Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1 - STAFF REPORT1 - 1 11-09-2020 DUE TO LACK OF QUORUM 1 - 2 1 - 3 1 - 4 1 - 5 1 - 6 1 - 7 1 - 8 1 - 9 EXHIBIT 1 1 - 10 Resolution No. 2020-xx Page 1 of 9 LS 11.9.20 RESOLUTION NO. 2020-xx A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA APPROVING SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2020-04 AS CONDITIONED FOR A NEW MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1801 EAST FOURTH STREET BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: A. Sean Rawson with Waterford Property Company, representing Park Center Santa Ana Associates, L.P (“Applicant”), is requesting approval of Site Plan Review No. 2020-04, as conditioned, to allow the construction of a new mixed-use development consisting of 644 multi-family residential units and 15,130 square feet of commercial space at 1801 East Fourth Street. B. The subject site has a General Plan land use designation of District Center (DC). The site is located within the Professional zoning district and has an overlay zone designation of Metro East Mixed-Use (MEMU) Overlay Zone (OZ-1), Active Urban district, which permits medium- to high-intensity mixed-use residential, commercial, office, and hotel developments subject to approval of a site plan review (SPR) application by the Planning Commission. C. The MEMU Overlay Zone was adopted in 2007 as a result of interest in developing mixed-use residential and commercial projects in the project area. In 2018, the City of Santa Ana expanded the MEMU designation along First Street between Grand Avenue and the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway. The regulating plan, which establishes land uses and development standards, allows a variety of housing and commercial projects, including mixed-use residential communities, live/work units, hotels, and offices. D. A noticed public hearing was scheduled to be heard before the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on October 26, 2020, but at that time there was not a quorum of the Planning Commission therefore, the item was continued by the Chair to the next regular meeting. On November 9, 2020, the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana held the duly noticed public hearing and considered all testimony, written and oral for the project. Resolution No. 2020-xx Page 2 of 9 E. Section 41-595.5 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code (“SAMC”) requires a review by the Planning Commission of all plans within a zoning district classification combined with an OZ suffix where the applicant wants to apply the overlay zone, to ensure the project is in conformity with the overlay zone plan. F. The zoning designation for the subject property is proposed to be Metro East Mixed-Use (MEMU) Overlay Zone (OZ-1) in the Active Urban land use district. G. The Planning Commission determines that the following findings, which must be established in order to grant this Site Plan Review pursuant to SAMC Section 41-595.5, have been established for Site Plan Review No. 2020-04 to allow construction of the proposed project: 1. That the proposed development plan is consistent with and will further the objectives outlined in Section 1.2 for the MEMU overlay district. The development will activate a vacant and underutilized 8-acre site in the MEMU Overlay Zone. The project will create a new mixed-use development within close proximity to office buildings, Cabrillo Park, Mabury Park, and less than two miles from Downtown Santa Ana providing opportunities to live, work, and recreate. Each building will be five-stories of residential units wrapped around a seven-level parking structure. The height of the buildings will blend in with the heights of the nearby office buildings which range from single-story, three-story and eight-story buildings and will create an interface with the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway. The project will be built to California Building Code standards, which include energy and water conservation measures and will improve pedestrian mobility by providing new sidewalks, and parkways along Fourth Street and Parkcourt Place. In addition, the publically accessible linear park will serve as a link to the meandering trail along Mabury Street and to Mabury Park to the north. Each building has a centrally located bike room, and there is a rideshare pick-up/drop-off in the middle of the project site. Additionally, the project is within walking distance of the OCTA route 463 bus stop at Fourth Street and Cabrillo Park Drive. The commercial space has been designed with retail floor heights of 20 feet with storefronts that will be visible from Fourth Street. In addition, the commercial space links directly to an on-site public plaza at the corner of Fourth Street and Cabrillo Park Drive which will include outdoor dining opportunities, decorative hardscape, specimen trees and plantings, umbrellas, seating and lawn games. Resolution No. 2020-xx Page 3 of 9 In addition, the ground floor residential units along Cabrillo Park Drive will have doors and patios with direct access to the street to help activate the street. 2. That the proposed development plan is consistent with the development standards specified in Section 4 of the MEMU overlay district. The project is consistent with the development standards specified in Section 4 of the MEMU Overlay Zone including land use, stories, development site area, building frontages, publically accessible open space, private/common open space, building setbacks, and parking. 3. That the proposed development plan is designed to be compatible with adjacent development in terms of similarity of scale, height, and site configuration and otherwise achieves the objectives of the Design Principles specified in Section 5 of the MEMU overlay district. The project is consistent with the development standards specified in Section 5 of the MEMU Overlay Zone. The buildings are designed with a high quality design that includes varied massing, changes in form, and is comprised of high quality material including metal siding, stone veneer, simulated wood siding, fiber cement lap siding, fiber cement panels, stucco, metal and glass railings, and aluminum storefronts. During the development review process, the architectural design was peer reviewed by John Kaliski Architects and City staff, which resulted in higher-quality building materials, an increase in the commercial square footage and a plaza at the corner of Fourth Street and Cabrillo Park Drive. The project massing is broken into discrete building elements, facades are broken up with the inclusion of private balconies, courtyards, and contrasting building materials. The commercial storefronts are enhanced with cornices and metal canopies and the primary access to the commercial uses will be from Fourth Street. The project promotes pedestrian activity with landscaping and publically accessible open space. Parking areas are screened from the street. Lastly, over 40 percent of the units are over 1,000 square feet. 4. That the land use uses, site design, and operational considerations in the proposed development plan have been planned in a manner that will result in a compatible and harmonious operation as specified in Section 7 of the MEMU overlay district. The project is consistent with the development standards specified in Section 7 of the MEMU Overlay Zone. The project has been Resolution No. 2020-xx Page 4 of 9 designed to ensure compatibility between the residential and non-residential uses on site. The commercial uses have separate entrances from the residential uses, and the parking management plan will manage parking between the residential and nonresidential uses. Each building has a dedicated move-in and commercial loading area that will be screened with roll-up doors and controlled by the property management company. On site lighting will be consistent with Santa Ana Municipal Code Chapter 8 (Security Ordinance). Section 2. The Applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, authorized volunteers, and instrumentalities thereof, harmless from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other and proceedings (whether legal, equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature), and alternative dispute resolution procedures (including, but not limited to arbitrations, mediations, and such other procedures), judgments, orders, and decisions (collectively “Actions”), brought against the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void, or annul, any action of, or any permit or approval issued by the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City) for or concerning the project, whether such Actions are brought under the Ralph M. Brown Act, California Environmental Quality Act, the Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivision Map Act, Code of Civil Procedure sections 1085 or 1094.5, or any other federal, state or local constitution, statute, law, ordinance, charter, rule, regulation, or any decision of a court of competent jurisdiction. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to approve, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, the legal counsel providing the City’s defense, and that Applicant shall reimburse the City for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the course of the defense. City shall promptly notify the Applicant of any Action brought and City shall cooperate with Applicant in the defense of the Action. Section 3. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the project has been determined to be adequately evaluated in the previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 2006-01 (SCH No. 2006031041) and Subsequent EIR SEIR No. 2018-15 as per Sections 15162 and 15168 of the CEQA guidelines. All mitigation measures in EIR No. 2006-01 and SEIR No. 2018-15 and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) will be enforced and apply to the proposed project. In addition, a traffic impact analysis dated July 30, 2020 was also prepared by Linscott Law and Greenspan which analyzed the project’s impacts on 25 intersections. The off-site improvements listed the Traffic Impact Analysis shall be implemented. A health risk assessment (HRA) was prepared to identify any impacts from developing a residential community near a major freeway. The HRA finds that a less than significant impact to project residents would occur due to the project’s proximity to a major freeway. Resolution No. 2020-xx Page 5 of 9 Section 4. The Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana, after conducting the public hearing, hereby approves Site Plan Review No. 2020-04 as conditioned in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated as though fully set forth herein. This decision is based upon the evidence submitted at the above said hearing, which includes, but is not limited to: the Request for Planning Commission Action dated October 26, 2020, and November 9, 2020, and exhibits attached thereto; and the public testimony, written and oral, all of which are incorporated herein by this reference. ADOPTED this 9th day of November, 2020 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTENTIONS: Commissioners: _______________________ Mark McLoughlin Chairman APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sonia R. Carvalho, City Attorney By:________________________ Lisa Storck Assistant City Attorney CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, SARAH BERNAL Recording Secretary, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. 2020-xx to be the original resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Ana on November 9, 2020. Date: ________________ ____________________________________ Recording Secretary City of Santa Ana Resolution No. 2020-xx Page 6 of 9 Conditions for Approval for Site Plan Review No. 2020-04 Site Plan Review No. 2020-04 is approved subject to compliance, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Planning Manager, with applicable sections of the Santa Ana Municipal Code, the California Administrative Code, the California Building Standards Code, and all other applicable regulations. In addition, it shall meet the following conditions of approval: The Applicant must comply with each and every condition listed below prior to exercising the rights conferred by this site plan review. The Applicant must remain in compliance with all conditions listed below throughout the life of the development project. Failure to comply with each and every condition may result in the revocation of the site plan review. A. Planning Division 1. All proposed site improvements must conform to the Development Project Review approval of DP No. 2019-26, and the staff report exhibits incorporated herein by reference. 2. Applicant shall agree to all recommendations contained within the required technical studies and reports prepared for the project including the Traffic Impact Analysis dated July 30, 2020. All studies and reports shall be finalized by the Applicant and approved by the City of Santa Ana prior to issuance of building permits. 3. Any amendment to this site plan review, including modifications to approved materials, finishes, architecture, site plan, landscaping, unit count, mix, and square footages must be submitted to the Planning Division for review. At that time, staff will determine if administrative relief is available or if the site plan review must be amended. 4. The full volume (first and second levels) of the commercial square footage within both buildings along Fourth Street shall be maintained for commercial purposes only and may not be converted or used for residential purposes. 5. The publicly accessible open space areas as shown on the open space plan shall remain accessible to the public and include a combination of landscape and hardscape as specified in Section 4.5 of the Metro East Mixed-Use Overlay Zone requirements. 6. A residential property manager shall be available at all times that the Project is occupied and Applicant and onsite management shall at all times maintain a 24- hour emergency contact and contact information on file with the City that is also posted at the entrance to the leasing office for public view. Resolution No. 2020-xx Page 7 of 9 7. All Project mechanical equipment shall be screened from view from public and courtyard areas. 8. After Project occupancy, landscaping and hardscape materials must be maintained as shown on the approved landscape plans. 9. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the subject site must meet the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act (i.e. a Lot Merger or Parcel Map must be recorded for the subject property). 10. Prior to issuance of any building permits, a final detailed amenity plan must be reviewed and approved by Applicant and the Planning Division. The plan shall include details on the hardscape design, lighting concepts and outdoor furniture for amenity, plaza, or courtyard areas, as well as an installation plan. 11. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall submit a construction schedule and staging plan to the Planning Division for review and approval. The plan shall include construction hours, staging areas, parking and site security/screening during Project construction. 12. Prior to installation of landscaping, the Applicant shall submit photos and specifications of all trees to be installed on the Project site for review and approval by the Planning Division. Specifications shall include, at a minimum, the species, box size (48 inches minimum), brown trunk height (10-foot minimum), and name and location of the supplier. 13. Applicant shall provide onsite parking for residents and visitors of the Project and actively monitor the parking demand of the Project site. Applicant shall continually monitor and take appropriate measures to manage the parking demand of the Project site to mitigate the use of offsite parking spaces on private or public properties and/or right-of-way. