SHEATHING23' - 5 7/8"ROOF45' - 0"PARAPET47'- 0"LEVEL 4 T.0 SHEATHING33' - 9 1/8"SF4SF121590'-0"T.O. PLATE42'-11 3/8"PARAPET49'- 6"9'-0"T.O.SUN SCREEN1010GRADE-6"47'- 0"10'-0"SF6GRADE0'- 0"LEVEL 2 T.0 SHEATHING 13'- 2 5/8"LEVEL 3 T.0 SHEATHING 23'- 5 7/8"LEVEL 4 T.0 SHEATHING 33'- 9 1/8"ROOF45'- 0"PARAPET215T.O. PLATE42'- 11 3/8"49'- 6"PARAPET9'-0"T.O.SUN SCREEN101010LEGENDS:(STUCCO COLORS BY PAREX)ABBREVATIONSHM :- HOLLOW METALDR :- DOORFR :- FRAMEPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA LEVEL 10"LEVEL 213' - 2 5/8"GRADE-6"LEVEL 323' - 5 7/8"LEVEL 433' - 9 1/8"ROOF45' - 0"PARAPET47' - 0"PARAPET49' - 6"9'-0"T.O.SUN SCREENLEVEL 10"LEVEL 213'- 2 5/8"GRADE-6"LEVEL 323'- 5 7/8"T.O. PLATE42'- 11 3/8"ROOF45'- 0"PARAPET47'- 0"LEVEL 433'- 9 1/8"PARAPET49' - 6"9'-0"T.O.SUN SCREENLEVEL 213'- 2 5/8"ABBREVATIONSHM :- HOLLOW METALDR :- DOORFR :- FRAME(3) COLOR COAT STUCCO (a) IS A 3-COAT, 7/8 INCH MINIMUM THICK(b) HAS TWO LAYERS OF GRADE D PAPER UNDER STUCCO WERE OCCURSOVER PLYWOOD SHEATHING; AND (c) HAS 26 ga GALVANIZED WEEPSCREED AT FOUNDATION PLATE LINE AT LEAST 4" ABOVE GRADE (OR 2INCH ABOVE CONCRETE OR PAVING) 2"x6" WOOD STUDS 16" ON CENTERWITH 7/8" CEMENT PLASTER (MEASURED FROM THE FACE OF STUDS) ONTHEEXTERIOR SURFACE WITH INTERIOR SURFACE TREATMENT AS REQUIREDFOR INTERIOR WOOD STUD PARTITIONS. PLASTER MIX 1:4 FOR SCRATCHCOAT AND 1:5 FOR BROWN COAT, BY VOLUME, CEMENT TO SAND1259PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA LEGENDS:(STUCCO COLORS BY PAREX) PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STUDIOSTUDIO 'C'ONEBEDROOMEND -ACCESSIBLESTAIR #BONEBEDROOMEND -ACCESSIBLESTUDIOSTUDIOMECH. ROOM /PBX ROOMACCESSIBLE STUDIOQQ ROOMQQ ROOMSTUDIOELECTRICALWOMENMENONEBEDROOMENDONEBEDROOMENDENGINEERVEST.FITNESS AREAPREPROOMTELECOM/DATAMARKETSTORAGEST.AGMSALESGM OFFICEVESTIBULEELEVATORLOBBYLAUNDRY ROOMEMPLOYEELOUNGEDRYERSMEETINGROOMWORK ROOMFR DESKEMPLOYEETOILETPATIOOUTDOOR POOLFOYERMAINENT.POOLEQUIPMENT1110280509 1515A232417&3317A23FEFEFEFE09BFESTAIR #A0802060712141618CORRIDOR.25CORRIDOR25CORRIDOR25ELEV.1ELEV.2272734MARKET21LINENTERMINATION08A35ACC.RESTROOM 08A FIRERISERROOMICE29HOUSEKEEPING09AELEVATOREQUIPMENT13FDCGUEST LAUNDRYHOUSEPHONE616 SQ. FT.FEFEFE FE FE32STOR.LIVING ROOMDENDININGROOMBARQUICK PRINTBARSTORAGESTORAGEPANTRY QQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOM32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP. 32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP. FIRST FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.012P.H.-INDICATES PANIC HARDWARE REQUIRED MOUNT BETWEEN34 INCHES & 44 INCHES ABOVE THE FINISH FLOOR.INITIATION:- INITIATION OF THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM SHALL BE BY AUTOMATICMEANS. APPROVED AUTOMATIC FIRE DETECTORS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN BOILER AND FURNACEROOMS, SHOPS, LAUNDRY ROOMS, MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL ROOMS, TRASH-COLLECTIONROOMS, STORAGE ROOMS, GIFT SHOPS, LOCKER ROOMS AND SIMILAR AREAS. AUTOMATICSMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN ALL COMMON AREAS AND INTERIOR CORRIDORSSERVING SLEEPING UNITS AS REQUIRED MEANS OF EGRESS.NOTIFICATION:- ACTIVATION OF THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM OR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERSYSTEM SHALL INITIATE A GENERAL EVACUATION SIGNAL.1.HAND-HELD PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS, NOT HOUSED IN CABINETS, SHALL BEINSTALLED ON THE HANGERS OR BRACKETS SUPPLIED. HANGERS OR BRACKETS SHALLBE SECURELY ANCHORED TO THE MOUNTING SURFACE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEMANUFACTURER'S INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS.2.THE EXTINGUISHER SHALL BE RATED 4-A COMPLYING PER IFC SECTION 906.3.ABATEMENT OF ELECTRICAL HAZARDS: IDENTIFIED ELECTRICAL HAZARDS SHALL BE ABATED. ELECTRICAL WIRING, DEVICES, APPLIANCESAND OTHER EQUIPMENT THAT IS MODIFIED OR DAMAGED AND CONSTITUTES AN ELECTRICAL SHOCK OR FIRE HAZARD SHALL NOT BE USED.ILLUMINATION: ILLUMINATION SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR SERVICE EQUIPMENT AREAS, MOTOR CONTROL CENTERS AND ELECTRICAL PANELBOARDS.WORKING SPACE AND CLEARANCE: A WORKING SPACE OF NOT LESS THAN 30 INCHES IN WIDTH, 36 INCHES IN DEPTH AND 78 INCHES INHEIGHT SHALL BE PROVIDED IN FRONT OF ELECTRICAL SERVICE EQUIPMENT. THE WORKING SPACE SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN THE WIDTHOF THE EQUIPMENT. NO STORAGE OF ANY MATERIALS SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN THE DESIGNATED WORKING SPACE.LABELING: DOORS INTO ELECTRICAL CONTROL PANEL ROOMS SHALL BE MARKED WITH A PLAINLY VISIBLE AND LEGIBLE SIGN STATINGELECTRICAL ROOM OR SIMILAR APPROVED WORDING. THE DISCONNECTING MEANS FOR EACH SERVICE, FEEDER OR BRANCH CIRCUITORIGINATING ON A SWITCHBOARD OR PANELBOARD SHALL BE LEGIBLY AND DURABLY MARKED TO INDICATE ITS PURPOSE UNLESS SUCHPURPOSE IS CLEARLY EVIDENT.MULTIPLUG ADAPTERS: MULTIPLUG ADAPTERS, SUCH AS CUBE ADAPTERS, UNFUSED PLUG STRIPS OR ANY OTHER DEVICE NOT COMPLYINGWITH NFPA 70 SHALL BE PROHIBITED.RECEIVER JACKS: RECEIVERS REQUIRED FOR USE WITH AN ASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEM SHALLINCLUDE A 18" STANDARD MONO JACK.receiver HEARING-AID COMPATIBILITY: RECEIVERS REQUIRED TO BE HEARING-AID COMPATIBLE SHALLINTERFACE WITH TELECOILS IN HEARING AIDS THROUGH THE PROVISION OF NECKLOOPS.SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL: ASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEMS SHALL BE CAPABLE OF PROVIDING A SOUNDPRESSURE LEVEL OF 110 dB MINIMUM AND 118 dB MAXIMUM WITH A DYNAMIC RANGE ON THE VOLUMECONTROL OF 50 dB.SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO: THE SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO FOR INTERNALLY GENERATED NOISE INASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEMS SHALL BE 18 dB MINIMUM.PEAK CLIPPING LEVEL: PEAK CLIPPING SHALL NOT EXCEED 18 dB OF CLIPPING RELATIVE TO THE PEAKSOF SPEECH.PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA ONEBEDROOMONEBEDROOMSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOACC. STUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIO - CSTUDIOONEBEDROOMONEBEDROOMSTUDIOSTUDIOQQ ROOMQQ ROOMSTORAGE 1STORAGE 4ELEV.1ELEV.2ELEVATORLOBBYLINEN CHUTESTAIRS #BSTAIRS #AICECORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMSTUDIO32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.UPDNSECOND FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.113PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA ONEBEDROOMONEBEDROOMSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOACC. STUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIO - CSTUDIOONEBEDROOMONEBEDROOMSTUDIOSTUDIOQQ ROOMQQ ROOMFEFEFE STORAGE 1STORAGE 4ELEV.1ELEV.2ELEVATORLOBBYLINEN CHUTESTAIRS #BSTAIRS #AFEICECORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMFESTUDIO32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP. THIRD FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.214PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA ONEBEDROOMONEBEDROOMSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOACC. STUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIO - CSTUDIOONEBEDROOMONEBEDROOMSTUDIOSTUDIOQQ ROOMQQ ROOMSTORAGE 1STORAGE 4ELEV.1ELEV.2ELEVATORLOBBYLINEN CHUTESTAIRS #BSTAIRS #AICECORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMSTUDIO32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP. FOURTH FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.315PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA 48888833333333331616ROOF PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.416PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA 0'-0" A.F.F.+10'-2" T.O SHEATHINGSECOND FLOOR+19'-3"THIRD FLOORFIRST FLOOR+46'-11"TOP OF ROOF+40'-10"TOP OF PARAPET+47'-9"TOP OF ROOF+37'-7"T.0 PLATE+28'-5" T.O SHEATHINGFOURTH FLOOR0'-0" A.F.F.+10'-2" T.O SHEATHINGSECOND FLOOR+19'-3" T.O SHEATHINGTHIRD FLOORFIRST FLOOR+28'-5" T.O SHEATHINGFOURTH FLOORTOP OF ROOFTOP OF PARAPET+37'-7" T.O PLATETOP OF ROOF+47'-9"+46'-11"+40'-10"EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.517FINISH LEGENDNOTE:STREET NUMBERS OF THE BUILDINGS SHALL BE EASILY VISIBLE FROM THE STREETAT ALL TIMES, DAY & NITE.PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA 0'-0" A.F.F.+10'-2" T.O.SHEATHINGSECOND FLOOR+19'-3" T.O.SHEATHINGTHIRD FLOORFIRST FLOOR+28'-5" T.O.SHEATHINGFOURTH FLOOR+47'-9"TOP OF ROOFTOP OF PARAPET+40'-10"0'-0" A.F.F.+10'-2" T.O.SHEATHINGSECOND FLOOR+19'-3" T.O.SHEATHINGTHIRD FLOORFIRST FLOOR+28'-5" T.O.SHEATHINGFOURTH FLOOR+46'-11"TOP OF ROOF+40'-10"TOP OF PARAPET+47'-9"TOP OF ROOFEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.618FINISH LEGENDNOTE:STREET NUMBERS OF THE BUILDINGS SHALL BE EASILY VISIBLE FROM THE STREETAT ALL TIMES, DAY & NITE.PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA UTILITYWALK-INCOOLER17 DOORPREPAREAOFFICESALES AREACASHIERUNISEXUNISEXWALK-INFREEZER2 DOOREQUIPMENT FLOOR PLAN - SIDE EXIT OPTIONPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CASCALE : 1/4"=1'-0"ROOF PLAN (C-STORE) PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA DOOR NOTES / HARDWAREGENERAL NOTESKEYED NOTESDOOR SCHEDULEWALL LEGENDKEYED NOTESCAR WASH BAYVEHICLEEXITVEHICLEENTRANCEEQUIPMENT ROOMCONSTRUCTION FLOOR PLANPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEWATER REQUIREMENTSNO.ITEM / DESCRIPTIONREMARKSNO.ITEM / DESCRIPTIONOPTIONALOPTIONALREMARKSOPTIONALOPTIONALVEHICLEEXITCAR WASH BAYVEHICLEENTRANCEEQUIPMENT ROOMCAR WASH EQUIPMENT PLANPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CASCALE : 1/4"=1'-0"ROOF PLAN (CAR WASH) CANOPY SLAB PLANPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA FREEZERKITCHENCOOLER13OFFICE8+++++++++++++++++++++++++5++++++++++++++++++CORRIDORCREW+++++++++++++++++STOCK267MENWOMENAE+++++++++++++++++D++++++++++++++18'-8"8'-7"8'-358"9'-834"27'-758"7'-018"79'-11"80'-3"35'-218" 3'-7"11'-61 2"20'-47 8" 35'-61 2"29'-1012"6'-312"3'-912"16'-658"4'-11"10'-012"39'-1112"7'-1118"14'9'-2"7'-278"4'-6"5'-9" 7'-21 4"7'-111 4"18'-71 4"CHAIRCHAIRCHAIR3'7'4'7'32" CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.26'-8"15'-0" SLOPE 1:486 333333522224A4.1.0SLOPE 1:48 SLOPE1:48SLOPE1:48 SLOPE1:48SLOPE1:48 13PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA FIRST FLOOR PLAN1SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"A4.1.027ROOF PLAN2SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"6.ROOFING 4GNC BY JOHN MANSVILLE OR APPROVED EQUAL5.4.1.3" ROOF DRAIN & OVER FLOW PIPE (TYP.)2.3.AT JUNCTION OF ROOF AND VERTICAL SURFACE, FLASHING AND COUNTER FLASHING SHALL BE PROVIDED PER ROOFING MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS.ALL METAL SHALL BE NOT LESS THAN #26 GAUGE CORROSION-RESISTANT METAL.REFER TO ROOF DETAILS ON AD-1 SHEET FOR EQUIPMENT PLATFORM REQUIREMENTS (SEE MECHANICAL PLAN TO VERIFY SIZES & NUMBER). VERIFYLOCATION W/ TRUSS MANUFACTURER FOR LOAD DISTRIBUTION.1/2" PLYWOOD CRICKET O/2X6 KICKERS @ 16"O.C. W/ 6":12" MAX. SLOPE TYPICALDRAFT STOPPING SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ATTICS AND CONCEALED ROOF SPACES, SUCH THAT ANY HORIZONTAL AREA DOES NOT EXCEED 3,000 S.F.DASHED LINE INDICATES BUILDING LINE BELOW8.7.CONCRETE TILE (OWNER TO SELECT) OVER 1/2" PLYWOOD OVER PRE-MANUFACTURED ROOF TRUSSES @ 24"O.C. VERIFY ATTACHMENT WITH TRUSSMANUFACTURER. PROVIDE CONTINUOS STUCCO SCREEN. (#ESR-1647)9.3"x22" EAVE VENT10.11.SEE MECHANICAL PLAN TO VERIFY SIZES & NUMBER. VERIFY LOCATION W/ TRUSS MANUFACTURER FOR LOAD DISTRIBUTION.12.CLOAKED VENT TILE-INSTALL PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS.ROOF HATCH WITH ALTERNATING TREAD DEVICE. 14" SS OR GALVANIZED CABLE GUARDRAIL BETWEEN POSTS @ 21" & 42" ABOVE FINISHED ROOF LEVEL(THE GUARD SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED SO AS TO PREVENT THE PASSAGE OF A SPHERE 21" IN DIAMETER)13.4'-0"CONT. 4" CANT STRIPROOF TRUSS BLOCKING ASPERSTRUCTURAL AND / ORTRUSSMFR. DRAWINGSBABCOCK-DAVIS 4'-0" X 4'-0"SINGLE LEAF GALV. ROOF HATCHW/ GALV. INSULATED CURB.INSULATED COVER AND PADLOCK EYEEXTEND ROOFING MATERIALAND FLASHING UP UNDER CURBCOUNTERFLASHING.5/8" TYPE 'X' GYP.BD. (TYPICAL)NOTE:REFER ROOF HATCH ON A1.5.0SHEET FOR GUARDRAIL POSITION.50°-70'9-1/2" MAX.5"MINSTEEL BAR GRATING STAIR TREADW-19-4 1-1/4"x3/16" W/ CHECKER ⅊NOSING & 1-1/4" WELD-IN SIDEPLATES8-1/2"MIN.1/82TREAD TOSTRINGER(TYP)MC12x10.6STRINGER⅊ 1/4x12STRINGER7"MIN.40" 3"7-1/2"1-1/2"x14GASQ. TUBE1" 12"F.FNOTES FOR CONTRACTOR:1.CBC 1015.6/7 – GUARDS SHALL BE PROVIDED WHERE APPLIANCES, EQUIPMENT, FANS, ROOFHATCH OPENINGS OR OTHER ITEMS THAT REQUIRE SERVICE ARE LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OFA ROOF EDGE OR OPEN SIDE OF A WALKING SURFACE AND SUCH EDGE OR OPEN SIDE ISLOCATED MORE THAN 30 INCHES ABOVE THE FLOOR, ROOF OR GRADE BELOW. THE GUARD SHALLBE CONSTRUCTED SO AS TO PREVENT THE PASSAGE OF A SPHERE 21 INCHES IN DIAMETER.THE GUARD SHALL EXTEND NOT LESS THAN 30 INCHES BEYOND EACH END OF SUCH APPLIANCE,EQUIPMENT, FAN, ROOF HATCH OR COMPONENT.2.AUTOMATIC SHUTOFFS - AIR-MOVING SYSTEMS SUPPLYING IN EXCESS OF 2000 CUBIC FEETPER MINUTE TO ENCLOSED SPACES WITHIN BUILDINGS SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH ANAUTOMATIC SHUTOFF. SHUTOFFS SHALL STOP THE AIR-MOVING EQUIPMENT WHEN SMOKE ISDETECTED IN ROOMS SERVED BY THE SYSTEM. EXCEPTIONS: (1) ROOMS HAVE A DIRECT EXITTO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING, OR (2) SYSTEMS ARE DESIGNED FOR SMOKE CONTROL.CMC §608.13.CMC 604.1.2 - INSULATION APPLIED TO THE EXTERIOR SURFACE OF DUCTS SHALL HAVE AFLAME-SPREAD RATING OF NOT MORE THAN 25 AND A SMOKE-DENSITY RATING OF NOT MORETHAN 50 WHEN TESTED AS A COMPOSITE ASSEMBLY INCLUDING INSULATION, FACINGMATERIALS, TAPES AND ADHESIVES AS NORMALLY APPLIED.ROOF HATCH W/ALTERNATING TREAD DEVISE4SCALE: N.T.S.DRAFT STOP DETAIL3SCALE: N.T.S.NOTE:-1.DRAFT STOPPING MATERIALS SHALL NOT BE LESSTHAN 0.5-INCH GYPSUM BOARD, 0.375-INCH WOODSTRUCTURAL PANEL, 0.375-INCH PARTICLEBOARD OROTHER APPROVED MATERIALS.LV24RD ROUND LOUVER VENT.KEY NOTES# A4.1.128PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA 3'-6"14'-3"3'-6"15'-6"3'-6"15'-0"3'-6"5'-0"30'-0"5'-0"43'-512"5'-0"30'-0"5'-0"43'-512"5'-0"30'-0"5'-0"3'-6"14'-3"3'-6"15'-6"3'-6"15'-0"3'-6"5'-0"29'-3"5'-0"52'-312"5'-0"30'-0"5'-0"52'-312"5'-0"29'-3"5'-0"14'-3"15'-0"15'-0"15'-0"15'-0"14'-3"15'-0"15'-0"15'-0"15'-0"15'-0"15'-0"223'-112"223'-112"67'-11" 67'-11"12439'-2"8'-1"9'-2"8'-1"32" CLEAR(MIN.)TYP.4'-0"PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA A6.1.1±PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA Gilroy Square at City of Gilroy Commercial Zoning Regulations Comparison Commercial District Requirements Regulations Requirements Proposed Lot none 443343 SF Yard Requirements (Minimum in Feet) Front (Measured from FOC) 41' Min. 41'-3" at burger king from Camino Arroyo street Side (Adjacent to Street from FOC) 31' Min. 93.7' at Warehouse from Holloway Road Side (All other Side Yards) 0 N/A Rear 0 Min. 17.5' from Burger King Height Requirements (Maximum) 55' Max. 55' (top of tower) Additional Regulations Off-Street Parking, Article XXXI Parking required for hotel 1 space= 1room, for drive thru 1 space=100 sq.ft , for C store 1 space = 250 sq.ft, warehouse 1 space=350 sq.ft. . Parking provided for hotel 1 space= 1room, for drive thru 1 space=100 sq.ft , for C store 1 space = 250 sq.ft, warehouse 1 space=350 sq.ft. Fences , Article XXXIV None None Landscaping, Article XXXVIII ( from FOC) Min. 8% of gross site area 15.66% of gross site area Perimeter Landscaping Required (from FOC) 21' required 21' provided Screen Outdoor Areas Landscape plans will provide a visual screen from less pleasing features of development. Meet Water Efficiency & Stormwater Management Standards Refer to Landscape plans for Preliminary SWCP. Landscaping Areas Located Adjacent to the Street Right-Of-Way 21' Wide Minimum (Measured from FOC) 21' Minimum EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (C-STORE)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (BURGER KING)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (CANOPY)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (FUTURE WAREHOUSE)COLOR LEGENDS:(STUCCO COLORS BY PAREX) PAREX TEXTURED,COLOR: PAREX MOONDANCE 3027L MULTI-TEXTURE SURFACE WITH STUCCO-2C, PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: PAREX MOONDANCE 3027L. STUCCO-3C PAREX MEDIUM, SAND FINE SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: PAREX TWIG 3021L. STUCCO-4C PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: SUN DRIED 3011L . STUCCO-5C PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: PAREX SNOWBALL 10400L. STUCCO-6C PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH COLOR:PAREX BASALT 3015L STONE CLADDING, LEDGESTONE SOUTHWEST BLEND SHT MTL-WH, SHEET METAL GRAVEL STOP TYPE COPPING. PAC-CLAD CUSTOM FABRICATED ROOF EDGE FLASHING AND FASCIA. COLOR: BONE WHITE. SHT MTL-GR, ELEVATOR OVERRUN GRAVEL STOP TYPE COPPING, SCUPPER AND DOWNSPOUT. PAC-CLAD CUSTOM FABRICATED ROOF EDGE FLASHING AND FASCIA. COLOR: SLATE GRAY. EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (RESIDENCE-INN)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (CAR WASH)COLOR 36" dia-side36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-side36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)07/14/2022PKDSC1 01TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA“” 36" dia-sid e 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)07/15/2022PKDSC202TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-sid e 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA07/15/2022ASDSC303 STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-side 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 07/15/2022ASDSC404TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-side 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)07/15/2022PKDSC505TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-side 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA07/15/2022PKDSC606 FFE=185.00RESIDENCE INNHOTELFFE=183.70FUTUREWAREHOUSEFFE=184.50HOLIDAY INNEXPRESSTITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-sid e 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)07/15/2022ASDSC808TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-sid e 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA07/15/2022ASDS C99 13111082LANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGCROSSACCESSCROSSACCESSVPVPVPVP1214736LANDSCAPING1178336" dia-side36" dia-side36" dia-side129103EVEVEVEVEVEVEVEV33L/SSIDE WALKSIDE WALKLANDSCAPINGFIRERISERROOMCAMINO ARROYO ROAD1VPVPVPVP2 10171 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYLANDSCAPINGMAINENTRYLANDSCAPINGOUTDOOR POOLLANDSCAPING16811023372PATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS88 ROOM - 4 STORY738LANDSCAPING10LANDSCAPINGEVEVEVEVLANDSCAPING4AREA:-57207 S.F. 4FIRE RISERROOMAREA:-35990 S.F. AREA:-84254 S.F.FIRE RISERROOMPARCEL-1(1.31 AC)(0.82 AC)AREA:-103765 S.F.(2.3 AC)(1.93 AC)EVVPEV VPVPEVEVEV(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYO13CAMINO ARROYO ROADHOLLOWAY ROAD17LANDSCAPINGAREA:-162217 S.F. (3.72 AC)VACANT FUTURE LOT FOROFFICE, WAREHOUSE, RETAIL& MEDICAL FACILITYHOLLOWAY ROADSCALE:080'6040'20'1" = 40'-0"SYMBOLDESCRIPTIONDETAILConcrete PavingCrosswalkADA ramp with detectable warningsAC Paving1234REFERENCE_NOTES_SCHEDULEIRRIGATION NARRATIVEThe Gilroy Square irrigation system will utilize high-efficiency irrigation equipment and best practices in design to create ahighly efficient and operator friendly irrigation system. The irrigation design will comply with the State's Model WaterEfficient Landscape Ordinance requirements.The new irrigation system will utilize municipal potable water and connect to new irrigation meter and reduced pressurebackflow preventer located along Camino Arroyo. A new master valve, flow sensor and manual shut off valve will belocated downstream of the RPBP. The irrigation system will be operated by a new 'Smart' Irrigation Controller whichutilizes automatic ETO data schedule adjustments and includes an automatic rain shut off sensor. The controller willcomply with MWELO requirements. Shrub and groundcover areas will be irrigated with a “Netafim” type sub-surface in-line drip irrigation system. Drip lineswill include built-in check valves and pressure compensating emitters. Lawn areas will not be included in the project.Trees will be irrigated with deep water tree bubblers, operated on a valve independent from those operating shrub andground cover irrigation. Additional irrigation equipment to be furnished will include quick coupling valves, gate valves,remote control valves, filters for drip irrigation valves, spare wire stubs, pressure regulators as required and drip systemindicators.234L1.00TYP.TYP.TYP.PRELIMINARY MWELO WATER USE CALCULATIONSMATCHLINE© Copyright 2018 QUADRIGA landscape architecture & planning, inc.Issuances & RevisionsKey Plan/Consultant StampStampGilroy Square Development Schematic Design 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy, CA 95020DescriptionNo.DateProject Number:Date:Scale:QUADRIGAlandscape architecture and planning, inc.SACRAMENTO | SANTA ROSA916.441.2129 | www.quadriga-inc.comSCHEMATIC SITE PLAN20-26502021/07/091"=40'-0"MATCHLINE1TYP.SITE PLANTINGCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMESIZEWATER USEACH M20Achillea millefolium `Moonshine` / Yarrow1 galLowCAL SPECalandrinia spectabilis / Pink Calandrinia1 galLowCAL DWACallistemon viminalis `Little John` / Dwarf Weeping Bottlebrush5 galLowCAR PR2Carex testacea `Prairie Fire` / Prairie Fire Sedge1 galMediumCHO TECChondropetalum tectorum / Cape Rush5 galLowDIA LRSDianella revoluta `Little Rev` / Little Rev Flax Lily1 galLowHES BR2Hesperaloe parviflora `Perpa` TM / Brakelights Red Yucca1 galLowLEY CANLeymus condensatus `Canyon Prince` / Canyon Prince Blue Rye1 galLowLOM IRALomandra longifolia `Breeze` TM / Breeze Mat Rush1 galLowMYR CO3Myrtus compacta / Compact Myrtle1 galLowOLE LITOlea europaea `Little Ollie` TM / Little Ollie Olive5 galLowPRU MONPrunus caroliniana `Monus` / Bright `N Tight Carolina Cherry Laurel5 galLowSAL BARSalvia leucantha `Santa Barbara` / Mexican Bush Sage1 galLowSED AN3Sedum x `Angelina` / Angelina Sedum1 galLowSEN SERSenecio serpens / Blue Chalksticks1 galLowVIB TINViburnum tinus / Laurustinus5 galMediumBIORETENTION PLANTINGSCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMESIZEWATER USEBAC PIGBaccharis pilularis `Pigeon Point` / Coyote Brush1 galLowCAR DIVCarex divulsa / Berkeley Sedge1 galLowJUN ELKJuncus patens `Elk Blue` / Spreading Rush1 galLowMIM CARMimulus cardinalis / Scarlet Monkey Flower1 galHighRUD CALRudbeckia californica / California Coneflower1 galMediumSIS BELSisyrinchium bellum / Blue Eyed Grass1 galVery LowLAG NAT lagerstroemia 'Natchez' / Natchez Crape Myrtle TREESCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMESIZECER DES Cercidium x `Desert Museum` / Thornless Palo Verde CER CMO Cercis canadensis texensis `Oklahoma` / Oklahoma Redbud PIS KEI Pistacia chinensis `Keith Davey` / Keith Davey Chinese Pistache PLA COL Platanus x acerifolia `Columbia` / London Plane Tree CED DEO Cedrus Deodarar / Deodar Cedar ULM DRA Ulmus parvifolia `Drake` / Drake Chinese Elm QUE SHU Quercus shumardii / Shumard Red Oak MEDIUM SHADE TREEARB MUL Arbutus x `Marina` / Arbutus Multi-Trunk EVERGREEN ACCENT TREESDECIDUOUS ACCENT TREESLARGE SHADE TREELARGE STREET TREENYS SYL Nyssa sylvatica / Sour Gum CANDIDATE TREE SCHEDULE24"boxGIN AUT Ginkgo 'Autumn Gold' / Autumn Gold Gingko MEDIUM STREET TREEKOU PAN Koulreuteria paniculata / Golden Rain Tree ZEL GRE Zelkova 'Green Vase` / Green Vase Zelkova ULM FRO Ulmus 'Frontier' / Frontier Elm 24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"boxCANDIDATE PLANT SCHEDULEWATER USELowLowMedLowLowMedLowMedMedMedLowMedMedMed CalEEMod Memo and Results B APPENDIX MEMORANDUM To: Teri Wissler Adam, Principal in Charge From: Zane Mortensen, Assistant Planner Cc: File Date: September 27, 2022 Re: Camino Arroyo Development Project – Emissions Modeling Methodology, Assumptions, and Results PROJECT DESCRIPTION This memorandum describes the methodology and assumptions used in the emissions modeling prepared for the Camino Arroyo Development Project. The project site is located at the intersection of Pacheco Pass Highway (State Route 152) and Camino Arroyo Road, in the City of Gilroy, California. The proposed development is within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin, which is under the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (“air district”). As shown on the project plans (ACE Design 2022) the proposed project intends to subdivide the 10.07-acre property into five lots to be developed in three phases: ▪ Phase 1a – a 2,600 square-foot drive-thru Burger King and 4,242 square-foot convenience store gas station with car wash on approximately 2.1 acres; ▪ Phase 1b – an 82,568 square-foot Residence Inn and 67,780 square-foot Holiday Inn on approximately 4.1 acres; and ▪ Phase 2 – two industrial warehouse buildings with a combined footprint of 46,000 square-feet on 3.8 acres; The project site is vacant and consists of unmaintained grasslands. Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 2 MEMORANDUM SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT This assessment provides methodology, assumptions and an estimate of the proposed project construction and operational criteria air pollutant emissions and construction and operational greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at buildout of all three phases. Emissions are quantified using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2020.4 software, a modeling platform recommended by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and accepted by the air district. Model results are attached to this assessment. METHODOLOGY Emissions Model CalEEMod estimates construction emissions associated with land use development projects and allows for the input of project-specific construction information including phasing and equipment information. CalEEMod was used to estimate annual emissions for on-site and off-site construction activity. On-site activities are primarily made up of construction equipment emissions, while off-site activity includes worker, hauling, and vendor traffic. The CalEEMod software utilizes emissions models USEPA AP-42 emission factors, CARB vehicle emission models studies and studies commissioned by other California agencies. The CalEEMod platform allows calculations of both construction and operational criteria pollutant and GHG emissions from land use projects. The model also calculates indirect emissions from processes “downstream” of the proposed project such as GHG emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use. CalEEMod is capable of estimating changes in the carbon sequestration potential of a site based on changes in natural vegetation communities and the net number of new trees that would be planted as part of the project. The model calculates a one-time only loss in the carbon sequestration potential of the site that would result from changes in land use such as converting vegetation to built or paved surfaces, and can provide an estimate of the change in the carbon sequestration potential that would result from planting new trees in an amount that is greater than the number of trees to be removed (net number of new trees). Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 3 MEMORANDUM Project Characteristics For modeling purposes, data inputs to the model take into account the type and size of proposed uses utilizing CalEEMod default land uses based on the size metrics shown on the project plans, construction data information provided by the project applicant and trip generation provided by the traffic engineer. Model results are attached to this memorandum. The three proposed project phases were modeled separately. The size and type of proposed sources of criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions during construction and operations of Phase 1a, Phase 1b, and Phase 2 are categorized by the CalEEMod land use default categories as shown in Table 1, Project Characteristics. Unless otherwise noted, model inputs are derived from project designs and specifications (ACE Design 2022). Construction and operational criteria air pollutant and operational GHG emissions estimates are modeled for each phase based on the project characteristics information presented in Table 1. Modeling Scenario Unmitigated modeling scenarios were prepared for each of the three phases of the proposed project to estimate the potential criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions. Unmitigated Emissions Scenario The “unmitigated” emissions scenario provides an estimate of operational emissions that would be generated by the proposed land uses in compliance with uniformly applied regulatory measures that reduce GHG emissions and have criteria air emission reduction co- benefits. This scenario shows modeled operational criteria air pollutant emissions and GHG emissions that would be generated during construction and operational activities. Regulatory compliance consistent with California Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) emissions reduction measures already included in the model are referenced here parenthetically. Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 4 MEMORANDUM Table 1 Project Characteristics Project Components CalEEMod Default Land Use1 Proposed2,3 Phase 1a Drive-thru Fast Food Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-thru 2,600 Convenience Store Gas Station with Carwash Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 4,242 8 pumps Parking Lot Parking Lot 54 spaces Concrete/paving Other Asphalt Surfaces 46,436 Landscaping City Park 20,990 Phase 1b Hotel Hotel 82,568 112 rooms Hotel Hotel 67,780 88 rooms Parking Lot Parking Lot 208 spaces Concrete/paving Other Asphalt Surfaces 63,158 Landscaping City Park 27,395 Phase 2 (Future Development) Industrial Warehouse Unrefrigerated Warehouse – No Rail 46,000 Parking Lot Parking Lot 52,400 131 spaces Concrete/paving Other Asphalt Surfaces 28,860 Landscaping City Park 39,951 SOURCE: Ace Design LLC, 2022 NOTES: 1. CalEEMod default land use subtype. Descriptions of the model default land use categories and subtypes are found in the User’s Guide for CalEEMod Version 2020.4available online at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide. 2. Expressed in units of square feet unless otherwise noted. 3. Numbers are rounded and may vary. Compliance with the following regulations during operations is assumed: ▪ State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) (CAPCOA WUW-4); ▪ Landscaping equipment is set to electric only to reflect phasing out of gas-powered landscaping tools potentially by 2024 (AB 1346). It is assumed that these or similar requirements will be in effect at buildout (CAPCOA A-1); and Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 5 MEMORANDUM ▪ Solid waste diversion of 75 percent is applied consistent with waste diversion targets identified in AB 341. It is assumed that these or similar requirements will be in effect at buildout (CAPCOA SW-1). Assumptions Unless otherwise noted, data inputs for the model scenarios are based on the following primary assumptions: 1. Construction and operational criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions generated by the proposed project were estimated using the following CalEEMod default land use subtypes: 2. Emissions generated by the convenience store and fueling stations are assumed to be similar to emissions generated by the CalEEMod default land use category of Convenience market with Gas Pumps; 3. Emissions generated by landscaping are assumed to be similar to emissions generated by the CalEEMod default land use subtype “City Park”. 4. The estimated construction start date for Phase 1a and Phase 1b is January, 2023; 5. The estimated operational year for Phase 1a and Phase 1b is 2025; 6. The estimated construction start date for Phase 2 is January, 2026 7. The estimated operational year for Phase 2 is 2028; 8. Changes to carbon sequestration potential were estimated based on the conversion of 10.07 acres of grassland. Operational Emissions Data Input Each air district (or county) assigns trip lengths for urban and rural settings, which are incorporated into the CalEEMod defaults. The model’s defaults were set to “urban” and the jurisdictional authority parameters are based on the model defaults for the air district. Model defaults for mobile operational sources are adjusted based on the trip generation information provided by the project traffic engineer (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2022). Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 6 MEMORANDUM Construction Emi ssions Data Inputs Construction-related GHG emissions are quantified. CalEEMod default construction parameters allow estimates of short-term construction GHG emissions based upon empirical data collected and analyzed by the CARB. CalEEMod estimates construction emissions associated with land use development projects and allows for the input of project-specific construction information including phasing and equipment information, if known. Construction information in detail sufficient to adjust model defaults was not available; therefore, the model’s default construction emissions factors were used in this assessment. GHG emissions are amortized over a 30-year time period to yield an annual emissions volume. Carbon Sequestration Potential Data Inputs CalEEMod estimates a one-time only change in sequestration potential resulting from changes in natural communities. The proposed project would replace approximately 10.07- acres of grassland with development. Grassland is identified as a natural community with carbon sequestration value in the model; therefore, an estimate of the one-time loss in carbon sequestration value attributable to the loss of cropland is included in this assessment. A landscaping plan was not available at the time of modeling; therefore, an estimate of the change in sequestration potential from tree planting was not modeled. CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANTS RESULTS Construction Emissio ns Average daily emissions were computed by dividing the total construction emissions by the number of construction days. Based on the applicant construction schedule and default construction equipment values, CalEEMod estimated emissions over 220 construction workdays for each phase. Unmitigated construction emissions are presented in Table 2, Unmitigated Annualized Daily Construction Emissions. Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 7 MEMORANDUM Table 2 Unmitigated Annualized Daily Construction Emissions Emissions ROG1 NOx1 Total PM101,2 Exhaust PM103 Total PM2.51,2 Phase 1a Maximum 0.23 1.84 0.15 0.08 0.10 Annualized Average Daily4 <0.001 0.004 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Phase 1b Maximum 0.83 2.28 0.34 0.10 0.18 Annualized Average Daily4 0.002 0.005 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Phase 2 Maximum 0.27 1.87 0.24 0.074 0.13 Annualized Average Daily4 0.001 0.004 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Source: EMC Planning Group 2022, Note: 1, Emissions amounts are expressed in pounds per day and rounded. 2. Total PM emissions include exhaust particles and fugitive dust. 3. Exhaust PM10 is assumed to be DPM. 4. CalEEMod assumes 220 construction days per phase. Operational Emissions Unmitigated operational criteria air pollutant emissions are summarized in Table 3, Unmitigated Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions. Table 3 Unmitigated Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Emissions Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Sulfur Oxides (SO2) Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10) PM2.5 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Phase 1a Unmitigated Annual 0.67 0.008 0.85 0.23 5.74 Average Daily Emissions 0.002 <0.001 0.002 0.001 0.016 Phase 1b Unmitigated Annual 0.91 0.01 1.21 0.35 5.45 Average Daily Emissions 0.002 <0.001 0.003 0.001 0.015 Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 8 MEMORANDUM Phase 2 Unmitigated Annual 0.09 0.002 0.21 0.06 0.73 Average Daily Emissions <0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.002 Buildout Average Daily Emissions 0.005 <0.001 0.006 0.002 0.032 SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2020 NOTES: 1. Results may vary due to rounding. 2. Expressed in tons. GHG EMISSIONS RESULTS Construction GHG Emissions Construction GHG emissions would be 333.69 MT CO2e for Phase 1a, 564.31 MT CO2e for Phase 1b, and 447.42 MT CO2e for Phase 2 for a total of 1,345.43 MT CO2e. When averaged over a 30-year operational lifetime, the annual amortized emissions equal 44.85 MT CO2e per year. Operational GHG Emissions At buildout of all phases, the proposed project would generate annual unmitigated operational GHG emissions of 2,467.46 MT CO2e as summarized in Table 3, Unmitigated Operational GHG Emissions. Carbon Sequestration Potential The change in carbon sequestration potential is shown in Section 2.3 of the model results for each phase. Phase 1a would result in a loss of 9.18 MT CO2e; Phase 1b would result in a loss of 17.71 MT CO2e; Phase 2 would result in a loss of 16.46 MT CO2e for a total net loss of 43.35 MT CO2e sequestration potential. Averaged over a 30-year lifetime, the annual loss in carbon sequestration potential would be 1.45 MT CO2e per year. Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 9 MEMORANDUM Table 3 Unmitigated Operational GHG Emissions Emissions Sources CO2e Phase 1a Phase 1b Phase 2 Area 0.001 0.001 0.002 Energy1 42.10 461.07 25.25 Mobile 747.15 975.23 153.00 Waste 3.77 13.78 5.45 Water2 1.36 7.10 14.38 Total by Phase 794.38 1,475.18 198.08 Buildout 2,467.46 SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2022 NOTES: Results may vary due to rounding. Expressed in MT CO2e per year. 1. Results include emissions reductions from compliance with State thresholds for the MWELO Total Unmitigated GHG Emissions at Buildout GHG emissions at buildout of all phases consist of amortized construction emissions added to the operational emissions and the amortized annual loss in carbon sequestration potential as presented in Table 4, Total Unmitigated Annual GHG Emissions. Table 4 Total Unmitigated Annual GHG Emissions Operational Emissions Amortized Construction Emissions Loss of Carbon Sequestration Potential Total Project Emissions 2,467.46 44.85 1.45 2,513.76 SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2022 NOTE: Results may vary due to rounding. SOURCES 1. Breeze Software, a Division of Trinity Consultants. California Emissions Estimator (CalEEMod) Version 2020.4. May 2021. Available online at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 10 MEMORANDUM 2. ----. 2021. CalEEMod User’s Guide (Version 2020.4). Available online at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide 3. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. May 2017. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. Available online at: http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and- research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en 4. Hexagon Transportation Consultants. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis. July 5, 2022. 5. ACE Design LLC. Site Plan Gilroy Square 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy CA, September 9, 2022. CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0 Parking Lot 54.00 Space 0.49 21,600.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 46.45 1000sqft 1.07 46,446.00 Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated Santa Clara County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days)58 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 8.00 Pump 0.03 4,242.00 0 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 2.60 1000sqft 0.06 2,600.00 0 City Park 0.48 Acre 0.48 20,990.00 Vehicle Trips - Trip rate adjusted to match Trip Generation Estimates. Water And Wastewater - No septic system - Wastewater service provided by South County Regional Wastewater Authority. Area Mitigation - Landscaping equipment is set to electric only to reflect phasing out of gas-powered landscaping tools potentially by 2024 (AB 1346). 0.004 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Land Use - Square footage adjusted to match project site plan. Demolition - No infrastructure located on project site CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 203.98 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.033 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Climate Zone 4 Operational Year 2025 Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.96 0.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 322.50 265.12 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 20,908.80 20,990.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 1,129.40 4,242.00 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 0.78 0.00 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 322.50 265.12 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 322.50 265.12 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 472.58 467.48 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 616.12 467.48 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 2.19 0.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 467.48 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.2343 1.8368 1.9268 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 1.3594 1.3594 7.0000e-005 1.0000e- 005 1.3628 0.0554 5.9200e- 003 332.3315 2024 0.0458 5.5400e- 003 8.9000e- 003 2.0000e-005 2.9000e-004 2.8000e-004 5.6000e-004 8.0000e-005 2.8000e-004 3.5000e-004 0.0000 0.0761 0.0998 0.0000 329.1822 329.18223.8500e-003 0.0721 0.0797 0.1518 0.02372023 0.0554 5.9200e- 003 332.33150.0761 0.0998 0.0000 329.1822 329.18223.8500e-003 0.0721 0.0797 0.1518 0.0237Maximum0.2343 1.8368 1.9268 2.2 Overall Operational N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 0.0000 0.0000 1.1300e- 003 Energy 2.9600e- 003 0.0269 0.0226 1.6000e-004 2.0400e-003 2.0400e-003 2.0400e-003 2.0400e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0700e-003 1.0700e-0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000Area0.0363 1.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 729.1279 729.12797.9000e-003 0.8401 6.7800e-003 0.8469 0.2242Mobile0.8629 0.6382 5.7253 41.8039 41.8039 2.5900e-003 7.8000e-004 42.1017 0.0000 0.0000Water 0.0000 1.5219 0.0899 0.0000 3.7705 0.0872 0.0532 747.1527 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.5219 6.2900e-003 0.2305 0.0000 771.5747 773.4054 0.1879 0.0546 794.3849 8.1800e-003 6.8000e-004 1.3589 Total 0.9022 0.6651 5.7485 8.0600e-003 0.8401 8.8200e-003 0.8489 0.2242 8.3300e-003 0.2326 1.8307 0.0000 0.0000 0.3088 0.6418 0.9506 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 2.3 Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation Land Change -9.1803 Total -9.1803 CO2e Category t o n s MT 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.8629 0.6382 5.7253 7.9000e-003 0.8401 6.7800e-003 0.8469 0.2242 6.2900e-003 0.2305 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2OExhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 0.0872 0.0532 747.1527 747.1527 Unmitigated 0.8629 0.6382 5.7253 7.9000e-003 0.8401 6.7800e-003 0.8469 0.2242 6.2900e-003 0.2305 0.0000 729.1279 729.1279 0.0000 729.1279 729.1279 0.0872 0.0532 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 1,215.45 1,215.45 1215.45 1,135,623 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 2,120.96 2,120.96 2120.96 1,137,692 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Total 3,336.41 3,336.41 3,336.41 2,273,315 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.00 19.00 66 28 6City Park 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-byLand Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W 78.80 19.00 29 21 50Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 9.50 7.30 7.30 2.20 80.20 19.00 14 21 65Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.80 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 0.00 0.00 0 0 0Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0Other Asphalt Surfaces 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893City Park 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MHMDVLHD1LHD2MHDHHD 0.000900 0.002720 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 5.0 Energy Detail 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 Parking Lot 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893 0.000372 0.024386 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 Unmitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 9926.28 5.0000e- 005 4.9000e- 004 4.1000e-004 0.0000 4.0000e-005 4.0000e-005 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 28.7579 28.7579 5.5000e-004 5.3000e- 004 28.9288 1.0000e- 005 0.5329 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 538902 2.9100e- 003 0.0264 0.0222 1.6000e-004 2.0100e-003 2.0100e-003 2.0100e- 003 2.0100e-003 0.0000 4.0000e-005 0.0000 0.5297 0.5297 1.0000e-005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity 29.2876 29.2876 5.6000e-004 5.4000e- 004 29.4616 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.9600e- 003 0.0269 0.0226 1.6000e-004 2.0500e-003 2.0500e-003 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr t o n s MT/yr City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 8.0000e-005 4.1183 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 83642 7.7389 1.2500e- 003 1.5000e-004 7.8154 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 44074.4 4.0779 6.6000e- 004 2.4000e-004 12.6401 6.0 Area Detail Total 12.5163 2.0200e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 7560 0.6995 1.1000e- 004 1.0000e-005 0.7064 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 4.9900e- 003 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.0313 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0700e-003 1.0700e-003 0.0000 0.0000 1.1300e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.1300e- 003 Total 0.0364 1.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0700e-003 1.0700e-0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000Landscaping 7.0 Water Detail CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 7.2 Water by Land Use Land Use Mgal t o n s MT/yr City Park 0 / 0.537024 0.1739 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1756 Unmitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e-005 0.1262 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 0.789188 / 0.0473009 0.6896 7.3700e- 003 6.2000e-004 1.0571 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 0.0836574 / 0.0481462 0.0871 7.8000e- 004 6.9000e-004 1.3589 8.0 Waste Detail Total 0.9506 8.1800e- 003 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons t o n s MT/yr CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.0000 3.7655 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 7.4875 1.5199 0.0898 City Park 0.01 2.0300e- 003 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 5.0300e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.5219 0.0899 0.0000 3.7705 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 11.0 Vegetation Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 11.1 Vegetation Land Change Vegetation Type Category t o n s MT Unmitigated -9.1803 0.0000 0.0000 -9.1803 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Initial/Final Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 0.0000 -9.1803Total-9.1803 0.0000 Acres t o n s MT Grassland 2.13 / 0 -9.1803 0.0000 0.0000 -9.1803 Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated Santa Clara County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0 Hotel 112.00 Room 0.10 82,568.00 0 City Park 0.63 Acre 0.63 27,442.80 0 Parking Lot 208.00 Space 1.87 83,200.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 63.16 1000sqft 1.45 63,158.00 Climate Zone 4 Operational Year 2025 Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days)58 Hotel 88.00 Room 0.06 67,780.00 Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value Vehicle Trips - Trip rate adjusted to match Trip Generation Estimates. Water And Wastewater - No septic systems - Wastewater service provided by South County Regional Wastewater Authority. Area Mitigation - Phasing out of gas-powered landscaping tools potentially by 2024 (AB 1346). 0.004 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Land Use - Area adjusted to match project description Other asphalt surfaces estimated based on total paved area and parking lotDemolition - No existing infrastructure located on the property. CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 203.98 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.033 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.96 0.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 8.42 tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.73 0.10 tblLandUse LotAcreage 2.93 0.06 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 162,624.00 82,568.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 127,776.00 67,780.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 0.78 0.00 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.36 8.42 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 2.19 0.00 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 8.42 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 N2O CO2ePM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.2605 2.2834 2.5794 Year tons/yr MT/yr 25.7402 25.7402 5.7200e-003 3.3000e- 004 25.9804 0.0834 0.0202 538.3331 2024 0.8322 0.1101 0.1647 2.9000e-004 5.5000e-003 5.1000e-003 0.0106 1.4700e-003 4.7700e-003 6.2500e-003 0.0000 0.0919 0.1754 0.0000 530.2248 530.22485.9200e-003 0.2415 0.0979 0.3394 0.08352023 0.0834 0.0202 538.33310.0919 0.1754 0.0000 530.2248 530.22485.9200e-003 0.2415 0.0979 0.3394 0.0835Maximum0.8322 2.2834 2.5794 2.2 Overall Operational N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 1.0000e-005 0.0000 4.7800e- 003 Energy 0.0356 0.3236 0.2718 1.9400e-003 0.0246 0.0246 0.0246 0.0246 0.0000 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005 0.0000 4.5400e-003 4.5400e-0030.0000 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005Area0.6785 2.0000e- 005 2.5100e- 003 959.4425 959.44250.0104 1.1823 7.5200e-003 1.1898 0.3156Mobile0.5785 0.5847 5.1778 457.9301 457.9301 0.0238 8.5300e-003 461.0682 0.0000 0.0000Water 0.0000 5.5594 0.3286 0.0000 13.7732 0.0664 0.0474 975.2328 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.5594 6.9900e-003 0.3226 0.0000 1,420.3168 1,427.6712 0.4662 0.0599 1,457.1789 0.0474 3.9600e-003 7.0999 Total 1.2926 0.9084 5.4521 0.0123 1.1823 0.0321 1.2144 0.3156 0.0316 0.3472 7.3544 0.0000 0.0000 1.7950 2.9396 4.7346 2.3 Vegetation Vegetation CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Vegetation Land Change -17.7141 Total -17.7141 CO2e Category t o n s MT 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Hotel 740.96 740.96 740.96 1,407,773 Hotel 943.04 943.04 943.04 1,791,711 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Total 1,684.00 1,684.00 1,684.00 3,199,483 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.00 19.00 66 28 6City Park 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-byLand Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W 61.60 19.00 58 38 4Hotel9.50 7.30 7.30 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4Hotel9.50 7.30 7.30 19.40 4.4 Fleet Mix 0.00 0.00 0 0 0Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0Other Asphalt Surfaces 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893City Park 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MHMDVLHD1LHD2MHDHHD 0.000900 0.002720 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 Hotel 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893 0.000372 0.024386 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 5.0 Energy Detail 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893Parking Lot 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 Unmitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 2.97622e+ 006 0.0161 0.1459 0.1226 8.8000e-004 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 193.4737 193.4737 3.7100e-003 3.5500e- 003 194.6235 2.9100e- 003 159.7662 Hotel 3.62556e+ 006 0.0196 0.1777 0.1493 1.0700e-003 0.0135 0.0135 0.0135 0.0135 0.0000 0.0111 0.0000 158.8224 158.8224 3.0400e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity 352.2962 352.2962 6.7500e-003 6.4600e- 003 354.3897 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0356 0.3236 0.2718 1.9500e-003 0.0246 0.0246 0.0246 0.0246 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 9.1000e-004 46.8662 Hotel 611003 56.5323 9.1500e- 003 1.1100e-003 57.0913 Hotel 501572 46.4073 7.5100e- 003 Land Use kWh/yr t o n s MT/yr City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0700e-003 106.6785 6.0 Area Detail Total 105.6339 0.0171 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 29120 2.6943 4.4000e- 004 5.0000e-005 2.7209 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 6.2 Area by SubCategory N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.0815 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.0000Consumer Products 0.5969 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.5400e-003 4.5400e-0030.0000 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005Landscaping1.7000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.5100e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.0 Water Detail 4.5400e-003 4.5400e-003 1.0000e-005 0.0000 4.7800e- 003 1.0000e-005 0.0000 4.7800e- 003 Total 0.6785 2.0000e- 005 2.5100e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005 0.0000 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 3.9600e-003 6.8694 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 5.07335 / 0.52932 4.5063 0.0474 Land Use Mgal t o n s MT/yr City Park 0 / 0.704845 0.2283 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2305 8.0 Waste Detail 0.0000 0.0000 Total 4.7346 0.0474 3.9600e-003 7.1000 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 0.0000 13.7669 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 27.375 5.5569 0.3284 Land Use tons t o n s MT/yr City Park 0.0125 2.5400e- 003 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 6.2900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 Total 5.5594 0.3286 0.0000 13.7732 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 11.0 Vegetation Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category t o n s MT Unmitigated -17.7141 0.0000 0.0000 -17.7141 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 11.1 Vegetation Land Change Vegetation Type Initial/Final Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 0.0000 -17.7141Total-17.7141 0.0000 Acres t o n s MT Grassland 4.11 / 0 -17.7141 0.0000 0.0000 -17.7141 Water Mitigation - State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) (CAPCOA WUW-4) Waste Mitigation - 75 percent is applied consistent with waste diversion targets identified in AB 341. Demolition - No existing infrastructure on the property. Vehicle Trips - Trip rate adjusted to match Trip Generation Estimates. Water And Wastewater - No septic systems - Wastewater service provided by South County Regional Wastwater Authority. Area Mitigation - Landscaping equipment is set to electric only to reflect phasing out of gas-powered landscaping tools potentially by 2024 (AB 1346). N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.004 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Land Use - Area adjusted to match project description. Other asphalt surfaces estimated based on total paved area and parking lot Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 203.98 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.033 Precipitation Freq (Days)58 Climate Zone 4 Operational Year 2028 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 0 City Park 0.92 Acre 0.92 39,951.00 0 Parking Lot 131.00 Space 1.18 52,400.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 28.86 1000sqft 0.66 28,860.00 0 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 46.00 1000sqft 1.06 46,000.00 Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated Santa Clara County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.0795 9.5700e-003 422.16550.0698 0.1318 0.0000 417.3279 417.32794.7300e- 003 0.1623 0.0744 0.2368 0.062020260.2079 1.8703 2.3061 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 1.74 4.13 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.74 4.13 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 0.78 0.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.74 4.13 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 2.19 0.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 39,951.01 39,951.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.96 0.00 Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Vegetation Land Change -16.4642 CO2e Category t o n s MT 2.3 Vegetation Vegetation 181.5181 187.4801 0.2407 0.0154 198.0816 0.0993 8.3000e-003 14.3771 Total 0.2829 0.0862 0.7328 1.6900e- 003 0.2049 1.6700e- 003 0.2066 0.0547 1.5900e- 003 0.0563 5.9620 0.0000 0.0000 3.7636 5.6589 9.42250.0000 0.0000Water 0.0000 2.1984 0.1299 0.0000 5.4464 8.6100e- 003 6.6100e-003 153.0042 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.1984 1.0000e- 003 0.0557 0.0000 150.8197 150.81971.6400e- 003 0.2049 1.0800e- 003 0.2060 0.0547Mobile0.0710 0.0784 0.7252 25.0375 25.0375 2.8500e- 003 4.8000e-004 25.2518 0.0000 0.0000 2.0900e- 003 Energy 8.5000e- 004 7.7600e- 003 6.5200e-003 5.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e-004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.9900e- 003 1.9900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Area0.2110 1.0000e- 005 1.1000e-003 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2.2 Overall Operational 0.0795 9.5700e-003 422.16550.0698 0.1318 0.0000 417.3279 417.32794.7300e- 003 0.1623 0.0744 0.2368 0.0620Maximum0.2718 1.8703 2.3061 25.0533 25.0533 5.9200e- 003 2.1000e-004 25.262520270.2718 0.1059 0.1666 2.9000e- 004 3.8900e- 003 4.7200e- 003 8.6100e- 003 1.0400e- 003 4.4200e- 003 5.4600e-003 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.000349 0.024273 0.000862 0.002585 5.0 Energy Detail 0.020137 0.005304 0.008188 0.006136 0.000868Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.576295 0.056490 0.183529 0.114985 0.000862 0.002585 Parking Lot 0.576295 0.056490 0.183529 0.114985 0.020137 0.005304 0.008188 0.006136 0.000868 0.000349 0.024273 0.000862 0.002585 0.000349 0.024273 0.000862 0.002585 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.576295 0.056490 0.183529 0.114985 0.020137 0.005304 0.008188 0.006136 0.000868 0.000349 0.024273 0.020137 0.005304 0.008188 0.006136 0.000868City Park 0.576295 0.056490 0.183529 0.114985 OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MHMDVLHD1LHD2MHDHHD 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 0.00 41.00 92 5 3Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0Other Asphalt Surfaces 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 48.00 19.00 66 28 6City Park 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-byLand Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Total 189.98 189.98 189.98 554,649 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 189.98 189.98 189.98 554,649 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile Total -16.4642 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 18340 1.6969 2.7000e-004 3.0000e- 005 1.7137 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 Land Use kWh/yr t o n s MT/yr City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 1.5000e- 004 8.4945 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity 5.9000e-004 0.0000 8.4443 8.4443 1.6000e- 004 8.4443 1.6000e- 004 1.5000e- 004 8.4945 Total 8.5000e- 004 7.7600e-003 6.5200e- 003 5.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e-004 0.0000 8.44436.5200e- 003 5.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 158240 8.5000e- 004 7.7600e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 Unmitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Unmitigated 7.2 Water by Land Use 7.0 Water Detail 1.9900e- 003 1.9900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 2.0900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 2.0900e- 003 Total 0.2110 1.0000e- 005 1.1000e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.9900e- 003 1.9900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Landscaping7.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.1000e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.1853 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.0257 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 6.2 Area by SubCategory 6.0 Area Detail 2.9000e- 004 15.0436 Total 16.5932 2.6800e-003 3.2000e- 004 16.7573 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 161000 14.8963 2.4100e-003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.0000 5.4364Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 10.81 2.1943 0.1297 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 Land Use tons t o n s MT/yr City Park 0.02 4.0600e- 003 2.4000e-004 0.0000 0.0101 Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 8.2 Waste by Land Use 8.0 Waste Detail 8.2900e- 003 14.0405 Total 9.4225 0.0993 8.3000e- 003 14.3771 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 10.6375 / 0 9.0892 0.0993 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 Land Use Mgal t o n s MT/yr City Park 0 / 1.0293 0.3333 5.0000e-005 1.0000e- 005 0.3366 Indoor/Outd oor Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.0000 -16.4642Total-16.4642 0.0000 Acres t o n s MT Grassland 3.82 / 0 -16.4642 0.0000 0.0000 -16.4642 11.1 Vegetation Land Change Vegetation Type Initial/Final Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category t o n s MT Unmitigated -16.4642 0.0000 0.0000 -16.4642 11.0 Vegetation Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Total 2.1984 0.1299 0.0000 5.4464 EMFAC Results C APPENDIX APPENDIX C EMFAC2021 Gilroy Square Fuel Demand 2028 Fuel Demand Vehicle Class Fuel Process Kgal/day Fuel Type Demand All Other Buses Dsl IDLEX 1.77E-05 Diesel All Other Buses Dsl RUNEX 0.00191 Kgal/day 0.09 LDA Dsl RUNEX 0.000257 KGal/yr 34.41 LDT1 Dsl RUNEX 6.55E-07 LDT2 Dsl RUNEX 0.000385 Gas LHD1 Dsl IDLEX 4.67E-05 Kgal/day 0.52 LHD1 Dsl RUNEX 0.008929 KGal/yr 188.11 LHD2 Dsl IDLEX 3.58E-05 LHD2 Dsl RUNEX 0.004929 Hybrid MDV Dsl RUNEX 0.001052 kgal/day 0.006 MH Dsl RUNEX 0.000362 Kgal/yr 2.33 Motor Coach Dsl IDLEX 3.31E-05 Motor Coach Dsl RUNEX 0.000689 TOTAL PTO Dsl RUNEX 0.001653 KGal/yr 224.85 SBUS Dsl IDLEX 4.96E-05 Gal/yr 224847.3 SBUS Dsl RUNEX 0.000569 T6 CAIRP Class 4 Dsl IDLEX 6.35E-08 T6 CAIRP Class 4 Dsl RUNEX 7.87E-06 T6 CAIRP Class 5 Dsl IDLEX 8.32E-08 Mileage T6 CAIRP Class 5 Dsl RUNEX 1.09E-05 Check: T6 CAIRP Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 2.94E-07 T6 CAIRP Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 2.74E-05 VMT/yr 6027447 T6 CAIRP Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 4.72E-07 mpg 26.81 T6 CAIRP Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 0.000164 T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 Dsl IDLEX 4.34E-05 T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 Dsl RUNEX 0.000816 T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 Dsl IDLEX 4.99E-05 T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 Dsl RUNEX 0.000954 T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 9.55E-05 T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 0.001809 T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 1.41E-05 T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 0.000398 T6 Instate Other Class 4 Dsl IDLEX 8.21E-05 T6 Instate Other Class 4 Dsl RUNEX 0.001697 T6 Instate Other Class 5 Dsl IDLEX 0.000166 T6 Instate Other Class 5 Dsl RUNEX 0.003563 T6 Instate Other Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 0.000159 T6 Instate Other Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 0.003329 T6 Instate Other Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 6.90E-05 T6 Instate Other Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 0.001413 T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 6.02E-07 APPENDIX C EMFAC2021 Gilroy Square Fuel Demand T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 1.52E-05 T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 2.14E-05 T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 0.000546 T6 OOS Class 4 Dsl IDLEX 3.65E-08 T6 OOS Class 4 Dsl RUNEX 4.49E-06 T6 OOS Class 5 Dsl IDLEX 4.75E-08 T6 OOS Class 5 Dsl RUNEX 6.19E-06 T6 OOS Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 1.69E-07 T6 OOS Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 1.57E-05 T6 OOS Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 2.42E-07 T6 OOS Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 0.000108 T6 Public Class 4 Dsl IDLEX 1.43E-05 T6 Public Class 4 Dsl RUNEX 0.000186 T6 Public Class 5 Dsl IDLEX 2.46E-05 T6 Public Class 5 Dsl RUNEX 0.000323 T6 Public Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 1.31E-05 T6 Public Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 0.000175 T6 Public Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 3.07E-05 T6 Public Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 0.00053 T6 Utility Class 5 Dsl IDLEX 5.17E-06 T6 Utility Class 5 Dsl RUNEX 0.000145 T6 Utility Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 9.76E-07 T6 Utility Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 2.73E-05 T6 Utility Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 1.09E-06 T6 Utility Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 3.76E-05 T7 CAIRP Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000798 T7 CAIRP Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.010172 T7 NNOOS Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000871 T7 NNOOS Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.012093 T7 NOOS Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000384 T7 NOOS Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.004496 T7 Other Port Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 2.83E-05 T7 Other Port Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.001195 T7 POAK Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000178 T7 POAK Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.003865 T7 POLA Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 2.66E-13 T7 POLA Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 7.26E-12 T7 Public Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 6.95E-05 T7 Public Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.001744 T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 5.65E-05 T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.001466 T7 Single Dump Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000113 T7 Single Dump Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.002225 T7 Single Other Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000158 APPENDIX C EMFAC2021 Gilroy Square Fuel Demand T7 Single Other Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.002763 T7 SWCV Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 2.85E-05 T7 SWCV Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.001913 T7 Tractor Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000729 T7 Tractor Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.009045 T7 Utility Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 3.98E-06 T7 Utility Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.000186 UBUS Dsl RUNEX 0.001656 LDA Gas RUNEX 0.222551 LDA Gas STREX 0.007111 LDT1 Gas RUNEX 0.018995 LDT1 Gas STREX 0.000688 LDT2 Gas RUNEX 0.134045 LDT2 Gas STREX 0.004515 LHD1 Gas IDLEX 9.06E-05 LHD1 Gas RUNEX 0.024046 LHD1 Gas STREX 0.000298 LHD2 Gas IDLEX 1.33E-05 LHD2 Gas RUNEX 0.003317 LHD2 Gas STREX 3.67E-05 MCY Gas RUNEX 0.001249 MCY Gas STREX 0.000104 MDV Gas RUNEX 0.087153 MDV Gas STREX 0.002998 MH Gas RUNEX 0.001585 MH Gas STREX 2.63E-07 OBUS Gas IDLEX 5.86E-06 OBUS Gas RUNEX 0.001119 OBUS Gas STREX 9.69E-06 SBUS Gas IDLEX 1.95E-05 SBUS Gas RUNEX 0.000299 SBUS Gas STREX 1.73E-06 T6TS Gas IDLEX 2.86E-05 T6TS Gas RUNEX 0.004868 T6TS Gas STREX 4.82E-05 T7IS Gas RUNEX 1.20E-05 T7IS Gas STREX 5.78E-08 UBUS Gas RUNEX 0.000165 UBUS Gas STREX 2.62E-07 LDA Phe RUNEX 0.00479 LDA Phe STREX 0.000231 LDT1 Phe RUNEX 4.30E-05 LDT1 Phe STREX 2.27E-06 LDT2 Phe RUNEX 0.000778 APPENDIX C EMFAC2021 Gilroy Square Fuel Demand LDT2 Phe STREX 4.57E-05 MDV Phe RUNEX 0.000463 MDV Phe STREX 3.42E-05 CNDDB Results D APPENDIX Appendix D 1 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Appendix D Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur in the Project Vicinity Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Plants Alkali milk-vetch (Astragalus tener var. tener) --/--/1B.2 Alkaline sites in playas, valley and foothill grassland (on adobe clay), and vernal pools; elevation 1-60m. Blooming Period: March - June Unlikely. Suitable grassland habitat not found at the project site. Anderson's manzanita (Arctostaphylos andersonii) --/--/1B.2 Broadleaved upland forest, chaparral, and North Coast coniferous forest. Known only from the Santa Cruz Mountains. Prefers open sites in redwood forest; elevation 180-800m. Blooming Period: November - April Unlikely. Suitable forest habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Arcuate bush-mallow (Malacothamnus arcuatus) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral, in gravelly alluvium; elevation 80-355m. Blooming Period: April - September Unlikely. Suitable chaparral habitat not found at the project site. Big-scale balsamroot (Balsamorhiza macrolepis) --/--/1B.2 Valley and foothill grassland, and cismontane woodland; sometimes on serpentine; elevation 35-1000m. Blooming Period: March - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. California alkali grass (Puccinellia simplex) --/--/1B.2 Meadows and seeps, chenopod scrub, valley and foothill grasslands, vernal pools. Alkaline, vernally mesic. Sinks, flats, and lake margins; elevation 1- 915m. Blooming Period: March - May Unlikely. Suitable mesic habitat not found at the project site. Chaparral harebell (Campanula exigua) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral (rocky, usually serpentine); elevation 275-1250m. Blooming Period: May - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi spp. congdonii) --/--/1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland (alkaline); elevation 1-230m. Known to occur on various substrates, and in disturbed and ruderal (weedy) areas. Blooming Period: June - November Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Eastwood’s goldenbush (Ericameria fasciculata) --/--/1B.1 Closed cone coniferous forest, chaparral (maritime), coastal dunes, and coastal scrub/sand; elevation 30 - 275 meters. Blooming Period: July - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Fragrant fritillary (Fritillaria liliacea) --/--/1B.2 Coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, and coastal prairie. Often on serpentine, various soils reported though usually clay in grassland; elevation 3-410m. Blooming Period: February - April Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Hairless popcorn flower (Plagiobothrys glaber) --/--/1A Meadows and seeps (alkaline), marshes and swamps (coastal salt); elevation 15-180m. Blooming Period: March - May Unlikely. Suitable mesic habitat not found at the project site. Appendix D 2 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Hall's tarplant (Deinandra halliana) --/--/1B.1 Cismontane woodland, chenopod scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Variety of substrates, including clay, sand, and alkaline soils; elevation 300- 950m. Blooming Period: April - May Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Hooker’s manzanita (Arctostaphylos hookeri ssp. hookeri) --/--/1B.2 Sandy soils in coastal scrub, chaparral, and closed-cone forest habitats; evergreen; elevation 45-215m. Blooming Period: February - April Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Hoover's button-celery (Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri) --/--/1B.1 Vernal pools. Alkaline depressions, roadside ditches, and other wet places near the coast; elevation 5-45m. Blooming Period: July Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Hospital Canyon larkspur (Delphinium californicum ssp. interius) --/--/1B.2 Cismontane woodland and chaparral, in wet, boggy meadows, openings in chaparral, and in canyons; elevation 225-1060m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Indian Valley bush-mallow (Malacothamnus aboriginum) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral and cismontane woodland; rocky, often burned areas. Prefers granitic outcrops and sandy bare soil; elevation 150-1700m. Blooming Period: April - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Legenere (Legenere limosa) --/--/1B.1 In beds of vernal pools; elevation 1-880m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Loma Prieta hoita (Hoita strobilina) --/--/1B.1 Wet areas on serpentine substrate in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and riparian woodland; elevation 30-860m. Blooming Period: May - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Monterey spineflower (Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens) FT/--/1B.2 Sandy openings in maritime chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal dunes, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland; elevation 3-450m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Most beautiful jewel-flower (Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral, valley and foothill grassland, and cismontane woodland; serpentine outcrops, on ridges and slopes; elevation 120-730m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Mt. Hamilton thistle (Cirsium fontinale var. campylon) --/--/1B.2 Serpentine seeps in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grassland; elevation 100-890m. Blooming Period: February - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Pajaro manzanita (Arctostaphylos pajaroensis) --/--/1B.1 Sandy soils in chaparral habitat; evergreen; elevation 30-760m. Blooming Period: December - March Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Appendix D 3 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Pine rose (Rosa pinetorum) --/--/1B.2 Closed-cone coniferous forest; elevation 2-300m. Blooming Period: May - July Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Pink creamsacs (Castilleja rubicundula ssp. rubicundula) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral, meadows and seeps, and valley and foothill grassland. Openings in chaparral or grasslands on serpentine soils; elevation 20-900m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Pinnacles buckwheat (Eriogonum nortonii) --/--/1B.3 Sandy sites in chaparral and valley and foothill grassland, often on recent burns; elevation 300-975m. Blooming Period: May - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Prostrate vernal pool navarretia (Navarretia prostrata) --/--/1B.1 Coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools. Alkaline soils in grassland, or in vernal pools; elevation 15-700m. Blooming Period: April - July Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Saline clover (Trifolium hydrophilum) --/--/1B.2 Marshes and swamps, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools. Prefers wet, alkaline sites; elevation 0-300m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable mesic habitat not found at the project site. San Francisco popcornflower (Plagiobothrys diffusus) --/SE/1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland, and coastal prairie. Historically from grassy slopes with marine influence; elevation 60-485m. Blooming Period: March - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. San Joaquin spearscale (Extriplex joaquinana) --/--/1B.2 Alkaline sites in chenopod scrub, meadows and seeps, playas, and valley and foothill grassland; elevation 1-320m. Blooming Period: April - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Santa Clara Valley dudleya (Dudleya abramsii ssp. setchellii) FE/--/1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland, and cismontane woodland. Endemic to serpentine outcrops and on rocks within grassland or woodland in Santa Clara County; elevation 80-335m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Santa Cruz Mountains beardtongue (Penstemon rattanii var. kleei) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral and lower montane coniferous forest. Sandy shale slopes in transition zone between forest and chaparral; elevation 400-1100m. Blooming Period: May - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Santa Cruz tarplant (Holocarpha macradenia) FT/SE/1B.1 Coastal prairie, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland; often on clay or sandy soils; elevation 10-220m. Blooming Period: June - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Seaside bird’s-beak (Cordylanthus rigidus ssp. littoralis) --/SE/1B.1 Closed-cone coniferous forest, maritime chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal dunes, coastal scrub, sandy often disturbed sites; elevation 0-215m. Blooming Period: May - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Appendix D 4 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Smooth lessingia (Lessingia micradenia var. glabrata) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral; endemic to Santa Clara County. Serpentine, often on roadsides; elevation 120-485m. Blooming Period: July - November Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Woodland woollythreads (Monolopia gracilens) --/--/1B.2 Serpentine, open sites in broadleaved upland forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, North Coast coniferous forest, and valley and foothill grassland; elevation 100-1200m. Blooming Period: March – July Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Yadon’s rein orchid (Piperia yadonii) FE/--/1B.1 Sandy sites in coastal bluff scrub, closed cone coniferous forest, maritime chaparral; elevation 10-510m. Blooming Period: May - August Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Wildlife American badger (Taxidea taxus) --/SSC Most abundant in drier, open stages of most shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats. Need sufficient food and open, uncultivated ground with friable soils to dig burrows. Prey on burrowing rodents. Unlikely. Suitable open grassland habitat not found at the project site. Bank swallow (Riparia riparia) --/ST Highly colonial species that nests in alluvial soils along rivers, streams, lakes, and ocean coasts. Nesting colonies only occur in vertical banks or bluffs of friable soils at least one meter tall, suitable for burrowing with some predator deterrence values. Breeding colony present in Salinas River. Unlikely. Suitable bank habitat not found at the project site. Bay checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis) FT/-- Restricted to native grasslands on outcrops of serpentine soil in the vicinity of San Francisco Bay. Plantago erecta is the primary host plant; Castilleja densiflora and C. exserta are secondary host plants. Unlikely. Suitable host plants not found at the project site. Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) --/SSC Open, dry, annual or perennial grasslands, desert, or scrubland, with available small mammal burrows. Possible. Suitable open habitats with available burrows found at the project site. California brackishwater snail (mimic tryonia) (Tryonia imitator) --/SSC Aquatic, found on rocks and in gravel of riffles in cool, swift, clear streams. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. California giant salamander (Anodonta californiensis) --/SSC Known from wet coastal forests near streams ad seeps from Mendocino County south to Monterey County and east to Napa County. Aquatic larvae found in cold, clear streams, occasionally in lakes and ponds. Adults known from wet forests under rocks and logs near streams and lakes. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. California linderiella (Linderiella occidentalis) FSC/-- Seasonal pools in unplowed grasslands with old alluvial soils underlain by hardpan or in sandstone depressions. Water in the pools typically has very low alkalinity, conductivity, and total dissolved solids. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Appendix D 5 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) FT/SSC Rivers, creeks, and stock ponds with pools and overhanging vegetation. Requires dense, shrubby or emergent riparian vegetation, and prefers short riffles and pools with slow-moving, well-oxygenated water. Needs upland habitat to aestivate (remain dormant during dry months) in small mammal burrows, cracks in the soil, or moist leaf litter. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. California Ridgway's rail (Rallus obsoletus obsoletus) FE/SE Found in saltwater and brackish marshes, traversed by tidal sloughs in the vicinity of San Francisco Bay. Associated with abundant growths of pickleweed, but feeds away from cover on invertebrates from mud-bottomed sloughs. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) FT/ST Grasslands and oak woodlands near seasonal pools and stock ponds in central and coastal California. Needs upland habitat to aestivate (remain dormant during dry months) in small mammal burrows, cracks in the soil, or moist leaf litter. Requires seasonal water sources that persist into late March for breeding habitat. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) --/SSC Arid grassland and scrubland habitats; prefers lowlands along sandy washes with scattered low bushes. Requires open areas for sunning, bushes for cover, patches of loose soil for burrowing, and abundant supply of ants and other insects for feeding. Unlikely. Suitable arid grassland habitat not found at the project site. Coast Range newt (Taricha torosa) --/SSC Coastal drainages; lives in terrestrial habitats and can migrate over 1 km to breed in ponds, reservoirs, and slow-moving streams. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Crotch bumble bee (Bombus crotchii) --/SCE Coastal California east to the Sierra-Cascade crest and south into Mexico. Food plant genera include Antirrhinum, Phacelia, Clarkia, Dendromecon, Eschscholzia, and Eriogonum. Unlikely. Suitable food plants and habitat not found at the project site. Foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) --/SE Partly shaded, shallow streams and riffles with rocky substrate in a variety of habitats. Requires at least some cobble-sized substrate for egg-laying and 15 weeks of available water to attain metamorphosis. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) --/SFP Rolling foothill mountain areas, sage-juniper flats, and desert. Cliff-walled canyons provide nesting habitat in most parts of range. Also uses large trees in open areas. Unlikely. Suitable nesting habitat not found at the project site. Hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) --/SSC Prefers open habitats or habitat mosaics, with access to trees for cover and open areas or habitat edges for feeding. Roosts in dense foliage of medium to large trees. Feeds primarily on moths. Requires water. Unlikely. Suitable nearby aquatic habitat not present. Appendix D 6 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) FE/SE Summer resident of southern and central California in riparian habitats below 2,000 feet in elevation. Often nests in large shrubs, along margins of bushes or on twigs projecting into pathways. Unlikely. Suitable riparian habitat not found at the project site. Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) --/SSC (Nesting) Broken woodlands, savannah, pinyon-juniper, Joshua tree and riparian woodlands, desert oases, scrub and washes. Prefers open country for hunting, with perches for scanning and fairly dense shrubs and brush for nesting. Possible. Suitable perching areas present adjacent to parcel and foraging habitat within open fields. Merlin (Falco columbarius) --/--/WL Seacoast, tidal estuaries, open woodlands, savannahs, edges of grassland and deserts, farms and ranches, clumps of trees or windbreaks are required for roosting in open county. Unlikely. Suitable natural open habitats not found at the project site. Monterey hitch (Lavinia exilicauda harengus) --/SSC Widely distributed in the Pajaro and Salinas river systems. Most abundant in lowland areas with large pools or in small reservoirs. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Mountain lion (Puma concolor) --/SC Southern California and central coast evolutionarily significant unit. Steep, rocky canyons or mountainous terrain. Deserts, coastal forest, from sea level to 10,000 feet. May encroach into developed areas at the edge of habitat area or along migratory corridors. Unlikely. Suitable mountainous, forested, or desert habitat or migratory corridors not found at the project site. Northern California legless lizard (Anniella pulchra) --/SSC Sandy or loose loamy soils under sparse vegetation, moist soils. Anniella pulchra is traditionally split into two subspecies: A. pulchra pulchra (silvery legless lizard) and A. pulchra nigra (black legless lizard), but these subspecies are typically no longer recognized. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) --/SSC Deserts, grasslands, scrublands, woodlands, and forests. Most common in open, dry habitats with rocky areas for roosting. Roosts must protect bats from high temperatures. Unlikely. Suitable rocky areas or potential roosting sites absent from project site. San Joaquin coachwhip (Masticophis flagellum ruddocki) --/SSC Open, dry habitats with little or no tree cover. Found in valley grassland and saltbush scrub in the San Joaquin Valley. Requires mammal burrows for refuge and oviposition sites. Unlikely. Suitable grassland or scrub habitats not found at the project site. San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) FE/ST Annual grasslands or grassy open stages with scattered shrubby vegetation. Needs loose-textured sandy soils for burrowing, and suitable prey base. Unlikely. Suitable open habitats not found at the project site. Santa Cruz black salamander (Aneides flavipunctatus niger) --/SSC Mixed deciduous and coniferous woodlands and coastal grasslands in San Mateo, Santa Cruz, and Santa Clara Counties. Adults found under rocks, talus, and damp woody debris. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Appendix D 7 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Santa Cruz long-toed salamander (Ambystoma macrodactylum croceum) FE/SE Wet meadows near sea level in a few restricted locales in Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties. Aquatic larvae prefer shallow (<12 inches) water; use clumps of vegetation or debris for cover. Adults use mammal burrows. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Southern coastal roach (Hesperoleucus venustus subditus) --/SSC Found in the drainages of Tomales Bay and northern San Francisco Bay in the north, and drainages of Monterey Bay in the south. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) FT/-- Coastal stream with clean spawning gravel. Requires cool water and pools. Needs migratory access between natal stream and ocean. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni) --/ST Breeds in grasslands with scattered trees, juniper-sage flats, riparian areas, savannahs, and agricultural or ranch lands with groves or lines of trees. Requires adjacent suitable foraging areas, such as grasslands or agricultural fields supporting rodent populations. Unlikely. Not known from immediate vicinity and suitable nesting habitat with adjacent small mammal activity not found at the project site. Townsend's big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) --/SSC Inhabits a wide variety of habitats. Most common in mesic sites. Roosts in the open, hanging from walls and ceilings. Roosting sites limiting. Extremely sensitive to human disturbance. Unlikely. Suitable rocky areas or potential roosting sites absent from project site. Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) --/ST Areas adjacent to open water with protected nesting substrate, which typically consists of dense, emergent freshwater marsh vegetation. Unlikely. Suitable emergent freshwater marsh habitat not found at the project site. Western bumble bee (Bombus occidentalis) --/SCE Historically known to occur throughout the mountains and northern coast of California. Prefers meadows and grasslands with abundant floral resources, including those from Fabaceae, Asteraceae, Rhamnaceae and Rosaceae families. Unlikely. Suitable food plants and meadow habitat not found at the project site. Western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus) --/SSC Many open, semi-arid habitats, including conifer and deciduous woodlands, coastal scrub, grasslands, chaparral, etc. Roosts in crevices in cliff faces, high buildings, trees and tunnels. Unlikely. Suitable rocky areas or potential roosting sites absent from project site. Western pond turtle (Emys marmorata) --/SSC Ponds, marshes, rivers, streams, and irrigation ditches with aquatic vegetation. Needs basking sites (such as rocks or partially submerged logs) and suitable upland habitat for egg-laying (sandy banks or grassy open fields). Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii) --/SSC Roosts primarily in trees, 2-40 feet above the ground, from sea level up through mixed conifer forests. Prefers habitat edges and mosaics with trees that are protected from above and open below with open areas for foraging. Unlikely. Suitable rocky areas or potential roosting sites absent from project site. Appendix D 8 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) --/SSC Occurs primarily in grassland habitats but can be found in valley-foothill hardwood woodlands, breeds in winter and spring (January - May) in quiet streams and temporary pools. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) --/SFP Rolling foothills and valley margins with scattered oaks, and river bottomlands or marshes next to deciduous woodlands. Open grasslands, meadows, or marshes for foraging close to isolated, dense-topped trees for nesting and perching. Possible. Suitable perching areas present adjacent to parcel and foraging habitat within open fields. SOURCE: CDFW 2022, CNPS 2022, USFWS 2022 NOTE: Status Codes: Federal (USFWS) FE: Listed as Endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act. FT: Listed as Threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act. FC: A Candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act. FSC: Species of Special Concern. FD: Delisted under the Federal Endangered Species Act. State (CDFW) SE: Listed as Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. ST: Listed as Threatened under the California Endangered Species Act. SR: Listed as Rare under the California Endangered Species Act. SC: A Candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. SSC: Species of Special Concern. SFP: Fully Protected species under the California Fish and Game Code. SD: Delisted under the California Endangered Species Act. CNPS Rare Plant Ranks and Threat Code Extensions 1B: Plants that are considered Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere. 2B: Plants that are considered Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. .1: Seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat). .2: Fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened). .3: Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened or no current threats known). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment E APPENDIX εRAS 1533 B Street εnvironmental, Inc. Hayward, CA 94541 __________________________________________________ Phone (510) 247-9885 Facsimile: (510) 886-5399 info@eras.biz PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy, California 95020 ERAS Project Number 18136 Prepared for: Mr. Bob Desai Temple Gilroy, LLC 527 Sima Drive Milpitas, California 95035 Prepared by: ERAS Environmental, Inc. October 12, 2018 εRAS 1533 B Street εnvironmental, Inc. Hayward, CA 94541 __________________________________________________ (510) 247-9885 Facsimile: (510) 886-5399 info@eras.biz October 12, 2018 Mr. Bob Desai Temple Gilroy, LLC 527 Sima Drive Milpitas, California 95035 Re: PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy, California 95020 ERAS Project Number 18136 Dear Mr. Desai: ERAS Environmental (ERAS) is pleased to provide you with the attached Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the above referenced Property. The assessment included a visual reconnaissance of the Property, a review of environmental databases for nearby sites, a review of historical maps, city directories and aerial photographs, an interview with the owner, and review of available files regarding the Property with the Gilroy Building Department and county health department. Conclusions and recommendations presented in our report were based upon the completion of these activities. If you have any questions regarding the information in this report, please don't hesitate to call us. It has been a pleasure working with you on this project. Sincerely, ERAS Environmental, Inc. David Siegel Andrew Savage Senior Program Manager Project Geologist TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Purpose and Scope ................................................................................................ 4 1.2 Authorization ........................................................................................................ 4 1.3 Limitations and Exceptions ..................................................................................... 4 2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION .................................................................................... 6 2.1 Location and Jurisdiction ........................................................................................ 6 2.2 Property Description .............................................................................................. 6 2.3 Property Use ......................................................................................................... 6 2.4 Suspect ACM/PCBs/Lead Paint/Lead in Drinking Water .............................................. 7 2.5 Physical Setting ..................................................................................................... 7 2.6 Geologic and Soil Conditions .................................................................................. 7 2.7 Groundwater Conditions ........................................................................................ 8 3.0 REGULATORY AGENCY RECORDS REVIEW .......................................................... 9 3.1 Standard Federal and State Environmental Record Sources ....................................... 9 3.2 Findings from Database Review .............................................................................10 3.3 Off-site Sources and Agency File Reviews ...............................................................12 4.0 HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION ...................................................................... 14 4.1 Historical Information Review ................................................................................14 4.2 Interview ............................................................................................................14 4.3 Building and Health Department File Review ...........................................................15 4.4 Synopsis of Previous Environmental Investigations ..................................................15 4.5 Environmental Liens .............................................................................................15 5.0 RECONNAISSANCE ............................................................................................ 16 5.1 Visual Reconnaissance of the Property ...................................................................16 5.2 Adjacent and Nearby Site Uses ..............................................................................17 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................... 18 6.1 Conclusions .........................................................................................................18 6.2 Recommendations ................................................................................................19 7.0 REFERENCES AND APPENDICES......................................................................... 20 APPENDICES A Environmental Professional’s Resume B Location and Site Maps C Property Photographs D ERIS Database Report E ASTM Transaction Screen and Environmental Site Assessment Questionnaire F Case Closure and Monitoring Information for 850 Pacheco Pass Highway 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 4 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Scope This Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was performed to identify, to the extent feasible, recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject site (cited hereinafter as the “Property”). The protocol utilized for this assessment is in general accordance with the requirements of ASTM Standard E 1527-13. We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in §312.10 of this part (40 CFR Part 312). We have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property. We have developed and performed the all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312. The environmental professional's resume is included in Appendix A. The assessment included four main components: Records Review, Historical Use Information Review, Visual Reconnaissance of the Property, and Report Preparation. The purpose of the records review is to obtain and review records that will help identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Property. The objective of the visual reconnaissance is to obtain information indicating the likelihood of identifying recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Property. The objective of the interviews is to obtain additional information indicating recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Property. The report includes documentation to support the analysis, opinions and conclusions as presented. 1.2 Authorization Authorization to perform this assessment was provided by Mr. Bob Desai of Temple Gilroy, LLC on September 25, 2018 in response to ERAS proposal dated the same day. 1.3 Limitations and Exceptions ERAS has performed the services for this project in accordance with our proposal, and in accordance with current standards of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ASTM standard E1527-13). No guarantees are either expressed or implied. The investigation was limited to a search for recognized environmental conditions. The term recognized environmental condition means the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on the Property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the Property or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the Property. The term includes hazardous substances or petroleum products even under conditions in compliance with laws. The term is not intended to include de minimis conditions that generally do not present a material risk of harm to public health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. There is no investigation, which is thorough enough to preclude the presence of hazardous 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 5 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 materials, which presently, or in the future, may be considered hazardous at the Property. Because regulatory evaluation criteria are constantly changing, concentrations of constituents presently considered low may, in the future, fall under more stringent regulatory standards that require remediation. The visual reconnaissance was limited to observation of surface conditions at the Property. Reason- ably ascertainable information was obtained. This information is publicly available and obtainable from its source within reasonable time and cost constraints and is reasonably reviewable. This approach reflects current ASTM standards unless the information obtained as part of this work suggests the need for further investigation. No warranty or guarantee of Property conditions is intended. The investigation addressed recognized environmental conditions at the Property. However, certain conditions, such as those listed below, may not be revealed: 1) naturally occurring toxic materials in the subsurface soils, rocks, water, or toxicity of on-site flora; 2) toxicity of substances common in current habitable environments, such as stored household products, building materials, and consumables; 3) biological pathogens; 4) contaminant plumes below sampled or observed surface levels, originating from a remote source; 5) constituents or constituent concentrations that do not violate present regulatory standards, but may violate future standards; 6) unknown impact to the Property, such as "midnight" dumping and/or accidental spillage which may occur following the visual reconnaissance of the Property by ERAS. Opinions and judgments expressed herein, which are based upon our understanding and interpretation of current regulatory standards, should not be construed as legal opinions. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 6 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 2.1 Location and Jurisdiction The subject property (hereinafter the “Property”) is located at 6970 Camino Arroyo in the southeastern portion of the City of Gilroy. This Property consists of an undeveloped dirt lot of approximately 10 acres identified by parcel number 841-70-049. The 1 Mile Radius Map included as a site location map in Appendix B shows the location of the Property. Current photographs showing important details of the Property are included in Appendix C. 2.2 Property Description An ERAS representative visited the Property on October 4, 2018. The Property was a long linear lot approximately 300 feet wide and 1,500 feet long. The Property was located in an area of commercial land uses. It was bounded on the southwest by Camino Arroyo and across the street was a Shell Station near the northwest corner and a retail shopping center along the remainder. To the southeast was Holloway Road and across the street was a vacant undeveloped lot. Along the northeast side was mostly contiguous vacant undeveloped land except at the southeast corner where a paved and fenced parking lot used by Cintas was located. The Property comes to a point close to the intersection of Pacheco Pass Highway (Highway 152) and Camino Arroyo. The Property was vacant except for a soil stockpile near the middle toward the southeast end of the Property. The pile was approximately 100 feet by 40 feet by an estimated 10-15 feet high. Another much smaller pile was near the northwest end. A gravel road extended from near the northwest corner along the center of the Property and exits at Camino Arroyo not far from Holloway Road. A pile of debris and refuse was located along the road near the large soil stockpile. The debris consisted mostly of residential type garbage including books, clothes, a car bumper and miscellaneous car parts, a small trailer and household garbage. A wrecked couch was on the opposite site of the large soil stockpile. No hazardous materials were used on the Property. No indication of spills or improper storage of hazardous materials were noted on or near the Property at the time of the site visit. Groundwater production wells, monitoring wells, septic systems, drywells, or pits were not observed on the Property by ERAS. No evidence of the current or former presence of aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) or underground storage tanks (USTs) were observed on the Property by ERAS. No evidence of leakage, spillage or dumping of regulated material was observed on or near the Property by ERAS. A Site Plan (Figure 2) illustrating important features of the Property is included in Appendix B. Observations made by ERAS at the time of the site visit are shown on the site reconnaissance checklist in Appendix E. 2.3 Property Use Based on the historical information reviewed for this assessment the Property has never been 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 7 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 developed since at least 1915. Additional historical detail regarding the uses of the Property is provided in Section 4.0. 2.4 Suspect ACM/PCBs/Lead Paint/Lead in Drinking Water Asbestos No building was present, therefore, no asbestos containing materials were present. PCBs No electrical transformers were observed on the Property. Oil containing electrical transformers are usually owned and serviced by Pacific Gas and Electric Company who would be responsible to remedy any releases. There were no indications of hydraulic equipment on the Property that would be likely to contain oil or PCBs. Lead Paint No building was present; therefore, no lead-based paint was likely to be present. Lead in Drinking Water No building was present, therefore, lead in drinking water is not an issue. 2.5 Physical Setting The Property is in the southwest part of the City of Gilroy, in the Santa Clara Valley, south of the San Francisco Bay Area. The Santa Clara Valley occupies a broad alluvial valley that slopes gently northward toward San Francisco Bay and southward toward the San Juan and Bolsa Valleys and is flanked by alluvial fans deposited at the foot of the Gavilan Range to the east and the Santa Cruz Mountains to the west. Elevation of the Property is approximately 180 feet above mean sea level (MSL), according to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Chittenden 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Map. Regionally, the topography slopes down to the southeast toward the Llagas Creek and Pajaro River, which flows to the Pacific Ocean at Monterey Bay. The topography in the vicinity of the Property is nearly flat with a very gentle slope down to the southeast. 2.6 Geologic and Soil Conditions The southernmost portion of the Santa Clara Valley, where the Property is located, contains mostly fine-grained with some beds of coarse-grained sands and gravel that represent alluvial sediments deposited on alluvial fans formed by rivers draining upland surfaces to the west and east of the Property. Beneath the Quaternary age alluvium, at estimated depths of approximately 300 feet, are older alluvial fan deposits of Upper Pliocene to Lower Pleistocene age (0.5 - 5 million years old) known as the Santa Clara Formation. The sediments comprising this unit are poorly-sorted, lenticular beds of gravel, sand, silt and clay (Goldman, 1967). Franciscan Formation rocks of probable Cretaceous age (70 - 150 million years old) form the bedrock surface beneath the sediments filling the Santa Clara Valley. These rocks consist of interbedded sandstone and shale, limestone, chert and metavolcanic rock. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 8 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 2.7 Groundwater Conditions The subject site is located in the southern part of the Llagas sub-basin, a sub-area of the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin. Principal recharge in the Llagas Sub-basin occurs in the forebay zone, located along the edge of the sub-basin (David Keith Todd, 1987). Lenses of sand and gravel are the principal aquifers, separated by finer textured materials that form discontinuous or leaky aquitards. In the sub-basin interior, water table conditions are present in the shallow aquifer zone, while artesian conditions are present in the deeper aquifer (usually greater than 150 feet). The regional groundwater flow follows the topography, moving from areas of higher elevation to areas of lower elevation. The regional groundwater flow direction in the area of the Property is estimated to be toward the south. Based on groundwater monitoring on and near the Property, the depth to water was reported to be approximately 11-43 feet below ground surface (bgs) with a flow direction toward the east (SCVWD, 2000). 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 9 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 3.0 REGULATORY AGENCY RECORDS REVIEW 3.1 Standard Federal and State Environmental Record Sources Groundwater provides the primary migration route for subsurface contamination from off-site sources to the Property. The groundwater flow direction in the vicinity of the Property is estimated to be variable. Note that under these conditions’ contamination does not migrate long distances but rather remains near its source. Only the sites that are directly up-gradient or in close proximity (adjacent) are usually considered to pose a threat to subsurface environmental conditions under the Property. The potential impact of off-site contaminants to the Property are based on the type of chemical released, the severity of the release, status of remediation or cleanup, and nature of the groundwater in the area of impact and area of the Property. Sites where groundwater is known to be impacted are listed on a variety of Federal and State databases and are the cases most likely to affect other nearby parcels. These databases are listed below. Databases searched for specified radii around the Property also include reported spills of hazardous materials (ERNS). Fuel hydrocarbons generally do not migrate as readily as other chemicals such as certain solvents; consequently, reported fuel leak sites at distances greater than ½ mile from the Property are not considered imminent threats and are not plotted on database maps. Leaks from underground storage tank sites are the most common source of local contamination. Leaks of this type generally do not extend down-gradient more than approximately 500 feet (approximately 1/10 mile) except under unusual conditions. All toxic sites within a 1-mile radius are plotted and reviewed to determine potential threats to the Property. Information from standard Federal and State environmental databases was provided to ERAS by Environmental Risk Information Services (ERIS) of Toronto. Data from governmental agency lists are updated and integrated into one database, which is updated as these data are released. This integrated database also contains postal service data in order to enhance matching of street addresses. Records from one government source are compared to records from another to clarify any address ambiguities. The demographic and geographic information available provides assistance in identifying and managing risk. The accuracy of the geo-coded locations is +/- 300 feet. Maps in the ERIS report shows the locations of all sites identified relative to the location of the Property. The following databases represent the known and likely leak sites that could potentially pose a threat to environmental conditions under the Property. These represent the databases that are consistent with the ASTM-standard environmental databases. The database includes a large number of supplemental, proprietary and non-ASTM standard databases that include many duplicate listings of sites that are already listed in the below-listed databases. ERAS reviewed all the listings provided in the databases as part of the process of evaluation of risk to the Property and further evaluates any site listings that ERAS considers significant. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 10 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 List Type Approximate Search Distance in Miles NPL 1.0 CERCLIS 0.5 CORRACTS 1.0 CONTROLS 0.5 ERNS Property ENVIRONSTOR 1.0 LUST 0.5 SLIC 0.5 VCP 0.5 Brownfields 0.5 3.2 Findings from Database Review The Property was not listed on the databases searched for this assessment. An adjacent site at 850 Pacheco Pass Highway was listed as a leaking underground storage tank (LUST) site. Based on its proximity, files were reviewed, and the results discussed in Section 3.3. A number of sites across Camino Arroyo were listed on various other database lists for the permitted use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials. These sites are not listed on databases that indicate chemical leaks, spills or releases occurred at these facilities. The proper use of hazardous materials and disposal of hazardous waste during normal business operation is not considered to pose a threat to subsurface environmental conditions beneath the Property. The locations of the other identified sites, relative to the Property, are shown on the 1 Mile Radius, .5 Mile Radius and .25 Mile Radius maps in the ERIS Report in Appendix D. NPL NPL National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, ERIS provides polygon coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) and regional EPA offices. State listed NPL equivalent sites (Response) are also included in this search. No NPL sites were listed within 1 mile of the Property. CERCLIS CERCLIS is the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System. CERCLIS contains information on hazardous waste sites, potential hazardous waste sites, and remedial activities across the nation, including sites that are on the National Priorities List (NPL) or being considered for the NPL. This database contains a listing of NPL Sites. Three CERCLIS sites were listed within ½ mile of the Property. The nearest identified site, South Bay Chemical at 721-731 Renz Lane, was located approximately a ½ mile to the west- northwest of the Property in a cross-gradient direction. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 11 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 Based on the distance and location this site and the other identified sites are not considered likely to pose a threat to the subsurface environmental conditions beneath the Property. CORRACTS This database contains Investigation or cleanup activities at Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) or state-only hazardous waste reported by the California Department of Toxic and Substance Control. One CORRACTS site was listed within 1 mile of the Property. The identified site, Hazcontrol Inc. at 731 Renz Lane, was located approximately a ½ mile to the northwest of the Property in a cross- gradient direction. Based on the distance and location this site is not considered likely to pose a threat to the subsurface environmental conditions beneath the Property. CONTROLS Controls, this database identifies sites that have liens reported by the California Department of Toxic and Substance Control, land use control information pertaining to the former Navy base realignment and closure properties, engineering controls sites, and sites with institutional controls. No Controls sites were listed in this database within ½ mile of the Property. ERNS The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting all oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. This database contains a listing of discharge locations. Agency: National Response Center The Property was not identified on this database. ENVIROSTOR This database identifies confirmed release sites where DTSC is involved in remediation, either in a lead role or oversight capacity. Eight ENVIROSTOR sites were listed within 1.0 miles of the Property. The nearest identified site, South Bay Chemical at 721-731 Renz Lane, was located approximately a ½ mile to the west- northwest of the Property in a cross-gradient direction. Based on the distance and location this site is not considered likely to pose a threat to the subsurface environmental conditions beneath the Property. Based on distance, and/or direction the remaining sites are not considered likely to pose a threat to the subsurface environmental conditions beneath the Property. LUST The California State Water Resources Control Board's Underground Storage Tank Program keeps a list of all underground storage tanks which have been reported as having had a release. These sites include those that have not yet been cleaned up and now have a status of Case Open and those 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 12 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 which have been cleaned up and have a case status of Closed. Fuel leak sites rarely affect an area more than 1/8 mile from its source except under unusual conditions. Most contamination from these sites is confined to areas within 500-700 feet of the leak source. Three LUST sites were listed within ½ mile of the Property. The nearest identified site, Shell at 850 Pacheco Pass Road, was located approximately 150 feet to the northwest of the Property in an up-gradient direction and is discussed further below in Section 3.3. Based on distance and/or direction the remaining sites are not considered likely to pose a threat to the subsurface environmental conditions beneath the Property. SLIC The Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup (SLIC) Program deals with site investigation and corrective action involving sites not overseen by the Underground Tank Program and the Well Investigation Program. Sites listed as “closed” have had remediation completed and are now considered closed by the agency. These listings include SLIC sites that are listed on Federal, state and county listings. No SLIC sites were listed within ½ mile of the Property. VCP This database contains a listing of sites with either confirmed or unconfirmed releases, and the project proponents have requested that DTSC oversee evaluation, investigation, and/or cleanup activities and have agreed to provide coverage for DTSC’s costs. No VCP sites were listed within ½ mile of the Property. BROWNFIELDS, A listing of ACRES Brownfield sites is obtained from Cleanups in My Community. Cleanups in My Community provide information on Brownfields properties for which information is reported back to EPA, as well as areas served by Brownfields grant programs. No US Brownfields sites were listed on the database within ½ mile. Only sites that are listed as potentially contaminated and are near or in a direction directly up- gradient are considered as potential threats to the Property. No additional sites, other than those leak sites identified above, were identified on these databases. 3.3 Off-site Sources and Agency File Reviews The site adjacent to the northwest across Camino Arroyo at 850 Pacheco Pass Highway, a Shell gasoline station, was listed as a closed leak case. Based on the proximity, records were reviewed for the site. Information regarding the site was obtained from a Case Closure Summary prepared by the Santa Clara Valley Water District in 2000. A total of 14 groundwater monitoring wells were installed on and near the site to assess the presence and extent of contamination in groundwater. A Site Plan that was included with the case closure information indicated three of the groundwater wells (S-5, 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 13 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 S-6, and S-7) were along the street near the Property and two wells (S-8, S-14) were located on the Property. Review of tables of analytical data indicated these off-site wells contained concentrations of contaminants in 1992 but subsequent sampling did not indicate detectable concentrations of contaminants. The Santa Clara Valley Water District determined that contamination from the site did not pose a threat to human health and safety and the environment and closed the case in 2000. Copies of selected information from the case closure is included in Appendix F. Based on the removal of the source of contamination the concentrations of contamination in groundwater will continue to decrease. Based on the information obtained, contamination from this site is not considered likely to pose a threat to subsurface environmental conditions under the Property. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 14 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 4.0 HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION Available historical data were researched to obtain information regarding the past uses of the Property and adjacent sites, especially as the information may pertain to environmental conditions or concerns. 4.1 Historical Information Review The United States Geological Survey Chittenden, California 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Maps, 1980, shows the Property elevation at approximately 180 feet. Historical USGS Topographic Maps ERAS reviewed topographic maps which include the location of the Property dated 1915, 1917, 1939, 1955, 1968, 1973, 1980, 1981, 1993 and 2015 provided by ERIS. From 1915 through 1955, no development was present on and near the Property. In 1968 and 1980 several buildings were present adjacent to the southwest of the Property, most of the surrounding area was still undeveloped and most of the current roads in the area were not yet present. In 1993 Camino Arroyo was present as a dirt road that ended at the adjacent buildings noted in earlier photographs. The Property was shown to be undeveloped on all the maps reviewed. Historical Aerial Photographs ERAS reviewed historical aerial photographs provided by ERIS dated in 1937, 1952, 1963, 1968, 1974, 1981, 1987, 1998, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2016. The northwest portion of the Property was used for orchard land in 1937 and 1952. From 1963 to 1987 a farm complex was located adjacent to the Property to the southwest. The Property was bounded on three sides by agricultural land. In 1993-2003 the Property and area to southwest was agricultural land, the only development was the farm complex adjacent to the southwest and a commercial building across Holloway to the southeast. From 2004-2016 the Property and nearby area was generally in its current state of development with a line of commercial buildings to the southeast and the current shopping center to the northwest. Historical City Directories Historical Business, Polk, and Haines Directories were provided by ERIS. Directories dated in 1970, 1975, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 1999, 2006, 2012 and 2018 were reviewed. There was no listing for the Property address in the directories. 4.2 Interview ERAS reviewed an interview form completed by manager Mr. Jim Stockhausen on October 5, 2018. Mr. Stockhausen indicated that the Property has always been vacant land. Mr. Stockhausen was not aware of: 1) the existence of environmental liens on the Property; 2) any 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 15 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 notifications by government of violations of current or historic environmental laws; 3) any existing or historic violations by occupants of environmental laws, or 4) the current presence of underground or aboveground storage tanks on the Property. These responses were compiled on ERAS Environmental Questionnaire along with observations made by ERAS at the time of the site visit. The Environmental Questionnaire is included as Appendix E. 4.3 Building and Health Department File Review Gilroy Building and Planning Department ERAS requested the Gilroy Building Department records for the Property. The only information on file was an entry from 2007 that indicated Land Capital Group was planning a 20,953 square foot retail building. The Planning Department indicated the Property is part of an area of redevelopment that includes the shopping center across Camino Arroyo to the northwest. There are restrictions to the development of the Property and one of the requirements for development would be to widen the nearby Pacheco Pass overcrossing. The complete requirements are contained in the Regency Centers Property Final Mitigation Monitoring Program. Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health ERAS requested available records for the Property. On September 28, 2018 ERAS was informed that there were no available records for the Property. 4.4 Synopsis of Previous Environmental Investigations There was no evidence discovered during this assessment, which indicates that any previous subsurface environmental investigations had been performed on the Property. 4.5 Environmental Liens There was no indication that the Property was the site of any ongoing subsurface investigations or remedial activities related to any additional release of hazardous materials on the Property, therefore a search for environmental liens for the Property was not considered likely to add additional information for this assessment. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 16 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 5.0 RECONNAISSANCE Photographs were taken during the reconnaissance to document the features observed and any environmental conditions of concern. Photographs are included in Appendix C. 5.1 Visual Reconnaissance of the Property ERAS conducted a visual reconnaissance of the Property on October 4, 2018 to identify potential indications of environmental concern. The items listed in this section, if any, are representative of those which could pose recognized environmental conditions as indicated in the ASTM standard for conducting environmental site assessments. Drums, Containers, and Storage Tanks The on-site reconnaissance addressed containers, drums, above ground storage tanks, and other storage units containing materials, which may pose an environmental threat at the Property. No such items were noted. Evidence of Waste Disposal The on-site reconnaissance addressed dumps, pits, ponds, landfills, borrow pits and lagoons, which may have been used for disposal purposes at the Property. No such items were observed on the Property. Surface Fill The on-site reconnaissance did not reveal any evidence of surface fill. Soil stockpiles were located on the Property. Surface Staining and Stressed Vegetation No surface staining or stressed vegetation was observed on the Property during the on-site reconnaissance. Transformers No transformers were observed on the Property. Air Stacks, Vents, and Odors The on-site reconnaissance addressed air stacks, vents, and strong, pungent or noxious odors at the Property. No such items were noted. Evidence of Underground or Aboveground Storage Tanks No USTs or ASTs were observed. Conduits to Groundwater Groundwater production wells or dry wells were not discovered on the Property. Evidence of Improper Waste Discharge Pipes and/or vents, indicating improper discharge of wastes, were not found at the Property. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 17 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 On-Site Environmental Management Practices The on-site reconnaissance addressed the following environmental management practices. Solid Waste Waste items were observed to have been dumped on the Property. These items included mostly household garbage and debris and a few pieces of furniture. No hazardous items were noted. Hazardous Materials and Waste No hazardous materials and waste were observed on the Property. Treatment Facilities No indications of wastewater disposal or treatment facilities were observed at the Property during the on-site reconnaissance. Application of Pesticides, Herbicides or Fertilizers No evidence of the application of pesticides, herbicides, or fertilizers was indicated during the on-site reconnaissance. General Environmental Practices No indications of adverse environmental practices were observed on the Property during the on- site reconnaissance. 5.2 Adjacent and Nearby Site Uses The following observations were made of parcels adjacent to the Property: Southwest Camino Arroyo and across the street was a Shell Station near the northwest corner and a retail shopping center Southeast Holloway Road and across the street was a vacant undeveloped lot Northeast Vacant undeveloped land and paved fenced parking lot Northwest Pacheco Pass Highway (Highway 152) 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 18 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Conclusions ERAS has performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E1527-13 for the Property. Any exceptions to, or deletions from this Practice are described in the report. We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in §312.10 of this part. We have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property. We have developed and performed all of the appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312. Data failures occurred for the Property for the periods 1917-1937, 1939-1952 and 1963-1973. The Property was undeveloped during these periods. Based on the non-hazardous uses of the Property, these data gaps are not considered likely to change the conclusions of this assessment. Site Visit An ERAS representative visited the Property on October 4, 2018. The Property was a long linear lot approximately 300 feet wide and 1,500 feet long. The Property was located in an area of commercial land uses. It was bounded on the southwest by Camino Arroyo and across the street was a Shell Station near the northwest corner and a retail shopping center along the remainder. To the southeast was Holloway Road and across the street was a vacant undeveloped lot. Along the northeast side was mostly contiguous vacant undeveloped land except at the southeast corner where a paved and fenced parking lot used by Cintas was located. The Property comes to a point close to the intersection of Pacheco Pass Highway (Highway 152) and Camino Arroyo. The Property was vacant except for a soil stockpile near the middle toward the southeast end of the Property. The pile was approximately 100 feet by 40 feet by an estimated 10-15 feet high. Another much smaller pile was near the northwest end. A gravel road extended from near the northwest corner along the center of the Property and exits at Camino Arroyo not far from Holloway Road. A pile of debris and refuse was located along the road near the large soil stockpile. The debris consisted mostly of residential type garbage including books, clothes, a car bumper and miscellaneous car parts, a small trailer and household garbage. A wrecked couch was on the opposite site of the large soil stockpile. No hazardous materials were used on the Property. No indication of spills or improper storage of hazardous materials were noted on or near the Property at the time of the site visit. Groundwater production wells, monitoring wells, septic systems, drywells, or pits were not observed on the Property by ERAS. No evidence of the current or former presence of USTs or ASTs were observed on the Property by ERAS. No evidence of leakage, spillage or dumping of regulated material was observed on or near the Property by ERAS. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 19 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 Historical Uses Based on the historical information reviewed for this assessment the Property has never been developed since at least 1915. Database Review The Property was not listed on any of the databases searched for this assessment. The site adjacent to the northwest across Camino Arroyo at 850 Pacheco Pass Highway, a Shell gasoline station, was listed as a closed leak case. Two monitoring wells had been installed on the Property and monitored. Review of tables of analytical data indicated these off-site wells contained concentrations of contaminants in 1992 but subsequent sampling did not indicate detectable concentrations of contaminants. The Santa Clara Valley Water District determined that contamination from the site did not pose a threat to human health and safety and the environment and closed the case in 2000. Based on the removal of the source of contamination the concentrations of contamination in groundwater will continue to decrease. Based on the information obtained, contamination from this site is not considered likely to pose a threat to subsurface environmental conditions under the Property. Based on distance, locations or current site status, none of the remaining identified sites are considered threats to the current environmental status of the Property or subsurface soil and groundwater beneath it. There was no indication that the Property was the site of ongoing subsurface investigations or remedial activities related to any additional release of hazardous materials on the Property, therefore a search for environmental liens for the Property was not considered likely to add additional information for this assessment. Recognized Environmental Conditions No recognized environmental conditions (REC), historical recognized environmental conditions (HREC), controlled recognized environmental condition (CREC), or de minimis conditions were identified for the Property. 6.2 Recommendations No evidence was discovered during this assessment to indicate that activities currently conducted on or near the Property have contributed contamination to soil or groundwater in the surrounding area. ERAS recommends no further actions pertaining to subsurface environmental conditions at the Property at 6970 Camino Arroyo in Gilroy, California. 7.0 REFERENCES AND APPENDICES Maps, Aerial Photographs, and Other Geographic References Historical Topographic maps United States Geological Survey Topographic Maps dated 1915, 1917, 1939, 1955, 1968, 1973, 1980, 1981, 1993 and 2015 provided by ERIS. Historical Aerial Photographs: Historical aerial photographs provided by ERIS dated in 1937,1952, 1963, 1968, 1974, 1981, 1987, 1998, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2016. Polk and Haines City Directories provided by ERIS dated 1970, 1975, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 1999, 2006, 2012 and 2018. Published References California Department of Water Resources, Evaluation of Ground Water Resources South Bay, Appendix A: Geology, Bulletin 118-1, August 1967. David Keith Todd Consulting Engineers, Inc., Groundwater Management in Santa Clara Valley, April 1987. ERIS, Database Report, 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy, CA Job Number 18136, dated September 27, 2018. Goldman, Harold B., Geology of San Francisco Bay prepared for San Mateo Bay Conservation and Development Commission, July 1967. Helley, E.J., La Joie, K.R., Spangle, W.E., and Blair, M.L., Flatland Deposits of the San Francisco Bay Region, California - their geology and engineering properties and their importance to comprehensive planning, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 943, 1974. Santa Clara Valley Water District, Case Closure Summary, Shell, 850 Pacheco Pass Highway, Gilroy, California, August 22, 2000. Records Review, Interviews and Agency Contacts Gilroy Building Department file review, October 4, 2018. Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health file review request, September 28, 2018. Interview with Mr. Jim Stockhausen, manager, October 5, 2018. APPENDIX A ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS RESUME David Siegel David Siegel is president of ERAS Environmental, Inc., an environmental consulting company formed in October 1998. Prior to that, Mr. Siegel was principle of Siegel Environmental Consulting Services, formed in February 1994, an environmental consulting company providing due diligence services, geological and hydrogeological research, Phase 2 field services such as groundwater well installation and sampling, waste disposal, project management and remediation planning and permitting. Before involvement with management of these environmental consulting firms, Mr. Siegel was a Project Hydrogeologist, Project Geologist, and Staff Geologist with three San Francisco Bay Area environmental consulting companies from 1987 to 1998. Mr. Siegel holds a master’s degree in geology from California State University East Bay and was a State of California Registered Environmental Assessor II. QUALIFICATIONS Experience since 1987 in hazardous materials consulting including due diligence projects, soil and groundwater investigations and remediation, and asbestos surveying. Strong organizational background in project management including budget development and management and client contact and service. Strong technical background in groundwater well design and installation, soil and groundwater chemical data evaluation and hydrogeological assessment. Inspection experience with thousands of commercial sites including retail, office, industrial and residential. Experience providing management, business development, technical oversight, client contact and regulatory agency negotiation and interaction for environmental case closures. WORK HISTORY 1994-Present: President of ERAS Environmental, Inc. and Principle of Siegel Environmental Management and completion of due diligence projects for a wide variety of commercial properties throughout California. Management and completion of Phase 2 soil and groundwater and asbestos sampling projects at former and operating gasoline stations and industrial facilities. Responsible for project initiation, planning, report preparation and technical oversight. Responsible for business development, client contact and local and state regulatory agency compliance for ongoing investigation, cost recovery and case closures. 1987-1994: Project Hydrogeologist (McCulley, Frick & Gilman, San Francisco; 1992-1994), Project Manager (Converse Environmental, San Francisco; 1989-1992), Project Manager (Exceltech, Inc., Fremont; 1987-1989) Management and completion of environmental and geotechnical investigations involving soil and groundwater contamination. Responsible for project planning, budgeting and operation, professional staff supervision and report completion. Interface with engineers for site remediation planning. EDUCATION AND LICENCES 1995 to Present - EPA Certified Asbestos Building Inspector 1990 to 2012 - California Registered Environmental Assessor II 1988 - M.S. Geological Sciences, California State University, East Bay 510.247.9885 www.eras.biz 510.886.5399 Andrew Savage Andrew Savage is a Project Geologist for ERAS Environmental, Inc. Prior to joining ERAS, Mr. Savage was a Geologic Intern at Chevron and a Biological Aide for the Bureau of Reclamations. Mr. Savage holds a Bachelors of Science in Geology from California State University in Chico. Involved in environmental consulting since 2003. Strong technical background in investigative methods, geological and hydrogeological assessment, installation and development of numerous types of monitoring and remediation wells, and data interpretation and evaluation. Proficient in borehole logging, field methods, data collection, and design of subsurface hydrogeological investigations. Project experience in hazardous material facility closure, soil and groundwater assessment, delineation, monitoring, and remediation, soil gas studies, health and safety plan preparation, permitting, work plan preparation, offsite right of entry issues, and regulatory contact and negotiation for investigations and remediation. 2003-Present: Project Geologist for ERAS Environmental, Inc., Hayward, California Managed and conducted Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessments, Transaction Screens and Phase 2 Assessments for commercial properties throughout Northern California. Management and completion of Phase 2 soil and groundwater sampling projects at former and operating gasoline stations and industrial facilities. Responsible for project initiation, planning, report preparation and technical oversight. 2001-2002: Biological Aid for the Bureau of Reclamations, Red Bluff, California Provided field services for the collection of data. 2001-2003: Geological Intern for Chevron, San Ramon, California Was in charge of managing geologic research information including well logs and reports. Duties also involved working closely with geologists and assisting them with research and gathering data. EDUCATION AND LICENCES 2002 B.S. Geological Sciences, California State University, Chico 2002 Hazwoper Certification, California State University, Chico 2003-2009 Hazwoper Certification Refresher Courses 2009 Self Performance Self Assessment Training (SPSA) QUALIFICATIONS WORK HISTORY APPENDIX B LOCATION AND SITE MAPS ^_ 121°31 '30"W121°32 'W121°32 '30"W121°33 'W121°33 '30"W121°34 'W121°34'30"W 37°1'30"N37°1'30"N37°1'N37°1'N37°0'30"N37°0'30"N37°0'N37°0'N36°59'30"N36°59'30"N36°59'N36°59'N0.35 0 0.350.175 Miles Order No: 20180926049Topographic Ma p 1:24000 Address: 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy, CA, 95020 © ERIS In formation Inc.Sourc e: USG S Topographic Map (2015) Qua drangle(s): Gilroy, CA; Chittenden, CA ; PROPERTY SITE PLAN FIGURE 2 nvironmental RAS N HOLLOWAY ROADCAMINO ARROYOPACHECO PASS HIGHWAY APPENDIX C PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy ERAS Project # 18136 Photograph 1 - View along Holloway Road (southeast side) of Property Photograph 2 - View northwest along northeast side of the Property 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy ERAS Project # 18136 Photograph 3 - Northeast view of vacant land adjacent to northeast Photograph 4 - View across center of Property, soil pile in right distance 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy ERAS Project # 18136 Photograph 5 - Gravel road, view northwest toward Pacheco Pass Hwy Photograph 6 - View of refuse dumped near road on Property APPENDIX D ERIS DATABASE REPORT Project Property:18136 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 Project No: Report Type:Database Report Order No: 20180926049 Requested by:ERAS Environmental, Inc. Date Completed: September 27, 2018 2 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Table of Contents Notice:IMPORTANT LIMITATIONS and YOUR LIABILITY Reliance on information in Report:This report DOES NOT replace a full Phase I Environmental Site Assessment but is solely intended to be used as database review of environmental records. License for use of information in Report:No page of this report can be used without this cover page,this notice and the project property identifier. The information in Report(s)may not be modified or re-sold. Your Liability for misuse:Using this Service and/or its reports in a manner contrary to this Notice or your agreement will be in breach of copyright and contract and ERIS may obtain damages for such mis-use,including damages caused to third parties,and gives ERIS the right to terminate your account, rescind your license to any previous reports and to bar you from future use of the Service. No warranty of Accuracy or Liability for ERIS:The information contained in this report has been produced by ERIS Information Inc.("ERIS")using various sources of information,including information provided by Federal and State government departments.The report applies only to the address and up to the date specified on the cover of this report,and any alterations or deviation from this description will require a new report.This report and the data contained herein does not purport to be and does not constitute a guarantee of the accuracy of the information contained herein and does not constitute a legal opinion nor medical advice.Although ERIS has endeavored to present you with information that is accurate,ERIS disclaims,any and all liability for any errors,omissions,or inaccuracies in such information and data,whether attributable to inadvertence,negligence or otherwise,and for any consequences arising therefrom.Liability on the part of ERIS is limited to the monetary value paid for this report. Trademark and Copyright:You may not use the ERIS trademarks or attribute any work to ERIS other than as outlined above.This Service and Report(s)are protected by copyright owned by ERIS Information Inc.Copyright in data used in the Service or Report(s)(the "Data")is owned by ERIS or its licensors.The Service,Report(s)and Data may not be copied or reproduced in whole or in any substantial part without prior written consent of ERIS. Table of Contents Table of Contents...........................................................................................2 Executive Summary........................................................................................3 Executive Summary: Report Summary.......................................................................................................................4 Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Project Property...................................................................................8 Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Surrounding Properties........................................................................9 Executive Summary: Summary by Data Source.......................................................................................................14 Map...............................................................................................................22 Aerial.............................................................................................................25 Topographic Map..........................................................................................26 Detail Report.................................................................................................27 Unplottable Summary.................................................................................120 Unplottable Report......................................................................................121 Appendix: Database Descriptions...............................................................122 Definitions...................................................................................................133 3 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Executive Summary Property Information: Project Property:18136 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 Project No: Coordinates: Latitude:37.001615 Longitude:-121.549435 UTM Northing:4,096,034.93 UTM Easting:629,066.68 UTM Zone:UTM Zone 10S Elevation:183 FT Order Information: Order No:20180926049 Date Requested:September 26, 2018 Requested by:ERAS Environmental, Inc. Report Type:Database Report Historicals/Products: Executive Summary 4 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Executive Summary: Report Summary Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total Standard Environmental Records Federal rr-NPL-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-PROPOSED NPL-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-DELETED NPL-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-SEMS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-SEMS ARCHIVE-aa Y .5 0 0 0 1 - 1 rr-ODI-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-IODI-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-CERCLIS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 1 - 1 rr-CERCLIS NFRAP-aa Y .5 0 0 0 1 - 1 rr-CERCLIS LIENS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-RCRA CORRACTS-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 rr-RCRA TSD-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-RCRA LQG-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-RCRA SQG-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-RCRA CESQG-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-RCRA NON GEN-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-FED ENG-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-FED INST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-ERNS 1982 TO 1986-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-ERNS 1987 TO 1989-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-ERNS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-FED BROWNFIELDS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-FEMA UST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-SEMS LIEN-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-SUPERFUND ROD-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 State rr-RESPONSE-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 NPL PROPOSED NPL DELETED NPL SEMS SEMS ARCHIVE ODI IODI CERCLIS CERCLIS NFRAP CERCLIS LIENS RCRA CORRACTS RCRA TSD RCRA LQG RCRA SQG RCRA CESQG RCRA NON GEN FED ENG FED INST ERNS 1982 TO 1986 ERNS 1987 TO 1989 ERNS FED BROWNFIELDS FEMA UST SEMS LIEN SUPERFUND ROD RESPONSE Executive Summary: Report Summary 5 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total rr-ENVIROSTOR-aa Y 1 0 0 0 2 4 6 rr-DELISTED ENVS-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-SWF/LF-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-HWP-aa Y 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 rr-LDS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-SWAT-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-LUST-aa Y .5 0 0 2 1 - 3 rr-DELISTED LST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-UST-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-SWRCB SWF-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-UST CLOSURE-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-HHSS-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-AST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED TNK-aa Y .25 0 0 2 -- 2 rr-CERS TANK-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-LUR-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-HLUR-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DEED-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-VCP-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-CLEANUP SITES-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DELISTED CTNK-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-HIST TANK-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 Tribal rr-INDIAN LUST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-INDIAN UST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED ILST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DELISTED IUST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 County rr-DELISTED COUNTY-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-SANJOSE HM-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-GILROY CUPA-aa Y .25 0 8 8 -- 16 rr-SANTACLARA CUPA-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-SANTACLARA HSOL-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-SANTACLARA LO-aa Y .5 0 0 1 0 - 1 rr-SUNNYVALE CUPA-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 Additional Environmental Records Federal rr-FINDS/FRS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-TRIS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 ENVIROSTOR DELISTED ENVS SWF/LF HWP LDS SWAT LUST DELISTED LST UST SWRCB SWF UST CLOSURE HHSS AST DELISTED TNK CERS TANK LUR HLUR DEED VCP CLEANUP SITES DELISTED CTNK HIST TANK INDIAN LUST INDIAN UST DELISTED ILST DELISTED IUST DELISTED COUNTY SANJOSE HM GILROY CUPA SANTACLARA CUPA SANTACLARA HSOL SANTACLARA LO SUNNYVALE CUPA FINDS/FRS TRIS 6 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total rr-HMIRS-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-NCDL-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-TSCA-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-HIST TSCA-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-FTTS ADMIN-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-FTTS INSP-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-PRP-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-SCRD DRYCLEANER-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-ICIS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-FED DRYCLEANERS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED FED DRY-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-FUDS-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-MLTS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HIST MLTS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-MINES-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-ALT FUELS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-SSTS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-PCB-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 State rr-INSP COMP ENF-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 rr-CDL-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-SCH-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-CHMIRS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HAZNET-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HWSS CLEANUP-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DTSC HWF-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-HIST MANIFEST-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HIST CHMIRS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HIST CORTESE-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-CDO/CAO-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DELISTED HAZ-aa Y .5 0 0 0 1 - 1 rr-DRYCLEANERS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED DRYC-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-WASTE DISCHG-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-EMISSIONS-aa Y .25 0 1 3 -- 4 rr-CERS HAZ-aa Y .125 0 8 --- 8 Tribal No Tribal additional environmental record sources available for this State. County No County additional environmental databases were selected to be included in the search. HMIRS NCDL TSCA HIST TSCA FTTS ADMIN FTTS INSP PRP SCRD DRYCLEANER ICIS FED DRYCLEANERS DELISTED FED DRY FUDS MLTS HIST MLTS MINES ALT FUELS SSTS PCB INSP COMP ENF CDL SCH CHMIRS HAZNET HWSS CLEANUP DTSC HWF HIST MANIFEST HIST CHMIRS HIST CORTESE CDO/CAO DELISTED HAZ DRYCLEANERS DELISTED DRYC WASTE DISCHG EMISSIONS CERS HAZ 7 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total Total:0 17 25 8 7 57 * PO – Property Only * 'Property and adjoining properties' database search radii are set at 0.25 miles. 8 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Project Property Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number No records found in the selected databases for the project property. Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Project Property 9 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Surrounding Properties Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number m1d dd-CERS HAZ-859598704-aa Michael's Store # 4703 6745 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 SW 0.07 / 361.98 3 p1p-27-859598704-x1x m1d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918499-aa Michael's Store # 4703 6745 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 SW 0.07 / 361.98 3 p1p-28-824918499-x1x m2d dd-CERS HAZ-859597250-aa PetSmart 0072 6755 CAMINO ARROYO BLDG 5 GILROY CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 369.82 1 p1p-29-859597250-x1x m2d dd-GILROY CUPA-828833730-aa PetSmart 0072 6755 Camino Arroyo Bldg 5 Gilroy CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 369.82 1 p1p-30-828833730-x1x m3d dd-CERS HAZ-859588691-aa Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 6765 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 373.29 1 p1p-31-859588691-x1x m3d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918425-aa Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 6765 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 373.29 1 p1p-33-824918425-x1x m4d dd-CERS HAZ-859594760-aa Bed, Bath and Beyond #608 6725 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.08 / 417.58 2 p1p-33-859594760-x1x m4d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918491-aa Bed, Bath and Beyond #608 6725 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 SSW 0.08 / 417.58 2 p1p-35-824918491-x1x m5d dd-CERS HAZ-859587253-aa Ross Dress For Less #0740 6715 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.09 / 473.04 2 p1p-35-859587253-x1x m5d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918309-aa Ross Dress For Less #0740 6715 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 SSW 0.09 / 473.04 2 p1p-37-824918309-x1x m6d dd-CERS HAZ-859552917-aa SALLY BEAUTY SUPPLY 6815 CAMINO ARROYO STE 50 GILROY CA 95020 WNW 0.10 / 551.29 4 p1p-37-859552917-x1x m6d dd-GILROY CUPA-845744811-aa SALLY BEAUTY SUPPLY 6815 Camino Arroyo Ste 50 Gilroy CA 95020 WNW 0.10 / 551.29 4 p1p-39-845744811-x1x 27 28 29 30 31 33 33 35 35 37 37 39 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Surrounding Properties 10 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number m7d dd-CERS HAZ-859567881-aa Flowstar, Inc.6800 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 NE 0.11 / 586.61 -1 p1p-39-859567881-x1x m7d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918290-aa Flowstar, Inc.6800 Silacci Way Gilroy CA 95020 NE 0.11 / 586.61 -1 p1p-43-824918290-x1x m7d dd-EMISSIONS-861189129-aa FLOWSTAR 6800 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 NE 0.11 / 586.61 -1 p1p-43-861189129-x1x m8d dd-CERS HAZ-859603807-aa Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 6955 CAMINO ARROYO STE 70 GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.12 / 627.57 2 p1p-51-859603807-x1x m8d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918509-aa Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 6955 Camino Arroyo Ste 70 Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.12 / 627.57 2 p1p-53-824918509-x1x m9d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918295-aa Leslie's Swimming Pool Supplies #505 6915 Camino Arroyo, Suite 10 Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.15 / 776.23 1 p1p-53-824918295-x1x m10d dd-SANTACLARA CUPA-867087703-aa CINTAS CORPORATION 904 HOLLOWAY RD GILROY CA 95020 ESE 0.15 / 780.44 -5 p1p-54-867087703-x1x m10d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918286-aa Cintas Corporation #630 904 Holloway Rd Gilroy CA 95020 ESE 0.15 / 780.44 -5 p1p-54-824918286-x1x m11d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918482-aa Creative Labels, Inc.6670 Silacci Way Gilroy CA 95020 E 0.16 / 824.48 -4 p1p-54-824918482-x1x m11d dd-EMISSIONS-861183403-aa CREATIVE LABELS INC 6670 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 E 0.16 / 824.48 -4 p1p-54-861183403-x1x m12d dd-GILROY CUPA-845744796-aa Roadhouse Jacks 6945 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.16 / 845.24 4 p1p-61-845744796-x1x m12d dd-DELISTED COUNTY-824918430-aa Roadhouse Jacks 6945 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.16 / 845.24 4 p1p-61-824918430-x1x m13d dd-LUST-820175315-aa Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.19 / 989.17 4 p1p-62-820175315-x1x Global ID | Status | Status Date: T0608502195 | Completed - Case Closed | 2001-01-09 00:00:00 m14d dd-LUST-820189637-aa Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.19 / 1,007.77 5 p1p-63-820189637-x1x 39 43 43 51 53 53 54 54 54 54 61 61 62 63 7 7 7 8 8 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 13 14 CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA EMISSIONS CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA GILROY CUPA SANTACLARA CUPA GILROY CUPA GILROY CUPA EMISSIONS GILROY CUPA DELISTED COUNTY LUST LUST 11 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number Global ID | Status | Status Date: T0608591842 | Completed - Case Closed | 2001-01-09 00:00:00 m15d dd-UST-860403661-aa Gilroy Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NNW 0.19 / 1,023.27 3 p1p-64-860403661-x1x Facility ID: 895 m16d dd-CERS TANK-859557346-aa Gilroy Shell 850 PACHECO PASS HWY GILROY CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 3 p1p-64-859557346-x1x m16d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918357-aa Gilroy Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 3 p1p-69-824918357-x1x m16d dd-HHSS-822974089-aa VIEIRA SERVICES CO INC 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 3 p1p-69-822974089-x1x m16d dd-HIST TANK-865094844-aa VIEIRA SERVICE CO., INC 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 3 p1p-70-865094844-x1x m16d dd-SANTACLARA LO-820142995-aa Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 3 p1p-70-820142995-x1x SCVWD ID | Closure Date: 11S4E05K01f | 1/9/2001 m16d dd-RCRA LQG-810484503-aa SERVICE STATION - SAP 135332 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 3 p1p-70-810484503-x1x m17d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918359-aa TARGET T1851 6705 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 4 p1p-72-824918359-x1x m17d dd-GILROY CUPA-845744786-aa CVS Pharmacy #16971 6705 Camino Arroyo Ste B Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 4 p1p-72-845744786-x1x m17d dd-EMISSIONS-861201413-aa TARGET CORPORATION - TARGET GI 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 4 p1p-72-861201413-x1x m17d dd-EMISSIONS-861207511-aa TARGET STORE T1851 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 4 p1p-75-861207511-x1x m17d dd-RCRA CESQG-848634326-aa CVS PHARMACY #16971 6705 CAMINO ARROYO STE B GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 4 p1p-77-848634326-x1x m17d dd-RCRA SQG-810627808-aa TARGET STORE T1851 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 4 p1p-79-810627808-x1x 64 64 69 69 70 70 70 72 72 72 75 77 79 15 16 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 17 17 UST CERS TANK GILROY CUPA HHSS HIST TANK SANTACLARA LO RCRA LQG GILROY CUPA GILROY CUPA EMISSIONS EMISSIONS RCRA CESQG RCRA SQG 12 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number m18d dd-DELISTED TNK-820077018-aa SHELL 850 Pacheco Pass Road Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.22 / 1,183.21 6 p1p-85-820077018-x1x m19d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918317-aa Tractor Supply Company Store# 1171-Gilroy 6881 Cameron Blvd Gilroy CA 95020 ENE 0.23 / 1,237.54 -3 p1p-85-824918317-x1x m20d dd-DELISTED TNK-820077017-aa TV'S FOOD MART 850 PACHECO PASS HWY GILROY CA 95020 N 0.25 / 1,296.71 2 p1p-85-820077017-x1x m21d dd-CERCLIS-805437323-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 950201626 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 5 p1p-85-805437323-x1x m21d dd-CERCLIS NFRAP-805476443-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 950201626 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 5 p1p-87-805476443-x1x m21d dd-SEMS ARCHIVE-828867835-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95020-1626 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 5 p1p-88-828867835-x1x m22d dd-LUST-820183743-aa PRIVATE RESIDENCE PRIVATE RESIDENCE Gilroy CA 95020 WNW 0.43 / 2,245.32 7 p1p-88-820183743-x1x Global ID | Status | Status Date: T0608500042 | Completed - Case Closed | 1998-01-05 00:00:00 m23d dd-DELISTED HAZ-859589068-aa Boral Roofing, LLC 6500 BREM LN GILROY CA 95020 SW 0.46 / 2,441.43 3 p1p-89-859589068-x1x m24d dd-ENVIROSTOR-820293155-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 7 p1p-89-820293155-x1x Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 80001324 | INACTIVE - NEEDS EVALUATION AS OF 6/26/2009 m24d dd-ENVIROSTOR-820299123-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 7 p1p-90-820299123-x1x Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: CAD000628149 | m24d dd-HWP-820356825-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 7 p1p-92-820356825-x1x m25d dd-ENVIROSTOR-820361343-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL COMPANY 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.52 / 2,722.07 7 p1p-93-820361343-x1x Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 43490062 | REFER: RCRA AS OF 6/8/1994 m26d dd-RCRA CORRACTS-810471734-aa HAZCONTROL INC.731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95021 NW 0.55 / 2,878.92 8 p1p-93-810471734-x1x m27d dd-ENVIROSTOR-820297879-aa INLAND PAPERBOARD AND PACKAGING, INC. 6400 JAMIESON WAY GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.57 / 3,010.66 3 p1p-104-820297879-x1x 85 85 85 85 87 88 88 89 89 90 92 93 93 104 18 19 20 21 21 21 22 23 24 24 24 25 26 27 DELISTED TNK GILROY CUPA DELISTED TNK CERCLIS CERCLIS NFRAP SEMS ARCHIVE LUST DELISTED HAZ ENVIROSTOR ENVIROSTOR HWP ENVIROSTOR RCRA CORRACTS ENVIROSTOR 13 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 71002634 | REFER: OTHER AGENCY AS OF 5/12/2006 m28d dd-ENVIROSTOR-866001266-aa TEMPLE-INLAND, INC.6400 JAMIESON WAY GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.58 / 3,081.49 4 p1p-106-866001266-x1x Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 60000630 | NO FURTHER ACTION AS OF 9/5/2008 m29d dd-ENVIROSTOR-820295074-aa METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 950207012 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 3 p1p-107-820295074-x1x Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: CAD077182293 | m29d dd-HWP-820356791-aa METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 950207012 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 3 p1p-111-820356791-x1x m29d dd-INSP COMP ENF-820209916-aa METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 3 p1p-114-820209916-x1x 106 107 111 114 28 29 29 29 ENVIROSTOR ENVIROSTOR HWP INSP COMP ENF 14 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Executive Summary: Summary by Data Source Standard Federal SEMS ARCHIVE - SEMS List 8R Archive Sites A search of the SEMS ARCHIVE database, dated Jun 8, 2018 has found that there are 1 SEMS ARCHIVE site(s) within approximately 0.50 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95020-1626 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 m-21-828867835-a CERCLIS - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System - CERCLIS A search of the CERCLIS database, dated Oct 25, 2013 has found that there are 1 CERCLIS site(s) within approximately 0.50 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 950201626 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 m-21-805437323-a CERCLIS NFRAP - CERCLIS - No Further Remedial Action Planned NFRAP A search of the CERCLIS NFRAP database, dated Oct 25, 2013 has found that there are 1 CERCLIS NFRAP site(s) within approximately 0.50 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 950201626 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 m-21-805476443-a RCRA CORRACTS - RCRA CORRACTS-Corrective Action A search of the RCRA CORRACTS database, dated Aug 2, 2018 has found that there are 1 RCRA CORRACTS site(s) within approximately 1.00 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key HAZCONTROL INC. 731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95021 NW 0.55 / 2,878.92 m-26-810471734-a RCRA LQG - RCRA Generator List A search of the RCRA LQG database, dated Aug 2, 2018 has found that there are 1 RCRA LQG site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. 21 21 21 26 Executive Summary: Summary by Data Source 15 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SERVICE STATION - SAP 135332 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 m-16-810484503-a RCRA SQG - RCRA Small Quantity Generators List A search of the RCRA SQG database, dated Aug 2, 2018 has found that there are 1 RCRA SQG site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key TARGET STORE T1851 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 m-17-810627808-a RCRA CESQG - RCRA Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators List A search of the RCRA CESQG database, dated Aug 2, 2018 has found that there are 1 RCRA CESQG site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key CVS PHARMACY #16971 6705 CAMINO ARROYO STE B GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 m-17-848634326-a State ENVIROSTOR - EnviroStor Database A search of the ENVIROSTOR database, dated Jul 18, 2018 has found that there are 6 ENVIROSTOR site(s) within approximately 1.00 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 m-24-820299123-a Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: CAD000628149 | SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 m-24-820293155-a Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 80001324 | INACTIVE - NEEDS EVALUATION AS OF 6/26/2009 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL COMPANY 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.52 / 2,722.07 m-25-820361343-a Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 43490062 | REFER: RCRA AS OF 6/8/1994 INLAND PAPERBOARD AND PACKAGING, INC. 6400 JAMIESON WAY GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.57 / 3,010.66 m-27-820297879-a Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 71002634 | REFER: OTHER AGENCY AS OF 5/12/2006 TEMPLE-INLAND, INC. 6400 JAMIESON WAY GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.58 / 3,081.49 m-28-866001266-a 16 17 17 24 24 25 27 28 16 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 60000630 | NO FURTHER ACTION AS OF 9/5/2008 METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 950207012 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 m-29-820295074-a Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: CAD077182293 | HWP - EnviroStor Hazardous Waste Facilities A search of the HWP database, dated Aug 23, 2018 has found that there are 2 HWP site(s) within approximately 1.00 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 m-24-820356825-a METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 950207012 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 m-29-820356791-a LUST - Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Reports A search of the LUST database, dated Jul 6, 2018 has found that there are 3 LUST site(s) within approximately 0.50 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.19 / 989.17 m-13-820175315-a Global ID | Status | Status Date: T0608502195 | Completed - Case Closed | 2001-01-09 00:00:00 Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.19 / 1,007.77 m-14-820189637-a Global ID | Status | Status Date: T0608591842 | Completed - Case Closed | 2001-01-09 00:00:00 PRIVATE RESIDENCE PRIVATE RESIDENCE Gilroy CA 95020 WNW 0.43 / 2,245.32 m-22-820183743-a Global ID | Status | Status Date: T0608500042 | Completed - Case Closed | 1998-01-05 00:00:00 UST - Permitted Underground Storage Tank (UST) in GeoTracker A search of the UST database, dated Jul 1, 2018 has found that there are 1 UST site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Gilroy Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NNW 0.19 / 1,023.27 m-15-860403661-a Facility ID: 895 HHSS - Historical Hazardous Substance Storage Information Database A search of the HHSS database, dated Aug 27, 2015 has found that there are 1 HHSS site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. 29 24 29 13 14 22 15 17 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key VIEIRA SERVICES CO INC 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 m-16-822974089-a DELISTED TNK - Delisted Storage Tanks A search of the DELISTED TNK database, dated Jul 01, 2018 has found that there are 2 DELISTED TNK site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SHELL 850 Pacheco Pass Road Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.22 / 1,183.21 m-18-820077018-a TV'S FOOD MART 850 PACHECO PASS HWY GILROY CA 95020 N 0.25 / 1,296.71 m-20-820077017-a CERS TANK - California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Tanks A search of the CERS TANK database, dated Jul 9, 2018 has found that there are 1 CERS TANK site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Gilroy Shell 850 PACHECO PASS HWY GILROY CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 m-16-859557346-a HIST TANK - Historical Hazardous Substance Storage Container Information - Facility Summary A search of the HIST TANK database, dated May 27, 1988 has found that there are 1 HIST TANK site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key VIEIRA SERVICE CO., INC 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 m-16-865094844-a County DELISTED COUNTY - Delisted County Records A search of the DELISTED COUNTY database, dated Seo 4, 2018 has found that there are 1 DELISTED COUNTY site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Roadhouse Jacks 6945 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.16 / 845.24 m-12-824918430-a GILROY CUPA - Santa Clara County - Gilroy City CUPA Facilities List 16 18 20 16 16 12 18 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 A search of the GILROY CUPA database, dated Jul 2, 2018 has found that there are 16 GILROY CUPA site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Michael's Store # 4703 6745 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 SW 0.07 / 361.98 m-1-824918499-a PetSmart 0072 6755 Camino Arroyo Bldg 5 Gilroy CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 369.82 m-2-828833730-a Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 6765 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 373.29 m-3-824918425-a Bed, Bath and Beyond #608 6725 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 SSW 0.08 / 417.58 m-4-824918491-a Ross Dress For Less #0740 6715 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 SSW 0.09 / 473.04 m-5-824918309-a SALLY BEAUTY SUPPLY 6815 Camino Arroyo Ste 50 Gilroy CA 95020 WNW 0.10 / 551.29 m-6-845744811-a Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 6955 Camino Arroyo Ste 70 Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.12 / 627.57 m-8-824918509-a Leslie's Swimming Pool Supplies #505 6915 Camino Arroyo, Suite 10 Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.15 / 776.23 m-9-824918295-a Roadhouse Jacks 6945 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.16 / 845.24 m-12-845744796-a Gilroy Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 m-16-824918357-a CVS Pharmacy #16971 6705 Camino Arroyo Ste B Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 m-17-845744786-a TARGET T1851 6705 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 m-17-824918359-a 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 12 16 17 17 19 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Lower Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Flowstar, Inc. 6800 Silacci Way Gilroy CA 95020 NE 0.11 / 586.61 m-7-824918290-a Cintas Corporation #630 904 Holloway Rd Gilroy CA 95020 ESE 0.15 / 780.44 m-10-824918286-a Creative Labels, Inc. 6670 Silacci Way Gilroy CA 95020 E 0.16 / 824.48 m-11-824918482-a Tractor Supply Company Store# 1171-Gilroy 6881 Cameron Blvd Gilroy CA 95020 ENE 0.23 / 1,237.54 m-19-824918317-a SANTACLARA CUPA - Santa Clara County CUPA Facilities List A search of the SANTACLARA CUPA database, dated Jun 12, 2018 has found that there are 1 SANTACLARA CUPA site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Lower Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key CINTAS CORPORATION 904 HOLLOWAY RD GILROY CA 95020 ESE 0.15 / 780.44 m-10-867087703-a SANTACLARA LO - Santa Clara Local Oversight Program Listing A search of the SANTACLARA LO database, dated Jun 14, 2017 has found that there are 1 SANTACLARA LO site(s) within approximately 0.50 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 m-16-820142995-a SCVWD ID | Closure Date: 11S4E05K01f | 1/9/2001 Non Standard State INSP COMP ENF - EnviroStor Inspection, Compliance, and Enforcement A search of the INSP COMP ENF database, dated May 28, 2018 has found that there are 1 INSP COMP ENF site(s) within approximately 1.00 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 m-29-820209916-a DELISTED HAZ - Delisted Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Hazardous Waste Sites 7 10 11 19 10 16 29 20 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 A search of the DELISTED HAZ database, dated Jul 9, 2018 has found that there are 1 DELISTED HAZ site(s) within approximately 0.50 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Boral Roofing, LLC 6500 BREM LN GILROY CA 95020 SW 0.46 / 2,441.43 m-23-859589068-a EMISSIONS - Toxic Pollutant Emissions Facilities A search of the EMISSIONS database, dated Dec 31, 2016 has found that there are 4 EMISSIONS site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key TARGET CORPORATION - TARGET GI 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 m-17-861201413-a TARGET STORE T1851 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 m-17-861207511-a Lower Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key FLOWSTAR 6800 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 NE 0.11 / 586.61 m-7-861189129-a CREATIVE LABELS INC 6670 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 E 0.16 / 824.48 m-11-861183403-a CERS HAZ - California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Hazardous Waste Sites A search of the CERS HAZ database, dated Jul 9, 2018 has found that there are 8 CERS HAZ site(s) within approximately 0.12 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Michael's Store # 4703 6745 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 SW 0.07 / 361.98 m-1-859598704-a PetSmart 0072 6755 CAMINO ARROYO BLDG 5 GILROY CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 369.82 m-2-859597250-a Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 6765 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 373.29 m-3-859588691-a 23 17 17 7 11 1 2 3 21 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Bed, Bath and Beyond #608 6725 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.08 / 417.58 m-4-859594760-a Ross Dress For Less #0740 6715 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.09 / 473.04 m-5-859587253-a SALLY BEAUTY SUPPLY 6815 CAMINO ARROYO STE 50 GILROY CA 95020 WNW 0.10 / 551.29 m-6-859552917-a Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 6955 CAMINO ARROYO STE 70 GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.12 / 627.57 m-8-859603807-a Lower Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Flowstar, Inc. 6800 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 NE 0.11 / 586.61 m-7-859567881-a 4 5 6 8 7 #*#*#* #*#* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #* #* #*#* #*#* #* ^_ m9c m28cm27c m26cm25c m23c m22c m20c m19c m18c m15c m13c m8c(2) m7c(3)m6c(2) m5c(2) m4c(2) m3c(2) m2c(2) m1c(2) m29c(3) m24c(3)m21c(3) m12c(2) m11c(2) m10c(2) Miller SloughLlag asCree k M iller SloughLlagasCreek US-101 SUS - 1 0 1 NCA-152P a checo PassHwyE 1 0 th S tPacheco Pass Hwy 121°32'W121°32'30"W121°33'W121°33'30"W121°34'W 37°1'N37°1'N37°0'30"N37°0'30"N37°0'N37°0'N36°59'30"N36°59'30"N0.25 0 0.250.12 5 Miles Order No: 20180 926049 Map : 1 Mile Radius 1:18200 Address: 6970 C amino Arroyo , Gilroy, C A, 95020 Source: © 2 016 ESRI © ERIS Information Inc. ^_Project Prop erty Buf fer Outlin e #*Eris Sites with Higher Elevation ")Eris Sites with Same Elevation #*Eris Sites with Lower Elevation (Eris Sites with Unk nown Elevation County Boundary Rails Major Highways Major Highways Ram ps Major Roads Major Roads Ramps Secondary Roads Secondary Roads Ramps Local Roads and Ramps State B oundary National Priority List Sites National Wetland Indian Reserve Land Historic Fill 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone FWS Special Designation A reas State Brownfield Sites State Brownfield A reas State Superfund A reas:Dept. of Defense State Superfund A reas:NPL WQARF Areas Federal Lands: Dept. of Defense (owned/adm inistered areas) 9 28 27 26 25 23 22 20 19 18 15 13 8 (2) 7 (3)6 (2) 5 (2) 4 (2) 3 (2) 2 (2) 1 (2) 29 (3) 24 (3)21 (3) 12 (2) 11 (2) 10 (2) #*#*#* #* #* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*#* #* #*#*#*#*#*#* #* #* #* #* #*#* #*#* ^_ m9c m28cm27c m26c m25c m23c m22c m20c m19c m18c m15c m14c m13c m8c(2)m7c(3) m6c(2) m5c(2) m4c(2) m3c(2) m2c(2) m1c(2) m24c(3) m21c(3) m17c(6)m16c(6) m12c(2) m11c(2) m10c(2) Miller Slough Jones CreekUS-101 NUS-101 SCA-152Pacheco Pass Hwy E 10th S tCA- 1 5 2 E 10th S tC a m in o A rro y oRenz LnH o l l o w a y R d C a m e ro n Blv d Brem LnVentureW ayE 1 0 th S tBear Cat CtCr o c k e r L n Ches t nut St S t u t z W a y Lindsteadt W ayE 9th S tPacheco Pass Hwy R e ta il C tr121°32'30"W121°33'W121°33'30"W 37°0'30"N37°0'30"N37°0'N37°0'N0.1 0 0.10.05 Miles Order No: 20180 926049 Map : 0.5 Mile Radius 1:9100 Address: 6970 C amino Arroyo , Gilroy, C A, 95020 Source: © 2 016 ESRI © ERIS Information Inc. ^_Project Prop erty Buf fer Outlin e #*Eris Sites with Higher Elevation ")Eris Sites with Same Elevation #*Eris Sites with Lower Elevation (Eris Sites with Unk nown Elevation County Boundary Rails Major Highways Major Highways Ram ps Major Roads Major Roads Ramps Secondary Roads Secondary Roads Ramps Local Roads and Ramps State B oundary National Priority List Sites National Wetland Indian Reserve Land Historic Fill 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone FWS Special Designation A reas State Brownfield Sites State Brownfield A reas State Superfund A reas:Dept. of Defense State Superfund A reas:NPL WQARF Areas Federal Lands: Dept. of Defense (owned/adm inistered areas) 9 28 27 26 25 23 22 20 19 18 15 13 8 (2)7 (3) 6 (2) 5 (2) 4 (2) 3 (2) 2 (2) 1 (2) 24 (3) 21 (3) 12 (2) 11 (2) 10 (2) 14 17 (6)16 (6) #* #* #* #* #* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*#* #* #*#*#*#*#*#* ^_ m9c m20c m19c m18c m15c m14c m13c m8c(2)m7c(3) m6c(2) m5c(2) m4c(2) m3c(2) m2c(2) m1c(2) m17c(6)m16c(6) m12c(2) m11c(2) m10c(2) Pacheco Pass HwyCA-1 5 2 C a m in o A rro y o H o l l o w a y R d Sila c ci W a y CameronBlvdRenz LnVenture WayGilroyX in g R e ta il C tr CameronBlvd121°33'W 37°0'N37°0'N0.07 0 0.070.035 Miles Order No: 20180 926049 Map : 0.25 M ile Radius 1:4600 Address: 6970 C amino Arroyo , Gilroy, C A, 95020 Source: © 2 016 ESRI © ERIS Information Inc. ^_Project Prop erty Buf fer Outlin e #*Eris Sites with Higher Elevation ")Eris Sites with Same Elevation #*Eris Sites with Lower Elevation (Eris Sites with Unk nown Elevation County Boundary Rails Major Highways Major Highways Ram ps Major Roads Major Roads Ramps Secondary Roads Secondary Roads Ramps Local Roads and Ramps State B oundary National Priority List Sites National Wetland Indian Reserve Land Historic Fill 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone FWS Special Designation A reas State Brownfield Sites State Brownfield A reas State Superfund A reas:Dept. of Defense State Superfund A reas:NPL WQARF Areas Federal Lands: Dept. of Defense (owned/adm inistered areas) 9 20 19 18 15 13 8 (2)7 (3) 6 (2) 5 (2) 4 (2) 3 (2) 2 (2) 1 (2) 12 (2) 11 (2) 10 (2) 14 17 (6)16 (6) ^_ Source: Esri, DigitalGlo be, GeoEye, Earthstar G eographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AeroG RID, IG N, and the GIS User C ommunity 121°32 '30"W121°33 'W121°33 '30"W 37°0'30"N37°0'30"N37°0'N37°0'N36°59'30"N36°59'30"N0.15 0 0.150.075 Miles Order No: 20180926049Aerial 1:12100 Address: 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy, CA, 95020 © ERIS In formation Inc.Source: ESRI Wo rld Ima gery (2017) ^_ 121°31 '30"W121°32 'W121°32 '30"W121°33 'W121°33 '30"W121°34 'W121°34'30"W 37°1'30"N37°1'30"N37°1'N37°1'N37°0'30"N37°0'30"N37°0'N37°0'N36°59'30"N36°59'30"N36°59'N36°59'N0.35 0 0.350.175 Miles Order No: 20180926049Topographic Ma p 1:24000 Address: 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy, CA, 95020 © ERIS In formation Inc.Sourc e: USG S Topographic Map (2015) Qua drangle(s): Gilroy, CA; Chittenden, CA ; 27 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Detail Report Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-1-859598704-b 1 of 2 SW 0.07 / 361.98 185.74 / 3 Michael's Store # 4703 6745 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859598704-bb p1p-859598704-y1y Site ID:134906 Latitude:37.000267 Longitude:-121.552719 Regulated Programs EI ID:10409650 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Michaels Stores, Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(972) 409-5786 Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Ryan Draper Entity Title: Address:8000 Bent Branch Drive City:Irving State:TX Country: Zip Code:75063 Phone:(972) 409-5786 Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Ryan Draper Entity Title:Safety Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Michaels Stores, Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Jessica Santos Entity Title:Store Manager 1 CERS HAZ Detail Report 28 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(972) 409-1306 Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Michaels Stores, Inc. Entity Title: Address:8000 Bent Branch Drive City:Irving State:TX Country:United States Zip Code:75063 Phone:(972) 409-5786 Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:Chris Ortega Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:8000 Bent Branch Drive City:Irving State:TX Country: Zip Code:75063 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:JOSEPH KOCHER Entity Title:DISTRICT Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(972) 409-1306 m-1-824918499-b 2 of 2 SW 0.07 / 361.98 185.74 / 3 Michael's Store # 4703 6745 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918499-bb p1p-824918499-y1y CERS ID:10409650 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:5520 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:No Inv Rpt Req:Not Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable 1 GILROY CUPA 29 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-2-859597250-b 1 of 2 WSW 0.07 / 369.82 184.17 / 1 PetSmart 0072 6755 CAMINO ARROYO BLDG 5 GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859597250-bb p1p-859597250-y1y Site ID:360042 Latitude:37.000270 Longitude:-121.552720 Regulated Programs EI ID:10648675 EI Description:Chemical Storage Facilities EI ID:10648675 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Paul Chrisman Entity Title:Regional Loss Prevention Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(888) 287-7387 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Susan Bruner Entity Title:STORE MANAGER Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(888) 287-7387 Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:PetSmart, Inc. Entity Title: Address:19601 N. 27th Avenue City:Phoenix State:AZ Country:United States Zip Code:85027 Phone:(623) 587-2912 Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Ken Dobias Entity Title:Director of Environmental Affairs Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:PetSmart, Inc. Entity Title: Address: 2 CERS HAZ 30 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(623) 580-6100 Affil Type Desc:Property Owner Entity Name:Gilroy Crossing - CA Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country:United States Zip Code: Phone:(209) 474-9900 Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:Ken Dobias Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:Contracted Services, 19601 N 27th Ave City:Phoenix State:AZ Country: Zip Code:85027 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Petsmart Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Ken Dobias Entity Title: Address:3481 Plano Parkway City:The Colony State:TX Country: Zip Code:75056 Phone:(972) 464-0004 m-2-828833730-b 2 of 2 WSW 0.07 / 369.82 184.17 / 1 PetSmart 0072 6755 Camino Arroyo Bldg 5 dd-GILROY CUPA-828833730-bb p1p-828833730-y1y 2 GILROY CUPA 31 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Gilroy CA 95020 CERS ID:10648675 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:No Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-3-859588691-b 1 of 2 WSW 0.07 / 373.29 184.51 / 1 Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 6765 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859588691-bb p1p-859588691-y1y Site ID:274514 Latitude:37.000900 Longitude:-121.550987 Regulated Programs EI ID:10618552 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Kohl's Department Stores Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(262) 703-7019 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:Scott Smith - Kohls Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Kohl's Department Stores Entity Title: Address:P.O. Box 3155 City:Milwaukee 3 CERS HAZ 32 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB State:WI Country:United States Zip Code:53201 Phone:(262) 703-7019 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Bertha Villa Entity Title:Store Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(866) 907-0048 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Operations Manager Entity Title:Operations Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(866) 907-0048 Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:P.O. Box 3155 City:Milwaukee State:WI Country: Zip Code:53201 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Ryan Piedot Entity Title:Manager of Environmental Compliance Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Ryan Piedot Entity Title: Address:P.O. Box 3155 City:Milwaukee State:WI Country: Zip Code:53201 Phone:(262) 703-7019 Coordinates Env Int Type Code:HWG Longitude:-121.551050 33 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Program ID:10618552 Coord Name: Latitude:37.000900 Ref Point Type Desc:Center of a facility or station. m-3-824918425-b 2 of 2 WSW 0.07 / 373.29 184.51 / 1 Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 6765 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918425-bb p1p-824918425-y1y CERS ID:10618552 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:5842 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:No Inv Rpt Req:Not Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-4-859594760-b 1 of 2 SSW 0.08 / 417.58 185.69 / 2 Bed, Bath and Beyond #608 6725 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859594760-bb p1p-859594760-y1y Site ID:97977 Latitude:37.000267 Longitude:-121.552719 Regulated Programs EI ID:10169697 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:5151 San Felipe St, Suite 1000 City:Houston State:TX Country: Zip Code:77056 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:ASHLEY CAMPBELL Entity Title: Address:5151 San Felipe St, Suite 1000 City:Houston State:TX Country: Zip Code:77056 Phone:(713) 985-5472 3 4 GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ 34 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Ashley Campbell Entity Title:Authorized Representative Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Bed, Bath and Beyond, Inc. Entity Title: Address:650 Liberty Ave City:Union State:NJ Country:United States Zip Code:07083 Phone:(908) 688-0888 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Scott Simon Entity Title:Regional Director Loss Prevention Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(310) 384-6799 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:ASHLEY CAMPBELL Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Bed, Bath and Beyond Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Bed, Bath and Beyond, Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(908) 688-0888 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Store Manager Entity Title:Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(310) 384-6799 35 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-4-824918491-b 2 of 2 SSW 0.08 / 417.58 185.69 / 2 Bed, Bath and Beyond #608 6725 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918491-bb p1p-824918491-y1y CERS ID:10169697 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:5410 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:No Inv Rpt Req:Not Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-5-859587253-b 1 of 2 SSW 0.09 / 473.04 184.77 / 2 Ross Dress For Less #0740 6715 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859587253-bb p1p-859587253-y1y Site ID:62973 Latitude:37.000267 Longitude:-121.552719 Regulated Programs EI ID:10509088 EI Description:Chemical Storage Facilities EI ID:10509088 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:ASHLEY CAMPBELL Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Ross Dress For Less Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(925) 965-4831 Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Ashley Campbell Entity Title:ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation 4 5 GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ 36 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Entity Name:Ross Stores, Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:5130 Hacienda Dr City:Dublin State:CA Country: Zip Code:94568-7579 Phone: Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Ross Dress For Less Inc. Entity Title: Address:5130 Hacienda Dr City:Dublin State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:94568-7579 Phone:(925) 965-4831 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:NANCY ALCANTARA Entity Title:STORE MANAGER Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(855) 257-7472 Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:ASHLEY CAMPBELL Entity Title: Address:5151 SAN FELIPE ST, SUITE 1000 City:HOUSTON State:TX Country: Zip Code:77056 Phone:(713) 985-5472 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Brad Wieland Entity Title:District Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(855) 257-7472 37 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Coordinates Env Int Type Code:HWG Longitude:-121.552720 Program ID:10509088 Coord Name: Latitude:37.000310 Ref Point Type Desc:Center of a facility or station. m-5-824918309-b 2 of 2 SSW 0.09 / 473.04 184.77 / 2 Ross Dress For Less #0740 6715 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918309-bb p1p-824918309-y1y CERS ID:10509088 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:5405 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:No Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-6-859552917-b 1 of 2 WNW 0.10 / 551.29 186.86 / 4 SALLY BEAUTY SUPPLY 6815 CAMINO ARROYO STE 50 GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859552917-bb p1p-859552917-y1y Site ID:367598 Latitude:37.002400 Longitude:-121.550890 Regulated Programs EI ID:10666558 EI Description:Chemical Storage Facilities EI ID:10666558 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:6815 CAMINO ARROYO #50 City:GILROY State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Larry Burton Entity Title:Director, Temarry Recycling, Inc Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy 5 6 GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ 38 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Randy Goss Entity Title: Address:3001 COLORADO BLVD City:DENTON State:TX Country: Zip Code:76210 Phone:(940) 898-7500 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Randy Goss Entity Title:Health and Safety Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(940) 898-7500 Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Sally Beauty Holding LLC Entity Title: Address:3001 COLORADO BLVD City:DENTON State:TX Country:United States Zip Code:76210 Phone:(940) 898-7500 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:David Epstein Entity Title:National Project Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(609) 381-1218 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:Larry Burton Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Sally Beauty Holding LLC Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(940) 898-7500 Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Sally Beauty Holding LLC Entity Title: Address: 39 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: m-6-845744811-b 2 of 2 WNW 0.10 / 551.29 186.86 / 4 SALLY BEAUTY SUPPLY 6815 Camino Arroyo Ste 50 Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-845744811-bb p1p-845744811-y1y CERS ID:10666558 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-7-859567881-b 1 of 3 NE 0.11 / 586.61 182.48 / -1 Flowstar, Inc. 6800 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859567881-bb p1p-859567881-y1y Site ID:30680 Latitude:37.002290 Longitude:-121.547450 Regulated Programs EI ID:10073965 EI Description:Chemical Storage Facilities EI ID:10073965 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Flowstar, Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:DEBBIE CURRIER Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA 6 7 GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ 40 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:6800 SILACCI WAY City:GILROY State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:DEBBIE CURRIER Entity Title:PRESIDENT Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Property Owner Entity Name:DEBBIE & JIM CURRIER Entity Title: Address:6800 SILACCI WAY City:GILROY State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-2400 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Mike Bennett Entity Title:Production Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 593-2830 Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Debbie Currier Entity Title: Address:6800 SILACCI WAY City:Gilroy State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-3523 Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Debbie Currier Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 842-2400 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Debbie Carrier Entity Title:Owner Address: City: 41 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 842-3523 Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Mike Bennett Entity Title: Address:6800 Silacci Way City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-2400 Coordinates Env Int Type Code:HWG Longitude:-121.547440 Program ID:10073965 Coord Name: Latitude:37.002686 Ref Point Type Desc:Unknown Evaluations Eval Date:10/27/2017 Violations Found:Yes Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HW Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:11/30/2015 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:10/27/2017 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:11/30/2015 Violations Found:Yes Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HW Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: CESQG Violations 42 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violation Date:10/27/2017 Violation Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Citation:22 CCR 12 66262.11 - California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Chapter 12, Section(s) 66262.11 Violation Program: HW Violation Source: CERS Violation Notes: Returned to compliance on 01/05/2018. Acid wipes are not disposed as hazardous waste. Start collecting acid wipes as hazardous waste. Violation Description: Failure to determine if wastes generated are hazardous waste by using generator knowledge or applying testing method. Violations Violation Date:10/27/2017 Violation Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Citation:40 CFR 1 265.174 - U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Section(s) 265.174 Violation Program: HW Violation Source: CERS Violation Notes: Returned to compliance on 01/05/2018. failed to perform self weekly inspection at hazardous waste storage area. Left copy of UNIDOCS weekly inspection form. Violation Description: Failure to inspect hazardous waste storage areas at least weekly and look for leaking and deteriorating containers. Violations Violation Date:11/30/2015 Violation Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Citation:40 CFR 1 265.173 - U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Section(s) 265.173 Violation Program: HW Violation Source: CERS Violation Notes: Returned to compliance on 11/30/2015. No lid on hazardous waste container. Operator replaced lid immediately. Violation Description: Failure to properly close hazardous waste containers when not in active use. Violations 43 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violation Date:10/27/2017 Violation Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Citation:22 CCR 12 66262.34(f) - California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Chapter 12, Section(s) 66262.34(f) Violation Program: HW Violation Source: CERS Violation Notes: Returned to compliance on 10/27/2017. Failed to put waste chemical constituents in hazardous waste label. Corrected during inspection. Violation Description: Failure to properly label hazardous waste accumulation containers and portable tanks with the following requirements: "Hazardous Waste", name and address of the generator, physical and chemical characteristics of the Hazardous Waste, and starting accumulation date. m-7-824918290-b 2 of 3 NE 0.11 / 586.61 182.48 / -1 Flowstar, Inc. 6800 Silacci Way Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918290-bb p1p-824918290-y1y CERS ID:10073965 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:1068 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-7-861189129-b 3 of 3 NE 0.11 / 586.61 182.48 / -1 FLOWSTAR 6800 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 dd-EMISSIONS-861189129-bb p1p-861189129-y1y 1995 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:1.1 CO:43 ROGT:.92692 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1995 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 7 7 GILROY CUPA EMISSIONS 44 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 1996 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:1.3 CO:43 ROGT:1.11038 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1996 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 1997 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:1.3 CO:43 ROGT:1.11038 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1997 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 1998 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:1.1 CO:43 ROGT:.9808 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1998 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: 45 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 1999 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:1.797 CO:43 ROGT:1.2553842 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1999 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2000 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:1.797 CO:43 ROGT:1.26 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2000 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2001 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.58 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 46 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 2001 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2002 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.473 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2002 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2003 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.473 CO:43 ROGT:.32 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2003 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2004 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: 47 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.473 CO:43 ROGT:.3304378 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2004 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2005 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.473 CO:43 ROGT:.3304378 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2005 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2006 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.636 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2006 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: 48 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2007 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.636 CO:43 ROGT:.4443096 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2007 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2008 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.636 CO:43 ROGT:.4443096 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2008 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2009 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.636 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2009 Toxic Data 49 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2010 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2011 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.616 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2011 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2012 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.616 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2012 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA 50 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2013 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.616 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2013 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2014 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.294499529 CO:43 ROGT: Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2014 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2015 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.294499546 CO:43 ROGT:.294499546 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 51 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 2015 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2016 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR CODE: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.294499529 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2016 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 TS: Facility SIC Code:3674 HRA: CERR CODE:CH Index: COID:SCL AH Index: CO:43 Air Basin:SF DISN:BAY AREA AQMD District:BA CHAPIS: m-8-859603807-b 1 of 2 NW 0.12 / 627.57 185.67 / 2 Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 6955 CAMINO ARROYO STE 70 GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859603807-bb p1p-859603807-y1y Site ID:18788 Latitude:37.002340 Longitude:-121.552800 Regulated Programs EI ID:10507234 EI Description:Chemical Storage Facilities Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Kim Oganesyan Entity Title: Address:1401 Wynkoop St., Suite 500 City:Denver State:CO Country: Zip Code:80202 Phone:(303) 222-2524 Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA 8 CERS HAZ 52 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:MIke Nuesca Entity Title:Facilities Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(310) 873-8071 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:Sam Smith Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Sam Smith Entity Title:Facilities Coordinator Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Chipotle Mexican Grill Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Whitney Rodriguez Entity Title:General Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 988-0618 Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:1401 Wynkoop St., Suite 500 City:Denver State:CO Country: Zip Code:80202 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 Entity Title: Address: City: 53 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 848-4079 Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. Entity Title: Address:1401 Wynkoop St., Suite 500 City:Denver State:CO Country:United States Zip Code:80202 Phone:(303) 595-4000 Evaluations Eval Date:6/22/2017 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: CO2 for soda dispensing m-8-824918509-b 2 of 2 NW 0.12 / 627.57 185.67 / 2 Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 6955 Camino Arroyo Ste 70 Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918509-bb p1p-824918509-y1y CERS ID:10507234 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:12932 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:No CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-9-824918295-b 1 of 1 NW 0.15 / 776.23 184.21 / 1 Leslie's Swimming Pool Supplies #505 6915 Camino Arroyo, Suite 10 Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918295-bb p1p-824918295-y1y CERS ID:10156991 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:5647 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:No CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: 8 9 GILROY CUPA GILROY CUPA 54 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-10-867087703-b 1 of 2 ESE 0.15 / 780.44 178.01 / -5 CINTAS CORPORATION 904 HOLLOWAY RD GILROY CA 95020 dd-SANTACLARA CUPA-867087703-bb p1p-867087703-y1y Facility ID:FA0201427 --Details-- Program Element:2201 Description:GENERATES WASTE OIL ONLY Record ID:PR0315264 m-10-824918286-b 2 of 2 ESE 0.15 / 780.44 178.01 / -5 Cintas Corporation #630 904 Holloway Rd Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918286-bb p1p-824918286-y1y CERS ID:10073893 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:2071 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-11-824918482-b 1 of 2 E 0.16 / 824.48 179.31 / -4 Creative Labels, Inc. 6670 Silacci Way Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918482-bb p1p-824918482-y1y CERS ID:10073911 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:2286 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-11-861183403-b 2 of 2 E 0.16 / 824.48 179.31 / -4 CREATIVE LABELS INC 6670 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 dd-EMISSIONS-861183403-bb p1p-861183403-y1y 1997 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:1.2 CO:43 ROGT:1.2 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1997 Toxic Data 10 10 11 11 SANTACLARA CUPA GILROY CUPA GILROY CUPA EMISSIONS 55 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 1998 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.3 CO:43 ROGT:.3 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1998 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 1999 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.254 CO:43 ROGT:.254 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1999 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2000 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.254 CO:43 ROGT:.25 Air Basin:SF COT: 56 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2000 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2002 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.659 CO:43 ROGT:.659 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2002 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2003 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.659 CO:43 ROGT:.66 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2003 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 57 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 2004 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.659 CO:43 ROGT:.659 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2004 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2005 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.846 CO:43 ROGT:.846 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2005 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2006 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.846 CO:43 ROGT:.846 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2006 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: 58 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2007 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.846 CO:43 ROGT:.846 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2007 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2008 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.846 CO:43 ROGT:.846 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2008 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2009 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:1.16 CO:43 ROGT:1.16 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 59 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 2009 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2010 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2011 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:1.201 CO:43 ROGT:1.201 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2011 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2012 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:1.201 CO:43 ROGT:1.201 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2012 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL 60 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2013 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:1.13 CO:43 ROGT:1.13 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2013 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2014 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:1.351271411 CO:43 ROGT: Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2014 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2015 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:10.3870504 CO:43 ROGT:10.3870504 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: 61 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2015 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2016 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR CODE: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:10.704002452 CO:43 ROGT:10.704002452 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2016 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 TS: Facility SIC Code:2759 HRA: CERR CODE:CH Index: COID:SCL AH Index: CO:43 Air Basin:SF DISN:BAY AREA AQMD District:BA CHAPIS: m-12-845744796-b 1 of 2 NW 0.16 / 845.24 186.78 / 4 Roadhouse Jacks 6945 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-845744796-bb p1p-845744796-y1y CERS ID:10630354 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:12961 Fac Info Rpt Req:Not Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Not Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:No CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-12-824918430-b 2 of 2 NW 0.16 / 845.24 186.78 / 4 Roadhouse Jacks 6945 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-DELISTED COUNTY-824918430-bb p1p-824918430-y1y Original Source Facility ID:10630354 Original Source Name:Gilroy City CUPA Facilities List Record Date:17-JUL-2015 12 12 GILROY CUPA DELISTED COUNTY 62 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-13-820175315-b 1 of 1 NW 0.19 / 989.17 187.24 / 4 Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 dd-LUST-820175315-bb p1p-820175315-y1y Global ID:T0608502195 CUF Case:YES Case Type:LUST Cleanup Site Begin Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Status:Completed - Case Closed How Discovered: Status Date:2001-01-09 00:00:00 Stop Method: RB Case No:596 County:Santa Clara LOC Case No:Latitude:37.0034637 Lead Agency:SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOP Longitude:-121.551918 Case Worker:UST File Location:All Files are on GeoTracker or in the Local Agency Database Local Agency:SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOP Potential Media Of Concern:Gasoline Potential Media Affected:Other Groundwater (uses other than drinking water) How Discovered Description: Stop Description: Cal Water Watershed Name:Pajaro River - South Santa Clara Valley (305.30) DWR Groundwater Subbasin Name: Gilroy-Hollister Valley - Llagas Area (3-003.01) Site History: Status History Status:Open - Remediation Status Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Status:Completed - Case Closed Status Date:2001-01-09 00:00:00 Status:Open - Case Begin Date Status Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Status:Open - Site Assessment Status Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Activities Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Remedial Progress Report Date:1996-10-15 00:00:00 Action Type:REMEDIATION Action:Other (Use Description Field) Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Action Type:ENFORCEMENT Action:Staff Letter - #17888 Date:1998-02-02 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Monitoring Report - Quarterly Date:1996-07-15 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Remedial Progress Report Date:1996-04-15 00:00:00 Action Type:ENFORCEMENT Action:Staff Letter - #17874 Date:1995-11-04 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Monitoring Report - Quarterly Date:1997-04-15 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Monitoring Report - Quarterly Date:1997-01-15 00:00:00 13 LUST 63 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Action Type:ENFORCEMENT Action:Staff Letter - #17876 Date:1996-02-09 00:00:00 Action Type:REMEDIATION Action:Pump & Treat (P&T) Groundwater Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Monitoring Report - Quarterly Date:1998-04-15 00:00:00 Action Type:Other Action:Leak Reported Date:1987-03-09 00:00:00 Action Type:ENFORCEMENT Action:Notice of Responsibility - #39243 Date:1988-01-11 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Monitoring Report - Quarterly Date:1996-01-15 00:00:00 Contacts Contact Type:Local Agency Caseworker City:SAN JOSE Contact Name:UST CASE WORKER Email: Organization Name:SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOP Phone No:4089183400 Address:1555 Berger Drive, Suite 300 Contact Type:Regional Board Caseworker City:SAN LUIS OBISPO Contact Name:RB3 STAFF Email:centralcoast@waterboards.ca.gov Organization Name:CENTRAL COAST RWQCB (REGION 3)Phone No:8055493147 Address:895 AEROVISTA PL, SUITE 101 m-14-820189637-b 1 of 1 NW 0.19 / 1,007.77 188.01 / 5 Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 dd-LUST-820189637-bb p1p-820189637-y1y Global ID:T0608591842 CUF Case:NO Case Type:LUST Cleanup Site Begin Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Status:Completed - Case Closed How Discovered: Status Date:2001-01-09 00:00:00 Stop Method: RB Case No:County:Santa Clara LOC Case No:Latitude:37.003789 Lead Agency:SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOP Longitude:-121.551572 Case Worker:File Location: Local Agency: Potential Media Of Concern:Gasoline Potential Media Affected: How Discovered Description: Stop Description: Cal Water Watershed Name:Pajaro River - South Santa Clara Valley (305.30) DWR Groundwater Subbasin Name: Gilroy-Hollister Valley - Llagas Area (3-003.01) Site History: Status History Status:Completed - Case Closed Status Date:2001-01-09 00:00:00 Status:Open - Remediation Status Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 14 LUST 64 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Status:Open - Site Assessment Status Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Status:Open - Case Begin Date Status Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Activities Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Monitoring Report - Quarterly Date:2004-04-20 00:00:00 Action Type:Other Action:Leak Reported Date:1965-01-02 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Correspondence Date:2004-04-29 00:00:00 Action Type:REMEDIATION Action:Pump & Treat (P&T) Groundwater Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Action Type:REMEDIATION Action:Other (Use Description Field) Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Well Destruction Report Date:2004-10-20 00:00:00 Action Type:ENFORCEMENT Action:Closure/No Further Action Letter Date:2001-01-09 00:00:00 m-15-860403661-b 1 of 1 NNW 0.19 / 1,023.27 185.88 / 3 Gilroy Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 dd-UST-860403661-bb p1p-860403661-y1y Facility ID:895 Latitude:37.00407 Permitting Agency:Gilroy City Fire Department Longitude:-121.551142 County:Santa Clara m-16-859557346-b 1 of 6 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 186.13 / 3 Gilroy Shell 850 PACHECO PASS HWY GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS TANK-859557346-bb p1p-859557346-y1y Site ID:33257 Latitude:37.004070 Longitude:-121.551140 Regulated Programs EI ID:10074328 EI Description:Underground Storage Tank EI ID:10074328 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator EI ID:10074328 EI Description:Chemical Storage Facilities Affiliations 15 16 UST CERS TANK 65 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Hwy City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Hwy City:Gilroy State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title:Owner Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 506-0739 Affil Type Desc:UST Property Owner Name Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Road City:Gilroy State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:UST Tank Owner Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Road City:Gilroy State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: 66 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Hwy City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title:Owner Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Property Owner Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Hwy City:Gilroy State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:UST Tank Operator Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Road City:Gilroy State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Gilroy Shell Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:UST Permit Applicant Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title:Owner Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: 67 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Phone:(408) 847-9583 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Teresa Vu Entity Title:Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 483-7272 Coordinates Env Int Type Code:HMBP Longitude:-121.551521 Program ID:10074328 Coord Name: Latitude:37.003780 Ref Point Type Desc:Unknown Evaluations Eval Date:1/18/2018 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:5/11/2017 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:UST Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: SB 989 test Eval Date:1/18/2018 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:UST Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Monitoring Systems Equipment Certification conducted. All passed inspection. Eval Date:2/10/2015 Violations Found:Yes Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Need to increase letter sizing for sign above emergency shut-off. Eval Date:5/11/2017 68 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:6/14/2016 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Other/Unknown Eval Type:Other, not routine, done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:UST Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Inspection conducted after UST service company contacted CUPA that brine had leaked from the annular space into the primary UST. UST service company had taken failed UST out of service (i.e. disconnected electrical, capped product line, closed ball valve, locked out/tagged out). Clean fuel was being transferred to neighboring UST. Brine-contaminated fuel scheduled for pick-up by hazardous waste hauler. Owner/operator informed inspector that his architect and engineer had recently completed plans to be submitted for the removal of the existing UST system and for a new VPH UST system to be installed. Eval Date:1/20/2016 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:UST Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:2/10/2015 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:UST Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:6/5/2014 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: All hazardous materials inside the USTs. Eval Date:6/5/2014 Violations Found:Yes Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:UST Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Secondary containment testing could not be completed due to deteriorated boots/fittings. Repair permit has been scheduled. Eval Date:1/20/2016 69 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Violations Violation Date:6/5/2014 Violation Program: Violation Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Violation Source: Citation:23 CCR 16 2637 - California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Chapter 16, Section(s) 2637 Violation Notes: Returned to compliance on 08/13/2014. Secondary containment testing could not be completed due to deteriorated boots and fittings. Repair and testing completed 8/13/2014. Violation Description: Failure to comply with one or more of the following: conduct secondary containment testing, within six months of installation and every 36 months thereafter, conducted in accordance with proper practices, protocols, or test methods. Violations Violation Date:2/10/2015 Violation Program: Violation Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Violation Source: Citation:HSC 6.95 Multiple Sections - California Health and Safety Code, Chapter 6.95, Section(s) Multiple Sections Violation Notes: Current sign has very small lettering for emergency shut off. Increase letter sizing to 4" size with contrasting background to be approved by inspector. Violation Description: Business Plan Program - Operations/Maintenance - General m-16-824918357-b 2 of 6 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 186.13 / 3 Gilroy Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918357-bb p1p-824918357-y1y CERS ID:10074328 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:895 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Applicable Own/Op UST:Yes RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-16-822974089-b 3 of 6 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 186.13 / 3 VIEIRA SERVICES CO INC 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA 95020 dd-HHSS-822974089-bb p1p-822974089-y1y County:Santa Clara Pdf File Url:http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ustpdfs/pdf/000208e0.pdf 16 16 GILROY CUPA HHSS 70 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-16-865094844-b 4 of 6 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 186.13 / 3 VIEIRA SERVICE CO., INC 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA dd-HIST TANK-865094844-bb p1p-865094844-y1y Owner Name:SHELL OIL COMPANY No of Containers:3 Owner Street:P.O. BOX 4848 County:SANTA CLARA Owner City:ANAHEIM Facility State:CA Owner State:CA Facility Zip:95020 Owner Zip:92803 m-16-820142995-b 5 of 6 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 186.13 / 3 Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA dd-SANTACLARA LO-820142995-bb p1p-820142995-y1y SCVWD ID:11S4E05K01f Closure Date:1/9/2001 Link:http://lustop.sccgov.org/files/11S4E05K01f/ m-16-810484503-b 6 of 6 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 186.13 / 3 SERVICE STATION - SAP 135332 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA 95020 dd-RCRA LQG-810484503-bb p1p-810484503-y1y EPA Handler ID:CAD981402514 Gen Status Universe:Large Quantity Generator Contact Name:DON F WISDOM Contact Address:P O BOX 3127, , HOUSTON, TX, 77253, US Contact Phone No and Ext:713-241-7011 7011 Contact Email:DON.F.WISDOM@SHELL.COM Contact Country:US County Name:SANTA CLARA EPA Region:09 Land Type: Receive Date:20100603 Violation/Evaluation Summary Note:NO RECORDS: As of Aug 2018, there are no Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement (violation) records associated with this facility (EPA ID). Handler Summary Importer Activity:No Mixed Waste Generator:No Transporter Activity:No Transfer Facility:No Onsite Burner Exemption:No Furnace Exemption:No Underground Injection Activity:No Commercial TSD:No Used Oil Transporter:No Used Oil Transfer Facility:No Used Oil Processor:No Used Oil Refiner:No Used Oil Burner:No Used Oil Market Burner:No Used Oil Spec Marketer:No Hazardous Waste Handler Details Sequence No:1 Receive Date:20100603 Handler Name:SERVICE STATION - SAP 135332 16 16 16 HIST TANK SANTACLARA LO RCRA LQG 71 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Generator Status Universe:Large Quantity Generator Source Type:B Sequence No:1 Receive Date:19980408 Handler Name:SHELL OIL CO Generator Status Universe:Large Quantity Generator Source Type:N Sequence No:1 Receive Date:19960901 Handler Name:SHELL OIL CO Generator Status Universe:Large Quantity Generator Source Type:I Waste Code Details Hazardous Waste Code:D018 Waste Code Description:BENZENE Hazardous Waste Code:D001 Waste Code Description:IGNITABLE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D001 Waste Code Description:IGNITABLE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D018 Waste Code Description:BENZENE Owner/Operator Details Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No: Type:Private Street 1:P O BOX 4453 Name:EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC Street 2: Date Became Current:City:HOUSTON Date Ended Current:State:TX Phone:713-241-2258 Country: Source Type:N Zip Code:77210-4453 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No: Type:Private Street 1:P O BOX 3127 Name:EQUILON ENT LLC/ DBA SHELL OIL PROD US Street 2: Date Became Current:19920801 City:HOUSTON Date Ended Current:State:TX Phone:Country:US Source Type:B Zip Code:77253 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:Private Street 1:NOT REQUIRED Name:NOT REQUIRED Street 2: Date Became Current:City:NOT REQUIRED Date Ended Current:State:ME Phone:415-555-1212 Country: Source Type:I Zip Code:99999 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:Private Street 1: Name:EQUILON ENT LLC/ DBA SHELL OIL PROD US Street 2: Date Became Current:19980801 City: Date Ended Current:State: Phone:Country: Source Type:B Zip Code: 72 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-17-824918359-b 1 of 6 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 186.98 / 4 TARGET T1851 6705 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918359-bb p1p-824918359-y1y CERS ID:10173229 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:5190 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-17-845744786-b 2 of 6 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 186.98 / 4 CVS Pharmacy #16971 6705 Camino Arroyo Ste B Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-845744786-bb p1p-845744786-y1y CERS ID:10668205 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-17-861201413-b 3 of 6 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 186.98 / 4 TARGET CORPORATION - TARGET GI 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-EMISSIONS-861201413-bb p1p-861201413-y1y 2003 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.002 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT:.001 District:BA NOXT:.006 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2003 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2004 Criteria Data 17 17 17 GILROY CUPA GILROY CUPA EMISSIONS 73 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.002 CO:43 ROGT:.0001828 Air Basin:SF COT:.001 District:BA NOXT:.006 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2004 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2005 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.004 CO:43 ROGT:.0003656 Air Basin:SF COT:.001 District:BA NOXT:.01 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2005 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2006 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.004 CO:43 ROGT:.0003656 Air Basin:SF COT:.001 District:BA NOXT:.01 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2006 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA 74 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2007 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.009 CO:43 ROGT:.0008226 Air Basin:SF COT:.003 District:BA NOXT:.023 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2007 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2008 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.009 CO:43 ROGT:.0008226 Air Basin:SF COT:.003 District:BA NOXT:.023 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2008 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2009 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.003 CO:43 ROGT:.0002742 Air Basin:SF COT:0 District:BA NOXT:.003 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 75 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 2009 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2010 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: m-17-861207511-b 4 of 6 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 186.98 / 4 TARGET STORE T1851 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-EMISSIONS-861207511-bb p1p-861207511-y1y 2011 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.003 CO:43 ROGT:.0002742 Air Basin:SF COT:0 District:BA NOXT:.004 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2011 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2012 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.003 CO:43 ROGT:.0002742 Air Basin:SF COT:0 District:BA NOXT:.004 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 17 EMISSIONS 76 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 2012 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2013 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.003 CO:43 ROGT:.0002742 Air Basin:SF COT:0 District:BA NOXT:.004 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2013 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2014 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.003159373 CO:43 ROGT: Air Basin:SF COT:.000491429 District:BA NOXT:.003885978 COID:SCL SOXT:.000000649 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:.000011429 CHAPIS:PM10T:.000011429 2014 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2015 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.002954014 77 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB CO:43 ROGT:.001495413 Air Basin:SF COT:.000459486 District:BA NOXT:.003633389 COID:SCL SOXT:.000000607 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:.000010686 CHAPIS:PM10T:.000010686 2015 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2016 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR CODE: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.002954014 CO:43 ROGT:.0002750187034 Air Basin:SF COT:.000459486 District:BA NOXT:.003633389 COID:SCL SOXT:.000000607 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:.000010686 CHAPIS:PM10T:.000010686 2016 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 TS: Facility SIC Code:5311 HRA: CERR CODE:CH Index: COID:SCL AH Index: CO:43 Air Basin:SF DISN:BAY AREA AQMD District:BA CHAPIS: m-17-848634326-b 5 of 6 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 186.98 / 4 CVS PHARMACY #16971 6705 CAMINO ARROYO STE B GILROY CA 95020 dd-RCRA CESQG-848634326-bb p1p-848634326-y1y EPA Handler ID:CAR000260075 Gen Status Universe:Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator Contact Name:NICOLE WILKINSON Contact Address:ONE, CVS DR MAIL CODE 2340, , WOONSOCKET, RI, 02895, US Contact Phone No and Ext:401-770-7132 Contact Email:NICOLE.WILKINSON@CVSHEALTH.COM Contact Country:US County Name:SANTA CLARA EPA Region:09 Land Type: Receive Date:20160329 Violation/Evaluation Summary Note:NO RECORDS: As of Aug 2018, there are no Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement (violation) records associated with this facility (EPA ID). Handler Summary 17 RCRA CESQG 78 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Importer Activity:No Mixed Waste Generator:No Transporter Activity:No Transfer Facility:No Onsite Burner Exemption:No Furnace Exemption:No Underground Injection Activity:No Commercial TSD:No Used Oil Transporter:No Used Oil Transfer Facility:No Used Oil Processor:No Used Oil Refiner:No Used Oil Burner:No Used Oil Market Burner:No Used Oil Spec Marketer:No Hazardous Waste Handler Details Sequence No:1 Receive Date:20160329 Handler Name:CVS PHARMACY #16971 Generator Status Universe:CEG Source Type:N Waste Code Details Hazardous Waste Code:214 Waste Code Description:Unspecified solvent mixture Hazardous Waste Code:D024 Waste Code Description:M-CRESOL Hazardous Waste Code:U122 Waste Code Description:FORMALDEHYDE Hazardous Waste Code:352 Waste Code Description:Other organic solids Hazardous Waste Code:D010 Waste Code Description:SELENIUM Hazardous Waste Code:P001 Waste Code Description:2H-1-BENZOPYRAN-2-ONE, 4-HYDROXY-3-(3-OXO-1-PHENYLBUTYL)-, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% (OR) WARFARIN, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% Hazardous Waste Code:U205 Waste Code Description:SELENIUM SULFIDE (OR) SELENIUM SULFIDE SES2 (R,T) Hazardous Waste Code:141 Waste Code Description:Off-specification, aged, or surplus inorganics Hazardous Waste Code:331 Waste Code Description:Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Hazardous Waste Code:123 Waste Code Description:Unspecified alkaline solution Hazardous Waste Code:134 Waste Code Description:Aqueous solution with <10% total organic residues Hazardous Waste Code:U044 Waste Code Description:CHLOROFORM (OR) METHANE, TRICHLORO- Hazardous Waste Code:U129 Waste Code Description:CYCLOHEXANE, 1,2,3,4,5,6-HEXACHLORO-, (1ALPHA, 2ALPHA, 3BETA, 4ALPHA, 5ALPHA, 6BETA)- (OR) 79 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB LINDANE Hazardous Waste Code:561 Waste Code Description:Detergent and soap Hazardous Waste Code:D002 Waste Code Description:CORROSIVE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D009 Waste Code Description:MERCURY Hazardous Waste Code:D011 Waste Code Description:SILVER Hazardous Waste Code:122 Waste Code Description:Alkaline solution without metals (pH > 12.5) Hazardous Waste Code:181 Waste Code Description:Other inorganic solid waste Hazardous Waste Code:311 Waste Code Description:Pharmaceutical waste Hazardous Waste Code:D001 Waste Code Description:IGNITABLE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:791 Waste Code Description:Liquids with pH < 2 Hazardous Waste Code:D007 Waste Code Description:CHROMIUM Hazardous Waste Code:U034 Waste Code Description:ACETALDEHYDE, TRICHLORO- (OR) CHLORAL Hazardous Waste Code:U201 Waste Code Description:1,3-BENZENEDIOL (OR) RESORCINOL Hazardous Waste Code:541 Waste Code Description:Photochemicals / photo processing waste Hazardous Waste Code:U188 Waste Code Description:PHENOL Owner/Operator Details Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:P Street 1: Name:GARFIELD BEACH CVS LLC Street 2: Date Became Current:20151216 City: Date Ended Current:State: Phone:Country:US Source Type:N Zip Code: Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No:1000 Type:P Street 1:NICOLETT MALL Name:TARGET CORPORATION Street 2: Date Became Current:20031008 City:MINNEAPOLIS Date Ended Current:State:MN Phone:612-304-6073 Country:US Source Type:N Zip Code:55403 m-17-810627808-b 6 of 6 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 186.98 / 4 TARGET STORE T1851 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-RCRA SQG-810627808-bb p1p-810627808-y1y EPA Handler ID:CAR000217950 17 RCRA SQG 80 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Gen Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Contact Name:STEVE MUSSER Contact Address:PO BOX 111, , MINNEAPOLIS, MN, 55440, US Contact Phone No and Ext:800-587-2228 Contact Email:POC@TARGET.COM Contact Country:US County Name:SANTA CLARA EPA Region:09 Land Type: Receive Date:20160218 Violation/Evaluation Summary Note:NO RECORDS: As of Aug 2018, there are no Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement (violation) records associated with this facility (EPA ID). Handler Summary Importer Activity:No Mixed Waste Generator:No Transporter Activity:No Transfer Facility:No Onsite Burner Exemption:No Furnace Exemption:No Underground Injection Activity:No Commercial TSD:No Used Oil Transporter:No Used Oil Transfer Facility:No Used Oil Processor:No Used Oil Refiner:No Used Oil Burner:No Used Oil Market Burner:No Used Oil Spec Marketer:No Hazardous Waste Handler Details Sequence No:2 Receive Date:20160218 Handler Name:TARGET STORE T1851 Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:B Sequence No:1 Receive Date:20110411 Handler Name:TARGET STORE NO 1851 Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:N Sequence No:1 Receive Date:20150204 Handler Name:TARGET STORE T1851 Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:B Waste Code Details Hazardous Waste Code:D006 Waste Code Description:CADMIUM Hazardous Waste Code:P001 Waste Code Description:2H-1-BENZOPYRAN-2-ONE, 4-HYDROXY-3-(3-OXO-1-PHENYLBUTYL)-, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% (OR) WARFARIN, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% 81 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Hazardous Waste Code:P042 Waste Code Description:1,2-BENZENEDIOL, 4-[1-HYDROXY-2-(METHYLAMINO)ETHYL]-, (R)- (OR) EPINEPHRINE Hazardous Waste Code:P075 Waste Code Description:NICOTINE, & SALTS (OR) PYRIDINE, 3-(1-METHYL-2-PYRROLIDINYL)-,(S)-, & SALTS Hazardous Waste Code:U154 Waste Code Description:METHANOL (I) (OR) METHYL ALCOHOL (I) Hazardous Waste Code:U200 Waste Code Description:RESERPINE (OR) YOHIMBAN-16-CARBOXYLIC ACID, 11,17-DIMETHOXY-18-[(3,4,5- TRIMETHOXYBENZOYL)OXY]-, METHYL ESTER, (3BETA, 16BETA, 17ALPHA, 18BETA, 20ALPHA)- Hazardous Waste Code:D005 Waste Code Description:BARIUM Hazardous Waste Code:U034 Waste Code Description:ACETALDEHYDE, TRICHLORO- (OR) CHLORAL Hazardous Waste Code:U188 Waste Code Description:PHENOL Hazardous Waste Code:P001 Waste Code Description:2H-1-BENZOPYRAN-2-ONE, 4-HYDROXY-3-(3-OXO-1-PHENYLBUTYL)-, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% (OR) WARFARIN, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% Hazardous Waste Code:D002 Waste Code Description:CORROSIVE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D008 Waste Code Description:LEAD Hazardous Waste Code:U035 Waste Code Description:BENZENEBUTANOIC ACID, 4-[BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)AMINO]- (OR) CHLORAMBUCIL Hazardous Waste Code:U188 Waste Code Description:PHENOL Hazardous Waste Code:D007 Waste Code Description:CHROMIUM Hazardous Waste Code:D024 Waste Code Description:M-CRESOL Hazardous Waste Code:D035 Waste Code Description:METHYL ETHYL KETONE Hazardous Waste Code:P081 Waste Code Description:1,2,3-PROPANETRIOL, TRINITRATE (R) (OR) NITROGLYCERINE (R) Hazardous Waste Code:D005 Waste Code Description:BARIUM Hazardous Waste Code:P046 Waste Code Description:ALPHA,ALPHA-DIMETHYLPHENETHYLAMINE (OR) BENZENEETHANAMINE, ALPHA, ALPHA-DIMETHYL- Hazardous Waste Code:P075 Waste Code Description:NICOTINE, & SALTS (OR) PYRIDINE, 3-(1-METHYL-2-PYRROLIDINYL)-,(S)-, & SALTS Hazardous Waste Code:D004 Waste Code Description:ARSENIC Hazardous Waste Code:D011 Waste Code Description:SILVER Hazardous Waste Code:U002 Waste Code Description:2-PROPANONE (I) (OR) ACETONE (I) 82 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Hazardous Waste Code:U122 Waste Code Description:FORMALDEHYDE Hazardous Waste Code:D010 Waste Code Description:SELENIUM Hazardous Waste Code:D011 Waste Code Description:SILVER Hazardous Waste Code:U201 Waste Code Description:1,3-BENZENEDIOL (OR) RESORCINOL Hazardous Waste Code:D007 Waste Code Description:CHROMIUM Hazardous Waste Code:D028 Waste Code Description:1,2-DICHLOROETHANE Hazardous Waste Code:D035 Waste Code Description:METHYL ETHYL KETONE Hazardous Waste Code:D001 Waste Code Description:IGNITABLE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D002 Waste Code Description:CORROSIVE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D004 Waste Code Description:ARSENIC Hazardous Waste Code:U200 Waste Code Description:RESERPINE (OR) YOHIMBAN-16-CARBOXYLIC ACID, 11,17-DIMETHOXY-18-[(3,4,5- TRIMETHOXYBENZOYL)OXY]-, METHYL ESTER, (3BETA, 16BETA, 17ALPHA, 18BETA, 20ALPHA)- Hazardous Waste Code:D011 Waste Code Description:SILVER Hazardous Waste Code:D010 Waste Code Description:SELENIUM Hazardous Waste Code:D024 Waste Code Description:M-CRESOL Hazardous Waste Code:P081 Waste Code Description:1,2,3-PROPANETRIOL, TRINITRATE (R) (OR) NITROGLYCERINE (R) Hazardous Waste Code:U201 Waste Code Description:1,3-BENZENEDIOL (OR) RESORCINOL Hazardous Waste Code:D008 Waste Code Description:LEAD Hazardous Waste Code:D016 Waste Code Description:2,4-D (2,4-DICHLOROPHENOXYACETIC ACID) Hazardous Waste Code:U044 Waste Code Description:CHLOROFORM (OR) METHANE, TRICHLORO- Hazardous Waste Code:U072 Waste Code Description:BENZENE, 1,4-DICHLORO- (OR) P-DICHLOROBENZENE Hazardous Waste Code:D001 Waste Code Description:IGNITABLE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D009 Waste Code Description:MERCURY Hazardous Waste Code:D003 Waste Code Description:REACTIVE WASTE 83 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Hazardous Waste Code:D005 Waste Code Description:BARIUM Hazardous Waste Code:D009 Waste Code Description:MERCURY Hazardous Waste Code:D018 Waste Code Description:BENZENE Hazardous Waste Code:U044 Waste Code Description:CHLOROFORM (OR) METHANE, TRICHLORO- Hazardous Waste Code:U279 Waste Code Description:CARBARYL (OR) 1-NAPHTHALENOL, METHYLCARBAMATE Hazardous Waste Code:D006 Waste Code Description:CADMIUM Hazardous Waste Code:P075 Waste Code Description:NICOTINE, & SALTS (OR) PYRIDINE, 3-(1-METHYL-2-PYRROLIDINYL)-,(S)-, & SALTS Hazardous Waste Code:U002 Waste Code Description:2-PROPANONE (I) (OR) ACETONE (I) Hazardous Waste Code:U035 Waste Code Description:BENZENEBUTANOIC ACID, 4-[BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)AMINO]- (OR) CHLORAMBUCIL Hazardous Waste Code:U122 Waste Code Description:FORMALDEHYDE Hazardous Waste Code:U058 Waste Code Description:2H-1,3,2-OXAZAPHOSPHORIN-2-AMINE, N,N-BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)TETRAHYDRO-, 2-OXIDE (OR) CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE Hazardous Waste Code:U279 Waste Code Description:CARBARYL (OR) 1-NAPHTHALENOL, METHYLCARBAMATE Hazardous Waste Code:D016 Waste Code Description:2,4-D (2,4-DICHLOROPHENOXYACETIC ACID) Hazardous Waste Code:D001 Waste Code Description:IGNITABLE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D016 Waste Code Description:2,4-D (2,4-DICHLOROPHENOXYACETIC ACID) Hazardous Waste Code:U034 Waste Code Description:ACETALDEHYDE, TRICHLORO- (OR) CHLORAL Hazardous Waste Code:U058 Waste Code Description:2H-1,3,2-OXAZAPHOSPHORIN-2-AMINE, N,N-BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)TETRAHYDRO-, 2-OXIDE (OR) CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE Hazardous Waste Code:U129 Waste Code Description:CYCLOHEXANE, 1,2,3,4,5,6-HEXACHLORO-, (1ALPHA, 2ALPHA, 3BETA, 4ALPHA, 5ALPHA, 6BETA)- (OR) LINDANE Hazardous Waste Code:D009 Waste Code Description:MERCURY Hazardous Waste Code:D026 Waste Code Description:CRESOL Hazardous Waste Code:U129 Waste Code Description:CYCLOHEXANE, 1,2,3,4,5,6-HEXACHLORO-, (1ALPHA, 2ALPHA, 3BETA, 4ALPHA, 5ALPHA, 6BETA)- (OR) LINDANE Hazardous Waste Code:U150 84 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Waste Code Description:L-PHENYLALANINE, 4-[BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)AMINO]- (OR) MELPHALAN Hazardous Waste Code:D026 Waste Code Description:CRESOL Hazardous Waste Code:U072 Waste Code Description:BENZENE, 1,4-DICHLORO- (OR) P-DICHLOROBENZENE Hazardous Waste Code:U150 Waste Code Description:L-PHENYLALANINE, 4-[BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)AMINO]- (OR) MELPHALAN Hazardous Waste Code:D018 Waste Code Description:BENZENE Hazardous Waste Code:P001 Waste Code Description:2H-1-BENZOPYRAN-2-ONE, 4-HYDROXY-3-(3-OXO-1-PHENYLBUTYL)-, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% (OR) WARFARIN, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% Hazardous Waste Code:P042 Waste Code Description:1,2-BENZENEDIOL, 4-[1-HYDROXY-2-(METHYLAMINO)ETHYL]-, (R)- (OR) EPINEPHRINE Hazardous Waste Code:U154 Waste Code Description:METHANOL (I) (OR) METHYL ALCOHOL (I) Hazardous Waste Code:D002 Waste Code Description:CORROSIVE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D008 Waste Code Description:LEAD Owner/Operator Details Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:Private Street 1:P.O. BOX 111 Name:TARGET CORPORATION Street 2: Date Became Current:20031012 City:MINNEAPOLIS Date Ended Current:State:MN Phone:800-587-2228 Country: Source Type:B Zip Code:55440 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No: Type:Private Street 1:PO BOX 111 Name:TARGET CORPORATION Street 2: Date Became Current:20031008 City:MINNEAPOLIS Date Ended Current:State:MN Phone:800-587-2228 Country:US Source Type:B Zip Code:55440 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No: Type:Private Street 1:P.O. BOX 111 Name:TARGET CORPORATION Street 2: Date Became Current:20031012 City:MINNEAPOLIS Date Ended Current:State:MN Phone:800-587-2228 Country: Source Type:B Zip Code:55440 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No: Type:Private Street 1:PO BOX 111 Name:TARGET CORP Street 2: Date Became Current:20031008 City:MINNEAPOLIS Date Ended Current:State:MN Phone:800-587-2228 Country:US Source Type:N Zip Code:55440-0111 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:Private Street 1: Name:TARGET CORPORATION Street 2: 85 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Date Became Current:20031008 City: Date Ended Current:State: Phone:Country: Source Type:B Zip Code: Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:Private Street 1: Name:TARGET CORP Street 2: Date Became Current:20031008 City: Date Ended Current:State: Phone:Country:US Source Type:N Zip Code: m-18-820077018-b 1 of 1 NW 0.22 / 1,183.21 188.88 / 6 SHELL 850 Pacheco Pass Road Gilroy CA 95020 dd-DELISTED TNK-820077018-bb p1p-820077018-y1y Facility ID:43-002-GIL2 Latitude:37.00417 County:Santa Clara Longitude:-121.55194 Permitting Agency:GILROY, CITY OF Original Source:UST Record Date:30-JAN-2017 m-19-824918317-b 1 of 1 ENE 0.23 / 1,237.54 180.14 / -3 Tractor Supply Company Store# 1171-Gilroy 6881 Cameron Blvd Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918317-bb p1p-824918317-y1y CERS ID:10440844 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:8377 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-20-820077017-b 1 of 1 N 0.25 / 1,296.71 185.62 / 2 TV'S FOOD MART 850 PACHECO PASS HWY GILROY CA 95020 dd-DELISTED TNK-820077017-bb p1p-820077017-y1y Facility ID:980216 Latitude:37.005128 County:Santa Clara Longitude:-121.55017 Permitting Agency:GILROY, CITY OF Original Source:UST Record Date:30-JAN-2017 m-21-805437323-b 1 of 3 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 188.55 / 5 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 950201626 dd-CERCLIS-805437323-bb p1p-805437323-y1y Site ID:0900266 RNPL Status Code:N Site EPA ID:CAD000628149 NPL Status:Not on the NPL Site Street Address 2:RFED Facility Code:N Site County Name:SANTA CLARA RFED Facility Desc:Not a Federal Facility Site FIPS Code:06085 USGS Hydro Unit No.:18060002 Region Code:09 Site Cong. Dist. Code:12 Site SMSA No.:7400 ROT Desc:Private Site Prim. Latitude:37D00M30S FR NPL Update No.: Site Prim. Longitude:121D34M06S RFRA Code: 18 19 20 21 DELISTED TNK GILROY CUPA DELISTED TNK CERCLIS 86 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Lat Long Source: RNON NPL Status Desc:NFRAP-Site does not qualify for the NPL based on existing information CERCLIS Assess History OU ID:00 RALT Short Name: Act Code ID:Act Start Date: RAT Code:Act Complete Date: RAT Short Name:AGT Order No.:0 RAT Name:SH OU: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Code: RAT NSI Indicator:SH Seq: RAT Level:SH Start Date: RAT DEF OU:SH Complete Date: RFBS Code:SH Lead: SPA Code: RAT Def: Site Desc:No description available . Site Alias:HAZCONTROL, INC.,,,CA,; CERCLIS Assess History OU ID:00 RALT Short Name:EPA In-House Act Code ID:001 Act Start Date: RAT Code:VS Act Complete Date:1/23/1996 00:00:00 RAT Short Name:ARCH SITE AGT Order No.:1500 RAT Name:ARCHIVE SITE SH OU: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Code: RAT NSI Indicator:B SH Seq: RAT Level:1 SH Start Date: RAT DEF OU:00 SH Complete Date: RFBS Code:SH Lead: SPA Code:13 RAT Def:The decision is made that no further activity is planned at the site. Site Desc: Site Alias: CERCLIS Assess History OU ID:00 RALT Short Name:EPA Fund Act Code ID:001 Act Start Date: RAT Code:PA Act Complete Date:5/14/1990 00:00:00 RAT Short Name:PA AGT Order No.:130 RAT Name:PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT SH OU: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Code: RAT NSI Indicator:B SH Seq: RAT Level:1 SH Start Date: RAT DEF OU:00 SH Complete Date: RFBS Code:P SH Lead: SPA Code:13 RAT Def:Collection of diverse existing information about the source and nature of the site hazard. It is EPA policy to complete the preliminary assessment within one year of site discovery. Site Desc: Site Alias: CERCLIS Assess History OU ID:00 RALT Short Name:EPA Fund Act Code ID:001 Act Start Date: RAT Code:DS Act Complete Date:11/7/1989 00:00:00 RAT Short Name:DISCVRY AGT Order No.:10 RAT Name:DISCOVERY SH OU: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Code: 87 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB RAT NSI Indicator:B SH Seq: RAT Level:1 SH Start Date: RAT DEF OU:00 SH Complete Date: RFBS Code:SH Lead: SPA Code:13 RAT Def:The process by which a potential hazardous waste site is brought to the attention of the EPA. The process can occur through the use of several mechanisms such as a phone call or referral by another government agency. Site Desc: Site Alias: m-21-805476443-b 2 of 3 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 188.55 / 5 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 950201626 dd-CERCLIS NFRAP-805476443-bb p1p-805476443-y1y Site ID:900266 Site FIPS Code:6085 Site EPA ID:CAD000628149 Region Code:9 Site Parent ID:Site Cong. Dist. Code:12 Site County Name:SANTA CLARA Federal Facility: Parent Site Name: CERCLIS-NFRAP Assess History OU ID:0 Act Start Date: Act Code ID:1 Act Complete Date:11/7/1989 RAT Code:DS AGT Order No.:10 RAT Short Name:DISCVRY SH OU: RAT Name:DISCOVERY SH Code: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Seq: RAT NSI Indicator:B SH Start Date: RAT Level:1 SH Complete Date: RAT DEF OU:00 SH Lead: RFBS Code:SH Qual: SPA Code:13 RAQ Act. Qual Short: RALT Short Name:EPA Fund RNPL Status Code:N RAT Def:The process by which a potential hazardous waste site is brought to the attention of the EPA. The process can occur through the use of several mechanisms such as a phone call or referral by another government agency. RNON NPL Status Desc:NFRAP-Site does not qualify for the NPL based on existing information CERCLIS-NFRAP Assess History OU ID:0 Act Start Date: Act Code ID:1 Act Complete Date:5/14/1990 RAT Code:PA AGT Order No.:130 RAT Short Name:PA SH OU: RAT Name:PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT SH Code: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Seq: RAT NSI Indicator:B SH Start Date: RAT Level:1 SH Complete Date: RAT DEF OU:00 SH Lead: RFBS Code:P SH Qual: SPA Code:13 RAQ Act. Qual Short:Deferred to RCRA RALT Short Name:EPA Fund RNPL Status Code:N RAT Def:Collection of diverse existing information about the source and nature of the site hazard. It is EPA policy to complete the preliminary assessment within one year of site discovery. RNON NPL Status Desc:NFRAP-Site does not qualify for the NPL based on existing information CERCLIS-NFRAP Assess History OU ID:0 Act Start Date: Act Code ID:1 Act Complete Date:1/23/1996 RAT Code:VS AGT Order No.:1500 RAT Short Name:ARCH SITE SH OU: RAT Name:ARCHIVE SITE SH Code: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Seq: RAT NSI Indicator:B SH Start Date: 21 CERCLIS NFRAP 88 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB RAT Level:1 SH Complete Date: RAT DEF OU:00 SH Lead: RFBS Code:SH Qual: SPA Code:13 RAQ Act. Qual Short: RALT Short Name:EPA In-House RNPL Status Code:N RAT Def:The decision is made that no further activity is planned at the site. RNON NPL Status Desc:NFRAP-Site does not qualify for the NPL based on existing information m-21-828867835-b 3 of 3 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 188.55 / 5 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95020-1626 dd-SEMS ARCHIVE-828867835-bb p1p-828867835-y1y Site ID:0900266 FIPS Code:06085 EPA ID:CAD000628149 Cong District:12 NPL:Not on the NPL County:SANTA CLARA Federal Facility:No Region:09 Non NPL Status:NFRAP-Site does not qualify for the NPL based on existing information Action Information Operable Units:00 Start Actual: Action Code:PA Finish Actual:5/14/1990 Action Name:PA Qual:D SEQ:1 Curr Action Lead:EPA Perf Operable Units:00 Start Actual:11/7/1989 Action Code:DS Finish Actual:11/7/1989 Action Name:DISCVRY Qual: SEQ:1 Curr Action Lead:EPA Perf Operable Units:00 Start Actual: Action Code:VS Finish Actual:1/23/1996 Action Name:ARCH SITE Qual: SEQ:1 Curr Action Lead:EPA Perf In-Hse m-22-820183743-b 1 of 1 WNW 0.43 / 2,245.32 190.45 / 7 PRIVATE RESIDENCE PRIVATE RESIDENCE Gilroy CA 95020 dd-LUST-820183743-bb p1p-820183743-y1y Global ID:T0608500042 CUF Case:NO Case Type:LUST Cleanup Site Begin Date:1997-07-03 00:00:00 Status:Completed - Case Closed How Discovered:Other Means Status Date:1998-01-05 00:00:00 Stop Method: RB Case No:2864 County:Santa Clara LOC Case No:Latitude:37.0044823 Lead Agency:SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOP Longitude:-121.5562439 Case Worker:File Location:All Files are on GeoTracker or in the Local Agency Database Local Agency: Potential Media Of Concern:Gasoline Potential Media Affected:Under Investigation How Discovered Description: Stop Description: Cal Water Watershed Name:Pajaro River - South Santa Clara Valley (305.30) DWR Groundwater Subbasin Name: Gilroy-Hollister Valley - Llagas Area (3-003.01) Site History: Status History Status:Completed - Case Closed Status Date:1998-01-05 00:00:00 Status:Open - Case Begin Date Status Date:1997-07-03 00:00:00 21 22 SEMS ARCHIVE LUST 89 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Activities Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Other Report / Document Date:1997-07-14 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Other Report / Document Date:2003-03-04 00:00:00 Action Type:ENFORCEMENT Action:Closure/No Further Action Letter Date:1998-01-05 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Other Report / Document Date:1998-01-05 00:00:00 Action Type:Other Action:Leak Reported Date:1997-07-03 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Other Report / Document Date:1997-06-30 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Other Report / Document Date:1997-07-03 00:00:00 Contacts Contact Type:Regional Board Caseworker City:SAN LUIS OBISPO Contact Name:RB3 STAFF Email:centralcoast@waterboards.ca.gov Organization Name:CENTRAL COAST RWQCB (REGION 3)Phone No:8055493147 Address:895 AEROVISTA PL, SUITE 101 m-23-859589068-b 1 of 1 SW 0.46 / 2,441.43 186.54 / 3 Boral Roofing, LLC 6500 BREM LN GILROY CA 95020 dd-DELISTED HAZ-859589068-bb p1p-859589068-y1y Siteid:379869 Latitude:36.996586 Longitude:-121.554741 Original Source:CHAZ Record Date:30-MAY-2017 m-24-820293155-b 1 of 3 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 190.64 / 7 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 dd-ENVIROSTOR-820293155-bb p1p-820293155-y1y Estor/EPA ID:80001324 County:SANTA CLARA Site Code:Latitude:37.005716 Special Program:Longitude:-121.55661 Census Tract:6085512602 Office:CLEANUP BERKELEY Permit Renew Lead:Nat Priority List:NO Project Manager:Funding: Pub Particip Spec:Assembly District:30 Supervisor:MARK PIROS Senate District:17 Site Type:CORRECTIVE ACTION Cleanup Status:INACTIVE - NEEDS EVALUATION AS OF 6/26/2009 Clean Up Oversight Agency:DTSC - SITE CLEANUP PROGRAM Cause of Contamination:NONE SPECIFIED Potential Media Affected:NONE SPECIFIED 23 24 DELISTED HAZ ENVIROSTOR 90 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB School District: APN:841-10-058 Acres:0 ACRES Potential Contaminants: NONE SPECIFIED Site History: Program Type:CORRECTIVE ACTION Status:INACTIVE - NEEDS EVALUATION Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/profile_report?global_id=80001324 Completed Activities Date Completed:5/14/1990 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:PA OR CERCLA INSPECTION-NOT A PA PLUS (CA049PA) Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:Preliminary Assessment Report Comments: Date Completed:7/13/1984 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:Operating Permit Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:* Historical Operating Permit Authority Comments: Date Completed:6/30/1993 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:RFA COMPLETED-ASSESSMENT WAS A RFA (CA050RF) Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/final_documents2?global_id=80001324&enforcement_id=6016083 Document Type:RCRA Facility Assessment Report Comments:RCRA Facility Assessment Completed, aka: Haz Control Date Completed:9/21/1994 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:STABILIZATION MEASURES EVALUATION-FACILITY NOT AMENABLE TO STABILIZATION (CA225NR) Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:Interim Measures Questionnaire Comments: m-24-820299123-b 2 of 3 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 190.64 / 7 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 dd-ENVIROSTOR-820299123-bb p1p-820299123-y1y Estor/EPA ID:CAD000628149 County:SANTA CLARA Site Code:Latitude:37.005716 Special Program:Longitude:-121.55661 Census Tract:6085512602 Office: Permit Renew Lead:Nat Priority List: Project Manager:Funding: 24 ENVIROSTOR 91 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Pub Particip Spec:Assembly District:30 Supervisor:Senate District:17 Site Type:CLOSED - PERMIT AUTHORITY: RCRA Cleanup Status: Clean Up Oversight Agency: Cause of Contamination: Potential Media Affected: School District: APN: Acres: Potential Contaminants: Site History: NO FACILITY HISTORY HAS BEEN ENTERED FOR THIS SITE Program Type:HAZ WASTE - RCRA Status:CLOSED Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/hwmp_profile_report?global_id=CAD000628149 Permit Units - Completed Activities Date:6/13/1989 Unit:CONTAIN1 Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PERMIT (EXPIRES) Doc Link: Date:6/13/1984 Unit:CONTAIN1 Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PERMIT Doc Link: Date:3/16/1984 Unit:CONTAIN1 Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - PUBLIC COMMENT (BEGIN) Doc Link: Date:2/11/1991 Unit:CONTAIN1 Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - APPLICATION PART A RECEIVED Doc Link: Date:6/13/1984 Unit:CONTAIN1 Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PERMIT (EFFECTIVE) Doc Link: Date:8/8/1983 Unit:CONTAIN1 Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Doc Link: Units Undergoing Closure Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTRT1, CONTAIN1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Date:5/17/1995 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - RECEIVE CLOSURE CERTIFICATION Doc Link: Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTRT1, CONTAIN1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Date:6/6/1995 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - ISSUE CLOSURE VERIFICATION Doc Link: 92 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-24-820356825-b 3 of 3 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 190.64 / 7 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 dd-HWP-820356825-bb p1p-820356825-y1y EPA ID:CAD000628149 Public Part Speci: Site Code:Public Info Officer: Status:CLOSED Assembly District:30 Facility Type:Historical - Non-Operating Senate District:17 Facility Size:County:SANTA CLARA Team:Latitude:37.005716 Project Manager:Longitude:-121.55661 Hazardous Waste Units Completed Activities Completed Date:06/13/1984 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PERMIT (EFFECTIVE) Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Completed Date:06/01/1989 Event Description:Renewal - Historical - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTRT1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Completed Date:06/13/1989 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PERMIT (EXPIRES) Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Completed Date:08/08/1983 Event Description:New Operating Permit - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Completed Date:11/01/1993 Event Description:New Operating Permit - PERMIT TERMINATED - TERMINATION RECEIVED Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Completed Date:09/26/1988 Event Description:Renewal - Historical - CALL-IN LETTER ISSUED Unit Names:ACIDTRT1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Completed Date:11/01/1993 Event Description:Renewal - Historical - FINAL PERMIT RENEWAL - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTRT1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Completed Date:02/11/1991 Event Description:Renewal - Historical - APPLICATION PART A RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTRT1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Completed Date:03/16/1984 Event Description:New Operating Permit - PUBLIC COMMENT (BEGIN) Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Completed Date:06/13/1984 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PERMIT Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Completed Date:02/11/1991 Event Description:New Operating Permit - APPLICATION PART A RECEIVED Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Hazardous Waste Units Undergoing Closure Completed Date:06/06/1995 Event Description:Closure Final - ISSUE CLOSURE VERIFICATION Unit Names:ACIDTRT1, CONTAIN1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Completed Date:05/17/1995 Event Description:Closure Final - RECEIVE CLOSURE CERTIFICATION 24 HWP 93 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Unit Names:ACIDTRT1, CONTAIN1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Alias Alias:43490062 Alias Type:Envirostor ID Number m-25-820361343-b 1 of 1 NW 0.52 / 2,722.07 190.02 / 7 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL COMPANY 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95020 dd-ENVIROSTOR-820361343-bb p1p-820361343-y1y Estor/EPA ID:43490062 County:SANTA CLARA Site Code:Latitude:37.006388 Special Program:Longitude:-121.556612 Census Tract:6085512602 Office:CLEANUP BERKELEY Permit Renew Lead:Nat Priority List:NO Project Manager:Funding: Pub Particip Spec:Assembly District:30 Supervisor:Senate District:17 Site Type:* HISTORICAL Cleanup Status:REFER: RCRA AS OF 6/8/1994 Clean Up Oversight Agency:NONE SPECIFIED Cause of Contamination:NONE SPECIFIED Potential Media Affected:NONE SPECIFIED School District: APN:841-10-019 Acres:NONE SPECIFIED Potential Contaminants: NONE SPECIFIED Site History: Program Type:HISTORICAL Status:REFER: RCRA Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/profile_report?global_id=43490062 Completed Activities Date Completed:4/30/1990 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:Discovery Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:* Discovery Comments:FACILITY IDENTIFIED IDENTIFIED VIA FIT ENVIRONMENTAL PRIOR- ITIES INITIATIVE PA m-26-810471734-b 1 of 1 NW 0.55 / 2,878.92 191.12 / 8 HAZCONTROL INC. 731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95021 dd-RCRA CORRACTS-810471734-bb p1p-810471734-y1y EPA Handler ID:CAD000628149 Gen Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Contact Name: Contact Address:US Contact Phone No and Ext: Contact Email: Contact Country:US County Name:SANTA CLARA EPA Region:09 25 26 ENVIROSTOR RCRA CORRACTS 94 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Land Type: Receive Date: Event/Area Details Area Name:ENTIRE FACILITY Event Code:CA075ME Corrective Action Event Descri:CA PRIORITIZATION-MEDIUM CA PRIORITY Actual Date of Event:19940921 Orig Sched Event Date: New Sched Event Date: Best Date:19940921 Groundwater Release Indicator:Yes Soil Release Indicator:Yes Air Release Indicator:Yes Surface Waste Release Ind:Yes Event Responsible Agency:EPA Area Name:ENTIRE FACILITY Event Code:CA075HI Corrective Action Event Descri:CA PRIORITIZATION-HIGH CA PRIORITY Actual Date of Event:19900514 Orig Sched Event Date: New Sched Event Date: Best Date:19900514 Groundwater Release Indicator:Yes Soil Release Indicator:Yes Air Release Indicator:Yes Surface Waste Release Ind:Yes Event Responsible Agency:EPA Violation/Evaluation Summary Note:VIOLATION or UNDETERMINED: There are VIOLATION or UNDETERMINED details or records associated with this facility (EPA ID) in the Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement table dated Aug, 2018. Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Container Use and Management Violation Determined Date:19930914 Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930914 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - General Violation Determined Date:19870505 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Violation Responsible Agency:State 95 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Enforcement Action Date:19881116 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:FINAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT Enforcement Action Date:19910924 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:INITIAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR MONETARY PENALTY Enforcement Action Date:19901015 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19880108 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - General Violation Determined Date:19921118 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930119 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - General Facility Standards Violation Determined Date:19930914 Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Violation Responsible Agency:State 96 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930914 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - General Violation Determined Date:19900601 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:INITIAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR MONETARY PENALTY Enforcement Action Date:19901015 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:FINAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT Enforcement Action Date:19910924 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Enforcement Action Date:19900803 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19900803 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Violation Determined Date:19910918 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 97 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violation Responsible Agency:EPA Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Violation Determined Date:19870818 Return to Compliance Date:19890628 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:FINAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT Enforcement Action Date:19910924 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Enforcement Action Date:19881116 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19870819 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:INITIAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR MONETARY PENALTY Enforcement Action Date:19901015 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - General Violation Determined Date:19910328 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:REFERRAL TO DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Enforcement Action Date:19910430 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: 98 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:INITIAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR MONETARY PENALTY Enforcement Action Date:19901015 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:FINAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT Enforcement Action Date:19910924 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19910430 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:Generators - General Violation Determined Date:19921118 Return to Compliance Date:19921118 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930119 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:Generators - Manifest Violation Determined Date:19921118 Return to Compliance Date:19930729 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930119 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: 99 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - General Violation Determined Date:19890628 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Enforcement Action Date:19890811 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:INITIAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR MONETARY PENALTY Enforcement Action Date:19901015 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19890811 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:FINAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT Enforcement Action Date:19910924 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Violation Determined Date:19920820 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Violation Responsible Agency:EPA Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Violation Determined Date:19921120 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 100 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930119 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:Permits - Application Violation Determined Date:19930729 Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930729 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:Generators - General Violation Determined Date:19930729 Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930729 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Violation Determined Date:19930914 Return to Compliance Date:19940114 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details 101 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930914 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Closure/Post-Closure Violation Determined Date:19870505 Return to Compliance Date:19890628 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:INITIAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR MONETARY PENALTY Enforcement Action Date:19901015 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:FINAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT Enforcement Action Date:19910924 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Enforcement Action Date:19881116 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19880108 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Evaluation Details Evaluation Start Date:19950620 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description: Return to Compliance Date: Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19930729 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE 102 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violation Short Description:TSD - General Facility Standards Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19930729 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:Generators - General Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19930729 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Return to Compliance Date:19940114 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19930729 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - Container Use and Management Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19930729 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:Permits - Application Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19930105 Evaluation Type Description:NOT A SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPLIER Violation Short Description: Return to Compliance Date: Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19921118 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19921118 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:Generators - Manifest Return to Compliance Date:19930729 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19921118 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:Generators - General Return to Compliance Date:19921118 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19921118 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - General Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19921116 Evaluation Type Description:FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Violation Short Description: Return to Compliance Date: Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19920820 Evaluation Type Description:FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:EPA Contractor/Grantee 103 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Evaluation Start Date:19910918 Evaluation Type Description:FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:EPA Contractor/Grantee Evaluation Start Date:19910328 Evaluation Type Description:SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPLIER Violation Short Description: Return to Compliance Date: Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19910328 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - General Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19900601 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - General Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19900514 Evaluation Type Description:FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Violation Short Description: Return to Compliance Date: Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19890628 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - General Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19890509 Evaluation Type Description:FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Violation Short Description: Return to Compliance Date: Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19870818 Evaluation Type Description:FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Return to Compliance Date:19890628 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19870505 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - General Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19870505 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - Closure/Post-Closure Return to Compliance Date:19890628 Evaluation Agency:State Handler Summary Importer Activity:No Mixed Waste Generator:No Transporter Activity:Yes Transfer Facility:No Onsite Burner Exemption:No 104 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Furnace Exemption:No Underground Injection Activity:No Commercial TSD:Yes Used Oil Transporter:No Used Oil Transfer Facility:No Used Oil Processor:No Used Oil Refiner:No Used Oil Burner:No Used Oil Market Burner:No Used Oil Spec Marketer:No Hazardous Waste Handler Details Sequence No:1 Receive Date:19900412 Handler Name:HAZ CONTROL/SOUTH BAY CHEMICALS CO Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:R Sequence No:1 Receive Date:19960901 Handler Name:HAZCONTROL INC. Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:I Sequence No:1 Receive Date:19900831 Handler Name:HAZCONTROL INC. Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:N Sequence No:2 Receive Date:19920401 Handler Name:HAZ/CONTROL, INC. Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:R Sequence No:2 Receive Date:19960901 Handler Name:HAZCONTROL INC. Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:I Owner/Operator Details Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No: Type:Private Street 1:PO BOX 1626 Name:MELVIN E NIELSEN Street 2: Date Became Current:City:GILROY Date Ended Current:State:CA Phone:408-848-1470 Country: Source Type:N Zip Code:95021 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:Private Street 1:PO BOX 1626 Name:MELVIN E NEILSEN Street 2: Date Became Current:City:GILROY Date Ended Current:State:CA Phone:408-848-1470 Country: Source Type:I Zip Code:95021 m-27-820297879-b 1 of 1 SSW 0.57 / 3,010.66 186.40 / 3 INLAND PAPERBOARD AND PACKAGING, INC. 6400 JAMIESON WAY GILROY CA 95020 dd-ENVIROSTOR-820297879-bb p1p-820297879-y1y 27 ENVIROSTOR 105 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Estor/EPA ID:71002634 County:SANTA CLARA Site Code:Latitude:36.994516 Special Program:Longitude:-121.554725 Census Tract:6085512602 Office:CLEANUP BERKELEY Permit Renew Lead:Nat Priority List:NO Project Manager:Funding: Pub Particip Spec:Assembly District:30 Supervisor:Senate District:17 Site Type:TIERED PERMIT Cleanup Status:REFER: OTHER AGENCY AS OF 5/12/2006 Clean Up Oversight Agency:NONE SPECIFIED Cause of Contamination:NONE SPECIFIED Potential Media Affected:NONE SPECIFIED School District: APN:NONE SPECIFIED Acres:NONE SPECIFIED Potential Contaminants: NONE SPECIFIED Site History: Site History: Gaylord Container Corporation /Inland Paperboard and Packaging, Inc. /Temple-Inland (GCC) is a paperboard manufacturing and packaging company that has been in operation over 15 years. Parcel size is approximately 20 acres. On April 20, 1992 GCC submitted a Permit by Rule (PBR) initial notification of intent to operate. A facility specific notification form to operate under Conditional Authorization (CA) was submitted on April 1, 1993. On December 31, 1996 GCC submitted a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Checklist claiming an exemption. Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) informed GCC in a letter dated June 29, 1998 that the phase 1 assessment is not complete. On August 7, 1998 GCC submitted the Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Checklist indicating further investigation is needed to determine the existence, nature, and/or extent of contamination at the facility. The Checklist indicated suspected release in Corrugator Department, Rotary Die Cutter/Flexographic Printing Press Department, Adhesive Mixing Department, Ink Storage, Air Compressors, Former Underground Storage Tank, Fire Prevention Building, Fuel Oil Aboveground Storage Tank, and Corrugator Storage Area. On June 26, 2002 DTSC sent a Further Investigation Questionnaire in connection with Phase 1 Environmental Assessment for GCC. On August 14, 2002 GCC submitted to DTSC the Further Investigation Questionnaire. DTSC conducted a Phase I Environmental Assessment Inspection on May 12, 2006. Several solid waste management units (SWMUs) were identified. On December 28, 2006 DTSC sent a Corrective Action Consent Agreement to the Company. Held a meeting with GCC. During the meeting GCC requested to combine cleanup activities at this location with GCC site at other location. DTSC-Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) is overseeing the cleanup at that site. Site was refered to VCP. Facility Comments: Formerly known as Gaylord Container Corp. (8/19/02 dh) Program Type:TIERED PERMIT Status:REFER: OTHER AGENCY Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/profile_report?global_id=71002634 Completed Activities Date Completed:6/30/2007 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:Consent Agreement Executed (Site refered to VCP) Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:Consent Agreement Comments: Date Completed:5/12/2006 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:Phase I Inspection Completed Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:Phase 1 Comments: Date Completed:5/12/2006 Area Name: 106 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Sub Area: Title:Inspection - Phase I Verification Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:Phase I Verification Comments:Inspection report sent on 5/12/2006 m-28-866001266-b 1 of 1 SSW 0.58 / 3,081.49 186.97 / 4 TEMPLE-INLAND, INC. 6400 JAMIESON WAY GILROY CA 95020 dd-ENVIROSTOR-866001266-bb p1p-866001266-y1y Estor/EPA ID:60000630 County:SANTA CLARA Site Code:201745 Latitude:36.9944053492905 Special Program:Longitude:-121.554965342556 Census Tract:6085512602 Office:CLEANUP BERKELEY Permit Renew Lead:Nat Priority List:NO Project Manager:Funding:SITE PROPONENT Pub Particip Spec:Assembly District:30 Supervisor:MARK PIROS Senate District:17 Site Type:VOLUNTARY CLEANUP Cleanup Status:NO FURTHER ACTION AS OF 9/5/2008 Clean Up Oversight Agency:DTSC - SITE CLEANUP PROGRAM - LEAD AGENCY Cause of Contamination:UNKNOWN Potential Media Affected:UNDER INVESTIGATION School District: APN:841-73-003, 841-73-033 Acres:20 ACRES Potential Contaminants: UNDER INVESTIGATION Site History: The paperboard manufacturing and packaging company has operated on site for roughly 15 years and is classified as a Small Quantity Generator. The facility submitted an application for Conditionally Authorized On-site Hazardous Waste Treatment in 1993 to treat inorganics-contaminated aqueous waste, wastewater treatment sludge, dust, contaminated solid metal and metal workings, and oil/water separator sludge. Activities and equipment used at the facility included: corrugators, rotary die cutters, printing presses, ink storage, air compressors, USTs, and ASTs. Waste streams included: aqueous solution with organic residue, inorganic solid waste, hydrocarbon solvents, waste oil and mixed oil, oil/water separator sludge, unspecified oil- containing waste, organic solids, and liquid with halogenated organic compounds. Program Type:VOLUNTARY CLEANUP Status:NO FURTHER ACTION Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/profile_report?global_id=60000630 Completed Activities Date Completed:8/22/2007 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:Voluntary Cleanup Agreement Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/final_documents2?global_id=60000630&enforcement_id=6011013 Document Type:Voluntary Cleanup Agreement Comments:VCA signed by acting branch chief. Date Completed:4/7/2008 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:PEA Workplan Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/final_documents2?global_id=60000630&doc_id=6016620 Document Type:Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Workplan Comments: 28 ENVIROSTOR 107 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Date Completed:9/5/2008 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:PEA Report Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/final_documents2?global_id=60000630&doc_id=6016622 Document Type:Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Comments:The Preliminary Endangerment Assessment, dated July 30, 2008, indicates that low concentrations of pesticides and total petroleum hydrocarbons in soils are below screening levels; the concentration of metals in soil is below below background levels; and the groundwater did not contain any metals or solvents above the drinking water standards. The Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report concluded that no further action is neccessary and DTSC has concurred with this conclusion. Date Completed:5/5/2008 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:PEA field work Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:Fieldwork Comments:Field work done on May 5, 6 and 7, 2008. m-29-820295074-b 1 of 3 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 186.55 / 3 METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 950207012 dd-ENVIROSTOR-820295074-bb p1p-820295074-y1y Estor/EPA ID:CAD077182293 County:SANTA CLARA Site Code:200334 Latitude:36.99016 Special Program:Longitude:-121.554015 Census Tract:6085512602 Office: Permit Renew Lead:Nat Priority List: Project Manager:Funding: Pub Particip Spec:Assembly District:30 Supervisor:Senate District:17 Site Type:CLOSED - PERMIT AUTHORITY: Standardized Cleanup Status: Clean Up Oversight Agency: Cause of Contamination: Potential Media Affected: School District: APN: Acres: Potential Contaminants: Site History: Metech International, Inc. (Metech) is a precious metal recycling facility operating since December 10,1997 when they were first permitted. Metech processes solid hazardous scrap metals and precious metal containing liquid hazardous waste. Precious metals are gold, silver, platinum, palladium, rhodium and iridium. The facility is designed to receive, sort, classify, homogenize, analyze and recover these metals which at the end of processing, are sent to smelters or other facilities for further processing. Solid scrap metals upon receipt are roasted, milled, melted in furnaces and then cast into ingots. Precious metal containing liquid hazardous waste is separated by pH. High pH liquids are electroplated to recover the metals. Low pH liquids are is neutralized to recover the precious metals. Metech is applying for a Series B standardized Hazardous Waste Facility Permit renewal. Their permit expired on December 10, 2007 but DTSC is allowing Metech to continue to operate under their old permit until a their permit is finalized. On April 27, 2009, Metech withdrew their Permit application and is now currently undergoing final closure. Metech received their last shipment of hazardous waste in May 2009 and completed all hazardous waste processing activities on September 1, 2009. Program Type:INSPECTION Status:SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPLIER Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/eerp_profile_report?global_id=3000606 29 ENVIROSTOR 108 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Program Type:HAZ WASTE - Standardized Status:CLOSED Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/hwmp_profile_report?global_id=CAD077182293 Permit Units - Completed Activities Date:12/10/1997 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PERMIT (EFFECTIVE) Doc Link: Date:7/25/1997 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - PUBLIC COMMENT (END) Doc Link: Date:12/10/2007 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PERMIT (EXPIRES) Doc Link: Date:6/19/2006 Unit: Event Description:*MOD CLASS 2 - 2 OR MORE UNITS - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST ACKNOWLEDGED Doc Link: Date:12/10/1997 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PERMIT Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/https://www.hwmpenvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/site_documents/75979439 61/Final%20Permit%201997%2Epdf Date:8/22/1995 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - 1ST NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Doc Link: Date:4/27/2009 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:RENEWAL - WITH CHANGES - FINAL PERMIT RENEWAL - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST RECEIVED Doc Link: Date:4/27/2009 109 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:RENEWAL - WITH CHANGES - FINAL PERMIT RENEWAL - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST ACKNOWLEDGED Doc Link: Date:6/19/2006 Unit: Event Description:*MOD CLASS 2 - 2 OR MORE UNITS - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST RECEIVED Doc Link: Date:4/28/2008 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:RENEWAL - WITH CHANGES - 2ND NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/https://www.hwmpenvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/site_documents/59125038 98/Metech%20Notice%20of%20Deficiency%202%2Epdf Date:6/25/1997 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PART A & PART B RECEIVED Doc Link: Date:7/25/1997 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - PUBLIC COMMENT (BEGIN) Doc Link: Date:5/21/1996 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Doc Link: Date:11/13/2007 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:RENEWAL - WITH CHANGES - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Doc Link: Date:6/5/2007 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:RENEWAL - WITH CHANGES - 1ST NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/https://www.hwmpenvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/site_documents/40860268 47/Metech%20Notice%20of%20Deficency%201%2Epdf Date:11/5/2001 110 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Unit: Event Description:*MOD CLASS 1* - PRIOR APPROVAL REQUIRED - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION Doc Link: Date:5/8/2000 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:*MOD CLASS 1* - PRIOR APPROVAL REQUIRED - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION Doc Link: Date:4/12/1999 Unit:BALLMILL(T16,17A,18A,18A-1) Event Description:*MOD CLASS 1* - PRIOR APPROVAL REQUIRED - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION Doc Link: Date:12/20/1995 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - 2ND NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Doc Link: Units Undergoing Closure Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Date:4/27/2009 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - CLOSURE NOTICE RECEIVED Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/hwmp_final_documents?global_id=CAD077182293&link_key=108&docum ent_category=CLOSURE+NOTICE&event_description=Closure+Final+%2D+CLOSURE+NOTICE+RECEIVED+& mytype=pa Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Date:8/31/2012 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - RECEIVE CLOSURE CERTIFICATION Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/https://www.hwmpenvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/site_documents/36939522 62/Closure%20Final%20aw%20envirostor%2Epdf Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Date:3/14/2014 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - ISSUE CLOSURE VERIFICATION Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/hwmp_final_documents?global_id=CAD077182293&link_key=108&docum ent_category=CLOSURE+VERIFICATION&event_description=Closure+Final+%2D+ISSUE+CLOSURE+VERIFIC ATION+&mytype=pa Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Date:4/25/2013 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - CEQA DETERMINATION Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/https://www.hwmpenvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/site_documents/78967720 111 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 86/NOE%20Final%20Nancy%20Envirostor%2Epdf Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Date:4/25/2013 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - CLOSURE PLAN APPROVED Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/https://www.hwmpenvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/site_documents/61662880 77/Closure%20Plan%20Approval%20letter%20Envirostor%2Epdf Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Date:10/12/2009 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - CLOSURE PLAN RECEIVED Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/hwmp_final_documents?global_id=CAD077182293&link_key=108&docum ent_category=PLAN+RECEIVED&event_description=Closure+Final+%2D+CLOSURE+PLAN+RECEIVED+&mytyp e=pa m-29-820356791-b 2 of 3 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 186.55 / 3 METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 950207012 dd-HWP-820356791-bb p1p-820356791-y1y EPA ID:CAD077182293 Public Part Speci: Site Code:200334 Public Info Officer: Status:CLOSED Assembly District:30 Facility Type:Historical - Non-Operating Senate District:17 Facility Size:County:SANTA CLARA Team:LORI KOCH Latitude:36.99016 Project Manager:Longitude:-121.554015 Hazardous Waste Units Completed Activities Completed Date:05/21/1996 Event Description:New Operating Permit - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:04/27/2009 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - FINAL PERMIT RENEWAL - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST ACKNOWLEDGED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:06/25/1997 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PART A & PART B RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:05/08/2000 Event Description:*Mod Class 1* - Prior Approval Required - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:04/12/1999 Event Description:*Mod Class 1* - Prior Approval Required - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION Unit Names:BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1) 29 HWP 112 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Completed Date:04/28/2008 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - 2ND NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:04/27/2009 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - FINAL PERMIT RENEWAL - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:06/19/2006 Event Description:*Mod Class 2 - 2 or More Units - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST RECEIVED Unit Names: Completed Date:12/20/1995 Event Description:New Operating Permit - 2ND NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:06/19/2006 Event Description:*Mod Class 2 - 2 or More Units - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST ACKNOWLEDGED Unit Names: Completed Date:11/13/2007 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:07/25/1997 Event Description:New Operating Permit - PUBLIC COMMENT (END) Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:08/22/1995 Event Description:New Operating Permit - 1ST NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:12/13/2006 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - INITIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW COMPLETED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:06/05/2007 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - 1ST NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:12/10/1997 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PERMIT (EFFECTIVE) Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), 113 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:09/20/2008 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - DISCLOSURE (CLEARED) Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:12/10/1997 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PERMIT Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:12/10/2007 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PERMIT (EXPIRES) Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:11/05/2001 Event Description:*Mod Class 1* - Prior Approval Required - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION Unit Names: Completed Date:07/17/2006 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - CALL-IN LETTER ISSUED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:07/25/1997 Event Description:New Operating Permit - PUBLIC COMMENT (BEGIN) Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Hazardous Waste Units Undergoing Closure Completed Date:04/27/2009 Event Description:Closure Final - CLOSURE NOTICE RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:04/25/2013 Event Description:Closure Final - CLOSURE PLAN APPROVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:04/25/2013 Event Description:Closure Final - CEQA DETERMINATION Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:10/12/2009 Event Description:Closure Final - CLOSURE PLAN RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), 114 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:03/14/2014 Event Description:Closure Final - ISSUE CLOSURE VERIFICATION Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:08/31/2012 Event Description:Closure Final - RECEIVE CLOSURE CERTIFICATION Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Alias Alias:200334 Alias Type:Project Code (Site Code) Alias:110000782939 Alias Type:FRS m-29-820209916-b 3 of 3 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 186.55 / 3 METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 95020 dd-INSP COMP ENF-820209916-bb p1p-820209916-y1y EPA ID:CAD077182293 County:SANTA CLARA Geotracker Address:6200 ENGEL WAY Geotracker City:GILROY Geotracker Latitude:36.99016 Geotracker Longitude:-121.554015 Report URL:https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/eerp_profile_report?global_id=3000606 Inspection Information Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:9/29/2005 Violations:No Violations Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:10/17/2005 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2395365 Inspection Date:6/23/2016 Violations:Class 1, Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:7/22/2016 Title:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2398040 Inspection Date:6/29/2017 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:7/5/2017 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:5/1/2012 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:6/8/2012 Report Sent Date:7/18/2013 29 INSP COMP ENF 115 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Title:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2394466 Inspection Date:8/7/2014 Violations:No Violations Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:8/7/2014 Title:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:1/28/2005 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:10/31/2005 Report Sent Date:1/31/2005 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2395366 Inspection Date:5/18/2017 Violations:Class 1, Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:9/29/2017 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2394592 Inspection Date:5/20/2015 Violations:Class 1, Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:6/19/2015 Report Sent Date:5/26/2015 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:6/24/2008 Violations:Minor Return to Compliance:6/26/2008 Report Sent Date:9/17/2008 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:5/18/2011 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:11/9/2011 Report Sent Date:6/15/2011 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:5/18/2011 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:11/9/2011 Report Sent Date:3/14/2012 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:6/27/2013 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:9/26/2013 Report Sent Date:7/18/2013 Title:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:11/29/2012 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:3/14/2014 Report Sent Date:11/29/2012 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:4/29/2010 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:2/9/2011 Report Sent Date:2/11/2011 116 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:12/14/2004 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:12/17/2004 Report Sent Date:12/29/2004 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:6/27/2013 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:9/17/2013 Report Sent Date:5/7/2014 Title:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2395140 Inspection Date:6/26/2015 Violations:Class 1, Minor Return to Compliance:7/31/2015 Report Sent Date:6/29/2015 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:5/1/2012 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:10/24/2012 Report Sent Date:5/30/2012 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:10/12/2000 Violations:Class 1, Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:11/26/2001 Report Sent Date:3/20/2001 Title:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:7/17/2007 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:8/26/2007 Report Sent Date:8/29/2007 Title:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:1/31/2005 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:8/26/2007 Report Sent Date:1/31/2005 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:6/27/2007 Violations:Minor Return to Compliance:8/27/2007 Report Sent Date:8/7/2007 Title:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:7/11/2008 Violations:No Violations Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:7/15/2008 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2393246 Inspection Date:5/29/2014 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:6/13/2014 117 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Report Sent Date:7/30/2014 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:12/14/2004 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:12/22/2004 Report Sent Date:3/23/2005 Title:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2396751 Inspection Date:8/2/2016 Violations:No Violations Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:8/2/2016 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2393285 Inspection Date:5/29/2014 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:6/13/2014 Report Sent Date:7/30/2014 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:4/29/2010 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:3/25/2011 Report Sent Date:5/6/2010 Title:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:1/12/2012 Violations:No Violations Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:1/12/2012 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:6/24/2008 Violations:Minor Return to Compliance:6/26/2008 Report Sent Date:6/26/2008 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:12/4/2001 Violations:No Violations Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:3/15/2002 Enforcement Information Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:5/18/2011 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:12/14/2004 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:5/18/2011 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:5/20/2015 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:5/1/2012 118 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:6/23/2016 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:1/12/2012 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:6/24/2008 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:6/24/2008 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:6/26/2015 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:6/29/2017 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:6/27/2013 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:7/11/2008 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:5/29/2014 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:8/2/2016 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:5/1/2012 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:7/17/2007 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:12/14/2004 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:1/28/2005 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:8/7/2014 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:6/27/2007 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:6/27/2013 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:5/29/2014 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:4/29/2010 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:5/18/2017 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:12/4/2001 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:9/29/2005 Enforcement Type:Consent Order with Enforcement and Settlement - Federal CA/FO (385) Enforcement Date:11/26/2001 119 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:10/12/2000 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:11/29/2012 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:1/31/2005 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:4/29/2010 Enforcement Actions Title:Consent Order with Enforcement and Settlement - Federal CA/FO (385) Title Link: Issued Completed Date:11/26/2001 Permitting Site Code:200334 Site Facility Type:CLOSED - PERMIT AUTHORITY: Standardized Program Type:HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY Assembly District:30 Senate District:17 Facility Type:HIST PERMITTED Facility History: Metech International, Inc. (Metech) is a precious metal recycling facility operating since December 10,1997 when they were first permitted. Metech processes solid hazardous scrap metals and precious metal containing liquid hazardous waste. Precious metals are gold, silver, platinum, palladium, rhodium and iridium. The facility is designed to receive, sort, classify, homogenize, analyze and recover these metals which at the end of processing, are sent to smelters or other facilities for further processing. Solid scrap metals upon receipt are roasted, milled, melted in furnaces and then cast into ingots. Precious metal containing liquid hazardous waste is separated by pH. High pH liquids are electroplated to recover the metals. Low pH liquids are is neutralized to recover the precious metals. Metech is applying for a Series B standardized Hazardous Waste Facility Permit renewal. Their permit expired on December 10, 2007 but DTSC is allowing Metech to continue to operate under their old permit until a their permit is finalized. On April 27, 2009, Metech withdrew their Permit application and is now currently undergoing final closure. Metech received their last shipment of hazardous waste in May 2009 and completed all hazardous waste processing activities on September 1, 2009. Permitting Site Code:200334 Site Facility Type:CLOSED - PERMIT AUTHORITY: Standardized Program Type:HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY Assembly District:30 Senate District:17 Facility Type:HIST PERMITTED Facility History: Metech International, Inc. (Metech) is a precious metal recycling facility operating since December 10,1997 when they were first permitted. Metech processes solid hazardous scrap metals and precious metal containing liquid hazardous waste. Precious metals are gold, silver, platinum, palladium, rhodium and iridium. The facility is designed to receive, sort, classify, homogenize, analyze and recover these metals which at the end of processing, are sent to smelters or other facilities for further processing. Solid scrap metals upon receipt are roasted, milled, melted in furnaces and then cast into ingots. Precious metal containing liquid hazardous waste is separated by pH. High pH liquids are electroplated to recover the metals. Low pH liquids are is neutralized to recover the precious metals. Metech is applying for a Series B standardized Hazardous Waste Facility Permit renewal. Their permit expired on December 10, 2007 but DTSC is allowing Metech to continue to operate under their old permit until a their permit is finalized. On April 27, 2009, Metech withdrew their Permit application and is now currently undergoing final closure. Metech received their last shipment of hazardous waste in May 2009 and completed all hazardous waste processing activities on September 1, 2009. 120 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Unplottable Summary Total: 2 Unplottable sites DB Company Name/Site Name Address City Zip ERIS ID uu-GILROY CUPA-824918379-aa PG&E - Llagas Satellite Materials Facility and Substation Renz Lane n/o Pacheco Pass Road (Hwy. 152) Gilroy CA 95020 824918379 uu-SANTACLARA LO-820144903-aa Caltrans Gilroy Maint. Sta. #2 Pacheco Pass Hwy Unincorporated CA 820144903 SCVWD ID | Closure Date: 11S4E03N01f | 8/20/1991 GILROY CUPA SANTACLARA LO Unplottable Summary 121 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Unplottable Report Site:PG&E - Llagas Satellite Materials Facility and Substation Renz Lane n/o Pacheco Pass Road (Hwy. 152) Gilroy CA 95020 uu-GILROY CUPA-824918379-bb CERS ID: 10147477 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID: 5655 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site: Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst: No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST: No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST: No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator: No CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle: No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt: No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req: ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: Site:Caltrans Gilroy Maint. Sta. #2 Pacheco Pass Hwy Unincorporated CA uu-SANTACLARA LO-820144903-bb SCVWD ID:11S4E03N01f Closure Date:8/20/1991 Link:http://lustop.sccgov.org/files/11S4E03N01f/ GILROY CUPA SANTACLARA LO Unplottable Report 122 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Appendix: Database Descriptions Environmental Risk Information Services (ERIS) can search the following databases. The extent of historical information varies with each database and current information is determined by what is publicly available to ERIS at the time of update. ERIS updates databases as set out in ASTM Standard E1527-13, Section 8.1.8 Sources of Standard Source Information: "Government information from nongovernmental sources may be considered current if the source updates the information at least every 90 days, or, for information that is updated less frequently than quarterly by the government agency, within 90 days of the date the government agency makes the information available to the public." Standard Environmental Record Sources Federal National Priority List:rr-NPL-bb National Priorities List (Superfund)-NPL: EPA's (United States Environmental Protection Agency) list of the most serious uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites identified for possible long-term remedial action under the Superfund program. The NPL, which EPA is required to update at least once a year, is based primarily on the score a site receives from EPA's Hazard Ranking System. A site must be on the NPL to receive money from the Superfund Trust Fund for remedial action. Government Publication Date: Jul 3, 2018 National Priority List - Proposed:rr-PROPOSED NPL-bb Includes sites proposed (by the EPA, the state, or concerned citizens) for addition to the NPL due to contamination by hazardous waste and identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a candidate for cleanup because it poses a risk to human health and/or the environment. Government Publication Date: Jul 3, 2018 Deleted NPL:rr-DELETED NPL-bb The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. Government Publication Date: Jul 3, 2018 SEMS List 8R Active Site Inventory:rr-SEMS-bb The Superfund Program has deployed the Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS), which integrates multiple legacy systems into a comprehensive tracking and reporting tool. This inventory contains active sites evaluated by the Superfund program that are either proposed to be or are on the National Priorities List (NPL) as well as sites that are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. The Active Site Inventory Report displays site and location information at active SEMS sites. An active site is one at which site assessment, removal, remedial, enforcement, cost recovery, or oversight activities are being planned or conducted. Government Publication Date: Jun 8, 2018 SEMS List 8R Archive Sites:rr-SEMS ARCHIVE-bb The Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) Archived Site Inventory displays site and location information at sites archived from SEMS. An archived site is one at which EPA has determined that assessment has been completed and no further remedial action is planned under the Superfund program at this time. Government Publication Date: Jun 8, 2018 Inventory of Open Dumps, June 1985:rr-ODI-bb The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) provides for publication of an inventory of open dumps. The Act defines "open dumps" as facilities which do not comply with EPA's "Criteria for Classification of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities and Practices" (40 CFR 257). Government Publication Date: Jun 1985 NPL PROPOSED NPL DELETED NPL SEMS SEMS ARCHIVE ODI Appendix: Database Descriptions 123 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 EPA Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands:rr-IODI-bb Public Law 103-399, The Indian Lands Open Dump Cleanup Act of 1994, enacted October 22, 1994, identified congressional concerns that solid waste open dump sites located on American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) lands threaten the health and safety of residents of those lands and contiguous areas. The purpose of the Act is to identify the location of open dumps on Indian lands, assess the relative health and environment hazards posed by those sites, and provide financial and technical assistance to Indian tribal governments to close such dumps in compliance with Federal standards and regulations or standards promulgated by Indian Tribal governments or Alaska Native entities. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 1998 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System - CERCLIS: rr-CERCLIS-bb Superfund is a program administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to locate, investigate, and clean up the worst hazardous waste sites throughout the United States. CERCLIS is a database of potential and confirmed hazardous waste sites at which the EPA Superfund program has some involvement. It contains sites that are either proposed to be or are on the National Priorities List (NPL) as well as sites that are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. The EPA administers the Superfund program in cooperation with individual states and tribal governments; this database is made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Oct 25, 2013 CERCLIS - No Further Remedial Action Planned:rr-CERCLIS NFRAP-bb An archived site is one at which EPA has determined that assessment has been completed and no further remedial action is planned under the Superfund program at this time. The Archive designation means that, to the best of EPA's knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List (NPL). This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that, based upon available information, the location is not judged to be a potential NPL site. Government Publication Date: Oct 25, 2013 CERCLIS Liens:rr-CERCLIS LIENS-bb A Federal Superfund lien exists at any property where EPA has incurred Superfund costs to address contamination ("Superfund site") and has provided notice of liability to the property owner. A Federal CERCLA ("Superfund") lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent Superfund monies. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Jan 30, 2014 RCRA CORRACTS-Corrective Action:rr-RCRA CORRACTS-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. At these sites, the Corrective Action Program ensures that cleanups occur. EPA and state regulators work with facilities and communities to design remedies based on the contamination, geology, and anticipated use unique to each site. Government Publication Date: Aug 2, 2018 RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD Facilities:rr-RCRA TSD-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. This database includes Non-Corrective Action sites listed as treatment, storage and/or disposal facilities of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Government Publication Date: Aug 2, 2018 RCRA Generator List:rr-RCRA LQG-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Large Quantity Generators (LQGs) generate 1,000 kilograms per month or more of hazardous waste or more than one kilogram per month of acutely hazardous waste. Government Publication Date: Aug 2, 2018 RCRA Small Quantity Generators List:rr-RCRA SQG-bb RCRA Info is the EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Small Quantity Generators (SQGs) generate more than 100 kilograms, but less than 1,000 kilograms, of hazardous waste per month. Government Publication Date: Aug 2, 2018 IODI CERCLIS CERCLIS NFRAP CERCLIS LIENS RCRA CORRACTS RCRA TSD RCRA LQG RCRA SQG 124 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 RCRA Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators List:rr-RCRA CESQG-bb RCRA Info is the EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQG) generate 100 kilograms or less per month of hazardous waste or one kilogram or less per month of acutely hazardous waste. Government Publication Date: Aug 2, 2018 RCRA Non-Generators:rr-RCRA NON GEN-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste. Government Publication Date: Aug 2, 2018 Federal Engineering Controls-ECs:rr-FED ENG-bb Engineering controls (ECs) encompass a variety of engineered and constructed physical barriers (e.g., soil capping, sub-surface venting systems, mitigation barriers, fences) to contain and/or prevent exposure to contamination on a property. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Jan 20, 2016 Federal Institutional Controls- ICs:rr-FED INST-bb Institutional controls are non-engineered instruments, such as administrative and legal controls, that help minimize the potential for human exposure to contamination and/or protect the integrity of the remedy. Although it is EPA's (United States Environmental Protection Agency ) expectation that treatment or engineering controls will be used to address principal threat wastes and that groundwater will be returned to its beneficial use whenever practicable, ICs play an important role in site remedies because they reduce exposure to contamination by limiting land or resource use and guide human behavior at a site. Government Publication Date: Jan 20, 2016 Emergency Response Notification System:rr-ERNS 1982 TO 1986-bb Database of oil and hazardous substances spill reports controlled by the National Response Center. The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. Government Publication Date: 1982-1986 Emergency Response Notification System:rr-ERNS 1987 TO 1989-bb Database of oil and hazardous substances spill reports controlled by the National Response Center. The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. Government Publication Date: 1987-1989 Emergency Response Notification System:rr-ERNS-bb Database of oil and hazardous substances spill reports controlled by the National Response Center. The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Feb 12, 2018 The Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) Brownfield Database:rr-FED BROWNFIELDS-bb Brownfields are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Cleaning up and reinvesting in these properties protects the environment, reduces blight, and takes development pressures off greenspaces and working lands. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Feb 20, 2018 FEMA Underground Storage Tank Listing:rr-FEMA UST-bb The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security maintains a list of FEMA owned underground storage tanks. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2017 RCRA CESQG RCRA NON GEN FED ENG FED INST ERNS 1982 TO 1986 ERNS 1987 TO 1989 ERNS FED BROWNFIELDS FEMA UST 125 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 LIEN on Property:rr-SEMS LIEN-bb The EPA Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) provides LIEN information on properties under the EPA Superfund Program. Government Publication Date: Jun 8, 2018 Superfund Decision Documents:rr-SUPERFUND ROD-bb This database contains a listing of decision documents for Superfund sites. Decision documents serve to provide the reasoning for the choice of (or) changes to a Superfund Site cleanup plan. The decision documents include Records of Decision (ROD), ROD Amendments, Explanations of Significant Differences (ESD), along with other associated memos and files. This information is maintained and made available by the US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Government Publication Date: Jun 8, 2018 State State Response Sites:rr-RESPONSE-bb A list of identified confirmed release sites where the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is involved in remediation, either in a lead or oversight capacity. These confirmed release sites are generally high-priority and high potential risk. This database is state equivalent NPL. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 EnviroStor Database:rr-ENVIROSTOR-bb The EnviroStor Data Management System is made available by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Includes Corrective Action sites, Tiered Permit sites, Historical Sites and Evaluation/Investigation sites. This database is state equivalent CERCLIS. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 Delisted State Response Sites:rr-DELISTED ENVS-bb Sites removed from the list of State Response Sites made available by the EnviroStor Data Management System, Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 Solid Waste Information System (SWIS):rr-SWF/LF-bb The Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) database made available by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) contains information on solid waste facilities, operations, and disposal sites throughout the State of California. The types of facilities found in this database include landfills, transfer stations, material recovery facilities, composting sites, transformation facilities, waste tire sites, and closed disposal sites. Government Publication Date: Aug 15, 2018 EnviroStor Hazardous Waste Facilities:rr-HWP-bb A list of hazardous waste facilities including permitted, post-closure and historical facilities found in the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database. Government Publication Date: Aug 23, 2018 Land Disposal Sites:rr-LDS-bb Land Disposal Sites in GeoTracker, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)'s data management system. The Land Disposal program regulates of waste discharge to land for treatment, storage and disposal in waste management units. Waste management units include waste piles, surface impoundments, and landfills. Government Publication Date: Jul 19, 2018 Sites Listed in the Solid Waste Assessment Test (SWAT) Program Report:rr-SWAT-bb In a 1993 Memorandum of Understanding, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) agreed to submit a comprehensive report on the Solid Waste Assessment Test (SWAT) Program to the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). This report summarizes the work completed to date on the SWAT Program, and addresses both the impacts that leakage from solid waste disposal sites (SWDS) may have upon waters of the State and the actions taken to address such leakage. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 1995 Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Reports:rr-LUST-bb List of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks within the Cleanup Sites data in GeoTracker database. GeoTracker is the State Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB) data management system for managing sites that impact groundwater, especially those that require groundwater cleanup (Underground Storage Tanks, Department of Defense and Site Cleanup Program) as well as permitted facilities such as operating Underground Storage Tanks. The Leak Prevention Program that overlooks LUST sites is the SWRCB in California's Environmental Protection Agency. SEMS LIEN SUPERFUND ROD RESPONSE ENVIROSTOR DELISTED ENVS SWF/LF HWP LDS SWAT LUST 126 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Government Publication Date: Jul 6, 2018 Delisted Leaking Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED LST-bb List of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) cleanup sites removed from GeoTracker, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)'s database system, as well as sites removed from the SWRCB's list of UST Case closures. Government Publication Date: Jul 19, 2018 Permitted Underground Storage Tank (UST) in GeoTracker:rr-UST-bb List of Permitted Underground Storage Tank (UST) sites made available by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in California's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Jul 1, 2018 Solid Waste Disposal Sites with Waste Constituents Above Hazardous Waste Levels:rr-SWRCB SWF-bb This is a list of solid waste disposal sites identified by California State Water Resources Control Board with waste constituents above hazardous waste levels outside the waste management unit. Government Publication Date: Sep 20, 2006 Proposed Closure of Underground Storage Tank Cases:rr-UST CLOSURE-bb List of UST cases that are being considered for closure by either the California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board or the Executive Director that have been posted for a 60-day public comment period. Government Publication Date: Jul 19, 2018 Historical Hazardous Substance Storage Information Database:rr-HHSS-bb The Historical Hazardous Substance Storage database contains information collected in the 1980s from facilities that stored hazardous substances. The information was originally collected on paper forms, was later transferred to microfiche, and recently indexed as a searchable database. When using this database, please be aware that it is based upon self-reported information submitted by facilities which has not been independently verified. It is unlikely that every facility responded to the survey and the database should not be expected to be a complete inventory of all facilities that were operating at that time. This database is maintained by the California State Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB) Geotracker. Government Publication Date: Aug 27, 2015 Aboveground Storage Tanks:rr-AST-bb A statewide list from 2009 of aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) made available by the Cal FIRE Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM). This list is no longer maintained or updated by the Cal FIRE OSFM. Government Publication Date: Aug 31, 2009 Delisted Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED TNK-bb This database contains a list of storage tank sites that were removed by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in California's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Cal FIRE Office of State Fire Marshal (OSFM). Government Publication Date: Jul 01, 2018 California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Tanks:rr-CERS TANK-bb List of sites in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal which fall under the Aboveground Petroleum Storage and Underground Storage Tank regulatory programs. The CalEPA oversees the statewide implementation of the Unified Program which applies regulatory standards to protect Californians from hazardous waste and materials. Government Publication Date: Jul 9, 2018 Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program Facility Sites with Land Use Restrictions:rr-LUR-bb The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program (SMBRP) list includes sites cleaned up under the program's oversight and generally does not include current or former hazardous waste facilities that required a hazardous waste facility permit. The list represents land use restrictions that are active. Some sites have multiple land use restrictions. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 Hazardous Waste Management Program Facility Sites with Deed / Land Use Restrictions:rr-HLUR-bb The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Hazardous Waste Management Program (HWMP) has developed a list of current or former hazardous waste facilities that have a recorded land use restriction at the local county recorder's office. The land use restrictions on this list were required by the DTSC HWMP as a result of the presence of hazardous substances that remain on site after the facility (or part of the facility) has been closed or cleaned up. The types of land use restriction include deed notice, deed restriction, or a land use restriction that binds current and future owners. DELISTED LST UST SWRCB SWF UST CLOSURE HHSS AST DELISTED TNK CERS TANK LUR HLUR 127 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Government Publication Date: Aug 8, 2018 Deed Restrictions and Land Use Restrictions:rr-DEED-bb List of Deed Restrictions, Land Use Restrictions and Covenants in GeoTracker made available by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in California's Environmental Protection Agency. A deed restriction (land use covenant) may be required to facilitate the remediation of past environmental contamination and to protect human health and the environment by reducing the risk of exposure to residual hazardous materials. Government Publication Date: Jul 27, 2018 Voluntary Cleanup Program:rr-VCP-bb List of sites in the Voluntary Cleanup Program made available by the Department of Toxic Substances and Control (DTSC). The Voluntary Cleanup Program was designed to respond to lower priority sites. Under the Voluntary Cleanup Program, DTSC enters site-specific agreements with project proponents for DTSC oversight of site assessment, investigation, and/or removal or remediation activities, and the project proponents agree to pay DTSC's reasonable costs for those services. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 GeoTracker Cleanup Sites Data:rr-CLEANUP SITES-bb A list of cleanup sites in the state of California made available by The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) of the California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). SWRCB tracks leaking underground storage tank cleanups as well as other water board cleanups. Government Publication Date: Jul 6, 2018 Delisted California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Tanks:rr-DELISTED CTNK-bb This database contains a list of Aboveground Petroleum Storage and Underground Storage Tank sites that were removed from in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal. Government Publication Date: Jul 9, 2018 Historical Hazardous Substance Storage Container Information - Facility Summary:rr-HIST TANK-bb The State Water Resources Control Board maintained the Hazardous Substance Storage Containers listing and inventory in th 1980s. This facility summary lists historic tank sites where the following container types were present: farm motor vehicle fuel tanks; waste tanks; sumps; pits, ponds, lagoons, and others; and all other product tanks. This set, published in May 1988, lists facility and owner information, as well as the number of containers. This data is historic and will not be updated. Government Publication Date: May 27, 1988 Tribal Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs) on Indian Lands:rr-INDIAN LUST-bb LUSTs on Tribal/Indian Lands in Region 9, which includes California. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2017 Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) on Indian Lands:rr-INDIAN UST-bb USTs on Tribal/Indian Lands in Region 9, which includes California. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2017 Delisted Tribal Leaking Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED ILST-bb Leaking Underground Storage Tank facilities which have been removed from the Regional Tribal LUST lists made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Oct 14, 2017 Delisted Tribal Underground Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED IUST-bb Underground Storage Tank facilities which have been removed from the Regional Tribal UST lists made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Oct 14, 2017 County Delisted County Records:rr-DELISTED COUNTY-bb Records removed from county or CUPA databases. Records may be removed from the county lists made available by the respective county departments because they are inactive, or because they have been deemed to be below reportable thresholds. DEED VCP CLEANUP SITES DELISTED CTNK HIST TANK INDIAN LUST INDIAN UST DELISTED ILST DELISTED IUST DELISTED COUNTY 128 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Government Publication Date: Seo 4, 2018 Santa Clara County - City of San Jose Hazardous Material Facilities:rr-SANJOSE HM-bb A list of facilities with hazardous materials, including underground and aboveground tanks. This list is maintained by the City of San Jose Fire Department. Government Publication Date: Jul 8, 2018 Santa Clara County - Gilroy City CUPA Facilities List:rr-GILROY CUPA-bb The Gilroy City Fire Marshal's office maintains a list of CUPA Facilities located in Gilroy City. Government Publication Date: Jul 2, 2018 Santa Clara County CUPA Facilities List:rr-SANTACLARA CUPA-bb A list of facilities associated with various Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) programs in Santa Clara County. This list is made available by Santa Clara County Department of Environmental health (DEH). DEH's Hazardous Materials Compliance Division (HMCD) is CUPA for the county with jurisdiction within the Cities of Los Altos Hills, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga; and in all unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County, including Moffett Field, San Martin, and Stanford. Government Publication Date: Jun 12, 2018 Santa Clara Historic Solvent Case Listing:rr-SANTACLARA HSOL-bb The Santa Clara Valley Water District was responsible for the oversight of solvent and toxic release cases and maintained a list of historic solvent cases in Santa Clara County. Government Publication Date: Aug 22, 2016 Santa Clara Local Oversight Program Listing:rr-SANTACLARA LO-bb A list of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) facilities in Santa Clara County Provided by Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health (DEH). Since July 1, 2004 the DEH has served as the oversight agency for investigations and clean-up of petroleum releases from underground storage tanks through implementation of the Local Oversight Program (LOP) contract with the State Water Resources Control Board. Government Publication Date: Jun 14, 2017 Santa Clara County - Sunnyvale City CUPA List:rr-SUNNYVALE CUPA-bb A list of facilities associated with various Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) programs in Sunnyvale City, Santa Clara County. This list is made available by the Fire Prevention & Hazardous Materials division of the Sunnyvale Department of Public Safety. Government Publication Date: Jun 14, 2018 Additional Environmental Record Sources Federal Facility Registry Service/Facility Index:rr-FINDS/FRS-bb The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s Facility Registry System (FRS) is a centrally managed database that identifies facilities, sites or places subject to environmental regulations or of environmental interest. FRS creates high-quality, accurate, and authoritative facility identification records through rigorous verification and management procedures that incorporate information from program national systems, state master facility records, data collected from EPA's Central Data Exchange registrations and data management personnel. Government Publication Date: Apr 17, 2018 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Program:rr-TRIS-bb The EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) is a database containing data on disposal or other releases of over 650 toxic chemicals from thousands of U.S. facilities and information about how facilities manage those chemicals through recycling, energy recovery, and treatment. One of TRI's primary purposes is to inform communities about toxic chemical releases to the environment. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2016 Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System:rr-HMIRS-bb US DOT - Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) Incidents Reports Database taken from Hazmat Intelligence Portal, U.S. Department of Transportation. Government Publication Date: May 23, 2018 SANJOSE HM GILROY CUPA SANTACLARA CUPA SANTACLARA HSOL SANTACLARA LO SUNNYVALE CUPA FINDS/FRS TRIS HMIRS 129 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 National Clandestine Drug Labs:rr-NCDL-bb The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this data as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry and does not guarantee its accuracy. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 Toxic Substances Control Act:rr-TSCA-bb The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 8(a) Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) rule and changing its name to the Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule. The CDR enables EPA to collect and publish information on the manufacturing, processing, and use of commercial chemical substances and mixtures (referred to hereafter as chemical substances) on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory (TSCA Inventory). This includes current information on chemical substance production volumes, manufacturing sites, and how the chemical substances are used. This information helps the Agency determine whether people or the environment are potentially exposed to reported chemical substances. EPA publishes submitted CDR data that is not Confidential Business Information (CBI). Government Publication Date: Jun 30, 2017 Hist TSCA:rr-HIST TSCA-bb The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 8(a) Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) rule and changing its name to the Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule. The 2006 IUR data summary report includes information about chemicals manufactured or imported in quantities of 25,000 pounds or more at a single site during calendar year 2005. In addition to the basic manufacturing information collected in previous reporting cycles, the 2006 cycle is the first time EPA collected information to characterize exposure during manufacturing, processing and use of organic chemicals. The 2006 cycle also is the first time manufacturers of inorganic chemicals were required to report basic manufacturing information. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2006 FTTS Administrative Case Listing:rr-FTTS ADMIN-bb An administrative case listing from the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), together known as FTTS. This database was obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Compliance Database (NCDB). The FTTS and NCDB was shut down in 2006. Government Publication Date: Jan 19, 2007 FTTS Inspection Case Listing:rr-FTTS INSP-bb An inspection case listing from the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), together known as FTTS. This database was obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Compliance Database (NCDB). The FTTS and NCDB was shut down in 2006. Government Publication Date: Jan 19, 2007 Potentially Responsible Parties List:rr-PRP-bb Early in the cleanup process, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducts a search to find the potentially responsible parties (PRPs). EPA looks for evidence to determine liability by matching wastes found at the site with parties that may have contributed wastes to the site. Government Publication Date: Jul 17, 2018 State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing:rr-SCRD DRYCLEANER-bb The State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners (SCRD) was established in 1998, with support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. Coalition members are states with mandated programs and funding for drycleaner site remediation. Current members are Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. Government Publication Date: Nov 08, 2017 Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS):rr-ICIS-bb The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) is a system that provides information for the Federal Enforcement and Compliance (FE&C) and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs. The FE&C component supports the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Civil Enforcement and Compliance program activities. These activities include Compliance Assistance, Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement. The NPDES program supports tracking of NPDES permits, limits, discharge monitoring data and other program reports. Government Publication Date: Nov 18, 2016 Drycleaner Facilities:rr-FED DRYCLEANERS-bb NCDL TSCA HIST TSCA FTTS ADMIN FTTS INSP PRP SCRD DRYCLEANER ICIS FED DRYCLEANERS 130 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 A list of drycleaner facilities from the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tracks facilities that possess NAIC and SIC codes that classify businesses as drycleaner establishments. Government Publication Date: May 29, 2018 Delisted Drycleaner Facilities:rr-DELISTED FED DRY-bb List of sites removed from the list of Drycleaner Facilities (sites in the EPA's Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) with NAIC or SIC codes identifying the business as a drycleaner establishment). Government Publication Date: May 29, 2018 Formerly Used Defense Sites:rr-FUDS-bb Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) are properties that were formerly owned by, leased to, or otherwise possessed by and under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense prior to October 1986, where the Department of Defense (DoD) is responsible for an environmental restoration. This list is published by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Government Publication Date: Nov 22, 2016 Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS):rr-MLTS-bb A list of sites that store radioactive material subject to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing requirements. This list is maintained by the NRC. As of September 2016, the NRC no longer releases location information for sites. Site locations were last received in July 2016. Government Publication Date: Jun 30, 2017 Historic Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS) sites:rr-HIST MLTS-bb A historic list of sites that have inactive licenses and/or removed from the Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS). In some cases, a site is removed from the MLTS when the state becomes an "Agreement State". An Agreement State is a State that has signed an agreement with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) authorizing the State to regulate certain uses of radioactive materials within the State. Government Publication Date: Jan 31, 2010 Mines Master Index File:rr-MINES-bb The Master Index File (MIF) contains mine identification numbers issued by the Department of Labor Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) for mines active or opened since 1971. Note that addresses may or may not correspond with the physical location of the mine itself. Government Publication Date: Jan 30, 2018 Alternative Fueling Stations:rr-ALT FUELS-bb List of alternative fueling stations made available by the US Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. Includes Biodiesel stations, Ethanol (E85) stations, Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Propane) stations, Ethanol (E85) stations, Natural Gas stations, Hydrogen stations, and Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE). The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) obtains information about new stations from trade media, Clean Cities coordinators, a Submit New Station form on the Station Locator website, and through collaborating with infrastructure equipment and fuel providers, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), and industry groups. Government Publication Date: Jul 24, 2018 Registered Pesticide Establishments:rr-SSTS-bb List of active EPA-registered foreign and domestic pesticide-producing and device-producing establishments based on data from the Section Seven Tracking System (SSTS). The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Section 7 requires that facilities producing pesticides, active ingredients, or devices be registered. The list of establishments is made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Mar 1, 2018 Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Notifiers:rr-PCB-bb Facilities included in the national list of facilities that have notified the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) activities. Any company or person storing, transporting or disposing of PCBs or conducting PCB research and development must notify the EPA and receive an identification number. Government Publication Date: Nov 30, 2017 State EnviroStor Inspection, Compliance, and Enforcement:rr-INSP COMP ENF-bb A list of permitted facilities with inspections and enforcements tracked in the Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) EnviroStor. Government Publication Date: May 28, 2018 DELISTED FED DRY FUDS MLTS HIST MLTS MINES ALT FUELS SSTS PCB INSP COMP ENF 131 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Clandestine Drug Lab Sites:rr-CDL-bb The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintains a listing of drug lab sites. DTSC is responsible for removal and disposal of hazardous substances discovered by law enforcement officials while investigating illegal/clandestine drug laboratories. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2017 School Property Evaluation Program Sites:rr-SCH-bb A list of sites registered with The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) School Property Evaluation and Cleanup (SPEC) Division. SPEC is responsible for assessing, investigating and cleaning up proposed school sites. The Division ensures that selected properties are free of contamination or, if the properties were previously contaminated, that they have been cleaned up to a level that protects the students and staff who will occupy the new school. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 California Hazardous Material Incident Report System (CHMIRS):rr-CHMIRS-bb A list of reported hazardous material incidents, spills, and releases from the California Hazardous Material Incident Report System (CHMIRS). This list has been made available by the California Office of Emergency Services (OES). Government Publication Date: Jun 19, 2018 Hazardous Waste Manifest Data:rr-HAZNET-bb A list of hazardous waste manifests received each year by Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). The volume of manifests is typically 900,000 - 1,000,000 annually, representing approximately 450,000 - 500,000 shipments. Government Publication Date: Oct 24, 2016 Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List - Site Cleanup:rr-HWSS CLEANUP-bb The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (Cortese) List is a planning document used by the State, local agencies and developers to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act requirements in providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. This list is published by California Department of Toxic Substance Control. Government Publication Date: Aug 14, 2018 List of Hazardous Waste Facilities Subject to Corrective Action:rr-DTSC HWF-bb This is a list of hazardous waste facilities identified in Health and Safety Code (HSC) § 25187.5. These facilities are those where Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has taken or contracted for corrective action because a facility owner/operator has failed to comply with a date for taking corrective action in an order issued under HSC § 25187, or because DTSC determined that immediate corrective action was necessary to abate an imminent or substantial endangerment. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2016 Historical Hazardous Waste Manifest Data:rr-HIST MANIFEST-bb A list of historic hazardous waste manifests received by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) from year the 1980 to 1992. The volume of manifests is typically 900,000 - 1,000,000 annually, representing approximately 450,000 - 500,000 shipments. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 1992 Historical California Hazardous Material Incident Report System (CHMIRS):rr-HIST CHMIRS-bb A list of reported hazardous material incidents, spills, and releases from the California Hazardous Material Incident Report System (CHMIRS) prior to 1993. This list has been made available by the California Office of Emergency Services (OES). Government Publication Date: Jan 1, 1993 Historical Cortese List:rr-HIST CORTESE-bb List of sites which were once included on the Cortese list. The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (Cortese) List is a planning document used by the State, local agencies and developers to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act requirements for providing information about the location of hazardous sites. Government Publication Date: Nov 13, 2008 Cease and Desist Orders and Cleanup and Abatement Orders:rr-CDO/CAO-bb The California Environment Protection Agency "Cortese List" of active Cease and Desist Orders (CDO) and Cleanup and Abatement Orders (CAO). This list contains many CDOs and CAOs that do NOT concern the discharge of wastes that are hazardous materials. Many of the listed orders concern, as examples, discharges of domestic sewage, food processing wastes, or sediment that do not contain hazardous materials, but the Water Boards' database does not distinguish between these types of orders. Government Publication Date: Feb 16, 2012 CDL SCH CHMIRS HAZNET HWSS CLEANUP DTSC HWF HIST MANIFEST HIST CHMIRS HIST CORTESE CDO/CAO 132 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Delisted Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Hazardous Waste Sites:rr-DELISTED HAZ-bb This database contains a list of sites that were removed from the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) in the following regulatory programs: Hazardous Chemical Management, Hazardous Waste Onsite Treatment, Household Hazardous Waste Collection, Hazardous Waste Generator, RCRA LQ HW Generator. Government Publication Date: Jul 9, 2018 Drycleaner Facilities:rr-DRYCLEANERS-bb A list of drycleaner related facilities that have EPA ID numbers. These are facilities with certain SIC codes: power laundries, family and commercial, linen supply, commercial laundry, dry cleaning and pressing machines - Coin Operated Laundry and Dry Cleaning. This is provided by the Department of Toxic Substance Control. Government Publication Date: Jun 21, 2018 Delisted Drycleaners:rr-DELISTED DRYC-bb Sites removed from the list of drycleaner related facilities that have EPA ID numbers, made available by the California Department of Toxic Substance Control. Government Publication Date: Jun 21, 2018 Waste Discharge Requirements:rr-WASTE DISCHG-bb List of sites in California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) Program in California, made available by the SWRCB via GeoTracker. The WDR program regulates point discharges that are exempt pursuant to Subsection 20090 of Title 27 and not subject to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The scope of the WDRs Program also includes the discharge of wastes classified as inert, pursuant to section 20230 of Title 27. Government Publication Date: May 30, 2018 Toxic Pollutant Emissions Facilities:rr-EMISSIONS-bb A list of criteria and toxic pollutant emissions data for facilities in California made available by the California Environmental Protection Agency - Air Resources Board (ARB). Risk data may be based on previous inventory submittals. The toxics data are submitted to the ARB by the local air districts as requirement of the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Program. This program requires emission inventory updates every four years. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2016 California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Hazardous Waste Sites:rr-CERS HAZ-bb List of sites in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal which fall under the following regulatory programs: Hazardous Chemical Management, Hazardous Waste Onsite Treatment, Household Hazardous Waste Collection, Hazardous Waste Generator, RCRA LQ HW Generator. The CalEPA oversees the statewide implementation of the Unified Program which applies regulatory standards to protect Californians from hazardous waste and materials. Government Publication Date: Jul 9, 2018 Tribal No Tribal additional environmental record sources available for this State. County No County additional environmental databases were selected to be included in the search. DELISTED HAZ DRYCLEANERS DELISTED DRYC WASTE DISCHG EMISSIONS CERS HAZ 133 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Definitions Database Descriptions:This section provides a detailed explanation for each database including:source,information available,time coverage,and acronyms used.They are listed in alphabetic order. Detail Report:This is the section of the report which provides the most detail for each individual record.Records are summarized by location,starting with the project property followed by records in closest proximity. Distance:The distance value is the distance between plotted points,not necessarily the distance between the sites'boundaries.All values are an approximation. Direction: The direction value is the compass direction of the site in respect to the project property and/or center point of the report. Elevation:The elevation value is taken from the location at which the records for the site address have been plotted.All values are an approximation. Source:Google Elevation API. Executive Summary:This portion of the report is divided into 3 sections: 'Report Summary'-Displays a chart indicating how many records fall on the project property and,within the report search radii. 'Site Report Summary'-Project Property'-This section lists all the records which fall on the project property.For more details,see the 'Detail Report' section. 'Site Report Summary-Surrounding Properties'-This section summarizes all records on adjacent properties,listing them in order of proximity from the project property.For more details,see the 'Detail Report'section. Map Key:The map key number is assigned according to closest proximity from the project property.Map Key numbers always start at #1.The project property will always have a map key of '1'if records are available.If there is a number in brackets beside the main number,this will indicate the number of records on that specific property.If there is no number in brackets,there is only one record for that property. The symbol and colour used indicates 'elevation':the red inverted triangle will dictate 'ERIS Sites with Lower Elevation',the yellow triangle will dictate 'ERIS Sites with Higher Elevation'and the orange square will dictate 'ERIS Sites with Same Elevation.' Unplottables:These are records that could not be mapped due to various reasons,including limited geographic information.These records may or may not be in your study area,and are included as reference. Definitions APPENDIX E SITE ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST AND ASTM TRANSACTION SCREEN AND ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX F CASE CLOSURE AND MONITORING INFORMATION FOR 850 PACHECO PASS HIGHWAY Noise Assessment F APPENDIX 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 1 ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE ASSESSMENT GILROY SQUARE DEVELOPMENT GILROY, CALIFORNIA WJVA Report No. 22‐23 PREPARED FOR EMC PLANNING 301 LIGHTHOUSE AVENUE, SUITE C MONTEREY, CA 93940 PREPARED BY WJV ACOUSTICS, INC. VISALIA, CALIFORNIA SEPTEMBER 28, 2022 113 N. Church Street, Suite 203 ∙ Visalia, CA 93291∙ (559) 627-4923 ∙ 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 2 1. INTRODUCTION Project Description The Gilroy Square project is a proposed new commercial development that would include two, four‐story hotels, a drive‐through fast food restaurant, a convenience store, gas station and car wash, a four‐story outpatient treatment facility, and a one‐story warehouse building. The project site consists of approximately 10 acres of currently undeveloped land, located in the City of Gilroy, California. The proposed project includes changing the general plan and zoning designations from industrial to commercial. The project site plan is provided as Figure 1. Environmental Noise Assessment This environmental noise assessment has been prepared to determine if significant noise impacts would be produced by the project and to describe mitigation measures for noise if significant impacts are determined. The environmental noise assessment, prepared by WJV Acoustics, Inc. (WJVA), is based upon the project site plan provided by the project applicant (dated 2/14/2022), project‐related traffic data provided by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. and a project site visit on March 22 and 23, 2022. Revisions to the site plan, project‐related traffic data or other project‐related information available to WJVA at the time the analysis was prepared may require a reevaluation of the findings and/or recommendations of the report. Appendix A provides definitions of the acoustical terminology used in this report. Unless otherwise stated, all sound levels reported in this analysis are A‐weighted sound pressure levels in decibels (dB). A‐weighting de‐emphasizes the very low and very high frequencies of sound in a manner similar to the human ear. Most community noise standards utilize A‐weighted sound levels, as they correlate well with public reaction to noise. Appendix B provides typical A‐weighted sound levels for common noise sources. In terms of human perception, a 5 dB increase or decrease is considered to be a noticeable change in noise levels. Additionally, a 10 dB increase or decrease is perceived by the human ear as half as loud or twice as loud. In terms of perception, generally speaking the human ear cannot perceive an increase (or decrease) in noise levels less than 3 dB. there are no residential land uses proposed onsite and the nearest residential land uses are located approximately one‐half mile west of the site. Therefore, the term "sensitive land uses," for the purpose of this assessment will also include transient lodging and medical facilities, where appropriate. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 3 2. THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The CEQA Guidelines apply the following questions for the assessment of significant noise impacts for a project: a. Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or 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, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? a. Noise Level Standards City of Gilroy General Plan‐ Section 9 (Potential Hazards) of the City of Gilroy General Plan1 (adopted November 2, 2020) establishes land use compatibility criteria in terms of the Day‐Night Average Level (DNL or Ldn). The Ldn is the time‐weighted energy average noise level for a 24‐hour day, with a 10 dB penalty added to noise levels occurring during the nighttime hours (10:00 p.m.‐7:00 a.m.). The Ldn represents cumulative exposure to noise over an extended period of time and is therefore calculated based upon annual average conditions. Goal PH6: Protect Gilroy residents from exposure to excessive noise and its effects through appropriate mitigation measures and responsive land use planning, especially in regard to noise‐sensitive land uses such as schools, hospitals, and housing for seniors. PH 6.1 Noise and Land Use Establish a physical development pattern that is compatible with the noise environment of Gilroy, ensuring that residential neighborhoods and park areas are the quietest areas in the community. PH 6.2 Noise Standard Consistency Review development proposals to assure consistency with noise standards, using the Future Noise Contours map to determine if additional noise studies are needed for proposed development. PH 6.3 Maximum Permissible Noise Levels Ensure that outdoor and indoor noise levels are within the maximum permitted levels. Prohibit further development of sensitive uses in areas where the current or projected future noise levels exceed these standards and feasible mitigation is not available to reduce the noise level to meet the standards identified in Table 9‐1 (provided below as Table I). 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 4 PH 6.4 Noise Study and Mitigation Require proposed development projects in areas where future residents or visitors may be exposed to major noise sources (e.g. roadways, rail lines, industrial activities) to conduct an environmental noise analysis. The noise analysis shall determine noise exposure and noise standard compatibility with respect to the noise standards identified in Table 9‐1 and shall incorporate noise mitigation when located in noise environments that are not compatible with the proposed uses of the project. PH 6.5 Acoustical Design Consider the acoustical design of projects in the development review process to reduce noise to an acceptable level. Ensure that noise mitigation features are designed and implemented in an aesthetically pleasing and consistent manner. PH 6.6 Setbacks and Earth Berms Require landscaped setbacks and earth berms as an alternative to soundwalls where feasible to buffer noise along major thoroughfares and rail lines adjacent to residential areas. Where an adequate setback and earth berm is not feasible, a masonry wall screened with drought tolerant, low maintenance landscaping will be required. PH 6.7 Residential Noise Standards Require the design of new residential development to comply with the noise standards found in Table 9‐1 (provided below as Table I). Maximum outdoor sound levels for residential properties shall be 60 dBA LDN, in areas where outdoor use is a major consideration (e.g., backyards in single family housing and common recreational areas in multi‐ family developments). In the Downtown Specific Plan Area, the maximum outdoor noise level in common recreation areas of multi‐family residential uses shall be 65 dBA LDN. In outdoor use areas where the City determines that maintaining the outdoor noise levels mentioned above cannot be achieved after the application of reasonable and feasible mitigation, a level of up to 70 dBA LDN may be permitted, if the following findings are made: That feasible sound attenuation measures have been incorporated in the project design; That potential noise levels are part of the developer’s disclosure to future residents; That interior noise limits established by the General Plan are strictly maintained; and Potential noise levels will not jeopardize the health, safety, and general welfare of the public. PH 6.8 Incremental Noise Impacts of Commercial and Industrial Development Review of proposed new or expanding commercial and industrial development shall consider potential noise impacts on nearby residential uses and, as necessary, shall require noise mitigation measures as a condition of project approval. PH 6.9 Transportation Noise Consider potential noise impacts when evaluating proposals for transportation projects, including road, freeway, and transit projects, and incorporate mitigation measures to meet General Plan standards. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 5 PH 6.10 Construction Noise Require proposed development projects subject to discretionary approval to assess potential construction noise impacts on nearby sensitive uses and to minimize impacts on those uses, to the extent feasible. 6.13 Transportation Vibration Require proposed residential and commercial projects located within 200 feet of existing major freeways and railroad lines (e.g. freight, Amtrak, and Caltrain) to conduct a ground vibration and vibration noise evaluation consistent with City‐approved methodologies (e.g. Caltrans, Federal Transportation Authority). TABLE I CITY OF GILROY MAXIMUM PERMITTED OUTDOOR AND INDOOR NOISE LEVELS Land Use Category Maximum Outdoor Ldn, dBA Maximum Indoor Ldn, dBA Residential 60 45 Commercial 65 61 Industrial 76 See Note 2 1The Outdoor sound levels for residential properties shall be held to 60‐dBA LDN, or a maximum of 70‐dBA if ALL of the following FINDINGS can be made: That feasible sound attenuation measures have been incorporated in the project design; That potential noise levels are part of the developer’s disclosure to future residents; That interior noise limits established by the General Plan are strictly maintained; and Potential noise levels will not jeopardize the health, safety, and general welfare of the public. 2The indoor standards for industrial land uses have been set by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The maximum level to be exceeded no more than 10 percent of the time (L10) is 65 dBA, while the maximum level to be exceeded no more than 50 percent of the time (L50) is 60 dBA. Source: City of Gilroy General Plan The City of Gilroy General Plan provides an interior noise level standard of 45 dB Ldn, within residential land uses. This is consistent with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations for residential construction and consistent with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The intent of the interior noise level guideline is to provide an acceptable noise environment for indoor communication and sleep. Additionally, Section 1207.4 of the California Building Code states “Interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources should not exceed 45 dB in any inhabitable room. The noise metric shall be the day‐night average sound level (Ldn) or the community noise equivalent level (CNEL), consistent with the noise level of the local general plan.” The section of the California Building Code applies to Hotels and Motels. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 6 City of Gilroy Zoning Ordinance‐ Additionally, Section 30.41.31 (Specific Provisions‐Noise) of the City of Gilroy Zoning Ordinance2 establishes noise level standards for non‐transportation noise sources (stationary/fixed sources). For residential noise sources, the ordinance establishes an Lmax (maximum) noise level criterion of 60 dB and an L10 statistical performance standard of 70 dB. For commercial noise sources (impacting residential properties), the ordinance establishes an L10 statistical performance standard of 70 dB between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Such noise is limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and prohibited between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. b. Construction Noise and Vibration Section 9 (Potential Hazards) of the City of Gilroy General Plan also provides some guidance in regards to construction noise and vibration: PH 6.11 Construction and Maintenance Noise Limits Limit the hours of construction and maintenance activities to the less sensitive hours of the day (7:00am to 7:00pm Monday through Friday and 9:00am to 7:00 pm on Saturdays). Construction hours that vary from these timeframes may be approved by the Building Official, in conformance with Article XVI. Hours of Construction of the Gilroy City Code. PH 6.12 Vibration Impact Assessment Require a vibration impact assessment for proposed development projects in which heavy‐duty construction equipment would be used (e.g. pile driving, bulldozing) within 200 feet of an existing structure or sensitive receptor. If applicable, require all feasible mitigation measures to be implemented to ensure that no damage or disturbance to structures or sensitive receptors would occur. Some further guidance related to vibration is provided by the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual 3. The Manual provides guidance for determining annoyance potential criteria and damage potential threshold criteria. These criteria are provided below in Table III and Table IV, and are presented in terms of peak particle velocity (PPV) in inches per second (in/sec). 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 7 TABLE II GUIDELINE VIBRATION ANNOYANCE POTENTIAL CRITERIA Human Response Maximum PPV (in/sec) Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources Barely Perceptible 0.04 0.01 Distinctly Perceptible 0.25 0.04 Strongly Perceptible 0.9 0.1 Severe 2.0 0.4 Source: Caltrans TABLE III GUIDELINE VIBRATION DAMAGE POTENTIAL THRESHOLD CRITERIA Structure and Condition Maximum PPV (in/sec) Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources Extremely fragile, historic buildings, ancient monuments 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 Source: Caltrans 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 8 3. SETTING The proposed project would include a commercial development on an approximately 10‐acre parcel of land, located within the City of Gilroy. The project site is located approximately 0.3 miles east of US Route 101 (US 101), along the south side of State Route 152 (SR 152). The project site is currently undeveloped land. The project site is generally bound by Camino Arroyo (and retail/commercial land uses) to the west, SR 152 to the north, and Holloway Road, commercial land uses and undeveloped land to the east and the south. The City of Gilroy General Plan does not clearly define what is considered a noise‐sensitive land use. The General Plan does state, that in addition to residential land uses, land uses “such as schools, hospitals, and housing for seniors” should be protected from excessive noise. The closest existing sensitive receptors (residential land uses) to the project site are located approximately 0.5 miles west (west side of US 101) and approximately 1 mile to the east, along SR 152. Additionally, Eliot Elementary School is located approximately 0.6 miles northwest of the project site. a. Background Noise Level Measurements Existing ambient noise levels in the project vicinity are dominated by traffic noise along State Route 152 (SR 152), as well traffic along Camino Arroyo and US 101. Additional sources of noise observed during site inspection included aircraft overflights and noise associated with nearby commercial/retail land uses. Measurements of existing ambient noise levels in the project vicinity were conducted on May 22 and May 23, 2022. Long‐term (24‐hour) ambient noise level measurements were conducted at one (1) location (site LT‐1). LT‐1 was located within the project site, in the general vicinity of the proposed hotels. Additionally, short‐term (15‐minute) ambient noise level measurements were conducted at five (5) locations (Sites ST‐1 through ST‐5). The project vicinity and locations of the noise monitoring sites are shown on Figure 2. Two (2) individual measurements were taken at each of the five short‐term sites to quantify ambient noise levels in the morning and afternoon hours. Noise monitoring equipment consisted of Larson‐Davis Laboratories Model LDL‐820 sound level analyzers equipped with B&K Type 4176 1/2” microphones. The equipment complies with the specifications of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) for Type I (Precision) sound level meters. The meters were calibrated with a B&K Type 4230 acoustic calibrator to ensure the accuracy of the measurements. Measured hourly energy average noise levels (Leq) at site LT‐1 ranged from a low of 50.2 dB between 1:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. to a high of 58.8 dB between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. Hourly maximum (Lmax) noise levels at site LT‐1 ranged from 67.1 to 85.2 dB. Residual noise levels at the monitoring site, as defined by the L90 statistical descriptor ranged from 45.8 to 56.1 dB. The L90 is 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 9 a statistical descriptor that defines the noise level exceeded 90% of the time during each hour of the sample period. The L 90 is generally considered to represent the residual (or background) noise level in the absence of identifiable single noise events from traffic, aircraft and other local noise sources. The measured Ldn value at site LT‐1 during the 24‐hour noise measurement period was 61.6 dB CNEL. Figure 3 graphically depicts hourly variations in ambient noise levels at the LT‐1 long‐term monitoring site as well as a site photograph. The short‐term site noise measurement data included energy average (Leq) maximum (Lmax) as well as five (5) individual statistical parameters. Observations were made of the dominant noise sources affecting the measurements. The statistical parameters describe the percent of time a noise level was exceeded during the measurement period. Table IV summarizes short‐term noise measurement results. TABLE IV SUMMARY OF SHORT-TERM NOISE MEASUREMENT DATA GILROY SQUARE DEVELOPMENT MAY 22 & 23, 2022 Site Time A‐Weighted Decibels, dBA Sources Leq Lmax L2 L8 L25 L50 L90 ST‐1 8:05 a.m. 62.2 78.4 71.2 65.0 62.1 58.8 54.9 TR ST‐1 3:50 p.m. 61.4 72.7 70.7 64.6 61.0 58.5 54.4 TR ST‐2 8:25 a.m. 68.2 77.7 78.4 42.3 68.6 64.0 59.0 TR, AC ST‐2 4:10 p.m. 67.9 80.0 77.9 70.9 67.5 63.1 58.2 TR ST‐3 8:45 a.m. 58.6 75.2 69.2 56.4 53.7 52.0 51.5 TR, C ST‐3 4:30 p.m. 56.0 71.3 67.9 54.3 51.8 50.8 49.3 TR, C ST‐4 9:10 a.m. 54.7 65.2 62.4 58.8 53.9 52.2 51.9 TR, C ST‐4 4:50 p.m. 52.8 63.1 59.9 56.2 52.0 50.9 49.6 TR, C ST‐5 9:30 a.m. 52.2 66.4 55.0 53.8 52.8 51.8 50.5 TR, AC, C ST‐5 5:10 p.m. 51.1 65.0 53.9 52.7 51.7 50.7 49.2 TR, C TR: Traffic AC: Aircraft V: Voices C: Commercial Activities Source: WJV Acoustics, Inc. Short‐term noise measurements were conducted for 15‐minute periods. Sites ST‐1 and ST‐2 were located in relatively close proximity to SR 152, and as such noise levels were elevated as compared to the remaining ambient noise measurement sites. Short‐term measurement sites ST‐3 and ST‐4 were located along Holloway Road, near the southern portion of the project site. Site ST‐5 was located within the eastern portion of the project site, near existing commercial land uses. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 10 4. PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES a. Project Traffic Noise Impacts on Existing Noise-Sensitive Land Uses Outside Project Site (Less Than Significant) WJVA utilized the FHWA Traffic Noise Model4 to quantify expected project‐related increases in traffic noise exposure at representative noise‐sensitive receptor locations in the project vicinity. Traffic noise exposure levels for Existing, Existing Plus Project, 2040 and 2040 Plus Project traffic conditions were calculated based upon the FHWA Model and traffic volumes provided by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. The percentages of trucks on SR 152 was obtained from Caltrans. The day/night distribution of traffic and the percentages of trucks on the remaining roadways used for modeling were obtained from previous studies WJVA has conducted along similar roadways as such data was not available from governmental sources. The Noise modeling assumptions used to calculate project traffic noise are provided as Appendix C. Project‐related significant impacts would occur if an increase in traffic noise associated with the project would result in noise levels exceeding the City’s applicable noise level standards at the location(s) of sensitive receptors. For the purpose of this analysis a significant impact is also assumed to occur if traffic noise levels were to increase by 3 dB at sensitive receptor locations where noise levels already exceed the City’s applicable noise level standards (without the project), as 3 dB generally represents the threshold of perception in change for the human ear. This analysis of project traffic noise focuses on residential land uses, as they represent the most restrictive noise level criteria by land use type provided in the General Plan. The City’s exterior noise level standard for residential land uses is 60 dB Ldn. It should be noted, the nearest residential land uses to the project site are located approximately one‐half mile to the west. Traffic noise was modeled at ten (10) receptor locations (R‐1 through R‐10). The ten modeled receptors are located at roadway setback distances representative of the sensitive receptors (residences) along each analyzed roadway segment. The receptor locations are described below and provided graphically on Figure 4. R‐1: Approximately 115 feet from the centerline of Monterey Rd., s/o W. 10th St. R‐2: Approximately 120 feet from the centerline of Alexander St., n/o W. 10th St. R‐3: Approximately 95 feet from the centerline of Chestnut St., n/o W. 10th St. R‐4: Approximately 200 feet from the centerline of SR 152, w/o Holsclaw Rd. R‐5: Approximately 80 feet from the centerline of Holsclaw Rd., n/o SR 152. R‐6: Approximately 135 feet from the centerline of SR 152, e/o Holsclaw Rd. R‐7: Approximately 100 feet from the centerline of Frazier Lake Rd. s/o SR 152. R‐8: Approximately 75 feet from the centerline of SR 152, e/o Frazier Lake Rd. R‐9: Approximately 95 feet from the centerline of Monterey Rd. n/o W. Luchessa Ave. R‐10: Approximately 90 feet from the centerline of W. Luchessa Ave, w/o Monterey Rd. Table V provides a comparison of traffic noise levels at the ten modeled receptor locations for Existing, Existing Plus Project, 2040 and 2040 Plus Project traffic conditions. Noise levels 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 11 described in Table V do not take into account any localized acoustic shielding that may result from intervening topography, existing buildings or existing sound walls, and should be considered a worst‐case assessment of traffic noise exposure levels. TABLE V PROJECT-RELATED INCREASES IN TRAFFIC NOISE, dB, CNEL GILROY SQUARE DEVELOPMENT Modeled Receptor Existing Existing Plus Project 2040 2040 Plus Project Change (Maximum) Significant Impact? R‐1 59 59 60 60 0 No R‐2 55 55 55 55 0 No R‐3 58 58 59 59 0 No R‐4 66 66 67 67 0 No R‐5 49 49 49 49 0 No R‐6 69 69 70 70 0 No R‐7 59 59 61 61 0 No R‐8 71 71 71 71 0 No R‐9 60 60 60 60 0 No R‐10 61 61 63 63 0 No Source: WJV Acoustics, Inc. Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. As described in Table V, project‐related traffic is not expected to result in noise levels at any sensitive receptors to exceed the City’s noise level standard, nor result in an increase of 3 dB in any sensitive receptor locations where noise levels already exceed the City’s noise level standard without the implementation of the project. Furthermore, project‐related increases in traffic are not expected to result in an increase in noise levels, as quantified by the Ldn metric, at any sensitive receptor locations. Therefore, project‐related increases in traffic noise exposure are not considered to be a significant impact. b. Noise Impacts from On-Site Noise Sources (No Impact) The project would include a variety of commercial retail land uses, including a drive‐through quick serve restaurant, convenience store, gas station and car wash, hotels, outpatient treatment facility, and a warehouse building. A wide variety of noise sources can be associated with such land uses. The noise levels produced by such sources can also be highly variable. The closest sensitive receptors to the proposed project site are located at distance of 0.5 miles or greater from the project site. At these distances, noise levels associated with these noise‐producing activities would not be audible. However, noise levels associated with such activities are discussed qualitatively below. For the purpose of this analysis and discussion, all associated noise levels have been normalized to a setback distance of 100 feet. Typical examples of stationary noise sources associated with such land uses include: 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 12 HVAC/Mechanical equipment Truck deliveries and movements Parking lot activities (closing of car doors and trunks, stereos, alarms etc.) Drive‐Through operations Loading Dock Activities Car Wash Operations Mechanical Equipment It is assumed that the project would include roof‐mounted HVAC units on the proposed buildings. For the purpose of noise and aesthetics, roof‐mounted HVAC units are typically shielded by means of a roof parapet. WJVA has conducted reference noise level measurements at numerous commercial and retail buildings with roof‐mounted HVAC units, and associated noise levels typically range between approximately 39‐44 dB at a distance of 100 feet from the building façade. Slowly Moving Trucks Large trucks would enter and exit the project site for deliveries as well as to access the proposed warehouse facility. WJVA has conducted measurements of the noise levels produced by slowly moving trucks for a number of studies. Such truck movements would be expected to produce noise levels in the range of 65 to 71 dBA at a distance of 100 feet. The range in measured truck noise levels is due to differences in the size of trucks, their speed of movement and whether they have refrigeration units in operation during the pass‐by. Parking Lot Activities Noise due to traffic in parking lots is typically limited by low speeds and is not usually considered to be significant. Human activity in parking lots that can produce noise includes voices, stereo systems and the opening and closing of car doors and trunk lids. Such activities can occur at any time. The noise levels associated with these activities cannot be precisely defined due to variables such as the number of parking movements, time of day and other factors. It is typical for a passing car in a parking lot to produce a maximum noise level of 54‐59 dBA at a distance of 100 feet. Drive Thru Retail The proposed project would include a drive‐thru quick serve restaurant. WJVA previously conducted reference noise levels measured at a Wendy’s drive‐thru restaurant located on South Mooney Boulevard in Visalia. Measurements were conducted during the early afternoon of July 11, 2011 between 12:45 p.m. and 1:45 p.m. using the previously‐described noise monitoring equipment. The microphone used by customers to order food and the loudspeaker used by employees to confirm orders are both integrated into a menu board that is located a few feet from the drive‐ thru lane at the approximate height of a typical car window. Vehicles would enter the drive‐thru lane from the west and then turn to the north along the east side of the restaurant. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 13 Reference noise measurements were obtained at a distance of approximately 40 feet from the menu board containing the microphone/loudspeaker system at an angle of about 45° toward the rear of the vehicle being served. This provided a worst‐case exposure to sound from the loudspeaker system since the vehicle was not located directly between the loudspeaker and measurement location. Cars were lined up in the access lane during the noise measurement period indicating that the drive‐through lane was operating at or near a peak level of activity. Each ordering cycle was observed to take approximately 60 seconds including vehicle movements. A typical ordering cycle included 5‐10 seconds of loudspeaker use with typical maximum noise levels in the range of 60‐62 dBA at the 40 foot‐reference location. Vehicles moving through the drive‐thru lane produced noise levels in the range of 55‐60 dBA at the same distance. Vehicles parked at the ordering position (between the menu board and measurement site) were observed to provide significant acoustic shielding during the ordering sequence. The effects of such shielding are reflected by the noise measurement data. Noise levels were measured to approximately 60 dB Leq at the measurement site, and included noise from all sources, including the loudspeaker, vehicle movements and HVAC equipment. At a reference distance of 100 feet, maximum noise levels associated with the amplified menu board would be approximately 52‐54 dB. Loading Dock Activities The proposed project includes a 15,000 square‐foot warehouse facility. The time and frequency of warehouse loading dock activities was not known at the time this analysis was prepared. Noise sources typically associated with loading dock activities include truck engines, the operation of truck‐mounted refrigeration units, fork lifts, the banging of hand carts and roll‐up doors, noise from P.A. systems, and the voices of truck drivers and store employees. Truck engines and/or refrigeration units are typically turned off while trucks are in loading dock areas to reduce noise and save energy. Based upon noise level measurements conducted by WJVA for other studies, loading dock noise levels would be expected to be in the range of 58 to 76 dBA at a distance of 100 feet. Car Wash The project would include an automated car wash facility, to be located in the vicinity of the convenience store and gas station. WJVA has conducted noise studies of numerous car wash operations. Automated car wash facilities can generally be categorized in two ways, 1). Conveyor belt operations and 2). Drive‐in operations. With conveyor belt operations, multiple cars can proceed through the tunnel simultaneously, and are pulled along through the wash tunnel by the conveyor belt, and during peak hours of operation, the dryer blowers (dominant noise producing component) may be in constant operation. With drive‐in styles one vehicle drives into the car wash tunnel bay and remains in place while the car wash operates around the vehicle. With this type of system one car is proce ssed through the car wash tunnel at a time, and typical wash cycle times are approximately six (6) minutes, with the dryer blower in operation for approximately 90 seconds out of the 6‐minute wash cycle time. The drive‐in type of car wash operations is the most common at convenience store/fuel service retail operations while the conveyor belt type of car wash is more common with “stand‐alone” 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 14 car wash retail locations. Reference to the project site plan indicates that a drive‐in car wash operation will likely be utilized. However, both types of car wash operations are discussed below. Conveyor Belt Car Wash‐ During peak hours of operation, conveyor belt car wash operations may be in constant operation, with the dryer blowers continuously operating. WJVA has conducted noise level measurements at numerous such car wash operations and has reviewed manufacturer‐supplied noise level data. Noise levels associated with such operations typically range between approximately 69‐73 dB a distance of 100 feet from the tunnel entrance and exit. The noise levels described above represent the noise levels that occur directly in front the tunnel entrance and exit. The blowers are located within the tunnel, and the tunnel provides acoustical shielding of blower noise to the sides of the car wash tunnel. Generally speaking, at a 45‐degree angle from a car wash tunnel entrance/exit, noise levels are approximately 6‐8 dB below noise levels measured directly in line with the tunnel, at the same distance. Additionally, at a 90‐degree angle, WJVA has observed noise levels to be approximately 10‐15 dB below noise levels measured directly in line with the tunnel, at the same distance. The noise levels described above apply noise levels measured and reviewed for Tommy Car Wash Systems, Peco Wash and Dryer System and MacNeil Wash Systems washers with Motor City drying systems. Drive‐Thru Car Wash‐ As described above, with drive‐thru type car wash operations (most common at convenience store/fuel service retail locations), one car is processed through the car wash tunnel at a time. Typical wash cycles take approximately 6 minutes in length, of which the dryer blowers are in operation for approximately 90 seconds per cycle. Taking these cycle times into account, the maximum number of car washes that could occur per hour would be ten (10). As described above, the blowers are in operation for approximately 90 seconds during each 6‐minute cycle, with the resulting maximum blower operation time of fifteen (15) minutes during any one hour. The most common type of equipment associated with drive‐thru style of car wash operations is the Mark VII ChoiceWash XT Wash System utilizing a Mark VII Dryer System. WJVA has measured noise levels at numerous locations utilizing this equipment and has also reviewed manufacturer‐ supplied noise level data. Noise levels measured by WJVA indicate that car wash noise levels for the drive‐thru (Mark VII equipment) would be approximately 63 dB L50 during any one hour, at a distance of 100 feet directly in front of the entrance and exit of the tunnel. This noise level assumes the car wash is in constant peak operation during any given hour, and should therefore be considered a worst‐case assessment of car wash operational noise levels. c. Noise From Construction (Less Than Significant) Construction noise would occur at various locations within and near the project site through the build‐out period. Table VI provides typical construction‐related noise levels at distances of 100 feet, 200 feet, and 300 feet. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 15 TABLE VI TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT MAXIMUM NOISE LEVELS, dBA Type of Equipment 100 Ft. 200 Ft. 300 Ft. Concrete Saw 84 78 74 Crane 75 69 65 Excavator 75 69 65 Front End Loader 73 67 63 Jackhammer 83 77 73 Paver 71 65 61 Pneumatic Tools 79 73 69 Dozer 76 70 66 Rollers 74 68 64 Trucks 80 72 70 Pumps 74 68 64 Scrapers 81 75 71 Portable Generators 74 68 64 Backhoe 80 74 70 Grader 80 74 70 Source: FHWA Noise Control for Buildings and Manufacturing Plants, Bolt, Beranek & Newman, 1987 Construction noise is not considered to be a significant impact if construction is limited to the daytime hours and construction equipment is adequately maintained and muffled. The City of Gilroy provides a restriction on the hours that construction activities may occur, between 7:00am to 7:00pm Monday through Friday and 9:00am to 7:00 pm on Saturdays. d. Vibration Impacts (Less Than Significant) The dominant sources of man‐made vibration are sonic booms, blasting, pile driving, pavement breaking, demolition, diesel locomotives, and rail‐car coupling. Typical vibration levels at distances of 100 feet and 300 feet are summarized by Table VII. These levels would not be expected to exceed any significant threshold levels for annoyance or damage, as provided above in Table II and Table III. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 16 TABLE VII TYPICAL VIBRATION LEVELS DURING CONSTRUCTION PPV (in/sec) Equipment @ 100´ @ 300´ Bulldozer (Large) 0.011 0.006 Bulldozer (Small) 0.0004 0.00019 Loaded Truck 0.01 0.005 Jackhammer 0.005 0.002 Vibratory Roller .03 0.013 Caisson Drilling .01 0.006 Source: Caltrans After full project build out, it is not expected that ongoing operational activities will result in any vibration impacts at nearby sensitive uses. Activities involved in trash bin collection could result in minor on‐site vibrations as the bin is placed back onto the ground. Such vibrations would not be expected to be felt at the closest off‐site sensitive uses and would generally not be expected to be felt at on‐site sensitive receptors as well. Additional mitigation is not required. e. Noise Impacts from Nearby Airports or Airstrips (No Impact) The Project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or private airstrip. The San Martin Airport and Frazier Lake Airpark are located approximately six miles from project site. f. Noise Impacts to On-Site Proposed Noise-Sensitive Uses (Less Than Significant, With Mitigation) The proposed project would include two hotels as well as an outpatient treatment facility, to be located in the southern portion of the project site. While not specifically described in the City of Gilroy General Plan, transient lodging facilities (hotels and motels) and medical facilities are typically considered to be a noise‐sensitive land use. The exterior noise level standards for transient lodging are typically applied to outdoor common use areas, such as pools, common courtyards and designated picnic or BBQ areas. The assumed exterior noise levels standard for transient lodging is 60 dB Ldn. Medical facilities typically do not have applicable exterior noise level standards. Typical interior noise level standards state that interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dB Ldn within residential land uses (including transient lodging). This is consistent with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations for residential construction and consistent with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as well as Section 1207.4 of the California Building Code. The intent of the interior noise level guideline is to provide an acceptable noise environment for indoor communication and sleep. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 17 Exterior Hotel Noise The site plan indicates that both proposed hotels would include outdoor pool areas. Both pools would be located along the south side of each hotel, where the hotel building would provide acoustical shielding from traffic noise associated with SR 152, the dominant source of project site noise. Noise levels measured at ambient noise measurement site LT‐1 indicate that project site noise exposure, in the vicinity of the proposed hotels, is approximately 62 dB Ldn. Taking into account the acoustical shielding provided by the hotel buildings, noise levels in the vicinity of the pool location at both hotels would be below the City’s (assumed) exterior noise level standard of 60 dB Ldn. Interior Hotel Noise The interior noise exposure is determined by subtracting the outdoor‐to‐indoor noise level reduction (NLR) performance that will be provided by the building construction from the assumed exterior noise exposure for the site. Hotel exterior noise exposure (as well as the outpatient treatment facility), would be expected to be approximately 62 dB Ldn, or less. Therefore, a minimum NLR of 17 dB will be required for compliance with the assumed 45 dBA Ldn interior noise level standard (62‐45=17). A specific analysis of interior noise levels was not performed. However, it may be assumed that construction methods complying with current building code requirements will reduce exterior noise levels by approximately 25 dB or more if windows and doors are closed. This will be sufficient for compliance with the City’s 45 dB Ldn interior standard at all proposed at all proposed rooms for the two hotels. Requiring that it be possible for windows and doors to remain closed for sound insulation means that air conditioning or mechanical ventilation will be required. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 18 5. IMPACT SUMMARY The proposed Gilroy Square development project would comply with all City of Gilroy exterior and interior noise level standards, provided air conditioning or mechanical ventilation should be installed in all hotel units so that it will be possible for windows to remain closed for sound insulation purposes. The closest off‐site noise‐sensitive land uses are located at distance of 0.5 miles or greater from the project site. At such distances, noise levels associated with the various project components would not be audible. Project‐related increases in traffic noise exposure was calculated to be less than 1 dB at all analyzed roadways where sensitive receptors (residential land uses and transient lodging) exist. An analysis of existing and 2040 traffic conditions indicate that the project would not result in a measurable increase in traffic noise exposure over existing noise levels. The project would include two hotels and outpatient treatment facility, which while not specifically described as such in the City of Gilroy General Plan, were considered to be noise‐sensitive land uses within this analysis and report. Exterior noise levels at the outdoor common use areas for each proposed hotel (outdoor swimming pool areas) would be below 60 dB Ldn. Additionally, interior noise levels within all rooms of both proposed hotels and the outpatient treatment facility would not exceed 45 dB Ldn. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 19 6. SOURCES CONSULTED 1. City of Gilroy General Plan, November 2, 2020. 2. City of Gilroy Zoning Ordinance, April 2022. 3. California Department of Transportation, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, September 2013. 4. Federal Highway Administration, Traffic Noise Model, Version 2.5, April 14, 2004 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 20 FIGURE 1: PROJECT SITE PLAN FIGURE 2: PROJECT VICINITY AND AMBIENT NOISE MONITORING SITES 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 21 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 22 FIGURE 3: HOURLY NOISE LEVELS AT LONG-TERM MONITORING SITE LT-1 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0:00:001:00:002:00:003:00:004:00:005:00:006:00:007:00:008:00:009:00:0010:00:0011:00:0012:00:0013:00:0014:00:0015:00:0016:00:0017:00:0018:00:0019:00:0020:00:0021:00:0022:00:0023:00:00Levels, dBATime Site LT‐1 May 22, 2022 Lmax Leq L90 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 23 FIGURE 4: LOCATIONS OF MODELED TRAFFIC NOISE RECEPTORS APPENDIX A-1 ACOUSTICAL TERMINOLOGY AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL: The composite of noise from all sources near and far. In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location. CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level. The average equivalent sound level during a 24‐hour day, obtained after addition of approximately five decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and ten decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m. DECIBEL, dB: A unit for 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, which is 20 micropascals (20 micronewtons per square meter). DNL/Ldn: Day/Night Average Sound Level. The average equivalent sound level during a 24‐hour day, obtained after addition of ten decibels to sound levels in the night after 10:00 p.m. and before 7:00 a.m. Leq: Equivalent Sound Level. The sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period. Leq is typically computed over 1, 8 and 24‐hour sample periods. NOTE: The CNEL and DNL represent daily levels of noise exposure averaged on an annual basis, while Leq represents the average noise exposure for a shorter time period, typically one hour. Lmax: The maximum noise level recorded during a noise event. Ln: The sound level exceeded "n" percent of the time during a sample interval (L90, L50, L10, etc.). For example, L10 equals the level exceeded 10 percent of the time. A-2 ACOUSTICAL TERMINOLOGY NOISE EXPOSURE CONTOURS: Lines drawn about a noise source indicating constant levels of noise exposure. CNEL and DNL contours are frequently utilized to describe community exposure to noise. NOISE LEVEL REDUCTION (NLR): The noise reduction between indoor and outdoor environments or between two rooms that is the numerical difference, in decibels, of the average sound pressure levels in those areas or rooms. A measurement of Anoise level reduction” combines the effect of the transmission loss performance of the structure plus the effect of acoustic absorption present in the receiving room. SEL or SENEL: Sound Exposure Level or Single Event Noise Exposure Level. The level of noise accumulated during a single noise event, such as an aircraft overflight, with reference to a duration of one second. More specifically, it is the time‐integrated A‐weighted squared sound pressure for a stated time interval or event, based on a reference pressure of 20 micropascals and a reference duration of one second. SOUND LEVEL: 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 response of the human ear and gives good correlation with subjective reactions to noise. SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASS (STC): The single‐number rating of sound transmission loss for a construction element (window, door, etc.) over a frequency range where speech intelligibility largely occurs. APPENDIX C TRAFFIC NOISE MODELING CALCULATIONS WJV Acoustics, IncFHWA-RD-77-108Calculation SheetsJuly 14, 2022Project #: 22-23Contour Levels (dB) 60 65 70 75Description: ExistingLdn/Cnel: LdnSite Type: SoftSegment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT %Day %Evening %Night %Med%Heavy Speed Distance Offset1Monterey s/o 10th R-1 8900 90 10 2 2 35 1152Alexander n/o 10th R-2 3870 90 10 2 2 35 1203Chestnut n/o 10th R-3 6010 90 10 2 2 35 954SR 152 w/o Holsclaw R-4 17170 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 2005Holsclaw n/o SR 152 R-5 580 90 10 2 2 35 806SR 152 e/o Holsclaw R-61717083172.7 14.3 50 1357Frazier Lake Rd s/o SR 152 R-7 7860 90 10 2 2 35 1008SR 152 e/o Frazier Lake 10870 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 759Monterey n/o Luchessa 8880 90 10 2 2 35 9510Luchessa w/o Monterey 9820 90 10 2 2 35 90 WJV Acoustics, IncFHWA-RD-77-108Calculation SheetsJuly 14, 2022Project #: 22-23Contour Levels (dB) 60 65 70 75Description: Existing + ProjectLdn/Cnel: LdnSite Type: SoftSegment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT %Day %Evening %Night %Med%Heavy Speed Distance Offset1Monterey s/o 10th R-1 9130 90 10 2 2 35 1152Alexander n/o 10th R-2 3870 90 10 2 2 35 1203Chestnut n/o 10th R-3 6010 90 10 2 2 35 954SR 152 w/o Holsclaw R-4 17600 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 2005Holsclaw n/o SR 152 R-5 580 90 10 2 2 35 806SR 152 e/o Holsclaw R-61760083172.7 14.3 50 1357Frazier Lake Rd s/o SR 152 R-7 7960 90 10 2 2 35 1008SR 152 e/o Frazier Lake 11200 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 759Monterey n/o Luchessa 9110 90 10 2 2 35 9510Luchessa w/o Monterey 10050 90 10 2 2 35 90 WJV Acoustics, IncFHWA-RD-77-108Calculation SheetsJuly 14, 2022Project #: 22-23Contour Levels (dB) 60 65 70 75Description: 2040Ldn/Cnel: LdnSite Type: SoftSegment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT %Day %Evening %Night %Med%Heavy Speed Distance Offset1Monterey s/o 10th R-1 12420 90 10 2 2 35 1152Alexander n/o 10th R-2 4180 90 10 2 2 35 1203Chestnut n/o 10th R-3 6540 90 10 2 2 35 954SR 152 w/o Holsclaw R-4 22100 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 2005Holsclaw n/o SR 152 R-5 590 90 10 2 2 35 806SR 152 e/o Holsclaw R-62211083172.7 14.3 50 1357Frazier Lake Rd s/o SR 152 R-7 11960 90 10 2 2 35 1008SR 152 e/o Frazier Lake 12340 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 759Monterey n/o Luchessa 9110 90 10 2 2 35 9510Luchessa w/o Monterey 18530 90 10 2 2 35 90 WJV Acoustics, IncFHWA-RD-77-108Calculation SheetsJuly 14, 2022Project #: 22-23Contour Levels (dB) 60 65 70 75Description: 2040 + ProjectLdn/Cnel: LdnSite Type: SoftSegment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT %Day %Evening %Night %Med%Heavy Speed Distance Offset1Monterey s/o 10th R-1 12560 90 10 2 2 35 1152Alexander n/o 10th R-2 4180 90 10 2 2 35 1203Chestnut n/o 10th R-3 6540 90 10 2 2 35 954SR 152 w/o Holsclaw R-4 22530 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 2005Holsclaw n/o SR 152 R-5 590 90 10 2 2 35 806SR 152 e/o Holsclaw R-62253083172.7 14.3 50 1357Frazier Lake Rd s/o SR 152 R-7 12060 90 10 2 2 35 1008SR 152 e/o Frazier Lake 12670 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 759Monterey n/o Luchessa 9340 90 10 2 2 35 9510Luchessa w/o Monterey 18760 90 10 2 2 35 90 Transportation Summary of Findings and Analysis G APPENDIX Memorandum Date: December 7, 2022 To: Kraig Tambornini, City of Gilroy CC: Gary Heap, P.E., City of Gilroy From: Gicela Del Rio, T.E. Subject: Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis – Summary of Findings This memo summarizes the result of the Transportation Analysis (TA) completed for the proposed Gilroy Square Development, located at 6970 Camino Arroyo, as documented in the TA report dated October 10, 2022. The memo also discusses the necessary actions required from the project to address project deficiencies at intersections, as discussed with City staff on November 15, 2022. Lastly, the memo lists site design recommendations included in the TA report. The project, as evaluated in the October 2022 TA, consists of the following uses: • 2,600-square-foot (s.f.) fast-food with drive-thru restaurant (Burger King) • 16-fueling positions gas station with a 2,880- s.f. convenience store and 1,152-s.f. car wash • 112-room 4-story all-suites hotel (Residence Inn) • 88-room 4-story hotel (Holiday Inn Express) • 18,000-s.f. industrial warehouse • 27,500-s.f. industrial warehouse CEQA VMT Evaluation Results The VTA’s VMT Evaluation Tool was utilized to evaluate the effects of the project’s employment land uses (industrial warehouse land use) on VMT. The City’s TDF model was utilized to complete the VMT evaluation for the rest of the proposed land uses (retail). The model results show that the retail component of the project would cause a net decrease of 1,334 citywide VMT per day. Therefore, the proposed retail uses of the project would not result in a significant VMT impact, based on the threshold of significance for retail uses recommended by OPR. The proposed warehouse land use is estimated to generate a total of 110 daily trips. Based on OPR’s small project screening threshold, the proposed warehouse land use is consider a small project and is presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Therefore, the proposed project was determined to create a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 Roadway Capacity Analysis Results Intersection Level of Service Analysis Results and Required Project Action The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the project would create (under background plus project conditions) or contribute to (under General Plan plus project conditions) operational deficiencies at the intersections listed below. The project’s required actions described for each of the intersection deficiencies were identified by City staff as the action required to satisfy City policies. Background Plus Project – With Proposed Luchessa/Holloway Connection 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM peak-hour) Project Deficiency: PM peak-hour Possible Improvements: The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. Project’s Required Action: The signalization of this intersection is included in the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan (TCMP) and Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program. Therefore, the proposed project will be required to pay the applicable TIF as a fair-share contribution towards the implementation of the above improvement. It has been determined that the project’s contribution to this intersection’s deficiency is approximately 2% of the projected near-term growth (see discussion below). 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions (GP & with Luchessa/Holloway Connection networks) 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: Contribution to an operational deficiency during the PM and SAT peak hours Possible Improvements: The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal or by restricting left-turn access to and from Silacci Way. Project’s Required Action: The project is projected to contribute to a deficiency caused cumulatively by the proposed project and all projected growth that is part of the General Plan buildout conditions. Therefore, since the intersection is not part of the TIF Program, the project must make a fair-share contribution toward future improvements that would restore operations at the intersection to acceptable levels. It has been determined that the project’s contribution to this intersection’s deficiency is approximately 5-7% of the projected near-term growth (see discussion below). 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: Contribution to an operational deficiency during the AM and PM peak hours Possible Improvements: Same as above. Project’s Required Action: Same as above. Intersection Operations Analysis Results The results of the queue analysis show that the proposed project would contribute to the projected queue length storage capacity deficiencies under background plus project conditions for the following turn-movements: 6. Camino Arroyo and SR 152 – Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 Northbound Left-Turn Movement (SAT peak-hour) Project deficiency: increase queue length by 4 vehicles per lane Possible Improvements: No feasible improvement due to back-to-back left-turn pockets with the upstream intersection at Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing. Westbound Left-turn movement (SAT peak-hour) Project deficiency: increase queue length by 4 vehicles per lane Possible Improvements: The possible extension of the existing left-turn pockets would affect the approach taper separating the westbound left-turn pockets and the northbound left-turn receiving/acceleration lane at the intersection of Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152). Northbound Right-Turn Movement (PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: increase queue length by 4 vehicles Possible Improvements: The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound right-turn lane an additional 125 feet, for a total of 250 feet. The extension of the northbound right-turn lane would require widening of the east side of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage. The above queue storage deficiencies at this intersection will be addressed as part of the US 101/Tenth Street/SR 152 Interchange Improvements project, currently in the Project Initiation Document (PID) phase, being conducted by the Santa Clara County Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). Project’s Required Action: This intersection is included in the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan (TCMP) and Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program. Therefore, the proposed project will be required to pay the applicable TIF as a fair-share contribution towards the implementation of the above improvement. It has been determined that the project’s contribution to this intersection’s deficiency is approximately 19-22% of the projected near-term growth (see discussion below). 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing – Southbound left-turn movement (PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: increase queue length by 5 vehicles Possible Improvements: The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by providing a second southbound left-turn lane. Implementation of this improvement would require two receiving lanes on the east leg of the intersection (project site driveway) and the potential widening of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage, to provide the necessary right-of-way for the second southbound left-turn lane. Project’s Required Action: The project must implement the above-identified improvements. Projects Contribution to Potential Growth In addition to the proposed project, other development projects in the area would add traffic to the adjacent roadway network and would increase the need for the enhancement of the existing roadway network to accommodate the projected future traffic demand. Potential projects that would add traffic to the roadway network in the project area include: • Holloway Site – 426,500 square feet of warehouse and distribution facility land use • Luchessa Site – 1.1 million square feet of warehouse and distribution facility land use Trip generation estimates for the proposed project and above potential projects were compared to determine the percent contribution each of these projects represent of the potential traffic growth in Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 the project area. As shown on Table A below, the proposed Gilroy Square development (proposed project) would represent approximately 19% of the projected daily traffic growth and approximately 10% of the PM peak-hour traffic growth. The proposed project represents approximately 2% of the near-term growth projections at the intersection of Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue during the PM peak-hour (see Table B). The proposed project also is estimated to contribute approximately 5-7% of the projected near-term growth at the intersection of Silacci Way/Pacheco Pass Highway (see Table C) and approximately 19-22% of the projected near-term growth at the intersection of Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway during the PM and Saturday peak hours (see Table D). Other Recommended Improvements Operations at Driveways Recommendation: The following are recommendations for Driveway 2: • Widen Driveway 2 to provide two outbound lanes (as proposed) and two inbound lanes. Driveway 2 must also align with the west leg of the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection. • At the first internal access point from Driveway 2 (approximately 125 feet east of the driveway), the two inbound lanes should become a left-turn lane providing access to the gas station/fast-food restaurant and a shared right-and-through lane, providing access to the hotels and parking spaces. • Align the Driveway 2 drive aisle lanes, in particular, the inbound lane. If necessary, remove the parking spaces along the south side of the driveway aisle so that the inbound through lane from Driveway 2 aligns with the eastbound lane along the rest of the drive aisle. • At the first internal access point from Driveway 2, provide uncontrolled inbound access, while stop-controlling the rest of the approaches. Recommendation: It is recommended that the project considers providing a connection extending from Driveway 2 to Silacci Way, via the adjacent undeveloped site. This new connection would displace some of the northbound right-turning project trips at the intersection of Camino Arroyo/SR 152 to Silacci Way, eliminating the project deficiency and need to extend the existing northbound right-turn pocket while enhancing the adjacent roadway network. Sight Distance Recommendation: The design of the project site should ensure that design features, such as the landscaping, signage, bus stop and other physical features, along the project site frontage and at the project site driveways, in particular near Driveway 1, would not interfere with the sight distance at the proposed site driveways. Pedestrian On-Site Circulation Recommendation: A defined pedestrian connection should be provided between the north hotel (Residence Inn) building and the hotel parking spaces located next to the gas station. Project’s Effect on Bicycle Facilities Recommendation: It is recommended that the proposed project provide adequate bicycle parking supply on-site, based on VTA’s recommended bicycle-parking rates, to serve the potential demand Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 of the project. Based on VTA’s bicycle parking supply recommendations, a minimum of 18 long- term (Class I) and 21 short-term (Class II) bicycle parking spaces should be provided on-site. Project’s Effect on Pedestrian Facilities Recommendation: It is recommended that 10-foot sidewalks, required in commercial areas, be installed along the entire project site frontage. Recommendation: It is recommended that ADA-compliant curb ramps be installed at all corners of the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection. Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 Table A Growth Projections (Trip Generation Estimates) Proposed Land Use Rate Trip Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total Gilroy Square 1 Retail Land Uses #945 - Convenience Store/Gas Station 16 Vehicle Fueling Positions 265.12 4,242 16.06 129 128 257 18.42 148 147 295 17.01 136 136 272 Passby Reduction 75%-3,182 76%-98 -97 -195 75%-111 -110 -221 75%-102 -102 -204 #934 - Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window 2,600 s.f.467.48 1,215 44.61 59 57 116 33.03 45 41 86 55.25 73 71 144 Passby Reduction 55%-668 50%-30 -29 -59 55%-25 -23 -48 55%-40 -39 -79 Retail Total (Prior to Reductions)5,457 188 185 373 193 188 381 209 207 416 Hotel and Retail Internal Reduction -85 -3 -4 -7 -4 -3 -7 -5 -5 -10 Hotel Land Uses #311 - All Suites Hotel 112 Rooms 4.40 493 0.34 20 18 38 0.36 20 20 40 0.53 29 31 60 #312 - Business Hotel 88 Rooms 4.02 354 0.36 12 20 32 0.31 15 12 27 0.46 19 21 40 Hotel Total (Prior to Reductions)847 32 38 70 35 32 67 48 52 100 Hotel and Retail Internal Reduction 10%-85 10%-3 -4 -7 10%-4 -3 -7 10%-5 -5 -10 Employment Land Uses #150 - Warehousing 45,500 s.f.2.42 110 0.64 22 7 29 0.70 9 23 32 0.05 1 1 2 Employment Total (Prior to Reductions)110 22 7 29 9 23 32 1 1 2 Gilroy Square Total Net Project Trips:2,394 19%108 96 204 13%93 104 197 10%106 109 215 8% Holloway Site – (APN: 841-67-029) 2 High-Quality Warehouse and Distribution Center #155 - High-Cube Fulfillment Center Warehouse - Sort 0.89 1.22 1.59 Holloway Site Total:426,500 s.f.6.63 2,828 23%305 75 380 24%317 203 520 25%415 265 680 26% Luchessa Site – (APN: 841-73-007 and 841-73-008) 2 #155 - High-Cube Fulfillment Center Warehouse - Sort 0.89 1.22 1.59 Luchessa Site Total:1,088,000 s.f.6.63 7,213 58%778 190 968 62%808 519 1,327 65%1,057 677 1,734 66% Total Trips Generated by All Proposed Development 12,435 100%1,191 361 1,552 100%1,218 827 2,045 ####1,578 1,051 2,629 100% Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition 2021, and project description per site plan dated 2/14/22 by ACE Design LLC. 1 Gilroy Square TA report, dated October 10, 2022, by Hexagon. 2 Luchessa-Holloway TA report, dated November 11, 2022, by Hexagon. Size AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour Weekday Daily Trip Trip Trip Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 Table B Growth Projections at Automall Parkway/Luchessa Avenue (#13) Intersection (PM Peak-Hour) Int.#[Model#](Traffix#)13 70666 11592 Intersection Name:Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Peak Hour:PM Count Date:03/24/22 Movements North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Percent Scenario:RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total of Growth Existing Conditions 343 3 80 130 259 0 0 6 3 9 79 184 1,096 Existing Plus Approved (with Reassignment due to Luchessa-Holloway Connection)317 3 67 131 472 0 1 6 3 8 251 211 1,470 Luchessa-Holloway Project Trips (Option 2)0 0 3 2 295 0 0 0 0 0 458 0 758 98% Gilroy Square Project Trips (Option 2)0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 15 2% Total Projected Growth:0 0 3 2 303 0 0 0 0 0 465 0 773 Background + Gilroy Square 317 3 67 131 480 0 1 6 3 8 258 211 1,485 Bckgd + Luchessa-Holloway + Gilroy Square 317 3 70 133 775 0 1 6 3 8 716 211 2,243 Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 Table C Growth Projections at Silacci Way/Pacheco Pass Highway (#7) Intersection (PM and Saturday Peak Hours) Int.#[Model#](Traffix#)7 71180 50935 Intersection Name:Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Peak Hour:PM Count Date:11/05/20 Movements North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Percent Scenario:RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total of Growth Existing Conditions 0 0 0 0 656 15 17 0 10 9 1,257 0 1,964 With Luchessa-Holloway Connection (Option 2) Existing Plus Approved (with Reassignment due to Luchessa-Holloway Connection)0 0 0 0 1,143 16 29 0 11 2 1,597 0 2,798 Luchessa-Holloway Project Trips (Option 2)0 0 0 0 228 0 0 0 0 0 147 0 375 93% Gilroy Square Project Trips (Option 2)0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 30 7% Total Projected Growth:0 0 0 0 242 0 0 0 0 0 163 0 405 Background + Gilroy Square 0 0 0 0 1,157 16 29 0 11 2 1,613 0 2,828 Bckgd + Luchessa-Holloway + Gilroy Square 0 0 0 0 1,385 16 29 0 11 2 1,760 0 3,203 Int.#[Model#](Traffix#)7 71180 50935 Intersection Name:Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Peak Hour:SAT Count Date:11/07/20 Movements North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Percent Scenario:RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total of Growth Existing Conditions 0 0 0 0 857 12 10 0 0 4 1,066 0 1,949 With Luchessa-Holloway Connection (Option 2) Existing Plus Approved (with Reassignment due to Luchessa-Holloway Connection)0 0 0 0 975 13 22 0 0 0 1,197 0 2,207 Luchessa-Holloway Project Trips (Option 2)0 0 0 0 298 0 0 0 0 0 191 0 489 95% Gilroy Square Project Trips (Option 2)0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 28 5% Total Projected Growth:0 0 0 0 312 0 0 0 0 0 205 0 517 Background + Gilroy Square 0 0 0 0 989 13 22 0 0 0 1,211 0 2,235 Bckgd + Luchessa-Holloway + Gilroy Square 0 0 0 0 1,287 13 22 0 0 0 1,402 0 2,724 Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 Table D Growth Projections at Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway (#6) Intersection (PM and Saturday Peak Hours) Int.#[Model#](Traffix#)6 70834 10715 Intersection Name:Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Peak Hour:PM Count Date:03/24/22 Movements North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Percent Scenario:RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total of Growth Existing Conditions 617 229 222 118 619 39 81 184 465 230 785 548 4,137 With Luchessa-Holloway Connection (Option 2) Existing Plus Approved (with Reassignment due to Luchessa-Holloway Connection)605 263 238 133 1,078 51 95 200 541 246 1,110 541 5,101 Luchessa-Holloway Project Trips (Option 2)0 23 0 0 0 228 147 15 277 429 0 0 1,119 78% Gilroy Square Project Trips (Option 2)0 5 0 0 -68 81 83 6 142 134 -67 0 316 22% Total Projected Growth:0 28 0 0 -68 309 230 21 419 563 -67 0 1435 Background + Gilroy Square 605 268 238 133 1,010 132 178 206 683 380 1,043 541 5,417 Bckgd + Luchessa-Holloway + Gilroy Square 605 291 238 133 1,010 360 325 221 960 809 1,043 541 6,536 Int.#[Model#](Traffix#)6 70834 10715 Intersection Name:Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Peak Hour:SAT Count Date:03/26/22 Movements North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Percent Scenario:RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total of Growth Existing Conditions 711 292 250 187 770 74 89 304 596 365 750 783 5,171 With Luchessa-Holloway Connection (Option 2) Existing Plus Approved (with Reassignment due to Luchessa-Holloway Connection)696 322 255 180 868 81 100 316 673 367 882 770 5,510 Luchessa-Holloway Project Trips (Option 2)0 30 0 0 0 298 191 19 359 560 0 0 1,457 81% Gilroy Square Project Trips (Option 2)0 6 0 0 -71 85 85 6 150 148 -71 0 338 19% Total Projected Growth:0 36 0 0 -71 383 276 25 509 708 -71 0 1,795 Background + Gilroy Square 696 328 255 180 797 166 185 322 823 515 811 770 5,848 Bckgd + Luchessa-Holloway + Gilroy Square 696 358 255 180 797 464 376 341 1,182 1,075 811 770 7,305 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis Prepared for: EMC Planning Group October 10, 2022 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Hexagon Office: 8070 Santa Teresa Boulevard, Suite 230 Gilroy, CA 95020 Hexagon Job Number: 21GD06 Phone: 408.846-7410 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... i 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Existing Transportation Setting ....................................................................................................... 8 3. CEQA Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation .......................................................................... 16 4. Traffic Operations Analysis ........................................................................................................... 22 5. Other Transportation Issues .......................................................................................................... 73 6. Conclusions ................................................................................................................................... 93 Appendices Appendix A Traffic Counts Appendix B Approved Project Information Appendix C Volume Summary Tables Appendix D Intersection Level of Service Calculations Appendix E Signal Warrant Checks Appendix F Queue Length Calculations List of Tables Table ES 1 VMT Analysis Summary ..................................................................................................... ii Table ES 2 Intersection Level of Service Results .............................................................................. viii Table ES 3 Intersection Vehicle Queue Analysis Results ..................................................................... x Table ES 4 Freeway Segment Level of Service Results ..................................................................... xii Table ES 5 Freeway Ramp Analysis Results ..................................................................................... xiii Table 1 Equivalent Retail Land Use Calculations ............................................................................. 20 Table 2 Retail and Hotel VMT Analysis ............................................................................................ 21 Table 3 Project Trip Generation Estimates ....................................................................................... 28 Table 4 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Definition Based on Delay .................................... 54 Table 5 Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definition Based on Control Delay ................... 55 Table 6 Intersection Level of Service Results ................................................................................... 58 Table 7 Intersection Vehicle Queue Analysis ................................................................................... 63 Table 8 Freeway Levels of Service Based on Density ...................................................................... 71 Table 9 Freeway Segment Level of Service Results ........................................................................ 72 Table 10 Parking Evaluation ............................................................................................................... 86 Table 11 Freeway Ramp Levels of Service Based on Volume-to-Capacity Ratio .............................. 87 Table 12 Freeway Ramps Analysis Results ....................................................................................... 90 Table 13 Recommended Bicycle Parking ........................................................................................... 91 List of Figures Figure 1 Site Location .......................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2 Proposed Site Plan ............................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3 Existing Bicycle Facilities ..................................................................................................... 11 Figure 4 Existing Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................................... 13 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Figure 5 Existing Transit Services ...................................................................................................... 14 Figure 6 Study Intersections .............................................................................................................. 24 Figure 7 Project Trip Distribution ........................................................................................................ 29 Figure 8 Project Trip Assignment (Existing Roadway Network) ......................................................... 30 Figure 9 Project Trip Assignment (With Luchessa/Holloway Connection) ........................................... 32 Figure 10 Existing Intersection Lane Configurations and Traffic Control Devices ............................... 35 Figure 11 Existing Conditions Traffic Volumes .................................................................................... 39 Figure 12 Background Conditions Traffic Volumes .............................................................................. 41 Figure 13 Background Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – Existing Roadway Network ........... 44 Figure 14 Background Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – With Luchessa/Holloway Connection .............................................................................................................................................. 46 Figure 15 Year 2040 General Plan Conditions Traffic Volumes .......................................................... 48 Figure 16 Year 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – General Plan Roadway Network ................................................................................................................................................... 50 Figure 17 Year 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – With Luchessa/Holloway Connection .............................................................................................................. 52 Figure 18 Project Traffic at the Project Site Driveways (Without Luchessa/Holloway Connection) ..... 74 Figure 19 Project Traffic at the Project Site Driveways (With Luchessa/Holloway Connection) .......... 75 Figure 20 Proposed Fire Truck Circulation Plan .................................................................................. 81 Figure 21 Proposed Solid Waste Truck Collector Circulation Plan ...................................................... 82 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | i Executive Summary The purpose of this transportation analysis is to evaluate the potential transportation impacts associated with the proposed Gilroy Square Development project in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Gilroy. The project consists of the development of the project site with the following uses: a 2,600-square-foot (s.f.) fast-food with drive-thru restaurant (Burger King) a 16-fueling positions gas station with a 2,880- s.f. convenience store and 1,152-s.f. car wash a 112-room 4-story all-suites hotel (Residence Inn) an 88-room 4-story hotel (Holiday Inn Express) an 18,000-s.f. industrial warehouse a 27,500-s.f. industrial warehouse Scope of Study This transportation analysis has been prepared in accordance with the standards and methodologies set forth by the City of Gilroy, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Congestion Management Program’s Transportation Impact Guidelines (October 2014), and by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In 2013, the State of California passed Senate Bill (SB) 743, which requires jurisdictions to stop using congestion and delay metrics, such as Level of Service (LOS), as the measurement for CEQA transportation analysis. Therefore, in adherence to SB 743, the effects and impacts to the transportation network as the result of the proposed project were evaluated based on VMT. However, the City of Gilroy currently uses LOS as their adopted methodology for the evaluation of the effects of new development and land use changes on the local transportation network. In addition, the City is still required to conform to the requirements of the VTA, which establishes a uniform program for evaluating the transportation impacts of land use decisions on the designated CMP Roadway System. Therefore, in addition to the evaluation of VMT, this transportation study also includes a level of service analysis to evaluate the effects of the project on the citywide transportation system, including intersections, freeway segments, and freeway ramps. The level of service analysis is presented to determine conformance to General Plan transportation goals and policies. However, the determination of project impacts per CEQA requirements is based solely on the VMT analysis. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | ii CEQA VMT Evaluation Results The VTA’s VMT Evaluation Tool could be utilized to evaluate the effects of the project’s employment land uses on VMT. However, since the proposed project would include retail, restaurant, and hotel uses for which the VMT tool is not capable of estimating VMT, the City’s TDF model was utilized to complete the VMT evaluation for the proposed retail category uses. For the purpose of this analysis, and for consistency with the City of Gilroy General Plan, the VMT analysis considers OPR’s recommended impact threshold of 15% below the existing citywide average VMT per job, which equates to 15.97 VMT per job. Additionally, the analysis also considers OPR’s recommendation of a net increase in total VMT from baseline conditions as the threshold to identify potential VMT impacts for commercial/retail projects. The model results show that the retail component of the project would cause a net decrease of 1,334 citywide VMT per day. The work trips would account for an increase of 1,908 daily VMT but the shopping trips would account for a decrease of 3,241 daily VMT. Therefore, the proposed retail uses of the project would not result in a significant VMT impact, based on the threshold of significance for retail uses recommended by OPR. The VMT results for the proposed retail and hotel uses are presented in Table ES-1. Table ES 1 VMT Analysis Summary The proposed warehouse land use is estimated to generate a total of 110 daily trips. Based on OPR’s small project screening threshold, the proposed warehouse land use is consider a small project and is presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Roadway Capacity Analysis Results Intersection Level of Service Analysis Results The results of the intersection level of service analysis conducted for the study intersections are described below and summarized in Table ES-2. Background Plus Project – With Proposed Luchessa/Holloway Connection The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the project would have an operational deficiency at the following intersection under background plus project conditions and assuming the implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection: 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM peak-hour) Project Deficiency: PM peak-hour VMT Analysis (Citywide) No Project With Project Change (Proj - No Proj) Home-Based Work VMT 452,495 454,403 1,908 Home-Based Shop VMT 343,999 340,758 -3,241 Total VMT 796,495 795,161 -1,334 Source: City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting Model. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | iii 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the project would contribute to an operational deficiency at the following three intersections under 2040 General Plan with project conditions and the planned future roadway network: 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: AM and PM peak hours 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions with Luchessa/Holloway Connection The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the project would contribute to an operational deficiency at the following three intersections under 2040 General Plan with project conditions and assuming the Luchessa/Holloway connection: 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: AM and PM peak hours Intersection Operations Analysis Results The operations analysis results are described below and summarized in Table ES-3. The results of the queue analysis show that the proposed project would contribute to the projected queue length storage capacity deficiencies for the following turn-movements: 6. Camino Arroyo and SR 152 – Northbound Left-Turn Movement Project deficiency: SAT peak-hour Westbound Left-turn movement Project deficiency: SAT peak-hour Northbound Right-Turn Movement Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing – Southbound left-turn movement Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours Projected Deficiencies and Possible Improvements Described below are possible improvements to improve operating conditions for the projected deficiencies. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | iv Level of Service Deficiencies – Background Plus Project Conditions 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Deficiency: Background plus project (w/ Luchessa/Holloway connection) – PM peak-hour The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under background plus project conditions. Level of Service Deficiencies – General Plan Conditions 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152 Deficiency: General Plan plus project (GP and GP+Luchessa/Holloway connection) – PM & SAT peak hours The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal, or by restricting left-turn access to and from Silacci Way. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under General Plan plus project conditions. 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Deficiency: General Plan plus project (GP and GP+Luchessa/Holloway connection) – AM & PM peak hours The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under General Plan plus project conditions. Queue Storage Deficiencies 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Movement: Northbound left-turn Available queue storage: 350 feet (14 vehicles) per lane Change in queue length: from 16 vehicles under background conditions to 20 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: SAT peak-hour Deficiency: 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound left-turn pockets an additional 150 feet each. However, this improvement is not feasible due to the back-to-back left-turn pockets with the upstream intersection at Gilroy Crossing. Additionally, the queue deficiency is only projected to occur during the Saturday peak-hour, with the turn pocket providing adequate queue storage capacity to serve both the AM and PM peak hours. Alternatively, the intersection traffic signal phasing could be adjusted to provide additional green time to serve the projected northbound left-turn movement demand during the Saturday peak-hour. However, adjusting the signal phasing could result in other intersection movements experiencing longer queue lengths and intersection delays. Without the extension of the existing northbound left-turn lanes or the Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | v adjustment of the intersection signal phasing, the projected queue length for this movement would store within the northbound through lane and extend past the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection. Movement: Westbound left-turn Available queue storage: 150 feet (6 vehicles) per lane Change in queue length: from 4 vehicles under background conditions to 8 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: SAT peak-hour Deficiency: 2 vehicles (50 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing westbound left-turn pockets an additional 50 feet each, for a total of 200 feet. However, extending the westbound left-turn pockets at this intersection would affect the length of the approach taper separating the westbound left-turn pockets and the northbound left-turn receiving/acceleration lane at the intersection of Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152). Therefore, in order to be able to implement this improvement, the northbound left-turn movement from Silacci Way to westbound SR 152 may have to be prohibited. Movement: Northbound right-turn Available queue storage: 125 feet (5 vehicles) Change in queue length: from 6 vehicles under background conditions to 10 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: PM and SAT peak hours Deficiency: 5 vehicles (125 feet) The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound right-turn lane an additional 125 feet, for a total of 250 feet. The extension of the northbound right-turn lane would require widening of the east side of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage. The project site plan shows a proposed right-in and right-out driveway along Camino Arroyo located approximately 325 feet south of Pacheco Pass Highway, providing only approximately 75 feet of space between the extended northbound right-turn lane and the proposed driveway. 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Movement: Southbound left-turn Available queue storage: 175 feet (7 vehicles) Change in queue length: from 8 vehicles under background conditions to 13 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: PM and SAT peak hours Deficiency: 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by providing a second southbound left-turn lane. Implementation of this improvement would require two receiving lanes on the east leg of the intersection (project site driveway) and the potential widening of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage, to provide the necessary right-of-way for the second southbound left-turn lane. Freeway Segment Evaluation The results of the freeway level of service analysis are summarized in Table ES-4. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | vi Freeway Segment Level of Service Results The results of the freeway segment level of service analysis show that the proposed project is not projected to add traffic representing one percent (1%) or more of the segments’ capacity to the deficient study freeway segments, therefore, the proposed project would not create a level of service deficiency at any of the study freeway segments. Other Transportation Issues Sight Distance Recommendation: The design of the project site should ensure that design features, such as the landscaping, signage, bus stop and other physical features, along the project site frontage and at the project site driveways, in particular near Driveway 1, would not interfere with the sight distance at the proposed site driveways. Emergency Vehicle Access Recommendation: The project should widen the inbound lane at Driveway 2 (Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection) to meet the minimum width requirement for emergency access (20 feet), or provide a second inbound lane, to provide adequate inbound emergency vehicle access at this signalized intersection. Recommendation: The project must work with the City and the Fire Department to identify the best access route for emergency vehicles to provide access to the entire project site and adequate response times. Pedestrian On-Site Circulation Recommendation: A defined pedestrian connection should be provided between the north hotel (Residence Inn) building and the hotel parking spaces located next to the gas station. Freeway Ramp Analysis Results The results of the freeway ramp analysis are summarized in Table ES-5. Based on the calculated V/C ratios, all of the study freeway ramps currently operate at acceptable levels. Under background plus project conditions, based on the ramp capacities and traffic volume projections, it is projected that all of the study freeway ramps would continue to operate at acceptable levels. Project’s Effect on Bicycle Facilities Recommendation: It is recommended that the proposed project provide adequate bicycle parking supply on-site, based on VTA’s recommended bicycle-parking rates, to serve the potential demand of the project. Based on VTA’s bicycle parking supply recommendations, a minimum of 18 long-term (Class I) and 21 short-term (Class II) bicycle parking spaces should be provided on-site. Project’s Effect on Pedestrian Facilities Recommendation: It is recommended that 10-foot sidewalks, required in commercial areas, be installed along the entire project site frontage. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | vii Recommendation: It is recommended that ADA-compliant curb ramps be installed at all corners of the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | viii Table ES 2 Intersection Level of Service Results Study Existing Conditions Background Conditions Background Plus Project (Existing Roadway Network) Background Plus Project with Proposed LH Connnection Int. Intersection LOS Peak Count Warrant Warrant Delay Warrant Delay Warrant Number Intersection Control Standard Hour Date Delay LOS Met? 1 Delay LOS Met? 1 Delay LOS Change 2 Met?1 Delay LOS Change 2 Met?1 1 Monterey Road and Tenth Street Signal D AM 03/24/22 22.7 C+ -- 22.6 C+ -- 22.9 C+ +0.3 -- 22.8 C+ +0.2 -- PM 03/24/22 28.6 C -- 28.4 C -- 28.6 C +0.2 -- 28.5 C +0.1 -- SAT 03/26/22 29.8 C -- 29.4 C -- 29.6 C +0.2 -- 29.5 C +0.1 -- 2 Alexander Street and Tenth Street Signal D AM 03/24/22 17.2 B -- 16.7 B -- 16.7 B +0.0 -- 16.8 B +0.1 -- PM 03/24/22 16.9 B -- 17.8 B -- 17.9 B +0.1 -- 17.2 B -0.6 -- SAT 03/26/22 20.1 C+ -- 18.0 B- -- 17.8 B -0.2 -- 18.3 B- +0.3 -- 3 Chestnut Street/Automall Parkway Signal D AM 03/24/22 29.9 C -- 34.4 C- -- 34.2 C- -0.2 -- 34.5 C- +0.1 -- and Tenth Street PM 03/24/22 32.5 C- -- 38.0 D+ -- 38.1 D+ +0.1 -- 37.6 D+ -0.4 -- SAT 03/26/22 29.4 C -- 37.7 D+ -- 37.8 D+ +0.1 -- 37.3 D+ -0.4 -- 4 US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth Street Signal D AM 03/24/22 20.0 C+ -- 21.1 C+ -- 21.4 C+ +0.3 -- 21.5 C+ +0.4 -- PM 03/24/22 22.8 C+ -- 26.0 C -- 26.5 C +0.5 -- 25.7 C -0.3 -- SAT 03/26/22 27.9 C -- 29.9 C -- 30.5 C +0.6 -- 30.2 C +0.3 -- 5 US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 03/24/22 8.1 A -- 9.0 A -- 9.1 A +0.1 -- 8.7 A -0.3 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 03/24/22 8.3 A -- 10.1 B+ -- 10.5 B+ +0.4 -- 9.8 A -0.3 -- SAT 03/26/22 9.9 A -- 10.7 B+ -- 11.0 B+ +0.3 -- 10.6 B+ -0.1 -- 6 Camino Arroyo Signal D AM 03/24/22 21.1 C+ -- 18.2 B- -- 20.4 C+ +2.2 -- 20.8 C+ +2.6 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 03/24/22 32.4 C- -- 41.8 D -- 45.1 D +3.3 -- 38.3 D+ -3.5 -- SAT 03/26/22 55.4 E+--59.9 E+--63.3 E +3.4 --60.5 E +0.6 -- 7 Silacci Way One-Way Stop D AM 11/05/20 0.2 A+ -- 0.3 A+ No 0.3 A+ +0.0 -- 0.3 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 11/05/20 0.5 A+ -- 1.5 A+ No 1.6 A+ +0.1 -- 0.8 A+ -0.7 -- SAT 11/05/20 0.1 A+ -- 0.1 A+ No 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- 0.2 A+ +0.1 -- One-Way Stop E AM 11/05/20 16.5 C No 36.0 E No 37.0 E +1.0 No 28.8 D -7.2 No (Worst Approach) PM 11/05/20 26.4 D No >120 F No >120 F >120 No 51.3 F -83.6 No SAT 11/07/20 12.4 B No 13.3 B No 13.4 B +0.1 No 13.5 B +0.2 No 8 Cameron Boulevard Signal D AM 03/24/22 5.4 A -- 7.1 A -- 7.0 A -0.1 -- 6.7 A -0.4 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 11/05/20 7.8 A -- 14.6 B -- 14.7 B +0.1 -- 12.7 B -1.9 -- SAT 11/07/20 7.3 A -- 8.5 A -- 8.4 A -0.1 -- 8.1 A -0.4 -- 9 Gilroy Foods Signal D AM 11/05/20 9.2 A -- 9.1 A -- 9.0 A -0.1 -- 10.4 B+ +1.3 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 11/05/20 10.2 B+ -- 10.9 B+ -- 10.9 B+ +0.0 -- 11.4 B+ +0.5 -- SAT 11/07/20 5.5 A -- 3.2 A -- 3.2 A +0.0 -- 7.2 A +4.0 -- 10 Holsclaw Road One-Way Stop D AM 03/24/22 0.1 A+ -- 0.1 A+ No 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 03/24/22 0.8 A+ -- 1.0 A+ No 1.0 A+ +0.0 -- 0.9 A+ -0.1 -- SAT 03/24/22 0.4 A+ -- 0.4 A+ No 0.4 A+ +0.0 -- 0.4 A+ +0.0 -- One-Way Stop E AM 03/24/22 17.0 C No 19.2 C No 19.7 C +0.5 No 19.5 C +0.3 No (Worst Approach) PM 03/24/22 35.0 E No 50.4 F No 53.1 F +2.7 No 49.8 E -0.6 No SAT 03/26/22 33.1 D No 38.7 E No 40.1 E +1.4 No 37.9 E -0.8 No 11 Frazier Lake Road Signal D AM 03/24/22 14.9 B -- 15.3 B -- 15.4 B +0.1 -- 15.8 B +0.5 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 03/24/22 8.2 A -- 7.8 A -- 7.8 A +0.0 -- 7.8 A +0.0 -- SAT 03/26/22 10.0 B+ -- 10.2 B+ -- 10.2 B+ +0.0 -- 10.2 B+ +0.0 -- 12 Monterey Road and Luchessa Avenue Signal D AM 03/24/22 26.1 C -- 26.6 C -- 26.6 C +0.0 -- 26.0 C -0.6 -- PM 03/24/22 35.5 D+ -- 39.5 D -- 39.5 D +0.0 -- 38.0 D+ -1.5 -- SAT 03/26/22 22.8 C+ -- 23.7 C -- 23.7 C +0.0 -- 23.8 C +0.1 -- 13 Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue One-Way Stop D AM 03/24/22 6.4 A -- 6.9 A- -- 6.9 A- +0.0 -- 7.0 A- +0.1 -- (Average Delay) PM 03/24/22 7.4 A- -- 7.9 A- -- 7.9 A- +0.0 -- 8.3 A- +0.4 -- SAT 03/24/22 7.2 A- -- 7.5 A- -- 7.5 A- +0.0 -- 6.3 A -1.2 -- One-Way Stop E AM 03/24/22 22.2 C Yes 25.0 C Yes 25.0 C +0.0 Yes 34.7 D +9.7 Yes (Worst Approach) PM 03/24/22 25.7 D Yes 29.4 D Yes 29.4 D +0.0 Yes 52.2 F +22.8 Yes SAT 03/26/22 15.8 C No 17.9 C Yes 17.9 C +0.0 Yes 18.2 C +0.3 Yes 14 US 101 SB Ramps and Monterey Road Signal D AM 03/24/22 12.0 B -- 12.0 B+ -- 12.0 B+ +0.0 -- 12.0 B+ +0.0 -- PM 03/24/22 22.2 C+ -- 22.1 C+ -- 22.1 C+ +0.0 -- 22.2 C+ +0.1 -- SAT 03/26/22 20.2 C+ -- 19.9 B- -- 19.9 B- +0.0 -- 20.2 C+ +0.3 -- 15 Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 03/24/22 18.9 B- -- 18.8 B- -- 18.8 B- +0.0 -- 18.7 B- -0.1 -- PM 03/24/22 23.8 C -- 25.2 C -- 25.2 C +0.0 -- 25.7 C +0.5 -- SAT 03/26/22 26.1 C -- 26.4 C -- 26.4 C +0.0 -- 26.5 C +0.1 -- 16 Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Signal D AM 03/24/22 13.4 B -- 13.3 B -- 19.6 B- +6.3 -- 22.5 C+ +9.2 -- PM 03/24/22 16.1 B -- 15.8 B -- 24.8 C +9.0 -- 23.1 C +7.3 -- SAT 03/26/22 18.1 B- -- 18.3 B- -- 27.6 C +9.3 -- 26.2 C +7.9 -- 17 Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road All-Way Stop D AM 03/24/22 7.7 A No 7.7 A No 7.8 A +0.1 No 8.6 A +0.9 No PM 03/24/22 7.8 A No 7.8 A No 7.9 A +0.1 No 11.2 B +3.4 Yes SAT 03/26/22 8.1 A No 8.1 A No 8.1 A +0.0 No 10.0 A +1.9 No 18 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.5 A +8.5 No and Holloway Road PM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.2 B +12.2 Yes SAT Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.0 A +9.0 No 19 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- and Luchessa Avenue PM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SAT Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 20 Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue All-Way Stop D AM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.6 A +9.6 No PM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 13.8 B +13.8 Yes SAT Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.1 A +8.1 No Notes: Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the City's current level of service standard. - Denotes project deficiency based on City of Gilroy criteria. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | ix Table ES 2 (Continued) Intersection Level of Service Results Study 2040 General Plan (No Project) Conditions General Plan Plus Project (GP Roadway Network) General Plan Plus Project with Proposed LH Connnection Int. Intersection LOS Peak Warrant Delay Warrant Warrant Number Intersection Control Standard Hour Delay LOS Met? 1 Delay LOS Change 2 Met?1 Delay LOS Met? 1 1 Monterey Road and Tenth Street Signal D AM 23.6 C -- 23.6 C +0.0 -- PM 29.3 C -- 29.5 C +0.2 -- SAT 32.6 C- -- 32.9 C- +0.3 -- 2 Alexander Street and Tenth Street Signal D AM 20.3 C+ -- 20.3 C+ +0.0 -- PM 16.4 B -- 16.4 B +0.0 -- SAT 21.5 C+ -- 21.5 C+ +0.0 -- 3 Chestnut Street/Automall Parkway Signal D AM 32.1 C- -- 31.9 C -0.2 -- and Tenth Street PM 36.2 D+ -- 36.3 D+ +0.1 -- SAT 31.5 C -- 31.6 C +0.1 -- 4 US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth Street Signal D AM 20.6 C+ -- 20.6 C+ +0.0 -- PM 22.4 C+ -- 22.2 C+ -0.2 -- SAT 27.6 C -- 27.4 C -0.2 -- 5 US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 11.5 B+ -- 11.3 B+ -0.2 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 12.8 B -- 12.7 B -0.1 -- SAT 14.8 B -- 14.7 B -0.1 -- 6 Camino Arroyo Signal D AM 21.4 C+ -- 22.5 C+ +1.1 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 34.8 C- -- 34.1 C- -0.7 -- SAT 80.2 F --75.2 E- -5.0 -- 7 Silacci Way One-Way Stop D AM 0.5 A+ -- 0.5 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 3.3 A+ -- 8.4 A- +5.1 -- SAT 1.5 A+ -- 3.8 A +2.3 -- One-Way Stop E AM 22.7 C No 23.2 C +0.5 No (Worst Approach) PM 80.9 F Yes >120 F +96.2 Yes SAT 42.5 E Yes 91.6 F +49.1 Yes 8 Cameron Boulevard Signal D AM 17.6 B -- 17.6 B +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 26.6 C -- 26.6 C +0.0 -- SAT 22.5 C+ -- 22.6 C+ +0.1 -- 9 Gilroy Foods Signal D AM 8.5 A -- 11.4 B+ +2.9 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 9.4 A -- 10.3 B+ +0.9 -- SAT 5.0 A -- 10.2 B+ +5.2 -- 10 Holsclaw Road One-Way Stop D AM 0.1 A+ -- 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 1.4 A+ -- 1.4 A+ +0.0 -- SAT 0.6 A+ -- 0.6 A+ +0.0 -- One-Way Stop E AM 24.8 C No 24.9 C +0.1 No (Worst Approach) PM 81.5 F No 80.6 F -0.9 No SAT 69.0 F No 68.6 F -0.4 No 11 Frazier Lake Road Signal D AM 36.6 D+ -- 35.2 D+ -1.4 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 8.7 A -- 8.5 A -0.2 -- SAT 9.9 A -- 10.0 B+ +0.1 -- 12 Monterey Road and Luchessa Avenue Signal D AM 29.6 C -- 30.1 C +0.5 -- PM 39.2 D -- 38.8 D+ -0.4 -- SAT 23.9 C -- 23.8 C -0.1 -- 13 Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue One-Way Stop D AM 29.5 D -- 32.8 D- +3.3 -- (Average Delay) PM 15.0 B- -- 15.3 C+ +0.3 -- SAT 6.5 A -- 6.3 A -0.2 -- One-Way Stop E AM >120 F Yes >120 F +24.7 Yes (Worst Approach) PM 86.7 F Yes 86.9 F +0.2 Yes SAT 20.8 C Yes 21.3 C +0.5 Yes 14 US 101 SB Ramps and Monterey Road Signal D AM 15.2 B -- 15.0 B -0.2 -- PM 31.6 C -- 31.1 C -0.5 -- SAT 22.8 C+ -- 22.7 C+ -0.1 -- 15 Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 82.7 F --85.2 F +2.5 -- PM 67.9 E --70.3 E +2.4 -- SAT 28.4 C -- 28.6 C +0.2 -- 16 Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Signal D AM 17.7 B -- 22.3 C+ +4.6 -- PM 20.7 C+ -- 22.8 C+ +2.1 -- SAT 23.8 C -- 26.4 C +2.6 -- 17 Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road All-Way Stop D AM 8.4 A No 8.5 A +0.1 No PM 9.6 A No 9.6 A +0.0 No SAT 10.2 B No 10.3 B +0.1 No 18 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.6 A No and Holloway Road PM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.2 B Yes SAT -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.1 A No 19 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.1 A No and Luchessa Avenue PM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.2 B Yes SAT -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.8 A No 20 Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue All-Way Stop D AM 12.0 B Yes 11.9 B --Yes 12.0 B Yes PM 29.5 D Yes 28.6 D --Yes 21.8 C Yes SAT 8.7 A No 8.7 A -- No 8.5 A No Notes: Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the City's current level of service standard. - Denotes project deficiency based on City of Gilroy criteria.Same as General Plan Plus Project Conditions (GP Roadway Network) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | x Table ES 3 Intersection Vehicle Queue Analysis Results US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth StreetUS 101 NB Ramps and SR 152Camino Arroyo and SR 152Southbound Left Northbound Right Northbound Left Westbound Left Northbound Right Eastbound RightSBL SBL SBL NBR NBR NBR NBL NBL NBL WBL WBL WBL NBR NBR NBR EBR EBR EBRMeasurement AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SATExisting Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 253 446 476 115 134 212 48 155 199 9 20 37 11 65 59 121 106 20695th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 1422275683815124146561695th %. Queue (ft./ln)2350 550 675 125 150 200 75 200 375 25 50 100 25 100 150 125 150 400Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YESBackground Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 309 492 474 173 178 223 59 178 216 9 20 37 11 65 59 147 149 23995th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 1624276784916124146681895th %. Queue (ft./ln)2400 600 675 150 175 200 100 225 400 25 50 100 25 100 150 150 200 450Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YESBackground Plus Project (No LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 328 509 494 184 188 234 106 228 270 49 60 80 55 116 110 258 251 35395th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 17 25 28 7 7 9 5 11 20 3 4 8 3 6 10 9 12 2595th %. Queue (ft./ln)2425 625 700 175 175 225 125 275 500 75 100 200 75 150 250 225 300 625Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YESNOYESNO NOYES YES YESBackground Plus Project (With LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 339 515 500 153 158 219 103 228 274 52 66 83 60 125 119 216 198 29595th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 18 25 29 6 7 8 5 11 20 3 4 8 3 7 10 8 10 2195th %. Queue (ft./ln)2450 625 725 150 175 200 125 275 500 75 100 200 75 175 250 200 250 525Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YESNOYESNO NOYES YES YES##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Notes:Vehicle queue calculated using the Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence level.NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound, EB = Eastbound, WB = Westbound, R = Right, T = Through, L = Left.Right-turn movements with overlapping protected left-turn phasing were adjusted manually to account for the right-turns on red.1 Vehicle queue calculations based on cycle length for signalized intersections and control delay for unsignalized intersections.2 Assumes 25 feet per vehicle in the queue. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | xi Table ES 3 (continued) Intersection Vehicle Queue Analysis Results Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Camino Arroyo and Holloway RoadL/H Connection and Holloway Road (All-way Stop)Southbound Left Westbound Right Eastbound Left Southbound Left Westbound Left Northbound LeftSBL SBL SBL WBR WBR WBR EBL EBL EBL SBL SBL SBL WBL WBL WBL NBL NBL NBLMeasurement AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SATExisting Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 -- -- -- 8.4 8.4 8.6 8.0 8.3 8.5 -- -- -- -- -- --Lanes 111------111111------------Volume (vphpl ) 23178209-- -- -- 424961204769-- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 268------111111------------95th %. Queue (ft./ln)250 150 200 -- -- -- 25 25 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- --Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 -- -- -- 125 125 125 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- --Adequate (Y/N) YES YESNO-- -- -- YES YES YES YES YES YES -- -- -- -- -- --Background Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 -- -- -- 8.4 8.4 8.6 8.0 8.3 8.5 -- -- -- -- -- --Lanes 111------111111------------Volume (vphpl ) 23178209-- -- -- 424961204769-- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 268------111111------------95th %. Queue (ft./ln)250 150 200 -- -- -- 25 25 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- --Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 -- -- -- 125 125 125 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- --Adequate (Y/N) YES YESNO-- -- -- YES YES YES YES YES YES -- -- -- -- -- --Background Plus Project (No LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 60 60 70 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.2 8.4 8.5 -- -- -- -- -- --Lanes 111111111111------------Volume (vphpl ) 221 382 435 64 68 74 42 49 61 42 56 70 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 71113334111111------------95th %. Queue (ft./ln)2175 275 325 75 75 100 25 25 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- --Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 Future Future Future 125 125 125 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- --Adequate (Y/N) YESNO NOYES YES YES YES YES YES -- -- -- -- -- --Background Plus Project (With LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 60 60 70 9.5 12.7 11.8 9.0 10.0 9.5 9.1 14.7 10.1 8.1 8.9 8.4Lanes 111111111111111111Volume (vphpl ) 214 376 426 64 67 73 109 201 215 40 55 70 93 329 170 2 1 195th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 7111333412211113211195th %. Queue (ft./ln)2175 275 325 75 75 100 25 50 50 25 25 25 25 75 50 25 25 25Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 Future Future Future 125 125 125 100 100 100 Future Future Future Future Future FutureAdequate (Y/N) YESNO NOYES YES YES YES YES YES##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Notes:Vehicle queue calculated using the Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence level.NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound, EB = Eastbound, WB = Westbound, R = Right, T = Through, L = Left.Right-turn movements with overlapping protected left-turn phasing were adjusted manually to account for the right-turns on red.1 Vehicle queue calculations based on cycle length for signalized intersections and control delay for unsignalized intersections.2 Assumes 25 feet per vehicle in the queue. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | xii Table ES 4 Freeway Segment Level of Service Results Peak Speed1# of Capacity Volume1Density Volume % of Volume % of# Freeway Segment Direction Hour (mi/hr) Lanes1(vph) (pc/h)(pc/mi/ln)LOS (vph) Capacity (vph) Capacity1 US 101 from Betabel Road to Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) NB AM 38 2 4,400 3,770 50 E 11 0.25 11 0.25NB PM 58 2 4,400 3,769 33 D 10 0.23 10 0.232 US 101 from Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) to Monterey Road NB AM 36 2 4,400 3,713 51 E 22 0.50 22 0.50NB PM 42 2 4,400 3,901 46 D 20 0.45 20 0.453 US 101 from Monterey Road to Pacheco Pass Highway NB AM 64 3 6,900 4,318 23 C 22 0.32 22 0.32NB PM 63 3 6,900 4,558 24 C 20 0.29 20 0.294 US 101 from Pacheco Pass Highway to Leavesley Road NB AM 59 3 6,900 5,596 32 D 35 0.51 35 0.51NB PM 59 3 6,900 5,494 31 D 38 0.55 38 0.555 US 101 from Leavesley Road to Masten Avenue NB AM 40 3 6,900 5,779 48 E 24 0.34 24 0.34NB PM 57 3 6,900 5,772 34 D 26 0.37 26 0.376 US 101 from Masten Avenue to San Martin Avenue NB AM 34 3 6,900 5,431 53 E 20 0.29 20 0.29NB PM 52 3 6,900 5,979 38 D 22 0.32 22 0.327 US 101 from San Martin Avenue to Masten Avenue SB AM 60 3 6,900 5,369 30 D 22 0.32 22 0.32SB PM 38 3 6,900 5,647 50 E 20 0.28 20 0.288 US 101 from Masten Avenue to Leavesley Road SB AM 67 3 6,900 2,626 13 B 26 0.37 26 0.37SB PM 66 3 6,900 5,533 28 D 23 0.33 23 0.339 US 101 from Leavesley Road to Pacheco Pass Highway SB AM 64 3 6,900 4,419 23 C 38 0.55 38 0.55SB PM 59 3 6,900 5,504 31 D 34 0.49 34 0.4910 US 101 from Pacheco Pass Highway to Monterey Road SB AM 64 3 6,900 4,225 22 C 19 0.28 19 0.28SB PM 30 3 6,900 5,154 57 E 22 0.32 22 0.3211 US 101 from Monterey Road to Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) SB AM 62 2 4,400 3,315 27 D 19 0.43 19 0.43SB PM 21 2 4,400 2,80467 F22 0.50 22 0.5012 US 101 from Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) to Betabel Road SB AM 62 2 4,400 3,212 26 C 10 0.22 10 0.22SB PM 58 2 4,400 3,726 32 D 11 0.25 11 0.251 Source: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Congestion Management Program (CMP) Monitoring Study, 2018. Although the CMP Monitoring report does not include count data for the Saturday peak-hour, for informational purposes, the Saturday peak-hour project traffic on the freeway is included.Bold indicates unacceptable LOS, or project traffic exceeding one percent (1%) of the segments capacity.Bold and boxed indicate adverse effect.Existing Plus Project Project Trips (Existing Roadway Network)Project Trips (w/ Luchessa-Holloway Connection) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | xiii Table ES 5 Freeway Ramp Analysis Results Interchange/RampPeak HourRamp TypeConstraint Point1ControlCapacity2 (vph)Volume3 (vph) V/C LOS4Volume (vph) V/C LOS4Volume (vph) V/C LOS4Volume (vph) V/C LOS4US 101 at Monterey RoadSouthbound Off-Ramp AM Diagonal Off 1 Signal 1,800 242 0.134 A 244 0.136 A 244 0.136 A 244 0.136 APM Signal 1,800 662 0.368 A 685 0.381 A 685 0.381 A 701 0.389 ASAT Signal 1,800 429 0.238 A 455 0.253 A 455 0.253 A 466 0.259 ASouthbound On-Ramp AM Diagonal On 1 Meter-Off 1,800 334 0.186 A 339 0.188 A 339 0.188 A 352 0.196 APM Meter-On 900 536 0.596 A 564 0.627 B 564 0.627 B 638 0.709 CSAT Meter-Off 1,800 517 0.287 A 549 0.305 A 549 0.305 A 564 0.313 ANorthbound Off-Ramp AM Diagonal Off1 Signal 1,800 499 0.277A538 0.299A538 0.299A596 0.331APM Signal 1,800 373 0.207 A 469 0.261 A 469 0.261 A 512 0.284 ASAT Signal 1,800 319 0.177 A 403 0.224 A 403 0.224 A 412 0.229 ANorthbound On-Ramp AM Loop On 1 Meter-On 900 437 0.486A438 0.487A438 0.487A413 0.459APM Meter-Off 1,600 292 0.183 A 321 0.201 A 321 0.201 A 223 0.139 ASAT Meter-Off 1,600 340 0.213 A 372 0.233 A 372 0.233 A 303 0.190 AUS 101 at Tenth Street/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152)Southbound Off-Ramp AM Diagonal Off 2 Signal 3,600 839 0.233 A 1,104 0.307 A 1,142 0.317 A 1,141 0.317 APM Signal 3,600 1,434 0.398 A 1,712 0.476 A 1,746 0.485 A 1,748 0.486 ASAT Signal 3,600 1,483 0.412 A 1,691 0.470 A 1,730 0.481 A 1,732 0.481 ASouthbound On-Ramp AM Loop On 1 Meter-Off 1,600 101 0.063 A 130 0.081 A 149 0.093 A 135 0.084 APM Meter-On 900 277 0.308 A 432 0.480 A 454 0.504 A 380 0.422 ASAT Meter-Off 1,600 219 0.137 A 255 0.159 A 277 0.173 A 262 0.164 ANorthbound Off-Ramp AM Diagonal Off1 Signal 1,800 325 0.181A520 0.289A542 0.301A482 0.268APM Signal 1,800 385 0.214 A 550 0.306 A 570 0.317 A 510 0.283 ASAT Signal 1,800 536 0.298 A 656 0.364 A 677 0.376 A 648 0.360 ANorthbound On-Ramp AM Diagonal On 1 Meter-On 900 592 0.658 B 617 0.686 B 652 0.724 C 652 0.724 CPM Meter-Off 1,800 869 0.483 A 1,038 0.577 A 1,076 0.598 A 1,076 0.598 ASAT Meter-Off 1,800 955 0.531 A 977 0.543 A 1,017 0.565 A 1,017 0.565 ANotes:1. The constraint point of a ramp is the location on the ramp that dictates how much traffic enters/exits the freeway. The constraint point determines the ramp's capacity. For freeway off-ramps, the constraint point is at the ramp's diverging point from the freeway mainline. For non-metered on-ramps, the constraint point is at the ramp's merging point with the freeway. For metered on-ramps, the constraint point is at the meter.2. Typical capacities for diagonal and loop ramps are 1,800 and 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl), respectively. The capacity for non-metered ramps is determined based on the number of lanes at the ramp's constraint point. The capacity for metered on-ramps was assumed to be 900 vph (Caltrans District 4 maximum meter rate).3. Existing ramp volumes were interpolated from existing peak-hour turn-movement counts at the ramp intersections.4. The ramp level of service corresponds to the calculated ramp V/C ratios. Background Plus Proj(Existing Roadway Network)Background Plus Proj (Luchessa/Holloway Connection)Existing ConditionsBackground Conditions Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 1 1. Introduction This report presents the results of a Transportation Analysis (TA) completed for the proposed Gilroy Square Development project located at 6970 Camino Arroyo in the City of Gilroy, California. The project site consists of an undeveloped 10.18-acre site bounded by Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) to the north, Camino Arroyo to the west, Holloway Road to the south, and undeveloped land to the east. The proposed project would be developed in three phases with the following land uses: Phase 1 – a 2,600-square-foot (s.f.) fast-food with drive-thru restaurant (Burger King) a 16-fueling positions gas station with a 2,880- s.f. convenience store and 1,152-s.f. car wash a 112-room 4-story all-suites hotel (Residence Inn) Phase 2 – an 88-room 4-story hotel (Holiday Inn Express) Phase 3 – an 18,000-s.f. industrial warehouse a 27,500-s.f. industrial warehouse Access to the project site would be provided via four driveways along Camino Arroyo (three existing driveway cuts and one proposed new driveway) and one along Holloway Road (existing). It should be noted that the project site, along with the parcel south of the project site along Holloway Road, was evaluated with potential development as Phase II of the Regency Centers Gilroy Crossing shopping center project in 2002 (Regency Centers Traffic Impact Analysis, by Hexagon). The Regency Centers Phase I project is located in the southwest corner of the Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway intersection, across the street from the project site, and is completed and occupied (Gilroy Crossing shopping center). Land Use and Zoning Conformance The City of Gilroy General Plan land use designation for the project site is General Industrial. The Zoning Map designation for the site is Highway Commercial (HC) and General Industrial (M2). Therefore, the development of the project site, as proposed, will require a General Plan amendment and Zoning amendment. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 2 Roadway Network Under the current roadway network, all access to the project sites is provided via Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) and Camino Arroyo. In the 2002 Regency Centers TIA, it was determined that in order to provide the additional capacity required to serve Phase II of the Regency Centers project (now the proposed project), a roadway connection from the project area to the south would be required. The adopted City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan includes roadway improvements throughout the city that will support the projected growth associated with the buildout of the General Plan. Some of these planned improvements would directly affect the project area by changing travel patterns. Planned roadway network improvements in the project area include: The extension of Luchessa Avenue from its current terminus point at Rossi Lane eastward to connect to the future Cameron Boulevard extension. The extension of Cameron Boulevard to the north to connect to Marcella Avenue at Leavesley Road and to the south to connect to and past the Luchessa Avenue extension, terminating at the Southside Drive extension. The extension of Rossi Lane from its current terminus point at Luchessa Avenue northward to connect to Holloway Road. The planned Rossi Lane extension would provide a second access route between the project site area and the south and southwest parts of Gilroy via Holloway Road, Rossi Lane, and Luchessa Avenue. From conversations with City staff, a more feasible option for the planned Rossi Lane extension would be a new roadway from Holloway Road, parallel to/west of Camino Arroyo/Venture Way and the existing UNFI building, and connecting to Luchessa Avenue at its planned extension, approximately 1,900 feet east of Rossi Lane. This new north/south roadway connection is referred to within this report as the Luchessa/Holloway connection. The Luchessa/Holloway connection would replace the planned Rossi Lane extension to Holloway Road included in the General Plan roadway network. Therefore, this study will evaluate operations of the proposed project under the current roadway network (near-term conditions) and assuming the construction of a new roadway providing a direct connection between Luchessa Avenue and Holloway Road (near-term and General Plan conditions). As specified in the Gilroy 2040 General Plan (Chapter 3, Mobility), the addition or deletion of planned roadways will require a General Plan Amendment. The project site location and surrounding study area are shown on Figure 1. The site plan is shown on Figure 2. Transportation Analysis Scope The purpose of this transportation analysis is to evaluate the potential transportation impacts associated with the increase in traffic due to the proposed project in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Gilroy. The TA consists of a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) required vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) analysis and a supplemental traffic operations analysis that demonstrates the project’s consistency with the City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan goals and policies. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 3 Figure 1 Site Location 101= City of GilroyLEGEND= Project Site Location Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 4 Figure 2 Proposed Site Plan A1.0.01PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIO NS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CAPARKI NG FOR 88 ROOM 4 STORY HOTEL (1 SPACE: 1 ROOM) = 97 SPACESPARKI NG ANALYSI S( HOLI DAY I NN EXPRESS & SUTES)PROJECT DATA ( HOLI DAY I NN EXPRESS)HOLI DAY I NN EXPRESSPROJECT DESCRI PTI ON:88 ROOMS 4 STORY HOTELASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURI SDI CTI ON :R1VA47' - 0" ( TOP OF PARAPET)AL LOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSI SOCCUPANCY CLASSI FI CATI ON:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTI ON:FI RE SPRI NKLERS:HEI GHT ( MAXI MUM)ACTUAL :4ACTUAL :STORI ES ( MAXI MUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841- 70- 049AREA:6.PARCEL-3 SI TE AREA6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CAPORTE COCHERE AREA 692 S. F. BUI L DING AREA BREAKDOWN16772 S. F. 1ST FLOOR AREA16772 S. F. 2ND FLOOR AREA16772 S. F. 3RD FLOOR AREATOTAL BUI LDI NG AREA 67780 S. F. .16772 S. F. 4TH FLOOR AREA= 5 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG PROVI DED:(INCLUDING ONE VAN ACCESSI BLE SPACES)DESI GNATI ON :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL49' - 6" ( TOP OF PARAPET)PROJ ECT DATA ( RESI DENCE I NN) RESI DENCE I NN PROJECT DESCRI PTI ON:112 ROOM 4 STORY HOTELASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURI SDI CTI ON :R1VA40' - 10" ( TOP OF PARAPET)AL LOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSI SOCCUPANCY CLASSI FI CATI ON:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTI ON:FI RE SPRI NKLERS:HEI GHT ( MAXI MUM)ACTUAL :4ACTUAL :STORI ES ( MAXI MUM)1.2.3.4.5.CI TY OF GI L ROY841- 70- 049PARCEL-2 AREA:6.PARCEL-2 SI TE AREA6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUI L DING AREA BREAKDOWN20642 S. F. 1ST FLOOR AREA20642 S. F. 2ND FLOOR AREA20642 S. F. 3RD FLOOR AREATOTAL BUI LDI NG AREA 82568 S. F. .20642 S. F. 4TH FLOOR AREADESI GNATI ON : COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL47' - 9" ( TOP OF TOWER )5TOTAL PAVED AREABUI L DINGS FOOTPRINTPROVI DED LANDSCAPE AREA TOTAL PAVED AREABUI L DINGS FOOTPRINTPROVI DED LANDSCAPE AREA 69913 S. F. ( 67. 37%)20642 S. F. ( 19. 90%)13210 S. F. ( 12. 73%)= 4 SPACES= 4 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG PROVI DED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG REQUIRED:70' R1, 70' A3 TABLE 504. 3 AL LOWABLE:LOT COVERAGE ( HOTEL)7.PARCEL-2 SI TE AREA15.PROVI DED:9.EXI TFI RE RESI STI VE CONSTRUCTI ON REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUI LDING USE:CODE YEAR/ TYPE :SPECI AL I NSPECTI ONS REQUI RED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUI RED:REQUI RED FI RE RESI STANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTI ON OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATI ON ON PROPERTYNO ( TABLE 602)YES YESHOTEL7 ( FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)HOURS OF OPERATI ON:70' R1, 70' A3 TABLE 504. 3 AL LOWABLE:LOT COVERAGE ( HOTEL)7.PARCEL-3 SI TE AREA8.15.PROVI DED:9.EXI TFI RE RESI STI VE CONSTRUCTI ON REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUI LDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :SPECI AL I NSPECTI ONS REQUI RED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUI RED:REQUI RED FI RE RESI STANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTI ON OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATI ON ON PROPERTYNO ( TABLE 602)HOTELNOHOURS OF OPERATI ON:= 4 SPACESTOTAL ELECTRICAL VEHI CLE ( EV) PARKI NG PROVI DED:VAN POOL PARKI NG PROVI DED= 4 SPACES LONG TERM BI CYCLE PARKI NG PROVI DED = 4 SPACES @ 2880 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREAPARKI NG REQUIRED FOR C- STORE: 1 SPACE PER 2 50 SQ FT AREA = 24 SPACESTOTAL PARKI NG PROVI DEDPARKI NG ANALYSI S { ( N) C- STORE}PROJECT DATA ( C- STORE)C-STOREPROJECT DESCRI PTI ON:C-STOREASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURI SDI CTI ON :M OCCUPANCY VA19' - 6" ( TOP OF PARAPET)AL LOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSI SOCCUPANCY CLASSI FI CATI ON:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTI ON:FI RE SPRI NKLERS:HEI GHT ( MAXI MUM)ACTUAL :1ACTUAL :STORI ES ( MAXI MUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841- 70- 049PARCEL-1A AREA:6.6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUI L DING AREA BREAKDOWN2880 S. F. C-STORE FLOOR AREADESI GNATI ON :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL4= 2 SPACES= 2 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG PROVI DED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG REQUI RED:LOT COVERAGE C-STORE7.TOTAL PAVED AREABUI L DINGS FOOTPRINTPROVI DED LANDSCAPE AREA 40811 S. F. ( 71. 39%)4242 S. F. ( 7. 41%)12154 S. F. ( 21. 20%)PARCEL 1A SITE AREA70' M TABLE 504.3 AL LOWABLE:15.PROVI DED:9.EXI TFI RE RESI STI VE CONSTRUCTI ON REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUI LDING USE:CODE YEAR/ TYPE :SPECI AL I NSPECTI ONS REQUIRED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUI RED:REQUI RED FI RE RESI STANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTI ON OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATI ON ON PROPERTYYES ( TABLE 60 2)YES YESC-STORE2 ( FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC,2019 CEC, 2019 CFC,2019 CALI FORNI A ENERGY CODE,2019 CALI FORNI A GREEN BUI LDI NG STANDARDS CODE& AL L APPROPRI ATE FI RE PROTECTI ON SYSTEMSTANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13, 20, 24, 72)24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATI ON:= 30 SPACESTOTAL PARKI NG REQUI REDPARKI NG REQUIRED FOR BURGER KI NG: 1 SPACE PER 1 00 SQ FT AREA PARKI NG ANALYSI S ( DRI VE- THRU BURGER KI NG)= 2 SPACES= 2 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG PROVI DED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG REQUIRED:= 30 SPACESTOTAL PARKI NG PROVI DEDPARCEL-1A SITE AREAPROJ ECT DATA ( DRI VE- THRU BURGER KI NG)DRI VE- THRU BURGER KI NGPROJECT DESCRI PTI ON:DRI VE- THRU RESTAURANTASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURI SDI CTI ON :A2 OCCUPANCYVANO19' - 0" ( TOP OF COPI NG)AL LOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSI SOCCUPANCY CLASSI FI CATI ON:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTI ON:FI RE SPRI NKLERS:HEI GHT ( MAXI MUM)ACTUAL :1ACTUAL :STORI ES ( MAXI MUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841- 70- 049PARCEL-1 AREA:6.PARCEL-1 SI TE AREA 35990 S. F. ( 0. 82 AC)6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUI L DING AREA BREAKDOWNDESI GNATI ON :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL2LOT COVERAGE BURGER KI NG7.TOTAL PAVED AREABUI L DINGS FOOTPRINTPROVI DED LANDSCAPE AREA PARCEL-1 AREA35990 S. F. ( 0. 82 AC)50 ' A2 TABL E 50 4. 3 AL LOWABLE:15.PROVI DED:9.EXI TFI RE RESI STI VE CONSTRUCTI ON REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUI LDING USE:CODE YEAR/ TYPE :SPECI AL I NSPECTI ONS REQUI RED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUI RED:REQUI RED FI RE RESI STANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTI ON OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATI ON ON PROPERTYNO ( TABLE 602)YES YESDRI VE- THRU' RESTAURANT3 ( FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC,2019 CEC, 2019 CFC,2019 CALI FORNI A ENERGY CODE,2019 CALI FORNI A GREEN BUI LDI NGSTANDARDS CODE & ALL APPROPRI ATE FI REPROTECTI ON SYSTEM STANDARDS ( e. g NFPA13, 20, 24, 72)HOURS OF OPERATI ON:2600 S. F. BURGER KI NG FLOOR AREA48 ( FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)NO ( TABLE 602)CAR WASH AREA1152 S. F. 1 PARKI NG PER EMPL OYEE @ 4 EMPL OYEES = 4 SPACES= 26 SPACES24554 S. F. ( 68. 3%)2600 S. F. ( 7. 2%)8836 S. F. ( 24. 5%)PARKI NG REQUIRED FOR CAR WASH: 1 SPACE PER 250 SQ FT AREA = 17 SPACESGROSS PARKI NG REQUI RED103765 S. F. ( 2. 3 AC) 103765 S. F. ( 2. 3 AC) 57207 S. F. ( 1. 31 AC)57207 S. F. ( 1. 31 AC)CANOPY AREA6679 S. F. PARKI NG ANALYSIS(RESIDENCE INN)a) PARKI NG FOR 112 ROOMS 4 STORY HOTEL (1 SPACE:1 ROOM)= 112 SPACESTOTAL PARKI NG REQUI RED= 118 SPACESTOTAL PARKI NG REQUI RED1 PARKI NG PER EMPL OYEE @ 6 EMPL OYEES = 6 SPACES= 111 SPACESSTANDARD PARKI NG PROVI DED21' - 0" ( TOP OF EXTENDED COPI NG)21' - 10" ( TOP OF PARAPET)79264 S. F. ( 1. 81 AC) TOTAL PAVED AREABUI L DINGS FOOTPRINTPROVI DED LANDSCAPE AREA 52487 S. F. ( 66. 21%)12592 S. F. ( 15. 89%)14185 S. F. ( 17. 90%)PARCEL-3 SI TE AREA79264 S. F. ( 1. 81 AC) F. A. R PROVI DED FOR BURGER KI NG:16.GROSS FLOOR AREA/ SI TE AREA2600/ 35990=0. 072 F. A. R PROVI DED FOR C- STORE:GROSS FLOOR AREA/ SI TE AREA2880/ 57207=0. 05 F. A. R FOR RESI DENCE I NN :16.GROSS FLOOR AREA/ SI TE AREA82568/ 103765=0. 79 F. A. R PROVI DED FOR RESI DENCE I NN :67780/ 79264=0. 85 GROSS FLOOR AREA/ SI TE AREAPROPERTY LI NECENTER LI NEPARKI NG STRI PSBL DG L I NEACCESSI BLE AI SL EFI RE ACCESS ROUTELI GHTI NG SI NGLE HEAD POLE LIGHTFI RE DEPARTMENT CONNECTI ONFDCPROPOSED VAN POOL PARKI NG (SHALLBE MARKED WITH SI GNS RESTRICTI NGTHEI R USE TO CL EAN AI R VAN POOL)VPEL ECTRI CAL VEHICLE CHARGI NGSTATI ONEVTRUNCATED DOMESFI RE HYDRANT AS PER CIVIL PLANSBOLL ARDTRUCK ROUTEVI CI NI TY MAPILLUMINATED MONUMENT SI GNAGE ( 3 5'HIGH) MIN. 100 SQ. FT OF SEASONALCOLOR AT BASE OF SI GNMSI TE PLAN1ST FLOOR PL AN ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)2ND FLOOR PL AN ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)4TH FLOOR PL AN ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)ROOF PLAN ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)1ST FLOOR PL AN ( RESI DENCE- I NN) 3RD FLOOR PL AN ( RESI DENCE- I NN) ROOF PLAN ( RESI DENCE- I NN) EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS ( RESI DENCE- I NN) FLOOR PLAN C- STORE)EXTERI OR ELEVATI ON ( CANOPY)A1.0.0A1.1.0A1.1.1A1.1.2A1.1.3A1.1.4A1.1.5A1.1.6A1.1.7A2.1.0A2.1.1A2.1.2A3.2.0A4.1.0A4.1.1FLOOR & ROOF PLAN ( BURGER KI NG)EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS ( BURGER KI NG)A1.0.2TRASH DETAI L SA5.1.0 1ST FLOOR PL AN ( FUTURE ASSI STED LI VI NG)A5.1.1 2ND FLOOR PL AN ( FUTURE ASSI STED LI VI NG)A5.1.2A5.1.3A5.1.4A5.1.5 EXTERIOR ELEVATI ONS ( FUTURE ASSI STED LI VI NG)A6.1.0 1ST FLOOR PL AN ( FUT URE WAREHOUSE)A6.1.1 ROOF PLAN ( F UTURE WAREHOUSE)A6.1.2 EXTERIOR ELEVATI ONS ( FUTURE WAREHOUSE)3RD FLOOR PL AN ( FUTURE ASSI STED LI VI NG)4TH FLOOR PL AN ( FUTURE ASSI STED LI VI NG)ROOF PLAN ( FUTURE ASSI STED L I VI NG)SI TE PLANA1.0.0AROOF PLAN ( C- STORE)A2.1.3EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS (C-STORE)A2.1.4FLOOR PLAN & EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS ( CAR WASH)A2.1.5EQUPMENT PLAN ( CAR WASH)A3.1.0FLOOR PLAN ( CANOPY)A3.1.2ROOF PLAN ( CAR WASH)A3.1.13RD FLOOR PL AN ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)EXTERI OR VI EW (HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)2ND FLOOR PL AN ( RESI DENCE- I NN) 4TH FLOOR PL AN ( RESI DENCE- I NN) EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS ( RESI DENCE- I NN) A2.1.6A3.2.1A3.2.2A3.3.0A3.3.1A7. 0 . 0 SI TE PHOTOSA7. 0 . 1 SI TE PHOTOSCOVER SHEETGRADI NG PLANUTILITY PLANGRADI NG SECTIONSC1PHASI NG PLANCI VI L SI TE PLANSTORMWATER CONTROL PLANC2SOLI D WASTE HANDLI NG PLANFI RE TRUCK CI RCULATI ON PLANC4C5C7C3C6C9C8YES( NFPA 13) YES( NFPA 13 ) YES( NFPA 13) TOTAL PARKI NG REQUIRED = 881 PARKI NG PER EMPL OYEE @ 6 EMPL OYEES = 6 SPACES= 94 SPACESTOTAL PARKI NG REQUI RED@ 2600 GROSS FLOOR AREA= 12 SPACES@ 1152 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREA= 5 SPACESF. A. R REQUIRED FOR BURGER KI NG:F. A. R REQUIRED FOR C- STORE:16.2F. A. R FOR RESI DENCE I NN :4F. A. R REQUIRED FOR RESI DENCE I NN :16.4 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 5 Figure 2 (continued) Proposed Site Plan A1.0.0A1 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 6 CEQA Transportation Analysis Scope Like most other jurisdictions in Santa Clara County and the State, the City of Gilroy has historically utilized vehicular delay as the primary analysis metric to evaluate traffic impacts and potential roadway improvements to relieve traffic congestion that may result due to proposed/planned growth. However, with the adoption of Senate Bill (SB) 743 legislation, public agencies are required (effective July 2020) to base transportation impacts on Vehicle-Miles-Traveled (VMT) rather than level of service that typically uses delay as its metric. The change in measurement is intended to better evaluate the effects of development growth on the State’s goal for climate change and multi-modal transportation. Therefore, to adhere to the state’s legislation, all new development projects are required to analyze transportation impacts using the VMT metric. In accordance with CEQA, all proposed projects are required to analyze transportation as a component of environmental review using average trip length per resident and/or per employee as metrics (total VMT for retail/commercial projects). The CEQA VMT impact analysis was completed using the Valley Transportation Authority’s (VTA) VMT Evaluation Tool and the City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model. The City of Gilroy is currently developing the framework for new transportation policies based on VMT as the primary measure of transportation impacts. However, since the City has not formally adopted its own City-specific VMT policies, the City relies on VMT analysis methodology and impact thresholds recommended in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, December 2018, for the evaluation of projects. Traffic Operations Analysis Scope The current City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan, adopted in November 2020, uses Level of Service (LOS) as its primary metric for the evaluation of the effects of new development and land use changes on the City’s transportation network. Therefore, a traffic operations analysis based upon peak hour intersection level of service analysis is included to determine the project’s conformance with General Plan transportation goals and policies. The traffic operations analysis supplements the CEQA-required VMT analysis. However, the determination of project impacts per CEQA requirements is based solely on the VMT analysis. The traffic operations analysis includes the evaluation of weekday AM and PM peak-hour and Saturday peak-hour operations at selected intersections for the purpose of identifying operational issues (queuing, signal operations, and potential multi-modal issues) in the general vicinity of the project site. The traffic operations analysis also includes an evaluation of the effects of the project on other transportation issues relating to on-site access, on-site circulation, sight distance, parking, roadway segments, freeway segments and ramps, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities, and related safety elements in the immediate area of the project. The effects of the proposed development on traffic operations on the surrounding roadway system were evaluated following the standards and methodologies set forth by the City of Gilroy, the Gilroy 2040 General Plan, and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Congestion Management Program’s Transportation Impact Guidelines (October 2014). The VTA administers the Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Santa Clara County. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 7 Report Organization The remainder of this report is divided into five chapters. Chapter 2 describes the existing transportation system including the existing roadway network, transit service, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Chapter 3 presents the CEQA transportation analysis. Chapter 4 describes the traffic operations analysis and the project's effects on the transportation system and describes the recommended roadway improvements. An evaluation of other transportation issues, including site access and on-site circulation review, parking, freeway ramp analysis, and effects on bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities, are presented in Chapter 5. Chapter 6 presents the conclusions of the transportation analysis. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 8 2. Existing Transportation Setting This chapter describes the existing transportation system within the project area. It describes existing conditions for all of the major transportation facilities in the vicinity of the project site, including the roadway network, transit service, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Existing Roadway Network Regional access to the project site is provided via US 101 and State Route (SR) 152/Pacheco Pass Highway. Local access to the project site is provided by Tenth Street, Camino Arroyo, Holloway Road, Cameron Boulevard, Silacci Way, and Luchessa Avenue. These facilities are shown on Figure 1 and described below. US 101 is a six-lane freeway north of the Monterey Road interchange (in south Gilroy) and transitions to a four-lane freeway south of that point. US 101 extends northward through San Jose and southward into Salinas. This freeway serves as the primary roadway connection between Gilroy and Morgan Hill and other Santa Clara County communities to the north and between Gilroy and Salinas to the south. US 101 includes full-access interchanges at Leavesley Road, Tenth Street/SR 152, and Monterey Road in Gilroy. A fourth interchange at Masten Avenue, north of Gilroy in unincorporated Santa Clara County, serves the north and northwestern areas of Gilroy. Regional access to the project site is provided via the US 101 interchange at Tenth Street/SR 152. SR 152 (Pacheco Pass Highway) is a two- to four-lane east-west highway that extends to the east, where it is known as Pacheco Pass Highway, starting at the US 101 interchange at Tenth Street, over the Pacheco Pass to Interstate 5 and through Los Banos. West of Gilroy, SR 152 is known as Hecker Pass Highway and extends westward from the US 101 interchange at Leavesley Road via Monterey Road and First Street over the Santa Cruz Mountains to Watsonville and Highway 1. SR 152 connects the communities of Watsonville and Gilroy to the Central Valley via Interstate 5. Access to the project site would be provided via its intersection with Camino Arroyo. Tenth Street is a two- to six-lane arterial roadway that begins at Uvas Parkway and extends eastward to US 101, where it changes designation to Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152). Tenth Street has one lane in each direction with a two-way left-turn lane west of Church Street. Between Church Street and Monterey Road, Tenth Street consists of two lanes in each direction, then transitions to three westbound lanes and two eastbound lanes between Monterey Road and Alexander Street, three lanes in each direction with a landscaped median between Alexander Street and Chestnut Street, and again to two lanes in each direction east of Chestnut Street. Tenth Street is one of six freeway crossings Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 9 within Gilroy and it is proposed to be extended from its current terminus point at Uvas Parkway westward over Llagas Creek to connect to Santa Teresa Boulevard at the current Miller Avenue/Santa Teresa Boulevard intersection. Bike lanes are available along Tenth Street, between Monterey Road and Orchard Drive. Camino Arroyo is a four-lane north-south roadway that extends from Arroyo Circle, just north of Sixth Street/Gilman Road, to Venture Way, south of SR 152. Arroyo Circle extends northward to Leavesley Road along the east side of US 101, and in conjunction with Camino Arroyo, provides a north/south connection between Leavesley Road and SR 152. Camino Arroyo would provide direct access to the project site via one full-access driveway at its intersection with Gilroy Crossing and three limited-access driveways. Bike lanes are available along the entire length of Camino Arroyo, including along the western project frontage. Holloway Road is a two-lane east-west roadway that begins at its intersection with Brem Lane and continues eastward until its intersection with Silacci Way, where it terminates. Direct access to the project site would be provided via a full-access driveway along Holloway Road. Cameron Boulevard is a four-lane north-south roadway that currently extends from SR 152 south to Venture Way, where it terminates as an access road to the UNFI warehouse facility. Bike lanes are available along the entire length of Cameron Boulevard. The 2040 Gilroy General Plan indicates that Cameron Boulevard is planned to be extended from its current terminus point at SR 152 northward to Gilman Road, and continuing north to form the south leg of the Marcella Avenue/Leavesley Road intersection. Additionally, Cameron Boulevard is planned to be extended from its current southern terminus point southward to connect to a planned extension of Luchessa Avenue and terminate at Southside Drive. Fully implemented, the Cameron Boulevard extension would provide an alternative north-south connection (east of US 101) between the south and southwest parts of Gilroy (Luchessa Avenue), SR 152, and Leavesley Road. Luchessa Avenue is a two- to four-lane arterial roadway that begins at Miller Avenue and extends eastward approximately 1,700 feet past US 101, where it terminates at its intersection with Rossi Lane. Luchessa Avenue consists of one to two lanes in each direction with a landscaped median west of Thomas Road. Between Thomas Road and Church Street, Luchessa Avenue is an undivided two-lane roadway. Between Church Street and Monterey Road, Luchessa Avenue is a four-lane roadway with left-turn pockets. East of Monterey Road, Luchessa Avenue is an undivided two-lane roadway. Bike lanes are available along Luchessa Avenue, west of Monterey Road. The 2040 Gilroy General Plan indicates that Luchessa Avenue is planned to be extended from its current terminus point at Rossi Lane eastward to form the west leg of the Cameron Boulevard/Luchessa Avenue intersection. Fully implemented, the Luchessa Avenue extension would provide an alternative east-west connection (south of SR 152) between the southwest and southeast parts of Gilroy. Existing Bicycle Facilities Bicycle facilities are divided into three classes of relative significance: Class I Bikeways (Bike Path). 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 (Bike Lane). Class II bikeways are striped bike lanes on roadways that are marked by signage and pavement markings. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 10 Class III Bikeways (Bike Route). Class III bikeways are bike routes and only have signs to help guide bicyclists on recommended routes to certain locations. There are several bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the project site. These are listed below and shown on Figure 3: Class I Bikeways (Bike Paths) The nearest bike path to the project site is the Western Ronan Channel Trail. This trail is located on the western side of the Ronan Channel between Leavesley Road and Sixth Street. Class II Bikeways (Bike Lanes) Class II Bikeways in the vicinity of the project site are provided along the following roadways: Camino Arroyo/Arroyo Circle, along the entire length of the street Venture Way, along the entire length of the street Cameron Boulevard, along the entire length of the street Renz Lane, between 1000 feet west of Camino Arroyo and eastern terminus Sixth Street, between Maple Street and Camino Arroyo; between Hanna Street and Wren Avenue Chestnut Street, between Tenth Street and Sixth Street Tenth Street, between Monterey Road and Orchard Drive (Gilroy High School) Forest Street, between Eighth Street and IOOF Avenue Eigleberry Street, between Tenth Street and First Street Church Street, between Tenth Street and First Street Luchessa Avenue, between Monterey Road and Princevalle Street; between Thomas Road and Miller Avenue Class III Bikeways (Bike Routes) Class III Bikeways in the vicinity of the project site are provided along the following roadways: Monterey Street, between First Street and Eighth Street Sixth Street, between Hanna Street and Rogers Lane Existing Pedestrian Facilities The project area consists of a mixture of commercial and industrial land uses, and undeveloped land. Pedestrian facilities in the project area consist primarily of sidewalks along both sides of the road within all commercial areas. Crosswalks and pedestrian push buttons are available along three or more legs of all signalized intersections in the vicinity of the project site (with the exception of the intersection of Cameron Boulevard/SR 152, which only has a crosswalk along the south side of the intersection). The existing sidewalks, along with the crosswalks and pedestrian push buttons, provide a pedestrian connection between all shopping centers in the study area. However, most undeveloped and industrial use parcels have missing sidewalks, including along the entire project site frontage on Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road, creating an incomplete pedestrian network. Sidewalks are missing along the following roadway segments in the vicinity of the project site: Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 11 Figure 3 Existing Bicycle Facilities = Project Site LocationLEGEND= Class II Bike Lanes= Class III Bike Routes= Class I Bike Paths101NORTHNot to Scale Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 12 Camino Arroyo, along the east side of the roadway, starting approximately 370 feet south of Renz Lane to approximately 300 feet south of Holloway Road (including along the project frontage). Camino Arroyo, along the west side of the roadway between Holloway Road and 300 feet south of Holloway Road Holloway Road, along the north side of the roadway between Camino Arroyo and Silacci Way (including along the project frontage). Holloway Road, along the south side of the roadway between 900 feet west of Camino Arroyo and Silacci Way SR 152, along the entire south side of the roadway, east of Camino Arroyo, with the exception of an approximately 825-foot segment along the McCarthy Business Park frontage, west from Cameron Boulevard. SR 152, along the entire north side of the roadway, with the exception of an approximately 275- foot segment on the east side of Camino Arroyo. Silacci Way, along both sides of the roadway. Continuous sidewalks along the south side of SR 152 that run across the US 101 interchange connect the existing commercial uses along Camino Arroyo (east of US 101) with the land uses along Tenth Street, west of US 101. The existing pedestrian facilities in the study area are shown on Figure 4. Existing Transit Services Transit services in Gilroy consist of local, regional, and intercity bus services, rail services, and paratransit services. Existing transit service in Gilroy is provided primarily by Santa Clara County VTA buses. Caltrain commuter rail service, San Benito County express bus service, and Greyhound bus service also serve Gilroy. The existing transit services in the study area are shown on Figure 5. The project site is served by Local Route 84, which provides weekday and weekend service between the Gilroy Transit Center and Saint Louise Regional Hospital via Tenth Street, Camino Arroyo, and San Ysidro Avenue with approximately 60-minute headways during commute hours. Existing VTA bus stops serving Route 84 are located directly along the Camino Arroyo project frontage at the Gilroy Crossing and Holloway Road intersections. Additionally, the Gilroy Transit Station is located just over one mile northwest of the project site, along Monterey Road. Other bus transit services currently serving Gilroy, as of June 2022, include: Local Bus Route 85 provides weekday and weekend services between the Gilroy Transit Center and Saint Louise Regional Hospital via Sixth Street, Wren Avenue, Mantelli Drive, Leavesley Road, and San Ysidro Avenue with approximately 60-minute headways during commute hours. Local Bus Route 86 provides weekday-only services between the Gilroy Transit Center and Gavilan College via Tenth Street, Princevalle Street, Luchessa Avenue, Thomas Road, and Santa Teresa Boulevard between the hours of 7:45 AM and 3:34 PM with approximately 30-minute headways. Frequent Route 68 provides weekday and weekend services between the Gilroy Transit Center and the San Jose Diridon Transit Center via Monterey Road between 4:43 AM and 1:20 AM with approximately 15- to 30-minute headways during commute hours. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 13 Figure 4 Existing Pedestrian Facilities Holloway Rd= Project Site LocationLEGEND= Existing Crosswalk= Existing Sidewalk Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 14 Figure 5 Existing Transit Services NORTH Not to Scale 101Monterey RdFirst St T e n th S tS ix t h S tT h ir d S tL e a v e s le y R d Mur r ay AveLuchessa AveChurch StPr i nceval l e St Thomas RdMiller AveWren AveCa mi n o Ar r oy o Santa Teresa BlvdTenth StSan Ysi dr o AveN in th S tRenz LnGilroy Crossing Gilroy Transit Center LEGEND = Site Location = Local Bus RouteXX XXX XXX = Express Bus Route = Frequent Bus Route = Bus Stops = Rapid Bus RouteXXX = Caltrain Line and Station 85 84 84 85 85 86 84 168 68 568 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 15 Express Route 121 provides weekday services between the Gilroy Transit Center and the Lockheed Martin Transit Center in Sunnyvale with northbound service (three trips) during the morning commute period and southbound service (three trips) during the afternoon commute period with approximately 60-minute headways. This express route has scheduled stops at the Gilroy Transit Center, the Morgan Hill Caltrain Station, Old Ironsides Light Rail Station, and the Lockheed Martin Transit Center. Rapid Route 568 provides weekday services between the Gilroy Transit Center and the San Jose Diridon Transit Center via Monterey Road between 5:00 AM and 12:20 AM with approximately 30- minute headways during commute hours. San Benito County Express Bus Service (Caltrain and Gavilan College Shuttle) provides express bus service between Hollister and the Gilroy Transit Center Monday through Friday. Currently, five northbound (to Gilroy) shuttles run during the morning and evening commute periods, between 4:55 and 10:40 AM and between 1:15 and 7:35 PM, respectively. In addition, there are four southbound (to Hollister) runs in the morning between 7:05 and 11:50 AM and five runs in the evening between 2:00 and 8:20 PM. The schedule is coordinated with the Caltrain schedule to facilitate connections with Caltrain arrivals and departures. San Benito County Express Bus Service (Greyhound Shuttle) provides service between Hollister and the Gilroy Transit Center, (which serves as the Greyhound Bus Depot) on Saturdays and Sundays. There are currently two northbound (to Gilroy) and two southbound (to Hollister) runs in the morning between 7:30 and 11:10 AM and two northbound and two southbound runs in the evening between 12:05 and 6:35 PM. The schedule is designed to allow for connections to Greyhound service. Additionally, Caltrain provides train service from Gilroy to San Francisco, with limited-stop service at other stations along the peninsula corridor. Caltrain service to Gilroy is only provided on weekdays; weekend service south of San Jose is not available. Currently, as of June 2022, the Gilroy Caltrain station is served by three northbound trains in the morning and three southbound trains in the evening. The northbound trains have scheduled departures from the Gilroy Transit Center at 5:54 and 6:52 AM and the southbound trains have scheduled arrivals at the Gilroy Transit Center at 5:21 and 7:19 PM. Greyhound Lines, Inc. is an intercity, long-distance bus service offering services to over 3,700 destinations in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The Gilroy Transit Center also serves as the Greyhound Bus Depot in Gilroy. Greyhound buses operate from the Transit Center every day of the week. All of the above transit routes serve the Gilroy Transit Center, located in Downtown Gilroy, along Monterey Road. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 16 3. CEQA Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation This chapter provides an evaluation of the proposed project’s effect on Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 743, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 2019 Update Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) states that VMT will be the metric in analyzing transportation impacts for land use projects for CEQA purposes. VMT Evaluation Methodology VMT is the total miles of travel by personal motorized vehicles a project is expected to generate in a day. VMT measures the full distance of personal motorized vehicle trips with one end within the project. Typically, development projects that are farther from other, complementary land uses (such as a business park far from housing) and in areas without transit or active transportation infrastructure (bike lanes, sidewalks, etc.) generate more driving than development near complementary land uses with more robust transportation options. Therefore, developments located in a central business district with high density and diversity of complementary land uses and frequent transit services are expected to internalize trips and generate shorter and fewer vehicle trips than developments located in a suburban area with low density of residential developments and no transit service in the project vicinity. Local- serving retail projects also would result in shorter vehicle trips as new local-serving retail development typically diverts/shortens existing shopping trips, rather than generating new retail trips. In accordance with CEQA, all proposed projects are required to analyze transportation as a component of environmental review using average trip length per resident and/or per employee as metrics. The daily VMT per resident accounts for trips that start or end at the home. Daily VMT per employee is calculated based on trips made by people driving to and from work. However, non-residential and non- employment projects, such as retail and hotel projects, include both trips made by employees and patrons. Thus, for non-residential and non-employment projects, OPR guidelines recommend the evaluation of total VMT. To determine whether a project would result in CEQA transportation impacts related to VMT, VTA has developed a VMT Evaluation Tool to streamline the analysis for development projects. However, the VMT tool is limited to the evaluation of VMT for the general land use categories of residential, office, and industrial. For non-residential or non-office/industrial projects, very large projects, or projects that can potentially shift travel patterns, a Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) model, or other City-approved methods, must be used to determine project VMT. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 17 Thus, for the evaluation of this project, the proposed land uses were categorized into employment and retail land uses. The proposed warehouse land use was categorized as an employment use since its trip-making characteristics are mainly dictated by its employees. The proposed gas station/retail, fast- food restaurant, and hotel were categorized as retail uses since their trip-making characteristics are dictated by their employees and patrons. The VTA’s VMT tool was used to estimate VMT for the employment uses proposed by the project. However, since the proposed project would include retail, restaurant, and hotel uses for which the VMT tool is not capable of estimating VMT, the City’s TDF model was utilized to complete the VMT evaluation for the proposed retail category uses. VTA VMT Evaluation Tool The VTA’s VMT Evaluation Tool could be utilized to evaluate the effects of the project’s employment land uses on VMT . The VMT tool identifies the existing average VMT per capita and VMT per employee for the project area based on the assessor’s parcel number (APN) of a project. Based on the project location, type of development, project description, and proposed trip reduction measures, the VMT tool calculates the project VMT. Projects located in areas where the existing VMT is above the established threshold are referred to as being in “high-VMT areas”. Projects in high-VMT areas are required to include a set of VMT reduction measures that would reduce the project VMT to the greatest extent possible. City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting Model The City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting Model (also referred to as the Gilroy Model within this report) was utilized to complete the VMT evaluation for the proposed gas station/retail, fast-food restaurant, and hotel uses of the project. The Gilroy Model, built in 2014, was developed as an extension and refinement of the Santa Clara VTA Countywide TDF Model (VTA Model). The Gilroy Model is a subarea model of VTA’s Model and provides a more detailed roadway network and zone system within Gilroy. The Gilroy Model was last updated for the evaluation of the City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan and has a 2017 base year (based on VTA/ABAG Projections 2017) and a 2040 horizon year (based on City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan land use data). The Gilroy Model was used since it can estimate the diversion of traffic and change in traffic patterns due to the proposed project. VMT Policies and Impact Criteria A project’s VMT is compared to established thresholds of significance based on the project location and type of development. When assessing a residential project, the project’s VMT is divided by the number of residents expected to occupy the project to determine the VMT per capita. When assessing an office or industrial project, the project’s VMT is divided by the number of employees to determine the VMT per employee/job. Retail uses are assessed based on their effects on total VMT. To adhere to the state’s legislation, the City of Gilroy is currently developing the framework for new transportation policies based on the implementation of VMT as the primary measure of transportation impacts for CEQA purposes. The new policies will replace the City’s current transportation policies that are based on levels of service. However, since the City has not formally adopted its own City-specific VMT policies, the City relies on VMT analysis methodology and impact thresholds recommended in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, December 2018. While OPR emphasizes that a lead agency has the discretionary authority to establish thresholds of significance, the Technical Advisory suggests criteria that indicate when a project may have a significant, or less than significant, transportation impact on the environment. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 18 The impact criteria and thresholds used for the evaluation of the proposed project are described below. Employment Uses Impact Thresholds As stated in the technical advisory, for office projects, OPR recommends an impact threshold of 15% below the existing regional VMT per employee. OPR also states that in cases where the region is substantially larger than the geography over which most workers would be expected to live, it might be appropriate to refer to a smaller geography that includes the area over which most workers would be expected to live. Currently, the City of Gilroy has limited employment land uses, which results in longer commute trips as a large number of Gilroy residents are required to travel outside of Gilroy for employment. This is reflected in the average VMT per employee for the City of Gilroy (18.79 miles per employee) compared to the regional VMT (15.33) and the County VMT (16.64) per employee, as reported by the VTA VMT Evaluation Tool. Providing employment opportunities in Gilroy will likely attract most employees from within the City. Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, the impact threshold for the evaluation of the employment uses was assumed to be 15% below the citywide employment VMT per job. The citywide employment VMT threshold is also consistent with the Gilroy 2040 General Plan EIR, which utilized 15% below the citywide VMT as the impact threshold for both residential (per-capita) and employment (per-job) VMT. The VTA’s VMT Evaluation Tool indicates that the existing citywide average VMT per job is currently 18.79. Therefore, the OPR recommended impact threshold of 15% below the existing average VMT per job equates to 15.97 VMT per job. Employment Impact Threshold: 15.97 VMT per Job Retail Use Impact Thresholds The VMT analysis for the proposed retail uses considers OPR’s recommendation of a net increase in total VMT from baseline conditions as the threshold to identify potential VMT impacts for commercial/retail projects. Retail Impact Threshold: Any Increase in VMT CEQA Transportation Analysis Exemption Criteria The 2018 OPR CEQA technical advisory identifies screening thresholds to determine whether a CEQA transportation analysis would be required for specific development projects. The screening thresholds are based on the project size, map-based screening (areas with low VMT), transit availability, and/or provision of affordable housing. If a project meets the screening thresholds, it is then presumed that the project, or the component of the project, would result in less-than-significant VMT impacts and a detailed CEQA VMT analysis is not required. Screening thresholds applicable to the proposed project include the following: Screening Threshold/Presumption of Less-Than-Significant Impact for Small Projects The OPR guidelines state that projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day, have no substantial evidence indicating that the project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, and are consistent with the adopted General Plan, generally may be assumed to cause a less-than- significant impact on VMT. Typical land uses that would generate 110 or fewer daily trips include up to 10,000 s.f. of office space. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 19 Retail Projects Although the OPR technical advisory does not specify screening criteria for the presumption of less- than-significant VMT impact for retail projects, it recognizes that the addition of new local-serving retail development tends to shorten trips, and consequently reduce VMT, by improving retail destination proximity. That is, new local-serving retail projects would provide an alternative to other similar uses located farther away. OPR specifies that, generally, retail development less than 50,000 square feet in size might be considered local-serving and should be considered to have a less-than-significant VMT impact. Evaluation of Screening Criteria Small Project Screening Criteria The proposed warehouse land use is estimated to generate a total of 110 daily trips (see Table 3, Trip Generation Table, in the following chapter). Based on OPR’s small project screening threshold, the proposed warehouse buildings would have a less-than-significant impact on VMT and, therefore, a detailed VMT analysis for this portion of the proposed project is not required. Local-Serving Retail The proposed gas station with convenience store and fast-food restaurant with drive-through window are not reflective of larger regional retail development, such as large shopping centers, which would attract new trips from outside the general city limits. Rather, the proposed commercial uses consist of readily available local-serving retail uses that are not anticipated to attract patrons from outside the project area, but instead, would result in a redistribution of local trips currently traveling to other similar locations. Furthermore, because of the location of the project site (adjacent to a freeway interchange and major thoroughfare (SR 152)), it is anticipated that a large percentage of traffic to the retail uses of the project would be pass-by traffic, or traffic already on the roadway system that would stop at the project site, access the proposed land uses, and continue on their final destination. Based on OPR’s screening threshold recommendations, retail development less than 50,000 square feet in size might be considered local-serving. In order to verify if the proposed gas station and fast- food restaurant have trip-making characteristics equivalent to a 50,000-square-foot or less retail project, the proposed gas station and fast-food restaurant were converted into an equivalent amount of retail space, based on their daily trip generation estimates. Trip generation rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021) were utilized for this process. Based on the ITE daily trip rate, and after applying the applicable pass-by trip reductions, the proposed gas station and fast-food restaurant are estimated to generate a total of 1,607 daily trips, which are equivalent to the trips estimated to be generated by 43,000 s.f. of retail space (see Table 1). Therefore, the proposed gas station and fast-food restaurants are estimated to generate daily traffic comparable to a 43,000-square-foot local-serving retail project, and therefore, should be considered to have a less- than-significant VMT impact. However, since the proposed hotel uses also were categorized as retail uses for the purpose of the VMT evaluation, the equivalent amount of retail space, including the hotel uses, equates to 66,000 s.f. of retail space. Therefore, the combined size of all three land uses categorized as retail land use (gas station, fast-food restaurant, hotels) would exceed the 50,000-s.f. local-serving retail size threshold identified by OPR and a VMT evaluation for these land uses was completed with the use of the Gilroy Model. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 20 Table 1 Equivalent Retail Land Use Calculations VMT Evaluation Employment VMT As discussed in the previous section, the proposed warehouse (employment) land use is estimated to generate 110 total daily trips and, per OPR’s small project screening threshold, is consider a small project and is presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Retail and Hotel VMT The City of Gilroy TDF Model was used to estimate VMT for the proposed retail uses of the project site. As described previously, the retail uses of the proposed project are not reflective of larger regional retail development, which would attract new trips from outside the City of Gilroy, but rather, they would be considered local-serving retail and provide a service that is currently provided in other parts of town. Thus, the proposed retail use of the project would result in a redistribution of trips that are currently made to other surrounding similar uses located outside the immediate project area and city limits. The underlying premise is that the proposed retail would not cause an increase in trips but rather result in a change in trip making as patrons and employees of the proposed retail uses access the project site because of its more convenient location instead of other similar uses elsewhere. In order to estimate the impact on VMT with the Gilroy Model for the proposed land uses categorized as retail, the proposed gas station and fast-food restaurant land uses were converted to equivalent retail land use which, along with the proposed hotel uses, were coded in the model within the project site. The anticipated shifts in trips associated with the proposed project were coded in the Gilroy Model by reallocating retail and service jobs from Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) that are used to reflect other locations with similar land uses in the City’s model to the TAZ representing the project site. The Gilroy Model was then used to estimate daily VMT for work and shop trips, without and with the proposed retail/restaurant and hotel uses, to quantify the effect of the project and the associated job reallocation. The model results summarized in Table 2 show that the retail component of the project would cause a net decrease of 1,334 citywide VMT per day. The work trips would account for an increase of 1,908 daily VMT but the shopping trips would account for a decrease of 3,241 daily VMT. Therefore, the proposed retail uses of the project would not result in a significant VMT impact, based on the threshold of significance for retail uses recommended by OPR. Land Use Rate Trip 16 2,600 vehicle fueling positions s.f.1,607 #820 - Shopping Center (>150k)Equivalent Retail Space = 43,000 s.f.37.01 1,607 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021 The daily trip estimates for the gas station and fast-food restaurant include the applicable passby reductions. #945 Gas station with convenience store, #934 Fast-food restaurant with drive-through window Size Daily Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 21 Table 2 Retail and Hotel VMT Analysis VMT Analysis (Citywide) No Project With Project Change (Proj - No Proj) Home-Based Work VMT 452,495 454,403 1,908 Home-Based Shop VMT 343,999 340,758 -3,241 Total VMT 796,495 795,161 -1,334 Source: City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting Model. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 22 4. Traffic Operations Analysis This chapter describes the traffic operations analysis. The traffic operations analysis provides supplemental analysis for use by the City of Gilroy in identifying potential improvement of the transportation system that may be included as part of the project’s Conditions of Approval. However, the identified roadway operations and improvements are not required or considered project impacts per CEQA guidelines. The chapter presents the method by which project traffic is estimated, intersection operations analysis for existing and future conditions, the identification of any adverse effects on study intersections caused by project-generated trips, and recommended improvements to alleviate the identified operational issues. In addition, the chapter includes an intersection vehicle queuing analysis and freeway segment capacity evaluation. Project Description The proposed project site is located at 6970 Camino Arroyo (Assessor’s Parcel Number [APN] 841-70- 049) and consists of an undeveloped 10.18-acre site bounded by Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) to the north, Camino Arroyo to the west, Holloway Road to the south, and undeveloped land to the east. The proposed project would be developed in three phases with the following land uses: Phase 1 – a 2,600-square-foot (s.f.) fast-food with drive-thru restaurant (Burger King) a 16-fueling positions gas station with a 2,880- s.f. convenience store and 1,152-s.f. car wash a 112-room 4-story all-suites hotel (Residence Inn) Phase 2 – an 88-room 4-story hotel (Holiday Inn Express) Phase 3 – an 18,000-s.f. industrial warehouse a 27,500-s.f. industrial warehouse Access to the project site would be provided via four driveways along Camino Arroyo (three existing driveway curb cuts and one proposed new driveway) and one along Holloway Road (existing). The project site plan is shown on Figure 2. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 23 Scope of Analysis A level of service analysis at key intersections was completed to satisfy local guidelines and determine conformance to General Plan transportation goals and policies. The effects of the project on the study facilities were evaluated in accordance with City of Gilroy and CMP methodologies and standards. The study intersections are listed below and shown on Figure 6. Study Intersections The study includes the evaluation of traffic conditions at 14 signalized intersections, three unsignalized intersections, and three future intersections. All but two of the study intersections are located within the City of Gilroy (denoted on the list below with a CofG superscript). The two study intersections outside the City of Gilroy limits are located within unincorporated Santa Clara County (denoted with an SCC superscript), within Gilroy’s sphere of influence, as identified in the Gilroy 2040 General Plan. The following key intersections were evaluated: 1. Monterey Street and Tenth Street CofG 2. Alexander Street and Tenth Street CofG 3. Chestnut Street/Automall Parkway and Tenth Street CofG 4. US 101 Southbound Ramps and Tenth Street CofG 5. US 101 Northbound Ramps and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) CofG 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) CofG 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) CofG 8. Cameron Boulevard and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) CofG 9. Gilroy Foods and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) CofG 10. Holsclaw Road and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) SCC 11. Frazier Lake Road and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) SCC 12. Monterey Street and Luchessa Avenue CofG 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue CofG 14. US 101 SB Ramps and Monterey Road CofG 15. US 101 NB Ramps and Monterey Road CofG 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing CofG 17. Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road CofG 18. Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Holloway Road (future) CofG 19. Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Luchessa Avenue (future) CofG 20. Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue (future) CofG Study Periods Traffic conditions at all of the study intersections were analyzed for the weekday AM and PM peak hours of adjacent street traffic and the Saturday peak-hour. It is during these times that the most congested traffic conditions occur on an average day. The weekday AM peak hour of traffic is generally between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM and the weekday PM peak hour is typically between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM. The Saturday peak-hour is generally an hour between the 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM period. It is during these time periods that the most congested traffic conditions occur on an average weekday and weekend. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 24 Figure 6 Study Intersections = City of GilroyLEGEND= Project Site LocationNORTHNot to ScaleX= City of Gilroy= Study IntersectionLEGEND= Project Site Location= LOS D Area= Luchessa-Holloway Connection1011234567891011121314151617181920 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 25 Study Scenarios Traffic conditions were evaluated for the conditions described below: Scenario 1: Existing Conditions. Existing intersection traffic volumes were obtained/derived from available intersection turning-movement counts (conducted in 2017- 2019) and new intersection traffic count data collected in March 2022. Current 2022 traffic counts were compared to traffic counts conducted prior to the Covid19 pandemic and adjusted as necessary to identify traffic volumes that would represent current 2022 traffic conditions without the effect of the Covid19 pandemic. This is discussed in more detail in the following section. Scenario 2: Background Conditions. Background traffic conditions represent future traffic volumes on the future transportation network. Background traffic volumes were estimated by adding to existing peak-hour volumes the projected trips from approved but not yet constructed developments in the study area. Background conditions represent the baseline conditions to which project conditions are compared for the purpose of determining the project’s adverse traffic effects on the surrounding roadway network. Scenario 3: Background Plus Project Conditions. Background plus project conditions, or simply referred to as Project Conditions, represent future traffic volumes with the proposed project. Background plus project conditions were estimated by adding to background traffic volumes the trips associated with the proposed project (or project traffic volumes). Background plus project conditions were evaluated under two roadway scenarios: (1) under the existing roadway network; and (2) assuming a new roadway connection from Holloway Road (project site area) to Luchessa Avenue (the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection). The comparison of these two roadway network scenarios demonstrates the effect of providing a second access roadway between the project area and the south and southwest parts of Gilroy. Background plus project conditions were evaluated relative to background conditions in order to determine adverse traffic effects on the roadway network caused by the proposed project. Scenario 4: 2040 General Plan Conditions. Year 2040 General Plan conditions represent future traffic conditions associated with buildout of the City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan land use growth projections and planned future roadway network. With implementation of the proposed project, changes to the adopted General Plan land use and roadway network would occur. Thus, Year 2040 General Plan conditions were evaluated for three scenarios: (1) Year 2040 General Plan conditions, as adopted in November 2020; (2) with the proposed project (replacing the planned land uses on the project site) and planned General Plan roadway network; and (3) with the proposed project and proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection (replacing the planned Rossi Lane extension). The change between these scenarios demonstrates the relative effect the proposed project and proposed roadway network change would have on adopted General Plan conditions. Project Trip 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 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 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 26 project trips are assigned to specific streets and intersections in the study area. These procedures are described further in the following sections. Trip Generation Through empirical research, data have been collected that correlate to common land uses their propensity for producing traffic. Thus, for the most common land uses there are standard trip generation rates that can be applied to help predict the future traffic increases that would result from a new development. Hexagon prepared trip estimates for the proposed project based on trip generation rates obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE’s) Trip Generation Manual, Eleventh Edition, 2021. The proposed gas station would include a convenience store and an automated car wash. Although the description of the gas station with convenience store land use in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, does not specify this land use also includes a car wash, it is believed that trip generation for a gas station/convenience store/car wash land use is mainly dictated by the gas station and convenience store, and the presence, or lack of, a car wash would have minimal effect on the number of trips generated by this land use. That is, the majority of the car wash users are patrons of the gas station/convenience store who conveniently decide to run their vehicle through the car wash. Additionally, the 10th Edition Trip Generation Manual does specify that the trip rates for the gas station/convenience store land use might also include a car wash. The trip generation rates for gas station with convenience store land use contained in the 10th and 11th Editions were compared. The trip generation rates comparison revealed that the 11th Edition trip generation rates are higher than the rates contained in the 10th Edition Manual. Therefore, it is concluded that the ITE trip generation rates for gasoline/service station with convenience market from the 11th Edition Manual are applicable to the proposed gas station/convenience store/car wash use. Based on the above assumptions, the project trip generation was estimated by applying to the size of the proposed development ITE trip generation rates for gasoline/service station with convenience market (ITE land use code #945), fast-food restaurant with drive-through window (ITE land use code #934), all-suites hotel (ITE land use code #311), business hotel (ITE land use code #312), and warehouse (ITE land use code #150). Based on the recommended rates and the size of the proposed project, it is estimated that, prior to any trip reductions, the proposed project would generate a total of 6,414 daily trips, with 472 trips (242 inbound and 230 outbound) occurring during the AM peak hour, 480 trips (237 inbound and 243 outbound) occurring during the PM peak hour, and 518 trips (258 inbound and 260 outbound) occurring during the Saturday peak-hour. Trip Reductions A 10-percent (%) trip reduction was applied to the project trip generation estimates for internalization between the proposed hotel and commercial land uses, as prescribed by VTA guidelines. This trip reduction represents patrons from the hotel walking to the proposed commercial sites instead of driving to a similar land use elsewhere, eliminating these trips from the roadway network. According to VTA guidelines, the percent reduction must be based on the smaller trip generator, in this case, the hotel uses, and the resulting number of trips must be reduced from both components. Furthermore, trip generation for commercial uses is typically adjusted to account for pass-by-trips. Pass-by-trips are trips that would already be on the adjacent roadways (and are therefore already counted in the existing traffic) but would turn into the site while passing by. Justification for applying the pass-by-trip reduction is founded on the observation that such retail traffic is not actually generated by the retail development but is already part of the ambient traffic levels. Pass-by-trips are therefore excluded from the traffic projections to yield net new project trips generated by the project. However, at intersections providing direct access to the retail sites and project site driveways, all project-generated Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 27 traffic is included, including pass-by trips. The applicable pass-by trip reductions were obtained from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. Net Project Trips On the basis of the ITE trip generation rates, and after applying the above trip reductions, it is estimated that the proposed project would generate 2,394 net daily vehicle trips, with 204 trips (108 inbound and 96 outbound) occurring during the AM peak-hour, 197 trips (93 inbound and 104 outbound) occurring during the PM peak-hour, and 215 trips (106 inbound and 109 outbound) occurring during the Saturday peak-hour. The trip generation estimates for the proposed project are presented in Table 3. Trip Distribution and Assignment The trip distribution patterns for project-generated traffic for the proposed project were estimated based on existing travel patterns on the surrounding roadway system, locations of complementary land uses, and use of the Gilroy Model. The peak-hour trips associated with the proposed project were added to the transportation network in accordance with the distribution patterns discussed above. The project trip distribution patterns are shown graphically in Figure 7. Figures 8 and 9 show the assignment of project traffic on the local transportation network, without and with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection, respectively. A tabular summary of project traffic at each study intersection is contained in Appendix D. Intersection Operations Methodology This section presents the methods used to evaluate traffic operations at each of the study intersections for each study scenario. It includes descriptions of the data requirements, the analysis methodologies, the applicable level of service standards, and the criteria defining deficiencies at the study facilities. The intersection operations analysis is intended to quantify the operations of intersections and to identify potential negative effects due to the addition of project traffic. However, a potential adverse effect on a study intersection is not considered a CEQA impact metric. Data Requirements The data required for the analysis were obtained from new traffic counts, previous traffic studies, the City of Gilroy, the CMP Annual Monitoring Report, the City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting Model, and field observations. The following data were collected from these sources: existing traffic volumes existing and planned lane configurations signal timing and phasing (for signalized intersections only) average speed (for freeway segments only) approved development information (size, use, and location) Year 2040 General Plan Conditions traffic forecasts Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 28 Table 3 Project Trip Generation Estimates Proposed Land Use Rate Trip Rate In Out In Out Total Rate In Out In Out Total Rate In Out In Out TotalRetail Land Uses#945 - Convenience Store/Gas Station 16Vehicle Fueling Positions265.12 4,242 16.06 50% 50% 129 128 257 18.42 50% 50% 148 147 295 17.01 50% 50% 136 136 272Passby Reduction175% -3,182 76% -98 -97 -195 75% -111 -110 -221 75% -102 -102 -204#934 - Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window2,600 Square Feet 467.48 1,215 44.61 51% 49% 59 57 116 33.03 52% 48% 45 41 86 55.25 51% 49% 73 71 144Passby Reduction155% -668 50% -30 -29 -59 55% -25 -23 -48 55% -40 -39 -79Retail Total (Prior to Reductions) 5,457 188 185 373 193 188 381 209 207 416Hotel and Retail Internal Reduction 2-85 -3 -4-7 -4-3-7 -5-5-10Hotel Land Uses#311 - All Suites Hotel3112 Rooms 4.40 493 0.34 53% 47% 20 18 38 0.36 49% 51% 20 20 40 0.53 48% 52% 29 31 60#312 - Business Hotel 88 Rooms 4.02 354 0.36 39% 61% 12 20 32 0.31 55% 45% 15 12 27 0.46 48% 52% 19 21 40Hotel Total (Prior to Reductions) 847 32 38 70 35 32 67 48 52 100Hotel and Retail Internal Reduction 210% -85 10% -3 -4 -7 10% -4 -3 -7 10% -5 -5 -10Employment Land Uses#150 - Warehousing 45,500 Square Feet 2.42 110 0.64 77% 23% 22 7 29 0.70 28% 72% 9 23 32 0.05 64% 36% 1 1 2Employment Total (Prior to Reductions) 110 22 7 29 9 23 32 1 1 2Total Project Trips Prior to Reductions6,414 242 230 472 237 243 480 258 260 518Total Passby Trip Reductions-3,850 -128 -126 -254 -136 -133 -269 -142 -141 -283Total Internal Reduction-170 -6 -8 -14 -8 -6 -14 -10 -10 -20Total Net Project Trips (With Reductions) 2,394 108 96 204 93 104 197 106 109 215Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition 2021, and project description per site plan dated 2/14/22 by ACE Design LLC.1 AM and PM peak-hour passer-by reduction rates obtained from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition 2021. Daily and Saturday peak-hour pass-by reductions for the land uses listed above are assumed to be the same as their PM peak-hour pass-by rate. 2 A 10 percent (%) internal trip reduction was applied for the interaction between the hotel and the retail land uses, as recommended in the VTA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. Ten percent of the smaller trip-generator is applied to both land uses.3 Since no Saturday peak-hour trip generation rate is available for the All Suites Hotel land use (ITE land use code #311), the Saturday peak-hour rate for this land use was derived by multiplying the Saturday peak-hour rate for Business Hotel (ITE land use #312) by the ratio between the PM peak-hour rates for the All Suites Hotel and Business Hotel land uses. The in and out split was assumed to be as that identified for the Business Hotel land use.SizeAM Peak Hour PM Peak HourSplit Trip Split TripWeekday DailySAT Peak HourSplit Trip Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 29 Figure 7 Project Trip Distribution = City of GilroyLEGEND= Project Site LocationNORTHNot to Scale101X= City of Gilroy= Study IntersectionLEGEND= Project Site Location= Luchessa-Holloway Connection= Hotel (Fast Food) [Gas Station](Warehouse) Project Trip Distribution X%(X%)[X%](X%)4 0 %(3 0 %)[4 0 %](3 0 %)1 0 %(1 0 %) [4 %](4 %)4%(15%)[4%](8%)6%(20%)[2%](10%)2 0 %(1 0 %) [3 0 %](2 0 %)10%(10%)[20%](10%)10%(5%)[0%](8%)0 %(0 %)[0 %](1 0 %)1234567891011121314151617181920 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 30 Figure 8 Project Trip Assignment (Existing Roadway Network) LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 8(6)[8]10(7)[10]8(7)[9] 7(7)[8] 9(8)[10]8(7)[9]24(22)[27] 24(22)[27] 26(20)[27]26(20)[27]38(34)[39]22(20)[21]35(38)[40] 43(45)[48] -63(-67)[-71] 149(142)[157] -64(-68)[-71] 80(81)[85]6(5)[6]13(16)[14] 16(14)[14] 13(16)[14]142(150)[160]5(6)[6]76(83)[85]16(14)[14] 13(16)[14] 16(14)[14] 13(16)[14] 16(14)[14] 12(14)[14] 1(2)[0]2(1)[0]14(13)[13] 10(7)[10]9(8)[10]65(55)[66] 26(20)[27] 19(22)[22] 24(22)[27] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 24(37)[24]128(135)[147]36(25)[22]198(204)[226]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 31 Figure 8 (continued) Project Trip Assignment (Existing Roadway Network) 17 18 19 22(9)[1]1(2)[0] 17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTION Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 32 Figure 9 Project Trip Assignment (With Luchessa/Holloway Connection) LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 8(6)[8] 8(7)[9] 7(7)[8]8(7)[9]15(14)[17] 15(14)[17] 16(13)[17]16(13)[17]38(34)[39]22(20)[21]35(38)[40] 34(36)[39] -63(-67)[-71] 139(134)[148] -64(-68)[-71] 80(81)[85]6(5)[6]13(16)[14] 16(14)[14] 13(16)[14]133(142)[150]5(6)[6]76(83)[85]16(14)[14] 13(16)[14] 16(14)[14] 13(16)[14] 16(14)[14] 12(14)[14] 1(2)[0]2(1)[0]14(13)[13] 10(7)[10] 9(8)[10] 54(47)[56] 16(13)[17] 19(22)[22] 15(14)[17] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 10(7)[10] 9(8)[10]28(38)[30]1(2)[2]127(134)[146] 8(6)[10]33(23)[21]191(198)[217]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 33 Figure 9 (continued) Project Trip Assignment (With Luchessa/Holloway Connection) 17 18 19 10(7)[10]9(8)[10]20(8)[1]10(7)[10]9(8)[10] 0(2)[0] 10(7)[10]9(8)[10]17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 9(8)[10] 10(7)[10] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi Ln Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 34 Roadway Network and Lane Configurations Existing and Background Conditions The existing lane configurations and traffic-control devices at the study intersections were determined by observations in the field and are presented graphically on Figure 10. It is assumed in this analysis that the transportation network under background conditions (without and with the project) would be the same as under existing conditions. Currently, all access to the project site is provided via Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) and Camino Arroyo. Background Plus Project Conditions Background plus project conditions were evaluated under two roadway network scenarios: (1) under the existing roadway network; and (2) assuming a secondary access route from the project site area via Holloway Road and Luchessa Avenue. Previous traffic analyses for site development in the project area, including the project site, have identified the need to provide a secondary access route to the project area to be able to adequately serve the planned future demand. A new access route connecting Holloway Road to Luchessa Avenue would provide an alternative access route between the project site area and the south and southwest parts of Gilroy. While the City investigates potential roadway connection layouts between Holloway Road and Luchessa Avenue, from conversations with City staff, a potential new roadway could be constructed from Holloway Road parallel to/west of Camino Arroyo/Venture Way and the existing UNFI building and connect to Luchessa Avenue at its planned extension, at approximately 1,900 feet east of its current terminus point at Rossi Lane (see Figure 6). Therefore, this study also evaluates traffic conditions with the project assuming a new north/south roadway between Luchessa Avenue and Holloway Road would be constructed as part of the project. This new proposed roadway connection is referred to hereafter as the Luchessa/Holloway connection. With the implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection, the following three new intersections would be created: 18. Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Holloway Road – in this analysis, this new T-intersection is assumed to be controlled by a stop sign on all legs of the intersection (all-way stop-controlled) and have the following lane configuration: south leg: 1 left and 1 right-turn lane; west leg: 1 through and 1 right-turn lane; east leg: 1 left and 1 through lane. 19. Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Luchessa Avenue – under near-term future conditions with the project, this new intersection would have no conflicting movements as it would consist of a 90- degree north and west road connection. 20. Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue – in this analysis, this new T-intersection is assumed to be controlled by a stop sign on all legs of the intersection (all-way stop-controlled) and have the following lane configuration: south leg: 1 left and 1 right-turn lane; west leg: 1 through and 1 right- turn lane; east leg: 1 left and 1 through lane. 2040 General Plan Conditions The adopted City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan includes roadway improvements throughout the City that will support the projected growth associated with buildout of the General Plan. Some of these roadway network improvements would affect the project area directly and are listed below: Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 35 Figure 10 Existing Intersection Lane Configurations and Traffic Control Devices 123 4 5 678 9101112 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 1613 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir STOP STOP LEGEND: = Signalized Intersection = Stop Controlled IntersectionSTOP STOP STOP Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 36 Figure 10 (Continued) Existing Intersection Lane Configurations and Traffic Control Devices 17 18 1917 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa AveHolloway Rd 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTIONLEGEND: = Signalized Intersection = Stop Controlled IntersectionSTOP STOP Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 37 Luchessa Avenue is planned to be extended from its current terminus point at Rossi Lane eastward to connect to the future Cameron Boulevard extension. This planned extension would result in the following roadway network changes near the project site: Cameron Boulevard/Luchessa Avenue intersection – create a new T-intersection with the planned Cameron Boulevard extension. Cameron Boulevard is planned to be extended from its current terminus point at SR 152 northward to connect to Marcella Avenue at Leavesley Road. Additionally, Cameron Boulevard is planned to be extended from its current southern terminus point southward to connect to and past the planned Luchessa Avenue extension and terminate at the Southside Drive extension. This planned extension would result in the following roadway network changes near the project site: Cameron Boulevard/SR 152 intersection – add north leg to this existing T-intersection. Cameron Boulevard/Luchessa Avenue extension – create new T-intersection. Cameron Boulevard/Southside Drive – connect to and terminate at Southside Drive. Cameron Boulevard/Gilman Road intersection – create a new intersection with Gilman Road. Rossi Lane is planned to be extended from its current northern terminus point at Luchessa Avenue northward to connect to Holloway Road at its western end. This planned extension would result in the following roadway network changes near the project site: Rossi Lane/Luchessa Avenue extension – create a new 4-legged intersection with the planned Luchessa Avenue extension. Provide a second access route to/from the project site area to/from the south and southwest parts of Gilroy via Holloway Road, Rossi Lane, and Luchessa Avenue. In addition to the above roadway extensions, the 2040 GP roadway network includes the following roadway improvements: Tenth Street/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) is planned to be widened to six travel lanes from Monterey Road to Holsclaw Road. Luchessa Avenue is planned to be widened to two through lanes in each direction between Monterey Road and Cameron Boulevard. Therefore, under 2040 General Plan conditions, this study evaluates operations of the proposed project under the planned future roadway network, as described above and identified in the adopted General Plan. This scenario also represents the General Plan Amendment associated with replacing the planned land uses on the project site identified in the adopted General Plan with the proposed project. 