Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
11122024 - 5.1
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 5.1 TO: Chair and Planning Commission November 12, 2024 SUBJECT: Resolution No. 2024-05, approving Development Plan request DP24-0008, Vesting Tentative Map for Condominium Purposes request MS861-24, and Tree Removal request TR24-0042 allowing the development of a 99- unit senior condominium project on a 3.17 acre site located at 425 El Pintado Road DESCRIPTION This application proposes a 99-unit, 223,000 square foot, four-story age restricted senior condominium project on a 3.17 acre site. The site is bounded by the northbound Interstate 680 on-ramp on the west side, El Cerro Boulevard to the south, and El Pintado Road on the east. The site is currently occupied by a 5,000 square foot office building and associated driveways and parking. An unnamed creek runs along the parcel’s El Pintado Road and El Cerro Boulevard frontages. The site would continue to be accessed via El Pintado Road, with a new 20 foot wide bridge with two (2) four foot wide sidewalks, replacing the existing wood bridge over the creek. This application was submitted under State Law SB 330 (The Housing Crisis Act of 2019). In addition, the applicant is requesting the waiver of several development standards including height, floor area ratio, drive aisle width, and retaining wall height and setbacks, pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law. BACKGROUND As part of the development of the Town’s 2023-2031 Housing Element, the State of California mandated that the nine-county Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) region plan for at least 441,176 housing units to be affordable at various income levels over the next eight year Housing Element cycle. In turn, ABAG assigned the Town of Danville 2,241 housing units to plan for over the eight year plan cycle. This housing requirement is known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The Town did not have sufficient land zone for residential use at sufficient densities to meet the RHNA and was required to find appropriate sites throughout Danville to designate for multifamily housing. The subject site was identified as Opportunity Site C and, along with over 70 other parcels Town-wide, on January 17, 2023, was redesigned for multifamily housing with a density of 30-35 units per acre. The project architectural and landscape plans were reviewed by the Town’s Design Review Board (DRB) in 2024 on June 13, June 27, and August 15. The June 27 meeting DEV24-0008 – 425 El Pintado Road 2 November 12, 2024 consisted of a field trip to view the site from the perspective of residents along El Rio Road. The DRB recommended the Planning Commission approve the project’s architectural and landscape design. State Laws The State of California has declared a housing crisis in the State and has passed and/or strengthened a number of laws aimed at promoting infill housing development. A jurisdiction may not impose local laws that conflict with State law. State laws which apply to this application include: The Housing Accountability Act (HAA) which was first approved in 1982 and was amended in 2017 and 2024. This law, often referred to as “the anti-NIMBY law,” prohibits local jurisdictions from denying a housing application which meets objective development standards. A qualifying housing application can only be denied upon making a finding that the project would cause a “specific, adverse impact” to public health. The Housing Crisis Act (HCA) which was approved in 2019 and amended in 2021. Amongst other things, the HCA prohibits local jurisdictions from denying a housing application or reduce its density based on subjective design standards – a project can only be reviewed against objective, quantifiable standards, conditions and policies. State Density Bonus Law (DBL) which was approved in 1979 and amended at least 13 times, most recently in 2023. DBL allows a developer to increase the density of a residential development above the maximum allowed density under the site’s General Plan land use designation in exchange for providing affordable units, or age restricted (55 years or older) senior developments (no affordable units required). In addition, developments which qualify under the DBL are entitled to receive requested incentives, concessions, and waivers to reduce otherwise required development standards. Under the DBL, an applicant may utilize an incentive, concession, or waiver regardless of whether they elect to incorporate density bonus units. EVALUATION Density Bonus This application includes a density bonus request under DBL (Attachment C). As allowed under the Law, the applicant is not asking for any additional units. However, the applicant is requesting waivers to reduce several otherwise applicable development standards established under the site’s M-35; Multifamily Residential zoning designation. A waiver is defined as a reduction or modification of a development standard and/or other regulations which would otherwise physically preclude construction of the project. There are no limits to the number of waivers an applicant can request. DEV24-0008 – 425 El Pintado Road 3 November 12, 2024 The DBL also states that, if the applicant requests waivers, and provides some evidence of physical preclusion, a jurisdiction can deny the request only if: 1. the waiver or reduction would have a “specific, adverse impact upon health or safety.” 2. the impact is “significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete,” and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. In addition, courts have ruled that features such as increased ceiling heights and other “amenities” such as courtyards, open areas, etc. can be the basis for the wavier. The applicant for this development is requesting four waivers: 1. Height – The subject M-35 zoning district requires an average maximum height of 43 feet. The proposed project would have a maximum height of 52’ 9” at the 4th floor penthouses, which are recessed back from the top of the building’s 3rd stories. The 3rd stories have a maximum height of 41’ 9”. 2. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) – The zoning district allows a maximum FAR of 120%. The application proposes a FAR of 128.7%. 3. Drive Aisle Width – The zoning district requires a parking lot drive aisle width of 28 feet. The applicant proposes a drive aisle width of 24 feet. A 24 foot drive aisle width is the standard used within the Town’s Downtown Business District. 4. Retaining Wall Height and Setback – A small section of retaining wall along the back of the property is proposed to be approximately eight feet tall, while the zoning district limits retaining wall height to six feet. In addition, rear and side yard retaining walls do not meet the Town’s three-foot setback requirement. General Plan The site’s General Plan land use designation is Residential – Multifamily – High Density Special, which requires a residential density of 30-35 units per acre. The proposed 99-unit development on the 3.17 acre site results in a density of 31.2 units per acre, within the required density range. Zoning The site is zoned M-35; Multifamily Residential Zoning District. This district allows a residential density of 35 units per acre and establishes development standards to control the massing and siting of the development. Except for the request waivers described above, the proposed project is consistent with the development standards. DEV24-0008 – 425 El Pintado Road 4 November 12, 2024 Parking The DBL also includes a provision establishing maximum parking requirements for qualifying projects. The DBL parking limits are: 1. Zero to one bedroom: one onsite parking space. 2. Two to three bedrooms: one and one-half onsite parking spaces. 3. Four and more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces. As a result, the maximum number of parking spaces the Town can require is 138. Under the Town’s code, 212 parking spaces would be required. The project proposes to provide 198 parking spaces. It should be noted that the Town’s parking standard does not take into consideration that the proposed development is an age restricted senior development, which would be expected to have a lower parking demand than a standards multifamily development. The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared for the project (Attachment E) includes a parking analysis. The study concluded that, based on the ITE Parking Generation Manual for senior housing, the project would provide sufficient parking to meet the peak parking demand. Traffic A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared for the project (Attachment E). The report includes analysis of potential impacts related to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), intersection Level of Service (LOS), Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Transit Access, and Parking. Based on the results of TIA, no adverse impacts related to these area of were found. Stormwater/Hydrology A Stormwater Pollution Control Plan (SPCP) was prepared for the project by DeBolt Civil Engineering. As required, all runoff from impervious surfaces would be collected and conveyed to be filtered through bioswales or basins prior to leaving the site. A Flood Investigation Report was also prepared for the project (Attachment F). This report reviews the area’s existing hydraulic patterns. The report found that the open channel through the site has capacity to convey the calculated 100 year flood. In addition, as water exits the site to the south, it travels under the freeway in a 48 inch concrete pipe, which also has sufficient capacity. All new stormwater runoff from the site would also be retained on-site so as not to add to the creek’s existing peak flows. Biology A Biological Resource Assessment (BRA) was prepared for the project (Attachment G). The primary biological resource on the site is the seasonal creek which runs along the project frontage. The proposed development would maintain a minimum setback of 25 feet from the creek in most locations. In addition, the new replacement bridge would span DEV24-0008 – 425 El Pintado Road 5 November 12, 2024 the creek banks. As a result, no California Department of Fish & Wildlife or Regional Water Quality Control Board permitting is expected to be required. A Tree Evaluation was prepared for the project by Bob Peralta Arbor Consulting (Attachment H). Seven (7) Town-protected trees would be removed to accommodate the development. Protected trees to be removed are valley oak trees and coast live oak trees, ranging in size from 38 inches to 12 inches. Most of the trees are in the 16-20” size range. The removal of Town-protected trees would be mitigated by the planting of new oak trees. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONEMNTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) STATUS The project is Categorically Exempt From the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15332, Class 32 – Infill Development Projects PUBLIC CONTACT Public notice of the November 12, 2024, meeting was mailed to property owners within 750 feet of the site. A total of 99 notices were mailed to surrounding property owners. The public hearing notice was also published in a newspaper of general circulation. Posting of the meeting agenda serves as notice to the general public. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution No. 2024-05, approving Development Plan request DP24-0008, Vesting Tentative Map for Condominium Purposes request MS 861-24, and Tree Removal request TR24-0042 allowing the development of a 99-unit senior condominium project on a 3.17 acre site located at 425 El Pintado Road. Prepared by: David Crompton Chief of Planning Attachments: A - Resolution No. 2024-05 B – Public Notification, Notification Map and Notification List C - Applicant’s Density Bonus Request Letter D – Applicant Statement Letter E - Traffic Impact Analysis F - Flood Impact Analysis G - Biological Impact Analysis H – Tree Evaluation I – Project Civil Drawing, Architectural and Landscape Plans J - Letters Received as of 11/7/2024 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLAN REQUEST DP24-0008, VESTING TENTATIVE MAP FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES REQUEST MS861-24, AND TREE REMOVAL REQUEST TR24-0042 ALLOWING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 99-UNIT SENIOR CONDOMINIUM PROJECT ON A 3.17 ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 425 EL PINTADO ROAD (APN: 200-040-012) WHEREAS, ROBERT & LISA CURTICE AND RUSSELL DARBY (Owners) and 425 EP INVESTMENTS, LLC (Applicant) have requested approval of a Development Plan (DP24—0008) application to construct a 99-unit age restricted senior condominium housing development; and WHEREAS, a Vesting Tentative Map for Condominium Purposes (MS861-24) is also proposed; and WHEREAS, a Tree Removal permit (TR24-0042) is requested to allow the removal of seven (7) Town-protected trees; and WHEREAS, the site is located at 425 El Pintado Road, and further identified as APN: 200- 040-012; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law (DBL) related to the provision of age restricted senior housing, the applicant has requested waivers related to building height, floor area ratio, retaining wall setback and height, and drive aisles width; and WHEREAS, the project is Categorically Exempt From the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15332, Class 32 – Infill Development Projects; and WHEREAS, a staff report was prepared recommending that the Planning Commission approve the requests; and WHEREAS, public notification for the public hearing to consider this proposal was provided consistent with all requirements of the law; and RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the Town of Danville approves Development Plan request DEV24-0008, Vesting Tentative Map for Condominium Purposes request MS861-24, and Tree Removal permit request TR24-0042 allowing for the development of a 99-unit age restricted senior condominium project on a 3.17 acre site located at 425 El Pintado Road. ATTACHMENT A PAGE 2 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 FINDINGS OF APPROVAL Vesting Tentative Map/Development Plan 1. The proposed subdivision is in substantial conformance with the goals and policies of the Danville 2030 General Plan and the site’s Residential – Multifamily – High Density Special land use designation which allows multiple family residential development in the range of 30-35 units per acre. 2. The design of the proposed subdivision is substantially in conformance with the site’s M-35; Multifamily Residential District. The M-35; Multifamily Residential District is listed as a consistent zoning designation under the site’s General Plan land use designation. Except for waivers for height, floor area ratio, drive aisle width, and retaining wall setbacks and height related to the State Density Bonus Law (DBL), the development is in conformance with the development standards established under the District. 3. The design of the subdivision and the type of associated improvements will not likely cause serious public health problems, because water and sanitary facilities and services will be available to the parcels. The project has been reviewed by the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District, Central Contra Costa County Sanitary District, East Bay Municipal Utility District, and the Town’s Building Division and it was determined that the site is adequately served by public facilities and services. 4. The design of the proposed subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or subsequently injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, in part because the project site is an area where development has previously occurred. Biological resources were reviewed as part of this development, and it was found that the project will not have a negative impact on biological resources. 5. The design of the proposed subdivision and proposed improvements would not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. There are currently no existing public easements for access through or use of the subject properties. Tree Removal Permit 1. Necessity. The primary reason for removal of seven (7) Town-protected trees is that preservation of those trees would be inconsistent with the proposed residential development of the property, including the creation of a new roadway system and grading to accommodate the development. PAGE 3 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 2. Erosion/surface water flow. Removal of the Town-protected trees will not cause significant soil erosion or cause a significant diversion or increase in the flow of surface water. 3. Visual effects. Removal of seven (7) Town-protected trees will not significantly affect off-site shade or adversely affect privacy between properties due to the site’s topography, the other trees that would remain, and the locations of the trees in relation to other properties. Categorical Exemption The proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as an Infill Development Project under Guidelines Section 15332, Class 32, based on the following findings: 1. The project is consistent with all the applicable General Plan designation and policies and with the applicable zoning designation. 2. The project is within the Town boundaries and is on a project site of less than five acres, substantially surrounded by urban uses (housing and the I-680 freeway). 3. The project site has no value, as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species based on the biological study conducted. 4. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality based on the studies conducted. 5. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. 6. In addition, the Town finds that there is no evidence demonstrating that the proposed project would have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances (Guidelines Section 15300.2(c)). CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Conditions of approval with an asterisk (*) in the left-hand column are standard project conditions of approval. Unless otherwise specified, the following conditions shall be complied with prior to the issuance of a building permits for the project. Each item is subject to review and approval by the Planning Division unless otherwise specified. PAGE 4 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 A. GENERAL 1. This approval is for Development Plan request DP24-0008, Vesting Tentative Map for Condominium Purposes request MS861-24, and Tree Removal request TR24-0042. These permits authorize the construction of a four-story 99-unit age restricted senior condominium housing development on a 3.17 acre site located at 425 El Pintado Road. The Tree Removal permit allows for the removal of seven (7) Town-protected trees. Development shall be substantially as shown on the project drawings as follows, except as may be modified by conditions contained herein; a. Preliminary Architectural Plans, Elevations, and Floor Plans as prepared by Form4 Architecture and dated October 29, 2024. b. Preliminary Landscape Plan as prepared by JETT Landscape Architecture + Design Environmental dated October 29, 2024. c. Vesting Tentative Map for Condominium purposes and Civil Drawings as prepared by DeBolt Civil Engineering dated October 28, 2024. d. Preliminary Stormwater Control Plan as prepared by Debolt Civil Engineering and dated March 3, 2024, and updated October 2024. e. Traffic Impact Study prepared by Kimley-Horn, dated September 2024. f. Biological Resource Assessment prepared by Greg Matuzak Environmental Consulting LLC, dated March 2024. g. Flood Investigation as prepared by Easton McAllister dated October 28, 2024. h. Preliminary Hydrology Analysis prepared by Debolt Civil Engineering dated October 28, 2024. i. Geotechnical Investigation as prepared by Rockridge Geotechnical, dated April 9, 2024. j. Tree Report, as prepared by Bob Peralta Arbor Consulting, dated October 23, 2024. 2. This development is subject to the State Density Bonus Law related to the provision of age restricted senior housing. Concurrently with the PAGE 5 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 recordation of the final map, deed restrictions limiting ownership to households including a person aged 55 or older shall be recorded for each of the 99 units created as part of this project. 3. This approval includes the granting of waivers of development standards consistent with State Density Bonus Law. Approved waivers are as follows: a. Height – The subject M-35 zoning district requires an average maximum height of 43 feet. The proposed project would have a maximum height of 52’ 9” at the 4th floor penthouses, which are recessed back from the top of the building’s 3rd stories. The 3rd stories have a maximum height of 41’ 9”. b. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) – The zoning district allows a maximum FAR of 120%. The application proposes a FAR of 128.7%. c. Drive Aisle Width – The zoning district requires a parking lot drive aisle width of 28 feet. The applicant proposes a drive aisle width of 24 feet. A 24 foot drive aisle width is the standard used within the Town’s Downtown Business District. d. Retaining Wall Height and Setbacks – A small section of retaining wall along the back of the property is proposed to be approximately eight feet tall, while the zoning district limits retaining wall height to six feet. In addition, the retaining walls do not meet the Town’s required three- foot setback requirement. 4. The following fees are due prior to recordation of the final map (based on 2023/24 Master Fee Schedule): a. Map Check Fee............ TBD b. Improvement Plan Check Fee........... %3 of cost estimate c. Engineering Inspection Fee............... %5 of cost estimate d. Grading Plan Check, Inspection & Permit................ TBD e. Base Map Revision Fee (based on parcels)........ TBD f. Park Land in Lieu Fee (based on units) $ 759,330 g. Excavation Mitigation Fee (SR)......................... TBD The following fees are due at building permit issuance: a. Finish Grading Inspection Fee................. $ TBD b. Stormwater Pollution Program Fee........ $ 228/building c. SCC Regional Fee............................................. $ 1,676/unit d. SCC Sub-Regional Fee..................................... $ 4,624/unit e. Residential TIP Fee.......................................... $ 1,400/unit PAGE 6 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 f. Tri-Valley Transportation Fee................ $ 3,890/unit 5. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall reimburse the Town for notifying surrounding residents and interested parties of the public hearings and study sessions for the project. The fee shall be $384.00 ($110.00 + 99 notices X $0.83 per notice X 2 notifications). * 6. Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, the applicant shall submit written documentation that all requirements of the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District (SRVFPD) and the San Ramon Valley Unified School District have been, or will be, met to the satisfaction of these respective agencies. 7. Prior to the commencement of ground disturbance, including site preparation and grading activities, the applicant will ensure that all construction workers are trained to recognize archaeological resources which may be found on the site. 8. If previously unidentified cultural resources are encountered during construction or land disturbance activities, work shall stop within 50 feet of the find and the Town of Danville shall be notified at once to assess the nature, extent, and potential significance of any cultural resource find. The applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to implement a Phase II subsurface testing program to determine the resource boundaries, assess the integrity of the resource, and evaluate the resource’s significance through a study of its features and artifacts. If the resource is determined significant, the Town of Danville may choose to allow the capping of the area containing the resource using culturally sterile and chemically neutral fill material. If such capping occurs, then a qualified archaeologist shall be retained to monitor the placement of fill upon the resource. If a significant resource will not be capped, the results and recommendations of the Phase II study shall determine the need for a Phase III data recovery program designed to record and remove significant cultural materials that could otherwise be tampered with. If the resource is determined to be not significant, no capping and/or further archaeological investigation or mitigation shall be required. The results and recommendations of the Phase II study shall determine the need for construction monitoring. If monitoring is warranted, a qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the applicant to be present during all earth moving activities that have the potential to affect archaeological or historical resources. A monitoring report shall be submitted to the Town upon completion of construction. * 9. Construction activity shall be restricted to the period between the weekday hours of 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. (Monday through Friday), unless otherwise PAGE 7 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 approved in writing by the City Engineer for general construction activity and the Chief Building Official for building construction activity. 10. At a minimum, all on-site structures shall include the following to achieve an acceptable interior noise level: • Air conditioning or a mechanical forced–air ventilation system so that windows and doors may remain closed • Double-paned windows and sliding glass doors mounted in low air infiltration rate frames (0.5 cubic feet per minute, per ANSI specifications) • Solid core exterior doors with perimeter weather stripping and threshold seals • Roof and attic vents facing away from I-680 freeway 11. The applicant shall apply the following measures during construction of the project. • Construction Staging. The contractor shall provide staging areas on-site to minimize off-site transportation of heavy construction equipment. These areas shall be located to maximize the distance between activity and sensitive receptors. This would reduce noise levels associated with most types of idling construction equipment. • Mufflers. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and all internal combustion engine driven machinery with intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, as applicable, shall be in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. During construction, all equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be operated with closed engine doors and shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers, consistent with manufacturers’ standards. • Electrical Power. Electrical power, rather than diesel equipment, shall be used to run compressors and similar power tools and to power any temporary structures, such as construction trailers or caretaker facilities. • Equipment Staging. All stationary equipment shall be staged as far away from the adjacent multi-family residential development as feasible. • Equipment Idling. Construction vehicles and equipment shall not be left idling for longer than five minutes when not in use. • Workers’ Radios. All noise from workers’ radios shall be controlled to a point that they are not audible at sensitive receptors near construction activity. PAGE 8 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 • Smart Back-up Alarms. Mobile construction equipment shall have smart back-up alarms that automatically adjust the sound level of the alarm in response to ambient noise levels. Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters to ensure safety when mobile construction equipment is moving in the reverse direction. • Disturbance Coordinator. The applicant shall designate a disturbance coordinator who shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The noise disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and shall require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. A telephone number for the disturbance coordinator shall be conspicuously posted at the construction site. • Construction Notice. Two weeks prior to the commencement of construction and grading at the project site, the applicant shall install a 3-foot by 3-foot sign at the project entry that discloses the allowable construction work days and hours, the planned construction schedule, and the contact name and phone number for residents to call for construction noise related complaints. All reasonable concerns shall be rectified within 24 hours of receipt. * 12. The applicant shall provide security fencing, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and/or the Chief Building Official, around the site during construction of the project. * 13. A watering program which incorporates the use of a dust suppressant, and which complies with Regulation 2 of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District shall be established and implemented for all on and off-site construction activities. Equipment and human resources for watering all exposed or disturbed soil surfaces shall be supplied on weekends and holidays as well as workdays. Dust-producing activities shall be discontinued during high wind periods. 14. All physical improvements other than landscaping shall be in place prior to occupancy of any structure in the project. All landscaping shall be installed prior to occupancy of the final unit. If occupancy within the project is requested to occur in phases, all physical improvements shall be required to be in place prior to occupancy except for items specifically excluded in a construction-phases occupancy plan approved by the Planning Division. No structure shall be occupied until construction activity in the adjoining area is complete and the area is safe, accessible, provided with all reasonably expected services and amenities, and appropriately separated PAGE 9 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 from remaining additional construction activity. A temporary vehicular turnaround shall be provided at the end of the completed section of loop roadway to allow separation of resident traffic and construction traffic. * 15. The applicant shall submit a written Compliance Report detailing how the conditions of approval for this project have been complied with as part of the initial submittal for the final map, plan check, and/or building permit review process (whichever occurs first). This report shall list each condition of approval followed by a description of what the applicant has provided as evidence of compliance with that condition. The applicant must sign the report. The report is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer and/or Chief of Planning and/or Chief Building Official and may be rejected by the Town if it is not comprehensive with respect to the applicable conditions of approval. 16. The applicant shall be responsible for either (a) washing the exterior of abutting residences or (b) providing a cash payment to said abutting residences in the amount of $500 per residence at the completion of mass grading activity, at the discretion of the Town. 17. If demolition or construction activity (e.g., tree removal, grading, road construction, home construction, etc.) is to occur within the raptor nesting season (i.e., between February 1 and July 31), a pre-construction survey of the property for nesting raptors shall be conducted, with such survey to occur a minimum of 15 days prior to planned commencement of demolition or construction activity. The nesting survey shall include examination of all trees located on the property and within 200 feet of the area proposed for demolition or construction activity. If birds are identified nesting on or within the zone of proposed demolition or construction activity, a qualified biologist shall establish a temporary protective nest buffer around the nest(s). Where protective nest buffering is deemed necessary, the nest buffer(s) shall be staked with orange construction fencing or orange lath staking. The buffer shall be of sufficient size to protect the nesting site from demolition or construction related disturbance and shall be established by a qualified ornithologist or biologist with extensive experience working with nesting birds near construction sites. Typically, adequate nesting buffers are 50 feet from the nest site or nest tree dripline for small birds, and up to 250 feet for sensitive nesting birds that include several raptor species known in the region of the project site. No demolition, construction or earth-moving activity shall occur within the established buffer until it is determined by a qualified biologist that the young have fledged and have attained sufficient flight skills to avoid project construction zones. This typically occurs by July 15th of each year. This date may be earlier or later and shall be determined by the qualified ornithologist or biologist. PAGE 10 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 18. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall retain a specialist to assess rodent control impacts anticipated to be associated with grading activity and installation of subdivision improvements. As deemed necessary, following the Planning Division’s review of the specialist’s assessment, the applicant shall develop and implement a rodent control plan to reduce impacts to surrounding properties to the extent reasonably possible for the time periods of heavy construction activity. The report shall include a schedule for regular rodent inspections and mitigation in conjunction with the developer and the Town based on the development schedule for the project. This report shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division. B. SITE PLANNING * 1. All lighting shall be installed in such a manner that lighting is generally down directed and glare is directed away from surrounding properties and rights-of-way. * 2. Any on-site wells and septic systems shall be destroyed in accordance with Contra Costa County Health Services Department - Environmental Health Division regulations. Environmental Health Division permits and inspections for this work shall be obtained. C. LANDSCAPING * 1. Final landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Division. The plan shall include common names of all plant materials and shall indicate the size that various plant materials will achieve within a five-year period of time. * 2. All plant material shall be served by an automatic irrigation system and maintained in a healthy growing condition. Landscaping and irrigation shall comply with all MWELO water conservation requirements. * 3. All trees shall be a minimum of 15-gallon container size. All trees shall be properly staked. All remaining shrubs used in the project, which are not used as ground cover, shall be a minimum of five gallons in size. * 4. All landscaped areas not covered by shrubs and trees shall be planted with live ground cover or covered with mulch. All proposed ground cover shall be placed so that it fills in within two years. * 5. If site construction activity occurs in the direct vicinity of the on-site and off-site protected trees, a security deposit in the amount of the assessed PAGE 11 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 value of the tree(s) (calculated pursuant to the Town’s Tree Protection Ordinance) shall be posted with the Town prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit to maximize the probability that the affected trees will be retained in good health. The applicant shall be required to secure an appraisal of the condition and value of all affected trees. The appraisal shall be done in accordance with the current edition of the “Guide for Establishing Values of Trees and Other Plants,” by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers under the auspices of the International Society of Arboriculture. The appraisal shall be performed by a Certified Arborist, and shall be subject to review and approval by the Chief of Planning. A tree preservation agreement shall be prepared that outlines the intended and allowed use of funds posted as a tree preservation security deposit. That portion of the security deposit still held by the Town two full growing seasons after project completion shall be returned upon verification that the trees covered by the deposit are as healthy as can be provided for under the terms of the tree preservation agreement. 6. The developer shall be required to mitigate the loss seven (7) Town- protected trees. As a result, the applicant shall be responsible for the planting on-site of either ninety four (94) 15-gallon oak trees (which are counted as 2” diameter trees) or forty seven (47) 24-inch box size oak trees (which are counted as 4” diameter trees). If all of the trees cannot be accommodated on-site, the applicant may pay the Town’s trees mitigation fee of $250.00 for each 15-gallon tree or $500.00 for each 24-inch box size tree. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for planting off-site screen trees as generally shown on Landscape Plan L1.01, if approved by the adjacent property owners. D. ARCHITECTURE * 1. All ducts, meters, air conditioning and/or any other mechanical equipment whether on the structure or on the ground shall be effectively screened from view with landscaping or materials architecturally compatible with the main structures. * 2. The street numbers for each building in the project shall be posted so as to be easily seen at all times, day and night by emergency service personnel. * 3. Samples of final materials and the proposed color palette shall be submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Board prior to the issuance of building permits for the project. PAGE 12 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 4. Final architectural elevations, details and revisions shall be submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Board prior to issuance of building permits for the project. In addition, final colors, and all proposed materials, including building siding, balcony railing, and roof equipment screening, shall be subject to review and approval by the DRB prior to issuance of building permits. E. AIR QUALITY 1. In order to reduce exposure of proposed residences to toxic air contaminants emissions from vehicles on I-680 freeway, the applicant shall submit to the Town of Danville for review and approval a ventilation proposal prepared by a licensed design professional for all on-site buildings that describes the ventilation design and how that design ensures all dwelling units would be below the excess cancer risk level of 10 in one million established by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. The ventilation proposal shall include, but is not limited to, the following measures: a. If the proposed buildings would use operable windows or other sources of infiltration of ambient air, the development shall install a central HVAC system that includes high efficiency particulate filters. The system may also include a carbon filter to remove other chemical matter. Filtration systems must operate to maintain positive pressure within the building interior to prevent entrainment of outdoor air indoors. b. If the development limits infiltration through non-operable windows, a suitable ventilation system shall include a ventilation system with filtration specifications equivalent to or better than the following: (1) American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air- Conditioning Engineers MERV-13 supply air filters or the equivalent if recommended by the system manufacturer, (2) greater than or equal to one air exchanges per hour of fresh outside filtered air, (3) greater than or equal to four air exchanges per hour recirculation, and (4) less than or equal to 0.25 air exchanges per hour in unfiltered infiltration. These types of filtration methods are capable of removing approximately 90 percent of the DPM emissions from air introduced into the HVAC system. c. Windows and doors shall be fully weatherproofed with caulking and weather-stripping that is rated to last at least 20 years. Weatherproof should be maintained and replaced by the property PAGE 13 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 owner, as necessary, to ensure functionality for the lifetime of the project. d. Where appropriate, install passive (drop-in) electrostatic filtering systems, especially those with low air velocities (i.e., 1 mph). e. Ensure an ongoing maintenance plan for the HVAC and filtration systems. Manufacturers of these types of filters recommend that they be replaced after two to three months of use. The applicant shall inform occupants regarding the proper use of any installed air filtration system. F. PARKING 1. All parking spaces other than the mechanical lifts, shall be striped and provided with wheel stops unless they are fronted by concrete curbs, in which case sufficient areas shall be provided beyond the ends of all parking spaces to accommodate the overhang of automobiles. * 2. Where authorized, compact car spaces shall be clearly designated with appropriate pavement marking or signage. Self-park compact spaces shall be no less than 8 feet by 16 feet in size, including allowable overhang. * 3. Regulatory signage/curb painting for the non-parking side of the interior loop roadway shall be provided, if deemed necessary, to the satisfaction of the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District and the City Engineer. G. GRADING * 1. Any grading on adjacent properties will require prior written approval of those property owners affected. * 2. At least one week prior to commencement of grading, the applicant shall post the site and mail to the owners of property within 300 feet of the exterior boundary of the project site, and to the Town of Danville Development Services Department, a notice that construction work will commence. 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 kept 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. 3. The applicant shall conduct a design-level geotechnical investigation. The PAGE 14 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 design-level geotechnical investigation shall include additional field exploration and laboratory testing. Soil borings and/or cone penetration tests (CPT) soundings shall be conducted to evaluate the potential for liquefaction in the area of the preliminary geotechnical investigation Boring. The recommendations of the design-level geotechnical investigation shall be incorporated into the proposed project grading and building plans after review and approval by the Town’s Building Services Division. These recommendations may include the removal of expansive soils, replacing expansive soils with non-expansive engineered fill, deepening foundations to develop support below the zone of significant seasonal moisture change, designing foundation/slab systems to resist uplift pressures generated by swelling soils, providing drainage and landscaping to minimize seasonal moisture fluctuations in the near-surface soils, compacting soils to the appropriate relative compaction, and designing foundations to resist the adverse effects of liquefaction and corrosive soils. * 4. Where soils or geologic conditions encountered in grading operations are different from that anticipated in the soil report, a revised soils report shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer. It shall be accompanied by an engineering and geological opinion as to the safety of the site from settlement and seismic activity. * 5. All development shall comply with Danville Ordinance 2004-06 which added Chapter 20 to the Danville Municipal Code relating to Stormwater Management and Discharge Control. All development shall also comply with the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002) adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board on September 2, 2009, and effective on July 1, 2010. These regulations require, among other things, that a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be prepared by a Qualified SWPPP Developer for submission to the State of California via the on-line Storm Water Multi-Application Reporting & Tracking (SMARTS) system. No land-disturbing activity shall occur until a Notice of Intent (NOI) is filed and a Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number is issued by the State of California. A copy of the final NOI, including WDID number and attached SWPPP, shall be kept at the project site at all times, with a copy provided to the Town. The requirements of the SWPPP and all other Permit Registration Documents shall be fully implemented during land-disturbing activities. * 6. All grading activity shall address National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) concerns. Specific measures to control sediment runoff, construction pollution and other potential construction contamination shall be addressed through the Erosion Control Plan (ECP) and Storm Water PAGE 15 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP 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 NPDES construction permit may be required, as determined by the City Engineer. * 7. If toxic or contaminated soil is encountered during construction, all construction activity in that area shall cease until the appropriate action is determined and implemented. The concentrations, extent of the contamination and mitigation shall be determined by the Contra Costa County Health Department. Suitable disposal and/or treatment of any contaminated soil shall meet all federal, state and local regulations. If deemed appropriate by the Health Department, the applicant shall make provisions for immediate containment of the materials. Runoff from any contaminated soil shall not be allowed to enter any drainage facility, inlet or creek. 8. Prior to ground disturbing activities, the project applicant shall install a silt fence or fabric fence along the perimeter of the site, adjacent to residential development, to provide a barrier to movement by rodents and other wildlife. The fence shall be maintained until all vegetation is remove from the site. During grading and construction activities, the project applicant shall maintain a contact person including a phone number, should issues associated with rodent dispersal occur, and shall monitor these recommended actions to determine their efficacy. H. STREETS * 1. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Engineering Division prior to commencing any construction activities within any public right-of-way or easement. * 2. Street signing shall be installed by the applicant as may be required by the City Engineer. Traffic signs and parking restriction signs, which may be required to be installed, shall be subject to review and approval by the Transportation Division and the Police Department. * 3. All mud or dirt carried off the construction site onto adjacent streets shall be swept each day. Water flushing of site debris or sediment or concrete washing is expressly prohibited. * 4. Any damage to street improvements now existing or done during construction on or adjacent to the subject property shall be repaired to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, at full expense to the applicant. This shall PAGE 16 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 include slurry seal, overlay or street reconstruction of the impacted areas if deemed warranted by the City Engineer. * 5. All improvements within the public right-of-way, including curb, gutter, sidewalks, driveways, paving and utilities, shall be constructed in accordance with approved standards and/or plans and shall comply with the standard plans and specifications of the Development Services Department and Chapters XII and XXXI of the Town Code. At the time project improvement plans are submitted, the applicant shall supply to the City Engineer an up-to-date title report for the subject property. * 6. Handicapped ramps shall be provided and located as required by the City Engineer. * 7. A satisfactory private road and private storm drain maintenance agreement shall be submitted for approval of the City Attorney prior to any Town Council final approval action. All private road maintenance agreements shall include provisions for regular street sweeping. * 8. The Project shall be required to stripe curbs and install any necessary parking or circulation signage, as determined by the Transportation Division. 