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy and/or building permit finals, Applicant shall submit and obtain approval from the Planning and Building Agency a Parking Management Plan (the “PMP”) meeting the requirements of this condition. The approved PMP shall be adhered to and be enforced by the Project at all times. 14. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy issuance, public art shall be installed on the Project site at a value of one-half of one percent (0.5%) of the total valuation of both buildings. The selection, design, and installation of the art shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning and Building Agency, the Community Development Agency, and the Applicant. 15. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy issuance, a Property Maintenance Agreement must be recorded against the property. The agreement will be subject to review and applicability by the Planning and Building Agency, the Community Development Agency, the Public Works Agency, and the City Attorney to ensure Resolution No. 2020-xx Page 8 of 9 that the property and all improvements located thereupon are properly maintained, Applicant (and the owner of the property upon which the authorized use and/or authorized improvements are located if different from the Applicant) shall execute a Maintenance Agreement with the City of Santa Ana which shall be recorded against the property and which shall be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the City Attorney. The Maintenance Agreement shall contain covenants, conditions and restrictions relating to the following: (a) Compliance with operational conditions applicable during any period(s) of construction or major repair (e.g., proper screening and securing of the construction site; implementation of proper erosion control, dust control and noise mitigation measure; adherence to approved project phasing etc.); (b) Compliance with ongoing operational conditions, requirements and restrictions, as applicable (including but not limited to hours of operation, security requirements, the proper storage and disposal of trash and debris, enforcement of the parking management plan, and/or restrictions on certain uses, (c) Ongoing compliance with approved design and construction parameters, signage parameters and restrictions as well as landscape designs, as applicable; (d) Ongoing maintenance, repair and upkeep of the property and all improvements located thereupon (including but not limited to controls on the proliferation of trash and debris about the property; the proper and timely removal of graffiti; the timely maintenance, repair and upkeep of damaged, vandalized and/or weathered buildings, structures and/or improvements; the timely maintenance, repair and upkeep of exterior paint, parking striping, lighting and irrigation fixtures, walls and fencing, publicly accessible bathrooms and bathroom fixtures, landscaping and related landscape improvements and the like, as applicable); (e) If Applicant and the owner of the property are different (e.g., if the Applicant is a tenant or licensee of the property or any portion thereof), both the Applicant and the owner of the property shall be signatories to the Maintenance Agreement and both shall be jointly and severally liable for compliance with its terms. (f) The Maintenance Agreement shall further provide that any party responsible for complying with its terms shall not assign its ownership interest in the property or any interest in any lease, sublease, license or sublicense, unless the prospective assignee agrees in writing to assume all of the duties, obligations and responsibilities set forth under the Maintenance Agreement. (g) The Maintenance Agreement shall contain provisions relating to the enforcement of its conditions by the City and shall also contain provisions authorizing the City to recover costs and expenses which the City may incur arising out of any enforcement and/or remediation efforts which the City may Resolution No. 2020-xx Page 9 of 9 undertake in order to cure any deficiency in maintenance, repair or upkeep or to enforce any restrictions or conditions upon the use of the property. The maintenance agreement shall further provide that any unreimbursed costs and/or expenses incurred by the City to cure a deficiency in maintenance or to enforce use restrictions shall become a lien upon the property in an amount equivalent to the actual costs and/or expense incurred by the City. EXHIBIT 2 1 - 20 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Project SPR No. 2020-041801 E. Fourth Street Exhibit 2 – Vicinity Zoning and Aerial View © 2020 Digital Map Products. A ll rights reserved. 2019 Aerial Santa Ana Boundary Zoning 313 feet 1 - 21 EXHIBIT 3 1 - 22 SPR No. 2020-04 1801 East Fourth Street Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Exhibit 3 – Site Photos 1 - 23 EXHIBIT 4 1 - 24 SPR No. 2020-04 1801 East Fourth Street Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Exhibit 4 – Site Plan 1 - 25 EXHIBIT 5 1 - 26 SPR No. 2020-04 1801 East Fourth Street Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Exhibit 5 – Residential Unit Floor Plans 1 - 27 SPR No. 2020-04 1801 East Fourth Street Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Exhibit 5 – Residential Unit Floor Plans 1 - 28 EXHIBIT 6 1 - 29 SPR No. 2020-04 1801 East Fourth Street Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Exhibit 6 – Building A Elevations 1 - 30 EXHIBIT 7 1 - 31 SPR No. 2020-04 1801 East Fourth Street Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Exhibit 7 – Building B Elevations 1 - 32 EXHIBIT 8 1 - 33 SPR No. 2020-04 1801 East Fourth Street Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Exhibit 8 – Renderings 1 - 34 EXHIBIT 9 1 - 35 SPR No. 2020-04 1801 East Fourth Street Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Exhibit 9 – Open Space Plan 1 - 36 EXHIBIT 10 1 - 37 Development Standards Standard Required by MEMU Active Urban Provided Land Uses Mixed-Use Development 644 multi-family residential units and 15,130 SF of commercial space Maximum Stories 3 minimum No maximum Complies; 5 stories residential 7 level parking structure and amenity deck Minimum Development Size 1 acre Complies; 8.03 acres net Street Level Building Frontages Forecourt, Shopfront, Gallery or Arcade Forecourt and Shopfront Publicly Accessible Open Space 15% of lot area (52,468 sq. ft.) Complies; 15% (52,521 SF) Private and Common Open Space 90 SF per unit and 5% of site area for non-residential uses (58,716 SF) Complies; 106,654 SF Building to Street 10 feet maximum Complies; 10 feet maximum Building to Property Line 5 feet adjacent to any other use N/A – no immediately adjacent uses Building to Building 15 feet minimum between buildings Complies; 95 feet between buildings Parking 2.0 per unit inclusive of guest and non-residential SF (1,288 spaces) Complies; 2.04 spaces/unit (1,318 spaces) SPR No. 2020-04 1801 East Fourth Street Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Exhibit 10 – Development Standards 1 - 38 EXHIBIT 11 1 - 39 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development DIESEL PARTICULATE MATTER (DPM) HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT CITY OF SANTA ANA PREPARED BY: Haseeb Qureshi hqureshi@urbanxroads.com (949) 336-5987 JUNE 5, 2020 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 1 - 40 1 - 41 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report i TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................... I APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................................... II LIST OF EXHIBITS ............................................................................................................................... III LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................. III LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS ........................................................................................................... IV EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 5 1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Site Location .................................................................................................................................. 7 1.2 Project Description ........................................................................................................................ 7 2 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION ......................................................................................................... 10 3 SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION ................................................................................................... 12 4 EXPOSURE QUANTIFICATION ................................................................................................... 15 5 RISK CHARACTERIZATION ........................................................................................................ 17 5.1 Carcinogenic Chemical Risk ......................................................................................................... 17 5.2 Non-Carcinogenic Exposures ...................................................................................................... 18 5.3 Potential Cancer and Non-Cancer Risks ...................................................................................... 19 6 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 21 7 CERTIFICATION ........................................................................................................................ 23 1 - 42 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report ii APPENDICES APPENDIX 3.1: EMISSION RATE CALCULATION WORKSHEETS APPENDIX 3.2: RISK CALCULATION WORKSHEETS APPENDIX 4.1: AERMOD MODEL OUTPUT SUMMARY FILE APPENDIX 4.2: AERMOD MODEL INPUT/OUTPUT FILES (ELECTRONIC FORMAT, AVAILABLE ON REQUEST) 1 - 43 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report iii LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP ............................................................................................................. 8 EXHIBIT 4-A: SOURCE RECEPTOR GRID NETWORK ............................................................................. 16 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 2-1 FREEWAY TRAFFIC VOLUMES ........................................................................................... 10 TABLE 3-1: VEHICLE FLEET MIX PROFILE ............................................................................................ 13 1 - 44 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report iv LIST OF ABBREVIATED TERMS (1) Reference AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic Volumes ARB Air Resources Board CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards Caltrans California Department of Transportation CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CO Carbon Monoxide CPF Cancer Potency Factor EPA Environmental Protection Agency HRA Health Risk Assessment LDA Light Duty Auto LDT Light Duty Truck LHD Light Heavy Duty MCY Motorcycle MDV Medium Duty Vehicle NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide OBUS Other Bus OLM Ozone Limiting PM10 Particulate Matter 10 microns in diameter or less PM2.5 Particulate Matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less PPM Parts per Million Project Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development PVMRM Plume Volume Molar Ratio Methods REL Reference Exposure Level RME Reasonable Maximum Exposure SBUS School Bus SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality management District TACs Toxic Air Contaminants UBUS Urban Bus URF Unit Risk Factor UTM Universal Traverse Mercator 1 - 45 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2005, the California Air Resources Board (ARB) promulgated an advisory recommendation to avoid setting sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles per day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles per day. The ARB indicates that due to traffic- generated pollutants, there is an estimated increased cancer risk incidence of 300 to 1,700 per million in within this domain. At some point however, the increased cancer risk incidence due the effects of freeway/roadway corridor pollutants become indistinguishable from the ambient air quality condition. In this regard, the effects of freeway/roadway-source pollutants that may impact the Project site are already acknowledged and accounted for within the ambient air quality discussions presented within this Section. More specifically, the MATES-IV Study data for the Project site comprehensively reflects increased TAC-source cancer risks affecting the City and Project site, inclusive of increased cancer risks due to freeway sources. The 2005 ARB guidance noted previously, information made available through the MATES-IV Study, and configuration and design of the Project would suggest that further assessment of freeway-source pollutant impacts is not warranted. Notwithstanding, this Off-Site Freeway- Source Air Toxic Health Risk Assessment has been prepared for the Project and is intended to: • Comply with and support CEQA Section 15003 (i) policies addressing adequacy, completeness, and a good-faith effort at full disclosure; • Disaggregate potential freeway-source air pollutant health effects from other background conditions identified in the MATES IV Study; and • Identify means to reduce the specific effects of freeway-source pollutants at the Project site. Findings and conclusions of this Assessment are summarized below. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS For carcinogenic exposures resulting from exposure to toxics from the freeway, the summation of risk for the maximum exposed residential receptor totaled 3.58 in one million and will not exceed the SCAQMD significance threshold of 10 in one million. For chronic noncarcinogenic effects, the hazard index identified for each toxicological endpoint totaled less than one. For acute exposures, the hazard indices for the identified averaging times did not exceed unity. Therefore, noncarcinogenic hazards are calculated to be within acceptable limits and a less than significant impact would occur. 1 - 46 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 6 This page intentionally left blank 1 - 47 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 7 1 INTRODUCTION In 2005, the California Air Resources Board (ARB) promulgated an advisory recommendation to avoid setting sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles per day or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles per day. According to the ARB, the increased cancer risk is 300 to 1,700 per million within this domain. The strongest association of traffic related emissions with adverse health outcomes was seen within 300 feet of roadways with high truck densities. Notwithstanding, the ARB notes that a site-specific analysis would be required to determine the actual risk near a particular land use and should consider factors such as prevailing wind direction, local topography and climate. In consideration of the above referenced requirement, the assessment and dispersion modeling methodologies used in the preparation of this report were composed of all relevant and appropriate procedures presented by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, California Environmental Protection Agency and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The methodologies and assumptions offered under this regulatory guidance were used to ensure that the assessment effectively quantified residential exposures associated with the generation of contaminant emissions from adjacent mobile source activity. This report summarizes the protocol used to evaluate contaminant exposures and presents the results of the health risk assessment (HRA) prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc., for the proposed Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development (referred to as “Project). 