2040 General Plan Amendment Conditions As mentioned above, the planned Rossi Lane extension would provide a new roadway connection between Luchessa Avenue/Rossi Lane and Holloway Road, providing a second access route between the project site area and the south and southwest parts of Gilroy. While the City investigates potential roadway connection layouts between Luchessa Avenue and Holloway Road, the previously described Luchessa/Holloway connection was identified by City staff as a more feasible option to the planned Rossi Lane extension included as part of the 2040 General Plan roadway network. Therefore, as part of this analysis, it was assumed that the Luchessa/Holloway connection would replace the planned Rossi Lane extension between Luchessa Avenue and Holloway Road. The proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection would result in two new intersections (Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Holloway Road and Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Luchessa Avenue), as described previously. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 38 The 2040 General Plan Amendment conditions scenario represents the General Plan Amendment associated with the proposed project (replacing the planned land uses on the project site) and the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection (replacing the planned Rossi Lane extension). Traffic Volumes Existing Conditions After almost two years of unprecedented traffic conditions caused by the Covid19 pandemic and the order to shelter in place issued by Santa Clara County Department of Public Health in March 2020, traffic conditions on the transportation network have slowly been restoring back to what is considered typical traffic conditions. For the purpose of this analysis, existing weekday AM and PM and Saturday peak-hour intersection traffic volumes were obtained from new intersection traffic count data or derived by comparing new and available intersection counts. With ambient traffic conditions returning back to “normal” levels, new intersection turn-movement traffic counts were collected at all of the study intersections in March 2022 for the analysis of the project. Additionally, intersection traffic counts from 2017-2019 (prior to the pandemic) were available at most of the study intersections. The 2022 traffic counts were compared to the older pre-pandemic counts to determine whether the current traffic volumes appear to be back to pre-pandemic conditions (traffic volumes are equal or greater than pre-pandemic conditions) or if the new traffic counts continue to show the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic (traffic volumes continue to be less than pre-pandemic levels). The comparison of new 2022 traffic count data to pre-pandemic traffic counts showed that 2022 traffic counts at all of the study intersections along Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) and most of the intersections along Tenth Street increased from pre-pandemic conditions during both the AM and PM peak hours while all study intersection along Monterey Road showed a decrease in traffic volumes compared to pre-pandemic conditions during the AM and PM peak hours. During the Saturday peak- hour, traffic counts at all but one intersection along Monterey Road and three intersections along SR 152 increased, compared to pre-pandemic conditions. Based on this comparison, a growth factor was calculated to be applied to the intersections that showed a decrease in traffic volumes to increase the 2022 traffic counts to pre-pandemic conditions. Intersections where traffic counts were shown to be larger than pre-pandemic conditions, the collected new 2022 counts were assumed to accurately represent typical current traffic conditions. The existing peak-hour intersection volumes are shown on Figure 11. The existing traffic count data are included in Appendix B. Near-Term (Background) Conditions Background peak-hour traffic volumes were estimated by adding to existing volumes the estimated traffic from approved but not yet constructed developments. Approved project information was obtained from City staff in April 2022 and is included in Appendix C. The traffic added to the study intersections from approved developments was estimated by distributing and assigning trips generated by these developments to the roadway network using the same procedure of trip generation, distribution, and assignment described previously. Background traffic volumes are shown on Figure 12. Background plus project peak-hour traffic volumes were estimated by adding to background traffic volumes the estimated project-generated traffic. Project traffic was added to the roadway network under two scenarios: 1.) under the existing roadway network, and 2.) assuming the implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection. In addition, a reassignment of background traffic (both existing and Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 39 Figure 11 Existing Conditions Traffic Volumes LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 55(27)[23] 442(386)[441] 84(99)[76]77(84)[79]137(143)[137]66(100)[93]71(169)[173] 351(577)[517] 63(218)[132]52(60)[41]107(246)[172]85(175)[176]51(83)[98]44(56)[29]10(12)[9]35(88)[53] 362(718)[854] 19(52)[37]78(67)[39]34(34)[20]44(59)[40]55(170)[116]77(142)[106]200(274)[262]108(128)[114] 340(673)[787] 283(411)[438]29(20)[22]84(144)[117]94(120)[111]86(83)[84] 499(514)[669] 38(34)[33] 59(47)[42] 413(434)[540] 95(138)[145]333(542)[527]0(0)[4]506(892)[952]95(118)[113]230(267)[423]592(869)[955] 363(794)[947] 343(548)[783] 503(785)[750] 160(230)[365]6(10)[0]3(17)[10]134(118)[187] 539(619)[770] 18(39)[74]262(617)[711]71(229)[292]49(222)[250]498(1257)[1066] 17(9)[4]22(109)[136]2(28)[34]866(656)[857] 18(15)[12] 475(1176)[906] 28(53)[102]145(465)[596]54(184)[304]18(81)[89]779(599)[715] 21(24)[33] 10(7)[7] 461(1194)[921] 14(5)[3]14(24)[2]16(9)[1]3(0)[0] 778(548)[739] 2(2)[0]8(14)[0]4(4)[0]1(13)[18] 470(1039)[894] 11(10)[8] 789(649)[997]6(16)[12]2(19)[6]412(472)[634] 47(586)[327]392(125)[179]23(7)[15]396(540)[736] 9(68)[32] 103(40)[37] 172(109)[111] 405(292)[291]310(249)[224]176(201)[209]280(117)[110]8(72)[27] 70(194)[133] 58(346)[139]82(98)[93]165(442)[338]62(35)[20]738(1404)[1387] 364(326)[536] 593(872)[971] 73(74)[108] 101(277)[219] 360(693)[842] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 249(184)[199] 227(79)[39] 7(9)[1]3(3)[1]2(6)[2]75(130)[43] 72(259)[51]92(343)[248]4(3)[2]82(80)[31]406(701)[378] 220(443)[328] 594(415)[357] 114(93)[93]155(184)[126]0(0)[96]87(478)[207]403(267)[209] 41(33)[38] 55(73)[72]90(84)[107]201(134)[146]13(5)[6]82(85)[88] 66(44)[53] 4(17)[12]281(164)[180]114(834)[261]88(103)[121]152(439)[595] 5(6)[6]9(6)[15]45(99)[124]100(205)[328]112(114)[161]23(178)[209]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 40 Figure 11 (continued) Existing Conditions Traffic Volumes 17 18 42(49)[61] 0(4)[2]2(2)[1]13(12)[17]27(48)[44]55(9)[13]20(47)[69]12(9)[1] 3(2)[0] 0(1)[0] 17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 147(389)[94]309(159)[70] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTION19 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 41 Figure 12 Background Conditions Traffic Volumes LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 108(119)[95] 744(692)[633] 85(107)[80]77(93)[84]140(151)[145]109(165)[153]89(221)[195] 541(1085)[799] 106(296)[204]74(105)[77]110(251)[178]124(206)[193]51(86)[98]44(56)[29]12(24)[10]39(109)[57] 608(1346)[1216] 32(54)[38]83(73)[53]34(34)[20]60(71)[42]60(178)[122]109(170)[149]201(275)[263]122(143)[130] 524(1218)[1041] 290(416)[446]104(118)[128]104(161)[145]310(317)[398]94(88)[97] 872(911)[924] 42(34)[33] 122(99)[120] 736(795)[712] 99(148)[152]487(729)[739]0(0)[4]617(983)[948]175(194)[210]345(356)[446]617(1038)[977] 554(1422)[1199] 352(567)[795] 1016(1214)[897] 194(291)[412]8(16)[0]3(17)[10]139(143)[192] 707(1319)[970] 18(39)[74]278(646)[734]71(229)[292]68(236)[253]1025(1698)[1216] 22(11)[4]143(745)[263]15(99)[48]1037(1376)[1062] 18(15)[12] 525(1260)[985] 505(410)[173]176(533)[649]54(184)[304]18(81)[89]830(683)[793] 74(64)[41] 20(25)[29] 514(1330)[992] 14(5)[3]14(24)[2]16(9)[1]4(1)[1] 878(649)[804] 2(2)[0]12(37)[21]4(5)[1]1(13)[18] 522(1175)[963] 11(10)[8] 888(749)[1060]6(16)[12]2(19)[6]464(608)[703] 47(586)[327]392(125)[179]23(7)[15]495(640)[799] 9(68)[32] 149(107)[98] 201(136)[150] 410(325)[312]348(359)[304]176(215)[220]284(118)[110]8(72)[27] 91(215)[163] 59(349)[139]128(177)[165]165(454)[347]63(35)[20]1181(1823)[1571] 503(497)[725] 1063(1373)[1348] 142(132)[190] 130(432)[255] 601(1242)[1156] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 277(211)[238] 233(80)[39] 7(9)[1]3(3)[1]2(6)[2]75(131)[43] 73(264)[51]113(363)[278]4(3)[2]83(80)[31]407(730)[410] 225(471)[360] 633(511)[441] 114(93)[93]157(207)[152]0(0)[96]87(478)[207]442(363)[293] 41(33)[38] 55(73)[72]90(84)[107]201(134)[146]13(5)[6]82(85)[88] 66(44)[53] 4(17)[12]282(193)[212]114(834)[261]88(103)[121]179(499)[641] 5(6)[6]9(6)[15]45(99)[124]130(258)[369]112(114)[161]23(178)[209]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 42 Figure 12 (continued) Background Conditions Traffic Volumes 17 18 19 42(49)[61] 0(4)[2]2(2)[1]13(12)[17]27(48)[44]55(9)[13]20(47)[69]12(9)[1] 3(2)[0] 0(1)[0] 17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 148(395)[94]316(160)[70] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTION Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 43 approved) was completed to account for the new traffic patterns in the area that would result from the implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection. The background plus project traffic volumes are shown graphically on Figures 13 and 14. Year 2040 General Plan Conditions Traffic volumes under Year 2040 General Plan conditions were obtained from traffic forecasts produced using the Gilroy TDF Model. These volumes represent traffic conditions that would occur with build out of all projects and planned roadway improvements included in the 2040 General Plan, as adopted in November 2020. General Plan plus project traffic conditions also were obtained from the Gilroy Model. Land use adjustments were made to the traffic zone in the model representing the project site, replacing the adopted General Plan land uses for the site with the proposed project. This scenario represents 2040 General Plan plus project conditions and the General Plan Amendment for the land use change associated with the proposed project. In addition, the planned Rossi Lane extension included in the General Plan roadway network was replaced with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection (described in the roadway network section). The resulting conditions represent 2040 General Plan plus project conditions with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection. This scenario also represents the General Plan Amendment for the land use change associated with the proposed project and the roadway network change associated with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection. Year 2040 General Plan traffic volumes are presented on Figure 15. Year 2040 General Plan plus project traffic conditions are presented on Figure 16. Year 2040 General Plan plus project traffic conditions with Luchessa/Holloway connection are presented on Figure 17. Peak-hour intersection turning movement volumes for all intersections and study scenarios are tabulated in Appendix D. Intersection Level of Service Methodologies, Standards, and Deficiency Thresholds 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. All study intersections were evaluated based on the City of Gilroy methodology and level of service standards. The City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan, Mobility chapter, identifies the established level of service standards and deficiency thresholds for intersections in the City of Gilroy. The analysis methods, level of service standards, and deficiency thresholds are described below. Signalized Intersections The City of Gilroy uses the Santa Clara County CMP level of service analysis procedure, TRAFFIX, for the evaluation of signalized intersections, based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (2000 HCM) method. TRAFFIX evaluates signalized intersection operations on the basis of 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 is shown in Table 4. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 44 Figure 13 Background Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – Existing Roadway Network LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 108(119)[95] 752(698)[641] 85(107)[80]77(93)[84]140(151)[145]119(172)[163]97(228)[204] 548(1092)[807] 115(304)[214]74(105)[77]110(251)[178]132(213)[202]51(86)[98]44(56)[29]12(24)[10]39(109)[57] 632(1368)[1243] 32(54)[38]83(73)[53]34(34)[20]60(71)[42]60(178)[122]109(170)[149]201(275)[263]122(143)[130] 548(1240)[1068] 290(416)[446]104(118)[128]104(161)[145]310(317)[398]94(88)[97] 898(931)[951] 42(34)[33] 122(99)[120] 762(815)[739] 99(148)[152]487(729)[739]0(0)[4]655(1017)[987]175(194)[210]367(376)[467]652(1076)[1017] 597(1467)[1247] 352(567)[795] 953(1147)[826] 343(433)[569]8(16)[0]3(17)[10]139(143)[192] 643(1251)[899] 98(120)[159]278(646)[734]77(234)[298]68(236)[253]1038(1714)[1230] 22(11)[4]143(745)[263]15(99)[48]1053(1390)[1076] 18(15)[12] 538(1276)[999] 505(410)[173]318(683)[809]59(190)[310]94(164)[174]846(697)[807] 74(64)[41] 20(25)[29] 527(1346)[1006] 14(5)[3]14(24)[2]16(9)[1]4(1)[1] 894(663)[818] 2(2)[0]12(37)[21]4(5)[1]1(13)[18] 535(1191)[977] 11(10)[8] 904(763)[1074]6(16)[12]2(19)[6]476(622)[717] 48(588)[327]394(126)[179]23(7)[15]509(653)[812] 9(68)[32] 159(114)[108] 201(136)[150] 410(325)[312]348(359)[304]176(215)[220]284(118)[110]8(72)[27] 91(215)[163] 59(349)[139]137(185)[175]165(454)[347]63(35)[20]1246(1878)[1637] 503(497)[725] 1089(1393)[1375] 142(132)[190] 149(454)[277] 625(1264)[1183] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 277(211)[238] 233(80)[39] 7(9)[1]3(3)[1]2(6)[2]75(131)[43] 73(264)[51]113(363)[278]4(3)[2]83(80)[31]407(730)[410] 225(471)[360] 633(511)[441] 114(93)[93]157(207)[152]0(0)[96]87(478)[207]442(363)[293] 41(33)[38] 55(73)[72]90(84)[107]201(134)[146]13(5)[6]82(85)[88] 66(44)[53] 4(17)[12]282(193)[212]114(834)[261]88(103)[121]179(499)[641] 5(6)[6]9(6)[15]69(136)[148]128(135)[147]130(258)[369]148(139)[183]221(382)[435]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 45 Figure 13 (continued) Background Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – Existing Roadway Network 17 18 19 42(49)[61] 0(4)[2]2(2)[1]13(12)[17]27(48)[44]55(9)[13]42(56)[70]13(11)[1] 3(2)[0] 0(1)[0] 17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 148(395)[94]316(160)[70] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTION Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 46 Figure 14 Background Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – With Luchessa/Holloway Connection LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 108(119)[95] 663(615)[604] 85(108)[81]78(93)[84]143(168)[148]93(138)[131]94(210)[201] 510(963)[761] 93(267)[182]74(105)[77]123(263)[182]119(203)[200]51(86)[98]44(56)[29]12(24)[10]39(109)[57] 568(1184)[1162] 32(54)[38]83(73)[53]34(34)[20]60(71)[42]60(177)[121]108(170)[149]198(276)[264]123(145)[132] 486(1054)[984] 276(359)[387]103(118)[128]104(161)[145]311(318)[399]94(88)[97] 769(806)[882] 42(34)[33] 122(99)[120] 633(688)[671] 99(148)[152]464(719)[728]0(0)[4]677(1029)[1000]176(195)[211]306(315)[437]652(1076)[1017] 507(1149)[1085] 326(541)[770] 832(1043)[811] 298(380)[515]8(11)[0]4(29)[22]135(133)[180] 613(1010)[797] 103(132)[166]266(605)[696]91(268)[328]68(238)[255]900(1613)[1211] 17(2)[0]108(557)[221]15(99)[48]1025(1157)[989] 21(16)[13] 550(1290)[1013] 353(305)[150]309(683)[823]69(206)[322]101(178)[185]858(654)[765] 73(63)[40] 31(27)[31] 442(1315)[977] 100(49)[44]35(130)[100]0(1)[1]17(23)[14]6(1)[1] 883(502)[669] 17(5)[3]13(49)[32]0(1)[1]4(7)[3]0(11)[16] 539(1206)[994] 10(10)[8] 915(720)[1026]7(16)[12]2(19)[6]483(647)[744] 42(576)[314]405(126)[179]24(7)[15]510(612)[768] 7(66)[30] 134(80)[76] 320(260)[221] 407(320)[308]347(353)[299]177(218)[222]339(162)[120]11(90)[31] 148(392)[251] 55(327)[77]113(146)[141]166(455)[348]77(45)[22]1111(1756)[1575] 503(497)[725] 955(1267)[1308] 142(131)[189] 135(380)[262] 550(1024)[1041] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 278(211)[238] 418(258)[120] 6(8)[0]3(3)[1]2(6)[2]0(1)[1]69(131)[43] 137(480)[128]105(317)[252]4(3)[2]76(67)[24]380(623)[337] 241(546)[376] 691(554)[450] 111(92)[92]157(208)[153]0(0)[96]87(493)[217]499(406)[302] 41(33)[38] 56(73)[72]89(84)[107]195(134)[146]13(5)[6]81(85)[88] 67(45)[54] 4(17)[12]257(94)[143]113(843)[267]88(102)[120]157(427)[560] 26(78)[87]27(38)[42]113(247)[287]1(2)[2]127(134)[146] 8(6)[10]112(226)[340]163(187)[225]214(376)[426]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 47 Figure 14 (continued) Background Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – With Luchessa/Holloway Connection 17 18 19 109(201)[215] 4(23)[24] 142(106)[23]38(194)[48]13(9)[14]78(179)[167]54(9)[13]40(55)[70]42(50)[60] 0(3)[3]2(1)[1]213(279)[189]31(51)[44] 93(329)[170] 12(11)[1] 8(9)[8] 0(1)[0] 215(280)[187]94(332)[171]17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 121(294)[64]27(102)[31]86(319)[122] 8(13)[4] 188(179)[78] 308(146)[66] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi Ln Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 48 Figure 15 Year 2040 General Plan Conditions Traffic Volumes LEGEND 123 4 5678 9 101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 49(31)[23] 456(388)[456] 199(100)[76]101(156)[136]374(399)[342]56(76)[93]83(170)[173] 442(622)[540] 55(122)[132]30(58)[41]148(389)[306]72(154)[176]51(83)[98]44(56)[29]10(12)[9]47(132)[101] 417(718)[854] 19(52)[37]78(69)[41]34(34)[20]46(67)[49]50(164)[116]89(197)[135]178(291)[265]116(83)[114] 421(628)[819] 349(387)[497]41(34)[28]140(148)[124]106(140)[111]87(87)[88] 499(514)[669] 38(34)[33] 49(52)[45] 364(463)[553] 86(121)[145]432(506)[527]1(1)[4]650(910)[952]134(113)[119]544(525)[774]0(0)[955] 498(1097)[1251] 645(660)[958] 583(825)[894] 383(479)[436]11(37)[27]4(65)[58]252(144)[247] 740(726)[964] 54(51)[95]339(684)[916]55(216)[292]108(473)[466]652(1660)[1466] 68(9)[4]95(618)[658]4(30)[29]15(141)[153]1137(851)[1051] 65(37)[34] 47(22)[21] 341(1338)[1225] 462(132)[196]171(497)[703]59(212)[339]22(190)[178]10(5)[5] 1054(454)[715] 126(22)[38]19(105)[102]27(22)[21]5(31)[30]10(7)[7] 461(1677)[1368] 14(5)[3]14(24)[2]16(9)[1]3(0)[0] 1115(548)[739] 2(2)[0]8(14)[0]4(4)[0]1(13)[18] 470(1532)[1440] 12(10)[8] 1144(649)[997]6(16)[12]2(20)[7]412(593)[763] 47(957)[724]839(138)[193]23(9)[17]396(540)[736] 9(92)[58] 126(60)[38] 579(213)[172] 715(388)[301]258(365)[224]396(425)[379]284(201)[158]35(152)[101] 81(729)[565] 67(322)[139]91(98)[100]208(532)[444]161(52)[27]1062(1459)[1397] 0(0)[536] 587(876)[971] 129(170)[143] 0(0)[219] 431(675)[921] 123 4 5678 9 101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 264(267)[236] 725(157)[85] 9(5)[1]4(4)[1]3(5)[2]0(3)[1]74(157)[51] 76(821)[340] 2(3)[1]81(365)[319]5(1)[2]190(51)[31]698(759)[459] 248(464)[379] 747(671)[493] 216(125)[120]329(231)[126]0(3)[96]220(912)[510]591(331)[209] 46(33)[42] 235(93)[85]673(623)[505]189(457)[376]6(9)[6]51(96)[111] 61(52)[64] 3(17)[12]489(211)[180]337(1364)[655]92(148)[145]156(439)[595] 14(66)[88]34(57)[85]81(216)[285]4(1)[1]4(48)[66] 0(4)[5]100(215)[342]195(130)[183]68(184)[217]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 49 Figure 15 (continued) Year 2040 General Plan Conditions Traffic Volumes 17 18 19 102(206)[239] 15(38)[41] 7(2)[2]3(14)[15]17(25)[32]0(1)[1]107(123)[129]69(15)[20]20(47)[69]12(9)[1] 35(45)[49] 0(2)[1] 17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 147(422)[104]27(102)[31]0(1)[0]4(32)[10] 27(337)[101] 0(1)[0]77(311)[112]8(13)[4]0(1)[0]178(172)[68] 352(43)[13] 436(159)[70] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTION Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 50 Figure 16 Year 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – General Plan Roadway Network LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 50(31)[23] 442(377)[448] 213(100)[76]101(164)[143]374(407)[349]56(76)[93]83(170)[173] 449(596)[517] 55(122)[132]31(58)[41]150(385)[303]72(154)[176]51(83)[98]44(56)[29]10(12)[9]46(132)[101] 422(718)[854] 19(52)[37]78(69)[41]34(34)[20]46(66)[48]50(164)[116]88(195)[133]179(290)[264]118(83)[114] 427(597)[787] 350(371)[481]40(33)[27]139(148)[124]106(140)[111]86(88)[89] 499(514)[669] 38(34)[33] 48(51)[44] 353(450)[540] 86(121)[145]436(506)[527]1(1)[4]656(910)[952]133(113)[119]523(518)[766]0(0)[955] 514(1031)[1170] 642(653)[949] 541(797)[871] 393(472)[410]14(60)[50]5(63)[56]242(156)[262] 686(685)[926] 114(104)[147]341(684)[916]51(216)[292]110(479)[474]651(1651)[1457] 89(9)[4]94(623)[664]4(26)[25]14(141)[153]1135(851)[1052] 63(39)[36] 48(20)[19] 341(1328)[1216] 460(132)[196]262(460)[629]52(184)[304]84(247)[232]10(5)[5] 1058(454)[715] 123(25)[41]20(98)[97]26(23)[22]4(29)[28]59(13)[13] 461(1616)[1315] 94(47)[42]34(124)[96]1(3)[3]17(22)[13]13(0)[0] 1090(548)[739] 18(3)[1]13(66)[48]1(3)[3]4(13)[8]1(13)[18] 470(1527)[1436] 11(10)[8] 1147(649)[997]6(16)[12]2(20)[7]412(615)[786] 47(930)[695]829(137)[192]23(8)[16]396(540)[736] 9(91)[57] 125(59)[37] 590(214)[174] 704(383)[297]250(365)[224]400(428)[382]317(208)[164]36(173)[118] 82(712)[552] 67(322)[139]91(97)[99]206(526)[439]177(55)[29]1050(1450)[1387] 0(0)[536] 587(876)[971] 130(172)[145] 0(0)[219] 434(604)[843] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 265(267)[236] 785(164)[92] 9(5)[1]4(4)[1]3(5)[2]0(3)[1]74(157)[51] 82(845)[357] 1(3)[1]81(343)[307]5(1)[2]190(51)[31]685(759)[460] 251(459)[375] 779(673)[494] 216(126)[121]320(231)[126]0(3)[96]222(897)[500]619(331)[209] 47(33)[42] 238(97)[88]661(634)[514]189(452)[373]6(9)[6]51(97)[112] 60(51)[64] 3(17)[12]480(211)[180]337(1366)[658]90(145)[143]152(439)[595] 8(41)[54]27(38)[59]119(256)[326]1(0)[0]122(130)[136] 5(6)[6]100(205)[328]243(174)[233]198(353)[398]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 51 Figure 16 (continued) Year 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes– General Plan Roadway Network 17 18 19 102(199)[232] 17(37)[40] 7(1)[1]3(14)[15]15(22)[28]0(1)[1]109(109)[112]68(13)[18]60(79)[106]13(9)[1] 35(46)[50] 0(1)[0] 17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 147(418)[103]27(102)[31]0(1)[0]4(34)[10] 25(330)[99] 0(1)[0]77(311)[112]8(13)[4]1(2)[1]178(172)[68] 348(45)[13] 436(159)[70] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTION Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 52 Figure 17 Year 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – With Luchessa/Holloway Connection LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 50(31)[23] 442(377)[448] 213(100)[76]101(164)[143]374(407)[349]56(76)[93]83(170)[173] 449(596)[517] 55(122)[132]31(58)[41]150(385)[303]72(154)[176]51(83)[98]44(56)[29]10(12)[9]46(132)[101] 422(718)[854] 19(52)[37]78(69)[41]34(34)[20]46(66)[48]50(164)[116]88(195)[133]179(290)[264]118(83)[114] 427(597)[787] 350(371)[481]40(33)[27]139(148)[124]106(140)[111]86(88)[89] 499(514)[669] 38(34)[33] 48(51)[44] 353(450)[540] 86(121)[145]436(506)[527]1(1)[4]656(910)[952]133(113)[119]523(518)[766]0(0)[955] 514(1031)[1170] 642(653)[949] 541(797)[871] 393(472)[410]14(60)[50]5(63)[56]242(156)[262] 686(685)[926] 114(104)[147]341(684)[916]51(216)[292]110(479)[474]651(1651)[1457] 89(9)[4]94(623)[664]4(26)[25]14(141)[153]1135(851)[1052] 63(39)[36] 48(20)[19] 341(1328)[1216] 460(132)[196]262(460)[629]52(184)[304]84(247)[232]10(5)[5] 1058(454)[715] 123(25)[41]20(98)[97]26(23)[22]4(29)[28]59(13)[13] 461(1616)[1315] 94(47)[42]34(124)[96]1(3)[3]17(22)[13]13(0)[0] 1090(548)[739] 18(3)[1]13(66)[48]1(3)[3]4(13)[8]1(13)[18] 470(1527)[1436] 11(10)[8] 1147(649)[997]6(16)[12]2(20)[7]412(615)[786] 47(930)[695]829(137)[192]23(8)[16]396(540)[736] 9(91)[57] 125(59)[37] 590(214)[174] 704(383)[297]250(365)[224]400(428)[382]317(208)[164]36(173)[118] 82(712)[552] 67(322)[139]91(97)[99]206(526)[439]177(55)[29]1050(1450)[1387] 0(0)[536] 587(876)[971] 130(172)[145] 0(0)[219] 434(604)[843] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 265(267)[236] 785(164)[92] 9(5)[1]4(4)[1]3(5)[2]0(3)[1]74(157)[51] 82(845)[357] 1(3)[1]81(343)[307]5(1)[2]190(51)[31]685(759)[460] 251(459)[375] 779(673)[494] 216(126)[121]320(231)[126]0(3)[96]222(897)[500]619(331)[209] 47(33)[42] 238(97)[88]661(634)[514]189(452)[373]6(9)[6]51(97)[112] 60(51)[64] 3(17)[12]480(211)[180]337(1366)[658]90(145)[143]152(439)[595] 8(41)[54]27(38)[59]119(256)[326]1(0)[0]122(130)[136] 5(6)[6]100(205)[328]243(174)[233]198(353)[398]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 53 Figure 17 (continued) Year 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes– With Luchessa/Holloway Connection 17 18 19 102(199)[232] 17(37)[40] 7(1)[1]3(14)[15]15(22)[28]0(1)[1]109(109)[112]68(13)[18]60(79)[106]42(53)[63] 1(5)[5]3(1)[1]213(279)[196]32(52)[45] 116(329)[170] 13(9)[1] 35(46)[50] 0(1)[0] 215(280)[187] 348(46)[46] 4(34)[34] 25(331)[331]94(332)[204]1(2)[2]17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 147(418)[103]27(102)[31]86(525)[163] 8(13)[4] 493(179)[78] 436(159)[70] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi Ln Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 54 Table 4 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Definition Based on Delay The City of Gilroy level of service standard for most signalized intersections located west of US 101 is LOS C or better, allowing some commercial and industrial areas (e.g., downtown Gilroy, First Street corridor) to operate at LOS D or better. For signalized intersections located east of US 101 and those in the commercial area designated in the City of Gilroy General Plan (LOS D Area), the City standard is LOS D or better. The level of service D area includes all areas east of US 101, the Tenth Street corridor from Monterey Road to US 101, the Luchessa corridor east of Monterey Road, and the Monterey Road corridor from Luchessa Avenue to the Monterey Road/US 101 interchange. The current City of Gilroy LOS D Area is depicted graphically on Figure 6 (Study Intersections). All of the signalized study intersections are located within the LOS D area. City of Gilroy Definition of Operational Deficiencies at Signalized Intersections Based on City of Gilroy intersection level of service standards, an operational deficiency at a signalized intersection would occur if any of the following criteria are satisfied: LOS D Area 1. The level of service at the intersection degrades from an acceptable LOS D or better under background conditions to an unacceptable LOS E or F under background plus project conditions, or 2. If the intersection is already operating at an unacceptable LOS E or F and the addition of project traffic causes the average delay to increase by four (4) seconds or more. Level of Service Description Average Control Delay per Vehicle (sec.) C Greater than 80.0 D Operations with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression, long c ycle lengths, or high V/C ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable. Operations with high delay values indicating poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable E Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to oversaturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths.F 35.1 to 55.0 Sources: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (Santa Clara County and City of Gilroy adopted level of service methodology). Traffic Level of Service Analysis Guidelines , Santa Clara County Transportation Authority Congestion Management Program, June 2003. A Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression and/or short cycle lengths. up to 10.0 B Operations with low delay occurring with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. 10.1 to 20.0 55.1 to 80.0 20.1 to 35.0Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 55 Unsignalized Intersections For unsignalized intersections in the City of Gilroy, an assessment of traffic operations at the intersection is based on two methodologies: (1) peak-hour levels of service are calculated for the intersection, and (2) an assessment is made of the need for signalization of the intersection based on traffic volume levels. The methodology used to determine the level of service for unsignalized intersections is TRAFFIX and the Santa Clara County CMP adopted 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology. This method is applicable for both two-way and all-way stop-controlled intersections. For the purpose of reporting level of service for stop-controlled intersections, two levels of service are used. For all-way stop-controlled intersections, “overall intersection average” delay and corresponding level of service are used, which is a measure of the average delay incurred by all motorists at the intersection. For one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections, the delay and corresponding level of service for the “highest delay approach”, which is a measure of the delay incurred by motorists only on the stop-controlled approach which is most impacted by traffic conditions at the intersection, is used. The correlation between average control delay and level of service for unsignalized intersections is shown in Table 5. Table 5 Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definition Based on Control Delay 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 operating conditions at the intersection (i.e., level of service) and on the peak-hour traffic signal warrant, warrant #3, described in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (CA MUTCD), Part 4, Highway Traffic Signals, 2014. This method provides an indication Level of Service Description Average Control Delay per Vehicle (sec.) Source: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (Santa Clara County and City of Gilroy adopted level of service methodology). A Operations with very low delays occurring with favorable progression.up to 10.0 B Operations with low delays occurring with good progression. 10.1 to 15.0 C Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression. 15.1 to 25.0 D Operation with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression of high V/C ratios.25.1 to 35.0 E Operation with high delay values indicating poor progression and high V/C ratios. This is considered to be the limited of acceptable delay. 35.1 to 50.0 F Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to oversaturation and poor progression.Greater than 50.0 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 56 of whether traffic conditions and peak-hour traffic levels are, or would be, sufficient to justify installation of a traffic signal. The City of Gilroy level of service standard for unsignalized intersections is based on the intersection control type as follows: All-way stop-controlled intersections must operate with an overall intersection average delay of LOS C or better for those intersections located within the LOS C area (as defined previously) and LOS D or better for those intersections located within the LOS D area and/or the peak-hour traffic volume level at the intersection must fall below the threshold that would warrant installation of a traffic signal. One-way/two-way stop-controlled intersections must operate with average delays corresponding to LOS D or better for those intersections located within the LOS C area or LOS E or better for intersections located within the LOS D area on their stop-controlled approach with the highest delay and/or the peak-hour traffic volume level at the intersection must fall below the threshold that would warrant installation of a traffic signal. The unsignalized study intersections consist of both one/two-way and all-way stop-controlled intersections located within the LOS D area. Therefore, the unsignalized study intersections have a level of service standard of LOS D for the overall intersection average delay (all-way stop-controlled) and LOS E for the stop-controlled approach with the highest delay (one/two-way stop-controlled). City of Gilroy Definition of Operational Deficiencies at Unsignalized Intersections Based on City of Gilroy intersection level of service standards, an operational deficiency at an unsignalized intersection would occur if any of the following criteria are satisfied: All-Way Stop-Controlled Intersections: LOS D Area 1. The overall intersection level of service degrades from an acceptable LOS D or better under background conditions to an unacceptable LOS E or F under background plus project conditions and the traffic volumes at the intersection satisfy the peak-hour volume traffic signal warrant adopted by Caltrans, or 2. The overall intersection level of service is already operating at an unacceptable LOS E/F and the addition of project traffic causes the average delay to increase by 4 seconds or more and the traffic volumes at the intersection satisfy the peak-hour volume traffic signal warrant adopted by Caltrans. One- and Two-Way Stop-Controlled Intersections: LOS D Area 1. The worst-approach intersection delay degrades from an acceptable LOS E or better under background conditions to an unacceptable LOS F under background plus project conditions and the traffic volumes at the intersection satisfy the peak-hour volume traffic signal warrant adopted by Caltrans, or 2. The worst-approach intersection delay is already operating at an unacceptable LOS F and the addition of project traffic causes the average delay to increase by 4 seconds or more and the traffic volumes at the intersection satisfy the peak-hour volume traffic signal warrant adopted by Caltrans. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 57 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Results The results of the intersection level of service analysis are described below and summarized in Table 6. The level of service calculation sheets are included in Appendix E. The peak-hour signal warrant sheets are contained in Appendix F. Existing and Background Intersection Level of Service Analysis The results of the intersection level of service analysis under existing conditions indicate that the following intersection currently operates deficiently during the Saturday peak-hour: 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152 (LOS E – Sat peak-hour) Under background conditions, the above intersection would continue to operate deficiently (LOS E) during the Saturday peak-hour. The remaining study intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service during all three peak hours analyzed under existing and background conditions. Background Plus Project Intersection Level of Service Analysis Background plus project conditions were evaluated under two roadway scenarios: (1) under the existing roadway network; and (2) assuming implementation of the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection. The comparison of these two roadway network scenarios demonstrates the effect of providing a second access roadway between the project area and the south and southwest parts of Gilroy. Background Plus Project – Existing Roadway Network The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the following intersection would operate deficiently during the Saturday peak-hour under background plus project conditions and under the existing roadway network: 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152 (LOS E – Sat peak-hour) The addition of project traffic to the intersection of Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) is not projected to increase the intersection’s average delay by more than the 4-second operational deficiency threshold. Therefore, the proposed project is not projected to create an operational deficiency at any of the study intersections under this scenario. Background Plus Project – With Proposed Luchessa/Holloway Connection The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the following intersections would operate deficiently under background plus project conditions and assuming the implementation of the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection: 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152 (LOS E – Sat peak-hour) 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM peak-hour) Project Deficiency: PM peak-hour Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 58 Table 6 Intersection Level of Service Results Study Existing Conditions Background Conditions Background Plus Project (Existing Roadway Network) Background Plus Project with Proposed LH Connnection Int. Intersection LOS Peak Count Warrant Warrant Delay Warrant Delay Warrant Number Intersection Control Standard Hour Date Delay LOS Met? 1 Delay LOS Met? 1 Delay LOS Change 2 Met?1 Delay LOS Change 2 Met?1 1 Monterey Road and Tenth Street Signal D AM 03/24/22 22.7 C+ -- 22.6 C+ -- 22.9 C+ +0.3 -- 22.8 C+ +0.2 -- PM 03/24/22 28.6 C -- 28.4 C -- 28.6 C +0.2 -- 28.5 C +0.1 -- SAT 03/26/22 29.8 C -- 29.4 C -- 29.6 C +0.2 -- 29.5 C +0.1 -- 2 Alexander Street and Tenth Street Signal D AM 03/24/22 17.2 B -- 16.7 B -- 16.7 B +0.0 -- 16.8 B +0.1 -- PM 03/24/22 16.9 B -- 17.8 B -- 17.9 B +0.1 -- 17.2 B -0.6 -- SAT 03/26/22 20.1 C+ -- 18.0 B- -- 17.8 B -0.2 -- 18.3 B- +0.3 -- 3 Chestnut Street/Automall Parkway Signal D AM 03/24/22 29.9 C -- 34.4 C- -- 34.2 C- -0.2 -- 34.5 C- +0.1 -- and Tenth Street PM 03/24/22 32.5 C- -- 38.0 D+ -- 38.1 D+ +0.1 -- 37.6 D+ -0.4 -- SAT 03/26/22 29.4 C -- 37.7 D+ -- 37.8 D+ +0.1 -- 37.3 D+ -0.4 -- 4 US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth Street Signal D AM 03/24/22 20.0 C+ -- 21.1 C+ -- 21.4 C+ +0.3 -- 21.5 C+ +0.4 -- PM 03/24/22 22.8 C+ -- 26.0 C -- 26.5 C +0.5 -- 25.7 C -0.3 -- SAT 03/26/22 27.9 C -- 29.9 C -- 30.5 C +0.6 -- 30.2 C +0.3 -- 5 US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 03/24/22 8.1 A -- 9.0 A -- 9.1 A +0.1 -- 8.7 A -0.3 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 03/24/22 8.3 A -- 10.1 B+ -- 10.5 B+ +0.4 -- 9.8 A -0.3 -- SAT 03/26/22 9.9 A -- 10.7 B+ -- 11.0 B+ +0.3 -- 10.6 B+ -0.1 -- 6 Camino Arroyo Signal D AM 03/24/22 21.1 C+ -- 18.2 B- -- 20.4 C+ +2.2 -- 20.8 C+ +2.6 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 03/24/22 32.4 C- -- 41.8 D -- 45.1 D +3.3 -- 38.3 D+ -3.5 -- SAT 03/26/22 55.4 E+--59.9 E+--63.3 E +3.4 --60.5 E +0.6 -- 7 Silacci Way One-Way Stop D AM 11/05/20 0.2 A+ -- 0.3 A+ No 0.3 A+ +0.0 -- 0.3 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 11/05/20 0.5 A+ -- 1.5 A+ No 1.6 A+ +0.1 -- 0.8 A+ -0.7 -- SAT 11/05/20 0.1 A+ -- 0.1 A+ No 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- 0.2 A+ +0.1 -- One-Way Stop E AM 11/05/20 16.5 C No 36.0 E No 37.0 E +1.0 No 28.8 D -7.2 No (Worst Approach) PM 11/05/20 26.4 D No >120 F No >120 F >120 No 51.3 F -83.6 No SAT 11/07/20 12.4 B No 13.3 B No 13.4 B +0.1 No 13.5 B +0.2 No 8 Cameron Boulevard Signal D AM 03/24/22 5.4 A -- 7.1 A -- 7.0 A -0.1 -- 6.7 A -0.4 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 11/05/20 7.8 A -- 14.6 B -- 14.7 B +0.1 -- 12.7 B -1.9 -- SAT 11/07/20 7.3 A -- 8.5 A -- 8.4 A -0.1 -- 8.1 A -0.4 -- 9 Gilroy Foods Signal D AM 11/05/20 9.2 A -- 9.1 A -- 9.0 A -0.1 -- 10.4 B+ +1.3 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 11/05/20 10.2 B+ -- 10.9 B+ -- 10.9 B+ +0.0 -- 11.4 B+ +0.5 -- SAT 11/07/20 5.5 A -- 3.2 A -- 3.2 A +0.0 -- 7.2 A +4.0 -- 10 Holsclaw Road One-Way Stop D AM 03/24/22 0.1 A+ -- 0.1 A+ No 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 03/24/22 0.8 A+ -- 1.0 A+ No 1.0 A+ +0.0 -- 0.9 A+ -0.1 -- SAT 03/24/22 0.4 A+ -- 0.4 A+ No 0.4 A+ +0.0 -- 0.4 A+ +0.0 -- One-Way Stop E AM 03/24/22 17.0 C No 19.2 C No 19.7 C +0.5 No 19.5 C +0.3 No (Worst Approach) PM 03/24/22 35.0 E No 50.4 F No 53.1 F +2.7 No 49.8 E -0.6 No SAT 03/26/22 33.1 D No 38.7 E No 40.1 E +1.4 No 37.9 E -0.8 No 11 Frazier Lake Road Signal D AM 03/24/22 14.9 B -- 15.3 B -- 15.4 B +0.1 -- 15.8 B +0.5 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 03/24/22 8.2 A -- 7.8 A -- 7.8 A +0.0 -- 7.8 A +0.0 -- SAT 03/26/22 10.0 B+ -- 10.2 B+ -- 10.2 B+ +0.0 -- 10.2 B+ +0.0 -- 12 Monterey Road and Luchessa Avenue Signal D AM 03/24/22 26.1 C -- 26.6 C -- 26.6 C +0.0 -- 26.0 C -0.6 -- PM 03/24/22 35.5 D+ -- 39.5 D -- 39.5 D +0.0 -- 38.0 D+ -1.5 -- SAT 03/26/22 22.8 C+ -- 23.7 C -- 23.7 C +0.0 -- 23.8 C +0.1 -- 13 Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue One-Way Stop D AM 03/24/22 6.4 A -- 6.9 A- -- 6.9 A- +0.0 -- 7.0 A- +0.1 -- (Average Delay) PM 03/24/22 7.4 A- -- 7.9 A- -- 7.9 A- +0.0 -- 8.3 A- +0.4 -- SAT 03/24/22 7.2 A- -- 7.5 A- -- 7.5 A- +0.0 -- 6.3 A -1.2 -- One-Way Stop E AM 03/24/22 22.2 C Yes 25.0 C Yes 25.0 C +0.0 Yes 34.7 D +9.7 Yes (Worst Approach) PM 03/24/22 25.7 D Yes 29.4 D Yes 29.4 D +0.0 Yes 52.2 F +22.8 Yes SAT 03/26/22 15.8 C No 17.9 C Yes 17.9 C +0.0 Yes 18.2 C +0.3 Yes 14 US 101 SB Ramps and Monterey Road Signal D AM 03/24/22 12.0 B -- 12.0 B+ -- 12.0 B+ +0.0 -- 12.0 B+ +0.0 -- PM 03/24/22 22.2 C+ -- 22.1 C+ -- 22.1 C+ +0.0 -- 22.2 C+ +0.1 -- SAT 03/26/22 20.2 C+ -- 19.9 B- -- 19.9 B- +0.0 -- 20.2 C+ +0.3 -- 15 Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 03/24/22 18.9 B- -- 18.8 B- -- 18.8 B- +0.0 -- 18.7 B- -0.1 -- PM 03/24/22 23.8 C -- 25.2 C -- 25.2 C +0.0 -- 25.7 C +0.5 -- SAT 03/26/22 26.1 C -- 26.4 C -- 26.4 C +0.0 -- 26.5 C +0.1 -- 16 Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Signal D AM 03/24/22 13.4 B -- 13.3 B -- 19.6 B- +6.3 -- 22.5 C+ +9.2 -- PM 03/24/22 16.1 B -- 15.8 B -- 24.8 C +9.0 -- 23.1 C +7.3 -- SAT 03/26/22 18.1 B- -- 18.3 B- -- 27.6 C +9.3 -- 26.2 C +7.9 -- 17 Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road All-Way Stop D AM 03/24/22 7.7 A No 7.7 A No 7.8 A +0.1 No 8.6 A +0.9 No PM 03/24/22 7.8 A No 7.8 A No 7.9 A +0.1 No 11.2 B +3.4 Yes SAT 03/26/22 8.1 A No 8.1 A No 8.1 A +0.0 No 10.0 A +1.9 No 18 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.5 A +8.5 No and Holloway Road PM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.2 B +12.2 Yes SAT Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.0 A +9.0 No 19 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- and Luchessa Avenue PM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SAT Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 20 Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue All-Way Stop D AM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.6 A +9.6 No PM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 13.8 B +13.8 Yes SAT Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.1 A +8.1 No Notes: Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the City's current level of service standard. - Denotes project deficiency based on City of Gilroy criteria. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 59 Table 6 (Continued) Intersection Level of Service Results Study 2040 General Plan (No Project) Conditions General Plan Plus Project (GP Roadway Network) General Plan Plus Project with Proposed LH Connnection Int. Intersection LOS Peak Warrant Delay Warrant Warrant Number Intersection Control Standard Hour Delay LOS Met? 1 Delay LOS Change 2 Met?1 Delay LOS Met? 1 1 Monterey Road and Tenth Street Signal D AM 23.6 C -- 23.6 C +0.0 -- PM 29.3 C -- 29.5 C +0.2 -- SAT 32.6 C- -- 32.9 C- +0.3 -- 2 Alexander Street and Tenth Street Signal D AM 20.3 C+ -- 20.3 C+ +0.0 -- PM 16.4 B -- 16.4 B +0.0 -- SAT 21.5 C+ -- 21.5 C+ +0.0 -- 3 Chestnut Street/Automall Parkway Signal D AM 32.1 C- -- 31.9 C -0.2 -- and Tenth Street PM 36.2 D+ -- 36.3 D+ +0.1 -- SAT 31.5 C -- 31.6 C +0.1 -- 4 US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth Street Signal D AM 20.6 C+ -- 20.6 C+ +0.0 -- PM 22.4 C+ -- 22.2 C+ -0.2 -- SAT 27.6 C -- 27.4 C -0.2 -- 5 US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 11.5 B+ -- 11.3 B+ -0.2 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 12.8 B -- 12.7 B -0.1 -- SAT 14.8 B -- 14.7 B -0.1 -- 6 Camino Arroyo Signal D AM 21.4 C+ -- 22.5 C+ +1.1 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 34.8 C- -- 34.1 C- -0.7 -- SAT 80.2 F --75.2 E- -5.0 -- 7 Silacci Way One-Way Stop D AM 0.5 A+ -- 0.5 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 3.3 A+ -- 8.4 A- +5.1 -- SAT 1.5 A+ -- 3.8 A +2.3 -- One-Way Stop E AM 22.7 C No 23.2 C +0.5 No (Worst Approach) PM 80.9 F Yes >120 F +96.2 Yes SAT 42.5 E Yes 91.6 F +49.1 Yes 8 Cameron Boulevard Signal D AM 17.6 B -- 17.6 B +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 26.6 C -- 26.6 C +0.0 -- SAT 22.5 C+ -- 22.6 C+ +0.1 -- 9 Gilroy Foods Signal D AM 8.5 A -- 11.4 B+ +2.9 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 9.4 A -- 10.3 B+ +0.9 -- SAT 5.0 A -- 10.2 B+ +5.2 -- 10 Holsclaw Road One-Way Stop D AM 0.1 A+ -- 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 1.4 A+ -- 1.4 A+ +0.0 -- SAT 0.6 A+ -- 0.6 A+ +0.0 -- One-Way Stop E AM 24.8 C No 24.9 C +0.1 No (Worst Approach) PM 81.5 F No 80.6 F -0.9 No SAT 69.0 F No 68.6 F -0.4 No 11 Frazier Lake Road Signal D AM 36.6 D+ -- 35.2 D+ -1.4 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 8.7 A -- 8.5 A -0.2 -- SAT 9.9 A -- 10.0 B+ +0.1 -- 12 Monterey Road and Luchessa Avenue Signal D AM 29.6 C -- 30.1 C +0.5 -- PM 39.2 D -- 38.8 D+ -0.4 -- SAT 23.9 C -- 23.8 C -0.1 -- 13 Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue One-Way Stop D AM 29.5 D -- 32.8 D- +3.3 -- (Average Delay) PM 15.0 B- -- 15.3 C+ +0.3 -- SAT 6.5 A -- 6.3 A -0.2 -- One-Way Stop E AM >120 F Yes >120 F +24.7 Yes (Worst Approach) PM 86.7 F Yes 86.9 F +0.2 Yes SAT 20.8 C Yes 21.3 C +0.5 Yes 14 US 101 SB Ramps and Monterey Road Signal D AM 15.2 B -- 15.0 B -0.2 -- PM 31.6 C -- 31.1 C -0.5 -- SAT 22.8 C+ -- 22.7 C+ -0.1 -- 15 Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 82.7 F --85.2 F +2.5 -- PM 67.9 E --70.3 E +2.4 -- SAT 28.4 C -- 28.6 C +0.2 -- 16 Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Signal D AM 17.7 B -- 22.3 C+ +4.6 -- PM 20.7 C+ -- 22.8 C+ +2.1 -- SAT 23.8 C -- 26.4 C +2.6 -- 17 Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road All-Way Stop D AM 8.4 A No 8.5 A +0.1 No PM 9.6 A No 9.6 A +0.0 No SAT 10.2 B No 10.3 B +0.1 No 18 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.6 A No and Holloway Road PM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.2 B Yes SAT -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.1 A No 19 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.1 A No and Luchessa Avenue PM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.2 B Yes SAT -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.8 A No 20 Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue All-Way Stop D AM 12.0 B Yes 11.9 B --Yes 12.0 B Yes PM 29.5 D Yes 28.6 D --Yes 21.8 C Yes SAT 8.7 A No 8.7 A -- No 8.5 A No Notes: Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the City's current level of service standard. - Denotes project deficiency based on City of Gilroy criteria.Same as General Plan Plus Project Conditions (GP Roadway Network) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 60 The addition of project traffic is projected to increase the worst approach delay at the deficient intersection of Automall Parkway/Luchessa Avenue by more than 4 seconds during the PM peak-hour. Therefore, based on the City of Gilroy definition of operational deficiencies at unsignalized intersections, the project would have an operational deficiency at the Automall Parkway/Luchessa Avenue intersection under background plus project conditions and assuming the implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection. The addition of project traffic to the intersection of Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) is not projected to increase the intersection’s average delay by more than the 4-second operational deficiency threshold under this scenario. Year 2040 General Plan Conditions Intersection Level of Service Analysis Year 2040 General Plan conditions were evaluated for three scenarios: (1) Year 2040 General Plan conditions, as adopted in November 2020; (2) with the proposed project (replacing the planned land uses on the project site) and planned General Plan roadway network; and (3) with the proposed project and proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection (replacing the planned Rossi Lane extension). The change between these scenarios demonstrates the relative effect the proposed project and proposed roadway network change would have on adopted General Plan conditions. 2040 General Plan (No Project) Conditions The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the following four intersections are projected to operate deficiently with buildout of the City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan land use growth projections and planned future roadway network: 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F – SAT peak-hour) 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM peak-hour) 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) 15. Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps (LOS F – AM peak-hour; LOS E – PM peak-hour) The remaining study intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service during all three peak hours analyzed under 2040 General Plan conditions. 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the following four intersections are projected to operate deficiently under 2040 General Plan with project conditions and the planned future roadway network: 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS E – SAT peak-hour) 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: AM and PM peak hours 15. Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps (LOS F – AM peak-hour; LOS E – PM peak-hour) The addition of project traffic is projected to increase the intersection delay (or the worst approach delay) at two of the above four deficient intersections by more than 4 seconds during the noted peak Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 61 hours. Therefore, based on the City of Gilroy definition of operational deficiencies at intersections, the project would contribute to an operational deficiency at the two intersections noted above under General Plan plus project conditions. 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions with Luchessa/Holloway Connection The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the following four intersections are projected to operate deficiently under 2040 General Plan with project conditions and assuming the Luchessa/Holloway connection: 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS E – SAT peak-hour) 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: AM and PM peak hours 15. Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps (LOS F – AM peak-hour; LOS E – PM peak-hour) The addition of project traffic is projected to increase the intersection delay (or the worst approach delay) at two of the above four deficient intersections by more than 4 seconds during the noted peak hours. Therefore, based on the City of Gilroy definition of operational deficiencies at intersections, the project would contribute to an operational deficiency at the two intersections noted above under General Plan plus project conditions with the Luchessa/Holloway connection. Based on the intersection level of service results, the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection would not change projected intersection operations at any of the study intersections, compared to the Rossi Lane extension that is part of the 2040 General Plan roadway network, with the exception of the intersections of the connection with Holloway Road and Luchessa Avenue, which would be created with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection but not the planned Rossi Lane extension. Therefore, in terms of intersection operations, both the Holloway/Luchessa connection and the Rossi Lane extension would provide the same benefits. Intersection Operations (Queue) Analysis The analysis of the intersection levels of service was supplemented with an analysis of intersection operations (queuing) for selected intersections. The intersection queuing analysis is an important component of the process to evaluate traffic conditions at an intersection. Although calculated levels of service may appear adequate at some locations, traffic operations problems caused by inadequate storage space for vehicle queues could prevent the intersection from ever realizing the calculated level of service. When inadequate storage space becomes an issue, queues in one turn movement might spill into an adjacent lane and block traffic in that lane from proceeding through the intersection. Vehicle Queue Estimate Methodology The operations analysis is based on vehicle queuing for high-demand movements at intersections. Vehicle queues were estimated using a Poisson probability distribution, which estimates the probability of “n” vehicles in the queue for a vehicle movement using the following formula: P (x=n) = n e – ( n! Where: Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 62 P (x=n) = probability of “n” vehicles in queue per lane n = number of vehicles in the queue per lane average number of vehicles in the queue per lane (vehicles per hour per lane/signal cycles per hour) The basis of the analysis is as follows: (1) the Poisson probability distribution is used to estimate the 95th percentile maximum number of queued vehicles per signal cycle for a particular movement; (2) the estimated maximum number of vehicles in the queue is translated into a queue length, assuming 25 feet per vehicle (20 feet vehicle length plus 5-foot headway space); 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 identifying locations where potential problems may arise in the future and for estimating future storage requirements at intersections. City of Gilroy Definition of Queue Deficiencies Based on City of Gilroy guidelines, a queue deficiency at an intersection would occur if: 1. The 95th percentile vehicle queue in a critical turn movement at a study intersection is projected to be less than the available or planned storage length for that movement under background conditions and the addition of projected traffic to that turn movement causes the projected 95th percentile vehicle queue to exceed the available or planned storage length, or 2. The 95th percentile vehicle queue in a critical turn movement at a study intersection is projected to exceed the available or planned storage length for that movement under background conditions and the addition of projected traffic to that turn movement causes the projected 95th percentile vehicle queue to grow by at least one vehicle. Queue deficiencies may be addressed by providing the additional queue storage capacity required to serve the projected queue length. Study Intersection Turn-Movements Key intersections where the project is anticipated to add more than 10 peak-hour trips per lane to the left-turn movement were selected for evaluation. Additionally, locations where the project would add a significant amount of trips to the right-turn movement also were included. The adequacy of the queue storage capacity for the following intersection movements was evaluated in this analysis: 4. US 101 NB Ramps and Tenth Street – Southbound left-turn movement 5. US 101 SB Ramps and SR 152 – Northbound right-turn movement 6. Camino Arroyo and SR 152 – Northbound and Westbound left-turn movements; Northbound and Eastbound right-turn movements 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing – Southbound left-turn and Westbound right-turn movements 17. Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road – Eastbound and Southbound left-turn movements 18. Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Holloway Road - Westbound left-turn movement The vehicle queue analysis results under background plus project conditions are summarized in Table 7. The intersection queue calculation sheets are included in Appendix G. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 63 Table 7 Intersection Vehicle Queue Analysis US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth StreetUS 101 NB Ramps and SR 152Camino Arroyo and SR 152Southbound Left Northbound Right Northbound Left Westbound Left Northbound Right Eastbound RightSBL SBL SBL NBR NBR NBR NBL NBL NBL WBL WBL WBL NBR NBR NBR EBR EBR EBRMeasurement AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SATExisting Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 253 446 476 115 134 212 48 155 199 9 20 37 11 65 59 121 106 20695th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 1422275683815124146561695th %. Queue (ft./ln)2350 550 675 125 150 200 75 200 375 25 50 100 25 100 150 125 150 400Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YESBackground Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 309 492 474 173 178 223 59 178 216 9 20 37 11 65 59 147 149 23995th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 1624276784916124146681895th %. Queue (ft./ln)2400 600 675 150 175 200 100 225 400 25 50 100 25 100 150 150 200 450Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YESBackground Plus Project (No LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 328 509 494 184 188 234 106 228 270 49 60 80 55 116 110 258 251 35395th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 1725287795112034836109122595th %. Queue (ft./ln)2425 625 700 175 175 225 125 275 500 75 100 200 75 150 250 225 300 625Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YESNOYESNO NOYES YES YESBackground Plus Project (With LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 339 515 500 153 158 219 103 228 274 52 66 83 60 125 119 216 198 29595th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 1825296785112034837108102195th %. Queue (ft./ln)2450 625 725 150 175 200 125 275 500 75 100 200 75 175 250 200 250 525Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YESNOYESNO NOYES YES YES##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Notes:Vehicle queue calculated using the Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence level.NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound, EB = Eastbound, WB = Westbound, R = Right, T = Through, L = Left.Right-turn movements with overlapping protected left-turn phasing were adjusted manually to account for the right-turns on red.1 Vehicle queue calculations based on cycle length for signalized intersections and control delay for unsignalized intersections.2 Assumes 25 feet per vehicle in the queue. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 64 Table 7 (Continued) Intersection Vehicle Queue Analysis Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Camino Arroyo and Holloway RoadL/H Connection and Holloway Road (All-way Stop)Southbound Left Westbound Right Eastbound Left Southbound Left Westbound Left Northbound LeftSBL SBL SBL WBR WBR WBR EBL EBL EBL SBL SBL SBL WBL WBL WBL NBL NBL NBLMeasurement AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SATExisting Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 -- -- -- 8.4 8.4 8.6 8.0 8.3 8.5 -- -- -- -- -- --Lanes 1 1 1 -- -- -- 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- --Volume (vphpl ) 23 178 209 -- -- -- 42 49 61 20 47 69 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 2 6 8 -- -- -- 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (ft./ln)250 150 200 -- -- -- 25 25 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- --Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 -- -- -- 125 125 125 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- --Adequate (Y/N) YES YESNO-- -- -- YES YES YES YES YES YES -- -- -- -- -- --Background Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 -- -- -- 8.4 8.4 8.6 8.0 8.3 8.5 -- -- -- -- -- --Lanes 1 1 1 -- -- -- 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- --Volume (vphpl ) 23 178 209 -- -- -- 42 49 61 20 47 69 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 2 6 8 -- -- -- 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (ft./ln)250 150 200 -- -- -- 25 25 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- --Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 -- -- -- 125 125 125 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- --Adequate (Y/N) YES YESNO-- -- -- YES YES YES YES YES YES -- -- -- -- -- --Background Plus Project (No LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 60 60 70 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.2 8.4 8.5 -- -- -- -- -- --Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- --Volume (vphpl ) 221 382 435 64 68 74 42 49 61 42 56 70 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 7 11 13 3 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (ft./ln)2175 275 325 75 75 100 25 25 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- --Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 Future Future Future 125 125 125 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- --Adequate (Y/N) YESNO NOYES YES YES YES YES YES -- -- -- -- -- --Background Plus Project (With LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 60 60 70 9.5 12.7 11.8 9.0 10.0 9.5 9.1 14.7 10.1 8.1 8.9 8.4Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Volume (vphpl ) 214 376 426 64 67 73 109 201 215 40 55 70 93 329 170 2 1 195th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 7 11 13 3 3 4 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 195th %. Queue (ft./ln)2175 275 325 75 75 100 25 50 50 25 25 25 25 75 50 25 25 25Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 Future Future Future 125 125 125 100 100 100 Future Future Future Future Future FutureAdequate (Y/N) YESNO NOYES YES YES YES YES YES##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Notes:Vehicle queue calculated using the Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence level.NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound, EB = Eastbound, WB = Westbound, R = Right, T = Through, L = Left.Right-turn movements with overlapping protected left-turn phasing were adjusted manually to account for the right-turns on red.1 Vehicle queue calculations based on cycle length for signalized intersections and control delay for unsignalized intersections.2 Assumes 25 feet per vehicle in the queue. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 65 Vehicle Queue Analysis Results The results of the queue analysis show that projected queue lengths for the following turn movements would exceed the available queue storage capacity during at least one of the study peak hours: 6. Camino Arroyo and SR 152 – Northbound Left-Turn Movement The maximum queue length for the northbound left-turn movement at the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection is projected to exceed the existing queue storage capacity for this movement during the Saturday peak-hour under existing, background, and background plus project conditions. The addition of project traffic to this turn-movement is projected to increase the 95th percentile vehicle queue length from 16 vehicles per lane under background conditions to 20 vehicles per lane under project conditions (both existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) during the Saturday peak- hour, exceeding the existing storage capacity by a total of 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane. This is considered a project deficiency, according to the City of Gilroy definition of queue deficiencies. Project deficiency: SAT peak-hour Westbound Left-Turn Movement The maximum queue length for the westbound left-turn movement at the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection is projected to exceed the existing queue storage capacity for this movement during the Saturday peak-hour under background plus project conditions. The addition of project traffic to this turn- movement is projected to increase the 95th percentile vehicle queue length from 4 vehicles per lane under background conditions to 8 vehicles per lane under project conditions (both existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) during the Saturday peak-hour, exceeding the existing storage capacity by a total of 2 vehicles (50 feet) per lane. This is considered a project deficiency, according to the City of Gilroy definition of queue deficiencies. Project deficiency: SAT peak-hour Northbound Right-Turn Movement The maximum queue length for the northbound right-turn movement at the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection is projected to exceed the existing queue storage capacity for this movement during the PM peak hour under background plus project conditions and during the Saturday peak hour under existing, background, and background plus project conditions. The addition of project traffic to this turn- movement is projected to increase the 95th percentile vehicle queue length from 6 vehicles under background conditions to 10 vehicles under project conditions (both existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) during the Saturday peak-hour, exceeding the existing storage capacity by a total of 5 vehicles (125 feet). This is considered a project deficiency, according to the City of Gilroy definition of queue deficiencies. Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing – Southbound left-turn movement The maximum queue length for the southbound left-turn movement at the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection is projected to exceed the existing queue storage capacity for this movement during the PM peak-hour under background plus project conditions and during the Saturday peak-hour under existing, background, and background plus project conditions. The addition of project traffic to this turn-movement is projected to increase the 95th percentile vehicle queue length from 8 vehicles under background conditions to 13 vehicles under project conditions (both under the existing roadway Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 66 network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) during the Saturday peak-hour, exceeding the existing storage capacity by a total of 6 vehicles (150 feet). This is considered a project deficiency, according to the City of Gilroy definition of queue deficiencies. Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours Intersection Deficiencies and Possible Improvements Described below are deficiencies that are projected to occur with implementation of the proposed project. The project’s contribution to the projected deficiencies and/or possible improvements to improve operating conditions also are described below. Level of Service Deficiencies – Background Plus Project Conditions 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Deficiency: Background plus project (w/ Luchessa/Holloway connection) – PM peak-hour This City of Gilroy unsignalized intersection is projected to operate acceptably under background conditions and the addition of project traffic (with the Luchessa/Holloway connection) would cause the intersection to operate with average delays corresponding to LOS F on its highest-delay approach and its peak-hour traffic volume would be high enough to meet the thresholds that warrant installation of a traffic signal during the PM peak-hour. This is considered a project deficiency based on the definition of operational deficiencies at unsignalized intersections identified in the City of Gilroy General Plan Transportation Policies. The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under background plus project conditions. Level of Service Deficiencies – General Plan Conditions 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152 Deficiency: General Plan plus project (GP and GP+Luchessa/Holloway connection) – PM & SAT peak hours This City of Gilroy unsignalized intersection is projected to operate deficiently (average delays corresponding to LOS F on its highest-delay approach and its peak-hour traffic volume would be high enough to meet the thresholds that warrant installation of a traffic signal) during the PM and Saturday peak hours under 2040 General Plan conditions. The addition of project traffic to this intersection (under both the GP and GP + Luchessa/Holloway connection roadway networks) would cause the worst approach delay to increase by 4 or more seconds during the PM and Saturday peak hours. The projected deficiency at this intersection is caused cumulatively by the proposed project and buildout of all other development projects included in the City of Gilroy General Plan. The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal, or by restricting left-turn access to and from Silacci Way. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under General Plan plus project conditions. The projected deficiency would be caused cumulatively by the proposed project and all other development projects that are part of the 2040 General Plan buildout conditions. Therefore, the Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 67 project is required to pay the applicable traffic impact fee (TIF) as a fair-share contribution toward future improvements that would restore operations at the intersection to acceptable levels. 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Deficiency: General Plan plus project (GP and GP+Luchessa/Holloway connection) – AM & PM peak hours This City of Gilroy unsignalized intersection is projected to operate deficiently (average delays corresponding to LOS F on its highest-delay approach and its peak-hour traffic volume would be high enough to meet the thresholds that warrant installation of a traffic signal) during the AM and PM peak hours under 2040 General Plan conditions. The addition of project traffic to this intersection (under both the GP and GP + Luchessa/Holloway connection roadway networks) would cause the worst approach delay to increase by 4 or more seconds during the AM and PM peak hours. The projected deficiency at this intersection is caused cumulatively by the proposed project and buildout of all other development projects included in the City of Gilroy General Plan. The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under General Plan plus project conditions. The projected deficiency would be caused cumulatively by the proposed project and all other development projects that are part of the 2040 General Plan buildout conditions. Therefore, the project is required to pay the applicable traffic impact fee (TIF) as a fair-share contribution toward future improvements that would restore operations at the intersection to acceptable levels. Queue Storage Deficiencies 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Movement: Northbound left-turn Available queue storage: 350 feet (14 vehicles) per lane Change in queue length: from 16 vehicles under background conditions to 20 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: SAT peak-hour Deficiency: 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound left-turn pockets an additional 150 feet each. However, this improvement is not feasible due to the back-to-back left-turn pockets with the upstream intersection at Gilroy Crossing. Additionally, the queue deficiency is only projected to occur during the Saturday peak-hour, with the turn pocket providing adequate queue storage capacity to serve both the AM and PM peak hours. Alternatively, the intersection traffic signal phasing could be adjusted to provide additional green time to serve the projected northbound left-turn movement demand during the Saturday peak-hour. However, adjusting the signal phasing could result in other intersection movements experiencing longer queue lengths and intersection delays. Without the extension of the existing northbound left-turn lanes or the adjustment of the intersection signal phasing, the projected queue length for this movement would store within the northbound through lane and extend past the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection. Movement: Westbound left-turn Available queue storage: 150 feet (6 vehicles) per lane Change in queue length: from 4 vehicles under background conditions to 8 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 68 Peak hour: SAT peak-hour Deficiency: 2 vehicles (50 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing westbound left-turn pockets an additional 50 feet each, for a total of 200 feet. However, extending the westbound left-turn pockets at this intersection would affect the length of the approach taper separating the westbound left-turn pockets and the northbound left-turn receiving/acceleration lane at the intersection of Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152). Therefore, in order to be able to implement this improvement, the northbound left-turn movement from Silacci Way to westbound SR 152 may have to be prohibited. Movement: Northbound right-turn Available queue storage: 125 feet (5 vehicles) Change in queue length: from 6 vehicles under background conditions to 10 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: PM and SAT peak hours Deficiency: 5 vehicles (125 feet) The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound right-turn lane an additional 125 feet, for a total of 250 feet. The extension of the northbound right-turn lane would require widening of the east side of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage. The project site plan shows a proposed right-in and right-out driveway along Camino Arroyo located approximately 325 feet south of Pacheco Pass Highway, providing only approximately 75 feet of space between the extended northbound right-turn lane and the proposed driveway. 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Movement: Southbound left-turn Available queue storage: 175 feet (7 vehicles) Change in queue length: from 8 vehicles under background conditions to 13 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: PM and SAT peak hours Deficiency: 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by providing a second southbound left-turn lane. Implementation of this improvement would require two receiving lanes on the east leg of the intersection (project site driveway) and the potential widening of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage, to provide the necessary right-of-way for the second southbound left-turn lane. Freeway Segment Evaluation The City is still required to conform to the requirements of the Valley Transit Authority (VTA) which establishes a uniform program for evaluating the transportation impacts of land-use decisions on the designated CMP Roadway System. The VTA’s Congestion Management Program (CMP) has yet to adopt and implement guidelines and standards for the evaluation of the CMP roadway system using VMT. Therefore, the effects of the proposed project on freeway segments in the vicinity of the project area following the current methodologies, as outlined in the VTA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, were completed. However, this analysis is presented for informational purposes only. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 69 Study Freeway Segments The following freeway segments were evaluated: 1. US 101, San Martin Avenue to Masten Avenue 2. US 101, Masten Avenue to Leavesley Road 3. US 101, Leavesley Road to Pacheco Pass Highway 4. US 101, Pacheco Pass Highway to Monterey Road 5. US 101, Monterey Road to SR 25 Freeway Segment Level of Service Methodology As prescribed in the CMP technical guidelines, the level of service for freeway segments is estimated based on vehicle density. Density is calculated by the following formula: D = V / S Where: D= density, in vehicles per mile per lane (vpmpl) V= peak hour volume, in vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl) S= average travel speed, in miles per hour (mph) The vehicle density on a segment is correlated to the level of service as shown in Table 8. The CMP specifies that a capacity of 2,300 vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl) be used for mixed-flow lane segments that are three lanes or wider in one direction, and a capacity of 2,200 vphpl be used for mixed-flow lane segments that are two lanes wide in one direction. A capacity of 1,650 vphpl should be used for high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. The CMP defines an acceptable level of service for freeway segments as LOS E or better. CMP Definition of Adverse Operations Effects on Freeway Segments An adverse effect on traffic conditions on a freeway segment would occur if for either peak hour: 1. The level of service on the freeway segment degrades from an acceptable LOS E or better under no project conditions to an unacceptable LOS F under with project conditions, or 2. The level of service on the freeway segment is LOS F and the amount of traffic added to that segment by the proposed project constitutes one percent or more of the capacity on that segment. Freeway Segment Level of Service Results The results of the CMP freeway level of service analysis under existing plus project conditions are summarized in Table 9. Existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes, average speeds, and densities for the subject freeway segments were obtained from the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority CMP Monitoring & Conformance Report, 2018, which was the latest available monitoring report at the time the traffic analysis was prepared. The CMP report only includes freeway count data for the AM and PM peak hours. Traffic Volumes on the study freeway segments under existing plus project conditions were estimated by adding project trips to the existing freeway traffic volumes. The results of the freeway segment level of service analysis show that the following study freeway segment currently operates at an unacceptable LOS F during the PM peak-hour: 11. US 101, Southbound from Monterey Road to Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) (PM peak-hour) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 70 The proposed project is not projected to add traffic representing one percent (1%) or more of the segments’ capacity to the deficient study freeway segment, therefore, the proposed project would not create a level of service deficiency at any of the study freeway segments. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 71 Table 8 Freeway Levels of Service Based on Density Level of Service Description Density (vehicles/mile/lane) Average operating speeds at the free-flow speed generally prevail. Vehicles are almost completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. B F Vehicular flow breakdowns occur. Large queues form behind breakdown points.>58 At this level, the freeway operates at or near capacity. Operations in this level are volatile, because there are virtually no usable gaps in the traffic stream, leaving little room to maneuver within the traffic stream. Speeds at or near the free-flow speed of the freeway prevail. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is noticeably restricted, and lane changes require more vigilance on the part of the driver. Speeds begin to decline slightly with increased flows at this level. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is more noticeably limited, and the driver experiences reduced physical and psychological comfort levels. C Sources: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (Santa Clara County and City of Gilroy adopted level of service methodology). Traffic Level of Service Analysis Guidelines , Santa Clara County Transportation Authority Congestion Management Program, June 2003. A D E >46-58 >26-46 >18-26 >11-18 0-11 Speeds at the free-flow speed are generally maintained. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted, and the general level of physical and psychological comfort provided to drivers is still high. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 72 Table 9 Freeway Segment Level of Service Results Peak Speed1# of Capacity Volume1Density Volume % of Volume % of# Freeway Segment Direction Hour (mi/hr) Lanes1(vph) (pc/h)(pc/mi/ln)LOS (vph) Capacity (vph) Capacity1 US 101 from Betabel Road to Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) NB AM 38 2 4,400 3,770 50 E 11 0.25 11 0.25NB PM 58 2 4,400 3,769 33 D 10 0.23 10 0.232 US 101 from Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) to Monterey Road NB AM 36 2 4,400 3,713 51 E 22 0.50 22 0.50NB PM 42 2 4,400 3,901 46 D 20 0.45 20 0.453 US 101 from Monterey Road to Pacheco Pass Highway NB AM 64 3 6,900 4,318 23 C 22 0.32 22 0.32NB PM 63 3 6,900 4,558 24 C 20 0.29 20 0.294 US 101 from Pacheco Pass Highway to Leavesley Road NB AM 59 3 6,900 5,596 32 D 35 0.51 35 0.51NB PM 59 3 6,900 5,494 31 D 38 0.55 38 0.555 US 101 from Leavesley Road to Masten Avenue NB AM 40 3 6,900 5,779 48 E 24 0.34 24 0.34NB PM 57 3 6,900 5,772 34 D 26 0.37 26 0.376 US 101 from Masten Avenue to San Martin Avenue NB AM 34 3 6,900 5,431 53 E 20 0.29 20 0.29NB PM 52 3 6,900 5,979 38 D 22 0.32 22 0.327 US 101 from San Martin Avenue to Masten Avenue SB AM 60 3 6,900 5,369 30 D 22 0.32 22 0.32SB PM 38 3 6,900 5,647 50 E 20 0.28 20 0.288 US 101 from Masten Avenue to Leavesley Road SB AM 67 3 6,900 2,626 13 B 26 0.37 26 0.37SB PM 66 3 6,900 5,533 28 D 23 0.33 23 0.339 US 101 from Leavesley Road to Pacheco Pass Highway SB AM 64 3 6,900 4,419 23 C 38 0.55 38 0.55SB PM 59 3 6,900 5,504 31 D 34 0.49 34 0.4910 US 101 from Pacheco Pass Highway to Monterey Road SB AM 64 3 6,900 4,225 22 C 19 0.28 19 0.28SB PM 30 3 6,900 5,154 57 E 22 0.32 22 0.3211 US 101 from Monterey Road to Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) SB AM 62 2 4,400 3,315 27 D 19 0.43 19 0.43SB PM 21 2 4,400 2,80467 F22 0.50 22 0.5012 US 101 from Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) to Betabel Road SB AM 62 2 4,400 3,212 26 C 10 0.22 10 0.22SB PM 58 2 4,400 3,726 32 D 11 0.25 11 0.251 Source: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Congestion Management Program (CMP) Monitoring Study, 2018. Although the CMP Monitoring report does not include count data for the Saturday peak-hour, for informational purposes, the Saturday peak-hour project traffic on the freeway is included.Bold indicates unacceptable LOS, or project traffic exceeding one percent (1%) of the segments capacity.Bold and boxed indicate adverse effect.Existing Plus Project Project Trips (Existing Roadway Network)Project Trips (w/ Luchessa-Holloway Connection) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 73 5. Other Transportation Issues This chapter presents an analysis of other transportation issues associated with the project, including: Site access and on-site circulation A review of the required on-site parking Freeway ramp analysis Potential impacts to bicycle, pedestrian, transit facilities Unlike the level of service impact methodology, which is adopted by the City Council, the analyses in this chapter are based on professional judgment in accordance with the standards and methods employed by the traffic engineering community. Any recommended transportation improvements identified as part of the review may be included as part of the project’s Conditions of Approval. However, the improvements are not required to mitigate project impacts per CEQA guidelines. Project Site Access and On-Site Circulation This analysis is based on a review of the various project site plans, dated September 2022, produced by ACE Design LLC. The site plan is presented on Figure 2 of this report. Site Access Access to the project site would be provided via four driveways along Camino Arroyo (three existing driveway curb cuts and one proposed new driveway) and one along Holloway Road (existing). The project trip assignment at the project site driveways under the existing roadway network and with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection are shown on Figures 18 and 19. The three northernmost driveways along Camino Arroyo (labeled as Driveways 1 through 3 on Figure 19) would provide access to the fast-food restaurant, gas station/convenience store, and hotels, with all three of the proposed land uses being accessible from each of the three driveways. The warehouse buildings would be accessible via the southernmost driveway along Camino Arroyo (labeled as Driveway 4) and the driveway along Holloway Road (labeled as Driveway 5). Although the site plan shows a fence and gates separating the two warehouse buildings, as directed by the project applicant, it was assumed that these gates would remain open during regular business hours, providing a connection between the two buildings. However, no direct connection would be provided between the fast-food restaurant/gas station/hotel sites (northern project site) and the warehouse sites (southern project site). Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 74 Figure 18 Project Traffic at the Project Site Driveways (Without Luchessa/Holloway Connection) 128(135)[147]154(163)[177]20(8)[1]6(21)[1]17(14)[24]44(41)[49]71(66)[79]14(16)[21]1(2)[0]2(1)[0]= Inbound Path= AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes = Outbound PathLEGENDXX(XX)[XX]= DrivewayX12345 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 75 Figure 19 Project Traffic at the Project Site Driveways (With Luchessa/Holloway Connection) 127(134)[146]1(2)[2]8(6)[10]144(155)[165] 1(1)[1]16(14)[22]47(43)[52]65(62)[72]14(15)[20]= Inbound Path= AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes = Outbound PathLEGENDXX(XX)[XX]= Driveway20(8)[1]6(21)[1]1(2)[0]2(1)[0]12345X Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 76 Operations at the Project Driveways The proposed project is projected to add approximately 500 trips (inbound and outbound combined) during the highest peak hour (Saturday peak-hour) to all five driveways serving the project site. Project traffic at the driveways was assigned based on its origin/destination, the existing and proposed roadway networks, site layout, and project driveway locations and turn restrictions. Following this method, it is estimated that approximately 64 percent (%) of the total project traffic would utilize the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing project driveway (Driveway 2), and the remainder would use all other driveways, as illustrated on Figures 18 and 19. Driveway 1 Driveway 1 is a proposed new driveway located approximately 325 feet south of Pacheco Pass Highway and would consist of an approximately 33.8-foot wide right-in/right-out access-only driveway. Driveway 1 would provide direct access to the fast-food restaurant and gas station/convenience store. It is estimated that Driveway 1 would serve a maximum of 49 inbound and 79 outbound trips during the Saturday peak-hour (or approximately 25% of the total project traffic), with slightly fewer trips during the AM and PM peak hours. Traffic operations at Driveway 1 would be greatly dictated by the operations along northbound Camino Arroyo at Pacheco Pass Highway. The level of service calculations at the intersection of Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway show that during the Saturday peak-hour under background conditions, the northbound through queue length is projected to be approximately 14 vehicles per lane, or 350 feet per lane assuming a vehicle length of 25 feet. A queue of this length would extend to the proposed Driveway 1 causing outbound access at Driveway 1 to potentially be momentarily blocked. The projected delay along northbound Camino Arroyo at Pacheco Pass Highway is approximately 59 seconds during the Saturday peak-hour under background plus project conditions. A similar delay would be experienced by outbound traffic at Driveway 1, resulting in a maximum queue length of 3 vehicles at Driveway 1 (outbound direction) during the Saturday peak-hour. Alternatively, drivers could utilize Driveway 2 to exit the site. During the AM and PM peak hours, the northbound queue length along Camino Arroyo is not projected to affect operations at Driveway 1. Driveway 1 would provide direct access to the fast-food restaurant and gas station/convenience store, the two highest trip generators of the proposed uses. Providing direct inbound/outbound access to these land uses would allow the traffic associated with these uses, in particular the outbound traffic, to bypass the main access intersection (Driveway 2) to exit the site. Driveway 2 Driveway 2 would consist of the east leg of the existing signalized intersection of Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing and would provide full access to the northern side of the project site. Driveway 2 is shown on the site plan to be 40 feet wide and provide one inbound lane and two outbound lanes. Driveway 2 would be adjacent to the gas station and northern hotel and is projected to serve approximately 64% of the total project traffic, or approximately 300 (inbound and outbound) peak-hour project trips. The level of service calculations show that the Driveway 2 intersection is projected to operate at acceptable LOS C or better during all three peak hours analyzed under background plus project conditions. It is also projected that a maximum queue length of 4 vehicles would be formed by outbound traffic making a right-turn at Driveway 2. The project site plan shows approximately 100 feet of queue storage capacity at Driveway 2, which would accommodate approximately 4 vehicles per lane, adequately serving the projected queue length. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 77 Driveways 3 and 4 Driveway 3 would provide direct access to the two proposed hotels and is shown on the site plan to be 30 feet wide. This existing driveway (curb cut) is located across from, although not aligning with, one of the Gilroy Crossing shopping center driveways. The offset location of these driveways, along with a raised center median along Camino Arroyo, allow for partial left-turn access only while reducing conflicting movements at the driveways. For example, at Driveway 3, right-in and out access, as well as left-turn in access, is provided to both the project site and the Gilroy Crossing shopping center, but no left-turn out access is provided from either driveway. It is estimated that a maximum of 21 vehicles would make a left-turn into the project site at Driveway 3, and a maximum of 24 vehicles would make a right turn out of Driveway 3 during the Saturday peak-hour. Approximately 7% of the total project traffic is estimated to utilize Driveway 3 during the peak hours. Driveway 4, like Driveway 3, would be located across from but just south of the southernmost Gilroy Crossing shopping center driveway, providing limited access to the warehouse buildings. The offset location and raised center median along Camino Arroyo provide full-access to the shopping center driveway, but only right-in and out access to Driveway 4. The full-access shopping center driveway provides direct access to the rear of the retail buildings, facilitating outbound access for larger truck traffic delivering goods to the stores. Traffic accessing Driveway 4 from the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection would have to complete a U-turn at the intersection of Camino Arroyo/Holloway Road or access the site via Holloway Road. It is estimated that a maximum of 1 inbound vehicle and 1 outbound vehicle would access Driveway 4 during the Saturday peak-hour. Approximately 4% of the total project traffic is estimated to utilize Driveway 4 during the peak hours. Driveway 4 is shown on the site plan to be 30 feet wide. Driveway 3 is located approximately 200 feet south of Driveway 2 and approximately 350 feet north of Driveway 4. Driveway 4 is located approximately 260 feet north of Holloway Road. The segment of Camino Arroyo between Gilroy Crossing and Holloway Road consists of a four-lane roadway with a raised center median and is projected to carry approximately 350 vehicles (both directions combined) during the AM peak-hour, 550 vehicles during the PM peak-hour, and 650 vehicles during the Saturday peak-hour under background plus project conditions. Ideally, when designing site access, opposing driveways along a roadway segment should align to form an intersection, providing full access and concentrating all turn-movements of the intersection to a single location. However, both Driveways 3 and 4 and their opposing driveways across the street were designed to provide limited access by off-setting the driveways and with the use of a raised center median. Providing limited access is typically done to reduce conflicting movements along roadway segments where physical traffic controls (such as stop signs or traffic signal) are not desired. In order to provide full access at Driveways 3 and 4, these site driveways would need to be realigned with the opposing shopping center driveways, the center media would need to be removed, and the intersections may need to be either stop-controlled or signalized, depending on the traffic demand. Alternatively, a two-way left-turn (TWLT) lane also could be provided. Left-turn outbound access from a driveway onto an uncontrolled four-lane roadway is typically not recommended. However, since these driveways are located less than 500 feet from the Camino Arroyo intersections with Gilroy Crossing and Holloway Road, it is not recommended that an all-way stop-control or traffic signal be installed at either one of these two locations. Based on the project trip assignment, potential left-turn outbound demand from Driveways 3 and 4 would be minimal. Therefore, with the limited access and relatively low traffic volume projections at Driveways 3 and 4, operations at these two driveways are anticipated to be adequate. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 78 Driveway 5 Driveway 5 is located along Holloway Road and consists of a full-access driveway. Driveway 5 would provide access to the warehouse sites. Minimal traffic is estimated to utilize Driveway 5 during the Saturday peak hour. Driveway 5 is shown on the site plan to be 42 feet wide. With the relatively low traffic volumes along Holloway Road under background plus project conditions, Driveway 5 is anticipated to operate adequately. Driveway Geometrics The City of Gilroy General Guidelines document, dated August 18, 2014, specifies that industrial and commercial driveways should have a minimum and maximum approach width of 35 and 45 feet, respectively. Although Driveways 1, 3, and 4 do not satisfy the City’s minimum width requirements for commercial/industrial driveways, these driveways would provide two 15-foot-wide lanes, which is adequate for the proposed limited-access operations. Driveway 2 is shown on the site plan to provide one inbound lane and two outbound lanes. However, as it was shown on the intersection operations analysis presented in the previous chapter, in order to serve the projected southbound left-turn movement queue demand, two southbound left-turn lanes are required, which would also require providing two inbound lanes at Driveway 2. Sight Distance Adequate sight distance should be provided at the project driveways. Outbound traffic at the driveways must be able to see opposing traffic in order to safely complete a turn out of the site. All project site driveways, with the exception of Driveway 1, are located along a straight roadway segment with minimal visual obstruction. Driveway 1 is located along a slightly curved segment of Camino Arroyo. Additionally, a bus stop is currently located along the project site frontage approximately 150 feet south of Driveway 1. The posted speed limit on Camino Arroyo along the project site frontage is 35 miles per hour (mph). According to the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, the minimum required stopping sight distance for a roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 mph is 250 feet. The sight distance from Driveways 3, 4, and 5 is well beyond the 250 feet minimum distance requirement. The sight distance from Driveway 1 would be to the intersection of Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing, just above the 250 feet of minimal distance required. However, this sight distance also assumes that the existing bus stop would not interfere with the driver’s line of sight from Driveway 1 to the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection. Objects such as bus stop shelters or signage could potentially interfere with drivers’ line of sight from Driveway 1. Providing a clear line of sight from Driveway 1, the available sight distance at all project site driveways would be adequate, based on Caltrans requirements. Recommendation: The design of the project site should ensure that design features, such as the landscaping, signage, bus stop and other physical features, along the project site frontage and at the project site driveways, in particular near Driveway 1, would not interfere with the sight distance at the proposed site driveways. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 79 Emergency Vehicle Access Project site driveways must be designed with adequate width to allow emergency vehicles access in and out of the site. Per City design guidelines, a fire access roadway greater than or equal to 20 feet in width is applicable to all commercial, industrial, and residential buildings. The fire access roadway should be provided within 150 feet of structures. The site plan shows most drive aisles within the project site to range in width from 24 to 26 feet, with a couple of locations with a greater width. All project driveways are a minimum of 30 feet wide, providing the minimum width requirement for emergency vehicle access and circulation. However, the main access driveway (Driveway 2) is proposed to provide a single 11.6-foot-wide inbound lane, in addition to two outbound lanes and raised center median. Therefore, the width of the inbound access lane at Driveway 2 does not meet the 20-foot minimum width requirement for emergency vehicle access. An emergency vehicle access and circulation plan was prepared as part of the site design (see Figure 20). Emergency vehicle access plans typically show the wheel travel path of a fire engine (or any other larger vehicle) entering, traveling through, and exiting the project site and are used to demonstrate that the proposed site plan layout, drive aisle widths, and corner radii would provide adequate emergency vehicular access and circulation. The fire truck circulation plan shows the wheel travel path of a 40-foot- long fire truck entering and traveling through the site. Emergency vehicle wheel travel paths are shown entering Driveways 3, 4 and 5, circulating the hotels and warehouse sites, and exiting the site via the same or an adjacent driveway. However, no access or circulation within the fast-food restaurant and gas station sites (Driveway 1) are shown on the plan. Additionally, the wheel travel path from Driveway 2 appears to depict outbound access but is not correctly shown as making a right-turn out of the site. The plan also shows emergency vehicles accessing the project site from westbound Holloway Road (Driveway 5) and northbound Camino Arroyo (Driveways 3 and 4). Although the circulation plan shows adequate site access and on-site circulation for a 40-foot long or smaller emergency vehicle from/to Driveways 3, 4, and 5, at some locations, mainly around turns, the wheel travel paths appear to be close to parking islands, fences, or structures. Additionally, as mentioned above, no access or circulation within the fast-food restaurant/gas station sites and Driveway 1 are shown on the plan. The project site is served by the Chestnut Fire Station, located at the northeast corner of the Chestnut Street/Tenth Street intersection, less than one mile west of the project site. Emergency vehicles accessing the project site would travel eastbound on Pacheco Pass Highway to Camino Arroyo to enter the site. Since Driveway 2 consists of a signalized full-access driveway, this driveway would provide access to the northern part of the project site emergency vehicles coming from the Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway intersection. However, due to the existing raised center median along Camino Arroyo, access to Driveways 3 and 4 from southbound Camino Arroyo would not be possible. Instead, access to Driveways 3 and 4 would be provided via the Silacci Way/Pacheco Pass Highway intersection, heading westbound on Holloway Road and northbound on Camino Arroyo. This longer access route would result in increased emergency vehicle’s response times. Alternatively, all emergency access to the north part of the project site could be provided via Driveway 2 (southbound left-turn) while all emergency access to the south part of the project site could be provided via Driveway 5 (eastbound left-turn). This, however, may also result in increased response time to some of the parts of the project site as the fire truck travels through the site. Inbound access to Driveway 1 from southbound Camino Arroyo would not be possible either, since this would require emergency vehicles to complete a U-turn at Driveway 2, which due to the width of Camino Arroyo (40 feet in the northbound direction), is not possible. Therefore, inbound emergency access to the fast-food restaurant and gas station areas should be provided via Driveway 2. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 80 The fastest emergency access route to the project site would be making a southbound left-turn into each of the project site driveways from Camino Arroyo. This, however, would require the removal of the raised center median, and consequently, the realignment of Driveways 3 and 4 with the opposing driveways across the roadway. Additionally, Driveway 2 may need to be widened to provide the 20-foot minimum width requirement for emergency vehicle access, or two inbound lanes. Although the emergency vehicle access and circulation plan shows adequate on-site circulation, site access as shown on the site plan may not represent the best access route in terms of response times. Ultimately, City staff, in consultation with the Fire Department, will determine the required improvements to provide adequate emergency response to the project site. Recommendation: The project should widen the inbound lane at Driveway 2 (Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection) to meet the minimum width requirement for emergency access (20 feet), or provide a second inbound lane to provide adequate inbound emergency vehicle access at this signalized intersection. Recommendation: The project must work with the City and the Fire Department to identify the best access route for emergency vehicles to provide access to the entire project site and adequate response times. Fuel Delivery Truck Access and Circulation Fuel delivery trucks also would access the site on a regular basis. The site plan shows fuel delivery trucks entering the project site from northbound Camino Arroyo at both Driveways 1 and 2, access the underground storage tanks (located south of the row of fuel pumps), and exit the site via Driveway 1. This access and circulation pattern would require delivery trucks to access the site via the Cameron Boulevard/Pacheco Pass Highway intersection, travel southbound on Cameron Boulevard to Venture Way and to northbound Camino Arroyo. The site plan shows the wheel travel path for the fuel delivery trucks adequately entering, circulating, and exiting the project site. Therefore, the proposed site plan layout and driveway/drive aisle width dimensions would be adequate for fuel delivery truck access (from northbound Camino Arroyo) and on- site circulation. Solid Waste Collection Trucks Access A solid waste handling plan was prepared as part of the site design (see Figure 21). The plan shows waste collector trucks entering the project site via each of the project driveways, access the trash enclosure for each of the proposed buildings, and exit the site via the same driveway. As with the emergency vehicle access, because of the limited access at the project driveways along Camino Arroyo, waste collector trucks access would be provided by completing a southbound left-turn movement at Driveway 2 and via Silacci Way or Cameron Boulevard to Holloway Road and Camino Arroyo at the rest of the driveways. Trash enclosures are shown on the site plan to be located adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity (less than 100 feet) of each of the proposed buildings, with the exception of the north hotel (Residence Inn), which shows the nearest trash enclosure to be located more than 100 feet northeast of the building. All internal drive aisles are proposed to be a minimum of 24 feet wide, providing adequate on-site circulation for waste collector trucks. Therefore, as shown on the solid waste handling plan, the proposed site plan layout and driveway/drive aisle width dimensions would be adequate for trash collector trucks to access and circulate the project site. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 81 Figure 20 Proposed Fire Truck Circulation Plan Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 82 Figure 21 Proposed Solid Waste Truck Collector Circulation Plan Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 83 Pedestrian Access Pedestrian traffic to/from the project site would be able to utilize the existing pedestrian facilities (sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian signal phasing at signalized intersections) along the adjacent streets to access the project site. Sidewalks are found along all developed areas within the project area, including along the west side of Camino Arroyo, the north side of Holloway Road (west of Camino Arroyo), the south side of Pacheco Pass Highway (from US 101 to Camino Arroyo and along the McCarthy Business Park, located approximately 1,000 feet east of Camino Arroyo), and along both sides of Camino Arroyo, north of the project site. However, as described earlier in this report, most undeveloped parcels have missing sidewalks, including along the entire project site frontage on Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road, and along most of Pacheco Pass Highway, creating an incomplete pedestrian network. The project site is required to implement full site frontage improvements, including driveways, curb ramps, and sidewalks. City guidelines require minimum sidewalk width of 10 feet in commercial areas. City guidelines also requires development projects to install (or upgrade existing) pedestrian crossings and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant curb ramps at intersections. By implementing these requirements, additional pedestrian facilities are provided to improve the pedestrian network as part of the city’s normal growth process. The site plan shows new sidewalks along the entire project site frontage, along with curb ramps at all project driveways. With implementation of the proposed sidewalks and curb ramps, pedestrian access between the project site and all adjacent pedestrian destinations, including shopping, dining, and bus stops, would be provided. However, various adjacent roadway segments would continue to have missing sidewalks, which will be installed as undeveloped parcels develop. On-Site Circulation The site plan shows 90-degree parking spaces throughout the project served by manly 24- to 26-foot- wide drive aisles. The fast-food restaurant, gas station, and hotels (2) would all be accessible via Driveways 1, 2, and 3. The warehouse sites would be accessible via Driveways 4 and 5, however, no direct vehicular connection would be provided between these sites and the rest of the site. Fast-Food Restaurant Direct access to the fast-food restaurant (and drive-through window) would be provided via Driveway 1. Driveway 1 is anticipated to serve fast-food restaurant and gas station traffic only. Drivers would enter the site, park, or access the drive-through window, and exit the site, or would access the fast-food restaurant after (or prior) to accessing the gas station. Overall, on-site circulation within the fast-food restaurant area is anticipated to be adequate. Drive-Through Window Operations The proposed drive-through lane entrance would be located along the south side of the building and would wrap around the building in a counter-clockwise direction, ending in front of the building next to the Camino Arroyo project site frontage. The site plan shows queuing capacity for approximately 9 vehicles within the restaurant’s drive-through lane. The queue length at drive-through windows is dependent of the type of establishment and its service rate. For example, drive-through lane lengths for other restaurants in town range from approximately 100 feet/4 vehicles (Wienerschnitzel restaurant on First Street), 250 feet/10 vehicles (McDonald’s restaurant on First Street), 170 feet/7 vehicles and 190 feet/7-8 vehicles (Starbucks on Camino Arroyo and Renz Lane, respectively), to approximately 300 feet/12 vehicles (Sonic restaurant Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 84 on Pacheco Pass Highway). The City of Gilroy Zoning Ordinance, under section 30.31.20 (Parking Spaces Requirements), states that restaurants with drive-up windows must provide 8 auto waiting spaces for each exterior service window. Limited published information regarding drive-through window operations and queue lengths is available. However, a study completed by CountingCars.com, a transportation data collection equipment manufacturer located in Minneapolis, Minnesota, provides some information on drive- through window operations for common land uses. “Drive-Through Queue Generation”, dated February 2012, provides queuing data for different land uses with drive-through service, based on video recordings conducted at a minimum of six sites per use. All sites surveyed were located in Minneapolis, Minnesota or Kansas City, Kansas and include fast-food restaurants and coffee shops. The report does not provide information on the size of the coffee shops or the fast-food restaurants. Based on the data collected, the report concludes that the 85th percentile maximum queue length for coffee shops is 13 vehicles and 12 vehicles for fast-food restaurants. This information, however, is based on a limited number of studies, none of which were conducted in California, and unknown coffee shop/restaurant size. Thus, the maximum queue length information presented in the study can only be used for comparison purposes. Based on the above queue length information, the proposed queue storage capacity for the proposed restaurant could be exceeded by three vehicles. Although the anticipated queue length within the proposed drive-through lane cannot be estimated without further research on similar land uses in the area, the proposed length of the drive-through lane would exceed the 8-vehicle waiting spaces required by the City’s Zoning Ordinance, and would be in line with the storage capacity provided at similar land use drive-through lanes in town. If the drive- through lane capacity would be exceeded by two to four vehicles, this queue would extend within the restaurant parking area, which although not ideal, would not extend to or create operation issues at Driveway 1 or the gas station. Gas Station with Convenience Store and Car Wash The gas station would be directly accessible via Driveways 1 and 2. Drivers would enter the site, access the gas station and/or convenience store, proceed to the car wash, the fast-food restaurant, or exit the site. The entrance to the car wash would be located along the south side of the convenience store and would wrap around behind the building to the car wash tunnel, located along the north side of the store. The gas station area includes wide drive aisles (from 31 to 45 feet wide) that would provide adequate circulation and additional queuing space at the gas pumps without blocking access to adjacent parking spaces. Overall, adequate circulation between the different services within the gas station site and between the gas station and other uses on site would be provided. Hotels Direct access to the hotels would be provided via Driveway 3. A row of parking spaces extending directly from Driveway 3 would separate the two hotel buildings, with the main entrance to both hotels facing this row of parking. Circulation within the hotel area would be circular around the proposed buildings, with parking for the south hotel (Holiday Inn Express) located along most sides of the building and parking for the north hotel (Residence Inn) located mainly behind the building. Based on the proposed drive aisle widths (mainly 26 feet wide), circulation within the hotels area would be adequate. Warehouses Direct access to the warehouse sites would be provided primarily via Driveway 4, with additional access provided via Driveway 5. Most drive aisles within the warehouse sites parking areas are shown on the site plan to be 26 feet wide. The majority of parking spaces would be located in front of the proposed northerly warehouse building (labeled Warehouse-2 on the site plan), with additional parking spaces Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 85 behind the building. Additional parking for the proposed southerly warehouse building (labeled Warehouse-1 on the site plan) would be located adjacent to Holloway Road and the eastern project site boundary. Circulation within the warehouse sites would be continuous allowing drivers to circulate the site and exit via one of the two access driveways. Based on the proposed drive aisle widths and site layout, circulation within the warehouse area would be adequate. Pedestrian On-Site Circulation The site plan shows marked pedestrian pathways connecting the parking areas to the proposed buildings and proposed sidewalks along the project site frontage on Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road. However, with the exception of the two hotels, no direct pedestrian connection is shown between adjacent uses. Pedestrians traveling between on-site buildings would have to do so via the sidewalks along the project site frontage. Additionally, some of the north hotel parking spaces would be located next to the gas station, along the Driveway 2 drive aisle, however, a direct pedestrian connection is not shown between these parking spaces and the hotel. Recommendation: A defined pedestrian connection should be provided between the north hotel (Residence Inn) building and the hotel parking spaces located next to the gas station. Parking The projected parking demand for the proposed project was estimated based on the City of Gilroy parking requirements contained within the City of Gilroy Zoning Ordinance (Section 30, Article 31, Off- street parking requirements) and project information. City of Gilroy Parking Requirements The City of Gilroy parking code has the following off-street parking requirements for the proposed land uses: Convenience market (general retail): 1 stall per 250 s.f. of gross floor area Fast-food restaurant with drive-up window: 1 parking stall for every 100 s.f. of gross floor area plus 1 stall for each shift employee Hotel: 1 stall for each guest room, plus 6 stalls Warehouses over 10,000 square feet of gross floor area: 1 stall per five 5,000 square feet of gross floor area; minimum 10 stalls per parcel It should be noted that City staff requested that the number of parking spaces required to serve the warehouse use be estimated based on a parking rate of 1 parking space per 350 square feet of gross floor area, which is the City’s parking rate for industrial land uses. Additionally, the parking rates for the convenience store do not include additional parking requirements for the car wash, which would be part of the gas station. Based on the City of Gilroy adopted parking rates, the size of the proposed project, information contained on the site plan, and the above assumptions, the proposed project is estimated to require a total of 385 parking spaces (see Table 10), not including the parking spaces required for the gas station car wash. The site plan shows a total of 515 parking stalls on site, which would exceed the City parking requirements. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 86 Table 10 Parking Evaluation Americans with Disabilities Act Requirements The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires developments to provide one accessible parking space for every 25 parking spaces provided for the first 100 parking spaces, and one additional parking space for every 50 parking spaces provided from 100 up to 200 total parking spaces. Accessible parking spaces shall be at least 96 inches (8 feet) wide and shall be located on the shortest accessible route of travel from adjacent parking to an accessible entrance. In addition, one in every 8 accessible spaces, but no less than one, shall be served by an access aisle at least 96 inches wide and shall be designated as “van accessible”. It should be noted that the accessible parking spaces are not additional parking spaces but are part of the minimum parking spaces required. The site plan shows a total of 20 accessible parking spaces are proposed. These consists of two accessible parking spaces at each of the restaurant and gas station sites, a total of nine accessible parking spaces to serve the hotel uses, and a total of seven accessible parking spaces to serve the warehouse uses. Therefore, the proposed project satisfies the minimum ADA parking requirements. Freeway Ramp Analysis A freeway ramp analysis was conducted at two freeway interchanges that provides access to the project site. The analysis is based on calculated volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios and includes freeway ramps that provide access to/from the project site area. The study freeway interchanges include: 1. US 101 at Tenth Street/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) 2. US 101 at Monterey Road Freeway Interchange Ramp Analysis Methodology The freeway ramp analysis was performed to evaluate projected interchange operations with implementation of the proposed project and supplements the intersection level of service analysis at the freeway ramp intersections. The study freeway ramps are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans. The analysis is based on calculated ramp capacity (volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios) at the study freeway ramps. Evaluation of the ramps' operating levels is based on Caltrans level of service Land Use Size 1 Parking Rate 2 Required Parking Spaces Provided Parking Spaces Required ADA Parking3 Convenience Store/Gas Station4 2,880 s.f. 1 stall per 250 s.f. 12 24 1 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window5 2,600 s.f. 1 stall per 100 s.f. + 1 stall per employee 31 30 2 Hotels (2) 200 rooms 1 stall per room + 6 stalls (per hotel) 212 208 7 Warehouses(2)6 45,500 s.f. 1 stall per 350 s.f. 130 131 5 Total: 385 515 20 1 Information obtained from the project site plan dated February 14, 2022 by ACE Design LLC. 2 Source: City of Gilroy Zoning Ordinance Section 30.31. 3 The required number of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) parking spaces are based on the number of parking spaces provided. 4 The parking rates for the convenience store land use do not include additional parking requirements for the car wash, which would be part of the gas station. 5 The fast-food restaurant would include 5 employees based on information provided by the project applicant. 6 City staff requested that the number of parking spaces required for the warehouse use be estimated based on a parking rate of 1 parking space per 350 square feet of gross floor area, which is the City’s parking rate for industrial land uses. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 87 standards (LOS C or better). The correlation between V/C ratio and level of service for freeway ramps is shown in Table 11. Table 11 Freeway Ramp Levels of Service Based on Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Definition of Adverse Operations Effects on Freeway Ramps The Caltrans level of service standard for freeway ramps is LOS C or better. An adverse effect on traffic conditions on a freeway ramp would occur if for either peak hour: 1. The level of service at the study facility degrades from an acceptable LOS C or better under background conditions to an unacceptable LOS D or worse under background plus project conditions, or 2. The level of service on the freeway ramp is deficient under background conditions and the project adds traffic to the ramp. Freeway Ramp Volumes Peak-hour ramp volumes were interpolated from turning-movement traffic volumes at the adjacent ramp intersections. Freeway Ramp Capacities The study freeway off-ramps consist of one or two lanes at the point where they diverge from the freeway mainline and some widen to multiple lanes at the off-ramp intersection. For this ramp analysis, the ramp capacity for the off-ramps is dictated by the number of lanes at the ramps’ diverging point from the freeway mainline, since this is the location that dictates how much traffic exits the freeway. The study on-ramps consist of one or two mixed-flow lanes with or without a separate HOV lane and are controlled by a ramp meter during the peak hours in the peak commute direction only (northbound in the morning and southbound in the evening). All multiple-lane on-ramps studied narrow to a single lane after the ramp meter before the freeway merge point. For metered on-ramps, the constraint point Level of Service V/C Ratio A Less than 0.600 B 0.600-0.699 C 0.700-0.799 D 0.800-0.899 E 0.900-0.999 F 1.000 and Greater Source: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual . (Washington, D.C., 2000) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 88 is at the meter. For non-metered on-ramps, the constraint point is at the ramps’ merging point with the freeway. The typical capacity for a diagonal freeway ramp is 1,800 vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl). Loop ramps have a typical capacity of 1,600 vphpl. For metered on-ramps, the capacity depends on the ramp meter rate. Freeway ramp meter rates for the study on-ramps were assumed to be 900 vph (maximum allowable rate per ramp in Caltrans District 4). Freeway Ramp Configurations The US 101 at Monterey Road interchange provides full-access to/from US 101 and includes the following ramps: US 101 southbound diagonal off-ramp (SB off-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a traffic signal on Monterey Road and consists of one lane where it diverges from the freeway mainline, for a total capacity of 1,800 vph. US 101 southbound diagonal on-ramp (SB on-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a ramp meter during the PM peak hour only and narrows down to a single lane after the meter to the freeway merging point. The capacity of the ramp is as follows: - AM peak hour (unmetered) – 1,800 vph - PM peak hour (metered) – 900 vph - SAT peak hour (unmetered) – 1,800 vph US 101 northbound diagonal off-ramp (NB off-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a traffic signal on Monterey Road and consists of one lane where it diverges from the freeway mainline, for a total capacity of 1,800 vph. US 101 northbound loop on-ramp (NB on-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a ramp meter during the AM peak hour only and narrows down to a single lane after the meter to the freeway merging point. The capacity of the ramp is as follows: - AM peak hour (metered) – 900 vph - PM peak hour (unmetered) – 1,600 vph - SAT peak hour (unmetered) – 1,600 vph The US 101 at Tenth Street/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) interchange consists of a full-access partial cloverleaf interchange and includes the following ramps: US 101 southbound diagonal off-ramp (SB off-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a traffic signal on Tenth Street and consists of two lanes where it diverges from the freeway mainline, for a total capacity of 3,600 vph. US 101 southbound loop on-ramp (SB loop on-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a ramp meter during the PM peak hour only and narrows down to a single lane after the meter to the freeway merging point. The capacity of the ramp is as follows: - AM peak hour (unmetered) – 1,600 vph - PM peak hour (metered) – 900 vph - SAT peak hour (unmetered) – 1,600 vph US 101 northbound diagonal off-ramp (NB off-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a traffic signal on Pacheco Pass Highway and consists of one lane where it diverges from the freeway mainline, for a total capacity of 1,800 vph. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 89 US 101 northbound diagonal on-ramp (NB on-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a ramp meter during the AM peak hour only and narrows down to a single lane after the meter to the freeway merging point. The capacity of the ramp is as follows: - AM peak hour (metered) – 900 vph - PM peak hour (unmetered) – 1,800 vph - SAT peak hour (unmetered) – 1,800 vph Freeway Ramp Analysis Results The results of the freeway ramp analysis under existing and background plus project conditions are summarized in Table 12. Based on the calculated V/C ratios, all of the study freeway ramps currently operate at acceptable levels. Under background plus project conditions, based on the ramp capacities and traffic volume projections, it is projected that all of the study freeway ramps would continue to operate at acceptable levels. Bicycle Circulation Various bicycle facilities exist in the vicinity of the project site, including bike lanes (Class II bikeways) along Camino Arroyo, Sixth Street, Venture Way, and Cameron Boulevard. The Bicycle Transportation Plan contained in the City of Gilroy General Plan, the City of Gilroy Bicycle/Pedestrian Transportation Plan, and the City of Gilroy Trails Master Plan indicate that a variety of bicycle facilities are planned in the City of Gilroy, some of which would serve the study area. Of the planned facilities, those relevant to the project include: Planned Class I multi-use trail: Along the Miller Slough (Llagas Creek) – between the Sixth Street trailhead west of US 101 to Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152. Planned Class II bikeways: SR 152 – between the US 101 interchange and Holsclaw Road Gilman Road – between Camino Arroyo and Holsclaw Road Cameron Boulevard extension – both north and south extensions Luchessa Avenue extension – between Monterey Road and Cameron Boulevard Holsclaw Road – between SR 152 and Leavesley Road Project’s Effect on Bicycle Facilities The proposed project could increase the demand for bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the project site. The potential demand could be served by the various bicycle facilities available in the vicinity of the project site, including the existing bike lanes along Camino Arroyo and Sixth Street, which would provide a connection between the project site and the residential areas on the west side of US 101. Although there are no plans to provide bikeway facilities along Tenth Street between US 101 and Monterey Road, there are planned Class II bikeways along the future Cameron Boulevard extension and Luchessa Avenue extension which would provide a more direct route to residential areas within the southwestern part of Gilroy. Therefore, potential project-generated bicycle traffic could be accommodated by the existing/proposed bicycle facilities in the project area. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 90 Table 12 Freeway Ramps Analysis Results Interchange/RampPeak HourRamp TypeConstraint Point1ControlCapacity2 (vph)Volume3 (vph) V/C LOS4Volume (vph) V/C LOS4Volume (vph) V/C LOS4Volume (vph) V/C LOS4US 101 at Monterey RoadSouthbound Off-Ramp AM Diagonal Off 1 Signal 1,800 242 0.134 A 244 0.136 A 244 0.136 A 244 0.136 APM Signal 1,800 662 0.368 A 685 0.381 A 685 0.381 A 701 0.389 ASAT Signal 1,800 429 0.238 A 455 0.253 A 455 0.253 A 466 0.259 ASouthbound On-Ramp AM Diagonal On 1 Meter-Off 1,800 334 0.186 A 339 0.188 A 339 0.188 A 352 0.196 APM Meter-On 900 536 0.596 A 564 0.627 B 564 0.627 B 638 0.709 CSAT Meter-Off 1,800 517 0.287 A 549 0.305 A 549 0.305 A 564 0.313 ANorthbound Off-Ramp AMDiagonal Off 1 Signal 1,800 499 0.277 A 538 0.299 A 538 0.299 A 596 0.331 APM Signal 1,800 373 0.207 A 469 0.261 A 469 0.261 A 512 0.284 ASAT Signal 1,800 319 0.177 A 403 0.224 A 403 0.224 A 412 0.229 ANorthbound On-Ramp AMLoop On 1 Meter-On 900 437 0.486 A 438 0.487 A 438 0.487 A 413 0.459 APM Meter-Off 1,600 292 0.183 A 321 0.201 A 321 0.201 A 223 0.139 ASAT Meter-Off 1,600 340 0.213 A 372 0.233 A 372 0.233 A 303 0.190 AUS 101 at Tenth Street/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152)Southbound Off-Ramp AM Diagonal Off 2 Signal 3,600 839 0.233 A 1,104 0.307 A 1,142 0.317 A 1,141 0.317 APM Signal 3,600 1,434 0.398 A 1,712 0.476 A 1,746 0.485 A 1,748 0.486 ASAT Signal 3,600 1,483 0.412 A 1,691 0.470 A 1,730 0.481 A 1,732 0.481 ASouthbound On-Ramp AM Loop On 1 Meter-Off 1,600 101 0.063 A 130 0.081 A 149 0.093 A 135 0.084 APM Meter-On 900 277 0.308 A 432 0.480 A 454 0.504 A 380 0.422 ASAT Meter-Off 1,600 219 0.137 A 255 0.159 A 277 0.173 A 262 0.164 ANorthbound Off-Ramp AMDiagonal Off 1 Signal 1,800 325 0.181 A 520 0.289 A 542 0.301 A 482 0.268 APM Signal 1,800 385 0.214 A 550 0.306 A 570 0.317 A 510 0.283 ASAT Signal 1,800 536 0.298 A 656 0.364 A 677 0.376 A 648 0.360 ANorthbound On-Ramp AMDiagonal On 1 Meter-On 900 592 0.658 B 617 0.686 B 652 0.724 C 652 0.724 CPM Meter-Off 1,800 869 0.483 A 1,038 0.577 A 1,076 0.598 A 1,076 0.598 ASAT Meter-Off 1,800 955 0.531 A 977 0.543 A 1,017 0.565 A 1,017 0.565 ANotes:1. The constraint point of a ramp is the location on the ramp that dictates how much traffic enters/exits the freeway. The constraint point determines the ramp's capacity. For freeway off-ramps, the constraint point is at the ramp's diverging point from the freeway mainline. For non-metered on-ramps, the constraint point is at the ramp's merging point with the freeway. For metered on-ramps, the constraint point is at the meter.2. Typical capacities for diagonal and loop ramps are 1,800 and 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl), respectively. The capacity for non-metered ramps is determined based on the number of lanes at the ramp's constraint point. The capacity for metered on-ramps was assumed to be 900 vph (Caltrans District 4 maximum meter rate).3. Existing ramp volumes were interpolated from existing peak-hour turn-movement counts at the ramp intersections.4. The ramp level of service corresponds to the calculated ramp V/C ratios. Background Plus Proj(Existing Roadway Network)Background Plus Proj (Luchessa/Holloway Connection)Existing ConditionsBackground Conditions Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 91 Although the City of Gilroy currently does not have requirements for bicycle parking, VTA recommends bicycle-parking rates for new developments in their Bicycle Technical Guidelines, revised in February 2022. The recommended bicycle parking rates are shown in Table 13 below. The standards distinguish between Class I (long-term) bicycle parking and Class II (short-term) bicycle parking. Table 13 Recommended Bicycle Parking Based on the recommended rates for the proposed land uses and the size of the project, a minimum of 18 long-term and 21 short-term bicycle parking spaces should be provided on-site. The project site plan shows bicycle parking near the convenience store and bicycle lockers near the south hotel. However, the site plan does not specify how many total bicycle parking spaces are being provided. Recommendation: It is recommended that the proposed project provide adequate bicycle parking supply on-site, based on VTA’s recommended bicycle-parking rates, to serve the potential demand of the project. Based on VTA’s bicycle parking supply recommendations, a minimum of 18 long-term (Class I) and 21 short-term (Class II) bicycle parking spaces should be provided on-site. Pedestrian Circulation Pedestrian traffic between the project site and the surrounding commercial areas would be able to utilize the existing pedestrian facilities (sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian signal phasing at signalized intersections) along the adjacent streets. Sidewalks are found along both sides of the street within all commercial areas north, west, and south of the project site. Project’s Effect on Pedestrian Facilities It can be expected that new pedestrian traffic would be generated by the proposed project. The project is proposing 5-foot sidewalks along its entire frontage on Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road, connecting to the existing sidewalks along these roadways. The project site is located within walking distance (within a half-mile radius) of various restaurants, retail, and service uses. Existing bus stops are located along the project’s Camino Arroyo frontage (discussed further below). These existing uses potentially could attract pedestrian traffic from the project site. The existing and proposed sidewalks, along with the crosswalks and pedestrian push buttons, would provide a pedestrian connection between all shopping centers in the study area, Land Use Size 1 Class I Class II Class I Class II Convenience Store/Gas Station3 2,880 s.f. 1 per 20 employees 1 0 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window4 2,600 s.f. 1 per 20 employees 1 per 4ksf 1 1 Hotel5 200 rooms 1 per 20 rooms + 1 per 20 employees 1 per 20 rooms 11 10 Warehouse 45,500 s.f. 1 per 10ksf 1 per 5 ksf 5 10 Total: 18 21 1 Information obtained from the project site plan dated September, 2022 by ACE Design LLC. 2 Source: VTA's Bicycle Parking Supply Recommendations (Bicycle Technical Guidelines , February 2022) 3The convenience store/gas station use would be served by 3 employees based on information provided by the applicant. 4The fast-food use would be served by 5 employees based on information provided by the applicant. 5The hotel uses would be served by a maximum of 7 employees per shift based on information provided by the applicant. Minimum Bicycle Parking Rate 2 Recommended Bicycle Parking Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 92 (including those located along the west side of Camino Arroyo and north of SR 152), the bus stops along the project frontage, and the project site. City guidelines require minimum sidewalk width of 10 feet in commercial areas. They also require development projects to install (or upgrade existing) pedestrian crossings and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant curb ramps at intersections. The existing sidewalks along Camino Arroyo and SR 152 (as well as all proposed sidewalks along the project site frontage) are 5 feet wide. The northwest corner of the intersection of Camino Arroyo/SR 152 was recently modified to include a pedestrian signal phase to cross the southbound right-turn movement lane (segment between the northwest corner of the intersection and the adjacent pork chop island). The improvement includes ADA-compliant wheelchair access within the pork chop island. However, none of the corners of the intersection currently include ADA-complaint curb ramps. Recommendation: It is recommended that 10-foot sidewalks, required in commercial areas, be installed along the entire project site frontage. Recommendation: It is recommended that ADA-compliant curb ramps be installed at all corners of the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection. Transit Service The project site is directly served by Local Bus Route 84, which provides weekday and weekend service between the Gilroy Transit Center and Saint Louise Regional Hospital, with bus stops at the intersections of Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing and Camino Arroyo/Holloway Road. Additional transit services are provided at the Gilroy Transit Center, located in Downtown Gilroy, just over one mile northwest of the project site. Project’s Effect on Transit Services Although no reduction to the project trip generation estimates was applied due to transit services, it can be assumed that some of the project trips could be made by public transportation. Applying an estimated three percent transit mode share, which is probably the highest that could be expected for the project, to the project trips equates to approximately 6 new transit riders added to the local transit service during the busiest peak-hour. The estimated number of new transit riders to the proposed project could be served by the existing bus line currently serving the project site. However, the limited- service area covered by the existing transit route and the hour-long headways could discourage potential transit users from using public transportation to access the site. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 93 6. Conclusions This transportation analysis has been prepared in accordance with the standards and methodologies set forth by the City of Gilroy, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Congestion Management Program’s Transportation Impact Guidelines (October 2014), and by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In adherence to SB 743, the effects and impacts on the transportation network as the result of the proposed project were evaluated based on VMT. In addition to the evaluation of VMT, this transportation study also includes level of service analysis to evaluate the effects of the project on the citywide transportation system, including intersections, freeway segments, and freeway ramps. The level of service analysis is presented to determine conformance to General Plan transportation goals and policies. The determination of project impacts per CEQA requirements is based solely on the VMT analysis. CEQA VMT Evaluation Results The model results show that the retail component of the project would cause a net decrease of 1,334 citywide VMT per day. The work trips would account for an increase of 1,908 daily VMT but the shopping trips would account for a decrease of 3,241 daily VMT. Therefore, the proposed retail uses of the project would not result in a significant VMT impact, based on the threshold of significance for retail uses recommended by OPR. The proposed warehouse land use is estimated to generate a total of 110 daily trips. Based on OPR’s small project screening threshold, the proposed warehouse land use is consider a small project and is presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Roadway Capacity Analysis Results Intersection Level of Service Analysis Results Background Plus Project – With Proposed Luchessa/Holloway Connection The project would have an operational deficiency at the following intersection under background plus project conditions and assuming the implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection: 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM peak-hour) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 94 Project Deficiency: PM peak-hour 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions The project would contribute to an operational deficiency at the following three intersections under 2040 General Plan with project conditions and the planned future roadway network: 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: AM and PM peak hours 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions with Luchessa/Holloway Connection The project would contribute to an operational deficiency at the following three intersections under 2040 General Plan with project conditions and assuming the Luchessa/Holloway connection: 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: AM and PM peak hours Intersection Operations Analysis Results The results of the queue analysis show that the proposed project would contribute to the projected queue length storage capacity deficiencies for the following turn-movements: 6. Camino Arroyo and SR 152 – Northbound Left-Turn Movement Westbound Left-turn movement Northbound Right-Turn Movement 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing – Southbound left-turn movement Projected Deficiencies and Possible Improvements Described below are possible improvements to improve operating conditions for the projected deficiencies. Level of Service Deficiencies – Background Plus Project Conditions 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Deficiency: Background plus project (w/ Luchessa/Holloway connection) – PM peak-hour The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under background plus project conditions. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 95 Level of Service Deficiencies – General Plan Conditions 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152 Deficiency: General Plan plus project (GP and GP+Luchessa/Holloway connection) – PM & SAT peak hours The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal, or by restricting left-turn access to and from Silacci Way. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under General Plan plus project conditions. 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Deficiency: General Plan plus project (GP and GP+Luchessa/Holloway connection) – AM & PM peak hours The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under General Plan plus project conditions. Queue Storage Deficiencies 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Movement: Northbound left-turn Deficiency: 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound left-turn pockets an additional 150 feet each. However, this improvement is not feasible due to the back-to-back left-turn pockets with the upstream intersection at Gilroy Crossing. Additionally, the queue deficiency is only projected to occur during the Saturday peak-hour, with the turn pocket providing adequate queue storage capacity to serve both the AM and PM peak hours. Alternatively, the intersection traffic signal phasing could be adjusted to provide additional green time to serve the projected northbound left-turn movement demand during the Saturday peak-hour. However, adjusting the signal phasing could result in other intersection movements experiencing longer queue lengths and intersection delays. Without the extension of the existing northbound left-turn lanes or the adjustment of the intersection signal phasing, the projected queue length for this movement would store within the northbound through lane and extend past the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection. Movement: Westbound left-turn Deficiency: 2 vehicles (50 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing westbound left-turn pockets an additional 50 feet each, for a total of 200 feet. However, extending the westbound left-turn pockets at this intersection would affect the length of the approach taper separating the westbound left-turn pockets and the northbound left-turn receiving/acceleration lane at the intersection of Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152). Therefore, in order to be able to implement this improvement, the northbound left-turn movement from Silacci Way to westbound SR 152 may have to be prohibited. Movement: Northbound right-turn Deficiency: 5 vehicles (125 feet) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 96 The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound right-turn lane an additional 125 feet, for a total of 250 feet. The extension of the northbound right-turn lane would require widening of the east side of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage. The project site plan shows a proposed right-in and right-out driveway along Camino Arroyo located approximately 325 feet south of Pacheco Pass Highway, providing only approximately 75 feet of space between the extended northbound right-turn lane and the proposed driveway. 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Movement: Southbound left-turn Deficiency: 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by providing a second southbound left-turn lane. Implementation of this improvement would require two receiving lanes on the east leg of the intersection (project site driveway) and the potential widening of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage, to provide the necessary right-of-way for the second southbound left-turn lane. Freeway Segment Evaluation The proposed project is not projected to add traffic representing one percent (1%) or more of the segments’ capacity to the deficient study freeway segments, therefore, the proposed project would not create a level of service deficiency at any of the study freeway segments. Project Plans A APPENDIX STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHO L L O W A Y R O A D LOT 1LOT 2 L O T 3 L O T 4 L O T 5 L O T 6 0SCALE 1" = 60'6060301TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAPROSE'S ENGINEERING6970 CAMINO ARROYOCITY OF GIROY1" = 60'LEGEND:CABINETCONCRETECONTROL POINTCPTESTDETECTOR HANDHOLEDROP INLETDRIVEWAYELECTRICAL METEREDGE OF PAVEMENTELECTRICAL PULLBOXELECTRICAL VAULTFIRE HYDRANTGAS METERGUY ANCHORJOINT UTILITY POLENO PARKING ANY TIME SIGNPEDESTALPEDESTRIAN SIGNAL POLEPUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENTPUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTRIGHT OF WAYSANITARY SEWER MANHOLESTORM DRAIN MANHOLESTREET LIGHTTELEPHONE MANHOLETELEPHONE VAULTTRAFFIC SIGNAL POLETRAFFIC SIGNAL PULLBOXUTILITYWATER MANHOLEWATER METERWATER VALVEWATER VAULTCABCONCCPCPTDHHDIDWYEMEPEPBEVLTFHGMGUYJPNPSPEDPSPP.S.E.P.U.E.R.O.W.SSMHSDMHSLTMHTVLTTSPTSPBUTILITYWMHWMWVWVLTSITE(800) 483-5000(800) 743-500111 ALMADEN BLVD. SAN JOSE, CA 95115(408) 846-04207351 ROSANNA STREET GILROY, CA 95020R-1Proposed Zoning:VACANTExisting Zoning:Water:Roads:Gas & Electric:Sewage:Proposed Use:Existing Improvements:Existing Sizes:Contour Interval:Source of Topo:F.E.M.A.Drainage:Telephone:Zone XVerizonPacific Gas & ElectricCity of GilroyCITY OF GILROY UTILITY DEPARTMENTCOMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL10.18 Net Acres1 FootField Survey6970 CAMINO ARROYOBhagirath Desai(916) 837 - 6058ELK GROVE, CA 956249612 KENT STREETROSE'S ENGINEERINGAll that certain real property situate in theCity of Gilroy, County of Santa Clara, Stateof California, being that property described incertificate of compliance no. 2004-12, filed asinstrument no. 18163081, official records ofsaid county, said property more particularlydescribed as follows:All of lots 7, 8, 9, and 10 as said lots areshown on the final map entitled “Tractno. 9487 Gilroy Crossing” filed in book 762 ofmaps, pages 20 through 25, Santa ClaraCounty Records.SUBDIVISION MAPTENTATIVE6970 CAMINO ARROYOAPN#: 841 - 070 - 049JULY 17, 2021Site Address:Submitted by:Owner/Applicants:Parcel Description:Date:NORTH(408) 846-04207351 ROSANNA STREET GILROY, CA 95020CITY OF GILROY UTILITY DEPARTMENT(866) 731-5420 Cable:CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS(408) 846-04207351 ROSANNA STREET GILROY, CA 95020CITY OF GILROY UTILITY DEPARTMENT527 Simas Dr., Milpitas CA 95035(408) 891-3503bkd784@gmail.com 1319.0'26.0'LANDSCAPING21.2'1119'19.0'26'CAMINO ARROYO ROADH O L L O W A Y R O A D 172PATIO OUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 STORY8.8'199.3'75.0'38LANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGFIRE RISERROOM 9A1.0.25.0'36.0'271.3'(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING15.3'61 0 . 0 ' 19.0' 3 6 . 7 'LANDSCAPING26.0'11B L D G . F O O T P R I N T = 1 8 0 0 0 S . F .6F E N C E 85.1'5'30.0'19.0'14.6'2 6 . 0 ' 1 9 . 0 ' 5 ' 5'10'66SIDE WALKSIDE WALKS I D E W A L K25 25.5'POROUSPAVEMENTR48.0'9 6 240.9'1 0 8 . 2 ' 5 . 0 ' 19.0'13.3'SIDE WALKS I D E W A L K SIDE WALKLANDSCAPING19.0'31.3'29.8'26.0'26.0'9991110101415.4'19.0'5.0'26.2'26.0'26.0'28.1'19.0'5.0'19.0'121.8' 3 0 . 0 ' 1 2 1 . 4 ' 25.8'3.8'19.0'19.0'POROUSPAVEMENT22 11EVEVEVEVEV1 9 . 0 ' L A N D S C A P I N G 1 0 ' 26.7' H O L L O W A Y R O A D FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2F U T U R E W A R E H O U S E - 1 5.5'22.3'5.0'34.3'T R A S H T R A S H TRASHR48.0'R28.0'404.8'1 S T O R Y 1 STORYBLDG. FOOTPRINT = 27500 S.F.LANDSCAPING3.1' 3 . 6 ' 2 1 2 . 6 'S31°27'02"E 770.74'N 5 8 ° 2 7 ' 0 3 " E 3 0 5 . 0 0 'R=40.00'H O L L O W A Y R O A DL=62.90'S31°27'02"E 845.90'=90°05'55"328.02'328.02'344.11' 3 4 4 . 7 5 '158.27'118.12'13111052CROSSACCESSC R O S S A C C E S S VPVPVPVP12147361178336" dia-side 36" dia-side36" dia-side129103EVEVEVEVEVEVEVEV331VP VP VP VP210 17OUTDOOR POOL16811023372P A T IO OUTDOOR POO L7 3810EVEVEVEV4 4 EVVP EVVPVP EVEVEV611666259 6 999111010142211EVEVEVEVEVTRASHTRASHT R A S H T R A S H T R A S H TRASHL=31.00'R=19.00'R=408.42'N10°33'00"E 120.34'S31°33'47"E 1529.90'S31°27'02"E 770.74'N5 8 ° 2 7 ' 0 3 " E 3 0 5 . 0 0 'CAMINO ARROYON06°11'39"E 188.73'R=937.00'=93°29'20"R=19.00'=92°52'38"L=30.80'66.00'S20°14'14"E=13°29'29"L=96.17'R=40.00'L=97.43'N03°22'26"W 126.82'=05°57'27"R=937.00'L=16.82'N06°11'39"E 120.00'=24°05'42"R=40.00'STATE HWY 152=05°57'27"CAMINO ARROYOH O L L O W A Y R O A D L=97.43'L=62.90'S31°27'02"E 845.90'=90°05'55"328.02'297.32'311.78'230.95'203.55'126.82'94.56'230.04'328.02'34 3 . 6 6 ' 34 4 . 1 1 ' 18 3 . 7 8 ' 20 6 . 4 8 '38.80'11 . 4 4 ' 80 . 0 7 '1.48'95.95'34 4 . 7 5 '=08°11'43"R=952.00'L=136.17'158.27'118.12'PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROPOSED CAR PARKING SPACES31 SPACES52 SPACES@18000 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREAPROJECT DATA(FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1) FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1PROJECT DESCRIPTION: FUTURE WAREHOUSEASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURISDICTION :M OCCUPANCY VAYES(NFPA 13) 29'-10" (TOP OF RIDGE)ALLOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSISOCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:FIRE SPRINKLERS:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL :1ACTUAL :STORIES (MAXIMUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841-70-049PARCEL-5 AREA:6.6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN18000 S.F. FUTURE WAREHOUSE FLOOR AREADESIGNATION :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL4LOT COVERAGE (FUTURE WAREHOUSE)7.TOTAL PAVED AREABUILDINGS FOOTPRINTPROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 22591 S.F. (41.66%)18000 S.F. (33.19%)13637 S.F. (25.15%)PARCEL-5 SITE AREA54228 S.F. (1.245 AC) 70' M TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE:14.PROVIDED:8.EXITFIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS9.PROPOSED BUILDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:12.11.10.13.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUIRED:REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATION ON PROPERTYNO (TABLE 602)YES YESFUTURE WAREHOUSE6 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC,2019 CEC, 2019 CFC,2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE,2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDSCODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTIONSYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72)24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATION:PARCEL-5 SITE AREA54228 S.F. (1.245 AC) PARCEL-4 AREAPROJECT DATA(FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2)PROJECT DESCRIPTION:FUTURE WAREHOUSEASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :JURISDICTION :M OCCUPANCY VAALLOWABLE:4EXISTING AND PROPOSED ZONING:COMMERCIALCODE ANALYSISOCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:FIRE SPRINKLERS:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL :ALLOWABLE:1ACTUAL :STORIES (MAXIMUM)1.2.3.4.5.FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTSSPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:10.9.8.REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS ANDPROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTYYESYESNOCITY OF GILROYAREA BREAKDOWN6.112979 S.F.(2.594 AC)841-70-0495422.8 SQ.FT.(10% OF PARCEL AREA)26814 S.F.(23.73%)27500 S.F.(24.32%)58665 S.F.(51.95%) REQD. LANDSCAPE AREA PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA TOTAL BUILDING FOOTPRINTTOTAL PAVED AREALOT COVERAGE70' M TABLE 504.329'-10" (TOP OF RIDGE)FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2ADDRESS:6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CA= 2 SPACES= 2 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED:BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN27500 S.F. FUTURE WAREHOUSE FLOOR AREAPROPOSED CAR PARKING SPACES100 SPACES= 5 SPACES= 2 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED:PARKING REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 :15.GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA18000/54228=0.33F.A.R PROVIDED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2:14.GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA27500/112979=0.24A1.0.0A1PROPERTY LINECENTER LINEPARKING STRIPSBLDG LINEACCESSIBLE AISLEFIRE ACCESS ROUTELIGHTING SINGLE HEAD POLE LIGHTFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFDCPROPOSED VAN POOL PARKING (SHALLBE MARKED WITH SIGNS RESTRICTINGTHEIR USE TO CLEAN AIR VAN POOL)VPELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGINGSTATIONEVTRUNCATED DOMESPROPOSED ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVELFIRE HYDRANT AS PER CIVIL PLANSBOLLARDTRUCK ROUTEVICINITY MAPNORTHILLUMINATED MONUMENT SIGNAGE (35'HIGH) MIN. 100 S.F.OF SEASONALCOLOR AT BASE OF SIGNMYES(NFPA 13) F.A.R REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 :2F.A.R REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2:2PARKING REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 : 1 SPACE PER 350 SQ FT AREA1 SPACE PER 350 SQ FT AREA @ 27500 S.F.GROSS FLOOR AREA79 SPACES13.PROPOSED BUILDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :11.12.FUTURE WAREHOUSE2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC,2019 CEC, 2019 CFC,2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE,2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDSCODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTIONSYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72)24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATION: A1.0.01PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CAPARKING FOR 88 ROOM 4 STORY HOTEL (1 SPACE:1 ROOM) = 97 SPACESPARKING ANALYSIS(HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES PROJECT DATA (HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES)HOLIDAY INN EXPRESSPROJECT DESCRIPTION:88 ROOMS 4 STORY HOTELASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURISDICTION :R1VA47'-0" (TOP OF PARAPET)ALLOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSISOCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:FIRE SPRINKLERS:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL :4ACTUAL :STORIES (MAXIMUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841-70-049AREA:6.PARCEL-3 SITE AREA6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CAPORTE COCHERE AREA692 S.F. BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN16772 S.F. 1ST FLOOR AREA16772 S.F. 2ND FLOOR AREA16772 S.F. 3RD FLOOR AREATOTAL BUILDING AREA67780 S.F..16772 S.F. 4TH FLOOR AREA= 5 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED:(INCLUDING ONE VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACES)DESIGNATION :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL49'-6" (TOP OF PARAPET)PROJECT DATA (RESIDENCE INN) RESIDENCE INN PROJECT DESCRIPTION:112 ROOM 4 STORY HOTELASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURISDICTION :R1VA40'-10"(TOP OF PARAPET)ALLOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSISOCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:FIRE SPRINKLERS:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL :4ACTUAL :STORIES (MAXIMUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841-70-049PARCEL-2 AREA:6.PARCEL-2 SITE AREA6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN20642 S.F. 1ST FLOOR AREA20642 S.F. 2ND FLOOR AREA20642 S.F. 3RD FLOOR AREATOTAL BUILDING AREA82568 S.F..20642 S.F. 4TH FLOOR AREADESIGNATION :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL47'-9" (TOP OF TOWER )5TOTAL PAVED AREABUILDINGS FOOTPRINTPROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA TOTAL PAVED AREABUILDINGS FOOTPRINTPROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 69913 S.F. (67.37%)20642 S.F. (19.90%)13210 S.F. (12.73%)= 4 SPACES= 4 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED:70' R1, 70' A3 TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE:LOT COVERAGE (HOTEL)7.PARCEL-2 SITE AREA15.PROVIDED:9.EXITFIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUILDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUIRED:REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATION ON PROPERTYNO (TABLE 602)YES YESHOTEL7 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)HOURS OF OPERATION:70' R1, 70' A3 TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE:LOT COVERAGE (HOTEL)7.PARCEL-3 SITE AREA8.15.PROVIDED:9.EXITFIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUILDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUIRED:REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATION ON PROPERTYNO (TABLE 602)HOTELNOHOURS OF OPERATION:= 4 SPACESTOTAL ELECTRICAL VEHICLE (EV) PARKING PROVIDED:VAN POOL PARKING PROVIDED= 4 SPACES LONG TERM BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED= 4 SPACES @ 2880 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREAPARKING REQUIRED FOR C-STORE: 1 SPACE PER 250 SQ FT AREA = 24 SPACESTOTAL PARKING PROVIDEDPARKING ANALYSIS {(N)C-STORE}PROJECT DATA (C-STORE)C-STOREPROJECT DESCRIPTION:C-STOREASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURISDICTION :M OCCUPANCY VA19'-6" (TOP OF PARAPET)ALLOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSISOCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:FIRE SPRINKLERS:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL :1ACTUAL :STORIES (MAXIMUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841-70-049PARCEL-1A AREA:6.6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN2880 S.F. C-STORE FLOOR AREADESIGNATION :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL4= 2 SPACES= 2 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED:LOT COVERAGE C-STORE7.TOTAL PAVED AREABUILDINGS FOOTPRINTPROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 40811 S.F. (71.39%)4242 S.F. (7.41%)12154 S.F. (21.20%)PARCEL 1A SITE AREA70' M TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE:15.PROVIDED:9.EXITFIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUILDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUIRED:REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATION ON PROPERTYYES (TABLE 602)YES YESC-STORE2 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC,2019 CEC, 2019 CFC,2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE,2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE& ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMSTANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72)24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATION:= 30 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIREDPARKING REQUIRED FOR BURGER KING: 1 SPACE PER 100 SQ FT AREA PARKING ANALYSIS (DRIVE-THRU BURGER KING)= 2 SPACES= 2 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED:= 30 SPACESTOTAL PARKING PROVIDEDPARCEL-1A SITE AREAPROJECT DATA (DRIVE-THRU BURGER KING)DRIVE-THRU BURGER KINGPROJECT DESCRIPTION:DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANTASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURISDICTION :A2 OCCUPANCYVANO19'-0" (TOP OF COPING)ALLOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSISOCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION:FIRE SPRINKLERS:HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL :1ACTUAL :STORIES (MAXIMUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841-70-049PARCEL-1 AREA:6.PARCEL-1 SITE AREA35990 S.F.(0.82 AC)6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUILDING AREA BREAKDOWNDESIGNATION :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL2LOT COVERAGE BURGER KING7.TOTAL PAVED AREABUILDINGS FOOTPRINTPROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA PARCEL-1 AREA35990 S.F.(0.82 AC)50' A2 TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE:15.PROVIDED:9.EXITFIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUILDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUIRED:REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATION ON PROPERTYNO (TABLE 602)YES YESDRIVE-THRU' RESTAURANT3 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC,2019 CEC, 2019 CFC,2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE,2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDINGSTANDARDS CODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIREPROTECTION SYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA13,20,24,72)HOURS OF OPERATION:2600 S.F. BURGER KING FLOOR AREA48 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)NO (TABLE 602)CAR WASH AREA1152 S.F. 1 PARKING PER EMPLOYEE @ 4 EMPLOYEES = 4 SPACES= 26 SPACES24554 S.F.(68.3%)2600 S.F. (7.2%)8836 S.F. (24.5%)PARKING REQUIRED FOR CAR WASH: 1 SPACE PER 250 SQ FT AREA = 17 SPACESGROSS PARKING REQUIRED103765 S.F. (2.3 AC) 103765 S.F. (2.3 AC) 57207 S.F. (1.31 AC)57207 S.F. (1.31 AC)CANOPY AREA6679 S.F. PARKING ANALYSIS(RESIDENCE INN)a) PARKING FOR 112 ROOMS 4 STORY HOTEL (1 SPACE:1 ROOM)= 112 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED= 118 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED1 PARKING PER EMPLOYEE @ 6 EMPLOYEES = 6 SPACES= 111 SPACESSTANDARD PARKING PROVIDED21'-0" (TOP OF EXTENDED COPING)21'-10" (TOP OF PARAPET)79264 S.F. (1.81 AC) TOTAL PAVED AREABUILDINGS FOOTPRINTPROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 52487 S.F. (66.21%)12592 S.F. (15.89%)14185 S.F. (17.90%)PARCEL-3 SITE AREA79264 S.F. (1.81 AC) F.A.R PROVIDED FOR BURGER KING:16.GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA2600/35990=0.072 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR C-STORE:GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA2880/57207=0.05 F.A.R FOR RESIDENCE INN :16.GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA82568/103765=0.79 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES :67780/79264=0.85 GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREAPROPERTY LINECENTER LINEPARKING STRIPSBLDG LINEACCESSIBLE AISLEFIRE ACCESS ROUTELIGHTING SINGLE HEAD POLE LIGHTFIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFDCPROPOSED VAN POOL PARKING (SHALLBE MARKED WITH SIGNS RESTRICTINGTHEIR USE TO CLEAN AIR VAN POOL)VPELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGINGSTATIONEVTRUNCATED DOMESFIRE HYDRANT AS PER CIVIL PLANSBOLLARDTRUCK ROUTEVICINITY MAPILLUMINATED MONUMENT SIGNAGE (35'HIGH) MIN. 100 SQ.FT OF SEASONALCOLOR AT BASE OF SIGNMSITE PLAN1ST FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)2ND FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)4TH FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)ROOF PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)1ST FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) 3RD FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) ROOF PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN) FLOOR PLAN C-STORE)EXTERIOR ELEVATION (CANOPY)A1.0.0A1.1.0A1.1.1A1.1.2A1.1.3A1.1.4A1.1.5A1.1.6A1.1.7A2.1.0A2.1.1A2.1.2A3.2.0A4.1.0A4.1.1FLOOR & ROOF PLAN (BURGER KING)EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (BURGER KING)A1.0.2TRASH DETAILSA5.1.01ST FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER)A5.1.12ND FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER)A5.1.2A5.1.3A5.1.4A5.1.5EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER)A6.1.01ST FLOOR PLAN ( FUTURE WAREHOUSE)A6.1.1ROOF PLAN (FUTURE WAREHOUSE)A6.1.2EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (FUTURE WAREHOUSE)3RD FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER4TH FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER)ROOF PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER)SITE PLANA1.0.0AROOF PLAN (C-STORE)A2.1.3EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (C-STORE)A2.1.4FLOOR PLAN & EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (CAR WASH)A2.1.5EQUPMENT PLAN (CAR WASH)A3.1.0FLOOR PLAN (CANOPY)A3.1.2ROOF PLAN (CAR WASH)A3.1.13RD FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)EXTERIOR VIEW (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE)2ND FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) 4TH FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN) A2.1.6A3.2.1A3.2.2A3.3.0A3.3.1A7.0.0SITE PHOTOSA7.0.1SITE PHOTOSCOVER SHEETGRADING PLANUTILITY PLANGRADING SECTIONSC1PHASING PLANCIVIL SITE PLANSTORMWATER CONTROL PLANC2SOLID WASTE HANDLING PLANFIRE TRUCK CIRCULATION PLANC4C5C7C3C6C9C8YES(NFPA 13) YES(NFPA 13) YES(NFPA 13) TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED = 881 PARKING PER EMPLOYEE @ 6 EMPLOYEES = 6 SPACES= 94 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED@ 2600 GROSS FLOOR AREA= 12 SPACES@ 1152 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREA= 5 SPACESF.A.R REQUIRED FOR BURGER KING:F.A.R REQUIRED FOR C-STORE:16.2F.A.R FOR RESIDENCE INN :4F.A.R REQUIRED FOR HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES :16.4 2" CAP BLOCK TYP.PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA 14'-9"4'-2"27'-6"6'-0"27'-6"4'-2"13'-2"13'-5"61'-0"FEFEFEFEFE13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-3"13'-412"13'-2"13'-2"13'-112"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"3'-5"10'-4"69'-4"VESTIBULE027'-912"1'-1112"3'-0"21'-4"19'-8"23" 23" 23"12" 4'-0"9'-4"9'-4"12" 23"7'-0"EMERGENCYESCAPE &RESCUE WINDOW3'-6" 4'-6"HI-LOW DRINKINGFOUNTAIN4'4'-0"4'4'-0"2% MAX. SLOPE @ AT ACCESS AISLE (MARKED WITH APAINTED BORDERLINE AROUND THEIR PERIMETER. THE AREAWITHIN THE BORDERLINE SHALL BE MARKED WITH HATCHEDLINES A MAXIMUM OF 36" ON CENTER IN A COLORCONTRASTING WITH THAT OF THE AISLE SURFACE)9'-0"x20'-0" DROP-OFF/LOADING ZONEPORTE COCHEREFLOORING PATTERNMAIN ENTRANCE2' 2 ' - 0 "14'-0"6'-0"5'-0"FE450 S.F.10'-312"13'-9"199'-1"Ω ΩΩΩΩ3'-01 2"MIN.CLEARANCEWHEN DOORFULLY OPENS FIREANNUNCIATIONPANEL19'-3"ELEV.222KING132KING130KING128KING126KING124KING122KING120STORELOBBY03WORK AREA34CHECKINLAUNDRY09GENERALMANAGEROFFICE05STAIR #127BREAK ROOM09AUNISEX08SALESOFFICE06LUGGAGE32SRVER09BCORRIDOR31MECH.17MAINT.33PANTRY26ABREAKFAST25GREATROOM26MEETINGROOM24ELEVATORLOBBY23ELEV.122ELEVATOREQUIPMENT13WOMEN'SRESTROOM19GUESTLAUNDRY10MEN'SRESTROOM15CORRIDOR31POOL VEST35POOL EQUIP.16FITNESS ROOM11STAIR #228CORRIDOR31OUTDOOR POOL12PORTE COCHERE01FIRE RISER30ELECT.17BPATIOTE5TE2CHUTE09CMOLTE5TE2MOLTE2TE5TE5TE2TE5TE2TE1 TE4TE4 TE1 SISEMOL TE5 TE2 MOL TE5 TE2 MOL TE2 TE5 TE4TE1TE4TE1TE1TE4TE1TE4 TE1TE4SESI MOL TE2 TE5 TE1TE4LOBBY & GUESTROOMS10,329 SFCORRIDOR31LOBBY/GREAT ROOMRAISEDSLAB38'-0"4'-0"7'-112"6'-5"40'-0"53'-0"14'-6"5'-4"10'-8"16'-6"14'-3"11'-10"24'-1112"13'-5"10'-112"16'-0"13'-2"13'-9"6'-3"7'-912"11'-112"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"ACC.KINGX-WIDE1291245678910111213151617ABCDEF143ONE HR. FIRE RATED WALL WITHINMIN. 4' OF FIRE WALL (45 MIN.OPENIING PROTECTION) COMPLIESW/CBC 706.5 EXP.18'-7"8'-7"7'-012"8'-0"32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.UPUPPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CASCALE:FIRST FLOOR PLAN- 1/8" = 1'-0"P.H.-TE1- INDICATES TACTILE 'EXIT' SIGNTE2- INDICATES TACTILE 'EXIT ROUTE' SIGNTE4- INDICATES LOW LEVEL TACTILE 'EXIT' SIGNTE5- INDICATES LOW LEVEL TACTILE 'EXIT ROUTE' SIGNFS-INDICATES FLOOR SINK. LOCATION PER PLUMBING PLANS.INDICATES PANIC HARDWARE REQUIRED MOUNTBETWEEN 34 INCHES & 44 INCHES ABOVE THEFINISH FLOOR.SI - STAIRWAY IDENTIFICATION TACTILE SIGNGUEST ROOMS WITH COMMUNICATIONS FEATURES TE3- INDICATES TACTILE 'EXIT STAIR DOWN' SIGN. (INCLUDING LOW LEVEL SIGN)GUEST ROOMS WITH MOBILITY FEATURES ANDCOMMUNICATION FEATURESFIRE EXTINGUISHERFE1.THE EXTINGUISHER SHALL BE RATED 2-A: 10-B:C-RATED FIRE EXTINGUISHERSWITH CURRENT STATE FIRE MARSHAL CERTIFICATION TAGS. TRAVEL DISTANCETO FIRE EXTINGUISHERS CANNOT EXCEED 75'. FIRE EXTINGUISHERS SHALL BEMOUNTED NEAR THE EXITS AT 48" ELEVATIONS TO THE TOP OF THEEXTINGUISHERS IN VISIBLE LOCATION IN EGRESS PATHS.FIRE EXTINGUISHERS-HANGERS AND BRACKETS:-NOTE:THE BUILDING SHALL HAVE APPROVED RADIO COVERAGE FOREMERGENCY RESPONDERS WITHIN THE BUILDING BASED UPON THEEXISTING COVERAGE LEVELS OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONSYSTEMS OF THE JURISDICTION AT THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDINGFIRE ALARMS & DETECTION SYSTEMS (CFC SECTION 907):ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, WIRING AND HAZARDSABATEMENT OF ELECTRICAL HAZARDS: IDENTIFIED ELECTRICAL HAZARDS SHALL BE ABATED. ELECTRICAL WIRING, DEVICES, APPLIANCESAND OTHER EQUIPMENT THAT IS MODIFIED OR DAMAGED AND CONSTITUTES AN ELECTRICAL SHOCK OR FIRE HAZARD SHALL NOT BE USED.ILLUMINATION: ILLUMINATION SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR SERVICE EQUIPMENT AREAS, MOTOR CONTROL CENTERS AND ELECTRICAL PANELBOARDS.WORKING SPACE AND CLEARANCE: A WORKING SPACE OF NOT LESS THAN 30 INCHES IN WIDTH, 36 INCHES IN DEPTH AND 78 INCHES INHEIGHT SHALL BE PROVIDED IN FRONT OF ELECTRICAL SERVICE EQUIPMENT. THE WORKING SPACE SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN THE WIDTHOF THE EQUIPMENT. NO STORAGE OF ANY MATERIALS SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN THE DESIGNATED WORKING SPACE.LABELING: DOORS INTO ELECTRICAL CONTROL PANEL ROOMS SHALL BE MARKED WITH A PLAINLY VISIBLE AND LEGIBLE SIGN STATINGELECTRICAL ROOM OR SIMILAR APPROVED WORDING. THE DISCONNECTING MEANS FOR EACH SERVICE, FEEDER OR BRANCH CIRCUITORIGINATING ON A SWITCHBOARD OR PANELBOARD SHALL BE LEGIBLY AND DURABLY MARKED TO INDICATE ITS PURPOSE UNLESS SUCHPURPOSE IS CLEARLY EVIDENT.MULTIPLUG ADAPTERS: MULTIPLUG ADAPTERS, SUCH AS CUBE ADAPTERS, UNFUSED PLUG STRIPS OR ANY OTHER DEVICE NOT COMPLYINGWITH NFPA 70 SHALL BE PROHIBITED.SWIMMING POOL NOTES:FITNESS ROOM NOTES:SAFETY GLAZING ADJACENT TO DOORS:SE - STAIR EXIT SIGN. REFER A4.2.0 SHEET.(GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE FOLLOWING FACILITIES)RECEIVER JACKS: RECEIVERS REQUIRED FOR USE WITH AN ASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEM SHALL INCLUDEA 18" STANDARD MONO JACK.receiver HEARING-AID COMPATIBILITY: RECEIVERS REQUIRED TO BE HEARING-AID COMPATIBLE SHALLINTERFACE WITH TELECOILS IN HEARING AIDS THROUGH THE PROVISION OF NECKLOOPS.SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL: ASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEMS SHALL BE CAPABLE OF PROVIDING A SOUNDPRESSURE LEVEL OF 110 dB MINIMUM AND 118 dB MAXIMUM WITH A DYNAMIC RANGE ON THE VOLUMECONTROL OF 50 dB.SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO: THE SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO FOR INTERNALLY GENERATED NOISE INASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEMS SHALL BE 18 dB MINIMUM.PEAK CLIPPING LEVEL: PEAK CLIPPING SHALL NOT EXCEED 18 dB OF CLIPPING RELATIVE TO THE PEAKSOF SPEECH.REQUIREMENTS FOR ASSISTIVELISTENING SYSTEMNOTE:ASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEM IS TO BE OPERABLE AT THE TIME OF FINAL INSPECTION.1.A FIRE COMMUNICATION AND CONTROL CIRCUIT IS NEEDED AT THE LOBBY, EACH ELEVATOR LOBBY AND STAIRWELL FLOOR LANDING FOREMERGENCY OPERATIONS.2.A FIRE ALARM ENUNCIATOR PANEL SHALL BE LOCATED NEAR THE FRONT ENTRANCE. THIS PANEL WILL CONNECT AND INDICATE ALARMFUNCTIONS, ZONE INDICATIONS, AND FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM STATUS WITH ALPHA/NUMERIC MESSAGING TO INDICATE SPECIFICZONES, LOCATIONS, OR ALARMS3.A RADIO SIGNAL BOOSTER SYSTEM FOR FIRE AND PD RADIOS SHALL BE INSTALLED FOR SEND AND RECEIVE. A BDA (BI-DIRECTIONALAMPLIFIER) SYSTEM IS AN IN-BUILDING COMMUNICATION SYSTEM THAT BRINGS WIRELESS SIGNALS INTO A STRUCTURE FROM OUTSIDE,AMPLIFIES THOSE SIGNALS WITH A SIGNAL BOOSTER, AND THEN EVENLY DISTRIBUTES THE AMPLIFIED SIGNALS THROUGHOUT ASTRUCTURE VIA A DISTRIBUTED ANTENNA SYSTEM (DAS). CA FIRE CODE 907.2.13.2 DIGITAL ANTENNA SYSTEM(DAS)/BI-DIRECTIONAL AMPLIFICATION (BDA). SYSTEMS.INITIATION:- INITIATION OF THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM SHALL BE BY AUTOMATIC MEANS. APPROVED AUTOMATIC FIRE DETECTORSSHALL BE PROVIDED IN BOILER AND FURNACE ROOMS, SHOPS, LAUNDRY ROOMS, MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL ROOMS,TRASH-COLLECTION ROOMS, STORAGE ROOMS, GIFT SHOPS, LOCKER ROOMS AND SIMILAR AREAS. AUTOMATIC SMOKE DETECTORS SHALLBE PROVIDED IN ALL COMMON AREAS AND INTERIOR CORRIDORS SERVING SLEEPING UNITS AS REQUIRED MEANS OF EGRESS.NOTIFICATION:- ACTIVATION OF THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM OR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM SHALL INITIATE A GENERALEVACUATION SIGNAL.1. 27.12.190 TOP OF FORM HEIGHT & HORIZONTAL LOCATION CERTIFICATIONNO INSPECTION OR APPROVAL ON THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURES FOUNDATION SYSTEM SHALL BE GIVEN BY THE BUILDINGOFFICIAL UNTIL THE CITY ENGINEER HAS RECEIVED, REVIEWED & APPROVED A CERTIFICATION THAT THE PROPOSED TOP OFFORM HEIGHT & HORIZONTAL LOCATION CONFORM TO THE APPROVED GRADING PLAN. THE REQUIRED TOP OF FORM HEIGHT &HORIZONTAL LOCATION CERTIFICATIONS SHALL BE PREPARED & SUBMITTED BY A LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR OR CIVILENGINEER.2. THERE WILL BE NO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STORED AND/OR USED WITHIN THE BUILDING, AS A CONDITION OFOCCUPANCY. IF SO, PERMITTEE WILL BE REQUIRED TO REGISTER WITHIN THE HAZMAT PROGRAM COORDINATOR IN THE FIREDEPT. PRIOR TO BEING ISSUED THE PERMIT.3. FRONTAGE USED FOR ALLOWABLE AREA INCREASES PER CBC SECTION 506.3 SHALL BE PERMANENTLY MAINTAINED.4. FIRE WALLS, FIRE PARTITIONS, SIRE BARRIERS, SMOKE BARRIERS & SMOKE PARTITIONS OR ANY OTHER WALL REQUIREDTO HAVE PROTECTED OPENINGS OR PENETRATIONS SHALL BE EFFECTIVELY & PERMANENTLY IDENTIFIED WITH SIGNS &STENCILING. SUCH IDENTIFICATION SHALL:A. BE LOCATED IN ACCESSIBLE CONCEALED FLOOR, FLOOR-CEILING OR ATTIC SPACES.B. BE LOCATED WITHIN 15' OF THE END OF EACH WALL & AT INTERVALS NOT EXCEEDING 30'(914MM) MEASUREDHORIZONTALLY ALONG THE WALL OR PARTITION.C. INCLUDE LETTERING NOT LESS 3" IN HEIGHT WITH A MINIMUM 3/8-INCH STROKEIN CONTRASTING COLOR INCORPORATING THE SUGGESTED WORDING. "FIRE AND/OR SMOKE BARRIER-PROTECT ALL OPENINGS",OR OTHER WORDING.Notes to contractor:MOL- MAXIMUM OCCUPANT LOADRADIO COVERAGE FOR EMERGENCY RESPONDERS:-A1.1.0402/16/2022FIRST FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITES)PROVIDE STAND PIPE PER CBC SEC SECTION 905.1 PERFIRE DEPT. APPROVALLEGEND90 MIN. FIRE RATED W/SELF CLOSING DOORA SIGN SHALL BE POSTED INDICATING “”Ω 13'-9"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-412"13'-412"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"3'-5"10'-4"4'-2" 27'-6"6'-0"27'-6"FEFEFEFE199'-1"69'-4" 23"12"23"12" 23" 12" 12" 23"9'-4"4'-6"9'-4"4'-4"FEICE 3'-1"MIN. CLEARANCEWHEN DOOR FULLY OPENS 4'-0"4'-0"ONE HR. FIRE RATED WALL WITHINMIN. 4' OF FIRE WALL (45 MIN.OPENIING PROTECTION) COMPLIESW/CBC 706.5 EXP.1ONE HR. FIRE RATED WALL WITHIN MIN. 4'OF FIRE WALL (45 MIN. OPENIINGPROTECTION) COMPLIES W/CBC 706.5 EXP.1KING328KING326KING324KING322KING320KING318KING316KINGSUITE314KINGSUITE312KINGSUITE310KING308KING306ACC.KINGX-WIDE304KINGX-WIDE325QQ323QQ321ACC.QQSUITE319QQSUITE311QQSUITE313QQSUITE309QQ307QQ305QQ303QQ301HSKPELEV.2ELEV.1CLOSETTE5TE2TE2TE5TE2 TE5 TE5TE2TE2TE5SETE3TE3SI13'-2"32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.8'-7"8'-7"7'-012"8'-0"UPDNDNUPSTAIR #2STAIR #1A1.1.2602/16/2022SCALE:THIRD FLOOR PLAN- 1/8" = 1'-0"P.H.-FS-INDICATES FLOOR SINK. LOCATION PER PLUMBING PLANS.INDICATES PANIC HARDWARE REQUIRED MOUNTBETWEEN 34 INCHES & 44 INCHES ABOVE THEFINISH FLOOR.TE3- INDICATES TACTILE 'EXIT STAIR DOWN' SIGN. (INCLUDING LOW LEVEL SIGN)FIRE EXTINGUISHER1.THE EXTINGUISHER SHALL BE RATED 2-A: 10-B:C-RATED FIREEXTINGUISHERS WITH CURRENT STATE FIRE MARSHAL CERTIFICATION TAGS.TRAVEL DISTANCE TO FIRE EXTINGUISHERS CANNOT EXCEED 75'. FIREEXTINGUISHERS SHALL BE MOUNTED NEAR THE EXITS AT 48" ELEVATIONS TOTHE TOP OF THE EXTINGUISHERS IN VISIBLE LOCATION IN EGRESS PATHS.FIRE EXTINGUISHERS-HANGERS AND BRACKETS:-NOTE:THE BUILDING SHALL HAVE APPROVED RADIO COVERAGE FOR EMERGENCYRESPONDERS WITHIN THE BUILDING BASED UPON THE EXISTING COVERAGE LEVELSOF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS OF THE JURISDICTION AT THEEXTERIOR OF THE BUILDINGPROVIDE STAND PIPE PER CBC SEC SECTION 905.1 PERFIRE DEPT. APPROVALLEGEND90 MIN. FIRE RATED W/SELF CLOSING DOORPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA 13'-9"4'-2"FEFEFEFE13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-412"13'-412"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-2"13'-9"199'-1"4'-2"27'-6"6'-0"27'-6"69'-4"12"23"4'-4"12" 12" 23" 12" 4'-6"8'-1"9'-9"9'-4"ICE 3'-01 2"MIN. CLEARANCEWHEN DOOR FULLY OPENS 3'-6" 4'-6"4'-0"4'4'ONE HR. FIRE RATED WALL WITHINMIN. 4' OF FIRE WALL (45 MIN.OPENIING PROTECTION) COMPLIESW/CBC 706.5 EXP.1ONE HR. FIRE RATEDWALL WITHIN MIN. 4' OF FIRE WALL(45 MIN. OPENIING PROTECTION)COMPLIES W/CBC 706.5 EXP.1KING427KING426KING424KING422KING420KING418KING416KINGSUITE414KINGSUITE412KINGSUITE410KING408KINGX-WIDE404QQ401QQ403QQ407QQSUITE409QQSUITE411QQSUITE413HSKGACCQQ419ELEV.2ELEV.1QQ421QQ423KINGX-WIDE425TE5TE2TE3SETE5TE2TE5 TE2 TE5TE2TE5TE2TE3IS13'-2"QQ423KING42613'-2"DN32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.8'-0"8'-7"8'-7"7'-012"DNPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CAA1.1.3702/16/2022SCALE:FOURTH FLOOR PLAN- 1/8" = 1'-0"P.H.-FS-INDICATES FLOOR SINK. LOCATION PER PLUMBING PLANS.INDICATES PANIC HARDWARE REQUIRED MOUNTBETWEEN 34 INCHES & 44 INCHES ABOVE THEFINISH FLOOR.TE3- INDICATES TACTILE 'EXIT STAIR DOWN' SIGN. (INCLUDING LOW LEVEL SIGN)GUEST ROOMS WITH MOBILITY FEATURES ANDCOMMUNICATION FEATURESFIRE EXTINGUISHER1.THE EXTINGUISHER SHALL BE RATED 2-A: 10-B:C-RATED FIREEXTINGUISHERS WITH CURRENT STATE FIRE MARSHAL CERTIFICATION TAGS.TRAVEL DISTANCE TO FIRE EXTINGUISHERS CANNOT EXCEED 75'. FIREEXTINGUISHERS SHALL BE MOUNTED NEAR THE EXITS AT 48" ELEVATIONS TOTHE TOP OF THE EXTINGUISHERS IN VISIBLE LOCATION IN EGRESS PATHS.FIRE EXTINGUISHERS-HANGERS AND BRACKETS:-NOTE:THE BUILDING SHALL HAVE APPROVED RADIO COVERAGE FOR EMERGENCYRESPONDERS WITHIN THE BUILDING BASED UPON THE EXISTING COVERAGE LEVELSOF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS OF THE JURISDICTION AT THEEXTERIOR OF THE BUILDINGPOST & COLUMNS PER STR. PLANSPROVIDE STAND PIPE PER CBC SEC SECTION 905.1 PERFIRE DEPT. APPROVALLEGEND90 MIN. FIRE RATED W/SELF CLOSING DOORGUEST ROOMS WITH COMMUNICATION FEATURES FRT. WD. PARAPETFRAMING S.S.D.PRE-FAB SPM WALLFLASHING2-LAYERS OF 5/8"TYPE 'X' GYP. SHTG.1/4" DURO-GUARD DENSDECK PRIMEMIN. 60 MILULTRAPLY TPOTJI ROOF JOISTS S.S.D.MIN. 0.5" ISOGARD HD.(MIN. R-20 VALUE COMPLYINGPER TABLE 1203.3)MIN. 19/32" PLYWOOD ATMAX.24" SPANSVAPOR BARRIERFULL WIDTH ACOUSTICINSULATION TO FILL ALLVOIDSFIELD WELDPLATE & FASTENERFACTORY WELD5/8"TYPE 'X' GYP.SHTG.LY AT 2-HR.EXT.BEARING WALL.WD.NAILER AS REQD.7/8"CEM.PLASTER O/METALLATH BACKED W/2-LAYERSOF GRADE-D 60-MIN.BLDG. PAPERSOLID BLKG.,S.S.DPRE-FAB SPM WALLFLASHINGMIN. 60 MIL ULTRAPLY TPO5/8" TYPE 'X' GYP. SHTG.1/4" DURO-GUARDDENSDECK PRIMEVAPOR BARRIERFIELD WELDSTANDING SEAMMETAL ROOFRDRDSOLAR ZONE INSTALLEDSEPARATELY UNDERFUTURE CONTACT (BYOWNER)SOLAR ZONE INSTALLEDSEPARATELY UNDER FUTURECONTACT (BY OWNER)543RD38RD998RD299RDRDSLOPE 1:48 SLOPE 1:48 SLOPE 1:48 SLOPE 1:48 SLOPE 1:48 SLOPE 1:48 1:48SLOPE 1:48SLOPE 1:48SLOPE1:48SLOPE1:48SLOPE 1:48SLOPE 1:48 SLOPE 1:48 SLOPERD SLOPE:1"=1'-0"SLOPE:1"=1'-0"SLOPE:1"=1'-0"RDRD PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CASCALE:ROOF PLAN1/8" = 1'-0"SCALE:DOWN SPOUTNTS.SCALE:ROOF PARAPET FLASHINGNTS.SCALE:CRICKET FLASHINGNTS.SCALE:ROOF DRAIN/OVERFLOWNTS.SCALE:MECH. EQUIPMENT SUPPORTNTS.KEY NOTES LEVEL 113' - 2 5/8"LEVEL 2 T.0 SHEATHINGGRADE-6"LEVEL 3 T.0 SHEATHING23' - 5 7/8"ROOF45' - 0"PARAPET47'- 0"LEVEL 4 T.0 SHEATHING33' - 9 1/8"SF4SF121590'-0"T.O. PLATE42'-11 3/8"PARAPET49'- 6"9'-0"T.O.SUN SCREEN1010GRADE-6"47'- 0"10'-0"SF6GRADE0'- 0"LEVEL 2 T.0 SHEATHING 13'- 2 5/8"LEVEL 3 T.0 SHEATHING 23'- 5 7/8"LEVEL 4 T.0 SHEATHING 33'- 9 1/8"ROOF45'- 0"PARAPET215T.O. PLATE42'- 11 3/8"49'- 6"PARAPET9'-0"T.O.SUN SCREEN101010LEGENDS:(STUCCO COLORS BY PAREX)ABBREVATIONSHM :- HOLLOW METALDR :- DOORFR :- FRAMEPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA LEVEL 10"LEVEL 213' - 2 5/8"GRADE-6"LEVEL 323' - 5 7/8"LEVEL 433' - 9 1/8"ROOF45' - 0"PARAPET47' - 0"PARAPET49' - 6"9'-0"T.O.SUN SCREENLEVEL 10"LEVEL 213'- 2 5/8"GRADE-6"LEVEL 323'- 5 7/8"T.O. PLATE42'- 11 3/8"ROOF45'- 0"PARAPET47'- 0"LEVEL 433'- 9 1/8"PARAPET49' - 6"9'-0"T.O.SUN SCREENLEVEL 213'- 2 5/8"ABBREVATIONSHM :- HOLLOW METALDR :- DOORFR :- FRAME(3) COLOR COAT STUCCO (a) IS A 3-COAT, 7/8 INCH MINIMUM THICK(b) HAS TWO LAYERS OF GRADE D PAPER UNDER STUCCO WERE OCCURSOVER PLYWOOD SHEATHING; AND (c) HAS 26 ga GALVANIZED WEEPSCREED AT FOUNDATION PLATE LINE AT LEAST 4" ABOVE GRADE (OR 2INCH ABOVE CONCRETE OR PAVING) 2"x6" WOOD STUDS 16" ON CENTERWITH 7/8" CEMENT PLASTER (MEASURED FROM THE FACE OF STUDS) ONTHEEXTERIOR SURFACE WITH INTERIOR SURFACE TREATMENT AS REQUIREDFOR INTERIOR WOOD STUD PARTITIONS. PLASTER MIX 1:4 FOR SCRATCHCOAT AND 1:5 FOR BROWN COAT, BY VOLUME, CEMENT TO SAND1259PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA LEGENDS:(STUCCO COLORS BY PAREX) PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STUDIOSTUDIO 'C'ONEBEDROOMEND -ACCESSIBLESTAIR #BONEBEDROOMEND -ACCESSIBLESTUDIOSTUDIOMECH. ROOM /PBX ROOMACCESSIBLE STUDIOQQ ROOMQQ ROOMSTUDIOELECTRICALWOMENMENONEBEDROOMENDONEBEDROOMENDENGINEERVEST.FITNESS AREAPREPROOMTELECOM/DATAMARKETSTORAGEST.AGMSALESGM OFFICEVESTIBULEELEVATORLOBBYLAUNDRY ROOMEMPLOYEELOUNGEDRYERSMEETINGROOMWORK ROOMFR DESKEMPLOYEETOILETPATIOOUTDOOR POOLFOYERMAINENT.POOLEQUIPMENT1110280509 1515A232417&3317A23FEFEFEFE09BFESTAIR #A0802060712141618CORRIDOR.25CORRIDOR25CORRIDOR25ELEV.1ELEV.2272734MARKET21LINENTERMINATION08A35ACC.RESTROOM 08A FIRERISERROOMICE29HOUSEKEEPING09AELEVATOREQUIPMENT13FDCGUEST LAUNDRYHOUSEPHONE616 SQ. FT.FEFEFE FE FE32STOR.LIVING ROOMDENDININGROOMBARQUICK PRINTBARSTORAGESTORAGEPANTRY QQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOM32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP. 32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP. FIRST FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.012P.H.-INDICATES PANIC HARDWARE REQUIRED MOUNT BETWEEN34 INCHES & 44 INCHES ABOVE THE FINISH FLOOR.INITIATION:- INITIATION OF THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM SHALL BE BY AUTOMATICMEANS. APPROVED AUTOMATIC FIRE DETECTORS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN BOILER AND FURNACEROOMS, SHOPS, LAUNDRY ROOMS, MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL ROOMS, TRASH-COLLECTIONROOMS, STORAGE ROOMS, GIFT SHOPS, LOCKER ROOMS AND SIMILAR AREAS. AUTOMATICSMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN ALL COMMON AREAS AND INTERIOR CORRIDORSSERVING SLEEPING UNITS AS REQUIRED MEANS OF EGRESS.NOTIFICATION:- ACTIVATION OF THE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM OR AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERSYSTEM SHALL INITIATE A GENERAL EVACUATION SIGNAL.1.HAND-HELD PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS, NOT HOUSED IN CABINETS, SHALL BEINSTALLED ON THE HANGERS OR BRACKETS SUPPLIED. HANGERS OR BRACKETS SHALLBE SECURELY ANCHORED TO THE MOUNTING SURFACE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEMANUFACTURER'S INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS.2.THE EXTINGUISHER SHALL BE RATED 4-A COMPLYING PER IFC SECTION 906.3.ABATEMENT OF ELECTRICAL HAZARDS: IDENTIFIED ELECTRICAL HAZARDS SHALL BE ABATED. ELECTRICAL WIRING, DEVICES, APPLIANCESAND OTHER EQUIPMENT THAT IS MODIFIED OR DAMAGED AND CONSTITUTES AN ELECTRICAL SHOCK OR FIRE HAZARD SHALL NOT BE USED.ILLUMINATION: ILLUMINATION SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR SERVICE EQUIPMENT AREAS, MOTOR CONTROL CENTERS AND ELECTRICAL PANELBOARDS.WORKING SPACE AND CLEARANCE: A WORKING SPACE OF NOT LESS THAN 30 INCHES IN WIDTH, 36 INCHES IN DEPTH AND 78 INCHES INHEIGHT SHALL BE PROVIDED IN FRONT OF ELECTRICAL SERVICE EQUIPMENT. THE WORKING SPACE SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN THE WIDTHOF THE EQUIPMENT. NO STORAGE OF ANY MATERIALS SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN THE DESIGNATED WORKING SPACE.LABELING: DOORS INTO ELECTRICAL CONTROL PANEL ROOMS SHALL BE MARKED WITH A PLAINLY VISIBLE AND LEGIBLE SIGN STATINGELECTRICAL ROOM OR SIMILAR APPROVED WORDING. THE DISCONNECTING MEANS FOR EACH SERVICE, FEEDER OR BRANCH CIRCUITORIGINATING ON A SWITCHBOARD OR PANELBOARD SHALL BE LEGIBLY AND DURABLY MARKED TO INDICATE ITS PURPOSE UNLESS SUCHPURPOSE IS CLEARLY EVIDENT.MULTIPLUG ADAPTERS: MULTIPLUG ADAPTERS, SUCH AS CUBE ADAPTERS, UNFUSED PLUG STRIPS OR ANY OTHER DEVICE NOT COMPLYINGWITH NFPA 70 SHALL BE PROHIBITED.RECEIVER JACKS: RECEIVERS REQUIRED FOR USE WITH AN ASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEM SHALLINCLUDE A 18" STANDARD MONO JACK.receiver HEARING-AID COMPATIBILITY: RECEIVERS REQUIRED TO BE HEARING-AID COMPATIBLE SHALLINTERFACE WITH TELECOILS IN HEARING AIDS THROUGH THE PROVISION OF NECKLOOPS.SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL: ASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEMS SHALL BE CAPABLE OF PROVIDING A SOUNDPRESSURE LEVEL OF 110 dB MINIMUM AND 118 dB MAXIMUM WITH A DYNAMIC RANGE ON THE VOLUMECONTROL OF 50 dB.SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO: THE SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO FOR INTERNALLY GENERATED NOISE INASSISTIVE LISTENING SYSTEMS SHALL BE 18 dB MINIMUM.PEAK CLIPPING LEVEL: PEAK CLIPPING SHALL NOT EXCEED 18 dB OF CLIPPING RELATIVE TO THE PEAKSOF SPEECH.PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA ONEBEDROOMONEBEDROOMSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOACC. STUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIO - CSTUDIOONEBEDROOMONEBEDROOMSTUDIOSTUDIOQQ ROOMQQ ROOMSTORAGE 1STORAGE 4ELEV.1ELEV.2ELEVATORLOBBYLINEN CHUTESTAIRS #BSTAIRS #AICECORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMSTUDIO32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.UPDNSECOND FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.113PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA ONEBEDROOMONEBEDROOMSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOACC. STUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIO - CSTUDIOONEBEDROOMONEBEDROOMSTUDIOSTUDIOQQ ROOMQQ ROOMFEFEFE STORAGE 1STORAGE 4ELEV.1ELEV.2ELEVATORLOBBYLINEN CHUTESTAIRS #BSTAIRS #AFEICECORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMFESTUDIO32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP. THIRD FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.214PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA ONEBEDROOMONEBEDROOMSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIOACC. STUDIOSTUDIOSTUDIO - CSTUDIOONEBEDROOMONEBEDROOMSTUDIOSTUDIOQQ ROOMQQ ROOMSTORAGE 1STORAGE 4ELEV.1ELEV.2ELEVATORLOBBYLINEN CHUTESTAIRS #BSTAIRS #AICECORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORCORRIDORQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMQQ ROOMSTUDIO32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.32"CLEAR (MIN.)TYP. FOURTH FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.315PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA 48888833333333331616ROOF PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.416PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA 0'-0" A.F.F.+10'-2" T.O SHEATHINGSECOND FLOOR+19'-3"THIRD FLOORFIRST FLOOR+46'-11"TOP OF ROOF+40'-10"TOP OF PARAPET+47'-9"TOP OF ROOF+37'-7"T.0 PLATE+28'-5" T.O SHEATHINGFOURTH FLOOR0'-0" A.F.F.+10'-2" T.O SHEATHINGSECOND FLOOR+19'-3" T.O SHEATHINGTHIRD FLOORFIRST FLOOR+28'-5" T.O SHEATHINGFOURTH FLOORTOP OF ROOFTOP OF PARAPET+37'-7" T.O PLATETOP OF ROOF+47'-9"+46'-11"+40'-10"EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.517FINISH LEGENDNOTE:STREET NUMBERS OF THE BUILDINGS SHALL BE EASILY VISIBLE FROM THE STREETAT ALL TIMES, DAY & NITE.PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA 0'-0" A.F.F.+10'-2" T.O.SHEATHINGSECOND FLOOR+19'-3" T.O.SHEATHINGTHIRD FLOORFIRST FLOOR+28'-5" T.O.SHEATHINGFOURTH FLOOR+47'-9"TOP OF ROOFTOP OF PARAPET+40'-10"0'-0" A.F.F.+10'-2" T.O.SHEATHINGSECOND FLOOR+19'-3" T.O.SHEATHINGTHIRD FLOORFIRST FLOOR+28'-5" T.O.SHEATHINGFOURTH FLOOR+46'-11"TOP OF ROOF+40'-10"TOP OF PARAPET+47'-9"TOP OF ROOFEXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN)02/16/2022HSMGA2.1.618FINISH LEGENDNOTE:STREET NUMBERS OF THE BUILDINGS SHALL BE EASILY VISIBLE FROM THE STREETAT ALL TIMES, DAY & NITE.PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA UTILITYWALK-INCOOLER17 DOORPREPAREAOFFICESALES AREACASHIERUNISEXUNISEXWALK-INFREEZER2 DOOREQUIPMENT FLOOR PLAN - SIDE EXIT OPTIONPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CASCALE : 1/4"=1'-0"ROOF PLAN (C-STORE) PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA DOOR NOTES / HARDWAREGENERAL NOTESKEYED NOTESDOOR SCHEDULEWALL LEGENDKEYED NOTESCAR WASH BAYVEHICLEEXITVEHICLEENTRANCEEQUIPMENT ROOMCONSTRUCTION FLOOR PLANPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA EQUIPMENT SCHEDULEWATER REQUIREMENTSNO.ITEM / DESCRIPTIONREMARKSNO.ITEM / DESCRIPTIONOPTIONALOPTIONALREMARKSOPTIONALOPTIONALVEHICLEEXITCAR WASH BAYVEHICLEENTRANCEEQUIPMENT ROOMCAR WASH EQUIPMENT PLANPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CASCALE : 1/4"=1'-0"ROOF PLAN (CAR WASH) CANOPY SLAB PLANPROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA FREEZERKITCHENCOOLER13OFFICE8+++++++++++++++++++++++++5++++++++++++++++++CORRIDORCREW+++++++++++++++++STOCK267MENWOMENAE+++++++++++++++++D++++++++++++++18'-8"8'-7"8'-358"9'-834"27'-758"7'-018"79'-11"80'-3"35'-218" 3'-7"11'-61 2"20'-47 8" 35'-61 2"29'-1012"6'-312"3'-912"16'-658"4'-11"10'-012"39'-1112"7'-1118"14'9'-2"7'-278"4'-6"5'-9" 7'-21 4"7'-111 4"18'-71 4"CHAIRCHAIRCHAIR3'7'4'7'32" CLEAR (MIN.)TYP.26'-8"15'-0" SLOPE 1:486 333333522224A4.1.0SLOPE 1:48 SLOPE1:48SLOPE1:48 SLOPE1:48SLOPE1:48 13PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA FIRST FLOOR PLAN1SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"A4.1.027ROOF PLAN2SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0"6.ROOFING 4GNC BY JOHN MANSVILLE OR APPROVED EQUAL5.4.1.3" ROOF DRAIN & OVER FLOW PIPE (TYP.)2.3.AT JUNCTION OF ROOF AND VERTICAL SURFACE, FLASHING AND COUNTER FLASHING SHALL BE PROVIDED PER ROOFING MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS.ALL METAL SHALL BE NOT LESS THAN #26 GAUGE CORROSION-RESISTANT METAL.REFER TO ROOF DETAILS ON AD-1 SHEET FOR EQUIPMENT PLATFORM REQUIREMENTS (SEE MECHANICAL PLAN TO VERIFY SIZES & NUMBER). VERIFYLOCATION W/ TRUSS MANUFACTURER FOR LOAD DISTRIBUTION.1/2" PLYWOOD CRICKET O/2X6 KICKERS @ 16"O.C. W/ 6":12" MAX. SLOPE TYPICALDRAFT STOPPING SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ATTICS AND CONCEALED ROOF SPACES, SUCH THAT ANY HORIZONTAL AREA DOES NOT EXCEED 3,000 S.F.DASHED LINE INDICATES BUILDING LINE BELOW8.7.CONCRETE TILE (OWNER TO SELECT) OVER 1/2" PLYWOOD OVER PRE-MANUFACTURED ROOF TRUSSES @ 24"O.C. VERIFY ATTACHMENT WITH TRUSSMANUFACTURER. PROVIDE CONTINUOS STUCCO SCREEN. (#ESR-1647)9.3"x22" EAVE VENT10.11.SEE MECHANICAL PLAN TO VERIFY SIZES & NUMBER. VERIFY LOCATION W/ TRUSS MANUFACTURER FOR LOAD DISTRIBUTION.12.CLOAKED VENT TILE-INSTALL PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS.ROOF HATCH WITH ALTERNATING TREAD DEVICE. 14" SS OR GALVANIZED CABLE GUARDRAIL BETWEEN POSTS @ 21" & 42" ABOVE FINISHED ROOF LEVEL(THE GUARD SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED SO AS TO PREVENT THE PASSAGE OF A SPHERE 21" IN DIAMETER)13.4'-0"CONT. 4" CANT STRIPROOF TRUSS BLOCKING ASPERSTRUCTURAL AND / ORTRUSSMFR. DRAWINGSBABCOCK-DAVIS 4'-0" X 4'-0"SINGLE LEAF GALV. ROOF HATCHW/ GALV. INSULATED CURB.INSULATED COVER AND PADLOCK EYEEXTEND ROOFING MATERIALAND FLASHING UP UNDER CURBCOUNTERFLASHING.5/8" TYPE 'X' GYP.BD. (TYPICAL)NOTE:REFER ROOF HATCH ON A1.5.0SHEET FOR GUARDRAIL POSITION.50°-70'9-1/2" MAX.5"MINSTEEL BAR GRATING STAIR TREADW-19-4 1-1/4"x3/16" W/ CHECKER ⅊NOSING & 1-1/4" WELD-IN SIDEPLATES8-1/2"MIN.1/82TREAD TOSTRINGER(TYP)MC12x10.6STRINGER⅊ 1/4x12STRINGER7"MIN.40" 3"7-1/2"1-1/2"x14GASQ. TUBE1" 12"F.FNOTES FOR CONTRACTOR:1.CBC 1015.6/7 – GUARDS SHALL BE PROVIDED WHERE APPLIANCES, EQUIPMENT, FANS, ROOFHATCH OPENINGS OR OTHER ITEMS THAT REQUIRE SERVICE ARE LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OFA ROOF EDGE OR OPEN SIDE OF A WALKING SURFACE AND SUCH EDGE OR OPEN SIDE ISLOCATED MORE THAN 30 INCHES ABOVE THE FLOOR, ROOF OR GRADE BELOW. THE GUARD SHALLBE CONSTRUCTED SO AS TO PREVENT THE PASSAGE OF A SPHERE 21 INCHES IN DIAMETER.THE GUARD SHALL EXTEND NOT LESS THAN 30 INCHES BEYOND EACH END OF SUCH APPLIANCE,EQUIPMENT, FAN, ROOF HATCH OR COMPONENT.2.AUTOMATIC SHUTOFFS - AIR-MOVING SYSTEMS SUPPLYING IN EXCESS OF 2000 CUBIC FEETPER MINUTE TO ENCLOSED SPACES WITHIN BUILDINGS SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH ANAUTOMATIC SHUTOFF. SHUTOFFS SHALL STOP THE AIR-MOVING EQUIPMENT WHEN SMOKE ISDETECTED IN ROOMS SERVED BY THE SYSTEM. EXCEPTIONS: (1) ROOMS HAVE A DIRECT EXITTO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING, OR (2) SYSTEMS ARE DESIGNED FOR SMOKE CONTROL.CMC §608.13.CMC 604.1.2 - INSULATION APPLIED TO THE EXTERIOR SURFACE OF DUCTS SHALL HAVE AFLAME-SPREAD RATING OF NOT MORE THAN 25 AND A SMOKE-DENSITY RATING OF NOT MORETHAN 50 WHEN TESTED AS A COMPOSITE ASSEMBLY INCLUDING INSULATION, FACINGMATERIALS, TAPES AND ADHESIVES AS NORMALLY APPLIED.ROOF HATCH W/ALTERNATING TREAD DEVISE4SCALE: N.T.S.DRAFT STOP DETAIL3SCALE: N.T.S.NOTE:-1.DRAFT STOPPING MATERIALS SHALL NOT BE LESSTHAN 0.5-INCH GYPSUM BOARD, 0.375-INCH WOODSTRUCTURAL PANEL, 0.375-INCH PARTICLEBOARD OROTHER APPROVED MATERIALS.LV24RD ROUND LOUVER VENT.KEY NOTES# A4.1.128PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA 3'-6"14'-3"3'-6"15'-6"3'-6"15'-0"3'-6"5'-0"30'-0"5'-0"43'-512"5'-0"30'-0"5'-0"43'-512"5'-0"30'-0"5'-0"3'-6"14'-3"3'-6"15'-6"3'-6"15'-0"3'-6"5'-0"29'-3"5'-0"52'-312"5'-0"30'-0"5'-0"52'-312"5'-0"29'-3"5'-0"14'-3"15'-0"15'-0"15'-0"15'-0"14'-3"15'-0"15'-0"15'-0"15'-0"15'-0"15'-0"223'-112"223'-112"67'-11" 67'-11"12439'-2"8'-1"9'-2"8'-1"32" CLEAR(MIN.)TYP.4'-0"PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA A6.1.1±PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC Folsom, CA 95630 1024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA Gilroy Square at City of Gilroy Commercial Zoning Regulations Comparison Commercial District Requirements Regulations Requirements Proposed Lot none 443343 SF Yard Requirements (Minimum in Feet) Front (Measured from FOC) 41' Min. 41'-3" at burger king from Camino Arroyo street Side (Adjacent to Street from FOC) 31' Min. 93.7' at Warehouse from Holloway Road Side (All other Side Yards) 0 N/A Rear 0 Min. 17.5' from Burger King Height Requirements (Maximum) 55' Max. 55' (top of tower) Additional Regulations Off-Street Parking, Article XXXI Parking required for hotel 1 space= 1room, for drive thru 1 space=100 sq.ft , for C store 1 space = 250 sq.ft, warehouse 1 space=350 sq.ft. . Parking provided for hotel 1 space= 1room, for drive thru 1 space=100 sq.ft , for C store 1 space = 250 sq.ft, warehouse 1 space=350 sq.ft. Fences , Article XXXIV None None Landscaping, Article XXXVIII ( from FOC) Min. 8% of gross site area 15.66% of gross site area Perimeter Landscaping Required (from FOC) 21' required 21' provided Screen Outdoor Areas Landscape plans will provide a visual screen from less pleasing features of development. Meet Water Efficiency & Stormwater Management Standards Refer to Landscape plans for Preliminary SWCP. Landscaping Areas Located Adjacent to the Street Right-Of-Way 21' Wide Minimum (Measured from FOC) 21' Minimum EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (C-STORE)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (BURGER KING)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (CANOPY)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (FUTURE WAREHOUSE)COLOR LEGENDS:(STUCCO COLORS BY PAREX) PAREX TEXTURED,COLOR: PAREX MOONDANCE 3027L MULTI-TEXTURE SURFACE WITH STUCCO-2C, PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: PAREX MOONDANCE 3027L. STUCCO-3C PAREX MEDIUM, SAND FINE SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: PAREX TWIG 3021L. STUCCO-4C PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: SUN DRIED 3011L . STUCCO-5C PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH. COLOR: PAREX SNOWBALL 10400L. STUCCO-6C PAREX SMOOTH, SAND SMOOTH SURFACE WITH PDR ACRYLIC FINISH COLOR:PAREX BASALT 3015L STONE CLADDING, LEDGESTONE SOUTHWEST BLEND SHT MTL-WH, SHEET METAL GRAVEL STOP TYPE COPPING. PAC-CLAD CUSTOM FABRICATED ROOF EDGE FLASHING AND FASCIA. COLOR: BONE WHITE. SHT MTL-GR, ELEVATOR OVERRUN GRAVEL STOP TYPE COPPING, SCUPPER AND DOWNSPOUT. PAC-CLAD CUSTOM FABRICATED ROOF EDGE FLASHING AND FASCIA. COLOR: SLATE GRAY. EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (RESIDENCE-INN)COLOR EXTERIOR MATERIAL BOARD (CAR WASH)COLOR 36" dia-side36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-side36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)07/14/2022PKDSC1 01TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA“” 36" dia-sid e 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)07/15/2022PKDSC202TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-sid e 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA07/15/2022ASDSC303 STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-side 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 07/15/2022ASDSC404TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-side 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)07/15/2022PKDSC505TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-side 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA07/15/2022PKDSC606 FFE=185.00RESIDENCE INNHOTELFFE=183.70FUTUREWAREHOUSEFFE=184.50HOLIDAY INNEXPRESSTITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-sid e 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)07/15/2022ASDSC808TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA STATE HWY 152CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYOHOLLOWAY ROAD 36" dia-sid e 36" dia-side36" dia-side 1 STORY (LOBBY) RESIDENCE INN 112 ROOM - 4 STORY OUTDOOR POOL PATIO OUTDOOR POOL HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 88 ROOM - 4 STORY TRASHTRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASHSUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4 STORY, 72 BEDSFUTURE WAREHOUSE 15000 SF TITLE PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:FOLSOM, CA 95630 1024 IRON POINT ROAD, SUITE 1046 Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155 Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural Engineering ACE Design LLCACE Design LLC OF 0919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY, CA07/15/2022ASDS C99 13111082LANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPINGCROSSACCESSCROSSACCESSVPVPVPVP1214736LANDSCAPING1178336" dia-side36" dia-side36" dia-side129103EVEVEVEVEVEVEVEV33L/SSIDE WALKSIDE WALKLANDSCAPINGFIRERISERROOMCAMINO ARROYO ROAD1VPVPVPVP2 10171 STORY (LOBBY)RESIDENCE INN112 ROOM - 4 STORYLANDSCAPINGMAINENTRYLANDSCAPINGOUTDOOR POOLLANDSCAPING16811023372PATIOOUTDOORPOOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS88 ROOM - 4 STORY738LANDSCAPING10LANDSCAPINGEVEVEVEVLANDSCAPING4AREA:-57207 S.F. 4FIRE RISERROOMAREA:-35990 S.F. AREA:-84254 S.F.FIRE RISERROOMPARCEL-1(1.31 AC)(0.82 AC)AREA:-103765 S.F.(2.3 AC)(1.93 AC)EVVPEV VPVPEVEVEV(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING(N) SIDEWALK(E) LANDSCAPING CAMINO ARROYOCAMINO ARROYO13CAMINO ARROYO ROADHOLLOWAY ROAD17LANDSCAPINGAREA:-162217 S.F. (3.72 AC)VACANT FUTURE LOT FOROFFICE, WAREHOUSE, RETAIL& MEDICAL FACILITYHOLLOWAY ROADSCALE:080'6040'20'1" = 40'-0"SYMBOLDESCRIPTIONDETAILConcrete PavingCrosswalkADA ramp with detectable warningsAC Paving1234REFERENCE_NOTES_SCHEDULEIRRIGATION NARRATIVEThe Gilroy Square irrigation system will utilize high-efficiency irrigation equipment and best practices in design to create ahighly efficient and operator friendly irrigation system. The irrigation design will comply with the State's Model WaterEfficient Landscape Ordinance requirements.The new irrigation system will utilize municipal potable water and connect to new irrigation meter and reduced pressurebackflow preventer located along Camino Arroyo. A new master valve, flow sensor and manual shut off valve will belocated downstream of the RPBP. The irrigation system will be operated by a new 'Smart' Irrigation Controller whichutilizes automatic ETO data schedule adjustments and includes an automatic rain shut off sensor. The controller willcomply with MWELO requirements. Shrub and groundcover areas will be irrigated with a “Netafim” type sub-surface in-line drip irrigation system. Drip lineswill include built-in check valves and pressure compensating emitters. Lawn areas will not be included in the project.Trees will be irrigated with deep water tree bubblers, operated on a valve independent from those operating shrub andground cover irrigation. Additional irrigation equipment to be furnished will include quick coupling valves, gate valves,remote control valves, filters for drip irrigation valves, spare wire stubs, pressure regulators as required and drip systemindicators.234L1.00TYP.TYP.TYP.PRELIMINARY MWELO WATER USE CALCULATIONSMATCHLINE© Copyright 2018 QUADRIGA landscape architecture & planning, inc.Issuances & RevisionsKey Plan/Consultant StampStampGilroy Square Development Schematic Design 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy, CA 95020DescriptionNo.DateProject Number:Date:Scale:QUADRIGAlandscape architecture and planning, inc.SACRAMENTO | SANTA ROSA916.441.2129 | www.quadriga-inc.comSCHEMATIC SITE PLAN20-26502021/07/091"=40'-0"MATCHLINE1TYP.SITE PLANTINGCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMESIZEWATER USEACH M20Achillea millefolium `Moonshine` / Yarrow1 galLowCAL SPECalandrinia spectabilis / Pink Calandrinia1 galLowCAL DWACallistemon viminalis `Little John` / Dwarf Weeping Bottlebrush5 galLowCAR PR2Carex testacea `Prairie Fire` / Prairie Fire Sedge1 galMediumCHO TECChondropetalum tectorum / Cape Rush5 galLowDIA LRSDianella revoluta `Little Rev` / Little Rev Flax Lily1 galLowHES BR2Hesperaloe parviflora `Perpa` TM / Brakelights Red Yucca1 galLowLEY CANLeymus condensatus `Canyon Prince` / Canyon Prince Blue Rye1 galLowLOM IRALomandra longifolia `Breeze` TM / Breeze Mat Rush1 galLowMYR CO3Myrtus compacta / Compact Myrtle1 galLowOLE LITOlea europaea `Little Ollie` TM / Little Ollie Olive5 galLowPRU MONPrunus caroliniana `Monus` / Bright `N Tight Carolina Cherry Laurel5 galLowSAL BARSalvia leucantha `Santa Barbara` / Mexican Bush Sage1 galLowSED AN3Sedum x `Angelina` / Angelina Sedum1 galLowSEN SERSenecio serpens / Blue Chalksticks1 galLowVIB TINViburnum tinus / Laurustinus5 galMediumBIORETENTION PLANTINGSCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMESIZEWATER USEBAC PIGBaccharis pilularis `Pigeon Point` / Coyote Brush1 galLowCAR DIVCarex divulsa / Berkeley Sedge1 galLowJUN ELKJuncus patens `Elk Blue` / Spreading Rush1 galLowMIM CARMimulus cardinalis / Scarlet Monkey Flower1 galHighRUD CALRudbeckia californica / California Coneflower1 galMediumSIS BELSisyrinchium bellum / Blue Eyed Grass1 galVery LowLAG NAT lagerstroemia 'Natchez' / Natchez Crape Myrtle TREESCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMESIZECER DES Cercidium x `Desert Museum` / Thornless Palo Verde CER CMO Cercis canadensis texensis `Oklahoma` / Oklahoma Redbud PIS KEI Pistacia chinensis `Keith Davey` / Keith Davey Chinese Pistache PLA COL Platanus x acerifolia `Columbia` / London Plane Tree CED DEO Cedrus Deodarar / Deodar Cedar ULM DRA Ulmus parvifolia `Drake` / Drake Chinese Elm QUE SHU Quercus shumardii / Shumard Red Oak MEDIUM SHADE TREEARB MUL Arbutus x `Marina` / Arbutus Multi-Trunk EVERGREEN ACCENT TREESDECIDUOUS ACCENT TREESLARGE SHADE TREELARGE STREET TREENYS SYL Nyssa sylvatica / Sour Gum CANDIDATE TREE SCHEDULE24"boxGIN AUT Ginkgo 'Autumn Gold' / Autumn Gold Gingko MEDIUM STREET TREEKOU PAN Koulreuteria paniculata / Golden Rain Tree ZEL GRE Zelkova 'Green Vase` / Green Vase Zelkova ULM FRO Ulmus 'Frontier' / Frontier Elm 24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"box24"boxCANDIDATE PLANT SCHEDULEWATER USELowLowMedLowLowMedLowMedMedMedLowMedMedMed CalEEMod Memo and Results B APPENDIX MEMORANDUM To: Teri Wissler Adam, Principal in Charge From: Zane Mortensen, Assistant Planner Cc: File Date: September 27, 2022 Re: Camino Arroyo Development Project – Emissions Modeling Methodology, Assumptions, and Results PROJECT DESCRIPTION This memorandum describes the methodology and assumptions used in the emissions modeling prepared for the Camino Arroyo Development Project. The project site is located at the intersection of Pacheco Pass Highway (State Route 152) and Camino Arroyo Road, in the City of Gilroy, California. The proposed development is within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin, which is under the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (“air district”). As shown on the project plans (ACE Design 2022) the proposed project intends to subdivide the 10.07-acre property into five lots to be developed in three phases: ▪ Phase 1a – a 2,600 square-foot drive-thru Burger King and 4,242 square-foot convenience store gas station with car wash on approximately 2.1 acres; ▪ Phase 1b – an 82,568 square-foot Residence Inn and 67,780 square-foot Holiday Inn on approximately 4.1 acres; and ▪ Phase 2 – two industrial warehouse buildings with a combined footprint of 46,000 square-feet on 3.8 acres; The project site is vacant and consists of unmaintained grasslands. Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 2 MEMORANDUM SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT This assessment provides methodology, assumptions and an estimate of the proposed project construction and operational criteria air pollutant emissions and construction and operational greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at buildout of all three phases. Emissions are quantified using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2020.4 software, a modeling platform recommended by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and accepted by the air district. Model results are attached to this assessment. METHODOLOGY Emissions Model CalEEMod estimates construction emissions associated with land use development projects and allows for the input of project-specific construction information including phasing and equipment information. CalEEMod was used to estimate annual emissions for on-site and off-site construction activity. On-site activities are primarily made up of construction equipment emissions, while off-site activity includes worker, hauling, and vendor traffic. The CalEEMod software utilizes emissions models USEPA AP-42 emission factors, CARB vehicle emission models studies and studies commissioned by other California agencies. The CalEEMod platform allows calculations of both construction and operational criteria pollutant and GHG emissions from land use projects. The model also calculates indirect emissions from processes “downstream” of the proposed project such as GHG emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use. CalEEMod is capable of estimating changes in the carbon sequestration potential of a site based on changes in natural vegetation communities and the net number of new trees that would be planted as part of the project. The model calculates a one-time only loss in the carbon sequestration potential of the site that would result from changes in land use such as converting vegetation to built or paved surfaces, and can provide an estimate of the change in the carbon sequestration potential that would result from planting new trees in an amount that is greater than the number of trees to be removed (net number of new trees). Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 3 MEMORANDUM Project Characteristics For modeling purposes, data inputs to the model take into account the type and size of proposed uses utilizing CalEEMod default land uses based on the size metrics shown on the project plans, construction data information provided by the project applicant and trip generation provided by the traffic engineer. Model results are attached to this memorandum. The three proposed project phases were modeled separately. The size and type of proposed sources of criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions during construction and operations of Phase 1a, Phase 1b, and Phase 2 are categorized by the CalEEMod land use default categories as shown in Table 1, Project Characteristics. Unless otherwise noted, model inputs are derived from project designs and specifications (ACE Design 2022). Construction and operational criteria air pollutant and operational GHG emissions estimates are modeled for each phase based on the project characteristics information presented in Table 1. Modeling Scenario Unmitigated modeling scenarios were prepared for each of the three phases of the proposed project to estimate the potential criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions. Unmitigated Emissions Scenario The “unmitigated” emissions scenario provides an estimate of operational emissions that would be generated by the proposed land uses in compliance with uniformly applied regulatory measures that reduce GHG emissions and have criteria air emission reduction co- benefits. This scenario shows modeled operational criteria air pollutant emissions and GHG emissions that would be generated during construction and operational activities. Regulatory compliance consistent with California Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) emissions reduction measures already included in the model are referenced here parenthetically. Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 4 MEMORANDUM Table 1 Project Characteristics Project Components CalEEMod Default Land Use1 Proposed2,3 Phase 1a Drive-thru Fast Food Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-thru 2,600 Convenience Store Gas Station with Carwash Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 4,242 8 pumps Parking Lot Parking Lot 54 spaces Concrete/paving Other Asphalt Surfaces 46,436 Landscaping City Park 20,990 Phase 1b Hotel Hotel 82,568 112 rooms Hotel Hotel 67,780 88 rooms Parking Lot Parking Lot 208 spaces Concrete/paving Other Asphalt Surfaces 63,158 Landscaping City Park 27,395 Phase 2 (Future Development) Industrial Warehouse Unrefrigerated Warehouse – No Rail 46,000 Parking Lot Parking Lot 52,400 131 spaces Concrete/paving Other Asphalt Surfaces 28,860 Landscaping City Park 39,951 SOURCE: Ace Design LLC, 2022 NOTES: 1. CalEEMod default land use subtype. Descriptions of the model default land use categories and subtypes are found in the User’s Guide for CalEEMod Version 2020.4available online at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide. 2. Expressed in units of square feet unless otherwise noted. 3. Numbers are rounded and may vary. Compliance with the following regulations during operations is assumed: ▪ State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) (CAPCOA WUW-4); ▪ Landscaping equipment is set to electric only to reflect phasing out of gas-powered landscaping tools potentially by 2024 (AB 1346). It is assumed that these or similar requirements will be in effect at buildout (CAPCOA A-1); and Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 5 MEMORANDUM ▪ Solid waste diversion of 75 percent is applied consistent with waste diversion targets identified in AB 341. It is assumed that these or similar requirements will be in effect at buildout (CAPCOA SW-1). Assumptions Unless otherwise noted, data inputs for the model scenarios are based on the following primary assumptions: 1. Construction and operational criteria air pollutant and GHG emissions generated by the proposed project were estimated using the following CalEEMod default land use subtypes: 2. Emissions generated by the convenience store and fueling stations are assumed to be similar to emissions generated by the CalEEMod default land use category of Convenience market with Gas Pumps; 3. Emissions generated by landscaping are assumed to be similar to emissions generated by the CalEEMod default land use subtype “City Park”. 4. The estimated construction start date for Phase 1a and Phase 1b is January, 2023; 5. The estimated operational year for Phase 1a and Phase 1b is 2025; 6. The estimated construction start date for Phase 2 is January, 2026 7. The estimated operational year for Phase 2 is 2028; 8. Changes to carbon sequestration potential were estimated based on the conversion of 10.07 acres of grassland. Operational Emissions Data Input Each air district (or county) assigns trip lengths for urban and rural settings, which are incorporated into the CalEEMod defaults. The model’s defaults were set to “urban” and the jurisdictional authority parameters are based on the model defaults for the air district. Model defaults for mobile operational sources are adjusted based on the trip generation information provided by the project traffic engineer (Hexagon Transportation Consultants 2022). Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 6 MEMORANDUM Construction Emi ssions Data Inputs Construction-related GHG emissions are quantified. CalEEMod default construction parameters allow estimates of short-term construction GHG emissions based upon empirical data collected and analyzed by the CARB. CalEEMod estimates construction emissions associated with land use development projects and allows for the input of project-specific construction information including phasing and equipment information, if known. Construction information in detail sufficient to adjust model defaults was not available; therefore, the model’s default construction emissions factors were used in this assessment. GHG emissions are amortized over a 30-year time period to yield an annual emissions volume. Carbon Sequestration Potential Data Inputs CalEEMod estimates a one-time only change in sequestration potential resulting from changes in natural communities. The proposed project would replace approximately 10.07- acres of grassland with development. Grassland is identified as a natural community with carbon sequestration value in the model; therefore, an estimate of the one-time loss in carbon sequestration value attributable to the loss of cropland is included in this assessment. A landscaping plan was not available at the time of modeling; therefore, an estimate of the change in sequestration potential from tree planting was not modeled. CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANTS RESULTS Construction Emissio ns Average daily emissions were computed by dividing the total construction emissions by the number of construction days. Based on the applicant construction schedule and default construction equipment values, CalEEMod estimated emissions over 220 construction workdays for each phase. Unmitigated construction emissions are presented in Table 2, Unmitigated Annualized Daily Construction Emissions. Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 7 MEMORANDUM Table 2 Unmitigated Annualized Daily Construction Emissions Emissions ROG1 NOx1 Total PM101,2 Exhaust PM103 Total PM2.51,2 Phase 1a Maximum 0.23 1.84 0.15 0.08 0.10 Annualized Average Daily4 <0.001 0.004 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Phase 1b Maximum 0.83 2.28 0.34 0.10 0.18 Annualized Average Daily4 0.002 0.005 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Phase 2 Maximum 0.27 1.87 0.24 0.074 0.13 Annualized Average Daily4 0.001 0.004 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 Source: EMC Planning Group 2022, Note: 1, Emissions amounts are expressed in pounds per day and rounded. 2. Total PM emissions include exhaust particles and fugitive dust. 3. Exhaust PM10 is assumed to be DPM. 4. CalEEMod assumes 220 construction days per phase. Operational Emissions Unmitigated operational criteria air pollutant emissions are summarized in Table 3, Unmitigated Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions. Table 3 Unmitigated Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Emissions Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Sulfur Oxides (SO2) Suspended Particulate Matter (PM10) PM2.5 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Phase 1a Unmitigated Annual 0.67 0.008 0.85 0.23 5.74 Average Daily Emissions 0.002 <0.001 0.002 0.001 0.016 Phase 1b Unmitigated Annual 0.91 0.01 1.21 0.35 5.45 Average Daily Emissions 0.002 <0.001 0.003 0.001 0.015 Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 8 MEMORANDUM Phase 2 Unmitigated Annual 0.09 0.002 0.21 0.06 0.73 Average Daily Emissions <0.001 <0.001 0.001 <0.001 0.002 Buildout Average Daily Emissions 0.005 <0.001 0.006 0.002 0.032 SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2020 NOTES: 1. Results may vary due to rounding. 2. Expressed in tons. GHG EMISSIONS RESULTS Construction GHG Emissions Construction GHG emissions would be 333.69 MT CO2e for Phase 1a, 564.31 MT CO2e for Phase 1b, and 447.42 MT CO2e for Phase 2 for a total of 1,345.43 MT CO2e. When averaged over a 30-year operational lifetime, the annual amortized emissions equal 44.85 MT CO2e per year. Operational GHG Emissions At buildout of all phases, the proposed project would generate annual unmitigated operational GHG emissions of 2,467.46 MT CO2e as summarized in Table 3, Unmitigated Operational GHG Emissions. Carbon Sequestration Potential The change in carbon sequestration potential is shown in Section 2.3 of the model results for each phase. Phase 1a would result in a loss of 9.18 MT CO2e; Phase 1b would result in a loss of 17.71 MT CO2e; Phase 2 would result in a loss of 16.46 MT CO2e for a total net loss of 43.35 MT CO2e sequestration potential. Averaged over a 30-year lifetime, the annual loss in carbon sequestration potential would be 1.45 MT CO2e per year. Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 9 MEMORANDUM Table 3 Unmitigated Operational GHG Emissions Emissions Sources CO2e Phase 1a Phase 1b Phase 2 Area 0.001 0.001 0.002 Energy1 42.10 461.07 25.25 Mobile 747.15 975.23 153.00 Waste 3.77 13.78 5.45 Water2 1.36 7.10 14.38 Total by Phase 794.38 1,475.18 198.08 Buildout 2,467.46 SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2022 NOTES: Results may vary due to rounding. Expressed in MT CO2e per year. 1. Results include emissions reductions from compliance with State thresholds for the MWELO Total Unmitigated GHG Emissions at Buildout GHG emissions at buildout of all phases consist of amortized construction emissions added to the operational emissions and the amortized annual loss in carbon sequestration potential as presented in Table 4, Total Unmitigated Annual GHG Emissions. Table 4 Total Unmitigated Annual GHG Emissions Operational Emissions Amortized Construction Emissions Loss of Carbon Sequestration Potential Total Project Emissions 2,467.46 44.85 1.45 2,513.76 SOURCE: EMC Planning Group 2022 NOTE: Results may vary due to rounding. SOURCES 1. Breeze Software, a Division of Trinity Consultants. California Emissions Estimator (CalEEMod) Version 2020.4. May 2021. Available online at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home Teri Wissler Adam EMC Planning Group September 27, 2022 Page 10 MEMORANDUM 2. ----. 2021. CalEEMod User’s Guide (Version 2020.4). Available online at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/user's-guide 3. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. May 2017. California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines. Available online at: http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and- research/ceqa/ceqa_guidelines_may2017-pdf.pdf?la=en 4. Hexagon Transportation Consultants. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis. July 5, 2022. 5. ACE Design LLC. Site Plan Gilroy Square 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy CA, September 9, 2022. CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0 Parking Lot 54.00 Space 0.49 21,600.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 46.45 1000sqft 1.07 46,446.00 Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated Santa Clara County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days)58 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 8.00 Pump 0.03 4,242.00 0 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 2.60 1000sqft 0.06 2,600.00 0 City Park 0.48 Acre 0.48 20,990.00 Vehicle Trips - Trip rate adjusted to match Trip Generation Estimates. Water And Wastewater - No septic system - Wastewater service provided by South County Regional Wastewater Authority. Area Mitigation - Landscaping equipment is set to electric only to reflect phasing out of gas-powered landscaping tools potentially by 2024 (AB 1346). 0.004 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Land Use - Square footage adjusted to match project site plan. Demolition - No infrastructure located on project site CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 203.98 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.033 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) Climate Zone 4 Operational Year 2025 Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.96 0.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 322.50 265.12 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 20,908.80 20,990.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 1,129.40 4,242.00 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 0.78 0.00 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 322.50 265.12 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 322.50 265.12 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 472.58 467.48 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 616.12 467.48 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 2.19 0.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 470.95 467.48 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.2343 1.8368 1.9268 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 1.3594 1.3594 7.0000e-005 1.0000e- 005 1.3628 0.0554 5.9200e- 003 332.3315 2024 0.0458 5.5400e- 003 8.9000e- 003 2.0000e-005 2.9000e-004 2.8000e-004 5.6000e-004 8.0000e-005 2.8000e-004 3.5000e-004 0.0000 0.0761 0.0998 0.0000 329.1822 329.18223.8500e-003 0.0721 0.0797 0.1518 0.02372023 0.0554 5.9200e- 003 332.33150.0761 0.0998 0.0000 329.1822 329.18223.8500e-003 0.0721 0.0797 0.1518 0.0237Maximum0.2343 1.8368 1.9268 2.2 Overall Operational N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 0.0000 0.0000 1.1300e- 003 Energy 2.9600e- 003 0.0269 0.0226 1.6000e-004 2.0400e-003 2.0400e-003 2.0400e-003 2.0400e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0700e-003 1.0700e-0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000Area0.0363 1.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 729.1279 729.12797.9000e-003 0.8401 6.7800e-003 0.8469 0.2242Mobile0.8629 0.6382 5.7253 41.8039 41.8039 2.5900e-003 7.8000e-004 42.1017 0.0000 0.0000Water 0.0000 1.5219 0.0899 0.0000 3.7705 0.0872 0.0532 747.1527 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.5219 6.2900e-003 0.2305 0.0000 771.5747 773.4054 0.1879 0.0546 794.3849 8.1800e-003 6.8000e-004 1.3589 Total 0.9022 0.6651 5.7485 8.0600e-003 0.8401 8.8200e-003 0.8489 0.2242 8.3300e-003 0.2326 1.8307 0.0000 0.0000 0.3088 0.6418 0.9506 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 2.3 Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation Land Change -9.1803 Total -9.1803 CO2e Category t o n s MT 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.8629 0.6382 5.7253 7.9000e-003 0.8401 6.7800e-003 0.8469 0.2242 6.2900e-003 0.2305 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2OExhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total 0.0872 0.0532 747.1527 747.1527 Unmitigated 0.8629 0.6382 5.7253 7.9000e-003 0.8401 6.7800e-003 0.8469 0.2242 6.2900e-003 0.2305 0.0000 729.1279 729.1279 0.0000 729.1279 729.1279 0.0872 0.0532 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 1,215.45 1,215.45 1215.45 1,135,623 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 2,120.96 2,120.96 2120.96 1,137,692 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Total 3,336.41 3,336.41 3,336.41 2,273,315 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.00 19.00 66 28 6City Park 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-byLand Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W 78.80 19.00 29 21 50Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 9.50 7.30 7.30 2.20 80.20 19.00 14 21 65Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.80 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 0.00 0.00 0 0 0Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0Other Asphalt Surfaces 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893City Park 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MHMDVLHD1LHD2MHDHHD 0.000900 0.002720 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 5.0 Energy Detail 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 Parking Lot 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893 0.000372 0.024386 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 Unmitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 9926.28 5.0000e- 005 4.9000e- 004 4.1000e-004 0.0000 4.0000e-005 4.0000e-005 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 28.7579 28.7579 5.5000e-004 5.3000e- 004 28.9288 1.0000e- 005 0.5329 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 538902 2.9100e- 003 0.0264 0.0222 1.6000e-004 2.0100e-003 2.0100e-003 2.0100e- 003 2.0100e-003 0.0000 4.0000e-005 0.0000 0.5297 0.5297 1.0000e-005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity 29.2876 29.2876 5.6000e-004 5.4000e- 004 29.4616 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.9600e- 003 0.0269 0.0226 1.6000e-004 2.0500e-003 2.0500e-003 2.0500e- 003 2.0500e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr t o n s MT/yr City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 8.0000e-005 4.1183 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 83642 7.7389 1.2500e- 003 1.5000e-004 7.8154 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 44074.4 4.0779 6.6000e- 004 2.4000e-004 12.6401 6.0 Area Detail Total 12.5163 2.0200e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 7560 0.6995 1.1000e- 004 1.0000e-005 0.7064 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 0.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 4.9900e- 003 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 4.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.0313 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0700e-003 1.0700e-003 0.0000 0.0000 1.1300e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 1.1300e- 003 Total 0.0364 1.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0700e-003 1.0700e-0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000Landscaping 7.0 Water Detail CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 7.2 Water by Land Use Land Use Mgal t o n s MT/yr City Park 0 / 0.537024 0.1739 3.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.1756 Unmitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 7.0000e-005 0.1262 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 0.789188 / 0.0473009 0.6896 7.3700e- 003 6.2000e-004 1.0571 Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 0.0836574 / 0.0481462 0.0871 7.8000e- 004 6.9000e-004 1.3589 8.0 Waste Detail Total 0.9506 8.1800e- 003 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons t o n s MT/yr CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.0000 3.7655 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Fast Food Restaurant with Drive Thru 7.4875 1.5199 0.0898 City Park 0.01 2.0300e- 003 1.2000e- 004 0.0000 5.0300e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 Total 1.5219 0.0899 0.0000 3.7705 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 11.0 Vegetation Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 11.1 Vegetation Land Change Vegetation Type Category t o n s MT Unmitigated -9.1803 0.0000 0.0000 -9.1803 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:43 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1a Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Initial/Final Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 0.0000 -9.1803Total-9.1803 0.0000 Acres t o n s MT Grassland 2.13 / 0 -9.1803 0.0000 0.0000 -9.1803 Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated Santa Clara County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0 Hotel 112.00 Room 0.10 82,568.00 0 City Park 0.63 Acre 0.63 27,442.80 0 Parking Lot 208.00 Space 1.87 83,200.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 63.16 1000sqft 1.45 63,158.00 Climate Zone 4 Operational Year 2025 Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days)58 Hotel 88.00 Room 0.06 67,780.00 Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value Vehicle Trips - Trip rate adjusted to match Trip Generation Estimates. Water And Wastewater - No septic systems - Wastewater service provided by South County Regional Wastewater Authority. Area Mitigation - Phasing out of gas-powered landscaping tools potentially by 2024 (AB 1346). 0.004 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Land Use - Area adjusted to match project description Other asphalt surfaces estimated based on total paved area and parking lotDemolition - No existing infrastructure located on the property. CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 203.98 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.033 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.96 0.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 8.42 tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.73 0.10 tblLandUse LotAcreage 2.93 0.06 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 162,624.00 82,568.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 127,776.00 67,780.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 0.78 0.00 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.36 8.42 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 2.19 0.00 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 8.42 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 N2O CO2ePM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.2605 2.2834 2.5794 Year tons/yr MT/yr 25.7402 25.7402 5.7200e-003 3.3000e- 004 25.9804 0.0834 0.0202 538.3331 2024 0.8322 0.1101 0.1647 2.9000e-004 5.5000e-003 5.1000e-003 0.0106 1.4700e-003 4.7700e-003 6.2500e-003 0.0000 0.0919 0.1754 0.0000 530.2248 530.22485.9200e-003 0.2415 0.0979 0.3394 0.08352023 0.0834 0.0202 538.33310.0919 0.1754 0.0000 530.2248 530.22485.9200e-003 0.2415 0.0979 0.3394 0.0835Maximum0.8322 2.2834 2.5794 2.2 Overall Operational N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 1.0000e-005 0.0000 4.7800e- 003 Energy 0.0356 0.3236 0.2718 1.9400e-003 0.0246 0.0246 0.0246 0.0246 0.0000 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005 0.0000 4.5400e-003 4.5400e-0030.0000 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005Area0.6785 2.0000e- 005 2.5100e- 003 959.4425 959.44250.0104 1.1823 7.5200e-003 1.1898 0.3156Mobile0.5785 0.5847 5.1778 457.9301 457.9301 0.0238 8.5300e-003 461.0682 0.0000 0.0000Water 0.0000 5.5594 0.3286 0.0000 13.7732 0.0664 0.0474 975.2328 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 5.5594 6.9900e-003 0.3226 0.0000 1,420.3168 1,427.6712 0.4662 0.0599 1,457.1789 0.0474 3.9600e-003 7.0999 Total 1.2926 0.9084 5.4521 0.0123 1.1823 0.0321 1.2144 0.3156 0.0316 0.3472 7.3544 0.0000 0.0000 1.7950 2.9396 4.7346 2.3 Vegetation Vegetation CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Vegetation Land Change -17.7141 Total -17.7141 CO2e Category t o n s MT 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Hotel 740.96 740.96 740.96 1,407,773 Hotel 943.04 943.04 943.04 1,791,711 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Total 1,684.00 1,684.00 1,684.00 3,199,483 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.00 19.00 66 28 6City Park 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-byLand Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W 61.60 19.00 58 38 4Hotel9.50 7.30 7.30 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4Hotel9.50 7.30 7.30 19.40 4.4 Fleet Mix 0.00 0.00 0 0 0Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0Other Asphalt Surfaces 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893City Park 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MHMDVLHD1LHD2MHDHHD 0.000900 0.002720 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 Hotel 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893 0.000372 0.024386 0.000372 0.024386 0.000900 0.002720 5.0 Energy Detail 0.020252 0.005158 0.008030 0.006377 0.000893Parking Lot 0.573651 0.055882 0.186012 0.115369 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 Unmitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 2.97622e+ 006 0.0161 0.1459 0.1226 8.8000e-004 0.0111 0.0111 0.0111 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 193.4737 193.4737 3.7100e-003 3.5500e- 003 194.6235 2.9100e- 003 159.7662 Hotel 3.62556e+ 006 0.0196 0.1777 0.1493 1.0700e-003 0.0135 0.0135 0.0135 0.0135 0.0000 0.0111 0.0000 158.8224 158.8224 3.0400e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity 352.2962 352.2962 6.7500e-003 6.4600e- 003 354.3897 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0356 0.3236 0.2718 1.9500e-003 0.0246 0.0246 0.0246 0.0246 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 9.1000e-004 46.8662 Hotel 611003 56.5323 9.1500e- 003 1.1100e-003 57.0913 Hotel 501572 46.4073 7.5100e- 003 Land Use kWh/yr t o n s MT/yr City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.0700e-003 106.6785 6.0 Area Detail Total 105.6339 0.0171 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 29120 2.6943 4.4000e- 004 5.0000e-005 2.7209 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 6.2 Area by SubCategory N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.0815 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.0000Consumer Products 0.5969 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.5400e-003 4.5400e-0030.0000 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005Landscaping1.7000e- 004 2.0000e- 005 2.5100e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.0 Water Detail 4.5400e-003 4.5400e-003 1.0000e-005 0.0000 4.7800e- 003 1.0000e-005 0.0000 4.7800e- 003 Total 0.6785 2.0000e- 005 2.5100e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005 0.0000 1.0000e-005 1.0000e-005 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 3.9600e-003 6.8694 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 5.07335 / 0.52932 4.5063 0.0474 Land Use Mgal t o n s MT/yr City Park 0 / 0.704845 0.2283 4.0000e- 005 0.0000 0.2305 8.0 Waste Detail 0.0000 0.0000 Total 4.7346 0.0474 3.9600e-003 7.1000 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 0.0000 13.7669 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 27.375 5.5569 0.3284 Land Use tons t o n s MT/yr City Park 0.0125 2.5400e- 003 1.5000e- 004 0.0000 6.2900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 Total 5.5594 0.3286 0.0000 13.7732 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 11.0 Vegetation Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category t o n s MT Unmitigated -17.7141 0.0000 0.0000 -17.7141 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 6/29/2022 11:53 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 1b Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 11.1 Vegetation Land Change Vegetation Type Initial/Final Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 0.0000 -17.7141Total-17.7141 0.0000 Acres t o n s MT Grassland 4.11 / 0 -17.7141 0.0000 0.0000 -17.7141 Water Mitigation - State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) (CAPCOA WUW-4) Waste Mitigation - 75 percent is applied consistent with waste diversion targets identified in AB 341. Demolition - No existing infrastructure on the property. Vehicle Trips - Trip rate adjusted to match Trip Generation Estimates. Water And Wastewater - No septic systems - Wastewater service provided by South County Regional Wastwater Authority. Area Mitigation - Landscaping equipment is set to electric only to reflect phasing out of gas-powered landscaping tools potentially by 2024 (AB 1346). N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.004 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Land Use - Area adjusted to match project description. Other asphalt surfaces estimated based on total paved area and parking lot Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 203.98 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.033 Precipitation Freq (Days)58 Climate Zone 4 Operational Year 2028 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 0 City Park 0.92 Acre 0.92 39,951.00 0 Parking Lot 131.00 Space 1.18 52,400.00 0 Other Asphalt Surfaces 28.86 1000sqft 0.66 28,860.00 0 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 46.00 1000sqft 1.06 46,000.00 Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated Santa Clara County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.0795 9.5700e-003 422.16550.0698 0.1318 0.0000 417.3279 417.32794.7300e- 003 0.1623 0.0744 0.2368 0.062020260.2079 1.8703 2.3061 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater SepticTankPercent 10.33 0.00 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 1.74 4.13 tblWater AerobicPercent 87.46 97.79 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 1.74 4.13 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 0.78 0.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.74 4.13 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 2.19 0.00 tblLandUse LandUseSquareFeet 39,951.01 39,951.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 1.96 0.00 Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Vegetation Land Change -16.4642 CO2e Category t o n s MT 2.3 Vegetation Vegetation 181.5181 187.4801 0.2407 0.0154 198.0816 0.0993 8.3000e-003 14.3771 Total 0.2829 0.0862 0.7328 1.6900e- 003 0.2049 1.6700e- 003 0.2066 0.0547 1.5900e- 003 0.0563 5.9620 0.0000 0.0000 3.7636 5.6589 9.42250.0000 0.0000Water 0.0000 2.1984 0.1299 0.0000 5.4464 8.6100e- 003 6.6100e-003 153.0042 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.1984 1.0000e- 003 0.0557 0.0000 150.8197 150.81971.6400e- 003 0.2049 1.0800e- 003 0.2060 0.0547Mobile0.0710 0.0784 0.7252 25.0375 25.0375 2.8500e- 003 4.8000e-004 25.2518 0.0000 0.0000 2.0900e- 003 Energy 8.5000e- 004 7.7600e- 003 6.5200e-003 5.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e-004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.9900e- 003 1.9900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Area0.2110 1.0000e- 005 1.1000e-003 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2.2 Overall Operational 0.0795 9.5700e-003 422.16550.0698 0.1318 0.0000 417.3279 417.32794.7300e- 003 0.1623 0.0744 0.2368 0.0620Maximum0.2718 1.8703 2.3061 25.0533 25.0533 5.9200e- 003 2.1000e-004 25.262520270.2718 0.1059 0.1666 2.9000e- 004 3.8900e- 003 4.7200e- 003 8.6100e- 003 1.0400e- 003 4.4200e- 003 5.4600e-003 0.0000 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.000349 0.024273 0.000862 0.002585 5.0 Energy Detail 0.020137 0.005304 0.008188 0.006136 0.000868Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 0.576295 0.056490 0.183529 0.114985 0.000862 0.002585 Parking Lot 0.576295 0.056490 0.183529 0.114985 0.020137 0.005304 0.008188 0.006136 0.000868 0.000349 0.024273 0.000862 0.002585 0.000349 0.024273 0.000862 0.002585 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.576295 0.056490 0.183529 0.114985 0.020137 0.005304 0.008188 0.006136 0.000868 0.000349 0.024273 0.020137 0.005304 0.008188 0.006136 0.000868City Park 0.576295 0.056490 0.183529 0.114985 OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MHMDVLHD1LHD2MHDHHD 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 0.00 41.00 92 5 3Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 9.50 7.30 7.30 59.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0Other Asphalt Surfaces 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 48.00 19.00 66 28 6City Park 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-byLand Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip %Trip Purpose % Total 189.98 189.98 189.98 554,649 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 189.98 189.98 189.98 554,649 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0.00 0.00 0.00 City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile Total -16.4642 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 18340 1.6969 2.7000e-004 3.0000e- 005 1.7137 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 Land Use kWh/yr t o n s MT/yr City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 1.5000e- 004 8.4945 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity 5.9000e-004 0.0000 8.4443 8.4443 1.6000e- 004 8.4443 1.6000e- 004 1.5000e- 004 8.4945 Total 8.5000e- 004 7.7600e-003 6.5200e- 003 5.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e-004 0.0000 8.44436.5200e- 003 5.0000e- 005 5.9000e- 004 5.9000e- 004 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 158240 8.5000e- 004 7.7600e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000City Park 0 0.0000 0.0000 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 Unmitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Unmitigated 7.2 Water by Land Use 7.0 Water Detail 1.9900e- 003 1.9900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 2.0900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 2.0900e- 003 Total 0.2110 1.0000e- 005 1.1000e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.9900e- 003 1.9900e- 003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000Landscaping7.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.1000e-003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.1853 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000Architectural Coating 0.0257 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 6.2 Area by SubCategory 6.0 Area Detail 2.9000e- 004 15.0436 Total 16.5932 2.6800e-003 3.2000e- 004 16.7573 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 161000 14.8963 2.4100e-003 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.0000 5.4364Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 10.81 2.1943 0.1297 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 0.0000 0.0000 Land Use tons t o n s MT/yr City Park 0.02 4.0600e- 003 2.4000e-004 0.0000 0.0101 Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 8.2 Waste by Land Use 8.0 Waste Detail 8.2900e- 003 14.0405 Total 9.4225 0.0993 8.3000e- 003 14.3771 Unrefrigerated Warehouse-No Rail 10.6375 / 0 9.0892 0.0993 0.0000 0.0000 Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Other Asphalt Surfaces 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 Land Use Mgal t o n s MT/yr City Park 0 / 1.0293 0.3333 5.0000e-005 1.0000e- 005 0.3366 Indoor/Outd oor Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 1 Date: 9/23/2022 10:45 AM Camino Arroyo Phase 2 Proposed Emissions Unmitigated - Santa Clara County, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied 0.0000 -16.4642Total-16.4642 0.0000 Acres t o n s MT Grassland 3.82 / 0 -16.4642 0.0000 0.0000 -16.4642 11.1 Vegetation Land Change Vegetation Type Initial/Final Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category t o n s MT Unmitigated -16.4642 0.0000 0.0000 -16.4642 11.0 Vegetation Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Total 2.1984 0.1299 0.0000 5.4464 EMFAC Results C APPENDIX APPENDIX C EMFAC2021 Gilroy Square Fuel Demand 2028 Fuel Demand Vehicle Class Fuel Process Kgal/day Fuel Type Demand All Other Buses Dsl IDLEX 1.77E-05 Diesel All Other Buses Dsl RUNEX 0.00191 Kgal/day 0.09 LDA Dsl RUNEX 0.000257 KGal/yr 34.41 LDT1 Dsl RUNEX 6.55E-07 LDT2 Dsl RUNEX 0.000385 Gas LHD1 Dsl IDLEX 4.67E-05 Kgal/day 0.52 LHD1 Dsl RUNEX 0.008929 KGal/yr 188.11 LHD2 Dsl IDLEX 3.58E-05 LHD2 Dsl RUNEX 0.004929 Hybrid MDV Dsl RUNEX 0.001052 kgal/day 0.006 MH Dsl RUNEX 0.000362 Kgal/yr 2.33 Motor Coach Dsl IDLEX 3.31E-05 Motor Coach Dsl RUNEX 0.000689 TOTAL PTO Dsl RUNEX 0.001653 KGal/yr 224.85 SBUS Dsl IDLEX 4.96E-05 Gal/yr 224847.3 SBUS Dsl RUNEX 0.000569 T6 CAIRP Class 4 Dsl IDLEX 6.35E-08 T6 CAIRP Class 4 Dsl RUNEX 7.87E-06 T6 CAIRP Class 5 Dsl IDLEX 8.32E-08 Mileage T6 CAIRP Class 5 Dsl RUNEX 1.09E-05 Check: T6 CAIRP Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 2.94E-07 T6 CAIRP Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 2.74E-05 VMT/yr 6027447 T6 CAIRP Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 4.72E-07 mpg 26.81 T6 CAIRP Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 0.000164 T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 Dsl IDLEX 4.34E-05 T6 Instate Delivery Class 4 Dsl RUNEX 0.000816 T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 Dsl IDLEX 4.99E-05 T6 Instate Delivery Class 5 Dsl RUNEX 0.000954 T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 9.55E-05 T6 Instate Delivery Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 0.001809 T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 1.41E-05 T6 Instate Delivery Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 0.000398 T6 Instate Other Class 4 Dsl IDLEX 8.21E-05 T6 Instate Other Class 4 Dsl RUNEX 0.001697 T6 Instate Other Class 5 Dsl IDLEX 0.000166 T6 Instate Other Class 5 Dsl RUNEX 0.003563 T6 Instate Other Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 0.000159 T6 Instate Other Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 0.003329 T6 Instate Other Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 6.90E-05 T6 Instate Other Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 0.001413 T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 6.02E-07 APPENDIX C EMFAC2021 Gilroy Square Fuel Demand T6 Instate Tractor Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 1.52E-05 T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 2.14E-05 T6 Instate Tractor Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 0.000546 T6 OOS Class 4 Dsl IDLEX 3.65E-08 T6 OOS Class 4 Dsl RUNEX 4.49E-06 T6 OOS Class 5 Dsl IDLEX 4.75E-08 T6 OOS Class 5 Dsl RUNEX 6.19E-06 T6 OOS Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 1.69E-07 T6 OOS Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 1.57E-05 T6 OOS Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 2.42E-07 T6 OOS Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 0.000108 T6 Public Class 4 Dsl IDLEX 1.43E-05 T6 Public Class 4 Dsl RUNEX 0.000186 T6 Public Class 5 Dsl IDLEX 2.46E-05 T6 Public Class 5 Dsl RUNEX 0.000323 T6 Public Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 1.31E-05 T6 Public Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 0.000175 T6 Public Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 3.07E-05 T6 Public Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 0.00053 T6 Utility Class 5 Dsl IDLEX 5.17E-06 T6 Utility Class 5 Dsl RUNEX 0.000145 T6 Utility Class 6 Dsl IDLEX 9.76E-07 T6 Utility Class 6 Dsl RUNEX 2.73E-05 T6 Utility Class 7 Dsl IDLEX 1.09E-06 T6 Utility Class 7 Dsl RUNEX 3.76E-05 T7 CAIRP Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000798 T7 CAIRP Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.010172 T7 NNOOS Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000871 T7 NNOOS Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.012093 T7 NOOS Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000384 T7 NOOS Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.004496 T7 Other Port Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 2.83E-05 T7 Other Port Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.001195 T7 POAK Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000178 T7 POAK Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.003865 T7 POLA Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 2.66E-13 T7 POLA Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 7.26E-12 T7 Public Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 6.95E-05 T7 Public Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.001744 T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 5.65E-05 T7 Single Concrete/Transit Mix Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.001466 T7 Single Dump Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000113 T7 Single Dump Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.002225 T7 Single Other Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000158 APPENDIX C EMFAC2021 Gilroy Square Fuel Demand T7 Single Other Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.002763 T7 SWCV Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 2.85E-05 T7 SWCV Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.001913 T7 Tractor Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 0.000729 T7 Tractor Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.009045 T7 Utility Class 8 Dsl IDLEX 3.98E-06 T7 Utility Class 8 Dsl RUNEX 0.000186 UBUS Dsl RUNEX 0.001656 LDA Gas RUNEX 0.222551 LDA Gas STREX 0.007111 LDT1 Gas RUNEX 0.018995 LDT1 Gas STREX 0.000688 LDT2 Gas RUNEX 0.134045 LDT2 Gas STREX 0.004515 LHD1 Gas IDLEX 9.06E-05 LHD1 Gas RUNEX 0.024046 LHD1 Gas STREX 0.000298 LHD2 Gas IDLEX 1.33E-05 LHD2 Gas RUNEX 0.003317 LHD2 Gas STREX 3.67E-05 MCY Gas RUNEX 0.001249 MCY Gas STREX 0.000104 MDV Gas RUNEX 0.087153 MDV Gas STREX 0.002998 MH Gas RUNEX 0.001585 MH Gas STREX 2.63E-07 OBUS Gas IDLEX 5.86E-06 OBUS Gas RUNEX 0.001119 OBUS Gas STREX 9.69E-06 SBUS Gas IDLEX 1.95E-05 SBUS Gas RUNEX 0.000299 SBUS Gas STREX 1.73E-06 T6TS Gas IDLEX 2.86E-05 T6TS Gas RUNEX 0.004868 T6TS Gas STREX 4.82E-05 T7IS Gas RUNEX 1.20E-05 T7IS Gas STREX 5.78E-08 UBUS Gas RUNEX 0.000165 UBUS Gas STREX 2.62E-07 LDA Phe RUNEX 0.00479 LDA Phe STREX 0.000231 LDT1 Phe RUNEX 4.30E-05 LDT1 Phe STREX 2.27E-06 LDT2 Phe RUNEX 0.000778 APPENDIX C EMFAC2021 Gilroy Square Fuel Demand LDT2 Phe STREX 4.57E-05 MDV Phe RUNEX 0.000463 MDV Phe STREX 3.42E-05 CNDDB Results D APPENDIX Appendix D 1 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Appendix D Special-Status Species with Potential to Occur in the Project Vicinity Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Plants Alkali milk-vetch (Astragalus tener var. tener) --/--/1B.2 Alkaline sites in playas, valley and foothill grassland (on adobe clay), and vernal pools; elevation 1-60m. Blooming Period: March - June Unlikely. Suitable grassland habitat not found at the project site. Anderson's manzanita (Arctostaphylos andersonii) --/--/1B.2 Broadleaved upland forest, chaparral, and North Coast coniferous forest. Known only from the Santa Cruz Mountains. Prefers open sites in redwood forest; elevation 180-800m. Blooming Period: November - April Unlikely. Suitable forest habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Arcuate bush-mallow (Malacothamnus arcuatus) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral, in gravelly alluvium; elevation 80-355m. Blooming Period: April - September Unlikely. Suitable chaparral habitat not found at the project site. Big-scale balsamroot (Balsamorhiza macrolepis) --/--/1B.2 Valley and foothill grassland, and cismontane woodland; sometimes on serpentine; elevation 35-1000m. Blooming Period: March - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. California alkali grass (Puccinellia simplex) --/--/1B.2 Meadows and seeps, chenopod scrub, valley and foothill grasslands, vernal pools. Alkaline, vernally mesic. Sinks, flats, and lake margins; elevation 1- 915m. Blooming Period: March - May Unlikely. Suitable mesic habitat not found at the project site. Chaparral harebell (Campanula exigua) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral (rocky, usually serpentine); elevation 275-1250m. Blooming Period: May - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi spp. congdonii) --/--/1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland (alkaline); elevation 1-230m. Known to occur on various substrates, and in disturbed and ruderal (weedy) areas. Blooming Period: June - November Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Eastwood’s goldenbush (Ericameria fasciculata) --/--/1B.1 Closed cone coniferous forest, chaparral (maritime), coastal dunes, and coastal scrub/sand; elevation 30 - 275 meters. Blooming Period: July - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Fragrant fritillary (Fritillaria liliacea) --/--/1B.2 Coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, and coastal prairie. Often on serpentine, various soils reported though usually clay in grassland; elevation 3-410m. Blooming Period: February - April Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Hairless popcorn flower (Plagiobothrys glaber) --/--/1A Meadows and seeps (alkaline), marshes and swamps (coastal salt); elevation 15-180m. Blooming Period: March - May Unlikely. Suitable mesic habitat not found at the project site. Appendix D 2 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Hall's tarplant (Deinandra halliana) --/--/1B.1 Cismontane woodland, chenopod scrub, valley and foothill grassland. Variety of substrates, including clay, sand, and alkaline soils; elevation 300- 950m. Blooming Period: April - May Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Hooker’s manzanita (Arctostaphylos hookeri ssp. hookeri) --/--/1B.2 Sandy soils in coastal scrub, chaparral, and closed-cone forest habitats; evergreen; elevation 45-215m. Blooming Period: February - April Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Hoover's button-celery (Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri) --/--/1B.1 Vernal pools. Alkaline depressions, roadside ditches, and other wet places near the coast; elevation 5-45m. Blooming Period: July Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Hospital Canyon larkspur (Delphinium californicum ssp. interius) --/--/1B.2 Cismontane woodland and chaparral, in wet, boggy meadows, openings in chaparral, and in canyons; elevation 225-1060m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Indian Valley bush-mallow (Malacothamnus aboriginum) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral and cismontane woodland; rocky, often burned areas. Prefers granitic outcrops and sandy bare soil; elevation 150-1700m. Blooming Period: April - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Legenere (Legenere limosa) --/--/1B.1 In beds of vernal pools; elevation 1-880m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Loma Prieta hoita (Hoita strobilina) --/--/1B.1 Wet areas on serpentine substrate in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and riparian woodland; elevation 30-860m. Blooming Period: May - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Monterey spineflower (Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens) FT/--/1B.2 Sandy openings in maritime chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal dunes, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland; elevation 3-450m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Most beautiful jewel-flower (Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral, valley and foothill grassland, and cismontane woodland; serpentine outcrops, on ridges and slopes; elevation 120-730m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Mt. Hamilton thistle (Cirsium fontinale var. campylon) --/--/1B.2 Serpentine seeps in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and valley and foothill grassland; elevation 100-890m. Blooming Period: February - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Pajaro manzanita (Arctostaphylos pajaroensis) --/--/1B.1 Sandy soils in chaparral habitat; evergreen; elevation 30-760m. Blooming Period: December - March Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Appendix D 3 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Pine rose (Rosa pinetorum) --/--/1B.2 Closed-cone coniferous forest; elevation 2-300m. Blooming Period: May - July Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Pink creamsacs (Castilleja rubicundula ssp. rubicundula) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral, meadows and seeps, and valley and foothill grassland. Openings in chaparral or grasslands on serpentine soils; elevation 20-900m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Pinnacles buckwheat (Eriogonum nortonii) --/--/1B.3 Sandy sites in chaparral and valley and foothill grassland, often on recent burns; elevation 300-975m. Blooming Period: May - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Prostrate vernal pool navarretia (Navarretia prostrata) --/--/1B.1 Coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools. Alkaline soils in grassland, or in vernal pools; elevation 15-700m. Blooming Period: April - July Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Saline clover (Trifolium hydrophilum) --/--/1B.2 Marshes and swamps, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools. Prefers wet, alkaline sites; elevation 0-300m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable mesic habitat not found at the project site. San Francisco popcornflower (Plagiobothrys diffusus) --/SE/1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland, and coastal prairie. Historically from grassy slopes with marine influence; elevation 60-485m. Blooming Period: March - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. San Joaquin spearscale (Extriplex joaquinana) --/--/1B.2 Alkaline sites in chenopod scrub, meadows and seeps, playas, and valley and foothill grassland; elevation 1-320m. Blooming Period: April - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Santa Clara Valley dudleya (Dudleya abramsii ssp. setchellii) FE/--/1B.1 Valley and foothill grassland, and cismontane woodland. Endemic to serpentine outcrops and on rocks within grassland or woodland in Santa Clara County; elevation 80-335m. Blooming Period: April - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Santa Cruz Mountains beardtongue (Penstemon rattanii var. kleei) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral and lower montane coniferous forest. Sandy shale slopes in transition zone between forest and chaparral; elevation 400-1100m. Blooming Period: May - June Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Santa Cruz tarplant (Holocarpha macradenia) FT/SE/1B.1 Coastal prairie, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland; often on clay or sandy soils; elevation 10-220m. Blooming Period: June - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Seaside bird’s-beak (Cordylanthus rigidus ssp. littoralis) --/SE/1B.1 Closed-cone coniferous forest, maritime chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal dunes, coastal scrub, sandy often disturbed sites; elevation 0-215m. Blooming Period: May - October Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Appendix D 4 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Smooth lessingia (Lessingia micradenia var. glabrata) --/--/1B.2 Chaparral; endemic to Santa Clara County. Serpentine, often on roadsides; elevation 120-485m. Blooming Period: July - November Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Woodland woollythreads (Monolopia gracilens) --/--/1B.2 Serpentine, open sites in broadleaved upland forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, North Coast coniferous forest, and valley and foothill grassland; elevation 100-1200m. Blooming Period: March – July Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Species known from higher elevations. Yadon’s rein orchid (Piperia yadonii) FE/--/1B.1 Sandy sites in coastal bluff scrub, closed cone coniferous forest, maritime chaparral; elevation 10-510m. Blooming Period: May - August Unlikely. Suitable habitat not found at the project site. Wildlife American badger (Taxidea taxus) --/SSC Most abundant in drier, open stages of most shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats. Need sufficient food and open, uncultivated ground with friable soils to dig burrows. Prey on burrowing rodents. Unlikely. Suitable open grassland habitat not found at the project site. Bank swallow (Riparia riparia) --/ST Highly colonial species that nests in alluvial soils along rivers, streams, lakes, and ocean coasts. Nesting colonies only occur in vertical banks or bluffs of friable soils at least one meter tall, suitable for burrowing with some predator deterrence values. Breeding colony present in Salinas River. Unlikely. Suitable bank habitat not found at the project site. Bay checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis) FT/-- Restricted to native grasslands on outcrops of serpentine soil in the vicinity of San Francisco Bay. Plantago erecta is the primary host plant; Castilleja densiflora and C. exserta are secondary host plants. Unlikely. Suitable host plants not found at the project site. Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) --/SSC Open, dry, annual or perennial grasslands, desert, or scrubland, with available small mammal burrows. Possible. Suitable open habitats with available burrows found at the project site. California brackishwater snail (mimic tryonia) (Tryonia imitator) --/SSC Aquatic, found on rocks and in gravel of riffles in cool, swift, clear streams. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. California giant salamander (Anodonta californiensis) --/SSC Known from wet coastal forests near streams ad seeps from Mendocino County south to Monterey County and east to Napa County. Aquatic larvae found in cold, clear streams, occasionally in lakes and ponds. Adults known from wet forests under rocks and logs near streams and lakes. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. California linderiella (Linderiella occidentalis) FSC/-- Seasonal pools in unplowed grasslands with old alluvial soils underlain by hardpan or in sandstone depressions. Water in the pools typically has very low alkalinity, conductivity, and total dissolved solids. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Appendix D 5 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii) FT/SSC Rivers, creeks, and stock ponds with pools and overhanging vegetation. Requires dense, shrubby or emergent riparian vegetation, and prefers short riffles and pools with slow-moving, well-oxygenated water. Needs upland habitat to aestivate (remain dormant during dry months) in small mammal burrows, cracks in the soil, or moist leaf litter. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. California Ridgway's rail (Rallus obsoletus obsoletus) FE/SE Found in saltwater and brackish marshes, traversed by tidal sloughs in the vicinity of San Francisco Bay. Associated with abundant growths of pickleweed, but feeds away from cover on invertebrates from mud-bottomed sloughs. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense) FT/ST Grasslands and oak woodlands near seasonal pools and stock ponds in central and coastal California. Needs upland habitat to aestivate (remain dormant during dry months) in small mammal burrows, cracks in the soil, or moist leaf litter. Requires seasonal water sources that persist into late March for breeding habitat. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) --/SSC Arid grassland and scrubland habitats; prefers lowlands along sandy washes with scattered low bushes. Requires open areas for sunning, bushes for cover, patches of loose soil for burrowing, and abundant supply of ants and other insects for feeding. Unlikely. Suitable arid grassland habitat not found at the project site. Coast Range newt (Taricha torosa) --/SSC Coastal drainages; lives in terrestrial habitats and can migrate over 1 km to breed in ponds, reservoirs, and slow-moving streams. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Crotch bumble bee (Bombus crotchii) --/SCE Coastal California east to the Sierra-Cascade crest and south into Mexico. Food plant genera include Antirrhinum, Phacelia, Clarkia, Dendromecon, Eschscholzia, and Eriogonum. Unlikely. Suitable food plants and habitat not found at the project site. Foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) --/SE Partly shaded, shallow streams and riffles with rocky substrate in a variety of habitats. Requires at least some cobble-sized substrate for egg-laying and 15 weeks of available water to attain metamorphosis. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) --/SFP Rolling foothill mountain areas, sage-juniper flats, and desert. Cliff-walled canyons provide nesting habitat in most parts of range. Also uses large trees in open areas. Unlikely. Suitable nesting habitat not found at the project site. Hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus) --/SSC Prefers open habitats or habitat mosaics, with access to trees for cover and open areas or habitat edges for feeding. Roosts in dense foliage of medium to large trees. Feeds primarily on moths. Requires water. Unlikely. Suitable nearby aquatic habitat not present. Appendix D 6 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) FE/SE Summer resident of southern and central California in riparian habitats below 2,000 feet in elevation. Often nests in large shrubs, along margins of bushes or on twigs projecting into pathways. Unlikely. Suitable riparian habitat not found at the project site. Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) --/SSC (Nesting) Broken woodlands, savannah, pinyon-juniper, Joshua tree and riparian woodlands, desert oases, scrub and washes. Prefers open country for hunting, with perches for scanning and fairly dense shrubs and brush for nesting. Possible. Suitable perching areas present adjacent to parcel and foraging habitat within open fields. Merlin (Falco columbarius) --/--/WL Seacoast, tidal estuaries, open woodlands, savannahs, edges of grassland and deserts, farms and ranches, clumps of trees or windbreaks are required for roosting in open county. Unlikely. Suitable natural open habitats not found at the project site. Monterey hitch (Lavinia exilicauda harengus) --/SSC Widely distributed in the Pajaro and Salinas river systems. Most abundant in lowland areas with large pools or in small reservoirs. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Mountain lion (Puma concolor) --/SC Southern California and central coast evolutionarily significant unit. Steep, rocky canyons or mountainous terrain. Deserts, coastal forest, from sea level to 10,000 feet. May encroach into developed areas at the edge of habitat area or along migratory corridors. Unlikely. Suitable mountainous, forested, or desert habitat or migratory corridors not found at the project site. Northern California legless lizard (Anniella pulchra) --/SSC Sandy or loose loamy soils under sparse vegetation, moist soils. Anniella pulchra is traditionally split into two subspecies: A. pulchra pulchra (silvery legless lizard) and A. pulchra nigra (black legless lizard), but these subspecies are typically no longer recognized. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus) --/SSC Deserts, grasslands, scrublands, woodlands, and forests. Most common in open, dry habitats with rocky areas for roosting. Roosts must protect bats from high temperatures. Unlikely. Suitable rocky areas or potential roosting sites absent from project site. San Joaquin coachwhip (Masticophis flagellum ruddocki) --/SSC Open, dry habitats with little or no tree cover. Found in valley grassland and saltbush scrub in the San Joaquin Valley. Requires mammal burrows for refuge and oviposition sites. Unlikely. Suitable grassland or scrub habitats not found at the project site. San Joaquin kit fox (Vulpes macrotis mutica) FE/ST Annual grasslands or grassy open stages with scattered shrubby vegetation. Needs loose-textured sandy soils for burrowing, and suitable prey base. Unlikely. Suitable open habitats not found at the project site. Santa Cruz black salamander (Aneides flavipunctatus niger) --/SSC Mixed deciduous and coniferous woodlands and coastal grasslands in San Mateo, Santa Cruz, and Santa Clara Counties. Adults found under rocks, talus, and damp woody debris. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Appendix D 7 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Santa Cruz long-toed salamander (Ambystoma macrodactylum croceum) FE/SE Wet meadows near sea level in a few restricted locales in Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties. Aquatic larvae prefer shallow (<12 inches) water; use clumps of vegetation or debris for cover. Adults use mammal burrows. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Southern coastal roach (Hesperoleucus venustus subditus) --/SSC Found in the drainages of Tomales Bay and northern San Francisco Bay in the north, and drainages of Monterey Bay in the south. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus) FT/-- Coastal stream with clean spawning gravel. Requires cool water and pools. Needs migratory access between natal stream and ocean. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni) --/ST Breeds in grasslands with scattered trees, juniper-sage flats, riparian areas, savannahs, and agricultural or ranch lands with groves or lines of trees. Requires adjacent suitable foraging areas, such as grasslands or agricultural fields supporting rodent populations. Unlikely. Not known from immediate vicinity and suitable nesting habitat with adjacent small mammal activity not found at the project site. Townsend's big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii) --/SSC Inhabits a wide variety of habitats. Most common in mesic sites. Roosts in the open, hanging from walls and ceilings. Roosting sites limiting. Extremely sensitive to human disturbance. Unlikely. Suitable rocky areas or potential roosting sites absent from project site. Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) --/ST Areas adjacent to open water with protected nesting substrate, which typically consists of dense, emergent freshwater marsh vegetation. Unlikely. Suitable emergent freshwater marsh habitat not found at the project site. Western bumble bee (Bombus occidentalis) --/SCE Historically known to occur throughout the mountains and northern coast of California. Prefers meadows and grasslands with abundant floral resources, including those from Fabaceae, Asteraceae, Rhamnaceae and Rosaceae families. Unlikely. Suitable food plants and meadow habitat not found at the project site. Western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus) --/SSC Many open, semi-arid habitats, including conifer and deciduous woodlands, coastal scrub, grasslands, chaparral, etc. Roosts in crevices in cliff faces, high buildings, trees and tunnels. Unlikely. Suitable rocky areas or potential roosting sites absent from project site. Western pond turtle (Emys marmorata) --/SSC Ponds, marshes, rivers, streams, and irrigation ditches with aquatic vegetation. Needs basking sites (such as rocks or partially submerged logs) and suitable upland habitat for egg-laying (sandy banks or grassy open fields). Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. Western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii) --/SSC Roosts primarily in trees, 2-40 feet above the ground, from sea level up through mixed conifer forests. Prefers habitat edges and mosaics with trees that are protected from above and open below with open areas for foraging. Unlikely. Suitable rocky areas or potential roosting sites absent from project site. Appendix D 8 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square Initial Study October 4, 2022 Species Status (Federal/State/ CNPS) Suitable Habitat Description Potential to Occur on Project Site Western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) --/SSC Occurs primarily in grassland habitats but can be found in valley-foothill hardwood woodlands, breeds in winter and spring (January - May) in quiet streams and temporary pools. Unlikely. Suitable aquatic habitat not found at the project site. White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus) --/SFP Rolling foothills and valley margins with scattered oaks, and river bottomlands or marshes next to deciduous woodlands. Open grasslands, meadows, or marshes for foraging close to isolated, dense-topped trees for nesting and perching. Possible. Suitable perching areas present adjacent to parcel and foraging habitat within open fields. SOURCE: CDFW 2022, CNPS 2022, USFWS 2022 NOTE: Status Codes: Federal (USFWS) FE: Listed as Endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act. FT: Listed as Threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act. FC: A Candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act. FSC: Species of Special Concern. FD: Delisted under the Federal Endangered Species Act. State (CDFW) SE: Listed as Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. ST: Listed as Threatened under the California Endangered Species Act. SR: Listed as Rare under the California Endangered Species Act. SC: A Candidate for listing as Threatened or Endangered under the California Endangered Species Act. SSC: Species of Special Concern. SFP: Fully Protected species under the California Fish and Game Code. SD: Delisted under the California Endangered Species Act. CNPS Rare Plant Ranks and Threat Code Extensions 1B: Plants that are considered Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere. 2B: Plants that are considered Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. .1: Seriously endangered in California (over 80% of occurrences threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat). .2: Fairly endangered in California (20-80% occurrences threatened). .3: Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened or no current threats known). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment E APPENDIX εRAS 1533 B Street εnvironmental, Inc. Hayward, CA 94541 __________________________________________________ Phone (510) 247-9885 Facsimile: (510) 886-5399 info@eras.biz PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy, California 95020 ERAS Project Number 18136 Prepared for: Mr. Bob Desai Temple Gilroy, LLC 527 Sima Drive Milpitas, California 95035 Prepared by: ERAS Environmental, Inc. October 12, 2018 εRAS 1533 B Street εnvironmental, Inc. Hayward, CA 94541 __________________________________________________ (510) 247-9885 Facsimile: (510) 886-5399 info@eras.biz October 12, 2018 Mr. Bob Desai Temple Gilroy, LLC 527 Sima Drive Milpitas, California 95035 Re: PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy, California 95020 ERAS Project Number 18136 Dear Mr. Desai: ERAS Environmental (ERAS) is pleased to provide you with the attached Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the above referenced Property. The assessment included a visual reconnaissance of the Property, a review of environmental databases for nearby sites, a review of historical maps, city directories and aerial photographs, an interview with the owner, and review of available files regarding the Property with the Gilroy Building Department and county health department. Conclusions and recommendations presented in our report were based upon the completion of these activities. If you have any questions regarding the information in this report, please don't hesitate to call us. It has been a pleasure working with you on this project. Sincerely, ERAS Environmental, Inc. David Siegel Andrew Savage Senior Program Manager Project Geologist TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Purpose and Scope ................................................................................................ 4 1.2 Authorization ........................................................................................................ 4 1.3 Limitations and Exceptions ..................................................................................... 4 2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION .................................................................................... 6 2.1 Location and Jurisdiction ........................................................................................ 6 2.2 Property Description .............................................................................................. 6 2.3 Property Use ......................................................................................................... 6 2.4 Suspect ACM/PCBs/Lead Paint/Lead in Drinking Water .............................................. 7 2.5 Physical Setting ..................................................................................................... 7 2.6 Geologic and Soil Conditions .................................................................................. 7 2.7 Groundwater Conditions ........................................................................................ 8 3.0 REGULATORY AGENCY RECORDS REVIEW .......................................................... 9 3.1 Standard Federal and State Environmental Record Sources ....................................... 9 3.2 Findings from Database Review .............................................................................10 3.3 Off-site Sources and Agency File Reviews ...............................................................12 4.0 HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION ...................................................................... 14 4.1 Historical Information Review ................................................................................14 4.2 Interview ............................................................................................................14 4.3 Building and Health Department File Review ...........................................................15 4.4 Synopsis of Previous Environmental Investigations ..................................................15 4.5 Environmental Liens .............................................................................................15 5.0 RECONNAISSANCE ............................................................................................ 16 5.1 Visual Reconnaissance of the Property ...................................................................16 5.2 Adjacent and Nearby Site Uses ..............................................................................17 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................... 18 6.1 Conclusions .........................................................................................................18 6.2 Recommendations ................................................................................................19 7.0 REFERENCES AND APPENDICES......................................................................... 20 APPENDICES A Environmental Professional’s Resume B Location and Site Maps C Property Photographs D ERIS Database Report E ASTM Transaction Screen and Environmental Site Assessment Questionnaire F Case Closure and Monitoring Information for 850 Pacheco Pass Highway 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 4 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Scope This Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was performed to identify, to the extent feasible, recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject site (cited hereinafter as the “Property”). The protocol utilized for this assessment is in general accordance with the requirements of ASTM Standard E 1527-13. We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in §312.10 of this part (40 CFR Part 312). We have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property. We have developed and performed the all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312. The environmental professional's resume is included in Appendix A. The assessment included four main components: Records Review, Historical Use Information Review, Visual Reconnaissance of the Property, and Report Preparation. The purpose of the records review is to obtain and review records that will help identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Property. The objective of the visual reconnaissance is to obtain information indicating the likelihood of identifying recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Property. The objective of the interviews is to obtain additional information indicating recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Property. The report includes documentation to support the analysis, opinions and conclusions as presented. 1.2 Authorization Authorization to perform this assessment was provided by Mr. Bob Desai of Temple Gilroy, LLC on September 25, 2018 in response to ERAS proposal dated the same day. 1.3 Limitations and Exceptions ERAS has performed the services for this project in accordance with our proposal, and in accordance with current standards of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) for Phase I Environmental Site Assessments (ASTM standard E1527-13). No guarantees are either expressed or implied. The investigation was limited to a search for recognized environmental conditions. The term recognized environmental condition means the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on the Property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the Property or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the Property. The term includes hazardous substances or petroleum products even under conditions in compliance with laws. The term is not intended to include de minimis conditions that generally do not present a material risk of harm to public health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. There is no investigation, which is thorough enough to preclude the presence of hazardous 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 5 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 materials, which presently, or in the future, may be considered hazardous at the Property. Because regulatory evaluation criteria are constantly changing, concentrations of constituents presently considered low may, in the future, fall under more stringent regulatory standards that require remediation. The visual reconnaissance was limited to observation of surface conditions at the Property. Reason- ably ascertainable information was obtained. This information is publicly available and obtainable from its source within reasonable time and cost constraints and is reasonably reviewable. This approach reflects current ASTM standards unless the information obtained as part of this work suggests the need for further investigation. No warranty or guarantee of Property conditions is intended. The investigation addressed recognized environmental conditions at the Property. However, certain conditions, such as those listed below, may not be revealed: 1) naturally occurring toxic materials in the subsurface soils, rocks, water, or toxicity of on-site flora; 2) toxicity of substances common in current habitable environments, such as stored household products, building materials, and consumables; 3) biological pathogens; 4) contaminant plumes below sampled or observed surface levels, originating from a remote source; 5) constituents or constituent concentrations that do not violate present regulatory standards, but may violate future standards; 6) unknown impact to the Property, such as "midnight" dumping and/or accidental spillage which may occur following the visual reconnaissance of the Property by ERAS. Opinions and judgments expressed herein, which are based upon our understanding and interpretation of current regulatory standards, should not be construed as legal opinions. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 6 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 2.1 Location and Jurisdiction The subject property (hereinafter the “Property”) is located at 6970 Camino Arroyo in the southeastern portion of the City of Gilroy. This Property consists of an undeveloped dirt lot of approximately 10 acres identified by parcel number 841-70-049. The 1 Mile Radius Map included as a site location map in Appendix B shows the location of the Property. Current photographs showing important details of the Property are included in Appendix C. 2.2 Property Description An ERAS representative visited the Property on October 4, 2018. The Property was a long linear lot approximately 300 feet wide and 1,500 feet long. The Property was located in an area of commercial land uses. It was bounded on the southwest by Camino Arroyo and across the street was a Shell Station near the northwest corner and a retail shopping center along the remainder. To the southeast was Holloway Road and across the street was a vacant undeveloped lot. Along the northeast side was mostly contiguous vacant undeveloped land except at the southeast corner where a paved and fenced parking lot used by Cintas was located. The Property comes to a point close to the intersection of Pacheco Pass Highway (Highway 152) and Camino Arroyo. The Property was vacant except for a soil stockpile near the middle toward the southeast end of the Property. The pile was approximately 100 feet by 40 feet by an estimated 10-15 feet high. Another much smaller pile was near the northwest end. A gravel road extended from near the northwest corner along the center of the Property and exits at Camino Arroyo not far from Holloway Road. A pile of debris and refuse was located along the road near the large soil stockpile. The debris consisted mostly of residential type garbage including books, clothes, a car bumper and miscellaneous car parts, a small trailer and household garbage. A wrecked couch was on the opposite site of the large soil stockpile. No hazardous materials were used on the Property. No indication of spills or improper storage of hazardous materials were noted on or near the Property at the time of the site visit. Groundwater production wells, monitoring wells, septic systems, drywells, or pits were not observed on the Property by ERAS. No evidence of the current or former presence of aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) or underground storage tanks (USTs) were observed on the Property by ERAS. No evidence of leakage, spillage or dumping of regulated material was observed on or near the Property by ERAS. A Site Plan (Figure 2) illustrating important features of the Property is included in Appendix B. Observations made by ERAS at the time of the site visit are shown on the site reconnaissance checklist in Appendix E. 2.3 Property Use Based on the historical information reviewed for this assessment the Property has never been 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 7 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 developed since at least 1915. Additional historical detail regarding the uses of the Property is provided in Section 4.0. 2.4 Suspect ACM/PCBs/Lead Paint/Lead in Drinking Water Asbestos No building was present, therefore, no asbestos containing materials were present. PCBs No electrical transformers were observed on the Property. Oil containing electrical transformers are usually owned and serviced by Pacific Gas and Electric Company who would be responsible to remedy any releases. There were no indications of hydraulic equipment on the Property that would be likely to contain oil or PCBs. Lead Paint No building was present; therefore, no lead-based paint was likely to be present. Lead in Drinking Water No building was present, therefore, lead in drinking water is not an issue. 2.5 Physical Setting The Property is in the southwest part of the City of Gilroy, in the Santa Clara Valley, south of the San Francisco Bay Area. The Santa Clara Valley occupies a broad alluvial valley that slopes gently northward toward San Francisco Bay and southward toward the San Juan and Bolsa Valleys and is flanked by alluvial fans deposited at the foot of the Gavilan Range to the east and the Santa Cruz Mountains to the west. Elevation of the Property is approximately 180 feet above mean sea level (MSL), according to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Chittenden 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Map. Regionally, the topography slopes down to the southeast toward the Llagas Creek and Pajaro River, which flows to the Pacific Ocean at Monterey Bay. The topography in the vicinity of the Property is nearly flat with a very gentle slope down to the southeast. 2.6 Geologic and Soil Conditions The southernmost portion of the Santa Clara Valley, where the Property is located, contains mostly fine-grained with some beds of coarse-grained sands and gravel that represent alluvial sediments deposited on alluvial fans formed by rivers draining upland surfaces to the west and east of the Property. Beneath the Quaternary age alluvium, at estimated depths of approximately 300 feet, are older alluvial fan deposits of Upper Pliocene to Lower Pleistocene age (0.5 - 5 million years old) known as the Santa Clara Formation. The sediments comprising this unit are poorly-sorted, lenticular beds of gravel, sand, silt and clay (Goldman, 1967). Franciscan Formation rocks of probable Cretaceous age (70 - 150 million years old) form the bedrock surface beneath the sediments filling the Santa Clara Valley. These rocks consist of interbedded sandstone and shale, limestone, chert and metavolcanic rock. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 8 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 2.7 Groundwater Conditions The subject site is located in the southern part of the Llagas sub-basin, a sub-area of the Santa Clara Valley Groundwater Basin. Principal recharge in the Llagas Sub-basin occurs in the forebay zone, located along the edge of the sub-basin (David Keith Todd, 1987). Lenses of sand and gravel are the principal aquifers, separated by finer textured materials that form discontinuous or leaky aquitards. In the sub-basin interior, water table conditions are present in the shallow aquifer zone, while artesian conditions are present in the deeper aquifer (usually greater than 150 feet). The regional groundwater flow follows the topography, moving from areas of higher elevation to areas of lower elevation. The regional groundwater flow direction in the area of the Property is estimated to be toward the south. Based on groundwater monitoring on and near the Property, the depth to water was reported to be approximately 11-43 feet below ground surface (bgs) with a flow direction toward the east (SCVWD, 2000). 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 9 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 3.0 REGULATORY AGENCY RECORDS REVIEW 3.1 Standard Federal and State Environmental Record Sources Groundwater provides the primary migration route for subsurface contamination from off-site sources to the Property. The groundwater flow direction in the vicinity of the Property is estimated to be variable. Note that under these conditions’ contamination does not migrate long distances but rather remains near its source. Only the sites that are directly up-gradient or in close proximity (adjacent) are usually considered to pose a threat to subsurface environmental conditions under the Property. The potential impact of off-site contaminants to the Property are based on the type of chemical released, the severity of the release, status of remediation or cleanup, and nature of the groundwater in the area of impact and area of the Property. Sites where groundwater is known to be impacted are listed on a variety of Federal and State databases and are the cases most likely to affect other nearby parcels. These databases are listed below. Databases searched for specified radii around the Property also include reported spills of hazardous materials (ERNS). Fuel hydrocarbons generally do not migrate as readily as other chemicals such as certain solvents; consequently, reported fuel leak sites at distances greater than ½ mile from the Property are not considered imminent threats and are not plotted on database maps. Leaks from underground storage tank sites are the most common source of local contamination. Leaks of this type generally do not extend down-gradient more than approximately 500 feet (approximately 1/10 mile) except under unusual conditions. All toxic sites within a 1-mile radius are plotted and reviewed to determine potential threats to the Property. Information from standard Federal and State environmental databases was provided to ERAS by Environmental Risk Information Services (ERIS) of Toronto. Data from governmental agency lists are updated and integrated into one database, which is updated as these data are released. This integrated database also contains postal service data in order to enhance matching of street addresses. Records from one government source are compared to records from another to clarify any address ambiguities. The demographic and geographic information available provides assistance in identifying and managing risk. The accuracy of the geo-coded locations is +/- 300 feet. Maps in the ERIS report shows the locations of all sites identified relative to the location of the Property. The following databases represent the known and likely leak sites that could potentially pose a threat to environmental conditions under the Property. These represent the databases that are consistent with the ASTM-standard environmental databases. The database includes a large number of supplemental, proprietary and non-ASTM standard databases that include many duplicate listings of sites that are already listed in the below-listed databases. ERAS reviewed all the listings provided in the databases as part of the process of evaluation of risk to the Property and further evaluates any site listings that ERAS considers significant. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 10 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 List Type Approximate Search Distance in Miles NPL 1.0 CERCLIS 0.5 CORRACTS 1.0 CONTROLS 0.5 ERNS Property ENVIRONSTOR 1.0 LUST 0.5 SLIC 0.5 VCP 0.5 Brownfields 0.5 3.2 Findings from Database Review The Property was not listed on the databases searched for this assessment. An adjacent site at 850 Pacheco Pass Highway was listed as a leaking underground storage tank (LUST) site. Based on its proximity, files were reviewed, and the results discussed in Section 3.3. A number of sites across Camino Arroyo were listed on various other database lists for the permitted use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials. These sites are not listed on databases that indicate chemical leaks, spills or releases occurred at these facilities. The proper use of hazardous materials and disposal of hazardous waste during normal business operation is not considered to pose a threat to subsurface environmental conditions beneath the Property. The locations of the other identified sites, relative to the Property, are shown on the 1 Mile Radius, .5 Mile Radius and .25 Mile Radius maps in the ERIS Report in Appendix D. NPL NPL National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, ERIS provides polygon coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) and regional EPA offices. State listed NPL equivalent sites (Response) are also included in this search. No NPL sites were listed within 1 mile of the Property. CERCLIS CERCLIS is the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System. CERCLIS contains information on hazardous waste sites, potential hazardous waste sites, and remedial activities across the nation, including sites that are on the National Priorities List (NPL) or being considered for the NPL. This database contains a listing of NPL Sites. Three CERCLIS sites were listed within ½ mile of the Property. The nearest identified site, South Bay Chemical at 721-731 Renz Lane, was located approximately a ½ mile to the west- northwest of the Property in a cross-gradient direction. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 11 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 Based on the distance and location this site and the other identified sites are not considered likely to pose a threat to the subsurface environmental conditions beneath the Property. CORRACTS This database contains Investigation or cleanup activities at Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) or state-only hazardous waste reported by the California Department of Toxic and Substance Control. One CORRACTS site was listed within 1 mile of the Property. The identified site, Hazcontrol Inc. at 731 Renz Lane, was located approximately a ½ mile to the northwest of the Property in a cross- gradient direction. Based on the distance and location this site is not considered likely to pose a threat to the subsurface environmental conditions beneath the Property. CONTROLS Controls, this database identifies sites that have liens reported by the California Department of Toxic and Substance Control, land use control information pertaining to the former Navy base realignment and closure properties, engineering controls sites, and sites with institutional controls. No Controls sites were listed in this database within ½ mile of the Property. ERNS The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting all oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. This database contains a listing of discharge locations. Agency: National Response Center The Property was not identified on this database. ENVIROSTOR This database identifies confirmed release sites where DTSC is involved in remediation, either in a lead role or oversight capacity. Eight ENVIROSTOR sites were listed within 1.0 miles of the Property. The nearest identified site, South Bay Chemical at 721-731 Renz Lane, was located approximately a ½ mile to the west- northwest of the Property in a cross-gradient direction. Based on the distance and location this site is not considered likely to pose a threat to the subsurface environmental conditions beneath the Property. Based on distance, and/or direction the remaining sites are not considered likely to pose a threat to the subsurface environmental conditions beneath the Property. LUST The California State Water Resources Control Board's Underground Storage Tank Program keeps a list of all underground storage tanks which have been reported as having had a release. These sites include those that have not yet been cleaned up and now have a status of Case Open and those 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 12 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 which have been cleaned up and have a case status of Closed. Fuel leak sites rarely affect an area more than 1/8 mile from its source except under unusual conditions. Most contamination from these sites is confined to areas within 500-700 feet of the leak source. Three LUST sites were listed within ½ mile of the Property. The nearest identified site, Shell at 850 Pacheco Pass Road, was located approximately 150 feet to the northwest of the Property in an up-gradient direction and is discussed further below in Section 3.3. Based on distance and/or direction the remaining sites are not considered likely to pose a threat to the subsurface environmental conditions beneath the Property. SLIC The Spills, Leaks, Investigation & Cleanup (SLIC) Program deals with site investigation and corrective action involving sites not overseen by the Underground Tank Program and the Well Investigation Program. Sites listed as “closed” have had remediation completed and are now considered closed by the agency. These listings include SLIC sites that are listed on Federal, state and county listings. No SLIC sites were listed within ½ mile of the Property. VCP This database contains a listing of sites with either confirmed or unconfirmed releases, and the project proponents have requested that DTSC oversee evaluation, investigation, and/or cleanup activities and have agreed to provide coverage for DTSC’s costs. No VCP sites were listed within ½ mile of the Property. BROWNFIELDS, A listing of ACRES Brownfield sites is obtained from Cleanups in My Community. Cleanups in My Community provide information on Brownfields properties for which information is reported back to EPA, as well as areas served by Brownfields grant programs. No US Brownfields sites were listed on the database within ½ mile. Only sites that are listed as potentially contaminated and are near or in a direction directly up- gradient are considered as potential threats to the Property. No additional sites, other than those leak sites identified above, were identified on these databases. 3.3 Off-site Sources and Agency File Reviews The site adjacent to the northwest across Camino Arroyo at 850 Pacheco Pass Highway, a Shell gasoline station, was listed as a closed leak case. Based on the proximity, records were reviewed for the site. Information regarding the site was obtained from a Case Closure Summary prepared by the Santa Clara Valley Water District in 2000. A total of 14 groundwater monitoring wells were installed on and near the site to assess the presence and extent of contamination in groundwater. A Site Plan that was included with the case closure information indicated three of the groundwater wells (S-5, 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 13 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 S-6, and S-7) were along the street near the Property and two wells (S-8, S-14) were located on the Property. Review of tables of analytical data indicated these off-site wells contained concentrations of contaminants in 1992 but subsequent sampling did not indicate detectable concentrations of contaminants. The Santa Clara Valley Water District determined that contamination from the site did not pose a threat to human health and safety and the environment and closed the case in 2000. Copies of selected information from the case closure is included in Appendix F. Based on the removal of the source of contamination the concentrations of contamination in groundwater will continue to decrease. Based on the information obtained, contamination from this site is not considered likely to pose a threat to subsurface environmental conditions under the Property. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 14 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 4.0 HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION Available historical data were researched to obtain information regarding the past uses of the Property and adjacent sites, especially as the information may pertain to environmental conditions or concerns. 4.1 Historical Information Review The United States Geological Survey Chittenden, California 7.5 Minute Series Topographic Maps, 1980, shows the Property elevation at approximately 180 feet. Historical USGS Topographic Maps ERAS reviewed topographic maps which include the location of the Property dated 1915, 1917, 1939, 1955, 1968, 1973, 1980, 1981, 1993 and 2015 provided by ERIS. From 1915 through 1955, no development was present on and near the Property. In 1968 and 1980 several buildings were present adjacent to the southwest of the Property, most of the surrounding area was still undeveloped and most of the current roads in the area were not yet present. In 1993 Camino Arroyo was present as a dirt road that ended at the adjacent buildings noted in earlier photographs. The Property was shown to be undeveloped on all the maps reviewed. Historical Aerial Photographs ERAS reviewed historical aerial photographs provided by ERIS dated in 1937, 1952, 1963, 1968, 1974, 1981, 1987, 1998, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2016. The northwest portion of the Property was used for orchard land in 1937 and 1952. From 1963 to 1987 a farm complex was located adjacent to the Property to the southwest. The Property was bounded on three sides by agricultural land. In 1993-2003 the Property and area to southwest was agricultural land, the only development was the farm complex adjacent to the southwest and a commercial building across Holloway to the southeast. From 2004-2016 the Property and nearby area was generally in its current state of development with a line of commercial buildings to the southeast and the current shopping center to the northwest. Historical City Directories Historical Business, Polk, and Haines Directories were provided by ERIS. Directories dated in 1970, 1975, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 1999, 2006, 2012 and 2018 were reviewed. There was no listing for the Property address in the directories. 4.2 Interview ERAS reviewed an interview form completed by manager Mr. Jim Stockhausen on October 5, 2018. Mr. Stockhausen indicated that the Property has always been vacant land. Mr. Stockhausen was not aware of: 1) the existence of environmental liens on the Property; 2) any 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 15 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 notifications by government of violations of current or historic environmental laws; 3) any existing or historic violations by occupants of environmental laws, or 4) the current presence of underground or aboveground storage tanks on the Property. These responses were compiled on ERAS Environmental Questionnaire along with observations made by ERAS at the time of the site visit. The Environmental Questionnaire is included as Appendix E. 4.3 Building and Health Department File Review Gilroy Building and Planning Department ERAS requested the Gilroy Building Department records for the Property. The only information on file was an entry from 2007 that indicated Land Capital Group was planning a 20,953 square foot retail building. The Planning Department indicated the Property is part of an area of redevelopment that includes the shopping center across Camino Arroyo to the northwest. There are restrictions to the development of the Property and one of the requirements for development would be to widen the nearby Pacheco Pass overcrossing. The complete requirements are contained in the Regency Centers Property Final Mitigation Monitoring Program. Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health ERAS requested available records for the Property. On September 28, 2018 ERAS was informed that there were no available records for the Property. 4.4 Synopsis of Previous Environmental Investigations There was no evidence discovered during this assessment, which indicates that any previous subsurface environmental investigations had been performed on the Property. 4.5 Environmental Liens There was no indication that the Property was the site of any ongoing subsurface investigations or remedial activities related to any additional release of hazardous materials on the Property, therefore a search for environmental liens for the Property was not considered likely to add additional information for this assessment. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 16 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 5.0 RECONNAISSANCE Photographs were taken during the reconnaissance to document the features observed and any environmental conditions of concern. Photographs are included in Appendix C. 5.1 Visual Reconnaissance of the Property ERAS conducted a visual reconnaissance of the Property on October 4, 2018 to identify potential indications of environmental concern. The items listed in this section, if any, are representative of those which could pose recognized environmental conditions as indicated in the ASTM standard for conducting environmental site assessments. Drums, Containers, and Storage Tanks The on-site reconnaissance addressed containers, drums, above ground storage tanks, and other storage units containing materials, which may pose an environmental threat at the Property. No such items were noted. Evidence of Waste Disposal The on-site reconnaissance addressed dumps, pits, ponds, landfills, borrow pits and lagoons, which may have been used for disposal purposes at the Property. No such items were observed on the Property. Surface Fill The on-site reconnaissance did not reveal any evidence of surface fill. Soil stockpiles were located on the Property. Surface Staining and Stressed Vegetation No surface staining or stressed vegetation was observed on the Property during the on-site reconnaissance. Transformers No transformers were observed on the Property. Air Stacks, Vents, and Odors The on-site reconnaissance addressed air stacks, vents, and strong, pungent or noxious odors at the Property. No such items were noted. Evidence of Underground or Aboveground Storage Tanks No USTs or ASTs were observed. Conduits to Groundwater Groundwater production wells or dry wells were not discovered on the Property. Evidence of Improper Waste Discharge Pipes and/or vents, indicating improper discharge of wastes, were not found at the Property. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 17 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 On-Site Environmental Management Practices The on-site reconnaissance addressed the following environmental management practices. Solid Waste Waste items were observed to have been dumped on the Property. These items included mostly household garbage and debris and a few pieces of furniture. No hazardous items were noted. Hazardous Materials and Waste No hazardous materials and waste were observed on the Property. Treatment Facilities No indications of wastewater disposal or treatment facilities were observed at the Property during the on-site reconnaissance. Application of Pesticides, Herbicides or Fertilizers No evidence of the application of pesticides, herbicides, or fertilizers was indicated during the on-site reconnaissance. General Environmental Practices No indications of adverse environmental practices were observed on the Property during the on- site reconnaissance. 5.2 Adjacent and Nearby Site Uses The following observations were made of parcels adjacent to the Property: Southwest Camino Arroyo and across the street was a Shell Station near the northwest corner and a retail shopping center Southeast Holloway Road and across the street was a vacant undeveloped lot Northeast Vacant undeveloped land and paved fenced parking lot Northwest Pacheco Pass Highway (Highway 152) 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 18 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Conclusions ERAS has performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E1527-13 for the Property. Any exceptions to, or deletions from this Practice are described in the report. We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in §312.10 of this part. We have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property. We have developed and performed all of the appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312. Data failures occurred for the Property for the periods 1917-1937, 1939-1952 and 1963-1973. The Property was undeveloped during these periods. Based on the non-hazardous uses of the Property, these data gaps are not considered likely to change the conclusions of this assessment. Site Visit An ERAS representative visited the Property on October 4, 2018. The Property was a long linear lot approximately 300 feet wide and 1,500 feet long. The Property was located in an area of commercial land uses. It was bounded on the southwest by Camino Arroyo and across the street was a Shell Station near the northwest corner and a retail shopping center along the remainder. To the southeast was Holloway Road and across the street was a vacant undeveloped lot. Along the northeast side was mostly contiguous vacant undeveloped land except at the southeast corner where a paved and fenced parking lot used by Cintas was located. The Property comes to a point close to the intersection of Pacheco Pass Highway (Highway 152) and Camino Arroyo. The Property was vacant except for a soil stockpile near the middle toward the southeast end of the Property. The pile was approximately 100 feet by 40 feet by an estimated 10-15 feet high. Another much smaller pile was near the northwest end. A gravel road extended from near the northwest corner along the center of the Property and exits at Camino Arroyo not far from Holloway Road. A pile of debris and refuse was located along the road near the large soil stockpile. The debris consisted mostly of residential type garbage including books, clothes, a car bumper and miscellaneous car parts, a small trailer and household garbage. A wrecked couch was on the opposite site of the large soil stockpile. No hazardous materials were used on the Property. No indication of spills or improper storage of hazardous materials were noted on or near the Property at the time of the site visit. Groundwater production wells, monitoring wells, septic systems, drywells, or pits were not observed on the Property by ERAS. No evidence of the current or former presence of USTs or ASTs were observed on the Property by ERAS. No evidence of leakage, spillage or dumping of regulated material was observed on or near the Property by ERAS. 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy 19 ERAS Environmental, Inc. Proj#18136 Historical Uses Based on the historical information reviewed for this assessment the Property has never been developed since at least 1915. Database Review The Property was not listed on any of the databases searched for this assessment. The site adjacent to the northwest across Camino Arroyo at 850 Pacheco Pass Highway, a Shell gasoline station, was listed as a closed leak case. Two monitoring wells had been installed on the Property and monitored. Review of tables of analytical data indicated these off-site wells contained concentrations of contaminants in 1992 but subsequent sampling did not indicate detectable concentrations of contaminants. The Santa Clara Valley Water District determined that contamination from the site did not pose a threat to human health and safety and the environment and closed the case in 2000. Based on the removal of the source of contamination the concentrations of contamination in groundwater will continue to decrease. Based on the information obtained, contamination from this site is not considered likely to pose a threat to subsurface environmental conditions under the Property. Based on distance, locations or current site status, none of the remaining identified sites are considered threats to the current environmental status of the Property or subsurface soil and groundwater beneath it. There was no indication that the Property was the site of ongoing subsurface investigations or remedial activities related to any additional release of hazardous materials on the Property, therefore a search for environmental liens for the Property was not considered likely to add additional information for this assessment. Recognized Environmental Conditions No recognized environmental conditions (REC), historical recognized environmental conditions (HREC), controlled recognized environmental condition (CREC), or de minimis conditions were identified for the Property. 6.2 Recommendations No evidence was discovered during this assessment to indicate that activities currently conducted on or near the Property have contributed contamination to soil or groundwater in the surrounding area. ERAS recommends no further actions pertaining to subsurface environmental conditions at the Property at 6970 Camino Arroyo in Gilroy, California. 7.0 REFERENCES AND APPENDICES Maps, Aerial Photographs, and Other Geographic References Historical Topographic maps United States Geological Survey Topographic Maps dated 1915, 1917, 1939, 1955, 1968, 1973, 1980, 1981, 1993 and 2015 provided by ERIS. Historical Aerial Photographs: Historical aerial photographs provided by ERIS dated in 1937,1952, 1963, 1968, 1974, 1981, 1987, 1998, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2012, 2014, and 2016. Polk and Haines City Directories provided by ERIS dated 1970, 1975, 1980, 1985, 1990, 1995, 1999, 2006, 2012 and 2018. Published References California Department of Water Resources, Evaluation of Ground Water Resources South Bay, Appendix A: Geology, Bulletin 118-1, August 1967. David Keith Todd Consulting Engineers, Inc., Groundwater Management in Santa Clara Valley, April 1987. ERIS, Database Report, 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy, CA Job Number 18136, dated September 27, 2018. Goldman, Harold B., Geology of San Francisco Bay prepared for San Mateo Bay Conservation and Development Commission, July 1967. Helley, E.J., La Joie, K.R., Spangle, W.E., and Blair, M.L., Flatland Deposits of the San Francisco Bay Region, California - their geology and engineering properties and their importance to comprehensive planning, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 943, 1974. Santa Clara Valley Water District, Case Closure Summary, Shell, 850 Pacheco Pass Highway, Gilroy, California, August 22, 2000. Records Review, Interviews and Agency Contacts Gilroy Building Department file review, October 4, 2018. Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health file review request, September 28, 2018. Interview with Mr. Jim Stockhausen, manager, October 5, 2018. APPENDIX A ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS RESUME David Siegel David Siegel is president of ERAS Environmental, Inc., an environmental consulting company formed in October 1998. Prior to that, Mr. Siegel was principle of Siegel Environmental Consulting Services, formed in February 1994, an environmental consulting company providing due diligence services, geological and hydrogeological research, Phase 2 field services such as groundwater well installation and sampling, waste disposal, project management and remediation planning and permitting. Before involvement with management of these environmental consulting firms, Mr. Siegel was a Project Hydrogeologist, Project Geologist, and Staff Geologist with three San Francisco Bay Area environmental consulting companies from 1987 to 1998. Mr. Siegel holds a master’s degree in geology from California State University East Bay and was a State of California Registered Environmental Assessor II. QUALIFICATIONS Experience since 1987 in hazardous materials consulting including due diligence projects, soil and groundwater investigations and remediation, and asbestos surveying. Strong organizational background in project management including budget development and management and client contact and service. Strong technical background in groundwater well design and installation, soil and groundwater chemical data evaluation and hydrogeological assessment. Inspection experience with thousands of commercial sites including retail, office, industrial and residential. Experience providing management, business development, technical oversight, client contact and regulatory agency negotiation and interaction for environmental case closures. WORK HISTORY 1994-Present: President of ERAS Environmental, Inc. and Principle of Siegel Environmental Management and completion of due diligence projects for a wide variety of commercial properties throughout California. Management and completion of Phase 2 soil and groundwater and asbestos sampling projects at former and operating gasoline stations and industrial facilities. Responsible for project initiation, planning, report preparation and technical oversight. Responsible for business development, client contact and local and state regulatory agency compliance for ongoing investigation, cost recovery and case closures. 1987-1994: Project Hydrogeologist (McCulley, Frick & Gilman, San Francisco; 1992-1994), Project Manager (Converse Environmental, San Francisco; 1989-1992), Project Manager (Exceltech, Inc., Fremont; 1987-1989) Management and completion of environmental and geotechnical investigations involving soil and groundwater contamination. Responsible for project planning, budgeting and operation, professional staff supervision and report completion. Interface with engineers for site remediation planning. EDUCATION AND LICENCES 1995 to Present - EPA Certified Asbestos Building Inspector 1990 to 2012 - California Registered Environmental Assessor II 1988 - M.S. Geological Sciences, California State University, East Bay 510.247.9885 www.eras.biz 510.886.5399 Andrew Savage Andrew Savage is a Project Geologist for ERAS Environmental, Inc. Prior to joining ERAS, Mr. Savage was a Geologic Intern at Chevron and a Biological Aide for the Bureau of Reclamations. Mr. Savage holds a Bachelors of Science in Geology from California State University in Chico. Involved in environmental consulting since 2003. Strong technical background in investigative methods, geological and hydrogeological assessment, installation and development of numerous types of monitoring and remediation wells, and data interpretation and evaluation. Proficient in borehole logging, field methods, data collection, and design of subsurface hydrogeological investigations. Project experience in hazardous material facility closure, soil and groundwater assessment, delineation, monitoring, and remediation, soil gas studies, health and safety plan preparation, permitting, work plan preparation, offsite right of entry issues, and regulatory contact and negotiation for investigations and remediation. 2003-Present: Project Geologist for ERAS Environmental, Inc., Hayward, California Managed and conducted Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessments, Transaction Screens and Phase 2 Assessments for commercial properties throughout Northern California. Management and completion of Phase 2 soil and groundwater sampling projects at former and operating gasoline stations and industrial facilities. Responsible for project initiation, planning, report preparation and technical oversight. 2001-2002: Biological Aid for the Bureau of Reclamations, Red Bluff, California Provided field services for the collection of data. 2001-2003: Geological Intern for Chevron, San Ramon, California Was in charge of managing geologic research information including well logs and reports. Duties also involved working closely with geologists and assisting them with research and gathering data. EDUCATION AND LICENCES 2002 B.S. Geological Sciences, California State University, Chico 2002 Hazwoper Certification, California State University, Chico 2003-2009 Hazwoper Certification Refresher Courses 2009 Self Performance Self Assessment Training (SPSA) QUALIFICATIONS WORK HISTORY APPENDIX B LOCATION AND SITE MAPS ^_ 121°31 '30"W121°32 'W121°32 '30"W121°33 'W121°33 '30"W121°34 'W121°34'30"W 37°1'30"N37°1'30"N37°1'N37°1'N37°0'30"N37°0'30"N37°0'N37°0'N36°59'30"N36°59'30"N36°59'N36°59'N0.35 0 0.350.175 Miles Order No: 20180926049Topographic Ma p 1:24000 Address: 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy, CA, 95020 © ERIS In formation Inc.Sourc e: USG S Topographic Map (2015) Qua drangle(s): Gilroy, CA; Chittenden, CA ; PROPERTY SITE PLAN FIGURE 2 nvironmental RAS N HOLLOWAY ROADCAMINO ARROYOPACHECO PASS HIGHWAY APPENDIX C PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy ERAS Project # 18136 Photograph 1 - View along Holloway Road (southeast side) of Property Photograph 2 - View northwest along northeast side of the Property 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy ERAS Project # 18136 Photograph 3 - Northeast view of vacant land adjacent to northeast Photograph 4 - View across center of Property, soil pile in right distance 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy ERAS Project # 18136 Photograph 5 - Gravel road, view northwest toward Pacheco Pass Hwy Photograph 6 - View of refuse dumped near road on Property APPENDIX D ERIS DATABASE REPORT Project Property:18136 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 Project No: Report Type:Database Report Order No: 20180926049 Requested by:ERAS Environmental, Inc. Date Completed: September 27, 2018 2 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Table of Contents Notice:IMPORTANT LIMITATIONS and YOUR LIABILITY Reliance on information in Report:This report DOES NOT replace a full Phase I Environmental Site Assessment but is solely intended to be used as database review of environmental records. License for use of information in Report:No page of this report can be used without this cover page,this notice and the project property identifier. The information in Report(s)may not be modified or re-sold. Your Liability for misuse:Using this Service and/or its reports in a manner contrary to this Notice or your agreement will be in breach of copyright and contract and ERIS may obtain damages for such mis-use,including damages caused to third parties,and gives ERIS the right to terminate your account, rescind your license to any previous reports and to bar you from future use of the Service. No warranty of Accuracy or Liability for ERIS:The information contained in this report has been produced by ERIS Information Inc.("ERIS")using various sources of information,including information provided by Federal and State government departments.The report applies only to the address and up to the date specified on the cover of this report,and any alterations or deviation from this description will require a new report.This report and the data contained herein does not purport to be and does not constitute a guarantee of the accuracy of the information contained herein and does not constitute a legal opinion nor medical advice.Although ERIS has endeavored to present you with information that is accurate,ERIS disclaims,any and all liability for any errors,omissions,or inaccuracies in such information and data,whether attributable to inadvertence,negligence or otherwise,and for any consequences arising therefrom.Liability on the part of ERIS is limited to the monetary value paid for this report. Trademark and Copyright:You may not use the ERIS trademarks or attribute any work to ERIS other than as outlined above.This Service and Report(s)are protected by copyright owned by ERIS Information Inc.Copyright in data used in the Service or Report(s)(the "Data")is owned by ERIS or its licensors.The Service,Report(s)and Data may not be copied or reproduced in whole or in any substantial part without prior written consent of ERIS. Table of Contents Table of Contents...........................................................................................2 Executive Summary........................................................................................3 Executive Summary: Report Summary.......................................................................................................................4 Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Project Property...................................................................................8 Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Surrounding Properties........................................................................9 Executive Summary: Summary by Data Source.......................................................................................................14 Map...............................................................................................................22 Aerial.............................................................................................................25 Topographic Map..........................................................................................26 Detail Report.................................................................................................27 Unplottable Summary.................................................................................120 Unplottable Report......................................................................................121 Appendix: Database Descriptions...............................................................122 Definitions...................................................................................................133 3 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Executive Summary Property Information: Project Property:18136 6970 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 Project No: Coordinates: Latitude:37.001615 Longitude:-121.549435 UTM Northing:4,096,034.93 UTM Easting:629,066.68 UTM Zone:UTM Zone 10S Elevation:183 FT Order Information: Order No:20180926049 Date Requested:September 26, 2018 Requested by:ERAS Environmental, Inc. Report Type:Database Report Historicals/Products: Executive Summary 4 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Executive Summary: Report Summary Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total Standard Environmental Records Federal rr-NPL-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-PROPOSED NPL-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-DELETED NPL-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-SEMS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-SEMS ARCHIVE-aa Y .5 0 0 0 1 - 1 rr-ODI-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-IODI-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-CERCLIS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 1 - 1 rr-CERCLIS NFRAP-aa Y .5 0 0 0 1 - 1 rr-CERCLIS LIENS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-RCRA CORRACTS-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 rr-RCRA TSD-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-RCRA LQG-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-RCRA SQG-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-RCRA CESQG-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-RCRA NON GEN-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-FED ENG-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-FED INST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-ERNS 1982 TO 1986-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-ERNS 1987 TO 1989-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-ERNS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-FED BROWNFIELDS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-FEMA UST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-SEMS LIEN-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-SUPERFUND ROD-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 State rr-RESPONSE-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 NPL PROPOSED NPL DELETED NPL SEMS SEMS ARCHIVE ODI IODI CERCLIS CERCLIS NFRAP CERCLIS LIENS RCRA CORRACTS RCRA TSD RCRA LQG RCRA SQG RCRA CESQG RCRA NON GEN FED ENG FED INST ERNS 1982 TO 1986 ERNS 1987 TO 1989 ERNS FED BROWNFIELDS FEMA UST SEMS LIEN SUPERFUND ROD RESPONSE Executive Summary: Report Summary 5 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total rr-ENVIROSTOR-aa Y 1 0 0 0 2 4 6 rr-DELISTED ENVS-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-SWF/LF-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-HWP-aa Y 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 rr-LDS-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-SWAT-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-LUST-aa Y .5 0 0 2 1 - 3 rr-DELISTED LST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-UST-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-SWRCB SWF-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-UST CLOSURE-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-HHSS-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-AST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED TNK-aa Y .25 0 0 2 -- 2 rr-CERS TANK-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-LUR-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-HLUR-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DEED-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-VCP-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-CLEANUP SITES-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DELISTED CTNK-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-HIST TANK-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 Tribal rr-INDIAN LUST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-INDIAN UST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED ILST-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DELISTED IUST-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 County rr-DELISTED COUNTY-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-SANJOSE HM-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-GILROY CUPA-aa Y .25 0 8 8 -- 16 rr-SANTACLARA CUPA-aa Y .25 0 0 1 -- 1 rr-SANTACLARA HSOL-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-SANTACLARA LO-aa Y .5 0 0 1 0 - 1 rr-SUNNYVALE CUPA-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 Additional Environmental Records Federal rr-FINDS/FRS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-TRIS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 ENVIROSTOR DELISTED ENVS SWF/LF HWP LDS SWAT LUST DELISTED LST UST SWRCB SWF UST CLOSURE HHSS AST DELISTED TNK CERS TANK LUR HLUR DEED VCP CLEANUP SITES DELISTED CTNK HIST TANK INDIAN LUST INDIAN UST DELISTED ILST DELISTED IUST DELISTED COUNTY SANJOSE HM GILROY CUPA SANTACLARA CUPA SANTACLARA HSOL SANTACLARA LO SUNNYVALE CUPA FINDS/FRS TRIS 6 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total rr-HMIRS-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-NCDL-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-TSCA-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-HIST TSCA-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-FTTS ADMIN-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-FTTS INSP-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-PRP-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-SCRD DRYCLEANER-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-ICIS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-FED DRYCLEANERS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED FED DRY-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-FUDS-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-MLTS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HIST MLTS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-MINES-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-ALT FUELS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-SSTS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-PCB-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 State rr-INSP COMP ENF-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 rr-CDL-aa Y .125 0 0 --- 0 rr-SCH-aa Y 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 rr-CHMIRS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HAZNET-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HWSS CLEANUP-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DTSC HWF-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-HIST MANIFEST-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HIST CHMIRS-aa Y PO 0 ---- 0 rr-HIST CORTESE-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-CDO/CAO-aa Y .5 0 0 0 0 - 0 rr-DELISTED HAZ-aa Y .5 0 0 0 1 - 1 rr-DRYCLEANERS-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-DELISTED DRYC-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-WASTE DISCHG-aa Y .25 0 0 0 -- 0 rr-EMISSIONS-aa Y .25 0 1 3 -- 4 rr-CERS HAZ-aa Y .125 0 8 --- 8 Tribal No Tribal additional environmental record sources available for this State. County No County additional environmental databases were selected to be included in the search. HMIRS NCDL TSCA HIST TSCA FTTS ADMIN FTTS INSP PRP SCRD DRYCLEANER ICIS FED DRYCLEANERS DELISTED FED DRY FUDS MLTS HIST MLTS MINES ALT FUELS SSTS PCB INSP COMP ENF CDL SCH CHMIRS HAZNET HWSS CLEANUP DTSC HWF HIST MANIFEST HIST CHMIRS HIST CORTESE CDO/CAO DELISTED HAZ DRYCLEANERS DELISTED DRYC WASTE DISCHG EMISSIONS CERS HAZ 7 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Database Searched Search Radius Project Property Within 0.12mi .125mi to 0.25mi 0.25mi to 0.50mi 0.50mi to 1.00mi Total Total:0 17 25 8 7 57 * PO – Property Only * 'Property and adjoining properties' database search radii are set at 0.25 miles. 8 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Project Property Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number No records found in the selected databases for the project property. Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Project Property 9 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Surrounding Properties Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number m1d dd-CERS HAZ-859598704-aa Michael's Store # 4703 6745 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 SW 0.07 / 361.98 3 p1p-27-859598704-x1x m1d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918499-aa Michael's Store # 4703 6745 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 SW 0.07 / 361.98 3 p1p-28-824918499-x1x m2d dd-CERS HAZ-859597250-aa PetSmart 0072 6755 CAMINO ARROYO BLDG 5 GILROY CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 369.82 1 p1p-29-859597250-x1x m2d dd-GILROY CUPA-828833730-aa PetSmart 0072 6755 Camino Arroyo Bldg 5 Gilroy CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 369.82 1 p1p-30-828833730-x1x m3d dd-CERS HAZ-859588691-aa Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 6765 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 373.29 1 p1p-31-859588691-x1x m3d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918425-aa Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 6765 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 373.29 1 p1p-33-824918425-x1x m4d dd-CERS HAZ-859594760-aa Bed, Bath and Beyond #608 6725 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.08 / 417.58 2 p1p-33-859594760-x1x m4d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918491-aa Bed, Bath and Beyond #608 6725 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 SSW 0.08 / 417.58 2 p1p-35-824918491-x1x m5d dd-CERS HAZ-859587253-aa Ross Dress For Less #0740 6715 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.09 / 473.04 2 p1p-35-859587253-x1x m5d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918309-aa Ross Dress For Less #0740 6715 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 SSW 0.09 / 473.04 2 p1p-37-824918309-x1x m6d dd-CERS HAZ-859552917-aa SALLY BEAUTY SUPPLY 6815 CAMINO ARROYO STE 50 GILROY CA 95020 WNW 0.10 / 551.29 4 p1p-37-859552917-x1x m6d dd-GILROY CUPA-845744811-aa SALLY BEAUTY SUPPLY 6815 Camino Arroyo Ste 50 Gilroy CA 95020 WNW 0.10 / 551.29 4 p1p-39-845744811-x1x 27 28 29 30 31 33 33 35 35 37 37 39 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA Executive Summary: Site Report Summary - Surrounding Properties 10 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number m7d dd-CERS HAZ-859567881-aa Flowstar, Inc.6800 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 NE 0.11 / 586.61 -1 p1p-39-859567881-x1x m7d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918290-aa Flowstar, Inc.6800 Silacci Way Gilroy CA 95020 NE 0.11 / 586.61 -1 p1p-43-824918290-x1x m7d dd-EMISSIONS-861189129-aa FLOWSTAR 6800 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 NE 0.11 / 586.61 -1 p1p-43-861189129-x1x m8d dd-CERS HAZ-859603807-aa Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 6955 CAMINO ARROYO STE 70 GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.12 / 627.57 2 p1p-51-859603807-x1x m8d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918509-aa Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 6955 Camino Arroyo Ste 70 Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.12 / 627.57 2 p1p-53-824918509-x1x m9d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918295-aa Leslie's Swimming Pool Supplies #505 6915 Camino Arroyo, Suite 10 Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.15 / 776.23 1 p1p-53-824918295-x1x m10d dd-SANTACLARA CUPA-867087703-aa CINTAS CORPORATION 904 HOLLOWAY RD GILROY CA 95020 ESE 0.15 / 780.44 -5 p1p-54-867087703-x1x m10d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918286-aa Cintas Corporation #630 904 Holloway Rd Gilroy CA 95020 ESE 0.15 / 780.44 -5 p1p-54-824918286-x1x m11d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918482-aa Creative Labels, Inc.6670 Silacci Way Gilroy CA 95020 E 0.16 / 824.48 -4 p1p-54-824918482-x1x m11d dd-EMISSIONS-861183403-aa CREATIVE LABELS INC 6670 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 E 0.16 / 824.48 -4 p1p-54-861183403-x1x m12d dd-GILROY CUPA-845744796-aa Roadhouse Jacks 6945 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.16 / 845.24 4 p1p-61-845744796-x1x m12d dd-DELISTED COUNTY-824918430-aa Roadhouse Jacks 6945 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.16 / 845.24 4 p1p-61-824918430-x1x m13d dd-LUST-820175315-aa Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.19 / 989.17 4 p1p-62-820175315-x1x Global ID | Status | Status Date: T0608502195 | Completed - Case Closed | 2001-01-09 00:00:00 m14d dd-LUST-820189637-aa Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.19 / 1,007.77 5 p1p-63-820189637-x1x 39 43 43 51 53 53 54 54 54 54 61 61 62 63 7 7 7 8 8 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 13 14 CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA EMISSIONS CERS HAZ GILROY CUPA GILROY CUPA SANTACLARA CUPA GILROY CUPA GILROY CUPA EMISSIONS GILROY CUPA DELISTED COUNTY LUST LUST 11 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number Global ID | Status | Status Date: T0608591842 | Completed - Case Closed | 2001-01-09 00:00:00 m15d dd-UST-860403661-aa Gilroy Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NNW 0.19 / 1,023.27 3 p1p-64-860403661-x1x Facility ID: 895 m16d dd-CERS TANK-859557346-aa Gilroy Shell 850 PACHECO PASS HWY GILROY CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 3 p1p-64-859557346-x1x m16d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918357-aa Gilroy Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 3 p1p-69-824918357-x1x m16d dd-HHSS-822974089-aa VIEIRA SERVICES CO INC 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 3 p1p-69-822974089-x1x m16d dd-HIST TANK-865094844-aa VIEIRA SERVICE CO., INC 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 3 p1p-70-865094844-x1x m16d dd-SANTACLARA LO-820142995-aa Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 3 p1p-70-820142995-x1x SCVWD ID | Closure Date: 11S4E05K01f | 1/9/2001 m16d dd-RCRA LQG-810484503-aa SERVICE STATION - SAP 135332 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 3 p1p-70-810484503-x1x m17d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918359-aa TARGET T1851 6705 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 4 p1p-72-824918359-x1x m17d dd-GILROY CUPA-845744786-aa CVS Pharmacy #16971 6705 Camino Arroyo Ste B Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 4 p1p-72-845744786-x1x m17d dd-EMISSIONS-861201413-aa TARGET CORPORATION - TARGET GI 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 4 p1p-72-861201413-x1x m17d dd-EMISSIONS-861207511-aa TARGET STORE T1851 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 4 p1p-75-861207511-x1x m17d dd-RCRA CESQG-848634326-aa CVS PHARMACY #16971 6705 CAMINO ARROYO STE B GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 4 p1p-77-848634326-x1x m17d dd-RCRA SQG-810627808-aa TARGET STORE T1851 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 4 p1p-79-810627808-x1x 64 64 69 69 70 70 70 72 72 72 75 77 79 15 16 16 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 17 17 UST CERS TANK GILROY CUPA HHSS HIST TANK SANTACLARA LO RCRA LQG GILROY CUPA GILROY CUPA EMISSIONS EMISSIONS RCRA CESQG RCRA SQG 12 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number m18d dd-DELISTED TNK-820077018-aa SHELL 850 Pacheco Pass Road Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.22 / 1,183.21 6 p1p-85-820077018-x1x m19d dd-GILROY CUPA-824918317-aa Tractor Supply Company Store# 1171-Gilroy 6881 Cameron Blvd Gilroy CA 95020 ENE 0.23 / 1,237.54 -3 p1p-85-824918317-x1x m20d dd-DELISTED TNK-820077017-aa TV'S FOOD MART 850 PACHECO PASS HWY GILROY CA 95020 N 0.25 / 1,296.71 2 p1p-85-820077017-x1x m21d dd-CERCLIS-805437323-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 950201626 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 5 p1p-85-805437323-x1x m21d dd-CERCLIS NFRAP-805476443-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 950201626 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 5 p1p-87-805476443-x1x m21d dd-SEMS ARCHIVE-828867835-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95020-1626 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 5 p1p-88-828867835-x1x m22d dd-LUST-820183743-aa PRIVATE RESIDENCE PRIVATE RESIDENCE Gilroy CA 95020 WNW 0.43 / 2,245.32 7 p1p-88-820183743-x1x Global ID | Status | Status Date: T0608500042 | Completed - Case Closed | 1998-01-05 00:00:00 m23d dd-DELISTED HAZ-859589068-aa Boral Roofing, LLC 6500 BREM LN GILROY CA 95020 SW 0.46 / 2,441.43 3 p1p-89-859589068-x1x m24d dd-ENVIROSTOR-820293155-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 7 p1p-89-820293155-x1x Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 80001324 | INACTIVE - NEEDS EVALUATION AS OF 6/26/2009 m24d dd-ENVIROSTOR-820299123-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 7 p1p-90-820299123-x1x Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: CAD000628149 | m24d dd-HWP-820356825-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 7 p1p-92-820356825-x1x m25d dd-ENVIROSTOR-820361343-aa SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL COMPANY 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.52 / 2,722.07 7 p1p-93-820361343-x1x Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 43490062 | REFER: RCRA AS OF 6/8/1994 m26d dd-RCRA CORRACTS-810471734-aa HAZCONTROL INC.731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95021 NW 0.55 / 2,878.92 8 p1p-93-810471734-x1x m27d dd-ENVIROSTOR-820297879-aa INLAND PAPERBOARD AND PACKAGING, INC. 6400 JAMIESON WAY GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.57 / 3,010.66 3 p1p-104-820297879-x1x 85 85 85 85 87 88 88 89 89 90 92 93 93 104 18 19 20 21 21 21 22 23 24 24 24 25 26 27 DELISTED TNK GILROY CUPA DELISTED TNK CERCLIS CERCLIS NFRAP SEMS ARCHIVE LUST DELISTED HAZ ENVIROSTOR ENVIROSTOR HWP ENVIROSTOR RCRA CORRACTS ENVIROSTOR 13 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key DB Company/Site Name Address Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev Diff (ft) Page Number Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 71002634 | REFER: OTHER AGENCY AS OF 5/12/2006 m28d dd-ENVIROSTOR-866001266-aa TEMPLE-INLAND, INC.6400 JAMIESON WAY GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.58 / 3,081.49 4 p1p-106-866001266-x1x Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 60000630 | NO FURTHER ACTION AS OF 9/5/2008 m29d dd-ENVIROSTOR-820295074-aa METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 950207012 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 3 p1p-107-820295074-x1x Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: CAD077182293 | m29d dd-HWP-820356791-aa METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 950207012 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 3 p1p-111-820356791-x1x m29d dd-INSP COMP ENF-820209916-aa METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 3 p1p-114-820209916-x1x 106 107 111 114 28 29 29 29 ENVIROSTOR ENVIROSTOR HWP INSP COMP ENF 14 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Executive Summary: Summary by Data Source Standard Federal SEMS ARCHIVE - SEMS List 8R Archive Sites A search of the SEMS ARCHIVE database, dated Jun 8, 2018 has found that there are 1 SEMS ARCHIVE site(s) within approximately 0.50 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95020-1626 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 m-21-828867835-a CERCLIS - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System - CERCLIS A search of the CERCLIS database, dated Oct 25, 2013 has found that there are 1 CERCLIS site(s) within approximately 0.50 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 950201626 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 m-21-805437323-a CERCLIS NFRAP - CERCLIS - No Further Remedial Action Planned NFRAP A search of the CERCLIS NFRAP database, dated Oct 25, 2013 has found that there are 1 CERCLIS NFRAP site(s) within approximately 0.50 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 950201626 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 m-21-805476443-a RCRA CORRACTS - RCRA CORRACTS-Corrective Action A search of the RCRA CORRACTS database, dated Aug 2, 2018 has found that there are 1 RCRA CORRACTS site(s) within approximately 1.00 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key HAZCONTROL INC. 731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95021 NW 0.55 / 2,878.92 m-26-810471734-a RCRA LQG - RCRA Generator List A search of the RCRA LQG database, dated Aug 2, 2018 has found that there are 1 RCRA LQG site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. 21 21 21 26 Executive Summary: Summary by Data Source 15 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SERVICE STATION - SAP 135332 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 m-16-810484503-a RCRA SQG - RCRA Small Quantity Generators List A search of the RCRA SQG database, dated Aug 2, 2018 has found that there are 1 RCRA SQG site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key TARGET STORE T1851 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 m-17-810627808-a RCRA CESQG - RCRA Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators List A search of the RCRA CESQG database, dated Aug 2, 2018 has found that there are 1 RCRA CESQG site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key CVS PHARMACY #16971 6705 CAMINO ARROYO STE B GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 m-17-848634326-a State ENVIROSTOR - EnviroStor Database A search of the ENVIROSTOR database, dated Jul 18, 2018 has found that there are 6 ENVIROSTOR site(s) within approximately 1.00 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 m-24-820299123-a Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: CAD000628149 | SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 m-24-820293155-a Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 80001324 | INACTIVE - NEEDS EVALUATION AS OF 6/26/2009 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL COMPANY 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.52 / 2,722.07 m-25-820361343-a Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 43490062 | REFER: RCRA AS OF 6/8/1994 INLAND PAPERBOARD AND PACKAGING, INC. 6400 JAMIESON WAY GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.57 / 3,010.66 m-27-820297879-a Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 71002634 | REFER: OTHER AGENCY AS OF 5/12/2006 TEMPLE-INLAND, INC. 6400 JAMIESON WAY GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.58 / 3,081.49 m-28-866001266-a 16 17 17 24 24 25 27 28 16 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: 60000630 | NO FURTHER ACTION AS OF 9/5/2008 METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 950207012 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 m-29-820295074-a Estor/EPA ID | Cleanup Status: CAD077182293 | HWP - EnviroStor Hazardous Waste Facilities A search of the HWP database, dated Aug 23, 2018 has found that there are 2 HWP site(s) within approximately 1.00 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 m-24-820356825-a METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 950207012 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 m-29-820356791-a LUST - Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Reports A search of the LUST database, dated Jul 6, 2018 has found that there are 3 LUST site(s) within approximately 0.50 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.19 / 989.17 m-13-820175315-a Global ID | Status | Status Date: T0608502195 | Completed - Case Closed | 2001-01-09 00:00:00 Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.19 / 1,007.77 m-14-820189637-a Global ID | Status | Status Date: T0608591842 | Completed - Case Closed | 2001-01-09 00:00:00 PRIVATE RESIDENCE PRIVATE RESIDENCE Gilroy CA 95020 WNW 0.43 / 2,245.32 m-22-820183743-a Global ID | Status | Status Date: T0608500042 | Completed - Case Closed | 1998-01-05 00:00:00 UST - Permitted Underground Storage Tank (UST) in GeoTracker A search of the UST database, dated Jul 1, 2018 has found that there are 1 UST site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Gilroy Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NNW 0.19 / 1,023.27 m-15-860403661-a Facility ID: 895 HHSS - Historical Hazardous Substance Storage Information Database A search of the HHSS database, dated Aug 27, 2015 has found that there are 1 HHSS site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. 29 24 29 13 14 22 15 17 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key VIEIRA SERVICES CO INC 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 m-16-822974089-a DELISTED TNK - Delisted Storage Tanks A search of the DELISTED TNK database, dated Jul 01, 2018 has found that there are 2 DELISTED TNK site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key SHELL 850 Pacheco Pass Road Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.22 / 1,183.21 m-18-820077018-a TV'S FOOD MART 850 PACHECO PASS HWY GILROY CA 95020 N 0.25 / 1,296.71 m-20-820077017-a CERS TANK - California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Tanks A search of the CERS TANK database, dated Jul 9, 2018 has found that there are 1 CERS TANK site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Gilroy Shell 850 PACHECO PASS HWY GILROY CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 m-16-859557346-a HIST TANK - Historical Hazardous Substance Storage Container Information - Facility Summary A search of the HIST TANK database, dated May 27, 1988 has found that there are 1 HIST TANK site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key VIEIRA SERVICE CO., INC 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 m-16-865094844-a County DELISTED COUNTY - Delisted County Records A search of the DELISTED COUNTY database, dated Seo 4, 2018 has found that there are 1 DELISTED COUNTY site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Roadhouse Jacks 6945 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.16 / 845.24 m-12-824918430-a GILROY CUPA - Santa Clara County - Gilroy City CUPA Facilities List 16 18 20 16 16 12 18 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 A search of the GILROY CUPA database, dated Jul 2, 2018 has found that there are 16 GILROY CUPA site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Michael's Store # 4703 6745 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 SW 0.07 / 361.98 m-1-824918499-a PetSmart 0072 6755 Camino Arroyo Bldg 5 Gilroy CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 369.82 m-2-828833730-a Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 6765 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 373.29 m-3-824918425-a Bed, Bath and Beyond #608 6725 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 SSW 0.08 / 417.58 m-4-824918491-a Ross Dress For Less #0740 6715 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 SSW 0.09 / 473.04 m-5-824918309-a SALLY BEAUTY SUPPLY 6815 Camino Arroyo Ste 50 Gilroy CA 95020 WNW 0.10 / 551.29 m-6-845744811-a Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 6955 Camino Arroyo Ste 70 Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.12 / 627.57 m-8-824918509-a Leslie's Swimming Pool Supplies #505 6915 Camino Arroyo, Suite 10 Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.15 / 776.23 m-9-824918295-a Roadhouse Jacks 6945 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.16 / 845.24 m-12-845744796-a Gilroy Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 m-16-824918357-a CVS Pharmacy #16971 6705 Camino Arroyo Ste B Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 m-17-845744786-a TARGET T1851 6705 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 m-17-824918359-a 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 12 16 17 17 19 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Lower Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Flowstar, Inc. 6800 Silacci Way Gilroy CA 95020 NE 0.11 / 586.61 m-7-824918290-a Cintas Corporation #630 904 Holloway Rd Gilroy CA 95020 ESE 0.15 / 780.44 m-10-824918286-a Creative Labels, Inc. 6670 Silacci Way Gilroy CA 95020 E 0.16 / 824.48 m-11-824918482-a Tractor Supply Company Store# 1171-Gilroy 6881 Cameron Blvd Gilroy CA 95020 ENE 0.23 / 1,237.54 m-19-824918317-a SANTACLARA CUPA - Santa Clara County CUPA Facilities List A search of the SANTACLARA CUPA database, dated Jun 12, 2018 has found that there are 1 SANTACLARA CUPA site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Lower Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key CINTAS CORPORATION 904 HOLLOWAY RD GILROY CA 95020 ESE 0.15 / 780.44 m-10-867087703-a SANTACLARA LO - Santa Clara Local Oversight Program Listing A search of the SANTACLARA LO database, dated Jun 14, 2017 has found that there are 1 SANTACLARA LO site(s) within approximately 0.50 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 m-16-820142995-a SCVWD ID | Closure Date: 11S4E05K01f | 1/9/2001 Non Standard State INSP COMP ENF - EnviroStor Inspection, Compliance, and Enforcement A search of the INSP COMP ENF database, dated May 28, 2018 has found that there are 1 INSP COMP ENF site(s) within approximately 1.00 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 m-29-820209916-a DELISTED HAZ - Delisted Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Hazardous Waste Sites 7 10 11 19 10 16 29 20 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 A search of the DELISTED HAZ database, dated Jul 9, 2018 has found that there are 1 DELISTED HAZ site(s) within approximately 0.50 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Boral Roofing, LLC 6500 BREM LN GILROY CA 95020 SW 0.46 / 2,441.43 m-23-859589068-a EMISSIONS - Toxic Pollutant Emissions Facilities A search of the EMISSIONS database, dated Dec 31, 2016 has found that there are 4 EMISSIONS site(s) within approximately 0.25 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key TARGET CORPORATION - TARGET GI 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 m-17-861201413-a TARGET STORE T1851 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 m-17-861207511-a Lower Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key FLOWSTAR 6800 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 NE 0.11 / 586.61 m-7-861189129-a CREATIVE LABELS INC 6670 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 E 0.16 / 824.48 m-11-861183403-a CERS HAZ - California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Hazardous Waste Sites A search of the CERS HAZ database, dated Jul 9, 2018 has found that there are 8 CERS HAZ site(s) within approximately 0.12 miles of the project property. Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Michael's Store # 4703 6745 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 SW 0.07 / 361.98 m-1-859598704-a PetSmart 0072 6755 CAMINO ARROYO BLDG 5 GILROY CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 369.82 m-2-859597250-a Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 6765 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 WSW 0.07 / 373.29 m-3-859588691-a 23 17 17 7 11 1 2 3 21 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Equal/Higher Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Bed, Bath and Beyond #608 6725 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.08 / 417.58 m-4-859594760-a Ross Dress For Less #0740 6715 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 SSW 0.09 / 473.04 m-5-859587253-a SALLY BEAUTY SUPPLY 6815 CAMINO ARROYO STE 50 GILROY CA 95020 WNW 0.10 / 551.29 m-6-859552917-a Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 6955 CAMINO ARROYO STE 70 GILROY CA 95020 NW 0.12 / 627.57 m-8-859603807-a Lower Elevation Address Direction Distance (mi/ft)Map Key Flowstar, Inc. 6800 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 NE 0.11 / 586.61 m-7-859567881-a 4 5 6 8 7 #*#*#* #*#* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#* #* #* #*#* #*#* #* ^_ m9c m28cm27c m26cm25c m23c m22c m20c m19c m18c m15c m13c m8c(2) m7c(3)m6c(2) m5c(2) m4c(2) m3c(2) m2c(2) m1c(2) m29c(3) m24c(3)m21c(3) m12c(2) m11c(2) m10c(2) Miller SloughLlag asCree k M iller SloughLlagasCreek US-101 SUS - 1 0 1 NCA-152P a checo PassHwyE 1 0 th S tPacheco Pass Hwy 121°32'W121°32'30"W121°33'W121°33'30"W121°34'W 37°1'N37°1'N37°0'30"N37°0'30"N37°0'N37°0'N36°59'30"N36°59'30"N0.25 0 0.250.12 5 Miles Order No: 20180 926049 Map : 1 Mile Radius 1:18200 Address: 6970 C amino Arroyo , Gilroy, C A, 95020 Source: © 2 016 ESRI © ERIS Information Inc. ^_Project Prop erty Buf fer Outlin e #*Eris Sites with Higher Elevation ")Eris Sites with Same Elevation #*Eris Sites with Lower Elevation (Eris Sites with Unk nown Elevation County Boundary Rails Major Highways Major Highways Ram ps Major Roads Major Roads Ramps Secondary Roads Secondary Roads Ramps Local Roads and Ramps State B oundary National Priority List Sites National Wetland Indian Reserve Land Historic Fill 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone FWS Special Designation A reas State Brownfield Sites State Brownfield A reas State Superfund A reas:Dept. of Defense State Superfund A reas:NPL WQARF Areas Federal Lands: Dept. of Defense (owned/adm inistered areas) 9 28 27 26 25 23 22 20 19 18 15 13 8 (2) 7 (3)6 (2) 5 (2) 4 (2) 3 (2) 2 (2) 1 (2) 29 (3) 24 (3)21 (3) 12 (2) 11 (2) 10 (2) #*#*#* #* #* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*#* #* #*#*#*#*#*#* #* #* #* #* #*#* #*#* ^_ m9c m28cm27c m26c m25c m23c m22c m20c m19c m18c m15c m14c m13c m8c(2)m7c(3) m6c(2) m5c(2) m4c(2) m3c(2) m2c(2) m1c(2) m24c(3) m21c(3) m17c(6)m16c(6) m12c(2) m11c(2) m10c(2) Miller Slough Jones CreekUS-101 NUS-101 SCA-152Pacheco Pass Hwy E 10th S tCA- 1 5 2 E 10th S tC a m in o A rro y oRenz LnH o l l o w a y R d C a m e ro n Blv d Brem LnVentureW ayE 1 0 th S tBear Cat CtCr o c k e r L n Ches t nut St S t u t z W a y Lindsteadt W ayE 9th S tPacheco Pass Hwy R e ta il C tr121°32'30"W121°33'W121°33'30"W 37°0'30"N37°0'30"N37°0'N37°0'N0.1 0 0.10.05 Miles Order No: 20180 926049 Map : 0.5 Mile Radius 1:9100 Address: 6970 C amino Arroyo , Gilroy, C A, 95020 Source: © 2 016 ESRI © ERIS Information Inc. ^_Project Prop erty Buf fer Outlin e #*Eris Sites with Higher Elevation ")Eris Sites with Same Elevation #*Eris Sites with Lower Elevation (Eris Sites with Unk nown Elevation County Boundary Rails Major Highways Major Highways Ram ps Major Roads Major Roads Ramps Secondary Roads Secondary Roads Ramps Local Roads and Ramps State B oundary National Priority List Sites National Wetland Indian Reserve Land Historic Fill 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone FWS Special Designation A reas State Brownfield Sites State Brownfield A reas State Superfund A reas:Dept. of Defense State Superfund A reas:NPL WQARF Areas Federal Lands: Dept. of Defense (owned/adm inistered areas) 9 28 27 26 25 23 22 20 19 18 15 13 8 (2)7 (3) 6 (2) 5 (2) 4 (2) 3 (2) 2 (2) 1 (2) 24 (3) 21 (3) 12 (2) 11 (2) 10 (2) 14 17 (6)16 (6) #* #* #* #* #* #*#*#* #*#*#*#*#* #* #*#*#*#*#*#* ^_ m9c m20c m19c m18c m15c m14c m13c m8c(2)m7c(3) m6c(2) m5c(2) m4c(2) m3c(2) m2c(2) m1c(2) m17c(6)m16c(6) m12c(2) m11c(2) m10c(2) Pacheco Pass HwyCA-1 5 2 C a m in o A rro y o H o l l o w a y R d Sila c ci W a y CameronBlvdRenz LnVenture WayGilroyX in g R e ta il C tr CameronBlvd121°33'W 37°0'N37°0'N0.07 0 0.070.035 Miles Order No: 20180 926049 Map : 0.25 M ile Radius 1:4600 Address: 6970 C amino Arroyo , Gilroy, C A, 95020 Source: © 2 016 ESRI © ERIS Information Inc. ^_Project Prop erty Buf fer Outlin e #*Eris Sites with Higher Elevation ")Eris Sites with Same Elevation #*Eris Sites with Lower Elevation (Eris Sites with Unk nown Elevation County Boundary Rails Major Highways Major Highways Ram ps Major Roads Major Roads Ramps Secondary Roads Secondary Roads Ramps Local Roads and Ramps State B oundary National Priority List Sites National Wetland Indian Reserve Land Historic Fill 100 Year Flood Zone 500 Year Flood Zone FWS Special Designation A reas State Brownfield Sites State Brownfield A reas State Superfund A reas:Dept. of Defense State Superfund A reas:NPL WQARF Areas Federal Lands: Dept. of Defense (owned/adm inistered areas) 9 20 19 18 15 13 8 (2)7 (3) 6 (2) 5 (2) 4 (2) 3 (2) 2 (2) 1 (2) 12 (2) 11 (2) 10 (2) 14 17 (6)16 (6) ^_ Source: Esri, DigitalGlo be, GeoEye, Earthstar G eographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AeroG RID, IG N, and the GIS User C ommunity 121°32 '30"W121°33 'W121°33 '30"W 37°0'30"N37°0'30"N37°0'N37°0'N36°59'30"N36°59'30"N0.15 0 0.150.075 Miles Order No: 20180926049Aerial 1:12100 Address: 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy, CA, 95020 © ERIS In formation Inc.Source: ESRI Wo rld Ima gery (2017) ^_ 121°31 '30"W121°32 'W121°32 '30"W121°33 'W121°33 '30"W121°34 'W121°34'30"W 37°1'30"N37°1'30"N37°1'N37°1'N37°0'30"N37°0'30"N37°0'N37°0'N36°59'30"N36°59'30"N36°59'N36°59'N0.35 0 0.350.175 Miles Order No: 20180926049Topographic Ma p 1:24000 Address: 6970 Camino Arroyo, Gilroy, CA, 95020 © ERIS In formation Inc.Sourc e: USG S Topographic Map (2015) Qua drangle(s): Gilroy, CA; Chittenden, CA ; 27 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Detail Report Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-1-859598704-b 1 of 2 SW 0.07 / 361.98 185.74 / 3 Michael's Store # 4703 6745 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859598704-bb p1p-859598704-y1y Site ID:134906 Latitude:37.000267 Longitude:-121.552719 Regulated Programs EI ID:10409650 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Michaels Stores, Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(972) 409-5786 Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Ryan Draper Entity Title: Address:8000 Bent Branch Drive City:Irving State:TX Country: Zip Code:75063 Phone:(972) 409-5786 Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Ryan Draper Entity Title:Safety Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Michaels Stores, Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Jessica Santos Entity Title:Store Manager 1 CERS HAZ Detail Report 28 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(972) 409-1306 Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Michaels Stores, Inc. Entity Title: Address:8000 Bent Branch Drive City:Irving State:TX Country:United States Zip Code:75063 Phone:(972) 409-5786 Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:Chris Ortega Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:8000 Bent Branch Drive City:Irving State:TX Country: Zip Code:75063 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:JOSEPH KOCHER Entity Title:DISTRICT Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(972) 409-1306 m-1-824918499-b 2 of 2 SW 0.07 / 361.98 185.74 / 3 Michael's Store # 4703 6745 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918499-bb p1p-824918499-y1y CERS ID:10409650 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:5520 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:No Inv Rpt Req:Not Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable 1 GILROY CUPA 29 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-2-859597250-b 1 of 2 WSW 0.07 / 369.82 184.17 / 1 PetSmart 0072 6755 CAMINO ARROYO BLDG 5 GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859597250-bb p1p-859597250-y1y Site ID:360042 Latitude:37.000270 Longitude:-121.552720 Regulated Programs EI ID:10648675 EI Description:Chemical Storage Facilities EI ID:10648675 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Paul Chrisman Entity Title:Regional Loss Prevention Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(888) 287-7387 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Susan Bruner Entity Title:STORE MANAGER Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(888) 287-7387 Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:PetSmart, Inc. Entity Title: Address:19601 N. 27th Avenue City:Phoenix State:AZ Country:United States Zip Code:85027 Phone:(623) 587-2912 Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Ken Dobias Entity Title:Director of Environmental Affairs Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:PetSmart, Inc. Entity Title: Address: 2 CERS HAZ 30 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(623) 580-6100 Affil Type Desc:Property Owner Entity Name:Gilroy Crossing - CA Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country:United States Zip Code: Phone:(209) 474-9900 Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:Ken Dobias Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:Contracted Services, 19601 N 27th Ave City:Phoenix State:AZ Country: Zip Code:85027 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Petsmart Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Ken Dobias Entity Title: Address:3481 Plano Parkway City:The Colony State:TX Country: Zip Code:75056 Phone:(972) 464-0004 m-2-828833730-b 2 of 2 WSW 0.07 / 369.82 184.17 / 1 PetSmart 0072 6755 Camino Arroyo Bldg 5 dd-GILROY CUPA-828833730-bb p1p-828833730-y1y 2 GILROY CUPA 31 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Gilroy CA 95020 CERS ID:10648675 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:No Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-3-859588691-b 1 of 2 WSW 0.07 / 373.29 184.51 / 1 Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 6765 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859588691-bb p1p-859588691-y1y Site ID:274514 Latitude:37.000900 Longitude:-121.550987 Regulated Programs EI ID:10618552 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Kohl's Department Stores Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(262) 703-7019 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:Scott Smith - Kohls Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Kohl's Department Stores Entity Title: Address:P.O. Box 3155 City:Milwaukee 3 CERS HAZ 32 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB State:WI Country:United States Zip Code:53201 Phone:(262) 703-7019 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Bertha Villa Entity Title:Store Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(866) 907-0048 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Operations Manager Entity Title:Operations Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(866) 907-0048 Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:P.O. Box 3155 City:Milwaukee State:WI Country: Zip Code:53201 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Ryan Piedot Entity Title:Manager of Environmental Compliance Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Ryan Piedot Entity Title: Address:P.O. Box 3155 City:Milwaukee State:WI Country: Zip Code:53201 Phone:(262) 703-7019 Coordinates Env Int Type Code:HWG Longitude:-121.551050 33 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Program ID:10618552 Coord Name: Latitude:37.000900 Ref Point Type Desc:Center of a facility or station. m-3-824918425-b 2 of 2 WSW 0.07 / 373.29 184.51 / 1 Kohl's Department Stores - Store #737 6765 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918425-bb p1p-824918425-y1y CERS ID:10618552 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:5842 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:No Inv Rpt Req:Not Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-4-859594760-b 1 of 2 SSW 0.08 / 417.58 185.69 / 2 Bed, Bath and Beyond #608 6725 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859594760-bb p1p-859594760-y1y Site ID:97977 Latitude:37.000267 Longitude:-121.552719 Regulated Programs EI ID:10169697 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:5151 San Felipe St, Suite 1000 City:Houston State:TX Country: Zip Code:77056 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:ASHLEY CAMPBELL Entity Title: Address:5151 San Felipe St, Suite 1000 City:Houston State:TX Country: Zip Code:77056 Phone:(713) 985-5472 3 4 GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ 34 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Ashley Campbell Entity Title:Authorized Representative Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Bed, Bath and Beyond, Inc. Entity Title: Address:650 Liberty Ave City:Union State:NJ Country:United States Zip Code:07083 Phone:(908) 688-0888 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Scott Simon Entity Title:Regional Director Loss Prevention Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(310) 384-6799 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:ASHLEY CAMPBELL Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Bed, Bath and Beyond Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Bed, Bath and Beyond, Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(908) 688-0888 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Store Manager Entity Title:Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(310) 384-6799 35 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-4-824918491-b 2 of 2 SSW 0.08 / 417.58 185.69 / 2 Bed, Bath and Beyond #608 6725 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918491-bb p1p-824918491-y1y CERS ID:10169697 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:5410 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:No Inv Rpt Req:Not Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-5-859587253-b 1 of 2 SSW 0.09 / 473.04 184.77 / 2 Ross Dress For Less #0740 6715 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859587253-bb p1p-859587253-y1y Site ID:62973 Latitude:37.000267 Longitude:-121.552719 Regulated Programs EI ID:10509088 EI Description:Chemical Storage Facilities EI ID:10509088 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:ASHLEY CAMPBELL Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Ross Dress For Less Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(925) 965-4831 Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Ashley Campbell Entity Title:ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation 4 5 GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ 36 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Entity Name:Ross Stores, Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:5130 Hacienda Dr City:Dublin State:CA Country: Zip Code:94568-7579 Phone: Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Ross Dress For Less Inc. Entity Title: Address:5130 Hacienda Dr City:Dublin State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:94568-7579 Phone:(925) 965-4831 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:NANCY ALCANTARA Entity Title:STORE MANAGER Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(855) 257-7472 Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:ASHLEY CAMPBELL Entity Title: Address:5151 SAN FELIPE ST, SUITE 1000 City:HOUSTON State:TX Country: Zip Code:77056 Phone:(713) 985-5472 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Brad Wieland Entity Title:District Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(855) 257-7472 37 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Coordinates Env Int Type Code:HWG Longitude:-121.552720 Program ID:10509088 Coord Name: Latitude:37.000310 Ref Point Type Desc:Center of a facility or station. m-5-824918309-b 2 of 2 SSW 0.09 / 473.04 184.77 / 2 Ross Dress For Less #0740 6715 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918309-bb p1p-824918309-y1y CERS ID:10509088 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:5405 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:No Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-6-859552917-b 1 of 2 WNW 0.10 / 551.29 186.86 / 4 SALLY BEAUTY SUPPLY 6815 CAMINO ARROYO STE 50 GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859552917-bb p1p-859552917-y1y Site ID:367598 Latitude:37.002400 Longitude:-121.550890 Regulated Programs EI ID:10666558 EI Description:Chemical Storage Facilities EI ID:10666558 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:6815 CAMINO ARROYO #50 City:GILROY State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Larry Burton Entity Title:Director, Temarry Recycling, Inc Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy 5 6 GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ 38 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Randy Goss Entity Title: Address:3001 COLORADO BLVD City:DENTON State:TX Country: Zip Code:76210 Phone:(940) 898-7500 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Randy Goss Entity Title:Health and Safety Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(940) 898-7500 Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Sally Beauty Holding LLC Entity Title: Address:3001 COLORADO BLVD City:DENTON State:TX Country:United States Zip Code:76210 Phone:(940) 898-7500 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:David Epstein Entity Title:National Project Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(609) 381-1218 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:Larry Burton Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Sally Beauty Holding LLC Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(940) 898-7500 Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Sally Beauty Holding LLC Entity Title: Address: 39 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: m-6-845744811-b 2 of 2 WNW 0.10 / 551.29 186.86 / 4 SALLY BEAUTY SUPPLY 6815 Camino Arroyo Ste 50 Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-845744811-bb p1p-845744811-y1y CERS ID:10666558 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-7-859567881-b 1 of 3 NE 0.11 / 586.61 182.48 / -1 Flowstar, Inc. 6800 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859567881-bb p1p-859567881-y1y Site ID:30680 Latitude:37.002290 Longitude:-121.547450 Regulated Programs EI ID:10073965 EI Description:Chemical Storage Facilities EI ID:10073965 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Flowstar, Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:DEBBIE CURRIER Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA 6 7 GILROY CUPA CERS HAZ 40 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:6800 SILACCI WAY City:GILROY State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:DEBBIE CURRIER Entity Title:PRESIDENT Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Property Owner Entity Name:DEBBIE & JIM CURRIER Entity Title: Address:6800 SILACCI WAY City:GILROY State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-2400 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Mike Bennett Entity Title:Production Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 593-2830 Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Debbie Currier Entity Title: Address:6800 SILACCI WAY City:Gilroy State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-3523 Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Debbie Currier Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 842-2400 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Debbie Carrier Entity Title:Owner Address: City: 41 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 842-3523 Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Mike Bennett Entity Title: Address:6800 Silacci Way City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-2400 Coordinates Env Int Type Code:HWG Longitude:-121.547440 Program ID:10073965 Coord Name: Latitude:37.002686 Ref Point Type Desc:Unknown Evaluations Eval Date:10/27/2017 Violations Found:Yes Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HW Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:11/30/2015 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:10/27/2017 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:11/30/2015 Violations Found:Yes Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HW Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: CESQG Violations 42 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violation Date:10/27/2017 Violation Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Citation:22 CCR 12 66262.11 - California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Chapter 12, Section(s) 66262.11 Violation Program: HW Violation Source: CERS Violation Notes: Returned to compliance on 01/05/2018. Acid wipes are not disposed as hazardous waste. Start collecting acid wipes as hazardous waste. Violation Description: Failure to determine if wastes generated are hazardous waste by using generator knowledge or applying testing method. Violations Violation Date:10/27/2017 Violation Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Citation:40 CFR 1 265.174 - U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Section(s) 265.174 Violation Program: HW Violation Source: CERS Violation Notes: Returned to compliance on 01/05/2018. failed to perform self weekly inspection at hazardous waste storage area. Left copy of UNIDOCS weekly inspection form. Violation Description: Failure to inspect hazardous waste storage areas at least weekly and look for leaking and deteriorating containers. Violations Violation Date:11/30/2015 Violation Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Citation:40 CFR 1 265.173 - U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Section(s) 265.173 Violation Program: HW Violation Source: CERS Violation Notes: Returned to compliance on 11/30/2015. No lid on hazardous waste container. Operator replaced lid immediately. Violation Description: Failure to properly close hazardous waste containers when not in active use. Violations 43 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violation Date:10/27/2017 Violation Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Citation:22 CCR 12 66262.34(f) - California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Chapter 12, Section(s) 66262.34(f) Violation Program: HW Violation Source: CERS Violation Notes: Returned to compliance on 10/27/2017. Failed to put waste chemical constituents in hazardous waste label. Corrected during inspection. Violation Description: Failure to properly label hazardous waste accumulation containers and portable tanks with the following requirements: "Hazardous Waste", name and address of the generator, physical and chemical characteristics of the Hazardous Waste, and starting accumulation date. m-7-824918290-b 2 of 3 NE 0.11 / 586.61 182.48 / -1 Flowstar, Inc. 6800 Silacci Way Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918290-bb p1p-824918290-y1y CERS ID:10073965 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:1068 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-7-861189129-b 3 of 3 NE 0.11 / 586.61 182.48 / -1 FLOWSTAR 6800 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 dd-EMISSIONS-861189129-bb p1p-861189129-y1y 1995 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:1.1 CO:43 ROGT:.92692 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1995 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 7 7 GILROY CUPA EMISSIONS 44 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 1996 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:1.3 CO:43 ROGT:1.11038 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1996 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 1997 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:1.3 CO:43 ROGT:1.11038 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1997 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 1998 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:1.1 CO:43 ROGT:.9808 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1998 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: 45 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 1999 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:1.797 CO:43 ROGT:1.2553842 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1999 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2000 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:1.797 CO:43 ROGT:1.26 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2000 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2001 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.58 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 46 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 2001 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2002 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.473 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2002 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2003 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.473 CO:43 ROGT:.32 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2003 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2004 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: 47 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.473 CO:43 ROGT:.3304378 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2004 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2005 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.473 CO:43 ROGT:.3304378 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2005 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2006 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.636 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2006 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: 48 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2007 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.636 CO:43 ROGT:.4443096 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2007 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2008 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.636 CO:43 ROGT:.4443096 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2008 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2009 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.636 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2009 Toxic Data 49 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2010 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2011 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.616 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2011 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2012 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.616 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2012 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA 50 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2013 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.616 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2013 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2014 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.294499529 CO:43 ROGT: Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2014 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2015 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.294499546 CO:43 ROGT:.294499546 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 51 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 2015 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:3674 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2016 Criteria Data Facility ID:10242 CERR CODE: Facility SIC Code:3674 TOGT:.294499529 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2016 Toxic Data Facility ID:10242 TS: Facility SIC Code:3674 HRA: CERR CODE:CH Index: COID:SCL AH Index: CO:43 Air Basin:SF DISN:BAY AREA AQMD District:BA CHAPIS: m-8-859603807-b 1 of 2 NW 0.12 / 627.57 185.67 / 2 Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 6955 CAMINO ARROYO STE 70 GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS HAZ-859603807-bb p1p-859603807-y1y Site ID:18788 Latitude:37.002340 Longitude:-121.552800 Regulated Programs EI ID:10507234 EI Description:Chemical Storage Facilities Affiliations Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Kim Oganesyan Entity Title: Address:1401 Wynkoop St., Suite 500 City:Denver State:CO Country: Zip Code:80202 Phone:(303) 222-2524 Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA 8 CERS HAZ 52 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:MIke Nuesca Entity Title:Facilities Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(310) 873-8071 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:Sam Smith Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Sam Smith Entity Title:Facilities Coordinator Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Chipotle Mexican Grill Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Whitney Rodriguez Entity Title:General Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 988-0618 Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:1401 Wynkoop St., Suite 500 City:Denver State:CO Country: Zip Code:80202 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 Entity Title: Address: City: 53 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 848-4079 Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. Entity Title: Address:1401 Wynkoop St., Suite 500 City:Denver State:CO Country:United States Zip Code:80202 Phone:(303) 595-4000 Evaluations Eval Date:6/22/2017 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: CO2 for soda dispensing m-8-824918509-b 2 of 2 NW 0.12 / 627.57 185.67 / 2 Chipotle Mexican Grill #2137 6955 Camino Arroyo Ste 70 Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918509-bb p1p-824918509-y1y CERS ID:10507234 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:12932 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:No CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-9-824918295-b 1 of 1 NW 0.15 / 776.23 184.21 / 1 Leslie's Swimming Pool Supplies #505 6915 Camino Arroyo, Suite 10 Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918295-bb p1p-824918295-y1y CERS ID:10156991 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:5647 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:No CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: 8 9 GILROY CUPA GILROY CUPA 54 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-10-867087703-b 1 of 2 ESE 0.15 / 780.44 178.01 / -5 CINTAS CORPORATION 904 HOLLOWAY RD GILROY CA 95020 dd-SANTACLARA CUPA-867087703-bb p1p-867087703-y1y Facility ID:FA0201427 --Details-- Program Element:2201 Description:GENERATES WASTE OIL ONLY Record ID:PR0315264 m-10-824918286-b 2 of 2 ESE 0.15 / 780.44 178.01 / -5 Cintas Corporation #630 904 Holloway Rd Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918286-bb p1p-824918286-y1y CERS ID:10073893 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:2071 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-11-824918482-b 1 of 2 E 0.16 / 824.48 179.31 / -4 Creative Labels, Inc. 6670 Silacci Way Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918482-bb p1p-824918482-y1y CERS ID:10073911 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:2286 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-11-861183403-b 2 of 2 E 0.16 / 824.48 179.31 / -4 CREATIVE LABELS INC 6670 SILACCI WAY GILROY CA 95020 dd-EMISSIONS-861183403-bb p1p-861183403-y1y 1997 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:1.2 CO:43 ROGT:1.2 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1997 Toxic Data 10 10 11 11 SANTACLARA CUPA GILROY CUPA GILROY CUPA EMISSIONS 55 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 1998 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.3 CO:43 ROGT:.3 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1998 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 1999 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.254 CO:43 ROGT:.254 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 1999 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2000 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.254 CO:43 ROGT:.25 Air Basin:SF COT: 56 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2000 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2002 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.659 CO:43 ROGT:.659 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2002 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2003 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.659 CO:43 ROGT:.66 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2003 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 57 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 2004 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.659 CO:43 ROGT:.659 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2004 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2005 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.846 CO:43 ROGT:.846 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2005 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2006 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.846 CO:43 ROGT:.846 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2006 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: 58 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2007 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.846 CO:43 ROGT:.846 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2007 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2008 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:.846 CO:43 ROGT:.846 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2008 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2009 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:1.16 CO:43 ROGT:1.16 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 59 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 2009 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2010 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2011 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:1.201 CO:43 ROGT:1.201 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2011 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2012 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:1.201 CO:43 ROGT:1.201 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2012 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL 60 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2013 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:1.13 CO:43 ROGT:1.13 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2013 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2014 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:1.351271411 CO:43 ROGT: Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2014 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2015 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:10.3870504 CO:43 ROGT:10.3870504 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: 61 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2015 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:2759 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2016 Criteria Data Facility ID:11246 CERR CODE: Facility SIC Code:2759 TOGT:10.704002452 CO:43 ROGT:10.704002452 Air Basin:SF COT: District:BA NOXT: COID:SCL SOXT: DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT: CHAPIS:PM10T: 2016 Toxic Data Facility ID:11246 TS: Facility SIC Code:2759 HRA: CERR CODE:CH Index: COID:SCL AH Index: CO:43 Air Basin:SF DISN:BAY AREA AQMD District:BA CHAPIS: m-12-845744796-b 1 of 2 NW 0.16 / 845.24 186.78 / 4 Roadhouse Jacks 6945 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-845744796-bb p1p-845744796-y1y CERS ID:10630354 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:12961 Fac Info Rpt Req:Not Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Not Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:No CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-12-824918430-b 2 of 2 NW 0.16 / 845.24 186.78 / 4 Roadhouse Jacks 6945 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-DELISTED COUNTY-824918430-bb p1p-824918430-y1y Original Source Facility ID:10630354 Original Source Name:Gilroy City CUPA Facilities List Record Date:17-JUL-2015 12 12 GILROY CUPA DELISTED COUNTY 62 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-13-820175315-b 1 of 1 NW 0.19 / 989.17 187.24 / 4 Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 dd-LUST-820175315-bb p1p-820175315-y1y Global ID:T0608502195 CUF Case:YES Case Type:LUST Cleanup Site Begin Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Status:Completed - Case Closed How Discovered: Status Date:2001-01-09 00:00:00 Stop Method: RB Case No:596 County:Santa Clara LOC Case No:Latitude:37.0034637 Lead Agency:SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOP Longitude:-121.551918 Case Worker:UST File Location:All Files are on GeoTracker or in the Local Agency Database Local Agency:SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOP Potential Media Of Concern:Gasoline Potential Media Affected:Other Groundwater (uses other than drinking water) How Discovered Description: Stop Description: Cal Water Watershed Name:Pajaro River - South Santa Clara Valley (305.30) DWR Groundwater Subbasin Name: Gilroy-Hollister Valley - Llagas Area (3-003.01) Site History: Status History Status:Open - Remediation Status Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Status:Completed - Case Closed Status Date:2001-01-09 00:00:00 Status:Open - Case Begin Date Status Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Status:Open - Site Assessment Status Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Activities Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Remedial Progress Report Date:1996-10-15 00:00:00 Action Type:REMEDIATION Action:Other (Use Description Field) Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Action Type:ENFORCEMENT Action:Staff Letter - #17888 Date:1998-02-02 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Monitoring Report - Quarterly Date:1996-07-15 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Remedial Progress Report Date:1996-04-15 00:00:00 Action Type:ENFORCEMENT Action:Staff Letter - #17874 Date:1995-11-04 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Monitoring Report - Quarterly Date:1997-04-15 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Monitoring Report - Quarterly Date:1997-01-15 00:00:00 13 LUST 63 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Action Type:ENFORCEMENT Action:Staff Letter - #17876 Date:1996-02-09 00:00:00 Action Type:REMEDIATION Action:Pump & Treat (P&T) Groundwater Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Monitoring Report - Quarterly Date:1998-04-15 00:00:00 Action Type:Other Action:Leak Reported Date:1987-03-09 00:00:00 Action Type:ENFORCEMENT Action:Notice of Responsibility - #39243 Date:1988-01-11 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Monitoring Report - Quarterly Date:1996-01-15 00:00:00 Contacts Contact Type:Local Agency Caseworker City:SAN JOSE Contact Name:UST CASE WORKER Email: Organization Name:SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOP Phone No:4089183400 Address:1555 Berger Drive, Suite 300 Contact Type:Regional Board Caseworker City:SAN LUIS OBISPO Contact Name:RB3 STAFF Email:centralcoast@waterboards.ca.gov Organization Name:CENTRAL COAST RWQCB (REGION 3)Phone No:8055493147 Address:895 AEROVISTA PL, SUITE 101 m-14-820189637-b 1 of 1 NW 0.19 / 1,007.77 188.01 / 5 Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 dd-LUST-820189637-bb p1p-820189637-y1y Global ID:T0608591842 CUF Case:NO Case Type:LUST Cleanup Site Begin Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Status:Completed - Case Closed How Discovered: Status Date:2001-01-09 00:00:00 Stop Method: RB Case No:County:Santa Clara LOC Case No:Latitude:37.003789 Lead Agency:SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOP Longitude:-121.551572 Case Worker:File Location: Local Agency: Potential Media Of Concern:Gasoline Potential Media Affected: How Discovered Description: Stop Description: Cal Water Watershed Name:Pajaro River - South Santa Clara Valley (305.30) DWR Groundwater Subbasin Name: Gilroy-Hollister Valley - Llagas Area (3-003.01) Site History: Status History Status:Completed - Case Closed Status Date:2001-01-09 00:00:00 Status:Open - Remediation Status Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 14 LUST 64 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Status:Open - Site Assessment Status Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Status:Open - Case Begin Date Status Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Activities Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Monitoring Report - Quarterly Date:2004-04-20 00:00:00 Action Type:Other Action:Leak Reported Date:1965-01-02 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Correspondence Date:2004-04-29 00:00:00 Action Type:REMEDIATION Action:Pump & Treat (P&T) Groundwater Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Action Type:REMEDIATION Action:Other (Use Description Field) Date:1986-12-09 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Well Destruction Report Date:2004-10-20 00:00:00 Action Type:ENFORCEMENT Action:Closure/No Further Action Letter Date:2001-01-09 00:00:00 m-15-860403661-b 1 of 1 NNW 0.19 / 1,023.27 185.88 / 3 Gilroy Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 dd-UST-860403661-bb p1p-860403661-y1y Facility ID:895 Latitude:37.00407 Permitting Agency:Gilroy City Fire Department Longitude:-121.551142 County:Santa Clara m-16-859557346-b 1 of 6 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 186.13 / 3 Gilroy Shell 850 PACHECO PASS HWY GILROY CA 95020 dd-CERS TANK-859557346-bb p1p-859557346-y1y Site ID:33257 Latitude:37.004070 Longitude:-121.551140 Regulated Programs EI ID:10074328 EI Description:Underground Storage Tank EI ID:10074328 EI Description:Hazardous Waste Generator EI ID:10074328 EI Description:Chemical Storage Facilities Affiliations 15 16 UST CERS TANK 65 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Affil Type Desc:Facility Mailing Address Entity Name:Mailing Address Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Hwy City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020 Phone: Affil Type Desc:Legal Owner Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Hwy City:Gilroy State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:Secondary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title:Owner Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 506-0739 Affil Type Desc:UST Property Owner Name Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Road City:Gilroy State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:CUPA District Entity Name:Gilroy City Fire Department Entity Title: Address:7351 Rosanna Street City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020-6141 Phone:(408) 846-0400 Affil Type Desc:UST Tank Owner Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Road City:Gilroy State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:Document Preparer Entity Name:Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: 66 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Affil Type Desc:Environmental Contact Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Hwy City:Gilroy State:CA Country: Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:Identification Signer Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title:Owner Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:Property Owner Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Hwy City:Gilroy State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:UST Tank Operator Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address:850 Pacheco Pass Road City:Gilroy State:CA Country:United States Zip Code:95020 Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:Parent Corporation Entity Name:Gilroy Shell Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone: Affil Type Desc:UST Permit Applicant Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title:Owner Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 842-9583 Affil Type Desc:Operator Entity Name:Trac N Vu Entity Title: Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: 67 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Phone:(408) 847-9583 Affil Type Desc:Primary Emergency Contact Entity Name:Teresa Vu Entity Title:Manager Address: City: State: Country: Zip Code: Phone:(408) 483-7272 Coordinates Env Int Type Code:HMBP Longitude:-121.551521 Program ID:10074328 Coord Name: Latitude:37.003780 Ref Point Type Desc:Unknown Evaluations Eval Date:1/18/2018 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:5/11/2017 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:UST Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: SB 989 test Eval Date:1/18/2018 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:UST Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Monitoring Systems Equipment Certification conducted. All passed inspection. Eval Date:2/10/2015 Violations Found:Yes Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Need to increase letter sizing for sign above emergency shut-off. Eval Date:5/11/2017 68 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:6/14/2016 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Other/Unknown Eval Type:Other, not routine, done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:UST Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Inspection conducted after UST service company contacted CUPA that brine had leaked from the annular space into the primary UST. UST service company had taken failed UST out of service (i.e. disconnected electrical, capped product line, closed ball valve, locked out/tagged out). Clean fuel was being transferred to neighboring UST. Brine-contaminated fuel scheduled for pick-up by hazardous waste hauler. Owner/operator informed inspector that his architect and engineer had recently completed plans to be submitted for the removal of the existing UST system and for a new VPH UST system to be installed. Eval Date:1/20/2016 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:UST Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:2/10/2015 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:UST Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Eval Date:6/5/2014 Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: All hazardous materials inside the USTs. Eval Date:6/5/2014 Violations Found:Yes Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:UST Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Secondary containment testing could not be completed due to deteriorated boots/fittings. Repair permit has been scheduled. Eval Date:1/20/2016 69 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violations Found:No Eval General Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection Eval Type:Routine done by local agency Eval Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Eval Program:HMRRP Eval Source:CERS Eval Notes: Violations Violation Date:6/5/2014 Violation Program: Violation Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Violation Source: Citation:23 CCR 16 2637 - California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Chapter 16, Section(s) 2637 Violation Notes: Returned to compliance on 08/13/2014. Secondary containment testing could not be completed due to deteriorated boots and fittings. Repair and testing completed 8/13/2014. Violation Description: Failure to comply with one or more of the following: conduct secondary containment testing, within six months of installation and every 36 months thereafter, conducted in accordance with proper practices, protocols, or test methods. Violations Violation Date:2/10/2015 Violation Program: Violation Division:Gilroy City Fire Department Violation Source: Citation:HSC 6.95 Multiple Sections - California Health and Safety Code, Chapter 6.95, Section(s) Multiple Sections Violation Notes: Current sign has very small lettering for emergency shut off. Increase letter sizing to 4" size with contrasting background to be approved by inspector. Violation Description: Business Plan Program - Operations/Maintenance - General m-16-824918357-b 2 of 6 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 186.13 / 3 Gilroy Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918357-bb p1p-824918357-y1y CERS ID:10074328 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:895 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Applicable Own/Op UST:Yes RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-16-822974089-b 3 of 6 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 186.13 / 3 VIEIRA SERVICES CO INC 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA 95020 dd-HHSS-822974089-bb p1p-822974089-y1y County:Santa Clara Pdf File Url:http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ustpdfs/pdf/000208e0.pdf 16 16 GILROY CUPA HHSS 70 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-16-865094844-b 4 of 6 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 186.13 / 3 VIEIRA SERVICE CO., INC 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA dd-HIST TANK-865094844-bb p1p-865094844-y1y Owner Name:SHELL OIL COMPANY No of Containers:3 Owner Street:P.O. BOX 4848 County:SANTA CLARA Owner City:ANAHEIM Facility State:CA Owner State:CA Facility Zip:95020 Owner Zip:92803 m-16-820142995-b 5 of 6 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 186.13 / 3 Shell 850 Pacheco Pass Hwy Gilroy CA dd-SANTACLARA LO-820142995-bb p1p-820142995-y1y SCVWD ID:11S4E05K01f Closure Date:1/9/2001 Link:http://lustop.sccgov.org/files/11S4E05K01f/ m-16-810484503-b 6 of 6 NNW 0.20 / 1,046.69 186.13 / 3 SERVICE STATION - SAP 135332 850 PACHECO PASS ROAD GILROY CA 95020 dd-RCRA LQG-810484503-bb p1p-810484503-y1y EPA Handler ID:CAD981402514 Gen Status Universe:Large Quantity Generator Contact Name:DON F WISDOM Contact Address:P O BOX 3127, , HOUSTON, TX, 77253, US Contact Phone No and Ext:713-241-7011 7011 Contact Email:DON.F.WISDOM@SHELL.COM Contact Country:US County Name:SANTA CLARA EPA Region:09 Land Type: Receive Date:20100603 Violation/Evaluation Summary Note:NO RECORDS: As of Aug 2018, there are no Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement (violation) records associated with this facility (EPA ID). Handler Summary Importer Activity:No Mixed Waste Generator:No Transporter Activity:No Transfer Facility:No Onsite Burner Exemption:No Furnace Exemption:No Underground Injection Activity:No Commercial TSD:No Used Oil Transporter:No Used Oil Transfer Facility:No Used Oil Processor:No Used Oil Refiner:No Used Oil Burner:No Used Oil Market Burner:No Used Oil Spec Marketer:No Hazardous Waste Handler Details Sequence No:1 Receive Date:20100603 Handler Name:SERVICE STATION - SAP 135332 16 16 16 HIST TANK SANTACLARA LO RCRA LQG 71 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Generator Status Universe:Large Quantity Generator Source Type:B Sequence No:1 Receive Date:19980408 Handler Name:SHELL OIL CO Generator Status Universe:Large Quantity Generator Source Type:N Sequence No:1 Receive Date:19960901 Handler Name:SHELL OIL CO Generator Status Universe:Large Quantity Generator Source Type:I Waste Code Details Hazardous Waste Code:D018 Waste Code Description:BENZENE Hazardous Waste Code:D001 Waste Code Description:IGNITABLE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D001 Waste Code Description:IGNITABLE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D018 Waste Code Description:BENZENE Owner/Operator Details Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No: Type:Private Street 1:P O BOX 4453 Name:EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC Street 2: Date Became Current:City:HOUSTON Date Ended Current:State:TX Phone:713-241-2258 Country: Source Type:N Zip Code:77210-4453 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No: Type:Private Street 1:P O BOX 3127 Name:EQUILON ENT LLC/ DBA SHELL OIL PROD US Street 2: Date Became Current:19920801 City:HOUSTON Date Ended Current:State:TX Phone:Country:US Source Type:B Zip Code:77253 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:Private Street 1:NOT REQUIRED Name:NOT REQUIRED Street 2: Date Became Current:City:NOT REQUIRED Date Ended Current:State:ME Phone:415-555-1212 Country: Source Type:I Zip Code:99999 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:Private Street 1: Name:EQUILON ENT LLC/ DBA SHELL OIL PROD US Street 2: Date Became Current:19980801 City: Date Ended Current:State: Phone:Country: Source Type:B Zip Code: 72 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-17-824918359-b 1 of 6 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 186.98 / 4 TARGET T1851 6705 Camino Arroyo Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918359-bb p1p-824918359-y1y CERS ID:10173229 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:5190 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-17-845744786-b 2 of 6 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 186.98 / 4 CVS Pharmacy #16971 6705 Camino Arroyo Ste B Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-845744786-bb p1p-845744786-y1y CERS ID:10668205 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-17-861201413-b 3 of 6 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 186.98 / 4 TARGET CORPORATION - TARGET GI 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-EMISSIONS-861201413-bb p1p-861201413-y1y 2003 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.002 CO:43 ROGT:0 Air Basin:SF COT:.001 District:BA NOXT:.006 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2003 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2004 Criteria Data 17 17 17 GILROY CUPA GILROY CUPA EMISSIONS 73 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.002 CO:43 ROGT:.0001828 Air Basin:SF COT:.001 District:BA NOXT:.006 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2004 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2005 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.004 CO:43 ROGT:.0003656 Air Basin:SF COT:.001 District:BA NOXT:.01 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2005 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2006 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.004 CO:43 ROGT:.0003656 Air Basin:SF COT:.001 District:BA NOXT:.01 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2006 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA 74 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2007 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.009 CO:43 ROGT:.0008226 Air Basin:SF COT:.003 District:BA NOXT:.023 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2007 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2008 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.009 CO:43 ROGT:.0008226 Air Basin:SF COT:.003 District:BA NOXT:.023 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2008 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2009 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.003 CO:43 ROGT:.0002742 Air Basin:SF COT:0 District:BA NOXT:.003 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 75 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 2009 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2010 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: m-17-861207511-b 4 of 6 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 186.98 / 4 TARGET STORE T1851 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-EMISSIONS-861207511-bb p1p-861207511-y1y 2011 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.003 CO:43 ROGT:.0002742 Air Basin:SF COT:0 District:BA NOXT:.004 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2011 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2012 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.003 CO:43 ROGT:.0002742 Air Basin:SF COT:0 District:BA NOXT:.004 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 17 EMISSIONS 76 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 2012 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2013 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.003 CO:43 ROGT:.0002742 Air Basin:SF COT:0 District:BA NOXT:.004 COID:SCL SOXT:0 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:0 CHAPIS:PM10T:0 2013 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2014 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.003159373 CO:43 ROGT: Air Basin:SF COT:.000491429 District:BA NOXT:.003885978 COID:SCL SOXT:.000000649 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:.000011429 CHAPIS:PM10T:.000011429 2014 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2015 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR Code: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.002954014 77 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB CO:43 ROGT:.001495413 Air Basin:SF COT:.000459486 District:BA NOXT:.003633389 COID:SCL SOXT:.000000607 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:.000010686 CHAPIS:PM10T:.000010686 2015 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 COID:SCL Facility SIC Code:5311 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD CO:43 CHAPIS: Air Basin:SF CERR Code: District:BA TS: Health Risk Asmt: Non-Cancer Chronic Haz Ind: Non-Cancer Acute Haz Ind: 2016 Criteria Data Facility ID:15334 CERR CODE: Facility SIC Code:5311 TOGT:.002954014 CO:43 ROGT:.0002750187034 Air Basin:SF COT:.000459486 District:BA NOXT:.003633389 COID:SCL SOXT:.000000607 DISN:BAY AREA AQMD PMT:.000010686 CHAPIS:PM10T:.000010686 2016 Toxic Data Facility ID:15334 TS: Facility SIC Code:5311 HRA: CERR CODE:CH Index: COID:SCL AH Index: CO:43 Air Basin:SF DISN:BAY AREA AQMD District:BA CHAPIS: m-17-848634326-b 5 of 6 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 186.98 / 4 CVS PHARMACY #16971 6705 CAMINO ARROYO STE B GILROY CA 95020 dd-RCRA CESQG-848634326-bb p1p-848634326-y1y EPA Handler ID:CAR000260075 Gen Status Universe:Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator Contact Name:NICOLE WILKINSON Contact Address:ONE, CVS DR MAIL CODE 2340, , WOONSOCKET, RI, 02895, US Contact Phone No and Ext:401-770-7132 Contact Email:NICOLE.WILKINSON@CVSHEALTH.COM Contact Country:US County Name:SANTA CLARA EPA Region:09 Land Type: Receive Date:20160329 Violation/Evaluation Summary Note:NO RECORDS: As of Aug 2018, there are no Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement (violation) records associated with this facility (EPA ID). Handler Summary 17 RCRA CESQG 78 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Importer Activity:No Mixed Waste Generator:No Transporter Activity:No Transfer Facility:No Onsite Burner Exemption:No Furnace Exemption:No Underground Injection Activity:No Commercial TSD:No Used Oil Transporter:No Used Oil Transfer Facility:No Used Oil Processor:No Used Oil Refiner:No Used Oil Burner:No Used Oil Market Burner:No Used Oil Spec Marketer:No Hazardous Waste Handler Details Sequence No:1 Receive Date:20160329 Handler Name:CVS PHARMACY #16971 Generator Status Universe:CEG Source Type:N Waste Code Details Hazardous Waste Code:214 Waste Code Description:Unspecified solvent mixture Hazardous Waste Code:D024 Waste Code Description:M-CRESOL Hazardous Waste Code:U122 Waste Code Description:FORMALDEHYDE Hazardous Waste Code:352 Waste Code Description:Other organic solids Hazardous Waste Code:D010 Waste Code Description:SELENIUM Hazardous Waste Code:P001 Waste Code Description:2H-1-BENZOPYRAN-2-ONE, 4-HYDROXY-3-(3-OXO-1-PHENYLBUTYL)-, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% (OR) WARFARIN, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% Hazardous Waste Code:U205 Waste Code Description:SELENIUM SULFIDE (OR) SELENIUM SULFIDE SES2 (R,T) Hazardous Waste Code:141 Waste Code Description:Off-specification, aged, or surplus inorganics Hazardous Waste Code:331 Waste Code Description:Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics Hazardous Waste Code:123 Waste Code Description:Unspecified alkaline solution Hazardous Waste Code:134 Waste Code Description:Aqueous solution with <10% total organic residues Hazardous Waste Code:U044 Waste Code Description:CHLOROFORM (OR) METHANE, TRICHLORO- Hazardous Waste Code:U129 Waste Code Description:CYCLOHEXANE, 1,2,3,4,5,6-HEXACHLORO-, (1ALPHA, 2ALPHA, 3BETA, 4ALPHA, 5ALPHA, 6BETA)- (OR) 79 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB LINDANE Hazardous Waste Code:561 Waste Code Description:Detergent and soap Hazardous Waste Code:D002 Waste Code Description:CORROSIVE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D009 Waste Code Description:MERCURY Hazardous Waste Code:D011 Waste Code Description:SILVER Hazardous Waste Code:122 Waste Code Description:Alkaline solution without metals (pH > 12.5) Hazardous Waste Code:181 Waste Code Description:Other inorganic solid waste Hazardous Waste Code:311 Waste Code Description:Pharmaceutical waste Hazardous Waste Code:D001 Waste Code Description:IGNITABLE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:791 Waste Code Description:Liquids with pH < 2 Hazardous Waste Code:D007 Waste Code Description:CHROMIUM Hazardous Waste Code:U034 Waste Code Description:ACETALDEHYDE, TRICHLORO- (OR) CHLORAL Hazardous Waste Code:U201 Waste Code Description:1,3-BENZENEDIOL (OR) RESORCINOL Hazardous Waste Code:541 Waste Code Description:Photochemicals / photo processing waste Hazardous Waste Code:U188 Waste Code Description:PHENOL Owner/Operator Details Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:P Street 1: Name:GARFIELD BEACH CVS LLC Street 2: Date Became Current:20151216 City: Date Ended Current:State: Phone:Country:US Source Type:N Zip Code: Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No:1000 Type:P Street 1:NICOLETT MALL Name:TARGET CORPORATION Street 2: Date Became Current:20031008 City:MINNEAPOLIS Date Ended Current:State:MN Phone:612-304-6073 Country:US Source Type:N Zip Code:55403 m-17-810627808-b 6 of 6 NW 0.21 / 1,131.13 186.98 / 4 TARGET STORE T1851 6705 CAMINO ARROYO GILROY CA 95020 dd-RCRA SQG-810627808-bb p1p-810627808-y1y EPA Handler ID:CAR000217950 17 RCRA SQG 80 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Gen Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Contact Name:STEVE MUSSER Contact Address:PO BOX 111, , MINNEAPOLIS, MN, 55440, US Contact Phone No and Ext:800-587-2228 Contact Email:POC@TARGET.COM Contact Country:US County Name:SANTA CLARA EPA Region:09 Land Type: Receive Date:20160218 Violation/Evaluation Summary Note:NO RECORDS: As of Aug 2018, there are no Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement (violation) records associated with this facility (EPA ID). Handler Summary Importer Activity:No Mixed Waste Generator:No Transporter Activity:No Transfer Facility:No Onsite Burner Exemption:No Furnace Exemption:No Underground Injection Activity:No Commercial TSD:No Used Oil Transporter:No Used Oil Transfer Facility:No Used Oil Processor:No Used Oil Refiner:No Used Oil Burner:No Used Oil Market Burner:No Used Oil Spec Marketer:No Hazardous Waste Handler Details Sequence No:2 Receive Date:20160218 Handler Name:TARGET STORE T1851 Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:B Sequence No:1 Receive Date:20110411 Handler Name:TARGET STORE NO 1851 Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:N Sequence No:1 Receive Date:20150204 Handler Name:TARGET STORE T1851 Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:B Waste Code Details Hazardous Waste Code:D006 Waste Code Description:CADMIUM Hazardous Waste Code:P001 Waste Code Description:2H-1-BENZOPYRAN-2-ONE, 4-HYDROXY-3-(3-OXO-1-PHENYLBUTYL)-, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% (OR) WARFARIN, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% 81 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Hazardous Waste Code:P042 Waste Code Description:1,2-BENZENEDIOL, 4-[1-HYDROXY-2-(METHYLAMINO)ETHYL]-, (R)- (OR) EPINEPHRINE Hazardous Waste Code:P075 Waste Code Description:NICOTINE, & SALTS (OR) PYRIDINE, 3-(1-METHYL-2-PYRROLIDINYL)-,(S)-, & SALTS Hazardous Waste Code:U154 Waste Code Description:METHANOL (I) (OR) METHYL ALCOHOL (I) Hazardous Waste Code:U200 Waste Code Description:RESERPINE (OR) YOHIMBAN-16-CARBOXYLIC ACID, 11,17-DIMETHOXY-18-[(3,4,5- TRIMETHOXYBENZOYL)OXY]-, METHYL ESTER, (3BETA, 16BETA, 17ALPHA, 18BETA, 20ALPHA)- Hazardous Waste Code:D005 Waste Code Description:BARIUM Hazardous Waste Code:U034 Waste Code Description:ACETALDEHYDE, TRICHLORO- (OR) CHLORAL Hazardous Waste Code:U188 Waste Code Description:PHENOL Hazardous Waste Code:P001 Waste Code Description:2H-1-BENZOPYRAN-2-ONE, 4-HYDROXY-3-(3-OXO-1-PHENYLBUTYL)-, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% (OR) WARFARIN, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% Hazardous Waste Code:D002 Waste Code Description:CORROSIVE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D008 Waste Code Description:LEAD Hazardous Waste Code:U035 Waste Code Description:BENZENEBUTANOIC ACID, 4-[BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)AMINO]- (OR) CHLORAMBUCIL Hazardous Waste Code:U188 Waste Code Description:PHENOL Hazardous Waste Code:D007 Waste Code Description:CHROMIUM Hazardous Waste Code:D024 Waste Code Description:M-CRESOL Hazardous Waste Code:D035 Waste Code Description:METHYL ETHYL KETONE Hazardous Waste Code:P081 Waste Code Description:1,2,3-PROPANETRIOL, TRINITRATE (R) (OR) NITROGLYCERINE (R) Hazardous Waste Code:D005 Waste Code Description:BARIUM Hazardous Waste Code:P046 Waste Code Description:ALPHA,ALPHA-DIMETHYLPHENETHYLAMINE (OR) BENZENEETHANAMINE, ALPHA, ALPHA-DIMETHYL- Hazardous Waste Code:P075 Waste Code Description:NICOTINE, & SALTS (OR) PYRIDINE, 3-(1-METHYL-2-PYRROLIDINYL)-,(S)-, & SALTS Hazardous Waste Code:D004 Waste Code Description:ARSENIC Hazardous Waste Code:D011 Waste Code Description:SILVER Hazardous Waste Code:U002 Waste Code Description:2-PROPANONE (I) (OR) ACETONE (I) 82 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Hazardous Waste Code:U122 Waste Code Description:FORMALDEHYDE Hazardous Waste Code:D010 Waste Code Description:SELENIUM Hazardous Waste Code:D011 Waste Code Description:SILVER Hazardous Waste Code:U201 Waste Code Description:1,3-BENZENEDIOL (OR) RESORCINOL Hazardous Waste Code:D007 Waste Code Description:CHROMIUM Hazardous Waste Code:D028 Waste Code Description:1,2-DICHLOROETHANE Hazardous Waste Code:D035 Waste Code Description:METHYL ETHYL KETONE Hazardous Waste Code:D001 Waste Code Description:IGNITABLE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D002 Waste Code Description:CORROSIVE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D004 Waste Code Description:ARSENIC Hazardous Waste Code:U200 Waste Code Description:RESERPINE (OR) YOHIMBAN-16-CARBOXYLIC ACID, 11,17-DIMETHOXY-18-[(3,4,5- TRIMETHOXYBENZOYL)OXY]-, METHYL ESTER, (3BETA, 16BETA, 17ALPHA, 18BETA, 20ALPHA)- Hazardous Waste Code:D011 Waste Code Description:SILVER Hazardous Waste Code:D010 Waste Code Description:SELENIUM Hazardous Waste Code:D024 Waste Code Description:M-CRESOL Hazardous Waste Code:P081 Waste Code Description:1,2,3-PROPANETRIOL, TRINITRATE (R) (OR) NITROGLYCERINE (R) Hazardous Waste Code:U201 Waste Code Description:1,3-BENZENEDIOL (OR) RESORCINOL Hazardous Waste Code:D008 Waste Code Description:LEAD Hazardous Waste Code:D016 Waste Code Description:2,4-D (2,4-DICHLOROPHENOXYACETIC ACID) Hazardous Waste Code:U044 Waste Code Description:CHLOROFORM (OR) METHANE, TRICHLORO- Hazardous Waste Code:U072 Waste Code Description:BENZENE, 1,4-DICHLORO- (OR) P-DICHLOROBENZENE Hazardous Waste Code:D001 Waste Code Description:IGNITABLE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D009 Waste Code Description:MERCURY Hazardous Waste Code:D003 Waste Code Description:REACTIVE WASTE 83 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Hazardous Waste Code:D005 Waste Code Description:BARIUM Hazardous Waste Code:D009 Waste Code Description:MERCURY Hazardous Waste Code:D018 Waste Code Description:BENZENE Hazardous Waste Code:U044 Waste Code Description:CHLOROFORM (OR) METHANE, TRICHLORO- Hazardous Waste Code:U279 Waste Code Description:CARBARYL (OR) 1-NAPHTHALENOL, METHYLCARBAMATE Hazardous Waste Code:D006 Waste Code Description:CADMIUM Hazardous Waste Code:P075 Waste Code Description:NICOTINE, & SALTS (OR) PYRIDINE, 3-(1-METHYL-2-PYRROLIDINYL)-,(S)-, & SALTS Hazardous Waste Code:U002 Waste Code Description:2-PROPANONE (I) (OR) ACETONE (I) Hazardous Waste Code:U035 Waste Code Description:BENZENEBUTANOIC ACID, 4-[BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)AMINO]- (OR) CHLORAMBUCIL Hazardous Waste Code:U122 Waste Code Description:FORMALDEHYDE Hazardous Waste Code:U058 Waste Code Description:2H-1,3,2-OXAZAPHOSPHORIN-2-AMINE, N,N-BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)TETRAHYDRO-, 2-OXIDE (OR) CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE Hazardous Waste Code:U279 Waste Code Description:CARBARYL (OR) 1-NAPHTHALENOL, METHYLCARBAMATE Hazardous Waste Code:D016 Waste Code Description:2,4-D (2,4-DICHLOROPHENOXYACETIC ACID) Hazardous Waste Code:D001 Waste Code Description:IGNITABLE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D016 Waste Code Description:2,4-D (2,4-DICHLOROPHENOXYACETIC ACID) Hazardous Waste Code:U034 Waste Code Description:ACETALDEHYDE, TRICHLORO- (OR) CHLORAL Hazardous Waste Code:U058 Waste Code Description:2H-1,3,2-OXAZAPHOSPHORIN-2-AMINE, N,N-BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)TETRAHYDRO-, 2-OXIDE (OR) CYCLOPHOSPHAMIDE Hazardous Waste Code:U129 Waste Code Description:CYCLOHEXANE, 1,2,3,4,5,6-HEXACHLORO-, (1ALPHA, 2ALPHA, 3BETA, 4ALPHA, 5ALPHA, 6BETA)- (OR) LINDANE Hazardous Waste Code:D009 Waste Code Description:MERCURY Hazardous Waste Code:D026 Waste Code Description:CRESOL Hazardous Waste Code:U129 Waste Code Description:CYCLOHEXANE, 1,2,3,4,5,6-HEXACHLORO-, (1ALPHA, 2ALPHA, 3BETA, 4ALPHA, 5ALPHA, 6BETA)- (OR) LINDANE Hazardous Waste Code:U150 84 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Waste Code Description:L-PHENYLALANINE, 4-[BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)AMINO]- (OR) MELPHALAN Hazardous Waste Code:D026 Waste Code Description:CRESOL Hazardous Waste Code:U072 Waste Code Description:BENZENE, 1,4-DICHLORO- (OR) P-DICHLOROBENZENE Hazardous Waste Code:U150 Waste Code Description:L-PHENYLALANINE, 4-[BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)AMINO]- (OR) MELPHALAN Hazardous Waste Code:D018 Waste Code Description:BENZENE Hazardous Waste Code:P001 Waste Code Description:2H-1-BENZOPYRAN-2-ONE, 4-HYDROXY-3-(3-OXO-1-PHENYLBUTYL)-, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% (OR) WARFARIN, & SALTS, WHEN PRESENT AT CONCENTRATIONS GREATER THAN 0.3% Hazardous Waste Code:P042 Waste Code Description:1,2-BENZENEDIOL, 4-[1-HYDROXY-2-(METHYLAMINO)ETHYL]-, (R)- (OR) EPINEPHRINE Hazardous Waste Code:U154 Waste Code Description:METHANOL (I) (OR) METHYL ALCOHOL (I) Hazardous Waste Code:D002 Waste Code Description:CORROSIVE WASTE Hazardous Waste Code:D008 Waste Code Description:LEAD Owner/Operator Details Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:Private Street 1:P.O. BOX 111 Name:TARGET CORPORATION Street 2: Date Became Current:20031012 City:MINNEAPOLIS Date Ended Current:State:MN Phone:800-587-2228 Country: Source Type:B Zip Code:55440 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No: Type:Private Street 1:PO BOX 111 Name:TARGET CORPORATION Street 2: Date Became Current:20031008 City:MINNEAPOLIS Date Ended Current:State:MN Phone:800-587-2228 Country:US Source Type:B Zip Code:55440 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No: Type:Private Street 1:P.O. BOX 111 Name:TARGET CORPORATION Street 2: Date Became Current:20031012 City:MINNEAPOLIS Date Ended Current:State:MN Phone:800-587-2228 Country: Source Type:B Zip Code:55440 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No: Type:Private Street 1:PO BOX 111 Name:TARGET CORP Street 2: Date Became Current:20031008 City:MINNEAPOLIS Date Ended Current:State:MN Phone:800-587-2228 Country:US Source Type:N Zip Code:55440-0111 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:Private Street 1: Name:TARGET CORPORATION Street 2: 85 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Date Became Current:20031008 City: Date Ended Current:State: Phone:Country: Source Type:B Zip Code: Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:Private Street 1: Name:TARGET CORP Street 2: Date Became Current:20031008 City: Date Ended Current:State: Phone:Country:US Source Type:N Zip Code: m-18-820077018-b 1 of 1 NW 0.22 / 1,183.21 188.88 / 6 SHELL 850 Pacheco Pass Road Gilroy CA 95020 dd-DELISTED TNK-820077018-bb p1p-820077018-y1y Facility ID:43-002-GIL2 Latitude:37.00417 County:Santa Clara Longitude:-121.55194 Permitting Agency:GILROY, CITY OF Original Source:UST Record Date:30-JAN-2017 m-19-824918317-b 1 of 1 ENE 0.23 / 1,237.54 180.14 / -3 Tractor Supply Company Store# 1171-Gilroy 6881 Cameron Blvd Gilroy CA 95020 dd-GILROY CUPA-824918317-bb p1p-824918317-y1y CERS ID:10440844 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID:8377 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site:Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst:No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST:No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST:No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator:Yes CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle:No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt:No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req:ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: m-20-820077017-b 1 of 1 N 0.25 / 1,296.71 185.62 / 2 TV'S FOOD MART 850 PACHECO PASS HWY GILROY CA 95020 dd-DELISTED TNK-820077017-bb p1p-820077017-y1y Facility ID:980216 Latitude:37.005128 County:Santa Clara Longitude:-121.55017 Permitting Agency:GILROY, CITY OF Original Source:UST Record Date:30-JAN-2017 m-21-805437323-b 1 of 3 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 188.55 / 5 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 950201626 dd-CERCLIS-805437323-bb p1p-805437323-y1y Site ID:0900266 RNPL Status Code:N Site EPA ID:CAD000628149 NPL Status:Not on the NPL Site Street Address 2:RFED Facility Code:N Site County Name:SANTA CLARA RFED Facility Desc:Not a Federal Facility Site FIPS Code:06085 USGS Hydro Unit No.:18060002 Region Code:09 Site Cong. Dist. Code:12 Site SMSA No.:7400 ROT Desc:Private Site Prim. Latitude:37D00M30S FR NPL Update No.: Site Prim. Longitude:121D34M06S RFRA Code: 18 19 20 21 DELISTED TNK GILROY CUPA DELISTED TNK CERCLIS 86 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Lat Long Source: RNON NPL Status Desc:NFRAP-Site does not qualify for the NPL based on existing information CERCLIS Assess History OU ID:00 RALT Short Name: Act Code ID:Act Start Date: RAT Code:Act Complete Date: RAT Short Name:AGT Order No.:0 RAT Name:SH OU: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Code: RAT NSI Indicator:SH Seq: RAT Level:SH Start Date: RAT DEF OU:SH Complete Date: RFBS Code:SH Lead: SPA Code: RAT Def: Site Desc:No description available . Site Alias:HAZCONTROL, INC.,,,CA,; CERCLIS Assess History OU ID:00 RALT Short Name:EPA In-House Act Code ID:001 Act Start Date: RAT Code:VS Act Complete Date:1/23/1996 00:00:00 RAT Short Name:ARCH SITE AGT Order No.:1500 RAT Name:ARCHIVE SITE SH OU: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Code: RAT NSI Indicator:B SH Seq: RAT Level:1 SH Start Date: RAT DEF OU:00 SH Complete Date: RFBS Code:SH Lead: SPA Code:13 RAT Def:The decision is made that no further activity is planned at the site. Site Desc: Site Alias: CERCLIS Assess History OU ID:00 RALT Short Name:EPA Fund Act Code ID:001 Act Start Date: RAT Code:PA Act Complete Date:5/14/1990 00:00:00 RAT Short Name:PA AGT Order No.:130 RAT Name:PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT SH OU: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Code: RAT NSI Indicator:B SH Seq: RAT Level:1 SH Start Date: RAT DEF OU:00 SH Complete Date: RFBS Code:P SH Lead: SPA Code:13 RAT Def:Collection of diverse existing information about the source and nature of the site hazard. It is EPA policy to complete the preliminary assessment within one year of site discovery. Site Desc: Site Alias: CERCLIS Assess History OU ID:00 RALT Short Name:EPA Fund Act Code ID:001 Act Start Date: RAT Code:DS Act Complete Date:11/7/1989 00:00:00 RAT Short Name:DISCVRY AGT Order No.:10 RAT Name:DISCOVERY SH OU: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Code: 87 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB RAT NSI Indicator:B SH Seq: RAT Level:1 SH Start Date: RAT DEF OU:00 SH Complete Date: RFBS Code:SH Lead: SPA Code:13 RAT Def:The process by which a potential hazardous waste site is brought to the attention of the EPA. The process can occur through the use of several mechanisms such as a phone call or referral by another government agency. Site Desc: Site Alias: m-21-805476443-b 2 of 3 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 188.55 / 5 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 950201626 dd-CERCLIS NFRAP-805476443-bb p1p-805476443-y1y Site ID:900266 Site FIPS Code:6085 Site EPA ID:CAD000628149 Region Code:9 Site Parent ID:Site Cong. Dist. Code:12 Site County Name:SANTA CLARA Federal Facility: Parent Site Name: CERCLIS-NFRAP Assess History OU ID:0 Act Start Date: Act Code ID:1 Act Complete Date:11/7/1989 RAT Code:DS AGT Order No.:10 RAT Short Name:DISCVRY SH OU: RAT Name:DISCOVERY SH Code: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Seq: RAT NSI Indicator:B SH Start Date: RAT Level:1 SH Complete Date: RAT DEF OU:00 SH Lead: RFBS Code:SH Qual: SPA Code:13 RAQ Act. Qual Short: RALT Short Name:EPA Fund RNPL Status Code:N RAT Def:The process by which a potential hazardous waste site is brought to the attention of the EPA. The process can occur through the use of several mechanisms such as a phone call or referral by another government agency. RNON NPL Status Desc:NFRAP-Site does not qualify for the NPL based on existing information CERCLIS-NFRAP Assess History OU ID:0 Act Start Date: Act Code ID:1 Act Complete Date:5/14/1990 RAT Code:PA AGT Order No.:130 RAT Short Name:PA SH OU: RAT Name:PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT SH Code: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Seq: RAT NSI Indicator:B SH Start Date: RAT Level:1 SH Complete Date: RAT DEF OU:00 SH Lead: RFBS Code:P SH Qual: SPA Code:13 RAQ Act. Qual Short:Deferred to RCRA RALT Short Name:EPA Fund RNPL Status Code:N RAT Def:Collection of diverse existing information about the source and nature of the site hazard. It is EPA policy to complete the preliminary assessment within one year of site discovery. RNON NPL Status Desc:NFRAP-Site does not qualify for the NPL based on existing information CERCLIS-NFRAP Assess History OU ID:0 Act Start Date: Act Code ID:1 Act Complete Date:1/23/1996 RAT Code:VS AGT Order No.:1500 RAT Short Name:ARCH SITE SH OU: RAT Name:ARCHIVE SITE SH Code: RAT Hist. Only Flag:SH Seq: RAT NSI Indicator:B SH Start Date: 21 CERCLIS NFRAP 88 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB RAT Level:1 SH Complete Date: RAT DEF OU:00 SH Lead: RFBS Code:SH Qual: SPA Code:13 RAQ Act. Qual Short: RALT Short Name:EPA In-House RNPL Status Code:N RAT Def:The decision is made that no further activity is planned at the site. RNON NPL Status Desc:NFRAP-Site does not qualify for the NPL based on existing information m-21-828867835-b 3 of 3 WNW 0.42 / 2,215.21 188.55 / 5 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95020-1626 dd-SEMS ARCHIVE-828867835-bb p1p-828867835-y1y Site ID:0900266 FIPS Code:06085 EPA ID:CAD000628149 Cong District:12 NPL:Not on the NPL County:SANTA CLARA Federal Facility:No Region:09 Non NPL Status:NFRAP-Site does not qualify for the NPL based on existing information Action Information Operable Units:00 Start Actual: Action Code:PA Finish Actual:5/14/1990 Action Name:PA Qual:D SEQ:1 Curr Action Lead:EPA Perf Operable Units:00 Start Actual:11/7/1989 Action Code:DS Finish Actual:11/7/1989 Action Name:DISCVRY Qual: SEQ:1 Curr Action Lead:EPA Perf Operable Units:00 Start Actual: Action Code:VS Finish Actual:1/23/1996 Action Name:ARCH SITE Qual: SEQ:1 Curr Action Lead:EPA Perf In-Hse m-22-820183743-b 1 of 1 WNW 0.43 / 2,245.32 190.45 / 7 PRIVATE RESIDENCE PRIVATE RESIDENCE Gilroy CA 95020 dd-LUST-820183743-bb p1p-820183743-y1y Global ID:T0608500042 CUF Case:NO Case Type:LUST Cleanup Site Begin Date:1997-07-03 00:00:00 Status:Completed - Case Closed How Discovered:Other Means Status Date:1998-01-05 00:00:00 Stop Method: RB Case No:2864 County:Santa Clara LOC Case No:Latitude:37.0044823 Lead Agency:SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOP Longitude:-121.5562439 Case Worker:File Location:All Files are on GeoTracker or in the Local Agency Database Local Agency: Potential Media Of Concern:Gasoline Potential Media Affected:Under Investigation How Discovered Description: Stop Description: Cal Water Watershed Name:Pajaro River - South Santa Clara Valley (305.30) DWR Groundwater Subbasin Name: Gilroy-Hollister Valley - Llagas Area (3-003.01) Site History: Status History Status:Completed - Case Closed Status Date:1998-01-05 00:00:00 Status:Open - Case Begin Date Status Date:1997-07-03 00:00:00 21 22 SEMS ARCHIVE LUST 89 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Activities Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Other Report / Document Date:1997-07-14 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Other Report / Document Date:2003-03-04 00:00:00 Action Type:ENFORCEMENT Action:Closure/No Further Action Letter Date:1998-01-05 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Other Report / Document Date:1998-01-05 00:00:00 Action Type:Other Action:Leak Reported Date:1997-07-03 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Other Report / Document Date:1997-06-30 00:00:00 Action Type:RESPONSE Action:Other Report / Document Date:1997-07-03 00:00:00 Contacts Contact Type:Regional Board Caseworker City:SAN LUIS OBISPO Contact Name:RB3 STAFF Email:centralcoast@waterboards.ca.gov Organization Name:CENTRAL COAST RWQCB (REGION 3)Phone No:8055493147 Address:895 AEROVISTA PL, SUITE 101 m-23-859589068-b 1 of 1 SW 0.46 / 2,441.43 186.54 / 3 Boral Roofing, LLC 6500 BREM LN GILROY CA 95020 dd-DELISTED HAZ-859589068-bb p1p-859589068-y1y Siteid:379869 Latitude:36.996586 Longitude:-121.554741 Original Source:CHAZ Record Date:30-MAY-2017 m-24-820293155-b 1 of 3 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 190.64 / 7 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 dd-ENVIROSTOR-820293155-bb p1p-820293155-y1y Estor/EPA ID:80001324 County:SANTA CLARA Site Code:Latitude:37.005716 Special Program:Longitude:-121.55661 Census Tract:6085512602 Office:CLEANUP BERKELEY Permit Renew Lead:Nat Priority List:NO Project Manager:Funding: Pub Particip Spec:Assembly District:30 Supervisor:MARK PIROS Senate District:17 Site Type:CORRECTIVE ACTION Cleanup Status:INACTIVE - NEEDS EVALUATION AS OF 6/26/2009 Clean Up Oversight Agency:DTSC - SITE CLEANUP PROGRAM Cause of Contamination:NONE SPECIFIED Potential Media Affected:NONE SPECIFIED 23 24 DELISTED HAZ ENVIROSTOR 90 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB School District: APN:841-10-058 Acres:0 ACRES Potential Contaminants: NONE SPECIFIED Site History: Program Type:CORRECTIVE ACTION Status:INACTIVE - NEEDS EVALUATION Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/profile_report?global_id=80001324 Completed Activities Date Completed:5/14/1990 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:PA OR CERCLA INSPECTION-NOT A PA PLUS (CA049PA) Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:Preliminary Assessment Report Comments: Date Completed:7/13/1984 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:Operating Permit Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:* Historical Operating Permit Authority Comments: Date Completed:6/30/1993 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:RFA COMPLETED-ASSESSMENT WAS A RFA (CA050RF) Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/final_documents2?global_id=80001324&enforcement_id=6016083 Document Type:RCRA Facility Assessment Report Comments:RCRA Facility Assessment Completed, aka: Haz Control Date Completed:9/21/1994 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:STABILIZATION MEASURES EVALUATION-FACILITY NOT AMENABLE TO STABILIZATION (CA225NR) Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:Interim Measures Questionnaire Comments: m-24-820299123-b 2 of 3 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 190.64 / 7 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 dd-ENVIROSTOR-820299123-bb p1p-820299123-y1y Estor/EPA ID:CAD000628149 County:SANTA CLARA Site Code:Latitude:37.005716 Special Program:Longitude:-121.55661 Census Tract:6085512602 Office: Permit Renew Lead:Nat Priority List: Project Manager:Funding: 24 ENVIROSTOR 91 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Pub Particip Spec:Assembly District:30 Supervisor:Senate District:17 Site Type:CLOSED - PERMIT AUTHORITY: RCRA Cleanup Status: Clean Up Oversight Agency: Cause of Contamination: Potential Media Affected: School District: APN: Acres: Potential Contaminants: Site History: NO FACILITY HISTORY HAS BEEN ENTERED FOR THIS SITE Program Type:HAZ WASTE - RCRA Status:CLOSED Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/hwmp_profile_report?global_id=CAD000628149 Permit Units - Completed Activities Date:6/13/1989 Unit:CONTAIN1 Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PERMIT (EXPIRES) Doc Link: Date:6/13/1984 Unit:CONTAIN1 Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PERMIT Doc Link: Date:3/16/1984 Unit:CONTAIN1 Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - PUBLIC COMMENT (BEGIN) Doc Link: Date:2/11/1991 Unit:CONTAIN1 Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - APPLICATION PART A RECEIVED Doc Link: Date:6/13/1984 Unit:CONTAIN1 Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PERMIT (EFFECTIVE) Doc Link: Date:8/8/1983 Unit:CONTAIN1 Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Doc Link: Units Undergoing Closure Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTRT1, CONTAIN1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Date:5/17/1995 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - RECEIVE CLOSURE CERTIFICATION Doc Link: Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTRT1, CONTAIN1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Date:6/6/1995 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - ISSUE CLOSURE VERIFICATION Doc Link: 92 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB m-24-820356825-b 3 of 3 NW 0.49 / 2,572.35 190.64 / 7 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL CO INC 731 RENZ LN GILROY CA 950200000 dd-HWP-820356825-bb p1p-820356825-y1y EPA ID:CAD000628149 Public Part Speci: Site Code:Public Info Officer: Status:CLOSED Assembly District:30 Facility Type:Historical - Non-Operating Senate District:17 Facility Size:County:SANTA CLARA Team:Latitude:37.005716 Project Manager:Longitude:-121.55661 Hazardous Waste Units Completed Activities Completed Date:06/13/1984 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PERMIT (EFFECTIVE) Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Completed Date:06/01/1989 Event Description:Renewal - Historical - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTRT1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Completed Date:06/13/1989 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PERMIT (EXPIRES) Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Completed Date:08/08/1983 Event Description:New Operating Permit - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Completed Date:11/01/1993 Event Description:New Operating Permit - PERMIT TERMINATED - TERMINATION RECEIVED Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Completed Date:09/26/1988 Event Description:Renewal - Historical - CALL-IN LETTER ISSUED Unit Names:ACIDTRT1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Completed Date:11/01/1993 Event Description:Renewal - Historical - FINAL PERMIT RENEWAL - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTRT1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Completed Date:02/11/1991 Event Description:Renewal - Historical - APPLICATION PART A RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTRT1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Completed Date:03/16/1984 Event Description:New Operating Permit - PUBLIC COMMENT (BEGIN) Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Completed Date:06/13/1984 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PERMIT Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Completed Date:02/11/1991 Event Description:New Operating Permit - APPLICATION PART A RECEIVED Unit Names:CONTAIN1 Hazardous Waste Units Undergoing Closure Completed Date:06/06/1995 Event Description:Closure Final - ISSUE CLOSURE VERIFICATION Unit Names:ACIDTRT1, CONTAIN1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Completed Date:05/17/1995 Event Description:Closure Final - RECEIVE CLOSURE CERTIFICATION 24 HWP 93 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Unit Names:ACIDTRT1, CONTAIN1, F006BIN1, FLAMABLE1 Alias Alias:43490062 Alias Type:Envirostor ID Number m-25-820361343-b 1 of 1 NW 0.52 / 2,722.07 190.02 / 7 SOUTH BAY CHEMICAL COMPANY 721-731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95020 dd-ENVIROSTOR-820361343-bb p1p-820361343-y1y Estor/EPA ID:43490062 County:SANTA CLARA Site Code:Latitude:37.006388 Special Program:Longitude:-121.556612 Census Tract:6085512602 Office:CLEANUP BERKELEY Permit Renew Lead:Nat Priority List:NO Project Manager:Funding: Pub Particip Spec:Assembly District:30 Supervisor:Senate District:17 Site Type:* HISTORICAL Cleanup Status:REFER: RCRA AS OF 6/8/1994 Clean Up Oversight Agency:NONE SPECIFIED Cause of Contamination:NONE SPECIFIED Potential Media Affected:NONE SPECIFIED School District: APN:841-10-019 Acres:NONE SPECIFIED Potential Contaminants: NONE SPECIFIED Site History: Program Type:HISTORICAL Status:REFER: RCRA Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/profile_report?global_id=43490062 Completed Activities Date Completed:4/30/1990 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:Discovery Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:* Discovery Comments:FACILITY IDENTIFIED IDENTIFIED VIA FIT ENVIRONMENTAL PRIOR- ITIES INITIATIVE PA m-26-810471734-b 1 of 1 NW 0.55 / 2,878.92 191.12 / 8 HAZCONTROL INC. 731 RENZ LANE GILROY CA 95021 dd-RCRA CORRACTS-810471734-bb p1p-810471734-y1y EPA Handler ID:CAD000628149 Gen Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Contact Name: Contact Address:US Contact Phone No and Ext: Contact Email: Contact Country:US County Name:SANTA CLARA EPA Region:09 25 26 ENVIROSTOR RCRA CORRACTS 94 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Land Type: Receive Date: Event/Area Details Area Name:ENTIRE FACILITY Event Code:CA075ME Corrective Action Event Descri:CA PRIORITIZATION-MEDIUM CA PRIORITY Actual Date of Event:19940921 Orig Sched Event Date: New Sched Event Date: Best Date:19940921 Groundwater Release Indicator:Yes Soil Release Indicator:Yes Air Release Indicator:Yes Surface Waste Release Ind:Yes Event Responsible Agency:EPA Area Name:ENTIRE FACILITY Event Code:CA075HI Corrective Action Event Descri:CA PRIORITIZATION-HIGH CA PRIORITY Actual Date of Event:19900514 Orig Sched Event Date: New Sched Event Date: Best Date:19900514 Groundwater Release Indicator:Yes Soil Release Indicator:Yes Air Release Indicator:Yes Surface Waste Release Ind:Yes Event Responsible Agency:EPA Violation/Evaluation Summary Note:VIOLATION or UNDETERMINED: There are VIOLATION or UNDETERMINED details or records associated with this facility (EPA ID) in the Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement table dated Aug, 2018. Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Container Use and Management Violation Determined Date:19930914 Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930914 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - General Violation Determined Date:19870505 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Violation Responsible Agency:State 95 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Enforcement Action Date:19881116 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:FINAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT Enforcement Action Date:19910924 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:INITIAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR MONETARY PENALTY Enforcement Action Date:19901015 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19880108 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - General Violation Determined Date:19921118 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930119 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - General Facility Standards Violation Determined Date:19930914 Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Violation Responsible Agency:State 96 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930914 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - General Violation Determined Date:19900601 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:INITIAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR MONETARY PENALTY Enforcement Action Date:19901015 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:FINAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT Enforcement Action Date:19910924 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Enforcement Action Date:19900803 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19900803 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Violation Determined Date:19910918 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 97 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violation Responsible Agency:EPA Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Violation Determined Date:19870818 Return to Compliance Date:19890628 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:FINAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT Enforcement Action Date:19910924 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Enforcement Action Date:19881116 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19870819 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:INITIAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR MONETARY PENALTY Enforcement Action Date:19901015 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - General Violation Determined Date:19910328 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:REFERRAL TO DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Enforcement Action Date:19910430 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: 98 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:INITIAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR MONETARY PENALTY Enforcement Action Date:19901015 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:FINAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT Enforcement Action Date:19910924 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19910430 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:Generators - General Violation Determined Date:19921118 Return to Compliance Date:19921118 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930119 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:Generators - Manifest Violation Determined Date:19921118 Return to Compliance Date:19930729 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930119 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: 99 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - General Violation Determined Date:19890628 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Enforcement Action Date:19890811 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:INITIAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR MONETARY PENALTY Enforcement Action Date:19901015 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19890811 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:FINAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT Enforcement Action Date:19910924 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Violation Determined Date:19920820 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Violation Responsible Agency:EPA Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Violation Determined Date:19921120 Return to Compliance Date:19930105 100 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930119 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:Permits - Application Violation Determined Date:19930729 Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930729 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:Generators - General Violation Determined Date:19930729 Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930729 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Violation Determined Date:19930914 Return to Compliance Date:19940114 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details 101 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19930914 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Violation Details Citation: Violation Short Description:TSD - Closure/Post-Closure Violation Determined Date:19870505 Return to Compliance Date:19890628 Violation Responsible Agency:State Enforcement Details Enforcement Type Description:INITIAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR COMPLIANCE AND/OR MONETARY PENALTY Enforcement Action Date:19901015 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:FINAL CIVIL JUDICIAL ACTION FOR IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT Enforcement Action Date:19910924 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL Enforcement Action Date:19881116 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Enforcement Type Description:WRITTEN INFORMAL Enforcement Action Date:19880108 Enf Disposition Status: Disposition Status Date: Enforcement Lead Agency: Proposed Penalty Amount: Final Amount: Paid Amount: Evaluation Details Evaluation Start Date:19950620 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description: Return to Compliance Date: Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19930729 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE 102 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Violation Short Description:TSD - General Facility Standards Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19930729 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:Generators - General Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19930729 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Return to Compliance Date:19940114 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19930729 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - Container Use and Management Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19930729 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:Permits - Application Return to Compliance Date:19940101 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19930105 Evaluation Type Description:NOT A SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPLIER Violation Short Description: Return to Compliance Date: Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19921118 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19921118 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:Generators - Manifest Return to Compliance Date:19930729 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19921118 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:Generators - General Return to Compliance Date:19921118 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19921118 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - General Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19921116 Evaluation Type Description:FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Violation Short Description: Return to Compliance Date: Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19920820 Evaluation Type Description:FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:EPA Contractor/Grantee 103 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Evaluation Start Date:19910918 Evaluation Type Description:FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:EPA Contractor/Grantee Evaluation Start Date:19910328 Evaluation Type Description:SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPLIER Violation Short Description: Return to Compliance Date: Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19910328 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - General Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19900601 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - General Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19900514 Evaluation Type Description:FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Violation Short Description: Return to Compliance Date: Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19890628 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - General Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19890509 Evaluation Type Description:FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Violation Short Description: Return to Compliance Date: Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19870818 Evaluation Type Description:FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW Violation Short Description:TSD - Financial Requirements Return to Compliance Date:19890628 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19870505 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - General Return to Compliance Date:19930105 Evaluation Agency:State Evaluation Start Date:19870505 Evaluation Type Description:COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE Violation Short Description:TSD - Closure/Post-Closure Return to Compliance Date:19890628 Evaluation Agency:State Handler Summary Importer Activity:No Mixed Waste Generator:No Transporter Activity:Yes Transfer Facility:No Onsite Burner Exemption:No 104 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Furnace Exemption:No Underground Injection Activity:No Commercial TSD:Yes Used Oil Transporter:No Used Oil Transfer Facility:No Used Oil Processor:No Used Oil Refiner:No Used Oil Burner:No Used Oil Market Burner:No Used Oil Spec Marketer:No Hazardous Waste Handler Details Sequence No:1 Receive Date:19900412 Handler Name:HAZ CONTROL/SOUTH BAY CHEMICALS CO Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:R Sequence No:1 Receive Date:19960901 Handler Name:HAZCONTROL INC. Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:I Sequence No:1 Receive Date:19900831 Handler Name:HAZCONTROL INC. Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:N Sequence No:2 Receive Date:19920401 Handler Name:HAZ/CONTROL, INC. Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:R Sequence No:2 Receive Date:19960901 Handler Name:HAZCONTROL INC. Generator Status Universe:Small Quantity Generator Source Type:I Owner/Operator Details Owner/Operator Ind:Current Owner Street No: Type:Private Street 1:PO BOX 1626 Name:MELVIN E NIELSEN Street 2: Date Became Current:City:GILROY Date Ended Current:State:CA Phone:408-848-1470 Country: Source Type:N Zip Code:95021 Owner/Operator Ind:Current Operator Street No: Type:Private Street 1:PO BOX 1626 Name:MELVIN E NEILSEN Street 2: Date Became Current:City:GILROY Date Ended Current:State:CA Phone:408-848-1470 Country: Source Type:I Zip Code:95021 m-27-820297879-b 1 of 1 SSW 0.57 / 3,010.66 186.40 / 3 INLAND PAPERBOARD AND PACKAGING, INC. 6400 JAMIESON WAY GILROY CA 95020 dd-ENVIROSTOR-820297879-bb p1p-820297879-y1y 27 ENVIROSTOR 105 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Estor/EPA ID:71002634 County:SANTA CLARA Site Code:Latitude:36.994516 Special Program:Longitude:-121.554725 Census Tract:6085512602 Office:CLEANUP BERKELEY Permit Renew Lead:Nat Priority List:NO Project Manager:Funding: Pub Particip Spec:Assembly District:30 Supervisor:Senate District:17 Site Type:TIERED PERMIT Cleanup Status:REFER: OTHER AGENCY AS OF 5/12/2006 Clean Up Oversight Agency:NONE SPECIFIED Cause of Contamination:NONE SPECIFIED Potential Media Affected:NONE SPECIFIED School District: APN:NONE SPECIFIED Acres:NONE SPECIFIED Potential Contaminants: NONE SPECIFIED Site History: Site History: Gaylord Container Corporation /Inland Paperboard and Packaging, Inc. /Temple-Inland (GCC) is a paperboard manufacturing and packaging company that has been in operation over 15 years. Parcel size is approximately 20 acres. On April 20, 1992 GCC submitted a Permit by Rule (PBR) initial notification of intent to operate. A facility specific notification form to operate under Conditional Authorization (CA) was submitted on April 1, 1993. On December 31, 1996 GCC submitted a Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Checklist claiming an exemption. Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) informed GCC in a letter dated June 29, 1998 that the phase 1 assessment is not complete. On August 7, 1998 GCC submitted the Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Checklist indicating further investigation is needed to determine the existence, nature, and/or extent of contamination at the facility. The Checklist indicated suspected release in Corrugator Department, Rotary Die Cutter/Flexographic Printing Press Department, Adhesive Mixing Department, Ink Storage, Air Compressors, Former Underground Storage Tank, Fire Prevention Building, Fuel Oil Aboveground Storage Tank, and Corrugator Storage Area. On June 26, 2002 DTSC sent a Further Investigation Questionnaire in connection with Phase 1 Environmental Assessment for GCC. On August 14, 2002 GCC submitted to DTSC the Further Investigation Questionnaire. DTSC conducted a Phase I Environmental Assessment Inspection on May 12, 2006. Several solid waste management units (SWMUs) were identified. On December 28, 2006 DTSC sent a Corrective Action Consent Agreement to the Company. Held a meeting with GCC. During the meeting GCC requested to combine cleanup activities at this location with GCC site at other location. DTSC-Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) is overseeing the cleanup at that site. Site was refered to VCP. Facility Comments: Formerly known as Gaylord Container Corp. (8/19/02 dh) Program Type:TIERED PERMIT Status:REFER: OTHER AGENCY Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/profile_report?global_id=71002634 Completed Activities Date Completed:6/30/2007 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:Consent Agreement Executed (Site refered to VCP) Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:Consent Agreement Comments: Date Completed:5/12/2006 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:Phase I Inspection Completed Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:Phase 1 Comments: Date Completed:5/12/2006 Area Name: 106 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Sub Area: Title:Inspection - Phase I Verification Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:Phase I Verification Comments:Inspection report sent on 5/12/2006 m-28-866001266-b 1 of 1 SSW 0.58 / 3,081.49 186.97 / 4 TEMPLE-INLAND, INC. 6400 JAMIESON WAY GILROY CA 95020 dd-ENVIROSTOR-866001266-bb p1p-866001266-y1y Estor/EPA ID:60000630 County:SANTA CLARA Site Code:201745 Latitude:36.9944053492905 Special Program:Longitude:-121.554965342556 Census Tract:6085512602 Office:CLEANUP BERKELEY Permit Renew Lead:Nat Priority List:NO Project Manager:Funding:SITE PROPONENT Pub Particip Spec:Assembly District:30 Supervisor:MARK PIROS Senate District:17 Site Type:VOLUNTARY CLEANUP Cleanup Status:NO FURTHER ACTION AS OF 9/5/2008 Clean Up Oversight Agency:DTSC - SITE CLEANUP PROGRAM - LEAD AGENCY Cause of Contamination:UNKNOWN Potential Media Affected:UNDER INVESTIGATION School District: APN:841-73-003, 841-73-033 Acres:20 ACRES Potential Contaminants: UNDER INVESTIGATION Site History: The paperboard manufacturing and packaging company has operated on site for roughly 15 years and is classified as a Small Quantity Generator. The facility submitted an application for Conditionally Authorized On-site Hazardous Waste Treatment in 1993 to treat inorganics-contaminated aqueous waste, wastewater treatment sludge, dust, contaminated solid metal and metal workings, and oil/water separator sludge. Activities and equipment used at the facility included: corrugators, rotary die cutters, printing presses, ink storage, air compressors, USTs, and ASTs. Waste streams included: aqueous solution with organic residue, inorganic solid waste, hydrocarbon solvents, waste oil and mixed oil, oil/water separator sludge, unspecified oil- containing waste, organic solids, and liquid with halogenated organic compounds. Program Type:VOLUNTARY CLEANUP Status:NO FURTHER ACTION Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/profile_report?global_id=60000630 Completed Activities Date Completed:8/22/2007 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:Voluntary Cleanup Agreement Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/final_documents2?global_id=60000630&enforcement_id=6011013 Document Type:Voluntary Cleanup Agreement Comments:VCA signed by acting branch chief. Date Completed:4/7/2008 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:PEA Workplan Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/final_documents2?global_id=60000630&doc_id=6016620 Document Type:Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Workplan Comments: 28 ENVIROSTOR 107 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Date Completed:9/5/2008 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:PEA Report Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/final_documents2?global_id=60000630&doc_id=6016622 Document Type:Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report Comments:The Preliminary Endangerment Assessment, dated July 30, 2008, indicates that low concentrations of pesticides and total petroleum hydrocarbons in soils are below screening levels; the concentration of metals in soil is below below background levels; and the groundwater did not contain any metals or solvents above the drinking water standards. The Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Report concluded that no further action is neccessary and DTSC has concurred with this conclusion. Date Completed:5/5/2008 Area Name: Sub Area: Title:PEA field work Area Link: Sub Area Link: Title Link: Document Type:Fieldwork Comments:Field work done on May 5, 6 and 7, 2008. m-29-820295074-b 1 of 3 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 186.55 / 3 METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 950207012 dd-ENVIROSTOR-820295074-bb p1p-820295074-y1y Estor/EPA ID:CAD077182293 County:SANTA CLARA Site Code:200334 Latitude:36.99016 Special Program:Longitude:-121.554015 Census Tract:6085512602 Office: Permit Renew Lead:Nat Priority List: Project Manager:Funding: Pub Particip Spec:Assembly District:30 Supervisor:Senate District:17 Site Type:CLOSED - PERMIT AUTHORITY: Standardized Cleanup Status: Clean Up Oversight Agency: Cause of Contamination: Potential Media Affected: School District: APN: Acres: Potential Contaminants: Site History: Metech International, Inc. (Metech) is a precious metal recycling facility operating since December 10,1997 when they were first permitted. Metech processes solid hazardous scrap metals and precious metal containing liquid hazardous waste. Precious metals are gold, silver, platinum, palladium, rhodium and iridium. The facility is designed to receive, sort, classify, homogenize, analyze and recover these metals which at the end of processing, are sent to smelters or other facilities for further processing. Solid scrap metals upon receipt are roasted, milled, melted in furnaces and then cast into ingots. Precious metal containing liquid hazardous waste is separated by pH. High pH liquids are electroplated to recover the metals. Low pH liquids are is neutralized to recover the precious metals. Metech is applying for a Series B standardized Hazardous Waste Facility Permit renewal. Their permit expired on December 10, 2007 but DTSC is allowing Metech to continue to operate under their old permit until a their permit is finalized. On April 27, 2009, Metech withdrew their Permit application and is now currently undergoing final closure. Metech received their last shipment of hazardous waste in May 2009 and completed all hazardous waste processing activities on September 1, 2009. Program Type:INSPECTION Status:SIGNIFICANT NON-COMPLIER Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/eerp_profile_report?global_id=3000606 29 ENVIROSTOR 108 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Program Type:HAZ WASTE - Standardized Status:CLOSED Cal Enviro Score:86-90% Summary Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/hwmp_profile_report?global_id=CAD077182293 Permit Units - Completed Activities Date:12/10/1997 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PERMIT (EFFECTIVE) Doc Link: Date:7/25/1997 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - PUBLIC COMMENT (END) Doc Link: Date:12/10/2007 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PERMIT (EXPIRES) Doc Link: Date:6/19/2006 Unit: Event Description:*MOD CLASS 2 - 2 OR MORE UNITS - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST ACKNOWLEDGED Doc Link: Date:12/10/1997 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PERMIT Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/https://www.hwmpenvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/site_documents/75979439 61/Final%20Permit%201997%2Epdf Date:8/22/1995 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - 1ST NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Doc Link: Date:4/27/2009 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:RENEWAL - WITH CHANGES - FINAL PERMIT RENEWAL - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST RECEIVED Doc Link: Date:4/27/2009 109 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:RENEWAL - WITH CHANGES - FINAL PERMIT RENEWAL - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST ACKNOWLEDGED Doc Link: Date:6/19/2006 Unit: Event Description:*MOD CLASS 2 - 2 OR MORE UNITS - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST RECEIVED Doc Link: Date:4/28/2008 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:RENEWAL - WITH CHANGES - 2ND NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/https://www.hwmpenvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/site_documents/59125038 98/Metech%20Notice%20of%20Deficiency%202%2Epdf Date:6/25/1997 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - FINAL PART A & PART B RECEIVED Doc Link: Date:7/25/1997 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - PUBLIC COMMENT (BEGIN) Doc Link: Date:5/21/1996 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Doc Link: Date:11/13/2007 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:RENEWAL - WITH CHANGES - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Doc Link: Date:6/5/2007 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:RENEWAL - WITH CHANGES - 1ST NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/https://www.hwmpenvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/site_documents/40860268 47/Metech%20Notice%20of%20Deficency%201%2Epdf Date:11/5/2001 110 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Unit: Event Description:*MOD CLASS 1* - PRIOR APPROVAL REQUIRED - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION Doc Link: Date:5/8/2000 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:*MOD CLASS 1* - PRIOR APPROVAL REQUIRED - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION Doc Link: Date:4/12/1999 Unit:BALLMILL(T16,17A,18A,18A-1) Event Description:*MOD CLASS 1* - PRIOR APPROVAL REQUIRED - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION Doc Link: Date:12/20/1995 Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Event Description:NEW OPERATING PERMIT - 2ND NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Doc Link: Units Undergoing Closure Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Date:4/27/2009 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - CLOSURE NOTICE RECEIVED Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/hwmp_final_documents?global_id=CAD077182293&link_key=108&docum ent_category=CLOSURE+NOTICE&event_description=Closure+Final+%2D+CLOSURE+NOTICE+RECEIVED+& mytype=pa Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Date:8/31/2012 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - RECEIVE CLOSURE CERTIFICATION Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/https://www.hwmpenvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/site_documents/36939522 62/Closure%20Final%20aw%20envirostor%2Epdf Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Date:3/14/2014 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - ISSUE CLOSURE VERIFICATION Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/hwmp_final_documents?global_id=CAD077182293&link_key=108&docum ent_category=CLOSURE+VERIFICATION&event_description=Closure+Final+%2D+ISSUE+CLOSURE+VERIFIC ATION+&mytype=pa Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Date:4/25/2013 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - CEQA DETERMINATION Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/https://www.hwmpenvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/site_documents/78967720 111 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB 86/NOE%20Final%20Nancy%20Envirostor%2Epdf Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Date:4/25/2013 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - CLOSURE PLAN APPROVED Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/https://www.hwmpenvirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/site_documents/61662880 77/Closure%20Plan%20Approval%20letter%20Envirostor%2Epdf Unit:MULTIPLE UNITS: ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21- 22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Date:10/12/2009 Event Description:CLOSURE FINAL - CLOSURE PLAN RECEIVED Doc Link:http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/hwmp_final_documents?global_id=CAD077182293&link_key=108&docum ent_category=PLAN+RECEIVED&event_description=Closure+Final+%2D+CLOSURE+PLAN+RECEIVED+&mytyp e=pa m-29-820356791-b 2 of 3 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 186.55 / 3 METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 950207012 dd-HWP-820356791-bb p1p-820356791-y1y EPA ID:CAD077182293 Public Part Speci: Site Code:200334 Public Info Officer: Status:CLOSED Assembly District:30 Facility Type:Historical - Non-Operating Senate District:17 Facility Size:County:SANTA CLARA Team:LORI KOCH Latitude:36.99016 Project Manager:Longitude:-121.554015 Hazardous Waste Units Completed Activities Completed Date:05/21/1996 Event Description:New Operating Permit - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:04/27/2009 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - FINAL PERMIT RENEWAL - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST ACKNOWLEDGED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:06/25/1997 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PART A & PART B RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:05/08/2000 Event Description:*Mod Class 1* - Prior Approval Required - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:04/12/1999 Event Description:*Mod Class 1* - Prior Approval Required - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION Unit Names:BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1) 29 HWP 112 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Completed Date:04/28/2008 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - 2ND NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:04/27/2009 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - FINAL PERMIT RENEWAL - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:06/19/2006 Event Description:*Mod Class 2 - 2 or More Units - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST RECEIVED Unit Names: Completed Date:12/20/1995 Event Description:New Operating Permit - 2ND NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:06/19/2006 Event Description:*Mod Class 2 - 2 or More Units - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION - WITHDRAWAL REQUEST ACKNOWLEDGED Unit Names: Completed Date:11/13/2007 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - APPLICATION PART B RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:07/25/1997 Event Description:New Operating Permit - PUBLIC COMMENT (END) Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:08/22/1995 Event Description:New Operating Permit - 1ST NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:12/13/2006 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - INITIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW COMPLETED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:06/05/2007 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - 1ST NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY ISSUED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:12/10/1997 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PERMIT (EFFECTIVE) Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), 113 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:09/20/2008 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - DISCLOSURE (CLEARED) Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:12/10/1997 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PERMIT Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:12/10/2007 Event Description:New Operating Permit - FINAL PERMIT (EXPIRES) Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:11/05/2001 Event Description:*Mod Class 1* - Prior Approval Required - FINAL PERMIT MODIFICATION Unit Names: Completed Date:07/17/2006 Event Description:Renewal - With Changes - CALL-IN LETTER ISSUED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:07/25/1997 Event Description:New Operating Permit - PUBLIC COMMENT (BEGIN) Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Hazardous Waste Units Undergoing Closure Completed Date:04/27/2009 Event Description:Closure Final - CLOSURE NOTICE RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:04/25/2013 Event Description:Closure Final - CLOSURE PLAN APPROVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:04/25/2013 Event Description:Closure Final - CEQA DETERMINATION Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:10/12/2009 Event Description:Closure Final - CLOSURE PLAN RECEIVED Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), 114 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:03/14/2014 Event Description:Closure Final - ISSUE CLOSURE VERIFICATION Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Completed Date:08/31/2012 Event Description:Closure Final - RECEIVE CLOSURE CERTIFICATION Unit Names:ACIDTANK(S2), BALLMILL(T16,17a,18a,18a-1), BIF1, CYANIDETANK(S1), LOW PH CYANIDE CONTAINMENT TRAY, MELTINGFURNACE(T12a,13a,15a), MELTINGFURNANCE(T11-14), OUTSIDESTORAGE(S3), PHADJUSTMENT(TANK7-8), RINSETANK(T20), SCREENER(T19), SCREENER(T21-22), SCREENER(T23), SOLUTIONPROCESS(TANK1-6), THERMALREDUCTIONFURNANCES(T9-10), TRUSTAGING(S4) Alias Alias:200334 Alias Type:Project Code (Site Code) Alias:110000782939 Alias Type:FRS m-29-820209916-b 3 of 3 SSW 0.83 / 4,379.14 186.55 / 3 METECH RECYCLING INC 6200 ENGEL WAY GILROY CA 95020 dd-INSP COMP ENF-820209916-bb p1p-820209916-y1y EPA ID:CAD077182293 County:SANTA CLARA Geotracker Address:6200 ENGEL WAY Geotracker City:GILROY Geotracker Latitude:36.99016 Geotracker Longitude:-121.554015 Report URL:https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/eerp_profile_report?global_id=3000606 Inspection Information Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:9/29/2005 Violations:No Violations Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:10/17/2005 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2395365 Inspection Date:6/23/2016 Violations:Class 1, Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:7/22/2016 Title:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2398040 Inspection Date:6/29/2017 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:7/5/2017 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:5/1/2012 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:6/8/2012 Report Sent Date:7/18/2013 29 INSP COMP ENF 115 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Title:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2394466 Inspection Date:8/7/2014 Violations:No Violations Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:8/7/2014 Title:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:1/28/2005 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:10/31/2005 Report Sent Date:1/31/2005 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2395366 Inspection Date:5/18/2017 Violations:Class 1, Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:9/29/2017 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2394592 Inspection Date:5/20/2015 Violations:Class 1, Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:6/19/2015 Report Sent Date:5/26/2015 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:6/24/2008 Violations:Minor Return to Compliance:6/26/2008 Report Sent Date:9/17/2008 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:5/18/2011 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:11/9/2011 Report Sent Date:6/15/2011 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:5/18/2011 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:11/9/2011 Report Sent Date:3/14/2012 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:6/27/2013 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:9/26/2013 Report Sent Date:7/18/2013 Title:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:11/29/2012 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:3/14/2014 Report Sent Date:11/29/2012 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:4/29/2010 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:2/9/2011 Report Sent Date:2/11/2011 116 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:12/14/2004 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:12/17/2004 Report Sent Date:12/29/2004 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:6/27/2013 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:9/17/2013 Report Sent Date:5/7/2014 Title:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2395140 Inspection Date:6/26/2015 Violations:Class 1, Minor Return to Compliance:7/31/2015 Report Sent Date:6/29/2015 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:5/1/2012 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:10/24/2012 Report Sent Date:5/30/2012 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:10/12/2000 Violations:Class 1, Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:11/26/2001 Report Sent Date:3/20/2001 Title:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:7/17/2007 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:8/26/2007 Report Sent Date:8/29/2007 Title:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:1/31/2005 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:8/26/2007 Report Sent Date:1/31/2005 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:6/27/2007 Violations:Minor Return to Compliance:8/27/2007 Report Sent Date:8/7/2007 Title:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:7/11/2008 Violations:No Violations Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:7/15/2008 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2393246 Inspection Date:5/29/2014 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:6/13/2014 117 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Report Sent Date:7/30/2014 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:12/14/2004 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:12/22/2004 Report Sent Date:3/23/2005 Title:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2396751 Inspection Date:8/2/2016 Violations:No Violations Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:8/2/2016 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link:view_eerp_document?global_id=3000606&enforcement_id=2393285 Inspection Date:5/29/2014 Violations:Class 2 Return to Compliance:6/13/2014 Report Sent Date:7/30/2014 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:4/29/2010 Violations:Class 2, Minor Return to Compliance:3/25/2011 Report Sent Date:5/6/2010 Title:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:1/12/2012 Violations:No Violations Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:1/12/2012 Title:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Title Link: Inspection Date:6/24/2008 Violations:Minor Return to Compliance:6/26/2008 Report Sent Date:6/26/2008 Title:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Title Link: Inspection Date:12/4/2001 Violations:No Violations Return to Compliance: Report Sent Date:3/15/2002 Enforcement Information Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:5/18/2011 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:12/14/2004 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:5/18/2011 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:5/20/2015 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:5/1/2012 118 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:6/23/2016 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:1/12/2012 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:6/24/2008 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:6/24/2008 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:6/26/2015 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:6/29/2017 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:6/27/2013 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:7/11/2008 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:5/29/2014 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:8/2/2016 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:5/1/2012 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:7/17/2007 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:12/14/2004 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:1/28/2005 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:8/7/2014 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:6/27/2007 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:6/27/2013 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:5/29/2014 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:4/29/2010 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:5/18/2017 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:12/4/2001 Enforcement Type:Focused Compliance Inspection - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:9/29/2005 Enforcement Type:Consent Order with Enforcement and Settlement - Federal CA/FO (385) Enforcement Date:11/26/2001 119 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Map Key Number of Records Direction Distance (mi/ft) Elev/Diff (ft) Site DB Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:10/12/2000 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:11/29/2012 Enforcement Type:Financial Records Review - Universal Waste Electronics Recycler Enforcement Date:1/31/2005 Enforcement Type:Compliance Evaluation Inspection - Standardized Permit Enforcement Date:4/29/2010 Enforcement Actions Title:Consent Order with Enforcement and Settlement - Federal CA/FO (385) Title Link: Issued Completed Date:11/26/2001 Permitting Site Code:200334 Site Facility Type:CLOSED - PERMIT AUTHORITY: Standardized Program Type:HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY Assembly District:30 Senate District:17 Facility Type:HIST PERMITTED Facility History: Metech International, Inc. (Metech) is a precious metal recycling facility operating since December 10,1997 when they were first permitted. Metech processes solid hazardous scrap metals and precious metal containing liquid hazardous waste. Precious metals are gold, silver, platinum, palladium, rhodium and iridium. The facility is designed to receive, sort, classify, homogenize, analyze and recover these metals which at the end of processing, are sent to smelters or other facilities for further processing. Solid scrap metals upon receipt are roasted, milled, melted in furnaces and then cast into ingots. Precious metal containing liquid hazardous waste is separated by pH. High pH liquids are electroplated to recover the metals. Low pH liquids are is neutralized to recover the precious metals. Metech is applying for a Series B standardized Hazardous Waste Facility Permit renewal. Their permit expired on December 10, 2007 but DTSC is allowing Metech to continue to operate under their old permit until a their permit is finalized. On April 27, 2009, Metech withdrew their Permit application and is now currently undergoing final closure. Metech received their last shipment of hazardous waste in May 2009 and completed all hazardous waste processing activities on September 1, 2009. Permitting Site Code:200334 Site Facility Type:CLOSED - PERMIT AUTHORITY: Standardized Program Type:HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY Assembly District:30 Senate District:17 Facility Type:HIST PERMITTED Facility History: Metech International, Inc. (Metech) is a precious metal recycling facility operating since December 10,1997 when they were first permitted. Metech processes solid hazardous scrap metals and precious metal containing liquid hazardous waste. Precious metals are gold, silver, platinum, palladium, rhodium and iridium. The facility is designed to receive, sort, classify, homogenize, analyze and recover these metals which at the end of processing, are sent to smelters or other facilities for further processing. Solid scrap metals upon receipt are roasted, milled, melted in furnaces and then cast into ingots. Precious metal containing liquid hazardous waste is separated by pH. High pH liquids are electroplated to recover the metals. Low pH liquids are is neutralized to recover the precious metals. Metech is applying for a Series B standardized Hazardous Waste Facility Permit renewal. Their permit expired on December 10, 2007 but DTSC is allowing Metech to continue to operate under their old permit until a their permit is finalized. On April 27, 2009, Metech withdrew their Permit application and is now currently undergoing final closure. Metech received their last shipment of hazardous waste in May 2009 and completed all hazardous waste processing activities on September 1, 2009. 120 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Unplottable Summary Total: 2 Unplottable sites DB Company Name/Site Name Address City Zip ERIS ID uu-GILROY CUPA-824918379-aa PG&E - Llagas Satellite Materials Facility and Substation Renz Lane n/o Pacheco Pass Road (Hwy. 152) Gilroy CA 95020 824918379 uu-SANTACLARA LO-820144903-aa Caltrans Gilroy Maint. Sta. #2 Pacheco Pass Hwy Unincorporated CA 820144903 SCVWD ID | Closure Date: 11S4E03N01f | 8/20/1991 GILROY CUPA SANTACLARA LO Unplottable Summary 121 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Unplottable Report Site:PG&E - Llagas Satellite Materials Facility and Substation Renz Lane n/o Pacheco Pass Road (Hwy. 152) Gilroy CA 95020 uu-GILROY CUPA-824918379-bb CERS ID: 10147477 RCRA Lrg Qnty Gen:No Facility ID: 5655 Fac Info Rpt Req:Applicable HM on Site: Yes Inv Rpt Req:Applicable CALARP Reg Subst: No UST Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op UST: No RMR Rpt Req:Not Applicable Own/Op PST: No APSA Rpt Req:Not Applicable HW Generator: No CALARP Rpt Req:Not Applicable Recycle: No Hw Treat Rpt Req:Not Applicable On Site HW Trtmnt: No CALARP Reg Code: Consolid Rpt Req: ER training Rpt Req: Tank Close Rpt Req: Site:Caltrans Gilroy Maint. Sta. #2 Pacheco Pass Hwy Unincorporated CA uu-SANTACLARA LO-820144903-bb SCVWD ID:11S4E03N01f Closure Date:8/20/1991 Link:http://lustop.sccgov.org/files/11S4E03N01f/ GILROY CUPA SANTACLARA LO Unplottable Report 122 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Appendix: Database Descriptions Environmental Risk Information Services (ERIS) can search the following databases. The extent of historical information varies with each database and current information is determined by what is publicly available to ERIS at the time of update. ERIS updates databases as set out in ASTM Standard E1527-13, Section 8.1.8 Sources of Standard Source Information: "Government information from nongovernmental sources may be considered current if the source updates the information at least every 90 days, or, for information that is updated less frequently than quarterly by the government agency, within 90 days of the date the government agency makes the information available to the public." Standard Environmental Record Sources Federal National Priority List:rr-NPL-bb National Priorities List (Superfund)-NPL: EPA's (United States Environmental Protection Agency) list of the most serious uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites identified for possible long-term remedial action under the Superfund program. The NPL, which EPA is required to update at least once a year, is based primarily on the score a site receives from EPA's Hazard Ranking System. A site must be on the NPL to receive money from the Superfund Trust Fund for remedial action. Government Publication Date: Jul 3, 2018 National Priority List - Proposed:rr-PROPOSED NPL-bb Includes sites proposed (by the EPA, the state, or concerned citizens) for addition to the NPL due to contamination by hazardous waste and identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a candidate for cleanup because it poses a risk to human health and/or the environment. Government Publication Date: Jul 3, 2018 Deleted NPL:rr-DELETED NPL-bb The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. Government Publication Date: Jul 3, 2018 SEMS List 8R Active Site Inventory:rr-SEMS-bb The Superfund Program has deployed the Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS), which integrates multiple legacy systems into a comprehensive tracking and reporting tool. This inventory contains active sites evaluated by the Superfund program that are either proposed to be or are on the National Priorities List (NPL) as well as sites that are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. The Active Site Inventory Report displays site and location information at active SEMS sites. An active site is one at which site assessment, removal, remedial, enforcement, cost recovery, or oversight activities are being planned or conducted. Government Publication Date: Jun 8, 2018 SEMS List 8R Archive Sites:rr-SEMS ARCHIVE-bb The Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) Archived Site Inventory displays site and location information at sites archived from SEMS. An archived site is one at which EPA has determined that assessment has been completed and no further remedial action is planned under the Superfund program at this time. Government Publication Date: Jun 8, 2018 Inventory of Open Dumps, June 1985:rr-ODI-bb The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) provides for publication of an inventory of open dumps. The Act defines "open dumps" as facilities which do not comply with EPA's "Criteria for Classification of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities and Practices" (40 CFR 257). Government Publication Date: Jun 1985 NPL PROPOSED NPL DELETED NPL SEMS SEMS ARCHIVE ODI Appendix: Database Descriptions 123 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 EPA Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands:rr-IODI-bb Public Law 103-399, The Indian Lands Open Dump Cleanup Act of 1994, enacted October 22, 1994, identified congressional concerns that solid waste open dump sites located on American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) lands threaten the health and safety of residents of those lands and contiguous areas. The purpose of the Act is to identify the location of open dumps on Indian lands, assess the relative health and environment hazards posed by those sites, and provide financial and technical assistance to Indian tribal governments to close such dumps in compliance with Federal standards and regulations or standards promulgated by Indian Tribal governments or Alaska Native entities. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 1998 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System - CERCLIS: rr-CERCLIS-bb Superfund is a program administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to locate, investigate, and clean up the worst hazardous waste sites throughout the United States. CERCLIS is a database of potential and confirmed hazardous waste sites at which the EPA Superfund program has some involvement. It contains sites that are either proposed to be or are on the National Priorities List (NPL) as well as sites that are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. The EPA administers the Superfund program in cooperation with individual states and tribal governments; this database is made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Oct 25, 2013 CERCLIS - No Further Remedial Action Planned:rr-CERCLIS NFRAP-bb An archived site is one at which EPA has determined that assessment has been completed and no further remedial action is planned under the Superfund program at this time. The Archive designation means that, to the best of EPA's knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List (NPL). This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that, based upon available information, the location is not judged to be a potential NPL site. Government Publication Date: Oct 25, 2013 CERCLIS Liens:rr-CERCLIS LIENS-bb A Federal Superfund lien exists at any property where EPA has incurred Superfund costs to address contamination ("Superfund site") and has provided notice of liability to the property owner. A Federal CERCLA ("Superfund") lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent Superfund monies. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Jan 30, 2014 RCRA CORRACTS-Corrective Action:rr-RCRA CORRACTS-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. At these sites, the Corrective Action Program ensures that cleanups occur. EPA and state regulators work with facilities and communities to design remedies based on the contamination, geology, and anticipated use unique to each site. Government Publication Date: Aug 2, 2018 RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD Facilities:rr-RCRA TSD-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. This database includes Non-Corrective Action sites listed as treatment, storage and/or disposal facilities of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Government Publication Date: Aug 2, 2018 RCRA Generator List:rr-RCRA LQG-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Large Quantity Generators (LQGs) generate 1,000 kilograms per month or more of hazardous waste or more than one kilogram per month of acutely hazardous waste. Government Publication Date: Aug 2, 2018 RCRA Small Quantity Generators List:rr-RCRA SQG-bb RCRA Info is the EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Small Quantity Generators (SQGs) generate more than 100 kilograms, but less than 1,000 kilograms, of hazardous waste per month. Government Publication Date: Aug 2, 2018 IODI CERCLIS CERCLIS NFRAP CERCLIS LIENS RCRA CORRACTS RCRA TSD RCRA LQG RCRA SQG 124 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 RCRA Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators List:rr-RCRA CESQG-bb RCRA Info is the EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQG) generate 100 kilograms or less per month of hazardous waste or one kilogram or less per month of acutely hazardous waste. Government Publication Date: Aug 2, 2018 RCRA Non-Generators:rr-RCRA NON GEN-bb RCRA Info is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. RCRA Info replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). A hazardous waste generator is any person or site whose processes and actions create hazardous waste (see 40 CFR 260.10). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste. Government Publication Date: Aug 2, 2018 Federal Engineering Controls-ECs:rr-FED ENG-bb Engineering controls (ECs) encompass a variety of engineered and constructed physical barriers (e.g., soil capping, sub-surface venting systems, mitigation barriers, fences) to contain and/or prevent exposure to contamination on a property. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Jan 20, 2016 Federal Institutional Controls- ICs:rr-FED INST-bb Institutional controls are non-engineered instruments, such as administrative and legal controls, that help minimize the potential for human exposure to contamination and/or protect the integrity of the remedy. Although it is EPA's (United States Environmental Protection Agency ) expectation that treatment or engineering controls will be used to address principal threat wastes and that groundwater will be returned to its beneficial use whenever practicable, ICs play an important role in site remedies because they reduce exposure to contamination by limiting land or resource use and guide human behavior at a site. Government Publication Date: Jan 20, 2016 Emergency Response Notification System:rr-ERNS 1982 TO 1986-bb Database of oil and hazardous substances spill reports controlled by the National Response Center. The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. Government Publication Date: 1982-1986 Emergency Response Notification System:rr-ERNS 1987 TO 1989-bb Database of oil and hazardous substances spill reports controlled by the National Response Center. The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. Government Publication Date: 1987-1989 Emergency Response Notification System:rr-ERNS-bb Database of oil and hazardous substances spill reports controlled by the National Response Center. The primary function of the National Response Center is to serve as the sole national point of contact for reporting oil, chemical, radiological, biological, and etiological discharges into the environment anywhere in the United States and its territories. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Feb 12, 2018 The Assessment, Cleanup and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) Brownfield Database:rr-FED BROWNFIELDS-bb Brownfields are real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. Cleaning up and reinvesting in these properties protects the environment, reduces blight, and takes development pressures off greenspaces and working lands. This database is made available by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Feb 20, 2018 FEMA Underground Storage Tank Listing:rr-FEMA UST-bb The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security maintains a list of FEMA owned underground storage tanks. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2017 RCRA CESQG RCRA NON GEN FED ENG FED INST ERNS 1982 TO 1986 ERNS 1987 TO 1989 ERNS FED BROWNFIELDS FEMA UST 125 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 LIEN on Property:rr-SEMS LIEN-bb The EPA Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEMS) provides LIEN information on properties under the EPA Superfund Program. Government Publication Date: Jun 8, 2018 Superfund Decision Documents:rr-SUPERFUND ROD-bb This database contains a listing of decision documents for Superfund sites. Decision documents serve to provide the reasoning for the choice of (or) changes to a Superfund Site cleanup plan. The decision documents include Records of Decision (ROD), ROD Amendments, Explanations of Significant Differences (ESD), along with other associated memos and files. This information is maintained and made available by the US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). Government Publication Date: Jun 8, 2018 State State Response Sites:rr-RESPONSE-bb A list of identified confirmed release sites where the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is involved in remediation, either in a lead or oversight capacity. These confirmed release sites are generally high-priority and high potential risk. This database is state equivalent NPL. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 EnviroStor Database:rr-ENVIROSTOR-bb The EnviroStor Data Management System is made available by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Includes Corrective Action sites, Tiered Permit sites, Historical Sites and Evaluation/Investigation sites. This database is state equivalent CERCLIS. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 Delisted State Response Sites:rr-DELISTED ENVS-bb Sites removed from the list of State Response Sites made available by the EnviroStor Data Management System, Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 Solid Waste Information System (SWIS):rr-SWF/LF-bb The Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) database made available by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) contains information on solid waste facilities, operations, and disposal sites throughout the State of California. The types of facilities found in this database include landfills, transfer stations, material recovery facilities, composting sites, transformation facilities, waste tire sites, and closed disposal sites. Government Publication Date: Aug 15, 2018 EnviroStor Hazardous Waste Facilities:rr-HWP-bb A list of hazardous waste facilities including permitted, post-closure and historical facilities found in the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database. Government Publication Date: Aug 23, 2018 Land Disposal Sites:rr-LDS-bb Land Disposal Sites in GeoTracker, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)'s data management system. The Land Disposal program regulates of waste discharge to land for treatment, storage and disposal in waste management units. Waste management units include waste piles, surface impoundments, and landfills. Government Publication Date: Jul 19, 2018 Sites Listed in the Solid Waste Assessment Test (SWAT) Program Report:rr-SWAT-bb In a 1993 Memorandum of Understanding, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) agreed to submit a comprehensive report on the Solid Waste Assessment Test (SWAT) Program to the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB). This report summarizes the work completed to date on the SWAT Program, and addresses both the impacts that leakage from solid waste disposal sites (SWDS) may have upon waters of the State and the actions taken to address such leakage. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 1995 Leaking Underground Fuel Tank Reports:rr-LUST-bb List of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks within the Cleanup Sites data in GeoTracker database. GeoTracker is the State Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB) data management system for managing sites that impact groundwater, especially those that require groundwater cleanup (Underground Storage Tanks, Department of Defense and Site Cleanup Program) as well as permitted facilities such as operating Underground Storage Tanks. The Leak Prevention Program that overlooks LUST sites is the SWRCB in California's Environmental Protection Agency. SEMS LIEN SUPERFUND ROD RESPONSE ENVIROSTOR DELISTED ENVS SWF/LF HWP LDS SWAT LUST 126 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Government Publication Date: Jul 6, 2018 Delisted Leaking Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED LST-bb List of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) cleanup sites removed from GeoTracker, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)'s database system, as well as sites removed from the SWRCB's list of UST Case closures. Government Publication Date: Jul 19, 2018 Permitted Underground Storage Tank (UST) in GeoTracker:rr-UST-bb List of Permitted Underground Storage Tank (UST) sites made available by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in California's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Government Publication Date: Jul 1, 2018 Solid Waste Disposal Sites with Waste Constituents Above Hazardous Waste Levels:rr-SWRCB SWF-bb This is a list of solid waste disposal sites identified by California State Water Resources Control Board with waste constituents above hazardous waste levels outside the waste management unit. Government Publication Date: Sep 20, 2006 Proposed Closure of Underground Storage Tank Cases:rr-UST CLOSURE-bb List of UST cases that are being considered for closure by either the California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board or the Executive Director that have been posted for a 60-day public comment period. Government Publication Date: Jul 19, 2018 Historical Hazardous Substance Storage Information Database:rr-HHSS-bb The Historical Hazardous Substance Storage database contains information collected in the 1980s from facilities that stored hazardous substances. The information was originally collected on paper forms, was later transferred to microfiche, and recently indexed as a searchable database. When using this database, please be aware that it is based upon self-reported information submitted by facilities which has not been independently verified. It is unlikely that every facility responded to the survey and the database should not be expected to be a complete inventory of all facilities that were operating at that time. This database is maintained by the California State Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB) Geotracker. Government Publication Date: Aug 27, 2015 Aboveground Storage Tanks:rr-AST-bb A statewide list from 2009 of aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) made available by the Cal FIRE Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM). This list is no longer maintained or updated by the Cal FIRE OSFM. Government Publication Date: Aug 31, 2009 Delisted Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED TNK-bb This database contains a list of storage tank sites that were removed by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in California's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Cal FIRE Office of State Fire Marshal (OSFM). Government Publication Date: Jul 01, 2018 California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Tanks:rr-CERS TANK-bb List of sites in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal which fall under the Aboveground Petroleum Storage and Underground Storage Tank regulatory programs. The CalEPA oversees the statewide implementation of the Unified Program which applies regulatory standards to protect Californians from hazardous waste and materials. Government Publication Date: Jul 9, 2018 Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program Facility Sites with Land Use Restrictions:rr-LUR-bb The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program (SMBRP) list includes sites cleaned up under the program's oversight and generally does not include current or former hazardous waste facilities that required a hazardous waste facility permit. The list represents land use restrictions that are active. Some sites have multiple land use restrictions. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 Hazardous Waste Management Program Facility Sites with Deed / Land Use Restrictions:rr-HLUR-bb The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Hazardous Waste Management Program (HWMP) has developed a list of current or former hazardous waste facilities that have a recorded land use restriction at the local county recorder's office. The land use restrictions on this list were required by the DTSC HWMP as a result of the presence of hazardous substances that remain on site after the facility (or part of the facility) has been closed or cleaned up. The types of land use restriction include deed notice, deed restriction, or a land use restriction that binds current and future owners. DELISTED LST UST SWRCB SWF UST CLOSURE HHSS AST DELISTED TNK CERS TANK LUR HLUR 127 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Government Publication Date: Aug 8, 2018 Deed Restrictions and Land Use Restrictions:rr-DEED-bb List of Deed Restrictions, Land Use Restrictions and Covenants in GeoTracker made available by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in California's Environmental Protection Agency. A deed restriction (land use covenant) may be required to facilitate the remediation of past environmental contamination and to protect human health and the environment by reducing the risk of exposure to residual hazardous materials. Government Publication Date: Jul 27, 2018 Voluntary Cleanup Program:rr-VCP-bb List of sites in the Voluntary Cleanup Program made available by the Department of Toxic Substances and Control (DTSC). The Voluntary Cleanup Program was designed to respond to lower priority sites. Under the Voluntary Cleanup Program, DTSC enters site-specific agreements with project proponents for DTSC oversight of site assessment, investigation, and/or removal or remediation activities, and the project proponents agree to pay DTSC's reasonable costs for those services. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 GeoTracker Cleanup Sites Data:rr-CLEANUP SITES-bb A list of cleanup sites in the state of California made available by The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) of the California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). SWRCB tracks leaking underground storage tank cleanups as well as other water board cleanups. Government Publication Date: Jul 6, 2018 Delisted California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Tanks:rr-DELISTED CTNK-bb This database contains a list of Aboveground Petroleum Storage and Underground Storage Tank sites that were removed from in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal. Government Publication Date: Jul 9, 2018 Historical Hazardous Substance Storage Container Information - Facility Summary:rr-HIST TANK-bb The State Water Resources Control Board maintained the Hazardous Substance Storage Containers listing and inventory in th 1980s. This facility summary lists historic tank sites where the following container types were present: farm motor vehicle fuel tanks; waste tanks; sumps; pits, ponds, lagoons, and others; and all other product tanks. This set, published in May 1988, lists facility and owner information, as well as the number of containers. This data is historic and will not be updated. Government Publication Date: May 27, 1988 Tribal Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs) on Indian Lands:rr-INDIAN LUST-bb LUSTs on Tribal/Indian Lands in Region 9, which includes California. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2017 Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) on Indian Lands:rr-INDIAN UST-bb USTs on Tribal/Indian Lands in Region 9, which includes California. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2017 Delisted Tribal Leaking Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED ILST-bb Leaking Underground Storage Tank facilities which have been removed from the Regional Tribal LUST lists made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Oct 14, 2017 Delisted Tribal Underground Storage Tanks:rr-DELISTED IUST-bb Underground Storage Tank facilities which have been removed from the Regional Tribal UST lists made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Oct 14, 2017 County Delisted County Records:rr-DELISTED COUNTY-bb Records removed from county or CUPA databases. Records may be removed from the county lists made available by the respective county departments because they are inactive, or because they have been deemed to be below reportable thresholds. DEED VCP CLEANUP SITES DELISTED CTNK HIST TANK INDIAN LUST INDIAN UST DELISTED ILST DELISTED IUST DELISTED COUNTY 128 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Government Publication Date: Seo 4, 2018 Santa Clara County - City of San Jose Hazardous Material Facilities:rr-SANJOSE HM-bb A list of facilities with hazardous materials, including underground and aboveground tanks. This list is maintained by the City of San Jose Fire Department. Government Publication Date: Jul 8, 2018 Santa Clara County - Gilroy City CUPA Facilities List:rr-GILROY CUPA-bb The Gilroy City Fire Marshal's office maintains a list of CUPA Facilities located in Gilroy City. Government Publication Date: Jul 2, 2018 Santa Clara County CUPA Facilities List:rr-SANTACLARA CUPA-bb A list of facilities associated with various Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) programs in Santa Clara County. This list is made available by Santa Clara County Department of Environmental health (DEH). DEH's Hazardous Materials Compliance Division (HMCD) is CUPA for the county with jurisdiction within the Cities of Los Altos Hills, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga; and in all unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County, including Moffett Field, San Martin, and Stanford. Government Publication Date: Jun 12, 2018 Santa Clara Historic Solvent Case Listing:rr-SANTACLARA HSOL-bb The Santa Clara Valley Water District was responsible for the oversight of solvent and toxic release cases and maintained a list of historic solvent cases in Santa Clara County. Government Publication Date: Aug 22, 2016 Santa Clara Local Oversight Program Listing:rr-SANTACLARA LO-bb A list of Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) facilities in Santa Clara County Provided by Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health (DEH). Since July 1, 2004 the DEH has served as the oversight agency for investigations and clean-up of petroleum releases from underground storage tanks through implementation of the Local Oversight Program (LOP) contract with the State Water Resources Control Board. Government Publication Date: Jun 14, 2017 Santa Clara County - Sunnyvale City CUPA List:rr-SUNNYVALE CUPA-bb A list of facilities associated with various Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) programs in Sunnyvale City, Santa Clara County. This list is made available by the Fire Prevention & Hazardous Materials division of the Sunnyvale Department of Public Safety. Government Publication Date: Jun 14, 2018 Additional Environmental Record Sources Federal Facility Registry Service/Facility Index:rr-FINDS/FRS-bb The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s Facility Registry System (FRS) is a centrally managed database that identifies facilities, sites or places subject to environmental regulations or of environmental interest. FRS creates high-quality, accurate, and authoritative facility identification records through rigorous verification and management procedures that incorporate information from program national systems, state master facility records, data collected from EPA's Central Data Exchange registrations and data management personnel. Government Publication Date: Apr 17, 2018 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Program:rr-TRIS-bb The EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) is a database containing data on disposal or other releases of over 650 toxic chemicals from thousands of U.S. facilities and information about how facilities manage those chemicals through recycling, energy recovery, and treatment. One of TRI's primary purposes is to inform communities about toxic chemical releases to the environment. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2016 Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System:rr-HMIRS-bb US DOT - Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) Incidents Reports Database taken from Hazmat Intelligence Portal, U.S. Department of Transportation. Government Publication Date: May 23, 2018 SANJOSE HM GILROY CUPA SANTACLARA CUPA SANTACLARA HSOL SANTACLARA LO SUNNYVALE CUPA FINDS/FRS TRIS HMIRS 129 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 National Clandestine Drug Labs:rr-NCDL-bb The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this data as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry and does not guarantee its accuracy. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 Toxic Substances Control Act:rr-TSCA-bb The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 8(a) Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) rule and changing its name to the Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule. The CDR enables EPA to collect and publish information on the manufacturing, processing, and use of commercial chemical substances and mixtures (referred to hereafter as chemical substances) on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory (TSCA Inventory). This includes current information on chemical substance production volumes, manufacturing sites, and how the chemical substances are used. This information helps the Agency determine whether people or the environment are potentially exposed to reported chemical substances. EPA publishes submitted CDR data that is not Confidential Business Information (CBI). Government Publication Date: Jun 30, 2017 Hist TSCA:rr-HIST TSCA-bb The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 8(a) Inventory Update Reporting (IUR) rule and changing its name to the Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule. The 2006 IUR data summary report includes information about chemicals manufactured or imported in quantities of 25,000 pounds or more at a single site during calendar year 2005. In addition to the basic manufacturing information collected in previous reporting cycles, the 2006 cycle is the first time EPA collected information to characterize exposure during manufacturing, processing and use of organic chemicals. The 2006 cycle also is the first time manufacturers of inorganic chemicals were required to report basic manufacturing information. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2006 FTTS Administrative Case Listing:rr-FTTS ADMIN-bb An administrative case listing from the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), together known as FTTS. This database was obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Compliance Database (NCDB). The FTTS and NCDB was shut down in 2006. Government Publication Date: Jan 19, 2007 FTTS Inspection Case Listing:rr-FTTS INSP-bb An inspection case listing from the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), together known as FTTS. This database was obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Compliance Database (NCDB). The FTTS and NCDB was shut down in 2006. Government Publication Date: Jan 19, 2007 Potentially Responsible Parties List:rr-PRP-bb Early in the cleanup process, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducts a search to find the potentially responsible parties (PRPs). EPA looks for evidence to determine liability by matching wastes found at the site with parties that may have contributed wastes to the site. Government Publication Date: Jul 17, 2018 State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing:rr-SCRD DRYCLEANER-bb The State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners (SCRD) was established in 1998, with support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. Coalition members are states with mandated programs and funding for drycleaner site remediation. Current members are Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. Government Publication Date: Nov 08, 2017 Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS):rr-ICIS-bb The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) is a system that provides information for the Federal Enforcement and Compliance (FE&C) and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs. The FE&C component supports the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Civil Enforcement and Compliance program activities. These activities include Compliance Assistance, Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement. The NPDES program supports tracking of NPDES permits, limits, discharge monitoring data and other program reports. Government Publication Date: Nov 18, 2016 Drycleaner Facilities:rr-FED DRYCLEANERS-bb NCDL TSCA HIST TSCA FTTS ADMIN FTTS INSP PRP SCRD DRYCLEANER ICIS FED DRYCLEANERS 130 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 A list of drycleaner facilities from the Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) tracks facilities that possess NAIC and SIC codes that classify businesses as drycleaner establishments. Government Publication Date: May 29, 2018 Delisted Drycleaner Facilities:rr-DELISTED FED DRY-bb List of sites removed from the list of Drycleaner Facilities (sites in the EPA's Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) with NAIC or SIC codes identifying the business as a drycleaner establishment). Government Publication Date: May 29, 2018 Formerly Used Defense Sites:rr-FUDS-bb Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) are properties that were formerly owned by, leased to, or otherwise possessed by and under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense prior to October 1986, where the Department of Defense (DoD) is responsible for an environmental restoration. This list is published by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Government Publication Date: Nov 22, 2016 Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS):rr-MLTS-bb A list of sites that store radioactive material subject to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing requirements. This list is maintained by the NRC. As of September 2016, the NRC no longer releases location information for sites. Site locations were last received in July 2016. Government Publication Date: Jun 30, 2017 Historic Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS) sites:rr-HIST MLTS-bb A historic list of sites that have inactive licenses and/or removed from the Material Licensing Tracking System (MLTS). In some cases, a site is removed from the MLTS when the state becomes an "Agreement State". An Agreement State is a State that has signed an agreement with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) authorizing the State to regulate certain uses of radioactive materials within the State. Government Publication Date: Jan 31, 2010 Mines Master Index File:rr-MINES-bb The Master Index File (MIF) contains mine identification numbers issued by the Department of Labor Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) for mines active or opened since 1971. Note that addresses may or may not correspond with the physical location of the mine itself. Government Publication Date: Jan 30, 2018 Alternative Fueling Stations:rr-ALT FUELS-bb List of alternative fueling stations made available by the US Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. Includes Biodiesel stations, Ethanol (E85) stations, Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Propane) stations, Ethanol (E85) stations, Natural Gas stations, Hydrogen stations, and Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE). The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) obtains information about new stations from trade media, Clean Cities coordinators, a Submit New Station form on the Station Locator website, and through collaborating with infrastructure equipment and fuel providers, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), and industry groups. Government Publication Date: Jul 24, 2018 Registered Pesticide Establishments:rr-SSTS-bb List of active EPA-registered foreign and domestic pesticide-producing and device-producing establishments based on data from the Section Seven Tracking System (SSTS). The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Section 7 requires that facilities producing pesticides, active ingredients, or devices be registered. The list of establishments is made available by the EPA. Government Publication Date: Mar 1, 2018 Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Notifiers:rr-PCB-bb Facilities included in the national list of facilities that have notified the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) activities. Any company or person storing, transporting or disposing of PCBs or conducting PCB research and development must notify the EPA and receive an identification number. Government Publication Date: Nov 30, 2017 State EnviroStor Inspection, Compliance, and Enforcement:rr-INSP COMP ENF-bb A list of permitted facilities with inspections and enforcements tracked in the Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) EnviroStor. Government Publication Date: May 28, 2018 DELISTED FED DRY FUDS MLTS HIST MLTS MINES ALT FUELS SSTS PCB INSP COMP ENF 131 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Clandestine Drug Lab Sites:rr-CDL-bb The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintains a listing of drug lab sites. DTSC is responsible for removal and disposal of hazardous substances discovered by law enforcement officials while investigating illegal/clandestine drug laboratories. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2017 School Property Evaluation Program Sites:rr-SCH-bb A list of sites registered with The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) School Property Evaluation and Cleanup (SPEC) Division. SPEC is responsible for assessing, investigating and cleaning up proposed school sites. The Division ensures that selected properties are free of contamination or, if the properties were previously contaminated, that they have been cleaned up to a level that protects the students and staff who will occupy the new school. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2018 California Hazardous Material Incident Report System (CHMIRS):rr-CHMIRS-bb A list of reported hazardous material incidents, spills, and releases from the California Hazardous Material Incident Report System (CHMIRS). This list has been made available by the California Office of Emergency Services (OES). Government Publication Date: Jun 19, 2018 Hazardous Waste Manifest Data:rr-HAZNET-bb A list of hazardous waste manifests received each year by Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). The volume of manifests is typically 900,000 - 1,000,000 annually, representing approximately 450,000 - 500,000 shipments. Government Publication Date: Oct 24, 2016 Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List - Site Cleanup:rr-HWSS CLEANUP-bb The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (Cortese) List is a planning document used by the State, local agencies and developers to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act requirements in providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. This list is published by California Department of Toxic Substance Control. Government Publication Date: Aug 14, 2018 List of Hazardous Waste Facilities Subject to Corrective Action:rr-DTSC HWF-bb This is a list of hazardous waste facilities identified in Health and Safety Code (HSC) § 25187.5. These facilities are those where Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has taken or contracted for corrective action because a facility owner/operator has failed to comply with a date for taking corrective action in an order issued under HSC § 25187, or because DTSC determined that immediate corrective action was necessary to abate an imminent or substantial endangerment. Government Publication Date: Jul 18, 2016 Historical Hazardous Waste Manifest Data:rr-HIST MANIFEST-bb A list of historic hazardous waste manifests received by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) from year the 1980 to 1992. The volume of manifests is typically 900,000 - 1,000,000 annually, representing approximately 450,000 - 500,000 shipments. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 1992 Historical California Hazardous Material Incident Report System (CHMIRS):rr-HIST CHMIRS-bb A list of reported hazardous material incidents, spills, and releases from the California Hazardous Material Incident Report System (CHMIRS) prior to 1993. This list has been made available by the California Office of Emergency Services (OES). Government Publication Date: Jan 1, 1993 Historical Cortese List:rr-HIST CORTESE-bb List of sites which were once included on the Cortese list. The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (Cortese) List is a planning document used by the State, local agencies and developers to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act requirements for providing information about the location of hazardous sites. Government Publication Date: Nov 13, 2008 Cease and Desist Orders and Cleanup and Abatement Orders:rr-CDO/CAO-bb The California Environment Protection Agency "Cortese List" of active Cease and Desist Orders (CDO) and Cleanup and Abatement Orders (CAO). This list contains many CDOs and CAOs that do NOT concern the discharge of wastes that are hazardous materials. Many of the listed orders concern, as examples, discharges of domestic sewage, food processing wastes, or sediment that do not contain hazardous materials, but the Water Boards' database does not distinguish between these types of orders. Government Publication Date: Feb 16, 2012 CDL SCH CHMIRS HAZNET HWSS CLEANUP DTSC HWF HIST MANIFEST HIST CHMIRS HIST CORTESE CDO/CAO 132 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 Delisted Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Hazardous Waste Sites:rr-DELISTED HAZ-bb This database contains a list of sites that were removed from the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) in the following regulatory programs: Hazardous Chemical Management, Hazardous Waste Onsite Treatment, Household Hazardous Waste Collection, Hazardous Waste Generator, RCRA LQ HW Generator. Government Publication Date: Jul 9, 2018 Drycleaner Facilities:rr-DRYCLEANERS-bb A list of drycleaner related facilities that have EPA ID numbers. These are facilities with certain SIC codes: power laundries, family and commercial, linen supply, commercial laundry, dry cleaning and pressing machines - Coin Operated Laundry and Dry Cleaning. This is provided by the Department of Toxic Substance Control. Government Publication Date: Jun 21, 2018 Delisted Drycleaners:rr-DELISTED DRYC-bb Sites removed from the list of drycleaner related facilities that have EPA ID numbers, made available by the California Department of Toxic Substance Control. Government Publication Date: Jun 21, 2018 Waste Discharge Requirements:rr-WASTE DISCHG-bb List of sites in California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) Program in California, made available by the SWRCB via GeoTracker. The WDR program regulates point discharges that are exempt pursuant to Subsection 20090 of Title 27 and not subject to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The scope of the WDRs Program also includes the discharge of wastes classified as inert, pursuant to section 20230 of Title 27. Government Publication Date: May 30, 2018 Toxic Pollutant Emissions Facilities:rr-EMISSIONS-bb A list of criteria and toxic pollutant emissions data for facilities in California made available by the California Environmental Protection Agency - Air Resources Board (ARB). Risk data may be based on previous inventory submittals. The toxics data are submitted to the ARB by the local air districts as requirement of the Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Program. This program requires emission inventory updates every four years. Government Publication Date: Dec 31, 2016 California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) Hazardous Waste Sites:rr-CERS HAZ-bb List of sites in the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) Regulated Site Portal which fall under the following regulatory programs: Hazardous Chemical Management, Hazardous Waste Onsite Treatment, Household Hazardous Waste Collection, Hazardous Waste Generator, RCRA LQ HW Generator. The CalEPA oversees the statewide implementation of the Unified Program which applies regulatory standards to protect Californians from hazardous waste and materials. Government Publication Date: Jul 9, 2018 Tribal No Tribal additional environmental record sources available for this State. County No County additional environmental databases were selected to be included in the search. DELISTED HAZ DRYCLEANERS DELISTED DRYC WASTE DISCHG EMISSIONS CERS HAZ 133 erisinfo.com | Environmental Risk Information Services Order No: 20180926049 h-Definitions Database Descriptions:This section provides a detailed explanation for each database including:source,information available,time coverage,and acronyms used.They are listed in alphabetic order. Detail Report:This is the section of the report which provides the most detail for each individual record.Records are summarized by location,starting with the project property followed by records in closest proximity. Distance:The distance value is the distance between plotted points,not necessarily the distance between the sites'boundaries.All values are an approximation. Direction: The direction value is the compass direction of the site in respect to the project property and/or center point of the report. Elevation:The elevation value is taken from the location at which the records for the site address have been plotted.All values are an approximation. Source:Google Elevation API. Executive Summary:This portion of the report is divided into 3 sections: 'Report Summary'-Displays a chart indicating how many records fall on the project property and,within the report search radii. 'Site Report Summary'-Project Property'-This section lists all the records which fall on the project property.For more details,see the 'Detail Report' section. 'Site Report Summary-Surrounding Properties'-This section summarizes all records on adjacent properties,listing them in order of proximity from the project property.For more details,see the 'Detail Report'section. Map Key:The map key number is assigned according to closest proximity from the project property.Map Key numbers always start at #1.The project property will always have a map key of '1'if records are available.If there is a number in brackets beside the main number,this will indicate the number of records on that specific property.If there is no number in brackets,there is only one record for that property. The symbol and colour used indicates 'elevation':the red inverted triangle will dictate 'ERIS Sites with Lower Elevation',the yellow triangle will dictate 'ERIS Sites with Higher Elevation'and the orange square will dictate 'ERIS Sites with Same Elevation.' Unplottables:These are records that could not be mapped due to various reasons,including limited geographic information.These records may or may not be in your study area,and are included as reference. Definitions APPENDIX E SITE ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST AND ASTM TRANSACTION SCREEN AND ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX F CASE CLOSURE AND MONITORING INFORMATION FOR 850 PACHECO PASS HIGHWAY Noise Assessment F APPENDIX 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 1 ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE ASSESSMENT GILROY SQUARE DEVELOPMENT GILROY, CALIFORNIA WJVA Report No. 22‐23 PREPARED FOR EMC PLANNING 301 LIGHTHOUSE AVENUE, SUITE C MONTEREY, CA 93940 PREPARED BY WJV ACOUSTICS, INC. VISALIA, CALIFORNIA SEPTEMBER 28, 2022 113 N. Church Street, Suite 203 ∙ Visalia, CA 93291∙ (559) 627-4923 ∙ 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 2 1. INTRODUCTION Project Description The Gilroy Square project is a proposed new commercial development that would include two, four‐story hotels, a drive‐through fast food restaurant, a convenience store, gas station and car wash, a four‐story outpatient treatment facility, and a one‐story warehouse building. The project site consists of approximately 10 acres of currently undeveloped land, located in the City of Gilroy, California. The proposed project includes changing the general plan and zoning designations from industrial to commercial. The project site plan is provided as Figure 1. Environmental Noise Assessment This environmental noise assessment has been prepared to determine if significant noise impacts would be produced by the project and to describe mitigation measures for noise if significant impacts are determined. The environmental noise assessment, prepared by WJV Acoustics, Inc. (WJVA), is based upon the project site plan provided by the project applicant (dated 2/14/2022), project‐related traffic data provided by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. and a project site visit on March 22 and 23, 2022. Revisions to the site plan, project‐related traffic data or other project‐related information available to WJVA at the time the analysis was prepared may require a reevaluation of the findings and/or recommendations of the report. Appendix A provides definitions of the acoustical terminology used in this report. Unless otherwise stated, all sound levels reported in this analysis are A‐weighted sound pressure levels in decibels (dB). A‐weighting de‐emphasizes the very low and very high frequencies of sound in a manner similar to the human ear. Most community noise standards utilize A‐weighted sound levels, as they correlate well with public reaction to noise. Appendix B provides typical A‐weighted sound levels for common noise sources. In terms of human perception, a 5 dB increase or decrease is considered to be a noticeable change in noise levels. Additionally, a 10 dB increase or decrease is perceived by the human ear as half as loud or twice as loud. In terms of perception, generally speaking the human ear cannot perceive an increase (or decrease) in noise levels less than 3 dB. there are no residential land uses proposed onsite and the nearest residential land uses are located approximately one‐half mile west of the site. Therefore, the term "sensitive land uses," for the purpose of this assessment will also include transient lodging and medical facilities, where appropriate. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 3 2. THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The CEQA Guidelines apply the following questions for the assessment of significant noise impacts for a project: a. Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b. Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or 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, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? a. Noise Level Standards City of Gilroy General Plan‐ Section 9 (Potential Hazards) of the City of Gilroy General Plan1 (adopted November 2, 2020) establishes land use compatibility criteria in terms of the Day‐Night Average Level (DNL or Ldn). The Ldn is the time‐weighted energy average noise level for a 24‐hour day, with a 10 dB penalty added to noise levels occurring during the nighttime hours (10:00 p.m.‐7:00 a.m.). The Ldn represents cumulative exposure to noise over an extended period of time and is therefore calculated based upon annual average conditions. Goal PH6: Protect Gilroy residents from exposure to excessive noise and its effects through appropriate mitigation measures and responsive land use planning, especially in regard to noise‐sensitive land uses such as schools, hospitals, and housing for seniors. PH 6.1 Noise and Land Use Establish a physical development pattern that is compatible with the noise environment of Gilroy, ensuring that residential neighborhoods and park areas are the quietest areas in the community. PH 6.2 Noise Standard Consistency Review development proposals to assure consistency with noise standards, using the Future Noise Contours map to determine if additional noise studies are needed for proposed development. PH 6.3 Maximum Permissible Noise Levels Ensure that outdoor and indoor noise levels are within the maximum permitted levels. Prohibit further development of sensitive uses in areas where the current or projected future noise levels exceed these standards and feasible mitigation is not available to reduce the noise level to meet the standards identified in Table 9‐1 (provided below as Table I). 