9. The project applicant shall develop and submit for approval to the Town of Danville a Construction Management and Mitigation Plan that includes designated haul routes and staging areas, traffic control procedures, emergency access provisions and construction crew parking, to minimize traffic impacts during construction. The plan shall ensure that haul routes and construction activity timing shall comply with the Town of Danville’s requirements. The plan shall also ensure that construction period employees can either park on-site or at an off-site location. In addition, the plan shall require that temporary signage, alternative pedestrian passage, and/or protected walkways be provided should sidewalks be closed during construction. 10. The applicant shall maintain vegetation at the corner of El Cerro Boulevard and the I-680 freeway north bound on-ramp to maintain the required site distance triangle. I. INFRASTRUCTURE * 1. Domestic water supply shall be from an existing public water system. Water supply service shall be from the East Bay Municipal Utility District water system in accordance with the requirements of the District. PAGE 17 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 * 2. All wastewater shall be disposed into an existing sewer system. Sewer disposal service shall be from the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District sewer system in accordance with the requirements of the District. * 3. Drainage facilities and easements shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and/or the Chief Engineer of the Contra Costa County Flood Control & Water Conservation District. 4. Prior to commencement of any site work, the applicant/owner shall submit evidence to the Town that the requirements for obtaining a State General Construction Permit have been met. Such evidence may be the copy of a WDID number issued by the State Water Resources Control Board in response to an application submitted via their online SMARTS System by a qualified SWPPP developer. Additionally, the applicant/owner shall submit evidence that the requirements for obtaining the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 404 Permit, the State Water Resources Control Board 401 Certification, and the California Department of Fish and Game’s Streambank Alteration Agreement have been or will be met. Such evidence might be a copy of the permit(s)/agreement and/or a letter from the applicant/owner stating that the above permit(s) are not required for the subject project. * 5. Roof drainage from structures shall be collected via a closed pipe and conveyed to an approved storm drainage facility in the street curb. No concentrated drainage shall be permitted to surface flow across sidewalks. * 6. Any portion of the drainage system that conveys runoff from public streets shall be installed within a dedicated drainage easement or public street. * 7. If a storm drain must cross a lot, or be in an easement between lots, the easement shall be equal to or at least double the depth of the storm drain. * 8. The applicant shall furnish proof to the City Engineer of the acquisition of all necessary rights of entry, permits and/or easements for the construction of off-site temporary or permanent road and drainage improvements. * 9. All new utilities required to serve the development shall be installed underground in accordance with the Town policies and existing ordinances. All utilities shall be located and provided within public utility easements, sited to meet utility company standards or in public streets. * 10. All utility distribution facilities, including but not limited to electric, communication and cable television lines, within a residential or PAGE 18 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 commercial subdivision shall be underground, except as follows: a. Equipment appurtenant to underground facilities, such as surface mounted transformers, pedestal mounted terminal boxes and meter boxes, and concealed ducts; b. Metal poles supporting street lights. * 11. All street, drainage or grading improvement plans shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer. J. MISCELLANEOUS * 1. The project shall be constructed as approved. Minor modifications in the design, but not the use, may be approved by staff. Any other change will require Planning Commission approval through the Development Plan review process. * 2. Pursuant to Government Code section 66474.9, the applicant (including the applicant or any agent thereof) shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Town of Danville and its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the Town or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the Town's approval concerning this application, which action is brought within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37. The Town will promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding and cooperate fully in the defense. 3. The project homeowners' association, through project-specific covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs), shall be responsible for maintenance of all on-site driveways, pedestrian ways, common landscape areas, common fencing, project recreation areas, internal roads and parking areas, stormwater pollution control basins, and common drainage facilities. In addition, the CC&Rs shall include a provision for the ongoing healthy maintenance on the roof decks which are intended as visual mitigation. Draft project CC&Rs shall be submitted to the Town of Danville for review and approval a minimum of 30 days prior to recordation of the final map. * 4. Use of a private gated entrance is expressly prohibited. * 5. The location, design and number of gang mailbox structures serving the project shall be subject to review and approval by the Design Review Board and the local Postmaster. * 6. The proposed project shall conform to the Town’s Stormwater Management PAGE 19 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 and Discharge Control Ordinance (Ord. No. 2004-06) and all applicable construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the site. For example, construction BMPs may include, but are not limited to: the storage and handling of construction materials, street cleaning, proper disposal of wastes and debris, painting, concrete operations, dewatering operations, pavement operations, vehicle/equipment cleaning, maintenance and fueling and stabilization of construction entrances. Training of contractors on BMPs for construction activities is a requirement of this permit. At the discretion of the City Engineer, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) may be required for projects under five acres. * 7. The project shall conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board post-construction C.3 regulations which shall be designed and engineered to integrate into the project’s overall site, architectural, landscaping and improvement plans. These requirements are contained in the project’s Stormwater Control Plan and are to be implemented as follows: Prior to issuance of permits for building, site improvements, or landscaping, the permit application shall be consistent with the applicant’s approved Stormwater Control Plan and shall include drawings and specifications necessary to implement all measures in the approved plan. The permit application shall include a completed Construction Plan C.3 Checklist as described in the Town’s Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. As may be required by the City Engineer and the Chief of Planning, drawings submitted with the permit application (including structural, mechanical, architectural, grading, drainage, site, landscape, and other drawings) shall show the details and methods of construction for site design features, measures to limit directly connected impervious area, pervious pavements, self-retaining areas, treatment (Best Management Practices) BMPs, permanent source control BMPs, and other features that control stormwater flow and potential stormwater pollutants. Prior to building permit final and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall execute any agreements identified in the Stormwater Control Plan which pertain to the transfer of ownership and/or long- term maintenance of stormwater treatment or hydrograph modification BMPs. Prior to building permit final and issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall submit, for the Town’s review and approval, a Stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Plan in accordance with the Town of Danville guidelines. Guidelines for the preparation of Stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Plans are in Appendix F PAGE 20 OF RESOLUTION NO. 2024-05 of the Town’s Stormwater C.3 Guidebook. APPROVED by the Danville Planning Commission at a regular meeting on November 12, 2024, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAINED: ABSENT: _____________________________ Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________ ______________________________ City Attorney Chief of Planning ATTACHMENT B 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 Date: October 29, 2024 To: David Crompton, Senior Planner-Town of Danville Via email only: DCrompton@danville.ca.gov From: Brian Griggs: (brian@griggsgroup.com ) Jeff Stone: (jbstone@diamondconstructioninc.com) Re: DEV23-0016 / APN 200-040-012 at 425 El Pintado Road (the “Project”) Dear Mr. Crompton: This memorandum is presented in connection with our securing entitlements for a senior residential development project located at 425 El Pintado in Danville. The project will consist of the construction of a 99 unit and 198 total spaces of underground parking (“Project”) in the Town of Danville (“Town”). Under Government Code Section 65589(j)(1) in the Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”), a city must meet specific requirements before disapproving a housing project that “complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria”. Our application is consistent with the Town’s General Plan High Density Special designation as well as the M-35 zoning and at the Town’s Design Review Board’s August 15, 2024 meeting, the DRB unanimously recommended approval of the Project after we incorporated a number of DRB design recommendations as well as input from the San Ramon Valley Fire Prevention District. The purpose of the HAA is to promote the construction of housing. If a housing project is to be denied, a city/town must base its denial on “written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that the project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety ” and that there is no feasible method to avoid that adverse impact other than denying the project. Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(2) defines a “specific, adverse impact” to mean “a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.” There are no “objective, identified written public health or safety standards or polices” in the zoning regulations nor the General Plan that would form a basis to disapprove the Project. Rather the Project is consistent with the Town’s plans for development in the High Density Special areas of the General Plan. The Project site is included in the Town’s Housing Element as a Housing Opportunity Site. Danville Ordinance Code Chapter 32 -29 addresses the M-35 Multi-Family Residential Zoning District requirements. The M-35 zoning and General Plan High Density Special designation permit a density range of between 30 and 35 units per acre. The total site area is 137,906 square feet (3.17 acres). Therefore, the minimum number of units that must be constructed on the site is 95 (30 x 3.17 = 94.98, rounded up to 95); the maximum allowable residential density is 111 units (35 x 3.17 = 110.81, rounded up to 111). Pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law (“SDBL”), the Project is applying for a density bonus under 65915 (b)(1)(C) and Danville Municipal Code section 32.74.4(a)(3) and a 20% density bonus is permissible over the maximum allowable gross residential density as the Project is a 100% senior, age restricted residential project. This would allow a maximum total project of 134 units (111 units x 0.20 = 22.2 (rounded to 23 units); 23 units + 111 units = 134 total units) however the Project contains 99 units as we feel this density is most appropriate for the site. Danville’s Municipal Code Section 32.73.5 (Inclusionary Housing) states “a project developed consistent with the regulations of the Density Bonus Ordinance at Section 32-74 shall be considered to have satisfied all requirements contained in this section”. Section 32-74.4(a)(3) states that a senior housing development ATTACHMENT C 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 of 35 units or more meets the minimum density bonus requirements therefore the Project’s Inclusionary Housing requirement is satisfied. Pursuant to SDBL, the Town is required to waive or reduce development standards if required to physically construct the project unless it makes specific findings that any such proposal will cause a public health or safety problem, an environmental problem, harm to historical property, or otherwise violates the law. Specifically, development standards are defined in the SDBL in section 65915(o)(1) as follows: (o) “Development standard” includes a site or construction condition, including, but not limited to, a height limitation, a setback requirement, a floor area ratio, an onsite open - space requirement, or a parking ratio that applies to a residential development pursuant to any ordinance, general plan element, specific plan, charter, or other local condition, law, policy, resolution, or regulation." The waivers requested include all site development standards that the Project does not meet and that would “physically preclude” the project from being constructed as designed including, specifically, the following: o Requested Wavier: Waiver of the Town’s requirement for a 28-foot-wide drive aisle • Rationale: Absent the waiver, the footprint of the Project would not be feasible and would preclude construction of the Project as designed as the building would need to be widened to meet the 28 foot wide drive aisle requirement o Requested Waiver: Waiver of the Town’s requirement for minimum parking stall sizes • Rationale: Absent the waiver, the footprint of the Project would not be feasible and would preclude construction of the Project as designed as the building would need to be widened to meet the Town’s minimum parking stall size requirement o Requested Waiver: Waiver of the Town’s requirement for height • Rationale: Absent the waiver, the Project as designed, would not be able to be constructed o Requested Waiver: Waiver on Floor Area Ratio (FAR) • Rationale: Absent the waiver, the Project, as designed, would not be able to be constructed o Requested Waiver: Retaining wall height and setback • Rationale: Absent the waiver, the Project, as designed, would not be able to be constructed As established in the frequently referenced landmark case of Wollmer v. City of Berkeley (2009) 179 Cal. App. 4th 933 the Town does not the ability to require that our Project be redesigned as an alternative to granting the requested waivers. We look forward to the Planning Commission’s discussion during the November 12, 2024 meeting however should you need additional information for preparation of your Staff Report, please let us know. 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 Date: October 29, 2024 To: David Crompton, Senior Planner-Town of Danville Via email only: (DCrompton@danville.ca.gov) From: Brian Griggs: (brian@griggsgroup.com) Jeff Stone: (jbstone@diamondconstructioninc.com) Re: DEV23-0016 / APN 200-040-012 at 425 El Pintado Road (the “Project”) We appreciate the opportunity to build more senior housing in the Town of Danville and would like to provide this “Applicant Statement” to be included in the upcoming staff report you are preparing for our November 12, 2024 Planning Commission hearing. First and foremost, we empathize with the concerns which many Danville citizens have expressed about our Project as we recognize that development is disruptive and change of any type, especially with a multi-story project is difficult. Being a local developer, we are committed to building high quality, architecturally significant, impact driven projects that the entire community feels enhances the area. While controversy almost always exists with change, we hope that this memorandum will help educate those who have concerns such that final opinions will be made after having a full understand of both our Project (including changes we have made over the past year based upon the input from the Town’s Planning Department, the Town’s Design Review Board, and the neighbors) and our rights under applicable state laws. During our combined +/- 60 years of development, we have come to recognize that only after a full understanding can our Project be evaluated versus “what could have been” if another developer were proposing a different project to maximize profits without consideration to the impacts which their development would have on the community and Danville’s “visual landscape”. In order to further explain what is described above, there are 3 significant areas which must be considered, namely (1) what is allowed by right, (2) how the architecture, siting, scale, height and massing has been designed to minimize the aesthetic impact of the Project vs. “the alternative” and (3) how providing 99 additional senior housing condominiums further addresses the market demand and a known need in the Danville community. (1)What is allowed by right: Over 100 state housing laws have been adopted over the past several years with the goal of providing much needed new housing deliveries in the state. With a stated goal of 2.5 million new housing units by the year 2030, the state has allocated 441,176 additional housing units among the Bay Area’s nine counties and 101 cities and towns during the 2023-31 period as set forth in the approved final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (“RHNA”). Danville’s RHNA allocation is 2,241 residential units and Danville’s recent ATTACHMENT D 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 adoption of its “Housing Element” identified how the Town would “develop local land use strategies to maximize land resources and encourage affordable housing ”. As a part of the Town’s adoption of the Danville Housing Element on February 6, 2024, the Town rezoned the property at 425 El Pintado upon which we will construct our 99-unit Project. This M-35 zoning requires construction of a minimum 95 units (30 units per acre) on the 3.166-acre property but allows construction of up to 111 units (35 units per acre). The zoning for the property also allows for 4 stories which our Project proposes. By deed restricting the property for “senior housing ” (e.g., age 55 and over), an additional 23 units are allowed pursuant to the “Density Bonus” provisions of Government Code Section 65915 (“SDBL”) thus a project of up to 134 units could be constructed “by right”. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65589(j)(1) in the Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”), a city must meet specific requirements before disapproving a housing project that “complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria”. The purpose of the HAA is to promote the construction of housing. If a housing project is to be denied, a city must base its denial on “written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on the record that the project would have a “specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety”. Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(2) defines a “specific, adverse impact” to mean “a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.” There are no “objective, identified written public health or safety standards or polices” in the zoning regulations nor the General Plan that would form a basis to disapprove either our Project or in all likelihood, any other project which would be proposed. (2) How the architecture, siting, scale, height and massing has been designed to minimize the aesthetic impact of the project vs. “the alternative” Aside from the rights afforded under the HAA pursuant to the provisions of the SDBL, the Town is required to waive or reduce development standards if required to physically construct a project unless it makes specific findings that any such proposal will cause a public health or safety problem, an environmental problem, harm to historical property, or otherwise violates the law. Specifically, development standards are defined in Government Code Section 65915(o)(1) as follows: (o) “Development standard” includes a site or construction condition, including, but not limited to, a height limitation, a setback requirement, a floor area ratio, an onsite open- space requirement, or a parking ratio that applies to a residential development pursuant to any ordinance, general plan element, specific plan, charter, or other local condition, law, policy, resolution, or regulation." What this means is rather than the Project we are proposing, another developer would 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 have the ability to not only construct a higher/wider/larger building but a project up to 167 units (a 50% density bonus if the alternative project were to provide 15% very low-income units). Given the site constraints with the creek setbacks and the fire access requirements of the San Ramon Valley Fire Prevention District, this density would undoubtedly require several more floors than the 4 floors we are proposing. The other key element is the “look” of a different project which attempts to maximize size /unit count and minimize construction costs in order to maximize profits as the new housing laws severally limit the Town’s ability to influence the design. Under state laws, the architecture can be very “plain and boxy” as if a design meets "objective standards" (or uses SDBL waivers) as personal opinions or subjective interpretations by a public officials may not be used. Objective standards are issues such as height and setbacks (e.g., development standards as defined above) as defined in California Government Code Section 66300(a)(7) as follows: (7) “Objective design standard” means a design standard that involves no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and is uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official before submittal of an application. SB 35’s amendment to California Government Code Section 65913.4(a)(5) further defines Objective Design Standards but as highlighted in bold below, with the use of the waivers afforded under SDBL, any “objective standard” requirements may be waived. (5) The development, excluding any additional density or any other concessions, incentives, or waivers of development standards granted pursuant to the Density Bonus Law in Section 65915, is consistent with objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards in effect at the time that the development is submitted to the local government pursuant to this section. For purposes of this paragraph , “objective zoning standards,” “objective subdivision standards,” and “objective design review standards” mean standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the developm ent applicant or proponent and the public official before submittal. In essence, the above provisions allow a developer using SDBL to exercise its right to use waivers to obtain approval of a building which does not meet the “Development Standards” defined above (e.g., “including, but not limited to, a height limitation, a setback requirement, a floor area ratio, an onsite open - space requirement, or a parking ratio”). Despite using SDBL providing us the use of unlimited waivers of Development Standards, we have chosen to create a building design which contains articulations, setbacks and a tiered, multi-level design worthy of its location at one of the key freeway intersections in Danville. Unlike many newly developed projects in the Bay Area, our modern design uses stepping of the building facades and a variety of materials such as tile, metal, concrete, wood, and stucco, which collectively help minimize the scale of the Project. By providing 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 a central courtyard and extensive landscaping throughout the project and on the upper decks, the project benefits from a desired “pedestrian scale”. We have engaged with neighbors along El Rio Drive who have expressed concerns about our Project and we have had multiple discussions with two neighbors (447 and 471 El Rio) about the possibility of voluntarily providing some plantings on these neighbor’s properties to help partially screen their views of our project. It is important, however, to reiterate that there is no requirement nor obligation to perform any improvements nor may the Town condition our project’s entitlements on any such improvements. The neighbor’s primary objections were over the 4 story building but as outlined above, the 4 stories is allowed “by right” by virtue of the February 6, 2024 zoning revisions enacted by the Town Council. Notwithstanding, in response to these two neighbors’ concerns we have redesigned the northern side of our building to minimize the massing by providing stepped back, recessed exterior decks. We have also shared the photo simulations below and the additional images from their properties to show the “site lines” and elevations of their living spaces to the proposed building’s height. 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 Changes (in green) made to upper level on north side 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 Unfortunately, the neighbor located at 441 El Rio has been unwavering in his opposition to our Project despite our efforts. Fortunately, the impacts of our Project on this neighbor are significantly less than the homes at 447 and 471 El Rio given there are no windows from 441 El Rio facing our Project. The windows and orientation of the 441 home face east towards Mount Diablo rather than our Project and from the inside of the home, our Project will not be directly visible as show in the photo simulation as shown below. Most importantly, our survey (the validity of which has been questioned by the 441 El Rio owner) places a portion of the neighbor’s fence and all 19 of the neighbor’s cypress trees on our property which help partially shield our Project from the neighbor’s view. We have elected to pull back our retaining wall by approximately 8 feet as shown in the final two images below in order to retain these trees. View from 441 El Rio Facing the Project 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 Location of property line/fence/trees per our survey Proposed retaining wall to retain fence and trees (per our survey) 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 Images of our proposed Project: 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 Details of Project’s Façade Design and Detailing 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 Images of other Bay Area projects: Walnut Creek 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 Berkeley Emeryville 425 EP Investment, LLC PO Box 477 Lafayette, California 94549 (3) How providing 99 additional senior housing condominiums further addresses the market demand and helps Danville There is a need for senior housing in Danville. Currently, downsizing options are scarce, forcing many older residents to either stay in larger homes or relocate out of state, away from their families and friends and away from a community where most seniors have lived for decades. Our Project offers a solution by providing suitable housing for those wishing to remain close to their loved ones, while also freeing up larger single -family homes for new families moving into the area. The creation of new senior housing communities results in benefits to both current residents and the future growth of the community. Building senior housing in Danville is crucial to support the significant portion of the community over the age of 55 who lack viable downsizing opportunities. Census data reveals that 48.1% of Danville’s population is aged 55 and over, reflecting nearly h alf of the community that may soon require more accessible and manageable living spaces. By developing housing solutions tailored to this demographi c, our Project will create an opportunity for older residents to have the ability to downsize within their community, preserving their independence and quality of life. Our Project will create a community where residents will have the ability to interact amongst others of a similar demographic. The amenity spaces which we will provide will serve as gathering spots for residents and we foresee this collaboration creating an environment where seniors will thrive. Here is a link to the Town’s information repository on our Project which provides much of the project information we have prepared. The Town also has received and approved the final required studies (including traffic and hydrology) and those reports will be available once the staff report and public notice is distributed prior to the November 12, 2024 Planning Commission hearing. In summary, community members always possess the right to comment on and either support or object to development projects. Prior to “having their hands tied” by state laws, local jurisdictions had the ability to use more subjectivity when evaluating projects and this led directly to citizens having more influence upon the decisions of local officials. Due to recent housing legislation and RHNA requirements, the Town of Danville has little ability to stop development however as local developers, we are confident our Project fit s into the “we don’t want to have it but if we are forced to have it then it is likely the best project it could be” category. The objections of the neighbors and voices of others in the community are important but once the Town adopted the rezoning of the 425 El Pintado property at the Town Council’s February 6, 2024 public hearing, the ability to obtain approvals and construct the Project we are proposing was solidified. We do hope the issues presented herein allow interested parties to better understand more about the background of our Project so each may make an informed opinion. TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY 425 El Pintado Road PREPARED FOR: TOWN OF DANVILLE SEPTEMBER 2024 | FINAL Prepared By: ATTACHMENT E Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final WARNING! The electronic data files ("Files") furnished by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to the intended receiver of the Files ("Receiving Party") are provided only for the convenience of Receiving Party and only for its sole use. In the case of any defects in the Files or any discrepancies between the electronic Files and the hardcopy of the Files prepared by Kimley-Horn, the hardcopy shall govern. Only printed copies of documents conveyed by Kimley-Horn may be relied upon. Any use of the information obtained or derived from these electronic files will be at the Receiving Party's sole risk. Because data stored in electronic media format can deteriorate or be modified inadvertently or otherwise without authorization of the data's creator, the Receiving Party agrees that it has 60 days to perform acceptance tests, after which it shall be deemed to have accepted the data transferred. Receiving Party accepts the Files on an "as is" basis with all faults. There are no express warranties made by Kimley- Horn with respect to the Files, and any implied warranties are excluded. Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final CONTENTS Contents .................................................................................................................................... iii Tables ........................................................................................................................................ iv Figures ....................................................................................................................................... iv Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... i Project Trip Estimates .................................................................................................................. i Project Impact and Deficiencies ................................................................................................... i Vehicular Site Access ................................................................................................................. ii Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Transit Access ...................................................................................... iii Parking Analysis ......................................................................................................................... iii 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 2. Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis ............................................................................................ 3 3. Traffic Operational Analysis ................................................................................................... 5 Study Area .................................................................................................................................. 5 Traffic Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 5 Level of Service Standards.......................................................................................................... 6 Roadway Operations ................................................................................................................... 7 Report Organization .................................................................................................................... 7 4. Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................ 9 Existing Roadway Network .......................................................................................................... 9 Existing Transit Facilities ............................................................................................................. 9 Existing Pedestrian Facilities ..................................................................................................... 11 Existing Bicycle Facilities .......................................................................................................... 11 Existing Lane Configuration and Traffic Control ......................................................................... 13 Existing Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes ....................................................................... 13 Existing Intersection Level of Service ........................................................................................ 13 Existing Roadway Operational Analysis ..................................................................................... 13 Existing Signal Warrant Evaluation ............................................................................................ 14 5. Project Conditions ............................................................................................................... 17 Proposed Site Use .................................................................................................................... 17 Trip Generation ......................................................................................................................... 17 Project Trip Distribution and Assignment ................................................................................... 19 Existing Plus Project Intersection Level of Service ..................................................................... 19 Existing Plus Project Roadway Operational Analysis ................................................................. 25 Existing Signal Warrant Evaluation ............................................................................................ 25 6. Site Access and Circulation ................................................................................................. 26 Vehicular Site Access ............................................................................................................... 26 Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Transit Access .................................................................................... 26 7. Parking Evaluation .............................................................................................................. 27 Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final Proposed Parking Supply .......................................................................................................... 27 Parking Requirements ............................................................................................................... 27 Parking Demand ....................................................................................................................... 28 8. Summary of Adverse Effects and Recommended Improvements ........................................ 30 APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................ 31 TABLES Table 1 - Intersection Level of Service Definitions .......................................................................6 Table 2 - Existing Intersection Level of Service Summary .........................................................13 Table 3 - Existing Roadway Segment Analysis .........................................................................14 Table 4 - Project Trip Generation ..............................................................................................19 Table 5 - Existing Plus Project Intersection Level of Service Summary .....................................24 Table 6 – Existing Plus Project Roadway Segment Analysis .....................................................25 Table 7 – Town of Danville Municipal Code – Parking Requirements ........................................27 Table 8 – Proposed Parking Demand .......................................................................................28 FIGURES Figure 1 – Project Location and Study Intersections....................................................................2 Figure 2 – Existing Transit Facilities ..........................................................................................10 Figure 3 – Existing Bicycle Facilities .........................................................................................12 Figure 4 – Existing Condition Lane Geometry and Traffic Control .............................................15 Figure 5 – Existing Condition Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes ......................................16 Figure 6 – Site Plan...................................................................................................................18 Figure 7 – Existing Small Office Building Trip Distribution .........................................................20 Figure 8 – Proposed Senior Housing Trip Distribution ...............................................................21 Figure 9 – Project Generated Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes .....................................22 Figure 10 – Existing Plus Project Condition Peak Hour Turning Movement Volumes ................23 Figure 11 – Parking Layout .......................................................................................................29 Transportation Impact Study │ 425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 425 El Pintado Road Project (“Project”) proposes to construct a multi-family senior housing development of 99 residential units located northwest of the intersection of El Cerro Boulevard and El Pintado Road, east of Interstate 680 (I-680). The proposed senior housing residential units consist of 22 one-bedroom units, 51 two-bedroom units, and 26 three-bedroom units. The existing use at the site is currently a small office building of approximately 7,710 square feet with various small businesses within the building. The project proposes to demolish the existing office building to construct the 4-story senior housing condominium. Access to the site would be provided by the existing unsignalized and full access driveway along El Pintado Road. This TIS was prepared to determine potential vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impacts, intersection level of service (LOS) deficiencies, and roadway capacity deficiencies of the proposed project on the adjacent roadway network. This study includes a daily VMT analysis and an intersection LOS analysis during the weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions for four (4) existing intersections/driveways. The study also includes a roadway capacity analysis for daily traffic conditions at three (3) study roadways. Site access, on-site circulation, and parking evaluations were also reviewed to determine the effects of the proposed project. PROJECT TRIP ESTIMATES Trips generated by the proposed senior housing project were determined using the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE)Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. Trip generation rates for ITE Land Use 252 (Senior Adult Housing – Multifamily) were used to determine the daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour trips generated. For the office building, a trip credit is taken for the trip generation since the existing land use is proposed to be removed from the site. To determine the trip generation for the office use, the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition was used instead of driveway counts because ITE is more reflective of the office land use than this specific tenant and occupancy. Based on ITE land use code 712 (Small Office Building), the existing office building generates 111 daily trips, 13 trips in the AM peak hour, and 17 trips in the PM peak hour. With the construction of the proposed senior housing development and demolition of the existing office building, the project will generate a net new +210 daily trips, +7 trips in the AM peak hour, and +8 trips in the PM peak hour. PROJECT IMPACT AND DEFICIENCIES The following summarizes the transportation impacts and project deficiencies related to the proposed project and the study area. Transportation impacts are based on vehicle miles traveled and not intersection level of service. Intersection level of service deficiencies under project conditions were also identified and summarized. VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) Based on the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) Measure J Growth Management Program Implementation Guide, the project does not qualify to screen out of a VMT analysis as it does not satisfy at least one of the five screening criteria. Therefore, a detailed VMT analysis was conducted for the proposed project. Transportation Impact Study │ 425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final ii CCTA travel demand model data and VMT information provided by the Town were used to conduct the project’s VMT analysis. Based on the information, the project is located within TAZ 40002, which comprises mostly of single-family residential units. The residential VMT for projects located within this TAZ is 24.5 VMT per capita and is greater than the target threshold. The target residential VMT for the Town of Danville is 18.9 VMT per capita (15 percent below the Citywide average residential VMT of 22.3 VMT per capita). However, residential uses modeled within the CCTA travel demand model typically utilize multi-family and single-family residential land uses. Senior housing facilities consist of different characteristics than the standard residential land uses and typically generate far fewer daily trips. Most trips generated by senior housing facilities are from visitors and staff, rather than the senior residents themselves. Since the CCTA travel demand model does not reflect the proposed project use, additional adjustments were made to the model results. Off-model adjustments were conducted to provide a VMT analysis that more appropriately represents the project’s characteristics. To determine the VMT for the proposed project, an adjustment was applied to the single-family residential VMT based on the Replica Big Data platform. To determine the difference in trip generation characteristics between single family residential units and senior multi-family residential units in Danville, the trip generation within the Town was obtained from Replica for these two uses. Only one age-restricted active adult multi-family development was identified within the Danville Town Limits, the Meadow Wood at Alamo Creek Apartments 1 . The trip making characteristics of this development were isolated from the surrounding Block Group, the smallest geography for selection available in Replica, using filters based on trip taker age and land use type (multi-family residential). The trip generation for the single-family residential detached housing (the type of housing in the Contra Costa Transportation Authority’s travel demand model representing the Project) for the entire Town of Danville was also obtained using filters based on land use type and the Town’s boundary. The trip generation for the two land use types resulted in 52-percent fewer trips for Town of Danville Age-Restricted Multi-Family Apartment development when compared to single-family detached housing. Thus, when this reduction to the calculated VMT per capita for the proposed project (24.5 VMT per capita) is applied, the resulting VMT per capita for the proposed Project is 11.8 VMT per capita, well below the target threshold of 18.9 VMT per capita. As the proposed Project is expected to result in a VMT per capita less than the target threshold, the Project is presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact for VMT. INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFICIENCIES Based on the intersection LOS analysis for Existing and Existing Plus Project conditions, no intersection LOS deficiencies result from the proposed project. VEHICULAR SITE ACCESS The proposed development will be accessible through the existing unsignalized and full-access driveway along El Pintado Road. Access to the below-grade parking garage is provided immediately across the driveway as vehicles enter the site through the New Creek Bridge. As vehicles enter the garage, guest parking is provided near the garage entrance and residential parking is provided further inwards to the garage. Regular parking stalls are located along the northwest side of the garage while puzzle and stacking parking spaces are mixed throughout the remaining spaces. 