1.1 SITE LOCATION The proposed Project is located at 1801 E Fourth Street at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Cabrillo Park Drive in the City of Santa Ana within the Metro East Mixed-Use (MEMU) Overlay District, as shown on Exhibit 1-A. 1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project is proposed to consist of up to 650 multi-family residential units and 8,800 square feet of commercial space on an approximately 8-acre site. As part of the project design, the Project applicant has agreed to installing and maintaining air filtration systems with efficiencies equal to or exceeding a Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) 13 as defined by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 52.2. (1)1 in the proposed multi-family residential dwelling units. 1 The use of MERV filtration systems to reduce DPM and particulates has been successfully implemented by several lead agencies, including, but not limited to: City of Los Angeles, City of Claremont, City of Irvine, City of Glendale, City of Berkley, City of Oakland, and the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). The average particle size efficiency (PSE) removal based on ASHRAE Standard 52.2 for MERV 13 is approximately 75% for 0.3 to 1.0 g/m3(DPM) (2). 1 - 48 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 8 EXHIBIT 1-A: LOCATION MAP 1 - 49 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 9 This page intentionally left blank 1 - 50 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 10 2 SOURCE IDENTIFICATION The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Traffic and Vehicle Data Systems Unit collects and maintains traffic volume counts for vehicles traversing the California state highway system. Table 2-1 presents the annual average daily traffic volumes (AADT) for the freeway segment considered in the assessment. TABLE 2-1 FREEWAY TRAFFIC VOLUMES Roadway Segment AADT Vehicles Per Hour (ALL) Vehicles Per Hour (gas) Vehicles Per Hour (diesel) I-5 Freeway 329,500 13,729 13,189 540 1 - 51 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 11 This page intentionally left blank 1 - 52 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 12 3 SOURCE CHARACTERIZATION In urban communities, vehicle emissions contribute significantly to localized concentrations of air contaminants. Typically, emissions generated from these sources are characterized by vehicle mix, the rate pollutants are generated during the course of travel and the number of vehicles traversing the roadway network. Currently, emission factors are generated from a series of computer based programs to produce a composite emission rate for vehicles traveling at various speeds within a defined geographical area or along a discrete roadway segment. To account for the emission standards imposed on the California fleet, the ARB has developed the EMFAC2017 emission factor model. EMFAC2017 was utilized to identify pollutant emission rates for total organic gases (TOG), diesel particulates, particulates (PM10 and PM2.5), carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) compounds (2). To produce a representative vehicle fleet distribution, the assessment utilized ARB’s Orange County population estimates for the 2020 calendar year. This approach provides an estimate of vehicle mix associated with operational profiles at the link or intersection level. Table 3-1 lists the identified fleet mix considered in the assessment. Based upon the freeway traffic volumes and population profiles noted above, discrete traffic counts were identified for each roadway segment. Diesel vehicles account for 3.94 percent of the total on-road mobile fleet. For chronic (long term) exposures, AADT values were averaged to produce representative hourly traffic volumes. An average observed route speed of 65 miles per hour was assumed for vehicles traversing the main highway link (I-5). The focus of this HRA is on DPM associated with vehicular activity traversing I-5. Appendix 3.1 presents the on-road emission rate calculation worksheets for the freeway segment considered in the assessment. 1 - 53 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 13 TABLE 3-1: VEHICLE FLEET MIX PROFILE Note: Vehicle category descriptions can be found on the California Air Resources Board website at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/modeling.htm. Vehicle class Orange County Fuel Population Percent LDA Diesel 11,165 0.43 LDA Gas 1,247,860 51.75 LDT1 Diesel 56 0.00 LDT1 Gas 134,019 5.46 LDT2 Diesel 2,427 0.07 LDT2 Gas 447,358 16.58 LHD1 Diesel 21,630 1.54 LHD1 Gas 36,819 1.59 LHD2 Diesel 8,344 0.58 LHD2 Gas 6,427 0.22 MCY Gas 55,869 2.69 MDV Diesel 6,029 0.25 MDV Gas 312,580 15.17 MH Diesel 2,902 0.20 MH Gas 7,043 0.55 T6 Diesel 27,487 1.17 T6 Gas 7,555 0.12 T7 Diesel 10,494 1.42 T7 Gas 10 0.00 OBUS Diesel 618 0.02 OBUS Gas 996 0.04 SBUS Diesel 1,330 0.08 SBUS Gas 478 0.04 UBUS Diesel 0 0.00 UBUS Gas 210 0.02 1 - 54 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 14 This page intentionally left blank 1 - 55 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 15 4 EXPOSURE QUANTIFICATION In order to assess the impact of emitted compounds on individuals who reside at the proposed apartment complex, air quality modeling utilizing the AMS/EPA Regulatory Model AERMOD was performed to assess the downwind extent of mobile source emissions. AERMOD’s air dispersion algorithms are based upon a planetary boundary layer turbulence structure and scaling concepts, including the treatment of surface and elevated sources in simple and complex terrain. The model offers additional flexibility by allowing the user to assign initial vertical and lateral dispersion parameters for sources representative of a localized mobile fleet. For this assessment, the volume source algorithm was utilized to model the emissions generated from on-road mobile source activity. Air dispersion models require additional input parameters including pollutant emission data and local meteorology. Due to the their sensitivity to individual meteorological parameters such as wind speed and direction, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recommends that meteorological data used as input into dispersion models be selected on the basis of relative spatial and temporal conditions that exist in the area of concern. In response to this recommendation, the nearest meteorological data available from the SCAQMD John Wayne Airport Meteorological Data Station (Source Receptor Area 18), was used to represent local weather conditions and prevailing winds. Five years (2012-2016) of available AERMOD meteorological data was utilized in the modeling. The modeling analysis also considered the spatial distribution of mobile source activity traversing the freeway in relation to the proposed site. To accommodate a Cartesian grid format, direction dependent calculations were obtained by identifying the universal transverse mercator (UTM) coordinates for each volume source location. On-site receptors were placed to provide coverage across the identified residential portion of the site. A ground level receptor height was assumed as a conservative measure. A graphical representation of the source-receptor grid network is presented in Exhibit 4-A. A dispersion model input summary table is provided in Appendix 4.1. A complete listing of model input/output files are provided in electronic format in Appendix 4.2. 1 - 56 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 16 EXHIBIT 4-A: SOURCE RECEPTOR GRID NETWORK 1 - 57 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 17 5 RISK CHARACTERIZATION 5.1 CARCINOGENIC CHEMICAL RISK The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993) states that emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) are considered significant if a HRA shows an increased risk of greater than ten in one million. Based on guidance from the SCAQMD in the document Health Risk Assessment Guidance for Analyzing Cancer Risks from Mobile Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis ( (3), for purposes of this analysis, ten (10) in one million is used as the cancer risk threshold for the proposed Project. Excess cancer risks are estimated as the upper-bound incremental probability that an individual will develop cancer over a lifetime as a direct result of exposure to potential carcinogens over a specified exposure duration. The estimated risk is expressed as a unitless probability. The cancer risk attributed to a chemical is calculated by multiplying the chemical intake or dose at the human exchange boundaries (e.g., lungs) by the chemical-specific cancer potency factor (CPF). A risk level of 1 in a million implies a likelihood that up to one person, out of one million equally exposed people would contract cancer if exposed continuously (24 hours per day) to the levels of toxic air contaminants over a specified duration of time. This risk would be an excess cancer risk that is in addition to any cancer risk borne by a person not exposed to these air toxics. Health risks associated with exposure to carcinogenic compounds can be defined in terms of the probability of developing cancer as a result of exposure to a chemical at a given concentration. Under a deterministic approach (i.e., point estimate methodology), the cancer risk probability is determined by multiplying the chemical’s annual concentration by its unit risk factor (URF). The URF is a measure of the carcinogenic potential of a chemical when a dose is received through the inhalation pathway. It represents an upper bound estimate of the probability of contracting cancer as a result of continuous exposure to an ambient concentration of one microgram per cubic meter (g/m3) over a 70 year lifetime. The URFs utilized in the assessment and corresponding cancer potency factors were obtained from the Consolidated Table of OEHHA/ARB Approved Risk Assessment Health Values. Notwithstanding, it is the intent of the HRA to provide risk estimates from near-field on-road sources that are reflective of anticipated exposures experienced at a given residential occupancy. As such, a review of relevant guidance was conducted to determine applicability of the use of early life exposure adjustments to identified carcinogens. For risk assessments conducted under the auspices of The Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act (AB 2588, Connelly, Statutes of 1987; Health and Safety Code Section 44300 et seq.) a weighting factor is applied to all carcinogens regardless of purported mechanism of action. However, for this assessment, the HRA relied upon U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidance relating to the use of early life exposure adjustment factors (Supplemental Guidance for Assessing Susceptibility from Early-Life Exposure to Carcinogens, EPA/630/R-003F) whereby adjustment factors are only considered when carcinogens act “through the mutagenic mode of action.” The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has identified 19 compounds that elicit a mutagenic mode of action for 1 - 58 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 18 carcinogenesis. None of the gaseous compounds considered in the HRA elicit a mutagenic mode of action and, therefore, early life exposure adjustments were not considered. For diesel particulates, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and their derivatives, which are known to exhibit a mutagenic mode of action, comprise < 1% of the exhaust particulate mass. To date, the U.S. Environmental Agency reports that whole diesel engine exhaust has not been shown to elicit a mutagenic mode of action. To effectively quantify dose, the procedure requires the incorporation of several discrete exposure variates. Once determined, contaminant dose is multiplied by the cancer potency factor (CPF) in units of inverse dose expressed in milligrams per kilogram per day (mg/kg/day)-1 to derive the cancer risk estimate. Therefore, to assess exposures associated with the proposed residential population, the following dose algorithm was utilized. CDI = (Cair  EF  ED  IR) / (BW  AT) Where: CDI = chronic daily intake (mg/kg/day) Cair = concentration of contaminant in air (mg/m3) EF = exposure frequency (days/year) ED = exposure duration (years) IR = inhalation rate (m3/day) BW = body weight (kg) AT = averaging time (days) To represent residential exposures, the assessment employed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s guidance to develop viable dose estimates based on reasonable maximum exposures (RME). Specifically, activity patterns for population mobility recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and presented in the Exposure Factors Handbook were utilized. As a result, lifetime risk values for residents were adjusted to account for an exposure duration of 350 days per year for 30 years (i.e., 95th percentile). These values are consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act which considers the evaluation of environmental effects of proposed projects in a manner that reflects both reasonable and feasible assumptions. 5.2 NON-CARCINOGENIC EXPOSURES An evaluation of the potential noncancerous effects of contaminant exposures was also conducted. Under the point estimate approach, adverse health effects are evaluated by comparing the concentration of each compound with the appropriate Reference Exposure Level (REL). Available REL’s presented in the Consolidated Table of OEHHA/ARB Approved Risk Assessment Health Values were considered in the assessment. 1 - 59 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 19 To quantify noncarcinogenic impacts, the hazard index approach was used. The hazard index assumes that subthreshold exposures adversely affect a specific organ or organ system (i.e., toxicological endpoint). For each discrete pollutant exposure, target organs presented in regulatory guidance were utilized. To calculate the hazard index, the pollutant concentration or dose is divided by the appropriate toxicity value. For compounds affecting the same toxicological endpoint, this ratio is summed. Where the total equals or exceeds one (i.e., unity), a health hazard is presumed to exist. For chronic exposures, REL’s were converted to units expressed in mg/kg/day to accommodate the above referenced intake algorithm. To assess acute noncancer impacts, the maximum pollutant concentration is divided by the REL for the corresponding averaging time (e.g., 1-hour). No exposure adjustments are considered for short duration exposures. Appendix 3.2, summarizes the REL’s and corresponding reference dose values used in the evaluation of chronic noncarcinogenic and acute exposures. The noncancer hazard quotient for identified compounds generated from each source and a summation for each toxicological endpoint are presented on this table. For chronic noncarcinogenic effects, the hazard index identified for each toxicological endpoint totaled less than the threshold of 1.0 for all exposure scenarios. For acute exposures, the hazard indices for the identified averaging times did not exceed the threshold of 1.0. Therefore, acute and chronic non-carcinogenic hazards were predicted to be within acceptable limits and are less than significant. 5.3 POTENTIAL CANCER AND NON-CANCER RISKS2 For carcinogenic exposures resulting from exposure to toxics from the freeway, the summation of risk for the maximum exposed residential receptor totaled 3.58 in one million and will not exceed the SCAQMD significance threshold of 10 in one million. 