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 4 PH 6.4 Noise Study and Mitigation Require proposed development projects in areas where future residents or visitors may be exposed to major noise sources (e.g. roadways, rail lines, industrial activities) to conduct an environmental noise analysis. The noise analysis shall determine noise exposure and noise standard compatibility with respect to the noise standards identified in Table 9‐1 and shall incorporate noise mitigation when located in noise environments that are not compatible with the proposed uses of the project. PH 6.5 Acoustical Design Consider the acoustical design of projects in the development review process to reduce noise to an acceptable level. Ensure that noise mitigation features are designed and implemented in an aesthetically pleasing and consistent manner. PH 6.6 Setbacks and Earth Berms Require landscaped setbacks and earth berms as an alternative to soundwalls where feasible to buffer noise along major thoroughfares and rail lines adjacent to residential areas. Where an adequate setback and earth berm is not feasible, a masonry wall screened with drought tolerant, low maintenance landscaping will be required. PH 6.7 Residential Noise Standards Require the design of new residential development to comply with the noise standards found in Table 9‐1 (provided below as Table I). Maximum outdoor sound levels for residential properties shall be 60 dBA LDN, in areas where outdoor use is a major consideration (e.g., backyards in single family housing and common recreational areas in multi‐ family developments). In the Downtown Specific Plan Area, the maximum outdoor noise level in common recreation areas of multi‐family residential uses shall be 65 dBA LDN. In outdoor use areas where the City determines that maintaining the outdoor noise levels mentioned above cannot be achieved after the application of reasonable and feasible mitigation, a level of up to 70 dBA LDN may be permitted, if the following findings are made: That feasible sound attenuation measures have been incorporated in the project design; That potential noise levels are part of the developer’s disclosure to future residents; That interior noise limits established by the General Plan are strictly maintained; and Potential noise levels will not jeopardize the health, safety, and general welfare of the public. PH 6.8 Incremental Noise Impacts of Commercial and Industrial Development Review of proposed new or expanding commercial and industrial development shall consider potential noise impacts on nearby residential uses and, as necessary, shall require noise mitigation measures as a condition of project approval. PH 6.9 Transportation Noise Consider potential noise impacts when evaluating proposals for transportation projects, including road, freeway, and transit projects, and incorporate mitigation measures to meet General Plan standards. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 5 PH 6.10 Construction Noise Require proposed development projects subject to discretionary approval to assess potential construction noise impacts on nearby sensitive uses and to minimize impacts on those uses, to the extent feasible. 6.13 Transportation Vibration Require proposed residential and commercial projects located within 200 feet of existing major freeways and railroad lines (e.g. freight, Amtrak, and Caltrain) to conduct a ground vibration and vibration noise evaluation consistent with City‐approved methodologies (e.g. Caltrans, Federal Transportation Authority). TABLE I CITY OF GILROY MAXIMUM PERMITTED OUTDOOR AND INDOOR NOISE LEVELS Land Use Category Maximum Outdoor Ldn, dBA Maximum Indoor Ldn, dBA Residential 60 45 Commercial 65 61 Industrial 76 See Note 2 1The Outdoor sound levels for residential properties shall be held to 60‐dBA LDN, or a maximum of 70‐dBA if ALL of the following FINDINGS can be made: That feasible sound attenuation measures have been incorporated in the project design; That potential noise levels are part of the developer’s disclosure to future residents; That interior noise limits established by the General Plan are strictly maintained; and Potential noise levels will not jeopardize the health, safety, and general welfare of the public. 2The indoor standards for industrial land uses have been set by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The maximum level to be exceeded no more than 10 percent of the time (L10) is 65 dBA, while the maximum level to be exceeded no more than 50 percent of the time (L50) is 60 dBA. Source: City of Gilroy General Plan The City of Gilroy General Plan provides an interior noise level standard of 45 dB Ldn, within residential land uses. This is consistent with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations for residential construction and consistent with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The intent of the interior noise level guideline is to provide an acceptable noise environment for indoor communication and sleep. Additionally, Section 1207.4 of the California Building Code states “Interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources should not exceed 45 dB in any inhabitable room. The noise metric shall be the day‐night average sound level (Ldn) or the community noise equivalent level (CNEL), consistent with the noise level of the local general plan.” The section of the California Building Code applies to Hotels and Motels. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 6 City of Gilroy Zoning Ordinance‐ Additionally, Section 30.41.31 (Specific Provisions‐Noise) of the City of Gilroy Zoning Ordinance2 establishes noise level standards for non‐transportation noise sources (stationary/fixed sources). For residential noise sources, the ordinance establishes an Lmax (maximum) noise level criterion of 60 dB and an L10 statistical performance standard of 70 dB. For commercial noise sources (impacting residential properties), the ordinance establishes an L10 statistical performance standard of 70 dB between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Such noise is limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and prohibited between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. b. Construction Noise and Vibration Section 9 (Potential Hazards) of the City of Gilroy General Plan also provides some guidance in regards to construction noise and vibration: PH 6.11 Construction and Maintenance Noise Limits Limit the hours of construction and maintenance activities to the less sensitive hours of the day (7:00am to 7:00pm Monday through Friday and 9:00am to 7:00 pm on Saturdays). Construction hours that vary from these timeframes may be approved by the Building Official, in conformance with Article XVI. Hours of Construction of the Gilroy City Code. PH 6.12 Vibration Impact Assessment Require a vibration impact assessment for proposed development projects in which heavy‐duty construction equipment would be used (e.g. pile driving, bulldozing) within 200 feet of an existing structure or sensitive receptor. If applicable, require all feasible mitigation measures to be implemented to ensure that no damage or disturbance to structures or sensitive receptors would occur. Some further guidance related to vibration is provided by the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual 3. The Manual provides guidance for determining annoyance potential criteria and damage potential threshold criteria. These criteria are provided below in Table III and Table IV, and are presented in terms of peak particle velocity (PPV) in inches per second (in/sec). 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 7 TABLE II GUIDELINE VIBRATION ANNOYANCE POTENTIAL CRITERIA Human Response Maximum PPV (in/sec) Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources Barely Perceptible 0.04 0.01 Distinctly Perceptible 0.25 0.04 Strongly Perceptible 0.9 0.1 Severe 2.0 0.4 Source: Caltrans TABLE III GUIDELINE VIBRATION DAMAGE POTENTIAL THRESHOLD CRITERIA Structure and Condition Maximum PPV (in/sec) Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources Extremely fragile, historic buildings, ancient monuments 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 Source: Caltrans 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 8 3. SETTING The proposed project would include a commercial development on an approximately 10‐acre parcel of land, located within the City of Gilroy. The project site is located approximately 0.3 miles east of US Route 101 (US 101), along the south side of State Route 152 (SR 152). The project site is currently undeveloped land. The project site is generally bound by Camino Arroyo (and retail/commercial land uses) to the west, SR 152 to the north, and Holloway Road, commercial land uses and undeveloped land to the east and the south. The City of Gilroy General Plan does not clearly define what is considered a noise‐sensitive land use. The General Plan does state, that in addition to residential land uses, land uses “such as schools, hospitals, and housing for seniors” should be protected from excessive noise. The closest existing sensitive receptors (residential land uses) to the project site are located approximately 0.5 miles west (west side of US 101) and approximately 1 mile to the east, along SR 152. Additionally, Eliot Elementary School is located approximately 0.6 miles northwest of the project site. a. Background Noise Level Measurements Existing ambient noise levels in the project vicinity are dominated by traffic noise along State Route 152 (SR 152), as well traffic along Camino Arroyo and US 101. Additional sources of noise observed during site inspection included aircraft overflights and noise associated with nearby commercial/retail land uses. Measurements of existing ambient noise levels in the project vicinity were conducted on May 22 and May 23, 2022. Long‐term (24‐hour) ambient noise level measurements were conducted at one (1) location (site LT‐1). LT‐1 was located within the project site, in the general vicinity of the proposed hotels. Additionally, short‐term (15‐minute) ambient noise level measurements were conducted at five (5) locations (Sites ST‐1 through ST‐5). The project vicinity and locations of the noise monitoring sites are shown on Figure 2. Two (2) individual measurements were taken at each of the five short‐term sites to quantify ambient noise levels in the morning and afternoon hours. Noise monitoring equipment consisted of Larson‐Davis Laboratories Model LDL‐820 sound level analyzers equipped with B&K Type 4176 1/2” microphones. The equipment complies with the specifications of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) for Type I (Precision) sound level meters. The meters were calibrated with a B&K Type 4230 acoustic calibrator to ensure the accuracy of the measurements. Measured hourly energy average noise levels (Leq) at site LT‐1 ranged from a low of 50.2 dB between 1:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. to a high of 58.8 dB between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. Hourly maximum (Lmax) noise levels at site LT‐1 ranged from 67.1 to 85.2 dB. Residual noise levels at the monitoring site, as defined by the L90 statistical descriptor ranged from 45.8 to 56.1 dB. The L90 is 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 9 a statistical descriptor that defines the noise level exceeded 90% of the time during each hour of the sample period. The L 90 is generally considered to represent the residual (or background) noise level in the absence of identifiable single noise events from traffic, aircraft and other local noise sources. The measured Ldn value at site LT‐1 during the 24‐hour noise measurement period was 61.6 dB CNEL. Figure 3 graphically depicts hourly variations in ambient noise levels at the LT‐1 long‐term monitoring site as well as a site photograph. The short‐term site noise measurement data included energy average (Leq) maximum (Lmax) as well as five (5) individual statistical parameters. Observations were made of the dominant noise sources affecting the measurements. The statistical parameters describe the percent of time a noise level was exceeded during the measurement period. Table IV summarizes short‐term noise measurement results. TABLE IV SUMMARY OF SHORT-TERM NOISE MEASUREMENT DATA GILROY SQUARE DEVELOPMENT MAY 22 & 23, 2022 Site Time A‐Weighted Decibels, dBA Sources Leq Lmax L2 L8 L25 L50 L90 ST‐1 8:05 a.m. 62.2 78.4 71.2 65.0 62.1 58.8 54.9 TR ST‐1 3:50 p.m. 61.4 72.7 70.7 64.6 61.0 58.5 54.4 TR ST‐2 8:25 a.m. 68.2 77.7 78.4 42.3 68.6 64.0 59.0 TR, AC ST‐2 4:10 p.m. 67.9 80.0 77.9 70.9 67.5 63.1 58.2 TR ST‐3 8:45 a.m. 58.6 75.2 69.2 56.4 53.7 52.0 51.5 TR, C ST‐3 4:30 p.m. 56.0 71.3 67.9 54.3 51.8 50.8 49.3 TR, C ST‐4 9:10 a.m. 54.7 65.2 62.4 58.8 53.9 52.2 51.9 TR, C ST‐4 4:50 p.m. 52.8 63.1 59.9 56.2 52.0 50.9 49.6 TR, C ST‐5 9:30 a.m. 52.2 66.4 55.0 53.8 52.8 51.8 50.5 TR, AC, C ST‐5 5:10 p.m. 51.1 65.0 53.9 52.7 51.7 50.7 49.2 TR, C TR: Traffic AC: Aircraft V: Voices C: Commercial Activities Source: WJV Acoustics, Inc. Short‐term noise measurements were conducted for 15‐minute periods. Sites ST‐1 and ST‐2 were located in relatively close proximity to SR 152, and as such noise levels were elevated as compared to the remaining ambient noise measurement sites. Short‐term measurement sites ST‐3 and ST‐4 were located along Holloway Road, near the southern portion of the project site. Site ST‐5 was located within the eastern portion of the project site, near existing commercial land uses. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 10 4. PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES a. Project Traffic Noise Impacts on Existing Noise-Sensitive Land Uses Outside Project Site (Less Than Significant) WJVA utilized the FHWA Traffic Noise Model4 to quantify expected project‐related increases in traffic noise exposure at representative noise‐sensitive receptor locations in the project vicinity. Traffic noise exposure levels for Existing, Existing Plus Project, 2040 and 2040 Plus Project traffic conditions were calculated based upon the FHWA Model and traffic volumes provided by Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. The percentages of trucks on SR 152 was obtained from Caltrans. The day/night distribution of traffic and the percentages of trucks on the remaining roadways used for modeling were obtained from previous studies WJVA has conducted along similar roadways as such data was not available from governmental sources. The Noise modeling assumptions used to calculate project traffic noise are provided as Appendix C. Project‐related significant impacts would occur if an increase in traffic noise associated with the project would result in noise levels exceeding the City’s applicable noise level standards at the location(s) of sensitive receptors. For the purpose of this analysis a significant impact is also assumed to occur if traffic noise levels were to increase by 3 dB at sensitive receptor locations where noise levels already exceed the City’s applicable noise level standards (without the project), as 3 dB generally represents the threshold of perception in change for the human ear. This analysis of project traffic noise focuses on residential land uses, as they represent the most restrictive noise level criteria by land use type provided in the General Plan. The City’s exterior noise level standard for residential land uses is 60 dB Ldn. It should be noted, the nearest residential land uses to the project site are located approximately one‐half mile to the west. Traffic noise was modeled at ten (10) receptor locations (R‐1 through R‐10). The ten modeled receptors are located at roadway setback distances representative of the sensitive receptors (residences) along each analyzed roadway segment. The receptor locations are described below and provided graphically on Figure 4. R‐1: Approximately 115 feet from the centerline of Monterey Rd., s/o W. 10th St. R‐2: Approximately 120 feet from the centerline of Alexander St., n/o W. 10th St. R‐3: Approximately 95 feet from the centerline of Chestnut St., n/o W. 10th St. R‐4: Approximately 200 feet from the centerline of SR 152, w/o Holsclaw Rd. R‐5: Approximately 80 feet from the centerline of Holsclaw Rd., n/o SR 152. R‐6: Approximately 135 feet from the centerline of SR 152, e/o Holsclaw Rd. R‐7: Approximately 100 feet from the centerline of Frazier Lake Rd. s/o SR 152. R‐8: Approximately 75 feet from the centerline of SR 152, e/o Frazier Lake Rd. R‐9: Approximately 95 feet from the centerline of Monterey Rd. n/o W. Luchessa Ave. R‐10: Approximately 90 feet from the centerline of W. Luchessa Ave, w/o Monterey Rd. Table V provides a comparison of traffic noise levels at the ten modeled receptor locations for Existing, Existing Plus Project, 2040 and 2040 Plus Project traffic conditions. Noise levels 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 11 described in Table V do not take into account any localized acoustic shielding that may result from intervening topography, existing buildings or existing sound walls, and should be considered a worst‐case assessment of traffic noise exposure levels. TABLE V PROJECT-RELATED INCREASES IN TRAFFIC NOISE, dB, CNEL GILROY SQUARE DEVELOPMENT Modeled Receptor Existing Existing Plus Project 2040 2040 Plus Project Change (Maximum) Significant Impact? R‐1 59 59 60 60 0 No R‐2 55 55 55 55 0 No R‐3 58 58 59 59 0 No R‐4 66 66 67 67 0 No R‐5 49 49 49 49 0 No R‐6 69 69 70 70 0 No R‐7 59 59 61 61 0 No R‐8 71 71 71 71 0 No R‐9 60 60 60 60 0 No R‐10 61 61 63 63 0 No Source: WJV Acoustics, Inc. Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. As described in Table V, project‐related traffic is not expected to result in noise levels at any sensitive receptors to exceed the City’s noise level standard, nor result in an increase of 3 dB in any sensitive receptor locations where noise levels already exceed the City’s noise level standard without the implementation of the project. Furthermore, project‐related increases in traffic are not expected to result in an increase in noise levels, as quantified by the Ldn metric, at any sensitive receptor locations. Therefore, project‐related increases in traffic noise exposure are not considered to be a significant impact. b. Noise Impacts from On-Site Noise Sources (No Impact) The project would include a variety of commercial retail land uses, including a drive‐through quick serve restaurant, convenience store, gas station and car wash, hotels, outpatient treatment facility, and a warehouse building. A wide variety of noise sources can be associated with such land uses. The noise levels produced by such sources can also be highly variable. The closest sensitive receptors to the proposed project site are located at distance of 0.5 miles or greater from the project site. At these distances, noise levels associated with these noise‐producing activities would not be audible. However, noise levels associated with such activities are discussed qualitatively below. For the purpose of this analysis and discussion, all associated noise levels have been normalized to a setback distance of 100 feet. Typical examples of stationary noise sources associated with such land uses include: 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 12 HVAC/Mechanical equipment Truck deliveries and movements Parking lot activities (closing of car doors and trunks, stereos, alarms etc.) Drive‐Through operations Loading Dock Activities Car Wash Operations Mechanical Equipment It is assumed that the project would include roof‐mounted HVAC units on the proposed buildings. For the purpose of noise and aesthetics, roof‐mounted HVAC units are typically shielded by means of a roof parapet. WJVA has conducted reference noise level measurements at numerous commercial and retail buildings with roof‐mounted HVAC units, and associated noise levels typically range between approximately 39‐44 dB at a distance of 100 feet from the building façade. Slowly Moving Trucks Large trucks would enter and exit the project site for deliveries as well as to access the proposed warehouse facility. WJVA has conducted measurements of the noise levels produced by slowly moving trucks for a number of studies. Such truck movements would be expected to produce noise levels in the range of 65 to 71 dBA at a distance of 100 feet. The range in measured truck noise levels is due to differences in the size of trucks, their speed of movement and whether they have refrigeration units in operation during the pass‐by. Parking Lot Activities Noise due to traffic in parking lots is typically limited by low speeds and is not usually considered to be significant. Human activity in parking lots that can produce noise includes voices, stereo systems and the opening and closing of car doors and trunk lids. Such activities can occur at any time. The noise levels associated with these activities cannot be precisely defined due to variables such as the number of parking movements, time of day and other factors. It is typical for a passing car in a parking lot to produce a maximum noise level of 54‐59 dBA at a distance of 100 feet. Drive Thru Retail The proposed project would include a drive‐thru quick serve restaurant. WJVA previously conducted reference noise levels measured at a Wendy’s drive‐thru restaurant located on South Mooney Boulevard in Visalia. Measurements were conducted during the early afternoon of July 11, 2011 between 12:45 p.m. and 1:45 p.m. using the previously‐described noise monitoring equipment. The microphone used by customers to order food and the loudspeaker used by employees to confirm orders are both integrated into a menu board that is located a few feet from the drive‐ thru lane at the approximate height of a typical car window. Vehicles would enter the drive‐thru lane from the west and then turn to the north along the east side of the restaurant. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 13 Reference noise measurements were obtained at a distance of approximately 40 feet from the menu board containing the microphone/loudspeaker system at an angle of about 45° toward the rear of the vehicle being served. This provided a worst‐case exposure to sound from the loudspeaker system since the vehicle was not located directly between the loudspeaker and measurement location. Cars were lined up in the access lane during the noise measurement period indicating that the drive‐through lane was operating at or near a peak level of activity. Each ordering cycle was observed to take approximately 60 seconds including vehicle movements. A typical ordering cycle included 5‐10 seconds of loudspeaker use with typical maximum noise levels in the range of 60‐62 dBA at the 40 foot‐reference location. Vehicles moving through the drive‐thru lane produced noise levels in the range of 55‐60 dBA at the same distance. Vehicles parked at the ordering position (between the menu board and measurement site) were observed to provide significant acoustic shielding during the ordering sequence. The effects of such shielding are reflected by the noise measurement data. Noise levels were measured to approximately 60 dB Leq at the measurement site, and included noise from all sources, including the loudspeaker, vehicle movements and HVAC equipment. At a reference distance of 100 feet, maximum noise levels associated with the amplified menu board would be approximately 52‐54 dB. Loading Dock Activities The proposed project includes a 15,000 square‐foot warehouse facility. The time and frequency of warehouse loading dock activities was not known at the time this analysis was prepared. Noise sources typically associated with loading dock activities include truck engines, the operation of truck‐mounted refrigeration units, fork lifts, the banging of hand carts and roll‐up doors, noise from P.A. systems, and the voices of truck drivers and store employees. Truck engines and/or refrigeration units are typically turned off while trucks are in loading dock areas to reduce noise and save energy. Based upon noise level measurements conducted by WJVA for other studies, loading dock noise levels would be expected to be in the range of 58 to 76 dBA at a distance of 100 feet. Car Wash The project would include an automated car wash facility, to be located in the vicinity of the convenience store and gas station. WJVA has conducted noise studies of numerous car wash operations. Automated car wash facilities can generally be categorized in two ways, 1). Conveyor belt operations and 2). Drive‐in operations. With conveyor belt operations, multiple cars can proceed through the tunnel simultaneously, and are pulled along through the wash tunnel by the conveyor belt, and during peak hours of operation, the dryer blowers (dominant noise producing component) may be in constant operation. With drive‐in styles one vehicle drives into the car wash tunnel bay and remains in place while the car wash operates around the vehicle. With this type of system one car is proce ssed through the car wash tunnel at a time, and typical wash cycle times are approximately six (6) minutes, with the dryer blower in operation for approximately 90 seconds out of the 6‐minute wash cycle time. The drive‐in type of car wash operations is the most common at convenience store/fuel service retail operations while the conveyor belt type of car wash is more common with “stand‐alone” 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 14 car wash retail locations. Reference to the project site plan indicates that a drive‐in car wash operation will likely be utilized. However, both types of car wash operations are discussed below. Conveyor Belt Car Wash‐ During peak hours of operation, conveyor belt car wash operations may be in constant operation, with the dryer blowers continuously operating. WJVA has conducted noise level measurements at numerous such car wash operations and has reviewed manufacturer‐supplied noise level data. Noise levels associated with such operations typically range between approximately 69‐73 dB a distance of 100 feet from the tunnel entrance and exit. The noise levels described above represent the noise levels that occur directly in front the tunnel entrance and exit. The blowers are located within the tunnel, and the tunnel provides acoustical shielding of blower noise to the sides of the car wash tunnel. Generally speaking, at a 45‐degree angle from a car wash tunnel entrance/exit, noise levels are approximately 6‐8 dB below noise levels measured directly in line with the tunnel, at the same distance. Additionally, at a 90‐degree angle, WJVA has observed noise levels to be approximately 10‐15 dB below noise levels measured directly in line with the tunnel, at the same distance. The noise levels described above apply noise levels measured and reviewed for Tommy Car Wash Systems, Peco Wash and Dryer System and MacNeil Wash Systems washers with Motor City drying systems. Drive‐Thru Car Wash‐ As described above, with drive‐thru type car wash operations (most common at convenience store/fuel service retail locations), one car is processed through the car wash tunnel at a time. Typical wash cycles take approximately 6 minutes in length, of which the dryer blowers are in operation for approximately 90 seconds per cycle. Taking these cycle times into account, the maximum number of car washes that could occur per hour would be ten (10). As described above, the blowers are in operation for approximately 90 seconds during each 6‐minute cycle, with the resulting maximum blower operation time of fifteen (15) minutes during any one hour. The most common type of equipment associated with drive‐thru style of car wash operations is the Mark VII ChoiceWash XT Wash System utilizing a Mark VII Dryer System. WJVA has measured noise levels at numerous locations utilizing this equipment and has also reviewed manufacturer‐ supplied noise level data. Noise levels measured by WJVA indicate that car wash noise levels for the drive‐thru (Mark VII equipment) would be approximately 63 dB L50 during any one hour, at a distance of 100 feet directly in front of the entrance and exit of the tunnel. This noise level assumes the car wash is in constant peak operation during any given hour, and should therefore be considered a worst‐case assessment of car wash operational noise levels. c. Noise From Construction (Less Than Significant) Construction noise would occur at various locations within and near the project site through the build‐out period. Table VI provides typical construction‐related noise levels at distances of 100 feet, 200 feet, and 300 feet. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 15 TABLE VI TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT MAXIMUM NOISE LEVELS, dBA Type of Equipment 100 Ft. 200 Ft. 300 Ft. Concrete Saw 84 78 74 Crane 75 69 65 Excavator 75 69 65 Front End Loader 73 67 63 Jackhammer 83 77 73 Paver 71 65 61 Pneumatic Tools 79 73 69 Dozer 76 70 66 Rollers 74 68 64 Trucks 80 72 70 Pumps 74 68 64 Scrapers 81 75 71 Portable Generators 74 68 64 Backhoe 80 74 70 Grader 80 74 70 Source: FHWA Noise Control for Buildings and Manufacturing Plants, Bolt, Beranek & Newman, 1987 Construction noise is not considered to be a significant impact if construction is limited to the daytime hours and construction equipment is adequately maintained and muffled. The City of Gilroy provides a restriction on the hours that construction activities may occur, between 7:00am to 7:00pm Monday through Friday and 9:00am to 7:00 pm on Saturdays. d. Vibration Impacts (Less Than Significant) The dominant sources of man‐made vibration are sonic booms, blasting, pile driving, pavement breaking, demolition, diesel locomotives, and rail‐car coupling. Typical vibration levels at distances of 100 feet and 300 feet are summarized by Table VII. These levels would not be expected to exceed any significant threshold levels for annoyance or damage, as provided above in Table II and Table III. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 16 TABLE VII TYPICAL VIBRATION LEVELS DURING CONSTRUCTION PPV (in/sec) Equipment @ 100´ @ 300´ Bulldozer (Large) 0.011 0.006 Bulldozer (Small) 0.0004 0.00019 Loaded Truck 0.01 0.005 Jackhammer 0.005 0.002 Vibratory Roller .03 0.013 Caisson Drilling .01 0.006 Source: Caltrans After full project build out, it is not expected that ongoing operational activities will result in any vibration impacts at nearby sensitive uses. Activities involved in trash bin collection could result in minor on‐site vibrations as the bin is placed back onto the ground. Such vibrations would not be expected to be felt at the closest off‐site sensitive uses and would generally not be expected to be felt at on‐site sensitive receptors as well. Additional mitigation is not required. e. Noise Impacts from Nearby Airports or Airstrips (No Impact) The Project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or private airstrip. The San Martin Airport and Frazier Lake Airpark are located approximately six miles from project site. f. Noise Impacts to On-Site Proposed Noise-Sensitive Uses (Less Than Significant, With Mitigation) The proposed project would include two hotels as well as an outpatient treatment facility, to be located in the southern portion of the project site. While not specifically described in the City of Gilroy General Plan, transient lodging facilities (hotels and motels) and medical facilities are typically considered to be a noise‐sensitive land use. The exterior noise level standards for transient lodging are typically applied to outdoor common use areas, such as pools, common courtyards and designated picnic or BBQ areas. The assumed exterior noise levels standard for transient lodging is 60 dB Ldn. Medical facilities typically do not have applicable exterior noise level standards. Typical interior noise level standards state that interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 dB Ldn within residential land uses (including transient lodging). This is consistent with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations for residential construction and consistent with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as well as Section 1207.4 of the California Building Code. The intent of the interior noise level guideline is to provide an acceptable noise environment for indoor communication and sleep. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 17 Exterior Hotel Noise The site plan indicates that both proposed hotels would include outdoor pool areas. Both pools would be located along the south side of each hotel, where the hotel building would provide acoustical shielding from traffic noise associated with SR 152, the dominant source of project site noise. Noise levels measured at ambient noise measurement site LT‐1 indicate that project site noise exposure, in the vicinity of the proposed hotels, is approximately 62 dB Ldn. Taking into account the acoustical shielding provided by the hotel buildings, noise levels in the vicinity of the pool location at both hotels would be below the City’s (assumed) exterior noise level standard of 60 dB Ldn. Interior Hotel Noise The interior noise exposure is determined by subtracting the outdoor‐to‐indoor noise level reduction (NLR) performance that will be provided by the building construction from the assumed exterior noise exposure for the site. Hotel exterior noise exposure (as well as the outpatient treatment facility), would be expected to be approximately 62 dB Ldn, or less. Therefore, a minimum NLR of 17 dB will be required for compliance with the assumed 45 dBA Ldn interior noise level standard (62‐45=17). A specific analysis of interior noise levels was not performed. However, it may be assumed that construction methods complying with current building code requirements will reduce exterior noise levels by approximately 25 dB or more if windows and doors are closed. This will be sufficient for compliance with the City’s 45 dB Ldn interior standard at all proposed at all proposed rooms for the two hotels. Requiring that it be possible for windows and doors to remain closed for sound insulation means that air conditioning or mechanical ventilation will be required. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 18 5. IMPACT SUMMARY The proposed Gilroy Square development project would comply with all City of Gilroy exterior and interior noise level standards, provided air conditioning or mechanical ventilation should be installed in all hotel units so that it will be possible for windows to remain closed for sound insulation purposes. The closest off‐site noise‐sensitive land uses are located at distance of 0.5 miles or greater from the project site. At such distances, noise levels associated with the various project components would not be audible. Project‐related increases in traffic noise exposure was calculated to be less than 1 dB at all analyzed roadways where sensitive receptors (residential land uses and transient lodging) exist. An analysis of existing and 2040 traffic conditions indicate that the project would not result in a measurable increase in traffic noise exposure over existing noise levels. The project would include two hotels and outpatient treatment facility, which while not specifically described as such in the City of Gilroy General Plan, were considered to be noise‐sensitive land uses within this analysis and report. Exterior noise levels at the outdoor common use areas for each proposed hotel (outdoor swimming pool areas) would be below 60 dB Ldn. Additionally, interior noise levels within all rooms of both proposed hotels and the outpatient treatment facility would not exceed 45 dB Ldn. 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 19 6. SOURCES CONSULTED 1. City of Gilroy General Plan, November 2, 2020. 2. City of Gilroy Zoning Ordinance, April 2022. 3. California Department of Transportation, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, September 2013. 4. Federal Highway Administration, Traffic Noise Model, Version 2.5, April 14, 2004 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 20 FIGURE 1: PROJECT SITE PLAN FIGURE 2: PROJECT VICINITY AND AMBIENT NOISE MONITORING SITES 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 21 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 22 FIGURE 3: HOURLY NOISE LEVELS AT LONG-TERM MONITORING SITE LT-1 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0:00:001:00:002:00:003:00:004:00:005:00:006:00:007:00:008:00:009:00:0010:00:0011:00:0012:00:0013:00:0014:00:0015:00:0016:00:0017:00:0018:00:0019:00:0020:00:0021:00:0022:00:0023:00:00Levels, dBATime Site LT‐1 May 22, 2022 Lmax Leq L90 22‐23 (Gilroy Square) 9‐28‐22 23 FIGURE 4: LOCATIONS OF MODELED TRAFFIC NOISE RECEPTORS APPENDIX A-1 ACOUSTICAL TERMINOLOGY AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL: The composite of noise from all sources near and far. In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location. CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level. The average equivalent sound level during a 24‐hour day, obtained after addition of approximately five decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and ten decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 a.m. and after 10:00 p.m. DECIBEL, dB: A unit for 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, which is 20 micropascals (20 micronewtons per square meter). DNL/Ldn: Day/Night Average Sound Level. The average equivalent sound level during a 24‐hour day, obtained after addition of ten decibels to sound levels in the night after 10:00 p.m. and before 7:00 a.m. Leq: Equivalent Sound Level. The sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period. Leq is typically computed over 1, 8 and 24‐hour sample periods. NOTE: The CNEL and DNL represent daily levels of noise exposure averaged on an annual basis, while Leq represents the average noise exposure for a shorter time period, typically one hour. Lmax: The maximum noise level recorded during a noise event. Ln: The sound level exceeded "n" percent of the time during a sample interval (L90, L50, L10, etc.). For example, L10 equals the level exceeded 10 percent of the time. A-2 ACOUSTICAL TERMINOLOGY NOISE EXPOSURE CONTOURS: Lines drawn about a noise source indicating constant levels of noise exposure. CNEL and DNL contours are frequently utilized to describe community exposure to noise. NOISE LEVEL REDUCTION (NLR): The noise reduction between indoor and outdoor environments or between two rooms that is the numerical difference, in decibels, of the average sound pressure levels in those areas or rooms. A measurement of Anoise level reduction” combines the effect of the transmission loss performance of the structure plus the effect of acoustic absorption present in the receiving room. SEL or SENEL: Sound Exposure Level or Single Event Noise Exposure Level. The level of noise accumulated during a single noise event, such as an aircraft overflight, with reference to a duration of one second. More specifically, it is the time‐integrated A‐weighted squared sound pressure for a stated time interval or event, based on a reference pressure of 20 micropascals and a reference duration of one second. SOUND LEVEL: 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 response of the human ear and gives good correlation with subjective reactions to noise. SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASS (STC): The single‐number rating of sound transmission loss for a construction element (window, door, etc.) over a frequency range where speech intelligibility largely occurs. APPENDIX C TRAFFIC NOISE MODELING CALCULATIONS WJV Acoustics, IncFHWA-RD-77-108Calculation SheetsJuly 14, 2022Project #: 22-23Contour Levels (dB) 60 65 70 75Description: ExistingLdn/Cnel: LdnSite Type: SoftSegment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT %Day %Evening %Night %Med%Heavy Speed Distance Offset1Monterey s/o 10th R-1 8900 90 10 2 2 35 1152Alexander n/o 10th R-2 3870 90 10 2 2 35 1203Chestnut n/o 10th R-3 6010 90 10 2 2 35 954SR 152 w/o Holsclaw R-4 17170 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 2005Holsclaw n/o SR 152 R-5 580 90 10 2 2 35 806SR 152 e/o Holsclaw R-61717083172.7 14.3 50 1357Frazier Lake Rd s/o SR 152 R-7 7860 90 10 2 2 35 1008SR 152 e/o Frazier Lake 10870 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 759Monterey n/o Luchessa 8880 90 10 2 2 35 9510Luchessa w/o Monterey 9820 90 10 2 2 35 90 WJV Acoustics, IncFHWA-RD-77-108Calculation SheetsJuly 14, 2022Project #: 22-23Contour Levels (dB) 60 65 70 75Description: Existing + ProjectLdn/Cnel: LdnSite Type: SoftSegment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT %Day %Evening %Night %Med%Heavy Speed Distance Offset1Monterey s/o 10th R-1 9130 90 10 2 2 35 1152Alexander n/o 10th R-2 3870 90 10 2 2 35 1203Chestnut n/o 10th R-3 6010 90 10 2 2 35 954SR 152 w/o Holsclaw R-4 17600 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 2005Holsclaw n/o SR 152 R-5 580 90 10 2 2 35 806SR 152 e/o Holsclaw R-61760083172.7 14.3 50 1357Frazier Lake Rd s/o SR 152 R-7 7960 90 10 2 2 35 1008SR 152 e/o Frazier Lake 11200 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 759Monterey n/o Luchessa 9110 90 10 2 2 35 9510Luchessa w/o Monterey 10050 90 10 2 2 35 90 WJV Acoustics, IncFHWA-RD-77-108Calculation SheetsJuly 14, 2022Project #: 22-23Contour Levels (dB) 60 65 70 75Description: 2040Ldn/Cnel: LdnSite Type: SoftSegment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT %Day %Evening %Night %Med%Heavy Speed Distance Offset1Monterey s/o 10th R-1 12420 90 10 2 2 35 1152Alexander n/o 10th R-2 4180 90 10 2 2 35 1203Chestnut n/o 10th R-3 6540 90 10 2 2 35 954SR 152 w/o Holsclaw R-4 22100 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 2005Holsclaw n/o SR 152 R-5 590 90 10 2 2 35 806SR 152 e/o Holsclaw R-62211083172.7 14.3 50 1357Frazier Lake Rd s/o SR 152 R-7 11960 90 10 2 2 35 1008SR 152 e/o Frazier Lake 12340 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 759Monterey n/o Luchessa 9110 90 10 2 2 35 9510Luchessa w/o Monterey 18530 90 10 2 2 35 90 WJV Acoustics, IncFHWA-RD-77-108Calculation SheetsJuly 14, 2022Project #: 22-23Contour Levels (dB) 60 65 70 75Description: 2040 + ProjectLdn/Cnel: LdnSite Type: SoftSegment Roadway Name Segment Description ADT %Day %Evening %Night %Med%Heavy Speed Distance Offset1Monterey s/o 10th R-1 12560 90 10 2 2 35 1152Alexander n/o 10th R-2 4180 90 10 2 2 35 1203Chestnut n/o 10th R-3 6540 90 10 2 2 35 954SR 152 w/o Holsclaw R-4 22530 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 2005Holsclaw n/o SR 152 R-5 590 90 10 2 2 35 806SR 152 e/o Holsclaw R-62253083172.7 14.3 50 1357Frazier Lake Rd s/o SR 152 R-7 12060 90 10 2 2 35 1008SR 152 e/o Frazier Lake 12670 83 17 2.7 14.3 50 759Monterey n/o Luchessa 9340 90 10 2 2 35 9510Luchessa w/o Monterey 18760 90 10 2 2 35 90 Transportation Summary of Findings and Analysis G APPENDIX Memorandum Date: December 7, 2022 To: Kraig Tambornini, City of Gilroy CC: Gary Heap, P.E., City of Gilroy From: Gicela Del Rio, T.E. Subject: Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis – Summary of Findings This memo summarizes the result of the Transportation Analysis (TA) completed for the proposed Gilroy Square Development, located at 6970 Camino Arroyo, as documented in the TA report dated October 10, 2022. The memo also discusses the necessary actions required from the project to address project deficiencies at intersections, as discussed with City staff on November 15, 2022. Lastly, the memo lists site design recommendations included in the TA report. The project, as evaluated in the October 2022 TA, consists of the following uses: • 2,600-square-foot (s.f.) fast-food with drive-thru restaurant (Burger King) • 16-fueling positions gas station with a 2,880- s.f. convenience store and 1,152-s.f. car wash • 112-room 4-story all-suites hotel (Residence Inn) • 88-room 4-story hotel (Holiday Inn Express) • 18,000-s.f. industrial warehouse • 27,500-s.f. industrial warehouse CEQA VMT Evaluation Results The VTA’s VMT Evaluation Tool was utilized to evaluate the effects of the project’s employment land uses (industrial warehouse land use) on VMT. The City’s TDF model was utilized to complete the VMT evaluation for the rest of the proposed land uses (retail). The model results show that the retail component of the project would cause a net decrease of 1,334 citywide VMT per day. Therefore, the proposed retail uses of the project would not result in a significant VMT impact, based on the threshold of significance for retail uses recommended by OPR. The proposed warehouse land use is estimated to generate a total of 110 daily trips. Based on OPR’s small project screening threshold, the proposed warehouse land use is consider a small project and is presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Therefore, the proposed project was determined to create a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 Roadway Capacity Analysis Results Intersection Level of Service Analysis Results and Required Project Action The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the project would create (under background plus project conditions) or contribute to (under General Plan plus project conditions) operational deficiencies at the intersections listed below. The project’s required actions described for each of the intersection deficiencies were identified by City staff as the action required to satisfy City policies. Background Plus Project – With Proposed Luchessa/Holloway Connection 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM peak-hour) Project Deficiency: PM peak-hour Possible Improvements: The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. Project’s Required Action: The signalization of this intersection is included in the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan (TCMP) and Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program. Therefore, the proposed project will be required to pay the applicable TIF as a fair-share contribution towards the implementation of the above improvement. It has been determined that the project’s contribution to this intersection’s deficiency is approximately 2% of the projected near-term growth (see discussion below). 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions (GP & with Luchessa/Holloway Connection networks) 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: Contribution to an operational deficiency during the PM and SAT peak hours Possible Improvements: The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal or by restricting left-turn access to and from Silacci Way. Project’s Required Action: The project is projected to contribute to a deficiency caused cumulatively by the proposed project and all projected growth that is part of the General Plan buildout conditions. Therefore, since the intersection is not part of the TIF Program, the project must make a fair-share contribution toward future improvements that would restore operations at the intersection to acceptable levels. It has been determined that the project’s contribution to this intersection’s deficiency is approximately 5-7% of the projected near-term growth (see discussion below). 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: Contribution to an operational deficiency during the AM and PM peak hours Possible Improvements: Same as above. Project’s Required Action: Same as above. Intersection Operations Analysis Results The results of the queue analysis show that the proposed project would contribute to the projected queue length storage capacity deficiencies under background plus project conditions for the following turn-movements: 6. Camino Arroyo and SR 152 – Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 Northbound Left-Turn Movement (SAT peak-hour) Project deficiency: increase queue length by 4 vehicles per lane Possible Improvements: No feasible improvement due to back-to-back left-turn pockets with the upstream intersection at Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing. Westbound Left-turn movement (SAT peak-hour) Project deficiency: increase queue length by 4 vehicles per lane Possible Improvements: The possible extension of the existing left-turn pockets would affect the approach taper separating the westbound left-turn pockets and the northbound left-turn receiving/acceleration lane at the intersection of Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152). Northbound Right-Turn Movement (PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: increase queue length by 4 vehicles Possible Improvements: The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound right-turn lane an additional 125 feet, for a total of 250 feet. The extension of the northbound right-turn lane would require widening of the east side of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage. The above queue storage deficiencies at this intersection will be addressed as part of the US 101/Tenth Street/SR 152 Interchange Improvements project, currently in the Project Initiation Document (PID) phase, being conducted by the Santa Clara County Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). Project’s Required Action: This intersection is included in the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan (TCMP) and Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program. Therefore, the proposed project will be required to pay the applicable TIF as a fair-share contribution towards the implementation of the above improvement. It has been determined that the project’s contribution to this intersection’s deficiency is approximately 19-22% of the projected near-term growth (see discussion below). 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing – Southbound left-turn movement (PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: increase queue length by 5 vehicles Possible Improvements: The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by providing a second southbound left-turn lane. Implementation of this improvement would require two receiving lanes on the east leg of the intersection (project site driveway) and the potential widening of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage, to provide the necessary right-of-way for the second southbound left-turn lane. Project’s Required Action: The project must implement the above-identified improvements. Projects Contribution to Potential Growth In addition to the proposed project, other development projects in the area would add traffic to the adjacent roadway network and would increase the need for the enhancement of the existing roadway network to accommodate the projected future traffic demand. Potential projects that would add traffic to the roadway network in the project area include: • Holloway Site – 426,500 square feet of warehouse and distribution facility land use • Luchessa Site – 1.1 million square feet of warehouse and distribution facility land use Trip generation estimates for the proposed project and above potential projects were compared to determine the percent contribution each of these projects represent of the potential traffic growth in Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 the project area. As shown on Table A below, the proposed Gilroy Square development (proposed project) would represent approximately 19% of the projected daily traffic growth and approximately 10% of the PM peak-hour traffic growth. The proposed project represents approximately 2% of the near-term growth projections at the intersection of Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue during the PM peak-hour (see Table B). The proposed project also is estimated to contribute approximately 5-7% of the projected near-term growth at the intersection of Silacci Way/Pacheco Pass Highway (see Table C) and approximately 19-22% of the projected near-term growth at the intersection of Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway during the PM and Saturday peak hours (see Table D). Other Recommended Improvements Operations at Driveways Recommendation: The following are recommendations for Driveway 2: • Widen Driveway 2 to provide two outbound lanes (as proposed) and two inbound lanes. Driveway 2 must also align with the west leg of the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection. • At the first internal access point from Driveway 2 (approximately 125 feet east of the driveway), the two inbound lanes should become a left-turn lane providing access to the gas station/fast-food restaurant and a shared right-and-through lane, providing access to the hotels and parking spaces. • Align the Driveway 2 drive aisle lanes, in particular, the inbound lane. If necessary, remove the parking spaces along the south side of the driveway aisle so that the inbound through lane from Driveway 2 aligns with the eastbound lane along the rest of the drive aisle. • At the first internal access point from Driveway 2, provide uncontrolled inbound access, while stop-controlling the rest of the approaches. Recommendation: It is recommended that the project considers providing a connection extending from Driveway 2 to Silacci Way, via the adjacent undeveloped site. This new connection would displace some of the northbound right-turning project trips at the intersection of Camino Arroyo/SR 152 to Silacci Way, eliminating the project deficiency and need to extend the existing northbound right-turn pocket while enhancing the adjacent roadway network. Sight Distance Recommendation: The design of the project site should ensure that design features, such as the landscaping, signage, bus stop and other physical features, along the project site frontage and at the project site driveways, in particular near Driveway 1, would not interfere with the sight distance at the proposed site driveways. Pedestrian On-Site Circulation Recommendation: A defined pedestrian connection should be provided between the north hotel (Residence Inn) building and the hotel parking spaces located next to the gas station. Project’s Effect on Bicycle Facilities Recommendation: It is recommended that the proposed project provide adequate bicycle parking supply on-site, based on VTA’s recommended bicycle-parking rates, to serve the potential demand Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 of the project. Based on VTA’s bicycle parking supply recommendations, a minimum of 18 long- term (Class I) and 21 short-term (Class II) bicycle parking spaces should be provided on-site. Project’s Effect on Pedestrian Facilities Recommendation: It is recommended that 10-foot sidewalks, required in commercial areas, be installed along the entire project site frontage. Recommendation: It is recommended that ADA-compliant curb ramps be installed at all corners of the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection. Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 Table A Growth Projections (Trip Generation Estimates) Proposed Land Use Rate Trip Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total Gilroy Square 1 Retail Land Uses #945 - Convenience Store/Gas Station 16 Vehicle Fueling Positions 265.12 4,242 16.06 129 128 257 18.42 148 147 295 17.01 136 136 272 Passby Reduction 75%-3,182 76%-98 -97 -195 75%-111 -110 -221 75%-102 -102 -204 #934 - Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window 2,600 s.f.467.48 1,215 44.61 59 57 116 33.03 45 41 86 55.25 73 71 144 Passby Reduction 55%-668 50%-30 -29 -59 55%-25 -23 -48 55%-40 -39 -79 Retail Total (Prior to Reductions)5,457 188 185 373 193 188 381 209 207 416 Hotel and Retail Internal Reduction -85 -3 -4 -7 -4 -3 -7 -5 -5 -10 Hotel Land Uses #311 - All Suites Hotel 112 Rooms 4.40 493 0.34 20 18 38 0.36 20 20 40 0.53 29 31 60 #312 - Business Hotel 88 Rooms 4.02 354 0.36 12 20 32 0.31 15 12 27 0.46 19 21 40 Hotel Total (Prior to Reductions)847 32 38 70 35 32 67 48 52 100 Hotel and Retail Internal Reduction 10%-85 10%-3 -4 -7 10%-4 -3 -7 10%-5 -5 -10 Employment Land Uses #150 - Warehousing 45,500 s.f.2.42 110 0.64 22 7 29 0.70 9 23 32 0.05 1 1 2 Employment Total (Prior to Reductions)110 22 7 29 9 23 32 1 1 2 Gilroy Square Total Net Project Trips:2,394 19%108 96 204 13%93 104 197 10%106 109 215 8% Holloway Site – (APN: 841-67-029) 2 High-Quality Warehouse and Distribution Center #155 - High-Cube Fulfillment Center Warehouse - Sort 0.89 1.22 1.59 Holloway Site Total:426,500 s.f.6.63 2,828 23%305 75 380 24%317 203 520 25%415 265 680 26% Luchessa Site – (APN: 841-73-007 and 841-73-008) 2 #155 - High-Cube Fulfillment Center Warehouse - Sort 0.89 1.22 1.59 Luchessa Site Total:1,088,000 s.f.6.63 7,213 58%778 190 968 62%808 519 1,327 65%1,057 677 1,734 66% Total Trips Generated by All Proposed Development 12,435 100%1,191 361 1,552 100%1,218 827 2,045 ####1,578 1,051 2,629 100% Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition 2021, and project description per site plan dated 2/14/22 by ACE Design LLC. 1 Gilroy Square TA report, dated October 10, 2022, by Hexagon. 2 Luchessa-Holloway TA report, dated November 11, 2022, by Hexagon. Size AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour SAT Peak Hour Weekday Daily Trip Trip Trip Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 Table B Growth Projections at Automall Parkway/Luchessa Avenue (#13) Intersection (PM Peak-Hour) Int.#[Model#](Traffix#)13 70666 11592 Intersection Name:Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Peak Hour:PM Count Date:03/24/22 Movements North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Percent Scenario:RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total of Growth Existing Conditions 343 3 80 130 259 0 0 6 3 9 79 184 1,096 Existing Plus Approved (with Reassignment due to Luchessa-Holloway Connection)317 3 67 131 472 0 1 6 3 8 251 211 1,470 Luchessa-Holloway Project Trips (Option 2)0 0 3 2 295 0 0 0 0 0 458 0 758 98% Gilroy Square Project Trips (Option 2)0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 15 2% Total Projected Growth:0 0 3 2 303 0 0 0 0 0 465 0 773 Background + Gilroy Square 317 3 67 131 480 0 1 6 3 8 258 211 1,485 Bckgd + Luchessa-Holloway + Gilroy Square 317 3 70 133 775 0 1 6 3 8 716 211 2,243 Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 Table C Growth Projections at Silacci Way/Pacheco Pass Highway (#7) Intersection (PM and Saturday Peak Hours) Int.#[Model#](Traffix#)7 71180 50935 Intersection Name:Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Peak Hour:PM Count Date:11/05/20 Movements North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Percent Scenario:RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total of Growth Existing Conditions 0 0 0 0 656 15 17 0 10 9 1,257 0 1,964 With Luchessa-Holloway Connection (Option 2) Existing Plus Approved (with Reassignment due to Luchessa-Holloway Connection)0 0 0 0 1,143 16 29 0 11 2 1,597 0 2,798 Luchessa-Holloway Project Trips (Option 2)0 0 0 0 228 0 0 0 0 0 147 0 375 93% Gilroy Square Project Trips (Option 2)0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 30 7% Total Projected Growth:0 0 0 0 242 0 0 0 0 0 163 0 405 Background + Gilroy Square 0 0 0 0 1,157 16 29 0 11 2 1,613 0 2,828 Bckgd + Luchessa-Holloway + Gilroy Square 0 0 0 0 1,385 16 29 0 11 2 1,760 0 3,203 Int.#[Model#](Traffix#)7 71180 50935 Intersection Name:Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Peak Hour:SAT Count Date:11/07/20 Movements North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Percent Scenario:RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total of Growth Existing Conditions 0 0 0 0 857 12 10 0 0 4 1,066 0 1,949 With Luchessa-Holloway Connection (Option 2) Existing Plus Approved (with Reassignment due to Luchessa-Holloway Connection)0 0 0 0 975 13 22 0 0 0 1,197 0 2,207 Luchessa-Holloway Project Trips (Option 2)0 0 0 0 298 0 0 0 0 0 191 0 489 95% Gilroy Square Project Trips (Option 2)0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 28 5% Total Projected Growth:0 0 0 0 312 0 0 0 0 0 205 0 517 Background + Gilroy Square 0 0 0 0 989 13 22 0 0 0 1,211 0 2,235 Bckgd + Luchessa-Holloway + Gilroy Square 0 0 0 0 1,287 13 22 0 0 0 1,402 0 2,724 Gilroy Square Development TA – Summary of Findings December 7, 2022 Table D Growth Projections at Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway (#6) Intersection (PM and Saturday Peak Hours) Int.#[Model#](Traffix#)6 70834 10715 Intersection Name:Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Peak Hour:PM Count Date:03/24/22 Movements North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Percent Scenario:RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total of Growth Existing Conditions 617 229 222 118 619 39 81 184 465 230 785 548 4,137 With Luchessa-Holloway Connection (Option 2) Existing Plus Approved (with Reassignment due to Luchessa-Holloway Connection)605 263 238 133 1,078 51 95 200 541 246 1,110 541 5,101 Luchessa-Holloway Project Trips (Option 2)0 23 0 0 0 228 147 15 277 429 0 0 1,119 78% Gilroy Square Project Trips (Option 2)0 5 0 0 -68 81 83 6 142 134 -67 0 316 22% Total Projected Growth:0 28 0 0 -68 309 230 21 419 563 -67 0 1435 Background + Gilroy Square 605 268 238 133 1,010 132 178 206 683 380 1,043 541 5,417 Bckgd + Luchessa-Holloway + Gilroy Square 605 291 238 133 1,010 360 325 221 960 809 1,043 541 6,536 Int.#[Model#](Traffix#)6 70834 10715 Intersection Name:Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Peak Hour:SAT Count Date:03/26/22 Movements North Approach East Approach South Approach West Approach Percent Scenario:RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT Total of Growth Existing Conditions 711 292 250 187 770 74 89 304 596 365 750 783 5,171 With Luchessa-Holloway Connection (Option 2) Existing Plus Approved (with Reassignment due to Luchessa-Holloway Connection)696 322 255 180 868 81 100 316 673 367 882 770 5,510 Luchessa-Holloway Project Trips (Option 2)0 30 0 0 0 298 191 19 359 560 0 0 1,457 81% Gilroy Square Project Trips (Option 2)0 6 0 0 -71 85 85 6 150 148 -71 0 338 19% Total Projected Growth:0 36 0 0 -71 383 276 25 509 708 -71 0 1,795 Background + Gilroy Square 696 328 255 180 797 166 185 322 823 515 811 770 5,848 Bckgd + Luchessa-Holloway + Gilroy Square 696 358 255 180 797 464 376 341 1,182 1,075 811 770 7,305 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis Prepared for: EMC Planning Group October 10, 2022 Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. Hexagon Office: 8070 Santa Teresa Boulevard, Suite 230 Gilroy, CA 95020 Hexagon Job Number: 21GD06 Phone: 408.846-7410 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... i 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Existing Transportation Setting ....................................................................................................... 8 3. CEQA Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation .......................................................................... 16 4. Traffic Operations Analysis ........................................................................................................... 22 5. Other Transportation Issues .......................................................................................................... 73 6. Conclusions ................................................................................................................................... 93 Appendices Appendix A Traffic Counts Appendix B Approved Project Information Appendix C Volume Summary Tables Appendix D Intersection Level of Service Calculations Appendix E Signal Warrant Checks Appendix F Queue Length Calculations List of Tables Table ES 1 VMT Analysis Summary ..................................................................................................... ii Table ES 2 Intersection Level of Service Results .............................................................................. viii Table ES 3 Intersection Vehicle Queue Analysis Results ..................................................................... x Table ES 4 Freeway Segment Level of Service Results ..................................................................... xii Table ES 5 Freeway Ramp Analysis Results ..................................................................................... xiii Table 1 Equivalent Retail Land Use Calculations ............................................................................. 20 Table 2 Retail and Hotel VMT Analysis ............................................................................................ 21 Table 3 Project Trip Generation Estimates ....................................................................................... 28 Table 4 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Definition Based on Delay .................................... 54 Table 5 Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definition Based on Control Delay ................... 55 Table 6 Intersection Level of Service Results ................................................................................... 58 Table 7 Intersection Vehicle Queue Analysis ................................................................................... 63 Table 8 Freeway Levels of Service Based on Density ...................................................................... 71 Table 9 Freeway Segment Level of Service Results ........................................................................ 72 Table 10 Parking Evaluation ............................................................................................................... 86 Table 11 Freeway Ramp Levels of Service Based on Volume-to-Capacity Ratio .............................. 87 Table 12 Freeway Ramps Analysis Results ....................................................................................... 90 Table 13 Recommended Bicycle Parking ........................................................................................... 91 List of Figures Figure 1 Site Location .......................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 2 Proposed Site Plan ............................................................................................................... 4 Figure 3 Existing Bicycle Facilities ..................................................................................................... 11 Figure 4 Existing Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................................... 13 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Figure 5 Existing Transit Services ...................................................................................................... 14 Figure 6 Study Intersections .............................................................................................................. 24 Figure 7 Project Trip Distribution ........................................................................................................ 29 Figure 8 Project Trip Assignment (Existing Roadway Network) ......................................................... 30 Figure 9 Project Trip Assignment (With Luchessa/Holloway Connection) ........................................... 32 Figure 10 Existing Intersection Lane Configurations and Traffic Control Devices ............................... 35 Figure 11 Existing Conditions Traffic Volumes .................................................................................... 39 Figure 12 Background Conditions Traffic Volumes .............................................................................. 41 Figure 13 Background Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – Existing Roadway Network ........... 44 Figure 14 Background Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – With Luchessa/Holloway Connection .............................................................................................................................................. 46 Figure 15 Year 2040 General Plan Conditions Traffic Volumes .......................................................... 48 Figure 16 Year 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – General Plan Roadway Network ................................................................................................................................................... 50 Figure 17 Year 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – With Luchessa/Holloway Connection .............................................................................................................. 52 Figure 18 Project Traffic at the Project Site Driveways (Without Luchessa/Holloway Connection) ..... 74 Figure 19 Project Traffic at the Project Site Driveways (With Luchessa/Holloway Connection) .......... 75 Figure 20 Proposed Fire Truck Circulation Plan .................................................................................. 81 Figure 21 Proposed Solid Waste Truck Collector Circulation Plan ...................................................... 82 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | i Executive Summary The purpose of this transportation analysis is to evaluate the potential transportation impacts associated with the proposed Gilroy Square Development project in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Gilroy. The project consists of the development of the project site with the following uses: a 2,600-square-foot (s.f.) fast-food with drive-thru restaurant (Burger King) a 16-fueling positions gas station with a 2,880- s.f. convenience store and 1,152-s.f. car wash a 112-room 4-story all-suites hotel (Residence Inn) an 88-room 4-story hotel (Holiday Inn Express) an 18,000-s.f. industrial warehouse a 27,500-s.f. industrial warehouse Scope of Study This transportation analysis has been prepared in accordance with the standards and methodologies set forth by the City of Gilroy, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Congestion Management Program’s Transportation Impact Guidelines (October 2014), and by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In 2013, the State of California passed Senate Bill (SB) 743, which requires jurisdictions to stop using congestion and delay metrics, such as Level of Service (LOS), as the measurement for CEQA transportation analysis. Therefore, in adherence to SB 743, the effects and impacts to the transportation network as the result of the proposed project were evaluated based on VMT. However, the City of Gilroy currently uses LOS as their adopted methodology for the evaluation of the effects of new development and land use changes on the local transportation network. In addition, the City is still required to conform to the requirements of the VTA, which establishes a uniform program for evaluating the transportation impacts of land use decisions on the designated CMP Roadway System. Therefore, in addition to the evaluation of VMT, this transportation study also includes a level of service analysis to evaluate the effects of the project on the citywide transportation system, including intersections, freeway segments, and freeway ramps. The level of service analysis is presented to determine conformance to General Plan transportation goals and policies. However, the determination of project impacts per CEQA requirements is based solely on the VMT analysis. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | ii CEQA VMT Evaluation Results The VTA’s VMT Evaluation Tool could be utilized to evaluate the effects of the project’s employment land uses on VMT. However, since the proposed project would include retail, restaurant, and hotel uses for which the VMT tool is not capable of estimating VMT, the City’s TDF model was utilized to complete the VMT evaluation for the proposed retail category uses. For the purpose of this analysis, and for consistency with the City of Gilroy General Plan, the VMT analysis considers OPR’s recommended impact threshold of 15% below the existing citywide average VMT per job, which equates to 15.97 VMT per job. Additionally, the analysis also considers OPR’s recommendation of a net increase in total VMT from baseline conditions as the threshold to identify potential VMT impacts for commercial/retail projects. The model results show that the retail component of the project would cause a net decrease of 1,334 citywide VMT per day. The work trips would account for an increase of 1,908 daily VMT but the shopping trips would account for a decrease of 3,241 daily VMT. Therefore, the proposed retail uses of the project would not result in a significant VMT impact, based on the threshold of significance for retail uses recommended by OPR. The VMT results for the proposed retail and hotel uses are presented in Table ES-1. Table ES 1 VMT Analysis Summary The proposed warehouse land use is estimated to generate a total of 110 daily trips. Based on OPR’s small project screening threshold, the proposed warehouse land use is consider a small project and is presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Roadway Capacity Analysis Results Intersection Level of Service Analysis Results The results of the intersection level of service analysis conducted for the study intersections are described below and summarized in Table ES-2. Background Plus Project – With Proposed Luchessa/Holloway Connection The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the project would have an operational deficiency at the following intersection under background plus project conditions and assuming the implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection: 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM peak-hour) Project Deficiency: PM peak-hour VMT Analysis (Citywide) No Project With Project Change (Proj - No Proj) Home-Based Work VMT 452,495 454,403 1,908 Home-Based Shop VMT 343,999 340,758 -3,241 Total VMT 796,495 795,161 -1,334 Source: City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting Model. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | iii 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the project would contribute to an operational deficiency at the following three intersections under 2040 General Plan with project conditions and the planned future roadway network: 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: AM and PM peak hours 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions with Luchessa/Holloway Connection The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the project would contribute to an operational deficiency at the following three intersections under 2040 General Plan with project conditions and assuming the Luchessa/Holloway connection: 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: AM and PM peak hours Intersection Operations Analysis Results The operations analysis results are described below and summarized in Table ES-3. The results of the queue analysis show that the proposed project would contribute to the projected queue length storage capacity deficiencies for the following turn-movements: 6. Camino Arroyo and SR 152 – Northbound Left-Turn Movement Project deficiency: SAT peak-hour Westbound Left-turn movement Project deficiency: SAT peak-hour Northbound Right-Turn Movement Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing – Southbound left-turn movement Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours Projected Deficiencies and Possible Improvements Described below are possible improvements to improve operating conditions for the projected deficiencies. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | iv Level of Service Deficiencies – Background Plus Project Conditions 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Deficiency: Background plus project (w/ Luchessa/Holloway connection) – PM peak-hour The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under background plus project conditions. Level of Service Deficiencies – General Plan Conditions 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152 Deficiency: General Plan plus project (GP and GP+Luchessa/Holloway connection) – PM & SAT peak hours The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal, or by restricting left-turn access to and from Silacci Way. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under General Plan plus project conditions. 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Deficiency: General Plan plus project (GP and GP+Luchessa/Holloway connection) – AM & PM peak hours The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under General Plan plus project conditions. Queue Storage Deficiencies 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Movement: Northbound left-turn Available queue storage: 350 feet (14 vehicles) per lane Change in queue length: from 16 vehicles under background conditions to 20 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: SAT peak-hour Deficiency: 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound left-turn pockets an additional 150 feet each. However, this improvement is not feasible due to the back-to-back left-turn pockets with the upstream intersection at Gilroy Crossing. Additionally, the queue deficiency is only projected to occur during the Saturday peak-hour, with the turn pocket providing adequate queue storage capacity to serve both the AM and PM peak hours. Alternatively, the intersection traffic signal phasing could be adjusted to provide additional green time to serve the projected northbound left-turn movement demand during the Saturday peak-hour. However, adjusting the signal phasing could result in other intersection movements experiencing longer queue lengths and intersection delays. Without the extension of the existing northbound left-turn lanes or the Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | v adjustment of the intersection signal phasing, the projected queue length for this movement would store within the northbound through lane and extend past the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection. Movement: Westbound left-turn Available queue storage: 150 feet (6 vehicles) per lane Change in queue length: from 4 vehicles under background conditions to 8 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: SAT peak-hour Deficiency: 2 vehicles (50 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing westbound left-turn pockets an additional 50 feet each, for a total of 200 feet. However, extending the westbound left-turn pockets at this intersection would affect the length of the approach taper separating the westbound left-turn pockets and the northbound left-turn receiving/acceleration lane at the intersection of Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152). Therefore, in order to be able to implement this improvement, the northbound left-turn movement from Silacci Way to westbound SR 152 may have to be prohibited. Movement: Northbound right-turn Available queue storage: 125 feet (5 vehicles) Change in queue length: from 6 vehicles under background conditions to 10 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: PM and SAT peak hours Deficiency: 5 vehicles (125 feet) The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound right-turn lane an additional 125 feet, for a total of 250 feet. The extension of the northbound right-turn lane would require widening of the east side of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage. The project site plan shows a proposed right-in and right-out driveway along Camino Arroyo located approximately 325 feet south of Pacheco Pass Highway, providing only approximately 75 feet of space between the extended northbound right-turn lane and the proposed driveway. 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Movement: Southbound left-turn Available queue storage: 175 feet (7 vehicles) Change in queue length: from 8 vehicles under background conditions to 13 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: PM and SAT peak hours Deficiency: 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by providing a second southbound left-turn lane. Implementation of this improvement would require two receiving lanes on the east leg of the intersection (project site driveway) and the potential widening of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage, to provide the necessary right-of-way for the second southbound left-turn lane. Freeway Segment Evaluation The results of the freeway level of service analysis are summarized in Table ES-4. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | vi Freeway Segment Level of Service Results The results of the freeway segment level of service analysis show that the proposed project is not projected to add traffic representing one percent (1%) or more of the segments’ capacity to the deficient study freeway segments, therefore, the proposed project would not create a level of service deficiency at any of the study freeway segments. Other Transportation Issues Sight Distance Recommendation: The design of the project site should ensure that design features, such as the landscaping, signage, bus stop and other physical features, along the project site frontage and at the project site driveways, in particular near Driveway 1, would not interfere with the sight distance at the proposed site driveways. Emergency Vehicle Access Recommendation: The project should widen the inbound lane at Driveway 2 (Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection) to meet the minimum width requirement for emergency access (20 feet), or provide a second inbound lane, to provide adequate inbound emergency vehicle access at this signalized intersection. Recommendation: The project must work with the City and the Fire Department to identify the best access route for emergency vehicles to provide access to the entire project site and adequate response times. Pedestrian On-Site Circulation Recommendation: A defined pedestrian connection should be provided between the north hotel (Residence Inn) building and the hotel parking spaces located next to the gas station. Freeway Ramp Analysis Results The results of the freeway ramp analysis are summarized in Table ES-5. Based on the calculated V/C ratios, all of the study freeway ramps currently operate at acceptable levels. Under background plus project conditions, based on the ramp capacities and traffic volume projections, it is projected that all of the study freeway ramps would continue to operate at acceptable levels. Project’s Effect on Bicycle Facilities Recommendation: It is recommended that the proposed project provide adequate bicycle parking supply on-site, based on VTA’s recommended bicycle-parking rates, to serve the potential demand of the project. Based on VTA’s bicycle parking supply recommendations, a minimum of 18 long-term (Class I) and 21 short-term (Class II) bicycle parking spaces should be provided on-site. Project’s Effect on Pedestrian Facilities Recommendation: It is recommended that 10-foot sidewalks, required in commercial areas, be installed along the entire project site frontage. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | vii Recommendation: It is recommended that ADA-compliant curb ramps be installed at all corners of the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | viii Table ES 2 Intersection Level of Service Results Study Existing Conditions Background Conditions Background Plus Project (Existing Roadway Network) Background Plus Project with Proposed LH Connnection Int. Intersection LOS Peak Count Warrant Warrant Delay Warrant Delay Warrant Number Intersection Control Standard Hour Date Delay LOS Met? 1 Delay LOS Met? 1 Delay LOS Change 2 Met?1 Delay LOS Change 2 Met?1 1 Monterey Road and Tenth Street Signal D AM 03/24/22 22.7 C+ -- 22.6 C+ -- 22.9 C+ +0.3 -- 22.8 C+ +0.2 -- PM 03/24/22 28.6 C -- 28.4 C -- 28.6 C +0.2 -- 28.5 C +0.1 -- SAT 03/26/22 29.8 C -- 29.4 C -- 29.6 C +0.2 -- 29.5 C +0.1 -- 2 Alexander Street and Tenth Street Signal D AM 03/24/22 17.2 B -- 16.7 B -- 16.7 B +0.0 -- 16.8 B +0.1 -- PM 03/24/22 16.9 B -- 17.8 B -- 17.9 B +0.1 -- 17.2 B -0.6 -- SAT 03/26/22 20.1 C+ -- 18.0 B- -- 17.8 B -0.2 -- 18.3 B- +0.3 -- 3 Chestnut Street/Automall Parkway Signal D AM 03/24/22 29.9 C -- 34.4 C- -- 34.2 C- -0.2 -- 34.5 C- +0.1 -- and Tenth Street PM 03/24/22 32.5 C- -- 38.0 D+ -- 38.1 D+ +0.1 -- 37.6 D+ -0.4 -- SAT 03/26/22 29.4 C -- 37.7 D+ -- 37.8 D+ +0.1 -- 37.3 D+ -0.4 -- 4 US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth Street Signal D AM 03/24/22 20.0 C+ -- 21.1 C+ -- 21.4 C+ +0.3 -- 21.5 C+ +0.4 -- PM 03/24/22 22.8 C+ -- 26.0 C -- 26.5 C +0.5 -- 25.7 C -0.3 -- SAT 03/26/22 27.9 C -- 29.9 C -- 30.5 C +0.6 -- 30.2 C +0.3 -- 5 US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 03/24/22 8.1 A -- 9.0 A -- 9.1 A +0.1 -- 8.7 A -0.3 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 03/24/22 8.3 A -- 10.1 B+ -- 10.5 B+ +0.4 -- 9.8 A -0.3 -- SAT 03/26/22 9.9 A -- 10.7 B+ -- 11.0 B+ +0.3 -- 10.6 B+ -0.1 -- 6 Camino Arroyo Signal D AM 03/24/22 21.1 C+ -- 18.2 B- -- 20.4 C+ +2.2 -- 20.8 C+ +2.6 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 03/24/22 32.4 C- -- 41.8 D -- 45.1 D +3.3 -- 38.3 D+ -3.5 -- SAT 03/26/22 55.4 E+--59.9 E+--63.3 E +3.4 --60.5 E +0.6 -- 7 Silacci Way One-Way Stop D AM 11/05/20 0.2 A+ -- 0.3 A+ No 0.3 A+ +0.0 -- 0.3 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 11/05/20 0.5 A+ -- 1.5 A+ No 1.6 A+ +0.1 -- 0.8 A+ -0.7 -- SAT 11/05/20 0.1 A+ -- 0.1 A+ No 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- 0.2 A+ +0.1 -- One-Way Stop E AM 11/05/20 16.5 C No 36.0 E No 37.0 E +1.0 No 28.8 D -7.2 No (Worst Approach) PM 11/05/20 26.4 D No >120 F No >120 F >120 No 51.3 F -83.6 No SAT 11/07/20 12.4 B No 13.3 B No 13.4 B +0.1 No 13.5 B +0.2 No 8 Cameron Boulevard Signal D AM 03/24/22 5.4 A -- 7.1 A -- 7.0 A -0.1 -- 6.7 A -0.4 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 11/05/20 7.8 A -- 14.6 B -- 14.7 B +0.1 -- 12.7 B -1.9 -- SAT 11/07/20 7.3 A -- 8.5 A -- 8.4 A -0.1 -- 8.1 A -0.4 -- 9 Gilroy Foods Signal D AM 11/05/20 9.2 A -- 9.1 A -- 9.0 A -0.1 -- 10.4 B+ +1.3 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 11/05/20 10.2 B+ -- 10.9 B+ -- 10.9 B+ +0.0 -- 11.4 B+ +0.5 -- SAT 11/07/20 5.5 A -- 3.2 A -- 3.2 A +0.0 -- 7.2 A +4.0 -- 10 Holsclaw Road One-Way Stop D AM 03/24/22 0.1 A+ -- 0.1 A+ No 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 03/24/22 0.8 A+ -- 1.0 A+ No 1.0 A+ +0.0 -- 0.9 A+ -0.1 -- SAT 03/24/22 0.4 A+ -- 0.4 A+ No 0.4 A+ +0.0 -- 0.4 A+ +0.0 -- One-Way Stop E AM 03/24/22 17.0 C No 19.2 C No 19.7 C +0.5 No 19.5 C +0.3 No (Worst Approach) PM 03/24/22 35.0 E No 50.4 F No 53.1 F +2.7 No 49.8 E -0.6 No SAT 03/26/22 33.1 D No 38.7 E No 40.1 E +1.4 No 37.9 E -0.8 No 11 Frazier Lake Road Signal D AM 03/24/22 14.9 B -- 15.3 B -- 15.4 B +0.1 -- 15.8 B +0.5 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 03/24/22 8.2 A -- 7.8 A -- 7.8 A +0.0 -- 7.8 A +0.0 -- SAT 03/26/22 10.0 B+ -- 10.2 B+ -- 10.2 B+ +0.0 -- 10.2 B+ +0.0 -- 12 Monterey Road and Luchessa Avenue Signal D AM 03/24/22 26.1 C -- 26.6 C -- 26.6 C +0.0 -- 26.0 C -0.6 -- PM 03/24/22 35.5 D+ -- 39.5 D -- 39.5 D +0.0 -- 38.0 D+ -1.5 -- SAT 03/26/22 22.8 C+ -- 23.7 C -- 23.7 C +0.0 -- 23.8 C +0.1 -- 13 Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue One-Way Stop D AM 03/24/22 6.4 A -- 6.9 A- -- 6.9 A- +0.0 -- 7.0 A- +0.1 -- (Average Delay) PM 03/24/22 7.4 A- -- 7.9 A- -- 7.9 A- +0.0 -- 8.3 A- +0.4 -- SAT 03/24/22 7.2 A- -- 7.5 A- -- 7.5 A- +0.0 -- 6.3 A -1.2 -- One-Way Stop E AM 03/24/22 22.2 C Yes 25.0 C Yes 25.0 C +0.0 Yes 34.7 D +9.7 Yes (Worst Approach) PM 03/24/22 25.7 D Yes 29.4 D Yes 29.4 D +0.0 Yes 52.2 F +22.8 Yes SAT 03/26/22 15.8 C No 17.9 C Yes 17.9 C +0.0 Yes 18.2 C +0.3 Yes 14 US 101 SB Ramps and Monterey Road Signal D AM 03/24/22 12.0 B -- 12.0 B+ -- 12.0 B+ +0.0 -- 12.0 B+ +0.0 -- PM 03/24/22 22.2 C+ -- 22.1 C+ -- 22.1 C+ +0.0 -- 22.2 C+ +0.1 -- SAT 03/26/22 20.2 C+ -- 19.9 B- -- 19.9 B- +0.0 -- 20.2 C+ +0.3 -- 15 Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 03/24/22 18.9 B- -- 18.8 B- -- 18.8 B- +0.0 -- 18.7 B- -0.1 -- PM 03/24/22 23.8 C -- 25.2 C -- 25.2 C +0.0 -- 25.7 C +0.5 -- SAT 03/26/22 26.1 C -- 26.4 C -- 26.4 C +0.0 -- 26.5 C +0.1 -- 16 Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Signal D AM 03/24/22 13.4 B -- 13.3 B -- 19.6 B- +6.3 -- 22.5 C+ +9.2 -- PM 03/24/22 16.1 B -- 15.8 B -- 24.8 C +9.0 -- 23.1 C +7.3 -- SAT 03/26/22 18.1 B- -- 18.3 B- -- 27.6 C +9.3 -- 26.2 C +7.9 -- 17 Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road All-Way Stop D AM 03/24/22 7.7 A No 7.7 A No 7.8 A +0.1 No 8.6 A +0.9 No PM 03/24/22 7.8 A No 7.8 A No 7.9 A +0.1 No 11.2 B +3.4 Yes SAT 03/26/22 8.1 A No 8.1 A No 8.1 A +0.0 No 10.0 A +1.9 No 18 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.5 A +8.5 No and Holloway Road PM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.2 B +12.2 Yes SAT Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.0 A +9.0 No 19 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- and Luchessa Avenue PM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SAT Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 20 Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue All-Way Stop D AM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.6 A +9.6 No PM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 13.8 B +13.8 Yes SAT Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.1 A +8.1 No Notes: Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the City's current level of service standard. - Denotes project deficiency based on City of Gilroy criteria. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | ix Table ES 2 (Continued) Intersection Level of Service Results Study 2040 General Plan (No Project) Conditions General Plan Plus Project (GP Roadway Network) General Plan Plus Project with Proposed LH Connnection Int. Intersection LOS Peak Warrant Delay Warrant Warrant Number Intersection Control Standard Hour Delay LOS Met? 1 Delay LOS Change 2 Met?1 Delay LOS Met? 1 1 Monterey Road and Tenth Street Signal D AM 23.6 C -- 23.6 C +0.0 -- PM 29.3 C -- 29.5 C +0.2 -- SAT 32.6 C- -- 32.9 C- +0.3 -- 2 Alexander Street and Tenth Street Signal D AM 20.3 C+ -- 20.3 C+ +0.0 -- PM 16.4 B -- 16.4 B +0.0 -- SAT 21.5 C+ -- 21.5 C+ +0.0 -- 3 Chestnut Street/Automall Parkway Signal D AM 32.1 C- -- 31.9 C -0.2 -- and Tenth Street PM 36.2 D+ -- 36.3 D+ +0.1 -- SAT 31.5 C -- 31.6 C +0.1 -- 4 US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth Street Signal D AM 20.6 C+ -- 20.6 C+ +0.0 -- PM 22.4 C+ -- 22.2 C+ -0.2 -- SAT 27.6 C -- 27.4 C -0.2 -- 5 US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 11.5 B+ -- 11.3 B+ -0.2 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 12.8 B -- 12.7 B -0.1 -- SAT 14.8 B -- 14.7 B -0.1 -- 6 Camino Arroyo Signal D AM 21.4 C+ -- 22.5 C+ +1.1 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 34.8 C- -- 34.1 C- -0.7 -- SAT 80.2 F --75.2 E- -5.0 -- 7 Silacci Way One-Way Stop D AM 0.5 A+ -- 0.5 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 3.3 A+ -- 8.4 A- +5.1 -- SAT 1.5 A+ -- 3.8 A +2.3 -- One-Way Stop E AM 22.7 C No 23.2 C +0.5 No (Worst Approach) PM 80.9 F Yes >120 F +96.2 Yes SAT 42.5 E Yes 91.6 F +49.1 Yes 8 Cameron Boulevard Signal D AM 17.6 B -- 17.6 B +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 26.6 C -- 26.6 C +0.0 -- SAT 22.5 C+ -- 22.6 C+ +0.1 -- 9 Gilroy Foods Signal D AM 8.5 A -- 11.4 B+ +2.9 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 9.4 A -- 10.3 B+ +0.9 -- SAT 5.0 A -- 10.2 B+ +5.2 -- 10 Holsclaw Road One-Way Stop D AM 0.1 A+ -- 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 1.4 A+ -- 1.4 A+ +0.0 -- SAT 0.6 A+ -- 0.6 A+ +0.0 -- One-Way Stop E AM 24.8 C No 24.9 C +0.1 No (Worst Approach) PM 81.5 F No 80.6 F -0.9 No SAT 69.0 F No 68.6 F -0.4 No 11 Frazier Lake Road Signal D AM 36.6 D+ -- 35.2 D+ -1.4 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 8.7 A -- 8.5 A -0.2 -- SAT 9.9 A -- 10.0 B+ +0.1 -- 12 Monterey Road and Luchessa Avenue Signal D AM 29.6 C -- 30.1 C +0.5 -- PM 39.2 D -- 38.8 D+ -0.4 -- SAT 23.9 C -- 23.8 C -0.1 -- 13 Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue One-Way Stop D AM 29.5 D -- 32.8 D- +3.3 -- (Average Delay) PM 15.0 B- -- 15.3 C+ +0.3 -- SAT 6.5 A -- 6.3 A -0.2 -- One-Way Stop E AM >120 F Yes >120 F +24.7 Yes (Worst Approach) PM 86.7 F Yes 86.9 F +0.2 Yes SAT 20.8 C Yes 21.3 C +0.5 Yes 14 US 101 SB Ramps and Monterey Road Signal D AM 15.2 B -- 15.0 B -0.2 -- PM 31.6 C -- 31.1 C -0.5 -- SAT 22.8 C+ -- 22.7 C+ -0.1 -- 15 Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 82.7 F --85.2 F +2.5 -- PM 67.9 E --70.3 E +2.4 -- SAT 28.4 C -- 28.6 C +0.2 -- 16 Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Signal D AM 17.7 B -- 22.3 C+ +4.6 -- PM 20.7 C+ -- 22.8 C+ +2.1 -- SAT 23.8 C -- 26.4 C +2.6 -- 17 Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road All-Way Stop D AM 8.4 A No 8.5 A +0.1 No PM 9.6 A No 9.6 A +0.0 No SAT 10.2 B No 10.3 B +0.1 No 18 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.6 A No and Holloway Road PM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.2 B Yes SAT -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.1 A No 19 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.1 A No and Luchessa Avenue PM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.2 B Yes SAT -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.8 A No 20 Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue All-Way Stop D AM 12.0 B Yes 11.9 B --Yes 12.0 B Yes PM 29.5 D Yes 28.6 D --Yes 21.8 C Yes SAT 8.7 A No 8.7 A -- No 8.5 A No Notes: Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the City's current level of service standard. - Denotes project deficiency based on City of Gilroy criteria.Same as General Plan Plus Project Conditions (GP Roadway Network) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | x Table ES 3 Intersection Vehicle Queue Analysis Results US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth StreetUS 101 NB Ramps and SR 152Camino Arroyo and SR 152Southbound Left Northbound Right Northbound Left Westbound Left Northbound Right Eastbound RightSBL SBL SBL NBR NBR NBR NBL NBL NBL WBL WBL WBL NBR NBR NBR EBR EBR EBRMeasurement AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SATExisting Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 253 446 476 115 134 212 48 155 199 9 20 37 11 65 59 121 106 20695th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 1422275683815124146561695th %. Queue (ft./ln)2350 550 675 125 150 200 75 200 375 25 50 100 25 100 150 125 150 400Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YESBackground Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 309 492 474 173 178 223 59 178 216 9 20 37 11 65 59 147 149 23995th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 1624276784916124146681895th %. Queue (ft./ln)2400 600 675 150 175 200 100 225 400 25 50 100 25 100 150 150 200 450Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YESBackground Plus Project (No LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 328 509 494 184 188 234 106 228 270 49 60 80 55 116 110 258 251 35395th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 17 25 28 7 7 9 5 11 20 3 4 8 3 6 10 9 12 2595th %. Queue (ft./ln)2425 625 700 175 175 225 125 275 500 75 100 200 75 150 250 225 300 625Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YESNOYESNO NOYES YES YESBackground Plus Project (With LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 339 515 500 153 158 219 103 228 274 52 66 83 60 125 119 216 198 29595th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 18 25 29 6 7 8 5 11 20 3 4 8 3 7 10 8 10 2195th %. Queue (ft./ln)2450 625 725 150 175 200 125 275 500 75 100 200 75 175 250 200 250 525Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YESNOYESNO NOYES YES YES##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Notes:Vehicle queue calculated using the Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence level.NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound, EB = Eastbound, WB = Westbound, R = Right, T = Through, L = Left.Right-turn movements with overlapping protected left-turn phasing were adjusted manually to account for the right-turns on red.1 Vehicle queue calculations based on cycle length for signalized intersections and control delay for unsignalized intersections.2 Assumes 25 feet per vehicle in the queue. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | xi Table ES 3 (continued) Intersection Vehicle Queue Analysis Results Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Camino Arroyo and Holloway RoadL/H Connection and Holloway Road (All-way Stop)Southbound Left Westbound Right Eastbound Left Southbound Left Westbound Left Northbound LeftSBL SBL SBL WBR WBR WBR EBL EBL EBL SBL SBL SBL WBL WBL WBL NBL NBL NBLMeasurement AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SATExisting Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 -- -- -- 8.4 8.4 8.6 8.0 8.3 8.5 -- -- -- -- -- --Lanes 111------111111------------Volume (vphpl ) 23178209-- -- -- 424961204769-- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 268------111111------------95th %. Queue (ft./ln)250 150 200 -- -- -- 25 25 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- --Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 -- -- -- 125 125 125 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- --Adequate (Y/N) YES YESNO-- -- -- YES YES YES YES YES YES -- -- -- -- -- --Background Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 -- -- -- 8.4 8.4 8.6 8.0 8.3 8.5 -- -- -- -- -- --Lanes 111------111111------------Volume (vphpl ) 23178209-- -- -- 424961204769-- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 268------111111------------95th %. Queue (ft./ln)250 150 200 -- -- -- 25 25 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- --Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 -- -- -- 125 125 125 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- --Adequate (Y/N) YES YESNO-- -- -- YES YES YES YES YES YES -- -- -- -- -- --Background Plus Project (No LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 60 60 70 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.2 8.4 8.5 -- -- -- -- -- --Lanes 111111111111------------Volume (vphpl ) 221 382 435 64 68 74 42 49 61 42 56 70 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 71113334111111------------95th %. Queue (ft./ln)2175 275 325 75 75 100 25 25 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- --Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 Future Future Future 125 125 125 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- --Adequate (Y/N) YESNO NOYES YES YES YES YES YES -- -- -- -- -- --Background Plus Project (With LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 60 60 70 9.5 12.7 11.8 9.0 10.0 9.5 9.1 14.7 10.1 8.1 8.9 8.4Lanes 111111111111111111Volume (vphpl ) 214 376 426 64 67 73 109 201 215 40 55 70 93 329 170 2 1 195th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 7111333412211113211195th %. Queue (ft./ln)2175 275 325 75 75 100 25 50 50 25 25 25 25 75 50 25 25 25Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 Future Future Future 125 125 125 100 100 100 Future Future Future Future Future FutureAdequate (Y/N) YESNO NOYES YES YES YES YES YES##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Notes:Vehicle queue calculated using the Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence level.NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound, EB = Eastbound, WB = Westbound, R = Right, T = Through, L = Left.Right-turn movements with overlapping protected left-turn phasing were adjusted manually to account for the right-turns on red.1 Vehicle queue calculations based on cycle length for signalized intersections and control delay for unsignalized intersections.2 Assumes 25 feet per vehicle in the queue. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | xii Table ES 4 Freeway Segment Level of Service Results Peak Speed1# of Capacity Volume1Density Volume % of Volume % of# Freeway Segment Direction Hour (mi/hr) Lanes1(vph) (pc/h)(pc/mi/ln)LOS (vph) Capacity (vph) Capacity1 US 101 from Betabel Road to Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) NB AM 38 2 4,400 3,770 50 E 11 0.25 11 0.25NB PM 58 2 4,400 3,769 33 D 10 0.23 10 0.232 US 101 from Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) to Monterey Road NB AM 36 2 4,400 3,713 51 E 22 0.50 22 0.50NB PM 42 2 4,400 3,901 46 D 20 0.45 20 0.453 US 101 from Monterey Road to Pacheco Pass Highway NB AM 64 3 6,900 4,318 23 C 22 0.32 22 0.32NB PM 63 3 6,900 4,558 24 C 20 0.29 20 0.294 US 101 from Pacheco Pass Highway to Leavesley Road NB AM 59 3 6,900 5,596 32 D 35 0.51 35 0.51NB PM 59 3 6,900 5,494 31 D 38 0.55 38 0.555 US 101 from Leavesley Road to Masten Avenue NB AM 40 3 6,900 5,779 48 E 24 0.34 24 0.34NB PM 57 3 6,900 5,772 34 D 26 0.37 26 0.376 US 101 from Masten Avenue to San Martin Avenue NB AM 34 3 6,900 5,431 53 E 20 0.29 20 0.29NB PM 52 3 6,900 5,979 38 D 22 0.32 22 0.327 US 101 from San Martin Avenue to Masten Avenue SB AM 60 3 6,900 5,369 30 D 22 0.32 22 0.32SB PM 38 3 6,900 5,647 50 E 20 0.28 20 0.288 US 101 from Masten Avenue to Leavesley Road SB AM 67 3 6,900 2,626 13 B 26 0.37 26 0.37SB PM 66 3 6,900 5,533 28 D 23 0.33 23 0.339 US 101 from Leavesley Road to Pacheco Pass Highway SB AM 64 3 6,900 4,419 23 C 38 0.55 38 0.55SB PM 59 3 6,900 5,504 31 D 34 0.49 34 0.4910 US 101 from Pacheco Pass Highway to Monterey Road SB AM 64 3 6,900 4,225 22 C 19 0.28 19 0.28SB PM 30 3 6,900 5,154 57 E 22 0.32 22 0.3211 US 101 from Monterey Road to Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) SB AM 62 2 4,400 3,315 27 D 19 0.43 19 0.43SB PM 21 2 4,400 2,80467 F22 0.50 22 0.5012 US 101 from Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) to Betabel Road SB AM 62 2 4,400 3,212 26 C 10 0.22 10 0.22SB PM 58 2 4,400 3,726 32 D 11 0.25 11 0.251 Source: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Congestion Management Program (CMP) Monitoring Study, 2018. Although the CMP Monitoring report does not include count data for the Saturday peak-hour, for informational purposes, the Saturday peak-hour project traffic on the freeway is included.Bold indicates unacceptable LOS, or project traffic exceeding one percent (1%) of the segments capacity.Bold and boxed indicate adverse effect.Existing Plus Project Project Trips (Existing Roadway Network)Project Trips (w/ Luchessa-Holloway Connection) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | xiii Table ES 5 Freeway Ramp Analysis Results Interchange/RampPeak HourRamp TypeConstraint Point1ControlCapacity2 (vph)Volume3 (vph) V/C LOS4Volume (vph) V/C LOS4Volume (vph) V/C LOS4Volume (vph) V/C LOS4US 101 at Monterey RoadSouthbound Off-Ramp AM Diagonal Off 1 Signal 1,800 242 0.134 A 244 0.136 A 244 0.136 A 244 0.136 APM Signal 1,800 662 0.368 A 685 0.381 A 685 0.381 A 701 0.389 ASAT Signal 1,800 429 0.238 A 455 0.253 A 455 0.253 A 466 0.259 ASouthbound On-Ramp AM Diagonal On 1 Meter-Off 1,800 334 0.186 A 339 0.188 A 339 0.188 A 352 0.196 APM Meter-On 900 536 0.596 A 564 0.627 B 564 0.627 B 638 0.709 CSAT Meter-Off 1,800 517 0.287 A 549 0.305 A 549 0.305 A 564 0.313 ANorthbound Off-Ramp AM Diagonal Off1 Signal 1,800 499 0.277A538 0.299A538 0.299A596 0.331APM Signal 1,800 373 0.207 A 469 0.261 A 469 0.261 A 512 0.284 ASAT Signal 1,800 319 0.177 A 403 0.224 A 403 0.224 A 412 0.229 ANorthbound On-Ramp AM Loop On 1 Meter-On 900 437 0.486A438 0.487A438 0.487A413 0.459APM Meter-Off 1,600 292 0.183 A 321 0.201 A 321 0.201 A 223 0.139 ASAT Meter-Off 1,600 340 0.213 A 372 0.233 A 372 0.233 A 303 0.190 AUS 101 at Tenth Street/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152)Southbound Off-Ramp AM Diagonal Off 2 Signal 3,600 839 0.233 A 1,104 0.307 A 1,142 0.317 A 1,141 0.317 APM Signal 3,600 1,434 0.398 A 1,712 0.476 A 1,746 0.485 A 1,748 0.486 ASAT Signal 3,600 1,483 0.412 A 1,691 0.470 A 1,730 0.481 A 1,732 0.481 ASouthbound On-Ramp AM Loop On 1 Meter-Off 1,600 101 0.063 A 130 0.081 A 149 0.093 A 135 0.084 APM Meter-On 900 277 0.308 A 432 0.480 A 454 0.504 A 380 0.422 ASAT Meter-Off 1,600 219 0.137 A 255 0.159 A 277 0.173 A 262 0.164 ANorthbound Off-Ramp AM Diagonal Off1 Signal 1,800 325 0.181A520 0.289A542 0.301A482 0.268APM Signal 1,800 385 0.214 A 550 0.306 A 570 0.317 A 510 0.283 ASAT Signal 1,800 536 0.298 A 656 0.364 A 677 0.376 A 648 0.360 ANorthbound On-Ramp AM Diagonal On 1 Meter-On 900 592 0.658 B 617 0.686 B 652 0.724 C 652 0.724 CPM Meter-Off 1,800 869 0.483 A 1,038 0.577 A 1,076 0.598 A 1,076 0.598 ASAT Meter-Off 1,800 955 0.531 A 977 0.543 A 1,017 0.565 A 1,017 0.565 ANotes:1. The constraint point of a ramp is the location on the ramp that dictates how much traffic enters/exits the freeway. The constraint point determines the ramp's capacity. For freeway off-ramps, the constraint point is at the ramp's diverging point from the freeway mainline. For non-metered on-ramps, the constraint point is at the ramp's merging point with the freeway. For metered on-ramps, the constraint point is at the meter.2. Typical capacities for diagonal and loop ramps are 1,800 and 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl), respectively. The capacity for non-metered ramps is determined based on the number of lanes at the ramp's constraint point. The capacity for metered on-ramps was assumed to be 900 vph (Caltrans District 4 maximum meter rate).3. Existing ramp volumes were interpolated from existing peak-hour turn-movement counts at the ramp intersections.4. The ramp level of service corresponds to the calculated ramp V/C ratios. Background Plus Proj(Existing Roadway Network)Background Plus Proj (Luchessa/Holloway Connection)Existing ConditionsBackground Conditions Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 1 1. Introduction This report presents the results of a Transportation Analysis (TA) completed for the proposed Gilroy Square Development project located at 6970 Camino Arroyo in the City of Gilroy, California. The project site consists of an undeveloped 10.18-acre site bounded by Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) to the north, Camino Arroyo to the west, Holloway Road to the south, and undeveloped land to the east. The proposed project would be developed in three phases with the following land uses: Phase 1 – a 2,600-square-foot (s.f.) fast-food with drive-thru restaurant (Burger King) a 16-fueling positions gas station with a 2,880- s.f. convenience store and 1,152-s.f. car wash a 112-room 4-story all-suites hotel (Residence Inn) Phase 2 – an 88-room 4-story hotel (Holiday Inn Express) Phase 3 – an 18,000-s.f. industrial warehouse a 27,500-s.f. industrial warehouse Access to the project site would be provided via four driveways along Camino Arroyo (three existing driveway cuts and one proposed new driveway) and one along Holloway Road (existing). It should be noted that the project site, along with the parcel south of the project site along Holloway Road, was evaluated with potential development as Phase II of the Regency Centers Gilroy Crossing shopping center project in 2002 (Regency Centers Traffic Impact Analysis, by Hexagon). The Regency Centers Phase I project is located in the southwest corner of the Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway intersection, across the street from the project site, and is completed and occupied (Gilroy Crossing shopping center). Land Use and Zoning Conformance The City of Gilroy General Plan land use designation for the project site is General Industrial. The Zoning Map designation for the site is Highway Commercial (HC) and General Industrial (M2). Therefore, the development of the project site, as proposed, will require a General Plan amendment and Zoning amendment. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 2 Roadway Network Under the current roadway network, all access to the project sites is provided via Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) and Camino Arroyo. In the 2002 Regency Centers TIA, it was determined that in order to provide the additional capacity required to serve Phase II of the Regency Centers project (now the proposed project), a roadway connection from the project area to the south would be required. The adopted City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan includes roadway improvements throughout the city that will support the projected growth associated with the buildout of the General Plan. Some of these planned improvements would directly affect the project area by changing travel patterns. Planned roadway network improvements in the project area include: The extension of Luchessa Avenue from its current terminus point at Rossi Lane eastward to connect to the future Cameron Boulevard extension. The extension of Cameron Boulevard to the north to connect to Marcella Avenue at Leavesley Road and to the south to connect to and past the Luchessa Avenue extension, terminating at the Southside Drive extension. The extension of Rossi Lane from its current terminus point at Luchessa Avenue northward to connect to Holloway Road. The planned Rossi Lane extension would provide a second access route between the project site area and the south and southwest parts of Gilroy via Holloway Road, Rossi Lane, and Luchessa Avenue. From conversations with City staff, a more feasible option for the planned Rossi Lane extension would be a new roadway from Holloway Road, parallel to/west of Camino Arroyo/Venture Way and the existing UNFI building, and connecting to Luchessa Avenue at its planned extension, approximately 1,900 feet east of Rossi Lane. This new north/south roadway connection is referred to within this report as the Luchessa/Holloway connection. The Luchessa/Holloway connection would replace the planned Rossi Lane extension to Holloway Road included in the General Plan roadway network. Therefore, this study will evaluate operations of the proposed project under the current roadway network (near-term conditions) and assuming the construction of a new roadway providing a direct connection between Luchessa Avenue and Holloway Road (near-term and General Plan conditions). As specified in the Gilroy 2040 General Plan (Chapter 3, Mobility), the addition or deletion of planned roadways will require a General Plan Amendment. The project site location and surrounding study area are shown on Figure 1. The site plan is shown on Figure 2. Transportation Analysis Scope The purpose of this transportation analysis is to evaluate the potential transportation impacts associated with the increase in traffic due to the proposed project in conformance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Gilroy. The TA consists of a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) required vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) analysis and a supplemental traffic operations analysis that demonstrates the project’s consistency with the City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan goals and policies. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 3 Figure 1 Site Location 101= City of GilroyLEGEND= Project Site Location Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 4 Figure 2 Proposed Site Plan A1.0.01PROJECTDWG. BY:DATE:JOB :SHEETREVISIO NS:CHK. BY:OF 3919-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CAPARKI NG FOR 88 ROOM 4 STORY HOTEL (1 SPACE: 1 ROOM) = 97 SPACESPARKI NG ANALYSI S( HOLI DAY I NN EXPRESS & SUTES)PROJECT DATA ( HOLI DAY I NN EXPRESS)HOLI DAY I NN EXPRESSPROJECT DESCRI PTI ON:88 ROOMS 4 STORY HOTELASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURI SDI CTI ON :R1VA47' - 0" ( TOP OF PARAPET)AL LOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSI SOCCUPANCY CLASSI FI CATI ON:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTI ON:FI RE SPRI NKLERS:HEI GHT ( MAXI MUM)ACTUAL :4ACTUAL :STORI ES ( MAXI MUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841- 70- 049AREA:6.PARCEL-3 SI TE AREA6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CAPORTE COCHERE AREA 692 S. F. BUI L DING AREA BREAKDOWN16772 S. F. 1ST FLOOR AREA16772 S. F. 2ND FLOOR AREA16772 S. F. 3RD FLOOR AREATOTAL BUI LDI NG AREA 67780 S. F. .16772 S. F. 4TH FLOOR AREA= 5 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG PROVI DED:(INCLUDING ONE VAN ACCESSI BLE SPACES)DESI GNATI ON :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL49' - 6" ( TOP OF PARAPET)PROJ ECT DATA ( RESI DENCE I NN) RESI DENCE I NN PROJECT DESCRI PTI ON:112 ROOM 4 STORY HOTELASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURI SDI CTI ON :R1VA40' - 10" ( TOP OF PARAPET)AL LOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSI SOCCUPANCY CLASSI FI CATI ON:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTI ON:FI RE SPRI NKLERS:HEI GHT ( MAXI MUM)ACTUAL :4ACTUAL :STORI ES ( MAXI MUM)1.2.3.4.5.CI TY OF GI L ROY841- 70- 049PARCEL-2 AREA:6.PARCEL-2 SI TE AREA6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUI L DING AREA BREAKDOWN20642 S. F. 1ST FLOOR AREA20642 S. F. 2ND FLOOR AREA20642 S. F. 3RD FLOOR AREATOTAL BUI LDI NG AREA 82568 S. F. .20642 S. F. 4TH FLOOR AREADESI GNATI ON : COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL47' - 9" ( TOP OF TOWER )5TOTAL PAVED AREABUI L DINGS FOOTPRINTPROVI DED LANDSCAPE AREA TOTAL PAVED AREABUI L DINGS FOOTPRINTPROVI DED LANDSCAPE AREA 69913 S. F. ( 67. 37%)20642 S. F. ( 19. 90%)13210 S. F. ( 12. 73%)= 4 SPACES= 4 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG PROVI DED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG REQUIRED:70' R1, 70' A3 TABLE 504. 3 AL LOWABLE:LOT COVERAGE ( HOTEL)7.PARCEL-2 SI TE AREA15.PROVI DED:9.EXI TFI RE RESI STI VE CONSTRUCTI ON REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUI LDING USE:CODE YEAR/ TYPE :SPECI AL I NSPECTI ONS REQUI RED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUI RED:REQUI RED FI RE RESI STANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTI ON OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATI ON ON PROPERTYNO ( TABLE 602)YES YESHOTEL7 ( FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)HOURS OF OPERATI ON:70' R1, 70' A3 TABLE 504. 3 AL LOWABLE:LOT COVERAGE ( HOTEL)7.PARCEL-3 SI TE AREA8.15.PROVI DED:9.EXI TFI RE RESI STI VE CONSTRUCTI ON REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUI LDING USE:CODE YEAR/TYPE :SPECI AL I NSPECTI ONS REQUI RED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUI RED:REQUI RED FI RE RESI STANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTI ON OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATI ON ON PROPERTYNO ( TABLE 602)HOTELNOHOURS OF OPERATI ON:= 4 SPACESTOTAL ELECTRICAL VEHI CLE ( EV) PARKI NG PROVI DED:VAN POOL PARKI NG PROVI DED= 4 SPACES LONG TERM BI CYCLE PARKI NG PROVI DED = 4 SPACES @ 2880 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREAPARKI NG REQUIRED FOR C- STORE: 1 SPACE PER 2 50 SQ FT AREA = 24 SPACESTOTAL PARKI NG PROVI DEDPARKI NG ANALYSI S { ( N) C- STORE}PROJECT DATA ( C- STORE)C-STOREPROJECT DESCRI PTI ON:C-STOREASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURI SDI CTI ON :M OCCUPANCY VA19' - 6" ( TOP OF PARAPET)AL LOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSI SOCCUPANCY CLASSI FI CATI ON:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTI ON:FI RE SPRI NKLERS:HEI GHT ( MAXI MUM)ACTUAL :1ACTUAL :STORI ES ( MAXI MUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841- 70- 049PARCEL-1A AREA:6.6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUI L DING AREA BREAKDOWN2880 S. F. C-STORE FLOOR AREADESI GNATI ON :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL4= 2 SPACES= 2 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG PROVI DED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG REQUI RED:LOT COVERAGE C-STORE7.TOTAL PAVED AREABUI L DINGS FOOTPRINTPROVI DED LANDSCAPE AREA 40811 S. F. ( 71. 39%)4242 S. F. ( 7. 41%)12154 S. F. ( 21. 20%)PARCEL 1A SITE AREA70' M TABLE 504.3 AL LOWABLE:15.PROVI DED:9.EXI TFI RE RESI STI VE CONSTRUCTI ON REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUI LDING USE:CODE YEAR/ TYPE :SPECI AL I NSPECTI ONS REQUIRED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUI RED:REQUI RED FI RE RESI STANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTI ON OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATI ON ON PROPERTYYES ( TABLE 60 2)YES YESC-STORE2 ( FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC,2019 CEC, 2019 CFC,2019 CALI FORNI A ENERGY CODE,2019 CALI FORNI A GREEN BUI LDI NG STANDARDS CODE& AL L APPROPRI ATE FI RE PROTECTI ON SYSTEMSTANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13, 20, 24, 72)24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATI ON:= 30 SPACESTOTAL PARKI NG REQUI REDPARKI NG REQUIRED FOR BURGER KI NG: 1 SPACE PER 1 00 SQ FT AREA PARKI NG ANALYSI S ( DRI VE- THRU BURGER KI NG)= 2 SPACES= 2 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG PROVI DED:TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSI BL E PARKI NG REQUIRED:= 30 SPACESTOTAL PARKI NG PROVI DEDPARCEL-1A SITE AREAPROJ ECT DATA ( DRI VE- THRU BURGER KI NG)DRI VE- THRU BURGER KI NGPROJECT DESCRI PTI ON:DRI VE- THRU RESTAURANTASSESSOR' S PARCEL NUMBER :ADDRESS:JURI SDI CTI ON :A2 OCCUPANCYVANO19' - 0" ( TOP OF COPI NG)AL LOWABLE:ZONING :CODE ANALYSI SOCCUPANCY CLASSI FI CATI ON:TYPE OF CONSTRUCTI ON:FI RE SPRI NKLERS:HEI GHT ( MAXI MUM)ACTUAL :1ACTUAL :STORI ES ( MAXI MUM)1.2.3.4.5.CITY OF GILROY841- 70- 049PARCEL-1 AREA:6.PARCEL-1 SI TE AREA 35990 S. F. ( 0. 82 AC)6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CABUI L DING AREA BREAKDOWNDESI GNATI ON :COMMERCIALCOMMERCIAL2LOT COVERAGE BURGER KI NG7.TOTAL PAVED AREABUI L DINGS FOOTPRINTPROVI DED LANDSCAPE AREA PARCEL-1 AREA35990 S. F. ( 0. 82 AC)50 ' A2 TABL E 50 4. 3 AL LOWABLE:15.PROVI DED:9.EXI TFI RE RESI STI VE CONSTRUCTI ON REQUIREMENTS10.PROPOSED BUI LDING USE:CODE YEAR/ TYPE :SPECI AL I NSPECTI ONS REQUI RED:13.12.11.14.2EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR:REQUI RED:REQUI RED FI RE RESI STANCE OF EXTERIORWALLS AND PROTECTI ON OF OPENINGS DUETO LOCATI ON ON PROPERTYNO ( TABLE 602)YES YESDRI VE- THRU' RESTAURANT3 ( FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC,2019 CEC, 2019 CFC,2019 CALI FORNI A ENERGY CODE,2019 CALI FORNI A GREEN BUI LDI NGSTANDARDS CODE & ALL APPROPRI ATE FI REPROTECTI ON SYSTEM STANDARDS ( e. g NFPA13, 20, 24, 72)HOURS OF OPERATI ON:2600 S. F. BURGER KI NG FLOOR AREA48 ( FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS)NO ( TABLE 602)CAR WASH AREA1152 S. F. 1 PARKI NG PER EMPL OYEE @ 4 EMPL OYEES = 4 SPACES= 26 SPACES24554 S. F. ( 68. 3%)2600 S. F. ( 7. 2%)8836 S. F. ( 24. 5%)PARKI NG REQUIRED FOR CAR WASH: 1 SPACE PER 250 SQ FT AREA = 17 SPACESGROSS PARKI NG REQUI RED103765 S. F. ( 2. 3 AC) 103765 S. F. ( 2. 3 AC) 57207 S. F. ( 1. 31 AC)57207 S. F. ( 1. 31 AC)CANOPY AREA6679 S. F. PARKI NG ANALYSIS(RESIDENCE INN)a) PARKI NG FOR 112 ROOMS 4 STORY HOTEL (1 SPACE:1 ROOM)= 112 SPACESTOTAL PARKI NG REQUI RED= 118 SPACESTOTAL PARKI NG REQUI RED1 PARKI NG PER EMPL OYEE @ 6 EMPL OYEES = 6 SPACES= 111 SPACESSTANDARD PARKI NG PROVI DED21' - 0" ( TOP OF EXTENDED COPI NG)21' - 10" ( TOP OF PARAPET)79264 S. F. ( 1. 81 AC) TOTAL PAVED AREABUI L DINGS FOOTPRINTPROVI DED LANDSCAPE AREA 52487 S. F. ( 66. 21%)12592 S. F. ( 15. 89%)14185 S. F. ( 17. 90%)PARCEL-3 SI TE AREA79264 S. F. ( 1. 81 AC) F. A. R PROVI DED FOR BURGER KI NG:16.GROSS FLOOR AREA/ SI TE AREA2600/ 35990=0. 072 F. A. R PROVI DED FOR C- STORE:GROSS FLOOR AREA/ SI TE AREA2880/ 57207=0. 05 F. A. R FOR RESI DENCE I NN :16.GROSS FLOOR AREA/ SI TE AREA82568/ 103765=0. 79 F. A. R PROVI DED FOR RESI DENCE I NN :67780/ 79264=0. 85 GROSS FLOOR AREA/ SI TE AREAPROPERTY LI NECENTER LI NEPARKI NG STRI PSBL DG L I NEACCESSI BLE AI SL EFI RE ACCESS ROUTELI GHTI NG SI NGLE HEAD POLE LIGHTFI RE DEPARTMENT CONNECTI ONFDCPROPOSED VAN POOL PARKI NG (SHALLBE MARKED WITH SI GNS RESTRICTI NGTHEI R USE TO CL EAN AI R VAN POOL)VPEL ECTRI CAL VEHICLE CHARGI NGSTATI ONEVTRUNCATED DOMESFI RE HYDRANT AS PER CIVIL PLANSBOLL ARDTRUCK ROUTEVI CI NI TY MAPILLUMINATED MONUMENT SI GNAGE ( 3 5'HIGH) MIN. 100 SQ. FT OF SEASONALCOLOR AT BASE OF SI GNMSI TE PLAN1ST FLOOR PL AN ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)2ND FLOOR PL AN ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)4TH FLOOR PL AN ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)ROOF PLAN ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)1ST FLOOR PL AN ( RESI DENCE- I NN) 3RD FLOOR PL AN ( RESI DENCE- I NN) ROOF PLAN ( RESI DENCE- I NN) EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS ( RESI DENCE- I NN) FLOOR PLAN C- STORE)EXTERI OR ELEVATI ON ( CANOPY)A1.0.0A1.1.0A1.1.1A1.1.2A1.1.3A1.1.4A1.1.5A1.1.6A1.1.7A2.1.0A2.1.1A2.1.2A3.2.0A4.1.0A4.1.1FLOOR & ROOF PLAN ( BURGER KI NG)EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS ( BURGER KI NG)A1.0.2TRASH DETAI L SA5.1.0 1ST FLOOR PL AN ( FUTURE ASSI STED LI VI NG)A5.1.1 2ND FLOOR PL AN ( FUTURE ASSI STED LI VI NG)A5.1.2A5.1.3A5.1.4A5.1.5 EXTERIOR ELEVATI ONS ( FUTURE ASSI STED LI VI NG)A6.1.0 1ST FLOOR PL AN ( FUT URE WAREHOUSE)A6.1.1 ROOF PLAN ( F UTURE WAREHOUSE)A6.1.2 EXTERIOR ELEVATI ONS ( FUTURE WAREHOUSE)3RD FLOOR PL AN ( FUTURE ASSI STED LI VI NG)4TH FLOOR PL AN ( FUTURE ASSI STED LI VI NG)ROOF PLAN ( FUTURE ASSI STED L I VI NG)SI TE PLANA1.0.0AROOF PLAN ( C- STORE)A2.1.3EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS (C-STORE)A2.1.4FLOOR PLAN & EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS ( CAR WASH)A2.1.5EQUPMENT PLAN ( CAR WASH)A3.1.0FLOOR PLAN ( CANOPY)A3.1.2ROOF PLAN ( CAR WASH)A3.1.13RD FLOOR PL AN ( HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)EXTERI OR VI EW (HOLI DAY- I NN & SUI TE)2ND FLOOR PL AN ( RESI DENCE- I NN) 4TH FLOOR PL AN ( RESI DENCE- I NN) EXTERI OR ELEVATI ONS ( RESI DENCE- I NN) A2.1.6A3.2.1A3.2.2A3.3.0A3.3.1A7. 0 . 0 SI TE PHOTOSA7. 0 . 1 SI TE PHOTOSCOVER SHEETGRADI NG PLANUTILITY PLANGRADI NG SECTIONSC1PHASI NG PLANCI VI L SI TE PLANSTORMWATER CONTROL PLANC2SOLI D WASTE HANDLI NG PLANFI RE TRUCK CI RCULATI ON PLANC4C5C7C3C6C9C8YES( NFPA 13) YES( NFPA 13 ) YES( NFPA 13) TOTAL PARKI NG REQUIRED = 881 PARKI NG PER EMPL OYEE @ 6 EMPL OYEES = 6 SPACES= 94 SPACESTOTAL PARKI NG REQUI RED@ 2600 GROSS FLOOR AREA= 12 SPACES@ 1152 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREA= 5 SPACESF. A. R REQUIRED FOR BURGER KI NG:F. A. R REQUIRED FOR C- STORE:16.2F. A. R FOR RESI DENCE I NN :4F. A. R REQUIRED FOR RESI DENCE I NN :16.4 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 5 Figure 2 (continued) Proposed Site Plan A1.0.0A1 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 6 CEQA Transportation Analysis Scope Like most other jurisdictions in Santa Clara County and the State, the City of Gilroy has historically utilized vehicular delay as the primary analysis metric to evaluate traffic impacts and potential roadway improvements to relieve traffic congestion that may result due to proposed/planned growth. However, with the adoption of Senate Bill (SB) 743 legislation, public agencies are required (effective July 2020) to base transportation impacts on Vehicle-Miles-Traveled (VMT) rather than level of service that typically uses delay as its metric. The change in measurement is intended to better evaluate the effects of development growth on the State’s goal for climate change and multi-modal transportation. Therefore, to adhere to the state’s legislation, all new development projects are required to analyze transportation impacts using the VMT metric. In accordance with CEQA, all proposed projects are required to analyze transportation as a component of environmental review using average trip length per resident and/or per employee as metrics (total VMT for retail/commercial projects). The CEQA VMT impact analysis was completed using the Valley Transportation Authority’s (VTA) VMT Evaluation Tool and the City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model. The City of Gilroy is currently developing the framework for new transportation policies based on VMT as the primary measure of transportation impacts. However, since the City has not formally adopted its own City-specific VMT policies, the City relies on VMT analysis methodology and impact thresholds recommended in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, December 2018, for the evaluation of projects. Traffic Operations Analysis Scope The current City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan, adopted in November 2020, uses Level of Service (LOS) as its primary metric for the evaluation of the effects of new development and land use changes on the City’s transportation network. Therefore, a traffic operations analysis based upon peak hour intersection level of service analysis is included to determine the project’s conformance with General Plan transportation goals and policies. The traffic operations analysis supplements the CEQA-required VMT analysis. However, the determination of project impacts per CEQA requirements is based solely on the VMT analysis. The traffic operations analysis includes the evaluation of weekday AM and PM peak-hour and Saturday peak-hour operations at selected intersections for the purpose of identifying operational issues (queuing, signal operations, and potential multi-modal issues) in the general vicinity of the project site. The traffic operations analysis also includes an evaluation of the effects of the project on other transportation issues relating to on-site access, on-site circulation, sight distance, parking, roadway segments, freeway segments and ramps, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities, and related safety elements in the immediate area of the project. The effects of the proposed development on traffic operations on the surrounding roadway system were evaluated following the standards and methodologies set forth by the City of Gilroy, the Gilroy 2040 General Plan, and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Congestion Management Program’s Transportation Impact Guidelines (October 2014). The VTA administers the Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Santa Clara County. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 7 Report Organization The remainder of this report is divided into five chapters. Chapter 2 describes the existing transportation system including the existing roadway network, transit service, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Chapter 3 presents the CEQA transportation analysis. Chapter 4 describes the traffic operations analysis and the project's effects on the transportation system and describes the recommended roadway improvements. An evaluation of other transportation issues, including site access and on-site circulation review, parking, freeway ramp analysis, and effects on bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities, are presented in Chapter 5. Chapter 6 presents the conclusions of the transportation analysis. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 8 2. Existing Transportation Setting This chapter describes the existing transportation system within the project area. It describes existing conditions for all of the major transportation facilities in the vicinity of the project site, including the roadway network, transit service, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Existing Roadway Network Regional access to the project site is provided via US 101 and State Route (SR) 152/Pacheco Pass Highway. Local access to the project site is provided by Tenth Street, Camino Arroyo, Holloway Road, Cameron Boulevard, Silacci Way, and Luchessa Avenue. These facilities are shown on Figure 1 and described below. US 101 is a six-lane freeway north of the Monterey Road interchange (in south Gilroy) and transitions to a four-lane freeway south of that point. US 101 extends northward through San Jose and southward into Salinas. This freeway serves as the primary roadway connection between Gilroy and Morgan Hill and other Santa Clara County communities to the north and between Gilroy and Salinas to the south. US 101 includes full-access interchanges at Leavesley Road, Tenth Street/SR 152, and Monterey Road in Gilroy. A fourth interchange at Masten Avenue, north of Gilroy in unincorporated Santa Clara County, serves the north and northwestern areas of Gilroy. Regional access to the project site is provided via the US 101 interchange at Tenth Street/SR 152. SR 152 (Pacheco Pass Highway) is a two- to four-lane east-west highway that extends to the east, where it is known as Pacheco Pass Highway, starting at the US 101 interchange at Tenth Street, over the Pacheco Pass to Interstate 5 and through Los Banos. West of Gilroy, SR 152 is known as Hecker Pass Highway and extends westward from the US 101 interchange at Leavesley Road via Monterey Road and First Street over the Santa Cruz Mountains to Watsonville and Highway 1. SR 152 connects the communities of Watsonville and Gilroy to the Central Valley via Interstate 5. Access to the project site would be provided via its intersection with Camino Arroyo. Tenth Street is a two- to six-lane arterial roadway that begins at Uvas Parkway and extends eastward to US 101, where it changes designation to Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152). Tenth Street has one lane in each direction with a two-way left-turn lane west of Church Street. Between Church Street and Monterey Road, Tenth Street consists of two lanes in each direction, then transitions to three westbound lanes and two eastbound lanes between Monterey Road and Alexander Street, three lanes in each direction with a landscaped median between Alexander Street and Chestnut Street, and again to two lanes in each direction east of Chestnut Street. Tenth Street is one of six freeway crossings Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 9 within Gilroy and it is proposed to be extended from its current terminus point at Uvas Parkway westward over Llagas Creek to connect to Santa Teresa Boulevard at the current Miller Avenue/Santa Teresa Boulevard intersection. Bike lanes are available along Tenth Street, between Monterey Road and Orchard Drive. Camino Arroyo is a four-lane north-south roadway that extends from Arroyo Circle, just north of Sixth Street/Gilman Road, to Venture Way, south of SR 152. Arroyo Circle extends northward to Leavesley Road along the east side of US 101, and in conjunction with Camino Arroyo, provides a north/south connection between Leavesley Road and SR 152. Camino Arroyo would provide direct access to the project site via one full-access driveway at its intersection with Gilroy Crossing and three limited-access driveways. Bike lanes are available along the entire length of Camino Arroyo, including along the western project frontage. Holloway Road is a two-lane east-west roadway that begins at its intersection with Brem Lane and continues eastward until its intersection with Silacci Way, where it terminates. Direct access to the project site would be provided via a full-access driveway along Holloway Road. Cameron Boulevard is a four-lane north-south roadway that currently extends from SR 152 south to Venture Way, where it terminates as an access road to the UNFI warehouse facility. Bike lanes are available along the entire length of Cameron Boulevard. The 2040 Gilroy General Plan indicates that Cameron Boulevard is planned to be extended from its current terminus point at SR 152 northward to Gilman Road, and continuing north to form the south leg of the Marcella Avenue/Leavesley Road intersection. Additionally, Cameron Boulevard is planned to be extended from its current southern terminus point southward to connect to a planned extension of Luchessa Avenue and terminate at Southside Drive. Fully implemented, the Cameron Boulevard extension would provide an alternative north-south connection (east of US 101) between the south and southwest parts of Gilroy (Luchessa Avenue), SR 152, and Leavesley Road. Luchessa Avenue is a two- to four-lane arterial roadway that begins at Miller Avenue and extends eastward approximately 1,700 feet past US 101, where it terminates at its intersection with Rossi Lane. Luchessa Avenue consists of one to two lanes in each direction with a landscaped median west of Thomas Road. Between Thomas Road and Church Street, Luchessa Avenue is an undivided two-lane roadway. Between Church Street and Monterey Road, Luchessa Avenue is a four-lane roadway with left-turn pockets. East of Monterey Road, Luchessa Avenue is an undivided two-lane roadway. Bike lanes are available along Luchessa Avenue, west of Monterey Road. The 2040 Gilroy General Plan indicates that Luchessa Avenue is planned to be extended from its current terminus point at Rossi Lane eastward to form the west leg of the Cameron Boulevard/Luchessa Avenue intersection. Fully implemented, the Luchessa Avenue extension would provide an alternative east-west connection (south of SR 152) between the southwest and southeast parts of Gilroy. Existing Bicycle Facilities Bicycle facilities are divided into three classes of relative significance: Class I Bikeways (Bike Path). 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 (Bike Lane). Class II bikeways are striped bike lanes on roadways that are marked by signage and pavement markings. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 10 Class III Bikeways (Bike Route). Class III bikeways are bike routes and only have signs to help guide bicyclists on recommended routes to certain locations. There are several bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the project site. These are listed below and shown on Figure 3: Class I Bikeways (Bike Paths) The nearest bike path to the project site is the Western Ronan Channel Trail. This trail is located on the western side of the Ronan Channel between Leavesley Road and Sixth Street. Class II Bikeways (Bike Lanes) Class II Bikeways in the vicinity of the project site are provided along the following roadways: Camino Arroyo/Arroyo Circle, along the entire length of the street Venture Way, along the entire length of the street Cameron Boulevard, along the entire length of the street Renz Lane, between 1000 feet west of Camino Arroyo and eastern terminus Sixth Street, between Maple Street and Camino Arroyo; between Hanna Street and Wren Avenue Chestnut Street, between Tenth Street and Sixth Street Tenth Street, between Monterey Road and Orchard Drive (Gilroy High School) Forest Street, between Eighth Street and IOOF Avenue Eigleberry Street, between Tenth Street and First Street Church Street, between Tenth Street and First Street Luchessa Avenue, between Monterey Road and Princevalle Street; between Thomas Road and Miller Avenue Class III Bikeways (Bike Routes) Class III Bikeways in the vicinity of the project site are provided along the following roadways: Monterey Street, between First Street and Eighth Street Sixth Street, between Hanna Street and Rogers Lane Existing Pedestrian Facilities The project area consists of a mixture of commercial and industrial land uses, and undeveloped land. Pedestrian facilities in the project area consist primarily of sidewalks along both sides of the road within all commercial areas. Crosswalks and pedestrian push buttons are available along three or more legs of all signalized intersections in the vicinity of the project site (with the exception of the intersection of Cameron Boulevard/SR 152, which only has a crosswalk along the south side of the intersection). The existing sidewalks, along with the crosswalks and pedestrian push buttons, provide a pedestrian connection between all shopping centers in the study area. However, most undeveloped and industrial use parcels have missing sidewalks, including along the entire project site frontage on Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road, creating an incomplete pedestrian network. Sidewalks are missing along the following roadway segments in the vicinity of the project site: Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 11 Figure 3 Existing Bicycle Facilities = Project Site LocationLEGEND= Class II Bike Lanes= Class III Bike Routes= Class I Bike Paths101NORTHNot to Scale Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 12 Camino Arroyo, along the east side of the roadway, starting approximately 370 feet south of Renz Lane to approximately 300 feet south of Holloway Road (including along the project frontage). Camino Arroyo, along the west side of the roadway between Holloway Road and 300 feet south of Holloway Road Holloway Road, along the north side of the roadway between Camino Arroyo and Silacci Way (including along the project frontage). Holloway Road, along the south side of the roadway between 900 feet west of Camino Arroyo and Silacci Way SR 152, along the entire south side of the roadway, east of Camino Arroyo, with the exception of an approximately 825-foot segment along the McCarthy Business Park frontage, west from Cameron Boulevard. SR 152, along the entire north side of the roadway, with the exception of an approximately 275- foot segment on the east side of Camino Arroyo. Silacci Way, along both sides of the roadway. Continuous sidewalks along the south side of SR 152 that run across the US 101 interchange connect the existing commercial uses along Camino Arroyo (east of US 101) with the land uses along Tenth Street, west of US 101. The existing pedestrian facilities in the study area are shown on Figure 4. Existing Transit Services Transit services in Gilroy consist of local, regional, and intercity bus services, rail services, and paratransit services. Existing transit service in Gilroy is provided primarily by Santa Clara County VTA buses. Caltrain commuter rail service, San Benito County express bus service, and Greyhound bus service also serve Gilroy. The existing transit services in the study area are shown on Figure 5. The project site is served by Local Route 84, which provides weekday and weekend service between the Gilroy Transit Center and Saint Louise Regional Hospital via Tenth Street, Camino Arroyo, and San Ysidro Avenue with approximately 60-minute headways during commute hours. Existing VTA bus stops serving Route 84 are located directly along the Camino Arroyo project frontage at the Gilroy Crossing and Holloway Road intersections. Additionally, the Gilroy Transit Station is located just over one mile northwest of the project site, along Monterey Road. Other bus transit services currently serving Gilroy, as of June 2022, include: Local Bus Route 85 provides weekday and weekend services between the Gilroy Transit Center and Saint Louise Regional Hospital via Sixth Street, Wren Avenue, Mantelli Drive, Leavesley Road, and San Ysidro Avenue with approximately 60-minute headways during commute hours. Local Bus Route 86 provides weekday-only services between the Gilroy Transit Center and Gavilan College via Tenth Street, Princevalle Street, Luchessa Avenue, Thomas Road, and Santa Teresa Boulevard between the hours of 7:45 AM and 3:34 PM with approximately 30-minute headways. Frequent Route 68 provides weekday and weekend services between the Gilroy Transit Center and the San Jose Diridon Transit Center via Monterey Road between 4:43 AM and 1:20 AM with approximately 15- to 30-minute headways during commute hours. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 13 Figure 4 Existing Pedestrian Facilities Holloway Rd= Project Site LocationLEGEND= Existing Crosswalk= Existing Sidewalk Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 14 Figure 5 Existing Transit Services NORTH Not to Scale 101Monterey RdFirst St T e n th S tS ix t h S tT h ir d S tL e a v e s le y R d Mur r ay AveLuchessa AveChurch StPr i nceval l e St Thomas RdMiller AveWren AveCa mi n o Ar r oy o Santa Teresa BlvdTenth StSan Ysi dr o AveN in th S tRenz LnGilroy Crossing Gilroy Transit Center LEGEND = Site Location = Local Bus RouteXX XXX XXX = Express Bus Route = Frequent Bus Route = Bus Stops = Rapid Bus RouteXXX = Caltrain Line and Station 85 84 84 85 85 86 84 168 68 568 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 15 Express Route 121 provides weekday services between the Gilroy Transit Center and the Lockheed Martin Transit Center in Sunnyvale with northbound service (three trips) during the morning commute period and southbound service (three trips) during the afternoon commute period with approximately 60-minute headways. This express route has scheduled stops at the Gilroy Transit Center, the Morgan Hill Caltrain Station, Old Ironsides Light Rail Station, and the Lockheed Martin Transit Center. Rapid Route 568 provides weekday services between the Gilroy Transit Center and the San Jose Diridon Transit Center via Monterey Road between 5:00 AM and 12:20 AM with approximately 30- minute headways during commute hours. San Benito County Express Bus Service (Caltrain and Gavilan College Shuttle) provides express bus service between Hollister and the Gilroy Transit Center Monday through Friday. Currently, five northbound (to Gilroy) shuttles run during the morning and evening commute periods, between 4:55 and 10:40 AM and between 1:15 and 7:35 PM, respectively. In addition, there are four southbound (to Hollister) runs in the morning between 7:05 and 11:50 AM and five runs in the evening between 2:00 and 8:20 PM. The schedule is coordinated with the Caltrain schedule to facilitate connections with Caltrain arrivals and departures. San Benito County Express Bus Service (Greyhound Shuttle) provides service between Hollister and the Gilroy Transit Center, (which serves as the Greyhound Bus Depot) on Saturdays and Sundays. There are currently two northbound (to Gilroy) and two southbound (to Hollister) runs in the morning between 7:30 and 11:10 AM and two northbound and two southbound runs in the evening between 12:05 and 6:35 PM. The schedule is designed to allow for connections to Greyhound service. Additionally, Caltrain provides train service from Gilroy to San Francisco, with limited-stop service at other stations along the peninsula corridor. Caltrain service to Gilroy is only provided on weekdays; weekend service south of San Jose is not available. Currently, as of June 2022, the Gilroy Caltrain station is served by three northbound trains in the morning and three southbound trains in the evening. The northbound trains have scheduled departures from the Gilroy Transit Center at 5:54 and 6:52 AM and the southbound trains have scheduled arrivals at the Gilroy Transit Center at 5:21 and 7:19 PM. Greyhound Lines, Inc. is an intercity, long-distance bus service offering services to over 3,700 destinations in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The Gilroy Transit Center also serves as the Greyhound Bus Depot in Gilroy. Greyhound buses operate from the Transit Center every day of the week. All of the above transit routes serve the Gilroy Transit Center, located in Downtown Gilroy, along Monterey Road. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 16 3. CEQA Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Evaluation This chapter provides an evaluation of the proposed project’s effect on Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 743, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 2019 Update Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) states that VMT will be the metric in analyzing transportation impacts for land use projects for CEQA purposes. VMT Evaluation Methodology VMT is the total miles of travel by personal motorized vehicles a project is expected to generate in a day. VMT measures the full distance of personal motorized vehicle trips with one end within the project. Typically, development projects that are farther from other, complementary land uses (such as a business park far from housing) and in areas without transit or active transportation infrastructure (bike lanes, sidewalks, etc.) generate more driving than development near complementary land uses with more robust transportation options. Therefore, developments located in a central business district with high density and diversity of complementary land uses and frequent transit services are expected to internalize trips and generate shorter and fewer vehicle trips than developments located in a suburban area with low density of residential developments and no transit service in the project vicinity. Local- serving retail projects also would result in shorter vehicle trips as new local-serving retail development typically diverts/shortens existing shopping trips, rather than generating new retail trips. In accordance with CEQA, all proposed projects are required to analyze transportation as a component of environmental review using average trip length per resident and/or per employee as metrics. The daily VMT per resident accounts for trips that start or end at the home. Daily VMT per employee is calculated based on trips made by people driving to and from work. However, non-residential and non- employment projects, such as retail and hotel projects, include both trips made by employees and patrons. Thus, for non-residential and non-employment projects, OPR guidelines recommend the evaluation of total VMT. To determine whether a project would result in CEQA transportation impacts related to VMT, VTA has developed a VMT Evaluation Tool to streamline the analysis for development projects. However, the VMT tool is limited to the evaluation of VMT for the general land use categories of residential, office, and industrial. For non-residential or non-office/industrial projects, very large projects, or projects that can potentially shift travel patterns, a Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) model, or other City-approved methods, must be used to determine project VMT. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 17 Thus, for the evaluation of this project, the proposed land uses were categorized into employment and retail land uses. The proposed warehouse land use was categorized as an employment use since its trip-making characteristics are mainly dictated by its employees. The proposed gas station/retail, fast- food restaurant, and hotel were categorized as retail uses since their trip-making characteristics are dictated by their employees and patrons. The VTA’s VMT tool was used to estimate VMT for the employment uses proposed by the project. However, since the proposed project would include retail, restaurant, and hotel uses for which the VMT tool is not capable of estimating VMT, the City’s TDF model was utilized to complete the VMT evaluation for the proposed retail category uses. VTA VMT Evaluation Tool The VTA’s VMT Evaluation Tool could be utilized to evaluate the effects of the project’s employment land uses on VMT . The VMT tool identifies the existing average VMT per capita and VMT per employee for the project area based on the assessor’s parcel number (APN) of a project. Based on the project location, type of development, project description, and proposed trip reduction measures, the VMT tool calculates the project VMT. Projects located in areas where the existing VMT is above the established threshold are referred to as being in “high-VMT areas”. Projects in high-VMT areas are required to include a set of VMT reduction measures that would reduce the project VMT to the greatest extent possible. City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting Model The City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting Model (also referred to as the Gilroy Model within this report) was utilized to complete the VMT evaluation for the proposed gas station/retail, fast-food restaurant, and hotel uses of the project. The Gilroy Model, built in 2014, was developed as an extension and refinement of the Santa Clara VTA Countywide TDF Model (VTA Model). The Gilroy Model is a subarea model of VTA’s Model and provides a more detailed roadway network and zone system within Gilroy. The Gilroy Model was last updated for the evaluation of the City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan and has a 2017 base year (based on VTA/ABAG Projections 2017) and a 2040 horizon year (based on City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan land use data). The Gilroy Model was used since it can estimate the diversion of traffic and change in traffic patterns due to the proposed project. VMT Policies and Impact Criteria A project’s VMT is compared to established thresholds of significance based on the project location and type of development. When assessing a residential project, the project’s VMT is divided by the number of residents expected to occupy the project to determine the VMT per capita. When assessing an office or industrial project, the project’s VMT is divided by the number of employees to determine the VMT per employee/job. Retail uses are assessed based on their effects on total VMT. To adhere to the state’s legislation, the City of Gilroy is currently developing the framework for new transportation policies based on the implementation of VMT as the primary measure of transportation impacts for CEQA purposes. The new policies will replace the City’s current transportation policies that are based on levels of service. However, since the City has not formally adopted its own City-specific VMT policies, the City relies on VMT analysis methodology and impact thresholds recommended in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, December 2018. While OPR emphasizes that a lead agency has the discretionary authority to establish thresholds of significance, the Technical Advisory suggests criteria that indicate when a project may have a significant, or less than significant, transportation impact on the environment. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 18 The impact criteria and thresholds used for the evaluation of the proposed project are described below. Employment Uses Impact Thresholds As stated in the technical advisory, for office projects, OPR recommends an impact threshold of 15% below the existing regional VMT per employee. OPR also states that in cases where the region is substantially larger than the geography over which most workers would be expected to live, it might be appropriate to refer to a smaller geography that includes the area over which most workers would be expected to live. Currently, the City of Gilroy has limited employment land uses, which results in longer commute trips as a large number of Gilroy residents are required to travel outside of Gilroy for employment. This is reflected in the average VMT per employee for the City of Gilroy (18.79 miles per employee) compared to the regional VMT (15.33) and the County VMT (16.64) per employee, as reported by the VTA VMT Evaluation Tool. Providing employment opportunities in Gilroy will likely attract most employees from within the City. Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, the impact threshold for the evaluation of the employment uses was assumed to be 15% below the citywide employment VMT per job. The citywide employment VMT threshold is also consistent with the Gilroy 2040 General Plan EIR, which utilized 15% below the citywide VMT as the impact threshold for both residential (per-capita) and employment (per-job) VMT. The VTA’s VMT Evaluation Tool indicates that the existing citywide average VMT per job is currently 18.79. Therefore, the OPR recommended impact threshold of 15% below the existing average VMT per job equates to 15.97 VMT per job. Employment Impact Threshold: 15.97 VMT per Job Retail Use Impact Thresholds The VMT analysis for the proposed retail uses considers OPR’s recommendation of a net increase in total VMT from baseline conditions as the threshold to identify potential VMT impacts for commercial/retail projects. Retail Impact Threshold: Any Increase in VMT CEQA Transportation Analysis Exemption Criteria The 2018 OPR CEQA technical advisory identifies screening thresholds to determine whether a CEQA transportation analysis would be required for specific development projects. The screening thresholds are based on the project size, map-based screening (areas with low VMT), transit availability, and/or provision of affordable housing. If a project meets the screening thresholds, it is then presumed that the project, or the component of the project, would result in less-than-significant VMT impacts and a detailed CEQA VMT analysis is not required. Screening thresholds applicable to the proposed project include the following: Screening Threshold/Presumption of Less-Than-Significant Impact for Small Projects The OPR guidelines state that projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day, have no substantial evidence indicating that the project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, and are consistent with the adopted General Plan, generally may be assumed to cause a less-than- significant impact on VMT. Typical land uses that would generate 110 or fewer daily trips include up to 10,000 s.f. of office space. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 19 Retail Projects Although the OPR technical advisory does not specify screening criteria for the presumption of less- than-significant VMT impact for retail projects, it recognizes that the addition of new local-serving retail development tends to shorten trips, and consequently reduce VMT, by improving retail destination proximity. That is, new local-serving retail projects would provide an alternative to other similar uses located farther away. OPR specifies that, generally, retail development less than 50,000 square feet in size might be considered local-serving and should be considered to have a less-than-significant VMT impact. Evaluation of Screening Criteria Small Project Screening Criteria The proposed warehouse land use is estimated to generate a total of 110 daily trips (see Table 3, Trip Generation Table, in the following chapter). Based on OPR’s small project screening threshold, the proposed warehouse buildings would have a less-than-significant impact on VMT and, therefore, a detailed VMT analysis for this portion of the proposed project is not required. Local-Serving Retail The proposed gas station with convenience store and fast-food restaurant with drive-through window are not reflective of larger regional retail development, such as large shopping centers, which would attract new trips from outside the general city limits. Rather, the proposed commercial uses consist of readily available local-serving retail uses that are not anticipated to attract patrons from outside the project area, but instead, would result in a redistribution of local trips currently traveling to other similar locations. Furthermore, because of the location of the project site (adjacent to a freeway interchange and major thoroughfare (SR 152)), it is anticipated that a large percentage of traffic to the retail uses of the project would be pass-by traffic, or traffic already on the roadway system that would stop at the project site, access the proposed land uses, and continue on their final destination. Based on OPR’s screening threshold recommendations, retail development less than 50,000 square feet in size might be considered local-serving. In order to verify if the proposed gas station and fast- food restaurant have trip-making characteristics equivalent to a 50,000-square-foot or less retail project, the proposed gas station and fast-food restaurant were converted into an equivalent amount of retail space, based on their daily trip generation estimates. Trip generation rates published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021) were utilized for this process. Based on the ITE daily trip rate, and after applying the applicable pass-by trip reductions, the proposed gas station and fast-food restaurant are estimated to generate a total of 1,607 daily trips, which are equivalent to the trips estimated to be generated by 43,000 s.f. of retail space (see Table 1). Therefore, the proposed gas station and fast-food restaurants are estimated to generate daily traffic comparable to a 43,000-square-foot local-serving retail project, and therefore, should be considered to have a less- than-significant VMT impact. However, since the proposed hotel uses also were categorized as retail uses for the purpose of the VMT evaluation, the equivalent amount of retail space, including the hotel uses, equates to 66,000 s.f. of retail space. Therefore, the combined size of all three land uses categorized as retail land use (gas station, fast-food restaurant, hotels) would exceed the 50,000-s.f. local-serving retail size threshold identified by OPR and a VMT evaluation for these land uses was completed with the use of the Gilroy Model. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 20 Table 1 Equivalent Retail Land Use Calculations VMT Evaluation Employment VMT As discussed in the previous section, the proposed warehouse (employment) land use is estimated to generate 110 total daily trips and, per OPR’s small project screening threshold, is consider a small project and is presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Retail and Hotel VMT The City of Gilroy TDF Model was used to estimate VMT for the proposed retail uses of the project site. As described previously, the retail uses of the proposed project are not reflective of larger regional retail development, which would attract new trips from outside the City of Gilroy, but rather, they would be considered local-serving retail and provide a service that is currently provided in other parts of town. Thus, the proposed retail use of the project would result in a redistribution of trips that are currently made to other surrounding similar uses located outside the immediate project area and city limits. The underlying premise is that the proposed retail would not cause an increase in trips but rather result in a change in trip making as patrons and employees of the proposed retail uses access the project site because of its more convenient location instead of other similar uses elsewhere. In order to estimate the impact on VMT with the Gilroy Model for the proposed land uses categorized as retail, the proposed gas station and fast-food restaurant land uses were converted to equivalent retail land use which, along with the proposed hotel uses, were coded in the model within the project site. The anticipated shifts in trips associated with the proposed project were coded in the Gilroy Model by reallocating retail and service jobs from Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) that are used to reflect other locations with similar land uses in the City’s model to the TAZ representing the project site. The Gilroy Model was then used to estimate daily VMT for work and shop trips, without and with the proposed retail/restaurant and hotel uses, to quantify the effect of the project and the associated job reallocation. The model results summarized in Table 2 show that the retail component of the project would cause a net decrease of 1,334 citywide VMT per day. The work trips would account for an increase of 1,908 daily VMT but the shopping trips would account for a decrease of 3,241 daily VMT. Therefore, the proposed retail uses of the project would not result in a significant VMT impact, based on the threshold of significance for retail uses recommended by OPR. Land Use Rate Trip 16 2,600 vehicle fueling positions s.f.1,607 #820 - Shopping Center (>150k)Equivalent Retail Space = 43,000 s.f.37.01 1,607 Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021 The daily trip estimates for the gas station and fast-food restaurant include the applicable passby reductions. #945 Gas station with convenience store, #934 Fast-food restaurant with drive-through window Size Daily Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 21 Table 2 Retail and Hotel VMT Analysis VMT Analysis (Citywide) No Project With Project Change (Proj - No Proj) Home-Based Work VMT 452,495 454,403 1,908 Home-Based Shop VMT 343,999 340,758 -3,241 Total VMT 796,495 795,161 -1,334 Source: City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting Model. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 22 4. Traffic Operations Analysis This chapter describes the traffic operations analysis. The traffic operations analysis provides supplemental analysis for use by the City of Gilroy in identifying potential improvement of the transportation system that may be included as part of the project’s Conditions of Approval. However, the identified roadway operations and improvements are not required or considered project impacts per CEQA guidelines. The chapter presents the method by which project traffic is estimated, intersection operations analysis for existing and future conditions, the identification of any adverse effects on study intersections caused by project-generated trips, and recommended improvements to alleviate the identified operational issues. In addition, the chapter includes an intersection vehicle queuing analysis and freeway segment capacity evaluation. Project Description The proposed project site is located at 6970 Camino Arroyo (Assessor’s Parcel Number [APN] 841-70- 049) and consists of an undeveloped 10.18-acre site bounded by Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) to the north, Camino Arroyo to the west, Holloway Road to the south, and undeveloped land to the east. The proposed project would be developed in three phases with the following land uses: Phase 1 – a 2,600-square-foot (s.f.) fast-food with drive-thru restaurant (Burger King) a 16-fueling positions gas station with a 2,880- s.f. convenience store and 1,152-s.f. car wash a 112-room 4-story all-suites hotel (Residence Inn) Phase 2 – an 88-room 4-story hotel (Holiday Inn Express) Phase 3 – an 18,000-s.f. industrial warehouse a 27,500-s.f. industrial warehouse Access to the project site would be provided via four driveways along Camino Arroyo (three existing driveway curb cuts and one proposed new driveway) and one along Holloway Road (existing). The project site plan is shown on Figure 2. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 23 Scope of Analysis A level of service analysis at key intersections was completed to satisfy local guidelines and determine conformance to General Plan transportation goals and policies. The effects of the project on the study facilities were evaluated in accordance with City of Gilroy and CMP methodologies and standards. The study intersections are listed below and shown on Figure 6. Study Intersections The study includes the evaluation of traffic conditions at 14 signalized intersections, three unsignalized intersections, and three future intersections. All but two of the study intersections are located within the City of Gilroy (denoted on the list below with a CofG superscript). The two study intersections outside the City of Gilroy limits are located within unincorporated Santa Clara County (denoted with an SCC superscript), within Gilroy’s sphere of influence, as identified in the Gilroy 2040 General Plan. The following key intersections were evaluated: 1. Monterey Street and Tenth Street CofG 2. Alexander Street and Tenth Street CofG 3. Chestnut Street/Automall Parkway and Tenth Street CofG 4. US 101 Southbound Ramps and Tenth Street CofG 5. US 101 Northbound Ramps and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) CofG 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) CofG 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) CofG 8. Cameron Boulevard and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) CofG 9. Gilroy Foods and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) CofG 10. Holsclaw Road and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) SCC 11. Frazier Lake Road and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) SCC 12. Monterey Street and Luchessa Avenue CofG 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue CofG 14. US 101 SB Ramps and Monterey Road CofG 15. US 101 NB Ramps and Monterey Road CofG 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing CofG 17. Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road CofG 18. Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Holloway Road (future) CofG 19. Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Luchessa Avenue (future) CofG 20. Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue (future) CofG Study Periods Traffic conditions at all of the study intersections were analyzed for the weekday AM and PM peak hours of adjacent street traffic and the Saturday peak-hour. It is during these times that the most congested traffic conditions occur on an average day. The weekday AM peak hour of traffic is generally between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM and the weekday PM peak hour is typically between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM. The Saturday peak-hour is generally an hour between the 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM period. It is during these time periods that the most congested traffic conditions occur on an average weekday and weekend. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 24 Figure 6 Study Intersections = City of GilroyLEGEND= Project Site LocationNORTHNot to ScaleX= City of Gilroy= Study IntersectionLEGEND= Project Site Location= LOS D Area= Luchessa-Holloway Connection1011234567891011121314151617181920 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 25 Study Scenarios Traffic conditions were evaluated for the conditions described below: Scenario 1: Existing Conditions. Existing intersection traffic volumes were obtained/derived from available intersection turning-movement counts (conducted in 2017- 2019) and new intersection traffic count data collected in March 2022. Current 2022 traffic counts were compared to traffic counts conducted prior to the Covid19 pandemic and adjusted as necessary to identify traffic volumes that would represent current 2022 traffic conditions without the effect of the Covid19 pandemic. This is discussed in more detail in the following section. Scenario 2: Background Conditions. Background traffic conditions represent future traffic volumes on the future transportation network. Background traffic volumes were estimated by adding to existing peak-hour volumes the projected trips from approved but not yet constructed developments in the study area. Background conditions represent the baseline conditions to which project conditions are compared for the purpose of determining the project’s adverse traffic effects on the surrounding roadway network. Scenario 3: Background Plus Project Conditions. Background plus project conditions, or simply referred to as Project Conditions, represent future traffic volumes with the proposed project. Background plus project conditions were estimated by adding to background traffic volumes the trips associated with the proposed project (or project traffic volumes). Background plus project conditions were evaluated under two roadway scenarios: (1) under the existing roadway network; and (2) assuming a new roadway connection from Holloway Road (project site area) to Luchessa Avenue (the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection). The comparison of these two roadway network scenarios demonstrates the effect of providing a second access roadway between the project area and the south and southwest parts of Gilroy. Background plus project conditions were evaluated relative to background conditions in order to determine adverse traffic effects on the roadway network caused by the proposed project. Scenario 4: 2040 General Plan Conditions. Year 2040 General Plan conditions represent future traffic conditions associated with buildout of the City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan land use growth projections and planned future roadway network. With implementation of the proposed project, changes to the adopted General Plan land use and roadway network would occur. Thus, Year 2040 General Plan conditions were evaluated for three scenarios: (1) Year 2040 General Plan conditions, as adopted in November 2020; (2) with the proposed project (replacing the planned land uses on the project site) and planned General Plan roadway network; and (3) with the proposed project and proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection (replacing the planned Rossi Lane extension). The change between these scenarios demonstrates the relative effect the proposed project and proposed roadway network change would have on adopted General Plan conditions. Project Trip 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 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 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 26 project trips are assigned to specific streets and intersections in the study area. These procedures are described further in the following sections. Trip Generation Through empirical research, data have been collected that correlate to common land uses their propensity for producing traffic. Thus, for the most common land uses there are standard trip generation rates that can be applied to help predict the future traffic increases that would result from a new development. Hexagon prepared trip estimates for the proposed project based on trip generation rates obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE’s) Trip Generation Manual, Eleventh Edition, 2021. The proposed gas station would include a convenience store and an automated car wash. Although the description of the gas station with convenience store land use in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, does not specify this land use also includes a car wash, it is believed that trip generation for a gas station/convenience store/car wash land use is mainly dictated by the gas station and convenience store, and the presence, or lack of, a car wash would have minimal effect on the number of trips generated by this land use. That is, the majority of the car wash users are patrons of the gas station/convenience store who conveniently decide to run their vehicle through the car wash. Additionally, the 10th Edition Trip Generation Manual does specify that the trip rates for the gas station/convenience store land use might also include a car wash. The trip generation rates for gas station with convenience store land use contained in the 10th and 11th Editions were compared. The trip generation rates comparison revealed that the 11th Edition trip generation rates are higher than the rates contained in the 10th Edition Manual. Therefore, it is concluded that the ITE trip generation rates for gasoline/service station with convenience market from the 11th Edition Manual are applicable to the proposed gas station/convenience store/car wash use. Based on the above assumptions, the project trip generation was estimated by applying to the size of the proposed development ITE trip generation rates for gasoline/service station with convenience market (ITE land use code #945), fast-food restaurant with drive-through window (ITE land use code #934), all-suites hotel (ITE land use code #311), business hotel (ITE land use code #312), and warehouse (ITE land use code #150). Based on the recommended rates and the size of the proposed project, it is estimated that, prior to any trip reductions, the proposed project would generate a total of 6,414 daily trips, with 472 trips (242 inbound and 230 outbound) occurring during the AM peak hour, 480 trips (237 inbound and 243 outbound) occurring during the PM peak hour, and 518 trips (258 inbound and 260 outbound) occurring during the Saturday peak-hour. Trip Reductions A 10-percent (%) trip reduction was applied to the project trip generation estimates for internalization between the proposed hotel and commercial land uses, as prescribed by VTA guidelines. This trip reduction represents patrons from the hotel walking to the proposed commercial sites instead of driving to a similar land use elsewhere, eliminating these trips from the roadway network. According to VTA guidelines, the percent reduction must be based on the smaller trip generator, in this case, the hotel uses, and the resulting number of trips must be reduced from both components. Furthermore, trip generation for commercial uses is typically adjusted to account for pass-by-trips. Pass-by-trips are trips that would already be on the adjacent roadways (and are therefore already counted in the existing traffic) but would turn into the site while passing by. Justification for applying the pass-by-trip reduction is founded on the observation that such retail traffic is not actually generated by the retail development but is already part of the ambient traffic levels. Pass-by-trips are therefore excluded from the traffic projections to yield net new project trips generated by the project. However, at intersections providing direct access to the retail sites and project site driveways, all project-generated Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 27 traffic is included, including pass-by trips. The applicable pass-by trip reductions were obtained from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. Net Project Trips On the basis of the ITE trip generation rates, and after applying the above trip reductions, it is estimated that the proposed project would generate 2,394 net daily vehicle trips, with 204 trips (108 inbound and 96 outbound) occurring during the AM peak-hour, 197 trips (93 inbound and 104 outbound) occurring during the PM peak-hour, and 215 trips (106 inbound and 109 outbound) occurring during the Saturday peak-hour. The trip generation estimates for the proposed project are presented in Table 3. Trip Distribution and Assignment The trip distribution patterns for project-generated traffic for the proposed project were estimated based on existing travel patterns on the surrounding roadway system, locations of complementary land uses, and use of the Gilroy Model. The peak-hour trips associated with the proposed project were added to the transportation network in accordance with the distribution patterns discussed above. The project trip distribution patterns are shown graphically in Figure 7. Figures 8 and 9 show the assignment of project traffic on the local transportation network, without and with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection, respectively. A tabular summary of project traffic at each study intersection is contained in Appendix D. Intersection Operations Methodology This section presents the methods used to evaluate traffic operations at each of the study intersections for each study scenario. It includes descriptions of the data requirements, the analysis methodologies, the applicable level of service standards, and the criteria defining deficiencies at the study facilities. The intersection operations analysis is intended to quantify the operations of intersections and to identify potential negative effects due to the addition of project traffic. However, a potential adverse effect on a study intersection is not considered a CEQA impact metric. Data Requirements The data required for the analysis were obtained from new traffic counts, previous traffic studies, the City of Gilroy, the CMP Annual Monitoring Report, the City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting Model, and field observations. The following data were collected from these sources: existing traffic volumes existing and planned lane configurations signal timing and phasing (for signalized intersections only) average speed (for freeway segments only) approved development information (size, use, and location) Year 2040 General Plan Conditions traffic forecasts Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 28 Table 3 Project Trip Generation Estimates Proposed Land Use Rate Trip Rate In Out In Out Total Rate In Out In Out Total Rate In Out In Out TotalRetail Land Uses#945 - Convenience Store/Gas Station 16Vehicle Fueling Positions265.12 4,242 16.06 50% 50% 129 128 257 18.42 50% 50% 148 147 295 17.01 50% 50% 136 136 272Passby Reduction175% -3,182 76% -98 -97 -195 75% -111 -110 -221 75% -102 -102 -204#934 - Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window2,600 Square Feet 467.48 1,215 44.61 51% 49% 59 57 116 33.03 52% 48% 45 41 86 55.25 51% 49% 73 71 144Passby Reduction155% -668 50% -30 -29 -59 55% -25 -23 -48 55% -40 -39 -79Retail Total (Prior to Reductions) 5,457 188 185 373 193 188 381 209 207 416Hotel and Retail Internal Reduction 2-85 -3 -4-7 -4-3-7 -5-5-10Hotel Land Uses#311 - All Suites Hotel3112 Rooms 4.40 493 0.34 53% 47% 20 18 38 0.36 49% 51% 20 20 40 0.53 48% 52% 29 31 60#312 - Business Hotel 88 Rooms 4.02 354 0.36 39% 61% 12 20 32 0.31 55% 45% 15 12 27 0.46 48% 52% 19 21 40Hotel Total (Prior to Reductions) 847 32 38 70 35 32 67 48 52 100Hotel and Retail Internal Reduction 210% -85 10% -3 -4 -7 10% -4 -3 -7 10% -5 -5 -10Employment Land Uses#150 - Warehousing 45,500 Square Feet 2.42 110 0.64 77% 23% 22 7 29 0.70 28% 72% 9 23 32 0.05 64% 36% 1 1 2Employment Total (Prior to Reductions) 110 22 7 29 9 23 32 1 1 2Total Project Trips Prior to Reductions6,414 242 230 472 237 243 480 258 260 518Total Passby Trip Reductions-3,850 -128 -126 -254 -136 -133 -269 -142 -141 -283Total Internal Reduction-170 -6 -8 -14 -8 -6 -14 -10 -10 -20Total Net Project Trips (With Reductions) 2,394 108 96 204 93 104 197 106 109 215Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition 2021, and project description per site plan dated 2/14/22 by ACE Design LLC.1 AM and PM peak-hour passer-by reduction rates obtained from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition 2021. Daily and Saturday peak-hour pass-by reductions for the land uses listed above are assumed to be the same as their PM peak-hour pass-by rate. 2 A 10 percent (%) internal trip reduction was applied for the interaction between the hotel and the retail land uses, as recommended in the VTA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. Ten percent of the smaller trip-generator is applied to both land uses.3 Since no Saturday peak-hour trip generation rate is available for the All Suites Hotel land use (ITE land use code #311), the Saturday peak-hour rate for this land use was derived by multiplying the Saturday peak-hour rate for Business Hotel (ITE land use #312) by the ratio between the PM peak-hour rates for the All Suites Hotel and Business Hotel land uses. The in and out split was assumed to be as that identified for the Business Hotel land use.SizeAM Peak Hour PM Peak HourSplit Trip Split TripWeekday DailySAT Peak HourSplit Trip Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 29 Figure 7 Project Trip Distribution = City of GilroyLEGEND= Project Site LocationNORTHNot to Scale101X= City of Gilroy= Study IntersectionLEGEND= Project Site Location= Luchessa-Holloway Connection= Hotel (Fast Food) [Gas Station](Warehouse) Project Trip Distribution X%(X%)[X%](X%)4 0 %(3 0 %)[4 0 %](3 0 %)1 0 %(1 0 %) [4 %](4 %)4%(15%)[4%](8%)6%(20%)[2%](10%)2 0 %(1 0 %) [3 0 %](2 0 %)10%(10%)[20%](10%)10%(5%)[0%](8%)0 %(0 %)[0 %](1 0 %)1234567891011121314151617181920 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 30 Figure 8 Project Trip Assignment (Existing Roadway Network) LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 8(6)[8]10(7)[10]8(7)[9] 7(7)[8] 9(8)[10]8(7)[9]24(22)[27] 24(22)[27] 26(20)[27]26(20)[27]38(34)[39]22(20)[21]35(38)[40] 43(45)[48] -63(-67)[-71] 149(142)[157] -64(-68)[-71] 80(81)[85]6(5)[6]13(16)[14] 16(14)[14] 13(16)[14]142(150)[160]5(6)[6]76(83)[85]16(14)[14] 13(16)[14] 16(14)[14] 13(16)[14] 16(14)[14] 12(14)[14] 1(2)[0]2(1)[0]14(13)[13] 10(7)[10]9(8)[10]65(55)[66] 26(20)[27] 19(22)[22] 24(22)[27] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 24(37)[24]128(135)[147]36(25)[22]198(204)[226]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 31 Figure 8 (continued) Project Trip Assignment (Existing Roadway Network) 17 18 19 22(9)[1]1(2)[0] 17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTION Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 32 Figure 9 Project Trip Assignment (With Luchessa/Holloway Connection) LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 8(6)[8] 8(7)[9] 7(7)[8]8(7)[9]15(14)[17] 15(14)[17] 16(13)[17]16(13)[17]38(34)[39]22(20)[21]35(38)[40] 34(36)[39] -63(-67)[-71] 139(134)[148] -64(-68)[-71] 80(81)[85]6(5)[6]13(16)[14] 16(14)[14] 13(16)[14]133(142)[150]5(6)[6]76(83)[85]16(14)[14] 13(16)[14] 16(14)[14] 13(16)[14] 16(14)[14] 12(14)[14] 1(2)[0]2(1)[0]14(13)[13] 10(7)[10] 9(8)[10] 54(47)[56] 16(13)[17] 19(22)[22] 15(14)[17] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 10(7)[10] 9(8)[10]28(38)[30]1(2)[2]127(134)[146] 8(6)[10]33(23)[21]191(198)[217]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 33 Figure 9 (continued) Project Trip Assignment (With Luchessa/Holloway Connection) 17 18 19 10(7)[10]9(8)[10]20(8)[1]10(7)[10]9(8)[10] 0(2)[0] 10(7)[10]9(8)[10]17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 9(8)[10] 10(7)[10] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi Ln Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 34 Roadway Network and Lane Configurations Existing and Background Conditions The existing lane configurations and traffic-control devices at the study intersections were determined by observations in the field and are presented graphically on Figure 10. It is assumed in this analysis that the transportation network under background conditions (without and with the project) would be the same as under existing conditions. Currently, all access to the project site is provided via Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) and Camino Arroyo. Background Plus Project Conditions Background plus project conditions were evaluated under two roadway network scenarios: (1) under the existing roadway network; and (2) assuming a secondary access route from the project site area via Holloway Road and Luchessa Avenue. Previous traffic analyses for site development in the project area, including the project site, have identified the need to provide a secondary access route to the project area to be able to adequately serve the planned future demand. A new access route connecting Holloway Road to Luchessa Avenue would provide an alternative access route between the project site area and the south and southwest parts of Gilroy. While the City investigates potential roadway connection layouts between Holloway Road and Luchessa Avenue, from conversations with City staff, a potential new roadway could be constructed from Holloway Road parallel to/west of Camino Arroyo/Venture Way and the existing UNFI building and connect to Luchessa Avenue at its planned extension, at approximately 1,900 feet east of its current terminus point at Rossi Lane (see Figure 6). Therefore, this study also evaluates traffic conditions with the project assuming a new north/south roadway between Luchessa Avenue and Holloway Road would be constructed as part of the project. This new proposed roadway connection is referred to hereafter as the Luchessa/Holloway connection. With the implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection, the following three new intersections would be created: 18. Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Holloway Road – in this analysis, this new T-intersection is assumed to be controlled by a stop sign on all legs of the intersection (all-way stop-controlled) and have the following lane configuration: south leg: 1 left and 1 right-turn lane; west leg: 1 through and 1 right-turn lane; east leg: 1 left and 1 through lane. 19. Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Luchessa Avenue – under near-term future conditions with the project, this new intersection would have no conflicting movements as it would consist of a 90- degree north and west road connection. 20. Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue – in this analysis, this new T-intersection is assumed to be controlled by a stop sign on all legs of the intersection (all-way stop-controlled) and have the following lane configuration: south leg: 1 left and 1 right-turn lane; west leg: 1 through and 1 right- turn lane; east leg: 1 left and 1 through lane. 2040 General Plan Conditions The adopted City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan includes roadway improvements throughout the City that will support the projected growth associated with buildout of the General Plan. Some of these roadway network improvements would affect the project area directly and are listed below: Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 35 Figure 10 Existing Intersection Lane Configurations and Traffic Control Devices 123 4 5 678 9101112 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 1613 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir STOP STOP LEGEND: = Signalized Intersection = Stop Controlled IntersectionSTOP STOP STOP Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 36 Figure 10 (Continued) Existing Intersection Lane Configurations and Traffic Control Devices 17 18 1917 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa AveHolloway Rd 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTIONLEGEND: = Signalized Intersection = Stop Controlled IntersectionSTOP STOP Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 37 Luchessa Avenue is planned to be extended from its current terminus point at Rossi Lane eastward to connect to the future Cameron Boulevard extension. This planned extension would result in the following roadway network changes near the project site: Cameron Boulevard/Luchessa Avenue intersection – create a new T-intersection with the planned Cameron Boulevard extension. Cameron Boulevard is planned to be extended from its current terminus point at SR 152 northward to connect to Marcella Avenue at Leavesley Road. Additionally, Cameron Boulevard is planned to be extended from its current southern terminus point southward to connect to and past the planned Luchessa Avenue extension and terminate at the Southside Drive extension. This planned extension would result in the following roadway network changes near the project site: Cameron Boulevard/SR 152 intersection – add north leg to this existing T-intersection. Cameron Boulevard/Luchessa Avenue extension – create new T-intersection. Cameron Boulevard/Southside Drive – connect to and terminate at Southside Drive. Cameron Boulevard/Gilman Road intersection – create a new intersection with Gilman Road. Rossi Lane is planned to be extended from its current northern terminus point at Luchessa Avenue northward to connect to Holloway Road at its western end. This planned extension would result in the following roadway network changes near the project site: Rossi Lane/Luchessa Avenue extension – create a new 4-legged intersection with the planned Luchessa Avenue extension. Provide a second access route to/from the project site area to/from the south and southwest parts of Gilroy via Holloway Road, Rossi Lane, and Luchessa Avenue. In addition to the above roadway extensions, the 2040 GP roadway network includes the following roadway improvements: Tenth Street/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) is planned to be widened to six travel lanes from Monterey Road to Holsclaw Road. Luchessa Avenue is planned to be widened to two through lanes in each direction between Monterey Road and Cameron Boulevard. Therefore, under 2040 General Plan conditions, this study evaluates operations of the proposed project under the planned future roadway network, as described above and identified in the adopted General Plan. This scenario also represents the General Plan Amendment associated with replacing the planned land uses on the project site identified in the adopted General Plan with the proposed project. 2040 General Plan Amendment Conditions As mentioned above, the planned Rossi Lane extension would provide a new roadway connection between Luchessa Avenue/Rossi Lane and Holloway Road, providing a second access route between the project site area and the south and southwest parts of Gilroy. While the City investigates potential roadway connection layouts between Luchessa Avenue and Holloway Road, the previously described Luchessa/Holloway connection was identified by City staff as a more feasible option to the planned Rossi Lane extension included as part of the 2040 General Plan roadway network. Therefore, as part of this analysis, it was assumed that the Luchessa/Holloway connection would replace the planned Rossi Lane extension between Luchessa Avenue and Holloway Road. The proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection would result in two new intersections (Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Holloway Road and Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Luchessa Avenue), as described previously. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 38 The 2040 General Plan Amendment conditions scenario represents the General Plan Amendment associated with the proposed project (replacing the planned land uses on the project site) and the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection (replacing the planned Rossi Lane extension). Traffic Volumes Existing Conditions After almost two years of unprecedented traffic conditions caused by the Covid19 pandemic and the order to shelter in place issued by Santa Clara County Department of Public Health in March 2020, traffic conditions on the transportation network have slowly been restoring back to what is considered typical traffic conditions. For the purpose of this analysis, existing weekday AM and PM and Saturday peak-hour intersection traffic volumes were obtained from new intersection traffic count data or derived by comparing new and available intersection counts. With ambient traffic conditions returning back to “normal” levels, new intersection turn-movement traffic counts were collected at all of the study intersections in March 2022 for the analysis of the project. Additionally, intersection traffic counts from 2017-2019 (prior to the pandemic) were available at most of the study intersections. The 2022 traffic counts were compared to the older pre-pandemic counts to determine whether the current traffic volumes appear to be back to pre-pandemic conditions (traffic volumes are equal or greater than pre-pandemic conditions) or if the new traffic counts continue to show the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic (traffic volumes continue to be less than pre-pandemic levels). The comparison of new 2022 traffic count data to pre-pandemic traffic counts showed that 2022 traffic counts at all of the study intersections along Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) and most of the intersections along Tenth Street increased from pre-pandemic conditions during both the AM and PM peak hours while all study intersection along Monterey Road showed a decrease in traffic volumes compared to pre-pandemic conditions during the AM and PM peak hours. During the Saturday peak- hour, traffic counts at all but one intersection along Monterey Road and three intersections along SR 152 increased, compared to pre-pandemic conditions. Based on this comparison, a growth factor was calculated to be applied to the intersections that showed a decrease in traffic volumes to increase the 2022 traffic counts to pre-pandemic conditions. Intersections where traffic counts were shown to be larger than pre-pandemic conditions, the collected new 2022 counts were assumed to accurately represent typical current traffic conditions. The existing peak-hour intersection volumes are shown on Figure 11. The existing traffic count data are included in Appendix B. Near-Term (Background) Conditions Background peak-hour traffic volumes were estimated by adding to existing volumes the estimated traffic from approved but not yet constructed developments. Approved project information was obtained from City staff in April 2022 and is included in Appendix C. The traffic added to the study intersections from approved developments was estimated by distributing and assigning trips generated by these developments to the roadway network using the same procedure of trip generation, distribution, and assignment described previously. Background traffic volumes are shown on Figure 12. Background plus project peak-hour traffic volumes were estimated by adding to background traffic volumes the estimated project-generated traffic. Project traffic was added to the roadway network under two scenarios: 1.) under the existing roadway network, and 2.) assuming the implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection. In addition, a reassignment of background traffic (both existing and Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 39 Figure 11 Existing Conditions Traffic Volumes LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 55(27)[23] 442(386)[441] 84(99)[76]77(84)[79]137(143)[137]66(100)[93]71(169)[173] 351(577)[517] 63(218)[132]52(60)[41]107(246)[172]85(175)[176]51(83)[98]44(56)[29]10(12)[9]35(88)[53] 362(718)[854] 19(52)[37]78(67)[39]34(34)[20]44(59)[40]55(170)[116]77(142)[106]200(274)[262]108(128)[114] 340(673)[787] 283(411)[438]29(20)[22]84(144)[117]94(120)[111]86(83)[84] 499(514)[669] 38(34)[33] 59(47)[42] 413(434)[540] 95(138)[145]333(542)[527]0(0)[4]506(892)[952]95(118)[113]230(267)[423]592(869)[955] 363(794)[947] 343(548)[783] 503(785)[750] 160(230)[365]6(10)[0]3(17)[10]134(118)[187] 539(619)[770] 18(39)[74]262(617)[711]71(229)[292]49(222)[250]498(1257)[1066] 17(9)[4]22(109)[136]2(28)[34]866(656)[857] 18(15)[12] 475(1176)[906] 28(53)[102]145(465)[596]54(184)[304]18(81)[89]779(599)[715] 21(24)[33] 10(7)[7] 461(1194)[921] 14(5)[3]14(24)[2]16(9)[1]3(0)[0] 778(548)[739] 2(2)[0]8(14)[0]4(4)[0]1(13)[18] 470(1039)[894] 11(10)[8] 789(649)[997]6(16)[12]2(19)[6]412(472)[634] 47(586)[327]392(125)[179]23(7)[15]396(540)[736] 9(68)[32] 103(40)[37] 172(109)[111] 405(292)[291]310(249)[224]176(201)[209]280(117)[110]8(72)[27] 70(194)[133] 58(346)[139]82(98)[93]165(442)[338]62(35)[20]738(1404)[1387] 364(326)[536] 593(872)[971] 73(74)[108] 101(277)[219] 360(693)[842] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 249(184)[199] 227(79)[39] 7(9)[1]3(3)[1]2(6)[2]75(130)[43] 72(259)[51]92(343)[248]4(3)[2]82(80)[31]406(701)[378] 220(443)[328] 594(415)[357] 114(93)[93]155(184)[126]0(0)[96]87(478)[207]403(267)[209] 41(33)[38] 55(73)[72]90(84)[107]201(134)[146]13(5)[6]82(85)[88] 66(44)[53] 4(17)[12]281(164)[180]114(834)[261]88(103)[121]152(439)[595] 5(6)[6]9(6)[15]45(99)[124]100(205)[328]112(114)[161]23(178)[209]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 40 Figure 11 (continued) Existing Conditions Traffic Volumes 17 18 42(49)[61] 0(4)[2]2(2)[1]13(12)[17]27(48)[44]55(9)[13]20(47)[69]12(9)[1] 3(2)[0] 0(1)[0] 17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 147(389)[94]309(159)[70] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTION19 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 41 Figure 12 Background Conditions Traffic Volumes LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 108(119)[95] 744(692)[633] 85(107)[80]77(93)[84]140(151)[145]109(165)[153]89(221)[195] 541(1085)[799] 106(296)[204]74(105)[77]110(251)[178]124(206)[193]51(86)[98]44(56)[29]12(24)[10]39(109)[57] 608(1346)[1216] 32(54)[38]83(73)[53]34(34)[20]60(71)[42]60(178)[122]109(170)[149]201(275)[263]122(143)[130] 524(1218)[1041] 290(416)[446]104(118)[128]104(161)[145]310(317)[398]94(88)[97] 872(911)[924] 42(34)[33] 122(99)[120] 736(795)[712] 99(148)[152]487(729)[739]0(0)[4]617(983)[948]175(194)[210]345(356)[446]617(1038)[977] 554(1422)[1199] 352(567)[795] 1016(1214)[897] 194(291)[412]8(16)[0]3(17)[10]139(143)[192] 707(1319)[970] 18(39)[74]278(646)[734]71(229)[292]68(236)[253]1025(1698)[1216] 22(11)[4]143(745)[263]15(99)[48]1037(1376)[1062] 18(15)[12] 525(1260)[985] 505(410)[173]176(533)[649]54(184)[304]18(81)[89]830(683)[793] 74(64)[41] 20(25)[29] 514(1330)[992] 14(5)[3]14(24)[2]16(9)[1]4(1)[1] 878(649)[804] 2(2)[0]12(37)[21]4(5)[1]1(13)[18] 522(1175)[963] 11(10)[8] 888(749)[1060]6(16)[12]2(19)[6]464(608)[703] 47(586)[327]392(125)[179]23(7)[15]495(640)[799] 9(68)[32] 149(107)[98] 201(136)[150] 410(325)[312]348(359)[304]176(215)[220]284(118)[110]8(72)[27] 91(215)[163] 59(349)[139]128(177)[165]165(454)[347]63(35)[20]1181(1823)[1571] 503(497)[725] 1063(1373)[1348] 142(132)[190] 130(432)[255] 601(1242)[1156] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 277(211)[238] 233(80)[39] 7(9)[1]3(3)[1]2(6)[2]75(131)[43] 73(264)[51]113(363)[278]4(3)[2]83(80)[31]407(730)[410] 225(471)[360] 633(511)[441] 114(93)[93]157(207)[152]0(0)[96]87(478)[207]442(363)[293] 41(33)[38] 55(73)[72]90(84)[107]201(134)[146]13(5)[6]82(85)[88] 66(44)[53] 4(17)[12]282(193)[212]114(834)[261]88(103)[121]179(499)[641] 5(6)[6]9(6)[15]45(99)[124]130(258)[369]112(114)[161]23(178)[209]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 42 Figure 12 (continued) Background Conditions Traffic Volumes 17 18 19 42(49)[61] 0(4)[2]2(2)[1]13(12)[17]27(48)[44]55(9)[13]20(47)[69]12(9)[1] 3(2)[0] 0(1)[0] 17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 148(395)[94]316(160)[70] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTION Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 43 approved) was completed to account for the new traffic patterns in the area that would result from the implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection. The background plus project traffic volumes are shown graphically on Figures 13 and 14. Year 2040 General Plan Conditions Traffic volumes under Year 2040 General Plan conditions were obtained from traffic forecasts produced using the Gilroy TDF Model. These volumes represent traffic conditions that would occur with build out of all projects and planned roadway improvements included in the 2040 General Plan, as adopted in November 2020. General Plan plus project traffic conditions also were obtained from the Gilroy Model. Land use adjustments were made to the traffic zone in the model representing the project site, replacing the adopted General Plan land uses for the site with the proposed project. This scenario represents 2040 General Plan plus project conditions and the General Plan Amendment for the land use change associated with the proposed project. In addition, the planned Rossi Lane extension included in the General Plan roadway network was replaced with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection (described in the roadway network section). The resulting conditions represent 2040 General Plan plus project conditions with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection. This scenario also represents the General Plan Amendment for the land use change associated with the proposed project and the roadway network change associated with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection. Year 2040 General Plan traffic volumes are presented on Figure 15. Year 2040 General Plan plus project traffic conditions are presented on Figure 16. Year 2040 General Plan plus project traffic conditions with Luchessa/Holloway connection are presented on Figure 17. Peak-hour intersection turning movement volumes for all intersections and study scenarios are tabulated in Appendix D. Intersection Level of Service Methodologies, Standards, and Deficiency Thresholds 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. All study intersections were evaluated based on the City of Gilroy methodology and level of service standards. The City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan, Mobility chapter, identifies the established level of service standards and deficiency thresholds for intersections in the City of Gilroy. The analysis methods, level of service standards, and deficiency thresholds are described below. Signalized Intersections The City of Gilroy uses the Santa Clara County CMP level of service analysis procedure, TRAFFIX, for the evaluation of signalized intersections, based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (2000 HCM) method. TRAFFIX evaluates signalized intersection operations on the basis of 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 is shown in Table 4. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 44 Figure 13 Background Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – Existing Roadway Network LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 108(119)[95] 752(698)[641] 85(107)[80]77(93)[84]140(151)[145]119(172)[163]97(228)[204] 548(1092)[807] 115(304)[214]74(105)[77]110(251)[178]132(213)[202]51(86)[98]44(56)[29]12(24)[10]39(109)[57] 632(1368)[1243] 32(54)[38]83(73)[53]34(34)[20]60(71)[42]60(178)[122]109(170)[149]201(275)[263]122(143)[130] 548(1240)[1068] 290(416)[446]104(118)[128]104(161)[145]310(317)[398]94(88)[97] 898(931)[951] 42(34)[33] 122(99)[120] 762(815)[739] 99(148)[152]487(729)[739]0(0)[4]655(1017)[987]175(194)[210]367(376)[467]652(1076)[1017] 597(1467)[1247] 352(567)[795] 953(1147)[826] 343(433)[569]8(16)[0]3(17)[10]139(143)[192] 643(1251)[899] 98(120)[159]278(646)[734]77(234)[298]68(236)[253]1038(1714)[1230] 22(11)[4]143(745)[263]15(99)[48]1053(1390)[1076] 18(15)[12] 538(1276)[999] 505(410)[173]318(683)[809]59(190)[310]94(164)[174]846(697)[807] 74(64)[41] 20(25)[29] 527(1346)[1006] 14(5)[3]14(24)[2]16(9)[1]4(1)[1] 894(663)[818] 2(2)[0]12(37)[21]4(5)[1]1(13)[18] 535(1191)[977] 11(10)[8] 904(763)[1074]6(16)[12]2(19)[6]476(622)[717] 48(588)[327]394(126)[179]23(7)[15]509(653)[812] 9(68)[32] 159(114)[108] 201(136)[150] 410(325)[312]348(359)[304]176(215)[220]284(118)[110]8(72)[27] 91(215)[163] 59(349)[139]137(185)[175]165(454)[347]63(35)[20]1246(1878)[1637] 503(497)[725] 1089(1393)[1375] 142(132)[190] 149(454)[277] 625(1264)[1183] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 277(211)[238] 233(80)[39] 7(9)[1]3(3)[1]2(6)[2]75(131)[43] 73(264)[51]113(363)[278]4(3)[2]83(80)[31]407(730)[410] 225(471)[360] 633(511)[441] 114(93)[93]157(207)[152]0(0)[96]87(478)[207]442(363)[293] 41(33)[38] 55(73)[72]90(84)[107]201(134)[146]13(5)[6]82(85)[88] 66(44)[53] 4(17)[12]282(193)[212]114(834)[261]88(103)[121]179(499)[641] 5(6)[6]9(6)[15]69(136)[148]128(135)[147]130(258)[369]148(139)[183]221(382)[435]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 45 Figure 13 (continued) Background Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – Existing Roadway Network 17 18 19 42(49)[61] 0(4)[2]2(2)[1]13(12)[17]27(48)[44]55(9)[13]42(56)[70]13(11)[1] 3(2)[0] 0(1)[0] 17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 148(395)[94]316(160)[70] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTION Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 46 Figure 14 Background Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – With Luchessa/Holloway Connection LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 108(119)[95] 663(615)[604] 85(108)[81]78(93)[84]143(168)[148]93(138)[131]94(210)[201] 510(963)[761] 93(267)[182]74(105)[77]123(263)[182]119(203)[200]51(86)[98]44(56)[29]12(24)[10]39(109)[57] 568(1184)[1162] 32(54)[38]83(73)[53]34(34)[20]60(71)[42]60(177)[121]108(170)[149]198(276)[264]123(145)[132] 486(1054)[984] 276(359)[387]103(118)[128]104(161)[145]311(318)[399]94(88)[97] 769(806)[882] 42(34)[33] 122(99)[120] 633(688)[671] 99(148)[152]464(719)[728]0(0)[4]677(1029)[1000]176(195)[211]306(315)[437]652(1076)[1017] 507(1149)[1085] 326(541)[770] 832(1043)[811] 298(380)[515]8(11)[0]4(29)[22]135(133)[180] 613(1010)[797] 103(132)[166]266(605)[696]91(268)[328]68(238)[255]900(1613)[1211] 17(2)[0]108(557)[221]15(99)[48]1025(1157)[989] 21(16)[13] 550(1290)[1013] 353(305)[150]309(683)[823]69(206)[322]101(178)[185]858(654)[765] 73(63)[40] 31(27)[31] 442(1315)[977] 100(49)[44]35(130)[100]0(1)[1]17(23)[14]6(1)[1] 883(502)[669] 17(5)[3]13(49)[32]0(1)[1]4(7)[3]0(11)[16] 539(1206)[994] 10(10)[8] 915(720)[1026]7(16)[12]2(19)[6]483(647)[744] 42(576)[314]405(126)[179]24(7)[15]510(612)[768] 7(66)[30] 134(80)[76] 320(260)[221] 407(320)[308]347(353)[299]177(218)[222]339(162)[120]11(90)[31] 148(392)[251] 55(327)[77]113(146)[141]166(455)[348]77(45)[22]1111(1756)[1575] 503(497)[725] 955(1267)[1308] 142(131)[189] 135(380)[262] 550(1024)[1041] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 278(211)[238] 418(258)[120] 6(8)[0]3(3)[1]2(6)[2]0(1)[1]69(131)[43] 137(480)[128]105(317)[252]4(3)[2]76(67)[24]380(623)[337] 241(546)[376] 691(554)[450] 111(92)[92]157(208)[153]0(0)[96]87(493)[217]499(406)[302] 41(33)[38] 56(73)[72]89(84)[107]195(134)[146]13(5)[6]81(85)[88] 67(45)[54] 4(17)[12]257(94)[143]113(843)[267]88(102)[120]157(427)[560] 26(78)[87]27(38)[42]113(247)[287]1(2)[2]127(134)[146] 8(6)[10]112(226)[340]163(187)[225]214(376)[426]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 47 Figure 14 (continued) Background Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – With Luchessa/Holloway Connection 17 18 19 109(201)[215] 4(23)[24] 142(106)[23]38(194)[48]13(9)[14]78(179)[167]54(9)[13]40(55)[70]42(50)[60] 0(3)[3]2(1)[1]213(279)[189]31(51)[44] 93(329)[170] 12(11)[1] 8(9)[8] 0(1)[0] 215(280)[187]94(332)[171]17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 121(294)[64]27(102)[31]86(319)[122] 8(13)[4] 188(179)[78] 308(146)[66] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi Ln Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 48 Figure 15 Year 2040 General Plan Conditions Traffic Volumes LEGEND 123 4 5678 9 101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 49(31)[23] 456(388)[456] 199(100)[76]101(156)[136]374(399)[342]56(76)[93]83(170)[173] 442(622)[540] 55(122)[132]30(58)[41]148(389)[306]72(154)[176]51(83)[98]44(56)[29]10(12)[9]47(132)[101] 417(718)[854] 19(52)[37]78(69)[41]34(34)[20]46(67)[49]50(164)[116]89(197)[135]178(291)[265]116(83)[114] 421(628)[819] 349(387)[497]41(34)[28]140(148)[124]106(140)[111]87(87)[88] 499(514)[669] 38(34)[33] 49(52)[45] 364(463)[553] 86(121)[145]432(506)[527]1(1)[4]650(910)[952]134(113)[119]544(525)[774]0(0)[955] 498(1097)[1251] 645(660)[958] 583(825)[894] 383(479)[436]11(37)[27]4(65)[58]252(144)[247] 740(726)[964] 54(51)[95]339(684)[916]55(216)[292]108(473)[466]652(1660)[1466] 68(9)[4]95(618)[658]4(30)[29]15(141)[153]1137(851)[1051] 65(37)[34] 47(22)[21] 341(1338)[1225] 462(132)[196]171(497)[703]59(212)[339]22(190)[178]10(5)[5] 1054(454)[715] 126(22)[38]19(105)[102]27(22)[21]5(31)[30]10(7)[7] 461(1677)[1368] 14(5)[3]14(24)[2]16(9)[1]3(0)[0] 1115(548)[739] 2(2)[0]8(14)[0]4(4)[0]1(13)[18] 470(1532)[1440] 12(10)[8] 1144(649)[997]6(16)[12]2(20)[7]412(593)[763] 47(957)[724]839(138)[193]23(9)[17]396(540)[736] 9(92)[58] 126(60)[38] 579(213)[172] 715(388)[301]258(365)[224]396(425)[379]284(201)[158]35(152)[101] 81(729)[565] 67(322)[139]91(98)[100]208(532)[444]161(52)[27]1062(1459)[1397] 0(0)[536] 587(876)[971] 129(170)[143] 0(0)[219] 431(675)[921] 123 4 5678 9 101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 264(267)[236] 725(157)[85] 9(5)[1]4(4)[1]3(5)[2]0(3)[1]74(157)[51] 76(821)[340] 2(3)[1]81(365)[319]5(1)[2]190(51)[31]698(759)[459] 248(464)[379] 747(671)[493] 216(125)[120]329(231)[126]0(3)[96]220(912)[510]591(331)[209] 46(33)[42] 235(93)[85]673(623)[505]189(457)[376]6(9)[6]51(96)[111] 61(52)[64] 3(17)[12]489(211)[180]337(1364)[655]92(148)[145]156(439)[595] 14(66)[88]34(57)[85]81(216)[285]4(1)[1]4(48)[66] 0(4)[5]100(215)[342]195(130)[183]68(184)[217]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 49 Figure 15 (continued) Year 2040 General Plan Conditions Traffic Volumes 17 18 19 102(206)[239] 15(38)[41] 7(2)[2]3(14)[15]17(25)[32]0(1)[1]107(123)[129]69(15)[20]20(47)[69]12(9)[1] 35(45)[49] 0(2)[1] 17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 147(422)[104]27(102)[31]0(1)[0]4(32)[10] 27(337)[101] 0(1)[0]77(311)[112]8(13)[4]0(1)[0]178(172)[68] 352(43)[13] 436(159)[70] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTION Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 50 Figure 16 Year 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – General Plan Roadway Network LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 50(31)[23] 442(377)[448] 213(100)[76]101(164)[143]374(407)[349]56(76)[93]83(170)[173] 449(596)[517] 55(122)[132]31(58)[41]150(385)[303]72(154)[176]51(83)[98]44(56)[29]10(12)[9]46(132)[101] 422(718)[854] 19(52)[37]78(69)[41]34(34)[20]46(66)[48]50(164)[116]88(195)[133]179(290)[264]118(83)[114] 427(597)[787] 350(371)[481]40(33)[27]139(148)[124]106(140)[111]86(88)[89] 499(514)[669] 38(34)[33] 48(51)[44] 353(450)[540] 86(121)[145]436(506)[527]1(1)[4]656(910)[952]133(113)[119]523(518)[766]0(0)[955] 514(1031)[1170] 642(653)[949] 541(797)[871] 393(472)[410]14(60)[50]5(63)[56]242(156)[262] 686(685)[926] 114(104)[147]341(684)[916]51(216)[292]110(479)[474]651(1651)[1457] 89(9)[4]94(623)[664]4(26)[25]14(141)[153]1135(851)[1052] 63(39)[36] 48(20)[19] 341(1328)[1216] 460(132)[196]262(460)[629]52(184)[304]84(247)[232]10(5)[5] 1058(454)[715] 123(25)[41]20(98)[97]26(23)[22]4(29)[28]59(13)[13] 461(1616)[1315] 94(47)[42]34(124)[96]1(3)[3]17(22)[13]13(0)[0] 1090(548)[739] 18(3)[1]13(66)[48]1(3)[3]4(13)[8]1(13)[18] 470(1527)[1436] 11(10)[8] 1147(649)[997]6(16)[12]2(20)[7]412(615)[786] 47(930)[695]829(137)[192]23(8)[16]396(540)[736] 9(91)[57] 125(59)[37] 590(214)[174] 704(383)[297]250(365)[224]400(428)[382]317(208)[164]36(173)[118] 82(712)[552] 67(322)[139]91(97)[99]206(526)[439]177(55)[29]1050(1450)[1387] 0(0)[536] 587(876)[971] 130(172)[145] 0(0)[219] 434(604)[843] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 265(267)[236] 785(164)[92] 9(5)[1]4(4)[1]3(5)[2]0(3)[1]74(157)[51] 82(845)[357] 1(3)[1]81(343)[307]5(1)[2]190(51)[31]685(759)[460] 251(459)[375] 779(673)[494] 216(126)[121]320(231)[126]0(3)[96]222(897)[500]619(331)[209] 47(33)[42] 238(97)[88]661(634)[514]189(452)[373]6(9)[6]51(97)[112] 60(51)[64] 3(17)[12]480(211)[180]337(1366)[658]90(145)[143]152(439)[595] 8(41)[54]27(38)[59]119(256)[326]1(0)[0]122(130)[136] 5(6)[6]100(205)[328]243(174)[233]198(353)[398]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 51 Figure 16 (continued) Year 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes– General Plan Roadway Network 17 18 19 102(199)[232] 17(37)[40] 7(1)[1]3(14)[15]15(22)[28]0(1)[1]109(109)[112]68(13)[18]60(79)[106]13(9)[1] 35(46)[50] 0(1)[0] 17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 147(418)[103]27(102)[31]0(1)[0]4(34)[10] 25(330)[99] 0(1)[0]77(311)[112]8(13)[4]1(2)[1]178(172)[68] 348(45)[13] 436(159)[70] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi LnNOT ANINTERSECTIONNOT ANINTERSECTION Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 52 Figure 17 Year 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes – With Luchessa/Holloway Connection LEGEND 123 4 5 678 9101112 XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes 50(31)[23] 442(377)[448] 213(100)[76]101(164)[143]374(407)[349]56(76)[93]83(170)[173] 449(596)[517] 55(122)[132]31(58)[41]150(385)[303]72(154)[176]51(83)[98]44(56)[29]10(12)[9]46(132)[101] 422(718)[854] 19(52)[37]78(69)[41]34(34)[20]46(66)[48]50(164)[116]88(195)[133]179(290)[264]118(83)[114] 427(597)[787] 350(371)[481]40(33)[27]139(148)[124]106(140)[111]86(88)[89] 499(514)[669] 38(34)[33] 48(51)[44] 353(450)[540] 86(121)[145]436(506)[527]1(1)[4]656(910)[952]133(113)[119]523(518)[766]0(0)[955] 514(1031)[1170] 642(653)[949] 541(797)[871] 393(472)[410]14(60)[50]5(63)[56]242(156)[262] 686(685)[926] 114(104)[147]341(684)[916]51(216)[292]110(479)[474]651(1651)[1457] 89(9)[4]94(623)[664]4(26)[25]14(141)[153]1135(851)[1052] 63(39)[36] 48(20)[19] 341(1328)[1216] 460(132)[196]262(460)[629]52(184)[304]84(247)[232]10(5)[5] 1058(454)[715] 123(25)[41]20(98)[97]26(23)[22]4(29)[28]59(13)[13] 461(1616)[1315] 94(47)[42]34(124)[96]1(3)[3]17(22)[13]13(0)[0] 1090(548)[739] 18(3)[1]13(66)[48]1(3)[3]4(13)[8]1(13)[18] 470(1527)[1436] 11(10)[8] 1147(649)[997]6(16)[12]2(20)[7]412(615)[786] 47(930)[695]829(137)[192]23(8)[16]396(540)[736] 9(91)[57] 125(59)[37] 590(214)[174] 704(383)[297]250(365)[224]400(428)[382]317(208)[164]36(173)[118] 82(712)[552] 67(322)[139]91(97)[99]206(526)[439]177(55)[29]1050(1450)[1387] 0(0)[536] 587(876)[971] 130(172)[145] 0(0)[219] 434(604)[843] 123 4 5 678 9101112 Tenth St MontereyRdTenth St AlexanderStCameronBlvdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)GilroyFoodsPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Tenth St 13 14 15 16 265(267)[236] 785(164)[92] 9(5)[1]4(4)[1]3(5)[2]0(3)[1]74(157)[51] 82(845)[357] 1(3)[1]81(343)[307]5(1)[2]190(51)[31]685(759)[460] 251(459)[375] 779(673)[494] 216(126)[121]320(231)[126]0(3)[96]222(897)[500]619(331)[209] 47(33)[42] 238(97)[88]661(634)[514]189(452)[373]6(9)[6]51(97)[112] 60(51)[64] 3(17)[12]480(211)[180]337(1366)[658]90(145)[143]152(439)[595] 8(41)[54]27(38)[59]119(256)[326]1(0)[0]122(130)[136] 5(6)[6]100(205)[328]243(174)[233]198(353)[398]13 14 15 16 Luchessa Ave Monterey Rd US 101 SBRampsBolsa RdCaminoArroyoPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) Pacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152) US 101 NB Ramps Gilroy Crossing US 101 SBRampsSilacci WayPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)AutomallPkwyChestnutStAutomallPkwyTenth St Luchessa Ave MontereyRdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)US 101 NBRampsHolsclawRdFrazierLake RdPacheco Pass Hwy (SR 152)CaminoArroyoMontereyRdTravel Park Cir Project Dwy Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 53 Figure 17 (continued) Year 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions Traffic Volumes– With Luchessa/Holloway Connection 17 18 19 102(199)[232] 17(37)[40] 7(1)[1]3(14)[15]15(22)[28]0(1)[1]109(109)[112]68(13)[18]60(79)[106]42(53)[63] 1(5)[5]3(1)[1]213(279)[196]32(52)[45] 116(329)[170] 13(9)[1] 35(46)[50] 0(1)[0] 215(280)[187] 348(46)[46] 4(34)[34] 25(331)[331]94(332)[204]1(2)[2]17 Holloway Rd Luchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave LEGEND XX(XX)[XX] = AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes Holloway Rd 147(418)[103]27(102)[31]86(525)[163] 8(13)[4] 493(179)[78] 436(159)[70] 20 CaminoArroyoLuchessa/HollowayConnectionLuchessa Ave Rossi Ln Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 54 Table 4 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Definition Based on Delay The City of Gilroy level of service standard for most signalized intersections located west of US 101 is LOS C or better, allowing some commercial and industrial areas (e.g., downtown Gilroy, First Street corridor) to operate at LOS D or better. For signalized intersections located east of US 101 and those in the commercial area designated in the City of Gilroy General Plan (LOS D Area), the City standard is LOS D or better. The level of service D area includes all areas east of US 101, the Tenth Street corridor from Monterey Road to US 101, the Luchessa corridor east of Monterey Road, and the Monterey Road corridor from Luchessa Avenue to the Monterey Road/US 101 interchange. The current City of Gilroy LOS D Area is depicted graphically on Figure 6 (Study Intersections). All of the signalized study intersections are located within the LOS D area. City of Gilroy Definition of Operational Deficiencies at Signalized Intersections Based on City of Gilroy intersection level of service standards, an operational deficiency at a signalized intersection would occur if any of the following criteria are satisfied: LOS D Area 1. The level of service at the intersection degrades from an acceptable LOS D or better under background conditions to an unacceptable LOS E or F under background plus project conditions, or 2. If the intersection is already operating at an unacceptable LOS E or F and the addition of project traffic causes the average delay to increase by four (4) seconds or more. Level of Service Description Average Control Delay per Vehicle (sec.) C Greater than 80.0 D Operations with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression, long c ycle lengths, or high V/C ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable. Operations with high delay values indicating poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable E Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to oversaturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths.F 35.1 to 55.0 Sources: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (Santa Clara County and City of Gilroy adopted level of service methodology). Traffic Level of Service Analysis Guidelines , Santa Clara County Transportation Authority Congestion Management Program, June 2003. A Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression and/or short cycle lengths. up to 10.0 B Operations with low delay occurring with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. 10.1 to 20.0 55.1 to 80.0 20.1 to 35.0Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 55 Unsignalized Intersections For unsignalized intersections in the City of Gilroy, an assessment of traffic operations at the intersection is based on two methodologies: (1) peak-hour levels of service are calculated for the intersection, and (2) an assessment is made of the need for signalization of the intersection based on traffic volume levels. The methodology used to determine the level of service for unsignalized intersections is TRAFFIX and the Santa Clara County CMP adopted 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology. This method is applicable for both two-way and all-way stop-controlled intersections. For the purpose of reporting level of service for stop-controlled intersections, two levels of service are used. For all-way stop-controlled intersections, “overall intersection average” delay and corresponding level of service are used, which is a measure of the average delay incurred by all motorists at the intersection. For one- and two-way stop-controlled intersections, the delay and corresponding level of service for the “highest delay approach”, which is a measure of the delay incurred by motorists only on the stop-controlled approach which is most impacted by traffic conditions at the intersection, is used. The correlation between average control delay and level of service for unsignalized intersections is shown in Table 5. Table 5 Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definition Based on Control Delay 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 operating conditions at the intersection (i.e., level of service) and on the peak-hour traffic signal warrant, warrant #3, described in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (CA MUTCD), Part 4, Highway Traffic Signals, 2014. This method provides an indication Level of Service Description Average Control Delay per Vehicle (sec.) Source: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (Santa Clara County and City of Gilroy adopted level of service methodology). A Operations with very low delays occurring with favorable progression.up to 10.0 B Operations with low delays occurring with good progression. 10.1 to 15.0 C Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression. 15.1 to 25.0 D Operation with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression of high V/C ratios.25.1 to 35.0 E Operation with high delay values indicating poor progression and high V/C ratios. This is considered to be the limited of acceptable delay. 35.1 to 50.0 F Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to oversaturation and poor progression.Greater than 50.0 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 56 of whether traffic conditions and peak-hour traffic levels are, or would be, sufficient to justify installation of a traffic signal. The City of Gilroy level of service standard for unsignalized intersections is based on the intersection control type as follows: All-way stop-controlled intersections must operate with an overall intersection average delay of LOS C or better for those intersections located within the LOS C area (as defined previously) and LOS D or better for those intersections located within the LOS D area and/or the peak-hour traffic volume level at the intersection must fall below the threshold that would warrant installation of a traffic signal. One-way/two-way stop-controlled intersections must operate with average delays corresponding to LOS D or better for those intersections located within the LOS C area or LOS E or better for intersections located within the LOS D area on their stop-controlled approach with the highest delay and/or the peak-hour traffic volume level at the intersection must fall below the threshold that would warrant installation of a traffic signal. The unsignalized study intersections consist of both one/two-way and all-way stop-controlled intersections located within the LOS D area. Therefore, the unsignalized study intersections have a level of service standard of LOS D for the overall intersection average delay (all-way stop-controlled) and LOS E for the stop-controlled approach with the highest delay (one/two-way stop-controlled). City of Gilroy Definition of Operational Deficiencies at Unsignalized Intersections Based on City of Gilroy intersection level of service standards, an operational deficiency at an unsignalized intersection would occur if any of the following criteria are satisfied: All-Way Stop-Controlled Intersections: LOS D Area 1. The overall intersection level of service degrades from an acceptable LOS D or better under background conditions to an unacceptable LOS E or F under background plus project conditions and the traffic volumes at the intersection satisfy the peak-hour volume traffic signal warrant adopted by Caltrans, or 2. The overall intersection level of service is already operating at an unacceptable LOS E/F and the addition of project traffic causes the average delay to increase by 4 seconds or more and the traffic volumes at the intersection satisfy the peak-hour volume traffic signal warrant adopted by Caltrans. One- and Two-Way Stop-Controlled Intersections: LOS D Area 1. The worst-approach intersection delay degrades from an acceptable LOS E or better under background conditions to an unacceptable LOS F under background plus project conditions and the traffic volumes at the intersection satisfy the peak-hour volume traffic signal warrant adopted by Caltrans, or 2. The worst-approach intersection delay is already operating at an unacceptable LOS F and the addition of project traffic causes the average delay to increase by 4 seconds or more and the traffic volumes at the intersection satisfy the peak-hour volume traffic signal warrant adopted by Caltrans. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 57 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Results The results of the intersection level of service analysis are described below and summarized in Table 6. The level of service calculation sheets are included in Appendix E. The peak-hour signal warrant sheets are contained in Appendix F. Existing and Background Intersection Level of Service Analysis The results of the intersection level of service analysis under existing conditions indicate that the following intersection currently operates deficiently during the Saturday peak-hour: 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152 (LOS E – Sat peak-hour) Under background conditions, the above intersection would continue to operate deficiently (LOS E) during the Saturday peak-hour. The remaining study intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service during all three peak hours analyzed under existing and background conditions. Background Plus Project Intersection Level of Service Analysis Background plus project conditions were evaluated under two roadway scenarios: (1) under the existing roadway network; and (2) assuming implementation of the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection. The comparison of these two roadway network scenarios demonstrates the effect of providing a second access roadway between the project area and the south and southwest parts of Gilroy. Background Plus Project – Existing Roadway Network The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the following intersection would operate deficiently during the Saturday peak-hour under background plus project conditions and under the existing roadway network: 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152 (LOS E – Sat peak-hour) The addition of project traffic to the intersection of Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) is not projected to increase the intersection’s average delay by more than the 4-second operational deficiency threshold. Therefore, the proposed project is not projected to create an operational deficiency at any of the study intersections under this scenario. Background Plus Project – With Proposed Luchessa/Holloway Connection The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the following intersections would operate deficiently under background plus project conditions and assuming the implementation of the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection: 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152 (LOS E – Sat peak-hour) 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM peak-hour) Project Deficiency: PM peak-hour Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 58 Table 6 Intersection Level of Service Results Study Existing Conditions Background Conditions Background Plus Project (Existing Roadway Network) Background Plus Project with Proposed LH Connnection Int. Intersection LOS Peak Count Warrant Warrant Delay Warrant Delay Warrant Number Intersection Control Standard Hour Date Delay LOS Met? 1 Delay LOS Met? 1 Delay LOS Change 2 Met?1 Delay LOS Change 2 Met?1 1 Monterey Road and Tenth Street Signal D AM 03/24/22 22.7 C+ -- 22.6 C+ -- 22.9 C+ +0.3 -- 22.8 C+ +0.2 -- PM 03/24/22 28.6 C -- 28.4 C -- 28.6 C +0.2 -- 28.5 C +0.1 -- SAT 03/26/22 29.8 C -- 29.4 C -- 29.6 C +0.2 -- 29.5 C +0.1 -- 2 Alexander Street and Tenth Street Signal D AM 03/24/22 17.2 B -- 16.7 B -- 16.7 B +0.0 -- 16.8 B +0.1 -- PM 03/24/22 16.9 B -- 17.8 B -- 17.9 B +0.1 -- 17.2 B -0.6 -- SAT 03/26/22 20.1 C+ -- 18.0 B- -- 17.8 B -0.2 -- 18.3 B- +0.3 -- 3 Chestnut Street/Automall Parkway Signal D AM 03/24/22 29.9 C -- 34.4 C- -- 34.2 C- -0.2 -- 34.5 C- +0.1 -- and Tenth Street PM 03/24/22 32.5 C- -- 38.0 D+ -- 38.1 D+ +0.1 -- 37.6 D+ -0.4 -- SAT 03/26/22 29.4 C -- 37.7 D+ -- 37.8 D+ +0.1 -- 37.3 D+ -0.4 -- 4 US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth Street Signal D AM 03/24/22 20.0 C+ -- 21.1 C+ -- 21.4 C+ +0.3 -- 21.5 C+ +0.4 -- PM 03/24/22 22.8 C+ -- 26.0 C -- 26.5 C +0.5 -- 25.7 C -0.3 -- SAT 03/26/22 27.9 C -- 29.9 C -- 30.5 C +0.6 -- 30.2 C +0.3 -- 5 US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 03/24/22 8.1 A -- 9.0 A -- 9.1 A +0.1 -- 8.7 A -0.3 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 03/24/22 8.3 A -- 10.1 B+ -- 10.5 B+ +0.4 -- 9.8 A -0.3 -- SAT 03/26/22 9.9 A -- 10.7 B+ -- 11.0 B+ +0.3 -- 10.6 B+ -0.1 -- 6 Camino Arroyo Signal D AM 03/24/22 21.1 C+ -- 18.2 B- -- 20.4 C+ +2.2 -- 20.8 C+ +2.6 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 03/24/22 32.4 C- -- 41.8 D -- 45.1 D +3.3 -- 38.3 D+ -3.5 -- SAT 03/26/22 55.4 E+--59.9 E+--63.3 E +3.4 --60.5 E +0.6 -- 7 Silacci Way One-Way Stop D AM 11/05/20 0.2 A+ -- 0.3 A+ No 0.3 A+ +0.0 -- 0.3 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 11/05/20 0.5 A+ -- 1.5 A+ No 1.6 A+ +0.1 -- 0.8 A+ -0.7 -- SAT 11/05/20 0.1 A+ -- 0.1 A+ No 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- 0.2 A+ +0.1 -- One-Way Stop E AM 11/05/20 16.5 C No 36.0 E No 37.0 E +1.0 No 28.8 D -7.2 No (Worst Approach) PM 11/05/20 26.4 D No >120 F No >120 F >120 No 51.3 F -83.6 No SAT 11/07/20 12.4 B No 13.3 B No 13.4 B +0.1 No 13.5 B +0.2 No 8 Cameron Boulevard Signal D AM 03/24/22 5.4 A -- 7.1 A -- 7.0 A -0.1 -- 6.7 A -0.4 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 11/05/20 7.8 A -- 14.6 B -- 14.7 B +0.1 -- 12.7 B -1.9 -- SAT 11/07/20 7.3 A -- 8.5 A -- 8.4 A -0.1 -- 8.1 A -0.4 -- 9 Gilroy Foods Signal D AM 11/05/20 9.2 A -- 9.1 A -- 9.0 A -0.1 -- 10.4 B+ +1.3 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 11/05/20 10.2 B+ -- 10.9 B+ -- 10.9 B+ +0.0 -- 11.4 B+ +0.5 -- SAT 11/07/20 5.5 A -- 3.2 A -- 3.2 A +0.0 -- 7.2 A +4.0 -- 10 Holsclaw Road One-Way Stop D AM 03/24/22 0.1 A+ -- 0.1 A+ No 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 03/24/22 0.8 A+ -- 1.0 A+ No 1.0 A+ +0.0 -- 0.9 A+ -0.1 -- SAT 03/24/22 0.4 A+ -- 0.4 A+ No 0.4 A+ +0.0 -- 0.4 A+ +0.0 -- One-Way Stop E AM 03/24/22 17.0 C No 19.2 C No 19.7 C +0.5 No 19.5 C +0.3 No (Worst Approach) PM 03/24/22 35.0 E No 50.4 F No 53.1 F +2.7 No 49.8 E -0.6 No SAT 03/26/22 33.1 D No 38.7 E No 40.1 E +1.4 No 37.9 E -0.8 No 11 Frazier Lake Road Signal D AM 03/24/22 14.9 B -- 15.3 B -- 15.4 B +0.1 -- 15.8 B +0.5 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 03/24/22 8.2 A -- 7.8 A -- 7.8 A +0.0 -- 7.8 A +0.0 -- SAT 03/26/22 10.0 B+ -- 10.2 B+ -- 10.2 B+ +0.0 -- 10.2 B+ +0.0 -- 12 Monterey Road and Luchessa Avenue Signal D AM 03/24/22 26.1 C -- 26.6 C -- 26.6 C +0.0 -- 26.0 C -0.6 -- PM 03/24/22 35.5 D+ -- 39.5 D -- 39.5 D +0.0 -- 38.0 D+ -1.5 -- SAT 03/26/22 22.8 C+ -- 23.7 C -- 23.7 C +0.0 -- 23.8 C +0.1 -- 13 Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue One-Way Stop D AM 03/24/22 6.4 A -- 6.9 A- -- 6.9 A- +0.0 -- 7.0 A- +0.1 -- (Average Delay) PM 03/24/22 7.4 A- -- 7.9 A- -- 7.9 A- +0.0 -- 8.3 A- +0.4 -- SAT 03/24/22 7.2 A- -- 7.5 A- -- 7.5 A- +0.0 -- 6.3 A -1.2 -- One-Way Stop E AM 03/24/22 22.2 C Yes 25.0 C Yes 25.0 C +0.0 Yes 34.7 D +9.7 Yes (Worst Approach) PM 03/24/22 25.7 D Yes 29.4 D Yes 29.4 D +0.0 Yes 52.2 F +22.8 Yes SAT 03/26/22 15.8 C No 17.9 C Yes 17.9 C +0.0 Yes 18.2 C +0.3 Yes 14 US 101 SB Ramps and Monterey Road Signal D AM 03/24/22 12.0 B -- 12.0 B+ -- 12.0 B+ +0.0 -- 12.0 B+ +0.0 -- PM 03/24/22 22.2 C+ -- 22.1 C+ -- 22.1 C+ +0.0 -- 22.2 C+ +0.1 -- SAT 03/26/22 20.2 C+ -- 19.9 B- -- 19.9 B- +0.0 -- 20.2 C+ +0.3 -- 15 Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 03/24/22 18.9 B- -- 18.8 B- -- 18.8 B- +0.0 -- 18.7 B- -0.1 -- PM 03/24/22 23.8 C -- 25.2 C -- 25.2 C +0.0 -- 25.7 C +0.5 -- SAT 03/26/22 26.1 C -- 26.4 C -- 26.4 C +0.0 -- 26.5 C +0.1 -- 16 Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Signal D AM 03/24/22 13.4 B -- 13.3 B -- 19.6 B- +6.3 -- 22.5 C+ +9.2 -- PM 03/24/22 16.1 B -- 15.8 B -- 24.8 C +9.0 -- 23.1 C +7.3 -- SAT 03/26/22 18.1 B- -- 18.3 B- -- 27.6 C +9.3 -- 26.2 C +7.9 -- 17 Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road All-Way Stop D AM 03/24/22 7.7 A No 7.7 A No 7.8 A +0.1 No 8.6 A +0.9 No PM 03/24/22 7.8 A No 7.8 A No 7.9 A +0.1 No 11.2 B +3.4 Yes SAT 03/26/22 8.1 A No 8.1 A No 8.1 A +0.0 No 10.0 A +1.9 No 18 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.5 A +8.5 No and Holloway Road PM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.2 B +12.2 Yes SAT Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.0 A +9.0 No 19 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- and Luchessa Avenue PM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- SAT Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 20 Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue All-Way Stop D AM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.6 A +9.6 No PM Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 13.8 B +13.8 Yes SAT Future -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.1 A +8.1 No Notes: Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the City's current level of service standard. - Denotes project deficiency based on City of Gilroy criteria. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 59 Table 6 (Continued) Intersection Level of Service Results Study 2040 General Plan (No Project) Conditions General Plan Plus Project (GP Roadway Network) General Plan Plus Project with Proposed LH Connnection Int. Intersection LOS Peak Warrant Delay Warrant Warrant Number Intersection Control Standard Hour Delay LOS Met? 1 Delay LOS Change 2 Met?1 Delay LOS Met? 1 1 Monterey Road and Tenth Street Signal D AM 23.6 C -- 23.6 C +0.0 -- PM 29.3 C -- 29.5 C +0.2 -- SAT 32.6 C- -- 32.9 C- +0.3 -- 2 Alexander Street and Tenth Street Signal D AM 20.3 C+ -- 20.3 C+ +0.0 -- PM 16.4 B -- 16.4 B +0.0 -- SAT 21.5 C+ -- 21.5 C+ +0.0 -- 3 Chestnut Street/Automall Parkway Signal D AM 32.1 C- -- 31.9 C -0.2 -- and Tenth Street PM 36.2 D+ -- 36.3 D+ +0.1 -- SAT 31.5 C -- 31.6 C +0.1 -- 4 US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth Street Signal D AM 20.6 C+ -- 20.6 C+ +0.0 -- PM 22.4 C+ -- 22.2 C+ -0.2 -- SAT 27.6 C -- 27.4 C -0.2 -- 5 US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 11.5 B+ -- 11.3 B+ -0.2 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 12.8 B -- 12.7 B -0.1 -- SAT 14.8 B -- 14.7 B -0.1 -- 6 Camino Arroyo Signal D AM 21.4 C+ -- 22.5 C+ +1.1 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 34.8 C- -- 34.1 C- -0.7 -- SAT 80.2 F --75.2 E- -5.0 -- 7 Silacci Way One-Way Stop D AM 0.5 A+ -- 0.5 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 3.3 A+ -- 8.4 A- +5.1 -- SAT 1.5 A+ -- 3.8 A +2.3 -- One-Way Stop E AM 22.7 C No 23.2 C +0.5 No (Worst Approach) PM 80.9 F Yes >120 F +96.2 Yes SAT 42.5 E Yes 91.6 F +49.1 Yes 8 Cameron Boulevard Signal D AM 17.6 B -- 17.6 B +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 26.6 C -- 26.6 C +0.0 -- SAT 22.5 C+ -- 22.6 C+ +0.1 -- 9 Gilroy Foods Signal D AM 8.5 A -- 11.4 B+ +2.9 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 9.4 A -- 10.3 B+ +0.9 -- SAT 5.0 A -- 10.2 B+ +5.2 -- 10 Holsclaw Road One-Way Stop D AM 0.1 A+ -- 0.1 A+ +0.0 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) (Average Delay) PM 1.4 A+ -- 1.4 A+ +0.0 -- SAT 0.6 A+ -- 0.6 A+ +0.0 -- One-Way Stop E AM 24.8 C No 24.9 C +0.1 No (Worst Approach) PM 81.5 F No 80.6 F -0.9 No SAT 69.0 F No 68.6 F -0.4 No 11 Frazier Lake Road Signal D AM 36.6 D+ -- 35.2 D+ -1.4 -- and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) PM 8.7 A -- 8.5 A -0.2 -- SAT 9.9 A -- 10.0 B+ +0.1 -- 12 Monterey Road and Luchessa Avenue Signal D AM 29.6 C -- 30.1 C +0.5 -- PM 39.2 D -- 38.8 D+ -0.4 -- SAT 23.9 C -- 23.8 C -0.1 -- 13 Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue One-Way Stop D AM 29.5 D -- 32.8 D- +3.3 -- (Average Delay) PM 15.0 B- -- 15.3 C+ +0.3 -- SAT 6.5 A -- 6.3 A -0.2 -- One-Way Stop E AM >120 F Yes >120 F +24.7 Yes (Worst Approach) PM 86.7 F Yes 86.9 F +0.2 Yes SAT 20.8 C Yes 21.3 C +0.5 Yes 14 US 101 SB Ramps and Monterey Road Signal D AM 15.2 B -- 15.0 B -0.2 -- PM 31.6 C -- 31.1 C -0.5 -- SAT 22.8 C+ -- 22.7 C+ -0.1 -- 15 Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps Signal D AM 82.7 F --85.2 F +2.5 -- PM 67.9 E --70.3 E +2.4 -- SAT 28.4 C -- 28.6 C +0.2 -- 16 Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Signal D AM 17.7 B -- 22.3 C+ +4.6 -- PM 20.7 C+ -- 22.8 C+ +2.1 -- SAT 23.8 C -- 26.4 C +2.6 -- 17 Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road All-Way Stop D AM 8.4 A No 8.5 A +0.1 No PM 9.6 A No 9.6 A +0.0 No SAT 10.2 B No 10.3 B +0.1 No 18 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8.6 A No and Holloway Road PM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.2 B Yes SAT -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.1 A No 19 Luchessa/Holloway Connection All-Way Stop D AM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.1 A No and Luchessa Avenue PM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12.2 B Yes SAT -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9.8 A No 20 Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue All-Way Stop D AM 12.0 B Yes 11.9 B --Yes 12.0 B Yes PM 29.5 D Yes 28.6 D --Yes 21.8 C Yes SAT 8.7 A No 8.7 A -- No 8.5 A No Notes: Entries denoted in bold indicate conditions that exceed the City's current level of service standard. - Denotes project deficiency based on City of Gilroy criteria.Same as General Plan Plus Project Conditions (GP Roadway Network) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 60 The addition of project traffic is projected to increase the worst approach delay at the deficient intersection of Automall Parkway/Luchessa Avenue by more than 4 seconds during the PM peak-hour. Therefore, based on the City of Gilroy definition of operational deficiencies at unsignalized intersections, the project would have an operational deficiency at the Automall Parkway/Luchessa Avenue intersection under background plus project conditions and assuming the implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection. The addition of project traffic to the intersection of Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) is not projected to increase the intersection’s average delay by more than the 4-second operational deficiency threshold under this scenario. Year 2040 General Plan Conditions Intersection Level of Service Analysis Year 2040 General Plan conditions were evaluated for three scenarios: (1) Year 2040 General Plan conditions, as adopted in November 2020; (2) with the proposed project (replacing the planned land uses on the project site) and planned General Plan roadway network; and (3) with the proposed project and proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection (replacing the planned Rossi Lane extension). The change between these scenarios demonstrates the relative effect the proposed project and proposed roadway network change would have on adopted General Plan conditions. 2040 General Plan (No Project) Conditions The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the following four intersections are projected to operate deficiently with buildout of the City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan land use growth projections and planned future roadway network: 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F – SAT peak-hour) 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM peak-hour) 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) 15. Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps (LOS F – AM peak-hour; LOS E – PM peak-hour) The remaining study intersections are projected to operate at acceptable levels of service during all three peak hours analyzed under 2040 General Plan conditions. 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the following four intersections are projected to operate deficiently under 2040 General Plan with project conditions and the planned future roadway network: 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS E – SAT peak-hour) 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: AM and PM peak hours 15. Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps (LOS F – AM peak-hour; LOS E – PM peak-hour) The addition of project traffic is projected to increase the intersection delay (or the worst approach delay) at two of the above four deficient intersections by more than 4 seconds during the noted peak Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 61 hours. Therefore, based on the City of Gilroy definition of operational deficiencies at intersections, the project would contribute to an operational deficiency at the two intersections noted above under General Plan plus project conditions. 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions with Luchessa/Holloway Connection The results of the intersection level of service analysis show that the following four intersections are projected to operate deficiently under 2040 General Plan with project conditions and assuming the Luchessa/Holloway connection: 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS E – SAT peak-hour) 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: AM and PM peak hours 15. Monterey Road and US 101 NB Ramps (LOS F – AM peak-hour; LOS E – PM peak-hour) The addition of project traffic is projected to increase the intersection delay (or the worst approach delay) at two of the above four deficient intersections by more than 4 seconds during the noted peak hours. Therefore, based on the City of Gilroy definition of operational deficiencies at intersections, the project would contribute to an operational deficiency at the two intersections noted above under General Plan plus project conditions with the Luchessa/Holloway connection. Based on the intersection level of service results, the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection would not change projected intersection operations at any of the study intersections, compared to the Rossi Lane extension that is part of the 2040 General Plan roadway network, with the exception of the intersections of the connection with Holloway Road and Luchessa Avenue, which would be created with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection but not the planned Rossi Lane extension. Therefore, in terms of intersection operations, both the Holloway/Luchessa connection and the Rossi Lane extension would provide the same benefits. Intersection Operations (Queue) Analysis The analysis of the intersection levels of service was supplemented with an analysis of intersection operations (queuing) for selected intersections. The intersection queuing analysis is an important component of the process to evaluate traffic conditions at an intersection. Although calculated levels of service may appear adequate at some locations, traffic operations problems caused by inadequate storage space for vehicle queues could prevent the intersection from ever realizing the calculated level of service. When inadequate storage space becomes an issue, queues in one turn movement might spill into an adjacent lane and block traffic in that lane from proceeding through the intersection. Vehicle Queue Estimate Methodology The operations analysis is based on vehicle queuing for high-demand movements at intersections. Vehicle queues were estimated using a Poisson probability distribution, which estimates the probability of “n” vehicles in the queue for a vehicle movement using the following formula: P (x=n) = n e – ( n! Where: Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 62 P (x=n) = probability of “n” vehicles in queue per lane n = number of vehicles in the queue per lane average number of vehicles in the queue per lane (vehicles per hour per lane/signal cycles per hour) The basis of the analysis is as follows: (1) the Poisson probability distribution is used to estimate the 95th percentile maximum number of queued vehicles per signal cycle for a particular movement; (2) the estimated maximum number of vehicles in the queue is translated into a queue length, assuming 25 feet per vehicle (20 feet vehicle length plus 5-foot headway space); 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 identifying locations where potential problems may arise in the future and for estimating future storage requirements at intersections. City of Gilroy Definition of Queue Deficiencies Based on City of Gilroy guidelines, a queue deficiency at an intersection would occur if: 1. The 95th percentile vehicle queue in a critical turn movement at a study intersection is projected to be less than the available or planned storage length for that movement under background conditions and the addition of projected traffic to that turn movement causes the projected 95th percentile vehicle queue to exceed the available or planned storage length, or 2. The 95th percentile vehicle queue in a critical turn movement at a study intersection is projected to exceed the available or planned storage length for that movement under background conditions and the addition of projected traffic to that turn movement causes the projected 95th percentile vehicle queue to grow by at least one vehicle. Queue deficiencies may be addressed by providing the additional queue storage capacity required to serve the projected queue length. Study Intersection Turn-Movements Key intersections where the project is anticipated to add more than 10 peak-hour trips per lane to the left-turn movement were selected for evaluation. Additionally, locations where the project would add a significant amount of trips to the right-turn movement also were included. The adequacy of the queue storage capacity for the following intersection movements was evaluated in this analysis: 4. US 101 NB Ramps and Tenth Street – Southbound left-turn movement 5. US 101 SB Ramps and SR 152 – Northbound right-turn movement 6. Camino Arroyo and SR 152 – Northbound and Westbound left-turn movements; Northbound and Eastbound right-turn movements 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing – Southbound left-turn and Westbound right-turn movements 17. Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road – Eastbound and Southbound left-turn movements 18. Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Holloway Road - Westbound left-turn movement The vehicle queue analysis results under background plus project conditions are summarized in Table 7. The intersection queue calculation sheets are included in Appendix G. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 63 Table 7 Intersection Vehicle Queue Analysis US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth StreetUS 101 NB Ramps and SR 152Camino Arroyo and SR 152Southbound Left Northbound Right Northbound Left Westbound Left Northbound Right Eastbound RightSBL SBL SBL NBR NBR NBR NBL NBL NBL WBL WBL WBL NBR NBR NBR EBR EBR EBRMeasurement AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SATExisting Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 253 446 476 115 134 212 48 155 199 9 20 37 11 65 59 121 106 20695th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 1422275683815124146561695th %. Queue (ft./ln)2350 550 675 125 150 200 75 200 375 25 50 100 25 100 150 125 150 400Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YESBackground Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 309 492 474 173 178 223 59 178 216 9 20 37 11 65 59 147 149 23995th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 1624276784916124146681895th %. Queue (ft./ln)2400 600 675 150 175 200 100 225 400 25 50 100 25 100 150 150 200 450Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YES YES YESNOYES YES YESBackground Plus Project (No LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 328 509 494 184 188 234 106 228 270 49 60 80 55 116 110 258 251 35395th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 1725287795112034836109122595th %. Queue (ft./ln)2425 625 700 175 175 225 125 275 500 75 100 200 75 150 250 225 300 625Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YESNOYESNO NOYES YES YESBackground Plus Project (With LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)1125 125 150 65 75 75 85 100 180 85 100 180 75 100 180 75 100 180Lanes 222222333222111111Volume (vphpl ) 339 515 500 153 158 219 103 228 274 52 66 83 60 125 119 216 198 29595th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 1825296785112034837108102195th %. Queue (ft./ln)2450 625 725 150 175 200 125 275 500 75 100 200 75 175 250 200 250 525Storage (ft./ ln.) 1000 1000 1000 300 300 300 350 350 350 150 150 150 125 125 125 775 775 775Adequate (Y/N) YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YESNOYES YESNOYESNO NOYES YES YES##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Notes:Vehicle queue calculated using the Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence level.NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound, EB = Eastbound, WB = Westbound, R = Right, T = Through, L = Left.Right-turn movements with overlapping protected left-turn phasing were adjusted manually to account for the right-turns on red.1 Vehicle queue calculations based on cycle length for signalized intersections and control delay for unsignalized intersections.2 Assumes 25 feet per vehicle in the queue. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 64 Table 7 (Continued) Intersection Vehicle Queue Analysis Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Camino Arroyo and Holloway RoadL/H Connection and Holloway Road (All-way Stop)Southbound Left Westbound Right Eastbound Left Southbound Left Westbound Left Northbound LeftSBL SBL SBL WBR WBR WBR EBL EBL EBL SBL SBL SBL WBL WBL WBL NBL NBL NBLMeasurement AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SAT AM PM SATExisting Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 -- -- -- 8.4 8.4 8.6 8.0 8.3 8.5 -- -- -- -- -- --Lanes 1 1 1 -- -- -- 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- --Volume (vphpl ) 23 178 209 -- -- -- 42 49 61 20 47 69 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 2 6 8 -- -- -- 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (ft./ln)250 150 200 -- -- -- 25 25 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- --Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 -- -- -- 125 125 125 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- --Adequate (Y/N) YES YESNO-- -- -- YES YES YES YES YES YES -- -- -- -- -- --Background Conditions##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 -- -- -- 8.4 8.4 8.6 8.0 8.3 8.5 -- -- -- -- -- --Lanes 1 1 1 -- -- -- 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- --Volume (vphpl ) 23 178 209 -- -- -- 42 49 61 20 47 69 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 2 6 8 -- -- -- 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (ft./ln)250 150 200 -- -- -- 25 25 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- --Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 -- -- -- 125 125 125 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- --Adequate (Y/N) YES YESNO-- -- -- YES YES YES YES YES YES -- -- -- -- -- --Background Plus Project (No LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 60 60 70 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.2 8.4 8.5 -- -- -- -- -- --Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- --Volume (vphpl ) 221 382 435 64 68 74 42 49 61 42 56 70 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 7 11 13 3 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- --95th %. Queue (ft./ln)2175 275 325 75 75 100 25 25 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- --Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 Future Future Future 125 125 125 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- -- --Adequate (Y/N) YESNO NOYES YES YES YES YES YES -- -- -- -- -- --Background Plus Project (With LH Connection)##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Cycle Length/Control Delay (sec)160 60 70 60 60 70 9.5 12.7 11.8 9.0 10.0 9.5 9.1 14.7 10.1 8.1 8.9 8.4Lanes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Volume (vphpl ) 214 376 426 64 67 73 109 201 215 40 55 70 93 329 170 2 1 195th %. Queue (veh/ln.) 7 11 13 3 3 4 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 195th %. Queue (ft./ln)2175 275 325 75 75 100 25 50 50 25 25 25 25 75 50 25 25 25Storage (ft./ ln.) 175 175 175 Future Future Future 125 125 125 100 100 100 Future Future Future Future Future FutureAdequate (Y/N) YESNO NOYES YES YES YES YES YES##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### ##### #####Notes:Vehicle queue calculated using the Poisson probability distribution and 95-percent confidence level.NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound, EB = Eastbound, WB = Westbound, R = Right, T = Through, L = Left.Right-turn movements with overlapping protected left-turn phasing were adjusted manually to account for the right-turns on red.1 Vehicle queue calculations based on cycle length for signalized intersections and control delay for unsignalized intersections.2 Assumes 25 feet per vehicle in the queue. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 65 Vehicle Queue Analysis Results The results of the queue analysis show that projected queue lengths for the following turn movements would exceed the available queue storage capacity during at least one of the study peak hours: 6. Camino Arroyo and SR 152 – Northbound Left-Turn Movement The maximum queue length for the northbound left-turn movement at the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection is projected to exceed the existing queue storage capacity for this movement during the Saturday peak-hour under existing, background, and background plus project conditions. The addition of project traffic to this turn-movement is projected to increase the 95th percentile vehicle queue length from 16 vehicles per lane under background conditions to 20 vehicles per lane under project conditions (both existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) during the Saturday peak- hour, exceeding the existing storage capacity by a total of 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane. This is considered a project deficiency, according to the City of Gilroy definition of queue deficiencies. Project deficiency: SAT peak-hour Westbound Left-Turn Movement The maximum queue length for the westbound left-turn movement at the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection is projected to exceed the existing queue storage capacity for this movement during the Saturday peak-hour under background plus project conditions. The addition of project traffic to this turn- movement is projected to increase the 95th percentile vehicle queue length from 4 vehicles per lane under background conditions to 8 vehicles per lane under project conditions (both existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) during the Saturday peak-hour, exceeding the existing storage capacity by a total of 2 vehicles (50 feet) per lane. This is considered a project deficiency, according to the City of Gilroy definition of queue deficiencies. Project deficiency: SAT peak-hour Northbound Right-Turn Movement The maximum queue length for the northbound right-turn movement at the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection is projected to exceed the existing queue storage capacity for this movement during the PM peak hour under background plus project conditions and during the Saturday peak hour under existing, background, and background plus project conditions. The addition of project traffic to this turn- movement is projected to increase the 95th percentile vehicle queue length from 6 vehicles under background conditions to 10 vehicles under project conditions (both existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) during the Saturday peak-hour, exceeding the existing storage capacity by a total of 5 vehicles (125 feet). This is considered a project deficiency, according to the City of Gilroy definition of queue deficiencies. Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing – Southbound left-turn movement The maximum queue length for the southbound left-turn movement at the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection is projected to exceed the existing queue storage capacity for this movement during the PM peak-hour under background plus project conditions and during the Saturday peak-hour under existing, background, and background plus project conditions. The addition of project traffic to this turn-movement is projected to increase the 95th percentile vehicle queue length from 8 vehicles under background conditions to 13 vehicles under project conditions (both under the existing roadway Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 66 network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) during the Saturday peak-hour, exceeding the existing storage capacity by a total of 6 vehicles (150 feet). This is considered a project deficiency, according to the City of Gilroy definition of queue deficiencies. Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours Intersection Deficiencies and Possible Improvements Described below are deficiencies that are projected to occur with implementation of the proposed project. The project’s contribution to the projected deficiencies and/or possible improvements to improve operating conditions also are described below. Level of Service Deficiencies – Background Plus Project Conditions 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Deficiency: Background plus project (w/ Luchessa/Holloway connection) – PM peak-hour This City of Gilroy unsignalized intersection is projected to operate acceptably under background conditions and the addition of project traffic (with the Luchessa/Holloway connection) would cause the intersection to operate with average delays corresponding to LOS F on its highest-delay approach and its peak-hour traffic volume would be high enough to meet the thresholds that warrant installation of a traffic signal during the PM peak-hour. This is considered a project deficiency based on the definition of operational deficiencies at unsignalized intersections identified in the City of Gilroy General Plan Transportation Policies. The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under background plus project conditions. Level of Service Deficiencies – General Plan Conditions 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152 Deficiency: General Plan plus project (GP and GP+Luchessa/Holloway connection) – PM & SAT peak hours This City of Gilroy unsignalized intersection is projected to operate deficiently (average delays corresponding to LOS F on its highest-delay approach and its peak-hour traffic volume would be high enough to meet the thresholds that warrant installation of a traffic signal) during the PM and Saturday peak hours under 2040 General Plan conditions. The addition of project traffic to this intersection (under both the GP and GP + Luchessa/Holloway connection roadway networks) would cause the worst approach delay to increase by 4 or more seconds during the PM and Saturday peak hours. The projected deficiency at this intersection is caused cumulatively by the proposed project and buildout of all other development projects included in the City of Gilroy General Plan. The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal, or by restricting left-turn access to and from Silacci Way. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under General Plan plus project conditions. The projected deficiency would be caused cumulatively by the proposed project and all other development projects that are part of the 2040 General Plan buildout conditions. Therefore, the Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 67 project is required to pay the applicable traffic impact fee (TIF) as a fair-share contribution toward future improvements that would restore operations at the intersection to acceptable levels. 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Deficiency: General Plan plus project (GP and GP+Luchessa/Holloway connection) – AM & PM peak hours This City of Gilroy unsignalized intersection is projected to operate deficiently (average delays corresponding to LOS F on its highest-delay approach and its peak-hour traffic volume would be high enough to meet the thresholds that warrant installation of a traffic signal) during the AM and PM peak hours under 2040 General Plan conditions. The addition of project traffic to this intersection (under both the GP and GP + Luchessa/Holloway connection roadway networks) would cause the worst approach delay to increase by 4 or more seconds during the AM and PM peak hours. The projected deficiency at this intersection is caused cumulatively by the proposed project and buildout of all other development projects included in the City of Gilroy General Plan. The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under General Plan plus project conditions. The projected deficiency would be caused cumulatively by the proposed project and all other development projects that are part of the 2040 General Plan buildout conditions. Therefore, the project is required to pay the applicable traffic impact fee (TIF) as a fair-share contribution toward future improvements that would restore operations at the intersection to acceptable levels. Queue Storage Deficiencies 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Movement: Northbound left-turn Available queue storage: 350 feet (14 vehicles) per lane Change in queue length: from 16 vehicles under background conditions to 20 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: SAT peak-hour Deficiency: 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound left-turn pockets an additional 150 feet each. However, this improvement is not feasible due to the back-to-back left-turn pockets with the upstream intersection at Gilroy Crossing. Additionally, the queue deficiency is only projected to occur during the Saturday peak-hour, with the turn pocket providing adequate queue storage capacity to serve both the AM and PM peak hours. Alternatively, the intersection traffic signal phasing could be adjusted to provide additional green time to serve the projected northbound left-turn movement demand during the Saturday peak-hour. However, adjusting the signal phasing could result in other intersection movements experiencing longer queue lengths and intersection delays. Without the extension of the existing northbound left-turn lanes or the adjustment of the intersection signal phasing, the projected queue length for this movement would store within the northbound through lane and extend past the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection. Movement: Westbound left-turn Available queue storage: 150 feet (6 vehicles) per lane Change in queue length: from 4 vehicles under background conditions to 8 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 68 Peak hour: SAT peak-hour Deficiency: 2 vehicles (50 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing westbound left-turn pockets an additional 50 feet each, for a total of 200 feet. However, extending the westbound left-turn pockets at this intersection would affect the length of the approach taper separating the westbound left-turn pockets and the northbound left-turn receiving/acceleration lane at the intersection of Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152). Therefore, in order to be able to implement this improvement, the northbound left-turn movement from Silacci Way to westbound SR 152 may have to be prohibited. Movement: Northbound right-turn Available queue storage: 125 feet (5 vehicles) Change in queue length: from 6 vehicles under background conditions to 10 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: PM and SAT peak hours Deficiency: 5 vehicles (125 feet) The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound right-turn lane an additional 125 feet, for a total of 250 feet. The extension of the northbound right-turn lane would require widening of the east side of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage. The project site plan shows a proposed right-in and right-out driveway along Camino Arroyo located approximately 325 feet south of Pacheco Pass Highway, providing only approximately 75 feet of space between the extended northbound right-turn lane and the proposed driveway. 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Movement: Southbound left-turn Available queue storage: 175 feet (7 vehicles) Change in queue length: from 8 vehicles under background conditions to 13 vehicles under project conditions (existing roadway network and with Luchessa/Holloway connection) Peak hour: PM and SAT peak hours Deficiency: 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by providing a second southbound left-turn lane. Implementation of this improvement would require two receiving lanes on the east leg of the intersection (project site driveway) and the potential widening of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage, to provide the necessary right-of-way for the second southbound left-turn lane. Freeway Segment Evaluation The City is still required to conform to the requirements of the Valley Transit Authority (VTA) which establishes a uniform program for evaluating the transportation impacts of land-use decisions on the designated CMP Roadway System. The VTA’s Congestion Management Program (CMP) has yet to adopt and implement guidelines and standards for the evaluation of the CMP roadway system using VMT. Therefore, the effects of the proposed project on freeway segments in the vicinity of the project area following the current methodologies, as outlined in the VTA Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, were completed. However, this analysis is presented for informational purposes only. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 69 Study Freeway Segments The following freeway segments were evaluated: 1. US 101, San Martin Avenue to Masten Avenue 2. US 101, Masten Avenue to Leavesley Road 3. US 101, Leavesley Road to Pacheco Pass Highway 4. US 101, Pacheco Pass Highway to Monterey Road 5. US 101, Monterey Road to SR 25 Freeway Segment Level of Service Methodology As prescribed in the CMP technical guidelines, the level of service for freeway segments is estimated based on vehicle density. Density is calculated by the following formula: D = V / S Where: D= density, in vehicles per mile per lane (vpmpl) V= peak hour volume, in vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl) S= average travel speed, in miles per hour (mph) The vehicle density on a segment is correlated to the level of service as shown in Table 8. The CMP specifies that a capacity of 2,300 vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl) be used for mixed-flow lane segments that are three lanes or wider in one direction, and a capacity of 2,200 vphpl be used for mixed-flow lane segments that are two lanes wide in one direction. A capacity of 1,650 vphpl should be used for high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. The CMP defines an acceptable level of service for freeway segments as LOS E or better. CMP Definition of Adverse Operations Effects on Freeway Segments An adverse effect on traffic conditions on a freeway segment would occur if for either peak hour: 1. The level of service on the freeway segment degrades from an acceptable LOS E or better under no project conditions to an unacceptable LOS F under with project conditions, or 2. The level of service on the freeway segment is LOS F and the amount of traffic added to that segment by the proposed project constitutes one percent or more of the capacity on that segment. Freeway Segment Level of Service Results The results of the CMP freeway level of service analysis under existing plus project conditions are summarized in Table 9. Existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes, average speeds, and densities for the subject freeway segments were obtained from the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority CMP Monitoring & Conformance Report, 2018, which was the latest available monitoring report at the time the traffic analysis was prepared. The CMP report only includes freeway count data for the AM and PM peak hours. Traffic Volumes on the study freeway segments under existing plus project conditions were estimated by adding project trips to the existing freeway traffic volumes. The results of the freeway segment level of service analysis show that the following study freeway segment currently operates at an unacceptable LOS F during the PM peak-hour: 11. US 101, Southbound from Monterey Road to Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) (PM peak-hour) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 70 The proposed project is not projected to add traffic representing one percent (1%) or more of the segments’ capacity to the deficient study freeway segment, therefore, the proposed project would not create a level of service deficiency at any of the study freeway segments. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 71 Table 8 Freeway Levels of Service Based on Density Level of Service Description Density (vehicles/mile/lane) Average operating speeds at the free-flow speed generally prevail. Vehicles are almost completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. B F Vehicular flow breakdowns occur. Large queues form behind breakdown points.>58 At this level, the freeway operates at or near capacity. Operations in this level are volatile, because there are virtually no usable gaps in the traffic stream, leaving little room to maneuver within the traffic stream. Speeds at or near the free-flow speed of the freeway prevail. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is noticeably restricted, and lane changes require more vigilance on the part of the driver. Speeds begin to decline slightly with increased flows at this level. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is more noticeably limited, and the driver experiences reduced physical and psychological comfort levels. C Sources: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (Santa Clara County and City of Gilroy adopted level of service methodology). Traffic Level of Service Analysis Guidelines , Santa Clara County Transportation Authority Congestion Management Program, June 2003. A D E >46-58 >26-46 >18-26 >11-18 0-11 Speeds at the free-flow speed are generally maintained. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted, and the general level of physical and psychological comfort provided to drivers is still high. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 72 Table 9 Freeway Segment Level of Service Results Peak Speed1# of Capacity Volume1Density Volume % of Volume % of# Freeway Segment Direction Hour (mi/hr) Lanes1(vph) (pc/h)(pc/mi/ln)LOS (vph) Capacity (vph) Capacity1 US 101 from Betabel Road to Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) NB AM 38 2 4,400 3,770 50 E 11 0.25 11 0.25NB PM 58 2 4,400 3,769 33 D 10 0.23 10 0.232 US 101 from Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) to Monterey Road NB AM 36 2 4,400 3,713 51 E 22 0.50 22 0.50NB PM 42 2 4,400 3,901 46 D 20 0.45 20 0.453 US 101 from Monterey Road to Pacheco Pass Highway NB AM 64 3 6,900 4,318 23 C 22 0.32 22 0.32NB PM 63 3 6,900 4,558 24 C 20 0.29 20 0.294 US 101 from Pacheco Pass Highway to Leavesley Road NB AM 59 3 6,900 5,596 32 D 35 0.51 35 0.51NB PM 59 3 6,900 5,494 31 D 38 0.55 38 0.555 US 101 from Leavesley Road to Masten Avenue NB AM 40 3 6,900 5,779 48 E 24 0.34 24 0.34NB PM 57 3 6,900 5,772 34 D 26 0.37 26 0.376 US 101 from Masten Avenue to San Martin Avenue NB AM 34 3 6,900 5,431 53 E 20 0.29 20 0.29NB PM 52 3 6,900 5,979 38 D 22 0.32 22 0.327 US 101 from San Martin Avenue to Masten Avenue SB AM 60 3 6,900 5,369 30 D 22 0.32 22 0.32SB PM 38 3 6,900 5,647 50 E 20 0.28 20 0.288 US 101 from Masten Avenue to Leavesley Road SB AM 67 3 6,900 2,626 13 B 26 0.37 26 0.37SB PM 66 3 6,900 5,533 28 D 23 0.33 23 0.339 US 101 from Leavesley Road to Pacheco Pass Highway SB AM 64 3 6,900 4,419 23 C 38 0.55 38 0.55SB PM 59 3 6,900 5,504 31 D 34 0.49 34 0.4910 US 101 from Pacheco Pass Highway to Monterey Road SB AM 64 3 6,900 4,225 22 C 19 0.28 19 0.28SB PM 30 3 6,900 5,154 57 E 22 0.32 22 0.3211 US 101 from Monterey Road to Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) SB AM 62 2 4,400 3,315 27 D 19 0.43 19 0.43SB PM 21 2 4,400 2,80467 F22 0.50 22 0.5012 US 101 from Bloomfield Avenue (SR 25) to Betabel Road SB AM 62 2 4,400 3,212 26 C 10 0.22 10 0.22SB PM 58 2 4,400 3,726 32 D 11 0.25 11 0.251 Source: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Congestion Management Program (CMP) Monitoring Study, 2018. Although the CMP Monitoring report does not include count data for the Saturday peak-hour, for informational purposes, the Saturday peak-hour project traffic on the freeway is included.Bold indicates unacceptable LOS, or project traffic exceeding one percent (1%) of the segments capacity.Bold and boxed indicate adverse effect.Existing Plus Project Project Trips (Existing Roadway Network)Project Trips (w/ Luchessa-Holloway Connection) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 73 5. Other Transportation Issues This chapter presents an analysis of other transportation issues associated with the project, including: Site access and on-site circulation A review of the required on-site parking Freeway ramp analysis Potential impacts to bicycle, pedestrian, transit facilities Unlike the level of service impact methodology, which is adopted by the City Council, the analyses in this chapter are based on professional judgment in accordance with the standards and methods employed by the traffic engineering community. Any recommended transportation improvements identified as part of the review may be included as part of the project’s Conditions of Approval. However, the improvements are not required to mitigate project impacts per CEQA guidelines. Project Site Access and On-Site Circulation This analysis is based on a review of the various project site plans, dated September 2022, produced by ACE Design LLC. The site plan is presented on Figure 2 of this report. Site Access Access to the project site would be provided via four driveways along Camino Arroyo (three existing driveway curb cuts and one proposed new driveway) and one along Holloway Road (existing). The project trip assignment at the project site driveways under the existing roadway network and with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection are shown on Figures 18 and 19. The three northernmost driveways along Camino Arroyo (labeled as Driveways 1 through 3 on Figure 19) would provide access to the fast-food restaurant, gas station/convenience store, and hotels, with all three of the proposed land uses being accessible from each of the three driveways. The warehouse buildings would be accessible via the southernmost driveway along Camino Arroyo (labeled as Driveway 4) and the driveway along Holloway Road (labeled as Driveway 5). Although the site plan shows a fence and gates separating the two warehouse buildings, as directed by the project applicant, it was assumed that these gates would remain open during regular business hours, providing a connection between the two buildings. However, no direct connection would be provided between the fast-food restaurant/gas station/hotel sites (northern project site) and the warehouse sites (southern project site). Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 74 Figure 18 Project Traffic at the Project Site Driveways (Without Luchessa/Holloway Connection) 128(135)[147]154(163)[177]20(8)[1]6(21)[1]17(14)[24]44(41)[49]71(66)[79]14(16)[21]1(2)[0]2(1)[0]= Inbound Path= AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes = Outbound PathLEGENDXX(XX)[XX]= DrivewayX12345 Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 75 Figure 19 Project Traffic at the Project Site Driveways (With Luchessa/Holloway Connection) 127(134)[146]1(2)[2]8(6)[10]144(155)[165] 1(1)[1]16(14)[22]47(43)[52]65(62)[72]14(15)[20]= Inbound Path= AM(PM)[SAT] Peak-Hour Traffic Volumes = Outbound PathLEGENDXX(XX)[XX]= Driveway20(8)[1]6(21)[1]1(2)[0]2(1)[0]12345X Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 76 Operations at the Project Driveways The proposed project is projected to add approximately 500 trips (inbound and outbound combined) during the highest peak hour (Saturday peak-hour) to all five driveways serving the project site. Project traffic at the driveways was assigned based on its origin/destination, the existing and proposed roadway networks, site layout, and project driveway locations and turn restrictions. Following this method, it is estimated that approximately 64 percent (%) of the total project traffic would utilize the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing project driveway (Driveway 2), and the remainder would use all other driveways, as illustrated on Figures 18 and 19. Driveway 1 Driveway 1 is a proposed new driveway located approximately 325 feet south of Pacheco Pass Highway and would consist of an approximately 33.8-foot wide right-in/right-out access-only driveway. Driveway 1 would provide direct access to the fast-food restaurant and gas station/convenience store. It is estimated that Driveway 1 would serve a maximum of 49 inbound and 79 outbound trips during the Saturday peak-hour (or approximately 25% of the total project traffic), with slightly fewer trips during the AM and PM peak hours. Traffic operations at Driveway 1 would be greatly dictated by the operations along northbound Camino Arroyo at Pacheco Pass Highway. The level of service calculations at the intersection of Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway show that during the Saturday peak-hour under background conditions, the northbound through queue length is projected to be approximately 14 vehicles per lane, or 350 feet per lane assuming a vehicle length of 25 feet. A queue of this length would extend to the proposed Driveway 1 causing outbound access at Driveway 1 to potentially be momentarily blocked. The projected delay along northbound Camino Arroyo at Pacheco Pass Highway is approximately 59 seconds during the Saturday peak-hour under background plus project conditions. A similar delay would be experienced by outbound traffic at Driveway 1, resulting in a maximum queue length of 3 vehicles at Driveway 1 (outbound direction) during the Saturday peak-hour. Alternatively, drivers could utilize Driveway 2 to exit the site. During the AM and PM peak hours, the northbound queue length along Camino Arroyo is not projected to affect operations at Driveway 1. Driveway 1 would provide direct access to the fast-food restaurant and gas station/convenience store, the two highest trip generators of the proposed uses. Providing direct inbound/outbound access to these land uses would allow the traffic associated with these uses, in particular the outbound traffic, to bypass the main access intersection (Driveway 2) to exit the site. Driveway 2 Driveway 2 would consist of the east leg of the existing signalized intersection of Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing and would provide full access to the northern side of the project site. Driveway 2 is shown on the site plan to be 40 feet wide and provide one inbound lane and two outbound lanes. Driveway 2 would be adjacent to the gas station and northern hotel and is projected to serve approximately 64% of the total project traffic, or approximately 300 (inbound and outbound) peak-hour project trips. The level of service calculations show that the Driveway 2 intersection is projected to operate at acceptable LOS C or better during all three peak hours analyzed under background plus project conditions. It is also projected that a maximum queue length of 4 vehicles would be formed by outbound traffic making a right-turn at Driveway 2. The project site plan shows approximately 100 feet of queue storage capacity at Driveway 2, which would accommodate approximately 4 vehicles per lane, adequately serving the projected queue length. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 77 Driveways 3 and 4 Driveway 3 would provide direct access to the two proposed hotels and is shown on the site plan to be 30 feet wide. This existing driveway (curb cut) is located across from, although not aligning with, one of the Gilroy Crossing shopping center driveways. The offset location of these driveways, along with a raised center median along Camino Arroyo, allow for partial left-turn access only while reducing conflicting movements at the driveways. For example, at Driveway 3, right-in and out access, as well as left-turn in access, is provided to both the project site and the Gilroy Crossing shopping center, but no left-turn out access is provided from either driveway. It is estimated that a maximum of 21 vehicles would make a left-turn into the project site at Driveway 3, and a maximum of 24 vehicles would make a right turn out of Driveway 3 during the Saturday peak-hour. Approximately 7% of the total project traffic is estimated to utilize Driveway 3 during the peak hours. Driveway 4, like Driveway 3, would be located across from but just south of the southernmost Gilroy Crossing shopping center driveway, providing limited access to the warehouse buildings. The offset location and raised center median along Camino Arroyo provide full-access to the shopping center driveway, but only right-in and out access to Driveway 4. The full-access shopping center driveway provides direct access to the rear of the retail buildings, facilitating outbound access for larger truck traffic delivering goods to the stores. Traffic accessing Driveway 4 from the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection would have to complete a U-turn at the intersection of Camino Arroyo/Holloway Road or access the site via Holloway Road. It is estimated that a maximum of 1 inbound vehicle and 1 outbound vehicle would access Driveway 4 during the Saturday peak-hour. Approximately 4% of the total project traffic is estimated to utilize Driveway 4 during the peak hours. Driveway 4 is shown on the site plan to be 30 feet wide. Driveway 3 is located approximately 200 feet south of Driveway 2 and approximately 350 feet north of Driveway 4. Driveway 4 is located approximately 260 feet north of Holloway Road. The segment of Camino Arroyo between Gilroy Crossing and Holloway Road consists of a four-lane roadway with a raised center median and is projected to carry approximately 350 vehicles (both directions combined) during the AM peak-hour, 550 vehicles during the PM peak-hour, and 650 vehicles during the Saturday peak-hour under background plus project conditions. Ideally, when designing site access, opposing driveways along a roadway segment should align to form an intersection, providing full access and concentrating all turn-movements of the intersection to a single location. However, both Driveways 3 and 4 and their opposing driveways across the street were designed to provide limited access by off-setting the driveways and with the use of a raised center median. Providing limited access is typically done to reduce conflicting movements along roadway segments where physical traffic controls (such as stop signs or traffic signal) are not desired. In order to provide full access at Driveways 3 and 4, these site driveways would need to be realigned with the opposing shopping center driveways, the center media would need to be removed, and the intersections may need to be either stop-controlled or signalized, depending on the traffic demand. Alternatively, a two-way left-turn (TWLT) lane also could be provided. Left-turn outbound access from a driveway onto an uncontrolled four-lane roadway is typically not recommended. However, since these driveways are located less than 500 feet from the Camino Arroyo intersections with Gilroy Crossing and Holloway Road, it is not recommended that an all-way stop-control or traffic signal be installed at either one of these two locations. Based on the project trip assignment, potential left-turn outbound demand from Driveways 3 and 4 would be minimal. Therefore, with the limited access and relatively low traffic volume projections at Driveways 3 and 4, operations at these two driveways are anticipated to be adequate. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 78 Driveway 5 Driveway 5 is located along Holloway Road and consists of a full-access driveway. Driveway 5 would provide access to the warehouse sites. Minimal traffic is estimated to utilize Driveway 5 during the Saturday peak hour. Driveway 5 is shown on the site plan to be 42 feet wide. With the relatively low traffic volumes along Holloway Road under background plus project conditions, Driveway 5 is anticipated to operate adequately. Driveway Geometrics The City of Gilroy General Guidelines document, dated August 18, 2014, specifies that industrial and commercial driveways should have a minimum and maximum approach width of 35 and 45 feet, respectively. Although Driveways 1, 3, and 4 do not satisfy the City’s minimum width requirements for commercial/industrial driveways, these driveways would provide two 15-foot-wide lanes, which is adequate for the proposed limited-access operations. Driveway 2 is shown on the site plan to provide one inbound lane and two outbound lanes. However, as it was shown on the intersection operations analysis presented in the previous chapter, in order to serve the projected southbound left-turn movement queue demand, two southbound left-turn lanes are required, which would also require providing two inbound lanes at Driveway 2. Sight Distance Adequate sight distance should be provided at the project driveways. Outbound traffic at the driveways must be able to see opposing traffic in order to safely complete a turn out of the site. All project site driveways, with the exception of Driveway 1, are located along a straight roadway segment with minimal visual obstruction. Driveway 1 is located along a slightly curved segment of Camino Arroyo. Additionally, a bus stop is currently located along the project site frontage approximately 150 feet south of Driveway 1. The posted speed limit on Camino Arroyo along the project site frontage is 35 miles per hour (mph). According to the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, the minimum required stopping sight distance for a roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 mph is 250 feet. The sight distance from Driveways 3, 4, and 5 is well beyond the 250 feet minimum distance requirement. The sight distance from Driveway 1 would be to the intersection of Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing, just above the 250 feet of minimal distance required. However, this sight distance also assumes that the existing bus stop would not interfere with the driver’s line of sight from Driveway 1 to the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection. Objects such as bus stop shelters or signage could potentially interfere with drivers’ line of sight from Driveway 1. Providing a clear line of sight from Driveway 1, the available sight distance at all project site driveways would be adequate, based on Caltrans requirements. Recommendation: The design of the project site should ensure that design features, such as the landscaping, signage, bus stop and other physical features, along the project site frontage and at the project site driveways, in particular near Driveway 1, would not interfere with the sight distance at the proposed site driveways. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 79 Emergency Vehicle Access Project site driveways must be designed with adequate width to allow emergency vehicles access in and out of the site. Per City design guidelines, a fire access roadway greater than or equal to 20 feet in width is applicable to all commercial, industrial, and residential buildings. The fire access roadway should be provided within 150 feet of structures. The site plan shows most drive aisles within the project site to range in width from 24 to 26 feet, with a couple of locations with a greater width. All project driveways are a minimum of 30 feet wide, providing the minimum width requirement for emergency vehicle access and circulation. However, the main access driveway (Driveway 2) is proposed to provide a single 11.6-foot-wide inbound lane, in addition to two outbound lanes and raised center median. Therefore, the width of the inbound access lane at Driveway 2 does not meet the 20-foot minimum width requirement for emergency vehicle access. An emergency vehicle access and circulation plan was prepared as part of the site design (see Figure 20). Emergency vehicle access plans typically show the wheel travel path of a fire engine (or any other larger vehicle) entering, traveling through, and exiting the project site and are used to demonstrate that the proposed site plan layout, drive aisle widths, and corner radii would provide adequate emergency vehicular access and circulation. The fire truck circulation plan shows the wheel travel path of a 40-foot- long fire truck entering and traveling through the site. Emergency vehicle wheel travel paths are shown entering Driveways 3, 4 and 5, circulating the hotels and warehouse sites, and exiting the site via the same or an adjacent driveway. However, no access or circulation within the fast-food restaurant and gas station sites (Driveway 1) are shown on the plan. Additionally, the wheel travel path from Driveway 2 appears to depict outbound access but is not correctly shown as making a right-turn out of the site. The plan also shows emergency vehicles accessing the project site from westbound Holloway Road (Driveway 5) and northbound Camino Arroyo (Driveways 3 and 4). Although the circulation plan shows adequate site access and on-site circulation for a 40-foot long or smaller emergency vehicle from/to Driveways 3, 4, and 5, at some locations, mainly around turns, the wheel travel paths appear to be close to parking islands, fences, or structures. Additionally, as mentioned above, no access or circulation within the fast-food restaurant/gas station sites and Driveway 1 are shown on the plan. The project site is served by the Chestnut Fire Station, located at the northeast corner of the Chestnut Street/Tenth Street intersection, less than one mile west of the project site. Emergency vehicles accessing the project site would travel eastbound on Pacheco Pass Highway to Camino Arroyo to enter the site. Since Driveway 2 consists of a signalized full-access driveway, this driveway would provide access to the northern part of the project site emergency vehicles coming from the Camino Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway intersection. However, due to the existing raised center median along Camino Arroyo, access to Driveways 3 and 4 from southbound Camino Arroyo would not be possible. Instead, access to Driveways 3 and 4 would be provided via the Silacci Way/Pacheco Pass Highway intersection, heading westbound on Holloway Road and northbound on Camino Arroyo. This longer access route would result in increased emergency vehicle’s response times. Alternatively, all emergency access to the north part of the project site could be provided via Driveway 2 (southbound left-turn) while all emergency access to the south part of the project site could be provided via Driveway 5 (eastbound left-turn). This, however, may also result in increased response time to some of the parts of the project site as the fire truck travels through the site. Inbound access to Driveway 1 from southbound Camino Arroyo would not be possible either, since this would require emergency vehicles to complete a U-turn at Driveway 2, which due to the width of Camino Arroyo (40 feet in the northbound direction), is not possible. Therefore, inbound emergency access to the fast-food restaurant and gas station areas should be provided via Driveway 2. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 80 The fastest emergency access route to the project site would be making a southbound left-turn into each of the project site driveways from Camino Arroyo. This, however, would require the removal of the raised center median, and consequently, the realignment of Driveways 3 and 4 with the opposing driveways across the roadway. Additionally, Driveway 2 may need to be widened to provide the 20-foot minimum width requirement for emergency vehicle access, or two inbound lanes. Although the emergency vehicle access and circulation plan shows adequate on-site circulation, site access as shown on the site plan may not represent the best access route in terms of response times. Ultimately, City staff, in consultation with the Fire Department, will determine the required improvements to provide adequate emergency response to the project site. Recommendation: The project should widen the inbound lane at Driveway 2 (Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection) to meet the minimum width requirement for emergency access (20 feet), or provide a second inbound lane to provide adequate inbound emergency vehicle access at this signalized intersection. Recommendation: The project must work with the City and the Fire Department to identify the best access route for emergency vehicles to provide access to the entire project site and adequate response times. Fuel Delivery Truck Access and Circulation Fuel delivery trucks also would access the site on a regular basis. The site plan shows fuel delivery trucks entering the project site from northbound Camino Arroyo at both Driveways 1 and 2, access the underground storage tanks (located south of the row of fuel pumps), and exit the site via Driveway 1. This access and circulation pattern would require delivery trucks to access the site via the Cameron Boulevard/Pacheco Pass Highway intersection, travel southbound on Cameron Boulevard to Venture Way and to northbound Camino Arroyo. The site plan shows the wheel travel path for the fuel delivery trucks adequately entering, circulating, and exiting the project site. Therefore, the proposed site plan layout and driveway/drive aisle width dimensions would be adequate for fuel delivery truck access (from northbound Camino Arroyo) and on- site circulation. Solid Waste Collection Trucks Access A solid waste handling plan was prepared as part of the site design (see Figure 21). The plan shows waste collector trucks entering the project site via each of the project driveways, access the trash enclosure for each of the proposed buildings, and exit the site via the same driveway. As with the emergency vehicle access, because of the limited access at the project driveways along Camino Arroyo, waste collector trucks access would be provided by completing a southbound left-turn movement at Driveway 2 and via Silacci Way or Cameron Boulevard to Holloway Road and Camino Arroyo at the rest of the driveways. Trash enclosures are shown on the site plan to be located adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity (less than 100 feet) of each of the proposed buildings, with the exception of the north hotel (Residence Inn), which shows the nearest trash enclosure to be located more than 100 feet northeast of the building. All internal drive aisles are proposed to be a minimum of 24 feet wide, providing adequate on-site circulation for waste collector trucks. Therefore, as shown on the solid waste handling plan, the proposed site plan layout and driveway/drive aisle width dimensions would be adequate for trash collector trucks to access and circulate the project site. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 81 Figure 20 Proposed Fire Truck Circulation Plan Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 82 Figure 21 Proposed Solid Waste Truck Collector Circulation Plan Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 83 Pedestrian Access Pedestrian traffic to/from the project site would be able to utilize the existing pedestrian facilities (sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian signal phasing at signalized intersections) along the adjacent streets to access the project site. Sidewalks are found along all developed areas within the project area, including along the west side of Camino Arroyo, the north side of Holloway Road (west of Camino Arroyo), the south side of Pacheco Pass Highway (from US 101 to Camino Arroyo and along the McCarthy Business Park, located approximately 1,000 feet east of Camino Arroyo), and along both sides of Camino Arroyo, north of the project site. However, as described earlier in this report, most undeveloped parcels have missing sidewalks, including along the entire project site frontage on Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road, and along most of Pacheco Pass Highway, creating an incomplete pedestrian network. The project site is required to implement full site frontage improvements, including driveways, curb ramps, and sidewalks. City guidelines require minimum sidewalk width of 10 feet in commercial areas. City guidelines also requires development projects to install (or upgrade existing) pedestrian crossings and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant curb ramps at intersections. By implementing these requirements, additional pedestrian facilities are provided to improve the pedestrian network as part of the city’s normal growth process. The site plan shows new sidewalks along the entire project site frontage, along with curb ramps at all project driveways. With implementation of the proposed sidewalks and curb ramps, pedestrian access between the project site and all adjacent pedestrian destinations, including shopping, dining, and bus stops, would be provided. However, various adjacent roadway segments would continue to have missing sidewalks, which will be installed as undeveloped parcels develop. On-Site Circulation The site plan shows 90-degree parking spaces throughout the project served by manly 24- to 26-foot- wide drive aisles. The fast-food restaurant, gas station, and hotels (2) would all be accessible via Driveways 1, 2, and 3. The warehouse sites would be accessible via Driveways 4 and 5, however, no direct vehicular connection would be provided between these sites and the rest of the site. Fast-Food Restaurant Direct access to the fast-food restaurant (and drive-through window) would be provided via Driveway 1. Driveway 1 is anticipated to serve fast-food restaurant and gas station traffic only. Drivers would enter the site, park, or access the drive-through window, and exit the site, or would access the fast-food restaurant after (or prior) to accessing the gas station. Overall, on-site circulation within the fast-food restaurant area is anticipated to be adequate. Drive-Through Window Operations The proposed drive-through lane entrance would be located along the south side of the building and would wrap around the building in a counter-clockwise direction, ending in front of the building next to the Camino Arroyo project site frontage. The site plan shows queuing capacity for approximately 9 vehicles within the restaurant’s drive-through lane. The queue length at drive-through windows is dependent of the type of establishment and its service rate. For example, drive-through lane lengths for other restaurants in town range from approximately 100 feet/4 vehicles (Wienerschnitzel restaurant on First Street), 250 feet/10 vehicles (McDonald’s restaurant on First Street), 170 feet/7 vehicles and 190 feet/7-8 vehicles (Starbucks on Camino Arroyo and Renz Lane, respectively), to approximately 300 feet/12 vehicles (Sonic restaurant Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 84 on Pacheco Pass Highway). The City of Gilroy Zoning Ordinance, under section 30.31.20 (Parking Spaces Requirements), states that restaurants with drive-up windows must provide 8 auto waiting spaces for each exterior service window. Limited published information regarding drive-through window operations and queue lengths is available. However, a study completed by CountingCars.com, a transportation data collection equipment manufacturer located in Minneapolis, Minnesota, provides some information on drive- through window operations for common land uses. “Drive-Through Queue Generation”, dated February 2012, provides queuing data for different land uses with drive-through service, based on video recordings conducted at a minimum of six sites per use. All sites surveyed were located in Minneapolis, Minnesota or Kansas City, Kansas and include fast-food restaurants and coffee shops. The report does not provide information on the size of the coffee shops or the fast-food restaurants. Based on the data collected, the report concludes that the 85th percentile maximum queue length for coffee shops is 13 vehicles and 12 vehicles for fast-food restaurants. This information, however, is based on a limited number of studies, none of which were conducted in California, and unknown coffee shop/restaurant size. Thus, the maximum queue length information presented in the study can only be used for comparison purposes. Based on the above queue length information, the proposed queue storage capacity for the proposed restaurant could be exceeded by three vehicles. Although the anticipated queue length within the proposed drive-through lane cannot be estimated without further research on similar land uses in the area, the proposed length of the drive-through lane would exceed the 8-vehicle waiting spaces required by the City’s Zoning Ordinance, and would be in line with the storage capacity provided at similar land use drive-through lanes in town. If the drive- through lane capacity would be exceeded by two to four vehicles, this queue would extend within the restaurant parking area, which although not ideal, would not extend to or create operation issues at Driveway 1 or the gas station. Gas Station with Convenience Store and Car Wash The gas station would be directly accessible via Driveways 1 and 2. Drivers would enter the site, access the gas station and/or convenience store, proceed to the car wash, the fast-food restaurant, or exit the site. The entrance to the car wash would be located along the south side of the convenience store and would wrap around behind the building to the car wash tunnel, located along the north side of the store. The gas station area includes wide drive aisles (from 31 to 45 feet wide) that would provide adequate circulation and additional queuing space at the gas pumps without blocking access to adjacent parking spaces. Overall, adequate circulation between the different services within the gas station site and between the gas station and other uses on site would be provided. Hotels Direct access to the hotels would be provided via Driveway 3. A row of parking spaces extending directly from Driveway 3 would separate the two hotel buildings, with the main entrance to both hotels facing this row of parking. Circulation within the hotel area would be circular around the proposed buildings, with parking for the south hotel (Holiday Inn Express) located along most sides of the building and parking for the north hotel (Residence Inn) located mainly behind the building. Based on the proposed drive aisle widths (mainly 26 feet wide), circulation within the hotels area would be adequate. Warehouses Direct access to the warehouse sites would be provided primarily via Driveway 4, with additional access provided via Driveway 5. Most drive aisles within the warehouse sites parking areas are shown on the site plan to be 26 feet wide. The majority of parking spaces would be located in front of the proposed northerly warehouse building (labeled Warehouse-2 on the site plan), with additional parking spaces Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 85 behind the building. Additional parking for the proposed southerly warehouse building (labeled Warehouse-1 on the site plan) would be located adjacent to Holloway Road and the eastern project site boundary. Circulation within the warehouse sites would be continuous allowing drivers to circulate the site and exit via one of the two access driveways. Based on the proposed drive aisle widths and site layout, circulation within the warehouse area would be adequate. Pedestrian On-Site Circulation The site plan shows marked pedestrian pathways connecting the parking areas to the proposed buildings and proposed sidewalks along the project site frontage on Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road. However, with the exception of the two hotels, no direct pedestrian connection is shown between adjacent uses. Pedestrians traveling between on-site buildings would have to do so via the sidewalks along the project site frontage. Additionally, some of the north hotel parking spaces would be located next to the gas station, along the Driveway 2 drive aisle, however, a direct pedestrian connection is not shown between these parking spaces and the hotel. Recommendation: A defined pedestrian connection should be provided between the north hotel (Residence Inn) building and the hotel parking spaces located next to the gas station. Parking The projected parking demand for the proposed project was estimated based on the City of Gilroy parking requirements contained within the City of Gilroy Zoning Ordinance (Section 30, Article 31, Off- street parking requirements) and project information. City of Gilroy Parking Requirements The City of Gilroy parking code has the following off-street parking requirements for the proposed land uses: Convenience market (general retail): 1 stall per 250 s.f. of gross floor area Fast-food restaurant with drive-up window: 1 parking stall for every 100 s.f. of gross floor area plus 1 stall for each shift employee Hotel: 1 stall for each guest room, plus 6 stalls Warehouses over 10,000 square feet of gross floor area: 1 stall per five 5,000 square feet of gross floor area; minimum 10 stalls per parcel It should be noted that City staff requested that the number of parking spaces required to serve the warehouse use be estimated based on a parking rate of 1 parking space per 350 square feet of gross floor area, which is the City’s parking rate for industrial land uses. Additionally, the parking rates for the convenience store do not include additional parking requirements for the car wash, which would be part of the gas station. Based on the City of Gilroy adopted parking rates, the size of the proposed project, information contained on the site plan, and the above assumptions, the proposed project is estimated to require a total of 385 parking spaces (see Table 10), not including the parking spaces required for the gas station car wash. The site plan shows a total of 515 parking stalls on site, which would exceed the City parking requirements. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 86 Table 10 Parking Evaluation Americans with Disabilities Act Requirements The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires developments to provide one accessible parking space for every 25 parking spaces provided for the first 100 parking spaces, and one additional parking space for every 50 parking spaces provided from 100 up to 200 total parking spaces. Accessible parking spaces shall be at least 96 inches (8 feet) wide and shall be located on the shortest accessible route of travel from adjacent parking to an accessible entrance. In addition, one in every 8 accessible spaces, but no less than one, shall be served by an access aisle at least 96 inches wide and shall be designated as “van accessible”. It should be noted that the accessible parking spaces are not additional parking spaces but are part of the minimum parking spaces required. The site plan shows a total of 20 accessible parking spaces are proposed. These consists of two accessible parking spaces at each of the restaurant and gas station sites, a total of nine accessible parking spaces to serve the hotel uses, and a total of seven accessible parking spaces to serve the warehouse uses. Therefore, the proposed project satisfies the minimum ADA parking requirements. Freeway Ramp Analysis A freeway ramp analysis was conducted at two freeway interchanges that provides access to the project site. The analysis is based on calculated volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios and includes freeway ramps that provide access to/from the project site area. The study freeway interchanges include: 1. US 101 at Tenth Street/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) 2. US 101 at Monterey Road Freeway Interchange Ramp Analysis Methodology The freeway ramp analysis was performed to evaluate projected interchange operations with implementation of the proposed project and supplements the intersection level of service analysis at the freeway ramp intersections. The study freeway ramps are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans. The analysis is based on calculated ramp capacity (volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios) at the study freeway ramps. Evaluation of the ramps' operating levels is based on Caltrans level of service Land Use Size 1 Parking Rate 2 Required Parking Spaces Provided Parking Spaces Required ADA Parking3 Convenience Store/Gas Station4 2,880 s.f. 1 stall per 250 s.f. 12 24 1 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window5 2,600 s.f. 1 stall per 100 s.f. + 1 stall per employee 31 30 2 Hotels (2) 200 rooms 1 stall per room + 6 stalls (per hotel) 212 208 7 Warehouses(2)6 45,500 s.f. 1 stall per 350 s.f. 130 131 5 Total: 385 515 20 1 Information obtained from the project site plan dated February 14, 2022 by ACE Design LLC. 2 Source: City of Gilroy Zoning Ordinance Section 30.31. 3 The required number of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) parking spaces are based on the number of parking spaces provided. 4 The parking rates for the convenience store land use do not include additional parking requirements for the car wash, which would be part of the gas station. 5 The fast-food restaurant would include 5 employees based on information provided by the project applicant. 6 City staff requested that the number of parking spaces required for the warehouse use be estimated based on a parking rate of 1 parking space per 350 square feet of gross floor area, which is the City’s parking rate for industrial land uses. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 87 standards (LOS C or better). The correlation between V/C ratio and level of service for freeway ramps is shown in Table 11. Table 11 Freeway Ramp Levels of Service Based on Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Definition of Adverse Operations Effects on Freeway Ramps The Caltrans level of service standard for freeway ramps is LOS C or better. An adverse effect on traffic conditions on a freeway ramp would occur if for either peak hour: 1. The level of service at the study facility degrades from an acceptable LOS C or better under background conditions to an unacceptable LOS D or worse under background plus project conditions, or 2. The level of service on the freeway ramp is deficient under background conditions and the project adds traffic to the ramp. Freeway Ramp Volumes Peak-hour ramp volumes were interpolated from turning-movement traffic volumes at the adjacent ramp intersections. Freeway Ramp Capacities The study freeway off-ramps consist of one or two lanes at the point where they diverge from the freeway mainline and some widen to multiple lanes at the off-ramp intersection. For this ramp analysis, the ramp capacity for the off-ramps is dictated by the number of lanes at the ramps’ diverging point from the freeway mainline, since this is the location that dictates how much traffic exits the freeway. The study on-ramps consist of one or two mixed-flow lanes with or without a separate HOV lane and are controlled by a ramp meter during the peak hours in the peak commute direction only (northbound in the morning and southbound in the evening). All multiple-lane on-ramps studied narrow to a single lane after the ramp meter before the freeway merge point. For metered on-ramps, the constraint point Level of Service V/C Ratio A Less than 0.600 B 0.600-0.699 C 0.700-0.799 D 0.800-0.899 E 0.900-0.999 F 1.000 and Greater Source: Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Capacity Manual . (Washington, D.C., 2000) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 88 is at the meter. For non-metered on-ramps, the constraint point is at the ramps’ merging point with the freeway. The typical capacity for a diagonal freeway ramp is 1,800 vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl). Loop ramps have a typical capacity of 1,600 vphpl. For metered on-ramps, the capacity depends on the ramp meter rate. Freeway ramp meter rates for the study on-ramps were assumed to be 900 vph (maximum allowable rate per ramp in Caltrans District 4). Freeway Ramp Configurations The US 101 at Monterey Road interchange provides full-access to/from US 101 and includes the following ramps: US 101 southbound diagonal off-ramp (SB off-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a traffic signal on Monterey Road and consists of one lane where it diverges from the freeway mainline, for a total capacity of 1,800 vph. US 101 southbound diagonal on-ramp (SB on-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a ramp meter during the PM peak hour only and narrows down to a single lane after the meter to the freeway merging point. The capacity of the ramp is as follows: - AM peak hour (unmetered) – 1,800 vph - PM peak hour (metered) – 900 vph - SAT peak hour (unmetered) – 1,800 vph US 101 northbound diagonal off-ramp (NB off-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a traffic signal on Monterey Road and consists of one lane where it diverges from the freeway mainline, for a total capacity of 1,800 vph. US 101 northbound loop on-ramp (NB on-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a ramp meter during the AM peak hour only and narrows down to a single lane after the meter to the freeway merging point. The capacity of the ramp is as follows: - AM peak hour (metered) – 900 vph - PM peak hour (unmetered) – 1,600 vph - SAT peak hour (unmetered) – 1,600 vph The US 101 at Tenth Street/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) interchange consists of a full-access partial cloverleaf interchange and includes the following ramps: US 101 southbound diagonal off-ramp (SB off-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a traffic signal on Tenth Street and consists of two lanes where it diverges from the freeway mainline, for a total capacity of 3,600 vph. US 101 southbound loop on-ramp (SB loop on-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a ramp meter during the PM peak hour only and narrows down to a single lane after the meter to the freeway merging point. The capacity of the ramp is as follows: - AM peak hour (unmetered) – 1,600 vph - PM peak hour (metered) – 900 vph - SAT peak hour (unmetered) – 1,600 vph US 101 northbound diagonal off-ramp (NB off-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a traffic signal on Pacheco Pass Highway and consists of one lane where it diverges from the freeway mainline, for a total capacity of 1,800 vph. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 89 US 101 northbound diagonal on-ramp (NB on-ramp) – this ramp is controlled by a ramp meter during the AM peak hour only and narrows down to a single lane after the meter to the freeway merging point. The capacity of the ramp is as follows: - AM peak hour (metered) – 900 vph - PM peak hour (unmetered) – 1,800 vph - SAT peak hour (unmetered) – 1,800 vph Freeway Ramp Analysis Results The results of the freeway ramp analysis under existing and background plus project conditions are summarized in Table 12. Based on the calculated V/C ratios, all of the study freeway ramps currently operate at acceptable levels. Under background plus project conditions, based on the ramp capacities and traffic volume projections, it is projected that all of the study freeway ramps would continue to operate at acceptable levels. Bicycle Circulation Various bicycle facilities exist in the vicinity of the project site, including bike lanes (Class II bikeways) along Camino Arroyo, Sixth Street, Venture Way, and Cameron Boulevard. The Bicycle Transportation Plan contained in the City of Gilroy General Plan, the City of Gilroy Bicycle/Pedestrian Transportation Plan, and the City of Gilroy Trails Master Plan indicate that a variety of bicycle facilities are planned in the City of Gilroy, some of which would serve the study area. Of the planned facilities, those relevant to the project include: Planned Class I multi-use trail: Along the Miller Slough (Llagas Creek) – between the Sixth Street trailhead west of US 101 to Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152. Planned Class II bikeways: SR 152 – between the US 101 interchange and Holsclaw Road Gilman Road – between Camino Arroyo and Holsclaw Road Cameron Boulevard extension – both north and south extensions Luchessa Avenue extension – between Monterey Road and Cameron Boulevard Holsclaw Road – between SR 152 and Leavesley Road Project’s Effect on Bicycle Facilities The proposed project could increase the demand for bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the project site. The potential demand could be served by the various bicycle facilities available in the vicinity of the project site, including the existing bike lanes along Camino Arroyo and Sixth Street, which would provide a connection between the project site and the residential areas on the west side of US 101. Although there are no plans to provide bikeway facilities along Tenth Street between US 101 and Monterey Road, there are planned Class II bikeways along the future Cameron Boulevard extension and Luchessa Avenue extension which would provide a more direct route to residential areas within the southwestern part of Gilroy. Therefore, potential project-generated bicycle traffic could be accommodated by the existing/proposed bicycle facilities in the project area. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 90 Table 12 Freeway Ramps Analysis Results Interchange/RampPeak HourRamp TypeConstraint Point1ControlCapacity2 (vph)Volume3 (vph) V/C LOS4Volume (vph) V/C LOS4Volume (vph) V/C LOS4Volume (vph) V/C LOS4US 101 at Monterey RoadSouthbound Off-Ramp AM Diagonal Off 1 Signal 1,800 242 0.134 A 244 0.136 A 244 0.136 A 244 0.136 APM Signal 1,800 662 0.368 A 685 0.381 A 685 0.381 A 701 0.389 ASAT Signal 1,800 429 0.238 A 455 0.253 A 455 0.253 A 466 0.259 ASouthbound On-Ramp AM Diagonal On 1 Meter-Off 1,800 334 0.186 A 339 0.188 A 339 0.188 A 352 0.196 APM Meter-On 900 536 0.596 A 564 0.627 B 564 0.627 B 638 0.709 CSAT Meter-Off 1,800 517 0.287 A 549 0.305 A 549 0.305 A 564 0.313 ANorthbound Off-Ramp AMDiagonal Off 1 Signal 1,800 499 0.277 A 538 0.299 A 538 0.299 A 596 0.331 APM Signal 1,800 373 0.207 A 469 0.261 A 469 0.261 A 512 0.284 ASAT Signal 1,800 319 0.177 A 403 0.224 A 403 0.224 A 412 0.229 ANorthbound On-Ramp AMLoop On 1 Meter-On 900 437 0.486 A 438 0.487 A 438 0.487 A 413 0.459 APM Meter-Off 1,600 292 0.183 A 321 0.201 A 321 0.201 A 223 0.139 ASAT Meter-Off 1,600 340 0.213 A 372 0.233 A 372 0.233 A 303 0.190 AUS 101 at Tenth Street/Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152)Southbound Off-Ramp AM Diagonal Off 2 Signal 3,600 839 0.233 A 1,104 0.307 A 1,142 0.317 A 1,141 0.317 APM Signal 3,600 1,434 0.398 A 1,712 0.476 A 1,746 0.485 A 1,748 0.486 ASAT Signal 3,600 1,483 0.412 A 1,691 0.470 A 1,730 0.481 A 1,732 0.481 ASouthbound On-Ramp AM Loop On 1 Meter-Off 1,600 101 0.063 A 130 0.081 A 149 0.093 A 135 0.084 APM Meter-On 900 277 0.308 A 432 0.480 A 454 0.504 A 380 0.422 ASAT Meter-Off 1,600 219 0.137 A 255 0.159 A 277 0.173 A 262 0.164 ANorthbound Off-Ramp AMDiagonal Off 1 Signal 1,800 325 0.181 A 520 0.289 A 542 0.301 A 482 0.268 APM Signal 1,800 385 0.214 A 550 0.306 A 570 0.317 A 510 0.283 ASAT Signal 1,800 536 0.298 A 656 0.364 A 677 0.376 A 648 0.360 ANorthbound On-Ramp AMDiagonal On 1 Meter-On 900 592 0.658 B 617 0.686 B 652 0.724 C 652 0.724 CPM Meter-Off 1,800 869 0.483 A 1,038 0.577 A 1,076 0.598 A 1,076 0.598 ASAT Meter-Off 1,800 955 0.531 A 977 0.543 A 1,017 0.565 A 1,017 0.565 ANotes:1. The constraint point of a ramp is the location on the ramp that dictates how much traffic enters/exits the freeway. The constraint point determines the ramp's capacity. For freeway off-ramps, the constraint point is at the ramp's diverging point from the freeway mainline. For non-metered on-ramps, the constraint point is at the ramp's merging point with the freeway. For metered on-ramps, the constraint point is at the meter.2. Typical capacities for diagonal and loop ramps are 1,800 and 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl), respectively. The capacity for non-metered ramps is determined based on the number of lanes at the ramp's constraint point. The capacity for metered on-ramps was assumed to be 900 vph (Caltrans District 4 maximum meter rate).3. Existing ramp volumes were interpolated from existing peak-hour turn-movement counts at the ramp intersections.4. The ramp level of service corresponds to the calculated ramp V/C ratios. Background Plus Proj(Existing Roadway Network)Background Plus Proj (Luchessa/Holloway Connection)Existing ConditionsBackground Conditions Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 91 Although the City of Gilroy currently does not have requirements for bicycle parking, VTA recommends bicycle-parking rates for new developments in their Bicycle Technical Guidelines, revised in February 2022. The recommended bicycle parking rates are shown in Table 13 below. The standards distinguish between Class I (long-term) bicycle parking and Class II (short-term) bicycle parking. Table 13 Recommended Bicycle Parking Based on the recommended rates for the proposed land uses and the size of the project, a minimum of 18 long-term and 21 short-term bicycle parking spaces should be provided on-site. The project site plan shows bicycle parking near the convenience store and bicycle lockers near the south hotel. However, the site plan does not specify how many total bicycle parking spaces are being provided. Recommendation: It is recommended that the proposed project provide adequate bicycle parking supply on-site, based on VTA’s recommended bicycle-parking rates, to serve the potential demand of the project. Based on VTA’s bicycle parking supply recommendations, a minimum of 18 long-term (Class I) and 21 short-term (Class II) bicycle parking spaces should be provided on-site. Pedestrian Circulation Pedestrian traffic between the project site and the surrounding commercial areas would be able to utilize the existing pedestrian facilities (sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian signal phasing at signalized intersections) along the adjacent streets. Sidewalks are found along both sides of the street within all commercial areas north, west, and south of the project site. Project’s Effect on Pedestrian Facilities It can be expected that new pedestrian traffic would be generated by the proposed project. The project is proposing 5-foot sidewalks along its entire frontage on Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road, connecting to the existing sidewalks along these roadways. The project site is located within walking distance (within a half-mile radius) of various restaurants, retail, and service uses. Existing bus stops are located along the project’s Camino Arroyo frontage (discussed further below). These existing uses potentially could attract pedestrian traffic from the project site. The existing and proposed sidewalks, along with the crosswalks and pedestrian push buttons, would provide a pedestrian connection between all shopping centers in the study area, Land Use Size 1 Class I Class II Class I Class II Convenience Store/Gas Station3 2,880 s.f. 1 per 20 employees 1 0 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window4 2,600 s.f. 1 per 20 employees 1 per 4ksf 1 1 Hotel5 200 rooms 1 per 20 rooms + 1 per 20 employees 1 per 20 rooms 11 10 Warehouse 45,500 s.f. 1 per 10ksf 1 per 5 ksf 5 10 Total: 18 21 1 Information obtained from the project site plan dated September, 2022 by ACE Design LLC. 2 Source: VTA's Bicycle Parking Supply Recommendations (Bicycle Technical Guidelines , February 2022) 3The convenience store/gas station use would be served by 3 employees based on information provided by the applicant. 4The fast-food use would be served by 5 employees based on information provided by the applicant. 5The hotel uses would be served by a maximum of 7 employees per shift based on information provided by the applicant. Minimum Bicycle Parking Rate 2 Recommended Bicycle Parking Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 92 (including those located along the west side of Camino Arroyo and north of SR 152), the bus stops along the project frontage, and the project site. City guidelines require minimum sidewalk width of 10 feet in commercial areas. They also require development projects to install (or upgrade existing) pedestrian crossings and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant curb ramps at intersections. The existing sidewalks along Camino Arroyo and SR 152 (as well as all proposed sidewalks along the project site frontage) are 5 feet wide. The northwest corner of the intersection of Camino Arroyo/SR 152 was recently modified to include a pedestrian signal phase to cross the southbound right-turn movement lane (segment between the northwest corner of the intersection and the adjacent pork chop island). The improvement includes ADA-compliant wheelchair access within the pork chop island. However, none of the corners of the intersection currently include ADA-complaint curb ramps. Recommendation: It is recommended that 10-foot sidewalks, required in commercial areas, be installed along the entire project site frontage. Recommendation: It is recommended that ADA-compliant curb ramps be installed at all corners of the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection. Transit Service The project site is directly served by Local Bus Route 84, which provides weekday and weekend service between the Gilroy Transit Center and Saint Louise Regional Hospital, with bus stops at the intersections of Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing and Camino Arroyo/Holloway Road. Additional transit services are provided at the Gilroy Transit Center, located in Downtown Gilroy, just over one mile northwest of the project site. Project’s Effect on Transit Services Although no reduction to the project trip generation estimates was applied due to transit services, it can be assumed that some of the project trips could be made by public transportation. Applying an estimated three percent transit mode share, which is probably the highest that could be expected for the project, to the project trips equates to approximately 6 new transit riders added to the local transit service during the busiest peak-hour. The estimated number of new transit riders to the proposed project could be served by the existing bus line currently serving the project site. However, the limited- service area covered by the existing transit route and the hour-long headways could discourage potential transit users from using public transportation to access the site. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 93 6. Conclusions This transportation analysis has been prepared in accordance with the standards and methodologies set forth by the City of Gilroy, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Congestion Management Program’s Transportation Impact Guidelines (October 2014), and by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In adherence to SB 743, the effects and impacts on the transportation network as the result of the proposed project were evaluated based on VMT. In addition to the evaluation of VMT, this transportation study also includes level of service analysis to evaluate the effects of the project on the citywide transportation system, including intersections, freeway segments, and freeway ramps. The level of service analysis is presented to determine conformance to General Plan transportation goals and policies. The determination of project impacts per CEQA requirements is based solely on the VMT analysis. CEQA VMT Evaluation Results The model results show that the retail component of the project would cause a net decrease of 1,334 citywide VMT per day. The work trips would account for an increase of 1,908 daily VMT but the shopping trips would account for a decrease of 3,241 daily VMT. Therefore, the proposed retail uses of the project would not result in a significant VMT impact, based on the threshold of significance for retail uses recommended by OPR. The proposed warehouse land use is estimated to generate a total of 110 daily trips. Based on OPR’s small project screening threshold, the proposed warehouse land use is consider a small project and is presumed to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Roadway Capacity Analysis Results Intersection Level of Service Analysis Results Background Plus Project – With Proposed Luchessa/Holloway Connection The project would have an operational deficiency at the following intersection under background plus project conditions and assuming the implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection: 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM peak-hour) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 94 Project Deficiency: PM peak-hour 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions The project would contribute to an operational deficiency at the following three intersections under 2040 General Plan with project conditions and the planned future roadway network: 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: AM and PM peak hours 2040 General Plan Plus Project Conditions with Luchessa/Holloway Connection The project would contribute to an operational deficiency at the following three intersections under 2040 General Plan with project conditions and assuming the Luchessa/Holloway connection: 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – PM and SAT peak hours) Project deficiency: PM and SAT peak hours 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue (LOS F and peak-hour signal warrant met – AM and PM peak hours) Project deficiency: AM and PM peak hours Intersection Operations Analysis Results The results of the queue analysis show that the proposed project would contribute to the projected queue length storage capacity deficiencies for the following turn-movements: 6. Camino Arroyo and SR 152 – Northbound Left-Turn Movement Westbound Left-turn movement Northbound Right-Turn Movement 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing – Southbound left-turn movement Projected Deficiencies and Possible Improvements Described below are possible improvements to improve operating conditions for the projected deficiencies. Level of Service Deficiencies – Background Plus Project Conditions 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Deficiency: Background plus project (w/ Luchessa/Holloway connection) – PM peak-hour The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under background plus project conditions. Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 95 Level of Service Deficiencies – General Plan Conditions 7. Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway/SR 152 Deficiency: General Plan plus project (GP and GP+Luchessa/Holloway connection) – PM & SAT peak hours The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal, or by restricting left-turn access to and from Silacci Way. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under General Plan plus project conditions. 13. Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Deficiency: General Plan plus project (GP and GP+Luchessa/Holloway connection) – AM & PM peak hours The projected deficiency at this intersection could be improved with the installation of a traffic signal. With implementation of this improvement, the intersection level of service would improve to acceptable levels under General Plan plus project conditions. Queue Storage Deficiencies 6. Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) Movement: Northbound left-turn Deficiency: 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound left-turn pockets an additional 150 feet each. However, this improvement is not feasible due to the back-to-back left-turn pockets with the upstream intersection at Gilroy Crossing. Additionally, the queue deficiency is only projected to occur during the Saturday peak-hour, with the turn pocket providing adequate queue storage capacity to serve both the AM and PM peak hours. Alternatively, the intersection traffic signal phasing could be adjusted to provide additional green time to serve the projected northbound left-turn movement demand during the Saturday peak-hour. However, adjusting the signal phasing could result in other intersection movements experiencing longer queue lengths and intersection delays. Without the extension of the existing northbound left-turn lanes or the adjustment of the intersection signal phasing, the projected queue length for this movement would store within the northbound through lane and extend past the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection. Movement: Westbound left-turn Deficiency: 2 vehicles (50 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing westbound left-turn pockets an additional 50 feet each, for a total of 200 feet. However, extending the westbound left-turn pockets at this intersection would affect the length of the approach taper separating the westbound left-turn pockets and the northbound left-turn receiving/acceleration lane at the intersection of Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152). Therefore, in order to be able to implement this improvement, the northbound left-turn movement from Silacci Way to westbound SR 152 may have to be prohibited. Movement: Northbound right-turn Deficiency: 5 vehicles (125 feet) Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis October 10, 2022 Page | 96 The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by extending the existing northbound right-turn lane an additional 125 feet, for a total of 250 feet. The extension of the northbound right-turn lane would require widening of the east side of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage. The project site plan shows a proposed right-in and right-out driveway along Camino Arroyo located approximately 325 feet south of Pacheco Pass Highway, providing only approximately 75 feet of space between the extended northbound right-turn lane and the proposed driveway. 16. Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing Movement: Southbound left-turn Deficiency: 6 vehicles (150 feet) per lane The projected queue storage deficiency for this turn-movement could be improved by providing a second southbound left-turn lane. Implementation of this improvement would require two receiving lanes on the east leg of the intersection (project site driveway) and the potential widening of Camino Arroyo, along the project site frontage, to provide the necessary right-of-way for the second southbound left-turn lane. Freeway Segment Evaluation The proposed project is not projected to add traffic representing one percent (1%) or more of the segments’ capacity to the deficient study freeway segments, therefore, the proposed project would not create a level of service deficiency at any of the study freeway segments. March 7, 2023 Kraig Tambornini Senior Planner City of Gilroy 7351 Rosanna Street Gilroy, CA 95020 Re: Gilroy Square Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration and Response to Comments Dear Kraig, This letter addressed two items in the CEQA process: a revised mitigated negative declaration (MND), and response to comments on the MND. Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration City staff found an error in the project description associated with the size of the speculative warehouse buildings after the MND public review period began. The project description, as corrected in strike-through and underline text, is as follows: Application for a six-lot subdivision, and Architectural and Site Review to establish the development plan for Phase II of the PUD for development on four of the lots. The proposed project includes two, four-story hotels, a drive-through fast food restaurant, a convenience store, a four-story speculative industrial warehouse, and a and two, one-story speculative warehouse buildings. The warehouse buildings are proposed as future development. Although the written project description was incorrect, the analysis of the warehouses in the initial study was based upon the site plan presented in Figure 5, Site Plan (Southern) of the initial study, which presents the square footage associated with one-story Kraig Tambornini City of Gilroy 3/7/23, Page 2 warehouses. Therefore, the initial study evaluated the correct project size, and other than the correction above regarding the warehouses, no changes to the MND are required. A revised MND is attached to this letter. This is the MND that should be adopted by the Planning Commission. Response to Comments on the MND EMC Planning Group has reviewed the public comments that were received during the 30-day public review period (January 27, 2023 to February 27, 2021) for the above- referenced mitigated negative declaration (MND). The lead agency (City of Gilroy, hereinafter “City”) is not required to respond to public comments on the proposed MND, but the City’s decision-making body is required to consider all comments prior to considering adoption of the MND and approval of the project. We are only providing responses to environmental issues, as well as comments on the environmental review (CEQA) process. The following public comments were received, and are attached to this letter: 1. Gilroy Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee, dated February 23, 2023; 2. California Department of Transportation, District #4, dated February 27, 2023; and 3. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, dated February 27, 2023. Gilroy Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee (February 23, 2023) The Gilroy Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee submitted a comment letter on February 23, 2023, which is attached to this response letter. Generally, the comment letter addresses environmental issues associated with vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). Many of the comments are in the form of recommendations (e.g., project to incorporate measures to reduce VMT), while several others acknowledge the VMT and GHG analyses included in the initial study document. Our responses to the comments are provided below. 1. The commenter states that the project will have direct effects on air emissions due to emissions from on-road motor vehicle and recommends encouraging mode shifts to transportation types that reduce emissions (e.g., cycling, walking, and transit). Kraig Tambornini City of Gilroy 3/7/23, Page 3 The comment is a general observation and is acknowledged. No specific comment on an environmental topic or content of the initial study is made. No further response is necessary. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 2. The commenter discusses reasons for the project to implement a transportation demand management (TDM) program and measures that should be considered to reduce VMT. TDM programs are commonly required by local agencies for qualifying projects. Gilroy Code Chapter 25B, Transportation Demand Management Program (more specifically, Section 25B.5, Applicability) states that a TDM program shall apply to all work sites within the City with 100 or more employees during the hours of 6:00 AM and 9:00 AM. The proposed project is estimated to generate less than 100 new employees. Therefore, it is not a qualifying project and a TDM program is not required. TDM programs or individual TDM measures are also commonly considered to reduce VMT for development projects where VMT impacts are determined to be significant and mitigation is required. Section 16.0, Transportation/Traffic, checklist question “b” of the initial study discusses the project VMT impact. The impact was determined to be less than significant. Therefore, no mitigation to reduce VMT (such as measures commonly included in a TDM program) are required. It is at the City’s discretion to require the applicant to implement TDM measures, but such a requirement would be unrelated to the CEQA process. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 3. The commenter provides general observations about programs and organizations whose intent is to promote mobility options. The comment is acknowledged. No specific comment on an environmental topic or content of the initial study is made. No further response is necessary. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 4. The commenter states that the City has fully connected bike networks and transit options and acknowledges the work of Hexagon Transportation Consultants’ analysis for the project. Kraig Tambornini City of Gilroy 3/7/23, Page 4 The comment is acknowledged. No specific comment on an environmental topic or content of the initial study is made. No further response is necessary. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 5. The commenter makes a range of general recommendations/observations. These include: a. Applying electric vehicle (EV) reach codes to the project; b. Incorporating EV charging stations; and c. Relationship between vehicle charger location and VMT, and methods for estimating VMT. The comment is acknowledged. No specific comment on the initial study is made. Refer to the response to comment #2 above. GHG impacts of the project were found to be less than significant with implementation of related mitigation measures designed to meet GHG reduction performance standards. One of the mitigation measures requires that the applicant install EV infrastructure/charging stations consistent with CALGreen Tier 2 requirements and consistent with Bay Area Air Quality Management District (“air district”) guidance for reducing GHG emissions from land development projects. Consequently, the project will support EV use and reductions in GHG emissions that result from reducing VMT associated with fossil-fuel powered transportation. The discussion of methods for estimating GHG reductions associated with EV charging infrastructure is acknowledged. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 6. The commenter states agreement with the mitigation measures in the initial study for reducing GHG emissions, but also suggests that the proposed project is not consistent with the air district’s GHG performance standard regarding eliminating natural gas use in new residential, commercial and office related land use projects. As stated in Section 8.0, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the applicant has agreed to eliminate natural gas infrastructure for all but the fast-food component of the project, with the intent of meeting air district direction on this issue to the Kraig Tambornini City of Gilroy 3/7/23, Page 5 extent feasible. Other air districts such as the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, have adopted GHG performance standard guidance similar to (and in this case preceding) those adopted by the air district. The latter guidance provides flexibility for mitigating GHG emissions when the applicant for a land use does not design the project to meet one or more of the performance standards. The City has the discretion to reference GHG thresholds of significance (in this case in the form of GHG performance standards) from other public agencies that it feels are most appropriate for the City in its effort to balance economic development with its goals to contribute its fair share toward reducing GHG emissions from land use projects. Mitigation Measure GHG-2 in Section 8.0 of the initial study requires that the applicant off-set the minor volume of GHG emissions that would result from natural gas use in the fast-food component of the project. This off-site would have the net effect of eliminating GHGs related to natural gas use without constraining economic development where natural gas is fundamental to successful operation of a minor component of a broader land use project. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 7. The applicant recommends adding features to the proposed project that include showers, lockers and dressing, and a bike fixit station. These recommendations are presumably made as an incentive to reduce VMT and GHGs by making bicycle transportation attractive to future employees. The first is a common feature considered in land use projects for the stated purpose, but in and of itself is typically not sufficient to have a measurable impact on VMT reduction or associated GHG generation. It is at the City’s discretion to require the applicant to implement these measures, but such a requirement would be unrelated to the CEQA process. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 8. The commenter states agreement with the Hexagon Transportation Engineers’ VMT analysis for the project. Comment acknowledged. No specific comment on an environmental topic or content of the initial study is made. No further response is necessary. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. Kraig Tambornini City of Gilroy 3/7/23, Page 6 9. The commenter asks whether there is a required Transportation Improvement Fee that will be used to help fund transportation improvements per the City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan (“General Plan”) Mobility Policy 3.7. Yes, the City of Gilroy publishes a “Fees to Build” document that identifies impact fees charged to new development. One is a traffic impact fee for residential, commercial, and industrial developments. Fee requirements are also discussed in the Hexagon Transportation Consultants’ transportation analysis included as Appendix G of the initial study. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 10. The commenter asks what the project is doing to implement General Plan Mobility Goal M4 and Mobility Policy 4.2 regarding requiring new development to accommodate, enhance, and facilitate public transit, including pedestrian and bicycle access to transit. The commenter recommends that the bus stop in front of the site be improved. In comment #6, the commenter cites recommendations made by Hexagon Transportation Consultants for incorporating project design features (that are part of the project description), including new pedestrian connections, bicycle parking, and constructing wide sidewalks along the project frontage. These features would facilitate access to the two existing Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) bus stops located along the project site frontage on Camino Arroyo. These features were identified for inclusion in the project to address its consistency with policies and plans, including the General Plan. It is at the City’s discretion to require the applicant to implement additional related measures, but doing so would be unrelated to the CEQA process. Refer also to the response to comment #11. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 11. The commenter asks whether the project was routed for plan review with VTA per General Plan Mobility Policies 4.6. and 4.8 regarding coordination with VTA to promote transit. City staff did send the project plans for review and comment to VTA. City staff will continue to coordinate with VTA, as VTA also provided comments during the public review period, which are addressed below. The VTA comments suggest one possible improvement to each bus stop – replacing Kraig Tambornini City of Gilroy 3/7/23, Page 7 older concrete pads with new pads. As discussed in the transportation analysis and summary memo prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants (Appendix G of the initial study), the project could generate a small number of new transit riders that can be served by existing transit services available at the site. Consequently, transit capacity improvements do not appear to be required. It is at the City’s discretion to require the applicant to replace the existing pads at the bus stops per VTA’s recommendation (e.g., the City could require these improvements as conditions of approval), but doing so would be unrelated to the CEQA process. Refer also to the responses to comment letter #3 for more information. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 12. The commenter describes the nearest bus stops and connecting transit services and opportunities to promote the use of public transit. The comment is acknowledged. No specific comment on an environmental topic or content of the initial study is made. No further response is necessary and no changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 13. The commenter notes Policy 1.12 from the General Plan regarding encouraging new development to incorporate TDM measures, and lists a range of potential TDM measures. See the response to comment #2. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. California Department of Transportation, District #4 (February 27, 2023) The California Department of Transportation, District #4, submitted a comment letter on February 27, 2023, which is attached to this response letter. Generally, this comment letter does not raise environmental issues, but rather discusses transportation-related state requirements. Our responses to these comments are provided below. 1. This comment describes the proposed project. It does not raise any environmental issues; therefore, no response is necessary. 2. The commenter expresses support for the various bicycle and pedestrian improvements recommended by Hexagon (Appendix G of the initial study) Kraig Tambornini City of Gilroy 3/7/23, Page 8 and listed in the project description of the initial study (pages 3 and 4). This comment does not raise an environmental issue and therefore, no response is necessary. 3. This comment is regarding reducing VMT and financing transit and active transportation improvements necessitated by the proposed project. The VMT analysis presented in the initial study concluded that the proposed project would not result in significant VMT impacts and, therefore, no mitigation measures are required in order to reduced VMT. The various infrastructure improvements identified on pages 3 and 4 of the project description in the initial study are the responsibility of the project developers. The transportation analysis did not identify any other transit and active transportation improvements required by the proposed project. Project developers will be required to pay the City’s traffic impact fee. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 4. The proposed project does not require any improvements to the State Transportation Network (STN), other than those identified on pages 3 and 4 that may be within the STN right-of-way (i.e., ADA-compliant curb ramps at all corners of the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection). No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. 5. This comment discusses the general requirements of project improvements impacting any Caltrans facilities meeting the American Disabilities Act (ADA) and maintaining bicycle and pedestrian access during construction activities. See comment #4 above. No changes to the mitigated negative declaration are necessary. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (February 27, 2023) The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority submitted a comment letter on February 27, 2023, which is attached to this response letter. Generally, this comment letter does not raise environmental issues, but rather recommends improvements at the existing bus stops along the project frontage and requests for information to be on the project plans, with a chance for additional review. Our response to the comments is provided below. 1. This comment includes recommendations for improvements of the existing bus stops along the project frontage. The City of Gilroy could consider requiring Kraig Tambornini City of Gilroy 3/7/23, Page 9 these improvements as conditions of approval. The comments do not raise an environmental issue; therefore, no changes to the mitigated negative declaration are required. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact either of us at wissler@emcplanning.com or lutz@emcplanning.com or at 831-649-1799. Sincerely, Teri Wissler Adam Shoshana Lutz Senior Principal Associate Planner Enc: Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration Comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration Community Development Department Planning Division (408) 846-0440 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION City of Gilroy 7351 Rosanna St. Gilroy, CA 95020 City File Number: File No. Z 22-01, TM-21-02, and AS 21-13 Project Description: Name of Project: Gilroy Square Nature of Project: Application for a six-lot subdivision, and Architectural and Site Review to establish the development plan for Phase II of the PUD for development on four of the lots. The proposed project includes two, four-story hotels, a drive-through fast food restaurant, a convenience store, and two, one-story speculative warehouse buildings. The warehouse buildings are proposed as future development. Project Location: Location: 6970 Camino Arroyo in the city of Gilroy. Assessor's Parcel Number: 841-70-049 Entity or Person(s) Undertaking Project: Name: Jaspal Singh Sidhu Address: 1024 Iron Point Road, Folsom, CA 95630 Staff Planner: Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner Initial Study: An initial study of this project was undertaken and prepared for the purpose of ascertaining whether this project might have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of this study is attached. Gilroy Square 2 March 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration Findings & Reasons: The initial study identified potentially significant effects on the environment. However, this project has been mitigated (see Mitigation Measures below which avoid or mitigate the effects) to a point where no significant effects will occur. On the basis of the whole record, there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The following reasons will support these findings: The proposal is a logical component of the existing land use of this area. Identified adverse impacts are proposed to be mitigated on-site and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program have been prepared. The proposed project is consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the General Plan of the City of Gilroy. City staff independently reviewed the Initial Study, and this Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City of Gilroy. With the application of the following Mitigation Measures the proposed project will not have any significant impacts on the environment. The Gilroy Planning Division is the custodian of the documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based. Air Quality Refer to Mitigation Measure GHG-1. Biological Resources BIO -1 To avoid/minimize impacts to burrowing owls potentially occurring within the project site, the project applicant shall retain a biologist qualified in ornithology to conduct surveys for burrowing owl. The approved biologist shall conduct a two-visit (i.e., morning and evening) presence/absence survey at areas of suitable habitat on and adjacent to the project site boundary no less than 14 days prior to the start of construction or ground disturbance activities. Surveys shall be conducted according to methods described in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012). The applicant shall submit evidence of completion of the preconstruction survey to the City of Gilroy Planning Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. Because burrowing owls occupy habitat year-round, seasonal no-disturbance buffers, as outlined in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), shall be in place around occupied habitat prior to and during any ground disturbance activities. The following table includes buffer areas based on the time of year and level of disturbance (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), unless a qualified biologist approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife verifies through non-invasive measures that either: 1) birds have not begun egg laying and incubation; or Gilroy Square 3 March 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration 2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. LLooccaattiioonn TTiimmee ooff YYeeaarr LLeevveell ooff DDiissttuurrbbaannccee BBuuffffeerrss ((mmeetteerrss)) LLooww MMeedd HHiigghh NNeessttiinngg SSiitteess AApprriill 11 –– AAuugg 1155 220000 mm 550000 mm 550000 mm NNeessttiinngg SSiitteess AAuugg 1166 –– OOcctt 1155 220000 mm 220000 mm 550000 mm NNeessttiinngg SSiitteess OOcctt 1166 –– MMaarr 3311 5500 mm 110000 mm 550000 mm If burrowing owl is found and avoidance is not possible, burrow exclusion may be conducted by qualified biologists only during the non-breeding season, before breeding behavior is exhibited and after the burrow is confirmed empty through non-invasive methods, such as surveillance. Occupied burrows shall be replaced with artificial burrows at a ratio of one collapsed burrow to one constructed artificial burrow (1:1). Evicted burrowing owls may attempt to colonize or re-colonize an area that would be impacted, thus ongoing surveillance during project activities shall be conducted at a rate sufficient to detect burrowing owls if they return. If surveys locate occupied burrows in or near construction areas, consultation with the CDFW shall occur to interpret survey results and develop a project-specific avoidance and minimization approach. BIO-2 To avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), to the extent feasible, construction activities that include any vegetation removal or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) shall be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If construction activities commence during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project construction. If construction activities are scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. Two surveys for active nests of such birds shall occur within 10 days prior to start of construction, with the second survey conducted with 48 hours prior to start of construction. Appropriate minimum survey radius surrounding the work area is typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. If no nesting activity is observed, a report shall be submitted to the City of Gilroy and disturbance activities may comments. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, a minimum no-disturbance buffer of 250 feet around active nests of non-listed bird species and a 500-foot no-disturbance buffer around active nests of non-listed raptors shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer Gilroy Square 4 March 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily, or as otherwise required by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. This measure shall be implemented by the developer prior to start of construction activities. Geology and Soils GEO-1 The developer shall prepare an erosion control plan that details appropriate methods to prevent and/or minimize erosion. The erosion control plan is subject to the review and approval of the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. GEO-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall implement the recommendations outlined in the geotechnical report prepared for the proposed project including, but not limited to: Recompact the surface soils; Fill material to be excavated and stockpiled so that the native soils can be prepared properly, with inspection of the bottom of the excavation by a qualified geotechnical engineer to verify no additional removal is required; and Replace the upper 30 inches of soil within slab-on-grade and exterior flatwork areas with non-expansive fill to reduce the potential soil movement. Greenhouse Gas Emissions GHG-1 The proposed project shall be designed to meet the following performance standards: a. With exception of the planned fast-food use, no permanent natural gas infrastructure shall be permitted as part of the improvement plans for any other individual project uses. These uses shall be all electric; and b. Electric vehicle infrastructure (e.g., electric vehicle parking spaces, charging station infrastructure, chargers, etc.) consistent with CALGreen Tier 2 mandatory standards in effect at the time individual building permits are issued, shall be installed at each individual proposed use. GHG-2 The applicant shall: a. Prepare a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan which identifies one or more GHG reduction actions that will be taken to reduce GHG emissions from the proposed fast food use by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year to offset emissions produced by using natural gas. The GHG Reduction Plan shall prioritize on-site GHG reduction design features. Gilroy Square 5 March 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration In lieu of or in addition to one or more of the on-site measures above, the applicant may make direct investments in off-site GHG reduction activities/programs in the vicinity. Examples include building retrofit programs that pay for cool roofs, solar panels, solar water heaters, smart meters, energy efficient lighting energy efficient windows, and insulation. Other examples include financing programs for installing electric vehicle charging stations, electrifying school buses, or planting local urban forests. The applicant may retain a qualified air quality / GHG professional to quantify the GHG reductions from implementing the Reduction Plan using substantial evidence to be included in the Reduction Plan. If the applicant elects to quantify the GHG emissions reductions from on-site measures and/or investments in off-site reduction programs and the reductions are less than insufficient to reduce project emissions by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year, the applicant may secure the reduction balance by purchasing and retiring carbon offset credits. The carbon offset credits shall meet the following standards: Carbon offset credits shall be issued by a recognized, reputable and accredited registry that mandates the use of established protocols for quantifying and issuing the offset credits. Credits issued based on protocols approved by the California Air Resources Board should be prioritized. Examples of such registries include the Climate Action Reserve, American Carbon Registry, and Vierra. The carbon offset credits should be generated from projects developed in the United States. Credits from projects developed internationally should not be used unless the applicant demonstrates with substantial evidence that sufficient carbon offsets from projects in the United States are unavailable. International offsets must be quantified and issued using established protocols that are recognized in the United States and that are issued by recognized, reputable and accredited registries. All carbon offset credits purchased to reduce GHG emissions, must meet the criteria of being real, quantifiable, permanent, verifiable, enforceable, and additional, consistent with the standards set forth in Health and Safety Code section 38562, subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(2). Prior to the City issuing a building permit for the fast food use, the applicant shall submit the GHG Reduction Plan for review and approval of the City of Gilroy. If carbon offsets are proposed, prior to approval of a building permit, the applicant shall provide an executed contract or other certification to the City Planner that the requisite volume carbon offset credits have been purchased. b. The planned fast food use shall include all electricity pre-wiring necessary so that the building is ready for a future retrofit to all-electric supply infrastructure sufficient to replace natural gas use in the future. Prior to issuing a building Gilroy Square 6 March 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration permit for the fast food use, the City shall verify that project improvement plans meet the pre-wiring requirement. Hydrology and Water Quality HYDRO-1 All stormwater on the project site must be treated aboveground in an approved low-impact development treatment device prior to entering stormwater chambers. The proposed project must show proof of compliance with this requirement on the project plans prior to issuance of a grading permit with approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department. HYDRO-2 The project proponent shall prepare and submit Erosion Control Plans to the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The Erosion Control Plans shall illustrate how the project’s grading phases would prevent or minimize erosion and siltation on- and off-site, such as the inclusion of Best Management Practices. HYDRO-3 The project proponent shall prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for review and approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall identify construction and post-construction Best Management Practices to prevent water pollution at the source Noise N-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for the two proposed hotels, the building plans shall include air conditioning or mechanical ventilation, subject to review and approval by the building department. Date Prepared: March 2023 Review Period: January 27, 2023 – February 27, 2023 Date Adopted by City Council: Kraig Tambornini Senior Planner Kraig.Tambornini@ci.gilroy.ca.us February 23, 2023 Re: Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) Project Number: Z 22-01, TM 21-02, and AS 21-13 Project Title: Gilroy Square Project Applicant: Jaspal Singh Sidhu, PE for Temple Gilroy, LLC Project Location: Located at 6970 Camino Arroyo Assessor Parcel No. APN 841-070-049 Kraig Tambornini (Senior Planner, City of Gilroy), Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Gilroy Square Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). Comments below are based on the review of the MND. Additional comments may be forthcoming pending final review. This project will have a direct impact in the City of Gilroy by achieving our goal to reduce air emissions from on-road motor vehicles and future developments. Improve air quality by encouraging our residents, commuters, employees to mode shift from vehicles to cycling, increase walking as alternatives to driving for short and first/last mile trips, and add new riders to the transit system. This project should include a robust Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program that leverages nearby transit, bike lanes, and walking routes to further reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and greenhouse gas emissions. With its convenient location to transit, shopping, and bike/ped facilities there are few barriers to reducing VMT at this project. With the recent adoption of our City’s General Plan 2040, we as a community called for bold actions that include continuing to promote cleaner modes of transportation. We encourage existing and proposed development to incorporate Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures such as car-sharing, transit passes, and unbundling of parking (requiring separate purchase or lease of a parking space) where such measures will result in a reduction in vehicle miles traveled, reduction of required amount of parking or an increase in the use of alternate transportation modes. We suggest all new construction incorporate an all-electric model and be fossil fuel free in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We are actively embracing, advancing ideas, and projects that promote the concept of free- range people in the City of Gilroy. We advocate for building and planning that considers future generations as well as current residents who don’t own cars. Advancing mobility options reflects what we are teaching the youth in our community through Safe Routes to School and why we are nationally recognized as a Bronze Bicycle Friendly Community from the League of American 1____________________________2 ___________3 _______________1 Bicyclists, as well as recognized by the World Health Organization as an Age-Friendly Community. Continuing to leverage our Measure B Education & Encouragement (E&E) funding for established work plans/programs will further enhance Gilroy’s efforts. Measure B E&E Bike to Work Day, Community Bike/Walks Counts, Community Engagement, General, Online Media Campaign, and Safe Routes to School work plans. While there might be portions of our city that are isolated from transit, this development is not in one of those areas. Gilroy has a fully connected bike network and transit options. We have a large population that works, visits, and attends schools in Gilroy that benefits from local transit and rideshare. Gilroy has the vision that the glass is half full, we have the ability to innovate, and adapt to programs that will further reduce our VMT. Thank you to Hexagon for their great analysis and recommendations. We have the following recommendations and comments based on the Gilroy Square IS/MND, Hexagon Analysis, and our General Plan 2040 Mobility- REACH Code for Electric Vehicle (EV)-The recent adoption of the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code pertaining to electric vehicle (EV) charging for new residential and non-residential construction REACH codes for EV’s applies to this project or CALGreen Tier 2 whichever requires more. Recommend Installation of Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Stations as mitigation for the Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2022 Consistency with GHG Reduction Performance Standards-We recommend electric car charging stations with city and developer partnership through such services as Chargepoint and EVgo with a total utilization of up to 10% of the total parking spaces planned for this development. EV Charging Stations as Greenhouse Gas Mitigation 2018 Santa Clara County Study1 allow for the following VMT mitigations for this development on page 5 of the white paper. Land Use and Location (VMT/vehicle charged):The type of land use (residential, commercial, institutional, etc.) affects the character of vehicle trips (home-based, work-based, and other) associated with the charger location. The location of the charger will influence the amount of use, the types of trips, and the distance of trips that are facilitated for EV use. The combination of land use and location determined the vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) associated with home-based, work-based, or other based trips shifted from fossil fuel to EVs.There are several different approaches to estimating VMT for use in estimating EVCS benefits. Method 1:EVCS Charging Activity Approach. Under this method, VMT is estimated based on the expected charging activity per day. This approach assumes that the GHG reductions for an EVCS are only related to the charging activity. The electricity (in kWh) delivered by the charger is converted to miles using the average efficiency of a battery electric engine (kwh/mile), which is then used to estimate both fossil-fuel vehicle GHG emissions and EV GHG emissions. This 1https://dtnz.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb481/files/Task-3D-EV-Charging-Stations-as-GHG-Mitigation-Me chanism-under-CEQA_White-Paper.pdf 2____________4 __________________________________________________________________________5 3 cont. approach requires estimation of daily charger use (see below), and EV GHG efficiency/mile to establish associated mitigation. Method 2:Location-Based VMT Approach. Under this method, VMT for EVs is based on the land use and location of the EV charger, the number of vehicle charges per day, and vehicle trips associated with that land use. For example, a residential EVCS would be assigned the benefit of shifting all residential fossil-fuel vehicle VMT to EV VMT. Alternatively, the assumption could be limited to home-based trip VMT. For non-residential development, VMT per charging parking space would need to be estimated or VMT could be assigned based on work-trips only. This approach requires estimation of VMT per residential vehicle or non-residential charging space. This is the approach used in the three CAPs reviewed for EVCS benefit quantification. CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts from Land Use Projects and Plans (Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2022) Consistency with GHG Reduction Performance Standards- The project is not consistent with two (No Natural Gas Appliances or Plumbing, Comply with CALGreen Tier 2 EV Standards) of the four GHG performance standards. Consequently, the project would have a significant impact from generating GHG emissions.We agree with the following mitigation measures proposed to reduce the significant GHG impact to less than significant. With the exception of the planned fast-food use, no permanent natural gas infrastructure shall be permitted as part of the improvement plans for any other individual project uses. These uses shall be all electric; and electric vehicle infrastructure (e.g. electric vehicle parking spaces, charging station infrastructure, chargers, etc.) consistent with CALGreen Tier 2 (Gilroy’s REACH EV codes whichever requirements are higher) mandatory standards in effect at the time individual building permits are issued, shall be installed at each individual proposed use. The applicant shall prepare a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan. The planned fast food use shall include all electricity pre-wiring necessary so that the building is ready for a future retrofit to all-electric supply infrastructure sufficient to replace natural gas use in the future. Prior to issuing a building permit for the fast food use, the City shall verify that project improvement plans meet the pre-wiring requirement. We would encourage the developer to not use natural gas for the fast food restaurant as this would reduce the GHG emissions on-site, rather than purchasing off-site credits which may or may not benefit Gilroy. Recommend Shower, Locker, & Dressing Facilities-Provide employee showers and dressing areas for each gender. Provide dressing rooms for each gender and one locker for each required long-term bicycle parking space. Required lockers shall be located in relation to required showers and dressing areas to permit access to locker areas by either gender. Recommend a Dero Bike Fixit Station with Air Kit Bike Pump and Public Outdoor Feature- We recommend placing this bike fixit station at a Public Outdoor Feature or near bike parking at the hotels. This would add to the current network throughout the City. https://www.dero.com/product/fixit/ 3__________________________5 cont._______________________________________________6 _____________________7 Hexagon Analysis-We agree with the following recommendations, and want to see the City of Gilroy implement their own Bike Parking Ordinance and VMT/TDM Ordinance so that future developments don’t have to continue to rely on VTA. -A defined pedestrian connection should be provided between the north hotel (Residence Inn) building and the hotel parking spaces located next to the gas station. -Provide adequate bicycle parking supply on-site, based on VTA’s recommended bicycle-parking rates, to serve the potential demand of the project. Based on VTA’s bicycle parking supply recommendations, a minimum of 18 long- term (Class I) and 21 short-term inverted “U” (Class II) bicycle parking spaces should be provided on-site. -10-foot sidewalks, required in commercial areas, be installed along the entire project site frontage. -ADA-compliant curb ramps be installed at all corners of the Camino Arroyo/SR 152 intersection. General Plan 2040 Mobility-The Mobility Element provides the framework for decisions in Gilroy concerning the citywide transportation system. It seeks to create a balanced transportation network that supports and encourages walking, bicycling, and transit ridership. The goals and policies address a variety of topics, including multimodal transportation, complete streets, pedestrian facilities, bikeways, public transit, vehicular transportation, parking, and goods movement. Mobility 3.7- Traffic Impact Fee for Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements Support and finance the construction of pedestrian and bicycle improvements specified in the Mobility Diagrams by using the comprehensive traffic impact fee.Is there a required Transportation Improvement Fee, in proportion to the project's share of transportation improvements needed to serve cumulative development within the City of Gilroy? The funds shall be used to fund improvements identified in the City Traffic Circulation Master Plan, which includes bikeways. Goal of Mobility M4- Plan for efficient and convenient local and regional transit systems that respond to the changing needs of Gilroy. Mobility 4.2- Transit and Development require new developments to fully accommodate, enhance, and facilitate public transit, including pedestrian and bicycle access to transit.What has this development done to enhance pedestrian and bicycle access to transit? We recommend as a condition of approval the developer install new amenities and improve the bus stop site conditions in front of the development for VTA Route 84. Amenities examples are shelters, lighting, benches, bike racks and trash cans. Partnerships with cities are essential for improving access to public transit. The VTA Better Bus Stops team coordinates regularly with member agency cities on incorporating transit improvements into city-led streetscape projects and conditioning new developments to improve nearby transit stops. Better Bus Stops does not directly contribute to or reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, providing amenities and improving conditions at bus stops improves the transit rider experience and may influence an individual’s 4_______________________________8 ________________________________9 ________________________________10 decision to ride transit. GHG emissions are likely to decrease as more individuals choose transit over driving alone. Mobility 4.6- Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Coordinate with VTA on the planning of new transit routes within Gilroy and maintain a strong relationship with VTA management to ensure continued cooperation.Was this development project routed for plan review with our partner VTA, we have the opportunity to shift riders towards transit through a robust Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program? Mobility 4.8- Consider Transit in Planning and Development Proposals Coordinate with VTA on advance planning projects and development proposals that may have implications for public transit and consider the VTA’s Transit Sustainability Policy/Service Design Guidelines.What has this development done towards meeting this general plan consistency? Transit Service-The nearest VTA bus stops serving the development are Route 84 (St. Louise Hospital/Gilroy Outlets) located on Camino Arroyo in front of the project. Route 568 Rapid stops and Route 121 Express Gilroy-Lockheed Martin located at Gilroy Transit Center. Caltrain provides service from Gilroy to San Francisco (2-Hour Train Ride) Monday to Friday. Three trains (only two times listed) leave the Downtown Gilroy Transit Center at 5:54am · 6:31am · 6:52am. You can take your bike with you or park it at a locker at the Gilroy Transit Center. Caltrain currently serves riders from Gilroy to San Francisco and a future extension south to Salinas.2 This is a great opportunity to promote the use of public transit to the residents and visitors through outreach programs established in a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. Leverage the Measure B E&E funding the city has and the marketing outreach resources from Valley Transportation Authority (VTA)3. Transportation Demand Management Mobility 1.12-Encourage existing and proposed development to incorporate TDM measures such as car-sharing, transit passes, and unbundling of parking (requiring separate purchase or lease of a parking space) where such measures will result in a reduction in vehicle miles traveled, reduction of required amount of parking or an increase in the use of alternate transportation modes. Recommended TDM programs to include: ● Annual Clipper Card, VTA Passes or VTA’s Smart Pass https://www.vta.org/go/fares/smartpass (The Smart Pass program allows employers, developers, educational institutions, management companies or homeowners associations the ability to purchase VTA transit passes at a bulk discount rate to provide to employees or residents to encourage transit usage. Smart Passes are good for unlimited use of VTA Bus and Light Rail services, seven days a week. The program also 3 https://www.vta.org/faq/how-do-i-start-riding-vta 2 https://www.tamcmonterey.org/monterey-county-rail-extension 5_____ ____________________________11 ________________________12 ______________________________13 10 cont. includes an “Emergency Ride Home” provision that allows Smart Pass holders to take a taxi home if they need to leave work in the middle of the day.) ● Expand Outthink’s Project Chrysalis E-Bike Program with the purchase of e-bikes for every home or a pool of e-bikes for rideshare in a central hub for the project.4 ● Provide updated bike maps to all employees/contractors from management in correspondence. ● Provide routes to major transit connections, parks, schools, shopping, and restaurants. ●Annual presentation to the Amazon Gilroy Data Center of current bike/walk/transit options and incentive programs offered by the City of Gilroy currently funded by the Measure B Education & Encouragement program. ● Encourage Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) new post-pandemic compliance option for the regional Commuter Benefits Program: Telework “Flex Your Work” program. Carpooling, public transportation, vanpools, bicycling, walking and teleworking are flexible choices Bay Area employees have when planning daily commutes. Both the new Commuter Benefits Program Option 5: Telework and the “Flex Your Commute” program will encourage sustainable commuting options as the Bay Area continues its recovery from the pandemic and returns to the workplace. Sincerely, Sean Reedy Community Organizer Gilroy Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee (Gilroy BPAC) GilroyBPAC@gmail.com https://www.facebook.com/GilroyBPAC We are a community group actively embracing, advancing ideas, and projects that promote the concept of free-range people in Gilroy. We support building projects that are energy resilient and promote the reduction of greenhouse gasses (GHG). We are seeking your input whether you are a BMX rider, trail runner, recreational bike rider, MTB rider, walker, and hiker! #GilroyBPAC 4 https://svcleanenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/CityChrysalis_FinalReport_29Mar2022_digital.pdf 6__________________________________________13 cont. “Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” DISTRICT 4 OFFICE OF REGIONAL AND COMMUNITY PLANNING P.O. BOX 23660, MS–10D | OAKLAND, CA 94623-0660 www.dot.ca.gov February 27, 2023 SCH #: 2023010472 GTS #: 04-SCL-2023-01162 GTS ID: 28707 Co/Rt/Pm: SCL/152/10.564 Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner City of Gilroy 7351 Rosanna Street Gilroy, CA 95020 Re: Gilroy Square Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) Dear Kraig Tambornini: Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environmental review process for the Gilroy Square Project. We are committed to ensuring that impacts to the State’s multimodal transportation system and to our natural environment are identified and mitigated to support a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system. The following comments are based on our review of the January 2023 MND. Project Understanding The proposed project is located at 6970 Camino Arroyo in Gilroy, adjacent to SR-152. The project includes subdividing 10.07 acres into six (6) lots, and an Architectural and Site Review to establish the development plan for Phase II of the Regency Center Planned Unit Development (PUD) and approve development on four (4) of the lots. The proposed project includes two, four-story hotels, a drive-through fast food restaurant, a convenience store, a four-story speculative industrial warehouse, and a one-story speculative warehouse building. Travel Demand Analysis With the enactment of Senate Bill (SB) 743, Caltrans is focused on maximizing efficient development patterns, innovative travel demand reduction strategies, and multimodal improvements. For more information on how Caltrans assesses Transportation Impact Studies, please review Caltrans’ Transportation Impact Study Guide (link). ___________________1 ______________2 Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner February 27, 2023 Page 2 “Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” The project VMT analysis and significance determination are undertaken in a manner consistent with the Office of Planning and Research’s (OPR) Technical Advisory. Per the IS/MND, this project is found to have a less than significant VMT impact, therefore working towards meeting the State’s VMT reduction goals. Based upon the project’s location adjacent to SR-152, Caltrans fully supports the proposed bicycle and pedestrian recommendations in Appendix G that recommend pedestrian access among all sites that meet accessibility standards. Any proposed sidewalk improvements within the State Right of Way must be consistent with the Highway Design Manual (HDM). Caltrans also supports the bicycle parking recommendation put forth in the same appendix. Transportation Impact Fees Please identify project-generated travel demand and estimate the costs of transit and active transportation improvements necessitated by the proposed project; viable funding sources, such as Traffic Impact Fees, should also be identified. We encourage a sufficient allocation of fair share contributions toward multi-modal and regional transit improvements to fully mitigate cumulative impacts to regional transportation. We also strongly support measures to increase sustainable mode shares, thereby reducing VMT. Lead Agency As the Lead Agency, the City of Gilroy is responsible for all project mitigation, including any needed improvements to the State Transportation Network (STN). The project’s fair share contribution, financing, scheduling, implementation responsibilities and lead agency monitoring should be fully discussed for all proposed mitigation measures. Equitable Access If any Caltrans facilities are impacted by the project, those facilities must meet American Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards after project completion. As well, the project must maintain bicycle and pedestrian access during construction. These access considerations support Caltrans’ equity mission to provide a safe, sustainable, and equitable transportation network for all users. _____________________________2 cont.___________________3 ___________4 _____________5 Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner February 27, 2023 Page 3 “Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” Thank you again for including Caltrans in the environmental review process. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, or for future notifications and requests for review of new projects, please email LDR-D4@dot.ca.gov. Sincerely, MARK LEONG District Branch Chief Local Development Review c: State Clearinghouse February 27, 2022 City of Gilroy 7351 Rosanna Street Gilroy, CA 95020 (Sent via email 02/27/23) Re: Gilroy Square MND Dear Kraig, Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. VTA has the following comments on the Gilroy Square Mitigated Negative Declaration. Bus Stop Improvements There are two existing bus stops along the project frontage that is served by Route 84 which connects St. Louise Hospital, Gilroy Crossing and the Gilroy Transit Center. See attached site plan with comments. VTA has the following recommendations: •VTA bus stop #1 (Northbound Camino Arroyo south of State Hwy 152) o Replace older concrete pad with new pad. Specs attached. For new concrete pads contractor must obtain a VTA permit. Contact permits@vta.org at least 2 weeks before work. o Confirm sidewalk is at least 8’ wide. 8’ wide sidewalk is needed for ADA wheelchair boarding at the bus stop. o Existing silver metal bench at bus stop to remain •VTA bus stop #2 (Northbound Camino Arroyo north of Holloway Road) o Replace older concrete pad with new pad. Specs attached. For new concrete pads contractor must obtain a VTA permit. Contact permits@vta.org at least 2 weeks before work. o Confirm sidewalk is at least 8’ wide. 8’ wide sidewalk is needed for ADA wheelchair boarding at the bus stop. o Existing silver metal bench at bus stop to remain. Please include on the construction plans a note to contact VTA at Bus.Stop@vta.org or 403- 321-5800 at least 72 business hours prior to any construction that may impact bus operations. VTA would like the opportunity to review updated site plans to ensure the placement of driveways, landscaping and any other features do not conflict with bus operations. VTA’s Transit Passenger Environment Plan provides design guidelines for bus stops. This document can be downloaded at https://www.vta.org/projects/transit-passenger-environment-plan. ____________________________________________________1 City of Gilroy Gilroy Square MND Page 2 of 2 VTA has a Bus Stop Placement, Closures and Relocations Policy (https://www.vta.org/sites/default/files/2022-02/Bus%20Stop%20Policy.pdf). Sincerely, Brent Pearse Transportation Planner ____ Aerial Photograph Gilroy Square Initial Study 0 250 feet Figure 2 Source: Santa Clara County GIS 2022, Google Earth 2022Project Site C am i n o A r r o y o Pacheco Pass Hwy. General Plan Designated General Industrial Holloway Rd.Si l a c c i W y . Commercial Uses Industrial Uses Vacant Vacant Truck Storage Lot Commercial Uses A1.0.0 1 PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY: OF 39 19-43 GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CAPARKING FOR 88 ROOM 4 STORY HOTEL (1 SPACE:1 ROOM) = 97 SPACES PARKING ANALYSIS(HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES PROJECT DATA (HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES) HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS PROJECT DESCRIPTION:88 ROOMS 4 STORY HOTEL ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER : ADDRESS: JURISDICTION : R1 VA 47'-0" (TOP OF PARAPET) ALLOWABLE: ZONING : CODE ANALYSIS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: FIRE SPRINKLERS: HEIGHT (MAXIMUM) ACTUAL : 4ACTUAL : STORIES (MAXIMUM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. CITY OF GILROY 841-70-049 AREA:6. PARCEL-3 SITE AREA 6970 CAMINO ARROYO, GILROY, CA PORTE COCHERE AREA 692 S.F. BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN 16772 S.F. 1ST FLOOR AREA 16772 S.F. 2ND FLOOR AREA 16772 S.F. 3RD FLOOR AREA TOTAL BUILDING AREA 67780 S.F.. 16772 S.F. 4TH FLOOR AREA = 5 SPACESTOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED: (INCLUDING ONE VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACES) DESIGNATION :COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL 49'-6" (TOP OF PARAPET) PROJECT DATA (RESIDENCE INN) RESIDENCE INN PROJECT DESCRIPTION:112 ROOM 4 STORY HOTEL ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER : ADDRESS: JURISDICTION : R1 VA 40'-10"(TOP OF PARAPET) ALLOWABLE: ZONING : CODE ANALYSIS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: FIRE SPRINKLERS: HEIGHT (MAXIMUM) ACTUAL : 4ACTUAL : STORIES (MAXIMUM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. CITY OF GILROY 841-70-049 PARCEL-2 AREA:6. PARCEL-2 SITE AREA 6970 CAMINO ARROYO, GILROY, CA BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN 20642 S.F. 1ST FLOOR AREA 20642 S.F. 2ND FLOOR AREA 20642 S.F. 3RD FLOOR AREA TOTAL BUILDING AREA 82568 S.F.. 20642 S.F. 4TH FLOOR AREA DESIGNATION :COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL 47'-9" (TOP OF TOWER ) 5 TOTAL PAVED AREA BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA TOTAL PAVED AREA BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 69913 S.F. (67.37%) 20642 S.F. (19.90%) 13210 S.F. (12.73%) = 4 SPACES = 4 SPACES TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED: TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED: 70' R1, 70' A3 TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE: LOT COVERAGE (HOTEL)7. PARCEL-2 SITE AREA 15. PROVIDED: 9.EXIT FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 10. PROPOSED BUILDING USE: CODE YEAR/TYPE : SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: 13. 12. 11. 14. 2 EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR: REQUIRED: REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY NO (TABLE 602) YES YES HOTEL 7 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS) HOURS OF OPERATION: 70' R1, 70' A3 TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE: LOT COVERAGE (HOTEL)7. PARCEL-3 SITE AREA 8. 15. PROVIDED: 9.EXIT FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 10. PROPOSED BUILDING USE: CODE YEAR/TYPE : SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: 13. 12. 11. 14. 2 EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR: REQUIRED: REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY NO (TABLE 602) HOTEL NO HOURS OF OPERATION: = 4 SPACESTOTAL ELECTRICAL VEHICLE (EV) PARKING PROVIDED: VAN POOL PARKING PROVIDED = 4 SPACES LONG TERM BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED = 4 SPACES @ 2880 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREA PARKING REQUIRED FOR C-STORE: 1 SPACE PER 250 SQ FT AREA = 24 SPACESTOTAL PARKING PROVIDED PARKING ANALYSIS {(N)C-STORE} PROJECT DATA (C-STORE) C-STORE PROJECT DESCRIPTION:C-STORE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER : ADDRESS: JURISDICTION : M OCCUPANCY VA 19'-6" (TOP OF PARAPET) ALLOWABLE: ZONING : CODE ANALYSIS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: FIRE SPRINKLERS: HEIGHT (MAXIMUM) ACTUAL : 1ACTUAL : STORIES (MAXIMUM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. CITY OF GILROY 841-70-049 PARCEL-1A AREA:6. 6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CA BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN 2880 S.F. C-STORE FLOOR AREA DESIGNATION :COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL 4 = 2 SPACES = 2 SPACES TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED: TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED: LOT COVERAGE C-STORE7. TOTAL PAVED AREA BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 40811 S.F. (71.39%) 4242 S.F. (7.41%) 12154 S.F. (21.20%) PARCEL 1A SITE AREA 70' M TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE: 15. PROVIDED: 9.EXIT FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 10. PROPOSED BUILDING USE: CODE YEAR/TYPE : SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: 13. 12. 11. 14. 2 EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR: REQUIRED: REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY YES (TABLE 602) YES YES C-STORE 2 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS) 2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC, 2019 CEC, 2019 CFC, 2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, 2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72) 24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATION: = 30 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED PARKING REQUIRED FOR BURGER KING: 1 SPACE PER 100 SQ FT AREA PARKING ANALYSIS (DRIVE-THRU BURGER KING) = 2 SPACES = 2 SPACES TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED: TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED: = 30 SPACESTOTAL PARKING PROVIDED PARCEL-1A SITE AREA PROJECT DATA (DRIVE-THRU BURGER KING) DRIVE-THRU BURGER KING PROJECT DESCRIPTION:DRIVE-THRU RESTAURANT ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER : ADDRESS: JURISDICTION : A2 OCCUPANCY VA NO 19'-0" (TOP OF COPING) ALLOWABLE: ZONING : CODE ANALYSIS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: FIRE SPRINKLERS: HEIGHT (MAXIMUM)ACTUAL : 1ACTUAL : STORIES (MAXIMUM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. CITY OF GILROY 841-70-049 PARCEL-1 AREA:6. PARCEL-1 SITE AREA 35990 S.F.(0.82 AC) 6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CA BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN DESIGNATION :COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL 2 LOT COVERAGE BURGER KING7. TOTAL PAVED AREA BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA PARCEL-1 AREA 35990 S.F.(0.82 AC) 50' A2 TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE: 15. PROVIDED: 9.EXIT FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 10. PROPOSED BUILDING USE: CODE YEAR/TYPE : SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: 13. 12. 11. 14. 2 EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR: REQUIRED: REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY NO (TABLE 602) YES YES DRIVE-THRU' RESTAURANT 3 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS) 2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC, 2019 CEC, 2019 CFC, 2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, 2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72) HOURS OF OPERATION: 2600 S.F. BURGER KING FLOOR AREA 4 8 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS) NO (TABLE 602) CAR WASH AREA 1152 S.F. 1 PARKING PER EMPLOYEE @ 4 EMPLOYEES = 4 SPACES = 26 SPACES 24554 S.F.(68.3%) 2600 S.F. (7.2%) 8836 S.F. (24.5%) PARKING REQUIRED FOR CAR WASH: 1 SPACE PER 250 SQ FT AREA = 17 SPACESGROSS PARKING REQUIRED 103765 S.F. (2.3 AC) 103765 S.F. (2.3 AC) 57207 S.F. (1.31 AC) 57207 S.F. (1.31 AC) CANOPY AREA 6679 S.F. PARKING ANALYSIS(RESIDENCE INN) a) PARKING FOR 112 ROOMS 4 STORY HOTEL (1 SPACE:1 ROOM) = 112 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED = 118 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED 1 PARKING PER EMPLOYEE @ 6 EMPLOYEES = 6 SPACES = 111 SPACESSTANDARD PARKING PROVIDED 21'-0" (TOP OF EXTENDED COPING)21'-10" (TOP OF PARAPET) 79264 S.F. (1.81 AC) TOTAL PAVED AREA BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 52487 S.F. (66.21%) 12592 S.F. (15.89%) 14185 S.F. (17.90%) PARCEL-3 SITE AREA 79264 S.F. (1.81 AC) F.A.R PROVIDED FOR BURGER KING: 16. GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA 2600/35990=0.072 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR C-STORE:GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA 2880/57207=0.05 F.A.R FOR RESIDENCE INN : 16. GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA 82568/103765=0.79 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES : 67780/79264=0.85 GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA PROPERTY LINE CENTER LINE PARKING STRIPS BLDG LINE ACCESSIBLE AISLE FIRE ACCESS ROUTE LIGHTING SINGLE HEAD POLE LIGHT FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFDC PROPOSED VAN POOL PARKING (SHALL BE MARKED WITH SIGNS RESTRICTING THEIR USE TO CLEAN AIR VAN POOL) VP ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING STATION EV TRUNCATED DOMES FIRE HYDRANT AS PER CIVIL PLANS BOLLARDTRUCK ROUTE VICINITY MAP ILLUMINATED MONUMENT SIGNAGE (35' HIGH) MIN. 100 SQ.FT OF SEASONAL COLOR AT BASE OF SIGN M SITE PLAN 1ST FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) 2ND FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) 4TH FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) ROOF PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) 1ST FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) 3RD FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) ROOF PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN) FLOOR PLAN C-STORE) EXTERIOR ELEVATION (CANOPY) A1.0.0 A1.1.0 A1.1.1 A1.1.2 A1.1.3 A1.1.4 A1.1.5 A1.1.6 A1.1.7 A2.1.0 A2.1.1 A2.1.2 A3.2.0 A4.1.0 A4.1.1 FLOOR & ROOF PLAN (BURGER KING) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (BURGER KING) A1.0.2 TRASH DETAILS A5.1.0 1ST FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER) A5.1.1 2ND FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER) A5.1.2 A5.1.3 A5.1.4 A5.1.5 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER) A6.1.0 1ST FLOOR PLAN ( FUTURE WAREHOUSE) A6.1.1 ROOF PLAN (FUTURE WAREHOUSE) A6.1.2 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (FUTURE WAREHOUSE) 3RD FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER 4TH FLOOR PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER) ROOF PLAN (SUBSTANCE USAGE DISORDER) SITE PLANA1.0.0A ROOF PLAN (C-STORE) A2.1.3 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (C-STORE) A2.1.4 FLOOR PLAN & EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (CAR WASH) A2.1.5 EQUPMENT PLAN (CAR WASH) A3.1.0 FLOOR PLAN (CANOPY) A3.1.2 ROOF PLAN (CAR WASH) A3.1.1 3RD FLOOR PLAN (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) EXTERIOR VIEW (HOLIDAY-INN & SUITE) 2ND FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) 4TH FLOOR PLAN (RESIDENCE-INN) EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS (RESIDENCE-INN) A2.1.6 A3.2.1 A3.2.2 A3.3.0 A3.3.1 A7.0.0 SITE PHOTOS A7.0.1 SITE PHOTOS COVER SHEET GRADING PLAN UTILITY PLAN GRADING SECTIONS C1 PHASING PLAN CIVIL SITE PLAN STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN C2 SOLID WASTE HANDLING PLAN FIRE TRUCK CIRCULATION PLAN C4 C5 C7 C3 C6 C9 C8 YES(NFPA 13) YES(NFPA 13) YES(NFPA 13) TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED = 88 1 PARKING PER EMPLOYEE @ 6 EMPLOYEES = 6 SPACES = 94 SPACESTOTAL PARKING REQUIRED @ 2600 GROSS FLOOR AREA = 12 SPACES @ 1152 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREA = 5 SPACES F.A.R REQUIRED FOR BURGER KING:F.A.R REQUIRED FOR C-STORE:16.2 F.A.R FOR RESIDENCE INN :4 F.A.R REQUIRED FOR HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES :16.4 Source: ACE Design 2022 Figure 4 Gilroy Square Initial Study Site Plan (Northern) 200 feet0 1 3 1 9 . 0 ' 2 6 . 0 ' L A N D S C A P I N G 21.2' 1 1 19' 19.0' 26' C A M I N O A R R O Y O R O A D HOLLOWAY R O A D 1 7 2 PATIOOUTDOOR POOLHOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES88 ROOM - 4 ST ORY 8.8' 199.3' 75.0' 3 8 LANDSCAP I N G LANDSCAPING LANDSCAPIN GFIRE RIS E R ROOM 9A1.0.25 . 0 ' 3 6 . 0 ' 2 7 1 . 3 ' ( N ) S I D E W A L K ( E ) L A N D S C A P I N G 15.3' 6 10.0'19.0'36.7' L A N D S C A P I N G 26.0' 1 1 BLDG.FO O TP R IN T =1 8 00 0 S . F. 6 FENCE8 5 . 1 ' 5 ' 3 0 . 0 ' 1 9 . 0 ' 1 4 . 6 ' 26.0' 19.0'5'5' 10' 6 6 S I D E W A L K S I D E W A L K SIDE WALK 2 5 2 5 . 5 ' P O R O U S P A V E M E N T R48.0'96 2 4 0 . 9 '108.2'5.0' 19.0' 13.3' S I D E W A L K SIDE W A LK SIDE W ALK L A N D S C A P I N G 19.0' 31.3' 2 9 . 8 ' 2 6 . 0 ' 26.0' 9 9 9 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 4 15.4'19.0' 5.0'26.2'2 6 . 0 ' 2 6 . 0 ' 28.1' 19.0' 5 . 0 ' 19.0' 121.8' 30.0' 121.4' 25.8' 3 . 8 '19.0'19.0' P O R O U S P A V E M E N T 22 1 1 EV EV EV EV EV 19.0' LANDSCAP I N G 10' 26.7' HOLLOWAY R O A D F U T U R E W A R E H O U S E - 2 FUTURE W A R EHOUSE - 1 5 . 5 ' 2 2 . 3 ' 5 . 0 ' 34.3' TRASH TRASH T R A S HR48.0'R28.0' 4 0 4 . 8 ' 1 STO R Y 1 S T O R Y B L D G . F O O T P R I N T = 2 7 5 0 0 S . F . L A N D S C A P I N G 3.1' 3.6' 212.6' S 3 1° 2 7 ' 0 2 " E 7 7 0 . 7 4 ' N58° 2 7 ' 0 3 " E 3 0 5 . 0 0 ' R=40.00' HOLL O WA Y R O A D L=62.90' S 3 1° 2 7 ' 0 2 " E 8 4 5 . 9 0 ' =90°05'55" 3 2 8 . 0 2 ' 3 2 8 . 0 2 ' 344.1 1 ' 344.7 5 ' 1 5 8 . 2 7 ' 1 1 8 . 1 2 ' 13 11 10 5 2 C R O S S AC C E S S CROSS ACCESS VPVPVPVP 12 14 7 3 6 11 7 8 3 12 9 10 3 EV EVEV EVEV EVEV EV 3 3 1 VPVPVPVP2 10 17 OUTDO O R P O O L 16 8 1 10 2 3 3 7 2 PATIO OUTDO O R POOL 7 3 8 10 EVEVEVEV 4 4 EVVP EVVPVPEV EV EV 6 11 6 6 6 2 5 9 6 9 9 9 1 1 10 10 14 22 11 EVEV EV EV EV TR A S H TRASH TRASH TRASH TRASH TR A S H L=31.00' R=19.00' R=408.42'N10°33'00"E 120.34'S31° 3 3 ' 4 7 " E 1 5 2 9 . 9 0 ' S3 1 ° 2 7 ' 0 2 " E 7 7 0 . 7 4 ' N58°27 ' 0 3 " E 3 0 5 . 0 0 ' CAM I NO AR RO YON06°11'39"E 188.73'R=937.00' =93°29'20"R=19.00' =92°52'38" L=30.80' 66 . 00'S20° 1 4'1 4 " E =13°29'29" L=96.17' R=40.00' L=97.43'N03°22'26"W 1 2 6 .82' =05°57'27"R=937.00' L=16.82'N06°11'39"E 120.00'=24°05'42"R=40.00' STATE HWY 152 =05°57'27"CAMINO ARROYOHOLLO W A Y R O A D L=97.43' L=62.90' S3 1 ° 2 7 ' 0 2 " E 8 4 5 . 9 0 ' =90°05'55" 32 8 . 0 2 ' 297 . 3 2 ' 31 1 . 7 8 ' 23 0 . 9 5 ' 203 . 5 5 '126.82' 94. 5 6 ' 230 . 0 4 ' 32 8 . 0 2 ' 343.66' 344.11' 183.78' 206.48' 38.80' 11.44' 80.07' 1.48' 95 .95' 344.75' =08°11'43"R=952.00'L=136.17' 158 . 2 7 ' 118 . 1 2 'PROJECTDWG. BY: DATE: JOB : SHEETREVISIONS:CHK. BY:Phone: (702) 396-5113, Fax: (702)446-8155Land Planning Civil Engineering Architectural Design Structural EngineeringACE Design LLCACE Design LLCFolsom, CA 956301024 Iron Point Road, Suite 1046OF 39 19-43GILROY SQUARE 6970 CAMINO ARROYOGILROY, CAPROPOSED CAR PARKING SPACES 31 SPACES 52 SPACES @18000 SQ FT GROSS FLOOR AREA PROJECT DATA(FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1) FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: FUTURE WAREHOUSE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER : ADDRESS: JURISDICTION : M OCCUPANCY VA YES(NFPA 13) 29'-10" (TOP OF RIDGE) ALLOWABLE: ZONING : CODE ANALYSIS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: FIRE SPRINKLERS: HEIGHT (MAXIMUM) ACTUAL : 1ACTUAL : STORIES (MAXIMUM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. CITY OF GILROY 841-70-049 PARCEL-5 AREA:6. 6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CA BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN 18000 S.F. FUTURE WAREHOUSE FLOOR AREA DESIGNATION :COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL 4 LOT COVERAGE (FUTURE WAREHOUSE)7. TOTAL PAVED AREA BUILDINGS FOOTPRINT PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA 22591 S.F. (41.66%) 18000 S.F. (33.19%) 13637 S.F. (25.15%) PARCEL-5 SITE AREA 54228 S.F. (1.245 AC) 70' M TABLE 504.3 ALLOWABLE: 14. PROVIDED: 8.EXIT FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS 9. PROPOSED BUILDING USE: CODE YEAR/TYPE : SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED: 12. 11. 10. 13. 2 EXIT ON 1ST FLOOR: REQUIRED: REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY NO (TABLE 602) YES YES FUTURE WAREHOUSE 6 (FOR PRIMARY OCCUPANTS) 2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC, 2019 CEC, 2019 CFC, 2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, 2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72) 24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATION: PARCEL-5 SITE AREA 54228 S.F. (1.245 AC) PARCEL-4 AREA PROJECT DATA(FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2) PROJECT DESCRIPTION:FUTURE WAREHOUSE ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER : JURISDICTION : M OCCUPANCY VA ALLOWABLE:4 EXISTING AND PROPOSED ZONING:COMMERCIAL CODE ANALYSIS OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: FIRE SPRINKLERS: HEIGHT (MAXIMUM) ACTUAL : ALLOWABLE: 1ACTUAL : STORIES (MAXIMUM) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. FIRE RESISTIVE CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS SPECIAL INSPECTIONS REQUIRED:10. 9. 8.REQUIRED FIRE RESISTANCE OF EXTERIOR WALLS AND PROTECTION OF OPENINGS DUE TO LOCATION ON PROPERTY YES YES NO CITY OF GILROY AREA BREAKDOWN6. 112979 S.F.(2.594 AC) 841-70-049 5422.8 SQ.FT.(10% OF PARCEL AREA) 26814 S.F.(23.73%) 27500 S.F.(24.32%) 58665 S.F.(51.95%) REQD. LANDSCAPE AREA PROVIDED LANDSCAPE AREA TOTAL BUILDING FOOTPRINT TOTAL PAVED AREA LOT COVERAGE 70' M TABLE 504.3 29'-10" (TOP OF RIDGE) FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2ADDRESS: 6970 CAMINO ARROYO,GILROY, CA = 2 SPACES = 2 SPACES TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED: TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED: BUILDING AREA BREAKDOWN 27500 S.F. FUTURE WAREHOUSE FLOOR AREA PROPOSED CAR PARKING SPACES 100 SPACES = 5 SPACES = 2 SPACES TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING PROVIDED: TOTAL HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED: PARKING REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 : 15. GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA 18000/54228=0.33 F.A.R PROVIDED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2: 14. GROSS FLOOR AREA/SITE AREA 27500/112979=0.24 A1.0.0A 1 PROPERTY LINE CENTER LINE PARKING STRIPS BLDG LINE ACCESSIBLE AISLE FIRE ACCESS ROUTE LIGHTING SINGLE HEAD POLE LIGHT FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONFDC PROPOSED VAN POOL PARKING (SHALL BE MARKED WITH SIGNS RESTRICTING THEIR USE TO CLEAN AIR VAN POOL) VP ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONEV TRUNCATED DOMES PROPOSED ACCESSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL FIRE HYDRANT AS PER CIVIL PLANS BOLLARDTRUCK ROUTE VICINITY MAP NORTHILLUMINATED MONUMENT SIGNAGE (35' HIGH) MIN. 100 S.F.OF SEASONAL COLOR AT BASE OF SIGN M YES(NFPA 13) F.A.R REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 :2 F.A.R REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-2:2 PARKING REQUIRED FOR FUTURE WAREHOUSE-1 : 1 SPACE PER 350 SQ FT AREA 1 SPACE PER 350 SQ FT AREA @ 27500 S.F.GROSS FLOOR AREA 79 SPACES 13. PROPOSED BUILDING USE: CODE YEAR/TYPE :11. 12.FUTURE WAREHOUSE 2019 CBC, 2019 CPC, 2019 CMC, 2019 CEC, 2019 CFC, 2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, 2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE & ALL APPROPRIATE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM STANDARDS (e.g NFPA 13,20,24,72) 24 HOURSHOURS OF OPERATION: Gilroy Square Initial Study Site Plan (Southern) Figure 5 Source: ACE Design 2022200 feet0 STATE HIGHWAYS State Route 1 State Route 68 State Route 156 U.S. HIGHWAYS U.S. Highway 101 INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS Interstate 5 or I-5 Community Development Department Planning Division (408) 846-0440 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION City of Gilroy 7351 Rosanna St. Gilroy, CA 95020 City File Number: File No. Z 22-01, TM-21-02, and AS 21-13 Project Description: Name of Project: Gilroy Square Nature of Project: Application for a six-lot subdivision, and Architectural and Site Review to establish the development plan for Phase II of the PUD for development on four of the lots. The proposed project includes two, four-story hotels, a drive-through fast food restaurant, a convenience store, and two, one-story speculative warehouse buildings. The warehouse buildings are proposed as future development. Project Location: Location: 6970 Camino Arroyo in the city of Gilroy. Assessor's Parcel Number: 841-70-049 Entity or Person(s) Undertaking Project: Name: Jaspal Singh Sidhu Address: 1024 Iron Point Road, Folsom, CA 95630 Staff Planner: Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner Initial Study: An initial study of this project was undertaken and prepared for the purpose of ascertaining whether this project might have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of this study is attached. Gilroy Square 2 March 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration Findings & Reasons: The initial study identified potentially significant effects on the environment. However, this project has been mitigated (see Mitigation Measures below which avoid or mitigate the effects) to a point where no significant effects will occur. On the basis of the whole record, there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The following reasons will support these findings: The proposal is a logical component of the existing land use of this area. Identified adverse impacts are proposed to be mitigated on-site and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program have been prepared. The proposed project is consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the General Plan of the City of Gilroy. City staff independently reviewed the Initial Study, and this Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City of Gilroy. With the application of the following Mitigation Measures the proposed project will not have any significant impacts on the environment. The Gilroy Planning Division is the custodian of the documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based. Air Quality Refer to Mitigation Measure GHG-1. Biological Resources BIO -1 To avoid/minimize impacts to burrowing owls potentially occurring within the project site, the project applicant shall retain a biologist qualified in ornithology to conduct surveys for burrowing owl. The approved biologist shall conduct a two-visit (i.e., morning and evening) presence/absence survey at areas of suitable habitat on and adjacent to the project site boundary no less than 14 days prior to the start of construction or ground disturbance activities. Surveys shall be conducted according to methods described in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012). The applicant shall submit evidence of completion of the preconstruction survey to the City of Gilroy Planning Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. Because burrowing owls occupy habitat year-round, seasonal no-disturbance buffers, as outlined in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), shall be in place around occupied habitat prior to and during any ground disturbance activities. The following table includes buffer areas based on the time of year and level of disturbance (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), unless a qualified biologist approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife verifies through non-invasive measures that either: 1) birds have not begun egg laying and incubation; or Gilroy Square 3 March 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration 2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. LLooccaattiioonn TTiimmee ooff YYeeaarr LLeevveell ooff DDiissttuurrbbaannccee BBuuffffeerrss ((mmeetteerrss)) LLooww MMeedd HHiigghh NNeessttiinngg SSiitteess AApprriill 11 –– AAuugg 1155 220000 mm 550000 mm 550000 mm NNeessttiinngg SSiitteess AAuugg 1166 –– OOcctt 1155 220000 mm 220000 mm 550000 mm NNeessttiinngg SSiitteess OOcctt 1166 –– MMaarr 3311 5500 mm 110000 mm 550000 mm If burrowing owl is found and avoidance is not possible, burrow exclusion may be conducted by qualified biologists only during the non-breeding season, before breeding behavior is exhibited and after the burrow is confirmed empty through non-invasive methods, such as surveillance. Occupied burrows shall be replaced with artificial burrows at a ratio of one collapsed burrow to one constructed artificial burrow (1:1). Evicted burrowing owls may attempt to colonize or re-colonize an area that would be impacted, thus ongoing surveillance during project activities shall be conducted at a rate sufficient to detect burrowing owls if they return. If surveys locate occupied burrows in or near construction areas, consultation with the CDFW shall occur to interpret survey results and develop a project-specific avoidance and minimization approach. BIO-2 To avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), to the extent feasible, construction activities that include any vegetation removal or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) shall be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If construction activities commence during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project construction. If construction activities are scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. Two surveys for active nests of such birds shall occur within 10 days prior to start of construction, with the second survey conducted with 48 hours prior to start of construction. Appropriate minimum survey radius surrounding the work area is typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. If no nesting activity is observed, a report shall be submitted to the City of Gilroy and disturbance activities may commence. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, a minimum no-disturbance buffer of 250 feet around active nests of non-listed bird species and a 500-foot no-disturbance buffer around active nests of non-listed raptors shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer Gilroy Square 4 March 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily, or as otherwise required by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. This measure shall be implemented by the developer prior to start of construction activities. Geology and Soils GEO-1 The developer shall prepare an erosion control plan that details appropriate methods to prevent and/or minimize erosion. The erosion control plan is subject to the review and approval of the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. GEO-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall implement the recommendations outlined in the geotechnical report prepared for the proposed project including, but not limited to: Recompact the surface soils; Fill material to be excavated and stockpiled so that the native soils can be prepared properly, with inspection of the bottom of the excavation by a qualified geotechnical engineer to verify no additional removal is required; and Replace the upper 30 inches of soil within slab-on-grade and exterior flatwork areas with non-expansive fill to reduce the potential soil movement. Greenhouse Gas Emissions GHG-1 The proposed project shall be designed to meet the following performance standards: a. With exception of the planned fast-food use, no permanent natural gas infrastructure shall be permitted as part of the improvement plans for any other individual project uses. These uses shall be all electric; and b. Electric vehicle infrastructure (e.g., electric vehicle parking spaces, charging station infrastructure, chargers, etc.) consistent with CALGreen Tier 2 mandatory standards in effect at the time individual building permits are issued, shall be installed at each individual proposed use. GHG-2 The applicant shall: a. Prepare a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan which identifies one or more GHG reduction actions that will be taken to reduce GHG emissions from the proposed fast food use by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year to offset emissions produced by using natural gas. The GHG Reduction Plan shall prioritize on-site GHG reduction design features. Gilroy Square 5 March 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration In lieu of or in addition to one or more of the on-site measures above, the applicant may make direct investments in off-site GHG reduction activities/programs in the vicinity. Examples include building retrofit programs that pay for cool roofs, solar panels, solar water heaters, smart meters, energy efficient lighting energy efficient windows, and insulation. Other examples include financing programs for installing electric vehicle charging stations, electrifying school buses, or planting local urban forests. The applicant may retain a qualified air quality / GHG professional to quantify the GHG reductions from implementing the Reduction Plan using substantial evidence to be included in the Reduction Plan. If the applicant elects to quantify the GHG emissions reductions from on-site measures and/or investments in off-site reduction programs and the reductions are less than insufficient to reduce project emissions by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year, the applicant may secure the reduction balance by purchasing and retiring carbon offset credits. The carbon offset credits shall meet the following standards: Carbon offset credits shall be issued by a recognized, reputable and accredited registry that mandates the use of established protocols for quantifying and issuing the offset credits. Credits issued based on protocols approved by the California Air Resources Board should be prioritized. Examples of such registries include the Climate Action Reserve, American Carbon Registry, and Vierra. The carbon offset credits should be generated from projects developed in the United States. Credits from projects developed internationally should not be used unless the applicant demonstrates with substantial evidence that sufficient carbon offsets from projects in the United States are unavailable. International offsets must be quantified and issued using established protocols that are recognized in the United States and that are issued by recognized, reputable and accredited registries. All carbon offset credits purchased to reduce GHG emissions, must meet the criteria of being real, quantifiable, permanent, verifiable, enforceable, and additional, consistent with the standards set forth in Health and Safety Code section 38562, subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(2). Prior to the City issuing a building permit for the fast food use, the applicant shall submit the GHG Reduction Plan for review and approval of the City of Gilroy. If carbon offsets are proposed, prior to approval of a building permit, the applicant shall provide an executed contract or other certification to the City Planner that the requisite volume carbon offset credits have been purchased. b. The planned fast food use shall include all electricity pre-wiring necessary so that the building is ready for a future retrofit to all-electric supply infrastructure sufficient to replace natural gas use in the future. Prior to issuing a building Gilroy Square 6 March 2023 Mitigated Negative Declaration permit for the fast food use, the City shall verify that project improvement plans meet the pre-wiring requirement. Hydrology and Water Quality HYDRO-1 All stormwater on the project site must be treated aboveground in an approved low-impact development treatment device prior to entering stormwater chambers. The proposed project must show proof of compliance with this requirement on the project plans prior to issuance of a grading permit with approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department. HYDRO-2 The project proponent shall prepare and submit Erosion Control Plans to the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The Erosion Control Plans shall illustrate how the project’s grading phases would prevent or minimize erosion and siltation on- and off-site, such as the inclusion of Best Management Practices. HYDRO-3 The project proponent shall prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for review and approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall identify construction and post-construction Best Management Practices to prevent water pollution at the source Noise N-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for the two proposed hotels, the building plans shall include air conditioning or mechanical ventilation, subject to review and approval by the building department. Date Prepared: March 2023 Review Period: January 27, 2023 – February 27, 2023 Date Adopted by City Council: Kraig Tambornini Senior Planner Kraig.Tambornini@ci.gilroy.ca.us Table of Contents MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM .................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Monitoring Program ................................................................................................................. 1 1.3 Monitoring Program Procedures ............................................................................................. 1 1.4 Monitoring Checklist ................................................................................................................. 2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square March 2023 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1.1 Introduction CEQA Guidelines section 15097 requires public agencies to adopt reporting or monitoring programs when they approve projects subject to an environmental impact report or a negative declaration that includes mitigation measures to avoid significant adverse environmental effects. The reporting or monitoring program is to be designed to ensure compliance with conditions of project approval during project implementation in order to avoid significant adverse environmental effects. The law was passed in response to historic non-implementation of mitigation measures presented in environmental documents and subsequently adopted as conditions of project approval. In addition, monitoring ensures that mitigation measures are implemented and thereby provides a mechanism to evaluate the effectiveness of the mitigation measures. A definitive set of project conditions would include enough detailed information and enforcement procedures to ensure the measure's compliance. This monitoring program is designed to provide a mechanism to ensure that mitigation measures and subsequent conditions of project approval are implemented. 1.2 Monitoring Program The basis for this monitoring program is the mitigation measures included in the project mitigated negative declaration. These mitigation measures are designed to eliminate or reduce significant adverse environmental effects to less than significant levels. These mitigation measures become conditions of project approval, which the project proponent is required to complete during and after implementation of the proposed project. The attached checklist is proposed for monitoring the implementation of the mitigation measures. This monitoring checklist contains all appropriate mitigation measures in the mitigated negative declaration. 1.3 Monitoring Program Procedures The City of Gilroy shall use the attached monitoring checklist for the proposed project. The monitoring program should be implemented as follows: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square March 2023 1. The Gilroy Community Development Department should be responsible for coordination of the monitoring program, including the monitoring checklist. The Community Development Department should be responsible for completing the monitoring checklist and distributing the checklist to the responsible individuals or agencies for their use in monitoring the mitigation measures. 2. Each responsible individual or agency will then be responsible for determining whether the mitigation measures contained in the monitoring checklist have been complied with. Once all mitigation measures have been complied with, the responsible individual or agency should submit a copy of the monitoring checklist to the Community Development Department to be placed in the project file. If the mitigation measure has not been complied with, the monitoring checklist should not be returned to the Community Development Department. 3. The Gilroy Community Development Department will review the checklist to ensure that appropriate mitigation measures and additional conditions of project approval included in the monitoring checklist have been complied with at the appropriate time, e.g., prior to issuance of a use permit, etc. Compliance with mitigation measures is required for project approvals. 4. If a responsible individual or agency determines that a non-compliance has occurred, a written notice should be delivered by certified mail to the project proponent within 10 days, with a copy to the Community Development Department, describing the non-compliance and requiring compliance within a specified period of time. If non-compliance still exists at the expiration of the specified period of time, construction may be halted and fines may be imposed at the discretion of the City of Gilroy. 1.4 Monitoring Checklist Step 1 – Prior to Issuance of a Grading Permit BIO-1 To avoid/minimize impacts to burrowing owls potentially occurring within the project site, the project applicant shall retain a biologist qualified in ornithology to conduct surveys for burrowing owl. The approved biologist shall conduct a two-visit (i.e., morning and evening) presence/absence survey at areas of suitable habitat on and adjacent to the project site boundary no less than 14 days prior to the start of construction or ground disturbance activities. Surveys shall be conducted according to methods described in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012). The applicant shall submit evidence of completion of the preconstruction survey to the City of Gilroy Planning Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. Because burrowing owls occupy habitat year-round, seasonal no-disturbance buffers, as outlined in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 3 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square March 2023 and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), shall be in place around occupied habitat prior to and during any ground disturbance activities. The following table includes buffer areas based on the time of year and level of disturbance (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), unless a qualified biologist approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife verifies through non-invasive measures that either: 1) birds have not begun egg laying and incubation; or 2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. Location Time of Year Level of Disturbance Buffers (meters) Low Med High Nesting Sites April 1 – Aug 15 200 m 500 m 500 m Nesting Sites Aug 16 – Oct 15 200 m 200 m 500 m Nesting Sites Oct 16 – Mar 31 50 m 100 m 500 m If burrowing owl is found and avoidance is not possible, burrow exclusion may be conducted by qualified biologists only during the non-breeding season, before breeding behavior is exhibited and after the burrow is confirmed empty through non-invasive methods, such as surveillance. Occupied burrows shall be replaced with artificial burrows at a ratio of one collapsed burrow to one constructed artificial burrow (1:1). Evicted burrowing owls may attempt to colonize or re-colonize an area that would be impacted, thus ongoing surveillance during project activities shall be conducted at a rate sufficient to detect burrowing owls if they return. If surveys locate occupied burrows in or near construction areas, consultation with the CDFW shall occur to interpret survey results and develop a project-specific avoidance and minimization approach. Party Responsible for Implementation: Project Applicant Party Responsible for Monitoring: City of Gilroy Planning Department Monitoring Notes: BIO-2 To avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), to the extent feasible, construction activities that include any vegetation Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 4 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square March 2023 removal or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) shall be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If construction activities commence during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project construction. If construction activities are scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. Two surveys for active nests of such birds shall occur within 10 days prior to start of construction, with the second survey conducted with 48 hours prior to start of construction. Appropriate minimum survey radius surrounding the work area is typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. If no nesting activity is observed, a report shall be submitted to the City of Gilroy and disturbance activities may commence. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, a minimum no-disturbance buffer of 250 feet around active nests of non-listed bird species and a 500-foot no-disturbance buffer around active nests of non-listed raptors shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily, or as otherwise required by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. This measure shall be implemented by the developer prior to start of construction activities. Party Responsible for Implementation: Project Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: City of Gilroy Planning Department Monitoring Notes: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 5 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square March 2023 GEO-1 and HYDRO-2 The developer shall prepare an erosion control plan that details appropriate methods to prevent and/or minimize erosion. The erosion control plan shall illustrate how the project’s grading phases would prevent or minimize erosion and siltation on- and off-site, such as the inclusion of Best Management Practices. The erosion control plan is subject to the review and approval of the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Party Responsible for Implementation: Project Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: City of Gilroy Public Works Department Monitoring Notes: GEO-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall include the following recommendations in project improvement plans and implement them as outlined in the geotechnical report prepared for the proposed project including, but not limited to: Recompact the surface soils; Fill material to be excavated and stockpiled so that the native soils can be prepared properly, with inspection of the bottom of the excavation by a qualified geotechnical engineer to verify no additional removal is required; and Replace the upper 30 inches of soil within slab-on-grade and exterior flatwork areas with non-expansive fill to reduce the potential soil movement. Party Responsible for Implementation: Project Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: City of Gilroy Public Works Department Monitoring Notes: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 6 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square March 2023 HYDRO-1 All stormwater on the project site must be treated aboveground in an approved low- impact development treatment device prior to entering stormwater chambers. The developer shall include this measure in project improvement plans and must show proof of compliance with this requirement on the project plans prior to issuance of a grading permit with approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department. Party Responsible for Implementation: Project Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: City of Gilroy Public Works Department Monitoring Notes: HYDRO-3 The project proponent shall prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for review and approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall identify construction and post-construction Best Management Practices to prevent water pollution at the source. Party Responsible for Implementation: Project Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: City of Gilroy Public Works Department Monitoring Notes: Step 2 - Prior to Issuance of Building Permits GHG-2 The fast-food developer shall: a. Prepare a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan which identifies one or more GHG reduction actions that will be taken to reduce GHG emissions from the proposed fast food use by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year to offset Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square March 2023 emissions produced by using natural gas. The GHG Reduction Plan shall prioritize on-site GHG reduction design features. In lieu of or in addition to one or more of the on-site measures above, the applicant may make direct investments in off-site GHG reduction activities/programs in the vicinity. Examples include building retrofit programs that pay for cool roofs, solar panels, solar water heaters, smart meters, energy efficient lighting energy efficient windows, and insulation. Other examples include financing programs for installing electric vehicle charging stations, electrifying school buses, or planting local urban forests. The applicant may retain a qualified air quality / GHG professional to quantify the GHG reductions from implementing the Reduction Plan using substantial evidence to be included in the Reduction Plan. If the applicant elects to quantify the GHG emissions reductions from on-site measures and/or investments in off-site reduction programs and the reductions are less than insufficient to reduce project emissions by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year, the applicant may secure the reduction balance by purchasing and retiring carbon offset credits. The carbon offset credits shall meet the following standards: Carbon offset credits shall be issued by a recognized, reputable and accredited registry that mandates the use of established protocols for quantifying and issuing the offset credits. Credits issued based on protocols approved by the California Air Resources Board should be prioritized. Examples of such registries include the Climate Action Reserve, American Carbon Registry, and Vierra. The carbon offset credits should be generated from projects developed in the United States. Credits from projects developed internationally should not be used unless the applicant demonstrates with substantial evidence that sufficient carbon offsets from projects in the United States are unavailable. International offsets must be quantified and issued using established protocols that are recognized in the United States and that are issued by recognized, reputable and accredited registries. All carbon offset credits purchased to reduce GHG emissions, must meet the criteria of being real, quantifiable, permanent, verifiable, enforceable, and additional, consistent with the standards set forth in Health and Safety Code section 38562, subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(2). Prior to the City issuing a building permit for the fast food use, the applicant shall submit the GHG Reduction Plan for review and approval of the City of Gilroy. If carbon offsets are proposed, prior to approval of a building permit, the applicant Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 8 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square March 2023 shall provide an executed contract or other certification to the City Planner that the requisite volume carbon offset credits have been purchased. b. The planned fast food use shall include all electricity pre-wiring necessary so that the building is ready for a future retrofit to all-electric supply infrastructure sufficient to replace natural gas use in the future. Prior to issuing a building permit for the fast food use, the City shall verify that project improvement plans meet the pre-wiring requirement. Party Responsible for Implementation: Project Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: City of Gilroy Planning Department Monitoring Notes: ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ GHG-1 The proposed project shall be designed to meet the following performance standards: a. With exception of the planned fast-food use, no permanent natural gas infrastructure shall be permitted as part of the improvement plans for any other individual project uses. These uses shall be all electric; and b. Electric vehicle infrastructure (e.g., electric vehicle parking spaces, charging station infrastructure, chargers, etc.) consistent with CALGreen Tier 2 mandatory standards in effect at the time individual building permits are issued, shall be installed at each individual proposed use. Party Responsible for Implementation: Project Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: City of Gilroy Planning Department Monitoring Notes: N-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for the two proposed hotels, the building plans shall include air conditioning or mechanical ventilation, subject to review and approval by the building department. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 9 EMC Planning Group Gilroy Square March 2023 Party Responsible for Implementation: Project Developer Party Responsible for Monitoring: City of Gilroy Building Department Monitoring Notes: Gilroy Square Project (File No. Z 22-01, TM-21-02, an AS 21-13) List of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 To avoid/minimize impacts to burrowing owls potentially occurring within the project site, the project applicant shall retain a biologist qualified in ornithology to conduct surveys for burrowing owl. The approved biologist shall conduct a two-visit (i.e., morning and evening) presence/absence survey at areas of suitable habitat on and adjacent to the project site boundary no less than 14 days prior to the start of construction or ground disturbance activities. Surveys shall be conducted according to methods described in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012). The applicant shall submit evidence of completion of the preconstruction survey to the City of Gilroy Planning Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. Because burrowing owls occupy habitat year-round, seasonal no-disturbance buffers, as outlined in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), shall be in place around occupied habitat prior to and during any ground disturbance activities. The following table includes buffer areas based on the time of year and level of disturbance (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), unless a qualified biologist approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife verifies through non-invasive measures that either: 1) birds have not begun egg laying and incubation; or 2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. Location Time of Year Level of Disturbance Buffers (meters) Low Med High Nesting Sites April 1 – Aug 15 200 m 500 m 500 m Nesting Sites Aug 16 – Oct 15 200 m 200 m 500 m Nesting Sites Oct 16 – Mar 31 50 m 100 m 500 m If burrowing owl is found and avoidance is not possible, burrow exclusion may be conducted by qualified biologists only during the non-breeding season, before breeding behavior is exhibited and after the burrow is confirmed empty through non-invasive methods, such as surveillance. Occupied burrows shall be replaced with artificial burrows at a ratio of one collapsed burrow to one constructed artificial burrow (1:1). Evicted burrowing owls may attempt to colonize or re-colonize an area that would be impacted, thus ongoing surveillance during project activities shall be conducted at a rate sufficient to detect burrowing owls if they return. If surveys locate occupied burrows in or near construction areas, consultation with the CDFW shall occur to interpret survey results and develop a project-specific avoidance and minimization approach. BIO-2 To avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), to the extent feasible, construction activities that include any vegetation removal or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) shall be conducted between September 16 and January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If construction activities commence during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project construction. If construction activities are scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. Two surveys for active nests of such birds shall occur within 10 days prior to start of construction, with the second survey conducted with 48 hours prior to start of construction. Appropriate minimum survey radius surrounding the work area is typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. If no nesting activity is observed, a report shall be submitted to the City of Gilroy and disturbance activities may comments. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, a minimum no- disturbance buffer of 250 feet around active nests of non-listed bird species and a 500-foot no-disturbance buffer around active nests of non-listed raptors shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily, or as otherwise required by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. This measure shall be implemented by the developer prior to start of construction activities. GEO-1 The developer shall prepare an erosion control plan that details appropriate methods to prevent and/or minimize erosion. The erosion control plan is subject to the review and approval of the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. GEO-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall implement the recommendations outlined in the geotechnical report prepared for the proposed project including, but not limited to: Recompact the surface soils; Fill material to be excavated and stockpiled so that the native soils can be prepared properly, with inspection of the bottom of the excavation by a qualified geotechnical engineer to verify no additional removal is required; and Replace the upper 30 inches of soil within slab-on-grade and exterior flatwork areas with non-expansive fill to reduce the potential soil movement. GHG-1 The proposed project shall be designed to meet the following performance standards: a. With exception of the planned fast-food use, no permanent natural gas infrastructure shall be permitted as part of the improvement plans for any other individual project uses. These uses shall be all electric; and b. Electric vehicle infrastructure (e.g., electric vehicle parking spaces, charging station infrastructure, chargers, etc.) consistent with CALGreen Tier 2 mandatory standards in effect at the time individual building permits are issued, shall be installed at each individual proposed use. GHG-2 The applicant shall: a. Prepare a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan which identifies one or more GHG reduction actions that will be taken to reduce GHG emissions from the proposed fast food use by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year to offset emissions produced by using natural gas. The GHG Reduction Plan shall prioritize on-site GHG reduction design features. In lieu of or in addition to one or more of the on-site measures above, the applicant may make direct investments in off-site GHG reduction activities/programs in the vicinity. Examples include building retrofit programs that pay for cool roofs, solar panels, solar water heaters, smart meters, energy efficient lighting energy efficient windows, and insulation. Other examples include financing programs for installing electric vehicle charging stations, electrifying school buses, or planting local urban forests. The applicant may retain a qualified air quality / GHG professional to quantify the GHG reductions from implementing the Reduction Plan using substantial evidence to be included in the Reduction Plan. If the applicant elects to quantify the GHG emissions reductions from on-site measures and/or investments in off-site reduction programs and the reductions are less than insufficient to reduce project emissions by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year, the applicant may secure the reduction balance by purchasing and retiring carbon offset credits. The carbon offset credits shall meet the following standards: Carbon offset credits shall be issued by a recognized, reputable and accredited registry that mandates the use of established protocols for quantifying and issuing the offset credits. Credits issued based on protocols approved by the California Air Resources Board should be prioritized. Examples of such registries include the Climate Action Reserve, American Carbon Registry, and Vierra. The carbon offset credits should be generated from projects developed in the United States. Credits from projects developed internationally should not be used unless the applicant demonstrates with substantial evidence that sufficient carbon offsets from projects in the United States are unavailable. International offsets must be quantified and issued using established protocols that are recognized in the United States and that are issued by recognized, reputable and accredited registries. All carbon offset credits purchased to reduce GHG emissions, must meet the criteria of being real, quantifiable, permanent, verifiable, enforceable, and additional, consistent with the standards set forth in Health and Safety Code section 38562, subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(2). Prior to the City issuing a building permit for the fast food use, the applicant shall submit the GHG Reduction Plan for review and approval of the City of Gilroy. If carbon offsets are proposed, prior to approval of a building permit, the applicant shall provide an executed contract or other certification to the City Planner that the requisite volume carbon offset credits have been purchased. b. The planned fast food use shall include all electricity pre-wiring necessary so that the building is ready for a future retrofit to all-electric supply infrastructure sufficient to replace natural gas use in the future. Prior to issuing a building permit for the fast food use, the City shall verify that project improvement plans meet the pre-wiring requirement. HYDRO-1 All stormwater on the project site must be treated aboveground in an approved low- impact development treatment device prior to entering stormwater chambers. The proposed project must show proof of compliance with this requirement on the project plans prior to issuance of a grading permit with approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department. HYDRO-2 The project proponent shall prepare and submit Erosion Control Plans to the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The Erosion Control Plans shall illustrate how the project’s grading phases would prevent or minimize erosion and siltation on- and off-site, such as the inclusion of Best Management Practices. HYDRO-3 The project proponent shall prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for review and approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall identify construction and post-construction Best Management Practices to prevent water pollution at the source. N-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for the two proposed hotels, the building plans shall include air conditioning or mechanical ventilation, subject to review and approval by the building department. General Plan Compliance Review Table Gilroy Crossing Phase II PUD – Gilroy Square Policy Consistency Analysis Policy LU 1.1 Pattern of Development. Ensure an orderly, contiguous pattern of development that prioritizes infill development, phases new development, encourages compactness and efficiency, preserves surrounding open space and agricultural resources, and avoids land use incompatibilities. Consistent – The project site is located in an area intended for future commercial/industrial development. The intensity of development is within the maximum 2.0 FAR allowed for the site and is appropriate and consistent with the C3- HC-M2-PUD designation. Policy LU 1.4 Mix of Uses. Encourage a diverse mix of land uses to achieve a balance between jobs and housing, to ensure the community’s long-term, and to increase job opportunities in the city to assist in equalizing the job/housing balance. Through the Land Use Diagram, the City shall encourage a range of housing types, mixed-use districts, a diversity of businesses and industries, and adequate services and leisure activities to meet the social and economic needs of residents. Consistent –The proposed project provides a range of commercial and industrial development and associated job opportunities on-site as anticipated by the General Plan and property PUD zoning. LU 1.5 Uses East of 101. Prohibit all residential uses and designate the area for industrial and agricultural uses, employment centers, compatible commercial development, and quasi-public facilities. Consistent – This project will result in commercial and industrial development as anticipated by the General Plan and the existing PUD. LU 1.8 Vacant and Underutilized Sites Monitor vacant and underutilized residential and non-residential land to encourage infill development on those sites Consistent – This project will result in comprehensive development of a site that will build out the property consistent with the PUD. LU 4.1 Clustering Commercial Uses Encourage new commercial uses to group into clustered areas or centers containing professional offices, retail sales and services. Clustered development shall locate at the intersections of major thoroughfares, and exclude “strip” commercial development (shallow depth, linear form, parking in front of building). Consistent – The project would provide adequate access, sidewalks and connectivity between sites in substantial conformance with this policy. LU 4.2 High Quality Design Encourage distinctive and high quality commercial architecture that respects the character of Gilroy and discourages the use of “franchise architecture”. Consistent – The project includes a concurrent architectural and site review and would be compatible with the existing Gilroy Crossings development. LU 4.4 Commercial Design Standards and Review Procedures Require commercial centers to incorporate high standards of site design, construction, buffering, and screening to ensure their compatibility and opportunity to enhance residential neighborhoods. Consistent – same comment as above. LU 4.5 Landscaping in Commercial Areas Require that landscaping on commercial properties be well maintained. The City shall encourage those properties currently without landscaping to provide landscaping. Consistent – Conditions are recommended to require common maintenance of landscaping, stormwater and parking improvements. LU 4.8 Tourist-Oriented Commercial Encourage tourist-oriented retail uses to locate near U.S. 101 interchanges and Gilroy Gardens Consistent – The project includes a brand name quality hotels. LU 5.1 Industrial Design Standards. Ensure that new industrial developments contribute to the overall attractiveness of the community through appropriate site design, architectural design, Consistent – The plan provides conceptual site improvement and building plans for the future industrial buildings. Subsequent General Plan Compliance Review Table Gilroy Crossing Phase II PUD – Gilroy Square Policy Consistency Analysis and landscaping. review will be required to ensure plans submitted for construction match the approved concepts. LU 5.4 Connectivity within Industrial Areas Encourage greater automobile, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit connections within industrial areas Consistent – The project includes sidewalks and internal connectivity. Bicycle parking is required per building codes and transit service is accessible on the Camino Arroyo frontage. LU 8.1 Community Beautification. Ensure the beautification of Gilroy by acquiring easements or development rights for open space, planting street trees, and landscaping public right-ofways Consistent – The project includes robust landscaping and street trees on the frontage. Policy LU 8.2 Community Gateway. Require new development at “gateways” to the city (i.e., including Monterey Road, Pacheco Pass, Hecker Pass, and U.S. 101 interchanges) to incorporate high-quality, site and architectural design, distinctive landscaping, public art and/or other improvements that enhance the visual integrity of such areas. Consistent – The project includes a high quality of design at the intersection of 152 and Camino Arroyo. LU 8.5 Public Art. Encourage the installation of public art in conjunction with residential and non-residential development Substantially Consistent – The project is within an existing PUD and did not include a proposed art installation. A condition of approval is recommended to require an art installation on the site. LU 8.7 Signs and Billboards. Require the location of signs and billboards to respect the surrounding context in order to minimize any negative impact on the visual environment. Consistent – Signage must comply with the existing program for Gilroy Crossings which requires individual letters on buildings. LU 8.9. Combined Driveways. Encourage owners s in retail corridors to reduce the number of driveways. When possible, property owners should cooperate and link parking lots to minimize traffic congestion on the arterial road. Consistent – The project will obtain access from existing planned intersections and driveways, and will also provide a connection to adjacent parcels to the east at Silacci Way. LU 8.12 Outdoor Lighting Energy Efficiency Select outdoor lighting fixtures to provide maximum energy efficiency as well as effective lighting. Consistent – All lighting is required to be energy efficient. A photometric plan has been provided that shows lighting sufficient for safety and security of the site. LU 8.13 Limit Light Pollution Encourage measures to limit light pollution from outdoor sources, and direct outdoor lighting downward and away from sensitive receptors. Consistent – All lighting is required to be shielded downward and to avoid glare or spillover onto adjacent sites. M 1.1 Transportation Network. Develop a coordinated transportation network consistent with the Mobility Diagrams M1- M5. Consistent – Camino Arroyo is an existing arterial that includes Class II bicycle paths, Route 84 bus service and designated truck route. The project would be required to accommodate a bus pad on its frontage. M 1.6. Street Safety and Accessibility. Design streets and transportation facilities that are safe and accessible to people of all abilities, including those with limited mobility. Consistent – The project must provide sidewalks that are ADA compliant. M 1.7 Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled Reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and greenhouse gas emissions by developing a transportation network that makes it convenient to use transit, ride Consistent – The project utilizes the existing transportation network with sufficient employment density that does not generate General Plan Compliance Review Table Gilroy Crossing Phase II PUD – Gilroy Square Policy Consistency Analysis a bicycle, walk, or use other non-automobile modes of transportation. conflicts with VMT measures and does not require VMT mitigation. M 1.8 Street Landscaping Require landscaping as a part of all new street design, including street trees, landscaped medians and buffers, and high-quality street furniture Consistent – Street tree planting is included. M 1.12 Transportation Demand Management. Encourage existing and proposed development to incorporate TDM measures such as car-sharing, transit passes, and unbundling of parking (requiring separate purchase or lease of a parking space) where such measures will result in a reduction in vehicle miles travelled, reduction of required amount of parking or an increase in the use of alternate transportation modes. Consistent – The City has not adopted a TDM program. The site is parked in compliance with City standards for a business/employment use, is served by existing transportation infrastructure, is required to provide bicycle parking in accord with City REACH codes, and does not trigger VMT mitigations. M 1.13 Ensure new development fully funds the construction of transportation facilities required to meet the City’s LOS policy and other required transportation mitigation, including roadways, trails, and transit stops. Consistent – as proposed and conditioned the project will pay its fair share of traffic improvement costs through payment of Traffic Impact Mitigation Fees and by construction a left turn lane improvement into the project site from Camino Arroyo. M 3.2 New Development Require new development to include a system of sidewalks, trails, and bikeways that link all land uses, provide accessibility to parks and schools, and connect to M-16 City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan | Adopted November 2, 2020 all existing or planned external street and trail facilities in accordance with the Mobility Diagrams. Consistent – See discussion above. M 3.3 Sidewalk Network Gaps. Fill gaps in the city’s existing sidewalk network as funds become available. New development in the vicinity of such gaps shall contribute to such projects when there is a nexus to do so, as a community benefit, or as an off- setting measure for a transportation impact, such as one identified in a transportation analysis or environmental review process. Consistent – the project is required to provide minimum 6 foot wide sidewalks along its frontage in compliance with City standards. M 3.9 Bicycle Parking Require adequate short- and long-term bicycle parking for all land uses except for single-family residential uses Consistent – As proposed and conditioned the site will include required bicycle parking in compliance the new City REACH codes. Policy M 4.2. Transit and Development. Require new development to fully accommodate, enhance, and facilitate public transit, including pedestrian and bicycle access to transit. Consistent – The project would be required to provide a bus pad for VTA bus service provided by Route 84. M 5.1 Standard Level of Service (LOS) Maintain traffic conditions at LOS C or better at Gilroy intersections and roadways, allowing some commercial and industrial areas (e.g., downtown Gilroy, First Street corridor) to operate at LOS D or better. Existing LOS D areas within City include the Gilroy Premium outlets, Gilroy Crossings, and Regency Commercial areas. Exceptions to this standard will be allowed only where the City Council determines that. the improvements needed to maintain the City’ s standard level of service at specific locations are infeasible Consistent – Traffic analysis has been completed that confirms compliance with LOS standards would be met. The project is required to pay traffic impact fees, will provide additional turn lane improvements as required by the project conditions. M 5.8 Commercial Driveways Require new commercial development to minimize commercial driveways and locate them to prevent conflicts at intersections and with other driveways. Also Consistent – The driveways are designed to accommodate vehicle access and avoid conflicts with street circulation. General Plan Compliance Review Table Gilroy Crossing Phase II PUD – Gilroy Square Policy Consistency Analysis encourage the reduction of duplicative existing commercial driveways. M 5.17 Transportation Fee Ordinance Require proposed new development to pay for on-site improvements to meet the needs of the development and its proportionate share of the costs for mitigating cumulative traffic impacts within the City of Gilroy. Use the Transportation Fee Ordinance to finance necessary off-site improvements equitably, including intersection and street improvements to maintain intersection levels of service, traffic safety improvements and improvements to reduce single occupant vehicle trips such as bicycle system enhancements, pedestrian improvements, and trip reduction measures Consistent – The project is required to pay Traffic Impact Fees prior to development to fund its share of costs for traffic improvements required for buildout under the General Plan. M 6.2 Off-Peak Deliveries Encourage business owners to schedule deliveries during off-peak traffic periods in residential, commercial, or mixed-use areas. Consistent – Project conditions will require scheduling of planned deliveries during off peak traffic periods. M 5.18 Traffic Studies Require site-specific traffic studies for proposed new development that may result in a cumulative intersection level of service exceeding the acceptable level established in Policy M 5.1, create safety hazards, or other substantial impacts on the circulation system Consistent – A traffic study has been prepared and used to evaluate project impacts. Mitigation measures and conditions of approval have been identified to ensure compliance. EP 2.1 Employment Recruitment Encourage industrial, high-tech, and commercial office employers to locate in Gilroy and provide a diversity of well-paid job opportunities for local residents Consistent – The project promotes varied employment including restaurant, hotel, and industrial. EP 3.2 Business-Friendly Values Encourage that the entire City organization, including employees, volunteers, and elected and appointed officials, understand and embrace Gilroy’s business- friendly values Consistent – The project has been promoted as appropriate commercial and industrial development consistent with the existing PUD and the General Plan land use map. EP 3.10 Permit Processing Ensure a timely, fair, and predictable permit process for all applicants. Consistent – The project has been processed in compliance with City permitting requirements, permit streamlining and CEQA review timelines. EP 5.3 Retail Mix Coordinate with retail centers to maintain a fresh mix of stores and an attractive shopping environment. Consistent – The project will provide buildout an existing commercial/industrial PUD with additional options for residents and visitors to work, dine, stay and obtain services. EP 6.2 Lodging Encourage hotels to locate in Gilroy, especially full-service business hotels with conference facilities or other amenities that will attract more business travel to Gilroy. Support expansion of bed and breakfast and other leisure hotel options as well. Consistent – The project provides two new hotels to serve visitors for tourism and business. EP 7.3 Public Art Support private efforts to create art in public places (e.g., murals, statues) as a means to create a vibrant community that attracts residents and businesses Consistent – The project is within an existing commercial/industrial PUD and did not include a requirement for public art. However, the project is recommended to propose an art installation on-site, either at the entry or on the Hotel parcels. EP 8.1 Industrial and Commercial Lands. Protect and improve the Consistent – The project will build out the General Plan Compliance Review Table Gilroy Crossing Phase II PUD – Gilroy Square Policy Consistency Analysis quantity and quality of lands designated for industrial and commercial use PUD consistent with anticipated commercial and industrial land uses. EP 8.2 Jobs to Employed Resident Ratio Seek to improve the city’s jobs to employed resident ratio through land use management, in part to support the City’s fiscal health Consistent – The project provides additional employment in the community. PFS 1.10 Facility and Service Funding Ensure that new development bears the cost for incremental public facilities and services costs it generates Consistent – Development Impact Fee payments are required prior to construction. PFS 1.11 Development Impact Fees Require applicants for new development to pay Development Impact Fees for traffic circulation, water, wastewater, storm water and public facilities to offset the costs of expanding these as detailed by the impact fee nexus study Consistent – See comment above. PFS 3.6 Water Infrastructure Ensure that water infrastructure is in place or required in conditions of approval prior to approving new development. Consistent – The Department of Public Works has reviewed the project and confirmed the development is within planned capacity. PFS 4.2 Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Capacities Provide for and maintain adequate wastewater treatment and disposal capacities to meet the needs of existing users and support the buildout of the Gilroy 2040 General Plan Consistent – See comment above. PFS 5.3 Green Infrastructure Require on-site stormwater management system (i.e. “green infrastructure”) design and Low Impact Development (LID) techniques per the City’s adopted stormwater requirements to preserve and create open space, improve runoff water quality, and decrease runoff volume Consistent – The project has been analyzed and conditioned to ensure it would comply with LID techniques at time of construction. PFS 6.1 Mandatory Collection Continue to require weekly solid waste collection throughout the city Consistent – Waste collection will be provided by the City waste service provider and collection areas have been designated onsite. PFS 7.3 Sidewalk Network Construct new sidewalks to fill in gaps in the existing sidewalk network, as funding allows See __M 3.3 above. Policy PFS 7.5 Street Trees. Strive to line the City’s streets with trees so that they become enjoyable and beautiful spaces, creating a rich “urban forest” for the enjoyment of future generations. Tree species should be selected that will provide a canopy of shade and have root systems that will not cause sidewalk buckling and other damage, to the extent practicable. Consistent – The proposed project would plant parking lot and street trees. PFS 7.5 Street Trees Strive to line the City’s streets with trees so that they become enjoyable and beautiful spaces, creating a rich “urban forest” for the enjoyment of future generations. Tree species should be selected that will provide a canopy of shade and have root systems that will not cause sidewalk buckling and other damage, to the extent practicable Consistent – See comment above. PFS 9.3 Development Review Include the Police Department in the review of development proposals to ensure that crime and safety issues are consistently addressed in the review of new development. Such review shall promote the implementation of Consistent – The project has been evaluated by the Police Department to ensure compliance with this policy. General Plan Compliance Review Table Gilroy Crossing Phase II PUD – Gilroy Square Policy Consistency Analysis Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles. PFS 10.3 Development Review Under the direction and authority of the Fire Chief, the Fire Marshall shall review of development proposals to ensure that projects adequately address fire access and building standards. Consistent – The project has been reviewed and conditioned to comply with Fire regulations including access and building design. PFS 10.5 New Development Continue to require that new development provides all necessary water service, fire hydrants, and roads consistent with Fire Department standards Consistent – See above. PFS 10.6 Sprinklers Continue to require installation of sprinklers in all new buildings in accordance with the California Fire Code Consistent – See above. NCR 3.3 Shade Tree Program Increase community-wide use of shade trees to decrease energy use associated with building cooling. Consistent – The project includes a variety of trees including shade trees in the parking lot areas. NCR 3.15 Reduce Construction Emissions Require the use of low emissions construction equipment for public and private projects, consistent with the air district 2017 Clean Air Plan. Where construction-related emissions would exceed the applicable Thresholds of Significance, the City will consider, on a case-by- case basis, implementing Additional Construction Mitigation Measures (Table 8-3 in BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines). Consistent – This is enforced by project conditions of approval and building code requirements. NCR 3.16 Implement Dust-Control Measures Require the implementation of the air district’s dust control measures during construction of individual projects, consistent with the air district 2017 Clean Air Plan. Consistent – See above. PH 1.1 Location of Future Development Allow development only in those areas where potential danger to the health, safety, and welfare of residents can be adequately mitigated to an acceptable level of risk. This applies to development in areas subject to flood damage, fire damage, or geological hazard due to their location and/or design. Consistent – The site consists of infill development. PH 1.3 Development Review Require appropriate studies as part of the development review process to assess potential hazards and assure that potential impacts are adequately mitigated Consistent – The project has been evaluated for compliance with CEQA, soils, city stormwater requirements and traffic. PH 2.5 Geologic Hazards Reports Require geologic hazards reports for all new development applications to assess potential geologic hazards and to determine if these hazards can be adequately mitigated Consistent – See above. PHASE I GP Designation Use APN Com.Ind.Com.Ind. 841 67 022 0.47 0.47 841 70 031 2.74 2.74 841 70 032 7.63 7.63 841 70 033 1.04 1.04 841 70 036 10.83 10.83 841 70 037 2.16 2.16 841 70 041 0.95 0.95 841 70 042 1.04 1.04 841 70 044 9.26 9.26 841 70 045 11.26 11.26 841 70 046 1.62 1.62 841 70 047 1.64 1.64 841 70 048 1.83 1.83 PHASE II APN 841 67 032 2.10 2.10 841 67 033 1.29 1.29 841 70 026 2.30 2.30 841 70 049 10.18 6.34 3.84 TOTALS 52.00 16.34 58.34 10.00 Gilroy Crossing GP Designation VS Use MND SCH2023010472 RESOLUTION NO. 2023-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GILROY RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR GILROY SQUARE PROJECT, INCLUDING ZONE CHANGE, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING AMENDMENT, ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE REVIEW AND TENTATIVE MAP ENTITLEMENTS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF 10.18 ACRES OF PROPERTY WITHIN GILROY CROSSINGS PHASE II, C3-HC-M2 PUD OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 6970 CAMINO ARROYO, APN 841-70-049 (SCH 2023010472) WHEREAS, on July 29, 2021, Bhagirath Desai, Temple Gilroy LLC submitted an application requesting planned development zone change, architectural and site review and tentative map zoning entitlements for the Gilroy Square development project consisting of a drive-through restaurant, vehicle fueling station with a convenience store and carwash, two 4 story hotels with 200 rooms, and two speculative industrial buildings, all of which would be on separate new parcels; and WHEREAS, on July 7, 2022, the application submittal was accepted as complete; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental review was required to identify, evaluate and disclose the potential environmental effects of the project before the City could consider the project merits. In accordance with CEQA Section 15070 of the California Code of Regulations, the City of Gilroy Planning Division prepared an Initial Study and determined 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; and WHEREAS, the draft mitigated negative declaration was published and circulated for a 30-day public review from January 27, 2023 through February 27, 2023; and WHEREAS, minor comments on the draft mitigated negative declaration were received during the public review period, and responses to the comments were prepared that resulted in no changes being made to the analysis, conclusions and determinations of the environmental document; and WHEREAS, on May 4, 2023 the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting, at which time the Planning Commission received and considered the staff report as well as all evidence received including written and oral public testimony on the Gilroy Square project mitigated negative declaration and the project zoning applications; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission based on its independent judgement and analysis of the whole record before it, including the initial study, mitigated negative declaration together Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 2 MND – Gilroy Square with comments received during the public review period, has determined that the mitigated negative declaration has adequately evaluated the potential impacts of the Gilroy Square project and that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment with the mitigation measures included; and WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the project approval is based is the Community Development Department, Planning Division. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Gilroy hereby recommends the City Council adopt the mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring and reporting program prepared by the City of Gilroy environmental consultant, EMC Planning Group January 2023 and revisions dated March 7, 2023 to analyze the proposed Gilroy Square project. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of May, 2023 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: APPROVED: _________________________________ __________________________________ Sharon Goei, Secretary Manny Bhandal, Community Development Director Chairperson Attachments: Mitigated Negative Declaration - Revised Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program RESOLUTION NO. 2023-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GILROY RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT TO GILROY CROSSINGS PHASE II C3-HC-M2 PUD ZONE DISTRICT, FOR THE GILROY SQUARE PROJECT ON 10.18 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6970 CAMINO ARROYO, APN: APN 841-70-049 (FILE NUMBER Z 22-01) WHEREAS, on July 29, 2021, Bhagirath Desai, Temple Gilroy LLC submitted an application requesting planned development zone change for property designated for development as phase II of an existing C3-HC-M2 PUD overlay district known as Gilroy Crossing, originally approved by Ordinance 2003-01, City File Z 02-06; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the PUD overlay requirements the rezoning request includes an architectural and site review application request for approval of the project site plan and design, along with a tentative parcel map to create six separate lots for proposed development with a drive-through restaurant, vehicle fueling station with a convenience store and carwash, two 4-story hotels with 200 rooms, and two speculative industrial buildings, all of which would be on separate new parcels; and WHEREAS, on July 7, 2022, the application submittal was accepted as complete; and WHEREAS, an initial study/mitigated negative declaration (MND) and mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) has been adopted for the project by separate resolution, and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program shall apply to approve of project zoning entitlements, which incorporates the mitigation measures identified in the MND to reduce the project potential environmental impacts to less than significant, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, on May 4, 2023 the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting, at which time the Planning Commission received and considered the staff report as well as all evidence received including written and oral public testimony on the Gilroy Square zoning amendment and related entitlements; and WHEREAS, in accordance with City of Gilroy Zoning Code Section’s 30.52.40 and Section 30.52.60, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed Zoning Ordinance Planned Unit Development Amendment is necessary to implement the general purposes and intent of the zoning code, including Section 30.1.10 and Section 30.26.10, and the goals and policies of the 2040 General Plan, by proposing a planned development amendment to support the types of commercial and industrial development anticipated for the site and which would benefit Gilroy residents and visitors; and Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 2 Z 22-01 WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the project approval is based is the Community Development Department, Planning Division. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Gilroy hereby recommends to the City Council the approval of Zoning Amendments Z22-01 as identified in Exhibit A to this Resolution, PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ____ by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: ______________________________ ___________________________________ Sharon Goei, Secretary Manny Bhandal, Chairperson Community Development Director Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 3 Z 22-01 Exhibit A ORDINANCE NO. 2023-XX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY AMENDING GILROY CROSSINGS PHASE II COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (C3-HC-M2 PUD) ZONE DISTRICT FOR THE GILROY SQUARE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 10.18 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6970 CAMINO ARROYO, APN: APN 841-70-049 (FILE NUMBER Z 22-01) WHEREAS, on July 29, 2021, Bhagirath Desai, Temple Gilroy LLC submitted an application requesting adoption of a planned unit amendment and establish the development plan for Phase II of the Gilroy Crossings C3-HC-M2 PUD for the Gilroy Square development project consisting of a drive-through restaurant, vehicle fueling station with a convenience store and carwash, two 4 story hotels with 200 rooms, and two speculative industrial buildings; and WEREAS, on May 4, 2023, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, considered written and oral public testimony, made affirmative findings that the zoning amendment implements the purposes and intent of the zoning code and the general plan goals and policies, and by _____ vote recommended that the City Council approve the zoning amendment; and WHEREAS, on June __, 2023, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing, considered written and oral public testimony, the staff report, and all other documentation related to the zoning amendment; and WHEREAS, an initial study/mitigated negative declaration (MND) and mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) were adopted for the project, by separate resolution, which incorporates mitigation measures identified to reduce project potential environmental impacts to less than significant, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which Z 22-01 approval is based is the office of the City Clerk. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I The City Council finds that: A.The planned unit development zoning amendment to Z 02-06 for the subject Gilroy Crossings Phase II PUD overlay zone requires approval of a planned unit development permit prior to site development, subject to Gilroy City Code Section 30.50.50(d) Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 4 Z 22-01 findings. The Gilroy Square project includes a concurrent development plan permit application AS 21-13, which is incorporated herein by reference and including any subsequent amendments that may be approved in compliance with the PUD overlay district regulations. B.The project conforms to the Gilroy General Plan in terms of general location and standards of development given that the project is consistent with the General Services and General Industrial land use designations as it consists of industrial and retail development as anticipated for the site, has been reviewed for compliance with the general plan goals, and would substantially implement all applicable policies of the general plan. C.The project provides the type of development that would fill a specific need of the surrounding area. The PUD is required to implement development for this site pursuant to the original PUD and development plan approval AS 02-22 planning commission resolution 2003-3. As proposed the general purposes and intent of the zoning code are satisfied, including the general intent of Section 30.1.10 and the intent of Section 30.26.10 (Planned Unit Development), by proposing a planned development amendment to support the types of commercial and industrial development anticipated for the site and which would benefit Gilroy residents and visitors. D.The project will not require urban services beyond those that are currently available. All utilities needed to serve the project are located adjacent to the property. No increase in capacity or extension of services is required to serve buildout of the site. E.The project reflects an economical and efficient pattern of land uses by developing the full potential of the site intensity with commercial and industrial land uses, and promotes an orderly pattern of development by following the existing pattern of development, utilizing approved access points from rights of way, and providing adequate internal and cross lot access. SECTION II If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise void or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance shall not be affected thereby. SECTION III Pursuant to section 608 of the Charter of the City of Gilroy, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from and after the date of its adoption Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 5 Z 22-01 PASSED AND ADOPTED this __ day of ____ , 2023 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: APPROVED: _____________________________ Marie Blankley, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ Thai Pham, City Clerk AS 17-25 RESOLUTION NO. 2023-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GILROY RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE GILROY SQUARE PROJECT ON 10.18 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6970 CAMINO ARROYO, APN: APN 841-70-049 (FILE NUMBER AS 21-13) WHEREAS, on July 29, 2021, Bhagirath Desai, Temple Gilroy LLC submitted an application for the Gilroy Square project requesting planned unit development zone change for the Gilroy Crossings C3-HC-M2 PUD phase II, architectural and site review for the PUD amendment, and tentative map to create six parcels for proposed development of a drive-through restaurant, vehicle fueling station with a convenience store and carwash, two 4 story hotels with 200 rooms, and two speculative industrial buildings, all of which would be on separate new parcels; and WHEREAS, on July 7, 2022, the application submittal was accepted as complete; and WHEREAS, an initial study/mitigated negative declaration (MND) and mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) has been adopted for the project by separate resolution, and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program shall apply to approve of project zoning entitlements, which incorporates the mitigation measures identified in the MND to reduce the project potential environmental impacts to less than significant, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, on May 4, 2023, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting, at which time the Planning Commission received and considered the staff report as well as all evidence received including written and oral public testimony on the Gilroy Square zoning amendment and related entitlements; and WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the project approval is based is the Community Development Department, Planning Division. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Gilroy hereby recommends to the City Council the approval of the Architectural and Site Review Planned Unit Development Permit AS 22-13 based on the following findings made pursuant to Gilroy City Code section 30.50.43 (AS review) and Section 30.50.50 (Planned Development Permit review) and subject to the conditions identified in Exhibit A to this Resolution: A. The project has been reviewed for compliance with City standards for traffic safety and efficiency including driveway and drive aisle dimensions, bicycle and vehicle parking, pedestrian access, emergency vehicle and truck circulation and access, and off-site traffic improvements. Conditions have been included as recommended Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 2 AS 17-25 by the City Engineer and consistent with those recommended in the project traffic report. The project also requires payment of traffic impact fees, and lengthening of a left turn lane queue lane into the site from Camino Arroyo. These conditions are detailed in the draft resolution for approval. As proposed and conditioned the project will provide safe and efficient traffic circulation; B. As proposed and conditioned, the project includes planned unit development standards and design criteria that includes unique architectural design details for each site and addressing all sides of each building, diverse colors and materials palettes that complement the buildings, and articulation in building wall planes and fenestration details; C. As proposed and conditioned parking for vehicles and bicycles will be provided for each building and for drive through service lanes in compliance with City standard parking regulations, building code requirements and design standards; D. Landscaping details are provided that address stormwater treatment and water efficient landscaping requirements, meeting commercial landscaping standards with minimum 21-foot landscaping proposed along the street frontage, typical 5- foot minimum planters, street trees along the project frontage and perimeter, distributed throughout parking areas, and landscape islands at the ends of parking rows; E. Buildings are designed to accommodate signage which shall be subject to separate sign permit and review for compliance with the Gilroy Crossings sign program; and F. The project satisfied findings for approval of the planned unit development permit as follows: a. Conforms to the Gilroy general plan in terms of general location and standards of development in that the project is recommended as consistent with the general plan and will conform to the standard C3/HC commercial and M2 Industrial zoning building setback and height requirements; b. Provides development which will fill a specific need of the surrounding area, in that it builds out the site with commercial and industrial uses as anticipated by the general plan and PUD; c. Does not require urban services beyond those which are currently available, in that the project has been reviewed by appropriate city staff and has been confirmed as within the intensity of development on which sewer and water analyses were based, and sufficient capacity exists for site buildout; Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 3 AS 17-25 d. Provides a harmonious, integrated plan which justifies exceptions, if such are required, to the normal requirements of this chapter. The applicant is proposing development that conforms to the base zoning regulations and as proposed and conditioned does not require exceptions. Further, the site provides internal connectivity between compatible uses as well as adjacent sites; e. Reflects an economical and efficient pattern of land uses in that the proposed intensity of development accommodates allowed uses, including desired visitor accommodation, in compliance with city standards; f. Include greater provisions for landscaping and open space than would generally be required, in that the site utilizes predominately low water use plants as shown on plan sheet L1.00, incorporates bioretention areas in site landscaping, and provides more than 18% of the site in landscaping exceeding the 8% minimum standard required pursuant to section 30.38.60; g. Utilizes creative, aesthetic design principles to create attractive buildings, open space and site design to blend with the character of surrounding areas; in that the design and architecture includes high quality materials, fully articulated facades, screening of exterior equipment and is compatible with the design in Gilroy Crossings Phase 1 shopping center; h. Would not create traffic congestion, noise, odor, or other adverse effects on surrounding areas as the project has been conditioned to avoid any conflicts or issues and accommodate anticipated traffic flows; and i. Provides adequate access, parking, landscaping, trash areas and storage, as necessary, as shown on plans and conditioned. PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ____ by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: ______________________________ ___________________________________ Sharon Goei, Secretary Manny Bhandal, Chairperson Community Development Director Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 4 AS 17-25 Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 5 AS 17-25 EXHIBIT A PLANNING CONDITIONS The following GENERAL conditions authorize specific terms of the project ENTITLEMENT(S). 1.APPROVED PROJECT: The approval is granted for Gilroy Crossings Planned Unit Development Phase II, 10.18 acre site located on the east side of Camino Arroyo, which includes a tentative map to create 6 parcels, architectural and site plan approval for a new restaurant with a drive through, a gas station with convenience store and car wash, two four story hotels and two lots for future industrial uses that shall be subject to C3/HC commercial and M2 industrial development standards, as specifically shown on the approved project development plans as follows: •Architectural Plans prepared for Gilroy Square by ACE Design LLC dated 1/26/23 consisting of 36 sheets; •Civil Plans prepared for Gilroy Square by ACE Design LLC, dated 2/9/23 consisting of 9 sheets; •Landscape Plan prepare for Gilroy Square Development by Quadriga, dated 7/9/21 consisting of 1 sheet; •Photometric Plan prepared for Gilroy Square by ACE Design LLC, dated 1/23/23 consisting of 2 sheets; •Materials Boards for Burger King, C Store, Canopy, Carwash, Holiday Inn Suite, Residence Inn, Future Warehouse 1 and Future Warehouse 2, stamped approved in the project file; and •Tentative Subdivision Map for 6970 Camino Arroyo by Rose’s Engineering dated 7/23/22 Sheet 1. Build-out of the project shall conform to the plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions. Any future adjustment or modification to the plans, including any changes made at time of building permit submittal, shall be considered by the Community Development Director or designee, may require separate discretionary approval, and shall conform to all City, State, and Federal requirements, including subsequent City Code requirements or policies adopted by City Council. 2.PERMIT EXPIRATION: The expiration date of this approval is two years from the decision date, _______. If any development for which architectural and site approval has been granted has not obtained building permits within two (2) years from the date of notification of approval, the approval shall be deemed automatically revoked. Upon application, an extension of time may be granted by the Community Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 6 AS 17-25 Development Director or designee. Should Developer intend to request an extension to the permit expiration date, Developer must submit to the Planning Division a written application with applicable fees prior to the expiration date. Only timely requests may be considered pursuant to the City Code. 3.RELATED ENTITLEMENTS: This permit is subject to the findings conditions of approval, and mitigation measures of concurrent related entitlements TM 21-02 and Z 22-01, or any subsequent amendments. 4.SUBSEQUENT ENTITLEMENTS: Subsequent site development, including the speculative industrial parcels if building permit applications are not filed prior to occupancy of the commercial phase of development and in accordance with approved plans, shall be subject to separate staff level administrative architectural and site permit review. 5.COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS: If Developer, owner or tenant fails to comply with any of the conditions of this permit, the Developer, owner or tenant shall be subject to permit revocation or enforcement actions pursuant to the City Code. All costs associated with any such actions shall be the responsibility of Developer, owner or tenant. 6.INDEMNIFICATION: Developer agrees, as a condition of permit approval, at Developer’s own expense, to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Gilroy (“the City”) and its officers, contractors, consultants, attorneys, employees and agents from any and all claim(s), action(s) or proceeding(s) brought against the City or its officers, contractors, consultants, attorneys, employees, or agents to challenge, attack, set aside, void or annul the approval of this resolution or any condition attached thereto or any proceedings, acts or determinations taken, including actions taken under the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, done or made prior to the approval of such resolution that were part of the approval process. 7.SIGNS: No signs are approved as part of this application. Prior to issuance of a sign permit for this site, Developer shall propose well-designed, quality signs that comply with the allowances of the City Code and Gilroy Crossings (Regency) Sign Program, subject to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director or designee. 8.WATER LIMITATIONS: Developer shall be advised that the approval is subject to the drought emergencies provisions pursuant to the Gilroy City Code Chapter 27.98. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 7 AS 17-25 9.MULTI-PHASE DEVELOPMENT: Construction of the project may be done in multiple phases. The following conditions shall be addressed PRIOR TO ISSUANCE of any BUILDING PERMIT, GRADING PERMIT or IMPROVEMENT PLAN, whichever is first issued, or as otherwise specified in the condition. 10.CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Developer shall include a plan sheet(s) that includes a reproduction of all conditions of approval of this permit, as adopted by the decision-maker. 11.PUBLIC ART/PUD AMENITY: In compliance with City Code 30.26 (PUD amenity) and other City policies, Prior to issuance of building permits, submit a process, timetable, and evidence of commitment acceptable to the City to ensure installation of a suitable, significant piece of public-oriented sculpture or similar public art installation prior to occupancy. This shall include involving the Community Development Director or designee in reviewing preliminary concepts, artist, and type of work. All public art must be reviewed and approved by the City of Gilroy Arts and Culture Commission. 12.HABITAT PERMIT: Concurrent with or prior to an application for a grading permit, Developer shall obtain a final Habitat Permit approval and submit payment of mitigation fees. The grading permit will be issued only after approval of the Habitat Plan permit and payment of assessed fees. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with review and issuance of the permit, including application processing fee and consultant review deposit. The application shall consist of submittal of a Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan Application For Private Projects and Fees and Conditions. Applications for Private Projects shall be submitted electronically through the agency website]. See the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency website: https://www.scv-habitatagency.org for more information. 13.CERTIFICATION OF BUILDING PERMIT PLANS: The project architect shall certify in writing that the architectural design shown in the building permit plans match the plans approved by the Community Development Director or designee/Planning Commission/City Council. Any changes must be clearly noted. The project architect shall also certify that the structural plans are consistent with the architectural plans. In the event of a discrepancy between the structural plans and the architectural plans, the architectural plans shall take precedence, and revised structural drawings shall be submitted to the Building Division. 14.SUBSEQUENT ENTITLEMENTS: Developer shall obtain necessary permits prior Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 8 AS 17-25 to initiating any new construction or modifications authorized under this approval, including but not limited to temporary construction trailers, temporary staging areas, model home sales offices, advertising signs of any kind, exterior and interior modifications. Developer shall pay all requisite fees in effect at the time of plan submittal and/or issuance, as applicable. 15.OTHER REVIEW AGENCIES: This project requires review and approval by outside agencies including, but not limited to [REVIEWING AGENCIES]. Proof of approval from these agencies may be required prior to building permit issuance, inspections, or prior to Certificate of Occupancy. 16.COLORS AND MATERIALS: Plans submitted for building permit applications shall include all exterior building materials and colors, including product and finish manufacturer name, color name and number, and surface finish type (e.g. stucco with sand finish, plaster with smooth finish) to be used in construction. 17.LIGHTING PLAN: Developer shall submit a lighting plan with the application for building permit. This plan should include photometric contours, manufacturer’s specifications on the fixtures, and mounting heights. Parking lot and exterior light fixtures shall be full cutoff type so that lighting is directed downward only, minimizing glare and light pollution, and shall not cast light on any adjacent property or roadway. Developer shall recess or conceal any under-canopy lighting elements so they are not directly visible from any public area. The lighting plan must be approved by the Community Development Director or designee. 18.LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING PLAN: Prior to issuance of grading permits, Developer shall submit a combined landscape and lighting plan to verify all project onsite lighting shall be of a type and in a location that does not constitute a hazard to vehicular traffic, either on private property or on public property, including streets. Such lighting shall not conflict with drainage plans, landscape plans, tree locations, parking spaces, or any other such land use concerns. 19.BICYCLE RACKS OR STORAGE: Developer shall provide “inverted U,” or equivalent racks as approved by the Community Development Director, and must secure the frame and both wheels. Racks should be located near the building entrance (i.e., within constant visual range) unless it is demonstrated that they create a public hazard or locating them there is otherwise infeasible. If space is unavailable near building entrances, the racks must be designed so that the lock is protected from physical assault. Bicycle lockers shall be provided in addition to bicycle racks as required by the Building Division conditions of approval. 20.PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN (SHARED PARKING): Developer shall create a parking management plan describing parking allocation for residents, guests, Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 9 AS 17-25 and/or commercial uses within the project, subject to approval by the Community Development Director or designee. 21.MUTUAL ACCESS: The Developer shall prepare a legal agreement recorded to run with the land providing for mutual access between commercial lots and between the two industrial parcels, as well as to the properties east of the site, located on Silacci Way. An additional access opportunity shall be provided from the northerly portion of eth site to the parcel(s) east of the site, subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and Community Development Director. Agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney, City Engineer and Community Development Director or designee and shall state that it may not be modified without the City’s consent. 22.LOADING ZONES: Prior to issuance of building permit, Developer shall stripe all loading zones, whether situated outside or inside a structure, for loading and unloading activities only and shall post a sign prohibiting storage or other non- loading activity within the designated loading zone. 23.TRASH ENCLOSURE: Prior to building permit issuance, details of an opaque screen trash enclosure are to be shown on construction drawings and approved by the Community Development Director or designee. The trash enclosure should match the architectural design, color, and materials of the primary structure. The trash enclosure for restaurants and other uses with food service shall be equipped with hot water, a drain inlet to the sanitary sewer system, and a locking device. 24.SCREENING OF APPERTUNANCES: Developer shall show on construction drawings details of screening for all exterior equipment, including but not limited to mechanical equipment, post indicator valves, backflow prevention devices, utility meters, mailboxes and address directories, etc. Ground mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers shall not be visible from any public right-of- way and shall be adequately screened through the use or combination of concrete or masonry walls, berms, and landscaping. In addition to the above, backflow preventers shall be painted dark green, except the fire connection which shall be painted yellow. The final placement and design of these items shall be to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director or designee. 25.ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT: Developer shall ensure rooftop mechanical equipment, including but not limited to heating and cooling systems, plumbing vents, ducts, Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 10 AS 17-25 antennas and other appurtenances protruding from the roof are recessed or otherwise screened. Details of the roof equipment and roof screens shall be included in the building permit drawings and approved by the Community Development Director or designee. 26.ROOF AND BUILDING DRAINPIPES: Developer shall install all roof and building drainpipes and downspouts inside building elements. These items shall not be visible on any exterior building elevations. 27.RAIN GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS: Developer shall install all roof and building rain gutters and downspouts, vents, and flashing to integrate as closely as possible with building design elements, including matching the color of the adjacent surface. 28.LANDSCAPING: Prior to building permit issuance, proposed landscaping shall be shown on the site plan and submitted with the construction drawings for review and approval by the Community Development Director or designee. 29.LANDSCAPE MULCH: As part of the Landscape Plan submittal, Developer shall clarify a minimum three (3) inch layer of mulch to be applied on all exposed soil surfaces, as required by the State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO). 30.INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES: Developer shall not include any invasive plant species, such as those listed by the California Invasive Plant Council. 31.LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTATION PACKAGE: Prior to issuance of building permits or initiation of the proposed use, whichever comes first, Developer shall submit a completed Landscape Documentation Package, including a soil analysis/management report along with appropriate application review fees, to the Community Development Department, including required documentation for compliance verification, and obtain approval of such plans. 32.IRRIGATION SENSORS: Prior to issuance of building permits, developer shall (as part of the irrigation system) indicate on construction drawings sensors that suspend or alter irrigation operation during unfavorable weather conditions (e.g. automatic rain shut-off devices). 33.PRECONSTRUCTION NESTING BIRD SURVEY: To the extent practicable, vegetation removal and construction activities shall be performed from September 1 through January 31 to avoid the general nesting period for birds. If construction or vegetation removal cannot be performed during this period, preconstruction surveys will be performed no more than two days prior to construction activities to Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 11 AS 17-25 locate any active nests as follows: “The Developer shall be responsible for the retention of a qualified biologist to conduct a survey of the project site and surrounding 500’ for active nests: with particular emphasis on nests of migratory birds: if construction (including site preparation) will begin during the bird nesting season, from February 1 through August 31. If active nests are observed on either the project site or the surrounding area, the project applicant, in coordination with the appropriate City staff, shall establish no-disturbance buffer zones around the nests, with the size to be determined in consultation with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (usually 100’ for perching birds and 300’ for raptors). The no- disturbance buffer will remain in place until the biologist determines the nest is no longer active or the nesting season ends. If construction ceases for two days or more and then resumes during the nesting season, an additional survey will be necessary to avoid impacts on active bird nests that may be present.” The following conditions shall be met prior to RELEASE OF UTILITIES, FINAL INSPECTION, or ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, whichever occurs first, or as otherwise specified in the condition. 34.ON- AND OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS: Prior to occupancy, Developer shall complete all required offsite and onsite improvements related to the project, including structures, paving, and landscaping, unless otherwise allowed by the Community Development Director, or stated in these conditions. 35.LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION INSTALLATION: Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy or building permit final sign-off, Developer shall complete installation of all landscaping and irrigation in accordance with the approved plans. 36.LANDSCAPE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION: Prior to occupancy or initiation of the proposed use, or completion of each build-out phase of development, Developer shall submit a signed Certificate of Completion, along with all necessary supporting documentation and payment to the Community Development Department, for compliance verification of the landscape installation. Developer is required under the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) to provide a copy of the approved Certificate of Completion to the property owner or his or her designee. 37.PLANNING INSPECTION: Inspection(s) by the Planning Division may be required for the foundation, framing, application of exterior materials, and final completion of each structure to ensure that the construction matches the approved plans. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 12 AS 17-25 38.SITE CLEAN-UP: Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, Developer shall remove all construction materials, debris, and vehicles from the subject property. The following conditions shall be met prior to the approval of the FINAL MAP or PARCEL MAP, or other deadline as specified in the condition. 39.COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS: Any covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) applicable to the project property shall be consistent with the terms of this permit and the City Code. If there is a conflict between the CC&Rs and the City Code or this permit, the City Code or this permit shall prevail. The following conditions shall be complied with AT ALL TIMES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT, or as otherwise specified in the condition. 40.CONSTRUCTION RELATED NOISE: To minimize potential construction-related impacts to noise, Developer shall include the following language on any grading, site work, and construction plans issued for the subject site “During earth-moving, grading, and construction activities, Developer shall implement the following measures at the construction site: a. Limit construction activity to weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., and on Saturdays between 9:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Construction noise is prohibited on Sundays and City-observed holidays; b. Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area; c. Construct sound walls or other noise reduction measures prior to developing the project site; d. Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment; e. Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines; f. Utilize “quiet” models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists; and g. Designate a “disturbance coordinator’ who would be responsible for responding to any complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g. bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem.” 41.CONSTRUCTION RELATED AIR QUALITY: To minimize potential construction- Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 13 AS 17-25 related impacts to air quality, Developer shall require all construction contractors to implement the basic construction mitigation measures recommended by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and shall include the following language on any grading, site work, and construction plans issued for the project site “During earth-moving, grading, and construction activities, Developer shall implement the following basic control measures at the construction site: a. All exposed surfaces (e.g. parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day; b. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material onsite or offsite shall be covered; c. All visible mud or dirt tracked out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited; d. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads or pathways shall be limited to 15 miles per hour; e. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used; f. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points; g. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator; and h. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.” 42.DISCOVERY OF CONTAMINATED SOILS: If contaminated soils are discovered, the Developer will ensure the contractor employs engineering controls and Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize human exposure to potential contaminants. Engineering controls and construction BMPs will include, but not be limited to, the following: a. Contractor employees working on-site will be certified in OSHA’s 40-hour Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) training; b. Contractor will stockpile soil during development activities to allow for proper Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 14 AS 17-25 characterization and evaluation of disposal options; c. Contractor will monitor area around construction site for fugitive vapor emissions with appropriate filed screening instrumentation; d. Contractor will water/mist soil as it is being excavated and loaded onto transportation trucks; e. Contractor will place any stockpiled soil in areas shielded from prevailing winds; and f. Contractor will cover the bottom of excavated areas with sheeting when work is not being performed. 43.DISCOVERY OF PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES: In the event that a fossil is discovered during construction of the project, excavations within 50’ of the find shall be temporarily halted or delayed until the discovery is examined by a qualified paleontologist, in accordance with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. The City shall include a standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. If the find is determined to be significant and if avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist shall design and carry out a data recovery plan consistent with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. 44.DISCOVERY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES: In the event of an accidental discovery of archaeological resources during grading or construction activities, Developer shall include the following language on any grading, site work, and construction plans issued for the project site: “If archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during earth-moving, grading, or construction activities, all work shall be halted within at least 50 meters (165 feet) of the find and the area shall be staked off immediately. The monitoring professional archaeologist, if one is onsite, shall be notified and evaluate the find. If a monitoring professional archaeologist is not onsite, the City shall be notified immediately and a qualified professional archaeologist shall be retained (at Developer’s expense) to evaluate the find and report to the City. If the find is determined to be significant, appropriate mitigation measures shall be formulated by the professional archaeologist and implemented by the responsible party.” 45.DISCOVERY OF HUMAN REMAINS: In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, Developer shall include the following language in all grading, site work, and construction plans: “If human remains are found during earth-moving, grading, or construction activities, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 15 AS 17-25 until the coroner of Santa Clara 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.” 46.MITIGATION MEASURES: The mitigation monitoring and reporting program adopted for the project shall be incorporate by reference herein implementing the following measures: BIO-1 To avoid/minimize impacts to burrowing owls potentially occurring within the project site, the project applicant shall retain a biologist qualified in ornithology to conduct surveys for burrowing owl. The approved biologist shall conduct a two-visit (i.e., morning and evening) presence/absence survey at areas of suitable habitat on and adjacent to the project site boundary no less than 14 days prior to the start of construction or ground disturbance activities. Surveys shall be conducted according to methods described in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012). The applicant shall submit evidence of completion of the preconstruction survey to the City of Gilroy Planning Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. Because burrowing owls occupy habitat year-round, seasonal no- disturbance buffers, as outlined in the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines (California Burrowing Owl Consortium 1993) and the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), shall be in place around occupied habitat prior to and during any ground disturbance activities. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 16 AS 17-25 The following table includes buffer areas based on the time of year and level of disturbance (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012), unless a qualified biologist approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife verifies through non-invasive measures that either: 1) birds have not begun egg laying and incubation; or 2) that juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. Level of Disturbance Buffers (meters) Location Time of Year Low Med High Nesting Sites April 1 – Aug 15 200 m 500 m 500 m Nesting Sites Aug 16 – Oct 15 200 m 200 m 500 m Nesting Sites Oct 16 – Mar 31 50 m 100 m 500 m If burrowing owl is found and avoidance is not possible, burrow exclusion may be conducted by qualified biologists only during the non- breeding season, before breeding behavior is exhibited and after the burrow is confirmed empty through non-invasive methods, such as surveillance. Occupied burrows shall be replaced with artificial burrows at a ratio of one collapsed burrow to one constructed artificial burrow (1:1). Evicted burrowing owls may attempt to colonize or re-colonize an area that would be impacted, thus ongoing surveillance during project activities shall be conducted at a rate sufficient to detect burrowing owls if they return. If surveys locate occupied burrows in or near construction areas, consultation with the CDFW shall occur to interpret survey results and develop a project-specific avoidance and minimization approach. BIO-2 To avoid impacts to nesting birds during the nesting season (January 15 through September 15), to the extent feasible, construction activities that include any vegetation removal or ground disturbance (such as grading or grubbing) shall be conducted between September 16 and Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 17 AS 17-25 January 14, which is outside of the bird nesting season. If construction activities commence during the bird nesting season, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey for nesting birds to ensure that no nests would be disturbed during project construction. If construction activities are scheduled during the nesting season (February 15 to August 30 for small bird species such as passerines; January 15 to September 15 for owls; and February 15 to September 15 for other raptors), a qualified biologist shall conduct nesting bird surveys. Two surveys for active nests of such birds shall occur within 10 days prior to start of construction, with the second survey conducted with 48 hours prior to start of construction. Appropriate minimum survey radius surrounding the work area is typically 250 feet for passerines, 500 feet for smaller raptors, and 1,000 feet for larger raptors. Surveys shall be conducted at the appropriate times of day to observe nesting activities. If no nesting activity is observed, a report shall be submitted to the City of Gilroy and disturbance activities may comments. If the qualified biologist documents active nests within the project site or in nearby surrounding areas, a minimum no-disturbance buffer of 250 feet around active nests of non-listed bird species and a 500-foot no-disturbance buffer around active nests of non-listed raptors shall be established. The buffer shall be clearly marked and maintained until the young have fledged and are foraging independently. Prior to construction, the qualified biologist shall conduct baseline monitoring of each nest to characterize “normal” bird behavior and establish a buffer distance, which allows the birds to exhibit normal behavior. The qualified biologist shall monitor the nesting birds daily, or as otherwise required by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, during construction activities and increase the buffer if birds show signs of unusual or distressed behavior (e.g., defensive flights and vocalizations, standing up from a brooding position, and/or flying away from the nest). If buffer establishment is not possible, the qualified biologist or construction Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 18 AS 17-25 foreman shall have the authority to cease all construction work in the area until the young have fledged and the nest is no longer active. This measure shall be implemented by the developer prior to start of construction activities. GEO-1 The developer shall prepare an erosion control plan that details appropriate methods to prevent and/or minimize erosion. The erosion control plan is subject to the review and approval of the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. GEO-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall implement the recommendations outlined in the geotechnical report prepared for the proposed project including, but not limited to: ▪Recompact the surface soils; ▪Fill material to be excavated and stockpiled so that the native soils can be prepared properly, with inspection of the bottom of the excavation by a qualified geotechnical engineer to verify no additional removal is required; and ▪Replace the upper 30 inches of soil within slab-on-grade and exterior flatwork areas with non-expansive fill to reduce the potential soil movement. GHG-1 The proposed project shall be designed to meet the following performance standards: a. With exception of the planned fast-food use, no permanent natural gas infrastructure shall be permitted as part of the improvement plans for any other individual project uses. These uses shall be all electric; and b. Electric vehicle infrastructure (e.g., electric vehicle parking spaces, charging station infrastructure, chargers, etc.) consistent with CALGreen Tier 2 mandatory standards in effect at the time individual building permits are issued, shall be installed at each individual proposed use. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 19 AS 17-25 GHG-2 The applicant shall: a. Prepare a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Plan which identifies one or more GHG reduction actions that will be taken to reduce GHG emissions from the proposed fast food use by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year to offset emissions produced by using natural gas. The GHG Reduction Plan shall prioritize on-site GHG reduction design features. In lieu of or in addition to one or more of the on-site measures above, the applicant may make direct investments in off-site GHG reduction activities/programs in the vicinity. Examples include building retrofit programs that pay for cool roofs, solar panels, solar water heaters, smart meters, energy efficient lighting energy efficient windows, and insulation. Other examples include financing programs for installing electric vehicle charging stations, electrifying school buses, or planting local urban forests. The applicant may retain a qualified air quality / GHG professional to quantify the GHG reductions from implementing the Reduction Plan using substantial evidence to be included in the Reduction Plan. If the applicant elects to quantify the GHG emissions reductions from on-site measures and/or investments in off-site reduction programs and the reductions are less than insufficient to reduce project emissions by a minimum of 28.9 MT CO2e per year, the applicant may secure the reduction balance by purchasing and retiring carbon offset credits. The carbon offset credits shall meet the following standards: ▪Carbon offset credits shall be issued by a recognized, reputable and accredited registry that mandates the use of established protocols for quantifying and issuing the offset credits. Credits issued based on protocols approved by the California Air Resources Board should be prioritized. Examples of such registries include the Climate Action Reserve, American Carbon Registry, and Vierra. ▪The carbon offset credits should be generated from projects Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 20 AS 17-25 developed in the United States. Credits from projects developed internationally should not be used unless the applicant demonstrates with substantial evidence that sufficient carbon offsets from projects in the United States are unavailable. International offsets must be quantified and issued using established protocols that are recognized in the United States and that are issued by recognized, reputable and accredited registries. ▪All carbon offset credits purchased to reduce GHG emissions, must meet the criteria of being real, quantifiable, permanent, verifiable, enforceable, and additional, consistent with the standards set forth in Health and Safety Code section 38562, subdivisions (d)(1) and (d)(2). Prior to the City issuing a building permit for the fast food use, the applicant shall submit the GHG Reduction Plan for review and approval of the City of Gilroy. If carbon offsets are proposed, prior to approval of a building permit, the applicant shall provide an executed contract or other certification to the City Planner that the requisite volume carbon offset credits have been purchased. b. The planned fast food use shall include all electricity pre-wiring necessary so that the building is ready for a future retrofit to all- electric supply infrastructure sufficient to replace natural gas use in the future. Prior to issuing a building permit for the fast food use, the City shall verify that project improvement plans meet the pre-wiring requirement. HYDRO-1 All stormwater on the project site must be treated aboveground in an approved low-impact development treatment device prior to entering stormwater chambers. The proposed project must show proof of compliance with this requirement on the project plans prior to issuance of a grading permit with approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department. HYDRO-2 The project proponent shall prepare and submit Erosion Control Plans to the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The Erosion Control Plans shall illustrate Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 21 AS 17-25 how the project’s grading phases would prevent or minimize erosion and siltation on- and off-site, such as the inclusion of Best Management Practices. HYDRO-3 The project proponent shall prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for review and approval by the City of Gilroy Public Works Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall identify construction and post-construction Best Management Practices to prevent water pollution at the source. N-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for the two proposed hotels, the building plans shall include air conditioning or mechanical ventilation, subject to review and approval by the building department. BUILDING DIVISION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 47.Conditions of Approval: All conditions of approval shall be included on the first sheet after the cover sheet of the construction drawing submitted for a building permit. 48.Pre-Construction Meeting: A pre-construction meeting shall be held at a time and location agreed upon by the City and applicant for the purpose of reviewing conditions of approval, pre-occupancy requirements / temporary certificate of occupancy and construction-site procedures. This meeting shall be held prior to the issuance of any permit issued by the building department. The applicant shall be represented by his design and construction staff, which includes any sub- contractors. Departments having conditions of approval for the project will represent the City. 49.Construction Management Plan: The project developer shall provide a Construction Management Plan (CMP). The CMP shall be submitted to as part of the building permit and/or Grading Permit and shall be incorporated into the plans for review and approval by the Building Official before issuance of a building permit. This plan shall be a binding document. Failure to adhere to the plan may result in a "Stop Work Notice" being placed on the project. This plan shall be updated as project conditions warrant. The construction plan shall be designed to minimize the loss of public parking spaces and, if any need to be lost, to minimize the length of the time they are used for construction-related activities. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 22 AS 17-25 The CMP shall include but not be limited to: The proposed location of materials and equipment storage, scaffolding, safety measures to protect the public from construction activities, temporary fencing, construction trailers, parking of construction vehicles, location of portable toilets, etc. Work schedule (start of construction date, road or lane closure intent/dates, important milestones and proposed final dates). It shall include the hours of construction, the construction waste Management plan, show the location of all staging/storage types, the travel routes and tum-around locations, any road and/or lane closures and a phasing plan. 50.Temporary Fencing: Temporary fencing along the perimeter of a building site, during construction is required to ensure security, public safety, and/or noise/dust mitigation. “Temporary” shall mean the placement of fencing in a manner that is not permanently attached to the ground, or attached to any other structure or material that is itself permanently attached to the ground. Temporary construction fences consisting of chain-link or plywood, no more that 6-feet in height above the ground and shall not require any permits or special authorization. Unless letters of permission from adjacent property owners or a City encroachment permit have been obtained, temporary construction fencing shall be placed only on the property that contains the subject construction project. All temporary construction fencing shall be thoroughly removed from the project site upon completion of construction. Temporary construction fences proposed in excess of 6-feet in height will require review and permitting by the Building Department (discretionary review is not required for temporary fences). 51.Job Site Signage: Prior to construction, A 24 inch by 36 inch weatherproof sign shall be located so it is clearly readable from the public right-of-way and shall include the following information: a. Address of the project site. b. Permitted hours of construction and of deliveries/off-haul. c. Name, e-mail address and direct phone number of the General Contractor. d. Name, e-mail address and direct phone number of the person responsible for managing the project. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 23 AS 17-25 e. Name and phone number of person to call in case of an emergency. f. Code Enforcement complaint telephone number (408-846-0264). 52.Construction Activities: The following provision to control traffic congestion, noise, and dust shall be followed during site excavation, grading and construction: Unless otherwise provided for in a validly issued permit or approval, construction activities shall be limited between the hours of seven am and seven pm Monday through Friday and nine am to seven pm on Saturday. 53.Final Grading and Drainage Plan: At the time of building permit plan submittal, the project developer shall submit a final grading and drainage plan prepared by a licensed civil engineer depicting all final grades (with accurate elevations above sea level indicated) and on-site drainage control measures to prevent storm water runoff onto adjoining properties. 54.Pad Elevation Certification: The applicant and/or developer shall submit a pad elevation certification letter prepared by a licensed land surveyor or registered civil engineer to the Building Official certifying that the pad elevation(s) and building location (setbacks) are pursuant to the approved plans, prior to receiving a foundation inspection for the structure. 55.Site Survey: The applicant shall provide a site survey of entire parcel stamped and signed by a Land Surveyor licensed by the State of California. The survey shall include, but not be limited to, the following: location and dimensions of property line, location of streets and easements, existing buildings, topographic contour lines, trees/landscape, miscellaneous structures, etc. 56.Permit Card: The stamped, approved, job copy of the plans and permit card shall be located onsite at all times. 57.Title 24:The building(s) covered by this approval shall be designed and constructed to the Title 24 Building Standards, including Building, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, Energy, Fire, Green Building and both State and Federal accessibility requirements in effect and as amended by the City of Gilroy at the time of building permit submittal. 58.Green Building Standards: The building shall be designed to include the green building measures specified as mandatory in the application checklists contained in the California Green Building Standards Code. The applicant shall incorporate the checklist along with a notation on the checklist to specify where the information can be located on the plans, details, or specifications, etc. All measures will be verified by the Building Inspector at final inspection. 59.Geotechnical Report: The applicant shall provide a stamped, signed, and dated Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 24 AS 17-25 soil investigation report containing design recommendations to the Building Official. The classification shall be based on observation and any necessary tests of materials disclosed by boring or excavations made in appropriate locations. Additional studies may be necessary to evaluate soil strength, the effect of moisture variation on soil-bearing capacity, compressibility, liquefaction, seismically induced soil liquefaction, soil instability, and expansiveness. Additionally, the applicant shall submit a stamped, signed, and dated letter from the Geotechnical Engineer or Civil Engineer who prepared the soil investigation stating the following: a. The plans and specifications substantially conform to the recommendations in the soil investigation. b. The Geotechnical Engineer or Civil Engineer who prepared the soil investigation has been retained to provide soil site observation and provide periodic and final reports to the City of Gilroy. Prior to final inspection for any building or structure, the Geotechnical Engineer or Civil Engineer who prepared the soil investigation shall issue a final report stating the completed pad, foundation, finish grading and associated site work substantially conform to the approved plans, specifications and investigations. 60.Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: The project developer shall submit a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City Engineer/Building Official for review and approval prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever is sooner. A copy of the approved SWPPP, including all approved amendments, shall be available at the project site for City review until all engineering and building work is complete and City permits have been finaled. A site specific SWPPP must be combined with proper and timely installation of the Best Management Practices (BMPs), thorough and frequent inspections, maintenance, and documentations. SWPPP for projects shall be kept up to date with the projects’ progress. Failure to comply with the most updated construction SWPPP may result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, and/ or stop work orders. The project developer is responsible for implementing the following BMPs. These, as well as any other applicable measures, shall be included in the SWPPP and implemented as approved by the City. a. The project developer shall include erosion control/stormwater quality measures on the project grading plan which shall specifically address measures to prevent soil, dirt, and debris from entering the public storm drain system. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, hydroseeding, hay bales, sandbags, and siltation fences and shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer/Building Official. If no grading plan is required, Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 25 AS 17-25 necessary erosion control/stormwater quality measures shall be shown on the site plan submitted for a building permit, and shall be subject to the review and approval of the Building Division. The project developer is responsible for ensuring that the contractor is aware of and implements such measures. b. All cut and fill slopes shall be revegetated and stabilized after completion of grading, but in no case later than October 15. Hydroseeding shall be accomplished before September 15 and irrigated with a temporary irrigation system to ensure that the vegetated areas are established before October 15. No grading shall occur between October 15 and May 1 unless approved erosion control/stormwater quality measures are in place, subject to the approval of City Engineer/Building Official. Such measures shall be maintained until such time as permanent landscaping is in place. c. Gather all sorted construction debris on a regular basis and place in the appropriate container for recycling; to be emptied at least on a weekly basis. When appropriate, use tarps on the ground to collect fallen debris or splatters that could contribute to stormwater runoff pollution. d. Remove all dirt, gravel, rubbish, refuse, and green waste from the street pavement and storm drains adjoining the site. Limit construction access routes onto the site and place gravel on them. Do not drive vehicles and equipment off paved or graveled areas during wet weather. Broom sweep the street pavement adjoining the project site on a daily basis. Scrape caked on mud and dirt from these areas before sweeping. e. Install filter materials (such as sandbags, filter fabric, etc.) at the storm drain inlet nearest the downstream side of the project site in order to retain any debris or dirt flowing in the storm drain system. Maintain and/or replace filter materials to ensure effectiveness and to prevent street flooding. f. Never clean machinery, equipment, tools, brushes, or rinse containers into a street, gutter, or storm drain. g. Ensure that concrete/gunite supply trucks or concrete/plaster operations do not discharge wash water into a street, gutter, or storm drain. h. Concrete wash area: 1) locate wash out area away from storm drains and open ditches; 2) construct a temporary pit large enough to store the liquid and solid waste; 3) clean the pit by allowing concrete to set; 4) break up the concrete; and then 5) recycle or dispose of properly. 61.Pre-Manufactured Trailer: A construction trailer shall be allowed to be placed on Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 26 AS 17-25 the project site for daily administration/coordination purposes during the construction period. At no time shall campers, trailers, motor homes, or any other vehicle be used as living or sleeping quarters on the construction site. All such vehicles shall be removed from the site at the end of each workday. A building permit is required for the installation of a pre-manufactured trailer. 62.Portable Toilets: Portable toilets used during construction shall be emptied on a regular basis as necessary to prevent odor. A containment pan is required under all portable toilets. 63.Construction Storage: All construction materials, debris and equipment shall be stored on site. If that is not physically possible, an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the Department of Public Works prior to placing any construction materials, debris, debris boxes or unlicensed equipment in the right-of-way. The placing of portable restroom facilities in the City right-of-way will not be permitted. 64.Construction Site Maintenance: All portions of the job site shall be maintained in an organized and professional condition. All trash, debris, construction scraps and broken/deteriorated machinery shall be removed from the site at the end of each week. If off loaded construction materials are not used within 2 weeks, they shall be screened from view. All sidewalks, driveways and public/private roadways fronting the subject site shall be broom cleaned at the end of each business day. 65.Demolition Permit: Demolition permit(s) shall be issued in accordance with Section 6.1 of the Gilroy Municipal Code. Safeguards during construction shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 33 of the California Building Code. 66.Plan Modifications: Acceptance of the plans does not release the developer from correction of mistakes, errors, or omissions contained therein. If, during the course of construction, the public interest requires a modification or a departure from these accepted plans, the City shall have the authority to require such modifications and shall specify the manner in which the same is to be made. 67.BICYCLE PARKING: Short-term bicycle parking. Provide permanently anchored bicycle racks within 200 feet of the visitor’s entrance, for 5 percent of new visitor parking spaces added, with a minimum of one two-bike capacity U-rack. Long-term bicycle parking. Provide secure bicycle parking for 5 percent of the tenant-occupant parking spaces with a minimum of one bicycle parking facility. Long-term bicycle parking for hotel buildings. Provide one on-site bicycle parking space for every 25 rooms (for employees and guests). Parking facilities shall be conveniently reached from the street. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 27 AS 17-25 FIRE PREVENTION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 68.Request a fire hydrant flow test by contacting Jonathan Crick at Jonathan.crick@cityofgilroy.org. The fee for the fire hydrant flow test is $300.00. 69.All buildings are to be equipped with modern fire protection system. The Burger King will be required to have a commercial fire sprinkler system (e.g. current edition of NFPA 13). 70.All fire protection systems (e.g. fire underground water supply, overhead fire sprinkler system, fire alarm, etc.) require deferred (i.e. separate) permits. The fire underground water supply system shall be designed to meet the requirements of the current edition of NFPA 24 and city standards. The building shall be equipped with an NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system designed for the highest expected hazard/commodity classification. The fire sprinkler system and all valves shall be monitored by a fire alarm system. 71.Show fire hydrant locations in plans. Private fire hydrants shall be positioned such that fire hydrant(s) are not more than 150 feet from the most remote portion of the building or hazard. 72.Using Autoturn vehicle pathway tracking software, show the pathway of a fire truck navigating into, through, and out of the property. Center dividing islands will need to be removed so that the fire apparatus may take a left hand turn into the development to access all buildings. 73.The fuel station underground storage tanks shall be designed and installed to meet current California codes, laws, and regulations. 74.All car washes and food facilities shall be equipped with the appropriately sized pretreatment devices/equipment (e.g. grease interceptors for food facilities, and clarifiers for car washes). Contact Isaias Lona at Isaias.lona@cityofgilroy.org for details. 75.The trash enclosures shall be equipped with a Vandal-proof floor drain and a 40 pound grease interceptor draining to the sanitary sewer system. 76.Operational permits will be issued by the Fire Prevention program. PUBLIC WORKS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The following conditions authorize the specific terms and are a part of the project Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 28 AS 17-25 ENTITLEMENT(S); and which shall be addressed on the construction plans submitted for any ENCROACHMENT PERMIT, BUILDING PERMIT, GRADING PERMIT or SUPERSTRUCTURE, and shall be satisfied prior to issuance of whichever permit is issued first, or if another deadline is specified in a condition, at that time. 77.PAYMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS PLAN CHECK AND INSPECTION FEE: At first improvement plan submittal, the applicant shall submit a $10,000.00 (Ten thousand dollar) initial deposit for project plan check and construction inspection. This deposit will be credited/accounted toward final plan check and inspection fee for the project. In addition, the applicant shall submit a detailed project cost estimate prepared by the project engineer, to approval of the City Engineer, with the initial project plan submittal. The cost estimate shall be broken out into on-site and off- site improvements. Prior to plan approval, the applicant shall pay 100% of the plan check and inspection fee based on the approved project cost estimate. Public Works will not sign-off on the issuance of the first City permit without full payment of this plan check and inspection fee. (PUBLIC WORKS). 78.PROJECT PHASING: The first phase of this development (Phase I) by the Master Developer shall make full frontage improvements along the full project boundary (Camino Arroyo, Holloway, & Highway 152) including pavement work, driveways, curb ramps, curb & gutter, 6’ minimum commercial sidewalk, on-site stormwater facilities, street trees, signage, striping, utilities to service all lots, undergrounding utilities, intersections, signals, lighting, etc. per City Standards, Specs, and Guidelines. Phase I work shall also include all improvements identified in the traffic study/traffic analysis. At first improvement plan submittal, include a detailed Phasing plan to include all offsite improvements as well as all improvements identified in the traffic study/traffic analysis. Also as part of your first submittal, include all necessary review documents for the proposed Parcel Map/Final Map. 79.PLAN SUBMITTAL: The proposed development Improvement Plans shall be submitted, in full, per the City of Gilroy Public Works Department Submittal Checklist. Off-site and On-Site improvements shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works Engineering prior to first building permit submittal. Subsequent phase building permit issuance will not be allowed until the master developer has completed all phase I work by the master developer. Improvement plans are required for both on-site and off- site improvements, and the improvement plan set cover sheet shall include an index referencing on-site and off-site improvements. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the City of Gilroy Municipal Code and Standard Specifications and Details, and are subject to all laws of the City of Gilroy by reference. The improvement plans shall include all civil project plans including, but not limited to, site plans, grading plans, utility plans, joint trench, off-site plans, lighting (photometric) plans, and landscaping plans within the public right-of-way. The plan shall clearly identify both public and private Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 29 AS 17-25 utilities. The improvement plans shall be submitted with the Public Works Engineering submittal checklist provided by the City, and available on the City website. In addition: a. A complete set of improvement plans shall consist of Civil site design, landscape site design, Electrical, Joint Trench, etc. Any walls or structural features part of the landscape design shall also be included; b. Improvement plans are required for both on-site and off-site improvements. A separate plan set for each shall be prepared, or at the approval of the City Engineer, onsite and offsite sheets can be combined into one plan set; c. The improvement plan submittal, including utility sheets, shall show appropriate line types and labels to identify different type of utilities pipe material types, and pipe sizes. Utility boxes, hydrants, backflow preventers, etc. shall be relocated/installed behind the back of sidewalk; d. Improvement plans (as second sheet in plan set) shall contain Approved Conditions of Approval; e. Improvement plans shall include General Notes found in the City of Gilroy General Guidelines; f. Improvement plans shall be completed per the Public Works Engineering submittal checklist, which can be found in the City’s website. At first submittal, a completed checklist shall be included in the submittal package, and shall show which items have been included. g. The improvement plan cover sheet shall include a table summarizing all facilities (Streets, Utilities, Parks, Landscaping, etc.), showing the ownership of all facilities, access rights to, and the maintenance responsibilities of all facilities; h. Improvement and grading plans shall show existing topo and features at least 50’ beyond the project boundary. The plan shall clearly show existing topo, label contour elevations, drainage patterns, flow lines, slopes, and all other property encumbrances; i. If the project has excess fill or cut that will be off-hauled to a site or on- hauled from a site within the city limits of Gilroy, an additional Haul Permit is required. A statement indicating the need to obtain a Haul Permit must be added as a general note to the Grading and Drainage Plan; j. All grading and improvement plans shall identify the vertical elevation datum, date of survey, and surveyor; k. A Title Report shall be submitted with first submittal improvement plans. An existing site plan shall be submitted showing all existing site conditions and title report easements. The plan shall include bearing and distance information for all right-of-way and easements; l. The plan shall show any proposed easements to be dedicated for any needed purpose, or any easement expected to be abandoned through Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 30 AS 17-25 separate instrument. This includes PUE, PSE, EVAE, Cross-Property Access Easement, Landscape Easement, Drainage Easement, Pole Line Easement, etc.; m. To ensure the plans are coordinated and there are no conflicts between disciplines, the applicant shall provide a “composite exhibit” showing Civil, Landscape, Electrical, and Joint Trench design information (as a separate sheet titled “Composite Plan”) to confirm that there are no conflicts; n. All Solid Waste Vehicle circulation movements shall be modeled and shown on a separate plan sheet. The circulation plan shall be prepared to the City Engineer’s satisfaction, and modeled using AutoTurn swept analysis software, and shall include all turning and street circulation movements; o. All Emergency Vehicle circulation movements shall be modeled and shown on a separate plan sheet. The circulation plan shall be prepared to the City Engineer’s satisfaction, and modeled using AutoTurn swept analysis software, and shall include all turning and street circulation movements; p. All utility boxes, including sanitary sewer and/or water meter boxes, shall have traffic-rated boxes and lids; q. All on-site recycled water system improvements, including appurtenances, shall be located within a PSE. (PUBLIC WORKS) 80.TRAFFIC STUDY/TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS: At first improvement plan submittal, this project shall incorporate and include all design and improvements identified in the Gilroy Square Development Transportation Analysis dated October 10, 2022, prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants. The proposed development (including on-site, offsite, and site plan changes) shall comply with all items identified in the Traffic Study/Transportation Study and all improvements shall be complete as part of Phase 1 of the Development. Improvements include, but are not limited to, roadway widening, adding additional turn lanes, lengthening existing turn lanes, signalizing intersections, modifying existing signalized intersects, etc. 81.CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: As a stand-alone document, submit detailed responses of how the development will comply with each Condition of Approval. 82.MASTER PLANS: Refer to the latest 2022 City Master Plans and check that the development is in conformance with the Master Plans, City Standards, City Specifications, & City General Guidelines. The Developers engineer shall confirm in writing this project is in conformance with Master Plans at first improvement plans submittal. If the project is not in conformance with the Master Plans, the Developers engineer shall design and construct all items to be in conformance with the Master Plans, City Standards, City Specifications, & City General Guidelines. 83.CITY WATER MASTER PLAN: The master plan identifies a 16” water line to be Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 31 AS 17-25 installed in the areas surrounding the proposed development. Developer shall install 16” water lines per the City Master Plan as part of Phase 1 of the Development. 84.UTILITY PLANS: A utility plan shall be provided for all projects as specified within these conditions of approval. To ensure coordination between the applicant and the relevant utility company: a. The applicant shall provide joint trench composite plans for the underground electrical, gas, telephone, cable television, and communication conduits and cables including the size, location and details of all trenches, locations of building utility service stubs and meters and placements or arrangements of junction structures as a part of the Improvement Plan submittals for the project. Show preferred and alternative locations for all utility vaults and boxes if project has not obtained PG&E approval. A licensed Civil or Electrical Engineer shall sign the composite drawings and/or utility improvement plans. (All dry utilities shall be placed underground). b. The applicant shall negotiate any necessary right-of-way or easement with PG&E, or any other utilities, subject to the review and approval by the Engineering Division and the utility companies. c. A “Will Serve Letter” shall be provided for each utility company expected to service the subdivision. Early coordination with the utility companies is necessary to obtain this letter. Coordination of City utilities shall be through the Engineering Division. d. A note shall be placed on the joint trench composite plans which states that the plan agrees with City Codes and Standards and that no underground utility conflict exists. (PUBLIC WORKS) 85.JOINT TRENCH: All utility services to the site shall be underground. Joint Trench design shall show the location of the joint trench including all boxes located outside of the roadway pavement section. Show the proposed joint trench location and ensure the plans reflect limits of trenching locations. Joint trench utility boxes shall be located behind the sidewalk and there shall be a minimum of 3’ clearance from the back of walk to the face of utility box. (PUBLIC WORKS) 86.JOINT TRENCH: Underground existing overhead utilities per City Code. Undergrounding existing utilities shall occur along the entire project frontage, boundaries, and project intersections. Overhead utilities shall be underground at all offsite improvement locations where conflicts with the required traffic improvements are encountered. (PUBLIC WORKS) 87.UTILITY RESPONSIBILITIES: Water, Storm, and sewer utilities in private areas shall be privately owned and privately maintained. Conversely, public utilities within utility easements on private property remain the responsibility of the individual Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 32 AS 17-25 utility companies to maintain. The plans shall note the inspection, ownership and maintenance responsibility for each utility shown on the plans within a Table of Responsibilities on the project cover sheet of the improvement plans at first improvement plans submittal. The table shall include the list of streets, the responsible party for inspection of the improvements, who is responsible for the ownership of the utility, and who is responsible for the maintenance of the utility. An example of this table, including the types of utilities to be listed, can be provided by the Engineering Division upon request. (PUBLIC WORKS) 88.PREPARATION OF ELECTRICAL PLANS: The project electrical plans shall be prepared by a registered professional engineer experienced in preparing these types of plans. The applicant shall submit, with the improvement plans submitted with the first improvement plan submittal, a letter from the design Electrical or Civil Engineer that states the electrical plan conform to City Codes and Standards, and to the approved improvement plans. The letter shall be signed and stamped by the professional engineer that prepares the improvement plans. (PUBLIC WORKS) 89.EXISTING FACILITIES PROTECTION: All existing public utilities shall be protected in place and if necessary, relocated as approved by the City Engineer. No permanent structure is permitted within City easements without the approval of the City of Gilroy. (PUBLIC WORKS) 90.PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: Show and label all existing and proposed Right-of-Way on all plans. This includes all Right-of-Way dedications required because of the improvements identified in the project Traffic Study. No permanent private structures are permitted within the City right-of-way. 91.RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION GRANT DEED: Identify all Right of Way acquisitions that are required to make all the improvements identified in the traffic study. The developer shall secure all Right of Way Acquisitions needed from other private landowners for the developer to construct all improvements per the Traffic Study. All Right of Way Acquisitions shall be secured prior to the first improvement plan submittal. 92.PUBLIC EASEMENTS: Private permanent facilities such as, structures, canopies, signs, utilities, fences, walls, stormwater treatment facilities, etc. are not allowed within public right of way or easement. Show and label all existing and proposed Easements on all plans. This includes all easement dedications required because of the improvements identified in the project Traffic Study. Easement widths shall be per City standard. 93.PUBLIC EASEMENT DEDICATION GRANT DEED: Identify all Public Easement acquisitions that are required to make all the improvements identified in the traffic Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 33 AS 17-25 study. The developer shall secure all Public Easement Acquisitions needed from private landowners for the developer to construct all improvements per the Traffic Study. All Easement Acquisitions shall be secured prior to the first improvement plan submittal. 94.PUBLIC EASEMENT CROSS SLOPE: Cross slopes behind the back of curb to the back of the public easement shall be 1.5% cross slope per city standards. 95.WATER QUALITY: Project design shall comply with the Stormwater Management Guidance Manual for Low Impact Development & Post-Construction Requirements. The applicant shall submit the Source Control Checklist as well as the appropriate Performance Requirements Checklist found in Appendix A of the manual at the time of the first improvement plan submittal and building permit submittals. The manual can be found at the following site: www.cityofgilroy.org/261/Storm-Water- Management (PUBLIC WORKS) 96.DEVELOPER STORM WATER QUALITY RESPONSIBILITY: The developer is responsible for ensuring that all contractors are aware of all storm water quality measures and implement such measures. Failure to comply with the approved construction BMPs will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations, or a project stop order. (PUBLIC WORKS) 97.BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP): The applicant shall perform all construction activities in accordance with Gilroy Municipal Code Section 27C, Municipal Storm Water Quality Protection and Discharge Controls, and Section E.10, Construction Site Storm Water Run-Off Control Program of the Regional NPDES Permit. Detailed information can be located at: www.flowstobay.org/documents/business/construction/SWPPP.pdf. This sheet shall be printed and included in all construction plan sets permitted for construction in the City of Gilroy. (PUBLIC WORKS) 98.TRASH CAPTURE DEVICES: Project shall include a trash capture device at all locations prior to discharge into the public Storm Drain system (Example: CDS units). At first improvement plans submittal, show trash capture devices for all storm drain systems. 99.FIRE DEPARTMENT HYDRANT FLOW TEST: The applicant shall perform a Fire Hydrant flow test to confirm the water system will adequately serve the development, and will modify any part of the systems that does not perform to the standards established by the City. Applicant shall coordinate with Fire Department for the Fire Hydrant flow test. The flow test results shall be submitted at first improvement plan submittal. (PUBLIC WORKS) Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 34 AS 17-25 100.WATER CONSERVATION: The project shall fully comply with the measures required by the City’s Water Supply Shortage Regulations Ordinance (Gilroy City Code, Chapter 27, Article VI), and subsequent amendments to meet the requirements imposed by the State of California’s Water Board. This ordinance established permanent voluntary water saving measures and temporary conservation standards. (PUBLIC WORKS) 101.PROJECT STUDIES: The applicant shall submit, for City approval, any applicable water, sewer, storm drain, and traffic studies for the development deemed appropriate by the City Engineer. These studies shall provide the supporting hydraulic calculation for pipe sizing per the City Standard Design Guidelines. The study shall be reviewed and approved by Engineering. If the results of the study indicate that this development contributes to the over-capacity of the trunk line, the applicant will be required to mitigate the impact by removing and replacing, or upsizing of the existing utilities to accommodate the appropriate level of project flows to the approval of the City Engineer. The improvements shall be addressed on the construction drawings, to the approval of the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of the first City permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 102.IMPACT FEES: The project is subject to the City’s Street Tree, Storm, Sewer, Water, Traffic, and Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. The City’s latest impact fee schedule is available on the City’s website. Payment of all Impact Fees is required at first building permit issuance. Fees shall be based on the current fee schedule in effect at the time of fee payment, consistent with and in accordance with City policy. Note that impact fees increase at the beginning of each fiscal year, July 1. Specific fee language is provided further in these conditions of approval. (PUBLIC WORKS) 103.STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN: At first improvement plan submittal, the applicant shall submit a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. The SWMP shall analyze the existing and ultimate conditions and facilities, and the study shall include all off-site tributary areas. Study and the design shall be in compliance with Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) and the City’s Stormwater Management Guidance Manual for Low Impact Development & Post Construction Requirements (latest edition). Existing off-site drainage patterns, i.e., tributary areas, drainage amount, and velocity shall not be altered by the development. Sizing tools for structural control measures for runoff retention can be found at https://countyofsb.org/pwd/sbpcw/development/new-and-redevelopment.sbc . Provide infiltration rates using a safety factor of 2 as part of your first improvement plan submittal. The plan shall be to the approval of the City Engineer and shall be approved prior to the issuance of the first City permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 104.STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN: At first improvement plan submittal, the applicant shall submit a design level Stormwater Control Plan Report (in 8 ½ x 11 Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 35 AS 17-25 report format), to include background, summary, and explanation of all aspects of stormwater management. A report template can be found at the Central Coast Regional Board website (MS Word): https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/water_issues/programs/stormwater/ Docs/lid/lid_hydromod_charette_index.html All new and disturbed areas (on-site and off-site) shall be accounted for and part of the stormwater management design calculations. The report shall also include exhibits, tables, calculations, and all technical information supporting facts, including but not limited to, exhibit of the proposed site conditions, which clearly delineates impervious and pervious areas on site. The plan shall provide a separate hatch or shading for landscaping/pervious areas on-site including those areas that are not bio-retention areas. This stormwater control plan report format does not replace, or is not in-lieu of any stormwater control plan sheet in the improvement plans. The stormwater control plan shall include a signed Performance Requirement Certifications specified in the Stormwater Guidance Manual. At applicant’s sole expense, the stormwater control plan shall be submitted for review by an independent third party accepted by the City for compliance. Result of the peer review shall be submittal and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the first City permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 105.REPAIR OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: The applicant shall repair or replace all existing improvements not designated for removal, and all new improvements that are damaged during construction or removed because of the applicant’s operations. The applicant shall request a walk-through with the Engineering Construction Inspector before the start of construction to verify existing conditions. Said repairs shall be completed prior to the first occupancy of the project. (PUBLIC WORKS) 106.ROADWAY AND INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS, ALIGNMENTS, PROFILES, & SIGNALS: This project will be required to design and construct roadways and intersections as part of the development. Roadway geometrics, alignments, profiles, etc. are typical plan sheets when designing roadways. At first improvement plan submittal, include roadway and intersection drawings for geometrics, alignments, profiles, signals, etc. You may refer to Caltrans standards and plan preparation manual for examples. All geometric design of road segments and intersections shall conform to AASHTO and Caltrans standards. 107.LANE ALIGNMENT: At first improvement plans submittal, the developer is responsible for showing on the plans lane striping at Intersections fronting the project and intersections identified in the traffic study. All intersections shall have lanes align from one side of the intersection to the far side of the intersection. Lane lines shall align with no offset through the intersection. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 36 AS 17-25 108.CAMINO ARROYO / GILROY CROSSING INTERSECTION: At first improvement plan submittal, provide drawings for updating the existing signalized intersection. The current striping exiting the existing development is a double left and a single a right. Vehicles leaving the existing Gilroy Crossing shopping center will require a through lane heading East into the proposed development. 109.TRUCK TURNS: At first improvement plan submittal, provide Truck Turn exhibits. The provided planning level documents showed trucks going into oncoming traffic which is not allowed. Trucks entering and leaving the proposed development and crossing lanes of traffic is not allowed. Truck turning templates shall clearly show trucks entering the proposed development while staying within the travel lane closest to the development and not having to use additional lanes. All frontage roads, frontage intersections, project entrances/exits, intersections identified in the traffic study, roadways identified in the traffic study, and on-site shall be modeled using autoturn for appropriate large truck turning movements, CA legal 67’ trucks and City of Gilroy Fire Trucks. All truck movements shall not conflict with opposing lanes. All intersection lane widths shall be dictated by truck movements. Show all possible truck turning movements at all intersections at appropriate scales. 110.SIGHT DISTANCE: At first improvement plan submittal, provide sight distance plans that clearly show standard sight distance will be provided and no items obstruct sight distance for driveways, roadways, intersections, etc. Please note that private signs, fences, walls, buildings, landscape features, above ground utilities, guardrail, barriers, railing, art, etc. will not be allowed within sight distance triangles. Provide all Sight Distance plans per Caltrans, AASHTO, and NCHRP Requirements for all project frontage access points, driveways, roadways, and offsite mitigation measure locations. These calculations shall be done as part of the first improvement plan submittal because it is important to ensure the development meets sight distance standards and all roadways, intersections, driveways, and access points to these facilities are safe for motorists and pedestrians. Sight distance plans shall approved by the City Engineer prior to first permit issuance. (PUBLIC WORKS) 111.DRIVEWAYS: The transportation analysis/traffic study identifies proposed Driveway 1 (driveway nearest HWY 152) conflicting with the widening improvements required to improve the Camino Arroyo left and right turn lane. Multiple turn lanes along Camino Arroyo have been identified as deficient and shall be improved per the Traffic Study. There is also a VTA bus stop in this area that requires improvements to the latest VTA standards. All project driveways shall not be detrimental to abutting streets capacities, safety, and/or efficiency. All project driveways shall not be located within the functional area of an intersection or in the influence area of an adjacent driveway. All Project driveways shall not conflict with Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 37 AS 17-25 intersections, bus stops, turn lanes, bike lanes, surrounding business access, etc. Tenants and customers will still be able to access the development from the signalized intersection at Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing Shopping Center. Proposed driveway 1 will not be allowed per the above mentioned items. At first improvement plan submittal, include fully designed intersections and frontage improvements per the project Transportation Analysis including all appropriate geometry, signal equipment, turn lanes, bay tapers, through lanes, bike lanes, etc. per Caltrans, AASHTO, NCHRP, & City Standards. 112.DRIVEWAY DESIGN: Driveway grades shall be designed to keep a standard design vehicle from dragging or “bottoming out” on the street or driveway, and to keep water collected in the street from flowing onto the lots. The details of such design shall be provided on the site civil improvement plans at first improvement plan submittal to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (PUBLIC WORKS) 113.SIGNING AND STRIPING: At first improvement plans submittal, the developer is responsible for including signing and striping plans for all areas along the project frontage, all offsite areas identified in the traffic study, and all on-site areas. Signing and striping shall be designed to Caltrans and CAMUTCD standards. All signing and striping plans need to be designed to account for truck turn exhibits. Installation of all signing and striping shall be done as part of Phase 1 of the project. (PUBLIC WORKS) 114.NO STOPPING ANY TIME SIGNS: “No Stopping Any Time” signs shall be placed along the entire project frontage. Spacing of the signs should be approximately 75’- 100’. 115.GRADING & DRAINAGE: Adjust grade breaks and/or field inlets to capture and direct all stormwater into the stormwater treatment areas prior to entering the public right of way and storm drain facilities. On-site stormwater facilities need to be sized to account for off-site impervious improvement areas. (PUBLIC WORKS) 116.GRADING & DRAINAGE: All grading activity shall address National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) concerns. There shall be no earthwork disturbance or grading activities between September 15th and April 15th unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. If approved, the applicant shall submit a Winterization Erosion Control Plan to the City Engineer for review and approval. This plan shall incorporate erosion control devices and other techniques in accordance with Gilroy Municipal Code § 27C to minimize erosion. Specific measures to control sediment runoff, construction pollution and other potential construction contamination sediment runoff, construction pollution and other potential construction contamination shall be addressed through the Erosion Control Plan and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 38 AS 17-25 shall supplement the Erosion Control Plan and project improvement plans. These documents shall also be kept on-site while the project is under construction. A Notice of Intent (NOI) shall be filed with the State Water Resources Control Board, with a copy provided to the Engineering Division before a grading permit will be issued. A project WDID# shall be added to the grading plans prior to plan approval. (PUBLIC WORKS) 117.PUBLIC FIRE HYDRANTS: Fire Hydrant spacing along the project frontage is not per City Standards, Specs, or Guidelines. At first improvement plan submittal, the developer is responsible for showing on the plans the installation of fire hydrants spaced along project frontage per City standards, specs, and guidelines. Installation of the fire hydrants including concrete pads shall be done as part of Phase 1 of the project. 118.PAVEMENT SECTION: At first improvement plan submittal, show pavement sections for all roadways, roadway widening, and drive isles per the Geotechnical Engineering recommendations. Pavement section shall consist of a minimum 6” AC per City standard. Lime treatment is not allowed within public right of way or easements. 119.GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: Prior to first permit issuance, the applicant’s Geotechnical Engineer shall review the final grading, pavement design and drainage plans to ensure that said designs are in accordance with the recommendations or the project geotechnical study, and the peer review comments. The applicant’s Geotechnical Engineer’s approval shall then be conveyed to the City either by letter, or by signing the plans. All grading operations and soil compaction activities shall be per the approved project’s design level geotechnical report. All grading activities shall be conducted under the observation of, and tested by, a licensed geotechnical engineer. A report shall be filed with the City of Gilroy for each phase of construction, stating that all grading activities were performed in conformance with the requirements of the project’s geotechnical report. The applicant shall add this condition to the general notes on the grading plan. Certification of grades and compaction are required prior to Building Permit final. This statement must be added as a general note to the Grading and Drainage Plan. (PUBLIC WORKS) 120.FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION: Site design, including building finished floor elevations, shall comply with the 1995 Uvas Creek Overflow Floodplain Delineation Project prepared by Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers. The project will be required to have a hydrologist review the project grading, to confirm this project Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 39 AS 17-25 does not have cumulative impacts to floodwaters. The City will require a review letter by Schaaf & Wheeler (Contact Caitlin Gilmore at 415-823-4964, Schaaf & Wheeler) be submitted to the approval of the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the building permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 121.ENCROACHMENT PERMIT REQUIREMENTS AND INSURANCE: The applicant must obtain an encroachment permit prior to the first building permit submittal and prior to any work being done in the City's right-of-way. Refer to the following link for encroachment permit requirements: https://www.cityofgilroy.org/244/Encroachment-and-Transportation-Permits Submit the encroachment permit at first improvement plan submittal to Weston.hill@cityofgilroy.org The applicant shall have off-site improvement plans prepared for all work in the public right-of-way by a licensed civil engineer, whose signed engineer’s stamp shall appear on the plans. All design assumptions and criteria shall be submitted with each submittal. Final construction plans shall be approved by the City Engineer, and released for construction, with the issuance of the encroachment permit. Right-of-way improvements shall include, but not limited to, the following items: (PUBLIC WORKS) a.STREET WIDENING: The applicant shall widen all streets and intersections identified in the Traffic Study. The applicant shall install new street section, curb, gutter, and sidewalk and relocate affected utilities as directed by the City Engineer. All work shall be shown on the required improvement plans. b.STREET TREES: The applicant shall plant street trees along the project frontage to match the City of Gilroy’s Street Tree Plan in effect at the time of construction. The street tree plans shall be per City Standard Drawings and will include City Standard tree grates. Trees shall be placed between the curb and sidewalk along Camino Arroyo. Trees shall be placed behind the back of sidewalk along Holloway Rd because sidewalk along Holloway will be monolithic per City Standard. c.FRONTAGE LANDSCAPING: The landscaping area between the Camino Arroyo back of curb and the sidewalk shall be a minimum of 4.5’ wide per City Standard. The landscaping area for street trees along Holloway shall be a minimum of 4.5’. Coordinate with the planning department for additional landscaping requirements fronting the project within private property. d.TREE GRATES: The applicant shall install City Standard Tree Grates as specified in the approved plans. Tree grates shall be 4’x6’, model OT-T24 by Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 40 AS 17-25 Urban Accessories, and shall be black power coated. The tree grates shall be shown on the improvement plans to be located to the approval of the City Engineer, and shall be installed with the street trees as part of Phase 1. e.STREET MARKINGS: The applicant shall install necessary street markings of a material and design approved by the City Engineer, and replace any that are damaged during construction. These include but are not limited to all pavement markings, painted curbs and handicap markings. All permanent pavement markings shall be thermoplastic and comply with Caltrans Standards. Color and location of painted curbs shall be shown on the plans, and are subject to approval by the City Engineer. Any existing painted curb or pavement markings no longer required shall be removed by grinding if thermoplastic, or sand blasting if in paint. f.SIGNAGE: The applicant shall install all necessary temporary and permanent street signs of a material and design approved by the City Engineer, and replace any that are damaged during construction. All permanent signs shall comply with CAMUTCH and Caltrans Standards. Any existing signs no longer required shall be removed. g.SIDEWALK: The applicant shall remove and replace to existing City standards all damaged and non-City Standard sidewalk with a new 6-ft commercial sidewalk surrounding the entire project site. The actual amount of sidewalk to be replaced shall be identified in the improvement plans. Sidewalk replacement shall be constructed per the City Standard Drawings. New 6-ft commercial sidewalk shall be installed along the entire project frontage per City Standard Drawings. h.CURB RAMP(S): The applicant shall construct all curb ramps in accordance with the latest Caltrans standards. The actual ramp "Case" shall be identified on the plans and shall be to the approval of the City Engineer. Dual curb ramps on the northeast and southeast quadrant shall be installed at the existing signalized intersection project entrance. Curb ramps along the project frontage and intersections fronting the project are not currently being shown. Curb ramps at all intersections along the project frontage, roadways, and intersections identifies in the Traffic study shall be ADA compliant and be designed to latest Caltrans Standards. If there are no curb ramps or existing curb ramps are not ADA compliant, developer shall install ADA compliant curb ramps in all the above-mentioned locations. Crosswalk paths and paths connecting curb ramps shall also meet ADA and PROWAG standards. Any existing crosswalks and paths connecting curb ramps that do not meet ADA and PROWAG standards shall be removed and replaced to meet ADA and PROWAG standards. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 41 AS 17-25 i.CURB AND GUTTER: At first improvement plan submittal, show the removal and replacement of any damaged and non-City Standard curb and gutter along the project frontage, intersections along the project frontage, roadways identified in the Traffic Study, and intersections identified in the Traffic Study. Removal and replacement limits shall be from expansion joint to expansion joint per City standard. Show the removal and replacement of curb and gutter for locations where existing utilities need to be removed where they cross the curb and gutter. Also show the removal and replacement of curb and gutter where new utilities will cross the curb and gutter. The actual amount of curb and gutter to be replaced shall be determined by the Public Works Construction Inspector and confirmed by the City Engineer in the field prior to construction. New curb and gutter shall be constructed per the City Standard Drawing STR-12. j.VALLEY GUTTER: The applicant shall remove and replace to existing City Standards any valley gutter that is damaged now or during construction of this project. New valley gutter shall be constructed per the City Standard Drawing. Doweling shall be provided to prevent vertical deflection into any abutting curb and gutter sections. The actual limits of valley gutter repair shall be identified in the plans at first improvement plans submittal. k.DRIVEWAY APPROACH(ES): The applicant shall install City Standard Commercial driveway approaches as shown on the approved plans. The new commercial driveway approach shall be constructed per the City Standard Drawing. l.DRIVEWAY TRANSITIONS: The applicant shall construct new driveway transitions at the existing driveway approach along the project frontage per the City Standard Drawing "Standard Commercial Driveway Approach." m.SEWER LATERAL: The applicant shall install a sewer lateral and main line connection to the sewer main located in Camino Arroyo. Connection to the City main will be with a Manhole. n.SANITARY SEWER MANHOLES: The applicant shall install standard sanitary sewer manholes and test manholes, per approved plans and in accordance with the City Standard Drawing. o.STORM DRAIN MANHOLES: The applicant shall install standard storm drain manholes, per approved plans and in accordance with the City Standard Drawing. p.STORM WATER CATCH BASINS: The applicant shall install standard storm water catch basins, in accordance with the City Standard Drawing. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 42 AS 17-25 q.STREET LIGHTS: i.Cobra Head. The applicant shall provide and install standard aluminum electrolier street light(s) per City Standard Drawing EL-1 to EL-5. The applicant is responsible for all PG&E service fees and hook-up charges. Any new service point connection required to power the new lights shall be shown on the construction drawings along with the conduit, pull boxes and other items necessary to install the street lights. An Isometric lighting level needs to be provided by the designer/contractor. A separate light study may be required by the City Engineer. The new street light shall has 32’ mounting height per Standard Drawing EL-3, with mounting arm length per Standard Drawing EL-4, the Fixture shall be Leotek GC1 or GC2 series in an approved configuration per detail EL-2 or approved equal. The arm shall be installed at the location as shown on the approved plans. r.FIRE HYDRANTS: The applicant shall install new fire hydrants along the project frontage. Spacing shall meet City and Fire Marshall requirements. s.BUS STOPS: There are existing bus stops along the proposed project frontage that need to be updated to the latest VTA standards. At first improvement plan submittal, show updated bus stops. This project will require review and approval by VTA prior to first permit issuance. t.WATER SERVICES: Project will need to evaluate if surrounding domestic water services can provide the new development water use demands (pressure and volume). If existing services do not meet the water use demands, the developer shall install new water lines and services. 122.POTHOLE REQUIREMENTS: The applicant is required to confirm the location of existing utility lines along the project frontage by potholing. Prior to any potholing, applicant shall submit a pothole plan for City review and approval. Applicant shall provide the pothole result to the City Engineer prior to final design. 123.EASEMENTS: Show and label the locations of the existing and proposed Easements on all plans. Identify what easements will be preserved or adjusted. This includes public service easements, public utility easements, private storm drainage, private sanitary sewer, private water, reciprocating ingress/egress easements between lots shown in this Tentative Map, reciprocating ingress/egress easements with the proposed development to the East, etc. 124.ACCESS TO EAST DEVELOPMENT: At first improvement plan submittal, show access to the proposed development located on the East project boundary. Site plan shall be designed with a wide enough drive isle to accommodate two-way traffic going to the development East of the project boundary. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 43 AS 17-25 125.UTILITIES: All new services to the development shall be "underground service" designed and installed in accordance with the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, AT&T (phone) Company and local cable company regulations. Transformers and switch gear cabinets shall be placed underground unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director and the City Engineer. Underground utility plans must be submitted to the City prior to installation. (PUBLIC WORKS) 126.STREET CUT MORATORIUM: Camino Arroyo is part of the Street Cut Moratorium due to the recently completed paving project. The project is proposing to make new pavement cuts on the newly resurfaced Camino Arroyo. Also, the project will create additional construction traffic and create additional future traffic all reducing the City Pavement Condition Index. The project shall grind and pave the entire width of Camino Arroyo (Lip of Gutter to Lip of Gutter) along the entire project frontage with a minimum 2.5” hot mix AC, and with pavement section dig-outs and repairs. Extend of the dig-outs and repairs to be determined by the Developers Geotechnical Engineer and City Engineer. (PUBLIC WORKS) 127.PAVEMENT RESTORATION: Due to the proposed development making pavement cuts into the existing roadway, additional construction traffic, and additional future traffic all reducing the City Pavement Condition Index, show on the plans pavement grind and pave along Holloway Rd. project frontage (half roadway width) with a minimum 2.5” hot mix AC with pavement section dig-out repairs. Also show on the plans pavement crack seal and microsurface slurry seal along the entire frontage of Holloway Rd (lip of gutter to lip of gutter). The extent of the pavement section dig-out repairs to be determined by the developer’s geotechnical engineer and to be confirmed by the City Engineer. The City Engineer shall approve the roadway repair prior to the release of utilities, final inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first. (PUBLIC WORKS) 128.EXTERIOR SITE LIGHTING STANDARDS: The applicant shall submit a photometric plan for on-site lighting showing lighting levels to Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) Standards. The plan shall comply with the requirement of an average of 1 foot-candle with a 4:1 minimum to average ratio and a minimum lighting of 0.3 foot-candle. This lighting standard is applicable to all publicly- accessibly parking lots, driveways, circulation areas, aisles, passageways, recesses, and publicly-accessible grounds contiguous to all buildings. Private, interior courtyards not accessible to the public are not required to meet this standard. The lighting system shall be so designed as to limit light spill beyond property lines and to shield the light source from view from off site. The photometric plan shall be approved by the City Engineer or their designee and shall be addressed on the construction plans submitted for any demolition permit, building permit, or grading permit and shall be satisfied prior to issuance of whichever Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 44 AS 17-25 permit is issued first. Any subsequent building permits that include any site lighting shall also meet these requirements. (PUBLIC WORKS) 129.STREET LIGHTING STANDARDS: The applicant shall submit plans for street/sidewalk showing lighting levels to Illuminating Engineering Society (IES) Standards. At first submittal, provide a photometrics plan along the project frontage. Also provide photometric plans for all the streets and intersections identified in the traffic study. If the existing lighting is not to current City Standard, the project shall install the necessary streetlights to meet the minimum lighting requirements. Photometrics shall meet the following standards: a. Arterial Streets: 1.0 fc average. 3/1 average to minimum uniformity. 0.34 fc minimum b. Collector Streets: 0.6 fc average. 4/1 average to minimum uniformity. 0.2 fc minimum c. Local Streets: 0.4 fc average. 6/1 average to minimum uniformity. 0.07fc minimum. d. High Volume Intersections: 1.1fc average. 3/1 average to minimum uniformity. 0.4 fc minimum. e. Low Volume Intersections: 0.7 fc average. 4/1 average to minimum uniformity. 0.2 fc minimum. The applicant shall submit a photometric plan identifying how these lighting levels are being met given the site geometrics, using the City Standard street lights, and a Type III lighting distribution. The width of the street and lighting levels shall determine the lighting spacing. Street lights and pull boxes shall be installed in the planter strip if one is present, or behind the back of walk where feasible so as to maintain sidewalk clear of obstructions to the approval of the City Engineer. All new streetlight meter pedestals shall be located behind the back of sidewalk and there shall be a minimum of 3’ clearance from the back of sidewalk to the face of utility box. Lighting shall be provided on both sides of the roadways. The photometric plan shall be approved prior to the issuance of the first City permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 130.FENCES AND OTHER PERMANENT STRUCTURES LOCATED OUTSIDE OF CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY: The applicant shall locate all project fencing and foundation of a permanent nature within the project’s property and outside of the City right-of- way and outside of the Public Easement. (PUBLIC WORKS) 131.STORM DRAIN INLETS: Storm drain inlet spacing along the project frontage is not per City Standards, Specs, or Guidelines. At first improvement plan submittal, the developer is responsible for showing on the plans installation of drainage inlets spaced along the project frontage per City Standards, Specs, and Guidelines. Installation of the storm drain inlets shall be done as part of Phase 1 of the project. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 45 AS 17-25 132.STORM DRAIN INLETS AND WATERWAYS: Per the City’s Clean Water Program’s requirements, the applicant shall mark with the words “No Dumping! Flows to Bay,” or equivalent, using methods approved by the City standards on all storm inlets surrounding and within the project parcel. Furthermore, storm drains shall be designed to serve exclusively stormwater. Dual-purpose storm drains that switch to sanitary sewer are not permitted in the City of Gilroy. (PUBLIC WORKS) 133.DOMESTIC WATER: At first improvement plan submittal, show the installation of domestic water service per City Standards. Water meter shall be located at the back of sidewalk within the Public Easement. Install backflow preventer on private property completely outside of the public right of way and completely outside of public easement per City Standards. Existing services not being used along the project frontage shall be removed up to the main line. 134.LANDSCAPE WATER: At first improvement plan submittal, show the installation of landscaping water service per City Standards. Water meter shall be located at the back of sidewalk within the Public Easement. Install backflow preventer on private property completely outside of the public right of way and completely outside of public easement per City Standards. Existing services not being used along the project frontage shall be removed up to the main line. 135.SEPARATE WATER METERS SERVICES: When a development includes multiple uses (mixed use or other), within one area designated as restaurant space, there shall be a separate water service and meter for the commercial space and a separate water meter for the other development use(s). This will facilitate the accurate assessment of the Sewer Service Charge, which is based on water use and customer class. (PUBLIC WORKS) 136.GARBAGE/RECYCLE STORAGE AND SERVICE: The applicant shall provide an adequate area for the purposes of storing garbage and recycling collection containers for scheduled servicing by the franchise solid waste collection service. The containers shall be placed at the service location allowing enough room for the truck to safely approach the containers. The collection containers shall be brought to the service area on the day of service and returned to the storage enclosure by the property owner. The containers are not to be in public view prior to, or beyond the scheduled service times. The applicant shall obtain a review letter from the City’s franchise solid waste collection service provider (Recology) confirming serviceability and site accessibility of the solid waste pickup as designed and shown on the project plans and provide to the City Engineer for approval. Contact Lisa Patton, Operations Manager 408-846-4421. No public right of way areas to be used for solid waste pickup. Provide confirmation that the garbage truck can fully access the site and does not have to “back up” into City Right of Way or Easement. There can be no interruption to the City Right of Way or easements due to solid Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 46 AS 17-25 waste pickup. (PUBLIC WORKS) 137.FUEL DISPENSING AREAS: Per Gilroy Municipal Code Section 27C.8 Prohibition of Discharges from Industrial or Commercial Activity, the applicant shall install impermeable surfaces that are graded at the minimum slope necessary to prevent ponding and separated from the rest of the site by a grade break that prevents run- on of stormwater to the maximum extent practicable. A canopy that extends a minimum of ten feet in each direction from each pump shall cover fueling area. The canopy shall not drain onto the fueling area. (PUBLIC WORKS) 138.UNDERGROUND FRONTAGE UTILITY LINES: The applicant must underground all overhead utilities, and remove all related utility poles, along the project frontage and project boundary from utility pole to utility pole. The applicant shall be responsible for the coordination with all utility companies existing on the poles and coordinate for their undergrounding or relocation as necessary so that the project frontage and boundary is free from utilities to the approval of the City Engineer. The applicant shall submit plans for this undergrounding work with the civil plans submitted at first improvement plan submittal. Permitting for this undergrounding work shall occur prior to the issuance of the first building permit unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. (PUBLIC WORKS) 139.DRAINAGE: Drainage designed into landscaping with the purpose of reducing volume or improving quality of runoff from the site shall be implemented according to the requirements of the Stormwater Management Guidance Manual for Low Impact Development & Post Construction Requirements (June 2015) and shall also be, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. No increase to the peak discharge shall be permitted downstream. In addition, discharge must conform to any non-point source permit issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Drainage improvements made on-site shall conform to standard engineering practices and shall not allow any site drainage to impact adjacent properties. All drainage capacity calculations shall be performed by a licensed Civil Engineer, whose signed engineer’s stamp shall appear on the calculations sheets, and shall be submitted to the City for review and approval with the project civil plans. For projects that include permanent structural controls for water quality protection, the O&M (operation and maintenance) procedures for such control features shall be submitted in a site-specific Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) which shall be reviewed and approved prior to occupancy. A formal O&M Agreement shall specify the owner’s responsibility to ensure their ongoing effective operation and maintenance. Such O&M responsibility requirements shall be recorded on the property deed. If the project is proposing to connect to an existing storm drain system within or downstream from the site, the design engineer shall provide calculations with the Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 47 AS 17-25 final design plans to demonstrate that the downstream drainage system has adequate capacity to accommodate the additional site flows being added to the system for the design storm per City Standards. The calculations shall be to the approval of the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the first City permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 140.STORMWATER: The project shall prepare a hydraulic study to evaluate the stormwater impacts and impacts to surrounding discharge locations and receiving waters. Stormwater detention shall be designed to not exceed existing condition discharge rates under stormwater events range of events, such as the 2-yr., 10-yr., and 25-yr. events. Refer to the City of Gilroy General Guidelines Section 7 #13 “A 24-hour, 25-year storm, total rainfall of 4.79 inches shall be used if a reasonable outlet is provided (detention). If no disposal other than evaporation, percolation or irrigation is provided (retention), a 24-hour, 100-year storm, total rainfall of 5.59 inches, shall be used. 25% of the total basin volume shall be considered as freeboard.” https://www.cityofgilroy.org/260/Standards-Specifications 141.STORMWATER MANAGEMENT: At Developer’s sole expense, Developer shall submit results from a third-party review of the project’s stormwater design. The results shall confirm that the project is complying with requirements set in the City of Gilroy Stormwater Management Guidance Manual for Low Impact Development and Post-Construction Requirements. (PUBLIC WORKS) 142.SITE LANDSCAPING COORDINATION: The site landscaping needs to be coordinated between the stormwater treatment area and the overall site landscaping plan area. The landscaping within the stormwater treatment area will not count towards the site landscaping requirement. Stormwater treatment areas should be identified on the site first, and then site landscaping to make sure the correct plant material is identified for each area. Some site landscaping plant material may not be suitable in stormwater treatment areas due to the nature of the facility. Sewer facilities cannot be aligned through stormwater treatment facilities. It is the applicant’s responsibility to coordinate the civil stormwater treatment facilities and the plans from the project landscaper. (PUBLIC WORKS) 143.PARKING LOTS: The applicant shall submit plans for all required off-street parking lots showing proper grading, drainage, ramps profile, and parking dimensions in conformance with City parking standards. The plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the first City permits. (PUBLIC WORKS) 144.BICYCLE PARKING: The applicant shall provide both long-term bicycle lockers and short-term bicycle racks on-site, as shown on the approved site plan, to the approval of the City Engineer. (PUBLIC WORKS) Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 48 AS 17-25 145.OFF-HOURS MATERIAL DELIVERY: The applicant shall coordinate with the future site operators so that all site delivery of materials and goods are delivered off-hours and on-site. This will allow the on-site customer parking for the development site to be utilized during business hours, and not be impacted by the staging of delivery vehicles. The applicant shall provide a written plan, to ensure that this condition is satisfied, prior to occupancy of the first site building. The plan shall be to the approval of the Planning Manager and City Engineer. (PUBLIC WORKS) 146.TRAFFIC SIGNAL EQUIPMENT: Per the project Transportation Analysis/Traffic Study dated October 10, 2022, the applicant shall procure all equipment and install, at developers cost, signal improvements. The signal equipment shall be to City Standard (unless Caltrans requires their standard to be met). The signal equipment shall include a 2070 controller with the latest McCain software, type 332 cabinet, and meet the requirements of the City Traffic Signal Design Standards. Signal equipment shall be installed at the back of walk to provide for a clear sidewalk at the intersection. Design shall be to the approval of (Caltrans and) the City Engineer, and shall be installed as part of Phase I and prior to occupancy of the first project building. (PUBLIC WORKS) 147.ADDRESS PLAN: The applicant shall submit to the Public Works Department a final address plan. The plan shall be substantially in conformance with the address plan approved with the Arch & Site application. Said submittal shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the submittal of plans for any demolition permit, building permit, or site development permit and shall be satisfied prior to issuance of whichever permit is issued first. (PUBLIC WORKS) 148.PERMITS REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES: The applicant shall obtain all applicable permits and approval from federal, state, and local agencies as required to construct the proposed improvements. The applicant is hereby informed that permits may be required by one (1) or more of the following: Caltrans, VTA, Army Corps of Engineers, UPRR/CPUC, Valley Water, Fish and Wildlife, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Clara County Roads and Airports, Santa Clara Valley Water District or Habitat Permit. If project is within jurisdiction of any of these agencies, verification of permit or waiver of permit must be given to the Public Works Department prior to issuance of any required City permits. If the City is required to be a party to the permit application and a fee is required, the applicant shall reimburse the City for its cost. A copy of these permits shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the first City permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 149.CALTRANS PERMIT: Prior to the issuance of the first City permit, the applicant must submit evidence to the Public Works Department of approval by the State of Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 49 AS 17-25 California for the performance of any work within the State right-of-way. If the City is required to be a party to the permit application and a fee is required, the applicant shall reimburse the City for its cost. The Applicant is encouraged to contact the Caltrans permit office as soon as possible to learn what is required to obtain Caltrans approval and issuance of a State Encroachment Permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 150.STREET TREE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE: The applicant shall pay a fee to prove funding towards additional tree planting in the City. The fee is based on the amount of added hardscape the project is adding. The estimated impact fee, based on the approved plans, is $7,287. This fee is only an estimate. The actual impact fee will be calculated based on building permit plans submitted, and the fees approved by the City Council in place at the time of the building permit submittal. The fee shall be collected by the Public Works Department and paid prior to issuance of the first City permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 151.STORM DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE: The applicant shall pay a fee proportional to the project's share of storm drainage flowing off-site, and shall be used to enhance the City’s storm drainage system based on the recommendations of the adopted Storm Drainage Master Plan. The estimated impact fee, based on the approved plans, is $12,014. This fee is only an estimate. The actual impact fee will be calculated based on building permit plans submitted, and the fees approved by the City Council in place at the time of the building permit submittal. The fee shall be collected by the Public Works Department and paid prior to issuance of the first City permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 152.SANITARY SEWER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE: The applicant shall pay a fee proportional to the project’s share of the increase amount of sewage generated by the project, which shall be used to enhance the City’s sewer system based on the adopted Sewer Master Plan. The estimated impact fee, based on the approved plans, is $1,542,728. This fee is only an estimate. The actual impact fee will be calculated based on building permit plans submitted, and the fees approved by the City Council in place at the time of the building permit submittal. The fee shall be collected by the Public Works Department and paid prior to issuance of the first building permit. At first improvement plan submittal, applicant’s engineer shall submit a calculation for sanitary sewer and water generation per the City’s Master Plan design criteria. The fee shall be collected by the Public Works Department and paid prior to issuance of the first building permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 153.WATER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE: The applicant shall pay a fee proportional to the project's share of impact to the City’s water system, and the water needs of the development. The fee shall be used to fund improvements identified in the City’s Water Master Plan. The estimated impact fee, based on the approved plans, Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 50 AS 17-25 is $402,763. This fee is only an estimate. The actual impact fee will be calculated based on building permit plans submitted, and the fees approved by the City Council in place at the time of the building permit submittal. At first improvement plan submittal, applicant’s engineer shall submit a calculation for water generation per the City’s Master Plan design criteria. The fee shall be collected by the Public Works Department and paid prior to issuance of the first building permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 154.TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE: The applicant shall pay a fee proportional to the project's share of transportation improvements needed to serve cumulative development within the City of Gilroy. The funds shall be used to fund improvements identified in the City Traffic Circulation Master Plan. The estimated impact fee, based on the approved plans, is $2,568,157. This fee is only an estimate. The actual impact fee will be calculated based on building permit plans submitted, and the fees approved by the City Council in place at the time of the building permit submittal. The fee shall be collected by the Public Works Department and paid prior to issuance of the first building permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 155.PUBLIC FACILITIES IMPACT FEE: The applicant shall pay a fee proportional to the project’s share of the increase to the use of City Public facilities. The estimated impact fee, based on the approved plans, is $3,897,623. This fee is only an estimate. The actual impact fee will be calculated based on building permit plans submitted, and the fees approved by the City Council in place at the time of the building permit submittal. The fee shall be collected by the Public Works Department and paid prior to issuance of the first building permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 156.CONSTRUCTION NOTICING: At least two week prior to commencement of any on or off-site work, the applicant shall post at the site, and to property owners within (300') three hundred feet of the exterior boundary of the project site a notice that construction work will commence on or around the stated date. The notice shall include a list of contact persons with name, title, phone number and area of responsibility. The person responsible for maintaining the list shall be included. The list shall be current at all times and shall consist of persons with authority to initiate corrective action in their area of responsibility. The names of individuals responsible for dust, noise and litter control shall be expressly identified in the notice. Noticing shall be in both English and Spanish. The notice shall be submitted for review to the approval of the City Engineer two weeks prior to the issuance of the first City permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) The following conditions shall be met prior to the approval of the FINAL MAP or PARCEL MAP, or if another deadline is specified in a condition, at that time. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 51 AS 17-25 157.DEDICATIONS: The applicant or owner shall dedicate all necessary right of way along the project frontage, project boundary, and all off-site locations in order to construct the improvements identified in the Transportation Analysis/Traffic Study. Where required, the applicant shall also dedicate a property line radius at the corner of his property. (PUBLIC WORKS) 158.DEDICATION OF EASEMENT: The applicant shall dedicate a 16-ft Public Utility Easement to the City for public utilities per City Standards. The easement shall be conveyed by the associated Parcel/Final Map. The applicant shall prepare the easement conveyance documents for review to the approval of the City Engineer. The easement shall be recorded with the County of Santa Clara prior to the issuance of the first City permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 159.DRIVEWAY ACCESS EASEMENT: The applicant or owner shall dedicate reciprocal driveway ingress and egress easements, as delineated on the approved plans. Said easements shall be approved by all affected property owners. The easements shall be approved by the City Engineer, recorded with the County Recorder’s Office, and a recorded copy of the document returned to the City prior to the issuance of the first City permit. The easement may also be designated on any associated parcel or subdivision map. (PUBLIC WORKS) 160.PARCEL MAP: It shall be the applicant's responsibility to have a parcel map, prepared by a person authorized to practice land surveying in California, delineating all parcels created or deleted and all changes in lot lines in conformance with the Gilroy Municipal Code. The parcel map shall be approved by the Department of Public Works and recorded with the County Recorder’s Office prior to the issuance of the first City permit. A parcel map guarantee shall be submitted to the City, by the applicant’s title company, prior to release of the parcel map to the title company for recordation. Prior to the City’s release of the parcel map to the title company, the applicant may, at the discretion of the City Engineer, be required to submit to the City an electronic copy of the map in the AutoCAD Version being used by the City at the time of recordation. It is the applicant's responsibility to check with their title company and the County Recorder’s Office to determine the time necessary to have the map recorded after City approval. (PUBLIC WORKS) 161.SUBDIVISION (FINAL) MAP: The applicant shall have a subdivision map, prepared by a person authorized to practice land surveying in California, delineating all parcels created or deleted and all changes in lot lines in conformance with the Gilroy Municipal Code. The Final Subdivision Map shall be approved by the Department of Public Works and recorded by the County Recorder’s Office prior to the issuance of the first City permit. A map guarantee shall be submitted to the City, by the applicant’s title company, prior to release of Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 52 AS 17-25 the map to the title company for recordation. Prior to the City’s release of the final map to the title company, the applicant may, at the discretion of the City Engineer, be required to submit to the City an electronic copy of the map in the AutoCAD Version being used by the City at the time of recordation. It is the applicant's responsibility to check with their title company and the County Recorder’s Office to determine the time necessary to have the map recorded after City approval. The Subdivision (Final) Map shall be presented to the City Council for review and action. The City Council meeting will be scheduled approximately fifty (50) days after the Subdivision (Final) Map is deemed technically correct, and Improvement Plans with supporting documents, reports and agreements are approved by the City. Executed Subdivision (Final) Map shall be returned to the City Public Works Department if Subdivision (Final) Map has not been filed in the County Recorder’s Office within ninety (90) days from the date of City Council’s approval. (Note: This item to also be added for condominium projects.) (PUBLIC WORKS) 162.PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT (PIA): The applicant shall enter into a property improvement agreement with the City per Gov. Code Section 66462(a), and shall arrange to provide Payment and Performance bonds each for 100% of the cost of public infrastructure improvements to be constructed in the public right- of-way. These improvements shall include, but not be limited to, roadway construction, sidewalk, curb and gutter, water lines, storm lines, sewer lines, street lights, and signal equipment. City Standard insurance shall be provided per the terms of the agreement. The agreement will be forwarded to the City Council for approval with project (parcel or final) map. The PIA shall be approved by the City Council prior to the issuance of the first project permit. (PUBLIC WORKS) 163.LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: The developer will be required to enter into a landscape maintenance agreement for the maintenance of landscape in the public right of way along the project frontage. 164.MONUMENTS: The applicant shall arrange for the engineer to have all monuments set per the recorded final map. A certificate letter by the Surveyor or Engineer will be provided to the City Engineer. (PUBLIC WORKS) 165.COVANANTS, CONDITIONS & RESTRICTIONS (CC&R): The applicant shall prepare project Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R) for the project. The CC&Rs shall be submitted with the project map for review and approval of the City Engineer, the City Attorney, and the Planning Manager. The CC&Rs shall include relevant project Conditions of Approval, and shall include language that restricts the Homeowner’s Association from making changes to the CC&Rs without first obtaining approval from the City. The CC&Rs shall be reviewed and approved prior to the City Council approval of the project map. (PUBLIC WORKS) Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 53 AS 17-25 166.LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT: It shall be the applicant's responsibility to have any lot line adjustment, prepared by a person authorized to practice land surveying in California, delineating all changes in lot lines in conformance with the Gilroy Municipal Code. The lot line adjustment shall be approved by the Department of Public Works, recorded by the County Recorder’s Office, and a recorded copy of the document returned to the City prior to the issuance of any City permits. It is the applicant's responsibility to check with their title company and the County Recorder’s Office to determine the time necessary to have the lot line adjustment recorded after City approval. (PUBLIC WORKS) 167.ELEVATION CERTIFICATE: (specifically for projects in the flood zone) An elevation certificate per FEMA requirements must be complete by a Land Surveyor or Civil Engineer. The elevation certificate shall be submitted, to the approval of the City Engineer, prior to the first building occupancy. (PUBLIC WORKS) 168.STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: The applicant shall execute a Stormwater Management Facilities Maintenance Agreement with the City Engineer as specified in Chapter 7.39.210-230 of the Stormwater Management and Discharge Control ordinance. The agreement shall outline the operation and maintenance (O&M) plan for the permanent storm water treatment facilities. The City-Standard Stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement will be provided by Public Works Engineering. The agreement shall include the following: a. This Agreement shall also provide that in the event that maintenance or repair is neglected, or the stormwater management facility becomes a danger to public health or safety, the city shall have the authority to perform maintenance and/or repair work and to recover the costs from the owner. b. All on-site stormwater management facilities shall be operated and maintained in good condition and promptly repaired/replaced by the property owner(s) or other legal entity approved by the City. c. Any repairs or restoration/replacement and maintenance shall be in accordance with City-approved plans. d. The property owner(s) shall develop a maintenance schedule for the life of any stormwater management facility and shall describe the maintenance to be completed, the time period for completion, and who shall perform the maintenance. This maintenance schedule shall be included with the approved Stormwater Runoff Management Plan. This agreement shall be executed prior to the first occupancy of the building. (PUBLIC WORKS) 169.STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES INSPECTION: The Stormwater Management Facilities Maintenance Agreement work shall require inspections be performed which shall adhere to the following: Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 54 AS 17-25 a. To comply with the State Stormwater requirements and the NPDES permit, the applicant shall secure a QSD or QSP to maintain all erosion control and BMP measures during construction. The applicant’s QSD or QSP shall provide the City weekly inspection reports to the approval of the City Engineer. b. Stormwater facility inspections shall be done at least twice per year, once in Fall by October 1st, in preparation for the wet season, and once in Winter by March 15th. Written records shall be kept of all inspections and shall include, at minimum, the following information: 1. Site address; 2. Date and time of inspection; 3. Name of the person conducting the inspection; 4. List of stormwater facilities inspected; 5. Condition of each stormwater facility inspected; 6. Description of any needed maintenance or repairs; and 7. As applicable, the need for site re-inspection. c. Upon completion of each inspection, an inspection report shall be submitted to Public Works Engineering no later than October 1st for the Fall report, and no later than March 15th of the following year for the Winter report. d. Before commencing any grading or construction activities, the applicant shall obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and provide evidence of filing of a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resources Control Board. e. The applicant is responsible for ensuring that all contractors are aware of all storm water quality measures and implement such measures. Failure to comply with the approved construction BMPs will result in the issuance of correction notices, citations or a project stop order. f. Sequence of construction for all stormwater facilities (bioswales, detention/ retention basins, drain rock, etc.) shall be done toward final phases of project to prevent silting of facilities and reduce the intended use of the facilities. g. Prior to final inspection, all stormwater facilities will be tested by a certified QSP or QSD to meet the minimum design infiltration rate. All tests shall be made at on 20 ft x 20ft grid pattern over the surface of the completed stormwater facility unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. All soil and infiltration properties for all stormwater facilities shall be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer. Percolation tests (using Double Ring Infiltrometer Testing with appropriate safety factors) at horizontal and vertical (at the depth of the stormwater facility) shall be conducted for each stormwater facility. A 50% safety factor shall be applied to the calculated percolation test and shall be used as the basis for design (the design percolation rate). The geotechnical report shall include a section designated for stormwater design, including percolation results and design parameters. (PUBLIC WORKS) Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 55 AS 17-25 170.REGIONAL BOARD STORMWATER: This project may be subject to an audit by the Central Coast Regional Board. City may be required to provide the project stormwater design and storm water management plan for Regional Board review and comment. The project may need to provide the Regional Board any and all necessary documents (including reports, technical data, plans, etc.) for the Regional Board approval. (PUBLIC WORKS) The following conditions shall be complied with AT ALL TIMES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT, or if another deadline is specified in a condition, at that time. 171.PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: The City shall be notified at least ten (10) working days prior to the start of any construction work, and at that time the contractor shall provide a project construction and phasing schedule, and a 24-hour emergency telephone number list. The schedule shall be in Microsoft Project, or an approved equal, and shall identify the scheduled critical path for the installation of improvements to the approval of the City Engineer. The schedule shall be updated weekly. The approved construction and phasing schedule shall be shared with Gilroy Unified School District (GUSD) to avoid traffic impacts to surrounding school functions. An approved construction information handout(s) shall also be provided to GUSD to share with school parents. (PUBLIC WORKS) a. All work shown on the improvement plans shall be inspected to the approval of the City Engineer as applicable. Uninspected work shall be removed as deemed appropriate by the City Engineer. b. Construction activities related to the issuance of any Public Works permit shall be restricted to the weekday between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. for general construction activities. No work shall be done on Sundays and on City Holidays unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Please note that no work shall be allowed to take place within the City right-of-way after 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. In addition, no work being done under the issuance of a Public Works encroachment permit may be performed on the weekend unless prior approvals have been granted by Public Works. The City Engineer may apply additional construction period restrictions, as necessary, to accommodate standard commute traffic along arterial roadways and along school commute routes. Signs outlining the project construction times shall be posted at conspicuous locations on site where it is visible to the public. The signs shall be per the City Standard Drawing for posting construction hours. The sign shall be kept free of graffiti at all times. Contact the Public Works Department to obtain sample City Standard sign outlining hours of operation. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 56 AS 17-25 c. The allowed hours of Public Works construction activities may be waived or modified through an exemption, for limited periods, if the City Engineer finds that the following criteria are met: i. Permitting extended hours of construction will decrease the total time needed to complete the project thus mitigating the total amount of noise associated with the project as a whole; or, ii. Permitting extended hours of construction are required to accommodate design or engineering requirements, such as a large concrete pour. Such a need would be determined by the project's design engineer and require approval of the City Engineer. iii. An emergency situation exists where the construction work is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition resulting in obvious and eminent peril to public health and safety. If such a condition exists, the City may waive any of the remaining requirements outlined below. iv. The exemption will not conflict with any other condition of approval required by the City to mitigate significant impacts. v. The contractor or owner of the property will notify residential and commercial occupants of property adjacent to the construction site of the hours of construction activity which may impact the area. This notification must be provided three days prior to the start of the extended construction activity. vi. The approved hours of construction activity will be posted at the construction site in a place and manner that can be easily viewed by any interested member of the public. vii. The City Engineer may revoke the exemption at any time if the contractor or owner of the property fails to abide by the conditions of exemption or if it is determined that the peace, comfort and tranquility of the occupants of adjacent residential or commercial properties are impaired because of the location and nature of the construction. The waiver application must be submitted to the Public Works Construction Inspector ten (10) working days prior to the requested date of waiver. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 57 AS 17-25 d. The following provision to control traffic congestion, noise, and dust shall be followed during site excavation, grading and construction: i. All construction vehicles should be properly maintained and equipped with exhaust mufflers that meet State standards. ii. Blowing dust shall be reduced by timing construction activities so that paving and building construction begin as soon as possible after completion of grading, and by landscaping disturbed soils as soon as possible. iii. Further, water trucks shall be present and in use at the construction site. All portions of the site subject to blowing dust shall be watered as often as deemed necessary by the City, or a minimum of three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites in order to ensure proper control of blowing dust for the duration of the project. iv. Watering on public streets, and wash down of dirt and debris into storm drain systems will not be allowed. Streets will be cleaned by street sweepers or by hand as often as deemed necessary by the Construction Inspector, or at least once a day. Watering associated with on-site construction activity shall take place between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. and shall include at least one late-afternoon watering to minimize the effects of blowing dust. Recycled water shall be used for construction watering to manage dust control where possible, as determined by the City Engineer. Recycled water shall be billed at the municipal industrial rate based on the current Santa Clara Valley Water District’s municipal industrial rate. Where recycled water is not available potable water shall be used. All potable construction water from fire hydrants shall be metered and billed at the current portable fire hydrant meter rate. v. All public streets soiled or littered due to this construction activity shall be cleaned and swept on a daily basis during the workweek to the satisfaction of the Construction Inspector. vi. Construction grading activity shall be discontinued in wind conditions that in the opinion of the Public Works Construction Inspector cause excessive neighborhood dust problems. vii. Site dirt shall not be tracked into the public right-of-way, and shall Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 58 AS 17-25 be cleaned immediately if done, or the project may risk being shut down. Mud, silt, concrete and other construction debris shall not be washed into the City’s storm drains. viii. Construction activities shall be scheduled so that paving and foundation placement begin immediately upon completion of grading operation. ix. All aggregate materials transported to and from the site shall be covered in accordance with Section 23114 of the California Vehicle Code during transit to and from the site. x. Prior to issuance of any permit, the applicant shall submit any applicable pedestrian or traffic detour plans, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, for any lane or sidewalk closures. The traffic control plan shall be prepared by a licensed professional engineer with experience in preparing such plans. The Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared by a licensed engineer in accordance with the requirements of the latest edition of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and standard construction practices. The Traffic Control Plan shall be approved prior to the commencement of any work within the public right-of- way. xi. During construction, the applicant shall make accessible any or all City utilities as directed by the City Engineer. xii. The minimum soils sampling and testing frequency shall conform to Chapter 8 of the Caltrans Construction Manual. The applicant shall require the soils engineer submit to daily testing and sampling reports to the City Engineer. 172.STREET RESURFACING PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE: Prior to final acceptance, the applicant shall apply a microsufacing to all streets, and apply final street markings, per the approved plans, in thermoplastic to Caltrans Standards. All microsurfacing and final striping shall be to the approval of the City Engineer. (PUBLIC WORKS) 173.PROJECT CLOSE-OUT AND RECORD DRAWINGS: At project completion, the applicant shall submit the complete Public Works project closeout package to the Department of Public Works Engineering Division. The project closeout package consists of As-Builts, AutoCAD files, etc. Additional information regarding the Public Works project closeout can be provided to the applicant upon request. This Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 59 AS 17-25 condition shall be met prior to the release of utilities, final inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first. (PUBLIC WORKS) 174.PROJECT CLOSE-OUT: Prior to City acceptance of all parcel map subdivision developments, tract subdivision developments, and property improvement agreements, the applicant shall comply with all City construction close-out procedures to the approval of the City Engineer. Refer to the City’s website for a copy of these procedure. Prior to final inspections, all pertinent conditions of approval and all improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City Engineer. A letter indicating that all project conditions have been met shall be submitted prior to the first occupancy. All public improvements, including the complete installation of all improvements relative to streets, fencing, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, water system, underground utilities, etc., shall be completed and attested to by the City Engineer before approval of occupancy of any unit. Where facilities of other agencies are involved, such installation shall be verified as having been completed and accepted by those agencies. In addition, the applicant shall submit a detailed project cost estimate of all public improvements constructed on-site and within the public right-of-way. The cost estimate shall be prepared by the project engineer, and be to the approval of the City Engineer. The cost estimate shall be broken out into on-site and off-site improvements based on the format provided by the City. Until such time as all improvements required are fully completed and accepted by City, the applicant shall be responsible for the care maintenance of and any damage to such improvements. City shall not, nor shall any officer or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage, regardless of cause, happening or occurring to the work or Improvements required for this project prior to the completion and acceptance of the work or Improvements. All such risks shall be the responsibility of, and are hereby assumed by the applicant. (PUBLIC WORKS) 175.MATERIAL HAULING ROUTE AND PERMIT: For material delivery vehicles equal to, or larger than two-axle, six-tire single unit truck (SU) size or larger as defined by FHWA Standards, the applicant shall submit a truck hauling route and receive a haul permit that conforms to City of Gilroy Standards to the approval of the City Engineer. Note that the City requires a Haul Permit be issued for any hauling activities. The project sponsor shall require contractors to prohibit trucks from using “compression release engine brakes” on residential streets. A letter from the applicant confirming the intention to use this hauling route shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works, and approved, prior to the issuance of any City permits. All material hauling activities including but not limited to, adherence to the approved route, hours of operation, staging of materials, dust control and street maintenance shall be the responsibility of the applicant. All storage and office Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 60 AS 17-25 trailers will be kept off the public right-of-way. Tracking of dirt onto City streets and walks will not be allowed. The applicant must provide an approved method of cleaning tires and trimming loads on-site. Any job-related dirt and/or debris that impacts the public right-of-way shall be removed immediately. No wash down of dirt into storm drains will be allowed. All material hauling activities shall be done in accordance with applicable City ordinances and conditions of approval. Mud, silt, concrete and other construction debris shall not be washed into the City’s storm drains. Violation of such may be cause for suspension of work. (PUBLIC WORKS) 176.CONSTRUCTION WORKER PARKING: The applicant shall provide an on-site construction-parking plan and shall include an estimate of the number of workers that will be present on the site during the various phases of construction and indicate where sufficient off-street parking will be utilized. Said plan shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of City permits and shall be complied with at all times during construction. Failure to enforce the parking plan may result in suspension of the City permits. (PUBLIC WORKS) 177.ARCHITECTURAL COPPER: Per Gilroy Municipal Code Section 27C.7 Prohibition of Illegal Discharges, the applicant shall follow the specific best management practices for the installation of the Architectural Copper. For detailed information please distribute the flyer to all construction personnel involved in the fabrication and installation of the Architectural Copper that is located at: http://flowstobay.org/files/newdevelopment/flyersfactsheets/ArchitecturalcopperBMPs.pdf (PUBLIC WORKS) The following conditions shall be complied with AT ALL TIMES that the use permitted by this entitlement occupies the premises 178.POST CONSTRUCTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP): In accordance with Gilroy Municipal Code Chapter 27D Post Construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention all projects that meet the criteria described in the Storm Water Guidance Manual for Low Impact Development and Post-Construction Requirements shall prepare a storm water control plan (SWCP) and shall meet the requirements of the design standards and selection of best management practices and shall be selected and designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer or designee. Requirements shall include: a. Owner/occupant shall inspect private storm drain facilities at least two (2) times per year and sweep parking lots immediately prior to and once during the storm season. b. The applicant shall be charged the cost of abatement for issues associated with, but not limited to, inspection of the private storm drain facilities, Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 61 AS 17-25 emergency maintenance needed to protect public health or watercourses, and facility replacement or repair in the event that the treatment facility is no longer able to meet performance standards or has deteriorated. Any abatement activity performed on the applicant’s property by City staff will be charged to the applicant at the City’s adopted hourly rate. c. Label new and redeveloped storm drain inlets with the phrase “No Dumping: Drains to Bay” plaques to alert the public to the destination of storm water and to prevent direct discharge of pollutants into the storm drain. Template ordering information is available at www.flowstobay.org. d. All process equipment, oils fuels, solvents, coolants, fertilizers, pesticides, and similar chemical products, as well as petroleum based wastes, tallow, and grease planned for storage outdoors shall be stored in covered containers at all times. e. All public outdoor spaces and trails shall include installation and upkeep of dog waste stations. Garbage and recycling receptacles and bins shall be designed and maintained with permanent covers to prevent exposure of trash to rain. Trash enclosure drains shall be connected to the sanitary sewer system. (PUBLIC WORKS) End. RESOLUTION NO. 2023-__ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GILROY RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE MAP FOR THE GILROY SQUARE PROJECT 10.18 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6970 CAMINO ARROYO, APN: APN 841-70-049 (FILE NUMBER TM 21-02) WHEREAS, on July 29, 2021, Bhagirath Desai, Temple Gilroy LLC submitted an application for the Gilroy Square project requesting planned unit development zone change for the Gilroy Crossings C3-HC-M2 PUD phase II, architectural and site review for the PUD amendment, and tentative map to create six parcels for proposed development of a drive-through restaurant, vehicle fueling station with a convenience store and carwash, two 4 story hotels with 200 rooms, and two speculative industrial buildings, all of which would be on separate new parcels; and WHEREAS, in compliance with the Subdivision Map Act the tentative map was referred to all utility and service providers for review and comment, including PG&E, Spectrum, Verizon, and local agencies, and no service issues or changes have been identified or required as a result of this review; and WHEREAS, on July 7, 2022, the application submittal was accepted as complete; and WHEREAS, an initial study/mitigated negative declaration (MND) and mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) has been adopted for the project by separate resolution, and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program shall apply to approve of project zoning entitlements, which incorporates the mitigation measures identified in the MND to reduce the project potential environmental impacts to less than significant, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, on May 4, 2023, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting, at which time the Planning Commission received and considered the staff report as well as all evidence received including written and oral public testimony on the Gilroy Square zoning amendment and related entitlements; and WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the project approval is based is the Community Development Department, Planning Division. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Gilroy hereby recommends City Council approval of Tentative Map TM 21-02, pursuant to Gilroy City Code Chapter 21 and subject to all conditions for filing of a final map as identified in AS 21-13 Exhibit A, based on the fact that the findings required for denial of the map pursuant to Government Code Section 66474 are not made, as follows: Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 2 (TM 21-02) A. Finding that the subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in 65451 cannot be made given the fact that the project implements the general plan commercial services and general industrial land use designations; B. Finding that the design or improvement of the subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans cannot be made based on the fact that the project has been reviewed by all city departments and service providers, which have confirmed existing capacity exists for serve site buildout as proposed and conditioned, and that the existing and proposed improvements meet City standards for the project and as anticipated for development within the PUD overlay district; C. Finding that the site is not physically suitable for the type of development cannot be made. The site is physically suitable for this type of development because it is generally consistent with the City’s Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision and Land Development Code; D. Finding that the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development cannot be made as the project does not include any residential density and the commercial and industrial development are within the allowable floor area ratios; E. Finding that the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat cannot be made. Environmental review has been prepared that includes mitigation measures to avoid any such impacts, the site is within a developed urban area and is not in or adjacent unique sensitive habitat areas, and the project shall pay habitat permit impact fees applicable to the project pursuant to the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan which is adopted to mitigate impacts of development on local flora and fauna; F. Finding that the design of the subdivision or type of improvements are likely to cause serious public health problems cannot be made given that the site is located within an urban context and has access to urban services including sewer and water; and G. Finding that the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision cannot be made given that there are no existing access easements encumbering this property. Easements for pedestrian access will be provided. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. Resolution No. 2023-__ Page 3 (TM 21-02) PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___ day of ____ by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: ______________________________ ___________________________________ Sharon Goei, Secretary Manny Bhandal, Chairperson Community Development Director Community Development Department 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020-6197 Telephone: (408) 846-0451 | Fax: (408) 846-0429 cityofgilroy.org |planningdivision@cityofgilroy.org Sharon Goei DIRECTOR DATE: May 4, 2023 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Daryl Jordan, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Finding of Consistency for the Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 2024 through Fiscal Year 2028 to Determine its Consistency with the City’s General Plan and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) RECOMMENDATION: Staff has analyzed the proposed project, and recommends that the Planning Commission: a) Receive report on proposed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Fiscal Year 2024 through Fiscal Year 2028; and b) Adopt a Resolution to make a Finding of Consistency with the General Plan. (roll call vote) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Gilroy’s Capital Improvement Program (“CIP”) represents an ongoing budget process through which the City identifies, prioritizes, and develops a multi-year work plan for major capital expenditures and their associated funding sources in an effort to improve and maintain the City of Gilroy’s roadways, parks, facilities, and other infrastructure. Generally, CIP improvements are major expenditures that have a multi- year life and result in becoming City assets. The CIP is a strategic planning tool focusing on City-owned infrastructure, summarizing in one document the City’s overall capital project needs and associated funding requirements during a five-year period. The CIP document is a work plan and a planning tool, and should be used as such in the biannual operating budget preparation process. There are a wide variety of funding sources for CIP projects, some steady and predictable while others are dependent on outside agencies. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Review of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for Fiscal Year 2024 through Fiscal Year 2028 to determine its consistency with the City’s General Plan. BACKGROUND 2 1 0 7 5 As part of the City’s budget process, the Planning Commission evaluates projects proposed for the five-year capital improvement program for consistency with the City’s General Plan. The Commission is requested to review the CIP and report its findings and recommendations, relative to consistency with the General Plan, to the City Council. Environmental Review: Staff has reviewed the list of projects identified in the CIP and determined that a number of projects will likely involve the need for preparation of environmental documentation in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ). As individual projects are selected to move forward through the CIP process, the appropriate CEQA documents will be prepared as the project scopes are more clearly defined. The CIP General Plan conformity determination report is not a project per CEQA Guidelines Section 15378. The CIP is a budgeting and fiscal planning tool. It does not commit the City to construct or implement any specific project. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS: Staff has reviewed the new projects included in the proposed Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 2024 through Fiscal Year 2028 for General Plan consistency. Attached is a list of the proposed CIP Projects with their associated General Plan Policies and/or Goals to indicate consistency with the document. NEXT STEPS: Staff will present the proposed CIP to the City Council on May 3 at a CIP workshop. The CIP will then be presented to Council on June 5 with a recommendation for adoption. Any significant changes made by the City Council may need to return to the Planning Commission for review of General Plan consistency. Attachments: A. Draft FY24-28 CIP Budget Book B. FY24-28 CIP General Plan Consistency Table C. FY24-28 CIP Planning Commission Resolution City of Gilroy Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2024 to Fiscal Year 2028 Draft DRAFT This page intentionally left blank DRAFT City of Gilroy Capital Improvement Program Mayor Marie Blankley Members of the City Council Dion Bracco, Mayor Pro Tempore Rebeca Armendariz, Council Member Tom Cline, Council Member Zack Hilton, Council Member Carol Marques, Council Member Fred Tovar, Council Member Submitted by Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator Prepared by Daryl Jordan, Public Works Director Julie Oates, Engineer II Ogarita Carranza, Management Analyst Bryce Atkins, Assistant to the City Administrator Harjot Sangha, Finance Director Fiscal Year 2024 to Fiscal Year 2028 DRAFT This page intentionally left blank DRAFT Table of Contents Capital Improvement Program Overview and Guide .......................................................... 1 Project Highlights and Analysis .......................................................................................... 1 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Development Process .............................................. 6 Program Categories ........................................................................................................... 7 Funding Sources ................................................................................................................ 7 CIP Project Charter Anatomy / How to Read a Project Charter ........................................ 10 CIP Policy Document ........................................................................................................ 15 CIP Budget Summary ....................................................................................................... 20 CIP Budget Program Details ............................................................................................. 22 CIP Budget Fund Balance Details .................................................................................... 27 Appendices – CIP Project Charters .................................................................................. 47 Appendix A – Funded CIP Projects (Within 5-Year CIP) ............................................ 55 Appendix B – Unfunded CIP Projects (Recommended Beyond FY28) .................... 181 Appendix C – Funded Studies/Plans (Within 5-Year CIP) ......................................... 273 Appendix D – Unfunded Studies/Plans (Recommended Beyond FY28) ................... 283 Appendix E – Miscellaneous Funded CIP Projects (Within 5-Year CIP) ................... 305 Appendix F – Completed CIP Projects ...................................................................... 321 DRAFT This page intentionally left blank DRAFT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM OVERVIEW AND GUIDE The City of Gilroy’s Capital Improvement Program (“CIP”) represents an ongoing budget process through which the City identifies, prioritizes, and develops a multi-year work plan for major capital expenditures and their associated funding sources. As a planning tool, the CIP document outlines the process and activities required to improve and maintain the City of Gilroy’s roadways, parks, facilities, and other infrastructure. Generally, CIP improvements are major expenditures that result in becoming City assets which have a multi-year life span. The CIP is a strategic planning tool focusing on City-owned infrastructure, summarizing in one document the City’s overall capital project needs and associated funding requirements, during a five- year period. The CIP document is a planning tool and should be used as such in the biennial operating budget preparation and update process. There are a wide variety of funding sources for CIP projects, some steady and predictable, while others are dependent on outside agencies. PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS AND ANALYSIS Projects Recommended for Consideration in the Current CIP Annual Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation – 800060 The purpose of this project is to rehabilitate and maintain the City’s pavement condition. The City, with approximately 270 lane miles of paved roads (not including alleys), conducts a pavement condition survey every two years. The 2022 survey showed the citywide average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is 62 out of 100. This project would prolong the lifespan of the current pavement and prevent further deterioration and reduction in the PCI. The project scope includes: Preventive measures such as crack sealing, slurry seal, microsurfacing, and cape seal for pavement in fair to good condition. Restoration measures such as grind and overlay, dig-outs, and cold-in-place recycling for pavement in fair to poor condition. Rehabilitation/Reconstruction measures to remove and replace pavement in poor to failed condition. 1DRAFT Ice Center Infrastructure – EN2402 This project will design and install the needed infrastructure for the future Gilroy Ice Center located at the Gilroy Sports Park. Expected work includes design, environmental, and construction for site grading, installation of the site stormwater collection system and stormwater treatment facilities, sewer collection, water service distribution, and joint trench. The project will also include the design and construction of traffic signal improvements at the entrance to the Sports Park at the Monterey Road/Monterey Frontage Road intersection. Civic Center Master Plan – FC2403 The development of a Civic Center Master Plan would examine the City facilities within the City Hall complex area to determine their remaining useful life, identify replacement costs, and identify a phasing plan for implementation. While the Police Station and Gilroy Library are relatively new buildings, other buildings within the complex area are in various degrees of deterioration and need significant investment if the buildings are to be kept in service for the next decade. Buildings considered for review in the master plan effort include City Hall, the Senior Center, the City Hall Annex Building, Wheeler Auditorium, and the Dowdy building. Citywide Park Restroom Reroofing/Rehabilitation – PK2401 The Citywide Park Restroom Reroofing/Rehabilitation project would replace approximately 32 park restrooms throughout the City with restrooms equipped with fire retardant roofs and durable, fire-resistant building materials. It has become increasingly challenging to maintain these public restrooms due to growing incidents of vandalism. This project would enhance public safety and reduce maintenance costs and staff time. 2DRAFT Master Plan Projects – Sewer Improvements – SW2401 The Master Plan Projects – Sewer Improvements project includes 16 individual projects in 6 system areas throughout the City. The purpose of these projects is to mitigate existing deficiencies in the City’s sewer system and implement improvements to service anticipated future growth throughout the City. The projects include pipeline replacements as well as new pipeline improvements. The projects in each subtrunk system area are listed below: Santa Teresa - Long Meadow Subtrunk – 1 Replacement Welburn Subtrunk – 2 Replacements Forest-Swanston Subtrunk – 2 Replacements Old Gilroy Subtrunk – 2 Replacements Uvas Park Subtrunk – 5 Replacements and 1 New Thomas Subtrunk – 2 Replacements Master Plan Projects – Water Improvements – WT2401 The Master Plan Projects – Water Improvements project includes 26 individual projects throughout the City. The purpose of these projects is to mitigate existing deficiencies in the City’s water system and implement improvements to service anticipated future growth throughout the City. The projects include pipeline replacements, new pipeline improvements, groundwater well improvements, and storage reservoir improvements. The number and types of projects in each category are summarized below: Pipeline Improvements - 13 Replacements and 9 New Storage Reservoir Improvements - 1 New Groundwater Well Improvements - 3 New 3DRAFT Joint Morgan Hill / Gilroy Trunk Line Repairs – SW2402 The Master Plan Projects – Joint Trunk Sewer Improvements Project includes 8 projects in the Joint Trunk Pipeline between the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill. The purpose of these projects is to mitigate existing deficiencies in the City’s sewer system joint trunk pipeline. The projects include emergency to intermediate pipeline and manhole repairs. The projects are listed below: Emergency/Immediate Pipeline Repairs – 5 Projects at various locations Emergency/Immediate Manhole Repairs – 40 Projects at various locations Intermediate Pipeline Repairs – Various locations The costs for projects on the Joint Morgan Hill / Gilroy Trunk Line are shared 50/50 between Morgan Hill and Gilroy. Coordination with the City of Morgan Hill will be required to ensure they have sufficient funding to cover their 50% of the costs when projects are considered. Projects on the Horizon Tenth Street and Uvas Creek Bridge – 800020 This project consists of constructing a two-lane bridge with sidewalks and Class II Bike Lanes to extend Tenth Street over Uvas Creek. The project will also include a “breezeway bridge” over the current Class I Levee Path, which will enable levee users to cross under Tenth Street and avoid an at-grade vehicle/pedestrian crossing. The project includes a new roundabout at the Uvas Park Drive/Tenth Street intersection. The bridge will connect two segments of Tenth Street, which currently terminate on either side of Uvas Creek, and allow Tenth Street to extend as one continuous roadway from the US 101/Tenth Street (Automall Parkway) Interchange to Santa Teresa Boulevard. Automall Parkway Pavement Rehabilitation - 800040 The project includes pavement rehabilitation, repair and replacement of deteriorated curb and gutter, reconstruction of approximately 20 curb ramps, drainage and striping improvements, and the addition of Class II Bike Lanes along Automall Parkway between Tenth Street and Luchessa Avenue. The project limits also include Automall Parkway from the Caltrans right-of-way to the Automall Parkway/Tenth Street/Chestnut Street intersection. The pavement condition along this road is in poor condition. This road serves as a commute route and truck route, and provides access to a variety of 4DRAFT commercial and industrial land uses, including many auto dealerships. This project will promote economic development, improve traffic circulation, and enhance pedestrian and bicyclist safety. State Trash Amendments Stormwater Compliance Project - 800460 On April 7, 2015, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted the Statewide Trash Provisions which address the impacts trash has on the beneficial uses of surface waters. The Trash Provisions establish a statewide water quality objective for trash and a prohibition of trash discharge. The City is required to demonstrate full compliance with the Trash Provisions by 2030, with preliminary milestones of 35% by 2026 and 70% by 2028. The City will complete this project as required under the State- Issued Trash Amendments and upcoming reissued NPDES Permit (anticipated in 2024). The proposed project will ultimately include all expenses related to compliance with the Trash Amendments. The tasks necessary to achieve compliance will include resources to ground truth the infrastructure shown in stormwater maps, design, installation, and long-term maintenance of full trash capture devices. The design and installation of the trash capture devices will be conducted by an outside contractor. Tenth Street and Highway 101 Bridge Widening – 800770 This project would widen the existing bridge overcrossing at the Tenth Street (Automall Parkway)/US 101/SR 152 interchange to add one additional lane through in each direction. The project would include widening the bridge structure, ramp work, grading, striping and signal modification improvements. The project is also expected to include roadway widening and Class II Bike Lanes between the Tenth Street/Automall Parkway/Chestnut Street and SR152/Camino Arroyo intersections and associated ramp and intersection improvements within the project limits. This project has been awarded $7,650,000 in Measure B Highway Program grant funding for the Project Approval & Environmental Documents (PA&ED) and the Planning/Project Initiation Documents (PID) phases. Funding for construction has not yet been identified. Glen Loma Temporary Fire Station – FR2401 This project would construct a temporary fire station on city-owned property near the Christmas Hill Park Ranch Site (adjacent to the TEEC building) to serve the Santa Teresa fire district. The structure will be a modular building and will include sleeping quarters, an office, a shower, and a kitchen to allow for 24-hour staffing. This project 5DRAFT would allow for improved emergency response times for the Santa Teresa fire district until a permanent fire station can be built. Master Plan Projects – Storm Drain Improvements – EN2405 The Master Plan Projects – Storm Drain Improvements project includes 43 individual projects in 6 hydrologic drainage areas throughout the City. The purpose of these projects is to mitigate existing deficiencies in the City’s storm drain system and implement improvements to service anticipated future growth throughout the City. The projects include pipeline replacements as well as new pipeline improvements. The number and types of projects in each hydrologic area are summarized below: Ronan Channel Drainage Area – 4 Replacements and 5 New Miller Slough Drainage Area – 6 Replacements North Uvas Drainage Area – 4 Replacements and 4 New South Uvas Drainage Area – 1 Replacement Princevalle Drainage Area – 12 Replacements and 1 New Lower Miller Slough Drainage Area – 6 Replacements CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) DEVELOPMENT PROCESS Under direction from the City Administrator, the Public Works Department takes the lead in the preparation of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and reports to Council of its progress and status. Written reports on the progress of the CIP will be submitted to Council through the City Administrator at the beginning and middle of each fiscal year. The CIP development process starts with a call for projects. Each department submits a CIP project submittal form to the Engineering Division of Public Works. Engineering then develops a “project charter” for each project. A project charter provides the project description, location, schedule, funding sources, expenditure timing, and an analysis of ongoing maintenance costs. Project charters usually include photos related to the project. The CIP scoring committee (further defined in the CIP Policy) reviews projects and ranks them according to a predetermined set of criteria. High ranking projects are recommended to be included in the CIP budget. Once a draft of the CIP is developed, Engineering provides the draft CIP for official review by the Planning Commission to ensure projects are consistent with the City’s 6DRAFT General Plan, prior to Council’s final CIP review. The proposed CIP is presented to the City Council for final review at a CIP hearing. Program Categories The CIP is intended to address the following multi-faceted infrastructure needs of the City: Streets: projects that develop and maintain the City’s roadway system. Parks and Trails: projects that develop and improve parks and sports fields, park structures, trails, the City Plaza Park, and various citywide tree planting and maintenance projects. Utilities: projects that develop and maintain the City’s water, sewer, and storm drain systems to provide safe, reliable and efficient service to customers. Public Facilities: projects that purchase, construct, or make capital repairs to City buildings, structures, and equipment. Funding Sources 100 - General Fund: this fund is used to account for all resources except for those where a separate fund is necessary for legal or administrative purposes. This fund includes the City's general-purpose services that relate to public safety, public works, community development, finance, and administration. 205 - Gas Tax -This is fuel tax money from the State and is used to fund Chip Seal, traffic signal and streetlight maintenance and electricity, congestion and pavement management, and related capital projects. Interest is allocated. 210 - Road Maintenance & Rehabilitation (SB1) - This is a State fuel tax that is allocated on formulae determined by statewide legislation. The City is allowed to use this funding for local street and road repairs only until the City’s average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) meets or exceeds 80, at which time a city or county may spend its apportionment of SB1 funds on functions similar to the other Gas Taxes listed above. 212 – Measure B - Local Streets and Roads (Measure B) - This is a portion of the Santa Clara County only sales tax measure intended to pay for various transportation improvements in the county including transit, bicycle/pedestrian, highway interchanges, and expressways, and grade separations. The Local 7DRAFT Streets and Roads portion of the funds is allocated on formulae determined by the revenue measure and is allocated to the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, which allocates a portion to Gilroy for maintaining the City’s local streets and roads. More stringent requirements regarding the use of these funds are in place if the City’s PCI is below 70. This fund is used for street projects. Interest is allocated. 215 - Transportation/Mobility Grants- This is for various transportation grants. Monies are received on a reimbursable basis. Interest is allocated. 220 - Vehicle Registration Fee - This fund represents registration fees from Santa Clara County which will be used for pavement maintenance, operations, signals, signs, and marking. Interest is allocated.200 - Sidewalk Repair Reserve: the original seed funds came from the State Franchise Board lawsuit. This money was supplemented by General Fund money. The interest on this fund is used for City sidewalk repair and replacement, including the Annual Shared-Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program. 245 - Community Dev Block Grant – HUD annual grant of federal funds to operate the Community Development Block Grant Program. Interest is allocated but must be paid back to the Federal Government. 400 - Capital Projects - Allocates resources intended to be used for major capital projects other than those financed by revenues of proprietary funds, including projects that are partially funded from other sources such as grants or fuel tax. Any unallocated interest is allocated to this fund. 410 - Storm Drain Development - The purpose of the Storm Drain Development Fund is to finance the construction of drainage collection and distribution systems within the City as described in the City of Gilroy Storm Drain Master Plan. Improvements and expansions of the City's storm drain system are needed to accommodate the development of new residential, commercial, and industrial uses within the City of Gilroy. The Storm Drain Development Fee is used to expand system capacity to accommodate new development. Interest is allocated. 415 – Utility Underground Fund - Allocates resources to underground existing overhead utilities (electricity, telephone, and cable) along fully constructed streets. The City collects the fee from developers as development occurs along these streets. Interest is allocated. 420 - Street Tree Development - The Street Tree Development Fund collects a front footage fee to plant trees in new developments. Interest is allocated. 8DRAFT 425 - Traffic Impact - The purpose of the Traffic Impact Fund is to finance the construction of streets, bridges, interchanges, and traffic signals within the City as described in the City of Gilroy's Circulation Element. Improvements and expansions of the City's traffic circulation system are needed to accommodate the development of new residential, commercial, and industrial uses within the City of Gilroy. The Traffic Impact Fee is used to expand system capacity to accommodate new development. Interest is allocated. 430 - Sewer Development - The purpose of the Sewer Development Fund is to finance the construction of sewer collection and conveyance systems within the City as described in the City of Gilroy’s Sewer Master Plan. Improvements and expansions of the City's sewer system are needed to accommodate the development of new residential, commercial, and industrial uses within the City of Gilroy. The Sewer Development Fee is used to expand system capacity to accommodate new development. Interest is allocated. 435 - Water Development - The purpose of the Water Development Fund is to finance the construction of water transmission, distribution, and storage systems within Pressure Zone 1 of the City water system as described in the City of Gilroy’s Water Master Plan. Improvements and expansions of the City's water system are needed to accommodate the development of new residential, commercial, and industrial uses within the City of Gilroy. The Water Development Fee is used to expand capacity to accommodate new development. Interest is allocated. 440 - Public Facilities Impact - The purpose of this fund is to finance the construction of parks, police, fire, and other City Facilities as described in the City of Gilroy’s Public Facilities Master Plan. These improvements to public facilities are completed to accommodate new residential and commercial development. Interest is allocated. 615 - Facilities: This internal service fund accounts for all expenses relating to the operation and maintenance of City facilities. The costs are recovered through an annual "user fee" which is charged to all departments/funds that have facilities. 625 - Equipment Outlay: This allocates resources intended for the purchase of General Fund equipment costing more than $1,000. 700 - Sewer: This is an enterprise fund which operates and maintains the sewer collection system. 705 - Water: This is an enterprise fund which operates and maintains the water production and distribution system. 9DRAFT CIP Project Charter Anatomy / How to Read a Project Charter The CIP is primarily organized by project charters. As explained above, a charter is a brief plan for each capital project and provides the requisite information for scheduling and funding a project within the CIP. CIP Charters have 16 separate parts which are explained in detail below: 1. Project Number: The project number is intended to identify a project, which could consist of a number of phases or stages of development. The project number consists of 6 digits. Currently funded projects begin with 800XX0. New projects in the draft CIP have been assigned “submittal numbers” which will be discussed in the next section. 2. Submittal Number: The submittal number is used to keep track of submissions. Departments submitting requests for capital project consideration, funding, and scheduling are identified by a two letter department (or division or section, as appropriate) designation, two letter FY designation (for this budget it is 24), and then a consecutive two digit identifier (recommended to be in priority order, but not necessary). For example, the first project submitted by the Facilities Section would have the designation FC2401. The department/division/section codes are as follows: AD – Administration, including City Attorney EN – Engineering FC – Facilities FR – Fire PK – Parks RC – Recreation SW – Sewer WT – Water 3. Project Name: The project name is related to a location, which could be a building name or street name, and the broad category of work required. If the project is not tied to a single location, then the most descriptive name available is used. Street names shall be spelled, not numbered (e.g., Ninth Street, not 9th Street), and intersections shall list the non-number street first, the more major street first, or the first alphabetical name first. 4. Department: The department listed represents the department/division/section that will be managing the project. For example, the Master Plan Projects – Sewer Improvements project is in the category of Wastewater: Sewer Collection, but the department is listed as Public Works: Engineering with the project being managed by the City Engineer. Some department designations may be further detailed into division or 10DRAFT section. Coordination of the project is assigned to the most appropriate person. Usually this will be someone in Public Works Engineering, but could also be an Operational section (e.g., Facilities, Parks), or a specialized expert. This person will be the Project Manager. 5. Category: Five categories have been identified for capital projects. Within the categories, there may be additional sub-categories. The categories and sub-categories may be revised or updated in any year by the CIP committee and presented for Council approval. Currently, these categories are: 1. Facilities a. Buildings b. Building Systems c. Specialized Facilities d. Parking Lots 2.Parks & Trails a. New Parks b. Park Expansion c. Trails d. Buildings e. Play Equipment f.Other Structures or Facilities g. Master Plans 3. Streets a. Pavement b. Pavement Markings c. Signage d. Traffic Signals e. Bridges f.Curbs & Sidewalks g. Other Concrete Features h. Congestion Management i. Street Lights j. Street Trees 4. Utilities a. Water i. Water Storage ii.Wells & Pumping iii.Distribution iv. Fire Hydrants & Blow-Offs 11DRAFT v.Meters & Service Lines b. Wastewater i. Sewer Trunks ii. Sewer Collection iii.Manholes, Cleanouts, Etc. iv. Lift Stations v. Recycled Water vi. Inspections c. Storm Drain i. Storm Trunks ii. Storm Collection iii.Manholes & Appurtenances iv. Lift Stations 5. Engineering a. Master Plans b. Stormwater Compliance c. Traffic Calming d.Standard Drawings & Specs e.Plans & Programs f. Downtown g. Utility Undergrounding 6. Project Type: There are seven categories for project type: New, Replacement, Rehabilitation, Renovation, Modification, Demolition, and Studies & Reports. New projects add capital value to the City’s asset base. Replacement projects provide an exchange or substitution of a current City resource for a similar system. Rehabilitation projects repair, enhance, or upgrade a current City property or resource. Renovation projects remodel a current City property or resource. Modification projects modify a current City property or resource. Demolition projects demolish a current City property or resource. Studies & Reports projects do not necessarily directly improve a City asset but are a planning/analysis tool for future CIP project identification and/or implementation. 7. Project Manager: The Project Manager is the individual in the department responsible for the oversight of the project. For the charters, the CIP team listed the position of the person responsible for delivering the project and not the name of the person that will serve as the project manager because that person may change over the term of the 5-year CIP. 12DRAFT 8. Council Priorities: Capital Improvement Projects satisfy the City Council priority to Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure, which is indicated on each project charter. 9. Location: Specifies either the general or specific location of the project. This may be a cross- street, an address, or a general location like the Downtown. 10. Project Description: This section describes the project in concise details, including any known special aspects. This should include the location and type, or level of work involved, and the project size in square feet of building, parking lot, or park; or in lineal feet for streets, pipelines, sidewalks, trails, bike lanes, etc. 11. Project Justification: This provides an explanation as to why this capital project is important and is required. This section identifies the strategic goals and objectives of the project and any Council priorities, Master Plan requirements, safety or health issues, public issues or requests, and any other reason to complete this work. 12. Master Planning Document: This section identifies if a project is contained in one of the City’s several Master Plans. A project that is specifically referenced in a master plan gains additional priority based on the City’s CIP Policy. 13. Project Funding: A. Project Costs – These include the cost of construction and the soft costs associated with a project. The soft costs can include preliminary planning efforts, property acquisition, design, construction management, inspection, public outreach, and other non-construction costs that must be accounted for in a thorough cost estimate. B. Funding Source – This identifies the cost centers that will fund the project and the specific amount that will be allocated for each year of project development and delivery. C. Project Fiscal Balance – From the Project Funding tables, it is easy to see if a project is fully funded for each fiscal year. So long as the sum of the total funding sources for a fiscal year match the sum of the project costs for that same fiscal year, a project is fully funded for that year. 14. Financial Comments: This section provides additional details related to a projects’ funding. It might be a summary of the project funding source, or it might provide information related to 13DRAFT alternative funding strategies that might not be easily identified or easy to show in tabular form. 15. Estimated Project Schedule: This shows the various project phases, and what year those phases are planned to be completed. 16. Ongoing Operational Cost Impact: Ongoing operational costs identify maintenance costs that would be associated with a fully constructed or delivered project, and the frequency of that maintenance. 14DRAFT This page intentionally left blank DRAFT15 This page intentionally left blank DRAFT16 CIP Policy Document CIP, a resolution amending the Council-adopted operating budget(s) shall be proposed to appropriate the expenditures needed to implement the projects identified in the adopted CIP. 2.2.3. CIP Document Preparation, Submittal and Reporting Under direction from the City Administrator, the Public Works Department takes the lead in the preparation of the current Capital Improvement Plan, and reporting to Council of its progress and status. Written reports on the progress of the CIP will be submitted to Council through the City Administrator at the beginning and mid-year of each fiscal year. Proposed projects are submitted by each department of the City via a CIP application form submitted to the Engineering Division of Public Works as part of their biennial call for projects. A reviewing committee will be established to evaluate the potential projects. The projects being recommended for inclusion in the CIP shall have a project charter developed, which will provide the project schedule, funding sources and timing, expenditure timing, location information, a description of the project, and an analysis of the ongoing maintenance and other cost impacts to the operating budget as a result of implementing the project. Once the projects and funding are assembled, the committee shall score the projects against the evaluation criteria, and then rank the projects based on the score and the funding sources. Once the draft CIP is developed, Engineering will submit the CIP for official review by the Planning Commission to ensure projects are consistent with the City’s General Plan prior to Council’s final CIP review. The proposed CIP is presented to the City Council for final review at a CIP hearing in spring, along with CIP and budget amendment approval scheduled in June. The CIP will include unfunded projects as a separate, unranked list of projects that will proceed through the process, including presentation to the Planning Commission and approved for conformance with General Plan guidelines. These unfunded projects will be brought to Council for approval at a later time, when resources become available, however will be included in the CIP document for easy reference. 17DRAFT CIP Policy Document 2.3. CIP Proposed Project Criteria 2.3.1. Fixed Capital Infrastructure Scoring When scoring proposed projects for funding and/or ranking, the below factors and points will be used by the CIP Committee. Scores from each committee member will be aggregated into a total score for the project. Factor Description Possible Points Critical health, environmental or safety hazard Project either reduces or eliminates risk to public health and safety associated with either a poor condition or lack of infrastructure. 20 Law or Mandate The project brings the City into compliance with regulation, mandate, court order or other legal requirement 15 Project Readiness (non- financial) How many prerequisites for the project, aside from funding, are complete and what prerequisites for the project remain. Years to complete the project are also considered in this factor 15 Council Strategic Plan Goals Project will meet or make progress towards attaining a goal identified as a strategic priority of the City Council 10 Infrastructure Preservation The benefit comparison of short-term repairs compared to long-term replacement of the infrastructure proposed to be improved by the project 10 Availability of External or Dedicated Funding The project has received and/or uses outside funding sources, or the City has a history of receiving funding from the planned or requested funding sources 10 Master Plan Compliance Project is identified as a priority project in an adopted Master Plan. 10 Economic/community impact The effect that the project will have on the local economy and/or community, including public perception 5 Annual Operating and Maintenance Cost The project’s effect on operating and maintenance costs compared to the current infrastructure 5 The Engineering Division will maintain Scoring Guidelines for the CIP review committee to provide a robust rubric for scoring within the above criteria. 2.4. Capital Improvement Plan Committee The Capital Improvement Plan Committee (“CIP Committee”) is a committee of Gilroy employees that shall score and evaluate the CIP projects and vehicles/equipment for ranking and consideration for funding. They shall also be the team to recommend funding to the City 18DRAFT CIP Policy Document Council, identifying funding sources and making other recommendations as needed to present a draft CIP to the City Council for consideration and adoption. The CIP Committee shall be comprised of 6 employees. The composition of these employees shall be as follows: Public Works Director Deputy Public Works Director City Engineer Senior CIP Engineer Public Works Management Analyst Senior Management Analyst – City Administrator’s Office The CIP Committee will be supported by other staff positions, but only these 6 employees will have scoring authority, and represent the CIP at the City Administrator review meeting, at the CIP adoption Council Meetings and study sessions, and Public Hearings. 19DRAFT Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast By Project Category FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total Percent Streets 7,929,766$ 14,928,516$ 9,219,262$ 4,532,150$ 4,606,649$ 41,216,343$ 27% Utilities 28,191,036 26,962,678 13,966,858 8,775,431 11,605,978 89,501,981 58% Public Facilities 6,038,827 4,361,371 211,900 71,100 - 10,683,198 7% Engineering 4,502,024 230,811 750,706 3,193,777 119,354 8,796,672 6% Parks and Trails 532,600 1,719,500 350,000 350,000 350,000 3,302,100 2% Utilities>Water 7,613,980 21,032,380 7,683,280 4,677,221 4,905,867 45,912,728 51% Utilities>Wastewater 20,551,846 5,930,298 5,996,878 4,098,210 6,338,211 42,915,443 48% Utilities>Storm Drain 25,210 - 286,700 - 361,900 673,810 1% Total All Projects 47,194,253$ 48,202,876$ 24,498,726$ 16,922,458$ 16,681,981$ 153,500,294$ 100% Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast By Project Category FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total Percent Streets 7,929,766$ 14,928,516$ 9,219,262$ 4,532,150$ 4,606,649$ 41,216,343$ 27% Utilities 28,191,036 26,962,678 13,966,858 8,775,431 11,605,978 89,501,981 58% Public Facilities 6,038,827 4,361,371 211,900 71,100 0 10,683,198 7% Engineering 4,502,024 230,811 750,706 3,193,777 119,354 8,796,672 6% Parks and Trails 532,600 1,719,500 350,000 350,000 350,000 3,302,100 2% Utilities>Water 7,613,980$ 21,032,380$ 7,683,280$ 4,677,221$ 4,905,867$ 45,912,728$ 51% Utilities>Wastewater 20,551,846 5,930,298 5,996,878 4,098,210 6,338,211 42,915,443 48% Utilities>Storm Drain 25,210 - 286,700 - 361,900 673,810 1% Total All Projects 47,194,253 48,202,876 24,498,726 16,922,458 16,681,981 153,500,294 100% Note: Some projects are phased over multiple years. The "5-Year Total" represents the total number of individual projects per category. Capital Improvement Program Summary Budget by Project Category FY24 - FY28 Capital Improvement Program Summary Number of Projects by Project Category FY24 - FY28 Streets 27% Utilities 58% Public Facilities 7% Engineering 6% Parks and Trails 2.15% CIP BY PROJECT CATEGORY FY24 TO FY28 Utilities>Water 51% Utilities>Wastewater 48% Utilities>Storm Drain 1% CIP BY UTILITIES PROJECT SUB-CATEGORY FY24 TO FY28 20DRAFT Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast By Funding Source FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total Percent 100 - General Fund 3,068,914$ 7,690,871$ 360,000$ 431,100$ 360,000$ 11,910,885$ 8% 200 - Sidewalk Repair Reserve 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,500,000 2% 205 - Gas Taxes 1,034,120 1,191,573 903,493 872,200 890,810 4,892,196 3% 210 - Road Funds 1,482,596 1,527,074 1,565,251 1,604,382 1,644,492 7,823,795 5% 212 - Measure B 900,000 4,500,000 4,950,000 900,000 900,000 12,150,000 8% 220 - Vehicle Registration Fee 230,000 240,500 491,525 555,568 571,347 2,088,940 1% 245 - CDBG 261,950 99,500 311,900 100,000 100,000 873,350 0.6% 400 - Capital Projects 1,194,580 - - - - 1,194,580 0.8% 410 - Storm Drain Development Im 220,438 220,811 621,506 595,477 471,254 2,129,486 1% 415 - Utility Undergrounding - - 405,900 2,588,300 - 2,994,200 2% 425 - Traffic Impact 2,631,607 8,660,209 708,993 - - 12,000,809 8% 430 - Sewer Development Impact 1,082,025 1,397,666 1,341,170 1,941,401 4,086,062 9,848,324 6% 435 - Water Development Impact 3,550,800 - - 2,885,454 3,029,726 9,465,980 6% 440 - Public Facilities Impact 143,793 941,107 - - - 1,084,900 1% 487 - Downtown Beautification 3,582,765 - - - - 3,582,765 2% 615 - Facilities 277,000 - - - - 277,000 0.18% 625 - Equipment Outlay 3,685,718 - - - - 3,685,718 2% 700 - Sewer 19,604,444 4,532,632 4,655,708 2,156,809 2,252,149 33,201,742 22% 705 - Water 3,523,503 16,619,180 7,683,280 1,791,767 1,876,141 31,493,871 21% Total All Projects 47,194,253$ 48,202,876$ 24,498,726$ 16,922,458$ 16,681,981$ 153,500,294$ 100% Capital Improvement Program Summary Budget by Funding Source FY24 - FY28 21DRAFT Project Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Number Project Title FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total 800020 Tenth Street and Uvas Creek Bridge* 1,000,000 - - - - 1,000,000 800060 Annual Pavement Maintenance 4,482,596 4,527,074 2,965,251 3,004,382 3,044,492 18,023,795 800070 Annual Curb Ramps Citywide 240,000 240,000 240,000 240,000 240,000 1,200,000 800080 Annual Safe Routes to Schools 62,600 65,730 69,017 72,467 76,091 345,905 800180 Traffic Calming 150,000 - - - - 150,000 800320 Annual Shared-Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,500,000 800330 Annual Pavement Markings 210,000 220,500 231,525 243,101 255,256 1,160,382 800340 Annual Signal/Street Light Maintenance 321,520 337,596 354,476 372,200 390,810 1,776,602 800350 Luchessa/Church Traffic Signal Installation 85,800 897,600 - - - 983,400 800360 Mantelli/Kern Traffic Signal Installation 94,600 983,900 - - - 1,078,500 800370 Monterey/I.O.O.F. Traffic Signal Installation 108,900 932,700 - - - 1,041,600 800410 Annual Citywide Traffic Signal Upgrades 150,000 150,000 - - - 300,000 800440 Automall/Luchessa Traffic Signal Installation 79,200 841,400 - - - 920,600 800450 Annual CDBG Sidewalk/Curb Ramp Project 261,950 99,500 100,000 100,000 100,000 661,450 800480 First/Kern Traffic Signal Installation 182,600 902,300 - - - 1,084,900 800770 Tenth Street/Hwy 101 Bridge Widening - 4,230,216 4,758,993 - - 8,989,209 Total All Projects $ 7,929,766 $ 14,928,516 $ 9,219,262 $ 4,532,150 $ 4,606,649 $ 41,216,343 Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Funding Sources FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total 100 - General Fund 1,600,000 1,600,000 - - - 3,200,000 200 - Sidewalk Repair Reserve 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,500,000 205 - Gas Taxes 1,034,120 1,191,573 903,493 872,200 890,810 4,892,196 210 - Road Funds 1,482,596 1,527,074 1,565,251 1,604,382 1,644,492 7,823,795 212 - Measure B 900,000 4,500,000 4,950,000 900,000 900,000 12,150,000 220 - Vehicle Registration Fee 230,000 240,500 491,525 555,568 571,347 2,088,940 245 - CDBG 261,950 99,500 100,000 100,000 100,000 661,450 425 - Traffic Impact 1,701,100 5,188,116 708,993 - - 7,598,209 Total All Projects $ 7,929,766 $ 14,928,516 $ 9,219,262 $ 4,532,150 $ 4,606,649 $ 41,216,343 * Note: 800020 Tenth Street and Uvas Creek Bridge has only been funded for the design phase. Streets Program Details 22DRAFT Project Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Number Project Title FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total 800270 Lions Creek Trail West of Santa Teresa and Day 182,600 1,369,500 - - - 1,552,100 PK2401 Citywide Park Restroom Reroofing/Rehabilitation 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 350,000 1,750,000 Total All Projects $ 532,600 $ 1,719,500 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 3,302,100 Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Funding Sources FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total 100 - General Fund 532,600 1,719,500 350,000 350,000 350,000 3,302,100 Total All Projects $ 532,600 $ 1,719,500 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 3,302,100 Parks and Trails Program Details 23DRAFT Project Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Number Project Title FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total 800050 McCarthy Site Well (Well #9) 3,550,800 - - - - 3,550,800 800250 Casey and Swanston Water Line Replacement 294,800 2,825,800 - - - 3,120,600 800310 Automated Flexnet Water Meter Installation 612,700 612,700 - - - 1,225,400 800390 Miller and Third Storm Drain Rehabilitation - - 286,700 - - 286,700 800400 Monterey and Luchessa Storm Drain Modifications - - - - 361,900 361,900 800430 Cohansey Avenue/Terri Court Storm Drain Improvements 25,210 - - - - 25,210 800490 Annual Citywide Sewer Repair and Rehabilitation Program 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,250,000 800510 Asbestos Cement Sewer Pipe Replacement Citywide - 199,100 1,008,600 - - 1,207,700 800520 Carmel-Dowdy Alley - Sixth to Seventh Sewer Replacement 57,200 273,200 - - - 330,400 800530 Large Diameter Sewer Rehabilitation Citywide - 202,400 1,081,100 - - 1,283,500 800540 Monterey and Princevalle Sewer Network - - - 755,038 2,840,381 3,595,419 800550 Old Gilroy - Chestnut to Forest Sewer Upgrade 35,200 251,600 - - - 286,800 800560 Seventh St - Carmel-Dowdy to Hanna-Rosanna Alleys Sewer Replacement - 48,400 211,300 - - 259,700 800570 Sewer Plant Expansion (SCRWA) 15,700,000 1,900,000 500,000 - - 18,100,000 800590 Broadway and Sargent Water Line Replacement - 129,800 877,600 - - 1,007,400 800600 Church and Gurries Water Line Replacement 66,000 314,600 - - - 380,600 800610 Church Street - Welburn to First Water Line Replacement - 176,000 1,173,400 - - 1,349,400 800620 Forest and Eighth Water Line Replacement 66,000 369,200 - - - 435,200 800630 Steel Water Service Lines Replacement Citywide 104,280 104,280 104,280 104,280 104,280 521,400 800640 Monterey and Eighth Water Line Replacement - 74,800 406,700 - - 481,500 800650 Abandon 2" Water Line from 7041 to 7161 Monterey Street 108,900 847,000 - - - 955,900 800660 Murray at Burke Water Line Reroute - 102,300 469,400 - - 571,700 800670 Saint Louise Hospital Large Water Meter Replacement 63,200 - - - - 63,200 800690 Water Reservoirs A and B - Painting 483,200 - - - - 483,200 800700 Water Reservoirs A and B - Retrofit Overflow Piping 482,000 - - - - 482,000 800710 Water Well Nos. 1 and 4 Compliance Improvements 82,600 - - - - 82,600 800720 Water Well Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 6 Upgrade Improvements 1,025,200 10,527,000 - - - 11,552,200 900740 Monterey - Leavesley to Ronan Water Line Replacement - 535,700 4,651,900 - - 5,187,600 EN2402 Ice Center Infrastructure 674,300 4,413,200 - - - 5,087,500 SW2401 Master Plan Projects - Sewer Improvements 2,671,998 2,805,598 2,945,878 3,093,172 3,247,830 14,764,476 SW2402 Joint Morgan Hill-Gilroy Trunk Line Repairs 1,837,448 - - - - 1,837,448 WT2401 Master Plan Projects - Water Improvements - - - 4,572,941 4,801,587 9,374,528 Total All Projects $ 28,191,036 $ 26,962,678 $ 13,966,858 $ 8,775,431 $ 11,605,978 $ 89,501,981 Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Funding Sources FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total 410 - Storm Drain Development Impact 25,210 - 286,700 - 361,900 673,810 425 - Traffic Impact 530,507 3,472,093 - - - 4,002,600 430 - Sewer Development Impact 1,082,025 1,397,666 1,341,170 1,941,401 4,086,062 9,848,324 435 - Water Development Impact 3,550,800 - - 2,885,454 3,029,726 9,465,980 440 - Public Facilities Impact 143,793 941,107 - - - 1,084,900 700 - Sewer 19,469,821 4,532,632 4,655,708 2,156,809 2,252,149 33,067,119 705 - Water 3,388,880 16,619,180 7,683,280 1,791,767 1,876,141 31,359,248 Total All Projects $ 28,191,036 $ 26,962,678 $ 13,966,858 $ 8,775,431 $ 11,605,978 $ 89,501,981 Utilities Program Details 24DRAFT Project Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Number Project Title FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total 800160 Golf Course Water Tank Replacement - 149,500 - - - 149,500 800230 Shooting Range Assessment 277,000 - - - - 277,000 800780 San Ysidro Park Healthy Living Enhancement 378,529 2,621,471 - - - 3,000,000 900370 City Hall Annex HVAC Replacement - 604,400 - - - 604,400 900460 Electrical Panel Evaluation Corporation Yard for OSHA Requirements 44,500 - - - - 44,500 900480 Gilroy Center for the Arts HVAC Replacement - 138,000 - - - 138,000 900490 Old City Hall HVAC Replacement 360,700 - - - - 360,700 900520 Senior Center ADA Restroom Access - - - 71,100 - 71,100 900530 Senior Center Roof Replacement - 230,400 - - - 230,400 900620 Miller Park Restrooms Electrical Undergounding 97,800 - - - - 97,800 FC2401 Cherry Blossom Apartments Reroofing - - 211,900 - - 211,900 FC2402 Creamery Building Demolition - 145,600 - - - 145,600 FC2403 Civic Center Master Plan 750,000 - - - - 750,000 FC2404 Citywide Energy Saving Measures 3,685,718 - - - - 3,685,718 FC2405 City Hall Reroofing - 472,000 - - - 472,000 FR2401 Glen Loma Temporary Fire Station 444,580 - - - - 444,580 Total All Projects $ 6,038,827 $ 4,361,371 $ 211,900 $ 71,100 $ - $ 10,683,198 Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Funding Sources FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total 100 - General Fund 881,529 4,361,371 - 71,100 - 5,314,000 245 - CDBG - - 211,900 - - 211,900 400 - Capital Projects 1,194,580 - - - - 1,194,580 615 - Facilities 277,000 - - - - 277,000 625 - Equipment Outlay 3,685,718 - - - - 3,685,718 Total All Projects $ 6,038,827 $ 4,361,371 $ 211,900 $ 71,100 $ - $ 10,683,198 Program Details Public Facilities 25DRAFT Project Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Number Project Title FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total 800240 Traffic Circulation Master Plan and Traffic Impact Fee Update 400,000 - - - - 400,000 800420 Utility Undergrounding - Monterey Street - Eighth to Tenth - - 405,900 2,588,300 - 2,994,200 800460 State Trash Amendments Stormwater Compliance Project 118,800 118,800 237,600 470,737 10,000 955,937 800470 Stormwater NPDES Compliance 86,428 112,011 107,206 134,740 109,354 549,739 800760 Gourmet and Railroad Alley Improvements 3,582,765 - - - - 3,582,765 EN2403 Corporation Yard EV and EV Charging 314,031 - - - - 314,031 Total All Projects $ 4,502,024 $ 230,811 $ 750,706 $ 3,193,777 $ 119,354 $ 8,796,672 Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast Funding Sources FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 5-Year Total 100 - General Fund 54,785 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 94,785 410 - Storm Drain Development Impact 195,228 220,811 334,806 595,477 109,354 1,455,676 425 - Traffic Impact 400,000 - - - - 400,000 487 - Downtown Beautification 3,582,765 - - - - 3,582,765 700 - Sewer 134,623 - - - - 134,623 705 - Water 134,623 - - - - 134,623 Total All Projects $ 4,502,024 $ 230,811 $ 750,706 $ 3,193,777 $ 119,354 $ 8,796,672 Engineering Program Details 26DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 200 - Sidewalk Repair Reserve Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 1,365,613 1,701,930 1,459,098 1,216,481 974,045 731,795 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest 7,559 7,786 8,019 8,220 8,425 8,636 Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers - - - - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents)- - - - - - Other Revenue (Transfers In) 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 Total Revenue 257,559 257,786 258,019 258,220 258,425 258,636 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 1,623,172 1,959,716 1,717,117 1,474,700 1,232,470 990,431 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services (600) (618) (637) (656) (675) (696) Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges - - - - - - Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenses (600) (618) (637) (656) (675) (696) Net Surplus/(Deficit)256,959 257,168 257,383 257,564 257,750 257,940 Total All Funds Available 1,622,572 1,959,098 1,716,481 1,474,045 1,231,795 989,735 Capital Projects: 800320 Annual Shared-Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program 79,358 (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) Total Capital Projects 79,358 (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) Ending Fund Balance - June 30 1,701,930 1,459,098 1,216,481 974,045 731,795 489,735 Fund Balance Detail 200 - Sidewalk Repair Reserve 27DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 205 - Gas Taxes Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 4,311,146 549,052 414,375 143,940 183,553 276,864 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest - - - - - - Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 1,532,669 1,701,791 1,744,336 1,787,944 1,832,643 1,878,459 Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) 31,146 32,080 33,043 33,869 34,716 35,583 Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 1,563,815 1,733,871 1,777,379 1,821,813 1,867,358 1,914,042 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 5,874,961 2,282,923 2,191,753 1,965,753 2,050,911 2,190,906 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services (704,802) (725,946) (747,724) (770,156) (793,261) (817,059) Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers (107,363) (107,363) (107,363) (107,363) (107,363) (107,363) Internal Service Fund Charges (1,087) (1,120) (1,153) (1,188) (1,223) (1,260) Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenses (813,252) (834,429) (856,241) (878,707) (901,847) (925,682) Net Surplus/(Deficit)750,563 899,443 921,138 943,106 965,511 988,360 Total All Funds Available 5,061,709 1,448,495 1,335,513 1,087,046 1,149,064 1,265,224 Capital Projects: 800060 Annual Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation (4,006,447) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) 800070 Annual Citywide Curb Ramp Project (200,000) - (138,247) - - - 800080 Annual Safe Routes to Schools - (62,600) (65,730) (49,017) - - 800340 Annual Signal/Street Light Maintenance (306,210) (321,520) (337,596) (354,476) (372,200) (390,810) 800410 Annual Citywide Traffic Signal Upgrades - (150,000) (150,000) - - - Total Capital Projects (4,512,657) (1,034,120) (1,191,573) (903,493) (872,200) (890,810) Ending Fund Balance - June 30 549,052 414,375 143,940 183,553 276,864 374,414 Fund Balance Detail 205 - Gas Taxes 28DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 210 - Road Funds Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 2,455,639 1,545,639 1,535,339 1,524,730 1,513,802 1,502,547 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest - - - - - - Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 1,300,752 1,482,596 1,527,074 1,565,251 1,604,382 1,644,492 Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 1,300,752 1,482,596 1,527,074 1,565,251 1,604,382 1,644,492 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 3,756,391 3,028,235 3,062,413 3,089,981 3,118,184 3,147,039 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services (10,000) (10,300) (10,609) (10,927) (11,255) (11,593) Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges - - - - - - Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenses (10,000) (10,300) (10,609) (10,927) (11,255) (11,593) Net Surplus/(Deficit)1,290,752 1,472,296 1,516,465 1,554,323 1,593,127 1,632,899 Total All Funds Available 3,746,391 3,017,935 3,051,804 3,079,053 3,106,929 3,135,446 Capital Projects: 800060 Annual Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation (2,200,752) (1,482,596) (1,527,074) (1,565,251) (1,604,382) (1,644,492) Total Capital Projects (2,200,752) (1,482,596) (1,527,074) (1,565,251) (1,604,382) (1,644,492) Ending Fund Balance - June 30 1,545,639 1,535,339 1,524,730 1,513,802 1,502,547 1,490,954 210 - Road Funds Fund Balance Detail 29DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 212 - Measure B Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 2,061,910 1,161,910 1,161,910 1,161,910 1,161,910 1,161,910 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest - - - - - - Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 900,000 900,000 4,500,000 4,950,000 900,000 900,000 Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 900,000 900,000 4,500,000 4,950,000 900,000 900,000 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 2,961,910 2,061,910 5,661,910 6,111,910 2,061,910 2,061,910 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services - - - - - - Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges - - - - - - Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenses - - - - - - Net Surplus/(Deficit)900,000 900,000 4,500,000 4,950,000 900,000 900,000 Total All Funds Available 2,961,910 2,061,910 5,661,910 6,111,910 2,061,910 2,061,910 Capital Projects: 800060 Annual Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation (1,800,000) (900,000) (900,000) (900,000) (900,000) (900,000) 800770 Tenth Street/Hwy 101 Bridge Widening - - (3,600,000) (4,050,000) - - Total Capital Projects (1,800,000) (900,000) (4,500,000) (4,950,000) (900,000) (900,000) Ending Fund Balance - June 30 1,161,910 1,161,910 1,161,910 1,161,910 1,161,910 1,161,910 212 - Measure B Fund Balance Detail 30DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 215 - Transportation/ Mobility Grant Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 227,986 227,986 227,986 227,986 227,986 227,986 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest - - - - - - Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers - 220,000 81,753 - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue - 220,000 81,753 - - - Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 227,986 447,986 309,739 227,986 227,986 227,986 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services - - - - - - Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges - - - - - - Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenses - - - - - - Net Surplus/(Deficit)- 220,000 81,753 - - - Total All Funds Available 227,986 447,986 309,739 227,986 227,986 227,986 Capital Projects: 800070 Annual Curb Ramps Citywide - (220,000) (81,753) - - - Total Capital Projects - (220,000) (81,753) - - - Ending Fund Balance - June 30 227,986 227,986 227,986 227,986 227,986 227,986 Fund Balance Detail 215 - Transportation/ Mobility Grant 31DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 220 - Vehicle Registration Fee Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 1,011,784 1,556,489 1,713,185 1,870,982 1,787,583 1,650,211 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest - - - - - - Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 389,944 401,642 413,692 424,034 434,635 445,501 Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) 9,761 10,054 10,355 10,614 10,880 11,152 Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 399,705 411,696 424,047 434,648 445,514 456,652 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 1,411,489 1,968,185 2,137,232 2,305,630 2,233,097 2,106,863 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services (25,000) (25,000) (25,750) (26,523) (27,318) (28,138) Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges - - - - - - Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenditures (25,000) (25,000) (25,750) (26,523) (27,318) (28,138) Net Surplus/(Deficit)374,705 386,696 398,297 408,126 418,196 428,515 Total All Funds Available 1,386,489 1,943,185 2,111,482 2,279,108 2,205,779 2,078,726 Capital Projects: 800070 Annual Citywide Curb Ramp Project - (20,000) (20,000) (240,000) (240,000) (240,000) 800080 Annual Safe Routes to Schools - - - (20,000) (72,467) (76,091) 800330 Annual Pavement Markings 170,000 (210,000) (220,500) (231,525) (243,101) (255,256) Total Capital Projects 170,000 (230,000) (240,500) (491,525) (555,568) (571,347) Ending Fund Balance - June 30 1,556,489 1,713,185 1,870,982 1,787,583 1,650,211 1,507,379 Fund Balance Detail 220 - Vehicle Registration Fee 32DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 245 - CDBG Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 (362,209) (590,734) (804,243) (1,026,866) (1,471,738) (1,714,855) Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest - - - - - - Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 779,246 648,000 368,000 368,000 368,000 368,000 Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 779,246 648,000 368,000 368,000 368,000 368,000 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 417,037 57,266 (436,243) (658,866) (1,103,738) (1,346,855) Operating Expenditures Personnel (122,295) (125,964) (129,743) (133,635) (137,644) (141,773) Materials and Services (130,993) (134,923) (138,970) (143,140) (147,434) (151,857) Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers (38,452) (39,606) (40,794) (42,018) (43,278) (44,576) Internal Service Fund Charges (17,738) (18,270) (18,818) (19,383) (19,964) (20,563) Other Charges (427,088) (280,797) (162,797) (162,797) (162,797) (162,797) Total Operating Expenditures (736,566) (599,559) (491,122) (500,972) (511,117) (521,567) Net Surplus/(Deficit)42,680 48,441 (123,122) (132,972) (143,117) (153,567) Total All Funds Available (319,529) (542,293) (927,366) (1,159,838) (1,614,855) (1,868,422) Capital Projects: 800450 Annual CDBG Sidewalk/Curb Ramp Project (271,205) (261,950) (99,500) (100,000) (100,000) (100,000) FC2401 Cherry Blossom Apartments Reroofing - - - (211,900) - - Total Capital Projects (271,205) (261,950) (99,500) (311,900) (100,000) (100,000) Ending Fund Balance - June 30 (590,734) (804,243) (1,026,866) (1,471,738) (1,714,855) (1,968,422) Fund Balance Detail 245 - CDBG 33DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 400 - Capital Projects Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 5,494,297 5,298,076 4,140,261 4,178,129 4,216,943 4,256,728 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest 35,694 36,765 37,868 38,814 39,785 40,779 Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 2,336,791 - - - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 2,372,485 36,765 37,868 38,814 39,785 40,779 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 7,866,782 5,334,841 4,178,129 4,216,943 4,256,728 4,297,507 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services - - - - - - Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges - - - - - - Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenditures - - - - - - Net Surplus/(Deficit)2,372,485 36,765 37,868 38,814 39,785 40,779 Total All Funds Available 7,866,782 5,334,841 4,178,129 4,216,943 4,256,728 4,297,507 Capital Projects: 800090 Eigleberry and Seventh Parking Lot (2,551,396) - - - - - FC2403 Civic Center Master Plan - (750,000) - - - - FR2401 Glen Loma Temporary Fire Station (17,310) (444,580) - - - - Total Capital Projects (2,568,706) (1,194,580) - - - - Ending Fund Balance - June 30 5,298,076 4,140,261 4,178,129 4,216,943 4,256,728 4,297,507 Fund Balance Detail 400 - Capital Projects 34DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 410 - Storm Drain Development Impact Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 1,223,210 863,874 833,739 966,340 583,872 117,952 Revenues Impact Fees 66,697 99,608 259,873 142,258 28,573 59,110 Allocated Interest 7,327 7,547 7,773 7,968 8,167 8,371 Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 85,834 88,498 91,276 94,461 98,606 464,345 Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 159,858 195,653 358,922 244,687 135,346 531,826 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 1,383,068 1,059,527 1,192,661 1,211,026 719,218 649,778 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services (5,000) (5,150) (5,305) (5,437) (5,573) (5,712) Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges (194) (200) (206) (211) (216) (222) Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenditures (5,194) (5,350) (5,510) (5,648) (5,789) (5,934) Net Surplus/(Deficit)154,664 190,303 353,412 239,038 129,556 525,892 Total All Funds Available 1,377,874 1,054,177 1,187,151 1,205,378 713,429 643,844 Capital Projects: 800390 Miller and Third Storm Drain Rehabilitation - - - (286,700) - - 800400 Monterey and Luchessa Storm Drain Modifications - - - - - (361,900) 800430 Cohansey Avenue/Terri Court Storm Drain Improvements - (25,210) - - - - 800460 State Trash Amendments Stormwater Compliance Project - (108,800) (108,800) (227,600) (460,737) - 800470 Stormwater NPDES Compliance (514,000) (86,428) (112,011) (107,206) (134,740) (109,354) Total Capital Projects (514,000) (220,438) (220,811) (621,506) (595,477) (471,254) Ending Fund Balance - June 30 863,874 833,739 966,340 583,872 117,952 172,590 Fund Balance Detail 410 - Storm Drain Development Impact 35DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 415 - Utility Undergrounding Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 - 3,487,397 3,487,455 3,487,514 3,081,675 493,437 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest 56 58 59 61 62 64 Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 3,487,341 - - - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 3,487,397 58 59 61 62 64 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 3,487,397 3,487,455 3,487,514 3,487,575 3,081,737 493,501 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services - - - - - - Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges - - - - - - Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenditures - - - - - - Net Surplus/(Deficit)3,487,397 58 59 61 62 64 Total All Funds Available 3,487,397 3,487,455 3,487,514 3,487,575 3,081,737 493,501 Capital Projects: 800420 Utility Undergrounding - Monterey Street - Eighth to Tenth - - - (405,900) (2,588,300) - Total Capital Projects - - - (405,900) (2,588,300) - Ending Fund Balance - June 30 3,487,397 3,487,455 3,487,514 3,081,675 493,437 493,501 Fund Balance Detail 415 - Utility Undergrounding 36DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 425 - Traffic Impact Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 17,488,071 20,757,271 25,707,998 26,349,575 31,425,241 33,969,528 Revenues Impact Fees 2,410,936 7,504,053 9,221,157 5,702,069 2,459,689 2,250,000 Allocated Interest 86,452 89,046 91,717 94,010 96,360 98,769 Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers - - - - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 2,497,388 7,593,099 9,312,874 5,796,079 2,556,049 2,348,769 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 19,985,459 28,350,370 35,020,872 32,145,654 33,981,290 36,318,297 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services (10,425) (10,738) (11,060) (11,392) (11,733) (12,085) Capital Outlay 3,802,388 - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges (26) (27) (28) (28) (29) (30) Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenditures 3,791,937 (10,765) (11,087) (11,420) (11,763) (12,116) Net Surplus/(Deficit)6,289,325 7,582,334 9,301,786 5,784,659 2,544,286 2,336,654 Total All Funds Available 23,777,396 28,339,605 35,009,784 32,134,234 33,969,528 36,306,181 Capital Projects: 800020 Tenth Street and Uvas Creek Bridge (2,020,125) (1,000,000) - - - - 800180 Traffic Calming - (150,000) - - - - 800240 Traffic Circulation Master Plan and Traffic Impact Fee Update - (400,000) - - - - 800350 Luchessa/Church Traffic Signal Installation - (85,800) (897,600) - - - 800360 Mantelli/Kern Traffic Signal Installation - (94,600) (983,900) - - - 800370 Monterey/I.O.O.F. Traffic Signal Installation - (108,900) (932,700) - - - 800440 Automall/Luchessa Traffic Signal Installation - (79,200) (841,400) - - - 800770 Tenth Street/Hwy 101 Bridge Widening (1,000,000) - (630,216) (708,993) - - EN2402 Ice Center Infrastructure - (530,507) (3,472,093) - - - 800480 First/Kern Traffic Signal Installation - (182,600) (902,300) - - - Total Capital Projects (3,020,125) (2,631,607) (8,660,209) (708,993) - - Ending Fund Balance - June 30 20,757,271 25,707,998 26,349,575 31,425,241 33,969,528 36,306,181 Fund Balance Detail 425 - Traffic Impact 37DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 430 - Sewer Development Impact Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 14,976,397 13,766,601 12,683,273 15,075,759 14,868,118 11,841,568 Revenues Impact Fees 608,436 1,803,192 5,620,243 3,315,184 1,093,093 1,357,983 Allocated Interest 81,904 84,361 86,892 89,064 91,291 93,573 Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 368,682 380,706 353,347 - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 1,059,022 2,268,259 6,060,482 3,404,248 1,184,384 1,451,556 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 16,035,419 16,034,860 18,743,755 18,480,007 16,052,502 13,293,124 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services (10,313) (10,622) (10,941) (11,269) (11,607) (11,956) Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers (2,244,000) (2,244,000) (2,244,000) (2,243,600) (2,241,600) (2,243,300) Internal Service Fund Charges - - - - - - Other Charges (14,505) (14,940) (15,388) (15,850) (16,326) (16,815) Anticipated Developer Reimbursements - - - - - - Total Operating Expenditures (2,268,818) (2,269,563) (2,270,329) (2,270,719) (2,269,533) (2,272,071) Net Surplus/(Deficit)(1,209,796) (1,303) 3,790,153 1,133,529 (1,085,149) (820,515) Total All Funds Available 13,766,601 13,765,298 16,473,425 16,209,288 13,782,969 11,021,053 Capital Projects: 800520 Carmel-Dowdy Alley - Sixth to Seventh Sewer Replacement - (57,200) (273,200) - - - 800540 Monterey and Princevalle Sewer Network - - - - (755,038) (2,840,381) 800560 Seventh St - Carmel-Dowdy to Hanna-Rosanna Alleys Sewer Replacement - - (48,400) (211,300) - - SW2401 Master Plan Projects - Sewer Improvements - (1,024,825) (1,076,066) (1,129,870) (1,186,363) (1,245,681) Total Capital Projects - (1,082,025) (1,397,666) (1,341,170) (1,941,401) (4,086,062) Ending Fund Balance - June 30 13,766,601 12,683,273 15,075,759 14,868,118 11,841,568 6,934,991 Fund Balance Detail 430 - Sewer Development Impact 38DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 435 - Water Development Impact Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 6,053,344 5,835,557 2,788,493 4,327,304 5,246,814 2,686,023 Revenues Impact Fees 319,569 478,204 1,512,512 892,597 297,121 363,752 Allocated Interest 32,895 33,882 34,898 35,771 36,665 37,582 Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers - - - - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 352,464 512,086 1,547,410 928,368 333,786 401,334 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 6,405,808 6,347,643 4,335,904 5,255,672 5,580,600 3,087,357 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services (8,100) (8,343) (8,593) (8,851) (9,117) (9,390) Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges (6) (6) (6) (7) (7) (7) Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenditures (8,106) (8,349) (8,600) (8,858) (9,123) (9,397) Net Surplus/(Deficit)344,358 503,737 1,538,811 919,510 324,663 391,937 Total All Funds Available 6,397,702 6,339,293 4,327,304 5,246,814 5,571,477 3,077,959 Capital Projects: 800050 McCarthy Site Well (Well #9)(562,145) (3,550,800) - - - - WT2401 Master Plan Projects - Water Improvements - - - - (2,885,454) (3,029,726) Total Capital Projects (562,145) (3,550,800) - - (2,885,454) (3,029,726) Ending Fund Balance - June 30 5,835,557 2,788,493 4,327,304 5,246,814 2,686,023 48,233 435 - Water Development Impact Fund Balance Detail 39DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 440 - Public Facilities Impact Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 4,734,333 3,523,961 3,275,361 9,503,703 12,479,739 11,067,987 Revenues Impact Fees 2,506,546 3,635,084 10,934,196 6,769,131 2,326,152 2,416,349 Allocated Interest - - - - - - Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers - - - - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 2,506,546 3,635,084 10,934,196 6,769,131 2,326,152 2,416,349 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 7,240,879 7,159,045 14,209,557 16,272,834 14,805,891 13,484,336 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services (10,000) (10,300) (10,609) (10,927) (11,255) (11,593) Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers (3,706,918) (3,729,591) (3,754,139) (3,782,168) (3,726,649) (4,023,015) Internal Service Fund Charges - - - - - - Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenditures (3,716,918) (3,739,891) (3,764,748) (3,793,095) (3,737,904) (4,034,607) Net Surplus/(Deficit)(1,210,372) (104,807) 7,169,448 2,976,036 (1,411,752) (1,618,258) Total All Funds Available 3,523,961 3,419,154 10,444,810 12,479,739 11,067,987 9,449,728 Capital Projects: EN2402 Ice Center Infrastructure - (143,793) (941,107) - - - Total Capital Projects - (143,793) (941,107) - - - Ending Fund Balance - June 30 3,523,961 3,275,361 9,503,703 12,479,739 11,067,987 9,449,728 Fund Balance Detail 440 - Public Facilities Impact 40DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 487 - Downtown Beautification Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 - (378,000) - - - - Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest - - - - - - Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers - 3,960,765 - - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue - 3,960,765 - - - - Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue - 3,582,765 - - - - Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services - - - - - - Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges - - - - - - Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenditures - - - - - - Net Surplus/(Deficit)- 3,960,765 - - - - Total All Funds Available - 3,582,765 - - - - Capital Projects: 800760 Gourmet and Railroad Alley Improvements (378,000) (3,582,765) - - - - Total Capital Projects (378,000) (3,582,765) - - - - Ending Fund Balance - June 30 (378,000) - - - - - 487 - Downtown Beautification Fund Balance Detail 41DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 615 - Facilities Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 1,787,292 630,030 353,030 353,031 353,031 353,031 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest 10,231 10,538 10,854 11,125 11,404 11,689 Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 300,000 - - - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services 2,292,306 3,081,744 3,181,546 3,284,397 3,390,334 3,499,451 Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) 245,000 245,000 245,000 245,000 245,000 245,000 Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 2,847,537 3,337,282 3,437,400 3,540,522 3,646,738 3,756,140 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 4,634,829 3,967,312 3,790,431 3,893,553 3,999,769 4,109,171 Operating Expenditures Personnel (752,462) (775,036) (798,287) (822,236) (846,903) (872,310) Materials and Services (2,182,361) (2,247,831) (2,315,266) (2,384,724) (2,456,266) (2,529,954) Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers (99,052) (102,024) (105,085) (108,237) (111,484) (114,829) Internal Service Fund Charges (179,021) (184,392) (189,924) (195,621) (201,490) (207,535) Other Charges (27,183) (27,998) (28,838) (29,703) (30,594) (31,512) Total Operating Expenditures (3,240,079) (3,337,282) (3,437,400) (3,540,522) (3,646,738) (3,756,140) Net Surplus/(Deficit)(392,542) 0 0 0 0 0 Total All Funds Available 1,394,750 630,030 353,031 353,031 353,031 353,031 Capital Projects: 800140 City Hall Backup Generator (700,920) - - - - - 800230 Shooting Range Assessment (63,800) (277,000) - - - - Total Capital Projects (764,720) (277,000) - - - - Ending Fund Balance - June 30 630,030 353,030 353,031 353,031 353,031 353,031 Fund Balance Detail 615 - Facilities 42DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 625 - Equipment Outlay Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 3,078,025 3,780,612 112,269 4,501,601 4,519,945 4,538,747 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest 16,869 17,375 17,896 18,344 18,802 19,272 Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 685,718 - - - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - 3,685,718 - - - Total Revenue 702,587 17,375 3,703,614 18,344 18,802 19,272 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 3,780,612 3,797,987 3,815,883 4,519,945 4,538,747 4,558,020 Operating Expenditures Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services - - - - - - Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges - - - - - - Other Charges - - 685,718 - - - Total Operating Expenditures - - 685,718 - - - Net Surplus/(Deficit)702,587 17,375 4,389,332 18,344 18,802 19,272 Total All Funds Available 3,780,612 3,797,987 4,501,601 4,519,945 4,538,747 4,558,020 Capital Projects: FC2404 Citywide Energy Saving Measures - (3,685,718) - - - - Total Capital Projects - (3,685,718) - - - - Ending Fund Balance - June 30 3,780,612 112,269 4,501,601 4,519,945 4,538,747 4,558,020 625 - Equipment Outlay Fund Balance Detail 43DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 700 - Sewer Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 62,369,457 50,395,537 37,092,510 39,049,937 41,009,364 45,594,355 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest 114,063 117,485 121,009 124,035 127,136 130,314 Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 2,244,000 2,244,000 2,244,000 2,243,600 2,241,600 2,243,300 Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services 13,002,387 13,392,459 13,794,232 14,139,088 14,492,565 14,854,880 Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) 87,000 89,610 92,298 94,606 96,971 99,395 Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue 15,447,450 15,843,554 16,251,540 16,601,329 16,958,272 17,327,889 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 77,816,907 66,239,091 53,344,050 55,651,265 57,967,636 62,922,244 Operating Expenditures Personnel (3,126,116) (3,219,899) (3,316,496) (3,415,991) (3,518,471) (3,624,025) Materials and Services (2,112,168) (2,175,533) (2,240,799) (2,308,023) (2,377,264) (2,448,582) Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers (300,000) (330,630) (340,549) (350,765) (361,288) (372,127) Internal Service Fund Charges (1,526,286) (1,572,075) (1,619,237) (1,667,814) (1,717,848) (1,769,384) Other Charges (2,556,800) (2,244,000) (2,244,400) (2,243,600) (2,241,600) (2,243,300) Total Operating Expenditures (9,621,370) (9,542,137) (9,761,481) (9,986,193) (10,216,471) (10,457,417) Net Surplus/(Deficit)5,826,080 6,301,417 6,490,059 6,615,135 6,741,801 6,870,471 Total All Funds Available 68,195,537 56,696,954 43,582,569 45,665,072 47,751,164 52,464,827 Capital Projects: 800490 Annual Citywide Sewer Repair and Rehabilitation - (250,000) (250,000) (250,000) (250,000) (250,000) 800510 Asbestos Cement Sewer Pipe Replacement Citywide - - (199,100) (1,008,600) - - 800530 Large Diameter Sewer Rehabilitation Citywide - - (202,400) (1,081,100) - - EN2403 Corporation Yard EV and EV Charging - (134,623) - - - - 800550 Old Gilroy - Chestnut to Forest Sewer Upgrade - (35,200) (251,600) - - - SW2401 Master Plan Projects - Sewer Improvements - (1,647,173) (1,729,532) (1,816,008) (1,906,809) (2,002,149) SW2402 Joint Morgan Hill-Gilroy Trunk Line Repairs - (1,837,448) - - - - 800570 Sewer Plant Expansion (SCRWA)(17,800,000) (15,700,000) (1,900,000) (500,000) - - Total Capital Projects (17,800,000) (19,604,444) (4,532,632) (4,655,708) (2,156,809) (2,252,149) Ending Fund Balance - June 30 50,395,537 37,092,510 39,049,937 41,009,364 45,594,355 50,212,678 Fund Balance Detail 700 - Sewer 44DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 705 - Water Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 30,616,245 30,052,776 31,205,130 19,402,082 16,599,600 19,753,241 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest 171,458 176,602 181,900 186,447 191,108 195,886 Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers 250,000 - - - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services 14,283,530 15,132,614 15,586,592 15,976,257 16,375,664 16,785,055 Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue 184,006 189,526 195,212 200,092 205,095 210,222 Total Revenue 14,888,994 15,498,742 15,963,704 16,362,797 16,771,867 17,191,163 Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue 45,505,239 45,551,518 47,168,834 35,764,879 33,371,467 36,944,405 Operating Expenditures Personnel (3,809,998) (3,366,077) (3,467,059) (3,571,071) (3,678,203) (3,788,549) Materials and Services (2,100,407) (1,453,693) (1,497,304) (1,542,223) (1,588,490) (1,636,144) Capital Outlay (9,337) (9,617) (9,906) (10,203) (10,509) (10,824) Transfers (321,000) (383,936) (395,454) (407,318) (419,537) (432,123) Internal Service Fund Charges (2,333,653) (1,363,986) (1,404,906) (1,447,053) (1,490,464) (1,535,178) Other Charges (6,083,868) (4,245,576) (4,372,943) (4,504,132) (4,639,256) (4,778,433) Total Operating Expenditures (14,658,263) (10,822,885) (11,147,572) (11,481,999) (11,826,459) (12,181,253) Net Surplus/(Deficit)230,731 4,675,857 4,816,133 4,880,798 4,945,408 5,009,911 Total All Funds Available 30,846,976 34,728,633 36,021,262 24,282,880 21,545,008 24,763,152 Capital Projects: 800250 Casey and Swanston Water Line Replacement - (294,800) (2,825,800) - - - 800310 Automated Flexnet Water Meter Installation (794,200) (612,700) (612,700) - - - 800590 Broadway and Sargent Water Line Replacement - - (129,800) (877,600) - - 800600 Church and Gurries Water Line Replacement - (66,000) (314,600) - - - 800610 Church Street - Welburn to First Water Line Replacement - - (176,000) (1,173,400) - - 800620 Forest and Eighth Water Line Replacement - (66,000) (369,200) - - - 800630 Steel Water Service Lines Replacement Citywide - (104,280) (104,280) (104,280) (104,280) (104,280) 900740 Monterey - Leavesley to Ronan Water Line Replacement - - (535,700) (4,651,900) - - 800640 Monterey and Eighth Water Line Replacement - - (74,800) (406,700) - - 800650 Abandon 2" Water Line from 7041 to 7161 Monterey Street - (108,900) (847,000) - - - 800660 Murray at Burke Water Line Reroute - - (102,300) (469,400) - - 800670 Saint Louise Hospital Large Water Meter Replacement - (63,200) - - - - 800690 Water Reservoirs A and B - Painting - (483,200) - - - - 800700 Water Reservoirs A and B - Retrofit Overflow Piping - (482,000) - - - - 800710 Water Well Nos. 1 and 4 Compliance Improvements - (82,600) - - - - 800720 Water Well Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 6 Upgrade Improvements - (1,025,200) (10,527,000) - - - EN2403 Corporation Yard EV and EV Charging - (134,623) - - - - WT2401 Master Plan Projects - Water Improvements - - - - (1,687,487) (1,771,861) Total Capital Projects (794,200) (3,523,503) (16,619,180) (7,683,280) (1,791,767) (1,876,141) Ending Fund Balance - June 30 30,052,776 31,205,130 19,402,082 16,599,600 19,753,241 22,887,011 Fund Balance Detail 705 - Water 45DRAFT Projected Proposed Proposed Forecast Forecast Forecast FUND ACTIVITY DETAIL FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Fund: 100 - General Fund Acct. #: Est. Beginning Fund Balance - July 1 Revenues Impact Fees - - - - - - Allocated Interest - - - - - - Revenue Projections - - - - - - Taxes - - - - - - Licenses and Permits - - - - - - Fines and Forfeitsures - - - - - - Intergovernmental Transfers - - - - - - Special Assessments - - - - - - Charges for Services - - - - - - Use of Money/Property (Interest and Rents) - - - - - - Other Revenue - - - - - - Total Revenue - - - - - - Fund Balance Subtotal after Revenue - - - - - - Expenditures Ongoing Operating Expenditures - - - - - - Personnel - - - - - - Materials and Services - - - - - - Capital Outlay - - - - - - Transfers - - - - - - Internal Service Fund Charges - - - - - - Other Charges - - - - - - Total Operating Expenditures - - - - - - Total Expenses - - - - - - Net Surplus/(Deficit)- - - - - - Total All Funds Available - - - - - - Capital Projects: 800060 Annual Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation (3,200,000) (1,600,000) (1,600,000) - - - 800110 Downtown Parking Management Plan (300,761) - - - - - 800160 Golf Course Water Tank Replacement - - (149,500) - - - 800270 Lions Creek Trail West of Santa Teresa and Day - (182,600) (1,369,500) - - - FC2405 City Hall Reroofing - - (472,000) - - - 800460 State Trash Amendments Stormwater Compliance Project - (10,000) (10,000) (10,000) (10,000) (10,000) 800470 Stormwater NPDES Compliance (120,000) - - - - - 900370 City Hall Annex HVAC Replacement - - (604,400) - - - 900460 Electrical Panel Evaluation Corporation Yard for OSHA Requirements - (44,500) - - - - 900480 Gilroy Center for the Arts HVAC Replacement - - (138,000) - - - 900490 Old City Hall HVAC Replacement - (360,700) - - - - 900520 Senior Center ADA Restroom Access - - - - (71,100) - 900530 Senior Center Roof Replacement - - (230,400) - - - 900620 Miller Park Restrooms Electrical Undergrounding - (97,800) - - - - EN2403 Corporation Yard EV and EV Charging - (44,785) - - - - FC2402 Creamery Building Demolition - - (145,600) - - - PK2401 Citywide Park Restroom Reroofing/Rehabilitation - (350,000) (350,000) (350,000) (350,000) (350,000) 800780 San Ysidro Park Healthy Living Enhancement - (378,529) (2,621,471) - - - Total Capital Projects (3,620,761) (3,068,914) (7,690,871) (360,000) (431,100) (360,000) Fund Balance Detail 100 - General Fund 46DRAFT Appendices Fiscal Year 2024-2028 Capital Improvement Program Project Charters City of Gilroy Public Works Department 47DRAFT This page intentionally left blank 48DRAFT 49 Appendices – CIP Project Charters Table of Contents Appendix A – Funded CIP Projects (Within 5‐Year CIP) ................................................................ 55 800020 Tenth Street and Uvas Creek Bridge .......................................................................... 57 800050 McCarthy Site Well (Well #9)..................................................................................... 59 800060 Annual Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation ................................................................ 61 800070 Annual Citywide Curb Ramp Project ......................................................................... 63 800080 Annual Safe Routes to Schools .................................................................................. 65 800160 Golf Course Water Tank Replacement ...................................................................... 67 800180 Traffic Calming ........................................................................................................... 69 800250 Casey and Swanston Water Line Replacement ......................................................... 71 800270 Lions Creek Trail West of Santa Teresa and Day ....................................................... 73 800310 Automated Flexnet Water Meter Installation ........................................................... 75 800320 Annual Shared‐Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program ............................................... 77 800330 Annual Pavement Markings ....................................................................................... 79 800350 Luchessa/Church Traffic Signal Installation ............................................................... 81 800360 Mantelli/Kern Traffic Signal Installation .................................................................... 83 800370 Monterey/I.O.O.F. Traffic Signal Installation ............................................................. 85 800390 Miller and Third Storm Drain Rehabilitation ............................................................. 87 800400 Monterey and Luchessa Storm Drain Modifications ................................................. 89 800410 Annual Citywide Traffic Signal Upgrades ................................................................... 91 800420 Utility Undergrounding ‐ Monterey Street ‐ Eighth to Tenth .................................... 93 800440 Automall/Luchessa Traffic Signal Installation ............................................................ 95 800450 Annual CDBG Sidewalk/Curb Ramp Project .............................................................. 97 800480 First/Kern Traffic Signal Installation .......................................................................... 99 800490 Annual Citywide Sewer Repair and Rehabilitation Program ................................... 101 800510 Asbestos Cement Sewer Pipe Replacement Citywide ............................................. 103 800520 Carmel‐Dowdy Alley ‐ Sixth to Seventh Sewer Replacement .................................. 105 800530 Large Diameter Sewer Rehabilitation Citywide ....................................................... 107 800540 Monterey and Princevalle Sewer Network .............................................................. 109 800550 Old Gilroy ‐ Chestnut to Forest Sewer Upgrade ...................................................... 111 800560 Seventh St ‐ Carmel‐Dowdy to Hanna‐Rosanna Alleys Sewer Replacement ........... 113 DRAFT 50 800570 Sewer Plant Expansion (SCRWA) ............................................................................. 115 800590 Broadway and Sargent Water Line Replacement .................................................... 117 800600 Church and Gurries Water Line Replacement ......................................................... 119 800610 Church Street ‐ Welburn to First Water Line Replacement ..................................... 121 800620 Forest and Eighth Water Line Replacement ............................................................ 123 800630 Steel Water Service Lines Replacement Citywide ................................................... 125 800640 Monterey and Eighth Water Line Replacement ...................................................... 127 800650 Abandon 2" Water Line from 7041 to 7161 Monterey Street ................................ 129 800660 Murray at Burke Water Line Reroute ...................................................................... 131 800670 Saint Louise Hospital Large Water Meter Replacement.......................................... 133 800690 Water Reservoirs A and B – Painting ....................................................................... 135 800700 Water Reservoirs A and B ‐ Retrofit Overflow Piping .............................................. 137 800710 Water Well Nos. 1 and 4 Compliance Improvements ............................................. 139 800720 Water Well Nos. 1 , 2, 4 and 6 Upgrade Improvements .......................................... 141 800760 Gourmet and Railroad Alley Improvements ............................................................ 143 800770 Tenth Street/Hwy 101 Bridge Widening ................................................................. 145 800780 San Ysidro Park Healthy Living Enhancement ......................................................... 147 900370 City Hall Annex HVAC Replacement ........................................................................ 149 900480 Gilroy Center for the Arts HVAC Replacement ........................................................ 151 900490 Old City Hall HVAC Replacement ............................................................................. 153 900530 Senior Center Roof Replacement ............................................................................ 155 900620 Miller Park Restrooms Electrical Undergrounding .................................................. 157 900740 Monterey ‐ Leavesley to Ronan Water Line Replacement ...................................... 159 EN2402 Ice Center Infrastructure ......................................................................................... 161 EN2403 Corporation Yard EV and EV Charging ..................................................................... 163 FC2401 Cherry Blossom Apartments Reroofing ................................................................... 165 FC2402 Creamery Building Demolition ................................................................................ 167 FC2405 City Hall Reroofing ................................................................................................... 169 FR2401 Glen Loma Temporary Fire Station .......................................................................... 171 PK2401 Citywide Park Restroom Reroofing/Rehabilitation ................................................. 173 SW2401 Master Plan Projects ‐ Sewer Improvements ........................................................... 175 SW2402 Joint Morgan Hill‐Gilroy Trunk Line Repairs ............................................................. 177 WT2401 Master Plan Projects ‐ Water Improvements ........................................................... 179 DRAFT 51 Appendix B – Unfunded CIP Projects (Recommended Beyond FY28) ........................................ 181 800010 Rancho Hills Development Concrete Repairs .......................................................... 183 800030 Corp Yard Stormwater Compliance Improvements ................................................ 185 800040 Automall Parkway Pavement Rehabilitation ........................................................... 187 800120 Las Animas Park Tennis Court ‐ Fence Repairs ........................................................ 189 800280 Lions Creek Trail West Gap Closure ‐ Kern to Day ................................................... 191 800290 Santa Teresa Fire Station ‐ New Station .................................................................. 193 800380 Church Street Storm Drain Extension ‐ Seventh to 7233 Church ............................ 195 800680 New Water Storage Tank at Walton Heath Court ................................................... 197 800730 Gateway Senior Apartments Pedestrian Crossing Safety Improvements ............... 199 900030 Drainage Improvements to Mitigate Minor Flooding ............................................. 201 900070 Luchessa Bridge Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Improvements .............................. 203 900090 Mantelli/Church Bulb‐Out and Crosswalk Improvements ...................................... 205 900100 Miller/Uvas Creek Trail Pedestrian Improvements ................................................. 207 900110 Murray Avenue Sidewalk Gap Closure .................................................................... 209 900120 Sidewalk Gap Closure ‐ 8340 Swanston Lane .......................................................... 211 900130 Storm Drain Cleaning and Inspection Program ....................................................... 213 900140 Fifth Street ‐ Miller to Princevalle Storm Drain Replacement ................................. 215 900150 Fifth Street ‐ Princevalle to Rosanna New Storm Drain Trunk ................................ 217 900160 Forest and Eighth Storm Drain Connection Replacement ....................................... 219 900170 Ninth Street Storm Drain Extension ‐ Monterey to Eigleberry ................................ 221 900180 Princevalle System ‐ Fifth to Santa Paula Storm Drain Improvements ................... 223 900190 Rosanna ‐ Fourth to Princevalle Channel Storm Drain Improvements ................... 225 900200 Second Street ‐ Hanna to Miller Slough Storm Drain Improvements ..................... 227 900210 Third Street Storm Drain Extension ‐ Hanna to Eigleberry ...................................... 229 900230 Wren Avenue Bridge Over Lions Creek BPMP ......................................................... 231 900320 Railroad At‐Grade Crossing Pedestrian Safety Improvements ................................ 233 900330 Neighborhood Street Lighting ................................................................................. 235 900350 Church Street Sidewalk Gap Closure ....................................................................... 237 900400 Chestnut Fire Station Bay Heaters and HVAC Replacement ................................... 239 900450 7380 Dowdy Building Demolition ............................................................................ 241 900500 Parks/Civic Facilities Sidewalk Improvements Citywide .......................................... 243 900510 City‐Owned Parking Lots Resurfacing ...................................................................... 245 DRAFT 52 900590 Chestnut Fire Station Seismic Upgrade ................................................................... 247 900600 Las Animas Fire Station Upgrade and Renovation .................................................. 249 900610 Christmas Hill Park Trail Wayfinding Signage .......................................................... 251 900630 Forest Street Park Expansion ................................................................................... 253 900640 Las Animas Veterans Park Miscellaneous Facility Rehabilitation ............................ 255 900680 Gilroy Sports Park Improvements Phases IV and V ................................................. 257 900690 Rehabilitate Softball Fields at Las Animas and Christmas Hill Parks ....................... 259 900720 Old Gilroy Street at Railroad Crossing Sewer Replacement .................................... 261 900730 Martin and Railroad Water Line Replacement ........................................................ 263 EN2404 Monterey Rd Sidewalk ‐ Luchessa to Tenth ............................................................ 265 EN2405 Master Plan Projects ‐ Storm Drain Improvements................................................. 267 EN2406 Luchessa Ave / Rossi Ln Reconstruction .................................................................. 269 PK2402 Parks Master Plan .................................................................................................... 271 Appendix C – Funded Studies/Plans (Within 5‐Year CIP) ........................................................... 273 800110 Downtown Parking Management Plan .................................................................... 275 800230 Shooting Range Assessment .................................................................................... 277 800240 Traffic Circulation Master Plan and Traffic Impact Fee Update .............................. 279 FC2403 Civic Center Master Plan ......................................................................................... 281 Appendix D – Unfunded Studies/Plans (Recommended Beyond FY28) .................................... 283 900220 Storm Outfalls #6 and #7 ‐ Investigations and Monitoring for NPDES .................... 285 900250 Development of Stormwater Specifications ............................................................ 287 900260 Update to the City's Trails Master Plan (Bike Master Plan) .................................... 289 900270 Development of a Pedestrian Master Plan.............................................................. 291 900280 Update to the City's Standard Drawings/Specifications/Design Standards ............ 293 900290 Development of an ADA Transition Plan ................................................................. 295 900360 ADA Assessment ‐ City Facilities Citywide ............................................................... 297 900650 Christmas Hill Ranch Site Master Planning .............................................................. 299 900660 Farrell Park Facility Master Planning ....................................................................... 301 900670 Uvas Creek Staging and Neighborhood Park Master Planning ................................ 303 Appendix E – Miscellaneous Funded CIP Projects (Within 5‐Year CIP) ...................................... 305 800340 Annual Signal/Street Light Maintenance ................................................................. 307 800430 Cohansey Avenue/Terri Court Storm Drain Improvements .................................... 309 800460 State Trash Amendments Stormwater Compliance Project .................................... 311 DRAFT 53 800470 Stormwater NPDES Compliance .............................................................................. 313 900460 Electrical Panel Evaluation Corporation Yard for OSHA Requirements .................. 315 900520 Senior Center ADA Restroom Access ....................................................................... 317 FC2404 Citywide Energy Saving Measures ........................................................................... 319 Appendix F – Completed CIP Projects ......................................................................................... 321 800090 Eigleberry and Seventh Parking Lot ......................................................................... 323 800140 City Hall Backup Generator ..................................................................................... 325 800150 Corp Yard Fuel Tank Repair ..................................................................................... 327 800170 Citywide Regulatory Sign Replacement ................................................................... 329 800200 Citywide Sidewalk Condition Assessment ............................................................... 331 800210 Orchard/Tenth Crosswalk Enhancements ............................................................... 333 800260 Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program ............................................................ 335 800300 Replace Station Alerting System ‐ All Fire Stations ................................................. 337 800740 San Ysidro Lighting / Picnic Area Improvements Project ........................................ 339 800750 Gilroy Sports Park Playground Surface Repair ......................................................... 341 900380 CHS Aquatics Pool Re‐Plastering ............................................................................. 343 DRAFT 54 This page intentionally left blank Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT 55 Appendix A – Funded CIP Projects (Within 5-Year CIP) Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT 56 This page intentionally left blank Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED* 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Tenth Street and Uvas Creek Bridge Project No. 800020 Category Streets: Bridges Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Tenth Street at Uvas Creek Project Description and Purpose This project consists of constructing a two-lane bridge with sidewalks and Class II Bike Lanes along Tenth Street over Uvas Creek, as well as other features. The project will also include a “breezeway bridge” over the current Class I Levee Path, which will enable levee users to cross under Tenth Street, avoiding an at-grade vehicle/pedestrian crossing. The project includes a new roundabout at the Uvas Park Drive/Tenth Street intersection. The bridge will connect two segments of Tenth Street, which currently terminate on either side of Uvas Creek, and allow Tenth Street to extend as one continuous roadway from the US 101 / Tenth Street (Automall Parkway) Interchange to Santa Teresa Boulevard. Project Justification This project is identified in the Traffic Circulation Master Plan. Per a 2005 Development Agreement with the Glen Loma Ranch Development, the City will complete the design of the bridge and the developer will build the bridge with reimbursement from the Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Fund. The City Council has directed the bridge to be designed with a width of 76 feet to accommodate four travel lanes in the future. Construction of this bridge will provide improved transportation circulation within the City and will improve emergency response time. Master Planning Documents This project is included in the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan which is part of the General Plan Mobility Element. Tenth St (Future) 57 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED* 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800020) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design Design $2,020,125 $2,020,125 CEQA $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Construction $23,013,049 $23,013,049 Con. Support $4,061,126 $4,061,126 Total $2,020,125 $1,000,000 $27,074,175 $30,094,300 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Traffic Improvement Fund (425) $2,020,125 $1,000,000 $3,020,125 Unfunded $27,074,175 $27,074,175 Total $2,020,125 $1,000,000 $27,074,175 $30,094,300 Financial Comments The design and environmental work for this project are being funded by Traffic Impact Fees (425). Funding for construction and construction management have not been identified. The estimate assumes no property acquisition for the project. The Gilroy Unified School District and the Santa Clara Valley Water would provide any needed property at no cost. If the project is required to purchase property from the School District or Valley Water, project costs could increase significantly. *This project will only be funded for design and environmental. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Environmental FY24 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Ongoing maintenance to the bridge and associated project improvements will include bridge deck sealing every three to five years, graffiti mitigation and general clean-up around the structure, and landscape activities (if any) associated within the roundabout areas. 58 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name McCarthy Site Well (Well #9) Project No. 800050 Category Water: Wells & Pumping Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 6601 Cameron Boulevard Project Description and Purpose This project will design and construct a new potable water well to increase the City’s water supply by approximately one million gallons per day (MGD). The investigation of possible well locations, property acquisition, a Right-of-Entry Agreement, and the development of conceptual plans are expected to be completed by the end of FY20. The project includes drilling a test hole and a monitoring well and constructing a production well and pump station with associated plumbing, electrical, and mechanical equipment. A site located at 6601 Cameron Boulevard has been identified as a possible location for the new well. Project Justification The City has recently undergone a significant amount of new development resulting in increased demand for potable water. A November 2018 report on Potable Water Demand and Supply for Imminent Development estimated that by 2022, the Average Daily Demand (ADD) for potable water will increase from the existing rate of 7.2 MGD to 8.1 MGD (an increase of 0.9 MGD). The increase in ADD due to imminent development is approximately one million gallons per day, which is equivalent to one new well with an average production of 1,500 gallons per minute (GPM). This project is required to meet the demand for water in the near future. The City Council approved the design and construction of a new well based on current and projected ADD and historical consumption. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Water Master Plan by planning, developing, and financing water system facilities to provide reliable and enhanced service for existing customers and to serve anticipated growth. Potential Well #9 Site 59 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800050) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $205,647 $205,647 Design $356,498 $260,444 $616,942 CEQA $41,129 $41,129 Construction $2,632,285 $2,632,285 Con. Support $616,942 $616,942 Total $562,145 $3,550,800 $4,112,945 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water Development Impact (435) $562,145 $4,233,500 $4,795,645 Total $562,145 $3,550,800 $4,112,945 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Development Impact Fee Fund (435). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY20 – FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The annual cost for the operation and maintenance of the well is approximately $21,500. This includes costs for chlorine, mechanical cleaning, semi-annual equipment testing, regulatory permitting, and regular staff maintenance of the facility. 60 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PCI Rating Example Project Name Annual Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Project No. 800060 Category Streets: Pavement Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The purpose of this project is to rehabilitate and maintain the City’s pavement condition. The City, with approximately 270 lane miles of paved roads (not including alleys) conducts a pavement condition survey every two years. The 2022 survey showed the citywide average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is 62 out of 100. This project would prolong the lifespan of the current pavement and prevent further deterioration and reduction in the PCI. The project scope includes: •Preventive measures such as crack sealing, slurry seal, microsurfacing, and cape seal for pavement in fair to good condition. •Restoration measures such as grind and overlay, dig-outs, and cold-in-place recycling for pavement in fair to poor condition. •Rehabilitation/Reconstruction measures to remove and replace pavement in poor to failed condition. Project Justification The City’s current pavement assets are valued at $219.4 million, which represents one of the largest assets owned and maintained by the City. Without proper maintenance, the investment needed to sustain this asset becomes economically unsustainable. A drop in PCI results in much higher maintenance and restoration costs. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan by providing a safe and well- maintained travel way. 61 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800060) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $448,260 $452,707 $296,525 $300,438 $304,449 $1,802,380 CEQA $2,241 $2,264 $1,483 $1,502 $1,522 $9,012 Construction $3,583,836 $3,619,396 $2,370,718 $2,402,003 $2,434,071 $14,410,024 Con. Support $448,260 $452,707 $296,525 $300,438 $304,449 $1,802,380 Total $4,482,596 $4,527,074 $2,965,251 $3,004,382 $3,044,492 $18,023,795 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total SB-1* (210) $1,482,596 $1,527,074 $1,565,251 $1,604,382 $1,644,492 $7,823,795 Measure B** LS&R (212) $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $4,500,000 Gas Taxes (205) $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $2,500,000 General Fund (100) $1,600,000 $1,600,000 $3,200,000 Total $4,482,596 $4,527,074 $2,965,251 $3,004,382 $3,044,492 $18,023,795 *The Road Repair and Accountability Act (SB-1) provides Transportation funding to state and local agencies for 10 years; the funding comes from additional gas tax, vehicle license and registration fees. ** Measure B is a 30-year, half-cent countywide sales tax to enhance transit, highways, expressways, and active transportation; the Local Streets and Roads category of Measure B provides for street pavement maintenance. Financial Comments Funding for this project will be from SB-1 (210), Measure B (212), Gas Taxes (205), and the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline All Phases FY24 and Ongoing Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project directly addresses maintenance needs. As the City invests more funding in this program, and as the City’s PCI increases, ongoing maintenance costs should be reduced. 62 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Annual Citywide Curb Ramp Project Project No. 800070 Category Streets: Curbs and Sidewalks Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The purpose of this project is to upgrade existing pedestrian curb ramps and to install new pedestrian curb ramps at high priority areas and locations with high levels of pedestrian activity. All upgraded and new pedestrian curb ramps will be compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). It is estimated that the city currently owns and maintains approximately 4,000 curb ramps. Curb ramps are an important part of making sidewalks, street crossings, and the other pedestrian routes within the public right-of-way accessible to all users, including people with disabilities. Project Justification Title II of the ADA requires local governments to make pedestrian crossings accessible to people with disabilities by providing curb ramps. To allow people with disabilities to cross streets safely, local governments must provide curb ramps at pedestrian crossings and at public transportation stops where walkways intersect with a vertical curb. To comply with ADA requirements, the curb ramps provided must meet specific standards for width, slope, cross slope, placement, and other features. Per ADA standards, all streets constructed after January 26, 1992 must provide curb ramps in compliance with ADA standards. In addition, any street that was constructed prior to 1992, but was altered after 1992, must also provide ADA-compliant curb ramps. Master Planning Documents This project is consistent with the City’s General Plan goals and policies. These goals and policies include correcting deficiencies and ensuring pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve. Example: Before Curb Ramp Upgrade Example: After Curb Ramp Upgrade 63 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800070) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $5,000 Design $32,000 $32,000 $32,000 $32,000 $32,000 $160,000 CEQA $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $5,000 Construction $184,000 $184,000 $184,000 $184,000 $184,000 $920,000 Con. Support $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $22,000 $110,000 Total $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $1,200,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Gas Taxes (205) $138,247 $138,247 Vehicle Registration Fees (220) $20,000 $20,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $760,000 Transportation/ Mobility Grant (215) $220,000 $81,753 $301,753 Total $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $240,000 $1,200,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded by Gas Taxes (205), Vehicle Registration Fees (220), and Transportation/Mobility Grant Funds (215). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Annually Project Advertisement Annually Project Construction Annually Project Completion Annually Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no net, new operational costs associated with this project. 64 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Annual Safe Routes to Schools Project No. 800080 Category Streets: Curbs and Sidewalks Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The purpose of the Safe Routes to School (SRTS) project is to provide minor capital improvements to enhance the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists around schools. Engineering staff attends regular coordination meetings with the Gilroy Unified School District (GUSD) to address safety concerns and develop strategies to encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation in the vicinity of schools. This project will allow staff to identify and construct minor improvements based on discussions with the School District, SRTS Groups, and the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission. SRTS improvements may include pavement striping, regulatory and advisory signs, crosswalks, sidewalks, and other minor concrete improvements. Project Justification In 2012, Council adopted Resolution 2012-20 supporting the SRTS program. This program is designed to promote the health and safety of children who walk or bicycle to school. Per the resolution, Council committed to encouraging walking, bicycling, and transit use among students and families in the community. Since 2016, the Santa Clara County Public Health Department has supported Gilroy in developing a SRTS Action Plan, which provides a framework for the GUSD and the City to collaborate and improve safety through the implementation of SRTS. This project will allow the City to address deficiencies which are highlighted in this plan. Master Planning Documents This project is consistent with the City’s General Plan goals and policies. These goals and policies include correcting deficiencies and ensuring pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve. 65 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800080) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $4,400 $4,620 $4,851 $5,094 $5,348 $24,313 Construction $56,000 $58,800 $61,740 $64,827 $68,069 $309,435 Con. Support $2,200 $2,310 $2,426 $2,547 $2,674 $12,156 Total $62,600 $65,730 $69,017 $72,467 $76,091 $345,905 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Gas Taxes (205) $62,600 $65,730 $49,017 $177,347 Vehicle Registration (220) $20,000 $72,467 $76,091 $168,558 Total $62,600 $65,730 $69,017 $72,467 $76,091 $345,905 Financial Comments It’s estimated that the first-year capital costs for this project would be approximately $63,000. This cost includes engineering traffic studies, design, and construction of minor improvement. Future investment is needed in order to provide upkeep for the improvement and expand to other schools within the City. Future years will be funded using Gas Tax (205) and Vehicle Registration Fee (220). An escalation factor of 5% is used to account for annual design and construction inflation. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Annually Project Advertisement Annually Project Construction Annually Project Completion Annually Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no net, new operational costs associated with this project. 66 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Golf Course Water Tank Replacement Project No. 800160 Category Facilities: Specialized Facilities Department Facilities Project Type Replacement Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Gilroy Golf Course Project Description and Purpose This project would replace the current recycled water storage tank at Gilroy Golf Course. The project would include the design of a suitable concrete pad for an 8,000-gallon water storage tank, replacement of the current tank, duplication of the auto-fill plumbing, and an upgrade to the hardware associated with the current irrigation system. Project Justification The existing 8,000-gallon recycled water tank was professionally assessed by a consultant, and they have found the tank to be severely corroded and in dire need of replacement. The tank is required for the Golf Course’s irrigation system. Should this tank rupture, it would render them unable to water the site, which would severely impact the public that uses the course and cause extensive and expensive damage to the greens and fairways. This tank has already received many repairs to stop previous leaks. A new tank is needed to ensure the greens and fairways are irrigated and the golf course can remain open. Recycled water is a reliable source of water for landscape irrigation, agriculture, and industrial operations. It can contribute to the long-term water security of the region by alleviating water supply challenges such as recurring droughts, and residential and commercial growth. Master Planning Documents Gilroy Golf Course receives its recycled water from the South County recycled water distribution system. The South County Recycled Water Master Plan (Master Plan) was prepared in 2004 by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) and the South County Regional Wastewater Authority (SCRWA), with participation from the cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill. The Master Plan was updated in 2015. Gilroy Golf Course Entrance Hecker Pass Highway (SR152) Recycled Water Storage Tank 67 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800160) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $17,600 $17,600 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $111,000 $111,000 Con. Support $19,800 $19,800 Total $149,500 $149,500 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $149,500 $149,500 Total $149,500 $149,500 Financial Comments This project would be funded by the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project would reduce operational costs because temporary repairs would no longer be needed. 68 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Traffic Calming Project No. 800180 Category Streets: Congestion Management Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project will fund the installation of physical traffic calming devices to reduce or eliminate the negative effects of motor vehicle traffic on residential streets. This can be done by causing drivers to reduce their speed or to use an alternative route through the use of engineering solutions and the installation of physical devices. These devices could include driver feedback signs, curb extensions, speed cushions, and roundabouts, as identified through the community outreach process outlined in the City’s Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP). Project Justification In November 2019, the City Council approved the City’s Neighborhood Traffic Management Program. The NTMP includes provisions for the installation of traffic calming improvements. The City has received approximately 20 neighborhood requests for traffic calming, which have been on hold pending approval of the NTMP document. Moving forward, staff will conduct outreach with the residents on the list, and begin the process to determine the need for installation of actual traffic calming improvements. The improvements will ultimately address neighborhood traffic concerns and community safety issues. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan by providing a safe and well- maintained travel way. 69 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800180) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $10,000 $10,000 Construction $138,900 $138,900 Con. Support $1,100 $1,100 Total $150,000 $150,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $150,000 $150,000 Total $150,000 $150,000 Financial Comments Projects will be identified on a first come, first served basis, and comprehensive NTMP project implementation will be funded through the CIP process, where projects will compete for funding annually with other CIP projects. It is hoped that this program could eventually be funded through Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) funds, but the Traffic Impact Fee Program will need to be modified to do this. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Ongoing Project Advertisement Ongoing Project Construction Ongoing Project Completion Ongoing Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 70 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Casey and Swanston Water Line Replacement Project No. 800250 Category Water: Distribution Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Casey Lane and Swanston Lane Project Description and Purpose This project would replace approximately 1,800 feet of deteriorating 6” cast iron water line with 10” ductile iron pipe on Swanston Lane between Leavesley Road and Forest Street, and replace approximately 600 feet of deteriorating 4” cast iron line with 10” ductile iron pipe on Casey Lane between Monterey Road and Swanston Lane. This project also includes replacing service laterals with new 1” and 2” copper service lines, installation of associated valves and fire hydrants, and abandonment of the existing 4” water line. Project Justification These water lines have experienced numerous leaks and have reached the end of their useful life, which could result in catastrophic failure if not replaced. This project will save City staff repair time and water loss from leaks, and improve fire flow pressure to nearby commercial land uses. The current pavement condition on Casey and Swanston Lanes is failed to poor. As a result, Casey Lane will require full reconstruction and Swanston Lane will require a grind and overlay. Although not included in this project’s cost estimate, the paving improvements could be combined with the water line project, which would provide a cost savings by constructing these improvements as one project. In addition to Enhancing Public Safety Capabilities, this project would also meet the Council Strategic Goals of Ensuring Financial Stability and Ensuring Neighborhoods Benefit Equally from City Services. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document but will provide reliable and enhanced service for existing customers and to serve anticipated future growth. Leavesley Rd Forest St Swanston Ln 71 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800250) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $13,200 $13,200 Design $268,400 $268,400 CEQA $13,200 $13,200 Construction $2,332,000 $2,332,000 Con. Support $371,800 $371,800 Other Fees $122,000 $122,000 Total $294,800 $2,825,800 $3,120,600 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (720) $294,800 $2,825,800 $3,120,600 Total $294,800 $2,825,800 $3,120,600 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (720). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project will create a reduction in maintenance costs associated with the aged and undersized infrastructure that will be replaced. 72 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Lions Creek Trail West of Santa Teresa and Day Project No. 800270 Category Parks and Trails: Trails Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Lions Creek - Santa Teresa Boulevard to Tapestry Drive Project Description and Purpose This project would construct a Class I, multi-use trail approximately 2,000 linear feet in length from Santa Teresa Boulevard to Tapestry Drive along Lions Creek. The trail would provide recreational usage along the creek and pedestrian access between nearby neighborhoods and Christopher High School. The scope of work would include: •Asphalt concrete Class I trail (for bicycles and pedestrians) •ADA-compliant curb ramps at all trail entrances •Concrete retaining wall Project Justification This project was originally approved by Council for design in 2010 as part of three major trail projects in the City (the Ronan Channel Trail and two segments of the Lions Creek Trail). However, funds previously allocated for this trail were diverted to the Ronan Channel Trail project to allow the Ronan Channel Trail project to be constructed and to take full advantage of federal funds that were available. The Lions Creek Trail project, which is currently at the 60% design phase, qualifies for future local and federal grants for the construction phase. Master Planning Documents This project is in conformance with the adopted Trail Master Plan and has already received environmental clearance, which is a prerequisite for permitting. Santa Teresa Blvd Tapestry Dr Lions Creek Project Limits 73 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800270) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $6,600 $6,600 Design $121,000 $121,000 CEQA $55,000 $55,000 Construction $1,243,000 $1,243,000 Con. Support $126,500 $126,500 Total $182,600 $1,369,500 $1,552,100 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $182,600 $1,369,500 $1,552,100 Total $182,600 $1,369,500 $1,552,100 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the General Fund (100). These funds will be reimbursed with grant funding. This project qualifies for the Measure B Bicycle & Pedestrian Capital Projects Competitive Grant Program and Valley Water’s Access to Trails & Open Space Grant funding. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. Once completed, this project will require an annual maintenance cost of approximately $16,000 per year. The trail will also require resurfacing (Type II Slurry Seal and Restriping) every 8 years at approximately $35,000 per treatment. 74 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Automated Flexnet Water Meter Installation Project No. 800310 Category Water: Meters & Service Lines Department Public Works: Water Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager Water Operations Supervisor Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project would continue the ongoing process of converting all radio read meters to Advanced Meter Infrastructure (AMI). The City currently has approximately 2,250 meters to upgrade. All of the water meters in the City are already “radio read,” but they require a reader to be in the vicinity of the meter. This project would allow real-time meter reading capabilities. This would enable leaks to be identified more quickly, monitoring for concerning activity, verification of billing data, and any needed updating for records. Over 85% of the City’s water meters have already been upgraded. Project Justification In 2012, with City Council approval, staff began exchanging traditional residential water meters with AMI meters. AMI meters provide the City with remote access to water consumption information. This information has enabled the City to notify customers of water leaks, saving them money and reducing overall water demand. This has been a cornerstone of the City’s water conservation program and targets non-beneficial uses of water. As of March 2023, approximately 12,750 out of 15,000 meters have been upgraded to AMI meters. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document. 75 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800310) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $24,200 $18,700 $18,700 $61,600 Construction $770,000 $594,000 $594,000 $1,958,000 Total $794,200 $612,700 $612,700 $2,019,600 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $794,200 $612,700 $612,700 $2,019,600 Total $794,200 $612,700 $612,700 $2,019,600 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There will be reduced operational costs for reading and maintaining meters in the future, allowing staff to focus on other operational needs. 76 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Annual Shared-Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program Project No. 800320 Category Streets: Curbs and Sidewalks Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The purpose of this program is to assist property owners in maintaining their sidewalk in a safe manner. In doing so, the program assists residents in maintaining the condition of walkways for which they have maintenance responsibility. To assist the property owners with these repairs, the current program reimburses 50% of the sidewalk repair cost and 100% of any other repairs in the City’s right- of-way, including; curb and gutter, driveway approach, street repair, tree removal (if warranted), and replacement. To date the City has had over 1,500 residential participants and has expended over $5 million. Project Justification According to the California Streets and Highway Code, the owner of a property fronting a public street must maintain the sidewalk, curb and gutter, and park strip area in a condition that will not endanger persons or property, or interfere with the convenient use of the area. The current sidewalk program began in 1994. Without this reimbursement mechanism, residents would be less likely to maintain the structural quality of their sidewalk and curb, leaving the sidewalk system in a poor and unsafe condition. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan. 77 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800320) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $50,000 Construction $470,000 $470,000 $470,000 $470,000 $470,000 $2,350,000 Con. Support $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000 Total $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $2,500,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Sidewalk Repair Reserve (200) $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $2,500,000 Total $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $2,500,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Sidewalk Repair Reserve Fund (200). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Annually Project Advertisement Annually Project Construction Annually Project Completion Annually Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 78 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Annual Pavement Markings Project No. 800330 Category Streets: Pavement Markings Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The purpose of this project is to upgrade and refresh existing pavement markings as needed throughout the City per the requirements set forth by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). Since 2017, the Council has approved an annual contract to restripe city streets and maintain longitudinal pavement markings to a minimum level of retro-reflectivity. To date, the approved funds have been expended through the restriping of approximately 192,000 linear feet of pavement markings. It is estimated that there are a total of approximately 1.2 million linear feet of markings throughout the City. Project Justification Per the recently adopted 2019 California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), local governments are required to maintain a minimum level of retro-reflectivity for longitudinal pavement markings. This new standard promotes safety while providing sufficient flexibility for agencies to choose a maintenance method that best matches their specific conditions. Table 3A-1 of the California MUTCD provides the minimum required levels for different types of pavement markings at various types of locations. It is recommended that this type of project be continued on an annual basis because the retro-reflectivity of pavement striping and markings will degrade over time, and can pose a safety hazard for drivers and pedestrians. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan by providing a safe and well- maintained travel way. 79 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800330) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $15,000 $15,750 $16,538 $17,364 $18,233 $82,884 Construction $185,000 $194,250 $203,963 $214,161 $224,869 $1,022,242 Con. Support $10,000 $10,500 $11,025 $11,576 $12,155 $55,256 Total $210,000 $220,500 $231,525 $243,101 $255,256 $1,160,383 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Vehicle Registration Fee (220) $210,000 $220,500 $231,525 $243,101 $255,256 $1,160,383 Total $210,000 $220,500 $231,525 $243,101 $255,256 $1,160,383 Financial Comments This project will be funded by Vehicle Registration Fees (220). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Annually Project Advertisement Annually Project Construction Annually Project Completion Annually Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project directly addresses maintenance needs. There are no new operational costs associated with this project. 80 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Luchessa /Church Traffic Signal Installation Project No. 800350 Category Streets: Traffic Signals Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Luchessa Avenue and Church Street Project Description and Purpose This project will design and construct a four-way, six-phase traffic signal at the Luchessa Avenue/Church Street intersection. The signal will have dedicated left-turn phasing for the east-west movements on Luchessa Avenue and passive left-turn phasing for the north-south movements on Church Street. The project will include pedestrian countdown timers as well as other pedestrian and lighting safety improvements at the intersection. Project Justification A signal warrant analysis was conducted for this intersection in late 2019. Signal warrants were close to being met, which would justify installation of traffic signal improvements. With increased traffic expected over the next several years, it is expected that signal warrants for this location will be met in the next two years. Completing the signal design improvements in advance will put the City in a position to put the project out to bid for construction once the signal warrants are met. This project will enhance safety at this intersection. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan by providing a safe and well- maintained travel way. Two-Way Stop Control at Luchessa Avenue and Church Street 81 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800350) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $9,900 $9,900 Design $72,600 $72,600 CEQA $3,300 $3,300 Construction $869,000 $869,000 Con. Support $28,600 $28,600 Total $85,800 $897,600 $983,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total TIF (425) $85,800 $897,600 $983,400 Total $85,800 $897,600 $983,400 Financial Comments This project is fully funded through the Traffic Impact Fee Program (425). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There would be minimal on-going maintenance costs associated with this project. 82 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Mantelli/Kern Traffic Signal Installation Project No. 800360 Category Streets: Traffic Signals Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Mantelli Drive and Kern Avenue Project Description and Purpose This project will design and construct a four-way, eight-phase traffic signal at the intersection of Mantelli Drive and Kern Ave. The signal will have dedicated left-turn phasing for the east-west approaches along Mantelli Drive and the north-south approaches along Kern Avenue. The project will include pedestrian count-down timers, intersection pedestrian improvements, and safety lighting. Project Justification Currently this skewed intersection at Mantelli Drive (a four-lane, two-way undivided roadway) and Kern Avenue (a two-lane, two-way undivided roadway) is all-way stop controlled. However, the geometry of the intersection has made it difficult for pedestrians and bicyclists to cross the intersection. Under General Plan buildout conditions, this intersection is projected to meet traffic signal warrants. In the meantime, pedestrian and bicycle volumes are projected to increase due to the intersection’s proximity to Rod Kelley Elementary School, and the recent installation of Class II bike lanes along Mantelli Drive. This intersection has long been the subject of numerous grievances to the Gilroy Unified School District as well as Safe Routes to School groups. Master Planning Documents A traffic signal at this location is included in the Traffic Circulation Master Plan and the Traffic Impact Fee program as Intersection Number 7. All-Way Stop Control at Mantelli Drive and Kern Avenue 83 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800360) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $11,000 $11,000 Design $80,300 $80,300 CEQA $3,300 $3,300 Construction $952,000 $952,000 Con. Support $31,900 $31,900 Total $94,600 $983,900 $1,078,500 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total TIF (425) $94,600 $983,900 $1,078,500 Total $94,600 $983,900 $1,078,500 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program (425). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Once completed, the operation and maintenance cost for the traffic signal is estimated at $6,500 annually. 84 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Monterey/I.O.O.F. Traffic Signal Installation Project No. 800370 Category Streets: Traffic Signals Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Monterey Street and I.O.O.F. Avenue Project Description and Purpose This project will design and construct a four-way, four-phase traffic signal at the intersection of Monterey Street and I.O.O.F. Avenue. The signal will have passive left-turn phasing for the north- south and east-west approaches (including the private driveway). The project will include pedestrian countdown timers as well as other pedestrian and lighting safety improvements at the intersection. As part of the Monterey Street Pavement Rehabilitation project, a pedestrian Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) system was installed in 2019 to increase pedestrian safety as part of the Safe Routes to School Action Plan. Phase I (design) of the traffic signal improvements will begin as soon as the signal warrants are met. Phase II (construction) will begin as funding is available. Project Justification A signal warrant analysis was conducted for this intersection in late 2019. Signal warrants were close to being met, which would justify installation of the signal improvements. With increased activity in downtown and increased traffic expected over the next several years, it is expected that signal warrants for this location will be met in the next two years. Completing the signal design improvements in advance will put the City in a position to put the project out to bid for construction once the signal warrants are met. This project will enhance safety at this intersection. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan by providing a safe and well- maintained travel way. One-Way Stop Control at Monterey Street and I.O.O.F. Avenue 85 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800370) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY25 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $9,900 $9,900 Design $95,700 $95,700 CEQA $3,300 $3,300 Construction $903,000 $903,000 Con. Support $29,700 $29,700 Total $108,900 $932,700 $1,041,600 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY25 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total TIF (425) $108,900 $932,700 $1,041,600 Total $108,900 $932,700 $1,041,600 Financial Comments This intersection is not currently included in the City’s Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program. However, it will be added to the TIF Program during the update of the Transportation Circulation Master Plan and Traffic Impact Fee updates. It will then be available for funding by the TIF Program (425). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Once completed, the operation and maintenance cost for the traffic signal is estimated at $6,500 annually. 86 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Miller and Third Storm Drain Rehabilitation Project No. 800390 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Miller Avenue and Third Street Project Description and Purpose This project would design and construct approximately 100 linear feet of new 18” storm drain pipe in the vicinity of the Miller Avenue/Third Street intersection. The project scope includes: •Remove and replace 100 linear feet of existing 12” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) with 18” RCP. •Remove and relocate existing catch basin •Connect new pipes to existing storm drain system Project Justification The existing catch basin at the intersection of Miller Avenue and Third Street is not optimally located. During moderate rain events, flood waters have extended from Third Street to Miller Avenue where there is high volume of vehicle at higher speed. This flooding may cause safety issues such as hydroplaning. Additionally, the storm drain lateral pipe that is connecting this catch basin to the main line is also acting as a mainline carrying additional volume from upper stream of this intersection. This lateral is undersized and is restricting optimal flow to the mainline. By relocating and up-sizing this line, flooding within this intersection will be eliminated and will restore additional operation capacity to respond to other locations. Master Planning Documents This project supports the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. Third St Santa Theresa Dr Miller Ave Project Area 87 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800390) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $46,200 $46,200 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $202,000 $202,000 Con. Support $37,400 $37,400 Total $286,700 $286,700 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Storm Drain Development Impact (410) $286,700 $286,700 Total $286,700 $286,700 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Storm Drain Development Impact Fund (410). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY26 Project Advertisement FY26 Project Construction FY26 Project Completion FY26 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 88 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Monterey and Luchessa Storm Drain Modifications Project No. 800400 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Monterey Road and Luchessa Avenue Project Description and Purpose This project would design and construct two storm drain catch basins at the intersection of Monterey Road and Luchessa Avenue. The project scope includes: •Install 120 linear feet of reinforced concrete pipe •Install 2 catch basins •Connect new pipes to existing storm drain system Project Justification There is currently only one catch basin at the intersection of Monterey Road and Luchessa Avenue that collects the storm water for this area. The catch basin is located at the northwest corner and is not sufficient in collecting storm water for the other three corners. As this is a large intersection with higher crown/slope along the roadway, there is no path for the water to travel to this existing catch basin. During moderate rain events, the flooding has reached Monterey Road where there is high volume of vehicle at higher speed. This flooding may cause safety issues such as hydroplaning. By installing two new catch basins at the northeast and southeast corner, flooding at this intersection will be eliminated restoring additional operation capacity to respond to other locations. The southwest corner can be constructed once the fronting property is constructed. Master Planning Documents This project supports the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. Luchessa Ave Project Area 89 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800400) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $57,200 $57,200 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $253,000 $253,000 Con. Support $50,600 $50,600 Total $361,900 $361,900 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Storm Drain Development Impact (410) $361,900 $361,900 Total $361,900 $361,900 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Storm Drain Development Impact Fund (410). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY28 Project Advertisement FY28 Project Construction FY28 Project Completion FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal and added to the maintenance schedule. 90 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Annual Citywide Traffic Signal Upgrades Project No. 800410 Category Streets: Traffic Signals Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The purpose of this project is to assess the consistency of the City’s traffic signal equipment, and make improvements so all 33 City-owned and controlled signalized intersections have the same signal equipment. Each signalized intersection should have the same type 2070 signal controller, cabinet, controller software, battery back-up system, pedestrian count-down timer, Accessible Pedestrian Signal (APS) push button heads, and video detection. In addition to replacing the needed signal equipment listed above to ensure equipment consistency, the project will also include replacing underground loop traffic detectors with overhead video assisted traffic detection. Project Justification Having consistent signal equipment at all City signalized intersections will save on maintenance costs and provide the best operational efficiency and safety for our residents. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan. 91 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800410) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $10,000 $10,000 $20,000 Construction $140,000 $140,000 $280,000 Total $150,000 $150,000 $300,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Gas Taxes (205) $150,000 $150,000 $300,000 Total $150,000 $150,000 $300,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded for the first two years by Gas Tax Funds (205). Funding will need to be identified in FYs 26-28. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 – FY25 Project Advertisement Project Construction FY24 – FY25 Project Completion FY24 – FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no net new operational costs for this project. Battery back-up systems are required to be replaced every five years at a total cost of replacement of $1,000 per location. 92 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Utility Undergrounding – Monterey St – Eighth to Tenth Project No. 800420 Category Engineering: Utility Undergrounding Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Monterey St between Eighth and Tenth Streets Project Description and Purpose This project would underground the existing overhead utility lines along Monterey Street between Eighth Street and Tenth Street using PG&E Rule 20A Fund Credits. The project could include sidewalk improvements, stormwater treatment improvements, street improvements, paving improvements, and other utility coordination efforts. Project Justification Per California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) mandates, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) sets aside funding each year for local agencies. Funding is allocated for undergrounding overhead utilities in order to prevent future calamities. The City of Gilroy has an accumulated balance in excess of $3,000,000 of these funds. Undergrounding utilities along Monterey Street, one of the primary roadways leading into the City’s Transit Center and Downtown, would enhance the visual characteristics of the area and enhance economic development. Master Planning Documents This project supports the Downtown Strategic Plan by supporting the downtown. Typical Overhead Distribution Line Conduit and Trench for Underground Distribution 93 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800420) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $53,900 $53,900 Design $324,500 $324,500 CEQA $27,500 $27,500 Construction $2,453,000 $2,453,000 Con. Support $135,300 $135,300 Total $405,900 $2,588,300 $2,994,200 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Utility Undergrounding (415) $405,900 $2,588,300 $2,994,200 Total $405,900 $2,588,300 $2,994,200 Financial Comments This project is funded through PG&E Undergrounding Credits. The project is estimated at $2,994,200. Per PG&E, as of March 2022, the City of Gilroy has 3,487,341 work credits ($3,487,341 value) that can be utilized for undergrounding. With each work credit equaling one dollar of work that PG&E would put towards the work they would perform on the project, there should be adequate funding for this project. Funding for this project is through the Utility Undergrounding Fund (415) which will be reimbursed from PG&E’s Rule 20A fund. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY26 Project Advertisement FY26 Project Construction FY27 Project Completion FY27 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Operational cost will be added to the current operating budget. 94 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Automall/Luchessa Traffic Signal Installation Project No. 800440 Category Streets: Traffic Signals Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue Project Description and Purpose This project will design and construct a four-way, eight-phase traffic signal at the intersection of Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue. The signal will have dedicated left-turn phasing for the east-west movements along Luchessa Avenue and the north-south movements along Automall Parkway. The project will include pedestrian count-down timers, intersection pedestrian improvements, safety lighting, and coordination with the Union Pacific Railroad company. Project Justification This intersection currently meets traffic signal warrants for the installation of signal improvements. This intersection has long been a high area of concern for residents as well as the business district south of the City. Currently this intersection is one-way stop controlled on southbound Automall Parkway. However, the high volume of trucks and passenger vehicles has degraded the level of service for this intersection. The installation of signal improvements will improve the safety of the intersection and optimize this intersection with minimal interference/conflict with the nearby at-grade railroad crossing. Master Planning Documents This traffic signal is listed in the Traffic Circulation Master Plan and the Traffic Impact Fee program under Intersection Number 26. Automall Pkwy Luchessa Ave Project Area 95 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800440) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $8,800 $8,800 Design $68,200 $68,200 CEQA $2,200 $2,200 Construction $815,000 $815,000 Con. Support $26,400 $26,400 Total $79,200 $841,400 $920,600 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total TIF (425) $79,200 $841,400 $920,600 Total $79,200 $841,400 $920,600 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Traffic Impact Fee Program (425). It includes additional funding for coordination with the Union Pacific Railroad during design. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Once completed, the operation and maintenance cost for the traffic signal is estimated at $7,500 annually. 96 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Annual CDBG Sidewalk/ Curb Ramp Project Project No. 800450 Category Streets: Curbs & Sidewalks Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Various Project Description and Purpose This project will install new sidewalk (gap closures) and curb ramps, both new and replacement of non-compliant existing ramps, where eligible for annual Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding. Currently, these improvements can happen only in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. Depending on the potential adoption of a city-wide neighborhood revitalization area designation, these funds may be used more broadly throughout the City in the future. Project Justification The City is required to install and maintain ADA accessible curb ramps and accessible sidewalk along publicly accessible pathways within the City. This project will focus on installing and upgrading ADA curb ramps in areas approved for CDBG funds expenditure. Consideration will also be given to locations along streets scheduled to be paved under the annual Street Resurfacing Project, which is funded using Measure B and SB-1 funds. This will allow the maximum use of the paving funds for asphalt rehabilitation as opposed to using paving funding for curb ramp work. Construction of these compliant new curb ramps will improve the accessibility and safety for the pedestrians in Gilroy. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s General Plan goals and policies. These goals and policies include correcting deficiencies and ensuring pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve. 97 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800450) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $15,717 $5,970 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $39,687 CEQA $2,620 $995 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $6,615 Construction $235,755 $89,550 $90,000 $90,000 $90,000 $595,305 Con. Support $7,859 $2,985 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $19,844 Total $261,950 $99,500 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $661,450 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total CDBG (245) $261,950 $99,500 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $661,450 Total $261,950 $99,500 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $661,450 Financial Comments This project will be funded by Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds (245). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Annually Project Advertisement Annually Project Construction Annually Project Completion Annually Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 98 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name First/Kern Traffic Signal Installation Project No. 800480 Category Streets: Traffic Signals Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location First Street and Kern Avenue Project Description and Purpose This project will design and construct a new traffic signal at the intersection of First Street and Kern Avenue. The project will also include pedestrian count-down timers, safety lighting, and associated signing and striping improvements. Project Justification This one-way stop-controlled intersection currently meets traffic signal warrants for the installation of signal improvements. The high traffic volumes at this intersection have increased vehicular delay and degraded the level of service to an unacceptable condition. In addition, a new residential development is proposed to be constructed near the northeast corner of this intersection. The residential development is in the project design and entitlement phase. Once this development is constructed and occupied, it will generate additional traffic that will impact this intersection by increasing delay and further degrading the level of service. The installation of signal improvements at this location will improve the delay and level of service to an acceptable condition. These improvements will also enhance the safety of all road users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. Master Planning Documents This traffic signal is identified in the Traffic Circulation Master Plan and the Traffic Impact Fee program as Intersection Number 11. Kern Ave Wren Ave First St Project Area 99 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800480) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $35,200 $35,200 Design $143,000 $143,000 CEQA $4,400 $4,400 Construction $789,000 $789,000 Con. Support $113,300 $113,300 Total $182,600 $902,300 $1,084,900 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total TIF (425) $182,600 $902,300 $1,084,900 Total $182,600 $902,300 $1,084,900 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Traffic Impact Fee Program (425). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operation and maintenance cost for the traffic signal is estimated at $7,500 annually. 100 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Annual Citywide Sewer Repair and Rehabilitation Program Project No. 800490 Category Wastewater: Sewer Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This annual project will include sewer main repairs that are beyond the capability of City Maintenance Crews who perform typical spot repairs. The project would include various locations identified through regular video inspection activities, normal maintenance, and operational activities performed by Maintenance Crews, and include engineering design, construction, construction management, and inspection. The work will include various diameters of pipe in locations throughout the City. In addition, areas with frequent customer concerns or service requests will be included in this program. Project Justification This project will improve the City’s ability to prevent and respond to undue sewage spills and backups. Some repair projects are not identifiable at one time and may individually be too small to be considered for capital project bidding and construction. By gathering information from several sources and identifying a reasonable size project over several locations, the City can be responsive to the findings of the maintenance activities and be proactive in correcting deficiencies before there is a catastrophic failure event. In accordance with the City’s updated Purchasing Policy, the Public Works Department plans to issue a Job Order Contact/s (on-Call construction) for this work. The overall scope is small enough to allow for quick processing of drawings and specifications, making this approach more economical and reliable. Master Planning Documents This project provides reliable and enhanced sewer service for existing customers and anticipated growth, which is the focus of the 2023 Sewer System Master Plan. 101 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800490) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $75,000 CEQA $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $5,000 Construction $184,000 $184,000 $184,000 $184,000 $184,000 $922,500 Con. Support $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $75,500 Total $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,250,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Sewer (700) $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,250,000 Total $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $1,250,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Sewer Fund (700). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Annually Project Advertisement Annually Project Construction Annually Project Completion Annually Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project addresses maintenance needs. Completion of this project could reduce operational costs. Any of these repairs are intended to be neutral or reduce operating costs and should also provide savings in unknown emergency costs by preventing potential serious system failures. 102 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Asbestos Cement Sewer Pipe Replacement Citywide Project No. 800510 Category Wastewater: Sewer Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project would replace all Asbestos Cement and Reinforced Concrete Pipe within the City’s wastewater collection system. The project includes nine locations for a total of 1,740 linear feet. The work will include replacing pipes of various diameters in locations throughout the City. The first year will include verifying the locations, designing the improvements, and developing one or more construction contracts to be completed in subsequent years. Project Justification Hydrogen sulfide corrodes concrete pipes and may cause sinkholes where the pipe wall is breached and the surrounding soil is carried away. In addition, the wastewater may contaminate the soil. This project will start by identifying the locations needing pipe replacement. The City has five Asbestos Cement Pipe segments totaling 1,065 linear feet and four Reinforced Concrete Pipe segments totaling 675 linear feet, for a total of 1,740 linear feet of gravity lines in the collection system. These repairs are needed because of the potential for pipe collapse, which would undermine public streets and cause blockages in the sanitary sewer collection system. Master Planning Documents This project provides for reliable and enhanced sewer service for existing customers and to serve anticipated growth which is the focus of the 2023 Sewer System Master Plan. 103 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800510) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $4,400 $4,400 Design $176,000 $176,000 CEQA $18,700 $18,700 Construction $870,000 $870,000 Con. Support $138,600 $138,600 Total $199,100 $1,008,600 $1,207,700 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Sewer (700) $199,100 $1,008,600 $1,207,700 Total $199,100 $1,008,600 $1,207,700 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Sewer Fund (700). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY26 Project Completion FY26 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project address maintenance needs. Completion of this project would reduce operational costs for trouble spots. 104 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Carmel-Dowdy Alley – Sixth to Seventh Sewer Replacement Project No. 800520 Category Wastewater: Sewer Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Carmel-Dowdy Alley from Sixth Street to Seventh Street Project Description and Purpose This project will replace and upgrade approximately 600 linear feet of existing 8” sewer pipe to a 10” sewer pipe in the alley between Carmel Street and Dowdy Street from Sixth Street to Seventh Street. Project Justification This portion of the subtrunk has a high likelihood of surcharging during wet weather conditions. Other portions of the subtrunk were replaced per the recommendation of the 1993 Sewer System Master Plan. Three portions of this subtrunk are recommended for replacement. Master Planning Documents This project is not identified in the 2023 Sewer System Master Plan. Carmel St Sixth St Dowdy St Seventh St Project Area 105 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800520) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $56,100 $56,100 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $238,000 $238,000 Con. Support $35,200 $35,200 Total $57,200 $273,200 $330,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Sewer Development Impact (430) $57,200 $273,200 $330,400 Total $57,200 $273,200 $330,400 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Sewer Development Impact Fund (430). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact No additional costs are expected. Completion of this project should reduce operational costs. 106 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Large Diameter Sewer Rehabilitation Citywide Project No. 800530 Category Wastewater: Sewer Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project would repair sewer mains 10” and larger throughout the City that were inspected and assessed in 2009. The project includes various locations. The first year will include verifying the locations, design, and scoping. Construction will be completed in subsequent years. Project Justification The City hired a contractor to inspect and evaluate trunk sewer lines 10” in diameter and larger in 2009. A number of locations were identified as being severely impaired and requiring immediate attention. This project will start by addressing those identified locations, including ascertaining the locations and limits, starting with the information from 2009. In subsequent years additional locations will be added based upon more current inspections. These repairs are significant because of the volume of flow and the large areas that benefit from the trunk lines. Many of the large diameter trunks run through important commercial locations in the City and will therefore be significantly impacted if this project is not completed. Master Planning Documents This project provides for reliable and enhanced sewer service for existing customers and to serve anticipated growth, which is the focus of the 2023 Sewer System Master Plan. 107 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800530) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $200,200 $200,200 CEQA $2,200 $2,200 Construction $915,000 $915,000 Con. Support $166,100 $166,100 Total $202,400 $1,081,100 $1,283,500 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Sewer Fund (700) $202,400 $1,081,100 $1,283,500 Total $202,400 $1,081,100 $1,283,500 Financial Comments This project is funded by the Sewer Fund (700). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY26 Project Completion FY26 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project addresses maintenance needs. Completion of this project should reduce operational costs. 108 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Monterey and Princevalle Sewer Network Project No. 800540 Category Wastewater: Sewer Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Tenth Street to Luchessa Avenue 2.69 Project Description and Purpose This project will replace and upgrade approximately 4,500 linear feet of existing sewer lines between the intersections of Princevalle Street/Catherine Court and Monterey Road/Luchessa Avenue. This replacement will consist of upsizing the current 18” sewer pipes to 21”. Project Justification The City’s Sewer System Master Plan indicated that this portion of the subtrunk may be undersized due to the growth in the western foothills of the City and recommended these that lines should be upsized. Alternative construction methods could be considered to save costs of construction and surface restoration. The recommended mitigation is to upgrade the size of existing pipes to accommodate the additional usage. Master Planning Documents This project is identified in the 2023 Sewer System Master Plan. Luchessa Ave London Pl Project Area 109 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800540) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $179,771 $179,771 Design $539,313 $539,313 CEQA $35,954 $35,954 Construction $2,301,068 $2,301,068 Con. Support $539,313 $539,313 Total $755,038 $2,840,381 $3,595,418 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Sewer Development Impact (430) $755,038 $2,840,381 $3,595,418 Total $755,038 $2,840,381 $3,595,418 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Sewer Development Impact Fund (430). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY27 Project Advertisement FY27 Project Construction FY28 Project Completion FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project would result in decreased maintenance costs due to reductions in cleaning time. 110 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Old Gilroy – Chestnut to Forest Sewer Upgrade Project No. 800550 Category Wastewater: Manholes & Cleanouts Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Old Gilroy Street between Forest St and Chestnut St Project Description and Purpose This project will redesign and modify a sewer manhole that has two sewer lines running through it, including the higher as a PVC pipe with the crown removed, and the lower being an older line that may now be abandoned. Investigation into the actual extent of the deeper, apparently abandoned line will allow for proper design of how best to remove this potential overflow location from being a concern. Project Justification Design and reconstruction of the sewer system in the area to correct the current condition is needed for clarity of operations and maintenance functionality. Failure to act would result in delayed response times to service calls and potential blockages that could result in impacts to the surrounding community and the Downtown. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in the 2023 Sewer System Master Plan. Project Area Old Gilroy St 111 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800550) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $34,100 $34,100 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $223,000 $223,000 Con. Support $28,600 $28,600 Total $35,200 $251,600 $286,800 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Sewer (700) $35,200 $251,600 $286,800 Total $35,200 $251,600 $286,800 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Sewer Fund (700). The scope of this project will not be fully known until the line can be investigated. The project cost estimate is therefore based on what is believed to be a “worst-case” scenario and may be conservatively high. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact No additional costs are expected. Completion of this project could reduce operational costs. 112 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Seventh St – Carmel-Dowdy to Hanna-Rosanna Alleys Sewer Replacement Project No. 800560 Category Wastewater: Sewer Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Seventh St btwn Carmel-Dowdy and Hanna-Rosanna Alleys Project Description and Purpose This project will replace and upgrade approximately 739 linear feet of existing 8” sewer pipe to a 10” sewer pipe on Seventh Street from the alley between Carmel Street and Dowdy Street to the alley between Hanna Street and Rosanna Street. This project is part of three segments to be replaced in this subtrunk. Project Justification This portion of the subtrunk has a high likelihood of surcharging during wet weather conditions. Other portions of the subtrunk were replaced per the recommendation of the 1993 Sewer Master Plan. Three portions of this subtrunk are recommended for replacement. This segment is on the high frequency cleaning list maintained by Public Works Operations. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in the 2023 Sewer Master Plan. Seventh St Carmel St Dowdy St Hanna St Rosanna St Church St Princevalle St Project Area 113 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800560) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $47,300 $47,300 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $186,000 $186,000 Con. Support $25,300 $25,300 Total $48,400 $211,300 $259,700 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Sewer Development Impact (430) $48,400 $211,300 $259,700 Total $48,400 $211,300 $259,700 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Sewer Development Impact Fee (430) fund. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY26 Project Completion FY26 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. This project will reduce future maintenance costs. 114 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion (SCRWA) Project No. 800570 Category Wastewater: Wastewater Treatment Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Expansion Project Manager Director of Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 1500 Southside Drive Project Description and Purpose The South County Regional Wastewater Authority (SCRWA) treatment plant was constructed in 1994. It treats wastewater for the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill. This project would expand the capacity of the existing plant to meet the demands associated with future growth in the area. In addition to expanding the plant’s treatment capacity, this project would also implement new standards for wastewater treatment to comply with State Water Resources Control Board requirements. Project Justification This project will allow the treatment plant to continue to provide adequate levels of service to its customers and meet State Water Resources Control Board regulatory requirements. Master Planning Documents This project is included in the 2023 Sewer System Master Plan. 115 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800570) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Construction $16,198,000 $14,287,000 $1,729,000 $455,000 $32,669,000 Con. Support $1,602,000 $1,413,000 $171,000 $45,000 $3,231,000 Total $17,800,000 $15,700,000 $1,900,000 $500,000 $35,900,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Sewer (700) $17,800,000 $15,700,000 $1,900,000 $500,000 $35,900,000 Total $17,800,000 $15,700,000 $1,900,000 $500,000 $35,900,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded from the Sewer Fund (700). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Project Advertisement Project Construction FY24 – FY26 Project Completion FY26 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The ongoing operational costs will increase due to managing a larger plant. These costs are necessary to manage the increased capacity due to the City’s growth, and will be offset by the increased fees associated with the growth. 116 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Broadway and Sargent Water Line Replacement Project No. 800590 Category Water: Distribution Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Broadway Street and Sargent Street Project Description and Purpose This project would upgrade water lines to ensure adequate water pressure for fire protection during fire emergencies. This project will upgrade approximately 1,300 feet of 6” pipe to 8” pipe on Broadway Street between Wayland Lane and Hanna Street, and approximately 200 feet of 4” pipe to 8” pipe on Sargent Street from Broadway Street to 200 feet south of Broadway Street. Project Justification The Fire Marshal has indicated the water pressures in this area require this project to allow for new construction and provide sufficient pressure for Fire Operations. Master Planning Documents This project supports the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Carmel St Broadway St First St 117 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800590) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $128,700 $128,700 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $783,000 $783,000 Con. Support $94,600 $94,600 Total $129,800 $877,600 $1,007,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $129,800 $877,600 $1,007,400 Total $129,800 $877,600 $1,007,400 Financial Comments The water project is funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY26 Project Completion FY26 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project’s operational costs would be nominal. 