1 Meadow Wood at Alamo Creek Apartments, 300 Damani Court, Danville, CA. 55+ Active Adult Apartments. https://www.meadowwoodatalamocreek.com/ Transportation Impact Study │ 425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final iii BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, AND TRANSIT ACCESS There are currently no existing bicycle facilities along the project frontage on El Pintado Road. The nearest bicycle facility to the site is located immediately south of the project along El Cerro Boulevard with a Class II bicycle lane. The nearest retail uses to the site are located in the Downtown Danville area, approximately 1.0 mile southwest of the project site. Bicycles traveling to Downtown Danville can utilize the existing Class II bicycle lanes along El Cerro Boulevard and Danville Boulevard or the Class III bicycle route along W El Pintado Road. Based on the Diablo Road (west) Bicycle Improvements Project, there are future planned bicycle improvements along Diablo Road between Hartz Avenue and Green Valley Road. These improvements include widening existing bike lanes, adding additional bike lanes, restriping the roadway as well as adding bicycle signage, traffic signal bicycle detection, green pavement markings, and bike boxes. These bicycle improvements are located an interchange to the south of the proposed project at I-680/Diablo Road and the project is not expected conflict with the bicycle improvements. Internal to the site, residents accessing the senior housing building may use the main entrance located to the southwest of the parking garage entrance. To access the adjacent local roadways (i.e., El Pintado Road and El Cerro Boulevard), there is a 6-foot wide pedestrian pathway on-site that connects residents from the main entrance to the pedestrian path adjacent to the New Creek Bridge near the project driveway. Within the parking garage, an accessible route is provided adjacent to the accessible parking spaces to guide residents to the stairway access. Stairway access is provided at four locations within the parking garage. External to the site, pedestrians may utilize the existing sidewalks along El Pintado Road, El Cerro Boulevard and Danville Boulevard and crosswalks at intersections to travel to Downtown Danville with a variety of retail and restaurant uses. The project is not proposing off-site improvements on the adjacent street network and therefore is not expected to conflict with any future pedestrian planned improvements. Residents or staff taking transit can walk along El Pintado Road and El Cerro Boulevard to access the nearest transit stop located to the west of the project site, at the intersection of El Cerro Boulevard and Danville Boulevard. This stop serves County Connection Routes 21 and 321, which provide weekday and weekend services between the Walnut Creek BART station and the San Ramon Transit Center. PARKING ANALYSIS A parking analysis was conducted for the site to determine whether the project is providing sufficient parking to meet the minimum parking requirements based on the Danville Municipal Code and the peak parking demand based on the ITE Parking Generation Manual, 6th Edition. The project is providing a total of 198 parking spaces (176 resident spaces and 22 guest spaces). Based on the Danville Municipal Code’s parking requirements for multifamily residential units, and the number of one-bedroom, two-bedroom, and three-bedroom units the project is providing, the project is required to provide 212 parking spaces (187 resident spaces and 25 guest spaces). The project does not meet the minimum parking requirements and is deficient by 14 spaces (11 resident spaces and 3 guest spaces). As mentioned previously in the VMT analysis, senior housing units have different characteristics than typical multi-family or single-family residential units. Senior housing typically generates fewer trips and typically has a lower parking demand as most of the demand is attributed to visitors and staff rather than the senior residents. Therefore, the peak parking demand for a senior housing facility was determined using the ITE Parking Generation Manual, 6th Edition for ITE Land Use Code 252 (Senior Adult Housing – Multifamily). Based on the 85th percentile peak parking demand rate, the peak parking demand for the project is 66 Transportation Impact Study │ 425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final iv parking spaces and is far below the proposed parking supply of 198 parking spaces. Therefore, the project is providing sufficient parking spaces to meet the peak parking demand. It should be noted that the applicant is requesting a parking waiver. Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 1 1. INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of the transportation impact study (TIS) for the proposed 425 El Pintado Road Project (“Project”) located in Danville, CA. The project proposes to construct a multi-family senior housing development of 99 residential units. The proposed senior housing residential units consist of 22 one-bedroom units, 51 two-bedroom units, and 26 three-bedroom units. The project is located northwest of the intersection of El Cerro Boulevard and El Pintado Road, east of Interstate 680 (I-680). The existing use at the site is currently a small office building of approximately 7,710 square feet with various small businesses within the building. The project proposes to demolish the existing office building to construct the 4-story senior housing condominium. Figure 1 illustrates the location of the project site in relation to the adjacent roadway network. The site would be accessed by the existing unsignalized and full access driveway along El Pintado Road. This TIS was prepared to determine potential vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impacts, intersection level of service (LOS) deficiencies, and roadway capacity deficiencies of the proposed project on the adjacent roadway network. This study includes a daily VMT analysis and an intersection LOS analysis during the weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions for four (4) existing intersections/driveways. The study also includes a roadway capacity analysis for daily traffic conditions at three (3) study roadways. Site access, on-site circulation, and parking evaluations were also reviewed to determine the effects of the proposed project. The following discusses the methodology, analysis, and results of the transportation analysis. 1 El Pint a d o R o a d A d o b e D r i v e E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d 4 R d P i n t a d o W E l L a G o n d a W a y El Cerro B o u l e v a r d INTERSTATEINTERSTATE68 0 I N T E R S T A T E I N T E R S T A T E 6 8 0 Danville Bou l e v a r d 3 2 SEPTEMBER 2024 N N O T T O S C A L E L E G E N D X P R O - E C 7 S I 7 E S 7 8 D Y I N 7 E R S E C 7 I O N S P R O - E C 7 L O C A 7 I O N A N D S 7 8 D Y I N 7 E R S E C 7 I O N S ) I G 8 R E 1 4 2 5 E L P I N T A D O R O A D Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 3 2. VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS The project’s VMT was analyzed to determine if the new development would result in a significant transportation impact under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). VMT was analyzed based on standards and methodology set forth in the State of California’s Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR)Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA2 and the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA)Measure J Growth Management Program Implementation Guide3. These documents, particularly the CCTA Implementation Guide, provide VMT initial screening criteria, significance thresholds, analysis methodologies, and mitigation measures for development projects under CEQA. Using the CCTA Implementation Guide, an initial screening was conducted for the proposed residential project to determine whether a detailed VMT analysis is required. Based on the project characteristics and location, the project does not satisfy the initial screening criteria. A description of the five screening criteria is provided below: 1.CEQA Exemption – Any project that is exempt from CEQA is not required to conduct a VMT analysis. o The project is not exempt from CEQA and is required to provide a VMT analysis. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. 2.Small Projects – Small projects can be presumed to cause a less-than-significant VMT impact. Small projects are defined as having 10,000 square feet or less of non-residential space or 20 residential units or less, or otherwise generating less than 836 VMT per day. o The project is proposing 99 residential units and is greater than the 20-unit threshold to be considered a small project. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. 3.Local-Serving Uses – Projects that consist of Local-Serving Uses can generally be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary, since these types of projects will primarily draw users and customers from a relatively small geographic area that will lead to short-distance trips and trips that are linked to other destinations. o The project is not considered locally serving as trips generated by the project will include local trips within Danville and also trips at a regional level to nearby cities and counties. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. 4.Projects Located in Transit Priority Areas (TPA)– Projects located within a TPA can be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. o Based on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Transit Priority Area database, Danville is not located within a TPA. Therefore, the project is also not located within a TPA. As a result, this criterion does not apply. 5. Projects Located in Low VMT Areas – Residential and employment-generating projects located within a low VMT-generating area can be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. For housing projects: Cities and unincorporated portions within 2 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, April 2018 3 Measure J Growth Management Program Implementation Guide, Contra Costa Transportation Authority, February 2021. Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 4 CCTA’s five subregions that have existing home-based VMT per capita that is 85% or less of the existing County-wide average. o Based on CCTA VMT information provided by the Town, the project is located within transportation analysis zone (TAZ) 40002 with a residential VMT of 24.5 VMT per capita. The mitigation target for residential VMT in the Town of Danville is 18.9 VMT per capita, which is 15 percent below the Citywide average residential VMT of 22.3 VMT per capita. Therefore the project, located in TAZ 40002 with a residential VMT of 24.5 VMT per capita, does not meet the target threshold of 18.9 VMT per capita. As described above, the project does not satisfy the initial screening criteria and a more detailed VMT analysis is required. Residential uses modeled within the CCTA travel demand model typically utilize multi- family and single-family residential land uses. However, the proposed project is a senior housing facility consisting of different characteristics than that of multi- or single-family residential as it generates far fewer daily trips. Most trips generated by senior housing facilities are from visitors and staff, rather than the senior residents themselves. Since the CCTA travel demand model does not reflect the proposed project use, additional adjustments were made to the model results. Off-model adjustments were conducted to provide a VMT analysis that more appropriately represents the project’s characteristics. As mentioned previously, the project is located within TAZ 40002, which comprises mostly of single-family residential units. Therefore, it is assumed that the single-family residential VMT is 24.5 VMT per capita. As mentioned previously, single- family homes typically generate more trips per residential unit and of longer distance within daily travel between work and school. Whereas senior housing generates fewer daily trips per residential unit as trips are primarily generated by staff and visitors. To determine the VMT for the proposed project, an adjustment was applied to the single-family residential VMT based on the Replica Big Data platform. Replica is a data analytics platform that provides detailed insights into the movement, behaviors, and patterns of people. It leverages aggregated and anonymized mobile location data to model the travel habits and demographics of populations. Replica uses synthetic data that is calibrated and validated using anonymized real-world data sources. To determine the difference in trip generation characteristics between single family residential units and senior multi-family residential units in Danville, the trip generation within the Town was obtained from Replica for these two uses. Only one age-restricted active adult multi-family development was identified within the Danville Town Limits, the Meadow Wood at Alamo Creek Apartments 4 . The trip making characteristics of this development were isolated from the surrounding Block Group, the smallest geography for selection available in Replica, using filters based on trip taker age and land use type (multi-family residential). The trip generation for the single-family residential detached housing (the type of housing in the Contra Costa Transportation Authority’s travel demand model representing the Project) for the entire Town of Danville was also obtained using filters based on land use type and the Town’s boundary. The trip generation for the two land use types are summarized in Table 1. As shown in Table 1, within the Town of Danville Age-Restricted Multi-Family Apartment development, such as the proposed Project, produce 52- percent fewer trips when compared to single-family detached housing. Thus, when this reduction to the calculated VMT per capita for the proposed project (24.5 VMT per capita) is applied, the resulting VMT per capita for the proposed Project is 11.8 VMT per capita, well below the target threshold of 18.9 VMT per capita. As the proposed Project is expected to result in a VMT per capita less than the target threshold, the Project is presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact for VMT. 4 Meadow Wood at Alamo Creek Apartments, 300 Damani Court, Danville, CA. 55+ Active Adult Apartments. https://www.meadowwoodatalamocreek.com/ Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 5 Table 1 - Intersection Level of Service Definitions Location Land Use Type Trip Generation (Daily Trips) Meadow Wood at Alamo Creek Age-Restricted Multi-Family Apartments 4.78 Danville (Whole Town)Single-Family Detached Housing 9.92 Percent Reduction:52% 3. TRAFFIC OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS This chapter describes the project area as well as the study intersections and study roadways for the traffic operational analysis. Also included is a description of the intersection level of service and roadway capacity standards and methodology used to analyze the study locations. STUDY AREA The proposed project would generate new vehicular trips that would increase traffic volumes for certain movements on the nearby street network. To assess changes in traffic conditions associated with the proposed project, the following intersections and roadways listed below were evaluated and are shown in Figure 1. The study intersections and roadways were selected based on the estimated vehicle trips generated by the project, the distribution and assignment of the trips to the roadway network, and in consultation with the Town. Study Intersections 1. El Pintado Road / Project Driveway –SSSC 2. El Cerro Boulevard / El Pintado Road –SSSC 3. El Cerro Boulevard / I-680 NB Ramps –Signal 4. El Cerro Boulevard / I-680 SB Ramps –Signal Note: SSSC – Side Street Stop Control Study Roadways 1. El Pintado Road – between El Cerro Boulevard and Project Driveway 2. El Cerro Blvd - between El Pintado Road and Alisal Court 3. El Cerro Blvd - between I-680 SB ramp and La Gonda Way TRAFFIC CONDITIONS This study evaluates the following two (2) scenarios: §Existing Conditions – Based on traffic counts collected in 2024. Existing roadway geometry and traffic control were assumed for this scenario. §Existing Plus Project Conditions – Based on traffic generated by the proposed project added to existing traffic volumes. Trip credits are assumed for the existing office use on the site that will be removed once demolished. This scenario assumes existing roadway geometry and traffic control. Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 6 LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS Analysis of intersection deficiencies are based on the concept of level of service (LOS). The LOS of an intersection is a qualitative measure used to describe operational conditions. LOS ranges from A (best), which represents minimal delay, to F (worst), which represents heavy delay and a facility that is operating at or near its functional capacity. Levels of service for this study were determined using methods defined in the Highway Capacity Manual, 7th Edition (HCM) within Synchro 12 analysis software for signalized and unsignalized intersections. However, due to the constraints of HCM 7th Edition to analyze specific geometry and signal timing settings, HCM 2000 Edition was used to analyze Intersections #3 and #4. HCM includes procedures for analyzing side street stop controlled (SSSC), all-way stop controlled (AWSC), and signalized intersections. The SSSC procedure defines LOS as a function of average control delay for the worst minor street movement or major left-turn. For this analysis, the delays for the worst movement and the overall intersection are reported. Conversely, the AWSC and signalized intersection procedures define LOS as a function of average control delay for the intersection as a whole.Table 2 relates the operational characteristics associated with each LOS category for signalized and unsignalized intersections. Table 2 - Intersection Level of Service Definitions Level of Service Description Signalized (Avg. control delay per vehicle sec/veh.) Unsignalized (Avg. control delay per vehicle sec/veh.) A Free flow with no delays. Users are virtually unaffected by others in the traffic stream ≤ 10 ≤ 10 B Stable traffic. Traffic flows smoothly with few delays.> 10 – 20 > 10 – 15 C Stable flow but the operation of individual users becomes affected by other vehicles. Modest delays. > 20 – 35 > 15 – 25 D Approaching unstable flow. Operation of individual users becomes significantly affected by other vehicles. Delays may be more than one cycle during peak hours. > 35 – 55 > 25 – 35 E Unstable flow with operating conditions at or near the capacity level. Long delays and vehicle queuing. > 55 – 80 > 35 – 50 F Forced or breakdown flow that causes reduced capacity. Stop and go traffic conditions. Excessive long delays and vehicle queuing. > 80 > 50 Sources: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition, National Research Council, 2022. Town of Danville As outlined in the Town of Danville’s 2030 General Plan5, the LOS standard is LOS D on local roads with the exception of locations where the Town has determined that LOS D cannot be maintained as a result of additional traffic from outside of Danville, CA. The Town’s General Plan does not have a criteria to determine deficiencies due to additional traffic generated by developments. Therefore, consistent with the 5 The Town of Danville 2030 General Plan, Town of Danville, March 19, 2013. Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 7 LOS criteria outlined in the Magee Preserve Traffic Impact Study6, a deficiency would occur if the proposed project caused the following: · For intersections operating at an acceptable LOS D or better without the project, a deficiency would occur if the project degrades the intersection to an unacceptable LOS E or worse, or; · For intersections operating at an unacceptable LOS E or worse without the project, a deficiency would occur if the project increases the volume to capacity (v/c) ratio by more than 5 percent. Contra Costa Transportation Authority Based on CCTA’s Tri-Valley Action Plan7 , the Roadway Regional Transportation Objective (RTO) for intersection LOS has established a LOS E standard at RTO monitoring locations, such as select freeway ramps. El Cerro Boulevard at the I-680 NB ramps and I-680 SB ramps has been established as RTO monitoring locations and therefore has a LOS standard of LOS E. Consistent with the CCTA Transportation Analysis Guidelines8, a deficiency would occur if the proposed project caused the following: · For intersections operating at an acceptable LOS E or better without the project, a deficiency would occur if the project degrades the intersection to an unacceptable LOS F, or; · For intersections operating at an unacceptable LOS F without the project, a deficiency would occur if the project increases the average intersection control delay for signalized intersections or the worst movement delay for SSSC intersections by five (5) seconds or more. ROADWAY OPERATIONS Roadway operations were evaluated at the study roadway segments using the methodology consistent with the 2030 Town of Danville General Plan roadway capacity thresholds. Daily roadway volumes were analyzed rather than peak hour volumes since roadway capacities provided in the general plan are based on vehicles per day rather than vehicles per hour. Roadway segments are assumed to be deficient when daily volumes exceed the capacity defined for its roadway classification. REPORT ORGANIZATION The remainder of the report is divided into the following chapters for the traffic operations analysis: · Chapter 4: Existing Conditions – describes existing conditions on the roadway network, transit system, pedestrian facilities, and bicycle facilities. · Chapter 5: Project Conditions – describes the proposed project, trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment on the street network. Estimated deficiencies on the transportation system are also evaluated under Existing Plus Project Conditions. · Chapter 6: Site Access and Circulation – describes the site access and circulation for the project as it relates to vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian access and describes any potential effects on these facilities. · Chapter 7: Parking Evaluation – describes the parking requirement and parking demand for the proposed project based on Town requirements and the ITE Parking Generation Manual. Parking 6 Traffic Impact Study for Magee Ranch in the Town of Danville,Stantec, June 25, 2018. 7 Tri-Valley Action Plan,Contra Costa Transportation Authority, March 2023. 8 Contra Costa Transportation Analysis Guidelines, Contra Costa County, June 23, 2020. Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 8 requirements and parking demand are then compared to the proposed parking supply to determine if the project is providing sufficient parking. · Chapter 8: Summary of Adverse Effects and Recommended Improvements – summarizes potential intersection LOS adverse effects of the proposed project and recommended improvements, if necessary. Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 9 4. EXISTING CONDITIONS This chapter describes the existing conditions of the roadway network, transit service, pedestrian facilities, and bicycle facilities within the vicinity of the project site. The chapter also presents the results of the existing conditions intersection level of service analysis. EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK Interstate 680 (I-680)is part of the interstate freeway system and is located directly to the west of the project site. I-680 extends north-south connecting the project to the City of Dublin, City of Pleasanton, and cities within the south bay to the south and to Contra Costa County to the north. I-680 also connects to I- 580 to the south and to SR 24 to the north. Within the project area, I-680 consists of three general purpose lanes and one express lane in each direction. The I-680 express lanes are in operation Monday through Friday from 5:00 AM to 8:00 PM. I-680 is a designated route of regional significance in the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance. The posted speed limit on I-680 is 65 miles per hour (mph) in the project area. El Cerro Boulevard is a two-lane east-west roadway within the study area and is classified as a minor arterial within the Town of Danville’s General Plan. The roadway begins at Danville Boulevard to the west and transitions into Diablo Road to the east, providing access to I-680, schools, and residential uses along its route. El Cerro Boulevard connects traffic from the nearby residential uses to I-680. The posted speed limit on El Cerro Boulevard is 30 mph. El Pintado Road is a north-south roadway within the study area and is classified as a neighborhood access roadway within the Town of Danville’s General Plan. The project’s access is located along El Pintado Road. The roadway connects to El Cerro Boulevard to the south and transitions to Briar Place to the northwest, providing access to residential uses. The posted speed limit on El Pintado Road is 30 mph. EXISTING TRANSIT FACILITIES The County Connection has multiple transit routes throughout the Town and to multiple cities within Contra Costa County. Existing transit services within the study area are shown in Figure 2 and described in this section. Schedules for each route are current as of May 2024 but may change due to external factors. Route 21 is a local bus route that operates between the Walnut Creek BART station and the San Ramon Transit Center, and provides access to the Danville Park N Ride along its route. Route 21 operates along Danville Boulevard, to the west of the project site. On weekdays, Route 21 operates between 5:43 AM and 9:28 PM with 30- to 60-minute headways. Route 21 does not operate on weekends. The closest bus stop to the project is located at the intersection of El Cerro Boulevard and Danville Boulevard, approximately ½ mile from the project site. Route 321 is a weekend route that operates between the Walnut Creek BART station and the San Ramon Transit Center. This route provides weekend services for the same stops as Route 21, which provides services on weekdays only. Route 321 operates along Danville Boulevard, to the west of the project site. On weekends, Route 321 operates between 7:31 AM and 8:17 PM with 60-minute headways. The closest bus stop to the project is located at the intersection of El Cerro Boulevard and Danville Boulevard, approximately ½ mile from the project site. 1 El Pint a d o R o a d A d o b e D r i v e E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d 4 R d P i n t a d o W E l L a G o n d a W a y El Cerro B o u l e v a r d INTERSTATEINTERSTATE68 0 I N T E R S T A T E I N T E R S T A T E 6 8 0 Danville Bou l e v a r d 3 2 SEPTEMBER 2024 N N O T T O S C A L E E X I S 7 I N G 7 R A N S I 7 ) A C I L I 7 I E S ) I G 8 R E 2 4 2 5 E L P I N T A D O R O A D X L E G E N D P R O - E C 7 S I 7 E A L A 0 O C R E E . S + 8 7 7 L E C O 8 N 7 Y C O N N E C 7 I O N R O 8 7 E 3 2 1 C O 8 N 7 Y C O N N E C 7 I O N R O 8 7 E 2 1 S 7 8 D Y I N 7 E R S E C 7 I O N S Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 11 Alamo Creek Shuttle is a shuttle service that operates between the Walnut Creek BART station and Alamo Creek, and provides access to the Danville Park N Ride along its route. Within the project area, the Alamo Creek Shuttle operates along I-680. On weekends, the shuttle operates between 6:00 AM and 10:00 AM during the AM peak period and between 3:00 PM and 6:30 PM during the PM peak period. There are no bus stops near the project site and the nearest stop is located at the Danville Park N Ride, approximately 1.7 miles to the south of the project site. EXISTING PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Existing pedestrian facilities in the project area include sidewalks on both sides of El Pintado Road and El Cerro Boulevard. There is a lack of crosswalks at the intersection of El Pintado Road and El Cerro Boulevard to cross El Cerro Boulevard. However, there is a nearby crosswalk on the east leg of El Cerro Boulevard and the I-680 NB ramps, allowing pedestrians access between the north and south side of El Cerro Boulevard. It is anticipated that residents of the project will not utilize this crosswalk. Instead, most residents are expected to travel to Downtown Danville, located to the southwest of the project site, and utilize the existing crosswalks at the intersection of El Cerro Boulevard and Danville Boulevard. On the anticipated pedestrian pathway between the Project and Downtown Danville, the northeast corner at the intersection of El Cerro Boulevard and the I-680 NB ramps has an existing large curb radius, which may result in higher vehicle speeds making the westbound right turn from El Cerro Boulevard to the I-680 NB on-ramp. The higher vehicle speeds may result in pedestrians being uncomfortable when crossing the north crosswalk at the intersection of El Cerro Boulevard and the I-680 NB ramps. It should be noted that this intersection was recently modified in 2023 to realign the crosswalk on the north leg to improve sight distance. In addition, the crosswalks for the three legs of the intersection were restriped to continental crosswalks to increase visibility. EXISTING BICYCLE FACILITIES Bicycle facilities are divided into four classes. Class I shared-used paths are physically separated from motor vehicle lanes. Class II bike lanes on roadways are lanes designated for bicycles only and are marked by signage and pavement striping. Painted buffers may separate the vehicle travel lanes from the bike lane and green bike lane pavement coloring are used to highlight potential conflict zones between vehicles and cyclists. Class III bike routes share the travel lane with motor vehicles and have signs and sharrow striping to guide bicyclists on paved routes. Class IV bike facilities are protected cycle tracks that provide a physical barrier between motor vehicles and cyclists.Figure 3 illustrates the bicycle facilities in the project area. The following lists the types of bicycle facilities near the project site: · Class II Bicycle Lane o El Cerro Boulevard between Danville Boulevard and Green Valley Road o Danville Boulevard between north and south of the Town limits. · Class III Bicycle Route o W El Pintado Road between El Cerro Boulevard and Diablo Road o La Gonda Way between Danville Boulevard to the north and Danville Boulevard to the south 1 El Pint a d o R o a d A d o b e D r i v e E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d 4 R d P i n t a d o W E l L a G o n d a W a y El Cerro B o u l e v a r d INTERSTATEINTERSTATE68 0 I N T E R S T A T E I N T E R S T A T E 6 8 0 Danville Bou l e v a r d 3 2 SEPTEMBER 2024 N N O T T O S C A L E E X I S 7 I N G B I C Y C L E ) A C I L I 7 I E S ) I G 8 R E 3 4 2 5 E L P I N T A D O R O A D X P R O - E C 7 S I 7 E S 7 8 D Y I N 7 E R S E C 7 I O N S E X I S 7 I N G C L A S S I I B I C Y C L E L A N E E X I S 7 I N G C L A S S I I I B I C Y C L E R O 8 7 E L E G E N D Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 13 EXISTING LANE CONFIGURATION AND TRAFFIC CONTROL Existing intersection lane configuration and traffic controls are illustrated in Figure 4. EXISTING PEAK HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES Weekday intersection turning movement volumes were collected on Wednesday, April 10, 2024 during the AM (7:00 – 9:00 AM) and PM (4:00 – 6:00 PM) peak periods when local schools were in session. These counts avoided holidays and school breaks. Weekday annual daily traffic (ADT) volumes were collected along the study roadways for 48-hours from Tuesday, April 9, 2024 to Wednesday, April 10, 2024. ADT volumes were collected during the same week intersection turning movement volumes were collected to ensure consistency in the traffic data. Intersection volume data sheets are provided in the Appendix. Peak hour turning movement volumes are shown in Figure 5. ADT volumes at the study roadways are summarized in the following section. EXISTING INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE Traffic operations were evaluated at the study intersections under Existing traffic conditions. The Synchro models were fine-tuned to calibrate to the intersection operations to reflect field observation conditions such as queuing and delay. Results of the analysis are presented in Table 3 and locations operating unacceptably are bolded.Table 3 lists the LOS criteria, municipal jurisdiction, intersection control, and LOS/delay for each intersection. All study intersections function within acceptable LOS standards under this analysis scenario, except for the intersection shown below. Synchro analysis sheets are provided in the Appendix. · Intersection #2 – El Cerro Boulevard / El Pintado Road (AM Peak Hour) Table 3 - Existing Intersection Level of Service Summary #Intersection LOS Criteria Jurisdiction1 Control Existing AM Peak PM Peak LOS Delay (sec)V/C LOS Delay (sec)V/C 1 El Pintado Road / Project Driveway D Town SSSC A 0.7 0.002 A 0.8 0.014Worst Movement A 8.7 A 8.7 2 El Cerro Boulevard / El Pintado Road D Town SSSC A 3.1 0.352 A 2.5 0.158Worst Movement E 48.5 D 27.5 3 El Cerro Boulevard / I-680 NB Ramps E Caltrans Signal C 30.6 0.820 C 27.8 0.510 4 El Cerro Boulevard / I-680 SB Ramps E Caltrans Signal E 67.6 0.970 C 29.9 0.550 Intersections that are operating below acceptable levels are shown in bold. 1. Town = Town of Danville 2. The average control delay is reported for signalized intersections. The delay for the worst movement is reported for side- street stop-controlled (SSSC) intersections. 3. HCM 7th Edition methodology used to analyze Intersections #1 and #2. HCM 2000 Edition methodology used to analyze Intersections #3 and #4. 4. V/C for unsignalized intersections is reported for the worst movement. EXISTING ROADWAY OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS Roadway operations were evaluated at each of the three (3) study roadway segments under Existing traffic conditions and compared to the capacity thresholds established in the 2030 Town of Danville General Plan. Results of the analysis are presented in Table 4 and locations with ADT volumes exceeding the capacity threshold are shown in bold.Table 4 lists the daily ADT volumes, roadway classification, and roadway Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 14 capacity for each roadway segment. ADT volumes for all study roadways are below its capacity and therefore operate within acceptable standards. Table 4 - Existing Roadway Segment Analysis #Roadway Segment Roadway Classification Capacity (veh per day) Existing Volume (veh per day) 1 El Pintado Road – between El Cerro Boulevard and Project Driveway Neighborhood Access 3,499 1,885 2 El Cerro Blvd - between El Pintado Road and Alisal Court Minor Arterial 14,999 10,675 3 El Cerro Blvd - between I-680 SB ramp and La Gonda Way Minor Arterial 14,999 13,782 EXISTING SIGNAL WARRANT EVALUATION Traffic volumes at the unsignalized study intersections were compared against the peak hour warrant in the 2014 California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). Traffic Signal Warrant #3 – Peak Hour Volume Warrant is satisfied when traffic volumes on the major and minor approaches exceed thresholds for one hour of the day. The Peak Hour Warrant is generally the first warrant to be satisfied. Based on the results of the signal warrant evaluation for Existing Conditions, the two unsignalized study intersections did not meet the peak hour signal warrant. Analysis sheets are provided in the Appendix. 1 El Pint a d o R o a d A d o b e D r i v e E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d 4 R d P i n t a d o W E l La Gonda WayEl Cerro Boulevard INTERSTATEINTERSTATE680 I N T E R S T A T E I N T E R S T A T E 6 8 0 Danville Boulevard 3 2 ) I G 8 R E 4 E X I S 7 I N G C O N D I 7 I O N L A N E G E O 0 E 7 R Y A N D 7 R A ) ) I C C O N 7 R O L N N O T T O S C A L E SEPTEMBER 2024 4 2 5 E L P I N T A D O R O A D E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d El Pintado Road NB I-680 On-Ramp SB I-680 Off-Ramp 1 2 3 110' 4 D R O P L E G E N D 7 R A ) ) I C S I G N A L P R O - E C 7 S I 7 E X D R O P L A N E D R O P S 7 O P S I G N S T O P S 7 8 D Y I N 7 E R S E C 7 I O N S S 7 O R A G E L E N G 7 + X X ' D R O P 1 0 5 ' 200' P r o j e c t D r i v e w a y El Pintado Road S T O P S T O P ST O P 4 0 ' 7 0 ' Adobe Drive E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d W El Pintado NB I-680 Off-Ramp SB I-680 On-Ramp 1 5 0 ' 1 El Pint a d o R o a d A d o b e D r i v e E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d 4 R d P i n t a d o W E l La Gonda WayEl Cerro Boulevard INTERSTATEINTERSTATE680 I N T E R S T A T E I N T E R S T A T E 6 8 0 Danville Boulevard 3 2 ) I G 8 R E 5 E X I S 7 I N G C O N D I 7 I O N P E A . + O 8 R 7 8 R N I N G 0 O 9 E 0 E N 7 9 O L 8 0 E S N N O T T O S C A L E SEPTEMBER 2024 4 2 5 E L P I N T A D O R O A D E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d El Pintado Road NB I-680 On-Ramp SB I-680 Off-Ramp 4 P r o j e c t D r i v e w a y El Pintado Road Adobe Drive E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d W El Pintado NB I-680 Off-Ramp 2 ( 1 1 ) 72(70) 62(96) 11(6) 1 3 ( 5 ) 5 4 1 ( 4 0 1 ) 2 1 ( 1 2 ) 1 5 ( 5 4 ) 4 2 8 ( 3 9 3 ) 5 2 ( 8 9 ) 9(10) 65(71) 4(4) 0(1) 34(24) 2 3 8 1 ( 2 4 4 ) 2 5 9 ( 2 5 2 ) 4 0 1 ( 4 1 5 ) 1 8 8 ( 1 4 0 ) 94(121) 3(7) 318(295) 3 2 0 6 ( 1 0 2 ) 4 9 3 ( 4 3 7 ) 3 5 8 ( 2 6 8 ) 2 8 5 ( 2 7 9 ) 232(245) 51(8) 197(126) 87(49) 37(10) 4 L E G E N D X A 0 ( P 0 ) P E A . + O 8 R 9 O L 8 0 E X X ( Y Y ) P R O - E C 7 S I 7 E S 7 8 D Y I N 7 E R S E C 7 I O N S Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 17 5. PROJECT CONDITIONS This chapter presents a description of the proposed site use, trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment, as well as potential adverse effects of the proposed project on the transportation system. PROPOSED SITE USE The proposed project will redevelop the existing small office building located at the northwest corner of El Pintado Road and El Cerro Boulevard. Based on aerial imagery, the existing building is approximately 7,710 square feet and consists of offices for small businesses. The project will then construct a 4-story senior housing development of 99 residential units. The proposed residential units consist of 22 one-bedroom units, 51 two-bedroom units, and 26 three-bedroom units. Access to the project site would be provided by the existing unsignalized driveway along El Pintado Road.Figure 6 illustrates the site plan for the proposed project, as provided by Form 4 Architecture. TRIP GENERATION Trip generation for projects is typically calculated based on information contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) publication,Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. The manual is a standard reference used by jurisdictions throughout the country for the estimation of trip generation potential of proposed projects. A trip is defined in the Trip Generation Manual as a single or one-directional vehicle movement with either the origin or destination at the project site. In other words, a trip can be either “to” or “from” the site and therefore, a single visitor to a site is counted as two trips. For purposes of determining the worst-case impacts of traffic on the surrounding street network, the trips generated by a proposed project are estimated for the AM peak hour (between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM), and for the PM peak hour (between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM) on a typical weekday. Trips generated by the senior housing units were based on an average rate for ITE Land Use 252 (Senior Adult Housing – Multifamily). Since the existing land use is proposed to be removed from the site, an existing trip credit is taken for the trip generation. To determine the trip generation for the office use, the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition was used instead of driveway counts because ITE is more reflective of the office land use than this specific tenant and occupancy. Based on ITE land use code 712 (Small Office Building), the existing office building generates 111 daily trips, 13 trips in the AM peak hour, and 17 trips in the PM peak hour. Table 5 presents the trip generation for the existing and proposed project. The project will generate a net new +210 daily trips, +7 trips in the AM peak hour, and +8 trips in the PM peak hour. ) I G 8 R E 6 S I 7 E P L A N Source: Form4 ArchitectureSEPTEMBER 2024 4 2 5 E L P I N T A D O R O A D N O T T O S C A L E N Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 19 Table 5 - Project Trip Generation ITE Land Use Code Land Uses Size Unit Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Total In Out Total In Out Proposed Land Use 1,2 252 Senior Adult Housing - Multifamily 99 DU 321 20 7 13 25 14 11 Existing Land Uses 1,3 712 Small Office Building 7.71 KSF -111 -13 -11 -2 -17 -6 -11 Net Proposed Trips 210 7 -4 11 8 8 0 KSF = 1,000 square feet; DU = Dwelling Units 1 Trip generation developed based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. 2 ITE Trip Generation average rates used for ITE Land Use Code 252. 3 ITE Trip Generation average rates used for ITE Land Use Code 712. PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT A separate trip distribution was determined for the existing and proposed project uses. Trip distributions for each use were determined based on existing traffic count information, the general orientation of population sources to the site, and location of complimentary uses to the existing and proposed land uses.Figure 7 and Figure 8 present the trip distribution assumed for the existing and proposed project, respectively. It should be noted the proposed project trip distribution initially had 15 percent to the east on El Cerro Boulevard based on existing traffic patterns, but due to engineering judgment, this was reallocated to the other three origins/destinations evenly (i.e. 5 percent to I-680 north, 5 percent to I-680 south, and 5 percent to El Cerro Boulevard west). There are likely few destinations for future residents to the east on El Cerro Boulevard. Based on the trip distributions, the existing to be removed and new vehicle trips generated by the project were assigned to the street network.Figure 9 presents the net new trip assignment as a result of the project. EXISTING PLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE Existing Plus Project traffic conditions were evaluated at the study intersections and volumes are shown in Figure 10. Results are presented in Table 6 and intersections operating unacceptably are bolded. As shown in the table, all study intersections operate an at acceptable LOS under Existing Plus Project conditions with the exception of the following intersection: · Intersection #2 – El Cerro Boulevard / El Pintado Road (AM Peak Hour) o Not an adverse effect since the project increases the v/c ratio for the worst movement by less than 5 percent. Synchro analysis sheets are provided in the Appendix. 1 El Pint a d o R o a d A d o b e D r i v e E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d 4 R d P i n t a d o W E l L a G o n d a W a y El Cerro B o u l e v a r d INTERSTATEINTERSTATE68 0 I N T E R S T A T E I N T E R S T A T E 6 8 0 Danville Bou l e v a r d 3 2 SEPTEMBER 2024 N N O T T O S C A L E E X I S 7 I N G S 0 A L L O ) ) I C E B 8 I L D I N G 7 R I P D I S 7 R I B 8 7 I O N ) I G 8 R E 7 4 2 5 E L P I N T A D O R O A D 2 0 % 3 5 % 2 5 % 2 0 % L E G E N D X P R O - E C 7 S I 7 E E X I S 7 I N G 7 R I P D I S 7 R I B 8 7 I O N S 7 8 D Y I N 7 E R S E C 7 I O N S 1 El Pint a d o R o a d A d o b e D r i v e E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d 4 R d P i n t a d o W E l L a G o n d a W a y El Cerro B o u l e v a r d INTERSTATEINTERSTATE68 0 I N T E R S T A T E I N T E R S T A T E 6 8 0 Danville Bou l e v a r d 3 2 SEPTEMBER 2024 N N O T T O S C A L E P R O P O S E D S E N I O R + O 8 S I N G 7 R I P D I S 7 R I B 8 7 I O N ) I G 8 R E 8 4 2 5 E L P I N T A D O R O A D 3 5 % 3 5 % 3 0 % L E G E N D X P R O - E C 7 S I 7 E E X I S 7 I N G 7 R I P D I S 7 R I B 8 7 I O N S 7 8 D Y I N 7 E R S E C 7 I O N S 1 El Pint a d o R o a d A d o b e D r i v e E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d 4 R d P i n t a d o W E l La Gonda WayEl Cerro Boulevard INTERSTATEINTERSTATE680 I N T E R S T A T E I N T E R S T A T E 6 8 0 Danville Boulevard 3 2 ) I G 8 R E P R O - E C 7 G E N E R A 7 E D P E A . + O 8 R 7 8 R N I N G 0 O 9 E 0 E N 7 9 O L 8 0 E S N N O T T O S C A L E E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d El Pintado Road NB I-680 On-Ramp SB I-680 Off-Ramp 4 P r o j e c t D r i v e w a y El Pintado Road Adobe Drive E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d W El Pintado NB I-680 Off-Ramp 1 1 ( 0 ) -4(8) 1 - 1 ( - 1 ) - 3 ( 9 ) 0(-2) 11(2) 2 7 ( 1 ) 4 ( 1 ) - 3 ( 6 ) 0(3) 3 4 ( 1 ) 3 ( 0 ) - 2 ( 3 ) -1(3) 4 L E G E N D X A 0 ( P 0 ) P E A . + O 8 R 9 O L 8 0 E X X ( Y Y ) P R O - E C 7 S I 7 E S 7 8 D Y I N 7 E R S E C 7 I O N S SEPTEMBER 2024 4 2 5 E L P I N T A D O R O A D 1 El Pint a d o R o a d A d o b e D r i v e E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d 4 R d P i n t a d o W E l La Gonda WayEl Cerro Boulevard INTERSTATEINTERSTATE680 I N T E R S T A T E I N T E R S T A T E 6 8 0 Danville Boulevard 3 2 ) I G 8 R E 1 0 E X I S 7 I N G P L 8 S P R O - E C 7 C O N D I 7 I O N P E A . + O 8 R 7 8 R N I N G 0 O 9 E 0 E N 7 9 O L 8 0 E S N N O T T O S C A L E E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d El Pintado Road NB I-680 On-Ramp SB I-680 Off-Ramp 4 P r o j e c t D r i v e w a y El Pintado Road Adobe Drive E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d E l C e r r o B o u l e v a r d W El Pintado NB I-680 Off-Ramp 1 3 ( 1 1 ) 72(70) 62(96) 7(14) 1 3 ( 5 ) 5 4 1 ( 4 0 1 ) 2 0 ( 1 1 ) 1 5 ( 5 4 ) 4 2 8 ( 3 9 3 ) 4 9 ( 9 8 ) 9(8) 76(73) 4(4) 0(1) 34(24) 2 3 8 8 ( 2 4 5 ) 2 6 3 ( 2 5 3 ) 3 9 8 ( 4 2 1 ) 1 8 8 ( 1 4 0 ) 94(124) 3(7) 318(295) 3 2 1 0 ( 1 0 3 ) 4 9 6 ( 4 3 7 ) 3 5 8 ( 2 6 8 ) 2 8 3 ( 2 8 2 ) 231(248) 51(8) 197(126) 87(49) 37(10) 4 L E G E N D X A 0 ( P 0 ) P E A . + O 8 R 9 O L 8 0 E X X ( Y Y ) P R O - E C 7 S I 7 E S 7 8 D Y I N 7 E R S E C 7 I O N S SEPTEMBER 2024 4 2 5 E L P I N T A D O R O A D Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 24 Table 6 - Existing Plus Project Intersection Level of Service Summary #Intersection LOS Criteria Juris- diction1 Control Existing Existing + Project AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak LOS Delay (sec)V/C LOS Delay (sec)V/C LOS Delay (sec) Delay Var (sec) V/C V/C % Change LOS Delay (sec) Delay Var (sec)V/C V/C % Change 1 El Pintado Road / Project Driveway D Town SSSC A 0.7 0.002 A 0.8 0.014 A 1.1 0.4 0.015 >100% A 1.0 0.2 0.014 0% Worst Movement A 8.7 A 8.7 A 8.7 0.0 A 8.7 0.0 2 El Cerro Boulevard / El Pintado Road D Town SSSC A 3.1 0.352 A 2.5 0.158 A 3.3 0.2 0.358 2% A 2.6 0.1 0.164 4% Worst Movement E 48.5 D 27.5 E 49.5 1.0 D 28.6 1.1 3 El Cerro Boulevard / I-680 NB Ramps E Caltrans Signal C 30.6 0.820 C 27.8 0.510 C 30.6 0.0 0.820 0%C 27.7 -0.1 0.510 0% 4 El Cerro Boulevard / I-680 SB Ramps E Caltrans Signal E 67.6 0.970 C 29.9 0.550 E 67.7 0.1 0.980 1%C 30.1 0.2 0.550 0% Intersections that are operating below acceptable levels are shown in bold and deficiencies are highlighted. 1. Town = Town of Danville 2. The average control delay is reported for signalized intersections. The delay for the worst movement is reported for side-street stop-controlled (SSSC) intersections. 3. HCM 7th Edition methodology used to analyze Intersections #1 and #2. HCM 2000 Edition methodology used to analyze Intersections #3 and #4. 4. V/C for unsignalized intersections is reported for the worst movement. Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 25 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT ROADWAY OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS Roadway operations were evaluated at each of the three (3) study roadway segments under Existing Plus Project traffic conditions and compared to the capacity thresholds established in the 2030 Town of Danville General Plan. Results of the analysis are presented in Table 7 and locations with ADT volumes exceeding the capacity threshold are shown in bold. ADT volumes for each study roadway are below its capacity under Existing Plus Project conditions and therefore operate within acceptable standards. Table 7 – Existing Plus Project Roadway Segment Analysis #Roadway Segment Roadway Classification Capacity (veh per day) Existing Volume (veh per day) Existing Plus Project Volume (veh per day) 1 El Pintado Road - between El Cerro Boulevard and Project Driveway Neighborhood Access 3,499 1,885 2,095 2 El Cerro Blvd - between El Pintado Road and Alisal Court Minor Arterial 14,999 10,675 10,653 3 El Cerro Blvd - between I-680 SB ramp and La Gonda Way Minor Arterial 14,999 13,782 13,856 EXISTING SIGNAL WARRANT EVALUATION Traffic volumes at the unsignalized study intersections were compared against the peak hour warrant in the 2014 California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD). Traffic Signal Warrant #3 – Peak Hour Volume Warrant is satisfied when traffic volumes on the major and minor approaches exceed thresholds for one hour of the day. The Peak Hour Warrant is generally the first warrant to be satisfied. Based on the results of the signal warrant evaluation for Existing Plus Project Conditions, the two unsignalized study intersections did not meet the peak hour signal warrant. Analysis sheets are provided in the Appendix. Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 26 6. SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION This chapter discusses the site access and circulation for the proposed project site. VEHICULAR SITE ACCESS As shown Figure 11 and the parking layout in Figure 6, the proposed development will be accessible through the existing unsignalized and full-access driveway along El Pintado Road. Access to the below- grade parking garage is provided immediately across the driveway as vehicles enter the site through the New Creek Bridge. As vehicles enter the garage, guest parking is provided near the garage entrance and residential parking is provided further inwards to the garage. Regular parking stalls are located along the northwest side of the garage while puzzle and stacking parking spaces are mixed throughout the remaining spaces. BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, AND TRANSIT ACCESS There are currently no existing bicycle facilities along the project frontage on El Pintado Road. The nearest bicycle facility to the site is located immediately south of the project along El Cerro Boulevard with a Class II bicycle lane. The nearest retail uses to the site are located in the Downtown Danville area, approximately 1.0 mile southwest of the project site. Bicycles traveling to Downtown Danville can utilize the existing Class II bicycle lanes along El Cerro Boulevard and Danville Boulevard or the Class III bicycle route along W El Pintado Road. Based on the Diablo Road (west) Bicycle Improvements Project, there are future planned bicycle improvements along Diablo Road between Hartz Avenue and Green Valley Road. These improvements include widening existing bike lanes, adding additional bike lanes, restriping the roadway as well as adding bicycle signage, traffic signal bicycle detection, green pavement markings, and bike boxes. These bicycle improvements are located an interchange to the south of the proposed project at I-680/Diablo Road and the project is not expected conflict with the bicycle improvements. Internal to the site, residents accessing the senior housing building may use the main entrance located to the southwest of the parking garage entrance. To access the adjacent local roadways (i.e., El Pintado Road and El Cerro Boulevard), there is a 6-foot wide pedestrian pathway on-site that connects residents from the main entrance to the pedestrian path adjacent to the New Creek Bridge near the project driveway (shown on Figure 11). Within the parking garage, an accessible route is provided adjacent to the accessible parking spaces to guide residents to the stairway access. Stairway access is provided at four locations within the parking garage. External to the site, pedestrians may utilize the existing sidewalks along El Pintado Road, El Cerro Boulevard and Danville Boulevard and crosswalks at intersections to travel to Downtown Danville with a variety of retail and restaurant uses. The project is not proposing off-site improvements on the adjacent street network and therefore is not expected to conflict with any future pedestrian planned improvements. Residents or staff taking transit can walk along El Pintado Road and El Cerro Boulevard to access the nearest transit stop located to the west of the project site, at the intersection of El Cerro Boulevard and Danville Boulevard. This stop serves County Connection Routes 21 and 321, which provide weekday and weekend services between the Walnut Creek BART station and the San Ramon Transit Center. Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 27 7. PARKING EVALUATION A parking analysis was conducted for the site to determine whether the project is providing sufficient parking to meet the parking requirements and the peak parking demand. The following describes the Town’s parking requirements and the proposed parking demand based on ITE in comparison to the proposed parking provided. PROPOSED PARKING SUPPLY The project is proposing to provide a total of 198 parking spaces, which includes 176 resident spaces and 22 guest spaces. Parking spaces are located below-grade on Level B of the residential building and utilizes regular stalls, stackers, and puzzle parking spaces to maximize the garage space. Of the 198 parking spaces, 12 spaces are located in stackers, 56 spaces in stalls, and 130 spaces in puzzles. Entrance to the parking garage is located directly across from the project driveway as vehicles enter the site and cross the New Creek Bridge. The parking layout for the proposed project is illustrated in Figure 11. PARKING REQUIREMENTS Parking requirements based on the Town of Danville’s Municipal Code, for multifamily dwelling units, were reviewed to determine whether the proposed parking supply of 198 parking spaces met the Town’s requirements. Based on the Municipal Code’s Ordinance 2024-01, Section 32-29-11 (Off-Street Parking), multifamily residential units are required to provide the following parking spaces: ·Resident Parking o One (1) bedroom units – 1.5 parking spaces required per unit o Two (2) bedroom or more units – 2 parking spaces required per unit ·Guest Parking o 0.25 parking spaces required per unit The total parking spaces required by the project is summarized in Table 8. As shown, the project is required to provide a total of 212 parking spaces (187 resident spaces and 25 guest spaces). Since the project is providing 198 parking spaces (176 resident spaces and 22 guest spaces), the project does not meet the minimum requirements. An additional 14 spaces (11 resident spaces and 3 guest spaces) are needed to meet the requirements. Table 8 – Town of Danville Municipal Code – Parking Requirements Land Use Parking Type Bedroom Unit Project Size Danville Municipal Code Requirements Parking Spaces SuppliedParking Requirements Parking Required Multifamily Residential Resident 1 Bedroom 22 units 1.5 space per unit 33 22 2 Bedroom 51 units 2 space per unit 102 102 3 Bedroom 26 units 2 space per unit 52 52 Guest N/A 0.25 spaces per unit 25 22 Total Spaces (Resident and Guest)212 198 Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 28 PARKING DEMAND Parking demand for the proposed project was determined based on the ITE Parking Generation Manual, 6th Edition9.Parking demand was reviewed to determine the peak demand for a senior housing use, rather than multi-family or single-family uses which are expected to generate a greater parking demand. Based on the 85th percentile peak parking demand rate for ITE Land Use Code 252 (Senior Adult Housing – Multifamily), the parking demand rate is 0.67 parking spaces per dwelling unit. This results in a peak parking demand of 66 parking spaces for the proposed 99-unit senior housing facility. A summary of the peak parking demand is provided in Table 9. Table 9 – Proposed Parking Demand Land Use Project Size ITE Parking Generation Parking Spaces SuppliedLand Use Code 85th Percentile Rate Peak Parking Demand Senior Adult Housing - Multifamily 99 Dwelling Units 252 0.67 66 198 Total Spaces (176 Resident Parking) (22 Guest Parking) Notes: Parking demand based on the ITE Parking Generation Manual, 6th Edition. Since the proposed parking supply is 198 total parking spaces, there is sufficient parking provided to meet the peak parking demand of 66 parking spaces. It should be noted that the applicant is requesting a parking waiver. 9 Parking Generation Manual, 6th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2024. ) I G 8 R E 1 1 P A R . I N G L A Y O 8 7 Source: Form4 ArchitectureSEPTEMBER 2024 4 2 5 E L P I N T A D O R O A D N O T T O S C A L E N Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final 30 8. SUMMARY OF ADVERSE EFFECTS AND RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS Based on the results of the traffic operational analysis and evaluation of the proposed site plan, the project does not generate any adverse effects on intersection LOS or roadway capacity. Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final APPENDIX A – TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS B – EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS C – EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS D – SIGNAL WARRANTS Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final A – Turning Movement Counts Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services ID:24-080078-001 Day: City:Danville Date: AM 0 67 0 0 AM NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON PM 0 68 0 0 PM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TEV 134 0 170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 PHF 0.86 0.83 1 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 AM NOON PM PM NOON AM PM 0 5 93 0 PM NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON AM 1 4 61 0 AM Pedestrians (Crosswalks) Cars (PM)HT (PM) 0 69 NORTHBOUND El Pintado Rd Cars (NOON)HT (NOON) NONE 0 0 0 Cars (AM)72 HT (AM) D a r b y P l a z a D w y E A S T B O U N D W E S T B O U N D D a r b y P l a z a D w y 4 0 5 CONTROL No Control 0 NONE 04:45 PM - 05:45 PM 93 El Pintado Rd & Darby Plaza Dwy Peak Hour Turning Movement Count El Pintado Rd Wednesday SOUTHBOUND 4/10/2024 4:00 PM - 06:00 PMPEAK H O U R S 07:30 AM - 08:30 AM 61 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM C O U N T P E R I O D S NOONAM PM PM AM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM AM NOON PM NOON N O O N P M A M N O O N A M P M N O O N A M P MNOON P M A M 000 101 0 0 0 0 0 1 000 000 000001 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 04 0 0 0 6 8 0 0 9 2 5 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 5 9 4 Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services ID:24-080078-002 Day: City:Danville Date: AM 61 0 9 0 AM NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON PM 64 0 9 0 PM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM 0 1 0 0 0 12 0 19 1 395 0 518 0 0 2 0 1 5 0 3 46 0 85 1 TEV 1136 0 1045 0 0 0 0 428 0 390 1 PHF 0.86 0.97 15 0 54 0 0 0 1 0 AM NOON PM PM NOON AM PM 0 24 1 4 PM NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON AM 0 33 0 4 AM Pedestrians (Crosswalks) Cars (PM)HT (PM) 0 18 NORTHBOUND El Pintado Rd Cars (NOON)HT (NOON) NONE 403 0 441 Cars (AM)59 HT (AM) E l C e r r o B l v d E A S T B O U N D W E S T B O U N D E l C e r r o B l v d 612 0 485 CONTROL 2-Way Stop(NB/SB) 0 NONE 04:45 PM - 05:45 PM 98 El Pintado Rd & El Cerro Blvd Peak Hour Turning Movement Count El Pintado Rd Wednesday SOUTHBOUND 4/10/2024 4:00 PM - 06:00 PMPEAK H O U R S 07:30 AM - 08:30 AM 65 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM C O U N T P E R I O D S NOONAM PM PM AM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM AM NOON PM NOON N O O N P M A M N O O N A M P M N O O N A M P MNOON P M A M 000 000 1 0 1 0 0 2 000 000 100000 1 3 00 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 00 14 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 392 554 388 85 6 4 0 9 3 1 2 4 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 514 315 414 44 6 1 0 8 4 0 3 3 Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services ID:24-080078-003 Day: City:Danville Date: AM 0 0 0 0 AM NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON PM 0 0 0 0 PM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM 0 0 0 0 1 249 0 259 1 241 0 380 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 188 0 138 1 TEV 1615 0 1461 0 0 0 0 378 0 410 1 PHF 0.89 0.96 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 1 AM NOON PM PM NOON AM PM 0 295 7 121 PM NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON AM 0 318 3 89 AM Pedestrians (Crosswalks) Cars (PM)HT (PM) 0 0 NORTHBOUND I-680 NB Ramps Cars (NOON)HT (NOON) NONE 531 0 467 Cars (AM)0 HT (AM) E l C e r r o B l v d E A S T B O U N D W E S T B O U N D E l C e r r o B l v d 698 0 536 CONTROL Signalized 0 NONE 04:45 PM - 05:45 PM 394 I-680 NB Ramps & El Cerro Blvd Peak Hour Turning Movement Count I-680 NB Ramps Wednesday SOUTHBOUND 4/10/2024 4:00 PM - 06:00 PMPEAK H O U R S 07:45 AM - 08:45 AM 450 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM C O U N T P E R I O D S NOONAM PM PM AM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM AM NOON PM NOON N O O N P M A M N O O N A M P M N O O N A M P MNOON P M A M 000 000 1 0 2 0 0 2 000 000 000000 3 0 00 2 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5 00 11 9 0 0 0 7 0 1 1 246 241 00 408 136 0 0 0 1 2 1 6 2 9 4 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 255 375 00 367 179 0 0 0 8 2 3 3 0 7 Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services ID:24-080078-004 Day: City:Danville Date: AM 197 51 221 0 AM NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON PM 126 8 243 0 PM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM 1 0.5 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 1 430 0 490 0 0 0 0 1 6 0 58 0 0 0 0 TEV 1414 0 1154 0 0 0 0 268 0 278 1 PHF 0.87 0.93 25 0 20 1 0 0.5 0 0.5 AM NOON PM PM NOON AM PM 0 10 0 33 PM NOON 0 0 0 0 NOON AM 0 37 0 67 AM Pedestrians (Crosswalks) Cars (PM)HT (PM) 0 134 NORTHBOUND I-680 SB Ramps/W El Pintado Cars (NOON)HT (NOON) NONE 554 0 556 Cars (AM)34 HT (AM) E l C e r r o B l v d E A S T B O U N D W E S T B O U N D E l C e r r o B l v d 724 0 566 CONTROL Signalized 0 NONE 05:00 PM - 06:00 PM 0 I-680 SB Ramps/W El Pintado & El Cerro Blvd Peak Hour Turning Movement Count I-680 SB Ramps/W El Pintado Wednesday SOUTHBOUND 4/10/2024 4:00 PM - 06:00 PMPEAK H O U R S 07:45 AM - 08:45 AM 0 7:00 AM - 09:00 AM C O U N T P E R I O D S NOONAM PM PM AM AM NOON PM PM NOON AM AM NOON PM NOON N O O N P M A M N O O N A M P M N O O N A M P MNOON P M A M 000 000 1 0 0 0 0 2 000 000 000000 0 1 00 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 10 9 0 3 3 7 4 0 1 0 429 620 275 0 1 2 4 8 2 4 2 3 3 0 1 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 478 5725 259 0 1 9 4 4 8 2 1 4 6 3 0 3 6 Day:Tuesday City:Danville Date:Project #:CA24_080079_001 NB SB EB WB Total 989 835 0 0 1,824 TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 0:00 1 0 1 12:00 19 16 35 00:00 01:00 1 0 1 0:15 0 0 0 12:15 17 11 28 01:00 02:00 0 0 0 0:30 0 0 0 12:30 14 10 24 02:00 03:00 0 0 0 0:45 0 0 0 12:45 22 13 35 03:00 04:00 1 2 3 1:00 0 0 0 13:00 13 13 26 04:00 05:00 3 2 5 1:15 0 0 0 13:15 10 8 18 05:00 06:00 9 12 21 1:30 0 0 0 13:30 20 15 35 06:00 07:00 21 16 37 1:45 0 0 0 13:45 14 18 32 07:00 08:00 51 58 109 2:00 0 0 0 14:00 14 13 27 08:00 09:00 59 48 107 2:15 0 0 0 14:15 18 16 34 09:00 10:00 60 43 103 2:30 0 0 0 14:30 18 13 31 10:00 11:00 63 54 117 2:45 0 0 0 14:45 15 19 34 11:00 12:00 75 74 149 3:00 1 0 1 15:00 24 8 32 12:00 13:00 72 50 122 3:15 0 0 0 15:15 22 23 45 13:00 14:00 57 54 111 3:30 0 0 0 15:30 21 28 49 14:00 15:00 65 61 126 3:45 0 2 2 15:45 23 22 45 15:00 16:00 90 81 171 4:00 1 0 1 16:00 16 25 41 16:00 17:00 72 77 149 4:15 0 0 0 16:15 19 20 39 17:00 18:00 85 76 161 4:30 1 1 2 16:30 22 13 35 18:00 19:00 70 46 116 4:45 1 1 2 16:45 15 19 34 19:00 20:00 62 34 96 5:00 0 2 2 17:00 14 17 31 20:00 21:00 32 21 53 5:15 0 0 0 17:15 27 19 46 21:00 22:00 22 12 34 5:30 7 5 12 17:30 25 24 49 22:00 23:00 11 8 19 5:45 2 5 7 17:45 19 16 35 23:00 00:00 8 6 14 6:00 1 5 6 18:00 18 20 38 6:15 5 3 8 18:15 20 14 34 NB SB EB WB TOTAL 6:30 9 3 12 18:30 13 5 18 00:00 to 12:00 6:45 6 5 11 18:45 19 7 26 343 309 652 7:00 14 7 21 19:00 16 16 32 10:30 10:45 11:00 7:15 11 9 20 19:15 22 10 32 75 74 149 7:30 15 16 31 19:30 13 1 14 0.815 0.841 0.847 7:45 11 26 37 19:45 11 7 18 8:00 18 11 29 20:00 6 8 14 12:00 to 00:00 8:15 11 9 20 20:15 9 4 13 646 526 1172 8:30 16 13 29 20:30 7 6 13 15:00 15:15 15:15 8:45 14 15 29 20:45 10 3 13 90 98 180 9:00 14 12 26 21:00 9 4 13 0.938 0.875 0.918 9:15 17 6 23 21:15 8 3 11 9:30 12 12 24 21:30 3 3 6 07:00 to 09:00 9:45 17 13 30 21:45 2 2 4 110 106 216 10:00 9 7 16 22:00 5 4 9 8:00 7:15 7:15 10:15 16 16 32 22:15 2 1 3 59 62 117 10:30 23 13 36 22:30 1 2 3 0.819 0.596 0.791 10:45 15 18 33 22:45 3 1 4 11:00 15 15 30 23:00 3 1 4 16:00 to 18:00 11:15 22 22 44 23:15 1 2 3 157 153 310 11:30 19 19 38 23:30 2 1 3 17:00 16:45 17:00 11:45 19 18 37 23:45 2 2 4 85 79 161 TOTALS 343 309 0 0 652 TOTALS 646 526 0 0 1172 0.787 0.823 0.821 SPLIT %53%47%0%0%36%SPLIT %55%45%0%0%64% Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Volume Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services VOLUME El Pintado Rd N/O El Cerro Blvd 4/9/2024 DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS 15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals TIME STATISTICS Peak Period 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 0 :0 0 0 1 :0 0 0 2 :0 0 0 3 :0 0 0 4 :0 0 0 5 :0 0 0 6 :0 0 0 7 :0 0 0 8 :0 0 0 9 :0 0 1 0 :0 0 1 1 :0 0 1 2 :0 0 1 3 :0 0 1 4 :0 0 1 5 :0 0 1 6 :0 0 1 7 :0 0 1 8 :0 0 1 9 :0 0 2 0 :0 0 2 1 :0 0 2 2 :0 0 2 3 :0 0 NB SB EB WB Day:Wednesday City:Danville Date:Project #:CA24_080079_001 NB SB EB WB Total 1,000 945 0 0 1,945 TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 0:00 2 1 3 12:00 24 23 47 00:00 01:00 2 1 3 0:15 0 0 0 12:15 23 20 43 01:00 02:00 0 1 1 0:30 0 0 0 12:30 16 25 41 02:00 03:00 2 0 2 0:45 0 0 0 12:45 27 16 43 03:00 04:00 1 2 3 1:00 0 1 1 13:00 27 16 43 04:00 05:00 1 2 3 1:15 0 0 0 13:15 24 25 49 05:00 06:00 3 8 11 1:30 0 0 0 13:30 19 21 40 06:00 07:00 11 19 30 1:45 0 0 0 13:45 18 12 30 07:00 08:00 42 59 101 2:00 2 0 2 14:00 19 20 39 08:00 09:00 55 65 120 2:15 0 0 0 14:15 20 22 42 09:00 10:00 51 71 122 2:30 0 0 0 14:30 19 14 33 10:00 11:00 69 68 137 2:45 0 0 0 14:45 19 21 40 11:00 12:00 72 60 132 3:00 0 1 1 15:00 19 20 39 12:00 13:00 90 84 174 3:15 1 0 1 15:15 31 20 51 13:00 14:00 88 74 162 3:30 0 0 0 15:30 27 20 47 14:00 15:00 77 77 154 3:45 0 1 1 15:45 21 23 44 15:00 16:00 98 83 181 4:00 0 0 0 16:00 13 24 37 16:00 17:00 71 91 162 4:15 0 1 1 16:15 14 24 38 17:00 18:00 97 68 165 4:30 0 0 0 16:30 19 18 37 18:00 19:00 62 55 117 4:45 1 1 2 16:45 25 25 50 19:00 20:00 57 26 83 5:00 0 0 0 17:00 19 15 34 20:00 21:00 27 19 46 5:15 0 0 0 17:15 27 19 46 21:00 22:00 14 10 24 5:30 3 4 7 17:30 27 14 41 22:00 23:00 5 1 6 5:45 0 4 4 17:45 24 20 44 23:00 00:00 5 1 6 6:00 0 3 3 18:00 17 18 35 6:15 1 5 6 18:15 17 12 29 NB SB EB WB TOTAL 6:30 3 5 8 18:30 19 14 33 00:00 to 12:00 6:45 7 6 13 18:45 9 11 20 309 356 665 7:00 6 9 15 19:00 12 10 22 10:15 8:45 7:30 7:15 5 13 18 19:15 24 4 28 72 73 138 7:30 14 15 29 19:30 13 6 19 0.900 0.830 0.885 7:45 17 22 39 19:45 8 6 14 8:00 20 17 37 20:00 10 5 15 12:00 to 00:00 8:15 17 16 33 20:15 9 10 19 691 589 1280 8:30 9 11 20 20:30 6 2 8 15:00 15:30 15:00 8:45 9 21 30 20:45 2 2 4 98 91 181 9:00 10 22 32 21:00 4 6 10 0.790 0.948 0.887 9:15 14 16 30 21:15 3 2 5 9:30 16 14 30 21:30 4 2 6 07:00 to 09:00 9:45 11 19 30 21:45 3 0 3 97 124 221 10:00 14 17 31 22:00 0 0 0 7:30 7:30 7:30 10:15 19 10 29 22:15 2 0 2 68 70 138 10:30 20 17 37 22:30 2 0 2 0.850 0.795 0.885 10:45 16 24 40 22:45 1 1 2 11:00 17 15 32 23:00 2 0 2 16:00 to 18:00 11:15 14 15 29 23:15 1 1 2 168 159 327 11:30 21 11 32 23:30 1 0 1 16:45 16:00 16:45 11:45 20 19 39 23:45 1 0 1 98 91 171 TOTALS 309 356 0 0 665 TOTALS 691 589 0 0 1280 0.907 0.910 0.855 SPLIT %46%54%0%0%34%SPLIT %54%46%0%0%66% Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Volume Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services VOLUME El Pintado Rd N/O El Cerro Blvd 4/10/2024 DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS 15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals TIME STATISTICS Peak Period 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 0 :0 0 0 1 :0 0 0 2 :0 0 0 3 :0 0 0 4 :0 0 0 5 :0 0 0 6 :0 0 0 7 :0 0 0 8 :0 0 0 9 :0 0 1 0 :0 0 1 1 :0 0 1 2 :0 0 1 3 :0 0 1 4 :0 0 1 5 :0 0 1 6 :0 0 1 7 :0 0 1 8 :0 0 1 9 :0 0 2 0 :0 0 2 1 :0 0 2 2 :0 0 2 3 :0 0 NB SB EB WB Day:Tuesday City:Danville Date:Project #:CA24_080079_002 NB SB EB WB Total 0 0 5,110 5,449 10,559 TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 0:00 5 1 6 12:00 85 77 162 00:00 01:00 9 6 15 0:15 1 2 3 12:15 78 83 161 01:00 02:00 8 3 11 0:30 1 1 2 12:30 80 87 167 02:00 03:00 4 1 5 0:45 2 2 4 12:45 68 87 155 03:00 04:00 2 6 8 1:00 1 1 2 13:00 84 72 156 04:00 05:00 20 16 36 1:15 2 0 2 13:15 64 90 154 05:00 06:00 76 58 134 1:30 1 0 1 13:30 79 94 173 06:00 07:00 127 137 264 1:45 4 2 6 13:45 85 100 185 07:00 08:00 447 432 879 2:00 3 0 3 14:00 92 118 210 08:00 09:00 405 564 969 2:15 0 1 1 14:15 106 104 210 09:00 10:00 298 343 641 2:30 1 0 1 14:30 89 131 220 10:00 11:00 287 304 591 2:45 0 0 0 14:45 117 168 285 11:00 12:00 312 356 668 3:00 0 1 1 15:00 115 101 216 12:00 13:00 311 334 645 3:15 0 2 2 15:15 160 139 299 13:00 14:00 312 356 668 3:30 2 1 3 15:30 93 124 217 14:00 15:00 404 521 925 3:45 0 2 2 15:45 99 142 241 15:00 16:00 467 506 973 4:00 2 1 3 16:00 74 131 205 16:00 17:00 332 412 744 4:15 3 3 6 16:15 110 101 211 17:00 18:00 413 368 781 4:30 6 7 13 16:30 61 81 142 18:00 19:00 312 282 594 4:45 9 5 14 16:45 87 99 186 19:00 20:00 245 204 449 5:00 11 11 22 17:00 86 94 180 20:00 21:00 145 115 260 5:15 21 14 35 17:15 105 105 210 21:00 22:00 95 73 168 5:30 25 17 42 17:30 117 98 215 22:00 23:00 59 37 96 5:45 19 16 35 17:45 105 71 176 23:00 00:00 20 15 35 6:00 22 22 44 18:00 71 71 142 6:15 26 24 50 18:15 85 63 148 NB SB EB WB TOTAL 6:30 32 31 63 18:30 88 70 158 00:00 to 12:00 6:45 47 60 107 18:45 68 78 146 1995 2226 4221 7:00 71 62 133 19:00 79 64 143 7:30 7:30 7:30 7:15 86 86 172 19:15 58 61 119 494 599 1093 7:30 127 135 262 19:30 55 41 96 0.758 0.871 0.876 7:45 163 149 312 19:45 53 38 91 8:00 109 172 281 20:00 38 32 70 12:00 to 00:00 8:15 95 143 238 20:15 34 34 68 3115 3223 6338 8:30 126 135 261 20:30 40 29 69 14:45 14:30 14:30 8:45 75 114 189 20:45 33 20 53 485 539 1020 9:00 88 105 193 21:00 24 29 53 0.758 0.802 0.853 9:15 71 79 150 21:15 33 18 51 9:30 67 81 148 21:30 19 11 30 07:00 to 09:00 9:45 72 78 150 21:45 19 15 34 852 996 1848 10:00 62 71 133 22:00 24 11 35 7:30 7:30 7:30 10:15 73 74 147 22:15 12 13 25 494 599 1093 10:30 78 82 160 22:30 15 10 25 0.758 0.871 0.876 10:45 74 77 151 22:45 8 3 11 11:00 72 88 160 23:00 6 6 12 16:00 to 18:00 11:15 81 81 162 23:15 7 3 10 745 780 1525 11:30 76 89 165 23:30 3 2 5 17:00 16:00 16:45 11:45 83 98 181 23:45 4 4 8 413 412 791 TOTALS 0 0 1995 2226 4221 TOTALS 0 0 3115 3223 6338 0.882 0.786 0.920 SPLIT %0%0%47%53%40%SPLIT %0%0%49%51%60% Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Volume Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services VOLUME El Cerro Blvd Bet El Pintado Rd & Alisal Ct 4/9/2024 DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS 15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals TIME STATISTICS Peak Period 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 0 :0 0 0 1 :0 0 0 2 :0 0 0 3 :0 0 0 4 :0 0 0 5 :0 0 0 6 :0 0 0 7 :0 0 0 8 :0 0 0 9 :0 0 1 0 :0 0 1 1 :0 0 1 2 :0 0 1 3 :0 0 1 4 :0 0 1 5 :0 0 1 6 :0 0 1 7 :0 0 1 8 :0 0 1 9 :0 0 2 0 :0 0 2 1 :0 0 2 2 :0 0 2 3 :0 0 NB SB EB WB Day:Wednesday City:Danville Date:Project #:CA24_080079_002 NB SB EB WB Total 0 0 5,145 5,645 10,790 TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 0:00 2 1 3 12:00 68 70 138 00:00 01:00 9 3 12 0:15 1 0 1 12:15 97 95 192 01:00 02:00 6 8 14 0:30 5 1 6 12:30 92 76 168 02:00 03:00 5 0 5 0:45 1 1 2 12:45 96 98 194 03:00 04:00 3 3 6 1:00 2 2 4 13:00 79 140 219 04:00 05:00 21 20 41 1:15 1 2 3 13:15 97 101 198 05:00 06:00 73 57 130 1:30 2 1 3 13:30 72 104 176 06:00 07:00 149 157 306 1:45 1 3 4 13:45 91 97 188 07:00 08:00 389 376 765 2:00 1 0 1 14:00 69 112 181 08:00 09:00 371 517 888 2:15 3 0 3 14:15 95 104 199 09:00 10:00 346 386 732 2:30 1 0 1 14:30 98 144 242 10:00 11:00 301 345 646 2:45 0 0 0 14:45 99 178 277 11:00 12:00 309 356 665 3:00 0 0 0 15:00 115 134 249 12:00 13:00 353 339 692 3:15 0 1 1 15:15 145 121 266 13:00 14:00 339 442 781 3:30 1 1 2 15:30 107 102 209 14:00 15:00 361 538 899 3:45 2 1 3 15:45 103 176 279 15:00 16:00 470 533 1003 4:00 2 2 4 16:00 112 115 227 16:00 17:00 375 413 788 4:15 4 1 5 16:15 88 95 183 17:00 18:00 406 402 808 4:30 2 6 8 16:30 71 96 167 18:00 19:00 332 323 655 4:45 13 11 24 16:45 104 107 211 19:00 20:00 258 176 434 5:00 13 12 25 17:00 99 104 203 20:00 21:00 108 116 224 5:15 15 12 27 17:15 108 103 211 21:00 22:00 107 90 197 5:30 21 17 38 17:30 91 102 193 22:00 23:00 35 31 66 5:45 24 16 40 17:45 108 93 201 23:00 00:00 19 14 33 6:00 22 36 58 18:00 72 73 145 6:15 27 26 53 18:15 81 77 158 NB SB EB WB TOTAL 6:30 50 37 87 18:30 94 81 175 00:00 to 12:00 6:45 50 58 108 18:45 85 92 177 1982 2228 4210 7:00 69 54 123 19:00 92 53 145 7:30 7:45 7:30 7:15 75 85 160 19:15 63 57 120 447 562 989 7:30 98 99 197 19:30 53 37 90 0.760 0.798 0.841 7:45 147 138 285 19:45 50 29 79 8:00 118 176 294 20:00 35 27 62 12:00 to 00:00 8:15 84 129 213 20:15 19 35 54 3163 3417 6580 8:30 77 119 196 20:30 25 30 55 15:00 14:30 14:30 8:45 92 93 185 20:45 29 24 53 470 577 1034 9:00 108 115 223 21:00 37 29 66 0.810 0.810 0.933 9:15 74 99 173 21:15 30 31 61 9:30 86 88 174 21:30 18 8 26 07:00 to 09:00 9:45 78 84 162 21:45 22 22 44 760 893 1653 10:00 84 87 171 22:00 9 10 19 7:30 7:45 7:30 10:15 75 81 156 22:15 9 6 15 447 562 989 10:30 60 82 142 22:30 12 9 21 0.760 0.798 0.841 10:45 82 95 177 22:45 5 6 11 11:00 68 96 164 23:00 9 5 14 16:00 to 18:00 11:15 67 80 147 23:15 4 7 11 781 815 1596 11:30 81 92 173 23:30 3 1 4 17:00 16:45 16:45 11:45 93 88 181 23:45 3 1 4 406 416 818 TOTALS 0 0 1982 2228 4210 TOTALS 0 0 3163 3417 6580 0.940 0.972 0.969 SPLIT %0%0%47%53%39%SPLIT %0%0%48%52%61% Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Volume Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services VOLUME El Cerro Blvd Bet El Pintado Rd & Alisal Ct 4/10/2024 DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS 15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals TIME STATISTICS Peak Period 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 0 :0 0 0 1 :0 0 0 2 :0 0 0 3 :0 0 0 4 :0 0 0 5 :0 0 0 6 :0 0 0 7 :0 0 0 8 :0 0 0 9 :0 0 1 0 :0 0 1 1 :0 0 1 2 :0 0 1 3 :0 0 1 4 :0 0 1 5 :0 0 1 6 :0 0 1 7 :0 0 1 8 :0 0 1 9 :0 0 2 0 :0 0 2 1 :0 0 2 2 :0 0 2 3 :0 0 NB SB EB WB Day:Tuesday City:Danville Date:Project #:CA24_080079_003 NB SB EB WB Total 0 0 6,916 6,865 13,781 TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 0:00 2 1 3 12:00 107 102 209 00:00 01:00 7 8 15 0:15 4 3 7 12:15 121 117 238 01:00 02:00 4 3 7 0:30 0 2 2 12:30 110 90 200 02:00 03:00 1 3 4 0:45 1 2 3 12:45 104 122 226 03:00 04:00 5 5 10 1:00 0 1 1 13:00 107 101 208 04:00 05:00 24 19 43 1:15 0 1 1 13:15 100 93 193 05:00 06:00 53 31 84 1:30 1 1 2 13:30 119 102 221 06:00 07:00 117 119 236 1:45 3 0 3 13:45 131 110 241 07:00 08:00 412 537 949 2:00 1 1 2 14:00 129 141 270 08:00 09:00 578 654 1232 2:15 0 0 0 14:15 112 141 253 09:00 10:00 412 381 793 2:30 0 1 1 14:30 169 148 317 10:00 11:00 393 354 747 2:45 0 1 1 14:45 167 199 366 11:00 12:00 432 378 810 3:00 1 0 1 15:00 201 136 337 12:00 13:00 442 431 873 3:15 0 1 1 15:15 207 141 348 13:00 14:00 457 406 863 3:30 2 1 3 15:30 167 149 316 14:00 15:00 577 629 1206 3:45 2 3 5 15:45 143 165 308 15:00 16:00 718 591 1309 4:00 6 2 8 16:00 143 142 285 16:00 17:00 541 573 1114 4:15 5 2 7 16:15 118 163 281 17:00 18:00 524 538 1062 4:30 6 5 11 16:30 134 121 255 18:00 19:00 388 512 900 4:45 7 10 17 16:45 146 147 293 19:00 20:00 362 312 674 5:00 8 7 15 17:00 164 134 298 20:00 21:00 251 180 431 5:15 16 7 23 17:15 128 138 266 21:00 22:00 146 131 277 5:30 14 4 18 17:30 113 131 244 22:00 23:00 44 44 88 5:45 15 13 28 17:45 119 135 254 23:00 00:00 28 26 54 6:00 22 23 45 18:00 78 128 206 6:15 21 24 45 18:15 83 118 201 NB SB EB WB TOTAL 6:30 31 26 57 18:30 120 114 234 00:00 to 12:00 6:45 43 46 89 18:45 107 152 259 2438 2492 4930 7:00 47 69 116 19:00 114 112 226 7:45 7:30 7:45 7:15 64 114 178 19:15 81 73 154 661 767 1405 7:30 113 144 257 19:30 80 47 127 0.879 0.913 0.883 7:45 188 210 398 19:45 87 80 167 8:00 160 207 367 20:00 65 64 129 12:00 to 00:00 8:15 170 206 376 20:15 47 37 84 4478 4373 8851 8:30 143 121 264 20:30 75 39 114 14:30 14:00 14:30 8:45 105 120 225 20:45 64 40 104 744 629 1368 9:00 119 102 221 21:00 45 54 99 0.899 0.790 0.934 9:15 102 104 206 21:15 47 28 75 9:30 98 88 186 21:30 39 30 69 07:00 to 09:00 9:45 93 87 180 21:45 15 19 34 990 1191 2181 10:00 90 85 175 22:00 11 13 24 7:45 7:30 7:45 10:15 94 72 166 22:15 8 16 24 661 767 1405 10:30 113 87 200 22:30 16 11 27 0.879 0.913 0.883 10:45 96 110 206 22:45 9 4 13 11:00 106 95 201 23:00 13 9 22 16:00 to 18:00 11:15 115 91 206 23:15 7 8 15 1065 1111 2176 11:30 108 91 199 23:30 4 4 8 16:30 16:00 16:15 11:45 103 101 204 23:45 4 5 9 572 573 1127 TOTALS 0 0 2438 2492 4930 TOTALS 0 0 4478 4373 8851 0.872 0.879 0.945 SPLIT %0%0%49%51%36%SPLIT %0%0%51%49%64% Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Volume Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services VOLUME El Cerro Blvd Bet I-680 Sb Ramps & La Gonda Way 4/9/2024 DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS 15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals TIME STATISTICS Peak Period 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 0 :0 0 0 1 :0 0 0 2 :0 0 0 3 :0 0 0 4 :0 0 0 5 :0 0 0 6 :0 0 0 7 :0 0 0 8 :0 0 0 9 :0 0 1 0 :0 0 1 1 :0 0 1 2 :0 0 1 3 :0 0 1 4 :0 0 1 5 :0 0 1 6 :0 0 1 7 :0 0 1 8 :0 0 1 9 :0 0 2 0 :0 0 2 1 :0 0 2 2 :0 0 2 3 :0 0 NB SB EB WB Day:Wednesday City:Danville Date:Project #:CA24_080079_003 NB SB EB WB Total 0 0 6,816 6,966 13,782 TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL TIME NB SB EB WB TOTAL NB SB EB WB TOTAL 0:00 7 2 9 12:00 130 100 230 00:00 01:00 12 7 19 0:15 3 2 5 12:15 153 101 254 01:00 02:00 1 7 8 0:30 0 2 2 12:30 131 84 215 02:00 03:00 5 2 7 0:45 2 1 3 12:45 107 131 238 03:00 04:00 3 8 11 1:00 0 2 2 13:00 127 115 242 04:00 05:00 25 9 34 1:15 0 2 2 13:15 107 125 232 05:00 06:00 47 51 98 1:30 1 2 3 13:30 114 105 219 06:00 07:00 119 122 241 1:45 0 1 1 13:45 107 126 233 07:00 08:00 360 519 879 2:00 3 0 3 14:00 122 117 239 08:00 09:00 578 651 1229 2:15 2 1 3 14:15 138 124 262 09:00 10:00 401 399 800 2:30 0 0 0 14:30 171 142 313 10:00 11:00 375 391 766 2:45 0 1 1 14:45 134 231 365 11:00 12:00 459 400 859 3:00 0 2 2 15:00 201 178 379 12:00 13:00 521 416 937 3:15 1 0 1 15:15 215 170 385 13:00 14:00 455 471 926 3:30 1 3 4 15:30 170 118 288 14:00 15:00 565 614 1179 3:45 1 3 4 15:45 135 183 318 15:00 16:00 721 649 1370 4:00 6 1 7 16:00 122 137 259 16:00 17:00 464 564 1028 4:15 6 0 6 16:15 107 141 248 17:00 18:00 535 572 1107 4:30 8 5 13 16:30 108 140 248 18:00 19:00 468 475 943 4:45 5 3 8 16:45 127 146 273 19:00 20:00 305 289 594 5:00 13 8 21 17:00 161 144 305 20:00 21:00 182 170 352 5:15 7 8 15 17:15 126 146 272 21:00 22:00 160 122 282 5:30 17 14 31 17:30 115 143 258 22:00 23:00 36 44 80 5:45 10 21 31 17:45 133 139 272 23:00 00:00 19 14 33 6:00 23 19 42 18:00 135 105 240 6:15 30 17 47 18:15 96 125 221 NB SB EB WB TOTAL 6:30 31 29 60 18:30 121 128 249 00:00 to 12:00 6:45 35 57 92 18:45 116 117 233 2385 2566 4951 7:00 45 60 105 19:00 94 86 180 7:45 7:30 7:45 7:15 56 110 166 19:15 102 83 185 627 752 1359 7:30 95 137 232 19:30 59 66 125 0.911 0.874 0.894 7:45 164 212 376 19:45 50 54 104 8:00 165 215 380 20:00 57 46 103 12:00 to 00:00 8:15 172 188 360 20:15 48 38 86 4431 4400 8831 8:30 126 117 243 20:30 48 36 84 14:30 14:30 14:30 8:45 115 131 246 20:45 29 50 79 721 721 1442 9:00 138 114 252 21:00 55 39 94 0.838 0.780 0.936 9:15 87 108 195 21:15 47 41 88 9:30 80 76 156 21:30 32 20 52 07:00 to 09:00 9:45 96 101 197 21:45 26 22 48 938 1170 2108 10:00 105 92 197 22:00 7 12 19 7:45 7:30 7:45 10:15 84 98 182 22:15 8 22 30 627 752 1359 10:30 94 102 196 22:30 10 4 14 0.911 0.874 0.894 10:45 92 99 191 22:45 11 6 17 11:00 110 92 202 23:00 11 4 15 16:00 to 18:00 11:15 102 104 206 23:15 4 5 9 999 1136 2135 11:30 139 89 228 23:30 3 3 6 17:00 16:45 16:45 11:45 108 115 223 23:45 1 2 3 535 579 1108 TOTALS 0 0 2385 2566 4951 TOTALS 0 0 4431 4400 8831 0.831 0.991 0.908 SPLIT %0%0%48%52%36%SPLIT %0%0%50%50%64% Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Volume Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Peak Hour Peak Volume Peak Hour Factor Peak Period Volume Prepared by National Data & Surveying Services VOLUME El Cerro Blvd Bet I-680 Sb Ramps & La Gonda Way 4/10/2024 DAILY TOTALS DAILY TOTALS 15-Minutes Interval Hourly Intervals TIME STATISTICS Peak Period 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 0 :0 0 0 1 :0 0 0 2 :0 0 0 3 :0 0 0 4 :0 0 0 5 :0 0 0 6 :0 0 0 7 :0 0 0 8 :0 0 0 9 :0 0 1 0 :0 0 1 1 :0 0 1 2 :0 0 1 3 :0 0 1 4 :0 0 1 5 :0 0 1 6 :0 0 1 7 :0 0 1 8 :0 0 1 9 :0 0 2 0 :0 0 2 1 :0 0 2 2 :0 0 2 3 :0 0 NB SB EB WB Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final B – Existing Traffic Conditions HCM 7th TWSC Timing Plan: AM Peak 1: El Pintado Rd & Project Driveway Existing 01 - Existing AM 425 El Pintado - Danville 10:12 am 04/05/2024 Existing Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.7 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 2 11 62 72 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 2 11 62 72 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 1 1 0 0 1 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ------ Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 3 2 0 Mvmt Flow 0 2 13 72 84 0 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 183 86 85 0 -0 Stage 1 85 ----- Stage 2 99 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.4 6.2 4.1 --- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.4 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.4 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 3.3 2.2 --- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 811 979 1525 --- Stage 1 944 ----- Stage 2 930 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 802 977 1523 --- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 802 ----- Stage 1 934 ----- Stage 2 929 ----- Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 8.69 1.11 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)271 -977 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.008 -0.002 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)7.4 0 8.7 -- HCM Lane LOS A A A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 -0 -- HCM 7th TWSC Timing Plan: AM Peak 2: Adobe Dr/El Pintado Rd & El Cerro Blvd Existing 01 - Existing AM 425 El Pintado - Danville 10:12 am 04/05/2024 Existing Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 52 428 15 3 541 21 34 0 4 9 0 65 Future Vol, veh/h 52 428 15 3 541 21 34 0 4 9 0 65 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length 70 --40 -------- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, %4 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Mvmt Flow 60 498 17 3 629 24 40 0 5 10 0 76 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 653 0 0 518 0 0 1266 1291 509 1267 1287 641 Stage 1 ------630 630 -648 648 - Stage 2 ------636 660 -619 639 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 --4.1 --7.1 6.5 6.2 7.21 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.1 5.5 -6.21 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.1 5.5 -6.21 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.236 --2.2 --3.5 4 3.3 3.599 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 924 --1058 --147 165 568 140 166 478 Stage 1 ------473 478 -444 469 - Stage 2 ------469 463 -461 474 - Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 924 --1055 --115 153 566 129 154 478 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------115 153 -129 154 - Stage 1 ------441 445 -443 467 - Stage 2 ------394 462 -428 441 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.96 0.04 48.46 18.13 HCM LOS E C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)126 924 --1055 --360 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.352 0.065 --0.003 --0.239 HCM Control Delay (s/veh)48.5 9.2 --8.4 --18.1 HCM Lane LOS E A --A --C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)1.4 0.2 --0 --0.9 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak 3: NB I-680 Off-Ramp/NB I-680 On-Ramp & El Cerro Blvd Existing 01 - Existing AM 425 El Pintado - Danville 10:12 am 04/05/2024 Existing Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)188 401 0 0 381 259 318 3 94 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph)188 401 0 0 381 259 318 3 94 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)4.7 29.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)1719 1845 1881 1583 1758 1495 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)1719 1845 1881 1583 1758 1495 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph)211 451 0 0 428 291 357 3 106 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 0 0 0 0 96 0 0 61 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph)211 451 0 0 428 195 0 360 45 0 0 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)4 4 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)1 Heavy Vehicles (%)5%3%0%0%1%2%3%0%8%0%0%0% Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s)22.3 50.3 47.3 47.3 25.9 25.9 Effective Green, g (s)22.3 50.3 47.3 47.3 25.9 25.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.46 0.43 0.43 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time (s)4.7 29.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.7 Vehicle Extension (s)0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph)348 843 808 680 413 352 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 c0.24 0.23 v/s Ratio Perm 0.12 0.20 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.53 0.53 0.29 0.87 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 39.9 21.4 23.1 20.4 40.5 33.1 Progression Factor 0.50 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 1.0 2.5 1.1 17.4 0.1 Delay (s)20.7 23.5 25.6 21.4 57.9 33.2 Level of Service C C C C E C Approach Delay (s/veh)22.6 23.9 52.3 0.0 Approach LOS C C D A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh)30.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 Actuated Cycle Length (s)110.0 Sum of lost time (s)33.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.0%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min)15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak 4: W El Pintado /SB I-680 Off-Ramp & SB I-680 On-Ramp & El Cerro Blvd Existing 01 - Existing AM 425 El Pintado - Danville 10:12 am 04/05/2024 Existing Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 2 Movement EBT EBR EBR2 WBL2 WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR NBR2 SBL2 SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)285 333 25 148 58 493 37 0 72 15 232 51 Future Volume (vph)285 333 25 148 58 493 37 0 72 15 232 51 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)5.1 5.1 4.7 5.1 4.7 19.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.96 Satd. Flow (prot)1845 1552 1782 1863 1624 1763 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.96 Satd. Flow (perm)1845 1552 1782 1863 1624 1763 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Adj. Flow (vph)328 383 29 170 67 567 43 0 83 17 267 59 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph)328 412 0 0 237 567 0 143 0 0 0 326 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)2 2 2 2 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)1 1 Heavy Vehicles (%)3%1%0%1%2%2%3%0%6%0%3%6% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Split NA Split NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 6 3 3 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green, G (s)33.2 33.2 16.8 54.7 10.2 15.6 Effective Green, g (s)33.2 33.2 16.8 54.7 10.2 15.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.30 0.15 0.50 0.09 0.14 Clearance Time (s)5.1 5.1 4.7 5.1 4.7 19.7 Vehicle Extension (s)0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph)556 468 272 926 150 250 v/s Ratio Prot 0.18 c0.13 0.30 c0.09 c0.18 v/s Ratio Perm c0.27 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.88 0.87 0.61 0.95 1.30 Uniform Delay, d1 32.6 36.5 45.5 20.0 49.7 47.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.04 0.41 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.5 20.5 21.3 2.6 58.7 162.8 Delay (s)37.2 57.0 68.7 10.7 108.4 210.0 Level of Service D E E B F F Approach Delay (s/veh)48.2 27.8 108.4 141.0 Approach LOS D C F F Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh)67.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service E HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.97 Actuated Cycle Length (s)110.0 Sum of lost time (s)34.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.4%ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min)15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak 4: W El Pintado /SB I-680 Off-Ramp & SB I-680 On-Ramp & El Cerro Blvd Existing 01 - Existing AM 425 El Pintado - Danville 10:12 am 04/05/2024 Existing Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 3 Movement SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)197 Future Volume (vph)197 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 Total Lost time (s)19.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 Frt 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)1583 Flt Permitted 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 Adj. Flow (vph)226 RTOR Reduction (vph)194 Lane Group Flow (vph)32 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Heavy Vehicles (%)2% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s)15.6 Effective Green, g (s)15.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 Clearance Time (s)19.7 Vehicle Extension (s)0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph)224 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.14 Uniform Delay, d1 41.3 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 Delay (s)41.5 Level of Service D Approach Delay (s/veh) Approach LOS Intersection Summary HCM 7th TWSC Timing Plan: PM Peak 1: El Pintado Rd & Project Driveway Existing 02 - Existing PM 425 El Pintado - Danville 9:03 am 04/23/2024 Existing Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.8 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 11 6 96 70 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 11 6 96 70 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 1 0 0 1 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ------ Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 1 0 0 Mvmt Flow 0 13 7 116 84 0 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 215 85 85 0 -0 Stage 1 85 ----- Stage 2 130 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.4 6.2 4.1 --- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.4 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.4 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 3.3 2.2 --- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 777 979 1524 --- Stage 1 943 ----- Stage 2 901 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 772 978 1522 --- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 772 ----- Stage 1 937 ----- Stage 2 900 ----- Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 8.73 0.43 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)106 -978 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 -0.014 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)7.4 0 8.7 -- HCM Lane LOS A A A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 -0 -- HCM 7th TWSC Timing Plan: PM Peak 2: Adobe Dr/El Pintado Rd & El Cerro Blvd Existing 02 - Existing PM 425 El Pintado - Danville 9:03 am 04/23/2024 Existing Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 89 393 54 5 401 12 24 1 4 10 0 71 Future Vol, veh/h 89 393 54 5 401 12 24 1 4 10 0 71 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length 70 --40 -------- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, %0 1 0 0 1 8 0 0 25 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 92 405 56 5 413 12 25 1 4 10 0 73 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 427 0 0 462 0 0 1041 1055 434 1020 1076 421 Stage 1 ------617 617 -431 431 - Stage 2 ------424 437 -589 645 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 --4.1 --7.1 6.5 6.45 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 --2.2 --3.5 4 3.525 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1143 --1110 --210 228 576 217 221 637 Stage 1 ------480 484 -607 586 - Stage 2 ------612 583 -498 470 - Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1142 --1109 --170 208 576 196 202 637 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------170 208 -196 202 - Stage 1 ------441 445 -603 583 - Stage 2 ------539 579 -454 432 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 1.4 0.1 27.53 13.67 HCM LOS D B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)189 1142 --1109 --498 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.158 0.08 --0.005 --0.168 HCM Control Delay (s/veh)27.5 8.4 --8.3 --13.7 HCM Lane LOS D A --A --B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.5 0.3 --0 --0.6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: PM Peak 3: NB I-680 Off-Ramp/NB I-680 On-Ramp & El Cerro Blvd Existing 02 - Existing PM 425 El Pintado - Danville 9:03 am 04/23/2024 Existing Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)140 415 0 0 244 252 295 7 121 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph)140 415 0 0 244 252 295 7 121 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)1787 1900 1900 1577 1806 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)1787 1900 1900 1577 1806 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph)146 432 0 0 254 262 307 7 126 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 87 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph)146 432 0 0 254 156 0 314 39 0 0 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)1 1 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)2 4 Heavy Vehicles (%)1%0%0%0%0%1%0%14%0%0%0%0% Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s)11.7 77.8 61.4 61.4 22.4 22.4 Effective Green, g (s)11.7 77.8 61.4 61.4 22.4 22.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.71 0.56 0.56 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.7 Vehicle Extension (s)0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph)190 1343 1060 880 367 328 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 c0.23 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.17 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.77 0.32 0.24 0.18 0.86 0.12 Uniform Delay, d1 47.8 6.1 12.4 11.9 42.2 35.8 Progression Factor 1.08 1.20 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 14.3 0.6 0.5 0.4 16.8 0.1 Delay (s)65.9 7.9 12.9 12.4 59.1 35.8 Level of Service E A B B E D Approach Delay (s/veh)22.5 12.6 52.4 0.0 Approach LOS C B D A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh)27.8 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length (s)110.0 Sum of lost time (s)14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.2%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min)15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: PM Peak 4: W El Pintado /SB I-680 Off-Ramp & SB I-680 On-Ramp & El Cerro Blvd Existing 02 - Existing PM 425 El Pintado - Danville 9:03 am 04/23/2024 Existing Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 2 Movement EBT EBR EBR2 WBL2 WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR NBR2 SBL2 SBL Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)279 248 20 96 6 437 10 0 33 16 243 2 Future Volume (vph)279 248 20 96 6 437 10 0 33 16 243 2 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)5.1 5.1 4.7 5.1 4.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.89 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot)1881 1536 1805 1900 1674 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm)1881 1536 1805 1900 1674 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph)300 267 22 103 6 470 11 0 35 17 261 2 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph)300 289 0 0 109 470 0 63 0 0 0 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)1 1 1 1 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)11 11 Heavy Vehicles (%)1%1%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Split NA Split Split Protected Phases 2 1 1 6 3 3 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green, G (s)54.3 54.3 9.6 68.6 7.0 Effective Green, g (s)54.3 54.3 9.6 68.6 7.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.09 0.62 0.06 Clearance Time (s)5.1 5.1 4.7 5.1 4.7 Vehicle Extension (s)0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph)928 758 157 1184 106 v/s Ratio Prot 0.16 c0.06 c0.25 c0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.19 v/c Ratio 0.32 0.38 0.69 0.40 0.59 Uniform Delay, d1 16.8 17.4 48.8 10.4 50.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.62 1.59 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.9 1.5 9.7 0.9 5.8 Delay (s)17.7 18.8 40.1 17.4 56.0 Level of Service B B D B E Approach Delay (s/veh)18.3 21.7 56.0 Approach LOS B C E Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh)29.9 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s)110.0 Sum of lost time (s)19.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.0%ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min)15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: PM Peak 4: W El Pintado /SB I-680 Off-Ramp & SB I-680 On-Ramp & El Cerro Blvd Existing 02 - Existing PM 425 El Pintado - Danville 9:03 am 04/23/2024 Existing Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 3 Movement SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)8 126 Future Volume (vph)8 126 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)5.2 5.2 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)1812 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)1812 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph)9 135 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 111 Lane Group Flow (vph)272 24 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Heavy Vehicles (%)0%2% Turn Type NA Perm Protected Phases 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s)19.4 19.4 Effective Green, g (s)19.4 19.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time (s)5.2 5.2 Vehicle Extension (s)0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph)319 279 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.85 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 43.9 37.