2 SCAQMD guidance does not require assessment of the potential health risk to on-site workers. Excerpts from the document OEHHA Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines—The Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments (OEHHA 2003), also indicate that it is not necessary to examine the health effects to on-site workers unless required by RCRA (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) / CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) or the worker resides on-site. 1 - 60 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 20 This page intentionally left blank 1 - 61 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 21 6 REFERENCES 1. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. Method of Testing General Ventilation Air Cleaning Devices for Removal by Particle Size. 2017. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 52.2.2017. 2. California Department of Transportation. EMFAC Software. [Online] http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/air/pages/emfac.htm. 3. South Coast Air Quality Managment District. Mobile Source Toxics Analysis. [Online] 2003. http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/mobile_toxic/mobile_toxic.html. 1 - 62 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 22 This page intentionally left blank 1 - 63 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report 23 7 CERTIFICATION The contents of this HRA represent an accurate depiction of the potential impacts to the proposed Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Project. The information contained in this HRA is based on the best available data at the time of preparation. If you have any questions, please contact me directly at (949) 336-5987. Haseeb Qureshi Associate Principal URBAN CROSSROADS, INC. 260 E Baker St. Costa Mesa, CA 92626 (949) 336-5987 hqureshi@urbanxroads.com EDUCATION Master of Science in Environmental Studies California State University, Fullerton • May 2010 Bachelor of Arts in Environmental Analysis and Design University of California, Irvine • June 2006 PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS AEP – Association of Environmental Planners AWMA – Air and Waste Management Association ASTM – American Society for Testing and Materials PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS Environmental Site Assessment – American Society for Testing and Materials • June 2013 Planned Communities and Urban Infill – Urban Land Institute • June 2011 Indoor Air Quality and Industrial Hygiene – EMSL Analytical • April 2008 Principles of Ambient Air Monitoring – California Air Resources Board • August 2007 AB2588 Regulatory Standards – Trinity Consultants • November 2006 Air Dispersion Modeling – Lakes Environmental • June 2006 1 - 64 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report This page intentionally left blank 1 - 65 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report APPENDIX 3.1: EMISSION RATE CALCULATION WORKSHEETS 1 - 66 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report This page intentionally left blank 1 - 67 EMFAC2017 Worksheet (65 mph) EMFAC2017 Emission Rates Region Type: County Region: ORANGE Calendar Year: 2020 Season: Annual Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories Pollutant Classification: Criteria Region CalYr Season Veh_Class Fuel MdlYr Speed Population Wt Frac CO_RUNEX CO_RUNEX AVE NOX_RUNEX NOx_RUNEX AVE PM10_RUNEX PM10_RUNEX AVE PM10_PMTW PM10_PMTW_AVE PM10_PMBW PM10_PMBW_AVE (miles/hr)(vehicles)(gms/mile)(gms/mile)(gms/mile)(gms/mile)(gms/mile)(gms/mile)(gms/mile)(gms/mile)(gms/mile)(gms/mile) ORANGE 2020 Annual LDA DSL Aggregated 65 11164.903 0.0048 0.1576780 0.00074923 0.0868281 0.00041257 0.0082320 0.00003912 0.0080 0.00003801 0.03675 0.000174622 ORANGE 2020 Annual LDA GAS Aggregated 65 1247860.077 0.5311 0.5131502 0.27251912 0.0438778 0.02330222 0.0014267 0.00075769 0.0080 0.00424857 0.03675 0.019516854 ORANGE 2020 Annual LDT1 DSL Aggregated 65 55.819 0.0000 1.8674899 0.00004436 1.3902125 0.00003303 0.1898617 0.00000451 0.0080 0.00000019 0.03675 0.000000873 ORANGE 2020 Annual LDT1 GAS Aggregated 65 134019.271 0.0570 1.0208223 0.05822426 0.1234590 0.00704169 0.0020130 0.00011482 0.0080 0.00045629 0.03675 0.002096096 ORANGE 2020 Annual LDT2 DSL Aggregated 65 2427.176 0.0010 0.0729230 0.00007533 0.0357127 0.00003689 0.0045846 0.00000474 0.0080 0.00000826 0.03675 0.000037962 ORANGE 2020 Annual LDT2 GAS Aggregated 65 447357.582 0.1904 0.6886944 0.13111970 0.0859344 0.01636095 0.0013986 0.00026629 0.0080 0.00152311 0.03675 0.006996788ORANGE2020AnnualLHDT1DSLAggregated6521629.925 0.0092 0.5292682 0.00487211 2.2226139 0.02046000 0.0169925 0.00015642 0.0120 0.00011046 0.07644 0.000703659 ORANGE 2020 Annual LHDT1 GAS Aggregated 65 36819.260 0.0157 0.8630355 0.01352354 0.2146306 0.00336320 0.0010699 0.00001676 0.0080 0.00012536 0.07644 0.001197794 ORANGE 2020 Annual LHDT2 DSL Aggregated 65 8343.637 0.0036 0.4462804 0.00158471 1.8266933 0.00648646 0.0162931 0.00005786 0.0120 0.00004261 0.08918 0.000316672 ORANGE 2020 Annual LHDT2 GAS Aggregated 65 6427.420 0.0027 0.5119900 0.00140051 0.2149770 0.00058805 0.0009178 0.00000251 0.0080 0.00002188 0.08918 0.000243944 ORANGE 2020 Annual MCY GAS Aggregated 65 55868.871 0.0238 23.7251412 0.56411192 1.2028594 0.02860035 0.0018872 0.00004487 0.0040 0.00009511 0.01176 0.000279617 ORANGE 2020 Annual MDV DSL Aggregated 65 6028.952 0.0026 0.1265906 0.00032481 0.0591852 0.00015186 0.0048780 0.00001252 0.0080 0.00002053 0.03675 0.000094294 ORANGE 2020 Annual MDV GAS Aggregated 65 312579.715 0.1330 0.9627388 0.12807249 0.1229682 0.01635837 0.0014811 0.00019704 0.0080 0.00106423 0.03675 0.004888827 ORANGE 2020 Annual MH DSL Aggregated 65 2901.594 0.0012 0.2650886 0.00032735 3.6428042 0.00449841 0.1460253 0.00018032 0.0160 0.00001976 0.13034 0.000160954 ORANGE 2020 Annual MH GAS Aggregated 65 7043.392 0.0030 2.2246649 0.00666857 0.4283714 0.00128407 0.0012950 0.00000388 0.0120 0.00003597 0.13034 0.000390702 ORANGE 2020 Annual MHDT DSL Aggregated 65 27487.170 0.0117 0.3870657 0.00452795 2.5404975 0.02971908 0.0975440 0.00114108 0.0120 0.00014038 0.13034 0.001524735 ORANGE 2020 Annual MHDT GAS Aggregated 65 7554.979 0.0032 0.9441306 0.00303565 0.3448827 0.00110890 0.0007712 0.00000248 0.0120 0.00003858 0.13034 0.000419081 ORANGE 2020 Annual HHDT DSL Aggregated 65 10494.469 0.0045 0.3731136 0.00166643 4.0257130 0.01798001 0.0808631 0.00036116 0.0360 0.00016079 0.06174 0.000275749 ORANGE 2020 Annual HHDT GAS Aggregated 65 10.178 0.0000 24.2851878 0.00010520 5.5044337 0.00002384 0.0012867 0.00000001 0.0200 0.00000009 0.06174 0.000000267 ORANGE 2020 Annual OBUS DSL Aggregated 65 617.692 0.0003 0.5133360 0.00013495 3.8917273 0.00102306 0.1074946 0.00002826 0.0120 0.00000315 0.13034 0.000034264 ORANGE 2020 Annual OBUS GAS Aggregated 65 995.682 0.0004 1.4501108 0.00061448 0.5132142 0.00021747 0.0007231 0.00000031 0.0120 0.00000508 0.13034 0.000055231 ORANGE 2020 Annual SBUS DSL Aggregated 65 1330.412 0.0006 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.0120 0.00000679 0.74480 0.000421708 ORANGE 2020 Annual SBUS GAS Aggregated 65 477.537 0.0002 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.0080 0.00000163 0.74480 0.000151368 ORANGE 2020 Annual UBUS DSL Aggregated 65 0.000 0.0000 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.0000000 0.00000000 0.0000 0.00000000 0.0000 0.000000000 ORANGE 2020 Annual UBUS GAS Aggregated 65 209.765 0.0001 0.2433834 0.00002173 0.3161702 0.00002823 0.0002009 0.00000002 0.0120 0.00000107 0.13035 0.000011637 2349705 1.0 1.194 0.179 0.0034 0.008 0.040 EMFAC2017 Emission Rates Region Type: CountyRegion: ORANGE Calendar Year: 2020 Season: Annual Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories Pollutant Classification: TOG GAS Region CalYr Season Veh_Class Fuel MdlYr Speed Population Wt Frac TOG_RUNEX TOG_RUNEX AVE (miles/hr)(vehicles)(gms/mile)(gms/mile) ORANGE 2020 Annual LDA GAS Aggregated 65 1247860.077 0.5528 0.0145697 0.0081 ORANGE 2020 Annual LDT1 GAS Aggregated 65 134019.271 0.0594 0.0364124 0.0022 ORANGE 2020 Annual LDT2 GAS Aggregated 65 447357.582 0.1982 0.0215635 0.0043 ORANGE 2020 Annual LHDT1 GAS Aggregated 65 36819.260 0.0163 0.0447649 0.0007ORANGE2020AnnualLHDT2GASAggregated656427.420 0.0028 0.0296607 0.0001 ORANGE 2020 Annual MCY GAS Aggregated 65 55868.871 0.0248 2.7688096 0.0685 ORANGE 2020 Annual MDV GAS Aggregated 65 312579.715 0.1385 0.0341850 0.0047 ORANGE 2020 Annual MH GAS Aggregated 65 7043.392 0.0031 0.0913197 0.0003 ORANGE 2020 Annual MHDT GAS Aggregated 65 7554.979 0.0033 0.0611843 0.0002 ORANGE 2020 Annual HHDT GAS Aggregated 65 10.178 0.0000 0.9835975 0.0000ORANGE2020AnnualOBUSGASAggregated65995.682 0.0004 0.0883973 0.0000 ORANGE 2020 Annual SBUS GAS Aggregated 65 477.537 0.0002 0.0000000 0.0000 ORANGE 2020 Annual UBUS GAS Aggregated 65 209.765 0.0001 0.0141811 0.0000 2257224 1.0 0.089 1 - 68 EMFAC2017 Worksheet (65 mph) PM2_5_RUNEX PM2_5_RUNEX_AVE PM2_5_PMTW PM2_5_PMTW_AVE PM2_5_PMBW PM2_5_PMBW_AVE (gms/mile)(gms/mile)(gms/mile)(gms/mile)(gms/mile)(gms/mile) 0.0078759 0.000037423 0.0020 0.000009503 0.01575 0.000074838 0.0013119 0.000696685 0.0020 0.001062142 0.01575 0.008364366 0.1816483 0.000004315 0.0020 0.000000048 0.01575 0.000000374 0.0018511 0.000105579 0.0020 0.000114073 0.01575 0.000898327 0.0043863 0.000004531 0.0020 0.000002066 0.01575 0.000016269 0.0012861 0.000244850 0.0020 0.000380778 0.01575 0.0029986230.0162574 0.000149655 0.0030 0.000027616 0.03276 0.000301568 0.0009842 0.000015422 0.0020 0.000031339 0.03276 0.000513340 0.0155883 0.000055353 0.0030 0.000010653 0.03822 0.000135716 0.0008438 0.000002308 0.0020 0.000005471 0.03822 0.000104548 0.0017678 0.000042032 0.0010 0.000023777 0.00504 0.000119836 0.0046670 0.000011975 0.0020 0.000005132 0.01575 0.000040412 0.0013630 0.000181322 0.0020 0.000266059 0.01575 0.002095212 0.1397083 0.000172522 0.0040 0.000004940 0.05586 0.000068980 0.0011917 0.000003572 0.0030 0.000008993 0.05586 0.000167444 0.0933243 0.001091720 0.0030 0.000035094 0.05586 0.000653458 0.0007091 0.000002280 0.0030 0.000009646 0.05586 0.000179606 0.0773650 0.000345535 0.0090 0.000040197 0.02646 0.000118178 0.0011830 0.000000005 0.0050 0.000000022 0.02646 0.000000115 0.1028444 0.000027036 0.0030 0.000000789 0.05586 0.000014684 0.0006651 0.000000282 0.0030 0.000001271 0.05586 0.000023671 0.0000000 0.000000000 0.0030 0.000001699 0.3192 0.000180732 0.0000000 0.000000000 0.0020 0.000000406 0.31920 0.000064872 0.0000000 0.000000000 0.0000 0.000000000 0.0000 0.000000000 0.0001847 0.000000016 0.0030 0.000000268 0.05587 0.000004987 0.0032 0.002 0.017 1 - 69 EMFAC2017 Worksheet (65 mph) EMFAC2017 Emission Rates Region Type: County Region: Orange (SC) Calendar Year: 2020 Season: Annual Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories Pollutant Classification: TOG DSL Region CalYr Season Veh_Class Fuel MdlYr Speed Population Wt Frac TOG_RUNEX TOG_RUNEX AVE (miles/hr)(vehicles)(gms/mile)(gms/mile) ORANGE 2020 Annual LDA DSL Aggregated 65 11164.903 0.1207 0.0140263 0.0017 ORANGE 2020 Annual LDT1 DSL Aggregated 65 55.819 0.0006 0.2697117 0.0002 ORANGE 2020 Annual LDT2 DSL Aggregated 65 2427.176 0.0262 0.0099900 0.0003 ORANGE 2020 Annual LHDT1 DSL Aggregated 65 21629.925 0.2339 0.0791822 0.0185 ORANGE 2020 Annual LHDT2 DSL Aggregated 65 8343.637 0.0902 0.0686702 0.0062 ORANGE 2020 Annual MDV DSL Aggregated 65 6028.952 0.0652 0.0091178 0.0006 ORANGE 2020 Annual MH DSL Aggregated 65 2901.594 0.0314 0.0638991 0.0020 ORANGE 2020 Annual MHDT DSL Aggregated 65 27487.170 0.2972 0.1043012 0.0310 ORANGE 2020 Annual HHDT DSL Aggregated 65 10494.469 0.1135 0.1028850 0.0117 ORANGE 2020 Annual OBUS DSL Aggregated 65 617.692 0.0067 0.1618479 0.0011 ORANGE 2020 Annual SBUS DSL Aggregated 65 1330.412 0.0144 0.0000000 0.0000 ORANGE 2020 Annual UBUS DSL Aggregated 65 0.000 0.0000 0.0000000 0.0000 92482 1.0 0.073 EMFAC2017 Emission Rates Region Type: CountyRegion: Orange (SC) Calendar Year: 2020 Season: Annual Vehicle Classification: EMFAC2007 Categories Pollutant Classification: DSL Particulate Region CalYr Season Veh_Class Fuel MdlYr Speed Population Wt Frac PM10_RUNEX PM10_RUNEX AVE (miles/hr)(vehicles)(gms/mile)(gms/mile) ORANGE 2020 Annual LDA DSL Aggregated 65 11164.903 0.1207 0.0082320 0.0010 ORANGE 2020 Annual LDT1 DSL Aggregated 65 55.819 0.0006 0.1898617 0.0001 ORANGE 2020 Annual LDT2 DSL Aggregated 65 2427.176 0.0262 0.0045846 0.0001 ORANGE 2020 Annual LHDT1 DSL Aggregated 65 21629.925 0.2339 0.0169925 0.0040 ORANGE 2020 Annual LHDT2 DSL Aggregated 65 8343.637 0.0902 0.0162931 0.0015 ORANGE 2020 Annual MDV DSL Aggregated 65 6028.952 0.0652 0.0048780 0.0003 ORANGE 2020 Annual MH DSL Aggregated 65 2901.594 0.0314 0.1460253 0.0046 ORANGE 2020 Annual MHDT DSL Aggregated 65 27487.170 0.2972 0.0975440 0.0290 ORANGE 2020 Annual HHDT DSL Aggregated 65 10494.469 0.1135 0.0808631 0.0092 ORANGE 2020 Annual OBUS DSL Aggregated 65 617.692 0.0067 0.1074946 0.0007ORANGE2020AnnualSBUSDSLAggregated651330.412 0.0144 0.0000000 0.0000 ORANGE 2020 Annual UBUS DSL Aggregated 65 0.000 0.0000 0.0000000 0.0000 92482 1.0 0.050 1 - 70 On-Road Mobile Sources Emission Rate Computation Interstate 5 Mainline DSL Particulate Emissions Number of Sources 9 Link Length (meters)520 Volume/Baseline (VPH)540 Pollutant Mass Emission Rate (gr/mi)0.050 Emission Rate (gr/sec) = ((Mass Emission Rate x Volume/Baseline)/(1609.3 m/mile) x (3600 sec/hr)) x (Link Length) Pollutant Emission Rate (gr/sec)0.00242 Pollutant Emission Rate (gr/sec/source)2.69E-04 1 - 71 All 2349705 DSL 92482 Diesel Fleet Mix (weight fraction)0.0394 Link Counts AADT VPH VPH VPH all gas diesel 1 Interstate 5 Mainline 329500 13729 13189 540 6 I-5 SB On-Ramp at 1st St.14900 621 596 24 1 - 72 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report APPENDIX 3.2: RISK CALCULATION WORKSHEETS 1 - 73 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report This page intentionally left blank 1 - 74 Source Weight Contaminant Fraction URF CPF REL RfD (ug/m3)(mg/m3)(ug/m3)(mg/kg/day)(ug/m3)(mg/kg/day) (a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f)(g)(h)(i)(j)(k)(l)(m)(n)(o)(p)(q)(r) Freeway 0.02900 2.9E-05 1.00E+00 Diesel Particulates 3.0E-04 1.1E+00 3.6E-06 5.0E+00 1.4E-03 5.6E-03 Total 3.58E-06 5.6E-03 0.0E+00 0.0E+00 0.0E+00 0.0E+00 0.0E+00 0.0E+00 0.0E+00 * Key to Toxocological Endpoints RESP Respiratory System CNS/PNS Central/Peripheral Nervous System CV/BL Cardiovascular/Blood System IMMUN Immune System KIDN Kidney GI/LV Gastrointestinal System/Liver REPRO Reproductive System (e.g., teratogenic and developmental effects) EYES Eye irritation and/or other effects Note:Exposure factors used to calculate contaminant intake exposure frequency (days/year)350 exposure duration (years)30 inhalation rate (m3/day)20 average body weight (kg)70 averaging time(cancer) (days)25550 averaging time(noncancer) (days)10950 Noncarcinogenic Hazards / Toxicological Endpoints* RISK RESP CNS/PNS CV/BL IMMUN KIDN GI/LV REPRO EYES Table A1Quantification of Carcinogenic Risks and Noncarcinogenic Hazards 30 Year Exposure Scenario / Maximum Residential Receptor Concentration Carcinogenic Risk 1 - 75 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report APPENDIX 4.1: AERMOD MODEL OUTPUT SUMMARY FILE 1 - 76 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report This page intentionally left blank 1 - 77  *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   1  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                             ***     MODEL SETUP OPTIONS SUMMARY       ***  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  **Model Is Setup For Calculation of Average CONCentration Values.       ‐‐  DEPOSITION LOGIC  ‐‐  **NO GAS DEPOSITION Data Provided.  **NO PARTICLE DEPOSITION Data Provided.  **Model Uses NO DRY DEPLETION.  DRYDPLT  =  F  **Model Uses NO WET DEPLETION.  WETDPLT  =  F     **Model Uses URBAN Dispersion Algorithm for the SBL for     9 Source(s),    for Total of    1 Urban Area(s):    Urban Population =   3010232.0 ;  Urban Roughness Length =  1.000 m     **Model Uses Regulatory DEFAULT Options:          1. Stack‐tip Downwash.          