118 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Church and Gurries Water Line Replacement Project No. 800600 Category Water: Distribution Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Gurries Drive between Hanna Street and Church Street Project Description and Purpose This project would upgrade water lines to ensure adequate water pressure for fire protection during fire emergencies. This project will upgrade approximately 400 feet of 4” pipe to 6” pipe on Gurries Drive from Church Street to approximately 400 feet west of Church Street. Due to their close proximity to one another, this project could be combined with Project 800610 (Church – Welburn to First Line Replacement). Project Justification The Fire Marshal has indicated the water pressures in this area require this project to allow for new construction and provide sufficient pressure for Fire Operations. Master Planning Documents This project supports the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Hanna St First St Project Area Church St Gurries Dr 119 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800600) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $64,900 $64,900 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $275,000 $275,000 Con. Support $39,600 $39,600 Total $66,000 $314,600 $380,600 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $66,000 $314,600 $380,600 Total $66,000 $314,600 $380,600 Financial Comments This project is funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project’s operational costs would be nominal. 120 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Church Street – Welburn to First Water Line Replacement Project No. 800610 Category Water: Distribution Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Church Street between Welburn Ave and First St Project Description and Purpose This project would upgrade approximately 2,000 feet of 6” cast iron water main to an 8” or greater ductile iron pipe along Church Street between Welburn Avenue and First Street. Due to their close proximity to one another, this project could be combined with Project 800600 (Church and Gurries Line Replacement). Project Justification This project is required due to the large number of failures in this line that have required expensive repairs. The replacement of this line would save the City in staff overtime. All of the breaks on this line require large sections of pipe to be replaced. Master Planning Documents This project improves reliability for existing customers and enhances the system to serve anticipated growth which is the focus of the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Howson St First St Church St Gurries Dr Welburn Ave 121 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800610) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $174,900 $174,900 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $1,026,000 $1,026,000 Con. Support $147,400 $147,400 Total $176,000 $1,173,400 $1,349,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $176,000 $1,173,400 $1,349,400 Total $176,000 $1,173,400 $1,349,400 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY26 Project Completion FY26 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project’s operational costs would be nominal. 122 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Forest and Eighth Water Line Replacement Project No. 800620 Category Water: Distribution Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Eighth Street between Alexander St and Forest St Project Description and Purpose This project would upgrade an existing water line to ensure adequate water pressure for fire protection during fire emergencies. This project will upgrade approximately 375 feet of 4” pipe to 6” pipe on Eighth Street between Alexander Street and Forest Street. Project Justification The Fire Marshal has indicated this project is necessary to allow for new construction and provide sufficient water pressure for Fire Operations. This project is recommended for design and construction as soon as possible to improve fire flows in the Gilroy water system. Master Planning Documents This project supports the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Forest St Eighth St Alexander St 123 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800620) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $63,800 $63,800 CEQA $2,200 $2,200 Construction $323,000 $323,000 Con. Support $46,200 $46,200 Total $66,000 $369,200 $435,200 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $66,000 $369,200 $435,200 Total $66,000 $369,200 $435,200 Financial Comments This project is funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project’s operational costs would be nominal. 124 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Steel Water Service Lines Replacement Citywide Project No. 800630 Category Water: Meters & Service Lines Department Public Works: Water Project Type Replacement Project Manager Water Operations Supervisor Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project would replace steel water service lines that may have lead fittings throughout the City. The City has approximately 250 steel service lines that need to be replaced by 2028. City crews will replace approximately 210 of the smaller, less complicated services. Approximately 40 of the remaining service lines may require design and construction to be performed by a consultant and contractor. Project Justification Per State of California law (SB 1398 and SB 427), community water systems must replace all known user service lines and their associated fittings that may contain lead and are actively used in the water distribution system. The Steel Service Lines Replacement project will enhance the health and safety of the community by ensuring the City’s water distribution system provides a reliable and adequate supply of safe drinking water. The majority of the steel service lines associated with this project are located within the City’s low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, as designated by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. The City’s low- and moderate-income neighborhoods are in need of higher levels of investment to meet the needs of the community. Master Planning Documents This project improves reliability for existing customers and enhances the system to serve anticipated growth which is the focus of the 2023 Water System Master Plan. 125 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800630) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $14,080 $14,080 $14,080 $14,080 $14,080 $70,400 CEQA $440 $440 $440 $440 $440 $2,200 Construction $79,200 $79,200 $79,200 $79,200 $79,200 $396,000 Con. Support $10,560 $10,560 $10,560 $10,560 $10,560 $52,800 Total $104,280 $104,280 $104,280 $104,280 $104,280 $521,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $104,280 $104,280 $104,280 $104,280 $104,280 $521,400 Total $104,280 $104,280 $104,280 $104,280 $104,280 $521,400 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 – FY28 Project Advertisement FY24 – FY28 Project Construction FY24 – FY28 Project Completion FY24 – FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project will reduce operational costs. 126 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Monterey and Eighth Water Line Replacement Project No. 800640 Category Water: Distribution Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Alley between Monterey St and Eigleberry St Project Description and Purpose This project would upgrade water lines to ensure adequate water pressure for fire protection during fire emergencies. This project will upgrade approximately 600 feet of 4” pipe to 8” pipe in the alley between Eigleberry Street and Monterey Street, from West Eighth Street to approximately 600 feet north of West Eighth Street. Project Justification The Fire Marshal has indicated this project is necessary to allow for new construction and provide sufficient water pressure for Fire Operations. This project is recommended for design and construction as soon as possible to improve fire flows in the Gilroy water system. Master Planning Documents This project supports the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Project Area Seventh St Eighth St Monterey St Eigleberry St 127 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800640) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $72,600 $72,600 CEQA $2,200 $2,200 Construction $355,000 $355,000 Con. Support $51,700 $51,700 Total $74,800 $406,700 $481,500 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $74,800 $406,700 $481,500 Total $74,800 $406,700 $481,500 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY26 Project Completion FY26 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project’s operational costs would be nominal. 128 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Abandon 2” Water Line from 7041 to 7161 Monterey Street Project No. 800650 Category Water: Distribution Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7041 to 7161 Monterey Street Project Description and Purpose There is a substandard 2” galvanized water main that runs under the sidewalk and feeds 6 meters on the west side of the street from 7041 to 7161 Monterey Street (between West Eighth Street and West Tenth Street). This project would abandon the 2” galvanized water main, which is approximately 650 feet long, and replace and connect 6 service laterals, each of which are approximately 60 feet long, to the existing 10” water main on Monterey Street. Project Justification This project would abandon an inadequate 2” water main that has been patched together over time. It would also eliminate six steel service lines with lead fittings. This project would save the City money by reducing staff time to conduct repairs to the deficient line. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Monterey St Eighth St Tenth St Ninth St 129 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800650) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $107,800 $107,800 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $748,000 $748,000 Con. Support $99,000 $99,000 Total $108,900 $847,000 $955,900 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $108,900 $847,000 $955,900 Total $108,900 $847,000 $955,900 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project will reduce maintenance costs by approximately $5,000 per year based on repair history to the current substandard line. 130 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Murray at Burke Water Line Reroute Project No. 800660 Category Water: Distribution Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Murray Avenue North of Leavesley Road Project Description and Purpose This project will upgrade water lines to ensure adequate water pressure is maintained to provide protection during fire emergencies. It would abandon approximately 1,570 feet of 4” pipe on Murray Avenue from Leavesley Road to 150 feet north of Garfield Court, and connect the 6” pipe on Burke Drive to the 12” pipe on Murray Avenue. It will also require the reconnection of approximately 12 service lines on the west side of Murray Avenue from the abandoned 4” pipe to the existing 12” pipe. Project Justification The Fire Marshal has indicated the water pressures in this area require this project to allow for new construction and provide sufficient pressure for Fire Operations. Master Planning Documents This project supports the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Murray Ave US 101 Project Area 131 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800660) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $100,100 $100,100 CEQA $2,200 $2,200 Construction $399,000 $399,000 Con. Support $70,400 $70,400 Total $102,300 $469,400 $571,700 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $102,300 $469,400 $571,700 Total $102,300 $469,400 $571,700 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY26 Project Completion FY26 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project’s operational costs would be nominal. 132 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Saint Louise Hospital Large Water Meter Replacement Project No. 800670 Category Water: Meters & Service Lines Department Public Works: Water Project Type Replacement Project Manager Water Operations Supervisor Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 9400 No Name Uno Project Description and Purpose This project would upgrade the large water meter at Saint Louise Hospital to a meter that can register low flows. The current water meter valve is broken, so the meter cannot be replaced without affecting water supply to the hospital. This project will install an additional water meter as a redundancy, repair the existing valves, and replace the existing large water meter. Project Justification A new water meter is required to allow accurate billing and to replace non-functioning valves. This meter serves an essential facility. As a result, the design effort for this project is expected to include engineering review of the existing meter assembly and its condition, development of a plan for sequence of construction, maintenance of service and phasing and coordination. Once all appropriate plans have been identified, the replacement of the large water meter and fire service connection can be accomplished with minimal issues/disruption. Master Planning Documents This project is not in a master plan document. 133 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800670) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $29,700 $29,700 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $25,800 $25,800 Con. Support $6,600 $6,600 Total $63,200 $63,200 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $63,200 $63,200 Total $63,200 $63,200 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project will not affect operational costs. 134 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Water Reservoirs A and B – Painting Project No. 800690 Category Water: Water Storage Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Upper Welburn Ave and Miller Ave Project Description and Purpose This project is to paint the exterior of reservoirs A and B. Reservoir A is located on upper Welburn Avenue, between Mantelli Drive and Rancho Real. Reservoir B is located on Miller Avenue, southwest of the Santa Teresa Boulevard / West Tenth Street (formerly Miller Avenue) roundabout. The interior coatings of these reservoirs have been recently inspected and are adequate. The reservoirs will be re-inspected in five years. Project Justification This project is needed to prevent corrosion of the reservoirs. These reservoirs were inspected by the State in 2017 and the paint condition was rated as fair to poor. This is a critical maintenance operation to ensure the structural integrity and continuing operation of valuable City infrastructure. Master Planning Documents This project improves reliability for existing customers and enhances the system to serve anticipated growth which is the focus of the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Reservoir B – Miller Ave Reservoir A – Welburn Ave 135 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800690) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $56,100 $56,100 CEQA $4,400 $4,400 Construction $371,000 $371,000 Con. Support $51,700 $51,700 Total $483,200 $483,200 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $483,200 $483,200 Total $483,200 $483,200 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 136 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Reservoirs A and B – Retrofit Overflow Piping Project No. 800700 Category Water: Water Storage Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Upper Welburn Ave and Miller Ave Project Description and Purpose This project would retrofit the overflow piping at Reservoirs A and B to add an adequately sized air gap between the outlet and the storm drain. The air gap would prevent the potential for storm water to be drawn into the reservoirs. Reservoir A is located on upper Welburn Avenue, between Mantelli Drive and Rancho Real. Reservoir B is located on Miller Avenue, southwest of the Santa Teresa Boulevard / West Tenth Street (formerly Miller Avenue) roundabout. Project Justification During their 2018 inspection, the State Water Resources Control Board mandated the City install adequately sized air gaps between the outlets and the storm drains. This project addresses this mandate. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document, but it improves reliability for existing customers and enhances the system to serve anticipated growth which is the focus of the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Reservoir B – Miller Ave Reservoir A – Welburn Ave 137 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800700) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $64,900 $64,900 CEQA $4,400 $4,400 Construction $361,000 $361,000 Con. Support $51,700 $51,700 Total $482,000 $482,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $482,000 $482,000 Total $482,000 $482,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 138 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Well Nos. 1 and 4 Compliance Improvements Project No. 800710 Category Water: Wells & Pumping Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location I.O.O.F. Avenue, First Street, Ninth Street Project Description and Purpose This project will install a well head pedestal with associated plumbing and electrical improvements at Wells No.1 and 4. This critical infrastructure must be installed as the first upgrade phase for the well projects. Project Justification These improvements are necessary to enhance public health and safety by meeting the standards set by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and current codes, which require well head pedestals to lift pumps a minimum of 18” above grade. Master Planning Documents This project improves reliability for existing customers and enhances the system to serve anticipated growth which is the focus of the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Well No. 1 – I.O.O.F. Ave Well No. 4 – Ninth St 139 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800710) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $8,800 $8,800 Construction $66,100 $66,100 Con. Support $7,700 $7,700 Total $82,600 $82,600 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $82,600 $82,600 Total $82,600 $82,600 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 140 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Well Nos. 1, 2, 4 & 6 Upgrade Improvements Project No. 800720 Category Water: Wells & Pumping Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location I.O.O.F. Avenue, First Street, Ninth Street Project Description and Purpose This project will implement the following improvements at City Well Nos. 1, 2, and 6: •Well No. 1 – Construct a new well house with AC system; interior installation of VFD, install emergency generator with automatic transfer switch, install pump control valve, and perform associated plumbing/ electrical improvements. •Well No. 2 & 6 – Construct a new well house with AC system; interior installation of VFD and perform associated plumbing and electrical improvements. •Well No. 4 – Construct upgrades to Well Pedestal to 18” Per California Water Board Requirement. Project Justification New well houses and AC systems are needed at Wells No. 1,2, & 6 to reduce over heating of VFD’s and improve operating performance. Well No. 1 is the City’s only well that does not “pump to waste” on startup and shutdown and does not have an emergency power source, per Department of Drinking Water Standards. The pedestal in Well 4 will be upgraded to the State Requirement of 18”. Master Planning Documents This project improves reliability for existing customers and enhances the system to serve anticipated growth which is the focus of the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Well No. 1 – I.O.O.F. Ave Well No. 2 – First St Well No. 4 – Ninth St Well No. 6 – Princevalle Channel 141 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800720) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $970,200 $970,200 CEQA $55,000 $55,000 Construction $9,900,000 $9,900,000 Con. Support $627,000 $627,000 Total $1,025,200 $10,527,000 $11,552,200 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $1,025,200 $10,527,000 $11,552,200 Total $1,025,200 $10,527,000 $11,552,200 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 142 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Gourmet and Railroad Alley Improvements Project No. 800760 Category Engineering: Downtown Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Gourmet and Railroad Alley Between 4th and 7th Streets Project Description and Purpose The City of Gilroy was awarded a $3.9 million grant in March of 2022 from the California Department of Transportation (“Caltrans”) Clean California Local Grant Program. The grant is for cleanup events and infrastructure improvements along Gourmet Alley and Railroad Alley. Gourmet Alley and Railroad Alley, which run parallel to each other between 4th and 7th Streets in Downtown Gilroy, are part of the public right-of-way. Both relatively narrow pedestrian walkways connect the surrounding neighborhoods to the Gilroy transit station and the Gilroy Center for the Arts. The space will be beautified by paving the alleys with marked paths for walkers and recycling receptacles. Project Justification The lack of lighting and community-oriented infrastructure in both alleys has resulted in a high level of illegal dumping, making both alleys appear undesirable for walking and community gatherings. The Clean California grant will transform these important alleyways into clean, well-lit, walkable corridors that connect the public to both the city’s main transit center and the Gilroy Center for the Arts. Master Planning Documents Improvements along Gourmet Alley and Railroad Alley are consistent with elements of the Gilroy Downtown Specific Plan which was approved by the City Council in 2005. The Downtown Specific Plan identifies the areas of need and identifies the improvements that were included in the grant request. 143 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800760) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $378,000 $378,000 CEQA Construction $3,582,765 $3,582,765 Con. Support Total $378,000 $3,582,765 $3,960,765 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Downtown Beautification (487) $378,000 $3,582,765 $3,960,765 Total $378,000 $3,582,765 $3,960,765 Financial Comments This project would be implemented through the Clean California Local Grant Program (State), administered by Caltrans, which was created to beautify and clean up local streets and roads, tribal lands, parks, pathways, transit centers, and other public spaces. Reimbursable scopes of work include lighting, landscape, surface improvements, and public clean-up. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY23 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Increased maintenance and operation costs will be required upon completion of the project. Staff will continue to maintain the improvements made during the lifespan of the project. 144 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Tenth Street/Highway 101 Bridge Widening Project No. 800770 Category Streets: Bridges Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Tenth Street (Automall Parkway) at US 101 Project Description and Purpose This project would widen the existing bridge overcrossing at the Tenth Street (Automall Parkway)/US 101/SR 152 interchange to add one additional lane through in each direction. The project would include widening the bridge structure, ramp work, grading, striping and signal modification improvements. Project Justification The Tenth Street (Automall Parkway)/US 101/SR 152 interchange is one of the major ingress/egress points to the City and connects the City’s arterial system to US 101 and SR 152. It is one of only three interchanges in the City and is located between the Leavesley Road/US 101 interchange to the north and the Monterey Road/US 101 interchange to the south. Tenth Street-Automall Parkway-SR 152 is also a major gateway into the City. In peak times, especially the PM peaks, queues leading to the interchange result in excessive back-ups along Tenth Street-Automall Parkway-SR 152. Adding one lane in each direction on the bridge will improve the flow of eastbound and westbound traffic along this corridor during peak times, provide better access to the freeways, and enhance overall traffic circulation in the area. The Tenth Street-Automall Parkway-SR152 corridor also provides direct access to the commercial areas east and west of US101, and to the auto dealerships on Automall Parkway. Improving the flow of traffic along this important arterial area could encourage economic development in the area. Master Planning Documents This project is included in the City’s Transportation Master Plan and is also listed in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), which makes it eligible for State and federal funding. 145 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800770) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $1,000,000 $1,000,000 CEQA $4,230,216 $4,230,216 Design $4,758,993 $4,758,993 ROW $0 Construction $0 Con. Support $0 Total $1,000,000 $4,230,216 $4,758,993 $9,989,209 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total TIF (425) $630,216 $708,993 $1,339,209 VTA Measure B Highway Program Fund (212)* $1,000,000 $3,600,000 $4,050,000 $8,650,000 Total $1,000,000 $4,230,216 $4,758,993 $9,989,209 *Transferred from the Buena Vista interchange. Financial Comments The City is working in cooperation with VTA to develop this project. The project was awarded $7,650,000 in Measure B Highway Program Funds for environmental and design. The City’s matching funds for environmental and design are funded by the TIF. The total project cost is estimated at $50 million. The City worked with the VTA to move $1 million in Measure B Highway Program funding from the Buena Vista / US 101 interchange to this project for Planning/Project Initiation Documents (PID). The City will be responsible for its fair-share cost (14.6%) for each phase of the project. Funding for construction has not been secured but is expected to come from VTA Measure B Highway Program funds. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Alternatives Analysis FY22 – FY23 Environmental Clearance FY24 – FY25 Design and Engineering FY26 – FY28 Construction FY29 – FY30 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 146 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name San Ysidro Park Healthy Living Enhancement Project No. 800780 Category Parks and Trails: Play Equipment Department Public Works: Parks Project Type New Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7700 Murray Ave Project Description and Purpose The City was awarded a Community Project Funding grant to provide new recreational opportunities at San Ysidro Park. Possible recreational features include: new playground equipment, paved trail, welcome kiosk, distance markers on paved trail, games etched in sidewalk, exercise equipment, new volleyball court, new picnic barbecue grills, bottle filler station/non-bottle filler water fountain, lighting, public art, and a drought resistant garden. Project Justification Although all City parks were considered, San Ysidro Park was selected for the application based on the following criteria: •Proximity to critically underserved communities •Communities with low median household incomes •High number of people below the poverty level •Receiving community input in critically underserved communities •Broad representation of residents (all ages) participating in community outreach efforts •Solutions for safe public use and park beautification such as landscaping and public art •Benefit the health and quality of life for youth, seniors and families •Mentoring of at-risk youth, senior socialization and family bonding Master Planning Documents This project provides for a well-maintained park which is the focus of the Parks and Recreation Systems Master Plan. 147 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800780) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $25,248 $25,248 Design $340,657 $340,657 CEQA $12,624 $12,624 Construction $2,293,534 $2,293,534 Con. Support $327,937 $327,937 Total $378,529 $2,621,471 $3,000,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $378,529 $2,621,471 $3,000,000 Total $378,529 $2,621,471 $3,000,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the General Fund (100). These funds will be reimbursed with grant funding. The City was awarded a Community Project Funding Grant in the amount of $3,000,000 for this project. There are no matching City funds required for this grant. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The park is currently maintained by the Parks Division with maintenance costs included in the budget. 148 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name City Hall Annex HVAC Replacement Project No. 900370 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Facilities Project Type Replacement Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7370 Rosanna Street Project Description and Purpose This project will replace the 35-year-old HVAC equipment in the radio/server and EOC rooms at the City Hall Annex building, to ensure there is enough cooling in those areas to keep all our emergency communication equipment, and 911 calls for south county operational. The current HVAC system is expected to fail within the next 1 to 5 years. This project excludes all other HVAC systems in the building (which are also expected to fail within the next 1 to 5 years. Project Justification The HVAC system that cools the EOC rooms and the server/radio repeater room at the Annex building is 35 years old and will stop working within the next five years. The server/radio repeater room holds equipment that handles 911 phone calls for South County, as well as all the City’s main Police Department radio communications radio repeaters, the Fire Department’s radio communications repeaters, and County Comm’s microwave back bone to Pacheco Peak. Without constant cooling, these systems start to overheat and fail. We need to replace the HVAC systems that cool these areas so that we can keep servicing our community with emergency lifesaving equipment and personnel. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in a master plan. 149 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900370) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $15,400 $15,400 Design $57,200 $57,200 Construction $479,000 $479,000 Con. Support $52,800 $52,800 Total $604,400 $604,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $604,400 $604,400 Total $604,400 $604,400 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Annual maintenance costs should remain the same. There would be some efficiency benefits associated with a new system that would reduce the use compared to if the occupancy of the building was increased without replacing the system. 150 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Gilroy Center for the Arts HVAC Replacement Project No. 900480 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Facilities Project Type Replacement Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7341 Monterey Street Project Description and Purpose The City Council approved replacing the Arts Center Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) units during the FY18 budget cycle. However, the project was put on hold due to plans to fully renovate the building. The HVAC units on the building are 34 years old and are well past their useful life. One of the two units no longer works as a heater, and they both need frequent repairs and refrigerant refilling. The project scope is to replace the HVAC units. Project Justification The HVAC units are past their useful life are not reliable. If they break down during theater performance dates, it could affect theater programming. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document. 151 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900480) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $33,000 $33,000 Construction $105,000 $105,000 Total $138,000 $138,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $138,000 $138,000 Total $138,000 $138,000 Financial Comments This project would be funded by the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement N/A Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact With more efficient heating and cooling, the utility bills for the Arts Center will be reduced. Repair costs will substantially be reduced after the installation. 152 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Old City Hall HVAC Replacement Project No. 900490 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Facilities Project Type Replacement Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7341 Monterey Street Project Description and Purpose The current Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) equipment at Old City Hall Restaurant is 35 years old and well past its useful life. The 12 units in the building frequently fail during large events such as wedding receptions and parties. The units are not able to run at 100% due to the chiller being excessively scaled with hard water deposits. All units and associated hardware and plumbing need to be replaced. Project Justification The City is responsible for capital maintenance of the building and is currently responsible for HVAC repairs. The units require frequent repairs and are unreliable. For example, staff was called out to service the units during a wedding reception. Staff remained on site to pour water over the cooling tower to make the units function. The HVAC repair company recommends replacing these units because repairing them may no longer be an option. If this replacement is not completed while the units are in a semi-functional state, there may be an extended downtime that will affect the tenants’ business. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document. Photo Credit: https://visitgilroy.com/downtown-restaurants/ 153 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900490) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $8,800 $8,800 Design $26,400 $26,400 Construction $309,000 $309,000 Con. Support $16,500 $16,500 Total $360,700 $360,700 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $360,700 $360,700 Total $360,700 $360,700 Financial Comments This project would be funded by the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The project would reduce operational cost because the new units would be more energy efficient and require less maintenance. 154 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Senior Center Roof Replacement Project No. 900530 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Facilities Project Type Replacement Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7371 Hanna Street Project Description and Purpose The Senior Center’s roof shingles are over 27 years old and is starting to leak in multiple locations. The shingles have lost their “grip” surface. The loss of the grip surface makes the roof slippery so it is difficult to walk on it to perform inspections, or repairs on roof mounted equipment. This project would replace the roof shingles, preventing leaks and extend the life of the Senior Center building. Project Justification This roof has developed leaks in multiple locations in the dining room area and kitchen. Furthermore, new roof shingles would allow staff to traverse the roof easier and more safely while they perform inspections and repairs on roof top HVAC equipment. . Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document. 155 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900530) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $28,600 $28,600 Construction $182,000 $182,000 Con. Support $19,800 $19,800 Total $230,400 $230,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $230,400 $230,400 Total $230,400 $230,400 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project address maintenance needs. There are no operational costs associated with this project. Costs may decrease if leaks are avoided. 156 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Miller Park Restrooms Electrical Undergrounding Project No. 900620 Category Parks & Trails: Buildings Department Public Works: Parks Project Type Replacement Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7851 Carmel Street Project Description and Purpose The Miller Park restrooms have inadequate above ground electrical service that extends approximately 30 feet from a nearby alley to a temporary construction electrical service. The electrical service is then wired underground from the temporary electrical service to the restrooms. This project would complete the 2017 Miller Park Restroom Replacement Project by fully undergrounding the electrical service. Project Justification Construction of the Miller Park restrooms was partially funded with federal funds. Park projects which receive any federal funding are required to have all overhead utilities undergrounded, per State and Federal regulations. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in a master plan document. 157 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900620) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $11,000 $11,000 Construction $79,100 $79,100 Con. Support $7,700 $7,700 Total $97,800 $97,800 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $97,800 $97,800 Total $97,800 $97,800 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project will reduce operating costs because it will eliminate vandalism repairs to the temporary electrical service. 158 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Monterey – Leavesley to Ronan Water Line Replacement Project No. 900740 Category Water: Distribution Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Monterey Road between Leavesley Rd and Ronan Ave Project Description and Purpose This project would upgrade a deteriorating 4” cast iron water line with a 12” ductile iron pipe on Monterey Road from Leavesley Road to the end of the 4” line. The actual limits of the work will not be known until the project area can be potholed. North of Ronan Avenue, the existing line is 12”. To be conservative, it is estimated that the project limits will extend 2,450 feet to Ronan Avenue. The existing line, which currently runs under curb, gutter, and sidewalk, will be abandoned. Project Justification The 4” line should be replaced because of its deteriorating condition and the restriction of flow due to its location between two 12” lines. This project will also improve fire flow for this predominantly commercial area between Leavesley Road and Cohansey Avenue. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Monterey Rd Project Area Leavesley Rd 159 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900740) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $22,000 $22,000 Design $502,700 $502,700 CEQA $11,000 $11,000 Construction $4,070,000 $4,070,000 Con. Support $581,900 $581,900 Total $535,700 $4,651,900 $5,187,600 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $535,700 $4,651,900 $5,187,600 Total $535,700 $4,651,900 $5,187,600 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY26 Project Completion FY26 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project’s operational costs would be nominal. 160 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Photo Source: https://www.sharksiceatsanjose.com/ Project Name Ice Center Infrastructure Project No. EN2402 Category Engineering: Master Plans Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Gilroy Sports Park Project Description and Purpose This project will design and install the needed infrastructure for the future Gilroy Ice Center located at the Gilroy Sports Park. Expected work includes design, environmental, and construction for site grading, installation of the site stormwater collection system and stormwater treatment facilities, sewer collection, water service distribution, and joint trench. The project will also include the design and construction of traffic signal improvements at the entrance to the Sports Park at the Monterey Road/Monterey Frontage Road intersection. Project Justification The proposed facility would be a great opportunity for economic development and has the potential to heighten the City’s position in the region as a destination location and increase travel and tourism to Gilroy. The ice rink facility would likely include opportunities for a variety of sporting programs and ice hockey events. The project would provide recreational opportunities for all Gilroy residents and those travelling to Gilroy for tournaments, competitions, and other events. Master Planning Documents The development of the Gilroy Ice Center is consistent with the Council goals related to making Gilroy a Recreation Destination. 161 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (EN2402) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $653,400 $653,400 CEQA $20,900 $20,900 Construction $3,861,000 $3,861,000 Con. Support $552,200 $552,200 Total $674,300 $4,413,200 $5,087,500 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Public Facilities (440) $143,793 $941,107 $1,084,900 TIF (425) $530,507 $3,472,093 $4,002,600 Total $674,300 $4,413,200 $5,087,500 Financial Comments Site work will be funded by the Public Facilities Fund (440) and traffic signal work will be funded by the TIF Fund (425). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There will be on-going operational costs for the site including storm, sewer, water, and signal maintenance. At this time, the cost of the on-going costs is unknown. 162 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Corporation Yard EV And EV Charging Project No. EN2403 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Public Works: Facilities Project Type New Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 613 Old Gilroy Street Project Description and Purpose City staff is working with Silicon Valley Clean Energy’s (SVCE) Consultant to identify opportunities for energy resilience that could be implemented by the City. The Consultant developed an overview report of resiliency strategies to inform the selection of a CapEx project by the City. Some of the determining factors to identify eligible projects included an overview of commonly available technology, design and implementation considerations, potential cost ranges and relevant case studies. The Consultant prepared a Resilience Strategies Overview Report and Feasibility Assessment (FA) for the project. The assessment provided an understanding of the requirements of a given strategy to determine opportunities for implementation. The FA identified a combination of grid- independent electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS) and electric utility vehicles (EV) as the optimal usage of funding for this grant. Four grid independent EVCS and one vehicle option was assessed (although multiple vehicle options were considered). City staff will evaluate and select a combination of EVCS and EVs to provide the best value and practicality. Project Justification Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE) launched its Community Energy Resilience Program in 2020 in partnership with and through the support of its Member Agencies and local stakeholders. The program is a $5.15 million investment to support community energy resilience planning efforts, build capacity, and develop local energy resilience projects at local critical community facilities. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in any master planning documents. Photo: https://svcleanenergy.org/ev-charging-assist/ 163 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (EN2403) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Planning/Design $44,785 $44,785 CEQA Construction $269,246 $269,246 Con. Support Total $314,031 $314,031 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $44,785 $44,785 Water (705)$134,623 $134,623 Sewer (700)$134,623 $134,623 Total $314,031 $314,031 Financial Comments Funding for this project will be from the General Fund (100), Water (705) and Sewer (700). These funds will be reimbursed with grant funding. The City of Gilroy has been approved for grant funding in the amount of $314,031 through the Silicon Valley Clean Energy Community Resilience Program. This included $52,339 which was allocated in the form of a Planning Grant. An unused $7,554 of the Planning Grant was rolled over to the CapEx project, providing the City with a total of $269,246 of remaining grant funding. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY23 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Ongoing operational costs will include the cost of the electricity to charge City vehicles and any associated subscription fees with the EV charging station supplier. 164 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Cherry Blossom Apartments Reroofing Project No. FC2401 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Facilities Project Type Replacement Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7259 Monterey Street Project Description and Purpose The Cherry Blossom Apartment’s flat roof flexes when walked on and has leaks in some areas. Temporary roof repairs have been made, but this roof needs to be replaced. The roof is of unknown age, but because of its current condition, the underlayment needs to be removed and replaced and new roofing installed. Project Justification The Cherry Blossom Apartments provide one- and two-bedroom affordable apartment units to the general population and supportive services to one unit. This facility would be impacted by roof leaks should they occur in the future given the age of the roof. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document. 165 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (FC2401) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $17,600 $17,600 Construction $180,000 $180,000 Con. Support $14,300 $14,300 Total $211,900 $211,900 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total CDBG (245) $211,900 $211,900 Total $211,900 $211,900 Financial Comments This project will be funded by Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding (245). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY26 Project Advertisement FY26 Project Construction FY26 Project Completion FY26 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project address maintenance needs. There are no operational costs associated with this project. Costs may decrease if leaks are avoided. 166 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Creamery Building Demolition Project No. FC2402 Category Facilities: Buildings Department Facilities Project Type Demolition Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 88 Martin St, Gilroy Project Description and Purpose This project would demolish the creamery building. Project Justification The creamery building is dilapidated and has become an attractive nuisance. Before the building can be demolished, it would need to be removed from the National Register of Historic Places. Because half the roof has fallen down, and the other half of the roof is slowly coming down, and the brick walls are not reinforced and bricks are starting to fall down, the building is a danger to the unhoused, who often break into the building. For safety reasons, this building should be demolished. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document. 167 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (FC2402) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $7,300 $7,300 Construction $131,000 $131,000 Con. Support $7,300 $7,300 Total $145,600 $145,600 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $145,600 $145,600 Total $145,600 $145,600 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project will eliminate existing operational costs. 168 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name City Hall Reroofing Project No. FC2405 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Facilities Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7351 Rosanna Street Project Description and Purpose City Hall’s roof is 43 years old and despite small repairs, it is leaking in multiple locations. These leaks need to be repaired. Since there are plans that may lead to a new City Hall in 6 to 10 years, roof repairs would be isolated to spots that are currently having issues, rather than performing a 25- 30 year re-roofing project on the entire roof. These problem areas need to have the roof tiles removed and new roofing materials applied, and the tiles reinstalled. Project Justification This roof is currently leaking in multiple areas, despite having roofing companies perform spot repairs. To ensure the integrity of the building, more substantial repairs on larger roof segments need to be performed by a roofing company to address these leaks. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document. 169 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (FC2405) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $55,000 $55,000 Construction $375,000 $375,000 Con. Support $42,000 $42,000 Total $472,000 $472,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $472,000 $472,000 Total $472,000 $472,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY25 Project Advertisement FY25 Project Construction FY25 Project Completion FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project address maintenance needs. There are no operational costs associated with this project. Costs may decrease if leaks are avoided. 170 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Glen Loma Temporary Fire Station Project No. FR2401 Category Facilities: Buildings Department Fire Project Type New Project Manager Fire Chief Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Christmas Hill Park Ranch Site Project Description and Purpose This project would construct a temporary fire station on city-owned property near the Christmas Hill Park Ranch Site (adjacent to the TEEC building) to serve the Santa Teresa fire district. The structure will be a modular building and will include sleeping quarters, an office, a shower, and a kitchen to allow for 24-hour staffing. Project Justification The project will allow for improved emergency response times for the Santa Teresa fire district until a permanent fire station can be built. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in any master plan document. However, the permanent fire station was identified in the Glen Loma Ranch Development EIR. Project Location 171 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (FR2401) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $17,310 $17,310 Construction $444,580 $444,580 Con. Support Total $17,310 $444,580 $461,890 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Capital Projects (400) $17,310 $444,580 $461,890 Total $17,310 $444,580 $461,890 Financial Comments This project will be funded by Capital Projects (400). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs of this project are unknown at this time. 172 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Examples of fire-resistant restroomshttps://modularconnecti ons.com/restrooms-park-facilities/ Project Name Citywide Park Restroom Reroofing/Rehabilitation Project No. PK2401 Category Parks and Trails: Buildings Department Public Works: Parks Project Type Replacement Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The Citywide Park Restroom Reroofing/Rehabilitation project would replace approximately 32 park restrooms throughout the City with restrooms equipped with fire retardant roofs and durable, fire- resistant building materials. Project Justification The City’s public restrooms have become increasingly challenging to maintain due to growing incidents of vandalism. This has caused safety concerns for park users and has increased maintenance costs and staff time. Master Planning Documents This project provides for well-maintained parks which is the focus of the Parks and Recreation Systems Master Plan. 173 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (PK2401) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design Design $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $175,000 Construction $315,000 $315,000 $315,000 $315,000 $315,000 $1,575,000 Con. Support Total $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $1,750,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $1,750,000 Total $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $1,750,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 – FY28 Project Advertisement FY24 – FY28 Project Construction FY24 – FY28 Project Completion FY24 – FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project will reduce maintenance costs for the City’s parks. 174 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Master Plan Projects – Sewer Improvements Project No. SW2401 Category Wastewater: Sewer Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The Master Plan Projects – Sewer Improvements Project includes 16 individual projects in 6 system areas throughout the City. The purpose of these projects is to mitigate existing deficiencies in the City’s sewer system and implement improvements to service anticipated future growth throughout the City. The projects include pipeline replacements as well as new pipeline improvements. The projects in each subtrunk system area are listed below: •Santa Teresa - Long Meadow Subtrunk – 1 Replacement •Welburn Subtrunk – 2 Replacements •Forest-Swanston Subtrunk – 2 Replacements •Old Gilroy Subtrunk – 2 Replacements •Uvas Park Subtrunk – 5 Replacements and 1 New •Thomas Subtrunk – 2 Replacements Project Justification These improvements are identified in the 2023 Sewer System Master Plan, which documents existing system facilities, acceptable hydraulic performance criteria, and projected wastewater flows consistent with the Urban Planning Area. The plan also included the development and calibration of the City’s GIS-based hydraulic sewer collection system model. Master Planning Documents These improvements are included in the 2023 Sewer System Master Plan. 175 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (SW2401) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $204,965 $215,213 $225,974 $237,273 $249,136 $1,132,561 CEQA $10,248 $10,761 $11,299 $11,864 $12,457 $56,628 Construction $655,888 $688,682 $723,117 $759,272 $797,236 $3,624,195 Con. Support $1,800,897 $1,890,942 $1,985,489 $2,084,763 $2,189,001 $9,951,091 Total $2,671,998 $2,805,598 $2,945,878 $3,093,172 $3,247,830 $14,764,476 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Sewer (700) $1,647,173 $1,729,532 $1,816,008 $1,906,809 $2,002,149 $9,101,671 Sewer Development Impact (430) $1,024,825 $1,076,066 $1,129,870 $1,186,363 $1,245,681 $5,662,805 Total $2,671,998 $2,805,598 $2,945,878 $3,093,172 $3,247,830 $14,764,476 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Sewer Fund (700) and the Sewer Development Impact Fund (430). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Ongoing Project Advertisement Ongoing Project Construction Ongoing Project Completion Ongoing Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 176 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Joint Morgan Hill-Gilroy Trunk Line Repairs Project No. SW2402 Category Wastewater: Sewer Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Various Project Description and Purpose The Master Plan Projects – Joint Trunk Sewer Improvements Project includes 8 projects in the Joint Trunk Pipeline between the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill. The purpose of these projects is to mitigate existing deficiencies in the City’s sewer system joint trunk pipeline. The projects include emergency to intermediate pipeline and manhole repairs. The projects are listed below: •Emergency/Immediate Pipeline Repairs – 5 Projects at various locations •Emergency/Immediate Manhole Repairs – 40 Projects at various locations •Intermediate Pipeline Repairs – Various locations Project Justification These improvements are identified in the 2023 Sewer System Master Plan, which documents existing system facilities, acceptable hydraulic performance criteria, and projected wastewater flows consistent with the Urban Planning Area. The plan also included the development and calibration of the City’s GIS-based hydraulic sewer collection system model. Master Planning Documents These improvements are included in the 2023 Sewer System Master Plan. 177 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (SW2402) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $734,979 $4,060,287 $4,795,266 CEQA $36,749 $203,014 $239,763 Construction $2,351,933 $12,992,918 $15,344,851 Construction Support $551,234 $3,045,215 $3,596,450 Total $3,674,895 $20,301,435 $23,976,330 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Sewer (700) $1,837,448 $10,150,718 $11,988,165 Morgan Hill $1,837,448 $10,150,718 $11,988,165 Total $3,674,895 $20,301,435 $23,976,330 Financial Comments The costs for projects on the joint Morgan Hill/Gilroy Trunk Line are shared 50%-50% between Morgan Hill and Gilroy. Coordination with Morgan Hill will be required to ensure they have sufficient funding to cover their 50% when the projects are considered. The Gilroy portion of the project work will be funded out of the Sewer Fund (700). The Emergency projects have been funded in FY24. The Intermediate need projects have been pushed out beyond 5 years. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 and Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement FY24 and Beyond FY28 Project Construction FY24 and Beyond FY28 Project Completion FY24 and Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 178 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Master Plan Projects – Water Improvements Project No. WT2401 Category Water: Distribution Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The Master Plan Projects – Water System Improvements Project includes 26 individual projects throughout the City. The purpose of these projects is to mitigate existing deficiencies in the City’s water system and implement improvements to service anticipated future growth throughout the City. The projects include pipeline replacements, new pipeline improvements, groundwater well improvements, and storage reservoir improvements. The number and types of projects in each category are summarized below: •Pipeline Improvements - 13 Replacements and 9 New •Storage Reservoir Improvements - 1 New •Groundwater Well Improvements - 3 New Project Justification These improvements are identified in the City of Gilroy 2023 Water System Master Plan, which documents existing distribution system facilities, acceptable hydraulic performance criteria, and projected water demands consistent with the Urban Planning Area. The plan also included the development of the City’s GIS-based hydraulic water model. Master Planning Documents These improvements are included in the 2023 Water System Master Plan. 179 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (WT2401) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $914,588 $960,317 $9,628,695 $11,503,600 CEQA $45,729 $48,016 $481,441 $575,187 Construction $2,926,682 $3,073,016 $30,811,810 $36,811,508 Con. Support $685,941 $720,238 $7,221,510 $8,627,689 Total $4,572,941 $4,801,587 $48,143,457 $57,517,985 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water (705) $1,687,487 $1,771,861 $17,765,708 $21,225,056 Water Development Impact (435) $2,885,454 $3,029,726 $30,377,749 $36,292,928 Total $4,572,941 $4,801,587 $48,143,457 $57,517,985 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Water Fund (705) and Water Development Impact Fund (435). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY27 – Beyond 5 Years Project Advertisement FY27 – Beyond 5 Years Project Construction FY27 – Beyond 5 Years Project Completion FY27 – Beyond 5 Years Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 180 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT 181 Appendix B – Unfunded CIP Projects (Recommended Beyond FY28) Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT 182 This page intentionally left blank Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Rancho Hills Development Concrete Repairs Project No. 800010 Category Streets: Curbs & Sidewalks Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Rancho Hills Neighborhood Project Description and Purpose This project will replace sidewalks and curb ramps in the Rancho Hills Area, which display spalling concrete (i.e., pieces of concrete flaking or breaking off). The City reached a settlement with the construction company responsible for defective work in four housing tracts. The construction company paid $380,000 towards the repair of the sidewalks and curb ramps. The Public Works Department issued a bid for this work in the spring of 2020. In March 2020, the City Council awarded construction of this project to EF&S Concrete, Inc. Construction of the contract was completed in summer 2020. The bid prices and funding did not allow for the bid of the fourth tract (Tract 8627). Therefore, tract four will remain in need of sidewalk and curb ramp repair work until new funding is identified. The remaining work includes replacement of approximately 9,000 square feet (SF) of sidewalk, 12,000 SF of driveway, 4,700 linear feet of curb and gutter, and some curb ramps. Project Justification The concrete in this area was not properly constructed and is in need of repair. In their current condition, these sidewalks pose a potential safety hazard due to the uneven surfaces. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document. The project is consistent with a number of General Plan goals and policies including correcting deficiencies and ensuring that pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve while protecting the character of residential neighborhoods. 183 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800010) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $117,700 $117,700 Construction $408,000 $961,000 $1,369,000 Con. Support $158,400 $158,400 Total $408,000 $1,237,100 $1,645,100 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Revolving Deposit Fund $408,000 $408,000 Unfunded $1,237,100 $1,237,100 Total $408,000 $1,237,100 $1,645,100 Financial Comments The first phase of this project was funded using money from the lawsuit settlement. Unfortunately, the funding from the settlement was not adequate to repair the poorly constructed sidewalk within all the impacted tracts. The sidewalk improvements within one tract, subdivision 8627, will need to be funded separately. At this time, no funding is anticipated within the next five years. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no ongoing operational costs associated with this project. 184 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Corp Yard Stormwater Compliance Improvements Project No. 800030 Category Engineering: Stormwater Compliance Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 613 Old Gilroy Street Project Description and Purpose This project would implement stormwater capturing and treatment improvements at the City’s Corporation Yard to allow compliance with the State Water Resources Control Board Phase II National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit (MS4 General Permit). Improvements may include structures for covering stored materials, vehicles, and equipment, storm drain inserts, and infiltration trenches to protect against stormwater borne pollutants and hazardous materials spills Project Justification The City’s Corporation Yard is considered a hotspot facility (Provision E.11.d) under the jurisdiction of the NPDES MS4 General Permit Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No.2013-0001-DWQ effective on July 1, 2013. On February 8, 2016, the Central Coast Water Board issued the City a Notice of Violation of the post-construction SWMP element of the MS4 General Permit. It was determined the City’s Corporation Yard is in violation of the MS4 General Permit Good Housekeeping provisions and should implement appropriate controls of pollution and Best Management Practices. City staff implemented temporary compliance measures until the project was constructed. Master Planning Documents This project is necessary for proper stewardship of facilities and compliance the Central Coast Water Board. Flood control, drainage, and water quality mitigation measures are included in the City’s General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Project Site US 101 Old Gilroy St 185 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800030) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $130,020 $130,020 Design $194,980 $194,980 CEQA $4,400 $4,400 Construction $1,710,000 $1,710,000 Con. Support $115,000 $115,000 Total $130,020 $2,024,380 $2,154,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Facilities (615) Sewer (700) Water (705) $130,020 $130,020 Unfunded $2,024,380 $2,024,380 Total $130,020 $2,024,380 $2,154,400 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Pre-Design FY20 Design Beyond FY28 Construction Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Ongoing maintenance and operational costs for the project will be approximately $18k per year. This includes costs for maintenance of the on-site storm drainage inlets, infiltration trench and structure preservation. 186 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Automall Parkway Pavement Rehabilitation Project No. 800040 Category Streets: Pavement Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Automall Parkway Project Description and Purpose The project includes: pavement rehabilitation, repair and replacement of deteriorated curb and gutter, reconstruction of approximately 20 curb ramps, drainage and striping improvements, and the addition of Class II Bike Lanes along Automall Parkway. The project limits include Automall Parkway from the Caltrans right-of-way to the Automall Parkway/Luchessa Avenue intersection. Project Justification This project is important for promoting continued economic growth within the City and for the businesses along these primary access roads (Automall Parkway and Tenth Street). These roadways provide access to a wide variety of commercial and industrial land uses, including the auto dealerships along Automall Parkway. This project supports the City Council’s goals related to promoting economic development within the City, is consistent with the City’s General Plan policies, will improve traffic circulation, and will enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety in the project area. Completion of the project could also lead to further development of the commercial properties along the roadways within the project limits, like the new Evergreen development. Failure to complete this project would result in the continued deterioration of the roadway surface and could increase the likelihood of damage to private vehicles due to poor pavement conditions. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan by providing a safe and well- maintained travel way. The street is also identified in StreetSaver as a failed street in need of reconstruction. Automall Pkwy Chestnut St Tenth St Tenth St To US 101 187 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800040) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $316,752 $316,752 Design $154,048 $154,048 CEQA $14,300 $14,300 Construction $2,519,000 $2,519,000 Con. Support $359,700 $359,700 Total $316,752 $3,047,048 $3,363,800 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Vehicle Registration Fee (220) $316,752 $316,752 Unfunded $3,047,048 $3,047,048 Total $316,752 $3,047,048 $3,363,800 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project directly addresses maintenance needs. Once completed, this project will require periodic surface maintenance treatments. These treatments will protect the surface from water, extend its life, and reduce long-term maintenance expenses. Treatments typically occur every 5-7 years. 188 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Las Animas Park Tennis Court –Fence Repairs Project No. 800120 Category Parks and Trails: Other Structures or Facilities Department Public Works: Parks Project Type Replacement Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Las Animas Veterans Park Project Description and Purpose This project would replace the fences around four of the six tennis courts at Las Animas Park. These 12-foot-tall chain-link fences, which were built in 1974, have sections that are rusted and falling apart. The project would also include replacement of several structural fence poles, which have been weakened due to high winds and heavy use. Project Justification The Las Animas Park tennis courts are heavily used by local residents and the Gilroy Tennis Club (which funds the resurfacing of the courts every few years at no cost to the City). The rusted bottom sections of the galvanized chain-link fences are, practically speaking, beyond repair. Multiple fence contractors have evaluated the fences and recommended replacement instead of continuing repairs. The deficient structural poles could fail during a high-wind storm, which could cause a total failure of the fences and render the tennis courts unusable. In addition to Ensuring Financial Stability, this project also meets the Council’s strategic goals of Providing Opportunities for Meaningful Public Engagement and Ensuring Neighborhoods Benefit Equally from City Services. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Parks & Recreation System Master Plan, which is to pursue a variety of financing mechanisms for acquisition, development, long-term operations, and maintenance of the City’s parks and recreation system. 189 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800120) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $1,100 $1,100 Design $4,400 $4,400 Construction $111,000 $111,000 Con. Support $7,700 $7,700 Total $124,200 $124,200 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $124,200 $124,200 Total $124,200 $124,200 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Operational costs should be reduced for several years by removing the need to constantly repair the broken bottom of the fences. 190 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Lions Creek Trail West Gap Closure – Kern to Day Project No. 800280 Category Parks and Trails: Trails Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Lions Creek – Santa Teresa Blvd/Day Rd to Kern Ave Project Description and Purpose This project would construct a Class I, multi-use trail approximately 4,500 linear feet in length from Santa Teresa Boulevard/Day Road to Kern Avenue along Lions Creek. This trail would provide recreational usage along the creek and pedestrian access between nearby neighborhoods and Christopher High School. The scope of work would include: •Asphalt concrete Class I trail (for bicycles and pedestrians) •ADA-compliant curb cramp at all trail entrances •Concrete retaining wall Project Justification This project was originally approved by Council for design in 2010 as part of three major trail projects in the City (Ronan Channel Trail and two segments of the Lions Creek Trail). However, funds previously allocated for this trail were diverted to the Ronan Channel Trail project for construction and to take full advantage of federal funds that were available. The Lions Creek Trail project, which is currently at the 60% design phase, qualifies for future local and federal grants for the construction phase. Master Planning Documents This project is in conformance with the adopted Trail Master Plan and has already received environmental clearance, which is a prerequisite for permitting. 191 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800280) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $22,000 $22,000 Design $440,000 $440,000 CEQA $89,100 $89,100 Construction $4,048,000 $4,048,000 Con. Support $367,400 $367,400 Total $4,966,500 $4,966,500 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $4,966,500 $4,966,500 Total $4,966,500 $4,966,500 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. This project is on the Measure B Bicycle & Pedestrian Capital Projects 10-year priority project list with a funding amount of $2.72M. This funding is still competitive and would have to be requested. Additional funding would be needed for initial design activities. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Once completed, this project will require an annual maintenance cost of approximately $16,000 per year. The trail will also require resurfacing (Type II Slurry Seal and Restriping) every 8 years at approximately $35,000 per treatment. 192 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Santa Teresa Fire Station – New Station Project No. 800290 Category Facilities: Buildings Department Fire Project Type New Project Manager Fire Chief Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location West Luchessa Avenue and Miller Avenue Project Description and Purpose This project would construct a new fire station within the Glen Loma Ranch Development area. The new fire station is proposed to include two apparatus bays and a community meeting room. The community meeting room would be designed to allow its future conversion into Chief Officer Quarters if needed. The new facility would meet the recommended functional needs for Essential Facility Standards, Environmental, Safety, Security, and Privacy. Project Justification The City of Gilroy entered into a Development Agreement in 2005 with the Glen Loma Group to build housing along Santa Teresa Boulevard. The agreement includes a stipulation that the developer will deliver a turnkey fire station to the City prior to the issuance of the 1,000th building permit. The agreement was amended in 2018 to change the language to the 1,100th permit. The development agreement contains a yearly escalation clause designed to keep up with inflation. The residential project was delayed due to the 2007 Great Recession. With an improved economy in 2015, the design of the new fire station began. However, the project was delayed again due to large increases in construction costs. The City and developer agreed to wait until construction costs came down, or until the City could provide gap funding to assist with constructing the fire station. On November 18, 2019, the City Council approved the additional funding needed to build the Santa Teresa Fire Station. Master Planning Documents This project is included in the Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan. 193 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Fire) (800290) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $60,500 $60,500 Design $1,292,500 $1,292,500 CEQA $60,500 $60,500 Construction $10,934,000 $10,934,000 Con. Support $1,082,400 $1,082,400 Permitting Fees $581,000 $581,000 Total $14,010,900 $14,010,900 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $14,010,900 $14,010,900 Total $14,010,900 $14,010,900 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. On November 18, 2019 Council approved an allocation of $2,900,000 from the General Fund unassigned balance towards this project. With that allocation, remaining projects costs are estimated at $11,110,900 (79% of the total project cost). Due to the City’s current financial situation, the Council allocated $2,900,000 has been reassigned to other needs, and the project is now expected to be funded beyond FY28. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The estimated ongoing annual maintenance cost of the station will initially be less than the current fire station maintenance costs of $80,000 per year per station. As the station ages, however, the maintenance costs will increase and will likely reach the $80,000 annual cost. 194 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Church Street Storm Drain Extension – Seventh to 7233 Church Project No. 800380 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Church/Seventh Intersection to 7233 Church Street Project Description and Purpose The purpose of this project is to design and construct approximately 500 linear feet of new 12” storm drain pipe along Church Street from the Church Street/Seventh Street intersection to 7223 Church Street. The project scope includes: •Install 500 linear feet of reinforced concrete pipe •Install catch basins •Connect new pipes to existing storm drain system Project Justification Church Street from Sixth Street to Eighth Street currently does not have a storm drain pipe. The system is designed to accommodate surface flow along the gutter from Sixth Street to Eighth Street. Due to uplifted curb and gutter along this segment, the surface is obstructed which causes temporary flooding at the intersection of Seventh Street and Church Street. The Operations Division has received numerous comments due to the flooding at this location and has had to expend resources. During moderate rain events the flooding has reached Church Street, which experiences relatively high traffic volumes and travel speeds. This type of flooding combined with higher travel speeds can create safety issues such as hydroplaning. Master Planning Documents This project is not in any master plan document. Eighth St Seventh St Church St Project Area 195 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800380) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design Design $53,729 $53,729 CEQA $2,686 $2,686 Construction $171,932 $171,932 Con. Support $40,297 $40,297 Total $268,644 $268,644 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $268,644 $268,644 Total $268,644 $268,644 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 196 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name New Water Storage Tank at Walton Heath Court Project No. 800680 Category Water: Water Storage Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Walton Heath Court Project Description and Purpose This project will provide a 710,000-gallon water storage tank for the Glen Loma Ranch and Eagle Ridge developments. The tank will provide extra system capacity for more efficient water delivery to residents and provide extra capacity for firefighting activities. The tank will be located at Walton Heath Court. Project Justification Additional water storage capacity is needed to service the Glen Loma Ranch and Eagle Ridge residential/commercial developments. The City’s reservoirs are built in pairs so that one reservoir can be taken off-line for maintenance or repair. The Glen Loma Ranch and Eagle Ridge developments are served by a single 710,000-gallon water tank in the immediate vicinity and by two other tanks located approximately three miles away. The water storage capacity for this area would be impaired should that tank be taken out of service for maintenance or repair. The other tanks would have to serve this area, and the distribution system would be missing 710,000 gallons for spikes in water demand and firefighting activities. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Santa Teresa Blvd Project Location 197 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800680) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $44,000 $44,000 Design $477,400 $477,400 CEQA $11,000 $11,000 Construction $4,070,000 $4,070,000 Con. Support $447,700 $447,700 Total $5,050,100 $5,050,100 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $5,050,100 $5,050,100 Total $5,050,100 $5,050,100 Financial Comments This project would be an expansion of the water system. The project is unfunded at this time and will be reevaluated during the next CIP funding cycle. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Ongoing maintenance and operational costs for the water storage tank would be nominal. 198 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Gateway Senior Apartments Pedestrian Crossing Safety Improvements Project No. 800730 Category Streets: Traffic Signals Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Monterey Street between Tenth St and Luchessa Ave Project Description and Purpose This project will install a High-Intensity Activated Crosswalk (HAWK), high visibility crosswalk improvements, and curb ramps to provide a safe pedestrian crossing of Monterey Road in front of the Gateway Senior Apartments. Project Justification The location of the Gateway Senior Apartments currently has challenges and safety issues in terms of the surrounding pedestrian infrastructure along Monterey Street. The project was approved without any adjacent sidewalk improvements. In a February 13, 2020 letter from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity expressed concerns over the lack of pedestrian accessibility in the area. The HAWK improvements would address the accessibility gaps by providing safe pedestrian access to the west side of Monterey Street where there are existing pedestrian facilities that lead to the Downtown. This project meets the City Council goal of Enhancing Public Safety Capabilities. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s General Plan goals and policies. These goals and policies include correcting deficiencies and ensuring pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve. High-Intensity Activated Crosswalk Example 199 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800730) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $48,500 $48,500 CEQA $2,200 $2,200 Construction $442,000 $442,000 Con. Support $41,800 $41,800 Total $48,500 $486,000 $534,500 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total CDBG (245) $48,500 $48,500 Unfunded $486,000 $486,000 Total $48,500 $486,000 $534,500 Financial Comments The design of this project has been completed. The construction phase of this project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 200 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Drainage Improvements to Mitigate Minor Flooding Project No. 900030 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project will address a number of localized flooding issues throughout the City. Public Works Operations has a list of locations where local flooding occurs during heavy rain events. Project Justification Public Works has identified a number of locations throughout the City that experience localized flooding during storm events. A number of these locations affect vehicular travel lanes and pedestrian walkways. Maintenance staff has to address these locations with each storm event, and places advanced warning signage at a number of locations. This is time consuming and costly. Also, to the extent these locations affect the health and safety of the public, the City is obligated to make repairs and/or improvements to the storm drain system. Not doing so could leave the City exposed to liability. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan, but provides flood control, drainage, and water quality mitigation measures in support of the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. Miller Avenue Closure – February 2017 201 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900030) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $1,100 $1,100 Design $71,500 $71,500 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $51,000 $51,000 Total $124,700 $124,700 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $124,700 $124,700 Total $124,700 $124,700 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project’s operational costs would be nominal. 202 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Luchessa Bridge Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Improvements Project No. 900070 Category Streets: Pavement Markings Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Luchessa Avenue between Princevalle and Thomas Project Description and Purpose This project would construct approximately 700 linear feet of pedestrian pathway along westbound Luchessa Avenue between Princevalle Street and Thomas Road. There are currently no sidewalks on either side of this bridge/road segment. The scope of work includes: •Concrete sidewalk •ADA-compliant curb ramps •Raised pedestrian walking surface on the bridge Project Justification The pedestrian route along this segment, which is the shoulder of the road, does not provide a vertical or horizontal separation between vehicles and pedestrians, is not ADA-compliant, and does not meet current safety guidelines. The only feature currently provided between the shoulder and travel way are temporary delineators, which is not the best possible safety measure. The Luchessa Bridge provides the only pedestrian route to Gilroy High School for students that live west of Thomas Road. Master Planning Documents Widening the Luchessa Avenue Bridge to two lanes in each direction is included in the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan (TCMP), which would include providing pedestrian facilities on the bridge. In addition, this project is consistent with the City’s General Plan goals and policies which include correcting deficiencies and ensuring pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve. 203 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900070) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $4,400 $4,400 Design $82,500 $82,500 CEQA $4,400 $4,400 Construction $707,000 $707,000 Con. Support $78,100 $78,100 Total $876,400 $876,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $876,400 $876,400 Total $876,400 $876,400 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Staff will continue to pursue state and federal grant opportunities to partially or fully fund this project. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. This project would reduce maintenance costs as City crews would no longer be required to continuously replace the temporary delineators that are currently installed between the shoulder and travel way. 204 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Mantelli/Church Bulb-Out and Crosswalk Improvements Project No. 900090 Category Streets: Other Concrete Features Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Mantelli Drive and Church Street Project Description and Purpose This project will install improvements to enhance the safety of pedestrians crossing Mantelli Drive at the intersection of Mantelli Drive and Church Street. The scope of work includes: •Install concrete bulb-out at the northwest corner of the intersection •Install ADA-compliant directional curb ramps at the northwest corner of the intersection •Relocate the stop sign at the northwest corner so it is closer to the travel lane Project Justification Staff has received multiple correspondences from residents concerned about pedestrian safety at this skewed intersection, including observations of drivers turning right from southbound Church Street to westbound Mantelli Drive without stopping at the stop sign (i.e., treating it as a “free” right-turn). The crosswalk on the west leg of the intersection is also unusually long due to the skewed geometry of the intersection. These improvements would discourage drivers from treating the southbound right-turn movement as a “free” right-turn. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan by providing a safe and well- maintained travel way. The street is also identified in StreetSaver as a failed street in need of reconstruction. Project Corner 205 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900090) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $1,100 $1,100 Design $23,100 $23,100 CEQA $2,200 $2,200 Construction $179,000 $179,000 Con. Support $9,900 $9,900 Total $215,300 $215,300 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $215,300 $215,300 Total $215,300 $215,300 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 206 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Miller/Uvas Creek Trail Pedestrian Improvements Project No. 900100 Category Streets: Curbs & Sidewalks Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Miller Avenue and Uvas Creek Trail Project Description and Purpose This project would enhance pedestrian safety at the Miller Avenue/Uvas Park Drive intersection. The scope of work would include: •Install raised concrete crosswalk for levee trail users to cross Miller Avenue •Install concrete sidewalk and retaining wall at the southwest corner of the intersection •Install ADA-compliant curb ramp at the southeast corner of the intersection Project Justification Staff has received multiple comments from residents and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission regarding the safety of pedestrians crossing at this intersection. It was reported that drivers are not making a complete stop at the intersection, particularly at the west leg of the intersection. As this intersection serves nearby neighborhoods, Gilroy High School, Solarsano Middle School, and Christmas Hill Park, it is important to investigate and identify possible solutions to enhance safety at this intersection. This project would also provide for ADA-compliant improvements at this intersection. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document, but it is consistent with the City’s General Plan goals and policies. These goals and policies include correcting deficiencies and ensuring pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve. Miller Ave Uvas Creek Trail Uvas Park Dr Image Source: ruraldesignguide.com 207 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900100) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $1,100 $1,100 Design $22,000 $22,000 CEQA $4,400 $4,400 Construction $204,000 $204,000 Con. Support $11,000 $11,000 Total $242,500 $242,500 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $242,500 $242,500 Total $242,500 $242,500 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 208 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Murray Avenue Sidewalk Gap Closure Project No. 900110 Category Streets: Curbs & Sidewalks Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Murray Avenue between Kishimura and Leavesley Project Description and Purpose The Murray Avenue Sidewalk Gap Closure Project will construct approximately 2,000 linear feet of sidewalk on the west side of Murray Avenue between Kishimura Drive and Leavesley Road. This project would complete the pedestrian network on this segment so that pedestrian access would be provided on both sides of the street. Project Justification Numerous residents and businesses on the west side of this segment of Murray Avenue do not have pedestrian facilities along their property’s frontage. The lack of a continuous sidewalk on this segment of Murray Avenue also impacts the ability of transit users to access the bus stops in the area. This project will enhance safety, connectivity, and access in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods as designated by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. Master Planning Documents This project is not specifically listed in any master plan document, but it is consistent with the City’s General Plan goals and policies. These goals and policies include correcting deficiencies and ensuring pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve. 209 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900110) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $9,900 $9,900 Design $115,500 $115,500 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $933,000 $933,000 Con. Support $92,400 $92,400 Right-of-Way $110,000 $110,000 Total $1,261,900 $1,261,900 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $1,261,900 $1,261,900 Total $1,261,900 $1,261,900 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 210 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Sidewalk Gap Closure – 8340 Swanston Lane Project No. 900120 Category Streets: Curbs & Sidewalks Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Swanston Lane between Leavesley and Casey Project Description and Purpose This project will construct approximately 1,200 square feet of new sidewalk and 240 linear feet of new curb and gutter on the east side of Swanston Lane between Leavesley Road and Casey Lane to close the existing gap in continuous sidewalk. This project would complete the pedestrian network on this segment so that pedestrian access would be provided on both sides of the street. Project Justification Residents have expressed safety concerns regarding the lack of continuous sidewalk along this segment of Swanston Lane. This project will enhance safety, connectivity, and access in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods that fall within the City’s Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area (NRSA), as designated by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document, but it is consistent with the City’s General Plan goals and policies. These goals and policies include correcting deficiencies and ensuring pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve. 211 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900120) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $23,100 $23,100 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $136,000 $136,000 Con. Support $7,700 $7,700 Land Acq. $55,000 $55,000 Total $222,900 $222,900 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $222,900 $222,900 Total $222,900 $222,900 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 212 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Storm Drain Cleaning and Inspection Program Project No. 900130 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The intent of this project is to video inspect the larger storm drain pipes and culverts within private easements and the public right-of-way to identify deficiencies (including deficiencies in structural integrity) and to clean the lines. Based on the video inspection, a capital improvement project would be developed to repair identified deficiencies. This project would be a multi-year, phased project. During the first year, locations that meet the project parameters would be identified throughout the City. During the second year, the lines identified in the first year would be inspected and improvements to address any identified deficiencies would be designed. During the third year, the improvements would be constructed. Project Justification A number of large diameter storm drain lines are constructed using corrugated metal pipe and reinforced concrete pipe (RCP). When these lines fail, they can create dangerous conditions including sink holes in the public right-of-way, which can result in safety issues. Master Planning Documents This project is not in any master plan document. Photo Credit: By Cheerfulmonk, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 213 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900130) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $66,400 $66,400 Salaries/Wages $7,000 $7,000 Total $73,400 $73,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $73,400 $73,400 Total $73,400 $73,400 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. The first phase of the project, identification of locations that meet the project parameters, is estimated to cost $73,400. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 214 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Fifth Street – Miller to Princevalle Storm Drain Replacement Project No. 900140 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Fifth Street between Miller Ave and Princevalle St Project Description and Purpose This project would replace approximately 1,250 feet of existing 42” storm drain pipe with a 48” storm drain pipe along Fifth Street between Miller Avenue and Princevalle Street to provide adequate storm drainage capacity. Project Justification The City of Gilroy’s storm drainage system consists of a combination of curb and gutter facilities, curb inlets, and underground pipelines draining to the nearest creek (Llagas Creek or Uvas Creek) or to a manmade channel. Storm water runoff is ultimately discharged into creeks that flow through the City and eventually reach Monterey Bay via the Pajaro River. The planning, development, and financing of storm drainage system facilities is vital to provide reliable and enhanced service for existing customers and to serve anticipated growth. Master Planning Documents This project is identified in the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. Fifth St Project Area Princevalle St 215 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900140) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $268,644 $268,644 CEQA $13,432 $13,432 Construction $859,660 $859,660 Con. Support $201,483 $201,483 Total $1,343,219 $1,343,219 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $1,343,219 $1,343,219 Total $1,343,219 $1,343,219 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 216 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Fifth Street – Princevalle to Rosanna New Storm Drain Trunk Project No. 900150 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Fifth Street between Princevalle and Rosanna Project Description and Purpose This project would construct a new 72” storm trunk approximately 1,500 feet in length along Fifth Street between Princevalle Street and Rosanna Street to provide adequate storm drainage capacity. Project Justification The City of Gilroy’s storm drainage system consists of a combination of curb and gutter facilities, curb inlets, and underground pipelines draining to the nearest creek (Llagas Creek or Uvas Creek) or to a manmade channel. Storm water runoff is ultimately discharged into creeks that flow through the City and eventually reach Monterey Bay via the Pajaro River. The planning, development, and financing of storm drainage system facilities is vital to provide reliable and enhanced service for existing customers and to serve anticipated growth. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. Dowdy St Fifth St Project Area Carmel St Princevalle St Hanna St Rosanna St 217 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900150) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $446,520 $446,520 CEQA $22,326 $22,326 Construction $1,428,865 $1,428,865 Con. Support $334,890 $334,890 Total $2,232,602 $2,232,602 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $2,232,602 $2,232,602 Total $2,232,602 $2,232,602 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 218 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Forest and Eighth Storm Drain Connection Replacement Project No. 900160 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Forest Street and Eighth Street Project Description and Purpose This project would remove and replace approximately 40 linear feet of 8” cast iron pipe with 15” reinforced concrete pipe, and remove and replace approximately 40 linear feet of 6” vitrified clay pipe with 15” reinforced concrete pipe near the intersection of Forest and Eighth Streets. This project would also install a new storm drain inlet, and tie the improvements into the existing storm drain system. Project Justification A resident near the intersection of Forest and Eighth Streets has submitted several service requests related to pavement flooding at this location. Maintenance and Engineering staff has identified a small inlet and smaller than required storm drain pipe network serving this location. With the increasing frequency of 100-year rainfall events, this area could be prone to frequent flooding in the future. These flooding events may result in damage to property and the City could be liable for these damages. Master Planning Documents This project supports the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. 219 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900160) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $1,100 $1,100 Design $59,400 $59,400 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $237,000 $237,000 Con. Support $39,600 $39,600 Total $338,200 $338,200 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $338,200 $338,200 Total $338,200 $338,200 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project would result in nominal operational costs and the new assets would be added to the City’s routine storm drain maintenance list. 220 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Ninth Street Storm Drain Extension – Monterey to Eigleberry Project No. 900170 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Ninth Street between Monterey and Eigleberry Project Description and Purpose This project will add a new 36” storm drain line for a total length of approximately 400 feet along Ninth Street between Eigleberry Street and Monterey Street. Project Justification The City of Gilroy’s storm drainage system consists of a combination of curb and gutter facilities, curb inlets, and underground pipelines draining to the nearest creek (Llagas Creek or Uvas Creek) or to a manmade channel. Storm water runoff is ultimately discharged into creeks that flow through the City and eventually reach Monterey Bay via the Pajaro River. The planning, development, and financing of storm drainage system facilities is vital to provide reliable and enhanced service for existing customers and to serve anticipated growth. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. Ninth St Monterey St Eigleberry St Project Area 221 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900170) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $62,737 $62,737 CEQA $3,137 $3,137 Construction $200,758 $200,758 Con. Support $47,053 $47,053 Total $313,685 $313,685 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $313,685 $313,685 Total $313,685 $313,685 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 222 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Princevalle System – Fifth to Santa Paula Storm Drain Improvements Project No. 900180 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Third St, Santa Theresa Dr, Fourth St and Miller Ave Project Description and Purpose This project will replace the existing 27” to 30” storm drain with 36” to 48” storm drain for a total length of approximately 3,400 feet along portions of Third Street (Santa Paula Drive to Santa Theresa Drive), Santa Theresa Drive (Third Street to Fourth Street), Fourth Street (Santa Theresa Drive to Miller Avenue), and Miller Avenue (Fourth Street to Fifth Street). Project Justification The City of Gilroy’s storm drainage system consists of a combination of curb and gutter facilities, curb inlets, and underground pipelines draining to the nearest creek (Llagas Creek or Uvas Creek) or to a manmade channel. Storm water runoff is ultimately discharged into creeks that flow through the City and eventually reach Monterey Bay via the Pajaro River. The planning, development, and financing of storm drainage system facilities is vital to provide reliable and enhanced service for existing customers and to serve anticipated growth. Master Planning Documents This project is included in the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. Third St Santa Paula Dr Wren Ave Project Area Santa Theresa Dr Miller Ave 223 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900180) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $16,500 $16,500 Design $457,600 $457,600 CEQA $16,500 $16,500 Construction $2,967,000 $2,967,000 Con. Support $375,100 $375,100 Total $3,832,700 $3,832,700 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $3,832,700 $3,832,700 Total $3,832,700 $3,832,700 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 224 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Rosanna – Fourth to Princevalle Channel Storm Drain Improvements Project No. 900190 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Rosanna St, Sixth St, Eigleberry St, Seventh St Project Description and Purpose This project will add new 36” to 84” storm drain line for a total length of approximately 6,700 feet along Rosanna Street from Fourth Street to Sixth Street, Sixth Street from Rosanna Street to Eigleberry Street, Eigleberry Street from Sixth Street to Seventh Street, Seventh Street from Eigleberry Street to Rosanna Street, and Rosanna Street from Seventh Street to Princevalle Channel. Project Justification The City of Gilroy’s storm drainage system consists of a combination of curb and gutter facilities, curb inlets, and underground pipelines draining to the nearest creek (Llagas Creek or Uvas Creek) or to a manmade channel. Storm water runoff is ultimately discharged into creeks that flow through the City and eventually reach Monterey Bay via the Pajaro River. The planning, development, and financing of storm drainage system facilities is vital to provide reliable and enhanced service for existing customers and to serve anticipated growth. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. Fourth St Sixth St Seventh St Eigleberry St Tenth St Church St Rosanna St Project Area 225 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900190) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $31,900 $31,900 Design $761,200 $761,200 CEQA $31,900 $31,900 Construction $5,854,000 $5,854,000 Con. Support $804,100 $804,100 Total $7,483,100 $7,483,100 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $7,483,100 $7,483,100 Total $7,483,100 $7,483,100 Financial Comments This project is not currently funded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 226 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Second Street – Hanna to Miller Slough Storm Drain Improvements Project No. 900200 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Second Street between Hanna St and Miller Slough Project Description and Purpose This project will replace the existing 15” storm drain with a 36” storm drain for a total length of approximately 1,450 feet along Second Street between Hanna Street and Monterey Road / Miller Slough. Project Justification The City of Gilroy’s storm drainage system consists of a combination of curb and gutter facilities, curb inlets, and underground pipelines draining to the nearest creek (Llagas Creek or Uvas Creek) or to a manmade channel. Storm water runoff is ultimately discharged into creeks that flow through the City and eventually reach Monterey Bay via the Pajaro River. The planning, development, and financing of storm drainage system facilities is vital to provide reliable and enhanced service for existing customers and to serve anticipated growth. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. First St Second St Hanna St Project Area 227 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900200) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design Design $227,421 $227,421 CEQA $11,371 $11,371 Construction $727,748 $727,748 Con. Support $170,566 $170,566 Total $1,137,107 $1,137,107 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $1,137,107 $1,137,107 Total $1,137,107 $1,137,107 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 228 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Third Street Storm Drain Extension – Hanna to Eigleberry Project No. 900210 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Third Street between Hanna St and Eigleberry St Project Description and Purpose This project would up-size approximately 1,200 linear feet of 6” storm drain line to 12” storm drain line on Third Street between Hanna Street and Eigleberry Street. The project scope includes: •Remove and replace 1,200 linear feet of 6” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) with 12” RCP •Remove and relocate existing catch basin •Connect new pipes to existing storm drain system Project Justification The existing storm drain line on Third Street between Hanna Street and Eigleberry Street is not an optimal size for this segment. During moderate rain events, flooding occurs at almost every intersection on this segment. This flooding may cause safety issues such as hydroplaning. This main line is undersized and is restricting optimal flow downstream. By up-sizing this line, flooding within this segment will be eliminated and it will restore additional operational capacity to respond to other locations. Currently, the Operations Division conducts frequent cleaning intervals at this segment just to maintain minimal flow. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. Eigleberry St Third St Project Area Church St Rosanna St Hanna St 229 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900210) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $128,949 $128,949 CEQA $6,447 $6,447 Construction $412,637 $412,637 Con. Support $96,712 $96,712 Total $644,745 $644,745 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $644,745 $644,745 Total $644,745 $644,745 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 230 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Wren Avenue Bridge Over Lions Creek BPMP Project No. 900230 Category Streets: Bridges Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Wren Avenue North of Tatum Avenue Project Description and Purpose In April 2006 Caltrans announced the creation of the Local Assistance Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program (BPMP). The BPMP program is funded through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Bridge Program (HBP), which, for the City of Gilroy, is administered through Caltrans District 4 Local Assistance. This project includes cleaning and treating the bridge deck on the Wren Avenue Bridge over Lions Creek with High Molecular Weight Methacrylate (HMWM). The project will also include replacing traffic stripes and pavement markings, and other incidental and appurtenant work necessary for the proper construction of the improvements. Project Justification The purpose of the project is to extend the life of the bridge by performing certain qualifying items of work, classified as “preventative maintenance”, to keep the bridge in structurally good condition while conserving limited funds for other bridges which may require major rehabilitation or replacement. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan by providing a safe and well- maintained travel way. Kern Ave Lions Creek Tatum Ave Wren Avenue Bridge Over Lions Creek 231 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900230) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $34,100 $34,100 CEQA $14,300 $14,300 Construction $121,000 $121,000 Con. Support $69,300 $69,300 Total $238,700 $238,700 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $238,700 $238,700 Total $238,700 $238,700 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. When funded, this project would be implemented through the Highway Bridge Program (HBP), which provides federal aid to local agencies for replacing and rehabilitating deficient bridges. A large portion of the Construction and Construction Engineering/Management Services for this project would be funded through the FHWA’s Highway Bridge Program (88.53%), which will be reimbursed to the City upon completion of the project. The City’s match for the project would be minimal (11.47%). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project directly addresses maintenance needs. There are no operational costs associated with this project. 232 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Railroad At-Grade Crossing Pedestrian Safety Improvements Project No. 900320 Category Streets: Curbs & Sidewalks Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location At-Grade Highway/Railroad Crossings within the City Project Description and Purpose The Railroad At-Grade Crossing Pedestrian Safety Improvements Project would improve safety at ten at-grade railroad track crossings by installing improvements such as fencing, pedestrian gates, sidewalks, and upgraded warning signals and signage. The project includes the at-grade highway/railroad crossings at the following locations: 1.Luchessa Avenue 2.Tenth Street 3.Old Gilroy Street 4.Sixth Street 5.Martin Street 6.Lewis Street 7.I.O.O.F. Avenue 8.Leavesley Road 9.Las Animas Avenue 10. Cohansey Avenue Project Justification The City’s ten at-grade highway/railroad crossings all fall within the City’s Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area (NRSA), as designated by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. Some of these crossings are located near schools or other high pedestrian activity centers (i.e., shopping centers, multi-family residential developments, etc.). This project would enhance safety, connectivity, and access in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods that fall within the City’s NRSA. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s General Plan goals and policies. These goals and policies include correcting deficiencies and ensuring pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve. Tenth Street At-Grade Railroad Crossing 233 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900320) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $66,000 $66,000 Design $2,112,000 $2,112,000 CEQA $253,000 $253,000 Construction $11,550,000 $11,550,000 Con. Support $2,167,000 $2,167,000 Total $16,148,000 $16,148,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $16,148,000 $16,148,000 Total $16,148,000 $16,148,000 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. The City of Gilroy may collaborate with the High Speed Rail Authority (HSRA) on this project with the majority of funding coming through their Environmental Justice (EJ) CEQA program. The City would provide sidewalk improvements within the City’s right-of- way to aid with the transition between City and railroad right-of-way. In addition, the City would provide public outreach and coordination, project management, and oversight during the design and construction of the project. Funding for the majority of the railroad safety improvements would come from HSRA. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 234 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Neighborhood Street Lighting Project No. 900330 Category Streets: Street Lights Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The Neighborhood Street Lighting Project would install new street lights in areas where the street lights do not meet the City’s minimum standards for street light spacing. Project Justification Adequate neighborhood street lighting improves safety by improving nighttime visibility and provides sidewalk and road users with an increased sense of security. Street lighting can also provide a sense of place and a more pleasing environment in residential and commercial areas. Some neighborhood groups also believe that extra illumination can help prevent or reduce crime. Most of the neighborhoods requiring street light improvements are located within the City’s Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area (NRSA), as designated by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. The Neighborhood Street Lighting Project will enhance safety, connectivity, and access in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods that fall within the City’s NRSA. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s General Plan goals and policies. These goals and policies include correcting deficiencies and ensuring pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve. Chestnut Street between Sixth and Seventh Streets 235 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900330) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $68,200 $68,200 CEQA $2,200 $2,200 Construction $311,000 $311,000 Con. Support $34,100 $34,100 Total $415,500 $415,500 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $415,500 $415,500 Total $415,500 $415,500 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. The City of Gilroy may collaborate with the High Speed Rail Authority (HSRA) on this project with the majority of funding coming through their Environmental Justice (EJ) CEQA program. In addition, the City would provide public outreach and coordination, project management, and oversight during the design and construction of the project. Funding for the majority of the project would come from HSRA. The City requested funding for this project through the EJ program. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 236 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Church Street Sidewalk Gap Closure Project No. 900350 Category Streets: Curbs & Sidewalks Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location West Side of Church Street North of First Street Project Description and Purpose This project will construct new sidewalk, curb, and gutter on the west side of Church Street, just north of First Street, along the eastern façade of the building that is currently occupied by the El Rancho Foods Supermarket. The diagonal parking spaces along the side of the building will be shifted partially out towards the street to accommodate the new walkway against the building. The sidewalk will tie into the existing sidewalk north and south of the building site. Project Justification The City has received a number of comments over the past several years regarding the lack of continuous sidewalk along the Church Street frontage of this property. Due to the existing diagonal parking configuration against the building, pedestrians are forced out into the street to travel along this portion of Church Street. This project has the potential to be funded by Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds because of its location in a low- and moderate-income neighborhood. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s General Plan goals and policies of correcting deficiencies and ensuring pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve. 237 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900350) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $20,900 $20,900 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $129,000 $129,000 Con. Support $26,400 $26,400 Total $177,400 $177,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $177,400 $177,400 Total $177,400 $177,400 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 238 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Chestnut Fire Station Bay Heaters and HVAC Replacement Project No. 900400 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Facilities Project Type Replacement Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7070 Chestnut Street Project Description and Purpose The two apparatus bay heaters and one HVAC rooftop unit are past their designed lifetime, and due to be replaced. These units are over 24 years old and are not expected to last much longer. Project Justification This project is necessary to keep Fire services operating properly and avoid downtime due to potential future equipment failures. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in a master plan. 239 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900400) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $12,100 $12,100 Construction $76,000 $76,000 Con. Support $2,200 $2,200 Total $90,300 $90,300 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $90,300 $90,300 Total $90,300 $90,300 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There will be some cost savings due to higher efficiency equipment. Replacement is anticipated every 15 to 20 years. 240 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name 7380 Dowdy Building Demolition Project No. 900450 Category Facilities: Buildings Department Facilities Project Type Demolition Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7380 Dowdy Street Project Description and Purpose The City has been purchasing homes along Dowdy Street for construction of a new City parking lot. This project would demolish a dilapidated City-owned home at 7380 Dowdy Street. This building is deteriorating and periodically gets vandalized and broken into by the unhoused. Project Justification This project would provide needed parking spaces for the Senior Center, Library, and Police Department. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document. Gilroy Senior Center Gilroy Library Gilroy Police Department Dowdy St 241 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900450) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $8,800 $8,800 Construction $152,000 $152,000 Con. Support $8,800 $8,800 Total $169,600 $169,600 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $169,600 $169,600 Total $169,600 $169,600 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project will eliminate existing operational cost. 242 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Parks/Civic Facilities Sidewalk Improvements Citywide Project No. 900500 Category Facilities: Specialized Facilities Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The City owns several properties including a Civic Center, Library, Police Station, various parks, parking lots and other parcels. This project would correct all defective sidewalks and walkways with a ½” or more vertical separation (considered a “trip and fall” location) that could leave the City liable to risk of lawsuit. This project would analyze the sidewalk condition along the frontage of all City-owned properties (including all City parks and public-accessible properties) and design and implement corrective measures to repair the defective areas to City Standards. Project Justification The California Streets and Highways Code requires the adjacent property owner to be responsible for the condition of the sidewalk fronting their property. City Public Works Maintenance Staff do not have the capacity to replace defective sidewalk along the frontage of all City-owned properties. The current practice is to use high-visibility paint to make these locations more visible, but not necessarily to make the repairs. This identifies potentially unsafe sidewalk conditions for the public, but leaves them in the path of travel where the public can trip and then file a claim against the City. This project meets several City Council goals including: Ensure Financial Stability and Ensure Neighborhoods Benefit Equity from City Services. Depending on the scope of the project, it may be phased over several years. Master Planning Documents This project is an action item in the Downtown Gilroy Strategic Plan. 243 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900500) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $12,100 $12,100 Construction $135,000 $135,000 Con. Support $7,700 $7,700 Total $154,800 $154,800 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $154,800 $154,800 Total $154,800 $154,800 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. It is recommended that this type of project be conducted every 10 years to determine if the City remains risk free or risk neutral regarding City sidewalk conditions. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 244 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name City-Owned Parking Lots Resurfacing Project No. 900510 Category Facilities: Parking Lots Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Various Locations Project Description and Purpose The City owns and maintains eight parking lots in the downtown totaling approximately 129,000 square feet of paved surface area. This project would resurface and restripe these lots. The scope of work includes asphalt resurfacing, pavement markings, wheel stops, striping, ADA parking stalls, signage, and storm water management. In addition, the parking lot at the northeast corner of Railroad Street and Sixth Street is a 0.58 acre lot with 58 parking spaces. The lot is not adequately lit with many areas that are in shadows after the lights turn on. The parking lot requires a new lighting design, poles and electrical service. Project Justification Pavement surfaces in City-owned lots have degraded over time. Many features of the parking lots, such as parking stall marking, directional arrows, and signs, also require replacement. This project would also provide an opportunity to review current parking lot layouts and optimize them to better suit adjacent land uses. Per Title II of the ADA, parking lot resurfacing also triggers ADA improvements. Since these are offsite parking lots, ADA accessibility shall comply with the City Municipal Code. Since a number of these lots support the Downtown, this project meets the City Council Goal of Downtown Revitalization. Master Planning Documents This project supports the Downtown Strategic Plan by providing adequate parking to accommodate additional customers and residents thus improving the downtown’s market conditions and growing appeal as a residential and commercial area. Monterey St Eigleberry St Alexander St Railroad St Lewis St Fourth St Sixth St Fifth St Seventh St 245 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900510) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $157,300 $157,300 Construction $694,000 $694,000 Con. Support $106,700 $106,700 Total $958,000 $958,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $958,000 $958,000 Total $958,000 $958,000 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project addresses maintenance needs. Parking lots should be maintained and resurfaced every 8-10 years. 246 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Chestnut Fire Station Seismic Upgrade Project No. 900590 Category Facilities: Buildings Department Fire Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager Fire Chief Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7070 Chestnut Street Project Description and Purpose This project would remodel the existing Chestnut Fire Station/Fire Headquarters, including necessary seismic retrofitting. The project includes replacing or upgrading the mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems, structural repairs, assessment for lead paint and asbestos insulation, remodeling to provide for increased staffing including privacy considerations and other requirements for multi- gender/identity situations, and various operational support facilities, such as fueling and decontamination. Project Justification The 2016 needs assessment report identified that the Chestnut Fire Station requires a significant seismic retrofit/remodel and numerous upgrades to be compliant with the Essential Services Buildings Seismic Safety Act (ESBSSA). Without these improvements, the apparatus bay may not be able to endure a large earthquake event. This could render the fire engines unavailable after a large- scale event. Master Planning Documents This project is recommended in the 2016 Fire Department needs assessment report. 247 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Fire) (900590) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $9,900 $9,900 Design $446,600 $446,600 CEQA $19,800 $19,800 Construction $3,608,000 $3,608,000 Con. Support $397,100 $397,100 Total $4,481,400 $4,481,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $4,481,400 $4,481,400 Total $4,481,400 $4,481,400 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The estimated ongoing maintenance cost of the station will initially be less than the current fire station maintenance costs of $100,000 per year. As the retrofitted and remodeled areas of the station age, the maintenance costs will increase. The following is a list of the types of services and equipment included in the cost of maintaining the Gilroy Fire Stations: •Apparatus doors •HVAC system, bathrooms and kitchen •Plymovent (systems for the extraction/filtration of polluted indoor air) •Monthly pest control service •Electricity and natural gas 248 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Las Animas Fire Station Upgrade and Renovation Project No. 900600 Category Facilities: Buildings Department Fire Project Type Renovation Project Manager Fire Chief Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 8383 Wren Avenue Project Description and Purpose This project would involve a seismic retrofit/remodel of the Las Animas Fire Station. A 2016 needs assessment report indicated the Las Animas Fire Station requires a significant seismic retrofit/remodel and numerous upgrades to be compliant with the Essential Services Buildings Seismic Safety Act (ESBSSA). Project Justification The 2016 needs assessment report identified the following areas of concern: (1)aged mechanical systems have exceeded their lifespans, (2) demand on electrical systems have been exceeded, (3) lead and asbestos were common building materials when the station was built, (4) thermostats all contain poisonous mercury, (5) dry rot and termites have led to a decrease in structural stability, (6) built for only one gender, (7) built to accommodate only two personnel on duty, (8) station does not qualify as an “Essential Facility”, (9) no on-site facility to fuel emergency equipment, (10) ability to remain standing after a sizeable seismic event is questionable, (11) lack of proper decontamination areas for medical equipment, (12) no facility to accommodate on duty Division Chiefs overnight, (13) wear and tear due to increased call volume has taken a toll on the station, and (14) privacy is a challenge. Master Planning Documents This project is recommended through the 2016 Fire Department needs assessment report. 249 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Fire) (900600) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $9,900 $9,900 Design $446,600 $446,600 CEQA $19,800 $19,800 Construction $3,608,000 $3,608,000 Con. Support $397,100 $397,100 Total $4,481,400 $4,481,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $4,481,400 $4,481,400 Total $4,481,400 $4,481,400 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Operational Cost Impact The estimated ongoing maintenance cost of the station will initially be less than the current fire station maintenance costs of $100,000 per year. As the retrofitted and remodeled areas of the station age, the maintenance costs will increase. 250 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Christmas Hill Park Trail Wayfinding Signage Project No. 900610 Category Parks & Trails: Other Structures or Facilities Department Public Works: Parks Project Type New Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7050 Miller Avenue Project Description and Purpose This project will design and install wayfinding signs within Christmas Hill Park and DeBell Uvas Creek Park Preserve. The project will also include associated trail maps and program graphics for community outreach. This project is needed to establish standards for City hiking trail signs that compliment and support various South County healthy living events and programs. Christmas Hill Park and the DeBell Uvas Creek Park Preserve trails are proposed for promoting healthy living activities for all age groups. Under guidance from a landscape consultant, the Santa Clara County Public Health Department, and the Gilroy Parks and Recreation Commission, this project will create a park trail signage program. Project Justification Community comments from healthy living events, the Parks and Recreation Commission, and the County’s Healthy Living Program has indicated that the City has a need to provide significant park trail signs and maps of the City’s trail system starting at Christmas Hill Park. This should include public trail interfaces surrounding Christmas Hill Park and the adjacent DeBell Uvas Creek Park Preserve. Master Planning Documents This project enhances park facilities, which is the goal of the Parks Master Plan. Uvas Park Dr DeBell Uvas Creek Park Preserve Christmas Hill Park DeBell Uvas Creek Park Preserve 251 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900610) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $23,100 $23,100 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $103,400 $103,400 Con. Support $4,400 $4,400 Total $132,000 $132,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $132,000 $132,000 Total $132,000 $132,000 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The annual estimated sign maintenance costs will gradually increase over a five to ten year period, from $200 to $400 per year for direct repair materials, and $600 to $800 per year based on sign hardiness and park visitor impacts. 252 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Forest Street Park Expansion Project No. 900630 Category Parks and Trails: Park Expansion Department Public Works: Parks Project Type New Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7325 Forest Street Project Description and Purpose The purpose of this project is to expand the Forest Street Park in accordance with the City’s approved Forest Street Park Master Plan. The existing park has a children’s play area and a small picnic area. The expanded park could include bocce ball courts and horseshoe pits. The project will include the acquisition of the adjacent property just south of the park, which is currently occupied by a commercial building. This is the second of two parcels needed to complete the approved master plan. The first parcel has already been acquired. Significant soil testing and anticipated mitigation of soil contamination is anticipated. Upon completion of property acquisition and soil mitigation, installation of the proposed improvements would be completed. Project Justification This project in consistent with the Gilroy City Council goal of ensuring neighborhoods benefit equally from City services. The Forest Street Park Expansion Project will promote a healthier population and enhance the quality of life and property values in low-and-moderate-income neighborhoods by expanding the existing recreational facility. The property is now for sale, making this an ideal time to acquire it. Master Planning Documents This project is identified in the Forest Street Park Master Plan, and also provides for a safe and well maintained park which is the focus of the Parks and Recreation Systems Master Plan. 253 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900630) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Land Acquisition $720,000 $720,000 Total $720,000 $720,000 Funding Source Total Prior v FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $720,000 $720,000 Total $720,000 $720,000 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Purchase of the property is estimated at $720,000. Mitigation of soil contamination should be negotiated to be completed by the seller, as a condition of sale. Future additional development costs will be determined when the final scope of the park is known. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There will be minor increases in landscape and facility maintenance for new park development on this final portion of the park. Park and contract maintenance staff already maintain the Forest Street Park, so no additional mobilization is required, only an expansion of current activities and contract work. 254 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Las Animas Veterans Park Miscellaneous Facility Rehabilitation Project No. 900640 Category Parks & Trails: Other Structures or Facilities Department Public Works: Parks Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 400 Mantelli Drive Project Description and Purpose This project would restore, renovate, and upgrade the “Oaks” restroom and Lake Side group barbecue area lighting and electrical, and remove and replace existing deteriorated asphalt pathways with new concrete walkways. Paths would be widened from 10 to 12 feet to meet City trail standards and would be wide enough for bicycles, walkers in both directions, and maintenance vehicles. The project also includes renovation of the main Mantelli Drive parking lot. Improvements would require replacement of several small bridges and path lighting upgrades. Replacement of the original low flow pathway channel culvert near the tennis courts and minor ball field to meet safe storm flows is also included. A new all-weather bridge for park visitors and service vehicles at the culvert is required. The base rock pathway between the Wayland and Hanna parking lots is also included. Both the Hanna parking lot and base rock pathway will need first time lights provided. Project Justification This park is the most heavily used in the City’s system. The Oaks restroom is old and needs overhauling for facilities and utilities. Many of the asphalt pathway service roads are more than 40 years old and have been reduced to base rock. The City has received comments from users who have expressed concerns after having fallen or been splashed at deteriorated locations. The need to upgrade and replace failed pathways and install new parking lot lights for park users is an important user safety and security measure. Master Planning Documents This project provides for a safe and well-maintained park, which is the focus of the Parks and Recreation Systems Master Plan. Arnold Dr Las Animas Veterans Park 255 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900640) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $30,800 $30,800 Design $609,400 $609,400 CEQA $91,300 $91,300 Construction $2,761,000 $2,761,000 Con. Support $364,100 $364,100 Total $3,856,600 $3,856,600 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $3,856,600 $3,856,600 Total $3,856,600 $3,856,600 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Funding for this project could come from state park grant funding and possibly the General Fund. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Operational cost impacts should be neutral. There will be less path and reduced restroom care work required, but there is more irrigation adjustment work that will take time to complete. 256 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Gilroy Sports Park Improvements Phases IV and V Project No. 900680 Category Parks and Trails: Park Expansion Department Public Works: Parks Project Type New Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 5925 Monterey Frontage Road Project Description and Purpose This project would design, and construct sports fields and associated amenities at the Gilroy Sports Park. The project would include four softball fields in a wagon wheel layout, and two soccer/football facilities, described as Phases IV and V in the Gilroy Sports Park Master Plan. The project would also include necessary support facilities such as restrooms, snack bar, parking, security residence, maintenance yard, and sports lighting utilities. A BMX/Pump Track could be included in Phase IV and/or V of the Sports Park project build out. Phase IV and V of the Sports Park project would involve improvements on 14 to 16 acres of the 72-acre site. Project Justification The Gilroy Sports Park has become popular with local leagues and as a destination for regional tournaments. The demand for local sports fields exceeds the available supply, suggesting this is the right time to develop more of this specialty park. Additional fields will allow hosting larger tournaments, and possibly increased revenues. Master Planning Documents This project is listed in the Parks and Recreation Systems Master Plan. Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV Gilroy Sports Park Phase VI Phase VII Phase IX Phase V 257 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900680) Project Costs Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $64,900 $64,900 Design $1,252,900 $1,252,900 CEQA $195,800 $195,800 Construction $11,880,000 $11,880,000 Con. Support $1,436,600 $1,436,600 Bioswale $1,045,440 $1,045,440 Permitting Fees $82,500 $82,500 Total $15,958,140 $15,958,140 Funding Source Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $15,958,140 $15,958,140 Total $15,958,140 $15,958,140 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Future funding could come from impact fees, state park development grants, and matching funds from the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Increased maintenance and operation costs will be required upon completion of the project, including an estimated annual cost of $90,000 for storm water facility maintenance as well as buildings and mobile trailers, with repairs as necessary. Costs could be partially offset by user fees and admission charges, where feasible. 258 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Rehabilitate Softball Fields at Las Animas and Christmas Hill Parks Project No. 900690 Category Parks & Trails: Other Structures or Facilities Department Public Works: Parks Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7050 Miller Avenue and 400 Mantelli Drive Project Description and Purpose This project would rehabilitate the major softball infields at Las Animas and Christmas Hill Parks. This would include demolishing and removing four inches of infield material down to mineral soil, and replacing it with the same infield material that was installed at the Gilroy Sports Park. The project will also include re-grading for positive drainage and replacement of infield bases. Project Justification The Christmas Hill Park and Las Animas Park softball infields are inferior to those at the Gilroy Sports Park. These infields have a grainier and coarser texture. This results in more abrasions and harsher flesh wounds when players fall. This project would improve safety for users of the softball fields. Master Planning Documents This project provides for a safe and well-maintained park which is the focus of the Parks and Recreation Systems Master Plan. Wren Ave Miller Ave Christmas Hill Park Softball Fields Las Animas Park Softball Fields 259 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900690) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $28,600 $28,600 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $145,000 $145,000 Con. Support $7,700 $7,700 Total $182,400 $182,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $182,400 $182,400 Total $182,400 $182,400 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. These parks are currently maintained by the Parks Division with maintenance costs included in the budget. 260 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Old Gilroy Street at Railroad Crossing Sewer Replacement Project No. 900720 Category Wastewater: Sewer Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Old Gilroy Street at Railroad Crossing Project Description and Purpose This project will replace and upgrade 238 linear feet of existing 12” sewer pipe to a 15” sewer pipe along the alley near the railroad crossing at Old Gilroy Street. This section was previously upgraded, but operation crews recommended this section to be up-sized again for increased capacity. This project is part of three segments to be replaced in this subtrunk. Project Justification This portion of the subtrunk has a high likelihood of surcharging during wet weather conditions. Other portions of the subtrunk were replaced per the recommendation of the 1993 Sewer Master Plan. Three portions of this subtrunk are recommended for replacement. Master Planning Documents This project is included in the 2023 Sewer System Master Plan. Project Area Old Gilroy St 261 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900720) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $106,700 $106,700 CEQA $2,200 $2,200 Construction $429,000 $429,000 Con. Support $49,500 $49,500 Total $587,400 $587,400 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $587,400 $587,400 Total $587,400 $587,400 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project, and it may reduce future maintenance costs. 262 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Martin and Railroad Water Line Replacement Project No. 900730 Category Water: Distribution Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Martin Street between Monterey St and Railroad St Project Description and Purpose This project would upgrade water lines to ensure adequate water pressure for fire protection during fire emergencies. This project will upgrade approximately 400 feet of 4” pipe to 6” pipe on Martin Street between Monterey Street and Railroad Street. This alignment crosses under two sets of railroad tracks. As a result, the project will include costs for coordination with Union Pacific Railroad Company and associated permitting fees. Project Justification The Fire Marshal has indicated the water pressures in this area require this project to allow for new construction and provide sufficient pressure for Fire Operations. Master Planning Documents This project supports the 2023 Water System Master Plan. Martin St Monterey St Railroad St 263 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900730) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $198,000 $198,000 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $1,035,000 $1,035,000 Con. Support $137,500 $137,500 Total $1,371,600 $1,371,600 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $1,371,600 $1,371,600 Total $1,371,600 $1,371,600 Financial Comments This project is not currently funded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project’s operational costs would be nominal. 264 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Monterey Rd Sidewalk – Luchessa to Tenth Project No. EN2404 Category Streets: Curbs & Sidewalks Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Monterey Rd from Luchessa Ave to Tenth St Project Description and Purpose This project would design and construct approximately 3,000 linear feet of six-foot wide sidewalk on the east side of Monterey Road between Tenth Street to Luchessa Avenue. The project would also address drainage issues along this road segment by installing approximately 1,850 linear feet of 48- inch and 1,550 feet of 90-inch storm drain pipeline. Project Justification There is currently only approximately 350 linear feet of sidewalk on the east side of Monterey Road between Tenth Street and Luchessa Avenue, in front of the recently constructed Gateway Senior Apartment complex. This project would improve accessibility and enhance safety by closing the gap in sidewalks on the east side of Monterey Road. It would also improve connectivity between the commercial and residential land uses on the east side of Monterey Road and commercial land uses to the north and south of the project area. Master Planning Documents The storm drain improvements for this project are included in the 2022 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. Monterey Rd New Sidewalk Tenth St Existing Sidewalk 265 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (EN2304) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $68,200 $68,200 Design $520,300 $520,300 CEQA $20,900 $20,900 Construction $6,237,000 $6,237,000 Con. Support $205,700 $205,700 Total $7,052,100 $7,052,100 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $7,052,100 $7,052,100 Total $7,052,100 $7,052,100 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact No additional costs are expected. Completion of this project should reduce operational costs. 266 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Master Plan Projects – Storm Drain Improvements Project No. EN2405 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The Master Plan Projects – Storm Drain Improvements Project includes 43 individual projects in 6 hydrologic drainage areas throughout the City. The purpose of these projects is to mitigate existing deficiencies in the City’s storm drain system and implement improvements to service anticipated future growth throughout the City. The projects include pipeline replacements as well as new pipeline improvements. The number and types of projects in each hydrologic area are summarized below: •Ronan Channel Drainage Area – 4 Replacements and 5 New •Miller Slough Drainage Area – 6 Replacements •North Uvas Drainage Area – 4 Replacements and 4 New •South Uvas Drainage Area – 1 Replacement •Princevalle Drainage Area – 12 Replacements and 1 New •Lower Miller Slough Drainage Area – 6 Replacements Project Justification The improvements are identified in the City of Gilroy 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan, which documents existing system facilities, acceptable hydrologic and hydraulic performance criteria, and projected stormwater runoff consistent with the Urban Planning Area. The plan also included the development of the City’s GIS-based hydrologic and hydraulic stormwater models. Master Planning Documents These improvements are included in the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. 267 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (EN2405) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $9,284,948 $9,284,948 CEQA $464,247 $464,247 Construction $29,711,835 $29,711,835 Con. Support $6,963,711 $6,963,711 Total $46,424,742 $46,424,742 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $46,424,742 $46,424,742 Total $46,424,742 $46,424,742 Financial Comments The projects in the Storm Drainage System Master Plan are currently unfunded. The funding source for new storm drainage lines and system upgrades would be the Storm Drain Development Impact Fund (410). The 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan identifies a total of $34.8M in current and future capital improvements over a five-year time period. For this charter, this amount has been escalated based on the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI) to the amount shown here. Future City capital improvement costs will be funded out of the storm drain development impact fee. There is also a need to develop another revenue stream to pay for storm water improvements. Additional funding mechanisms are required due to the fact that Storm Drainage is not currently one of the City’s Enterprise Funds (funded by rate payers), like Sewer and Water. Because of this, storm drain maintenance and capital projects must be paid out of the General Fund if they do not qualify for the use of storm drain impact fees. There is a need to create a new Storm Drain Fund to pay for Storm Drainage System Master Plan improvements. This will be studied over the next year. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 268 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Luchessa Ave/Rossi Ln Reconstruction Project No. EN2406 Category Streets: Pavement Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Luchessa from Monterey to Rossi & Rossi from Luchessa Ave to Mayock Rd Project Description and Purpose This project would reconstruct Luchessa Avenue from Monterey Road to Rossi Lane and reconstruct Rossi Lane from Luchessa Avenue to Mayock Road. The project also includes new sidewalk on Luchessa Avenue between Monterey Road and Automall Parkway. The project would also install Class II bike lanes on Luchessa Avenue and Rossi Lane within the project limits, as well as other traffic stripes and pavement markings. Project Justification The overall quality and condition of a road is measured using the Pavement Condition Index (PCI). PCI is a numerical index between 0 and 100, with 100 representing the best possible condition and 0 representing the worst possible condition. Pavement features such as the existence of cracking and potholes will impact the PCI classification. The pavement within the project limits is very poor, with PCIs of 14 (Luchessa Avenue) and 18 (Rossi Lane). These roads are located along a commuter route and in an industrial area and are thus heavily traveled. The City has received numerous complaints from local commuters and business owners regarding the condition of these roads. In addition, these roads experience high maintenance costs due to their poor condition. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in any master planning documents. Luchessa Ave Project Area 269 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (EN2406) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $408,000 $408,000 CEQA $1,000 $1,000 Construction $3,059,000 $3,059,000 Con. Support $612,000 $612,000 Total $4,080,000 $4,080,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $4,080,000 $4,080,000 Total $4,080,000 $4,080,000 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. City staff have submitted grant applications in attempts to secure funding to reconstruct these roads, but these attempts have been unsuccessful. Staff will continue to pursue funding opportunities and will also consider alternative treatment options that may reduce costs and make funding the project more feasible. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project would result in reduced maintenance costs. 270 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Parks Master Plan Project No. PK2402 Category Parks and Trails: Master Plans Department Public Works: Parks Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project would create a Parks Master Plan for the City of Gilroy. The Parks Master Plan would assess the condition of the City’s existing parks, conduct public outreach to identify community needs, and recommend improvements based on feedback from the public and the goals and policies within the 2040 General Plan. It will also identify potential funding sources for the proposed improvements. The plan will assist decision-makers in prioritizing future park improvements, allocating funding, and pursuing additional funding opportunities. Project Justification The City’s Parks & Recreation System Master Plan was last updated in September 2004. In addition to identifying park deficiencies and proposed improvements, the Parks & Recreation System Master Plan also evaluated recreation programs and special use facilities (e.g., Wheeler Community Center, Gilroy Museum, etc.). The Parks Master Plan will review, update, and build upon the capital improvements identified for parks within the 2004 Parks & Recreation System Master Plan. Having an adopted Parks Master Plan in place will allow the City to develop a Parks Impact Fee Program which will provide a funding source for park improvements throughout the City and will allow for continued programming of Recreation Services within the City’s parks. Master Planning Documents This project will create a Parks Master Plan. 271 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (PK2402) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $225,000 $225,000 Salaries/Wages $25,000 $25,000 Total $250,000 $250,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $250,000 $250,000 Total $250,000 $250,000 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project will not generate operational costs and will inform additional capital development in the future. 272 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT 273 Appendix C – Funded Studies/Plans (Within 5-Year CIP) Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT 274 This page intentionally left blank Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Downtown Parking Management Plan Project No. 800110 Category Engineering: Plans & Programs Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Downtown Project Description and Purpose This project will fund a professional services agreement with a consultant to analyze the existing parking conditions in the Downtown and provide recommendations regarding parking management and supportive capital improvement needs. Project Justification Parking management in the Downtown Core is a high priority for the City. It supports the Downtown and encourages economic development. The Gilroy Downtown Business Association (GDBA) completed an informal Downtown Parking Assessment in 2019 which identified a significant shortage in the number of parking spaces within the Downtown area. A Parking Management Plan will analyze opportunity areas in the Downtown to create additional parking, suggest strategies for optimizing use, and identify potential funding sources and strategies to pay for building and maintaining parking assets within the district. The program will be developed through a survey of residents and business owners, recommendations from the GDBA, additional research, and extensive public outreach. The Parking Management Plan will be used to develop goals for fair and consolidated parking management and may include recommendations for changes to City codes, administrative regulations, practices, procedures, and enforcement. Master Planning Documents The Downtown Specific Plan, completed in 2005, calls for increased parking in the Downtown as well as a comprehensive Parking Management Plan. This project also supports the downtown and will encourage economic development. 275 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800110) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Contract Admin. $25,721 $25,721 Public Outreach $11,317 $11,317 Consulting $263,723 $263,723 Total $300,761 $300,761 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $300,761 $300,761 Total $300,761 $300,761 Financial Comments This project received funding in FY23 and is currently underway. The project is expected to be completed in FY24. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design N/A Project Advertisement FY23 Project Construction N/A Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 276 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Shooting Range Assessment Project No. 800230 Category Facilities: Specialized Facilities Department Facilities Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 1300 Southside Drive Project Description and Purpose This project involves conducting an assessment to determine the lead abatement procedures necessary to bring the City’s shooting range into compliance with Federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards, and to meet the provisions of the Clean Water Act. To satisfy these requirements, it may be necessary to construct overhead structures, drainage ditches and storage tanks, targets that encapsulate bullets, and other runoff collection devices. The extent of the required modifications will not be known until the study is completed. Phase I of the project will be the assessment and engineering of the abatement measures. Phase II will be construction and implementation of the corrective measures identified during Phase I analysis determination. Project Justification This project is needed to bring the City’s shooting range into compliance with Federal EPA regulations. It is needed to identify a system to ensure the lead is captured so it does not leach into the soil and transfer into the local groundwater aquifer. Master Planning Documents This project is not specifically listed in any master plan document. 277 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Police) (800230) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $55,000 $55,000 Salaries/Wages $8,800 $8,800 Construction $200,000 $200,000 Equipment $77,000 $77,000 Total $63,800 $277,000 $340,800 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Facilities (615) $63,800 $277,000 $340,800 Total $63,800 $277,000 $340,800 Financial Comments This project would be funded out of the Facilities Fund (615). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY23 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Operational costs are unknown but will involve continual lead abatement recycling efforts and runoff prevention. 278 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Traffic Circulation Master Plan and Traffic Impact Fee Update Project No. 800240 Category Engineering: Master Plans Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The Traffic Circulation Master Plan (TCMP) Update will include a review of transportation projects based on the 2040 General Plan and the City’s travel forecast model. It will include the identification of all intersections (both short-term and long-term) that do not meet the City’s adopted Level of Service (LOS) Standard, and will determine the level of improvements needed to bring levels of service into compliance. The traffic analysis will include a review of intersection operations, opportunities for needed improvements, and sufficient conceptual design to identify project challenges, project right-of-way needs, and preliminary cost estimates. The Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) update will include a nexus study to calculate the appropriate impact fees necessary to fund proposed infrastructure improvements required to support future growth as identified in the updated Traffic Circulation Master Plan and 2040 General Plan. Project Justification The City's Traffic Circulation Master Plan and Traffic Impact Fee program have not had major updates since 2004. The documents need to be revised to correspond to the 2040 General Plan and the City's updated 2040 travel forecast model. The TIF Program establishes the amount of Traffic Impact Fees paid by developers, and the method for reimbursement of transportation-related development costs to developers after project completion. Modifications to the TIF program could make the collection of traffic impact fees more beneficial to the City. Master Planning Documents The Traffic Circulation Master Plan Update will be consistent with the new GP Mobility Element. 279 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800240) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $400,000 $400,000 Total $400,000 $400,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Traffic Impact Fee (425) $400,000 $400,000 Total $400,000 $400,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded using Traffic Impact Fees (425). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Advertisement FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 280 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Civic Center Master Plan Project No. FC2403 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Administration Project Type New Project Manager Assistant to City Administrator Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Civic Center Project Description and Purpose The development of a Civic Center Master Plan would examine the City facilities within the City Hall complex area, to determine their remaining useful life, identify replacement costs, and identify a phasing plan for implementation. While the Police Station and Gilroy Library are relatively new buildings, other buildings within the complex area are in various degrees of deterioration and are in need of significant investment if the buildings are to be kept in service for the next decade. Buildings considered for review in the master plan effort include City Hall, the Senior Center, the City Hall Annex Building, Wheeler Auditorium, and the Dowdy building. Project Justification The creation of a Civic Center Master Plan would assist the City in laying the groundwork for considering major and minor repairs to existing civic facilities, possible replacement of civic facilities, identifying the addition of desired amenities, and providing a road map for future improvements as funding becomes available. The improvements would address a number of City Council Strategic Goals. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in any master plan document. 281 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (FC2403) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $750,000 $750,000 Design Construction Con. Support Total $750,000 $750,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Capital Projects Fund (400) $750,000 $750,000 Total $750,000 $750,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the Capital Projects Fund (400). Cost savings from funds that were previously set aside by the City Council to fund the City Hall HVAC Replacement will be used to fund this project. The funding would pay for the development of a master plan. Construction funding for identified improvements would need to be secured at a later date. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Pre-Design FY24 Project Advertisement TBD Project Construction TBD Project Completion TBD Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no ongoing operational costs for this master plan development. Future costs associated with maintaining new facilities would have to be considered with any future project construction funding. 282 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT 283 Appendix D – Unfunded Studies/Plans (Recommended Beyond FY28) Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT 284 This page intentionally left blank Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Storm Outfalls #6 and #7 – Investigations and Monitoring for NPDES Project No. 900220 Category Engineering: Stormwater Compliance Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location West Branch Llagas Creek and Princevalle Channel Project Description and Purpose The purpose of this project is to identify and eliminate the source(s) of high levels of human bacteria coming from Outfall #6 (located in the West Branch of Llagas Creek) and Outfall #7 (located at the west end of Princevalle Channel). The project has four phases, as described below: 1)A Desktop Study was completed within the two drainage areas to identify high risk areas where underground stormwater pipes are most likely to be compromised. 2)Maintenance staff installed “Drains to Bay” medallions on all storm drain inlets in these catchment areas where illegal discharge could possibly be taking place. 3)Based on future requirements and testing, a CCTV Investigative Program might be required for all stormwater pipe segments identified in the high-risk zone. The focus would be to locate compromised underground pipes that allow infiltration and inflow of stormwater, containing high levels of human bacteria, during storm events. 4)A stormwater pipe repair program would then be generated to correct the compromised pipes. Project Justification The City of Gilroy is required under State Law to do this work for compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s General Plan. Flood control, drainage, and water quality mitigation measures are included in the City’s General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). 285 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900220) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $10,000 $10,000 Design $40,000 $40,000 CEQA $1,000 $1,000 Construction $200,000 $200,000 Con. Support $50,000 $50,000 Total $10,000 $291,000 $301,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund - Environmental Programs (100- 2404) $10,000 $10,000 Unfunded $291,000 $291,000 Total $10,000 $291,000 $301,000 Financial Comments Funding for the cost of the video inspection and storm water pipe mitigation program has yet to be determined. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Phase 1 Complete Phase 2 Complete Water Sampling FY25 Phase 3 Beyond FY28 Phase 4 Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 286 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Development of Stormwater Specifications Project No. 900250 Category Engineering: Standard Drawings & Specs Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project will develop a set of specifications for the City to be in compliance with the regions stormwater requirements. These specifications will bring the City in compliance with the current Municipal General Permit. The specifications will provide guidance for staff and the development community regarding design and construction of storm water capture and treatment devices in compliance with stormwater requirements. Project Justification The City is required to follow guidelines for stormwater design, construction, and management dictated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The City does not have a set of specifications that are up to date or in conformance with the current Board permit requirements. Having clear and concise specifications is a requirement by the State, and which the City has recently received Notice of Violations by the State in part related to the lack of stormwater specifications. Stormwater specifications will ensure compliance with State requirements, satisfy the existing Notice of Violations, and prevent penalties or future Notice of Violation from the Regional Board on this item. Master Planning Documents This project supports the 2022 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. 287 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900250) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $76,000 $76,000 Salaries/Wages $13,200 $13,200 Total $89,200 $89,200 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $89,200 $89,200 Total $89,200 $89,200 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 288 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Update to the City’s Trails Master Plan (Bike Master Plan) Project No. 900260 Category Engineering: Master Plans Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project would update the City’s Trails Master Plan using a consultant specializing in bike and pedestrian planning. The Master Plan would be updated to match the City’s current bicycle infrastructure, review gaps in the bike network, recommend system upgrades, evaluate the network for enhancements or modifications, and recommend alternate routes for those no longer safe or reasonable. The plan would evaluate bike best practices/systems and make recommendations for enhancements. The plan would also identify at least ten high priority projects that would be individually chartered and estimated for future grant or CIP funding consideration. Input would be obtained from the community through a series of community outreach meetings, and through the City’s website. Project Justification Typically, bike Master Plans should be updated every five to ten years. The 2005 Trails Master Plan is in need of update. This would keep the City up to date on current bike trends and other safety considerations. This update would meet a number of high priority goals identified by the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission (BPC). The City was also recently recognized as a Bronze Bicycle Friendly Community. Upgrading the Master Plan would be in line with that honor. The Trails Master Plan is 18 years old and should have been updated at least five to ten years ago. This project should be a priority in the next one to two years. Master Planning Documents This project would update the City’s current Trails Master Plan (Bike Master Plan). 289 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900260) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $332,000 $332,000 Salaries/Wages $51,700 $51,700 Total $383,700 $383,700 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $383,700 $383,700 Total $383,700 $383,700 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 290 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Development of a Pedestrian Master Plan Project No. 900270 Category Engineering: Master Plans Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project would develop a Pedestrian Master Plan using a consultant specializing in pedestrian and accessible planning. It would define pedestrian standards for the City including sidewalk widths; high-priority pedestrian zones or paths of travel; right-of-way zones including furniture, walkway, and sidewalk seating for the Downtown; and identify pedestrian needs throughout the community. It could also include Safe Routes to School improvements. The plan would evaluate best practices, make recommendations for enhancements, and identify at least ten high-priority projects which would be individually chartered and estimated for future grant or CIP funding consideration. Input would be obtained from residents through a series of public outreach meetings and through the City’s website. Project Justification The City currently has a Trails (and Bike) Master Plan but not a pedestrian-specific master plan. In cases where pedestrian and bicycle needs are combined into one document, the emphasis is usually towards bicycle improvements. The Trails Master Plan is almost silent to the needs of pedestrians and does not include sidewalk or pathway information. Creating this Master Plan would also meet a number of high-priority goals identified by the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission (BPC). Master Planning Documents This project would create a Pedestrian Master Plan, which the City does not currently have. The Pedestrian Master Plan could be developed in conjunction with the Bicycle Master Plan. 291 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900270) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $494,000 $494,000 Salaries/Wages $44,000 $44,000 Total $538,000 $538,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $538,000 $538,000 Total $538,000 $538,000 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 292 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Update to the City’s Standard Drawings/Specifications/ Design Standards Project No. 900280 Category Engineering: Standard Drawings & Specs Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project would update the City’s Standard Drawings, Engineering Specifications, and Engineering Design Standards to current industry standard practices. This would be done through the use of a consultant hired through an RFP process. Project Justification It’s important to keep up to date on current engineering standards and best practices. The current City Standard Details and specifications were recently updated in 2014. The City’s specifications are inadequate for a city the size of Gilroy, which needs a full set of Engineering Design Specifications and Design Standards that meet current industry standards and addresses emerging issues and requirements. In addition, the City’s current Standard Details, although recently updated, are still outdated. There is a need to reevaluate the way improvements are constructed in the City’s right-of- way, and to develop comprehensive standards and guidance documents to direct the construction of future improvements. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s General Plan and Water System, Sewer System, Storm Drainage System, Trails, and Parks Master Plans by providing for properly-designed public infrastructure. 293 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900280) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $105,700 $105,700 Salaries/Wages $9,000 $9,000 Total $114,700 $114,700 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $114,700 $114,700 Total $114,700 $114,700 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 294 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Development of an ADA Transition Plan Project No. 900290 Category Engineering: Plans & Programs Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project would develop an ADA Transition Plan for the City of Gilroy. An ADA Transition Plan details a program that will bring a city’s programs, procedures, practices, facilities, sidewalks and curb ramps into compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The plan would be developed with the help of a consultant that specializes in this area of expertise. Project Justification The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 provides comprehensive civil rights protections to qualified individuals with disabilities in the areas of employment, public accommodations, State and Local government services and telecommunications. Cities are required to have an ADA Transition Plan. The Transition Plan will be developed with input from community members and is intended to ensure access to City facilities, programs and services. Items identified in the ADA Transition Plan will be incorporated into all applicable Capital Improvement Projects. The plan will require ADA assessment of City facilities and buildings, as well as City infrastructure in the public right-of-way. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan by providing safe and well-maintained access for disabled persons. 295 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900290) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $222,000 $222,000 Salaries/Wages $18,000 $18,000 Total $240,000 $240,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $240,000 $240,000 Total $240,000 $240,000 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 296 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name ADA Assessment – City Facilities Citywide Project No. 900360 Category Facilities: Buildings Department Facilities Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The City owns facilities with restrooms, entry doors, walkways, etc. that do not comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This project involves hiring a consultant to thoroughly analyze City facilities for ADA compliance. The results of the analysis would be summarized in a report and would include recommendations for developing a scope of work for improvements which would be completed by a contractor. Project Justification This project would make City facilities more accessible for people with disabilities, and it would bring the City into compliance with ADA requirements. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan. https://www.ada.gov/2010AD Astandards_index.htm 297 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900360) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $127,000 $127,000 Salaries/Wages $6,600 $6,600 Total $133,600 $133,600 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $133,600 $133,600 Total $133,600 $133,600 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. The cost to bring the deficient buildings up to ADA compliance would be determined based on the deficiencies identified thorough the study. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 298 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Christmas Hill Ranch Site Master Planning Project No. 900650 Category Parks and Trails: Master Plans Department Public Works: Parks Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7049 and 7050 Miller Avenue Project Description and Purpose This project would update and complete the Master Plan for the Christmas Hill Park complex, which is outdated. The update would include the Ranch Site, the Hillside addition, and the Uvas Creek channel. Due to the complex interrelations with varying use and need areas, this project is needed as soon as possible to guide actions which will have lasting impacts on health, safety, environmental protection, and best public benefits. Proper time should be allowed to complete the plan adequately, suggesting a multi-year schedule to coordinate with planning experts, City departments, state agencies and the public. Project Justification There is an old Master Plan for Christmas Hill Park, but significant additions and improvements have been made without updating the plan. The important adjacent interrelation with the Uvas Creek channel and wildlife habitat should be explored and properly planned with regard to their unique needs and opportunities. Important decisions are required related to restrooms, demolition of out of date and dilapidated facilities, preservation of historic features, addition of barbecue areas, upgraded trail planning, and adequate lighting. As the focal point of the Gilroy Garlic Festival, and adjacent to a protected fishery, master planning this area is imperative to assure public needs are met while protecting the environment and preserving historic resources. Master Planning Documents There have been significant additions and improvements done at Christmas Hill Park that are not included in the master plan. Miller Ave Uvas Creek Christmas Hill Park Christmas Hill Park Ranch Site Uvas Park Dr 299 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900650) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $506,323 $506,323 Salaries/Wages $49,500 $49,500 Total $555,823 $555,823 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $555,823 $555,823 Total $555,823 $555,823 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project will not generate operational costs and will inform additional capital development in the future. 300 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Farrell Park Facility Master Planning Project No. 900660 Category Parks and Trails: Master Plans Department Public Works: Parks Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Wren Avenue and Vickery Lane Project Description and Purpose This project would complete the conceptual master planning and cost estimating for this under- utilized and underdeveloped neighborhood park at the corner of Wren Avenue and Vickery Lane. Project Justification The Farrell Park Site, dedicated and built by a developer a few years ago as an open space, is currently not developed as a full use neighborhood park. Open turf was the interim use plan during the recession. A Master Plan will provide a structure to move forward on constructing park improvements and provide shovel ready plans for grant competition and state park funding opportunities. The project will investigate the needs of the community and assess City park organization documents to best meet the needs of the City and surrounding neighborhoods. Master Planning Documents The project provides a safe and well-maintained park which is the focus of the Parks Master Plan. This neighborhood park site has been pending master plan guidance since acquisition in 2004. 301 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900660) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $266,000 $266,000 Salaries/Wages $40,700 $40,700 Total $306,700 $306,700 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $306,700 $306,700 Total $306,700 $306,700 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There will be no operational costs as a result of the plan. However, when capital development of the site is completed there will be the need for contract additions with a landscape maintenance contractor and additional work load for Parks staff. 302 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Uvas Creek Staging and Neighborhood Park Master Planning Project No. 900670 Category Parks and Trails: Master Plans Department Public Works: Parks Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location DeBell Uvas Creek Park Preserve/Christmas Hill Park Project Description and Purpose This project would complete the Park Master Plan and conceptual construction cost estimating for both a neighborhood serving park and public access for nearby DeBell Uvas Creek Park Preserve and related Class I bicycle pathways. The site is located at the northwest corner of Uvas Park drive and Miller Avenue. Project Justification A fully vetted park master planning process with significant community outreach is needed for this five-acre park parcel which has been held since 2001. This neighborhood park site directly joins the Uvas Creek channel and DeBell Uvas Creek Park Preserve. The City’s intent in acquiring this parcel was to provide both a needed neighborhood park to nearby residents and a complementary park preserve access point with destination park amenities (e.g., parking lot and restrooms). Completing a site master plan and the required CEQA process will greatly help if and when the City competes for grant funding opportunities. Proper and early planning of the future improvements of this park in advance of any potential public pressure to complete the improvements will help avoid haphazard park development. This park planning step will at a minimum ensure that the City Council strategic goals and public needs are clear and are followed into the design and development stage. Master Planning Documents This project is listed in the Parks Master Plan. 303 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY UNFUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900670) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $314,000 $314,000 Salaries/Wages $49,500 $49,500 Total $363,500 $363,500 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $363,500 $363,500 Total $363,500 $363,500 Financial Comments This project is currently unfunded. Future funding could come from impact fees, state park development grants, and matching funds from the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design Beyond FY28 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs related to the development of the Master Plan for this site. Once physical improvements are constructed on the site, there will be operational and maintenance costs. The extent of such costs will depend upon the results of the Master Plan. 304 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT 305 Appendix E – Miscellaneous Funded CIP Projects (Within 5-Year CIP) Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT 306 This page intentionally left blank Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Annual Signal/Street Light Maintenance Project No. 800340 Category Streets: Traffic Signals Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The purpose of this project is to maintain the City’s current inventory of traffic signals and street lights. Project Justification Currently, the City owns and maintains 33 traffic signals and 4,757 streetlights. In addition, the City also maintains 11 traffic signals owned by Caltrans. Both the traffic signal and streetlight systems require regular maintenance that includes, but is not limited to: •Monthly Routine Maintenance •Three-Month Routine Maintenance •Six-Month Routine Maintenance •Annual Routine Maintenance The Public Works Department does not have a functional unit dedicated to regular and emergency traffic signal and streetlight maintenance. The Department fulfills this need with the help of a specialized maintenance contractor. Master Planning Documents This project supports the goals of the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan. 307 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800340) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Traffic Signal Maintenance $116,520 $122,346 $128,463 $134,886 $141,631 $643,846 Street Light Maintenance $100,000 $105,000 $110,250 $115,763 $121,551 $552,564 USA Markings $100,000 $105,000 $110,250 $115,763 $121,551 $552,564 Additional Services $5,000 $5,250 $5,513 $5,788 $6,078 $27,629 Total $321,520 $337,596 $354,476 $372,200 $390,810 $1,776,602 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Gas Taxes (205) $321,520 $337,596 $354,476 $372,200 $390,810 $1,776,602 Total $321,520 $337,596 $354,476 $372,200 $390,810 $1,776,602 Financial Comments This project will be funded by Gas Tax (205) funds. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Streetlight, Signal Maintenance and USA Markings Annually Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There could be potential reductions in emergency maintenance costs because of proper signal upkeep as a result of this project. 308 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Cohansey Avenue/Terri Court Storm Drain Improvements Project No. 800430 Category Storm Drain: Storm Collection Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Cohansey Avenue and Terri Court Project Description and Purpose This project will address storm runoff issues at the intersection of Cohansey Avenue and Terri Court. The drainage problems arise from a combination of the following factors: 1.Lack of adequate City drainage system in the vicinity of the property 2.Major land release from surrounding properties along Terri Court and other land uses, primarily agricultural 3.Increased 100-year frequency storms and saturated ground Project Justification In the past few years, the property owner at 655 Cohansey Avenue has submitted several requests to the City Public Works, Operations Division to address flooding issues. This property sits at the edge of City and County boundary. In the past, City forces (and at times County maintenance crews) have performed minor ditch grading and debris cleanup effort which has addressed the problem to a certain extent. However, detailed analysis of the problem needs to be conducted and design plans developed to identify a more sustainable solution. Master Planning Documents This project is not included in the 2023 Storm Drainage System Master Plan. 309 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800430) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $24,000 $24,000 CEQA $1,210 $1,210 Construction Con. Support Total $25,210 $25,210 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Storm Drain Development Impact (410) $25,210 $25,210 Total $25,210 $25,210 Financial Comments This project is funded by the Storm Drain Development Impact Fund (410). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement Beyond FY28 Project Construction Beyond FY28 Project Completion Beyond FY28 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. 310 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name State Trash Amendments Stormwater Compliance Project Project No. 800460 Category Engineering: Stormwater Compliance Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose On April 7, 2015, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted the Statewide Trash Provisions which address the impacts trash has on the beneficial uses of surface waters. The Trash Provisions establish a statewide water quality objective for trash and a prohibition of trash discharge. The City is required to demonstrate full compliance with the Trash Provisions by 2030, with preliminary milestones of 35% by 2026 and 70% by 2028. The City will complete this project as required under the State-Issued Trash Amendments and upcoming reissued NPDES Permit (anticipated in 2024). The proposed project will ultimately include all expenses related to compliance with the Trash Amendments. The tasks necessary to achieve compliance will include resources to ground-truth the infrastructure shown in stormwater maps, design, installation, and long-term maintenance of full trash capture devices. The design and installation of the trash capture devices will be conducted by an outside contractor. Project Justification Full compliance with the Trash Provisions will require the City to install, operate, and maintain State- certified Full Capture System (FCS) devices that capture all trash down to five millimeters in size from Priority Land Use areas (PLUs) which include Commercial, Mixed Use, Industrial, High Density Residential, and Transit Oriented Areas. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s General Plan and Storm Drain Master Plan to the extent the proposed systems provide increased capacity. Flood control, drainage, and water quality mitigation measures are included in the City’s General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Uvas Creek Image Source: hhttps://swims clean.com/stor mtek/ Image Source: https://www.en viropod.com/en- us/products/litta trap 311 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800460) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design/Const. $49,789 $118,800 $118,800 $237,600 $470,737 $10,000 $2,344,063 $3,349,789 Total $49,789 $118,800 $118,800 $237,600 $470,737 $10,000 $2,344,063 $3,349,789 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Storm Drain Development Impact Fee (410) $39,789 $108,800 $108,800 $227,600 $460,737 $945,726 Environmental Programs (100- 2404) $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $70,000 Unfunded $2,334,063 $2,334,063 Total $49,789 $118,800 $118,800 $237,600 $470,737 $10,000 $2,344,063 $3,349,789 Financial Comments A Trash Amendments Cost Analysis was completed in FY23. The City will have until the year 2030 to reach full compliance with the Trash Amendments. To reach the 70% compliance milestone by 2028, $1,683,000 in funding will be required. An additional $1,617,000 will be needed to reach the 100% milestone by 2030. However, only $955,937 in funding has been identified for FY24 through FY28. As a result, $727,063 of project costs are unfunded for FY27 and FY28. In addition, $1,617,000 in project costs are unfunded beyond FY28. These costs do not include the operation and maintenance costs for long-term maintenance of the installed devices. There is potential for alternative compliance options to help meet these requirements. These alternative options allow for flexibility in the compliance milestones where funding may be distributed differently amongst the years, depending on how the City decides to comply. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 – FY28 Project Advertisement FY24 – FY28 Project Construction FY25 – FY30 Project Completion FY30 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Based on the Trash Amendment Cost Analysis, the anticipated operational and maintenance costs associated with this project are approximately $49,725,000 for in-house staff. Beyond five years, the ongoing costs may be approximately $47,775,000. This includes the rental of a vac truck at $500/hour. Not included is an estimated cost to purchase a street sweeper to help keep the trash capture devices clean. A street sweeper is between $50,000 to $100,000, depending on the truck selected. A street sweeper will help decrease maintenance needed on the trash capture devices by removing leaves and sediment debris on-land before entering the trash capture devices. 312 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Stormwater NPDES Compliance Project No. 800470 Category Engineering: Stormwater Compliance Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Studies & Reports Project Manager City Engineer Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project involves preparing the plans and studies required for compliance under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program. The work will include receiving water monitoring, outfall water monitoring, dry weather illicit discharge water monitoring, and microbial source tracking. In addition, the project will include construction inspection support, GIS mapping, and public outreach materials. It will also include completion of Water Quality Monitoring Reports, Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Status Updates, and Geodatabase updates for Annual State Reporting. These efforts are based on the current NPDES Permit. A new permit is anticipated to become effective in 2024. It is currently anticipated that the new permit will build on existing provisions and programs, as well as include new significant provisions. The new permit will require new resources to implement that are not included here. Project Justification The project is proposed for City compliance with the requirements of the City’s Phase II National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit. This project will be ongoing into perpetuity. Costs will change over time as new requirements are introduced by the State/Regional Water Board. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document, but provides for flood control, drainage, and water quality mitigation measures that are included in the City’s General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Source: EPA NPDES Permit Writer’s Manual 313 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800470) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Water Monitoring Requirements $299,700 $47,826 $72,538 $48,617 $75,505 $49,455 $78,649 $672,290 Post Construction Requirements $124,600 $8,747 $9,010 $27,500 $27,500 $27,500 $27,500 $252,357 State Trash Compliance GIS, Discharge, Outreach, Inspect $202,700 $28,522 $29,130 $29,756 $30,402 $31,066 $31,750 $383,326 Salaries/Wages $7,000 $1,333 $1,333 $1,333 $1,333 $1,333 $1,333 $14,998 Total $634,000 $86,428 $112,011 $107,206 $134,740 $109,354 $139,232 $1,322,971 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund - Environmental Programs (100- 2404) $60,000 $60,000 Storm Drain Impact (410) $514,000 $86,428 $112,011 $107,206 $134,740 $109,354 $139,232 $1,202,971 General Fund – Engineering (100- 2601) $60,000 $60,000 Total $634,000 $86,428 $112,011 $107,206 $134,740 $109,354 $139,232 $1,322,971 Financial Comments The project cost estimate is for Contract Services through 2028. The costs shown are for contract services only (Plans and Studies) and do not include costs for other resources required to run the Stormwater Program. State Trash Compliance is shown in the table with no cost estimate because the City is submitting a separate Charter specific for Trash Compliance. The costs shown also do not reflect charge rate increases anticipated to occur over time or costs for new permit requirements. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design N/A Project Advertisement N/A Project Construction N/A Project Completion N/A Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no operational costs associated with this project. 314 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Electrical Panel Evaluation Corporation Yard for OSHA Requirements Project No. 900460 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Facilities Project Type Studies and Reports Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Corporation Yard Project Description and Purpose This project would involve hiring a consultant to assign an arc rating to all electrical panels at the Corporation Yard and provide recommendations for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). Project Justification The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requires electrical panels to be given an arc flash rating that dictates the level of PPE needed to work safely on the panels. This project is needed to as a first step towards meeting CalOSHA requirements for electrical panel safety and will inform the City of the level of PPE needed to safeguard employees. This is a safety issue. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document. Photo Credit: "Electrical-Panel_Automatic-Fuses_DIN-Rail__4061IMG_1843" by Public Domain Photos is licensed under CC BY 2.0 315 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900460) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $2,200 $2,200 Construction $39,000 $39,000 Con. Support $3,300 $3,300 Total $44,500 $44,500 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $44,500 $44,500 Total $44,500 $44,500 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Study FY23 Project Advertisement N/A Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact One-time purchase cost of PPE and equipment. There will be a nominal operational cost thereafter. 316 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Senior Center ADA Restroom Access Project No. 900520 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Facilities Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7371 Hanna Street Project Description and Purpose This project would install self-opening restroom doors to the men’s and women’s restrooms in the Gilroy Senior Center building. The current restroom doors have door handles that must be tightly grasped and pulled open. A large number of Senior Center participants have challenges with mobility and have expressed their difficulties with opening the restroom doors while simultaneously navigating their use of a walker, cane, scooter, or wheelchair. The project would include installation of square handicap push plates, consistent with the main entrance doors to the Senior Center. Project Justification Although the interiors of the restrooms are ADA accessible, as well as the Senior Center entry, the restroom entries are not. To provide physical access to the Senior Center restrooms, there needs to be the installation of self-opening restroom entry doors. Title III of the ADA requires public places, like hotels, retailers, doctor's offices, and restaurants, to have handicap accessible facilities. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in a master plan document. 317 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900520) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $16,000 $16,000 Construction $55,100 $55,100 Total $71,100 $71,100 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $71,100 $71,100 Total $71,100 $71,100 Financial Comments This project would be funded by the General Fund (100). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY27 Project Advertisement FY27 Project Construction FY27 Project Completion FY27 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no maintenance costs associated with this project. 318 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Citywide Energy Saving Measures Project No. FC2404 Category Facilities: Specialized Facilities Department Facilities Project Type New Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose To save energy and incorporate Green Energy Practices, the City is moving forward with Energy Conservation Measures (ECM) such as HVAC control upgrades, HVAC refurbishments and equipment replacement, duct sealing, heat hump installations, lighting upgrades, and transformer replacements. These ECM projects and will save the City millions of dollars over the life of the projects, while reducing the City’s energy consumption. This project will be implemented and financed through PG&E’s On-Bill Financing (OBF) program. The selected locations for the ECM projects include the Police Department, Chestnut Fire Station, Las Animas Fire Station, Sunrise Fire Station, Senior Center, Wheeler Auditorium, Corporation Yard, Gilroy Museum, City Hall, City Hall Annex, and other locations throughout the City. Project Justification This project will reduce energy consumption across City owned infrastructure, reduce the City’s ongoing utility and operational costs, reduce overall City greenhouse gas emissions, upgrade aging infrastructure by improving efficiencies of existing equipment and systems, and create safer and more comfortable conditions for City staff and the general public. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document. 319 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY FUNDED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (FC2404) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design Construction $3,685,718 $3,685,718 Con. Support Total $3,685,718 $3,685,718 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Equipment Outlay (625) $3,685,718 $3,685,718 Total $3,685,718 $3,685,718 Financial Comments The City would pay the contractor an upfront cost of $3,685,718. This project would initially be funded from the Equipment Outlay Fund (625) and reimbursed the following year through the On-Bill Financing Program with PG&E. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY24 Project Advertisement FY24 Project Construction FY24 Project Completion FY24 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The ongoing operational cost impacts of this project would be nominal. 320 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT 321 Appendix F – Completed CIP Projects Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT 322 This page intentionally left blank Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Eigleberry and Seventh Parking Lot Project No. 800090 Category Facilities: Parking Lots Department Public Works: Facilities Project Type New Project Manager Sr. CIP Engineer Council Priorities Revitalize Downtown Location NE Corner of Eigleberry Street and Seventh Street Project Description and Purpose This project would construct a surface parking lot at the northeast corner of Eigleberry Street and Seventh Street. The scope of work would include removal of the existing community garden area, which is proposed to be relocated to Christmas Hill Park, and construction of grading, drainage, paving, sidewalk, landscaping, and decorative post-top lighting improvements. Project Justification The City owns several surface parking lots in the Downtown. However, the parking supply in the existing lots is not sufficient to address the parking demand created by the residential and commercial land uses in the Downtown. The Downtown Gilroy Business Association (GDBA) completed an informal Downtown Parking Assessment in 2019. One of the assessment’s findings was that there is a shortage of parking in the Downtown to support the existing and growing businesses in the area. This site was identified as a potential site for an additional Downtown surface parking lot and would enhance the economic development potential in the Downtown which is a City Council Priority. Master Planning Documents This project is supportive of the City’s General Plan, which places a high priority on the Downtown and sets forth a variety of policies to support that position. The General Plan aims to provide comprehensive direction for the area’s physical design and development, addressing issues such as land use, circulation, parking, economic development, urban design, historic preservation, and public facilities. The Downtown Specific Plan, completed in 2005, also calls for increased parking in the Downtown as well as a comprehensive Parking Management Plan. Monterey St Project Site Eigleberry St COMPLETED323 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800090) Project Costs Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $205,138 $205,138 CEQA $36,258 $36,258 Construction $1,098,604 $1,098,604 Con. Support $85,000 $85,000 Permitting Fees $75,000 $75,000 Total $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Capital Projects Fund (400) $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Total $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Financial Comments In fall 2019, the City Council allocated $1.5M towards the construction of this project. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY21 Project Advertisement FY21 Project Construction FY21 Project Completion FY21 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The operational costs associated with this project would be nominal. Maintenance costs include pavement, striping, and stormwater facility maintenance. It is estimated that pavement crack sealing would cost approximately $10,000 every four years and stormwater facility maintenance could cost approximately $30,000 per year for three years. COMPLETED324 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name City Hall Backup Generator* Project No. 800140 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Public Works: Facilities Project Type Modification Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Enhance Public Safety Capabilities Location 7351 Rosanna Street Project Description and Purpose This project would provide a means for backup power for City Hall in the event of a power outage. The Police Station has an oversized backup generator. This project would provide a connection from the Police Department’s existing generator to the City Hall panel so that both buildings would be functional during a power outage. The design for this project is currently underway. Project Justification This project would enable City Hall to remain functional during power outages. This is especially important due to the growing threat of extreme weather and wildfires. In September 2019, PG&E published their Public Safety Power Shutoff Policies and Procedures for turning off power when gusty winds and dry conditions, combined with increased fire risks, threaten a portion of the electric system. PG&E estimates that these Public Safety Power Shutoffs could occur several times per year. This project will enable City staff to continue to provide customer service and perform other job functions instead of closing City Hall and sending employees home when the power goes out. An extended power outage at City Hall could also impact operations at the Emergency Operations Center (EOC). The City’s servers are located in City Hall and these servers have a limited amount of backup power. Loss of the servers would significantly impact operations in the EOC. As a result, this project would also enhance safety for the community. Master Planning Documents This project is not specifically listed in any master plan document. *This project is included in project 900570 - Civic Center Master Project Photo Credit: "Generators" by Tim Dorr is licensed under CC COMPLETED325 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800140) Project Costs Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $90,000 $90,000 CEQA $5,000 $5,000 Construction $385,000 $385,000 Con. Support $29,700 $29,700 Total $95,000 $414,700 $509,700 Funding Source Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Facilities Service Fund (651) $95,000 $414,700 $509,700 Total $95,000 $414,700 $509,700 Financial Comments This project design is underway and expected to be completed under an existing contract. Construction for this project will be funded through the Facilities Service Fund (651). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY21 Project Advertisement FY21 Project Construction FY21 Project Completion FY21 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no anticipated operational costs associated with this project. There may be minor maintenance costs associated with the new panel connection at City Hall. COMPLETED326 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Corp Yard Fuel Tank Repair Project No. 800150 Category Facilities: Specialized Facilities Department Public Works: Facilities Project Type Replacement Project Manager Sr. CIP Engineer Council Priorities Enhance Public Safety Capabilities Location 613 Old Gilroy Street Project Description and Purpose The City of Gilroy’s fuel station, located at the Corporation Yard, underwent Secondary Containment Testing per SB 989 in August of 2017. The results of this test indicated that these secondary containment systems did not pass. The purpose of this project is to replace the components of this system that have failed. This project would install and replace two underground dispenser pans, fiberglass piping, spill buckets, and a new manway. Project Justification These tests are done to ensure that if the primary fuel containment unit fails, the secondary containment can assist with reducing leakage until the primary unit is fixed. This test is conducted after installation of new systems, six months after installation of new systems, and at least once every thirty-six months. The fuel station located at the Corporation Yard was last tested in August of 2017 and failed. These repairs are necessary to meet State Water Board and Environmental regulations. Per State regulations, this fuel station will be due for another test by the end August 2020. These repairs are vital to meet regulations and to ensure that if there is a failure in the primary containment unit that the City will have all measures in place to reduce the chance of leaks and contamination. Master Planning Documents This project is not specifically listed in any master plan document. US 101 Old Gilroy St Corp Yard Fuel Tank COMPLETED327 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800150) Project Costs Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design $1,100 $1,100 Design $46,925 $46,925 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $165,000 $165,000 Con. Support $26,400 $26,400 Total $240,525 $240,525 Funding Source Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Fleet Fund (600) $240,525 $240,525 Total $240,525 $240,525 Financial Comments The design and construction of this project will be funded using the Fleet Fund (600). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY21 Project Advertisement FY21 Project Construction FY21 Project Completion FY21 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Operational expenses will continue to be $1,500 every thirty-six months for required SB989 testing. COMPLETED328 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Citywide Regulatory Sign Replacement Project No. 800170 Category Streets: Signage Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Replacement Project Manager City Transportation Engineer Council Priorities Enhance Public Safety Capabilities Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose This project would upgrade the City’s inventory of regulatory traffic signs. In 2018, Council approved a contract to evaluate the compliance of approximately 6,700 regulatory traffic signs throughout the City. Approximately 2,700 signs (40% of the entire inventory) were found to be deficient and in need of replacement. Project Justification Regulatory signs inform road users of selected traffic laws or regulations. Retroreflectivity is one of several factors associated with maintaining adequate nighttime sign visibility. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), issued by the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), specifies standards for the design, installation, and use of traffic signs, road surface markings, and traffic signals. This ensures that traffic control devices conform to the national standard, which promotes highway safety and efficiency by providing for the orderly movement of traffic for all road users. The State of California has also developed its own MUTCD which substantially conforms to the federal MUTCD. Per Section 2A.08 of the California MUTCD, local agencies are required to establish and implement a sign assessment and management method to maintain a minimum level of sign retroreflectivity. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan by providing a safe and well- maintained travel way. Image Source: CA MUTCD, Caltrans COMPLETED329 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800170) Project Costs Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $69,807 $12,100 $81,700 CEQA $1,100 $1,100 Construction $300,000 $550,000 Con. Support $5,500 $11,500 Total $69,807 $318,700 $644,507 Funding Source Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Vehicle Registration Fee Fund (225) $69,807 $243,700 $569,507 Gas Tax 2106 Fund (210) $55,000 $55,000 Gas Tax 2103 Fund (213) $20,000 $20,000 Total $69,807 $318,700 $644,507 Financial Comments This project is proposed to be funded by the Vehicle Registration Fee Fund (225), Gas Tax 2106 Fund (210), and Gas Tax 2103 Fund (213). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Phase I Sign Inventory and Condition Rating – Completed in 2018 Phase II High Priority Sign Replacement – FY21 Phase III All Other Non-Compliant Signs – Beyond 5 Years Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no net new operational costs associated with this project. $256,000 $256,000 $250,000 $6,000 $256,000 COMPLETED330 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Citywide Sidewalk Condition Assessment Project No. 800200 Category Streets: Curbs & Sidewalks Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Enhance Public Safety Capabilities Location Citywide Project Description and Purpose The purpose of this project is to develop a Sidewalk Network Management Program that would include sidewalk and curb ramp data collection, condition rating, and maintenance optimization. Since 1995, the City has conducted a Sidewalk Assessment Program based on data collected by volunteers that did not necessarily have the proper training and expertise in ADA-compliance review and quantitative data analysis. This project would supplement the previously collected data and provide recommended maintenance strategies to allow the City Council to evaluate recommendations and determine the appropriate level of future investment needed to achieve the desired outcome. Once completed, this program will function similar to that of the Pavement Management Program. Project Justification According to the California Streets and Highways Code, property owners are responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the sidewalks fronting their property. In order to create a more walkable community, the Council has allocated funds in the past to improve the sidewalk network and assist property owners with ensuring the sidewalks in front of their properties are safe. The previous investments in sidewalk improvements have been inconsistent. This important City infrastructure requires a more comprehensive program to enable the evaluation and implementation of sidewalk improvements throughout the City. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document. COMPLETED331 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of Contents CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800200) Project Costs Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Consulting $125,000 $125,000 Salaries/Wages $20,000 $20,000 Total $145,000 $145,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Gas Tax Fund 2105 (209) $145,000 $145,000 Total $145,000 $145,000 Financial Comments The data collection cost and system initialization is estimated at $145,000 which is funded in the FY21 Gas Tax Fund 2105 (209). Under the current sidewalk replacement program, it is recommended that this project be conducted every 10 years to determine City sidewalk conditions and level of liability risks associated with defective sidewalks. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY21 Project Advertisement FY21 Sidewalk Assessment FY21 Project Completion FY21 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are no net, new operational costs associated with this project. COMPLETED332 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of Contents CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Orchard/Tenth Crosswalk Enhancements Project No. 800210 Category Streets: Traffic Signals Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type New Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Enhance Public Safety Capabilities Location Tenth Street and Orchard Drive Project Description and Purpose This project would install a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) system at the intersection of Orchard Drive and Tenth Street. The RRFBs will be installed at the northeast and southeast corners of the intersection to increase the safety of students crossing the street to attend Gilroy High School. As part of this project, the existing curb and gutter will be extended to create “bulb-outs”, which are curb extensions used to narrow the roadway, shorten the pedestrian crossing distance, and provide additional pedestrian refuge areas at intersections. Project Justification This project is needed to increase the safety of pedestrians crossing Tenth Street to reach the high school. The current pedestrian crossing distance is approximately 80 feet in length. Traffic on Orchard Drive is controlled by a stop sign and traffic on Tenth Street is uncontrolled. Although drivers are required by law to yield to pedestrians crossing the street, citizens have expressed concerns of drivers not yielding to pedestrians at this location. The RRFB system will increase safety by alerting drivers that pedestrians are crossing the street. The addition of bulb-outs will reduce the pedestrian crossing distance to approximately 50 feet and will provide a raised concrete pad for installing the RRFBs, making them more visible to drivers and less likely to be damaged by vehicles. Master Planning Documents This project supports the City’s General Plan goals and policies. These goals and policies include correcting deficiencies and ensuring pedestrian facilities serve the function they are intended to serve. RRFB System at Wren Avenue and Byers Street Uncontrolled Crossing at Orchard Drive and Tenth Street COMPLETED333 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800210) Project Costs Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $9,300 $9,300 Construction $62,700 $62,700 Con. Support $8,000 $8,000 Total $80,000 $80,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Gas Tax Fund 2107 (211) $80,000 $80,000 Total $80,000 $80,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded with Gas Tax Fund 2107 (211). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY21 Project Advertisement FY21 Project Construction FY21 Project Completion FY21 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There are minimal ongoing operational costs associated with this project improvements. Maintenance would be managed through the City’s Street Light and Signal Maintenance Contract. COMPLETED334 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program Project No. 800260 Category Streets: Bridges Department Public Works: Engineering Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager CIP Engineer Council Priorities Enhance Public Safety Capabilities Location Six Bridges at Various Locations within the City Project Description and Purpose In April 2006 Caltrans announced the creation of the Local Assistance Bridge Preventative Maintenance Program (BPMP). The BPMP program is funded through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Bridge Program (HBP), which, for the City of Gilroy, is administered through Caltrans District 4 Local Assistance. This project includes cleaning and treating bridge decks with High Molecular Weight Methacrylate (HMWM) at six bridges throughout the City. The project will also include replacing traffic stripes and pavement markings, and other incidental and appurtenant work necessary for the proper construction of the improvements. Project Justification The purpose of the project is to extend the life of bridges by performing certain qualifying items of work, classified as “preventative maintenance”, to keep these bridges in structurally good condition while conserving limited funds for other bridges which may require major rehabilitation or replacement. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan document but provides for safe and well-maintained travel way as identified in the City’s Traffic Circulation Master Plan. COMPLETED335 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800260) Project Costs Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $42,072 $42,072 Construction $200,000 $200,000 Con. Support $142,909 $142,909 Total $42,072 $342,909 $384,981 Funding Source Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Transportation Grants Fund (224) $304,385 $304,385 Gas Tax 2103 Fund (213) $42,072 $38,524 $80,596 Total $42,072 $342,909 $384,981 Financial Comments A large portion of the Construction and Construction Engineering/Management Services for this project will be funded through the FHWA’s Highway Bridge Program (88.53%), which will be reimbursed to the City upon completion of the project. The City’s match (11.47%) to the project is funded out of Gas Tax Fund 213. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY19 Project Advertisement FY20 Project Construction FY21 Project Completion FY21 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact This project directly addresses maintenance needs. There are no new operational costs associated with this project. COMPLETED336 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Replace Station Alerting System – All Fire Stations Project No. 800300 Category Facilities: Building Systems Department Fire Project Type Replacement Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Enhance Public Safety Capabilities Location Chestnut, Las Animas, and Sunrise Fire Stations Project Description and Purpose This project would replace the emergency altering system at the City’s three fire stations: •Chestnut Fire Station – Chestnut Street/Ninth Street •Las Animas Fire Station – Wren Avenue/Welburn Avenue •Sunrise Fire Station – Sunrise Drive East of Comanche Street Project Justification The City’s current emergency alerting system is technologically out of date and experiences consistent failures. Between August 2018 and February 2019, the Las Animas Fire Station alone experienced over 60 station emergency alert system failures. These failures cause significant delays in responding to emergencies. Replacing the system with a state of the art system meets the City Council strategic goals of Enhancing Public Safety Capabilities. A new system will allow the City’s emergency response personnel to provide improved response capabilities. The Fire Department contracts with Santa Clara County Communications (SCCC) to repair and maintain the City’s emergency alerting system. SCCC was able to create a temporary patch to the system to fix the problem, but this patch cannot be maintained long term. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in any master plan documents. COMPLETED337 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Fire) (800300) Project Costs Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $6,600 $6,600 Construction $291,200 $291,200 Con. Support $2,200 $2,200 Total $300,000 $300,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Equipment Outlay Fund (605) $300,000 $300,000 Total $300,000 $300,000 Financial Comments This project is fully funded by the Equipment Outlay Fund (605). Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY21 Project Advertisement FY21 Project Construction FY21 Project Completion FY21 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact There is a one-time $40k cost for CAD software interface between Dispatch and the station alerting system. Starting in year two, there is an ongoing annual maintenance cost of $3,600 for this CAD interface. COMPLETED338 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name San Ysidro Lighting / Picnic Area Improvements Project Project No. 800740 Category Parks and Trails: Other Structures or Facilities Department Public Works: Parks Project Type Replacement Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 7700 Murray Ave Project Description and Purpose The State of California Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Grants and Local Services (OGALS) allocates funds to cities and counties based on population under Proposition 68. The City submitted a grant application to OGALS to provide new recreational opportunities at San Ysidro Park, including new lighting, barbecue grills, trash enclosures, a picnic bench, and a shaded structure. Project Justification Although all City parks were considered, San Ysidro Park was selected for the application based on eligibility requirements and other selection criteria including: •Proximity to critically underserved communities •Communities with low median household incomes •High number of people below the poverty level •Receiving community input in critically underserved communities •Broad representation of residents (all ages) participating in community outreach efforts •Solutions for safe public use and park beautification such as landscaping and public art •Benefit the health and quality of life for youth, seniors, and families •Mentoring of at-risk youth, senior socialization, and family bonding Master Planning Documents This project provides for a well-maintained park which is the focus of the Parks and Recreation Systems Master Plan. COMPLETED339 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800740) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design Design $34,058 $34,058 Construction $136,231 $136,231 Con. Support Total $170,289 $170,289 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $170,289 $170,289 Total $170,289 $170,289 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the General Fund (100). The General Fund will be reimbursed $127,717 by State Proposition 68 grant funds. The remaining $42,572 will be absorbed by the General Fund’s Landscape Operating Budget. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY23 Project Advertisement FY23 Project Construction FY23 Project Completion FY23 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The park is currently maintained by the Parks Division with maintenance costs included in the budget. COMPLETED340 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name Gilroy Sports Park Playground Surface Repair Project No. 800750 Category Parks and Trails: Play Equipment Department Public Works: Parks Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager Deputy Director Public Works Council Priorities Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure Location 5925 Monterey Frontage Rd Project Description and Purpose The State of California Department of Parks and Recreation, Office of Grants and Local Services (OGALS) allocates funds to cities and counties based on population under Proposition 68. The City submitted a grant application to OGALS to provide needed repairs at the Gilroy Sports Park. The project will repair approximately 6,400 square feet of badly damaged recycled rubber playground surface at the Gilroy Sports Park. Project Justification Although all City parks were considered, the Gilroy Sports Park was selected for the application based on eligibility requirements and other selection criteria including: •Proximity to critically underserved communities •Communities with low median household incomes •High number of people below the poverty level •Receiving community input in critically underserved communities •Broad representation of residents (all ages) participating in community outreach efforts •Solutions for safe public use and park beautification such as landscaping and public art •Benefit the health and quality of life for youth, seniors, and families •Mentoring of at-risk youth, senior socialization, and family bonding Master Planning Documents This project provides for a well-maintained park which is the focus of the Parks and Recreation Systems Master Plan. COMPLETED341 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2024-2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (800750) Project Costs Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Pre-Design Design $21,000 $21,000 Construction $84,000 $84,000 Con. Support Total $105,000 $105,000 Funding Source Total Prior FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28 Beyond 5 Years Project Total General Fund (100) $105,000 $105,000 Total $105,000 $105,000 Financial Comments This project will be funded by the General Fund (100). The General Fund will be reimbursed with $78,750 in State Proposition 68 grant funding. The remaining $26,250 will be will be absorbed by the General Fund’s Landscape Operating Budget. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Design FY23 Project Advertisement FY23 Project Construction FY23 Project Completion FY23 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact The park is currently maintained by the Parks Division with maintenance costs included in the budget. COMPLETED342 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of ContentsDRAFT CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Name CHS Aquatics Pool Re-Plastering Project No. 900380 Category Facilities: Specialized Facilities Department Public Works: Facilities Project Type Rehabilitation Project Manager Facilities Manager Council Priorities Ensure Neighborhoods Benefit Equally from City Services Location 850 Day Road Project Description and Purpose There are two pools at Christopher High School, an Olympic pool and a shallow wading pool. The plaster on the bottom of the shallow pool is peeling, cracking and bubbling. The plaster has been repaired approximately eight times over the last three years. The temporary fixes are not enduring so the entire pool requires re-plastering. Project Justification The County Health Department Health Inspector has documented that the bottom of the pool is rough, with areas of cracking and buckling. The City’s Facilities staff has done some temporary repairs to address these areas; however the repairs are not enduring. At some point the pool may be shut down by the inspector. This pool is used by both the high school and the public, and is considered a significant community benefit. Losing access to this pool would be a significant impact to a number of stakeholders. Master Planning Documents This project is not listed in a master plan. COMPLETED343 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of Contents CITY OF GILROY COMPLETED 2021-2025 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Project Funding (Public Works) (900380) Project Costs Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Design $24,200 $24,200 Construction $220,000 $220,000 Total $244,200 $244,200 Funding Source Total Prior FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Beyond 5 Years Project Total Unfunded $244,200 $244,200 Total $244,200 $244,200 Financial Comments There is no funding for this project. Estimated Project Schedule Project Phase Timeline Project Study Beyond FY25 Project Advertisement Beyond FY25 Project Construction Beyond FY25 Project Completion Beyond FY25 Ongoing Operational Cost Impact Annual re-plastering is expected every 10 to 15 years. COMPLETED344 Back to CIP Project Charters Table of Contents General Plan Consistency800010 Rancho Hills Development Concrete RepairsPolicy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.800020 Tenth Street and Uvas Creek Bridge800770 Tenth Street/Hwy 101 Bridge Widening900070 Luchessa Bridge Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Improvements900090 Mantelli/Church Bulb-Out and Crosswalk Improvements900230 Wren Avenue Bridge Over Lions Creek BPMP800030 Corp Yard Stormwater Compliance ImprovementsPolicy 15.01Public Facilities and Development. Develop a system of public facilities that will:b) Minimize adverse impacts on the environment, and adverse fiscal, economic and social impacts on the community.800040 Automall Parkway Pavement RehabilitationPolicy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 14.03Bicycle and Pedestrian Paths and Facilities. Correct deficiencies, expand existing facilities, and provide for the design of safer, convenient and attractive bicycle and pedestrian facilities whenever possible. Proposed roadways will be planned to accommodate bicycle traffic in accordance with the bikeway designations set forth in the City’s Bicycle Transportation Plan. Similarly, greenbelts, linear parks, public easements and drainages reserved in public open space will be planned to accommodate bike and pedestrian traffic if they are so designated in the Bicycle Transportation Plan.Action 14.FRoad Surfacing. Strive to maintain and improve the quality of the surface of the right-hand portion of existing roads as well as the travel lanes so that they are suitable for bicycle travel, regardless of whether or not bikeways are designated.800060 Annual Citywide Pavement RehabilitationPolicy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.800080 Annual Safe Routes to SchoolsPolicy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.800110 Downtown Parking Management PlanAction 12.GDowntown Parking District. Use the Downtown Specific Plan process to address parking coordination and design issues in the Downtown, and update the City’s Downtown Parking Ordinance as necessary to ensure adequate parking facilities while maintaining the area’s pedestrian orientation.800120 Las Animas Park Tennis Court - Fence ReplacementPolicy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 16.09Physical Access. Ensure that all facilities and parks comply with State and Federal accessibility codes and standards, such as those established by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and California Building Standards Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations).FY24 to FY28 Capital Improvement Program General Plan ConsistencyPolicy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 14.04Crossings. Design street crossings to provide for the safety needs of bicyclists and pedestrians. River and other crossings by bridges will be designed to accommodate bike lanes or paths in accordance with the designationsset forth in the Bicycle Transportation Plan. Bridges for the exclusive use of pedestrians and bicycles should be considered whenever barriers exist which impede convenient and safe access.Project Number and TitlePage 1 of 8 General Plan ConsistencyFY24 to FY28 Capital Improvement Program General Plan ConsistencyProject Number and Title800050 McCarthy Site Well (Well #9)800070 Annual Citywide Curb Ramp Project800250 Casey and Swanston Water Line Replacement800590 Broadway and Sargent Water Line Replacement800600 Church and Gurries Water Line Replacement800610 Church Street - Welburn to First Water Line Replacement800620 Forest and Eighth Water Line Replacement800630 Steel Water Service Lines Replacement Citywide800640 Monterey and Eighth Water Line Replacement800650 Abandon 2" Water Line from 7041 to 7161 Monterey Street800660 Murray at Burke Water Line Reroute800670 Saint Louise Hospital Large Water Meter Replacement800690 Water Reservoirs A and B - Painting800700 Water Reservoirs A and B - Retrofit Overflow Piping800710 Water Well Nos. 1, 2 and 4 Compliance Improvements800720 Water Well Nos. 1 and 2 Upgrade Improvements900730 Martin and Railroad Water Line Replacement900740 Monterey - Leavesley to Ronan Water Line Replacement800160 Golf Course Water Tank Replacement800780 San Ysidro Park Healthy Living Enhancement900450 7380 Dowdy Building Demolition900460 Electrical Panel Evaluation Citywide for OSHA Requirements900480 Gilroy Center for the Arts HVAC Replacement900490 Old City Hall HVAC Replacement900500 Parks/Civic Facilities Sidewalk Improvements Citywide900510 City-Owned Parking Lots Resurfacing900520 Senior Center ADA Restroom Access900530 Senior Center Roof Replacement900610 Christmas Hill Park Trail Wayfinding Signage900620 Miller Park Restrooms Electrical Undergrounding900630 Forest Street Park Expansion900640 Las Animas Veterans Park Miscellaneous Facility Rehabilitation900680 Gilroy Sports Park Improvements Phases IV and V900690 Rehabilitate Softball Fields at Las Animas and Christmas Hill ParksFC2401 Cherry Blossom Apartments ReroofingFC2403 Civic Center Master Plan800180 Traffic CalmingPolicy 12.02System Function and Neighborhood Protection. Ensure that the existing and proposed highways, streets, bikeways and pedestrian paths serve the functions they are intended to serve, while protecting the character of residential neighborhoods.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage. Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 15.06Service Delivery. Provide adequate staffing and program support to maintain high quality service to residents at all community facilities.Page 2 of 8 General Plan ConsistencyFY24 to FY28 Capital Improvement Program General Plan ConsistencyProject Number and Title800230 Shooting Range AssessmentPolicy 18.01Standards of Service. Continue to provide and maintain police and fire servicesthat are adequate in manpower, equipment, and resources to respond to localizedemergencies and calls for service within the City. The departments’ current levels ofservice should be maintained or improved as the City continues to grow, with average emergency response times for police services of approximately 4.5 minutes and average emergency response times for fire services of less than 5.0 minutes.Policy 15.06Service Delivery. Provide adequate staffing and program support to maintainhigh quality service to residents at all community facilities.800240 Traffic Circulation Master Plan UpdatePolicy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.800270 Lions Creek Trail West of Santa Teresa and Day800280 Lions Creek Trail West Gap Closure - Kern to Day800320 Annual Shared-Cost Sidewalk Replacement Program800330 Annual Pavement Markings800450 Annual CDBG Sidewalk/Curb Ramp Project900100 Miller/Uvas Creek Trail Pedestrian Improvements900400 Chestnut Fire Station Bay Heaters and HVAC Replacement900590 Chestnut Fire Station Seismic Upgrade800290 Santa Teresa Fire District Station - New Station900600 Las Animas Fire Station Upgrade and RenovationFR2401 Santa Teresa Fire District Temporary Fire Station800310 Automated Flexnet Water Meter InstallationGoal 19 InfrastructureGOAL: Infrastructure systems that meet residents’ needs; conserve resources; protect the environment; and protect public health and safety.800340 Annual Signal/Street Light MaintenanceAction 12.JSignal Timing. In accordance with the recommendations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District in the 2000 Clean Air Plan, continue and expand local signal timing programs.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.Policy 12.08Standard Level of Service (LOS). Maintain traffic conditions at LOSC or better at Gilroy intersections and roadways, allowing some areas (as specified on the ‘Level of Service D Areas’ Map, page 6-11) subject to the timing and other limitations imposed by the Gilroy Urban Growth Boundary Initiative) to operate at LOSD or better. Exceptions to this standard will be allowed only where the City Council determines that the improvements needed to maintain the City’s standard level of service at specific locations are infeasible.Policy 16.05Trails Master Plan. Develop a Trails Master Plan to guide the planning, design and implementation of a citywide trail network. The Plan should indicate specific trail alignments and opportunities, identify private and public property with trails potential, and set forth acquisition/easement priorities. To support implementation of the Trails Master Plan, encourage incentive points for on-site trails dedication or contribution to off-site trails as part of the RDO process.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 18.01Standards of Service. Continue to provide and maintain police and fire services that are adequate in manpower, equipment, and resources to respond to localized emergencies and calls for service within the City. The departments’ current levels of service should be maintained or improved as the City continues to grow, with average emergency response times for police services of approximately 4.5 minutes and average emergency response times for fire services of less than 5.0 minutes.Policy 15.06Service Delivery. Provide adequate staffing and program support to maintain high quality service to residents at all community facilities.Page 3 of 8 General Plan ConsistencyFY24 to FY28 Capital Improvement Program General Plan ConsistencyProject Number and Title800350 Luchessa/Church Traffic Signal InstallationAction 12.JSignal Timing. In accordance with the recommendations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District in the 2000 Clean Air Plan, continue and expand local signal timing programs.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.800360 Mantelli/Kern Traffic Signal InstallationAction 12.JSignal Timing. In accordance with the recommendations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District in the 2000 Clean Air Plan, continue and expand local signal timing programs.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.800370 Monterey/I.O.O.F. Traffic Signal InstallationAction 12.JSignal Timing. In accordance with the recommendations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District in the 2000 Clean Air Plan, continue and expand local signal timing programs.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.800380 Church Street Storm Drain Extension - Seventh to 7233 Church800390 Miller and Third Storm Drain Rehabilitation800400 Monterey and Luchessa Storm Drain Modifications800430 Cohansey Avenue/Terri Court Storm Drain Improvements900030 Drainage Improvements to Mitigate Minor Flooding900130 Storm Drain Cleaning and Inspection Program900140 Fifth Street - Miller to Princevalle Storm Drain Replacement900150 Fifth Street - Princevalle to Rosanna New Storm Drain Trunk900160 Forest and Eighth Storm Drain Connection Replacement900170 Ninth Street Storm Drain Extension - Monterey to Eigleberry900180 Princevalle System - Fifth to Santa Paula Storm Drain Improvements900190 Rosanna - Fourth to Princevalle Channel Storm Drain Improvements900200 Second Street - Hanna to Miller Slough Storm Drain Improvements900210 Third Street Storm Drain Extension - Hanna to EigleberryEN2405 Master Plan Projects - Storm Drain Improvements800410 Traffic Signal Upgrades CitywideAction 12.JSignal Timing. In accordance with the recommendations of the Bay Area AirQuality Management District in the 2000 Clean Air Plan, continue and expandlocal signal timing programs.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existingresidential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks,schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodatetraffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and theBicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas toencourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internalmovement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.Policy 19.09Storm Drain System. Provide and maintain a system of storm drains to protect areas of development from localized flooding.Page 4 of 8 General Plan ConsistencyFY24 to FY28 Capital Improvement Program General Plan ConsistencyProject Number and Title800420 Utility Undergrounding - Monterey Street - Eighth to TenthPolicy 1.13Undergrounding of Utilities. Remove overhead utility lines and wooden poles in central areas, and ultimately throughout the City, and require undergrounding of utilities in all new developments.800440 Automall/Luchessa Traffic Signal InstallationAction 12.JSignal Timing. In accordance with the recommendations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District in the 2000 Clean Air Plan, continue and expand local signal timing programs.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.800460State Trash Amendments Stormwater ComplianceProject800470 Stormwater NPDES Compliance900220 Storm Outfalls #6 and #7 - Investigations and Monitoring900250 Development of Stormwater Specifications800480 First/Kern Traffic Signal InstallationAction 12.JSignal Timing. In accordance with the recommendations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District in the 2000 Clean Air Plan, continue and expand local signal timing programs.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.800490 Annual Citywide Sewer Repair and Rehabilitation800510 Asbestos Cement Sewer Pipe Replacement Citywide800520 Carmel-Dowdy Alley - Sixth to Seventh Sewer Replacement800530 Large Diameter Sewer Rehabilitation Citywide800540 Monterey and Princevalle Sewer Network800550 Old Gilroy - Chestnut to Forest Sewer Upgrade800560Seventh St - Carmel-Dowdy to Hanna-Rosanna Alleys SewerReplacement800570 Sewer Plan Expansion (SCRWA)900720 Old Gilroy Street at Railroad Crossing Sewer ReplacementSW2401 Master Plan Projects - Sewer ImprovementsSW2402 Joint Morgan Hill-Gilroy Trunk Line RepairsPolicy 19.09Storm Drain System. Provide and maintain a system of storm drains to protect areas of development from localized flooding.Policy 19.03Sewer, Treatment, and Disposal Capacities. Provide and maintain adequate sewers, wastewater treatment, and treated water disposal capacities to meet the needs of future growth (residential, industrial, and other).Page 5 of 8 General Plan ConsistencyFY24 to FY28 Capital Improvement Program General Plan ConsistencyProject Number and Title800730 Gateway Senior Apartments Pedestrian Crossing Safety ImprovementsPolicy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.800760 Gourmet and Railroad Alley ImprovementsPolicy 1.06Downtown. Promote the old downtown section of Monterey Street as the focal point for community identity, providing a “sense of place” and feeling of historic continuity for Gilroy residents.Action 12. GDowntown Parking District. Use the Downtown Specific Plan process to address parking coordination and design issues in the Downtown, and update theCity’s Downtown Parking Ordinance as necessary to ensure adequate parking facilities while maintaining the area’s pedestrian orientation.900110 Murray Avenue Sidewalk Gap ClosurePolicy 16.05Trails Master Plan. Develop a Trails Master Plan to guide the planning, designand implementation of a citywide trail network. The Plan should indicate specific trail alignments and opportunities, identify private and public property withtrails potential, and set forth acquisition/easement priorities. To support implementation of the Trails Master Plan, encourage incentive points for on-site trailsdedication or contribution to off-site trails as part of the RDO process.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodatetraffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and theBicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas toencourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internalmovement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existingresidential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.900120 Sidewalk Gap Closure - 8340 Swanston LanePolicy 16.05Trails Master Plan. Develop a Trails Master Plan to guide the planning, design and implementation of a citywide trail network. The Plan should indicate specific trail alignments and opportunities, identify private and public property with trails potential, and set forth acquisition/easement priorities. To support implementation of the Trails Master Plan, encourage incentive points for on-site trails dedication or contribution to off-site trails as part of the RDO process.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.900260 Update to the City's Trails Master Plan (Bike Master Plan)900270 Development of a Pedestrian Master PlanPolicy 16.05Trails Master Plan. Develop a Trails Master Plan to guide the planning, design and implementation of a citywide trail network. The Plan should indicate specific trail alignments and opportunities, identify private and public property with trails potential, and set forth acquisition/easement priorities. To support implementation of the Trails Master Plan, encourage incentive points for on-site trails dedication or contribution to off-site trails as part of the RDO process.Page 6 of 8 General Plan ConsistencyFY24 to FY28 Capital Improvement Program General Plan ConsistencyProject Number and Title900280 Update to the City's Standard Drawings/Specifications/ Design StandardsGoal 12 Traffic Circulation and ParkingGOAL: (a) A functional and balanced transportation system that provides access for all, is compatible with existing and proposed land uses, and minimizes emissions of air pollutants; (b) A coordinated multi-modal system that accommodates private motor vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles and mass transit.900290 Development of an ADA Transition PlanPolicy 16.09Physical Access. Ensure that all facilities and parks comply with State and Federalaccessibility codes and standards, such as those established by the Americans withDisabilities Act (ADA), and California Building Standards Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations).Policy 15.06Service Delivery. Provide adequate staffing and program support to maintainhigh quality service to residents at all community facilities.900320 Railroad At-Grade Crossing Pedestrian Safety ImprovementsPolicy 1.03Uses East of Highway 101. Restrict lands east of Highway 101 to industrialand agricultural use except for (1) commercial developments that draw a clearmajority of customers from outside of Gilroy, in accordance with criteriaestablished by the City of Gilroy; and (2) public and quasi-public facilitiesidentified on the Land Use Plan Map. The City will encourage the maintenanceof agricultural uses in all undeveloped industrially designated areas. Residentialcare facilities will only be allowed in the area east of Highway 101 if they meetthe criteria set forth in Policy 14.05, Residential Care Facilities for Seniors.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodatetraffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and theBicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas toencourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internalmovement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existingresidential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks,schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Policy 14.04Crossings. Design street crossings to provide for the safety needs of bicyclistsand pedestrians. River and other crossings by bridges will be designed to accommodate bike lanes or paths in accordance with the designations set forth in theBicycle Transportation Plan. Bridges for the exclusive use of pedestrians and bicycles should be considered whenever barriers exist which impede convenient andsafe access.900330 Neighborhood Street LightingPolicy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.900350 Church Street Sidewalk Gap ClosurePolicy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.900360 ADA Assessment - City Facilities CitywidePolicy 16.09Physical Access. Ensure that all facilities and parks comply with State and Federal accessibility codes and standards, such as those established by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and California Building Standards Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations).Policy 15.06Service Delivery. Provide adequate staffing and program support to maintain high quality service to residents at all community facilities.900650 Christmas Hill Ranch Site Master Planning900660 Farrell Park Facility Master Planning900670 Uvas Creek Staging and Neighborhood Park Master PlanningPolicy 15.06Service Delivery. Provide adequate staffing and program support to maintain high quality service to residents at all community facilities.Policy 16.04Parks and Recreation System Master Plan. Develop and regularly update a Parks and Recreation System Master Plan to guide the planning, design and implementation of a citywide system of parks and recreation facilities and programs, including cultural and other special use facilities, in keeping with the goals and policies of the General Plan. The Parks and Recreation System Master Plan should be reviewed and updated every 5 years, in coordination with the General Plan when feasible.Page 7 of 8 General Plan ConsistencyFY24 to FY28 Capital Improvement Program General Plan ConsistencyProject Number and TitleEN2402 Ice Center InfrastructurePolicy 15.06Service Delivery. Provide adequate staffing and program support to maintain high quality service to residents at all community facilities.Policy 16.04Parks and Recreation System Master Plan. Develop and regularly update a Parks and Recreation System Master Plan to guide the planning, design and implementation of a citywide system of parks and recreation facilities and programs, including cultural and other special use facilities, in keeping with the goals and policies of the General Plan. The Parks and Recreation System Master Plan should be reviewed and updated every 5 years, in coordination with the General Plan when feasible.Goal 19 InfrastructureGOAL: Infrastructure systems that meet residents’ needs; conserve resources; protect the environment; and protect public health and safety.EN2403 Corporation Yard EV and EV ChargingGoal 19 InfrastructureGOAL: Infrastructure systems that meet residents’ needs; conserve resources; protect the environment; and protect public health and safety.EN2404 Monterey Rd Sidewalk - Luchessa to TenthPolicy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.EN2406 Luchessa Ave / Rossi Ln ReconstructionPolicy 16.05Trails Master Plan. Develop a Trails Master Plan to guide the planning, design and implementation of a citywide trail network. The Plan should indicate specific trail alignments and opportunities, identify private and public property with trails potential, and set forth acquisition/easement priorities. To support implementation of the Trails Master Plan, encourage incentive points for on-site trails dedication or contribution to off-site trails as part of the RDO process.Policy 12.01Street System. Use the proposed major street system (designed to accommodate traffic at build-out of the General Plan) shown on the Circulation Map and the Bicycle Transportation Plan Map to guide long-term planning of the citywide circulation system.Policy 12.03Residential Street System Design. Design street systems in residential areas to encourage direct connections between neighborhoods; to encourage internal movement by bicycling and walking; and to provide safer and quieter neighborhoods.Policy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.FC2404 Citywide Energy Saving MeasuresGoal 19 InfrastructureGOAL: Infrastructure systems that meet residents’ needs; conserve resources; protect the environment; and protect public health and safety.PK2401 Citywide Park Restroom Reroofing/RehabilitationPolicy 15.06Service Delivery. Provide adequate staffing and program support to maintain high quality service to residents at all community facilities.Policy 16.04Parks and Recreation System Master Plan. Develop and regularly update a Parks and Recreation System Master Plan to guide the planning, design and implementation of a citywide system of parks and recreation facilities and programs, including cultural and other special use facilities, in keeping with the goals and policies of the General Plan. The Parks and Recreation System Master Plan should be reviewed and updated every 5 years, in coordination with the General Plan when feasible.Goal 19 InfrastructureGOAL: Infrastructure systems that meet residents’ needs; conserve resources; protect the environment; and protect public health and safety.PK2402 Parks Master PlanPolicy 16.04Parks and Recreation System Master Plan. Develop and regularly update a Parks and Recreation System Master Plan to guide the planning, design and implementation of a citywide system of parks and recreation facilities and programs, including cultural and other special use facilities, in keeping with the goals and policies of the General Plan. The Parks and Recreation System Master Plan should be reviewed and updated every 5 years, in coordination with the General Plan when feasible.WT2401 Master Plan Projects - Water ImprovementsPolicy 1.05Existing Neighborhoods. Maintain and enhance the quality of existing residential neighborhoods, ensuring adequate public facilities such as parks, schools, streets, water supply, and drainage.Page 8 of 8 RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF GILROY FINDING THE PROPOSED 2024- 2028 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Gilroy Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is a five-year program adjusted annually that outlines public improvements and estimated expenditures to construct improvements. The current CIP has been updated for the 2024-2028 time period for City Council review and consideration; and WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65401 requires that the City’s Planning Commission make a determination that the annual CIP is in conformance with the City’s General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Division completed an environmental assessment for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and recommends that the Planning Commission determine that the General Plan Conformity Finding is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 in that the General Plan conformance finding as required by State law is not a project as defined under CEQA; and WHEREAS, on May 4, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public meeting and reviewed the 2024-2028 CIP for consistency with the General Plan 2040. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Gilroy hereby finds, determines and resolves as follows: Section 1: The Planning Commission has duly considered the full record before it, including the City staff report, the 2024-2028 CIP, testimony by staff and the public, and other materials and evidence submitted or provided to the Commission. Furthermore, the recitals set forth above are found to be true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference. Section 2: The Planning Commission determines that the General Plan Conformity Finding is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 since it is not a project as defined under CEQA. Section 3: The Planning Commission finds that each of the Capital Improvement Projects contained in the proposed 2024-2028 Capital Improvement Program is in conformance with the City of Gilroy General Plan 2040 as outlined in the General Plan Consistency Table attached to the Planning Commission staff report dated May 4, 2023. Section 4: The Planning Commission of the City of Gilroy hereby adopts this Resolution finding the proposed 2024-2028 Capital Improvement Program is in conformity with the General Plan and directs staff to transmit this finding to the City Council in compliance with Government Code section 65401. RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of May, 2023 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: ________________________ ___________________________ Sharon Goei, Secretary Manny Bhandal, Chairperson Community Development Director Community Development Department 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020-6197 Telephone: (408) 846-0451 | Fax: (408) 846-0429 cityofgilroy.org |planningdivision@cityofgilroy.org Sharon Goei DIRECTOR DATE: May 4, 2023 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Susana Ramirez, Engineer I SUBJECT: Planning Commission Review of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Requesting the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission RECOMMENDATION: Receive report, provide feedback, and recommend City Council adopt a resolution to approve the Transportation Development Act Article 3 grant funding request from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for Fiscal Year 2024. BACKGROUND: The Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA 3) provides funding to cities annually for bicycle and pedestrian projects. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), as the regional transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region, awards the TDA 3 grant funding. MTC allows each county to determine how to use the TDA 3 funds, which amount to about 2% of TDA funds collected in the county. MTC sets forth policies and procedures for TDA 3 funds. All projects must be reviewed and recommended to the City Council by the local bicycle advisory committee, and the City Council must approve the funding request. MTC reviews the applications and allocates the funds to eligible projects. The Planning Commission of the City of Gilroy acts as the bicycle and pedestrian commission for the City of Gilroy, as required by the MTC and its funding requirements. TDA funds are eligible for the following types of projects: 1. Construction and/or engineering of a bicycle or pedestrian capital project 2. Maintenance of a multi-purpose path that is closed to motorized traffic 3. Bicycle safety education program (no more than 5% of county total) 4. Development of comprehensive bicycle or pedestrian facilities plans (allocations to a claimant for this purpose may not be made more than once every five years) 5. Restriping Class II bicycle lanes. The TDA Article 3 project must be ready to implement within one year of the application cycle, which closes on May 26, 2023. 2 ANALYSIS: Title II of the ADA requires state and local governments to provide ADA-compliant curb ramps along pedestrian routes in the public right-of-way whenever streets are altered. Alterations include reconstruction, rehabilitation, resurfacing, and widening. Based on Title II of the ADA, the City’s upcoming FY24 Annual Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Project will result in the need to construct approximately 65 curb ramps. Staff selected a total of 22 curb ramps from the FY24 Annual Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Project to be included in the FY24 Annual Citywide Curb Ramp Project. Additional deficient curb ramps will be constructed as part of the FY24 Annual Citywide Pavement Rehabilitation Project and the FY24 Annual CDBG Sidewalk/Curb Ramp Project. Staff has identified this project for the annual TDA Article 3 grant funding, as a qualifying pedestrian capital project. As required by the TDA Article 3 grant, the local body designated to review bicycle and pedestrian projects to recommend the project to the City Council. The attached resolution is required to be adopted by the City Council in order to apply for and receive grant funds. Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the resolution. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: The total cost of the FY24 Annual Citywide Curb Ramp Project is estimated to be $240,000 of which $220,000 will be funded by the TDA 3 grant with the remaining $20,000 to be funded with Vehicle Registration Fees (220). NEXT STEPS: Staff will recommend the adoption of this resolution by City Council on May 15, 2023. Attachments: 1. MTC Resolution 2. Resolution Findings Attachment A 3. TDA 3 Fund Grant Application RESOLUTION 2023-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY REQUESTING THE ALLOCATION OF FISCAL YEAR 2024 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT ARTICLE 3 PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE PROJECT FUNDING FROM THE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION WHEREAS, Article 3 of the Transportation Development Act (TDA), Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 99200 et seq., authorizes the submission of claims to a regional transportation planning agency for the funding of projects exclusively for the benefit and/or use of pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), as the regional transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region, has adopted MTC Resolution No. 4108, Revised, entitled “Transportation Development Act, Article 3, Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects,” which delineates procedures and criteria for submission of requests for the allocation of “TDA Article 3” funding; and WHEREAS, MTC Resolution No. 4108, Revised requires that requests for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funding be submitted as part of a single, countywide coordinated claim from each county in the San Francisco Bay region; and WHEREAS, the City of Gilroy desires to submit a request to MTC for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funds to support the projects described in Attachment B to this resolution, which are for the exclusive benefit and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists; now, therefore, be it NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of Gilroy declares it is eligible to request an allocation of TDA Article 3 funds pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code, and furthermore, be it RESOLVED THAT there is no pending or threatened litigation that might adversely affect the project or projects described in Attachment B to this resolution, or that might impair the ability of the City of Gilroy to carry out the project; and furthermore, be it RESOLVED THAT the City of Gilroy attests to the accuracy of and approves the statements in Attachment A to this resolution; and furthermore, be it RESOLVED THAT a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments, and any accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency, countywide transportation planning agency, or county association of governments, as the case may be, of Santa Clara County for submission to MTC as part of the countywide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Gilroy at a regular meeting duly held on the 15th day of May 2023 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: APPROVED: Marie Blankley, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________ Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk Resolution No. 2023-XX Attachment A Re: Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding Findings Page 1 of 2 1. That the City of Gilroy is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is the City of Gilroy legally impeded from undertaking the project(s) described in “Attachment B” of this resolution. 2. That the City of Gilroy has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the project(s) described in Attachment B. 3. A review of the project(s) described in Attachment B has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent matters, including those related to environmental and right-of-way permits and clearances, attendant to the successful completion of the project(s). 4. Issues attendant to securing environmental and right-of-way permits and clearances for the projects described in Attachment B have been reviewed and will be concluded in a manner and on a schedule that will not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested. 5. That the project(s) described in Attachment B comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.). 6. That as portrayed in the budgetary description(s) of the project(s) in Attachment B, the sources of funding other than TDA are assured and adequate for completion of the project(s). 7. That the project(s) described in Attachment B are for capital construction and/or final design and engineering or quick build project; and/or for the maintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic and/or Class IV separated bikeway; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA Article 3 funding for such a plan has not been received by the City of Gilroy within the prior five fiscal years. 8. That the project(s) described in Attachment B which are bicycle projects have been included in a detailed bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan, or included in an adopted comprehensive bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code section 2370 et seq.) or responds to an immediate community need, such as a quick-build project. Findings Page 2 of 2 9. That any project described in Attachment B bicycle project meets the mandatory minimum safety design criteria published in the California Highway Design Manual or is in a National Association of City and Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidance or similar best practices document. 10. That the project(s) described in Attachment B will be completed in the allocated time (fiscal year of allocation plus two additional fiscal years). 11. That the City of Gilroy agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the project(s) and facilities described in Attachment B, for the benefit of and use by the public. Resolution No. 2023-XX Page 1 Attachment B TDA Article 3 Project Application Form 1. Agency City of Gilroy 2. Primary Contact Susana Ramirez, Engineer I 3. Mailing Address 7351 Rosanna St, Gilroy, CA 95020 4. Email Address susana.ramirez@cityofgilroy.org 5. Phone Number 408-846-0212 6. Secondary Contact (in the event primary is not available) Ogarita Carranza, Management Analyst 7. Mailing address (if different) N/A☒ 8. Email Address Ogarita.Carranza@cityofgilroy.org 9. Phone Number 408-846-0255 10. Send allocation instructions to (if different from above): 11. Project Title FY24 Citywide Curb Ramp Project 12. Amount requested $220,000 13. Fiscal Year of Claim 2024 14. Description of Overall Project: 15. Project Scope Proposed for Funding: (Project level environmental, preliminary planning, and ROW are ineligible uses of TDA funds.) 16. Project Location: A map of the project location is attached or a link to a online map of the project location is provided below: This project will perform curb ramp upgrades at various locations throughout to the City to meet ADA accessibility standards. The TDA funds being requested will be used only for construction costs. The local funds will be used for construction, construction management, and design costs. Various locations throughout the City of Gilroy. Resolution No. 2023-XX Page 2 Project Relation to Regional Policies (for information only) 17. Is the project in an Equity Priority Community? Yes☐ No☒ 18. Is this project in a Priority Development Area or a Transit-Oriented Community? Yes☐ No☒ 19. Project Budget and Schedule Project Eligibility A. Has the project been reviewed by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee? Yes☐ No☒ If “YES,” identify the date and provide a copy or link to the agenda. If "NO," provide an explanation. Expected Date: May 04, 2023 B. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? Yes☐ No☒ If "NO," provide expected date: May 15, 2023 C. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? Yes☐ No☒ (If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page) D. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria Yes☐ No☐ pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California Highway Design Manual? N/A☒ E. 1. Is the project categorically exempt from CEQA, pursuant to CCR Section 15301(c), Yes☒ No☐ Existing Facility? 2. If “NO” above, is the project is exempt from CEQA for another reason? Yes☐ No☐ Cite the basis for the exemption. __________________________ N/A☒ If the project is not exempt, please check “NO,” and provide environmental documentation, as appropriate. F. Estimated Completion Date of project (month and year): June 2024 G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has Yes☒ No☐ the claimant arranged for such maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility, please identify below and provide the agreement. Project Phase TDA 3 Other Funds Total Cost Estimated Completion (month/year) Bike/Ped Plan ENV PA&ED PS&E ROW CON $220,000 $20,000 $240,000 06/2024 Total Cost $220,000 $20,000 $240,000 Resolution No. 2023-XX Page 3 The City shall maintain the project. H. Is a Complete Streets Checklist required for this project ? Yes☐ No☒ If the amount requested is over $250,000 or if the total project phase or construction phase is over $250,000, a Complete Streets checklist is likely required. Please attach the Complete Streets checklist or record of review, as applicable. More information and the for may be found here: https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/complete-streets Community Development Department 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, California 95020-6197 Telephone: (408) 846-0451 Fax: (408) 846-0429 http://www.cityofgilroy.org TO:Planning Commission FROM:Sharon Goei, Community Development Director Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner DATE:May 4, 2023 SUBJECT:Planning Division Staff Approvals In conformance with Gilroy Municipal Code Sections 30.50.20(b) and 30.50.46, the following table lists all Minor Deviation approvals and all Architectural and Site approval/denial actions taken by the Planning Division since the last report was provided to the Planning Commission at its April 6, 2023 meeting. APPROVED PROJECT #LOCATION PROJECT NAME & DESCRIPTION None DENIED PROJECT #LOCATION PROJECT NAME & DESCRIPTION None AS Architectural and Site Review The current status of other planning projects is available online at: https://www.cityofgilroy.org/298/Development-Activity-Projects