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 18.6 0.0 Delay (s)62.5 37.9 Level of Service E D Approach Delay (s/veh)54.4 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final C – Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions HCM 7th TWSC Timing Plan: AM Peak 1: El Pintado Rd & Project Driveway Existing Plus Project 03 - Ex+P AM 425 El Pintado - Danville 3:35 pm 05/15/2024 Existing Plus Project Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 13 7 62 72 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 13 7 62 72 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 1 1 0 0 1 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ------ Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 3 2 0 Mvmt Flow 0 15 8 72 84 0 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 174 86 85 0 -0 Stage 1 85 ----- Stage 2 89 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.4 6.2 4.1 --- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.4 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.4 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 3.3 2.2 --- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 820 979 1525 --- Stage 1 944 ----- Stage 2 939 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 814 977 1523 --- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 814 ----- Stage 1 937 ----- Stage 2 938 ----- Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 8.74 0.75 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)183 -977 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.005 -0.015 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)7.4 0 8.7 -- HCM Lane LOS A A A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 -0 -- HCM 7th TWSC Timing Plan: AM Peak 2: Adobe Dr/El Pintado Rd & El Cerro Blvd Existing Plus Project 03 - Ex+P AM 425 El Pintado - Danville 3:35 pm 05/15/2024 Existing Plus Project Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 49 428 15 3 541 20 34 0 4 9 0 76 Future Vol, veh/h 49 428 15 3 541 20 34 0 4 9 0 76 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length 70 --40 -------- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 86 Heavy Vehicles, %4 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 Mvmt Flow 57 498 17 3 629 23 40 0 5 10 0 88 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 652 0 0 518 0 0 1259 1283 509 1259 1280 641 Stage 1 ------623 623 -648 648 - Stage 2 ------636 659 -612 632 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 --4.1 --7.1 6.5 6.2 7.21 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.1 5.5 -6.21 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.1 5.5 -6.21 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.236 --2.2 --3.5 4 3.3 3.599 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 925 --1058 --149 167 568 141 167 479 Stage 1 ------477 481 -445 469 - Stage 2 ------469 464 -466 477 - Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 925 --1055 --113 155 566 131 156 479 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------113 155 -131 156 - Stage 1 ------446 450 -443 468 - Stage 2 ------381 462 -433 446 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.91 0.04 49.54 18.07 HCM LOS E C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)124 925 --1055 --374 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.358 0.062 --0.003 --0.265 HCM Control Delay (s/veh)49.5 9.1 --8.4 --18.1 HCM Lane LOS E A --A --C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)1.5 0.2 --0 --1 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak 3: NB I-680 Off-Ramp/NB I-680 On-Ramp & El Cerro Blvd Existing Plus Project 03 - Ex+P AM 425 El Pintado - Danville 3:35 pm 05/15/2024 Existing Plus Project Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)188 398 0 0 388 263 318 3 94 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph)188 398 0 0 388 263 318 3 94 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)4.7 29.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)1719 1845 1881 1583 1758 1495 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)1719 1845 1881 1583 1758 1495 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Adj. Flow (vph)211 447 0 0 436 296 357 3 106 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 0 0 0 0 96 0 0 61 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph)211 447 0 0 436 200 0 360 45 0 0 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)4 4 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)1 Heavy Vehicles (%)5%3%0%0%1%2%3%0%8%0%0%0% Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s)22.3 50.3 47.3 47.3 25.9 25.9 Effective Green, g (s)22.3 50.3 47.3 47.3 25.9 25.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.46 0.43 0.43 0.24 0.24 Clearance Time (s)4.7 29.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.7 Vehicle Extension (s)0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph)348 843 808 680 413 352 v/s Ratio Prot c0.12 c0.24 0.23 v/s Ratio Perm 0.13 0.20 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.61 0.53 0.54 0.29 0.87 0.13 Uniform Delay, d1 39.9 21.4 23.3 20.5 40.5 33.1 Progression Factor 0.50 1.06 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.8 0.9 2.6 1.1 17.4 0.1 Delay (s)20.7 23.5 25.8 21.5 57.9 33.2 Level of Service C C C C E C Approach Delay (s/veh)22.6 24.1 52.3 0.0 Approach LOS C C D A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh)30.6 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.82 Actuated Cycle Length (s)110.0 Sum of lost time (s)33.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.9%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min)15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak 4: W El Pintado /SB I-680 Off-Ramp & SB I-680 On-Ramp & El Cerro Blvd Existing Plus Project 03 - Ex+P AM 425 El Pintado - Danville 3:35 pm 05/15/2024 Existing Plus Project Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 2 Movement EBT EBR EBR2 WBL2 WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR NBR2 SBL2 SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)283 333 25 152 58 496 37 0 72 15 231 51 Future Volume (vph)283 333 25 152 58 496 37 0 72 15 231 51 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)5.1 5.1 4.7 5.1 4.7 19.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.91 1.00 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.96 Satd. Flow (prot)1845 1552 1782 1863 1624 1763 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 0.96 Satd. Flow (perm)1845 1552 1782 1863 1624 1763 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Adj. Flow (vph)325 383 29 175 67 570 43 0 83 17 266 59 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph)325 412 0 0 242 570 0 143 0 0 0 325 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)2 2 2 2 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)1 1 Heavy Vehicles (%)3%1%0%1%2%2%3%0%6%0%3%6% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Split NA Split NA Protected Phases 2 1 1 6 3 3 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green, G (s)33.0 33.0 17.0 54.7 10.2 15.6 Effective Green, g (s)33.0 33.0 17.0 54.7 10.2 15.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.30 0.30 0.15 0.50 0.09 0.14 Clearance Time (s)5.1 5.1 4.7 5.1 4.7 19.7 Vehicle Extension (s)0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph)553 465 275 926 150 250 v/s Ratio Prot 0.18 c0.14 0.31 c0.09 c0.18 v/s Ratio Perm c0.27 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.89 0.88 0.62 0.95 1.30 Uniform Delay, d1 32.7 36.7 45.5 20.0 49.7 47.2 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.05 0.41 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 4.5 21.3 22.5 2.6 58.7 161.1 Delay (s)37.2 58.0 70.2 10.9 108.4 208.3 Level of Service D E E B F F Approach Delay (s/veh)48.8 28.6 108.4 139.9 Approach LOS D C F F Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh)67.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service E HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.98 Actuated Cycle Length (s)110.0 Sum of lost time (s)34.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 82.5%ICU Level of Service E Analysis Period (min)15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: AM Peak 4: W El Pintado /SB I-680 Off-Ramp & SB I-680 On-Ramp & El Cerro Blvd Existing Plus Project 03 - Ex+P AM 425 El Pintado - Danville 3:35 pm 05/15/2024 Existing Plus Project Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 3 Movement SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)197 Future Volume (vph)197 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 Total Lost time (s)19.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 Frt 0.85 Flt Protected 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)1583 Flt Permitted 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.87 Adj. Flow (vph)226 RTOR Reduction (vph)194 Lane Group Flow (vph)32 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Heavy Vehicles (%)2% Turn Type Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s)15.6 Effective Green, g (s)15.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 Clearance Time (s)19.7 Vehicle Extension (s)0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph)224 v/s Ratio Prot v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.14 Uniform Delay, d1 41.3 Progression Factor 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 0.1 Delay (s)41.5 Level of Service D Approach Delay (s/veh) Approach LOS Intersection Summary HCM 7th TWSC Timing Plan: PM Peak 1: El Pintado Rd & Project Driveway Existing Plus Project 04 - Ex+P PM 425 El Pintado - Danville 3:37 pm 05/15/2024 Existing Plus Project Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 11 14 96 70 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 11 14 96 70 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 1 0 0 1 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ------ Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 0 1 0 0 Mvmt Flow 0 13 17 116 84 0 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 235 85 85 0 -0 Stage 1 85 ----- Stage 2 149 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.4 6.2 4.1 --- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.4 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.4 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 3.3 2.2 --- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 758 979 1524 --- Stage 1 943 ----- Stage 2 883 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 748 978 1522 --- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 748 ----- Stage 1 931 ----- Stage 2 882 ----- Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 8.73 0.94 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)229 -978 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 -0.014 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)7.4 0 8.7 -- HCM Lane LOS A A A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 -0 -- HCM 7th TWSC Timing Plan: PM Peak 2: Adobe Dr/El Pintado Rd & El Cerro Blvd Existing Plus Project 04 - Ex+P PM 425 El Pintado - Danville 3:37 pm 05/15/2024 Existing Plus Project Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 2 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 98 393 54 5 401 11 24 1 4 8 0 73 Future Vol, veh/h 98 393 54 5 401 11 24 1 4 8 0 73 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length 70 --40 -------- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, %0 1 0 0 1 8 0 0 25 0 0 0 Mvmt Flow 101 405 56 5 413 11 25 1 4 8 0 75 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 426 0 0 462 0 0 1060 1072 434 1038 1094 420 Stage 1 ------636 636 -430 430 - Stage 2 ------424 436 -608 664 - Critical Hdwy 4.1 --4.1 --7.1 6.5 6.45 7.1 6.5 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.1 5.5 -6.1 5.5 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.2 --2.2 --3.5 4 3.525 3.5 4 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1144 --1110 --204 222 576 211 216 638 Stage 1 ------469 475 -607 587 - Stage 2 ------612 583 -486 461 - Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1143 --1109 --163 201 576 189 195 637 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------163 201 -189 195 - Stage 1 ------428 433 -604 583 - Stage 2 ------537 580 -439 420 - Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 1.52 0.1 28.61 13.32 HCM LOS D B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)182 1143 --1109 --516 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.164 0.088 --0.005 --0.162 HCM Control Delay (s/veh)28.6 8.5 --8.3 --13.3 HCM Lane LOS D A --A --B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.6 0.3 --0 --0.6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: PM Peak 3: NB I-680 Off-Ramp/NB I-680 On-Ramp & El Cerro Blvd Existing Plus Project 04 - Ex+P PM 425 El Pintado - Danville 3:37 pm 05/15/2024 Existing Plus Project Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)140 421 0 0 245 253 295 7 124 0 0 0 Future Volume (vph)140 421 0 0 245 253 295 7 124 0 0 0 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)1787 1900 1900 1577 1806 1615 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)1787 1900 1900 1577 1806 1615 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Adj. Flow (vph)146 439 0 0 255 264 307 7 129 0 0 0 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 0 0 0 0 107 0 0 88 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph)146 439 0 0 255 157 0 314 41 0 0 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)1 1 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)2 4 Heavy Vehicles (%)1%0%0%0%0%1%0%14%0%0%0%0% Turn Type Prot NA NA Perm Perm NA Perm Protected Phases 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 6 8 8 Actuated Green, G (s)11.7 77.8 61.4 61.4 22.4 22.4 Effective Green, g (s)11.7 77.8 61.4 61.4 22.4 22.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.71 0.56 0.56 0.20 0.20 Clearance Time (s)4.7 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.7 4.7 Vehicle Extension (s)0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph)190 1343 1060 880 367 328 v/s Ratio Prot c0.08 c0.23 0.13 v/s Ratio Perm 0.10 0.17 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.77 0.33 0.24 0.18 0.86 0.12 Uniform Delay, d1 47.8 6.1 12.4 11.9 42.2 35.8 Progression Factor 1.08 1.19 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 14.2 0.6 0.5 0.4 16.8 0.1 Delay (s)65.7 7.9 12.9 12.4 59.1 35.8 Level of Service E A B B E D Approach Delay (s/veh)22.3 12.6 52.3 0.0 Approach LOS C B D A Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh)27.7 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.51 Actuated Cycle Length (s)110.0 Sum of lost time (s)14.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 52.2%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min)15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: PM Peak 4: W El Pintado /SB I-680 Off-Ramp & SB I-680 On-Ramp & El Cerro Blvd Existing Plus Project 04 - Ex+P PM 425 El Pintado - Danville 3:37 pm 05/15/2024 Existing Plus Project Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 2 Movement EBT EBR EBR2 WBL2 WBL WBT NBL NBT NBR NBR2 SBL2 SBL Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)282 248 20 97 6 437 10 0 33 16 246 2 Future Volume (vph)282 248 20 97 6 437 10 0 33 16 246 2 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)5.1 5.1 4.7 5.1 4.7 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 0.89 Flt Protected 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Satd. Flow (prot)1881 1536 1805 1900 1674 Flt Permitted 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 Satd. Flow (perm)1881 1536 1805 1900 1674 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph)303 267 22 104 6 470 11 0 35 17 265 2 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Group Flow (vph)303 289 0 0 110 470 0 63 0 0 0 0 Confl. Peds. (#/hr)1 1 1 1 Confl. Bikes (#/hr)11 11 Heavy Vehicles (%)1%1%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0% Turn Type NA Perm Prot Prot NA Split NA Split Split Protected Phases 2 1 1 6 3 3 4 4 Permitted Phases 2 Actuated Green, G (s)54.0 54.0 9.7 68.4 7.0 Effective Green, g (s)54.0 54.0 9.7 68.4 7.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.49 0.49 0.09 0.62 0.06 Clearance Time (s)5.1 5.1 4.7 5.1 4.7 Vehicle Extension (s)0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph)923 754 159 1181 106 v/s Ratio Prot 0.16 c0.06 c0.25 c0.04 v/s Ratio Perm 0.19 v/c Ratio 0.33 0.38 0.69 0.40 0.59 Uniform Delay, d1 17.0 17.6 48.7 10.5 50.1 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 0.62 1.59 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.0 1.5 9.5 0.9 5.8 Delay (s)17.9 19.0 39.7 17.5 56.0 Level of Service B B D B E Approach Delay (s/veh)18.5 21.7 56.0 Approach LOS B C E Intersection Summary HCM 2000 Control Delay (s/veh)30.1 HCM 2000 Level of Service C HCM 2000 Volume to Capacity ratio 0.55 Actuated Cycle Length (s)110.0 Sum of lost time (s)19.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.2%ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min)15 c Critical Lane Group HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Timing Plan: PM Peak 4: W El Pintado /SB I-680 Off-Ramp & SB I-680 On-Ramp & El Cerro Blvd Existing Plus Project 04 - Ex+P PM 425 El Pintado - Danville 3:37 pm 05/15/2024 Existing Plus Project Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn & Associates Page 3 Movement SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)8 126 Future Volume (vph)8 126 Ideal Flow (vphpl)1900 1900 Total Lost time (s)5.2 5.2 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 Frpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 Flpb, ped/bikes 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot)1812 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm)1812 1583 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 Adj. Flow (vph)9 135 RTOR Reduction (vph)0 111 Lane Group Flow (vph)276 24 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) Confl. Bikes (#/hr) Heavy Vehicles (%)0%2% Turn Type NA Perm Protected Phases 4 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s)19.6 19.6 Effective Green, g (s)19.6 19.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 Clearance Time (s)5.2 5.2 Vehicle Extension (s)0.2 0.2 Lane Grp Cap (vph)322 282 v/s Ratio Prot c0.15 v/s Ratio Perm 0.02 v/c Ratio 0.86 0.09 Uniform Delay, d1 43.8 37.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 18.9 0.0 Delay (s)62.8 37.8 Level of Service E D Approach Delay (s/veh)54.6 Approach LOS D Intersection Summary Transportation Impact Study │425 El Pintado Road September 2024 │ Final D – Signal Warrants TRAFFIC SIGNAL VOLUME WARRANT ANALYSIS (2010 MUTCD) MAJOR STREET:NB SB # OF APPROACH LANES:1 MINOR STREET:EB WB # OF APPROACH LANES:1 CITY, STATE:Danville, CA COMMENTS:Existing Conditions ISOLATED COMMUNITY WITH POPULATION LESS THAN 10,000 (Y OR N):N 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED GREATER THAN 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET (Y OR N):N MAJOR ST MINOR ST Ped Count WARRANT 2 WARRANT 3 TWO-WAY TRAFFIC TRAFFIC HEAVY LEG CROSSING MAJOR ST MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET Four-Hour Peak Hour THRESHOLD VALUES 500 150 750 75 400 120 600 60 60 75 06:30 AM TO 07:30 AM 07:30 AM TO 08:30 AM 145 2 08:30 AM TO 09:30 AM 09:30 AM TO 10:30 AM 10:30 AM TO 11:30 AM 11:00 AM TO 12:00 PM 12:30 PM TO 01:30 PM 01:30 PM TO 02:30 PM 02:30 PM TO 03:30 PM 03:30 PM TO 04:30 PM 04:30 PM TO 05:30 PM 05:30 PM TO 06:30 PM 172 11 06:30 PM TO 07:30 PM 07:30 PM TO 08:30 PM 08:30 PM TO 09:30 PM 09:30 PM TO 10:30 PM 317 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 HRS NEEDED 1 HR NEEDED NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED 08/30/24 Kimley-Horn and Associates 8 HOURS NEEDED 8 HOURS NEEDED 8 HOURS NEEDED for both Condition A & B WARRANT 1 - Condition A, Part 1 WARRANT 1 - Condition B, Part 1 WARRANT 1 - Condition A, Part 2 WARRANT 1 - Condition B, Part 2 NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED El Pintado Road Project Driveway TRAFFIC SIGNAL VOLUME WARRANT ANALYSIS (2010 MUTCD) MAJOR STREET:NB SB # OF APPROACH LANES:1 MINOR STREET:EB WB # OF APPROACH LANES:1 CITY, STATE:Danville, CA COMMENTS:Existing Conditions ISOLATED COMMUNITY WITH POPULATION LESS THAN 10,000 (Y OR N):N 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED GREATER THAN 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET (Y OR N):N MAJOR ST MINOR ST Ped Count WARRANT 2 WARRANT 3 TWO-WAY TRAFFIC TRAFFIC HEAVY LEG CROSSING MAJOR ST MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET Four-Hour Peak Hour THRESHOLD VALUES 500 150 750 75 400 120 600 60 60 75 06:30 AM TO 07:30 AM 07:30 AM TO 08:30 AM 1,060 74 Y Y Y Y Y Y 08:30 AM TO 09:30 AM 09:30 AM TO 10:30 AM 10:30 AM TO 11:30 AM 11:00 AM TO 12:00 PM 12:30 PM TO 01:30 PM 01:30 PM TO 02:30 PM 02:30 PM TO 03:30 PM 03:30 PM TO 04:30 PM 04:30 PM TO 05:30 PM 05:30 PM TO 06:30 PM 954 102 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 06:30 PM TO 07:30 PM 07:30 PM TO 08:30 PM 08:30 PM TO 09:30 PM 09:30 PM TO 10:30 PM 2,014 176 2 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 4 HRS NEEDED 1 HR NEEDED NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED 08/30/24 Kimley-Horn and Associates NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED El Cerro Boulevard El Pintado Road 8 HOURS NEEDED 8 HOURS NEEDED 8 HOURS NEEDED for both Condition A & B WARRANT 1 - Condition A, Part 1 WARRANT 1 - Condition B, Part 1 WARRANT 1 - Condition A, Part 2 WARRANT 1 - Condition B, Part 2 ` TRAFFIC SIGNAL VOLUME WARRANT ANALYSIS (2010 MUTCD) MAJOR STREET:NB SB # OF APPROACH LANES:1 MINOR STREET:EB WB # OF APPROACH LANES:1 CITY, STATE:Danville, CA COMMENTS:Existing Plus Project Conditions ISOLATED COMMUNITY WITH POPULATION LESS THAN 10,000 (Y OR N):N 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED GREATER THAN 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET (Y OR N):N MAJOR ST MINOR ST Ped Count WARRANT 2 WARRANT 3 TWO-WAY TRAFFIC TRAFFIC HEAVY LEG CROSSING MAJOR ST MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET Four-Hour Peak Hour THRESHOLD VALUES 500 150 750 75 400 120 600 60 60 75 06:30 AM TO 07:30 AM 07:30 AM TO 08:30 AM 141 13 08:30 AM TO 09:30 AM 09:30 AM TO 10:30 AM 10:30 AM TO 11:30 AM 11:00 AM TO 12:00 PM 12:30 PM TO 01:30 PM 01:30 PM TO 02:30 PM 02:30 PM TO 03:30 PM 03:30 PM TO 04:30 PM 04:30 PM TO 05:30 PM 05:30 PM TO 06:30 PM 180 11 06:30 PM TO 07:30 PM 07:30 PM TO 08:30 PM 08:30 PM TO 09:30 PM 09:30 PM TO 10:30 PM 321 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 HRS NEEDED 1 HR NEEDED NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED 08/30/24 Kimley-Horn and Associates NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED El Pintado Road Project Driveway 8 HOURS NEEDED 8 HOURS NEEDED 8 HOURS NEEDED for both Condition A & B WARRANT 1 - Condition A, Part 1 WARRANT 1 - Condition B, Part 1 WARRANT 1 - Condition A, Part 2 WARRANT 1 - Condition B, Part 2 TRAFFIC SIGNAL VOLUME WARRANT ANALYSIS (2010 MUTCD) MAJOR STREET:NB SB # OF APPROACH LANES:1 MINOR STREET:EB WB # OF APPROACH LANES:1 CITY, STATE:Danville, CA COMMENTS:Existing Plus Project Conditions ISOLATED COMMUNITY WITH POPULATION LESS THAN 10,000 (Y OR N):N 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED GREATER THAN 40 MPH ON MAJOR STREET (Y OR N):N MAJOR ST MINOR ST Ped Count WARRANT 2 WARRANT 3 TWO-WAY TRAFFIC TRAFFIC HEAVY LEG CROSSING MAJOR ST MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET MAIN LINE SIDE STREET BOTH MET Four-Hour Peak Hour THRESHOLD VALUES 500 150 750 75 400 120 600 60 60 75 06:30 AM TO 07:30 AM 07:30 AM TO 08:30 AM 1,056 85 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 08:30 AM TO 09:30 AM 09:30 AM TO 10:30 AM 10:30 AM TO 11:30 AM 11:00 AM TO 12:00 PM 12:30 PM TO 01:30 PM 01:30 PM TO 02:30 PM 02:30 PM TO 03:30 PM 03:30 PM TO 04:30 PM 04:30 PM TO 05:30 PM 05:30 PM TO 06:30 PM 962 110 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 06:30 PM TO 07:30 PM 07:30 PM TO 08:30 PM 08:30 PM TO 09:30 PM 09:30 PM TO 10:30 PM 2,018 195 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 2 2 1 0 4 HRS NEEDED 1 HR NEEDED NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED 08/30/24 Kimley-Horn and Associates NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED NOT SATISFIED El Cerro Boulevard El Pintado Road 8 HOURS NEEDED 8 HOURS NEEDED 8 HOURS NEEDED for both Condition A & B WARRANT 1 - Condition A, Part 1 WARRANT 1 - Condition B, Part 1 WARRANT 1 - Condition A, Part 2 WARRANT 1 - Condition B, Part 2 ` DEBOLT|CIVIL ENGINEERING 1 MEMORANDUM Date:October 28, 2024 Job No.:23103 To:Jeff Stone Diamond Construction Copies To: From: Easton McAllister, PE Subject: 425 El Pintado Road – Flood Investigation Dear Mr. Stone, This memorandum is provided to discuss the potential for flooding concerns with the proposed development at 425 El Pintado Road and the existing drainage patterns in the surrounding area. Flood Insurance Rate Maps have been obtained that show no evidence of flooding in the area. The project site is located in Zone X, areas of minimal flooding, as shown on the Flood Rate Map 06013C0434F. In addition, a regional drainage study was prepared by Schaaf & Wheeler studying the drainage channel in front of the property as well as the 48” diameter storm drain pipe immediately downstream of the development. OPEN CHANNEL Hydrology The Schaaf & Wheeler identifies this section of the drainage channel as “Reach 3” in their drainage report. The report establishes a tributary area of 136.7 acres, a runoff coefficient of 0.46 and a time of concentration of 40 minutes. From this information and 21.5” average rainfall depth, a 100-year rain intensity of 1.62 in/hr is calculated. Using the rational method, the 100- year flow through the channel is calculated as follows: Q = (c)(i)(A) = (0.46)(136.7)(1.62) = 102 cfs Capacity The channel passing through the property is conservatively estimated with the following characteristics: 30’ width, 2 foot wide base and side slopes of 4:1. Based on field topography, the average channel slope is calculated to be 1.5%. Using Manning’s Equation for open channels and maintaining 12 inches of freeboard (3’ flow depth), a channel capacity of 295 cfs is calculated. 48” DRAINAGE PIPE Hydrology The Schaaf & Wheeler identifies this section of the drainage channel as “Reach 4” in their drainage report. The report establishes a tributary area of 184.7 acres, a runoff coefficient of 0.48. Using the same 100-year rain intensity of 1.62 in/hr, the 100-year flow through the drainage pipe is calculated as follows: Q = (c)(i)(A) = (0.48)(184.7)(1.62) = 144 cfs ATTACHMENT F DEBOLT|CIVIL ENGINEERING 2 Capacity The 48” drainage pipe at the bottom of the project has been surveyed to identify 1.5% slope crossing under Caltrans right of way (I-680) and discharging at 375 W El Pintado Road. Using Manning’s Equation for closed pipes, a pipe capacity of 176 cfs is calculated. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT As is standard engineering practice, the site is designed to handle flows from the project site in a manner so that it does not adversely impact the existing downstream system. For this purpose, an underground detention pipe is designed to mitigate any increased flow rates caused by an increase in impervious surfaces created by redevelopment. The detention sizing is established using Contra Costa County design standards and guidelines for the 10-year storm event. In addition, the development will be required to convey any existing storm drainage entering the site in a manner that prevents any ponding or surcharge to upstream properties. All project run- on is designed for collection through the project’s underground pipe network. A final hydrology and hydraulics report will be provided with construction drawings that will calculate the required pipe size and slope for the storm drain system. The pipe system capacity will be calculated using standard engineering principles (Manning’s Equation) and will be sized for the 100-year storm event. FINDINGS Based on the information contained in this memorandum, there is no evidence of flooding issues in the area with proper maintenance of the existing infrastructure. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments. Signed, Easton C. McAllister, PE Attachments Flood Insurance Rate Map Schaaf Wheeler Report Tables Open Channel Capacity 48” Pipe Capacity 100-yr Precipitation-Duration Curve National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250 Feet Ü SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE) Zone A, V, A99 With BFE or Depth Zone AE, AO, AH, VE, AR Regulatory Floodway 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas of 1% annual chance flood with average depth less than one foot or with drainage areas of less than one square mile Zone X Future Conditions 1% Annual Chance Flood Hazard Zone X Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to Levee. See Notes.Zone X Area with Flood Risk due to Levee Zone D NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard Zone X Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone D Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer Levee, Dike, or Floodwall Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance 17.5 Water Surface Elevation Coastal Transect Coastal Transect Baseline Profile Baseline Hydrographic Feature Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE) Effective LOMRs Limit of Study Jurisdiction Boundary Digital Data Available No Digital Data Available Unmapped This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of digital flood maps if it is not void as described below. The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap accuracy standards The flood hazard information is derived directly from the authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map was exported on 10/31/2024 at 7:03 PM and does not reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and time. The NFHL and effective information may change or become superseded by new data over time. This map image is void if the one or more of the following map elements do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels, legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers, FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for regulatory purposes. Legend OTHER AREAS OF FLOOD HAZARD OTHER AREAS GENERAL STRUCTURES OTHER FEATURES MAP PANELS 8 B 20.2 The pin displayed on the map is an approximate point selected by the user and does not represent an authoritative property location. 1:6,000 122°0'21"W 37°50'3"N 121°59'44"W 37°49'34"N Basemap Imagery Source: USGS National Map 2023 Biological Resources Assessment Senior Housing Project at 425 El Pintado Road in the Town of Danville, Contra Costa County, CA Prepared for: 425 EP Investment, LLC In Care of Brian Griggs Email: brian@griggsgroup.com Phone: (925) 580-4902 Prepared by: Greg Matuzak, Principal Greg Matuzak Environmental Consulting LLC P.O. Box 2016 Nevada City, CA 95959 Email: gmatuzak@gmail.com March 2024 ATTACHMENT G TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1.0 2.0 Regulatory Overview and Definitions ............................................................................. 2.0 3.0 Methods ............................................................................................................................. 3.0 4.0 Results.................................................................................................................................. 4.0 5.0 Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................. 5.0 Appendices Appendix A Parcel Report Appendix B Site Plan Appendix C Plants and Wildlife Observed During the Site Survey Appendix D National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Figure Appendix E USDA Soils Figure Appendix F Photo Log Appendix G Special-Status Species Tables Appendix H USFWS IPaC Species List and CNDDB/CNPS Species Lists 1.0 INTRODUCTION Greg Matuzak, a California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Qualified Biologist, conducted a reconnaissance-level biological resources survey and required background research related to potential sensitive biological resources as part of the proposed 425 El Pintado Road Senior Housing Project (Project) in order to develop this Biological Resources Assessment (BRA). Additionally, Greg Matuzak has previously developed several biological resources assessments, CEQA documents, and state and federal permitting applications and consultations for projects within Contra Costa County and for projects in the vicinity of the Town of Danville. In addition, potential CDFW, United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) jurisdiction within the Project area was assessed as well as specific Town of Danville General Plan policies and Town ordinances covering sensitive biological resources. No previous BRA reports specifically covering the subject parcel (Project area) are known to exist, so this BRA has been developed based on background research, including database searches for biological resources and a review of previous biological resources assessment reports developed within the greater Project area, and the results of a reconnaissance-level biological resources survey of the Project area to identify any sensitive biological resources within the Project area. This includes an assessment of special-status plants or wildlife species and any sensitive habitats such as wetlands, riparian habitat, stream zones, and protected tree and oak resources within the Project area. Based on a review of the proposed Project by the Town of Danville, the proposed Project requires consistency with the Town of Danville’s M-35 zoning district’s Required Special Studies (Section 32-29.16), which include the development of a BRA given the proximity of the proposed development adjacent to an existing stream zone. Therefore, the development of this BRA ensures consistency with the Required Species Study as outlined within the Town of Danville’s Incomplete Application Letter (dated December 19, 2023). The Project area is located within the Town of Danville approximately 2.5 miles south of the Town of Alamo down Interstate 680 (I-680) and the Project site is located approximately 6.0 miles north of the City of San Ramon along I-680. The Project area is located at 425 El Pintado Road and currently contains a single large office building, parking, and some open space grassy areas with several trees, both native and non- native. The Project area includes the following subject parcel: a 3.166-acre parcel (Parcel ID: 200040012). See attachments in Appendix A and Appendix B for a Parcel Report and Site Plan). In total, the subject parcel comprises a total of 3.166 acres with the planned developed area within the subject parcel that would include a greater area of the subject parcel than what exists currently within the subject parcel. The proposed Project includes the development of a reconfigured subject parcel that would include a multifamily senior housing condominium development. Along with the condominium facilities, parking spaces, walking trails, and landscaping will be included as part of the proposed Project (see the Site Plan attached in Appendix B). The subject parcel includes an unnamed seasonal stream that runs from the northeast to the southeast along El Pintado Road and El Cerro Boulevard within the subject parcel. The access into the subject parcel off of El Pintado Road crosses over the stream with an existing bridge. Given the proposed reconfiguration of the subject parcel, a 25-foot stream setback will be encroached upon by the proposed access and circulation within the updated Project area. The proposed parking, access and circulation, and condominium building construction will not encroach into unnamed seasonal stream, nor will it impact any existing riparian vegetation along the creek. The unnamed seasonal stream enters into the underground stormwater management system for the Town of Danville and surrounding areas at the southeastern corner of the subject parcel where the I-680 North onramp and El Cerro Boulevard meet. The Project area is located at approximately 380 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL). However, the subject parcel ranges between approximately 370 feet above MSL in the eastern and southern sections of the subject parcel where the seasonal stream runs along El Pintado Road and El Cerro Boulevard and 390 feet above MSL along the northwestern section of the subject parcel given an upslope from east to west occurs in that area. Therefore, general drainage within the Project area is from west to east and north to south with the low spot being the channel of the seasonal stream, which is a low gradient seasonal stream that historically may have been manmade to reduce the risk of flooding in the subject parcel and within the adjacent neighborhood and roads. See Appendix C for a list of plant and wildlife species observed within the Project area during the site survey conducted as part of the development of this BRA and see Appendix D for a map showing the results of a search of the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) covering the Project area. The NWI data does not identify any stream or other aquatic resources within the subject parcel. Additionally, Appendix E contains a USDA Soils Map, Appendix F contains a Photo Log of the subject parcel, and Appendix H contains the USFWS, CDFW, and California Native Plant Society (CNPS) species lists covering the Project area. Appendix G includes assessment tables for special-status species with potential to occur within the subject parcel. The purpose of this BRA is to identify the location and extent of sensitive biological resources within the Project area, including special-status plant and wildlife species, and the presence of drainage and wetland features that could potentially meet the Corps’ criteria as a “waters of the United States,” pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), and streams that could be under the jurisdiction of the California Fish and Wildlife Code Section 1600 et. seq. This BRA also satisfies the Town of Danville General Plan and Ordinance requirements for sensitive biological resources. 2.0 REGULATORY OVERVIEW AND DEFINITIONS Federal Regulations Section 404 of the Clean Water Act The United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulate the discharge of dredge or fill material into waters of the U.S. under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Waters of the United States include wetlands and lakes, rivers, streams, and their tributaries. Wetlands are defined for regulatory purposes as areas inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated solid conditions (33 CFR 328.3, 40 CFR 230.3). Project proponents must obtain a permit from the Corps for all discharges of fill material into waters of the U.S., including wetlands, before proceeding with a proposed action. The proposed Project does not include the placement of fill or dredge within any “waters of the U.S.” including wetlands. However, there is a single unnamed stream that runs from the northeast to southeast within the subject parcel. Though the unnamed stream connects directly with an underground stormwater drain, the development of the proposed Project would potentially be subject to additional reporting and/or permitting as required for compliance with the CWA if fill and dredge material were placed within the seasonal stream, a potential federally regulated aquatic resource. However, for the proposed Project, no CWA permitting will be required given there will be no encroachment into the stream zone. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act CWA Section 401 compliance is required for any project requiring a federal action (i.e. Corps permit or federal funding) with construction that could have an impact to surface water quality. Project proponents must obtain a permit from the local Regional Water Quality Control Board for all discharges of fill material into waters of the U.S., including wetlands, before proceeding with a proposed action. The proposed Project does not include the placement of fill or dredge within any “waters of the U.S.” including wetlands. The proposed Project does not include the placement of fill or dredge within any “waters of the U.S.” including wetlands. However, there is a single unnamed stream that runs from the northeast to southeast within the subject parcel. Though the unnamed stream connects directly with an underground stormwater drain, the development of the proposed Project would potentially be subject to additional reporting and/or permitting as required for compliance with the CWA if fill and dredge material were placed within the seasonal stream, a potential federally regulated aquatic resource. However, for the proposed Project, no CWA permitting will be required given there will be no encroachment into the stream zone. Endangered Species Act of 1973 For the Project area, consultation with the USFWS would be necessary if a proposed action may affect suitable habitat for a federally listed species. This consultation would proceed under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) if a federal action is part of the proposed action or through Section 10 of the ESA if no such nexus were available (USFWS, 1973). Within the CNDDB Diablo and Las Trampas Ridge Quad where the Project is located, there are previous documented locations of several federally protected species listed under the ESA, including steelhead – Central Valley DPS, steelhead – Central California Coast DPS, California tiger salamander – Central California DPS, foothill yellow-legged frog – Central Coast DPS, California red-legged frog, San Joaquin kit fox, and Alameda whipsnake. Additionally, the western pond turtle is proposed for listing as Threatened under the ESA and has also been previously identified within the Diablo and Las Trampas Ridge Quads where the subject parcel is located (CDFW 2024). Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 and Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 USC Section 703-711) and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BAGEPA) (16 USC Section 668) protect certain species of birds from direct “take” (i.e. harm or harassment as described above). The MBTA protects migrant bird species from take through setting hunting limits and seasons and protecting occupied nests and eggs (USFWS, 1918). BAGEPA prohibits the take or commerce of any part of the bald or golden eagles (USFWS, 1940). The USFWS administers both Acts and reviews actions that may affect species protected under each Act. State Regulations California Endangered Species Act The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has jurisdiction over plant and wildlife species listed as threatened or endangered under section 2080 of the CDFW Code. The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) prohibits take of state- listed threatened and endangered species. The state Act differs from the federal Act in that it does not include habitat destruction in its definition of take. The CDFW defines take as “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” The CDFW may authorize take under the CESA through Sections 2081 agreements. If the results of a biological survey indicate that a state-listed species would be affected by the project, the CDFW would issue an Agreement under Section 2081 of the CDFW Code and would establish a Memorandum of Understanding for the protection of state-listed species. CDFW maintains lists for Candidate-Endangered Species and Candidate- Threatened Species. Several CESA listed species have been previously documented within the CNDDB Diablo and Las Trampas Ridge Quad where the Project is located. They include bald eagle, California tiger salamander – Central California DPS, foothill yellow-legged frog – Central Coast DPS, San Joaquin kit fox, western bumblebee, Crotchs bumble bee, Swainson’s hawk, tricolored blackbird, and Alameda whipsnake (CDFW 2024). Streambed Alteration Agreements: CDFG Code Section 1600 et seq. CDFW has jurisdictional authority over wetland resources associated with rivers, streams, and lakes under Sections 1600–1616. CDFW has the authority to regulate all work under the jurisdiction of the State of California that would substantially divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow of a river, stream, or lake; substantially change the bed, channel, or bank of a river, stream, or lake; or use material from a streambed. In practice, CDFW marks its jurisdictional limit at the top of the stream or lake bank, or the outer edge of the riparian vegetation (where present) and extends its jurisdiction to the edge of the 100-year floodplain. The Project area contains a seasonal stream along and along with its associated riparian habitat would most likely be protected by CDFW within the subject parcel. Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act & Section 1601 – Section 1607 of CDFG Code These acts and codes pertain to projects with potential impacts to water quality or waterways. The Project area contains potential waters of the State as defined by the State Water Resources Board (State Board 2014). Besides the seasonal stream located within the subject parcel, there are no other aquatic resources that would be subject to a report of waste discharge. California Department of Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3800: Nesting Migratory Bird and Raptors Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3800 of the CDFG Code prohibit the take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests or eggs. Implementation of the take provisions requires that project-related disturbance within active nesting territories be reduced or eliminated during critical phases of the nesting cycle (approximately March 1 – August 31). Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort (e.g. killing or abandonment of eggs or young), or the loss of habitat upon which birds are dependent, is considered "taking", and is potentially punishable by fines and/or imprisonment (LCC 2013). Such taking would also violate federal law protecting migratory birds (e.g. MBTA above). California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15380 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines section 15380(b) provides that a species not listed on the federal or state list of protected species may be considered rare or endangered if the species can be shown to meet certain specific criteria. This section was included in the guidelines to deal primarily with situations in which a public agency is reviewing a project that may have a significant effect on, for example a “candidate species” that has not yet been listed by the USFWS or CDFW. CEQA, therefore, enables an agency to protect a species from significant project impacts until the respective government agencies have had an opportunity to list the species as protected, if warranted (CNRA 2012). Plants appearing on the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) are considered to meet CEQA’s Section 15380 criteria. Ranks include: 1A) plants presumed extirpated in California and either rare or extinct elsewhere, 1B) plant rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere, 2A) plants presumed extirpated in California, but more common elsewhere, and 2B) plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. Impacts to these species would therefore be considered “significant” requiring mitigation. State Oak Woodland Regulations State laws that regulate protection of oak woodlands include Professional Forester’s Law (PFL) and CEQA according to Public Resources Code Section 21083.4. Oak woodlands are defined as areas having 10% oak canopy cover or greater. “Oaks” are defined in Public Resources Code Section 21083.4 as a native tree species in the genus Quercus, that is 5 inches diameter at breast height (DBH) or greater. The Oak Woodlands Conservation Act (SB 1334) provides funding for the conservation and protection of oak woodlands in California. Oak woodland habitats are protected under both the State and the Placer County General Plan. Local Regulations and Policies Town of Danville 2030 General Plan The Town of Danville adopted a General Plan on March 19, 2013 (Town of Danville 2030 General Plan) to address the Town’s goals, policies, and programs regarding development, resource management, and public safety. The Resources and Hazards Element of the Town’s 2030 General Plan provides the following environmental quality goals and policies pertaining to biological resources applicable to this Project: Goal 21: Protect and enhance Danville’s natural features, including its hillsides, ridgelines, creeks, vegetation, and wildlife. Goal 22: Improve water quality in Danville and the water bodies that receive runoff from Danville, including San Francisco Bay. Town of Danville Tree Preservation Ordinance The Town of Danville’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code, Section 32-79) requires acquisition of a Tree Removal Permit prior to removal of certain trees within the City Limits. A Tree Removal Permit for tree removal is required if the tree(s) are on the Town’s list of protected, heritage, and/or memorial trees, as defined below: Protected Trees: Any of the following native trees having a single trunk or main stem 10 inches or greater in diameter or multiple trunk trees with tree trunks totaling 20 inches in diameter, measured 4.5 feet above natural grade: • Blue oak (Quercus douglasii) • California bay (Umbellularia californica) • California black oak (Quercus kelloggii) • California buckeye (Aesculus californica) • California sycamore (Platanus racemosa) • Canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepis) • Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) • Interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii) • Madrone (Arbutus menziesii) • London plane tree (Plantanus acerifolia) • Valley oak (Quercus lobata) • White alder (Alnus rhombifolia) Heritage Trees: Any single trunked tree, regardless of species, which has a trunk diameter of 36 inches or greater, measured 4.5 feet above natural grade. Multi- trunk trees are not considered heritage trees therefore no permit would be required. Memorial Trees: A tree planted on public property in memory of or commemoration of an individual or individuals. 