2. Model Accounts for ELEVated Terrain Effects.          3. Use Calms Processing Routine.          4. Use Missing Data Processing Routine.          5. No Exponential Decay.          6. Urban Roughness Length of 1.0 Meter Assumed.     **Other Options Specified:          ADJ_U*   ‐ Use ADJ_U* option for SBL in AERMET          CCVR_Sub ‐ Meteorological data includes CCVR substitutions          TEMP_Sub ‐ Meteorological data includes TEMP substitutions     **Model Accepts FLAGPOLE Receptor Heights.     **The User Specified a Pollutant Type of:  DPM          **Model Calculates ANNUAL Averages Only     **This Run Includes:      9 Source(s);       1 Source Group(s); and     348  Receptor(s)                 with:      0 POINT(s), including                            0 POINTCAP(s) and      0 POINTHOR(s)                  and:      9 VOLUME source(s) 1 - 78                  and:      0 AREA type source(s)                  and:      0 LINE source(s)                  and:      0 RLINE/RLINEXT source(s)                  and:      0 OPENPIT source(s)                  and:      0 BUOYANT LINE source(s) with      0 line(s)     **Model Set To Continue RUNning After the Setup Testing.  **The AERMET Input Meteorological Data Version Date:  16216     **Output Options Selected:           Model Outputs Tables of ANNUAL Averages by Receptor           Model Outputs External File(s) of High Values for Plotting (PLOTFILE  Keyword)           Model Outputs Separate Summary File of High Ranked Values (SUMMFILE  Keyword)     **NOTE:  The Following Flags May Appear Following CONC Values:  c for Calm Hours                                                                  m for Missing  Hours                                                                  b for Both Calm  and Missing Hours     **Misc. Inputs:  Base Elev. for Pot. Temp. Profile (m MSL) =    17.00 ;  Decay  Coef. =    0.000     ;  Rot. Angle =     0.0                   Emission Units = GRAMS/SEC                                ;   Emission Rate Unit Factor =   0.10000E+07                   Output Units   = MICROGRAMS/M**3                              **Approximate Storage Requirements of Model =      3.5 MB of RAM.     **Input Runstream File:          aermod.inp                                                                                        **Output Print File:             aermod.out                                                                                        **Detailed Error/Message File:   13400 FREEWAY HRA.ERR                                                                             **File for Summary of Results:   13400 FREEWAY HRA.SUM                                                                             *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   2  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                             *** METEOROLOGICAL DAYS SELECTED FOR  1 - 79 PROCESSING ***                                                                (1=YES; 0=NO)             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1                 NOTE:  METEOROLOGICAL DATA ACTUALLY PROCESSED WILL ALSO DEPEND ON  WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE DATA FILE.                                   *** UPPER BOUND OF FIRST THROUGH FIFTH WIND SPEED CATEGORIES ***                                                             (METERS/SEC)                                                  1.54,   3.09,   5.14,   8.23,   10.80,  *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   3  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                     *** UP TO THE FIRST 24 HOURS OF METEOROLOGICAL  DATA ***    Surface file:   KSNA_V9_ADJU\KSNA_V9.SFC                                                           Met Version:  16216    Profile file:   KSNA_V9_ADJU\KSNA_V9.PFL                                                            Surface format: FREE                                                                                                         Profile format: FREE                                                                                                         Surface station no.:    93184                  Upper air station no.:     3190 1 - 80                   Name: UNKNOWN                                    Name: UNKNOWN                                                    Year:   2012                                     Year:   2012  First 24 hours of scalar data  YR MO DY JDY HR     H0     U*     W*  DT/DZ ZICNV ZIMCH  M‐O LEN    Z0  BOWEN  ALBEDO  REF WS   WD     HT  REF TA     HT ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐   12 01 01   1 01   ‐4.5  0.082 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   56.     11.0  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.87   62.    5.8  283.8    2.0  12 01 01   1 02   ‐3.5  0.073 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   47.      9.9  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.77   27.    5.8  283.1    2.0  12 01 01   1 03   ‐3.5  0.073 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   47.      9.9  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.77  336.    5.8  283.1    2.0  12 01 01   1 04   ‐3.3  0.070 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   45.      9.7  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.74   34.    5.8  283.1    2.0  12 01 01   1 05   ‐3.0  0.068 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   42.      9.4  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.70  154.    5.8  282.5    2.0  12 01 01   1 06 ‐999.0 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999. ‐999. ‐99999.0  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.00    0.    5.8  282.0    2.0  12 01 01   1 07   ‐2.0  0.059 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   34.      9.0  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.55  343.    5.8  281.4    2.0  12 01 01   1 08   ‐2.6  0.066 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   40.      9.7  0.12   2.65    0.53    0.69   25.    5.8  281.4    2.0  12 01 01   1 09   21.6  0.133  0.252  0.010   27.  116.     ‐9.9  0.12   2.65    0.31    1.03  344.    5.8  282.5    2.0  12 01 01   1 10  115.6  0.162  0.713  0.008  114.  156.     ‐3.3  0.12   2.65    0.24    1.06  233.    5.8  286.4    2.0  12 01 01   1 11  160.9  0.126  1.129  0.005  325.  108.     ‐1.1  0.12   2.65    0.21    0.67  261.    5.8  291.4    2.0  12 01 01   1 12  187.0  0.138  1.467  0.005  614.  123.     ‐1.3  0.12   2.65    0.20    0.75  252.    5.8  294.9    2.0  12 01 01   1 13  186.9  0.189  1.755  0.005 1051.  197.     ‐3.3  0.12   2.65    0.20    1.23  280.    5.8  297.5    2.0  12 01 01   1 14  168.3  0.247  1.857  0.005 1383.  295.     ‐8.1  0.12   2.65    0.21    1.86  268.    5.8  299.2    2.0  12 01 01   1 15  115.3  0.275  1.688  0.005 1517.  346.    ‐16.3  0.12   2.65    0.24    2.25  248.    5.8  298.1    2.0  12 01 01   1 16   41.5  0.262  1.211  0.005 1552.  322.    ‐39.2  0.12   2.65    0.33    2.32  227.    5.8  295.9    2.0  12 01 01   1 17  ‐17.9  0.217 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.  244.     52.0  0.12   2.65    0.60    2.18  227.    5.8  292.5    2.0  12 01 01   1 18  ‐24.7  0.250 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.  300.     68.7  0.12   2.65    1.00    2.50  219.    5.8  288.8    2.0  12 01 01   1 19   ‐5.2  0.088 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   91.     12.0  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.94  201.    5.8  287.5    2.0  12 01 01   1 20   ‐3.5  0.073 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   47.     10.0  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.77  259.    5.8  287.0    2.0  12 01 01   1 21   ‐2.6  0.064 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   39.      9.1  0.12   2.65    1 - 81 1.00    0.65  264.    5.8  286.4    2.0  12 01 01   1 22   ‐4.4  0.081 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   55.     10.9  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.86  211.    5.8  285.9    2.0  12 01 01   1 23   ‐4.2  0.079 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   53.     10.7  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.84  247.    5.8  284.9    2.0  12 01 01   1 24   ‐7.1  0.103 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   80.     14.1  0.12   2.65    1.00    1.09  236.    5.8  283.8    2.0  First hour of profile data  YR MO DY HR HEIGHT F  WDIR    WSPD AMB_TMP sigmaA  sigmaW  sigmaV  12 01 01 01    5.8 1   62.    0.87   283.8   99.0  ‐99.00  ‐99.00  F indicates top of profile (=1) or below (=0)  *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   4  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                    *** THE SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM ANNUAL RESULTS  AVERAGED OVER   5 YEARS ***                                     ** CONC OF DPM      IN MICROGRAMS/M**3                          **                                                                                                              NETWORK GROUP ID                       AVERAGE CONC                RECEPTOR  (XR, YR,  ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG)  OF TYPE  GRID‐ID ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  ALL       1ST HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.11599 AT (  421925.73,  3734653.54,     36.00,    36.00,    7.00)  DC                     2ND HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.11329 AT (  421937.11,  3734627.53,     36.00,    36.00,    7.00)  DC                     3RD HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.11286 AT (  421925.73,  3734662.21,     36.00,    36.00,    7.00)  DC                     4TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.11236 AT (  421902.97,  3734705.56,     36.45,    36.45,    7.00)  DC                     5TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.11117 AT (  421914.35,  3734688.22,     36.26,    36.26,    7.00)  DC                     6TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.11073 AT (  421937.11,  3734636.20,     36.00,    36.00,    7.00)  DC                     7TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.10963 AT (  421948.49,  3734601.52,     36.00,    36.00,    7.00)  DC           1 - 82           8TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.10923 AT (  421925.73,  3734670.88,     36.08,    36.08,    7.00)  DC                     9TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.10818 AT (  421937.11,  3734644.87,     36.00,    36.00,    7.00)  DC                    10TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.10817 AT (  421902.97,  3734714.23,     36.54,    36.54,    7.00)  DC            *** RECEPTOR TYPES:  GC = GRIDCART                       GP = GRIDPOLR                       DC = DISCCART                       DP = DISCPOLR  *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   5  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*  *** Message Summary : AERMOD Model Execution ***   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Summary of Total Messages ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐     A Total of            0 Fatal Error Message(s)  A Total of            2 Warning Message(s)  A Total of         1864 Informational Message(s)  A Total of        43848 Hours Were Processed  A Total of         1500 Calm Hours Identified  A Total of          364 Missing Hours Identified (  0.83 Percent)           ******** FATAL ERROR MESSAGES ********                 ***  NONE  ***                    ********   WARNING MESSAGES   ********   ME W186      99       MEOPEN: THRESH_1MIN 1‐min ASOS wind speed threshold used           0.50  ME W187      99       MEOPEN: ADJ_U* Option for Stable Low Winds used in AERMET               1 - 83 Central Pointe Mixed-Use Development Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Health Risk Assessment 13400-03 Freeway HRA Report APPENDIX 4.2: AERMOD MODEL INPUT/OUTPUT FILES (ELECTRONIC FORMAT, AVAILABLE ON REQUEST) 1 - 84 ** Lakes Environmental AERMOD MPI ** **************************************** ** ** AERMOD INPUT PRODUCED BY: ** AERMOD VIEW VER. 9.9.0 ** LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL SOFTWARE INC. ** DATE: 6/5/2020 ** FILE: C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\13400 FREEWAY HRA\13400 FREEWAY HRA.ADI ** **************************************** ** ** **************************************** ** AERMOD CONTROL PATHWAY **************************************** ** ** CO STARTING    TITLEONE C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660 E FIRST ST.ISC    MODELOPT DFAULT CONC    AVERTIME ANNUAL    URBANOPT 3010232    POLLUTID DPM    FLAGPOLE 0.00    RUNORNOT RUN    ERRORFIL "13400 FREEWAY HRA.ERR" CO FINISHED ** **************************************** ** AERMOD SOURCE PATHWAY **************************************** ** ** SO STARTING ** SOURCE LOCATION ** ** SOURCE ID ‐ TYPE ‐ X COORD. ‐ Y COORD. ** ** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ** LINE SOURCE REPRESENTED BY ADJACENT VOLUME SOURCES ** LINE VOLUME SOURCE ID = SLINE1 ** DESCRSRC I‐5 MAINLINE ** PREFIX ** LENGTH OF SIDE = 57.91 ** CONFIGURATION = ADJACENT ** EMISSION RATE = 0.00242 ** VERTICAL DIMENSION = 7.59 ** SZINIT = 3.53 ** NODES = 4 ** 421732.353, 3734852.628, 37.00, 0.00, 26.93 ** 421856.672, 3734643.962, 36.00, 0.00, 26.93 1 - 85 ** 421905.810, 3734500.098, 35.00, 0.00, 26.93 ** 421939.898, 3734380.185, 34.94, 0.00, 26.93 ** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    LOCATION L0000001     VOLUME   421747.173 3734827.753 37.00    LOCATION L0000002     VOLUME   421776.813 3734778.004 37.00    LOCATION L0000003     VOLUME   421806.453 3734728.254 36.69    LOCATION L0000004     VOLUME   421836.093 3734678.504 36.15    LOCATION L0000005     VOLUME   421862.394 3734627.210 36.00    LOCATION L0000006     VOLUME   421881.112 3734572.408 36.00    LOCATION L0000007     VOLUME   421899.829 3734517.607 35.42    LOCATION L0000008     VOLUME   421916.585 3734462.192 35.00    LOCATION L0000009     VOLUME   421932.421 3734406.489 35.00 ** END OF LINE VOLUME SOURCE ID = SLINE1 ** SOURCE PARAMETERS ** ** LINE VOLUME SOURCE ID = SLINE1    SRCPARAM L0000001     0.0002688889      0.00     26.93      3.53    SRCPARAM L0000002     0.0002688889      0.00     26.93      3.53    SRCPARAM L0000003     0.0002688889      0.00     26.93      3.53    SRCPARAM L0000004     0.0002688889      0.00     26.93      3.53    SRCPARAM L0000005     0.0002688889      0.00     26.93      3.53    SRCPARAM L0000006     0.0002688889      0.00     26.93      3.53    SRCPARAM L0000007     0.0002688889      0.00     26.93      3.53    SRCPARAM L0000008     0.0002688889      0.00     26.93      3.53    SRCPARAM L0000009     0.0002688889      0.00     26.93      3.53 ** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐    URBANSRC ALL    SRCGROUP ALL SO FINISHED ** **************************************** ** AERMOD RECEPTOR PATHWAY **************************************** ** ** RE STARTING    INCLUDED "13400 FREEWAY HRA.ROU" RE FINISHED ** **************************************** ** AERMOD METEOROLOGY PATHWAY **************************************** ** ** ME STARTING    SURFFILE KSNA_V9_ADJU\KSNA_V9.SFC    PROFFILE KSNA_V9_ADJU\KSNA_V9.PFL    SURFDATA 93184 2012    UAIRDATA 3190 2012    PROFBASE 17.0 METERS ME FINISHED 1 - 86 ** **************************************** ** AERMOD OUTPUT PATHWAY **************************************** ** ** OU STARTING ** AUTO‐GENERATED PLOTFILES    PLOTFILE   ANNUAL ALL "13400 FREEWAY HRA.AD\AN00GALL.PLT" 31    SUMMFILE "13400 FREEWAY HRA.SUM" OU FINISHED   *** Message Summary For AERMOD Model Setup ***   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Summary of Total Messages ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐     A Total of            0 Fatal Error Message(s)  A Total of            2 Warning Message(s)  A Total of            0 Informational Message(s)           ******** FATAL ERROR MESSAGES ********                 ***  NONE  ***                    ********   WARNING MESSAGES   ********   ME W186      99       MEOPEN: THRESH_1MIN 1‐min ASOS wind speed threshold used           0.50  ME W187      99       MEOPEN: ADJ_U* Option for Stable Low Winds used in AERMET                ***********************************  *** SETUP Finishes Successfully ***  ***********************************  *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   1  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                             ***     MODEL SETUP OPTIONS SUMMARY       ***  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  **Model Is Setup For Calculation of Average CONCentration Values. 1 - 87       ‐‐  DEPOSITION LOGIC  ‐‐  **NO GAS DEPOSITION Data Provided.  **NO PARTICLE DEPOSITION Data Provided.  **Model Uses NO DRY DEPLETION.  DRYDPLT  =  F  **Model Uses NO WET DEPLETION.  WETDPLT  =  F     **Model Uses URBAN Dispersion Algorithm for the SBL for     9 Source(s),    for Total of    1 Urban Area(s):    Urban Population =   3010232.0 ;  Urban Roughness Length =  1.000 m     **Model Uses Regulatory DEFAULT Options:          1. Stack‐tip Downwash.          2. Model Accounts for ELEVated Terrain Effects.          3. Use Calms Processing Routine.          4. Use Missing Data Processing Routine.          5. No Exponential Decay.          6. Urban Roughness Length of 1.0 Meter Assumed.     **Other Options Specified:          ADJ_U*   ‐ Use ADJ_U* option for SBL in AERMET          CCVR_Sub ‐ Meteorological data includes CCVR substitutions          TEMP_Sub ‐ Meteorological data includes TEMP substitutions     **Model Accepts FLAGPOLE Receptor Heights.     **The User Specified a Pollutant Type of:  DPM          **Model Calculates ANNUAL Averages Only     **This Run Includes:      9 Source(s);       1 Source Group(s); and     348  Receptor(s)                 with:      0 POINT(s), including                            0 POINTCAP(s) and      0 POINTHOR(s)                  and:      9 VOLUME source(s)                  and:      0 AREA type source(s)                  and:      0 LINE source(s)                  and:      0 RLINE/RLINEXT source(s)                  and:      0 OPENPIT source(s)                  and:      0 BUOYANT LINE source(s) with      0 line(s)     **Model Set To Continue RUNning After the Setup Testing.  **The AERMET Input Meteorological Data Version Date:  16216     **Output Options Selected:           Model Outputs Tables of ANNUAL Averages by Receptor           Model Outputs External File(s) of High Values for Plotting (PLOTFILE  1 - 88 Keyword)           Model Outputs Separate Summary File of High Ranked Values (SUMMFILE  Keyword)     **NOTE:  The Following Flags May Appear Following CONC Values:  c for Calm Hours                                                                  m for Missing  Hours                                                                  b for Both Calm  and Missing Hours     **Misc. Inputs:  Base Elev. for Pot. Temp. Profile (m MSL) =    17.00 ;  Decay  Coef. =    0.000     ;  Rot. Angle =     0.0                   Emission Units = GRAMS/SEC                                ;   Emission Rate Unit Factor =   0.10000E+07                   Output Units   = MICROGRAMS/M**3                              **Approximate Storage Requirements of Model =      3.5 MB of RAM.     **Input Runstream File:          aermod.inp                                                                                        **Output Print File:             aermod.out                                                                                        **Detailed Error/Message File:   13400 FREEWAY HRA.ERR                                                                             **File for Summary of Results:   13400 FREEWAY HRA.SUM                                                                             *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   2  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                                   *** VOLUME SOURCE DATA ***                NUMBER EMISSION RATE                    BASE    RELEASE    INIT.     INIT.   URBAN  EMISSION RATE    SOURCE       PART.  (GRAMS/SEC)     X        Y      ELEV.   HEIGHT      SY       SZ     SOURCE  SCALAR VARY      ID         CATS.               (METERS) (METERS) (METERS) (METERS) (METERS)  (METERS)              BY  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  L0000001         0   0.26889E‐03  421747.2 3734827.8    37.0     0.00    26.93     3.53     YES            L0000002         0   0.26889E‐03  421776.8 3734778.0    37.0     0.00    26.93     1 - 89 3.53     YES            L0000003         0   0.26889E‐03  421806.5 3734728.3    36.7     0.00    26.93     3.53     YES            L0000004         0   0.26889E‐03  421836.1 3734678.5    36.1     0.00    26.93     3.53     YES            L0000005         0   0.26889E‐03  421862.4 3734627.2    36.0     0.00    26.93     3.53     YES            L0000006         0   0.26889E‐03  421881.1 3734572.4    36.0     0.00    26.93     3.53     YES            L0000007         0   0.26889E‐03  421899.8 3734517.6    35.4     0.00    26.93     3.53     YES            L0000008         0   0.26889E‐03  421916.6 3734462.2    35.0     0.00    26.93     3.53     YES            L0000009         0   0.26889E‐03  421932.4 3734406.5    35.0     0.00    26.93     3.53     YES            *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   3  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                            *** SOURCE IDs DEFINING SOURCE GROUPS  ***  SRCGROUP ID                                              SOURCE IDs  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐                                              ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐   ALL        L0000001    , L0000002    , L0000003    , L0000004    , L0000005    ,  L0000006    , L0000007    , L0000008    ,              L0000009    ,  *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   4  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                           *** SOURCE IDs DEFINED AS URBAN SOURCES  ***   URBAN ID   URBAN POP                                    SOURCE IDs   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐                                    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ 1 - 90               3010232.   L0000001    , L0000002    , L0000003    , L0000004    ,  L0000005    , L0000006    , L0000007    ,  L0000008    ,              L0000009    ,  *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   5  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                              *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS ***                                            (X‐COORD, Y‐COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG)                                                            (METERS)      ( 421959.9, 3734566.8,      35.9,      35.9,       7.0);         ( 421971.2,  3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421982.6, 3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421994.0,  3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422005.4, 3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422016.8,  3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422028.1, 3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422039.5,  3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422050.9, 3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422062.3,  3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422073.7, 3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422085.0,  3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422096.4, 3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422107.8,  3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422119.2, 3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422130.6,  3734566.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421959.9, 3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421971.2,  3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421982.6, 3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421994.0,  3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422005.4, 3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422016.8,  3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422028.1, 3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422039.5,  3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422050.9, 3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422062.3,  3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422073.7, 3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422085.0,  3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422096.4, 3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422107.8,  3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422119.2, 3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422130.6,  3734575.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);       1 - 91      ( 421959.9, 3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421971.2,  3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421982.6, 3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421994.0,  3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422005.4, 3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422016.8,  3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422028.1, 3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422039.5,  3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422050.9, 3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422062.3,  3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422073.7, 3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422085.0,  3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422096.4, 3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422107.8,  3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422119.2, 3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422130.6,  3734584.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421959.9, 3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421971.2,  3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421982.6, 3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421994.0,  3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422005.4, 3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422016.8,  3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422028.1, 3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422039.5,  3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422050.9, 3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422062.3,  3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422073.7, 3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422085.0,  3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422096.4, 3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422107.8,  3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422119.2, 3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422130.6,  3734592.8,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421948.5, 3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421959.9,  3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421971.2, 3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421982.6,  3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421994.0, 3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422005.4,  3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422016.8, 3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422028.1,  3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422039.5, 3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422050.9,  3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422062.3, 3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422073.7,  3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422085.0, 3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422096.4,  3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422107.8, 3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422119.2,  3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422130.6, 3734601.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421948.5,  3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);       1 - 92      ( 421959.9, 3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421971.2,  3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421982.6, 3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421994.0,  3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422005.4, 3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422016.8,  3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422028.1, 3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422039.5,  3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);        *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   6  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                              *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS ***                                            (X‐COORD, Y‐COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG)                                                            (METERS)      ( 422050.9, 3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422062.3,  3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422073.7, 3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422085.0,  3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422096.4, 3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422107.8,  3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422119.2, 3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422130.6,  3734610.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421948.5, 3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421959.9,  3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421971.2, 3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421982.6,  3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421994.0, 3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422005.4,  3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422016.8, 3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422028.1,  3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422039.5, 3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422050.9,  3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422062.3, 3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422073.7,  3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422085.0, 3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422096.4,  3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422107.8, 3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422119.2,  3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422130.6, 3734618.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421937.1,  3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421948.5, 3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421959.9,  3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421971.2, 3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421982.6,  3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);       1 - 93      ( 421994.0, 3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422005.4,  3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422016.8, 3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422028.1,  3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422039.5, 3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422050.9,  3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422062.3, 3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422073.7,  3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422085.0, 3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422096.4,  3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422107.8, 3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422119.2,  3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422130.6, 3734627.