3.0 METHODS In order to evaluate the Project area for the presence of sensitive biological resources, baseline information from databases and reporting for similar projects in the Contra Costa County was collected and reviewed prior to conducting a reconnaissance-level biological resources survey within the subject parcel. The database searches, background research, and reconnaissance-level biological resources survey characterized the baseline conditions of the subject parcel. Based on the baseline conditions of the subject parcel and specifically, the proposed Project area, an assessment was implemented to determine if any special-status plant or wildlife species have the potential to use the subject parcel and Project area at any time during their life cycle. The baseline conditions also identified the presence of sensitive habitat or communities, if they were identified within the subject parcel or within or adjacent to the proposed Project area. The general assessment was conducted for the entirety of the Project area. Sensitive Biological Resources The following information was used to identify potential special-status plant and wildlife species within the region surrounding the Project area that could be found to use the Project area: • California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s California Natural Diversity Database records for special-status species previously identified within the Las Trampas Ridge and Diablo Quads where the Project area is located (CDFW, 2024); • California Native Plant Society’s online Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California known to occur within the Las Trampas Ridge and Diablo Quads where the Project area is located (CNPS, 2024); • The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Information, Planning, and Consultation System (IPaC) for endangered, threatened, and proposed listed species for the subject parcel (USFWS, 2024); • National Wetland Inventory (NWI, 2024); • United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soils Mapper (USDA, 2024); • Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Hydric Soils List for Contra Costa County (NRCS, 2024); and • Town of Danville 2030 General Plan (adopted by the Town of Danville on March 19, 2013). Reconnaissance-level Biological Resources Field Survey A reconnaissance-level biological survey was conducted on foot of the Project area and within the entirety of the subject parcel by Greg Matuzak, a CDFW and USFWS Qualified Biologist. Greg Matuzak has developed several assessments of biological resources within Contra Costa County in the past. The site visit and reconnaissance-level biological survey was conducted on March 13th, 2024. The purpose of the survey was to identify sensitive habitat and vegetation types within the proposed Project area and to identify protected trees that would be subject to the Town of Danville Tree Protection Ordinance and permitting requirements. Additionally, the site visit and survey were implemented to determine the potential for any special-status plant and wildlife species identified within the desktop analysis and background research to occur within the Project area. The site visit and survey were conducted during the winter; therefore, the survey was not considered comprehensive in nature for all plants that may occur within the Project area. However, as detailed within this BRA, the proposed areas of disturbance within the subject parcel do not contain suitable habitat for any potential special-status plant species given the developed, landscaped, and overall impacted nature of the Project area. An assessment of the existing trees and protected oak resources was also conducted during the site survey. A photo log of the Project area and a list of plant and wildlife species observed during the field surveys was compiled (see Appendix C and Appendix F respectively). Attached in Appendix D is an NWI figure and Appendix E includes a USDA Soils Map for the Project area. 4.0 RESULTS Environmental Setting The Project area is located within the Town of Danville approximately 2.5 miles south of the Town of Alamo down Interstate 680 (I-680) and the Project site is located approximately 6.0 miles north of the City of San Ramon along I-680. The Project area is located at approximately 380 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL). However, the subject parcel ranges between approximately 370 feet above MSL in the eastern and southern sections of the subject parcel where the seasonal stream runs along El Pintado Road and El Cerro Boulevard and 390 feet above MSL along the northwestern section of the subject parcel given an upslope from east to west occurs in that area. Therefore, general drainage within the Project area is from west to east and north to south with the low spot being the channel of the seasonal stream, which is a low gradient seasonal stream. Plant Communities Plant communities have been classified based on the California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System developed by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The CDFW also manages the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB), which is a database inventory of the previously identified locations of rare and endangered plants, wildlife, and natural communities in California. A list of plants and wildlife documented during the field surveys is attached in Appendix C to this BRA. Given the field survey was conducted during the late spring when most plants and vegetation would be identifiable, the plant and vegetation community survey was comprehensive in nature. Below is a description of the habitat communities identified within the Project site during the site visit and survey. Disturbed and Developed Disturbed/developed areas occur throughout much of the subject parcel and is comprised of the existing office building, existing parking areas, landscaped areas, and the enclosed trash areas. This habitat type does not provide suitable habitat for any sensitive or otherwise special-status species. Any vegetation present within this habitat type is adapted to high levels of disturbance and endures for long periods of time in areas that have continual disturbance. Dominant grass and forb species observed within this type of vegetation community within the Project site include black mustard (Brassica nigra), bristly ox- tongue (Helminthotheca echioides), California burclover (Medicago polymorpha), poison hemlock (Conium maculatum), and yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis). Non-Native Annual Grassland The majority of the undeveloped areas within the subject parcel comprise of non-native annual grassland. The grassland is characterized primarily by an assemblage of non-native grasses and herbaceous species. Non-native annual grassland is comprised primarily of plant species that mature in spring and early summer, before spreading seed and dying in late summer and fall. Non-native annual grassland is found in patches along El Pintado Road and El Cerro Boulevard and within the upland areas adjacent to the seasonal creek flowing within the subject parcel as well as within some of the parking and open space areas within the Project site. Dominant grass and forb species observed within non-native annual grassland communities within the Project site include slender wild oat (Avena barbata), ripgut brome (Bromus diandrus), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus ssp. pycnocephalus), and filaree species (Erodium botrys, E. cicutarium). Seasonal Stream and Associated Riparian Habitat The existing stream within the Project area is a single thread channel with seasonal flow in a northeast to southwestern direction that discharges underground at the southeastern corner of the subject parcel where the onramp onto I-680 North off of El Cerro Boulevard occurs. The channel bottom within the subject parcel varies from gravel and sand and is unvegetated. Below the OHWM of the creek, no emergent wetland vegetation was observed given the lack of benches and the incised, urbanized nature of the creek within the Project area. Riparian woodland habitat is present within and surrounding the seasonal stream and the dominant plant species observed within the riparian woodland community on the Project site include Italian ryegrass (Festuca perennis), mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana), giant reed (Arundo donax), mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia), red willow (Salix laevigata), Fremont cottonwood (Populus fremontii), and white alder (Alnus rhombifolia). Included within this habitat are valley oak (Quercus lobata) and coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia). The seasonal stream and its associated riparian habitat will not be impacted by the proposed Project. Project related disturbance will be maintained outside of the 25- foot stream setback to the extent feasible within the subject parcel. However, based on the site constraints some edge areas of the proposed circulation will encroach within the stream setback (see attached Site Plan with the stream flow line, 25-foot setbacks, and proposed disturbance within the subject parcel). Protected Trees Protected trees are defined under the Town of Danville Tree Protection Ordinance that were documented within the subject parcel including white alder, valley oak, and coast live oak. Several Protected Trees (any of the trees on the Town of Danville list that have a single trunk or main stem 10 inches or greater in diameter or multiple trunk trees with tree trunks totaling 20 inches in diameter, measured 4.5 feet above natural grade) were identified within the subject parcel within the riparian zone of the seasonal stream and others along the southeast fenceline adjacent to the I-680 North onramp. A Tree Removal Permit for tree removal is required if the tree(s) are on the Town’s list of protected, heritage, and/or memorial trees. The subject parcel does not include any heritage or memorial trees but as stated above does contain protected trees. Soils Alo clay, 15 to 30 percent slopes This is the only soil type mapped by USDA within the subject parcel and overall Project area. Alo soils are well drained soils underlain by soft sandstone and shale. These soils are on uplands. Slopes are 15 to 75 percent. Elevation ranges from 500 to 1,500 feet. The average annual rainfall is 14 to 25 inches. These soil types are moist from December to May and are dry from June to mid-October in most years. Vegetation is annual grasses, forbs, and scattered oaks. This soil is mainly used for range. Alo clay, 15 to 30 percent slopes, is classified as a hydric soil by the NRCS. A USDA Soils map is attached in Appendix E. SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES Special status species were considered for this BRA based on a current review of the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) and database information provided by the CDFW, CNPS, and USFWS (see Appendix H for attachments containing the results of the database searches). Per the tables below, several federal and state listed species have been documented within the Diablo and Las Trampas Ridge Topo Quads where the subject area is located within both USGS Quadrangles. The results of the USFWS IPaC contain additional potential federally protected species that may have the potential to occur within the Project area. Therefore, the tables attached in Appendix G include the following information: • Table 1 includes a review of special-status plant species that could occur within the Project area that are listed under the federal and/or state Endangered Species Act or they are listed as CNPS List 1, 2, or 3 species; and • Table 2 includes a review of special-status wildlife species that could occur within the Project area that are listed under the federal and/or state Endangered Species Act or they are listed by CDFW as a Species of Special Concern. However, none of the species reviewed within the databases were observed during the field survey and the Project area does not contain suitable habitat for any of these species given the lack of suitable habitat for these species within the Project area. However, as described within Table 1 and Table 2 (attached within Appendix G), the seasonal stream does have a low potential for some special-status species to occur within the Project area, but given the proposed disturbance within the subject parcel will be contained within the open non-native annual grassland and disturbed areas outside of the stream and riparian zone, the proposed Project would have no potential to impact any special-status species. Additionally, the Project area is not located within an area containing a sensitive habitat community mapped within the CNDDB (CDFW 2024). There is no Designated Critical Habitat (DCH) mapped for any species within the subject parcel or adjacent to it (USFWS, 2024). The tables attached in Appendix G include a description of each special- status species that has previously been identified within the Diablo and Las Trampas Ridge Topo Quads and/or identified within the USFWS IPaC list for the subject parcel (see Appendix H for database results and Appendix G for the special-status species tables). 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS As discussed, the subject parcel comprises a total of 3.166 acres with a newly developed areas within the subject parcel being greater than the current land use and development within the subject parcel. Most of the additional disturbance will include the transformation of some non-native annual grassland and disturbed areas into parking, access and circulation within the subject parcel, and the development of the facilities as well. None of the seasonal stream and its associated riparian habitat within the subject parcel will be impacted by the proposed Project. Sensitive habitats identified within the subject parcel includes the seasonal stream and its associated riparian habitat and there are no other sensitive habitats or otherwise vegetation communities within the subject parcel. Disturbance will be maintained a minimum of 25 feet from the edge of the seasonal stream except for some minor encroachment into the setback as part of the access and circulation required within the Project area. However, this disturbance will remain outside the seasonal stream and the edge of its associated riparian habitat and the minor impact within the 25-foot setback will be maintained within the non-native and disturbed grassland areas (see Photo 9 and Photo 13 within the attached Photo Log in Appendix F showing the upland grassy area that will be encroached into as part of the access and circulation proposed). Given there are no additional aquatic resources within the subject parcel, no CWA or CDFW permitting would be required based on the attached Site Plan in Appendix B given no fill or dredge material will be placed within the seasonal stream and no willow or other riparian related vegetation will be removed as part of the proposed Project. Known or potential biological constraints within the subject parcel include the following: • Potential nesting and foraging habitat for migratory birds and other birds of prey; • Seasonal stream and its associated riparian habitat; and • Protected trees. Recommendations Based on site specific field survey, the Project area does contain large individual valley and coast live oak trees and a well-developed riparian habitat zone adjacent to the seasonal stream. These large trees and habitat could provide nesting habitat for birds protected under MBTA and by CDFW, including raptor species. However, no special-status plant or wildlife species were documented during the site visit and the biological resources survey conducted as part of the development of this BRA. Therefore, the proposed Project would have little potential to impact special-status species except for the presence of nesting protected birds, if present during vegetation removal and other proposed disturbance within the Project area. Additional impacts could include protected trees if such trees are required to be removed within any area proposed for development and disturbance. If such impacts would occur to protected trees as outlined in this BRA and below, a Tree Removal Permit and potential mitigation for impacts to and the loss of such sensitive and protected trees would be required for the proposed Project under the Town of Danville Tree Preservation Ordinance. Impacts to Sensitive Habitats, Including Protected Aquatic Habitats The Project area contains a seasonal stream, which would most likely meet the criteria as a “waters of the U.S.” defined by the Corps for being jurisdictional and regulated under the Clean Water Act (CWA). However, the proposed Project will remain a minimum outside of the ordinary high water mark along the seasonal stream and therefore, no impacts to the creek are expected from the development and implementation of the Project. The seasonal stream does not contain associated wetlands but does contain a well-developed riparian habitat zone. The proposed development and implementation of the proposed disturbance will remain generally outside of a 25-foot stream setback except for some encroachment into the stream setback as part of the access and circulation within the subject parcel. Any disturbance within the 25-foot setback to the seasonal stream would remain outside of its associated riparian habitat zone. The seasonal stream and its associated riparian habitat zone would also be regulated as a stream by CDFW. Given the proposed disturbance will remain outside of the seasonal stream and its associated riparian habitat zone, CWA and CDFW permitting for impacts to the sensitive aquatic habitat within the subject parcel as part of the proposed Project will not be required. Impacts to Special-Status Plant Species Special-status plant species were not identified during the field survey implemented as part of the development of this BRA. Given that none of the special-status plant species were documented during the site visit and field survey and the subject parcel does not contain suitable habitat for any special-status plant species, the proposed Project would have no impact to such special-status plant species. Therefore, no mitigation is recommended for special-status plant species. Impacts to Special-Status Wildlife Species Special-status wildlife species were not identified during the field survey implemented as part of the development of this BRA. Given that none of the special-status wildlife species were documented during the site visit and field survey and the subject parcel does not contain suitable habitat for any special-status wildlife species, the proposed Project would have no impact to such special-status wildlife species. The seasonal stream within the subject parcel enters into a stormwater drain within the edge of the subject parcel and within the subject parcel and continues underground within the stormwater management system within the Town of Danville and surrounding areas. The seasonal stream does not contain required habitat characteristics for special-status amphibians or fish species. Therefore, no mitigation is recommended for special-status wildlife species. Impacts to Protected Nesting Bird Species The trees, shrubs, and grasslands within the subject parcel contain suitable habitat for nesting raptors and MBTA and CDFW protected nesting bird species. The breeding season for most protected birds in the vicinity of the Project area is generally from February 1st to August 31st. Vegetation clearing or tree removal outside of the breeding season for such bird species would not require the implementation of any avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures. However, construction or development activities during the breeding season could disturb or remove occupied nests of migratory birds and other songbirds and would require the implementation of a pre-construction survey within 300 feet of the disturbance area within the subject parcel for nesting migratory birds prior to development. For raptors, binoculars should be used to survey up to 500 feet from the disturbance area to search for active raptor nesting or reproductive behavior. If nests are found and considered to be active, the project biologist should establish buffer zones to prohibit construction activities and minimize nest disturbance until the young have successfully fledged. Buffer width will depend on the species in question, surrounding existing disturbances, and specific site characteristics, but may range from 50 feet for some songbirds to 300 feet for most raptors. If active nests are found within any trees slated for removal, then an appropriate buffer should be established around the trees and the trees should not be removed until a biologist determines that the nestlings have successfully fledged. In addition, a pre- construction worker awareness training should be conducted alerting workers to the presence of and protections for the active avian nests. If construction activities begin during the non-breeding season (September 1 through January 31), a survey and training would not be required, and no further studies or surveys would be necessary. With the implementation of such measures any potential impact to protected MBTA or CDFW protected bird species would be sufficiently minimized to a level of less than significant. Impacts to Protected Trees The Town of Danville’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code, Section 32- 79) requires acquisition of a Tree Removal Permit prior to removal of certain trees within the City Limits. These impacts could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Trees within the subject parcel that are subject to the Town of Danville’s Tree Preservation Ordinance include the white alder, valley oak, and coast live oak trees with a 10-inch DBH or greater. The subject parcel does not contain any heritage or memorial trees. If trees are slated for removal as part of the proposed Project, the Project developer’s consulting arborist shall prepare an arborist report to ensure protected, heritage, and or memorial trees are identified and considered for preservation. At least 90 days prior to project initiation, a Tree Removal Application shall be submitted to the Town for review and for acquisition of a Tree Removal Permit, if required. The Town will consider the following criteria upon receipt of the application and prior to issuing a permit: 1. The condition of the tree with respect to its health, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing structures, and interference with utility infrastructure; 2. The necessity to remove the tree to allow for the reasonable use, enjoyment, or development of the property; 3. The age and size of the protected tree with regard to the appropriate size of the area in which the tree is planted, and if removal would encourage healthy, more vigorous growth of other plant materials in the area; 4. Planning Commission may authorize removal if the tree is unreasonably adversely impacting the use of the property. Mitigation would be required; 5. The effect of the removal in relation to soil erosion and surface water flow; 6. The number of species, size, and location of other protected trees in the area and the effect of the removal as it pertains to shade, privacy between properties, and scenic beauty of the area; 7. Possible visual impacts within a Town-identified Major Ridgeline or Scenic Hillside Area. To compensate for the removal of any trees protected by the Town of Danville’s Tree Protection Ordinance, the Project developer shall ensure the protection (i.e., health and safety) of trees to be retained and provide mitigation for trees authorized by the Town for removal. Accordingly, the Project developer’s consulting arborist shall calculate the total inches of diameter of Town- protected trees and submit that calculation to the Town’s Planning Division for review. The Project developer shall be required to replace on-site the Town-protected trees to be removed, if they are removed and compensatory mitigation is required. Conclusion Given the site conditions of the Project area containing ruderal, disturbed, non-native annual grassland within an otherwise urban and built environment, there are habitat types of little value for special-status wildlife and plant species previously recorded within the vicinity of the Project area. However, given the presence of the seasonal stream within the subject parcel, the stream shall be avoided as well as its associated riparian habitat zone to ensure no impacts occur to such protected sensitive habitats. Special-status plant and wildlife species have a very low potential to occur within the Project area given no such species were documented during the field survey and also given the potential presence of suitable habitat for such species was not identified within the subject parcel. The ruderal and developed nature of the Project area rules out the presence of any potential special-status or otherwise sensitive species except for common wildlife. Given the reconnaissance-level biological resources survey did identify the large trees and riparian habitat as potential suitable nesting habitat for protected bird species, the implementation of a pre-construction survey for protected nesting bird species would sufficiently avoid a significant impact to such species protected under the MBTA and by CDFW. Lastly, the applicant would be required to apply for a Tree Removal Permit and would fully mitigate for the removal of any protected trees (white alder, valley oak, and coast live oak were identified within the subject parcel) ensuring that impacts to protected trees would be either avoided or mitigation would reduce otherwise potential significant impacts to a level of less tan significant. References Burt, William Henry. 1980. A Field Guide to the Mammals of North America north of Mexico. New York, New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1980. Calflora. Information on California Plant for Education, Research and Conservation. [web application]. 2024. California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 1987. Five-Year Status Report: California Black Rail. Non-Game Bird and Mammal Section, Wildlife Management Division, Department of Fish and Game. California. California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2011. Special - 898 Taxa. California Natural Diversity Database, The Natural Resources Agency, Biogeographic Branch, Department of Fish and Game. California. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2024. Search for Special-Status Species within the Diablo and Las Tramps Ridge Topo Quads. California Natural Diversity Database, California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, California. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2024. Threatened and Endangered Species. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, California. CaliforniaHerps.com (CaliforniaHerps). 2024. A Guide to Amphibians and Reptiles in California. CaliforniaHerps.com. California. California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2000. A Manual of California Vegetation. [web based version]. California Native Plant Society. Information Center for the Environment, University of California Davis. California Native Plant Society (CNPS). 2024. Online Inventory of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants of California. Search for Special-Status Plant Species within the Diablo and Las Tramps Ridge Topo Quads. California Native Plant Society. California. Jennings, M.R.; Hayes, M.P. 1994. Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California. Inland Fisheries Division, California Department of Fish and Game. Rancho Cordova, California. Jepson Herbarium, The. (Jespson eFlora). 2024. The Jepson Herbarium, University of California, Berkeley. Berkeley, California. Legislative Counsel of California (LCC). 2004. Senate Bill 1334- Oak Woodlands Conservation Act. Official California Legislative Information. California. Legislative Counsel of California (LCC). 2013. California Law: California Fish and Game Code. Official California Legislative Information. California. Shuford, W. D., and T. Gardali, editors. 2008. California bird species of special concern: a ranked assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento. Spautz, H., Nur, N., Stralberg, D. 2005. California Black Rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus): Distribution and Abundance in Relation to Habitat and Landscape Features in the San Francisco Bay Estuary. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report: PSW-GTR-191. Town of Danville 2030 General Plan. 2020. Town of Danville General Plan (Updated). Adopted by the Town of Danville on March 19, 2013 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1918. Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. 1918. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1940. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1973. Endangered Species Act. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2024. Federal Endangered and Threatened Species Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) for the Subject Parcel in the Town of Danville and Contra Costa County. Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Service. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2024. National Wetland Inventory (NWI). Zeiner, D.C., Laudenslayer Jr., W.F., Mayer, K.E., White, M. 1988-1990. California's Wildlife, Vol. I-III. Updated 2000. California Department of Fish and Game. Sacramento, California. Appendix A Parcel Report Appendix B Site Plan Appendix C Plants and Wildlife Observed Table. Plants Identified within the Subject Parcel During the Site Survey Scientific Name Common Name Family Name Native Aesculus californica California buckeye Sapindaceae Yes Alnus rhombifolia white alder Betulaceae Yes Artemisia douglasiana California mugwort Asteraceae Yes Baccharis pilularis coyote brush Asteraceae Yes Bromus diandrus ripgut brome Poaceae No Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle Asteraceae No Centaurea solstitialis yellow star thistle Asteraceae No Cirsium vulgare bull thistle Asteraceae No Conium maculatum poison hemlock Apiaceae No Erodium sp. filaree Geraniaceae No Festuca perennis Italian ryegrass Poaceae No Galium aparine cleavers Rubiaceae Yes Geranium dissectum cutleaf geranium Geraniaceae No Heteromeles arbutifolia toyon Rosaceae Yes Hirschfeldia incana summer mustard Brassicaceae No Hordeum brachyantherum meadow barley Poaceae Yes Hordeum murinum foxtail barley Poaceae Yes Medicago polymorpha California burclover Fabaceae Yes Nasturtium gambelii Gambel’s yellowcress Brassicaceae Yes Olea europaea European olive Oleaceae No Populus fremontii Fremont’s cottonwood Salicaceae Yes Prunus sp. plum Rosaceae - Quercus agrifolia coast live oak Fagaceae Yes Quercus lobata valley oak Fagaceae Yes Rumex crispus curly dock Polygonaceae Yes Salix laevigata red willow Salicaceae Yes Sequoia sempervirens coast redwood Cupressaceae Yes Silybum marianum milk thistle Asteraceae No Symphoricarpos sp. snowberry Caprifoliaceae Yes Toxicodendron diversilobum poison oak Anacardiaceae Yes Trifolium sp. clover Fabaceae - Urtica dioica stinging nettle Urticaceae Yes Vicia sativa spring vetch Fabaceae Yes Vinca major bigleaf periwinkle Apocynaceae No Table. Wildlife Identified within the Subject Parcel During the Site Survey Scientific Name Common Name Birds Agelaius phoeniceus American crow Aphelocoma california California scrub-jay Baeolophus inornatus oak titmouse Buteo jamaicensis red-tailed hawk Cathartes aura turkey vulture Junco hyemalis dark-eyed junco Melanerpes formicivorus acorn woodpecker Mimus polyglottos northern mockingbird Passerella iliaca fox sparrow Mammals Odocoileus hemionus mule deer Appendix D National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Map Appendix E USDA Soils Map Soil Map—Contra Costa County, California Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 3/14/2024 Page 1 of 3 41 8 7 4 1 0 41 8 7 4 4 0 41 8 7 4 7 0 41 8 7 5 0 0 41 8 7 5 3 0 41 8 7 5 6 0 41 8 7 5 9 0 41 8 7 6 2 0 41 8 7 4 1 0 41 8 7 4 4 0 41 8 7 4 7 0 41 8 7 5 0 0 41 8 7 5 3 0 41 8 7 5 6 0 41 8 7 5 9 0 41 8 7 6 2 0 587770 587800 587830 587860 587890 587920 587950 587980 588010 588040 588070 588100 587770 587800 587830 587860 587890 587920 587950 587980 588010 588040 588070 588100 37° 49' 54'' N 12 2 ° 0 ' 9 ' ' W 37° 49' 54'' N 12 1 ° 5 9 ' 5 5 ' ' W 37° 49' 47'' N 12 2 ° 0 ' 9 ' ' W 37° 49' 47'' N 12 1 ° 5 9 ' 5 5 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 50 100 200 300 Feet 0 20 40 80 120 Meters Map Scale: 1:1,580 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Contra Costa County, California Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 12, 2023 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Mar 9, 2022—Mar 11, 2022 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Soil Map—Contra Costa County, California Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 3/14/2024 Page 2 of 3 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI AaE Alo clay, 15 to 30 percent slopes 4.7 100.0% Totals for Area of Interest 4.7 100.0% Soil Map—Contra Costa County, California Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 3/14/2024 Page 3 of 3 Appendix F Photo Log Photos of the March 13th, 2024 Field Survey of the Project Area Photo 1: Entrance into the Project area off of El Pintado Road with the driveway into the subject parcel located to the left within the photo. Photo 2: Entrance off of El Pintado Road into the subject parcel immediately crosses over the existing seasonal stream within the Project area. Photo 3: Access into the Project area to the right with existing development, parking, and landscaping present. Photo 4: Photo of the southwestern section of the Project area with existing parking, existing building to the right, and landscaping and natural vegetation. Photo 5: Backside of the Project area within the western section of the subject parcel. Photo 6: Northern area of subject parcel with existing building to the left includes grassy open areas with mixed landscaping and mix of small native and non-native trees. Photo 7: Far northern area of subject parcel includes grassy open areas with mixed landscaping and mix of small native and non-native trees. Photo 8: Seasonal stream with El Pintado Road in the background and the stream flow to the right. Bridge crossing into the subject parcel is downstream to the right. Photo 9: Photo looking northeast with the seasonal stream and associated riparian zone downslope in the photo beyond the grassy area. Photo 10: Looking north along seasonal stream with the bridge into the Project area off of El Pintado Road in the photo. Existing building and parking upslope to the left. Photo 11: Looking northeast along El Cerro Boulevard from the southeastern corner of the Project area at the I-680 north onramp. Outside edge of stream riparian to the left. Photo 12: Looking into the Project area from the southeastern corner of the subject parcel along the stream and riparian corridor. Photo 13: Upland area outside the seasonal stream and riparian habitat zone with the access and building in photo. Encroachment into 25’ setback will be in grassy area. Photo 14: Looking northeast from the existing building and extensive landscaping adjacent to it and the parking and access areas within the subject parcel. Photo 15: Looking southeast from southwestern corner of the parcel. I-680 North onramp is to the right and building to the left. Mix of native and non-native trees. Photo 16: Southwest section looking at building, parking, and adjacent areas are dominated by disturbed vegetation and non-native grassland species. Appendix G Special-Status Species Tables Table 1. Special-Status Plant Species with Potential to Occur within the Project Site. Scientific Name Common Name Listed Status Habitat Requirements Potential for Occurrence Arctostaphylos auriculata Mt. Diablo manzanita 1B.3 Occurs in sandstone chaparral and cismontane woodland at elevations of 440 to 2,135 feet MSL. Blooms from Jan - March. None. no suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Arctostaphylos manzanita ssp. laevigata Contra Costa manzanita 1B.2 Occurs in rocky chaparral at elevations of 1,410 to 3,610 feet MSL. Blooms from January through March. None. no suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Calochortus pulchellus Mt. Diablo fairy lantern 1B.2 Occurs in chaparral, cismontane woodland, riparian woodland, and valley and foothill grassland at elevations of 95 to 2,755 feet MSL. Blooms from April - June. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Campanula exigua chaparral harebell 1B.2 Occurs in rocky, usually serpentinite soils within chaparral at elevations of 900 to 4,100 feet MSL. Blooms from May through June. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii Congdon's tarplant 1B.1 Occurs in valley and foothill grassland at elevations of 0 to 754 feet. Blooms from May through October. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Delphinium californicum ssp. interius Hospital Canyon larkspur 1B.2 Occurs in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and coastal scrub. Blooms from April through June. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Dirca occidentalis western leatherwood 1B.2 Occurs in mesic soils within Broad leafed upland forest, closed cone coniferous forest, chaparral, cismontane woodland, North Coast coniferous forest, riparian forest, and riparian woodland at elevations of 80 to 1,395 feet MSL. Blooms from January through March. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Eriogonum truncatum Mt. Diablo buckwheat 1B.1 Occurs in sandy soils in chaparral, coastal scrub, and valley and foothill grassland at elevations of 5 to 1,150 feet MSL. Blooms from April - Sept. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Eryngium jepsonii Jepson’s coyote thistle 1B.2 Occurs in clay soils within valley and foothill grassland and vernal pools at elevations of 5 to 985 feet MSL. Blooms from April through August. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Extriplex joaquinana San Joaquin spearscale 1B.2 Occurs in alkaline soils within chenopod scrub, meadows and seeps, playas as well as valley and foothill grassland. Blooms April through October. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Scientific Name Common Name Listed Status Habitat Requirements Potential for Occurrence Fritillaria liliacea fragrant fritillary 1B.1 Often occurs in serpentinite soils within cismontane woodland, coastal prairie, coastal scrub and valley and foothill grassland. Blooms from February through April. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Hesperolinon breweri Brewer’s western flax 1B.2 Occurs in chaparral, cismontane woodland and valley and foothill grassland, usually serpentinite soils. Blooms from May - July. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Malacothamn us hallii Hall’s bushmallow 1B.2 Occurs in chaparral and coastal scrub. Blooms from May through September. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Monolopia gracilens woodland wooly threads 1B.2 Occurs in serpentinite soils within broadleafed upland forest (openings), chaparral (openings), cismontane woodland, North Coast coniferous forest (openings), and valley and foothill grassland at elevation of 325 to 3,935 feet MSL. Blooms from March through July. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Navarretia nigelliformis ssp. radians shining navarretia 1B.3 Occurs in cismontane woodland, valley and foothill grassland, and vernal pools, sometimes in clay soils. Blooms from April through July. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Phacelia phacelioides Mt. Diablo phacelia 1B.2 Occurs in rocky areas, chaparral, and cismontane woodland. Blooms April - May. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Sanicula saxatilis rock sanicle 1B.2 Occurs in rocky, scree, talus within broadleafed upland forest, chaparral, and valley and foothill grassland. Blooms from April through May. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Strepthanthu s hispidus Mt. Diablo jewelflower 1B.3 Occurs in chaparral, valley and foothill grasslands. Blooms March - June. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Stuckenia filiformis ssp. aplina northern slender pondweed 2B.2 Occurs in marshes and swamps (assorted shallow freshwater). Blooms from May through July. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Triquetrella californica coastal triquetrella 1B.2 Occurs in coastal bluff scrub and coastal scrub at elevations of 30 to 330 feet MSL. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Viburnum ellipticum oval- leaved viburnum 2B.3 Occurs in chaparral, cismontane woodland, and lower montane coniferous forest Blooms from May through June. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Key to status: FT=Federally listed as threatened species CE=California listed as endangered species CNPS Rare Plant Rank 1A=Plants presumed extirpated in California, and either rare or extinct elsewhere 1B=Pants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, or elsewhere 2A=Plants presumed extirpated in California but common elsewhere 2B=Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California but more common elsewhere 3=Plants about which more information is needed Note: CNPS ranks below 3 were excluded from this analysis. Table 2. Special-Status Animal Species with Potential to Occur within the Project Site. Scientific Name Common Name Listed Status Habitat Requirements Potential for Occurrences Mammals Vulpes macrotis mutica San Joaquin kit fox FE, CT Occurs in annual grasslands or open stages with scattered shrubby vegetation. Requires loose sandy textured soils for burrowing. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Birds Sterna antillarum browni California least tern FE, CE, FP Occurs and nests along coastal, sandy, open areas usually around bays, estuaries, and creek and river mouths. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Amphibians/Reptiles Ambystoma californiense California tiger salamander FT, CT Occurs in vernal and seasonal pools and associated grasslands, oak savanna, woodland, and coastal scrub. Needs underground refuges (i.e., small mammal burrows) in upland areas such as grassland and scrub zones. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Rana draytonii California red- legged frog FT, SSC Occurs in semi-permanent or permanent water at least two feet deep, bordered by wetland or riparian zones. grassland, forest, or scrub habitats for aestivation/dispersal. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Emys marmorata western pond turtle PT/SSC Occurs in rivers, ponds, and freshwater marshes, and nests in upland areas up to 1,640 feet from water. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Masticophis lateralis erymanthus Alameda whipsnake FT, CT A fast-moving, diurnal predator; actively hunts with head held high. Limited range, mostly in Alameda and Contra Costa counties, utilizing chaparral, scrub, and rocky outcrops as core habitat. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Rana boylii Population 4 foothill yellow- legged frog Central coast DPS FT/CE Found in rocky streams and rivers with rocky substrate and open, sunny banks in forests, woodlands, and chaparral. May also occur in isolated pools and vegetated backwaters. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Scientific Name Common Name Listed Status Habitat Requirements Potential for Occurrences Fish Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus Population 11 Central Valley steelhead DPS FT Spawning occurs in streams with pool and riffle complexes. The species requires cold water and gravelly streambed to successfully breed. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus Population 8 Central California steelhead DPS FT Spawning occurs in streams with pool and riffle complexes. The species requires cold water and gravelly streambed to successfully breed. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. Invertebrates Branchinecta lynchi vernal pool fairy shrimp FT Occurs in vernal pools. Endemic to the grasslands of the Central Valley, Central Coast mountains, and South Coast mountains. None. No suitable habitat occurs on the Project site. FE=Federally listed as endangered species FT=Federally listed as threatened species FC=Federally listed as a candidate species for listing CE=California listed as endangered species CT=California listed as threatened species FP=California listed as fully protected SSC=California species of special concern Appendix H USFWS IPaC Species List and CNDDB/CNPS Species Lists Tree Evaluation Prepared For: Jeff Stone Partner Diamond Construction Inc. P.O. Box 477 Lafayette, CA 94549 Prepared By: Bob Peralta Bob Peralta Arbor Consulting American Society of Consulting Arborists 237 Bernal Avenue Napa, California 94559 (707) 332-5980 October 23, 2024 ATTACHMENT H Bob Peralta- I.S.A. Certified Arborist #WE7150A ASCA #505 2 Dear Jeff, Thank you for asking me to provide a Consulting Arborist Report for your Proposed new Project located at 425 El Pintado in Danville, California. I visited the site on October 21, 2024, to review the Topographic Survey Map for 425 El Pintado Road - provided to you by DeBolt Civil Engineering. The map I reviewed is the Existing Conditions Plan - dated 3/13/2024– Job No: 23103 – Using Sheet VTM-2 The purpose of my site visit is to evaluate the species, size, location, health , and recommendations. I reviewed a total of 118 trees on the property – (9) Redwood Trees (Sequoia sempervirens), (19) Mulberry Trees (Morus species), (15) Valley Oaks (Quercas lobata), (5) Coast Live Oaks (Quercas agrifolia), (19) Italian Cypress (Cupressus sempervirens, (18) Arroyo Willows, (16) Deodar Cedar Trees (Cedrus deodara), (6) California Privets, (5) Black Walnut Trees (Juglans californica), (2) Cherry Plums, (1) Alder Tree, (1) Pine Tree, (1) Xylosma, and (1) Mexican Fan Palm., The trees that surround the existing building and parking lot were all planted trees when the property was developed. The mulberry trees were planted at the edge of the parking lot to provide shade throughout. Each year those trees were pollarded and very poor branch structure that requires these trees to continue to be pollarded annually. At one time these trees appear to have had irrigation, and I did not detect any active irrigation to any of the trees onsite. There are (3) Live Oaks were planted to provide privacy between the freeway/freeway onramp and the property. The (5) Valley oaks in that same area have grown naturally and are in good health. There are (6) Valley Oak trees that have been growing naturally at the edge of the creek. None of the perimeter trees on the property have ever been maintained and all have been growing naturally. The (9) Redwoods behind the property appear to have been planted as a screen to the above homes and the property. All the trees were planted 10 to 15 feet apart. Over the years as the trees have matured, they are all now competing in the line they were planted in. All (9) Redwood trees are very close to the parking area and existing building. The roots of these trees have developed under the road, walkways, and buildings. Pruning redwoods is not recommended and over time the upper branches will start to compete. I recommend continuing to monitor these trees each year to look for any broken limbs or erosion from the hillside into the root zone of these trees. There will be no activity in the creek and all those trees are in various stages of health from good to critical. Some of the Willow trees have failed and the failed branches have taken root. If any activity needs to occur, I recommend end -weight reduction to prevent limbs falling towards El Pintado Road, the bridge and your side of the property. Safety prune and debris removals as needed. Bob Peralta- I.S.A. Certified Arborist #WE7150A ASCA #505 3 There are two areas where neighbors, or the property owner planted screen trees in a row. Tree Tags 305 through 324 are all Deodar cedar trees planted on 6-foot center and have all grown together as they continue to mature. The other grove ate Trees are Tree tags are 355 thru 373 – all Italian cypress that have grown very tall on a hillside. All these trees are not irrigated and due to how close they were all planted eventually they will grow too tall and start to fail. I recommend monitoring these trees each year for safety to people and property. Trees being preserved will need to follow the guidelines listed below. I have attached maps that show the general location of each tree and a picture of each tree with diameter (dbh), size and health. Please review the health rating below and tree protection measures. Listed below Is the Inventory and Health of each Protected tree. Tree Inventory and Health – Yellow Highlight is Danville Protected Tree Note: Trees are measured using the DBH method – circumference, measured at 4.3 above the ground. Tag # Species DBH Health 214 Valley Oak 19"-24" 60% - Fair 302 Valley Oak 11" 60% - Fair 303 Valley Oak 5/6/3 60% - Fair 301 Valley Oak 9" 60% - Fair 304 Valley Oak 25" 60% - Fair 305 Deodar Cedar 14.5 20% - Critical 306 Deodar Cedar 14.5 40% - Poor 307 Deodar Cedar 15" 40% - Poor 308 White Alder 6/4/5 40% - Poor 309 Deodar Cedar 15" 40% - Poor 310 Deodar Cedar 13" 40% - Poor 311 Deodar Cedar 16" 20% - Critical 312 Cherry Plum 7"-12" 40% - Poor 313 Deodar Cedar 15" 40% - Poor 314 Deodar Cedar 15" 40% - Poor 315 Deodar Cedar 16" 40% - Poor 316 Deodar Cedar 16" 40% - Poor 317 Deodar Cedar 14" 40% - Poor Bob Peralta- I.S.A. Certified Arborist #WE7150A ASCA #505 4 Tag # Species DBH Health 318 Deodar Cedar 16” 40% - Poor 319 Deodar Cedar 16" 40% - Poor 320 Pine Species 15" 20% - Critical 321 Deodar Cedar 16" 20% - Critical 322 Coast Redwood 22" 60% - Fair 323 Deodar Cedar 16" 20% - Critical 324 Deodar Cedar 16" 20% - Critical 331 Valley Oak 11" 60% - Fair 332 Valley Oak 19" 60% - Fair 334 Coast Redwood 20" 60% - Fair 335 Coast Redwood 14" 60% - Fair 336 Coast Redwood 14" 60% - Fair 337 Coast Redwood 23" 60% - Fair 217 Coast Live Oak 12/24 60% - Fair 207 Mulberry Species 13" 40% - Poor 216 Coast Live Oak 13" 60% - Fair 208 Mulberry Species 13" 40% - Poor 209 Mulberry Species 13" 40% - Poor 215 Coast Live Oak 18" 60% - Fair 211 Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor 210 Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor 212 Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor 213 Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor 331 Shiny Xylosma 8" 40% - Poor 338 Coast Redwood 16" 60% - Fair 339 Coast Redwood 20" 60% - Fair 340 Coast Redwood 20" 60% - Fair 341 Coast Redwood 21" 60% - Fair 342 Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor 344 Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor 343 Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor 346 Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor 345 Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor 347 Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor 351 California Black Walnut 11" 20% - Critical Bob Peralta- I.S.A. Certified Arborist #WE7150A ASCA #505 5 Tag # Species DBH Health 349 California Black Walnut 11" 20% - Critical 350 California Black Walnut 11" 20% - Critical 348 Valley Oak 17" 60% - Fair 355 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 356 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 357 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 358 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 359 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 360 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 361 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 362 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 363 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 364 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 365 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 366 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 367 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 368 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 369 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 370 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 371 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 372 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 373 Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor 354 Coast Live Oak 12/4 60% - Fair 352 Arroyo Willow 13"-18" 20% - Critical 353 Arroyo Willow 21" 20% - Critical 218 Valley Oak 32" 60% - Fair 222 California Privet 7"-12" 20% - Critical 219 Valley Oak 16” 60% - Fair 220 Valley Oak 16" 40% - Poor 221` Mexican Fan Palm 13"-18" 40% - Poor 125 Coast Live Oak 6" 60% - Fair 128 California Privet 7"-12" 20% - Critical 124 California Privet 7"-12" 20% - Critical 126 California Privet 7"-12" 20% - Critical Bob Peralta- I.S.A. Certified Arborist #WE7150A ASCA #505 6 Tag # Species DBH Health 123 Arroyo Willow 21" 20% - Critical 127 Arroyo Willow 4" 20% - Critical 129 Arroyo Willow 4" 20% - Critical 201 Mulberry Species 10" 40% - Poor 202 Mulberry Species 10" 40% - Poor 203 Mulberry Species 10" 40% - Poor 204 Mulberry Species 10" 40% - Poor 205 Mulberry Species 10" 40% - Poor 206 Mulberry Species 10" 40% - Poor 101 Valley Oak 12" 40% - Poor 102 Valley Oak 12" 40% - Poor 103 California Black Walnut 14" 20% - Critical 104 Valley Oak 38" 40% - Poor 105 California Privet 7"-12" 20% - Critical 106 Arroyo Willow 18" 20% - Critical 107 Arroyo Willow 18" 20% - Critical 108 Arroyo Willow 18" 20% - Critical 109 Cherry Plum 13" 40% - Poor 110 Arroyo Willow 18" 20% - Critical 122 California Black Walnut 14" 20% - Critical 120 Arroyo Willow 18" 20% - Critical 119 Valley Oak 10" 40% - Poor 121 Arroyo Willow 18" 20% - Critical 113 California Privet 7"-12" 20% - Critical 118 Arroyo Willow 7"-12" 20% - Critical 114 Arroyo Willow 7"-12" 20% - Critical 117 Arroyo Willow 7"-12" 20% - Critical 116 Arroyo Willow 7"-12" 20% - Critical 112 Arroyo Willow 7”-12” 20% - Critical 115 Arroyo Willow 7"-12" 20% - Critical 111 Arroyo Willow 7"-12" 20% - Critical Bob Peralta- I.S.A. Certified Arborist #WE7150A ASCA #505 7 The health and structure of the trees were assessed visually from ground level. No drilling, root excavation, or ariel inspections were performed. Internal or non-detectable defects may exist and could lead to part of whole tree failures. Due to the dynamic nature of trees and their environment, it is not possible for Arborists to guarantee that trees will not fail in the future. Any future construction activity will need to follow the outlined tree protection guidelines below. The preservation of these trees will follow the tree protection guidelines outlined below. Recommended Tree Protection Guidelines: All contractors including demolition, grading, and underground contractors, sub - contractors, construction superintendent and other pertinent personnel should be required to review these guidelines with the Project Arborist (PA) prior to beginning work on site. The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) identifies will be installed 2’ outside of the drip -line in a half circle on all sides of the proposed home - by installing 4’ high orange protective fencing around the entire drip-line of the tree and roots from disturbance. The installation will be installed by the Project Arborist (Bob Peralta) and any work within the erected TPZ will need permission from the PA before being moved. The following signs will be posted on 8.5x11 inches and installed on all the fences – the sign will read: This is a Tree Protection Zone Movement of this fence requires the prior authorization of the Project Arborist & Owner (List Contact Information) Activities prohibited within the TPZ include: • Storage or parking vehicles, building materials, refuse, excavated spoils, or dumping of paint or poisonous materials on or around trees and roots. Poisonous materials include, but are not limited to, paint, petroleum products, concrete or stucco mix dirty water or any other material which may be deleterious to tree health. • The use of tree trunks as winch support, anchorage, as a temporary power pole, signpost or any other similar function. Bob Peralta- I.S.A. Certified Arborist #WE7150A ASCA #505 8 • Cutting of roots by utility trenching, foundation digging, placement of curbs, trenches and other miscellaneous excavation without prior approval of the PA. • Soil disturbance or grade/drainage changes. • Materials must not be stored, stockpiled, dumped, even temporarily, inside the TPZ of protected trees. Activities permitted within the TPZ include or recommended by the PA. • Irrigation, aeration, or other beneficial practices that have been specifically approved for use within the TPZ. • Mulch if needed and or fertilization as recommended by monthly site visits by the PA. • Each site visit will require a report recommending any tree healthcare supplements, recommended watering as needed during peak summer months and reduction into Fall and Winter. Please give me a call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Bob Peralta Bob Peralta Certified Arborist WE-7150A ASCA Consulting Arborist #505 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m PR O J E C T N U M B E R _ P R O J E C T N A M E _ I S S U A N C E _ D A T E 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 REV 01 10/29/24 | 07/18/24 ATTACHMENT I ZONING INFO SITE ADDRESS: 425 EL PINTADO RD DANVILLE, CA 94526 ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER: 200040012 SITE AREA: TOTAL SITE AREA: 137,906 SF / 3.166 AC ZONING DISTRICT: DENSITY: SETBACKS: FLOOR AREA RATIO: HEIGHT + BULK LIMIT: M-35 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 30 MIN TO 35 MAX UNITS / ACR NET 3.17 X 30 = 96 UNITS MIN 3.17 X 35 = 111 UNITS MAX REQUIRED: 99 UNITS AVERAGE UNIT SIZE 1367 SF PROPOSED: FRONT: 25 FT SIDE: 20 FT REAR: 20 FT ABUTTING SINGLE RESI ZONES: SIDE / REAR SETBACK 50 FT MIN AT 2ND STORY BLDG ELEMENTS OPEN SPACE AREA:25%OF SITE AREA NOT COVERED WITH BUILDING, STRUCTURES OR PAVEMENT, BUT SHALL BE LANDSCAPED, PER 32-51.8. ----------------------------------------------- 75% OF OPEN SPACE AREA LANDSCAPED 137,906 X 25% X 75% = 25,858 SF REQ LANDSCAPED AREA MAX: 120% OF SITE AREA SITE AREA = 137,906 SF 120% = 165,487 SF MAX MAX (4) STORIES 45' MAX BUILDING HEIGHT WHERE 4 STORY MASSING IS PROPOSED MIN OF 7.5% OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT MUST BE EXPRESSED AS 3 OR 3.5 STORIES PROPORTIONATELY ACROSS THE ELEVATION ABUTTING THE PUBLIC STREET. OFF-STREET PARKING: PER 32-1.14 • 9'X19' SPACES WITH 28' DRIVE AISLE AND 90 DEGREE PARKING • WHERE NOT PARKED: 20' AISLE AT 2 WAY, 12' AT ONE WAY • ADA PARKING STALL DIM PER CBC • LOCATION OF PARKING STALL TO ADJACENT STRUCTURE AND COLUMNS VARIES, MIN 6". STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW: 1 BR (22) X 1 = 22 SPACES 2 BR (51) X 1.5 = 76.5 SPACES 3 BR (26) X 1.5 = 39 SPACES TOTAL: 137.5 SPACES GUEST: NOT REQUIRED LOT AREA:MIN. AREA: None MIN. WIDTH: None MIN. DEPTH: None LANDSCAPE BUFFER:PER ORDINANCE NO. 2023.02: "SIGNIFICANT" LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIRED FRONT: VARIES > 25 FT SIDE: 20 FT REAR: 20 FT BUILDING RELATIONSHIP: BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES SHALL BE LOCATED AT LEAST 20 FEET APART, EXCEPT THAT GARAGES OR COVERED WALKWAYS MAY BE LOCATED WITHIN THIS 20 FOOT DISTANCE 137,906 SF / 3.17 ACR GROSS 130,721 SF / 3.00 ACR NET PROPOSED GFA: LB = 15,810 SF (EX GARAGE 45,657 SF) L1 = 45,687 SF L2 = 47,198 SF L3 = 42,889 SF L4 = 25,951 SF TOTAL = 177,535 SF 177,535 : 137,909 SF = 128.7% *WAIVER REQUESTED FOR FAR, TO MEET CITY REQ DENSITY FOR M-35 4 STORIES OF RES TYP, ON TOP OF BELOW GRADE GARAGE BLDG HT TO PENTHOUSE ROOF = 52'-9" MEASURED FROM AVERAGE GRADE PLANE, SEE HEIGHT ANALYSIS *WAIVER REQUESTED FOR HEIGHT 100% OF THE FACADE FACING EL CERRO BLVD / EL PINTADO RD IS EXPRESSED AS 3 STORIES. BUILDING FOOTPRINT = 61,467 SF PAVED AREA = 33,556 SF TOTAL COVERED = 95,023 SF 95,023 : 137,906 = 69% COVERED 31% NOT COVERED ---------------------------------------------------- SITE LANDSCAPE: 137,906 (SITE) - 95,023 (COVER) = 42,883 COURTYARD LANDSCAPE: 5,150 TOTAL LANDSCAPED AREA: 42,883 + 5,150 = 48,033 SF MIN BLDG DISTANCE = 60' > 20' SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS TOTAL PARKING (A004) 198 CARS TOTAL • 12 IN STACKERS • 56 STALLS ON GRADE • 130 IN PUZZELS PARKING ASSIGNED PER UNIT 1BR (22x) = 22 SPACES 2BR (51x) = 102 SPACES 3BR (26x) = 52 SPACES 22 SPACES GUEST BUILDING GROSS AREA:SEE FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR MAX 223,192 SF © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 3 0 / 2 0 2 4 9 : 3 9 : 3 7 A M A u t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A001 TITLE SHEET 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 PROJECT DESCRIPTION l PL A N N I N G S U B M I T T A L 01 - GENERAL A000 COVER PAGE X A001 TITLE SHEET X A003 HEIGHT ANAYLSIS X A004 PARKING DIAGRAM X A005 RENDERINGS X A006 MATERIALS BOARD X A007 SITE PHOTOS X 7 02 - CIVIL VTM-1 VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP X VTM-2 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN X VTM-3 PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PLAN X VTM-4 PRELIMINARY STORM WATER CONTROL PLAN X 4 04 - LANDSCAPE L1.01 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN - LEVEL B1 & LEVEL 01 X L1.02 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN - LEVEL 3 & 4 X L1.03 EXISTING TREE PLAN X L2.01 PRELIMINARY PLANT PALETTE X L3.01 PRECEDENT IMAGES X L4.01 PRELIMINARY LIGHTING PLAN X 6 05 - DEMOLITION AD100 DEMO SITE PLAN X 1 06 - ARCHITECTURAL SITE AS100 CONTEXT PLAN X AS101 PROPOSED SITE PLAN AT BASEMENT LEVEL X AS102 PROPOSED SITE PLAN AT LEVEL 1 X AS103 FIRE ACCESS AT BASEMENT LEVEL X AS104 FIRE ACCESS AT LEVEL 1 X AS105 FIRE ACCESS SECTIONS X AS106 CONCEPTUAL EGRESS PLAN X 7 07 - ARCHITECTURAL A100 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL B X A101 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1 X A102 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 2 X A103 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 3 X A104 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 4 X A105 UPPER ROOF PLAN X A300 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - OVERALL X A310 BUILDING SECTIONS, NORTH - SOUTH X A311 BUILDING SECTIONS, EAST-WEST X A500 TYP UNIT PLANS 1BR X A502 TYP UNIT PLANS 2BR X A504 TYP UNIT PLANS 3BR X A505 TYP UNIT PLANS 3BR X A506 TYP UNIT PLANS PENTHOUSE X A507 TYP UNIT PLANS PENTHOUSE X A508 TYP UNIT PLANS PENTHOUSE X 16 Grand total: 41 DRAWING SHEET INDEX PROJECT DIRECTORYVICINITY MAP CLIENT 425 EP Investment, LLC JBSTONE@DIAMONDCONSTRUCTION INC.COM ARCHITECT FORM4 ARCHITECTURE 120 SECOND ST. 2ND FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO, CA. 94105 PAUL FERRO -PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE PFERRO@FORM4INC.COM T (415)775-8748 GOETZ FRANK -PROJECT DIRECTOR GFRANK@FORM4INC.COM T (415)775-8748 CONTRACTOR DIAMOND CONSTRUCTION PO BOX 477 LAFAYETTE, CA. 94549 Overview:425 El Pintado Senior Residences is a modern and vibrant senior housing condominium development, with (99) units spread across three main stories, partial penthouse levels, and select units in the garage/basement. Nestled near the freeway and the town center, this project redefines senior living, offering an environment that encourages an active and fulfilling lifestyle. Site Concept and massing: The project is located at 425 El Pintado Road on a 3.17 AC site that is confined by a freeway on-ramp on the Southwest, El Cerro BLVD and El Pintado RD on the Southeast and steep hill sided with residential sites to the North. On the SE side following El Cerro and and El Pintado an open creek crosses the site from North to South. The site is entered over a bridge from El Pintado Road. The project is comprised of a linear East Wing and a C-shaped West wing both located on a basement podium garage. To minimize the bulk of the project the podium is built into the hill on the NW side and is only exposed on the SE side which is the side with the biggest setback, far exceeding what is required. The maximum height calculation per the City standards shows a maximum building height of 52’-9”. However, the nearest Neighbors (at the North property line) are at a much higher elevation on a hill. For them the building will appear to be 33’-0” at the West Wing and 29’ at the East Wing (see A003), making the height less of an factor. Architectural Design:The design blends dark-colored paneling and warm wood composite wall paneling, featuring recessed facades and balconies that provide a sense of depth, comfort, and protection for residents. The project features a rich selection of Amenities: 1. Amenity Bridge:At the heart of the community, the Amenity Bridge serves as a central gathering area designed with the specific needs and preferences of seniors in mind. It's a place for socialization, relaxation, and various activities, fostering a sense of community and connection among residents. 2. Twin Courtyards:The community bridge divides the central green space into twin courtyards, creating private, intimate outdoor spaces for residents. Lush landscaping, gardens, and seating areas offer tranquil settings for relaxation and quiet conversations. 3. The Cascades:The Cascades are a succession of gently stepped landscape terraces and ramps, connecting the courtyard to ground-level pathways. These paths along the creek invite seniors for leisurely strolls, allowing them to enjoy the soothing natural surroundings. 4. Loop Trail:A Loop Trail encircles the project, following the creek's course, offering residents scenic walks, wildlife observations, and a connection with nature. It promotes an active lifestyle and community engagement while also providing truck access to the fire department around the project. The 425 El Pintado Senior Residences doesn't just enhance the lives of its residents; it enriches the entire community and residential neighborhood. By introducing a dense and lively senior community, it creates a positive synergy, fostering a more vibrant and engaged neighborhood. Residents actively participate in local events and businesses, adding life and vitality to the area. Their presence also promotes intergenerational connections, as seniors interact with neighboring families and local businesses, contributing to a more inclusive and interconnected community that benefits everyone /005.1 1. SCOPE DOCUMENTS: THESE DRAWINGS INDICATE THE GENERAL SCOPE OF THE PROJECT IN TERMS OF THE OVERALL CONCEPT, THE DIMENSIONS OF THE BUILDING, THE MAJOR ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS AND THE TYPE OF STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS, ON THE BASIS OF THE GENERAL SCOPE INDICATED OR DESCRIBED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH ALL ITEMS REQUIRED FOR THE PROPER EXECUTION AND COMPLETION OF THE WORK. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE A FULLY FUNCTIONING INSTALLATION WHICH MEETS THE DESIGN INTENT, INCLUDING THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS INCLUDED IN THESE DOCUMENTS. 2. APPROVAL BY THE CITY INSPECTOR DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AUTHORITY TO DEVIATE FROM THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. 3. ALL WORK SHOWN, NOTED OR DETAILED IS NEW, EXCEPT WHERE INDICATED AS EXISTING OR AS EXISTING TO REMAIN. 4. THE FOLLOWING NOTES AND TYPICAL DETAILS APPLY TO ALL DRAWINGS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 5. ABBREVIATIONS ON THIS SHEET APPLY TO THE ENTIRE SET UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 6. DRAWINGS INDICATE GENERAL AND TYPICAL DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION. WHERE CONDITIONS ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY INDICATED BUT ARE OF SIMILAR CHARACTER TO DETAILS SHOWN, DETAILS OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE USED SUBJECT TO THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE ARCHITECT. 7. CODE REQUIREMENTS: ALL CONSTRUCTION AND MATERIALS SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED AND AS REQUIRED BY THE APPLICABLE EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, LOCAL CODES AND JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITIES AND AGENCIES. 8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM IN A MANNER CONFORMING TO APPLICABLE REGULATION, AND REQUIRMENTS OF ALL GOVERNING AGENCIES AS WELL AS STANDARD INDUSTRY PRACTICES. 9. RESPONSIBILITY: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND SITE CONDITIONS BEFORE STARTING WORK. SHOULD A DISCREPANCY APPEAR IN THE SPECIFICATIONS OR DRAWINGS, OR IN THE WORK DONE BY OTHERS FROM THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS THAT AFFECT ANY WORK, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT AND OWNER IN WRITING AT ONCE FOR INSTRUCTIONS TO PROCEED. IF THE CONTRACTOR PROCEEDS WITH THE WORK AFFECTED WITHOUT WRITTEN INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE ARCHITECT, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE GOOD ANY RESULTING DAMAGE OR DEFECT TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER WITH NO RESULTING COST TO THE OWNER. SHOULD A CONFLICT OCCUR IN OR BETWEEN THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS, OR WHERE DETAIL REFERENCES ON THE CONTRACT DRAWINGS HAVE BEEN OMITTED, THE CONTRACTOR IS DEEMED TO HAVE ESTIMATED THE MOST EXPENSIVE MATERIAL AND CONSTRUCTION METHODS INVOLVED, UNLESS A WRITTEN DECISION FROM THE ARCHITECT / OWNER HAS BEEN OBTAINED WHICH DESCRIBES AN ALTERNATE METHOD AND/OR MATERIALS OR UNLESS THE ORIGINAL BID IS APPROPRIATELY QUALIFIED. 10. ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE COORDINATION OF NEW WORK OR EXISTING CONDITIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE IN WRITING PRIOR TO THE BID SUBMISSION AND WITH ADEQUATE TIME FOR RESPONSE TO ALL BIDDERS. THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE WILL RESPOND TO QUESTIONS, SUBMITTED IN A TIMELY MANNER, WITH WRITTEN CLARIFICATIONS FORWARDED TO ALL BIDDERS. 11. THE EXISTING DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS ARE ASSUMED TO BE ACCURATE BASED ON AVAILABLE INFORMATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL, PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION, VERIFY ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS, PROVIDE A COMPLETE FIELD LAYOUT ON THE JOB SITE, AND NOTIFY IN WRITING (RFI) TO THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER, AND ARCHITECT OF ANY DEVIATIONS OR CONFLICTS WITH THESE DRAWINGS. 12. THE DRAWINGS SHALL NOT BE SCALED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE DIMENSIONS INDICATED OR THE ACTUAL SIZES OF CONSTRUCTION ITEMS. WHERE NO DIMENSION OR METHOD OF DETERMINING A LOCATION IS GIVEN, VERIFY CORRECT DIMENSION OR LOCATION WITH THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFINE HIS/HER OPERATIONS ON THE SITE TO AREAS PERMITTED BY THE OWNER. THE WORK SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPLICABLE LAWS, LOCAL ORDINANCES, PERMITS AND THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. THE JOB SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CLEAN, ORDERLY CONDITION FREE OF DEBRIS AND LITTER, AND SHALL NOT BE UNREASONABLY ENCUMBERED WITH ANY MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT. EACH SUBCONTRACTOR IMMEDIATELY UPON COMPLETION OF EACH PHASE OF HIS/HER WORK SHALL REMOVE ALL TRASH AND DEBRIS AS A RESULT OF HIS/HER OPERATION. 14. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL INCIDENTAL WORK NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE INSTALLATION OF NEW WORK. THIS INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, THE REMOVAL AND/OR REINSTALLATION OF ALL EXISTING ITEMS, OF PORTIONS OF THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION WHETHER SHOWN OR NOT. 15. ALL MATERIALS STORED ON THE SITE SHALL BE PROPERLY STACKED AND PROTECTED TO PREVENT DAMAGE AND DETERIORATION UNTIL USE. FAILURE TO PROTECT MATERIALS MAY BE CAUSE FOR REJECTION OF WORK. 16. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND THE SUBCONTRACTORS TO REVIEW ALL DRAWINGS, PROJECT MANUAL, ADDENDA, ETC. IN ORDER TO ASSURE THE COORDINATION OF ALL WORK AFFECTING EACH TRADE. FAILURE TO REVIEW AND COORDINATE ALL CONTRACT DOCUMENTS BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR WITH ALL THE SUBCONTRACTORS FOR APPLICABLE ITEMS OF THE WORK SHALL NOT RELIEVE THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY FROM PERFORMING ALL WORK SO REQUIRED AS PART OF THE CONTRACT. 17. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LAYOUT AND SEQUENCE THE INSTALLATION OF THE WORK SO THAT THE DIFFERENT SYSTEMS DO NOT OBSTRUCT THE INSTALLATION OF SUCCESSIVE WORK. IN GENERAL, SYSTEMS INSTALLED FIRST SHOULD BE KEPT AS HIGH AND TIGHT TO STRUCTURE AS POSSIBLE SO AS TO LEAVE SPACE AVAILABLE FOR SYSTEMS WHICH FOLLOW. 18. DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF FINISH, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 19. PROVIDE ALL NECESSARY BLOCKING, BACKING AND FRAMING FOR LIGHT FIXTURES, ELECTRICAL UNITS, H.V.A.C. EQUIPMENT AND ALL OTHER ITEMS REQUIRING SAME. 20. ALL MATERIALS SHALL BE HANDLED AND INSTALLED PER THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. 21. STORAGE & DISPENSING OR USE OF ANY FLAMMABLE OR COMBUSTIBLE LIQUIDS, FLAMMABLE GASES AND HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE APPLICABLE CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE REGULATIONS. 22. NO MATERIALS SHALL BE STORED ON PUBLIC PROPERTY UNLESS AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT IS FIRST OBTAINED FROM THE PUBLIC WORK DEPARTMENT. 23. WHERE DIMENSIONS ARE NOTED TO BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD (V.I.F.) THE DIMENSION SHOWN IS THE DESIGN BASIS, BUT MAY DIFFER FROM ACTUAL CONDITIONS. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THESE DIMENSIONS WHILE LAYING OUT THE WORK AND REPORT ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE DESIGN BASIS AND ACTUAL DIMENSIONS TO THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK. WHERE DIMENSIONS ARE NOTED "±", FIELD DIMENSIONS MAY VARY FROM THE NOTED DIMENSIONS BY MINOR AMOUNTS. 24. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DO ALL CUTTING, FITTING, OR PATCHING OF HIS/HER WORK THAT MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAKE ITS SEVERAL PARTS FIT TOGETHER PROPERLY AND SHALL NOT ENDANGER ANY OTHER WORK BY CUTTING, EXCAVATING, OR OTHERWISE ALTERING THE TOTAL WORK OR ANY PART OF IT. ALL PATCHING, REPAIRING, AND REPLACING OF MATERIALS AND SURFACES, CUT OR DAMAGED IN EXECUTION OF WORK, SHALL BE DONE WITH APPLICABLE MATERIALS SO THAT SURFACES REPLACED WILL UPON COMPLETION MATCH SURROUNDING SIMILAR SURFACES. 25. SHOP DRAWINGS: SHOP DRAWINGS ARE AN AID FOR FIELD PLACEMENT AND ARE SUPERSEDED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO MAKE CERTAIN THAT ALL CONSTRUCTION IS IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH THE LATEST ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUPPLY THE ARCHITECT/ENGINEER WITH A MINIMUM OF TWO COPIES OF CHECKED SHOP DRAWINGS BEARING THE CONTRACTOR'S STAMP OF APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE A MINIMUM OF THREE WEEKS PRIOR TO FABRICATION. THE REVIEW OF SHOP DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS BY THE ARCHITECT/ ENGINEER IS ONLY FOR GENERAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL AND/OR STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS. THIS REVIEW DOES NOT GUARANTEE IN ANY WAY THAT THE SHOP DRAWINGS ARE CORRECT, COMPLETE, NOR DOES IT INFER THAT THEY SUPERCEDE THE ARCHITECTURAL AND/OR STUCTURAL DRAWINGS. NO PORTION OF THE WORK REQUIRING A SHOP DRAWING OR SAMPLE SUBMISSION SHALL COMMENCE UNTIL THE SUBMISSION HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY THE ARCHITECT. ALL SUCH PORITONS OF THE WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPROVED SHOP DRAWINGS AND SAMPLES. THE ARCHITECT SHALL NOT PROCEED WITH THE REVIEW OF SHOP DRAWINGS FOR A SPECIFIC SECTION OF SPECIFICATIONS UNLESS THE SHOP DRAWINGS FOR THAT SECTION AND ALL RELATED AND CONTIGUOUS SECTIONS OF WORK ARE SUBMITTED IN THEIR ENTIRETY SIMULTANEOUSLY. THE REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE OF A PART OF THE SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL NOT IMPLY THE ACCPEPTANCE OF THE SHOP DRAWINGS IN WHOLE OR IN PART. 26. THE CONTRACT DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS REPRESENT THE FINISHED STRUCTURE. UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN, THEY DO NOT INDICATE THE METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL SUPERVISE AND DIRECT THE WORK AND HE/SHE SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION MEANS, METHODS, TECHNIQUES, SEQUENCES, AND PROCEDURES. OBSERVATION VISITS TO THE SITE BY FIELD REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ARCHITECT AND HIS CONSULTANTS DO NOT INCLUDE INSPECTION OF THE PROTECTIVE MEASURES OR THE PROCEDURES FOR SUCH METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION. ANY SUPPORT SERVICES PERFORMED BY THE ARCHITECT AND HIS CONSULTANTS DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE DISTINGUISHED FROM CONTNUOUS AND DETAILED INSPECTION SERVCES WHICH ARE FURNISHED BY OTHERS. THESE SUPPORT SERVICES WHICH ARE FURNISHED BY THE ARCHITECT AND HIS CONSULTANTS, WHETHER OF MATERIAL OR WORK AND WHETHER PERFORMED PRIOR TO, DURING OR AFTER COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION, ARE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSISTING IN QUALTIY CONTROL AND IN ACHIEVING CONFORMANCE WITH CONTRACT DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS, BUT THEY DO NOT GUARANTEE CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS SUPERVISION OF CONSTRUCTION. 27. FIRE PROTECTION DRAWINGS SHALL BE PREPARED BY THE FIRE PROTECTION SUBCONTRACTOR AND SUBMITTED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT.SUBMIT FIRE PROTECTION PLANS TO THE FIRE CHIEF FOR REVIEW AND STAMP OF APPROVAL FOR FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS 28. PROVIDE PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHER & CABINETS. TRAVEL DISTANCE TO A FIRE EXTINGUISHER SHALL NOT TO EXCEED MAXIMUM TRAVEL DISTANCE OF 75-FEET. FIRE EXTINGUISHERS TO BE 2A-10B:C MINIMUM, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 29. ALL UTILITY LINES, CONDUIT, MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL PIPES INSTALLED ABOVE THE CEILINGS SHALL BE HELD AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO THE ADJACENT ROOF/FLOOR STRUCTURE. 30. EXIT SIGN ILLUMINATION CIRCUIT SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND CONTROLLED SEPARATELY FROM ALL OTHER CIRCUITS IN THE BUILDING. 31. PEDESTRIAN AISLES SHALL BE 36 INCHES MINIMUM IF SERVING ELEMENTS ON ONLY ONE SIDE, AND 44 INCHES MINIMUM IF SERVING ELEMENTS ON BOTH SIDES. 32. CORRIDORS SERVING 10 OR MORE OCCUPANTS SHALL BE 44 INCHES MINIMUM. 33. THE CLEAR WIDTH FOR SIDEWALKS AND WALKS SHALL BE 48 INCHES MINIMUM, IN CLEAR AND UNOBSTRUCTED WIDTH TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. 34. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PROTECTION FOR PEDESTRIANS DURING CONSTRUCTION. 35. PROVIDE ALL ACCESS PANELS AS REQUIRED BY GOVERNING CODE OR AUTHORITIES TO ALL CONCEALED SPACES, VOIDS, ATTICS, AND SO ON. VERIFY THE TYPE REQUIRED WITH THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 36. ALL INSULATION MATERIALS MUST BE INSTALLED IN COMPLIANCE WITHT THE FLAME SPREAD AND SMOKE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 720 OF THE 2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE. 37. BUILDING INSULATION TO BE CERTIFIED BY THE MANUFACTURER TO MEET THE CALIFORNIA STANDARDS FOR INSULATING MATERIAL. 38. THE BUILDING INSPECTOR SHALL BE NOTIFIED JUST PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING GRADING IF IN SCOPE. 39. PROVIDE METAL TRIM OR CASING AT ALL EDGES OF PLASTER OR DRYWALL SURFACES WHERE IT TERMINATES OR MEETS ANY OTHER MATERIAL, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 40. WHERE INDICATED, PROVIDE EXTERNALLY ILLUMINATED EXIT SIGNS AND DIRECTIONAL SIGNS WITH MINIMUM 6" HIGH BY 3/4" WIDE STROKE BLOCK LETTERS ON A CONTRASTING BACKGROUND. SEE PLANS FOR LOCATIONS. 2022 CBC SECTION 1013.6. 41. EXTERNALLY ILLUMINATED EXIT SIGNS SHALL BE ILLUMINATED AT ALL TIMES TO AN INTENSITY OF 5 FOOT CANDLES MINIMUM (2022 CBC 1013). 42. EXIT DOORS SHALL SWING IN THE DIRECTION OF EXIT TRAVEL WHEN SERVING 50 OR MORE PERSONS AND IN ANY HAZARDOUS AREA OF GROUP H OCCUPANCY. 43. EVERY EXIT DOOR SHALL BE OPENABLE FROM THE INSIDE WITHOUT THE USE OF A KEY OR TOOL, OR SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE OR EFFORT. SPECIAL LOCKING DEVICES SHALL BE ONLY APPROVED TYPE. 44. EXIT ILLUMINATION SHALL BE PROVIDED FROM AN EMERGENCY POWER SYSTEM OR ITS EQUIVALENT. SED 45. WITHIN CONCEALED SPACES, FIRE WALLS, FIRE BARRIERS, FIRE PARTITIONS, SMOKE BARRIERS AND SMOKE PARTITIONS OR ANY OTHER WALL REQUIRED TO HAVE PROTECTED OPENINGS OR PENETRATIONS SHALL BE EFFECTIVELY AND PERMANENTLY IDENTIFIED WITH SIGNS OR STENCILING AND SHALL COMPLY WITH CBC 703.5. SIGN SHALL READ "FIRE AND/OR SMOKE BARRIER -PROTECT ALL OPENINGS" 46. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN A DESIGN TEAM PROJECT SIGN AT ALL TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION. 47. WHEN THE INTRUSION ALARM IS SHUT DOWN AT ANY POINT DURING CONTSTRUCTION FOR ANY AMOUNT OF TIME, SECURITY PERSONNEL MUST BE PRESENT ON SITE. 48. WHEN THE FIRE ALARM OR FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM IS SHUT DOWN AT ANY POINT DURING CONSTRUCTION FOR ANY AMOUNT OF TIME, A FIRE WATCH MUST BE IN EFFECT FOR THE DURATION OF THE SHUT DOWN AT MINIMUM, AND THE LOCAL FIRE AUTHORITY MUST BE NOTIFIED. A/C AIR CONDITIONING ABV ABOVE ACOUS ACOUSTICAL ACP ACOUSTICAL CEILING PANEL ACT ACOUSTICAL CEILING TILE AD AREA DRAIN ADDL ADDITIONAL ADJ ADJUSTABLE AESS ARCHITECTURALLY EXPOSED STRUCTURAL STEEL AFF ABOVE FINISH FLOOR AGGR AGGREGATE AL ALUMINUM ALT ALTERNATE ANC ANCHOR ANO ANODIZED APPROX APPROXIMATE ARCH ARCHITECT / ARCHITECTURAL ASPH ASPHALT ASSY ASSEMBLY ATS AUTOMATIC TRANSFER SWITCH AUTO AUTOMATIC BD BOARD BITUM BITUMEN / BITUMINOUS BKG BACKING BLDG BUILDING BLKG BLOCKING BM BEAM BOT BOTTOM BR BACKER ROD BRKT BRACKET BSMT BASEMENT BTWN BETWEEN BUR BUILT-UP ROOF CAB CABINET CB CATCH BASIN CEM CEMENT CER CERAMIC CFCI CONTRACTOR FURNISHED CONTRACTOR INSTALLED CFOI CONTRACTOR FURNISHED OWNER INSTALLED CG CORNER GUARD CH CHANNEL CI CAST IRON CIP CAST IN PLACE CJ CONTROL JOINT CL CENTERLINE CLG CEILING CLO CLOSET CLR CLEAR CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT COL COLUMN CONC CONCRETE CONN CONNECTION CONSTR CONSTRUCTION CONT CONTINUOUS CONTR CONTRACTOR COORD COORDINATE CORR CORRIDOR CP CEMENT PLASTER CPT CARPET CR CARD READER CSWK CASEWORK CT CERAMIC TILE CTR CENTER CTSK COUNTERSUNK CW CURTAIN WALL DBL DOUBLE DD DECK DRAIN DEMO DEMOLISH / DEMOLITION DEPT DEPARTMENT DF DRINKING FOUNTAIN DIA DIAMETER DIAG DIAGONAL DIM /S DIMENSION /S DISP DISPENSER DN DOWN DO DOOR OPENING DR DOOR DSA DIVISION OF STATE ARCHITECT DTL DETAIL DWG /S DRAWING /S DWR DRAWER (E)EXISTING EA EACH EAS EACH SIDE EAW EACH WAY EF EACH FACE EJ EXPANSION JOINT ELEC ELECTRICAL ELEV ELEVATOR EMBED EMBED /MENT EMERG EMERGENCY ENCL ENCLOSURE ENG ENGINEER EOS EDGE OF SLAB EP ELECTRICAL PANEL EPS EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE EQ EQUAL EQUIP EQUIPMENT ESCUT ESCUTCHEON ETC ET CETERA EWC ELECTRIC WATER COOLER EXP EXPANSION EXT EXTERIOR EXTR EXTRUDED FA FIRE ALARM FACP FIRE ALARM CONTROL PANEL FD FLOOR DRAIN FDC FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION FDN FOUNDATION FE FIRE EXTINGUISHER FEC FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET FF FINISH FLOOR FG FINISH GRADE FHC FIRE HOSE CABINET FIN FINISH FL FLOOR FLUOR FLUORESCENT FO FACE OF FOC FACE OF CONCRETE FOF FACE OF FINISH FOG FACE OF GLASS FOS FACE OF STUD FP FIREPROOF /ING FR FIRE RATED FS FLOOR SINK FSD FIRE SMOKE DAMPER FSL FIRE SPRINKLER FSR FIRE SPRINKLER RISER FT FOOT / FEET FTG FOOTING FURR FURRING FWP FABRIC WRAPPED PANEL GA GAUGE GALV GALVANIZED GB GRAB BAR GC GENERAL CONTRACTOR GEN GENERATOR GFRC GLASS FIBER REINFORCED CONCRETE GFRG GLASS FIBER REINFORCED GYPSUM GL GLASS / GLAZING GLB GLUE LAMINATED BEAM GLU-LAM GLUE LAMINATED GND GROUND GR GRADE GSM GALVANIZED SHEET METAL GWB GYPSUM WALL BOARD GYP GYPSUM HAT CH HAT CHANNEL HB HOSE BIB HC HOLLOW CORE HDBD HARDBOARD HDR HEADER HDWD HARDWOOD HDWR HARDWARE HM HOLLOW METAL HO HOLD OPEN /MAGNETIC HORIZ HORIZONTAL HP HIGH POINT HPL HIGH PRESSURE LAMINATE HR HOUR HRAIL HANDRAIL HSS HOLLOW STRUCTURAL SECTION HT HEIGHT HTR HEATER HVAC "HEATING, VENTILATING AND AIR CONDITIONING" ID INSIDE DIAMETER / DIMENSION IN INCH INCAND INCANDESCENT INCL INCLUDE /ING INSUL INSULATION /ING INT INTERIOR INTER INTERMEDIATE INTUM INTUMESCENT INV INVERT JAN JANITOR /IAL JST JOIST JT JOINT K KIPS KIT KITCHEN KP KICK PLATE LAB LABORATORY LAM LAMINATE /D LAV LAVATORY LB POUND LKR LOCKER LL LEAD LINED LOC LOCATION LP LOW POINT LW LIGHT WEIGHT MACH MACHINE MAT MATERIAL MAX MAXIMUM MDF MEDIUM DENSITY FIBERBOARD MECH MECHANICAL MED MEDIUM MEMB MEMBRANE MEPS MOLDED EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE MEZZ MEZZANINE MFR MANUFACTURER MIN MINIMUM / MINUTE MIRR MIRROR MISC MISCELLANEOUS MO MASONRY OPENING MTD MOUNTED MTG MEETING MTL METAL MUL MULLION (N)NEW NIC NOT IN CONTRACT NO NUMBER NOM NOMINAL NR NON-RATED NTS NOT TO SCALE O/OVER O/H OVERHEAD OA OVERALL OC ON CENTER OD OUTSIDE DIAMETER / DIMENSION OFCI OWNER FURNISHED CONTRACTOR INSTALLED OFD OVERFLOW DRAIN OFF OFFICE OFOI OWNER FURNISHED OWNER INSTALLED OH OPPOSITE HAND OPNG OPENING OPP OPPOSITE PAD POWER ACTIVATED DEVICE PAF POWDER ACTUATED FASTENER PENN PENETRATION PERF PERFORATED PERIM PERIMETER PH PANIC HARDWARE PIV POST INDICATOR VALVE PL PLATE PL PROPERTY LINE PLAM PLASTIC LAMINATE PLAS PLASTER PLMB PLUMBING PLYWD PLYWOOD PNL PANEL PR PAIR PRCST PRECAST PREFAB PREFABRICATED PROJ PROJECTION PSF POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT PSI POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH PT POINT / PAINT PTD PAINTED PTD/R PAPER TOWEL DISPENSER OR RECEPTACLE PTN PARTITION PTR PRESSURE TREATED PTRWD PRESSURE TREATED WOOD PVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDE QT QUARRY TILE QTY QUANTITY R RISER RAD RADIUS RAIL RAILING RB RESILIENT BASE RCP REFLECTED CEILING PLAN RD ROOF DRAIN RDWD REDWOOD REF REFERENCE REFL REFLECTED REFR REFRIGERATOR REINF REINFORCED /ING /MENT REQ REQUIRED RESIL RESILIENT RET RETAINING / RETARDANT REV REVISION RGTR REGISTER RM ROOM RO ROUGH OPENING RWL RAIN WATER LEADER SAF SELF-ADHERING FLASHING SAN SANITARY SASM SELF-ADHERING SHEET MEMBRANE SC SOLID CORE SCD SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS / SEAT COVER DISPENSER SCHD SCHEDULED SCWD SOLID CORE WOOD SD SOAP DISPENSER SECT SECTION SED SEE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS SF SQUARE FOOT / FEET SF STOREFRONT SHT SHEET SHTG SHEATHING SHWR SHOWER SIM SIMILAR SJ SEISMIC JOINT SK SINK SLBB SHORT LEGS BACK TO BACK SLD SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS SM SHEET METAL SMD SEE MECHANICAL DRAWINGS SMS SHEET METAL SCREW SND SANITARY NAPKIN DISPENSER SNR SANITARY NAPKIN RECEPTACLE SOFF SOFFIT SOG SLAB ON GRADE SPAC SPACING SPD SEE PLUMBING DRAWINGS SPEC /S SPECIFICATION /S SQ SQUARE SRF SURFACE SS STAINLESS STEEL / SOLID SURFACE SSD SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS SSK SERVICE SINK SSM SOLID SURFACING MATERIAL ST STAIR STA STATION STC SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASS STD STANDARD STIFF STIFFENER STL STEEL STOR STORAGE STR STRUCTURAL STS SELF TAPPING SCREW SUSP SUSPENDED SY SQUARE YARD SYM SYMMETRICAL SYN SYNTHETIC SYS SYSTEM T TREAD T&B TOP AND BOTTOM T&G TONGUE AND GROOVE TEL TELEPHONE TEMP TEMPERATURE / TEMPORARY TER TERRAZZO THERM THERMOSTAT / THERMAL THK THICK T/O TOP OF TOC TOP OF CONCRETE TOIL TOILET TOS TOP OF STEEL TOW TOP OF WALL TPD TOILET PAPER DISPENSER TV TELEVISION TYP TYPICAL UL UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIES UON UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED UR URINAL VERT VERTICAL VEST VESTIBULE VIF VERIFY IN FIELD VTR VENT THROUGH ROOF W WEST / WIDTH W/WITH W/O WITHOUT WC WATER CLOSET WD WOOD WDW WINDOW WGL WIRE GLASS WK WORK WO WHERE OCCURS WP WATERPROOF /ING WPT WORKING POINT WR WATER RESISTANT WRB WATER RESISTIVE BARRIER WSCT WAINSCOT WT WEIGHT WWF WELDED WIRE FABRIC WWM WELDED WIRE MESH XFMR TRANSFORMER +16' -0" LEVEL 2 BUILDING GRID LINE DATUM POINT DETAIL REFERENCE 1 A101 GRID DESIGNATION GRID LINE WORK POINT INDICATES REFERENCE POINT DIMENSIONED IN LARGER SCALE DRAWING. DRAWING NUMBER SHEET NUMBER DETAIL SECTION 1 A101DRAWING NUMBER SHEET NUMBER ELEVATION REFERENCE 1 A101DRAWING NUMBER SHEET NUMBER BLDG SECTION / ELEVATION 1 A101DRAWING NUMBER SHEET NUMBER INTERIOR ELEVATION A-501 INTERIOR ELEVATION NUMBER SHEET NUMBER 1A 1B 1C 1D +16' -6" INDICATES ELEVATION AT AREA INDICATES ELEVATION AT GIVEN POINT ROOM TAG ROOM NAME 2013 DOOR TAG DOOR # = ROOM # + LETTER FOR ADD'L DOORS 2013A RM NAME 280 SFROOM NUMBER EXAMPLE: LEVEL: 2, ZONE:0, RM#: 13) ROOM AREA WINDOW TAG WINDOW NUMBER LISTED IN WIN. SCHEDULE 18 PARTITION TYPE TAG PARTITIION TYPE DESIGNATION SEE INTERIOR PARTITION SCHEDULE 1A4W -2 DRAWING REVISIONS DELTA DESIGNATES REVISION ISSUANCE CLOUDS SHOWN FOR CURRENT REVISION ONLY 1 ALIGNALIGNMENT SYMBOL DESIGNATES ALIGNMENT OF DRAWING ELEMENTS CENTER LINE SYMBOL DESIGNATES CENTER LINE NORTH SYMBOL HEAVY LINE DESIGNATES NORTH DIRECTION FINISH TAG DOOR # = ROOM # + LETTER FOR ADD'L DOORS DP-2 EXTERIOR WALL ASSY TAG VERTICAL ASSEMBLY TYPE DESIGNATION SEE SHEET A-401 FOR ASSEMBLY DETAILS 1X1A © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 3 : 2 8 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A002 GENERAL NOTES, ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 GENERAL NOTESABBREVIATIONS SYMBOLS LEGEND UP LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" 393' ABV SEA LEVEL = FL R T O F L R 11 ' - 0 " FL R T O F L R 11 ' - 0 " FL R T O F L R 11 ' - 0 " FL R T O F L R 11 ' - 0 " FL R T O F L R 15 ' - 0 " 384.3' ABV SEA LEVEL = 6' - 0 " BELOW GRADE DATUM FOR GARAGE = 387' SEE DIAGRAM #3 LOWEST GRADE @ PERIMETER 375' - 6" HIGHEST GRADE @ PERIMETER 393' - 0" EQ EQ AP P A R E N T H E I G H T 33 ' - 0 " AP P A R E N T H E I G H T 29 ' - 0 " AT EAST WING, SEE PLAN 408' ABOVE SEA LVL = NEIGHBOR ELV AT WEST WING, SEE PLAN 404' ABOVE SEA LVL = NEIGHBOR ELV PER ZONING CODE 32-45.10 LAND USE AREAS: BUILDING HEIGHT SHALL MEAN THE VERTICAL DISTANCE MEASURED FROM THE AVERAGE GRADE LEVEL OF THE HIGHEST AND LOWEST POINT OF FIN GRADE. MA X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T 52 ' - 9 " HIGH POINT OF GRADE: EL CERRO BLVD E L P I N T A D O R O A D F R E E W A Y O N R A M P LOW POINT OF GRADE: (E) RESIDENCE MAIN LEVEL @ 404' ABOVE SEA LEVEL PROJECT WILL APPEAR 33' TALL, SEE SECTION (E) RESIDENCE MAIN LEVEL @ 408' ABOVE SEA LEVEL PROJECT WILL APPEAR 29' TALL, SEE SECTION 375' - 6" EAST WING WEST WING 393' - 0" SIGHT LINE SIGHT LINE PER ZONING CODE 32-2 DEFINITION, STORY: "IF THE FINISH FLOOR LEVEL DIRECTLY ABOVE THE BASEMENT IS MORE THAN 6' ABOVE THE GROUND ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING FOR MORE THAN 50% OF THE TOTAL PERIMETER, SUCH BASEMENT...SHALL BE CONSIDERED A STORY." IN OTHER WORDS, FOR THIS TO BE A BASEMENT GARAGE, LEVEL 1 (AT 393' ELV) CANNOT BE MORE THAN 6' ABOVE GRADE FOR MORE THAN 50% OF THE PERIMETER. THEREFORE THE GRADE ELEVATION MUST BE 387' FOR 50% OR MORE OF THE PERIMETER. TOTAL BLDG PERIMETER AT GRADE = 1,412' BLDG PERIMETER @ 387' = 716' = 50.7% 150' - 4" 16 0 ' - 1 0 1 / 4 " 14 4 ' - 6 " 232' - 0" 387' 387' 4 7 ' - 2 " 171' - 0" 2 8 ' - 8 " 3 1 ' - 3 " 1 0 1 ' - 3 " 17 ' - 1 1 " 1 6 ' - 1 0 " 6 ' - 0 " 1 ' - 6 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 5 ' - 1 0 " 3 4 ' - 3 " 2 2 ' - 3 " 1 3 ' - 6 " 1 4 6 ' - 1 0 " 1 ' - 6 " 6 ' - 1 0 " 5 ' - 9 " 2 2 ' - 0 " 1 2 ' - 0 " 45 ' - 0 " © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 3 : 3 4 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A003 HEIGHT ANAYLSIS 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/8" = 1'-0"2 HEIGHT ANALYSIS SECTION 1" = 40'-0"1 AVERAGE GRADE PLANE DIAGRAM 1" = 60'-0"3 BASEMENT -GRADE LEVEL DIAGRAM DN DN UP UP 4. 8 4 % NE W CR E E K BR I D G E (2 3 ) ( 5 3 ) (5 ) (5 ) (1 0 ) SL I D E R (2 4 ) (2 6 ) (2 6 ) (8 ) 24 ' - 0 " 2 8 ' - 0 " 1 ' - 0 " 2 4 ' - 1 0 " (4 ) (4 ) (2 ) ( 4 ) (1 1 ) (4 ) 2 4 ' - 0 " 2 4 ' - 0 " 24 ' - 0 " PL A N -CU T T H R O U G H H I L L S I D E , SE E L E V E L 1 F O R R E S T O F S I T E CALCULATIONS LEGEND 0'8'16' 3 2 ' ON GRADE STALLSTOTAL PARKING (A004)198 CARS TOTAL • 12 IN STACKERS • 56 STALLS ON GRADE • 130 IN PUZZELS PARKING ASSIGNED PER UNIT 3BR (26x) = 52 SPACES (2 EA per code)2BR (51x) = 102 SPACES (2 EA per code)1BR (22x) = 22 SPACES (1 EA)22 SPACES REMAINING FOR GUEST *WAIVER REQUESTED FOR PARKING • Resid Parking - 1 8 7 r e q / 1 7 6 p r o v i d e d • Guest Parking - 2 4 . 7 5 r e q / 2 2 p r o v i d e d • 28' drive aisle waiver 2 LEVEL STACKER SYSTEM 2 CARS STACKED VERTICALLY 3 LEVEL PUZZLER SYSTEM 3 CARS STACKED VERTICALLY 1 CAR OMITTED PER MACHINE FOR DRIVE -IN ACCESSON GRADE ADA STALLS © 2020PROJECT NO:STAMP:SHEET NAME:1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO:PHASE: KEY PLAN:CLIENT:ISSUANCE D A T E REVISIONS Δ D E L T A D A T E ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 0 5.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 0 6.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 0 7.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 1 0 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 4 : 4 5 : 0 0 P M A u t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD,DANVILLE, CA 94526 A004PARKING DIAGRAM425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment,LLC 22.056.00 1/ 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 PA R K I N G D I A G R A M ?SLIDERS ON GRADE FOR INCREASED PARKING DENSITY UPKEY PLAN E L C E R R O B L V DEL P I N T A D O F R E E W A Y O N R A M P A D O B E D R1 25 346 © 2020PROJECT NO:STAMP:SHEET NAME:1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO:PHASE: KEY PLAN:CLIENT:ISSUANCE D A T E REVISIONS Δ D E L T A D A T E ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 0 5.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 0 6.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 0 7.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 1 0 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 5 2 : 2 2 P M A u t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD,DANVILLE, CA 94526 A005RENDERINGS425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment,LLC 22.056.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 UP KEY PLAN EL CERRO BLVD E L P I N T A D O F R E E W A Y O N R A M P A D O B E D R 1 2 5 3 4 6 © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 3 1 / 2 0 2 4 7 : 0 6 : 5 7 P M A u t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A005.1 RENDERINGS 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 3 : 4 2 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A006 MATERIALS BOARD 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 WINDOWS: • ALU WINDOWS DARK BRONZE ANODIZED • CLEAR LOW-E, NON MIRRORED GLAZING LOCATION: • TYPICAL WINDOWS, SEE ELEVATIONS FIBER CEMENT PANELS: • DARK GREY LOCATION: • FACADE BANDS AND COPLANAR ELEVATIONS, SEE ELEVATIONS WOOD SIDING: • COMPOSITE WOOD SIDING • LIGHT GREY-BROWN WOOD • WARM TONE LOCATION: • RECESSED FACADE AREAS, SEE ELV FACADE WALLS OPENINGS / BALCONIESPODIUM WALL BOARD FORM CONCRETE: • TEXTURED WOOD PLANKS LOCATION: • CONCRETE PODIUM WALL, TYP METAL PANEL: • STANDING SEAM SINC MTL, STAGGERED JOINTS LOCATION: • BREEZEWAY FASCIA, STAIR TOWER WALL, ENTRY CANOPY GREEN SCREEN WALL PANELS: • CREEPERS / VINES PER LANDSCAPE LOCATION: • CONCRETE PODIUM WALL, SEE ELEVATIONS BALCONY RAILS: • DARK PER METAL LOCATION: • BALCONY RAILINGS TYPICAL SITE COURTYARDS PRECAST CONCRETE PAVERS: • LIGHT GRAY LOCATION: • RESIDENTIAL DECK AT GROUND LEVEL WOOD BENCHES: • DARK WOOD • WARM TONES LOCATION: • FIRST STEP OF CASCADES • THROUGHOUT COURTYARD AT PLANTER EDGES TILE MOSAIC: • TILE MOSIC, PATTERN AND COLORS TBD LOCATION: • PODIUM WALL AT MAIN ENTRY KEY PLAN EL CERRO BLVD E L P I N T A D O R O A D F R E E W A Y O N R A M P A D O B E D R 6 1 2 3 4 5 © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 3 : 4 7 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A007 SITE PHOTOS 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1 2 3 4 5 6 THE MONUMENT LINE OF EL PINTADO ROAD TAKEN AS NORTH 62°06'03" WEST, AS SHOWN ON THE PARCEL MAP OF SUBDIVISION MSM 104-77 (76-PM-1). BASIS OF BEARINGS ZONE AE - FLOOD HAZARD AREA WITH BASE FLOOD ELEVATION OF 480.3 (NVGD-29) / 483.0 (NAVD-88) ZONE X - AREA OF MINIMAL FLOOD HAZARD COMMUNITY PANEL NO: 06013C0462F EFFECTIVE DATE: 06/16/2009 FLOOD ZONE BLDG CONC (E)/EX ESMT FNC INV. P.U.E REBAR. () R/W SSCO SSMH SDDI (T) WM WV BUILDING CONCRETE EXISTING EASEMENT FENCE INVERT PRIVATE UTILITY EASEMENT REBAR RECORD DATA RIGHT OF WAY SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE STORM DRAIN DRAIN INLET TOTAL WATER METER WATER VALVE ABBREVIATIONS: SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE WATER VALVE FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED STANDARD STREET MONUMENT EASEMENT LINE ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE BOUNDARY LINE TIE LINE CENTERLINE EXISTING WATER LINE EXISTING STORM DRAIN PIPE EXISTING ELECTRIC CABLE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER EXISTING TREE LEGEND: VESTING TENTATIVE MAP 99 RESIDENTIAL UNITS 425 EL PINTADO ROAD PROJECT SUMMARY ENGINEER'S STATEMENT EASTON C. MCALLISTER, PE DATE UTILITIES: AT&T PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC TOWN OF DANVILLE CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITATION DISTRICT COMCAST SAN RAMON VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT EAST BAY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (EBMUD) CABLE TELEVISION: TELEPHONE: SEWAGE DISPOSAL: FIRE PROTECTION: WATER SUPPLY: GAS & ELECTRIC: STORM DRAIN: M-35 COMMERCIAL OFFICE O-1EXISTING ZONING: CIVIL ENGINEER: PROPOSED LAND USE: EXISTING LAND USE: PROPOSED ZONING: TOTAL AREA: OWNER: SURVEYOR: 137,906 SQ.FT. / 3.17± AC ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO:200-040-012 PROPERTY ADDRESS: P.E. #61148 EXP 12/31/24 DIAMOND CONSTRUCTION 425 EL PINTADO ROAD DANVILLE, CA 94526 DEBOLT CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC. 480 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD UNIT L DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94596 (925) 837-3780 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 425 EL PINTADO RD DANVILLE, CA 94526 CIVIL ENGINEERING WORK ON THIS VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD CIVIL ENGINEERING PRACTICE. 10/28/24 DESCRIPTIONSHEET SHEET INDEX VTM-1 VTM-2 VTM-3 VTM-4 VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PLAN PRELIMINARY STORM WATER CONTROL PLAN DEBOLT CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC. 480 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD UNIT L DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94596 (925) 837-3780 N N.T.S. VICINITY MAP EARTHWORKS: CUT 2,700 C.Y. FILL 1,500 C.Y. EXPORT 1,200 C.Y. © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE 6 /6 /2 0 2 3 5 :1 3 :5 6 P M 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 425 EL PINTADO RD HOUSING 23103 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.4 10.23.23 03.13.24 10.28.24 VTM-1 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP PROJECT BENCHMARK CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BENCHMARK #3589 - A FASTENER AND TAG SET IN THE CENTER OF THE CONCRETE HEADWALL LOCATED 270± FEET SOUTH FROM THE INTERSECTION OF EL CERRO BOULEVARD AND EL PINTADO WEST IN DANVILLE, APPROXIMATELY 45 FEET WEST OF THE CENTERLINE OF EL PINTADO WEST. ELEVATION 362.20' NGVD29 FOR CONDOMINIUM PURPOSES TOWN OF DANVILLE, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA M-35 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 425 EP INVESTMENT, LLC © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE 6 /6 /2 0 2 3 5 :1 3 :5 6 P M 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 425 EL PINTADO RD HOUSING 23103 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.4 10.23.23 03.13.24 10.28.24 VTM-2 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANTREE REMOVAL & REPLACEMENT CALCULATIONS Total trees to be preserved 19 Total trees to be removed 98 Protected trees to be removed 18 Proposed new trees – 24” box minimum 58 Tree Replacement Notes 1. The Town’s mitigation requirements include replacement trees of a number the equals the total diameter of the town protect trees to be removed. 2. The total diameter of protect trees to be removed is 337.5” 3. Replacement trees required: (169) 15 gallon @ 2” caliper OR (85) 24” box @ 4” caliper OR (56) 36” box @ 6” caliper 11 EXISTING TREE TABLE Tag # Protected Species DBH Health Remove or Protect 101 YES Valley Oak 12" 40% - Poor REMAIN 102 YES Valley Oak 12" 40% - Poor REMAIN 103 NO California Black Walnut 14" 20% - Critical REMAIN 104 YES Valley Oak 38" 40% - Poor REMAIN 105 NO California Privet 7" 20% - Critical REMAIN 106 NO Arroyo Willow 18" 20% - Critical REMAIN 107 NO Arroyo Willow 18" 20% - Critical REMAIN 108 NO Arroyo Willow 18" 20% - Critical REMAIN 109 NO Cherry Plum 13" 40% - Poor REMAIN 110 NO Arroyo Willow 18" 20% - Critical REMAIN 111 NO Arroyo Willow 7" 20% - Critical REMOVE 112 NO Arroyo Willow 7" 20% - Critical REMAIN 113 NO California Privet 7" 20% - Critical REMAIN 114 NO Arroyo Willow 7" 20% - Critical REMAIN 115 NO Arroyo Willow 7" 20% - Critical REMOVE 116 NO Arroyo Willow 7" 20% - Critical REMAIN 117 NO Arroyo Willow 7" 20% - Critical REMAIN 118 NO Arroyo Willow 7" 20% - Critical REMAIN 119 YES Valley Oak 10" 40% - Poor REMAIN 120 NO Arroyo Willow 18" 20% - Critical REMAIN 121 NO Arroyo Willow 18" 20% - Critical REMAIN 122 NO California Black Walnut 14" 20% - Critical REMAIN 123 NO Arroyo Willow 21" 20% - Critical REMAIN 124 NO California Privet 7" 20% - Critical REMAIN 125 NO Coast Live Oak 6" 60% - Fair REMAIN 126 NO California Privet 7" 20% - Critical REMAIN 127 NO Arroyo Willow 4" 20% - Critical REMAIN 128 NO California Privet 7" 20% - Critical REMAIN 129 NO Arroyo Willow 4" 20% - Critical REMAIN 201 NO Mulberry Species 10" 40% - Poor REMOVE 202 NO Mulberry Species 10" 40% - Poor REMOVE 203 NO Mulberry Species 10" 40% - Poor REMOVE 204 NO Mulberry Species 10" 40% - Poor REMOVE 205 NO Mulberry Species 10" 40% - Poor REMOVE 206 NO Mulberry Species 10" 40% - Poor REMOVE 207 NO Mulberry Species 13" 40% - Poor REMOVE 208 NO Mulberry Species 13" 40% - Poor REMOVE 209 NO Mulberry Species 13" 40% - Poor REMOVE 210 NO Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor REMOVE 211 NO Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor REMOVE 212 NO Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor REMOVE 213 NO Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor REMOVE 214 YES Valley Oak 22" 60% - Fair REMOVE 215 YES Coast Live Oak 18" 60% - Fair REMOVE 216 YES Coast Live Oak 13" 60% - Fair REMOVE 217 YES Coast Live Oak 12"/24" 60% - Fair REMOVE 218 YES Valley Oak 32" 60% - Fair REMAIN 219 YES Valley Oak 16” 60% - Fair REMAIN 220 YES Valley Oak 16" 40% - Poor REMAIN 221 NO Mexican Fan Palm 13" 40% - Poor REMAIN 222 NO California Privet 7" 20% - Critical REMAIN 301 NO Valley Oak 9" 60% - Fair REMOVE 302 YES Valley Oak 11" 60% - Fair REMOVE 303 NO Valley Oak 5"/6"/3" 60% - Fair REMOVE 304 YES Valley Oak 25" 60% - Fair REMOVE 305 NO Deodar Cedar 14.5 20% - Critical REMOVE 306 NO Deodar Cedar 14.5 40% - Poor REMOVE 307 NO Deodar Cedar 15" 40% - Poor REMOVE 308 NO White Alder 6"/4"/5" 40% - Poor REMOVE 309 NO Deodar Cedar 15" 40% - Poor REMOVE 310 NO Deodar Cedar 13" 40% - Poor REMOVE 311 NO Deodar Cedar 16" 20% - Critical REMOVE 312 NO Cherry Plum 7" 40% - Poor REMOVE 313 NO Deodar Cedar 15" 40% - Poor REMOVE 314 NO Deodar Cedar 15" 40% - Poor REMOVE 315 NO Deodar Cedar 16" 40% - Poor REMOVE 316 NO Deodar Cedar 16" 40% - Poor REMOVE 317 NO Deodar Cedar 14" 40% - Poor REMOVE 318 NO Deodar Cedar 16” 40% - Poor REMOVE 319 NO Deodar Cedar 16" 40% - Poor REMOVE 320 NO Pine Species 15" 20% - Critical REMOVE 321 NO Deodar Cedar 16" 20% - Critical REMOVE 322 NO Coast Redwood 22" 60% - Fair REMOVE 323 NO Deodar Cedar 16" 20% - Critical REMOVE 324 NO Deodar Cedar 16" 20% - Critical REMOVE 331 YES Valley Oak 11" 60% - Fair REMOVE 332 YES Valley Oak 19" 60% - Fair REMOVE 333 NO Coast Redwood 19" 60% - Fair REMOVE 334 NO Coast Redwood 20" 60% - Fair REMOVE 335 NO Coast Redwood 14" 60% - Fair REMOVE 336 NO Coast Redwood 14" 60% - Fair REMOVE 337 NO Coast Redwood 23" 60% - Fair REMOVE 338 NO Coast Redwood 16" 60% - Fair REMOVE 339 NO Coast Redwood 20" 60% - Fair REMOVE 340 NO Coast Redwood 20" 60% - Fair REMOVE 341 NO Coast Redwood 21" 60% - Fair REMOVE 342 NO Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor REMOVE 343 NO Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor REMOVE 344 NO Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor REMOVE 345 NO Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor REMOVE 346 NO Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor REMOVE 347 NO Mulberry Species 9" 40% - Poor REMOVE 348 YES Valley Oak 17" 60% - Fair REMOVE 349 NO California Black Walnut 11" 20% - Critical REMOVE 350 NO California Black Walnut 11" 20% - Critical REMOVE 351 NO California Black Walnut 11" 20% - Critical REMOVE 352 NO Arroyo Willow 13" 20% - Critical REMOVE 353 NO Arroyo Willow 21" 20% - Critical REMOVE 354 YES Coast Live Oak 12”/4” 60% - Fair REMOVE 355 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 356 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 357 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 358 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 359 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 360 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 361 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 362 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 363 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 364 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 365 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 366 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 367 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 368 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 369 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 370 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 371 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 372 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN 373 NO Italian Cypress 5" 40% - Poor REMAIN TOTAL OF PROTECTED TREES:17 TOTAL OF REMOVED TREES:67 TOTAL OF NOT PROTECTED TREES:101 TOTAL OF REMAINING TREES:51 TOTAL OF PROTECTED TREES REMOVED:10 TOTAL OF PROTECTED TREES TO REMAIN 7 Protected : Single trunk >10", Multiple trunk>20" Tree Replacement Notes TOTAL DIAMETER OF PROTECTED TREES TO BE REMOVED:160 inches REPLACEMENT TREES REQUIRED: 80 15 gal 2 -inch caliper 40 24 box 4 -inch caliper THE TOWN’S MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE REPLACEMENT TREES OF A NUMBER THAT EQUALS THE TOTAL DIAMETER OF THE TOWN-PROTECTED TREES REMOVED. © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE 6 /6 /2 0 2 3 5 :1 3 :5 6 P M 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 425 EL PINTADO RD HOUSING 23103 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.4 10.23.23 03.13.24 10.28.24 VTM-3 PRELIMINARY GRADING, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PLAN HATCH LEGEND © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE 6 /6 /2 0 2 3 5 :1 3 :5 6 P M 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 425 EL PINTADO RD HOUSING 23103 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.4 10.23.23 03.13.24 10.28.24 VTM-4 PRELIMINARY STORM WATER CONTROL PLAN PO T E N T I A L N E W O F F S I T E T R E E L O C A T I O N S (E ) T R E E S T O R E M A I N TREES LARGE SHRUBS MEDIUM SHRUBS, GRASSES & PERENNIALS SMALL SHRUBS, GRASSES & PERENNIALS VINES GROUNDCOVERS STORMWATER ACER PALMATUM JAPANESE MAPLE ARCTOSTAPHYLOS SP MANZANITA ACACIA C. ‘COUSIN ITT’ LITTLE RIVER WATTLE ANIGOZANTHOS SPP KANGAROO PAW FICUS PUMILA CREEPING FIG ARCTOSTAPHYLOS UVA URSI MANZANITA ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM YARROW ARBUTUS UNEDO ‘MARINA STRAWBERRY TREE CARPENTERIA CALIFORNICA BUSH ANEMONE AGAVE ATTENUATA ‘NOVA’ BLUE FOX TAIL AGAVE CHONDROPETALUM TECTORUM CAPE RUSH CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS WESTERN REDBUD DODONEA VISCOSA ‘PURPUREA’ PUPLE HOP-BUSH DIETES IRIOIDES FORTNIGHT LILY CISTANTHE GRANDIFLORA ROCK PURSLANE HARDENBERGIA VIOLACEA PURPLE LILAC VINE COTONEASTER ‘CORAL BEAUTY’ COTONEASTER PITTOSPORUM TOBIRA ‘VARIEGATA’ MOCK ORANGE LOROPETALUM ‘SUZANNE’ FRINGE FLOWER PARTHENOCISSUS HENRYANA CHINESE VIRG. CREEPER LANTANA HYBRID LANTANA JUNCUS PATENS RUSH OLEA EUROPAEA ‘SWAN HILL’ FRUITLESS OLIVE QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA COAST LIVE OAK LAGERSTROEMIA ‘MUSKOGEE’ CRAPE MYRTLE MUHLENBERGIA RIGENS DEER GRASS RHAMNUS CALIFORNICA ‘MOUND SAN BRUNO’ COFFEEBERRY ROSMARINUS ‘TUSCAN BLUE’ ROSEMARY PITTOSPORUM ‘WHEELERS DWARF’ DWARF MOCK ORANGE SALVIA LEUCANTHA SAGE LOMANDRA L. ‘BREEZE’ DWARF MAT RUSH PHORMIUM HYBRID NEW ZEALAND FLAX ROSA ‘SEA FOAM’ GROUNDCOVER ROSE LIMONIUM PEREZII SEA LAVENDER SYMPHORICARPOS ALBUS SNOWBERRY EL CERRO BLVD E L P I N T A D O R OA D EGBERT BETTY A TRE 200-040-014 ZHANG CHENYUE 196-171-014 EGBERT BETTY A TRE 200-040-014 LAURENCE PETER C & ANNE E 200-040-015 (E) DRIVEWAY TO BE REMOVED (E) WOOD BRIDGE TO BE REMOVED (E) CONC HEADWALLS TO BE REMOVED (E) PAVED DRIVEWAY TO BE REMOVED (E) PAVED DRIVEWAY TO BE REMOVED (E) PAVED DRIVEWAY TO BE REMOVED (E) BUILDING TO BE REMOVED (E) FENCE ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTY TO REMAIN (E) CONCRETE TO BE REMOVED (E) WALKWAY TO BE REMOVED (E) SIGN TO BE REMOVED (E) CONC PATIO TO BE REMOVED EASEMENT (7969 O.R. 23) 10' - 0" WIDE SEWER 1 3 1 ' - 1 1 5 /2 5 6 "41' - 0 241/256" 1 4 7 ' - 1 1 1 3/1 2 8 " 57 ' - 1 0 1 4 1 / 2 5 6 " 169' - 8 61/128" SHEET NOTES PROPERTY LINE LEGEND 0'8' 16' 32' 1. SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR SITE SURVEY AND FULL DEMOLITION SCOPE (E) BUILDING TO REMAIN TREE , REMOVED (E) BLDG AND PAVING TO BE REMOVED SITE FEATURE TO BE REMOVED EASEMENT LINE CREEK SETBACK LINE © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 3 : 4 8 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 AD100 DEMO SITE PLAN 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 SITE PLAN - DEMO DN DN UP DN DNDN UP UP C R E E K H I G H W A Y O N R A M P EL CERRO BLVD A L I S A L C T E L P I N T A D O R D DRAINAGE EASEMENT (5804 O.R. 536) P L 5 ' - 7 " P R O P E R T Y L I N E 5 6 ' - 5 3 /4 " EGBERT BETTY A TRE 200-040-014 ZHANG CHENYUE 196-171-014 SO KENG-CHENG & CHRISTY F TRE 196-171-015 EGBERT BETTY A TRE 200-040-014 LAURENCE PETER C & ANNE E 200-040-015 NISHIKAWA JOHN T & MARIA B TRE 200-040-010 OSWALD PATRICK O & ELISE M 200-040-011 MOSE DAREK 200-040-019 425 EL PINTADO 200-040-012 425 EL PINTADO 200-040-012 PROPERTY LINE 241' - 1 3/4" 25' - 0 1/4"60' - 3" 31 ' - 9 1 / 2 " 67 ' - 7 3 / 4 " 75 ' - 3 1 / 4 " PR O P E R T Y L I N E 13 8 ' - 6 " 2 5 ' - 0 " 97' - 8 1/4" 2 5 ' - 0 " 2 0 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " 33 ' - 3 1 / 4 " PR O P E R T Y L I N E 14 7 ' - 9 " PROPERTY LINE 212' - 0 1/4" 2 0 ' - 0 " PROPERTY LINE 222' - 0 1/4" P R O P E R T Y L I N E 1 3 3 ' - 9 " P R O P E R T Y L I N E 2 8 8 ' - 1 1 3 / 4 " 96' - 11 1/4" 2 9 ' - 1 1 1 /2 " 1 0 4 ' - 5 1 /2 " 1 4 2 ' - 8 1 /2 " 112' - 9 3/4" P R O P E R T Y L I N E 3 9 ' - 3 1 /4 " P R O P E R T Y L I N E 1 6 3 ' - 1 0 1 /4 " SHEET NOTES LEGEND 0'15' 30' 60' 1. .... FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION (SEE SITE PLANS) FIRE HYDRANT (SEE SITE PLANS) Y D H D C F (E) BLDG TO REMAIN (E), AND PROPOSED TREE PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE EASEMENT LINE CREEK SETBACK LINE LEVEL 3 ROOF DECK LEVEL 4 ROOF DECK BUILDING ROOF © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 3 : 5 2 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 AS100 CONTEXT PLAN 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1" = 20'-0"1 CONTEXT PLAN UP UP EL CERRO BLVD E L P I N T A D O R OA D DRAINAGE EASEMENT (5804 O.R. 536) CREEK SETBACK BRIDGE 25 ' - 3 " 14 4 ' - 6 " 70 ' - 0 " 22 ' - 0 " 211' - 3 1/2"30' - 1 1/2" PARKING GARAGE ENTRYMAIN ENTRY SEE LEVEL 1 SITE PLAN FOR SITE STAIRS EGBERT BETTY A TRE 200-040-014 ZHANG CHENYUE 196-171-014 EGBERT BETTY A TRE 200-040-014 LAURENCE PETER C & ANNE E 200-040-015 BELOW GRADE 384' - 0" 383' - 0" 384' - 0" 383' - 6" 382' - 8" 381' - 11" 385' - 4" 388' - 0" 386' - 8" 1 " / 1 2 " 1 " / 1 2 " 4 .8 2 % 4 .9 4 % 4 .6 9 % 2.7 3 % 1 .8 2 % 4 .0 4 % 7 . 3 9 % 385' - 6" 386' - 6" 380' - 0" EASEMENT (7969 O.R. 23) 10' - 0" WIDE SEWER 379' - 8" 382' - 0" 378' - 0" 381' - 0" 382' - 0" 25 ' - 3 " 16 0 ' - 1 0 1 / 4 " 40' - 8 3/4"57' - 3"93' - 1"21' - 0" 232' - 0"30' - 1 1/2" 380' - 0" 1 0 3 ' - 1 1 3 / 4 " 9 .5 0 % 381' - 6" 1 4 6 ' - 1 0 " 1 7 2 ' - 3 " Y DH 379' - 6" 379' - 6" PLAN-CUT THROUGH HILLSIDE, SEE NEXT SHEET FOR REST OF SITE SHEET NOTES LEGEND 0'8'16' 32' 1. DUE TO THE HILLY SITE, THE SITE PLAN IS SHOWN ACROSS TWO DRAWINGS SO THAT ALL AT GRADE ENTRANCES AND SITE PATHS CAN BE SHOWN. SEE SECTIONS FOR MORE INFORMATION. (E) BUILDING FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION (E), AND PROPOSED TREE FIRE HYDRANT Y D H D C F PATH OF TRAVEL PROPOSED BLDG FOOTPRINT PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE EASEMENT LINE CREEK SETBACK LINE 16' - 0" EARTH (BELOW GRADE AT THIS LEVEL) © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 4 : 3 4 : 1 3 P M A u t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 AS101 PROPOSED SITE PLAN AT BASEMENT LEVEL 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED SITE PLAN AT BASEMENT LEVEL DN DN UP DN DNDN UP EL CERRO BLVD E L P I N T A D O R OA D EL CERRO BLVD E L P I N T A D O R OA D DRAINAGE EASEMENT (5804 O.R. 536) CREEK SETBACK BRIDGE SEE BASEMENT LEVEL SITE PLAN FOR ENTRY BELOW SEE BASEMENT LEVEL SITE PLAN FOR ENTRY BELOW SEE BASEMENT LEVEL SITE PLAN FOR GARAGE ENTRY BELOW BLDG COURTYARD ACCESS BLDG COURTYARD ACCESS EGRESS DOOR EGBERT BETTY A TRE 200-040-014 ZHANG CHENYUE 196-171-014 EGBERT BETTY A TRE 200-040-014 LAURENCE PETER C & ANNE E 200-040-015 39' - 8 3/4"33' - 3"24' - 0"95' - 1"20' - 0" 247' - 10"26' - 6" 22 ' - 0 1 / 4 " 69 ' - 1 1 1 / 2 " Y DH EASEMENT (7969 O.R. 23) 10' - 0" WIDE SEWER 393' - 0" 393' - 0" 383' - 9" 393' - 0" 379' - 6" 379' - 6" 393' - 0" 33 ' - 1 1 / 2 " 7 1 ' - 0 " 146' - 10" 1 7 1 ' - 3 " 24 ' - 3 " 74 ' - 1 3 / 4 " 88 ' - 8 1 / 2 " 24 ' - 3 " 72 ' - 5 " 71 ' - 1 " EGRESS DOOR EGRESS DOOR 9 .5 0 % 379' - 6" 393' - 0" SHEET NOTES LEGEND 0'8' 16' 32' 1. DUE TO THE HILLY SITE, THE SITE PLAN IS SHOWN ACROSS TWO DRAWINGS SO THAT ALL AT GRADE ENTRANCES AND SITE PATHS CAN BE SHOWN. SEE SECTIONS FOR MORE INFORMATION. (E) BUILDING FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION (E), AND PROPOSED TREE FIRE HYDRANT Y D H D C F PATH OF TRAVEL PROPOSED BLDG FOOTPRINT PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE EASEMENT LINE CREEK SETBACK LINE 16' - 0" EARTH (BELOW GRADE AT THIS LEVEL) © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 4 : 3 9 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 AS102 PROPOSED SITE PLAN AT LEVEL 1 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED SITE PLAN AT LEVEL 1 UP UP UP SHEET NOTES LEGEND 0'8' 16' 32' 1. DUE TO THE HILLY SITE, THE SITE PLAN IS SHOWN ACROSS TWO DRAWINGS SO THAT ALL AT GRADE ENTRANCES AND SITE PATHS CAN BE SHOWN. SEE SECTIONS FOR MORE INFORMATION. 2. SIGNAGE SHALL BE POSTED AT THE DROP OFF ZONE TO INDICATE THAT IT IS NOT A PERMANENT PARKING AREA TO AVOID CONFLICT WITH EMERGENCY VEHICLES. 3. FIRE TRUCK PATH OF TRAVEL: A. AT HYD, ROAD SHALL BE 26' WIDE -CFC D103.1 B. 150' MAX BEFORE REQUIRING TURNING CIRCLE -CFC D103.4 C. WIDTH SHALL BE 20' MIN -103.4 D. GRADES SHALL NOT BE STEEPER THAN 10% -CFC D103.2 4. AT ARIEL APPARATUS ACCESS LOCATIONS TRUCK MUST BE LOCATED 15'-35' FROM BUILDING (E) BUILDING FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION FIRE HYDRANT Y D H D C F PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE EASEMENT LINE CREEK SETBACK LINE AGREEMENTS WITH FIRE DEPT A. "ARIEL APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS" ARE TYPICAL REQUIRED TO BE 26' PER CFC APPENDIX D TO ALLOW EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO PASS THE APPARATUS. PER SRVFD MEETING, ARIEL ACCESS ROADS MAY BE 20' WIDE ON THIS PROJECT SINCE PASSING WILL BE UNLIKELY. B. PER CFC 503.1.1 EXCEPTION 1, SRVFD HAS DIRECTED US TO INCREASED HOSE LAY DISTANCE FROM 150' TO 200'. C. PER PREAPP MEETING SRVFD HAS AGREED THAT A ROOF HATCH IS AN ACCEPTABLE METHOD TO ACCESS THE ROOF WHERE STAIRS ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ROOF ACCESS. ARCHITECT HAS AGREED TO PROVIDE AN ENLARGED ROOF HATCH WHICH WILL BE ACCESSED VIA STAIRS, NOT LADDER. THESE STAIRS SHALL NOT BE ALTERNATING TREAD OR SHIP'S LADDER. THESE STAIRS WILL HAVE RISERS TALLER THAN THE TYPICAL 7" MAX PER CBC TO AVOID HEAD HEIGHT ISSUES UNDER THE HATCH. D. TURNING RADIUS OF THE ACCESS AISLE AT TYPICAL INSIDE CORNERS CAN BE 25' E. TURNING RADIUS AT HAMMER HEAD IS 32' PER SRVFD STANDARD. F. PROJECT MAY USE THE SRVFD STANDARD HAMMER HEAD WHICH IS SMALLER THAN THE CFC VARIANT. CODE REQUIRED STANDPIPES ROOF ACCESS STAIRS 200' MAX HOSE LAY (SHOWN ON LEVEL 1) DIM BELOW GRADE DUE TO SITE SLOPE DIM DIM SRVFD TURN AROUND, 100' HAMMER HEAD EL CERRO BLVD E L P I N T A D O R OA D DRAINAGE EASEMENT (5804 O.R. 536) CREEK SETBACK PARKING GARAGE ENTRYMAIN ENTRY EGBERT BETTY A TRE 200-040-014 ZHANG CHENYUE 196-171-014 EGBERT BETTY A TRE 200-040-014 LAURENCE PETER C & ANNE E 200-040-015 BELOW GRADE R 1 0 0 ' - 0 " PER CFC 507.1.1 BUILDING'S EQUIPED WITH A STANDPIPE SYSTEM SHALL HAVE AN FDC WITHIN 100' OF THE FIRE HYDRUANT Y DH 40 ' M I N F R O M B U I L D I N G P E R N F P A 7 . 2 . 3 73 ' - 9 1 / 4 " F I R E A I S L E20' - 0 " 4. 7 6 % ROOF ACCESS P R E D E S T I A N E G R E S S P R E D E S T I A N E G R E S S E M E R G E N C Y V E H I C L E D C F 379' - 6" 9 .5 0 % 379' - 6" BLDG ABOVE FIRE AISLE, 13'-6" VERTICAL CLR PROVIDED. • L1 ELV IS 393' • -1'-6" FLOOR ASSEMBLY • -13'-6" CLR • AISLE ELV TO BE 378' MAX BLDG ABOVE FIRE AISLE, 13'-6" VERTICAL CLR PROVIDED. • L1 ELV IS 393' • -1'-6" FLOOR ASSEMBLY • -13'-6" CLR • AISLE ELV TO BE 378' MAX ROOF ACCESS GATE TO PREVENT PEDESTRIAN VEHICLES FROM ENTERING THE FIRE LANE 1 AS105 2 AS105 3 AS105 380' - 0" 380' - 0" 377' - 9" 8.32% 11 . 7 6 % 379' - 6" © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 4 : 5 7 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 AS103 FIRE ACCESS AT BASEMENT LEVEL 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED FIRE ACCESS PLAN AT BASEMENT UP UP EL CERRO BLVD E L P I N T A D O R OA D EL CERRO BLVD E L P I N T A D O R OA D DRAINAGE EASEMENT (5804 O.R. 536) CREEK SETBACK SEE BASEMENT LEVEL SITE PLAN FOR ENTRY BELOW BLDG COURTYARD ACCESS BLDG COURTYARD ACCESS EGBERT BETTY A TRE 200-040-014 ZHANG CHENYUE 196-171-014 EGBERT BETTY A TRE 200-040-014 LAURENCE PETER C & ANNE E 200-040-015 2 0 ' - 0 " ROOF ACCESS 1 4 0 ' - 0 " 30' - 0" 70' - 0" 164' - 0" 36 ' - 0 " 90 ' - 0 " 3 9 ' - 0 " Y DH 60' - 0" 40 ' - 0 " 50' - 0"50' - 0" 20 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " 20' - 0" 52 ' - 0 " R 3 2 ' - 0 "R 3 2 ' - 0 " R 2 5 ' - 0 " 50' - 0"50' - 0" 20 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " 20' - 0" 52 ' - 0 " R 3 2 ' - 0 "R 3 2 ' - 0 " 1 1 0 ' - 0 " 32' - 0"25' - 0" 46' - 0" 90 ' - 0 " 8 5 ' - 0 " 1 AS105 ST 2 ST 1 2 AS105 3 AS105 ST 3 ST 4 P R E D E S T I A N E G R E S S P R E D E S T I A N E G R E S S E M E R G E N C Y V E H I C L E BLDG ABOVE FIRE AISLE, 13'-6" VERTICAL CLR PROVIDED. • L1 ELV IS 393' • -1'-6" FLOOR ASSEMBLY • -13'-6" CLR • AISLE ELV TO BE 378' MAX GATE TO PREVENT PEDESTRIAN VEHICLES FROM ENTERING THE FIRE LANE 379' - 6" 9 .5 0 % 379' - 6" 393' - 0" SHEET NOTES LEGEND 0'8' 16' 32' 1. DUE TO THE HILLY SITE, THE SITE PLAN IS SHOWN ACROSS TWO DRAWINGS SO THAT ALL AT GRADE ENTRANCES AND SITE PATHS CAN BE SHOWN. SEE SECTIONS FOR MORE INFORMATION. 2. SIGNAGE SHALL BE POSTED AT THE DROP OFF ZONE TO INDICATE THAT IT IS NOT A PERMANENT PARKING AREA TO AVOID CONFLICT WITH EMERGENCY VEHICLES. 3. FIRE TRUCK PATH OF TRAVEL: A. AT HYD, ROAD SHALL BE 26' WIDE -CFC D103.1 B. 150' MAX BEFORE REQUIRING TURNING CIRCLE -CFC D103.4 C. WIDTH SHALL BE 20' MIN -103.4 D. GRADES SHALL NOT BE STEEPER THAN 10% -CFC D103.2 4. AT ARIEL APPARATUS ACCESS LOCATIONS TRUCK MUST BE LOCATED 15'-35' FROM BUILDING (E) BUILDING FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION FIRE HYDRANT Y D H D C F PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE EASEMENT LINE CREEK SETBACK LINE AGREEMENTS WITH FIRE DEPT A. "ARIEL APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS" ARE TYPICAL REQUIRED TO BE 26' PER CFC APPENDIX D TO ALLOW EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO PASS THE APPARATUS. PER SRVFD MEETING, ARIEL ACCESS ROADS MAY BE 20' WIDE ON THIS PROJECT SINCE PASSING WILL BE UNLIKELY. B. PER CFC 503.1.1 EXCEPTION 1, SRVFD HAS DIRECTED US TO INCREASED HOSE LAY DISTANCE FROM 150' TO 200'. C. PER PREAPP MEETING SRVFD HAS AGREED THAT A ROOF HATCH IS AN ACCEPTABLE METHOD TO ACCESS THE ROOF WHERE STAIRS ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ROOF ACCESS. ARCHITECT HAS AGREED TO PROVIDE AN ENLARGED ROOF HATCH WHICH WILL BE ACCESSED VIA STAIRS, NOT LADDER. THESE STAIRS SHALL NOT BE ALTERNATING TREAD OR SHIP'S LADDER. THESE STAIRS WILL HAVE RISERS TALLER THAN THE TYPICAL 7" MAX PER CBC TO AVOID HEAD HEIGHT ISSUES UNDER THE HATCH. D. TURNING RADIUS OF THE ACCESS AISLE AT TYPICAL INSIDE CORNERS CAN BE 25' E. TURNING RADIUS AT HAMMER HEAD IS 32' PER SRVFD STANDARD. F. PROJECT MAY USE THE SRVFD STANDARD HAMMER HEAD WHICH IS SMALLER THAN THE CFC VARIANT. CODE REQUIRED STANDPIPES ROOF ACCESS STAIRS 200' MAX HOSE LAY (SHOWN ON LEVEL 1) DIM BELOW GRADE DUE TO SITE SLOPE DIM DIM SRVFD TURN AROUND, 100' HAMMER HEAD © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 5 : 3 1 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 AS104 FIRE ACCESS AT LEVEL 1 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED FIRE ACCESS PLAN AT LEVEL 1 ? LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" 15' - 0" 7 5 M A X 6 4 .0 0 ° ACCESS TO L4 BY LADDER OR STAIR 1 ACCESS TO PENTHOUSE ROOF BY LADDER AND WALK ON COVERED WALKWAY OR BY STAIR 2 LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" 15' - 0" 7 5 M A X 6 3 .0 0 ° ACCESS TO L4 BY LADDER OR BY STAIR 3 LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" ACCESS TO PENTHOUSE ROOF BY LADDER OR BY STAIR 4 15' - 0" 7 5 M A X 6 4 .0 0 ° © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 5 : 3 2 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 AS105 FIRE ACCESS SECTIONS 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/8" = 1'-0"1 ARIEL ACCESS AT EAST WING 1/8" = 1'-0"2 ARIEL ACCESS AT WEST WING - L4 1/8" = 1'-0"3 ARIEL ACCESS AT WEST WING - PENTHOUSE UP ST 2 ST 3 ST 1 ST 4 P R E D E S T I A N E G R E S S P R E D E S T I A N E G R E S S E M E R G E N C Y V E H I C L E AT BRIDGE OCCUPANTS ARE KEPT SEPERATED FROM DRIVE SURFACE STAIR 1 EXITS OUT OF THE LOBBY AT THE BASEMENT LEVEL 393' - 0" 393' - 0" 393' - 0" 393' - 0" GATE TO PREVENT PEDESTRIAN VEHICLES FROM ENTERING THE FIRE LANE © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 6 : 0 4 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 AS106 CONCEPTUAL EGRESS PLAN 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 CONCEPTUAL EGRESS PATHS 71 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 SA SB A B C D F G I J 22 ' - 0 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 2 2 ' - 0 " 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 31' - 1 1/2" 32 ' - 6 " 4 3 ' - 0 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 3 8 ' - 0 " S1 PACKAGE BIKE ST 3 -11' - 0" -15' - 0" 4.84% 1BR 3BR AMENITY BIKE BOH CIRCULATION TRASH 2' - 0 " 2' - 0 " 10' - 1 1/2" 22' - 2" 29' - 0" 30' - 0 " 29' - 0" 29' - 10" S3 S4 S5 S6 1' - 0" SC 3 0 ' - 0 " 2 1 ' - 0 " 2 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 3 9 ' - 9 " SD SE ECR -12' - 0" A300 3 A3002 A300 4 A300 1 A301 1 A3012 A3013 A302 1 A302 2 A302 3 A303 1 A3032 A304 1 1 A310 2 A310 3 A310 4 A310 1 A311 3 A311 -13' - 0" 4 A311 2 A311 NEW CREEK BRIDGE 4 E H 2 3 65 S2 SF 22' - 2" 26' - 0" 40' - 0" 14' - 0" 30' - 0" 20' - 2" 2 4 ' - 0" 24' - 0"24' - 0" MPOE 3BR-A3 1BR-A 3BR-C PET WASH 2 4 ' - 0 " TRASH BIKE TRASH ST 4 ELEC CIRC BOH TBD 2 4 ' - 0" ST 1 8 . 3 3 % 8.33% UP TO L1 COURTYARD GARAGE GATE TO PREVENT PEDESTRIAN VEHICLES FROM ENTERING THE FIRE LANE LOBBY MAIL AREA PLAN-CUT THROUGH HILLSIDE, SEE NEXT SHEET FOR REST OF SITE 0'8'16' 32' LEGEND PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE CREEK SETBACK LINE © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 4 : 3 1 : 4 3 P M A u t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A100 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL B 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL B 3BR-A3 CIRC 71 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 SA SB A B C D F G I J S1 20 ' - 0 " 2 2 ' - 0 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 2 2 ' - 0 " 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 31' - 1 1/2" 22' - 2" 26' - 0" 40' - 0" 14' - 0" 30' - 0" 20' - 2" 32 ' - 6 " 1 3 ' - 0 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 8 ' - 0 " 1BR 2BR 3BR AMENITY BOH CIRCULATION TRASH S3 S4 S5 S6 9 0.0 0° SC SD SE FIT ZONE PRIVATE A300 3 A3002 A300 4 A300 1 A301 1 A3012 A3013 A302 1 A302 2 A302 3 A303 1 A3032 A304 1 A304 2 1 A310 2 A310 3 A310 4 A310 1 A311 3 A311 4 A311 22' - 2" 29' - 0" 30' - 0 " 29' - 0" 29' - 10" 3 0 ' - 0 " 2 1 ' - 0 " 2 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 3 9 ' - 9 " 2 A311 1BR-C 3BR-B 1BR-A 2BR-A1 2BR-A11BR-A 2BR-A2 2BR-A1 2BR-A2 2BR-A1 2BR-B 3BR-A2 NEW CREEK BRIDGE 393' - 0" 393' - 0" SOUTH COURTYARD NORTH COURTYARD 3BR-A1 3BR-A1 393' - 0" 19' - 8" 4 E H 2 3 65 S2 SF ST 2 ST 1 OUTDOOR FITNESS AREA 393' - 0" GATE TO PREVENT PEDESTRIAN VEHICLES FROM ENTERING THE FIRE LANE FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS AISLE, SEE AS103 / AS104 FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS AISLE, SEE AS103 / AS104 1BR-B 2BR-A3 ST 4 1BR-D 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 ST 3 1BR-A 3BR-C 1BR-A 3BR-A3 3BR-A4 TR STOR TRASH RR 0'8' 16' 32' LEGEND PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE CREEK SETBACK LINE © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 6 : 5 5 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A101 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN 1 71 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 SA SB A B C D F G I J S1 1BR 2BR 3BR AMENITY BOH CIRCULATION TRASH 22 ' - 0 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 2 2 ' - 0 " 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 31' - 1 1/2" 152' - 4" 32 ' - 6 " 4 3 ' - 0 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 3 8 ' - 0 " S3 S4 S5 S6 SC SD SE RR BRIDGE LOUNGE A300 3 A3002 A300 4 A300 1 1 A310 2 A310 3 A310 4 A310 1 A311 3 A311 4 A311 51' - 2" 30' - 0" 2 9 ' - 0" 29' - 10" 2 1 ' - 0 " 2 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 3 9 ' - 9 " 2 A311 2BR-A3 3BR-A1 3BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 1BR-D 3BR-B 1BR-C 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 4 E H 2 3 65 S2 SF 1BR-B 3BR-A2 2BR-B 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-A2 2BR-A22BR-A1 2BR-A1 1BR-A 1BR-A BREAKOUT YOGA ST 1 ST 2 ST 3 ST 4 TRASH TR STOR 3BR-C 1BR-A 1BR-A 3BR-A4 3BR-A3 0'8' 16' 32' LEGEND PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE CREEK SETBACK LINE © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 6 : 5 9 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A102 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 2 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN 71 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 SA SB A B C D F G I J S1 1BR 2BR 3BR AMENITY OUTDOOR DECK BOH CIRCULATION TRASH 22 ' - 0 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 2 2 ' - 0 " 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 31' - 1 1/2" 32 ' - 6 " 4 3 ' - 0 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 3 8 ' - 0 " TRASH S3 S4 S5 S6 SC SD SE EVENT SPACE A300 3 A3002 A300 4 A300 1 1 A310 2 A310 3 A310 4 A310 1 A311 3 A311 4 A311 5 1 ' - 2" 3 0 ' - 0" 29' - 0" 2 9 ' - 1 0" 2 1 ' - 0 " 2 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 3 9 ' - 9 " 2 A311 2BR-A3 3BR-A1 3BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 1BR-D 3BR-B 1BR-PH2 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 4 E H 2 3 65 S2 SF 1BR-B RR ST 4 ST 3 TR STOR ART STUDIO AMENITY ST 1 1BR-PH1 3BR-PH1 1BR-A 1BR-A 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-A2 2BR-A2 2BR-A1 2BR-A1 2BR-B 3BR-A2 ST 2 0'8' 16' 32' LEGEND PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE CREEK SETBACK LINE © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 7 : 0 2 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A103 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 3 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN 71 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 SA SB A B C D F G I J S1 1BR 2BR 3BR CIRCULATION 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 31' - 1 1/2" 152' - 4" 32 ' - 6 " 4 3 ' - 0 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 3 8 ' - 0 " 22 ' - 0 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 2 2 ' - 0 " S3 S4 S5 S6 SC SD SE A300 3 A3002 A300 4 A300 1 A301 1 A3012 A3013 A302 1 A302 2 A302 3 A303 1 A3032 A304 1 A304 2 1 A310 2 A310 3 A310 4 A310 1 A311 3 A311 4 A311 5 1 ' - 2 " 3 0 ' - 0 " 2 9 ' - 0 " 2 9 ' - 1 0" 2 1 ' - 0 " 2 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 3 9 ' - 9 " 2 A311 ROOF ACCESS STAIR TO L4 ST 1 1832 SF 3BR-PHB N 2BR-A5 2BR-A2 2BR-A22BR-A5 1BR-D 4 E H 2 3 65 S2 SF NON- OCCUPIED ROOF ST 3 ST 4 BREEZEWAY ROOF ACCESS STAIR TO L4 TRELLIS AND BREEZEWAY ROOF BELOW 2038 SF 3BR - PHA N 1672 SF 3BR-PH E 0'8' 16' 32' LEGEND PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE CREEK SETBACK LINE © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 7 : 0 5 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A104 FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 4 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 LEVEL 4 & LOW ROOF PLAN A300 3 A3002 A300 4 A300 1 1 A310 2 A310 3 A310 4 A310 1 A311 3 A311 4 A311 2 A311 ROOF ACCESS HATCH BREEZEWAY ROOF PENTHOUSE ROOF PENTHOUSE ROOF BREEZEWAY ROOF ROOF ACCESS HATCH MECH SCREEN AREA 0'8' 16' 32' LEGEND PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE CREEK SETBACK LINE © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 7 : 0 7 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A105 UPPER ROOF PLAN 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 HIGH ROOF PLAN LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" 7 LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 5 ' - 0 " MA X B L D G H E I G H T 52 ' - 9 " GREEN WALL PANELS, DARK GREEN W/ PLANTING 423 65 LEVEL B1 UNITS 382' -0" CIP CONCRETE, GREY RAILING, PERF MTL PANEL, DARK GREY FIBER CEMENT PANELS, DARK WARM-GRAY WOOD COMPOSITE PANELS, LIGHT WD COLOR MECH ROOF SCREEN, MT PANEL, LIGHT GREY PENTHOUS LEVEL, SET BACK FROM MAIN FACADE, SEE SECTIONS PENTHOUS LEVEL, SET BACK FROM MAIN FACADE, SEE SECTIONS PENTHOUS LEVEL, SET BACK FROM MAIN FACADE, SEE SECTIONS PENTHOUSE SET BACK FROM MAIN VOLUME 17' - 8 1/2" LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" A B C D F G I J MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" MA X B L D G H E I G H T 52 ' - 9 " 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " ALU WINDOWS, DARK-BRONZE ANNODIZED E H LEVEL B1 UNITS 382' -0" 11 ' - 0 " 11 ' - 0 " 4' - 0 " CIP CONCRETE, GREY RAILING, PERF MTL PANEL, DARK GREY FIBER CEMENT PANELS, DARK WARM-GRAY WOOD COMPOSITE PANELS, LIGHT WD COLOR TRELLIS, MT FRAME AND LOUVERS, DARK GREY PENTHOUS LEVEL, SET BACK FROM MAIN FACADE, SEE SECTIONS GREEN WALL PANELS, DARK GREEN W/ PLANTING BLDG FACADE IN BACKGROUND 20' - 2" PENTHOUSE SET BACK FROM MAIN VOLUME LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" MA X B L D G H E I G H T 52 ' - 9 " 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " FIBER CEMENT PANELS, DARK WARM-GRAY LEVEL B1 UNITS 382' -0" 11 ' - 0 " 11 ' - 0 " 4' - 0 " WOOD COMPOSITE PANELS, LIGHT WD COLOR RAILING, PERF MTL PANEL, DARK GREY ALU WINDOWS, DARK-BRONZE ANNODIZED CIP CONCRETE, GREY PENTHOUSE SET BACK FROM MAIN VOLUME 13' - 6" LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" 7 LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" 189101112131415 MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" MA X B L D G H E I G H T 52 ' - 9 " 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " CIP CONCRETE, GREY 4 2365 LEVEL B1 UNITS 382' -0" 4' - 0 " 11 ' - 0 " ALU WINDOWS, DARK-BRONZE ANNODIZED FIBER CEMENT PANELS, DARK WARM-GRAY RAILING, PERF MTL PANEL, DARK GREY 17' - 8" PENTHOUSE SET BACK FROM MAIN VOLUME OFF-WHITE FIBER CEMENT PANELS LEGEND COMPOSITE WOOD SIDING 0'8' 16' 32' BOARD FORM CONCRETE DARK GREY PERFORATED MTL BALCONY RAILING GREEN SCREEN WALL PANELS W/ FOLIAGE PER LANDSCAPE MECHANICAL SCREEN WALL MTL PANEL © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 7 : 5 2 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A300 BUILDING ELEVATIONS - OVERALL 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"3 SOUTH ELEVATION 1/16" = 1'-0"2 EAST ELEVATION 1/16" = 1'-0"4 WEST ELEVATION 1/16" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" BU I L D I N G H E I G H T 52 ' - 9 " 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 15 ' - 0 " BASEMENT / GARAGE PENTHOUSE ROOF DECK 4' - 0 " LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 5 ' - 0 " BL D G H E I G H T 41 ' - 9 " BASEMENT / GARAGE NORTH COURTYARD SOUTH COURTYARD AMENITY BRIDGE BU I L D I N G H E I G H T 52 ' - 9 " PENTHOUSE ROOF DECK LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " BL D G H E I G H T 52 ' - 9 " 15 ' - 0 " BASEMENT / GARAGE PENTHOUSE ROOF DECK LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 5 ' - 0 " BL D G H E I G H T 52 ' - 9 " BASEMENT / GARAGE PENTHOUSE ROOF DECK © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 4 : 3 9 : 5 8 P M A u t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A310 BUILDING SECTIONS, NORTH - SOUTH 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 NORTH - SOUTH SECTION 1 1/16" = 1'-0"2 NORTH - SOUTH SECTION 2 1/16" = 1'-0"3 NORTH - SOUTH SECTION 3 1/16" = 1'-0"4 NORTH - SOUTH SECTION 4 LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 5 ' - 0 " BU I L D I N G H E I G H T 41 ' - 9 " LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 5 ' - 0 " BU I L D I N G H E I G H T 52 ' - 9 " BASEMENT / GARAGEBASEMENT / GARAGE COURTYARD AMENITY BRIDGE OPEN BRIDGE-TOP LOUNGE LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 5 ' - 0 " BU I L D I N G H E I G H T 52 ' - 9 " BASEMENT / GARAGE LEVEL B1 378' -0" LEVEL 1 393' -0" LEVEL 2 404' -0" LEVEL 3 415' -0" AVG GRADE 384' -3" PENTHOUSE ROOF LEVEL 437' -0" MAIN ROOF / LEVEL 4 426' -0" 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 0 " 1 5 ' - 0 " BU I L D I N G H E I G H T 52 ' - 9 " © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 7 : 5 7 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A311 BUILDING SECTIONS, EAST-WEST 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/16" = 1'-0"1 EAST-WEST SECTION 1 1/16" = 1'-0"3 EAST-WEST SECTION 3 1/16" = 1'-0"4 EAST-WEST SECTION 4 1/16" = 1'-0"2 EAST-WEST SECTION 2 LIVING/ DINING W/D WIC COATS PANTRY BALCONY LINEN KIT UNIT AREA= 833 SF 6' - 3 " 12' - 0" 27 ' - 2 " 10 ' - 9 " 12' - 7 1/8"16' - 2 1/2" LIVING/ DINING PANTRY W/D CLOSET KIT UNIT AREA= 996 SF 33 ' - 1 0 " 20' - 1 5/8" 10' - 6 3/4" 11 ' - 1 7 / 1 6 " BALCONY 8' - 8" 11 ' - 9 " WIC W/D LINEN KIT LIVING/ DINING PANTRY BALCONY 6' - 1 " 22' - 2 1/4" 26 ' - 8 " 32 ' - 0 " 15 ' - 7 " 13' - 2 3/4" 22' - 3 197/256" UNIT AREA = 969 SF UNIT AREA= 791 SF KIT LIVING/ DINING W/D WIC PANTRY BALCONY 12' - 8 3/8"15' - 2 3/8" 6' - 1 " 12' - 0" 27 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 31 ' - 1 1 8 7 / 2 5 6 " 10 ' - 1 0 " 1/4" = 1'-0"1 UNIT PLAN 1BR-A 1/4" = 1'-0"2 UNIT PLAN 1BR-B 1/4" = 1'-0"3 UNIT PLAN 1BR-PH2 © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 7 : 5 8 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A500 TYP UNIT PLANS 1BR 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/4" = 1'-0"4 UNIT PLAN 1BR-D LIVING/ DINING DEN W/D WIC BALCONY KIT PRIMARY BR UNIT AREA= 1,222 SF 20' - 0" 6' - 3 5 / 6 4 " 10' - 10 1/2" 12 ' - 1 0 " 19' - 2" 12 ' - 8 3 / 8 " 11' - 2 7/8" KI T WI C LIVING/ DINING UNIT AREA= 1,347 SF PRIMARY BR BALCONY DEN W/D 34 ' - 1 1 / 4 " 37 ' - 7 3 / 4 " 19' - 0"12' - 6 33/256"14 ' - 0 " 10' - 11 31/256" 12 ' - 8 " 18' - 4 1/4" 6' - 1 3 / 4 " LIVING/ DINING BALCONY W/D WIC DEN PRIMARY BR KIT UNIT AREA= 1,251 SF 18' - 4 1/4" 6' - 1 1 / 4 " 32 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 10' - 11 31/256" 12 ' - 8 " 19' - 0"12' - 6 33/256" 14 ' - 0 " 34 ' - 0 1 / 2 " W/D PRIMARY BR BALCONY LIVING/ DINING KIT WIC 31 ' - 1 1 3 / 4 " 19 ' - 0 5 / 8 " 13 ' - 2 1 0 5 / 1 2 8 " 13' - 2 107/256" 13' - 1 15/256" 11 ' - 1 1 1 / 1 6 " UNIT AREA= 1,292 SF 1/4" = 1'-0"2 UNIT PLAN 2BR-A2 1/4" = 1'-0"1 UNIT PLAN 2BR-A1 © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 8 : 0 1 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A502 TYP UNIT PLANS 2BR 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/4" = 1'-0"3 UNIT PLAN 2BR-A3 1/4" = 1'-0"4 UNIT PLAN 2BR-B WIC PANTRY W/D BALCONY LIVING/ DINING WIC PRIMARY BR POWDER RM KIT UNIT AREA= 1,557 SF 9' - 2 1/2" 13 ' - 5 1 / 2 " 12' - 0 3/8" 13 ' - 2 3 / 8 " 29 ' - 7 " 22 ' - 0 " 1 4 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 9' - 1 0 1 / 8 " 9' - 1 0 " 12' - 5" 12' - 5" 14 ' - 7 3 / 8 " LINEN 24' - 0" 9' - 10" PANTRY WIC W/D BALCONY LINEN LIVING/ DINING WIC PRIMARY BR POWDER RM KIT UNIT AREA= 1,520 SF 12 ' - 1 1 3 / 4 " 2 2 ' - 0 " 12 ' - 2 3 / 4 " 9' - 4 35/128" 13 ' - 0 7 / 8 " 10 ' - 0 " 12' - 6" 12' - 6" 10 ' - 0 " 13 ' - 3 " 11' - 11 7/16" 32' - 0" 9' - 11 1/2" PANTRY WIC W/D LINEN LIVING/ DINING WIC PRIMARY BR POWDER RM KIT UNIT AREA= 1,545 SF 13 ' - 6 7 / 8 " 10 ' - 5 5 / 8 " 12' - 8 1/4" 12' - 8 1/4" 10 ' - 0 1 / 8 " 12 ' - 3 3 / 4 " 12' - 3 1/2" 22 ' - 0 " 1 3 ' - 6 " 9' - 1 45/64" 12 ' - 9 " 9' - 10"24' - 0" BALCONY PANTRY WIC W/D LIVING/ DINING WIC PRIMARY BR POWDER RM KIT UNIT AREA= 1,539 SF BALCONY 10 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 12' - 8 1/4" 12' - 8 1/4" 13 ' - 7 " 12' - 3 1/2" 12 ' - 1 1 " 8' - 4" 24' - 0" 13 ' - 6 " 2 2 ' - 0 " 7' - 7" 12 ' - 9 " 1/4" = 1'-0"2 UNIT PLAN 3BR-A2 1/4" = 1'-0"1 UNIT PLAN 3BR-A1 © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 8 : 0 4 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A504 TYP UNIT PLANS 3BR 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/4" = 1'-0"4 UNIT PLAN 3BR-A4 1/4" = 1'-0"3 UNIT PLAN 3BR-A3 PANTRYWIC W/D LINEN LIVING/ DINING WIC PRIMARY BR POWDER RM KIT UNIT AREA= 1,700 SF BALCONY 32 ' - 6 " 8' - 0"26' - 0"17' - 6" 12 ' - 0 " 2 2 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 12' - 4 3/4" 12' - 4 3/4" 10 ' - 1 1 / 2 " 24' - 6 1/4" 11 ' - 0 " 1 1 ' - 2 2 9 / 3 2 " 15 ' - 7 " 11' - 11 207/256" PRIMARY BR WIC KIT LIVING/ DINING BALCONY DEN W/D UNIT AREA= 1,524 SF 10' - 7 3/4" 15 ' - 5 2 2 1 / 2 5 6 " 10' - 11 3/4" 13 ' - 1 2 9 / 2 5 6 " 19' - 2" 12' - 6 1/4" 1 2 ' - 8 1 8 7 / 2 5 6 " 32 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 23' - 6"16' - 8 1/2"14' - 0 3/8" 6' - 2 3 3 / 1 2 8 " © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 8 : 0 6 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A505 TYP UNIT PLANS 3BR 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/4" = 1'-0"2 UNIT PLAN 3BR-C 1/4" = 1'-0"1 UNIT PLAN 3BR-B W/D DEN WIC LIVING/ DINING WET BAR PRIMARY BR KIT PRIVATE TERRACE UNIT AREA= 1,396 SF PANTRY WIC BALCONY LIVING/ DINING KIT UNIT AREA= 1,024 SF W/D LINEN PRIMARY BR PRIVATE TERRACE 1/4" = 1'-0"1 UNIT PLAN 2BR-PH © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 8 : 0 7 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A506 TYP UNIT PLANS PENTHOUSE 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/4" = 1'-0"2 UNIT PLAN 1BR-PH1 POWDER RM W/D WIC LIVING / DINING PRIMARY BR KIT UNIT AREA= 1,766 SF PRIVATE TERRACE PRIVATE TERRACE PRIVATE TERRACE LINEN PANTRY PANTRY WIC LIVING/ DINING KIT UNIT AREA= 1,806 SF W/D LINEN PRIMARY BR DEN 29 ' - 1 1 " 13 ' - 5 1 / 4 " 10' - 1 25/256"9' - 7" 11 ' - 2 3 / 4 " 15' - 6 67/128" 10 ' - 4 " 20' - 2 3/128" 31 ' - 8 1 / 4 " 17 ' - 6 " 7 ' - 1 " 21' - 7 99/128" PRIVATE TERRACE PRIVATE TERRACE PRIVATE TERRACE POWDER RM 1/4" = 1'-0"2 UNIT PLAN 3BR-PH2 © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 8 : 0 8 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A507 TYP UNIT PLANS PENTHOUSE 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/4" = 1'-0"1 UNIT PLAN 3BR-PH1 DEN W/D WIC WIC LIVING/ DINING KIT PRIMARY BR UNIT AREA= 1,777 SF POWDER RM PANTRY © 2020 PROJECT NO: STAMP: SHEET NAME: 1 2 0 S e c o n d S t 2 n d F l o o r S a n F r a n c i s c o, C A 9 4 1 0 5 T e l : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 4 8 F a x : 4 1 5 . 7 7 5 . 8 7 5 2 w w w . F o r m 4 i n c . c o m SHEET NO: PHASE: KEY PLAN: CLIENT: ISSUANCE DATE REVISIONS Δ DELTA DATE ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2 03.13.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.1 05.02.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.2 06.11.2024 ENTITLEMENT SUBMITTAL 2.3 07.18.2024 REVISION 1 10.29.2024 10 / 2 9 / 2 0 2 4 1 2 : 4 8 : 0 9 PM Au t o d e s k D o c s : / / 2 2 . 0 5 6 . 0 0 _ J e f f S t o n e _ 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o H o u s i n g / 4 2 5 E l P i n t a d o _ A R . r v t 425 EL PINTADO RD, DANVILLE, CA 94526 A508 TYP UNIT PLANS PENTHOUSE 425 EL PINTADO SENIOR HOUSING 425 EP Investment, LLC 22.056.00 1/4" = 1'-0"1 UNIT PLAN 3BR-PH3 ATTACHMENT J Stephen & Shelley Margolis 509 El Pintado Rd. From:Tristan Munday To:David Crompton Cc:Severine Munday Subject:Objection to proposed development at 425 El Pintado Road Date:Wednesday, November 6, 2024 5:48:29 PM***CAUTION*** THIS EMAIL WAS NOT SENT FROM DANVILLE STAFFThis email originated from outside of the Town of Danville and was not sent from aTown Staff member! Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize thesender and know the content is safe. Tristan & Severine Munday 11 Ohlson Lane, Danville, CA, 94526 tristanmunday@gmail.com November 6, 2024 David Crompton Chief of Planning Town of Danville 500 La Gonda Way Danville, CA 94526 Subject: Objection to Proposed Development at 425 El Pintado Road Dear Mr. Crompton, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed development at 425 El Pintado Road. While I understand the need for senior housing, this project raises several concerns: 1.Density and Scale: The proposed four-story structure with approximately 100 units is inconsistent with the surrounding neighborhood’s character, which predominantly features lower-density, single-family homes. Such a development will significantly alter the area’s aesthetic and community feel. 2.Traffic and Safety: My major concern is traffic & safety. The junction of El Pintado is already a challenge. At school times, the junction is already impossible to get out of El Pintado onto El Cerro. 100 extra potential cars, with no improvement to the infrastructure will dramatically add to the safety and traffic situation. Also, our street is one without sidewalks, which will add to the safety challenges of 100 extra cars. The Traffic Impact Analysis should be thoroughly reviewed to assess these implications. 3.Environmental Impact: The project’s scale may adversely affect local ecosystems, including potential impacts on native flora and fauna. A comprehensive environmental review is essential to address these concerns. 4.Infrastructure Strain: The addition of 100 units could place undue pressure on existing infrastructure, including water supply, sewage systems, and public services, potentially leading to service degradation for current residents. We would require the project and the planning department to outline the plan for zero impact on current residents across all services. I urge the Planning Commission to reconsider this development proposal, taking into account the potential negative impacts on our community’s character, safety, and environment. At a minimum, we are requesting the above items to be fully outlined on how Danville will provide assurances on traffic, safety & infrastructure. Thank you for considering my concerns. Sincerely, Tristan Munday