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421937.1,  3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421948.5, 3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421959.9,  3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421971.2, 3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421982.6,  3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421994.0, 3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422005.4,  3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422016.8, 3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422028.1,  3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422039.5, 3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422050.9,  3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422062.3, 3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422073.7,  3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422085.0, 3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422096.4,  3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422107.8, 3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422119.2,  3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422130.6, 3734636.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421937.1,  3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421948.5, 3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421959.9,  3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421971.2, 3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421982.6,  3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421994.0, 3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422005.4,  3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422016.8, 3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422028.1,  3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422039.5, 3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422050.9,  3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422062.3, 3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422073.7,  3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422085.0, 3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422096.4,  3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422107.8, 3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422119.2,  3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422130.6, 3734644.9,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421925.7,  3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);       1 - 94      ( 421937.1, 3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421948.5,  3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421959.9, 3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421971.2,  3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421982.6, 3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421994.0,  3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422005.4, 3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422016.8,  3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422028.1, 3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422039.5,  3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);        *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   7  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                              *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS ***                                            (X‐COORD, Y‐COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG)                                                            (METERS)      ( 422050.9, 3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422062.3,  3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422073.7, 3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422085.0,  3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422096.4, 3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422107.8,  3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422119.2, 3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422130.6,  3734653.5,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421925.7, 3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421937.1,  3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421948.5, 3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421959.9,  3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421971.2, 3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421982.6,  3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 421994.0, 3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422005.4,  3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422016.8, 3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422028.1,  3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422039.5, 3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422050.9,  3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422062.3, 3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422073.7,  3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422085.0, 3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422096.4,  3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422107.8, 3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 422119.2,  3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);            ( 422130.6, 3734662.2,      36.0,      36.0,       7.0);         ( 421925.7,  3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);       1 - 95      ( 421937.1, 3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);         ( 421948.5,  3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);            ( 421959.9, 3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);         ( 421971.2,  3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);            ( 421982.6, 3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);         ( 421994.0,  3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);            ( 422005.4, 3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);         ( 422016.8,  3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);            ( 422028.1, 3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);         ( 422039.5,  3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);            ( 422050.9, 3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);         ( 422062.3,  3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);            ( 422073.7, 3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);         ( 422085.0,  3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);            ( 422096.4, 3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);         ( 422107.8,  3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);            ( 422119.2, 3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);         ( 422130.6,  3734670.9,      36.1,      36.1,       7.0);            ( 421925.7, 3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);         ( 421937.1,  3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);            ( 421948.5, 3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);         ( 421959.9,  3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);            ( 421971.2, 3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);         ( 421982.6,  3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);            ( 421994.0, 3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);         ( 422005.4,  3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);            ( 422016.8, 3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);         ( 422028.1,  3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);            ( 422039.5, 3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);         ( 422050.9,  3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);            ( 422062.3, 3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);         ( 422073.7,  3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);            ( 422085.0, 3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);         ( 422096.4,  3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);            ( 422107.8, 3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);         ( 422119.2,  3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);            ( 422130.6, 3734679.5,      36.2,      36.2,       7.0);         ( 421914.3,  3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);            ( 421925.7, 3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);         ( 421937.1,  3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);            ( 421948.5, 3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);         ( 421959.9,  3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);            ( 421971.2, 3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);         ( 421982.6,  3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);            ( 421994.0, 3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);         ( 422005.4,  3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);            ( 422016.8, 3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);         ( 422028.1,  3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);            ( 422039.5, 3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);         ( 422050.9,  3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);       1 - 96      ( 422062.3, 3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);         ( 422073.7,  3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);            ( 422085.0, 3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);         ( 422096.4,  3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);            ( 422107.8, 3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);         ( 422119.2,  3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);            ( 422130.6, 3734688.2,      36.3,      36.3,       7.0);         ( 421914.3,  3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);            ( 421925.7, 3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);         ( 421937.1,  3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);            ( 421948.5, 3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);         ( 421959.9,  3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);        *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   8  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                              *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTORS ***                                            (X‐COORD, Y‐COORD, ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG)                                                            (METERS)      ( 421971.2, 3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);         ( 421982.6,  3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);            ( 421994.0, 3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);         ( 422005.4,  3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);            ( 422016.8, 3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);         ( 422028.1,  3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);            ( 422039.5, 3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);         ( 422050.9,  3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);            ( 422062.3, 3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);         ( 422073.7,  3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);            ( 422085.0, 3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);         ( 422096.4,  3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);            ( 422107.8, 3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);         ( 422119.2,  3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);            ( 422130.6, 3734696.9,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);         ( 421903.0,  3734705.6,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);            ( 421914.3, 3734705.6,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);         ( 421925.7,  3734705.6,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);            ( 421937.1, 3734705.6,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);         ( 421948.5,  3734705.6,      36.4,      36.4,       7.0);            ( 421959.9, 3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 421971.2,  3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);            ( 421982.6, 3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 421994.0,  3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);            ( 422005.4, 3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 422016.8,  3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);       1 - 97      ( 422028.1, 3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 422039.5,  3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);            ( 422050.9, 3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 422062.3,  3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);            ( 422073.7, 3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 422085.0,  3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);            ( 422096.4, 3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 422107.8,  3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);            ( 422119.2, 3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 422130.6,  3734705.6,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);            ( 421903.0, 3734714.2,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 421914.3,  3734714.2,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);            ( 421925.7, 3734714.2,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 421937.1,  3734714.2,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);            ( 421948.5, 3734714.2,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 421959.9,  3734714.2,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);            ( 421971.2, 3734714.2,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 421982.6,  3734714.2,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);            ( 421994.0, 3734714.2,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 422005.4,  3734714.2,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);            ( 422016.8, 3734714.2,      36.5,      36.5,       7.0);         ( 422028.1,  3734714.2,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 422039.5, 3734714.2,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 422050.9,  3734714.2,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 422062.3, 3734714.2,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 422073.7,  3734714.2,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 422085.0, 3734714.2,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 422096.4,  3734714.2,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 422107.8, 3734714.2,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 422119.2,  3734714.2,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 422130.6, 3734714.2,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 421903.0,  3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 421914.3, 3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 421925.7,  3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 421937.1, 3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 421948.5,  3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 421959.9, 3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 421971.2,  3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 421982.6, 3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 421994.0,  3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 422005.4, 3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 422016.8,  3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 422028.1, 3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 422039.5,  3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 422050.9, 3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 422062.3,  3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 422073.7, 3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);         ( 422085.0,  3734722.9,      36.6,      36.6,       7.0);            ( 422096.4, 3734722.9,      36.7,      36.7,       7.0);         ( 422107.8,  3734722.9,      36.7,      36.7,       7.0);       1 - 98      ( 422119.2, 3734722.9,      36.7,      36.7,       7.0);         ( 422130.6,  3734722.9,      36.7,      36.7,       7.0);        *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE   9  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                             *** METEOROLOGICAL DAYS SELECTED FOR  PROCESSING ***                                                                (1=YES; 0=NO)             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1             1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1   1 1 1 1 1 1                 NOTE:  METEOROLOGICAL DATA ACTUALLY PROCESSED WILL ALSO DEPEND ON  WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE DATA FILE.                                   *** UPPER BOUND OF FIRST THROUGH FIFTH WIND SPEED CATEGORIES ***                                                             (METERS/SEC)                                                  1.54,   3.09,   5.14,   8.23,   10.80,  *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE  10  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                                     *** UP TO THE FIRST 24 HOURS OF METEOROLOGICAL  1 - 99 DATA ***    Surface file:   KSNA_V9_ADJU\KSNA_V9.SFC                                                           Met Version:  16216    Profile file:   KSNA_V9_ADJU\KSNA_V9.PFL                                                            Surface format: FREE                                                                                                         Profile format: FREE                                                                                                         Surface station no.:    93184                  Upper air station no.:     3190                   Name: UNKNOWN                                    Name: UNKNOWN                                                    Year:   2012                                     Year:   2012  First 24 hours of scalar data  YR MO DY JDY HR     H0     U*     W*  DT/DZ ZICNV ZIMCH  M‐O LEN    Z0  BOWEN  ALBEDO  REF WS   WD     HT  REF TA     HT ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐   12 01 01   1 01   ‐4.5  0.082 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   56.     11.0  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.87   62.    5.8  283.8    2.0  12 01 01   1 02   ‐3.5  0.073 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   47.      9.9  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.77   27.    5.8  283.1    2.0  12 01 01   1 03   ‐3.5  0.073 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   47.      9.9  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.77  336.    5.8  283.1    2.0  12 01 01   1 04   ‐3.3  0.070 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   45.      9.7  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.74   34.    5.8  283.1    2.0  12 01 01   1 05   ‐3.0  0.068 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   42.      9.4  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.70  154.    5.8  282.5    2.0  12 01 01   1 06 ‐999.0 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999. ‐999. ‐99999.0  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.00    0.    5.8  282.0    2.0  12 01 01   1 07   ‐2.0  0.059 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   34.      9.0  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.55  343.    5.8  281.4    2.0  12 01 01   1 08   ‐2.6  0.066 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   40.      9.7  0.12   2.65    0.53    0.69   25.    5.8  281.4    2.0  12 01 01   1 09   21.6  0.133  0.252  0.010   27.  116.     ‐9.9  0.12   2.65    0.31    1.03  344.    5.8  282.5    2.0  12 01 01   1 10  115.6  0.162  0.713  0.008  114.  156.     ‐3.3  0.12   2.65    0.24    1.06  233.    5.8  286.4    2.0  12 01 01   1 11  160.9  0.126  1.129  0.005  325.  108.     ‐1.1  0.12   2.65    0.21    0.67  261.    5.8  291.4    2.0  12 01 01   1 12  187.0  0.138  1.467  0.005  614.  123.     ‐1.3  0.12   2.65    0.20    0.75  252.    5.8  294.9    2.0  12 01 01   1 13  186.9  0.189  1.755  0.005 1051.  197.     ‐3.3  0.12   2.65    0.20    1.23  280.    5.8  297.5    2.0  12 01 01   1 14  168.3  0.247  1.857  0.005 1383.  295.     ‐8.1  0.12   2.65    0.21    1.86  268.    5.8  299.2    2.0  12 01 01   1 15  115.3  0.275  1.688  0.005 1517.  346.    ‐16.3  0.12   2.65    0.24    2.25  248.    5.8  298.1    2.0 1 - 100  12 01 01   1 16   41.5  0.262  1.211  0.005 1552.  322.    ‐39.2  0.12   2.65    0.33    2.32  227.    5.8  295.9    2.0  12 01 01   1 17  ‐17.9  0.217 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.  244.     52.0  0.12   2.65    0.60    2.18  227.    5.8  292.5    2.0  12 01 01   1 18  ‐24.7  0.250 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.  300.     68.7  0.12   2.65    1.00    2.50  219.    5.8  288.8    2.0  12 01 01   1 19   ‐5.2  0.088 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   91.     12.0  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.94  201.    5.8  287.5    2.0  12 01 01   1 20   ‐3.5  0.073 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   47.     10.0  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.77  259.    5.8  287.0    2.0  12 01 01   1 21   ‐2.6  0.064 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   39.      9.1  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.65  264.    5.8  286.4    2.0  12 01 01   1 22   ‐4.4  0.081 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   55.     10.9  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.86  211.    5.8  285.9    2.0  12 01 01   1 23   ‐4.2  0.079 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   53.     10.7  0.12   2.65    1.00    0.84  247.    5.8  284.9    2.0  12 01 01   1 24   ‐7.1  0.103 ‐9.000 ‐9.000 ‐999.   80.     14.1  0.12   2.65    1.00    1.09  236.    5.8  283.8    2.0  First hour of profile data  YR MO DY HR HEIGHT F  WDIR    WSPD AMB_TMP sigmaA  sigmaW  sigmaV  12 01 01 01    5.8 1   62.    0.87   283.8   99.0  ‐99.00  ‐99.00  F indicates top of profile (=1) or below (=0)  *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE  11  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                    *** THE ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATION    VALUES AVERAGED OVER   5 YEARS FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL      ***                                   INCLUDING SOURCE(S):     L0000001    , L0000002    , L0000003    , L0000004    , L0000005    ,                   L0000006    , L0000007    , L0000008    , L0000009    ,                                               *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***                                         ** CONC OF DPM      IN MICROGRAMS/M**3                          **        X‐COORD (M)   Y‐COORD (M)        CONC                       X‐COORD (M)    Y‐COORD (M)        CONC  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐          421959.87    3734566.84        0.10666                      421971.25     1 - 101 3734566.84        0.09644                                   421982.63    3734566.84        0.08740                      421994.01     3734566.84        0.07937                                   422005.39    3734566.84        0.07220                      422016.77     3734566.84        0.06580                                   422028.15    3734566.84        0.06006                      422039.53     3734566.84        0.05491                                   422050.91    3734566.84        0.05028                      422062.29     3734566.84        0.04614                                   422073.67    3734566.84        0.04242                      422085.05     3734566.84        0.03907                                   422096.43    3734566.84        0.03608                      422107.81     3734566.84        0.03340                                   422119.19    3734566.84        0.03098                      422130.57     3734566.84        0.02881                                   421959.87    3734575.51        0.10469                      421971.25     3734575.51        0.09489                                   421982.63    3734575.51        0.08620                      421994.01     3734575.51        0.07846                                   422005.39    3734575.51        0.07156                      422016.77     3734575.51        0.06537                                   422028.15    3734575.51        0.05981                      422039.53     3734575.51        0.05481                                   422050.91    3734575.51        0.05031                      422062.29     3734575.51        0.04625                                   422073.67    3734575.51        0.04260                      422085.05     3734575.51        0.03932                                   422096.43    3734575.51        0.03636                      422107.81     3734575.51        0.03370                                   422119.19    3734575.51        0.03129                      422130.57     3734575.51        0.02913                                   421959.87    3734584.18        0.10300                      421971.25     3734584.18        0.09351                                   421982.63    3734584.18        0.08510                      421994.01     3734584.18        0.07763                                   422005.39    3734584.18        0.07095                      422016.77     3734584.18        0.06496                                   422028.15    3734584.18        0.05957                      422039.53     3734584.18        0.05471                                   422050.91    3734584.18        0.05032                      422062.29     3734584.18        0.04635                                   422073.67    3734584.18        0.04276                      422085.05     3734584.18        0.03953                                   422096.43    3734584.18        0.03661                      422107.81     3734584.18        0.03397                                   422119.19    3734584.18        0.03158                      422130.57     3734584.18        0.02942                                   421959.87    3734592.85        0.10129                      421971.25     3734592.85        0.09209                                   421982.63    3734592.85        0.08396                      421994.01     1 - 102 3734592.85        0.07675                                   422005.39    3734592.85        0.07029                      422016.77     3734592.85        0.06450                                   422028.15    3734592.85        0.05927                      422039.53     3734592.85        0.05454                                   422050.91    3734592.85        0.05026                      422062.29     3734592.85        0.04638                                   422073.67    3734592.85        0.04287                      422085.05     3734592.85        0.03969                                   422096.43    3734592.85        0.03681                      422107.81     3734592.85        0.03419                                   422119.19    3734592.85        0.03183                      422130.57     3734592.85        0.02968                                   421948.49    3734601.52        0.10963                      421959.87     3734601.52        0.09952                                   421971.25    3734601.52        0.09063                      421982.63     3734601.52        0.08279                                   421994.01    3734601.52        0.07582                      422005.39     3734601.52        0.06958                                   422016.77    3734601.52        0.06397                      422028.15     3734601.52        0.05890                                   422039.53    3734601.52        0.05431                      422050.91     3734601.52        0.05015                                   422062.29    3734601.52        0.04636                      422073.67     3734601.52        0.04292                                   422085.05    3734601.52        0.03980                      422096.43     3734601.52        0.03696                                   422107.81    3734601.52        0.03438                      422119.19     3734601.52        0.03204                           *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE  12  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                    *** THE ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATION    VALUES AVERAGED OVER   5 YEARS FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL      ***                                   INCLUDING SOURCE(S):     L0000001    , L0000002    , L0000003    , L0000004    , L0000005    ,                   L0000006    , L0000007    , L0000008    , L0000009    ,                                               *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***                                         ** CONC OF DPM      IN MICROGRAMS/M**3                          **        X‐COORD (M)   Y‐COORD (M)        CONC                       X‐COORD (M)    1 - 103 Y‐COORD (M)        CONC  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐          422130.57    3734601.52        0.02991                      421948.49     3734610.19        0.10746                                   421959.87    3734610.19        0.09772                      421971.25     3734610.19        0.08915                                   421982.63    3734610.19        0.08158                      421994.01     3734610.19        0.07485                                   422005.39    3734610.19        0.06883                      422016.77     3734610.19        0.06340                                   422028.15    3734610.19        0.05849                      422039.53     3734610.19        0.05403                                   422050.91    3734610.19        0.04998                      422062.29     3734610.19        0.04629                                   422073.67    3734610.19        0.04292                      422085.05     3734610.19        0.03986                                   422096.43    3734610.19        0.03707                      422107.81     3734610.19        0.03453                                   422119.19    3734610.19        0.03221                      422130.57     3734610.19        0.03010                                   421948.49    3734618.86        0.10525                      421959.87     3734618.86        0.09588                                   421971.25    3734618.86        0.08764                      421982.63     3734618.86        0.08034                                   421994.01    3734618.86        0.07385                      422005.39     3734618.86        0.06804                                   422016.77    3734618.86        0.06279                      422028.15     3734618.86        0.05803                                   422039.53    3734618.86        0.05371                      422050.91     3734618.86        0.04976                                   422062.29    3734618.86        0.04617                      422073.67     3734618.86        0.04288                                   422085.05    3734618.86        0.03988                      422096.43     3734618.86        0.03714                                   422107.81    3734618.86        0.03463                      422119.19     3734618.86        0.03235                                   422130.57    3734618.86        0.03026                      421937.11     3734627.53        0.11329                                   421948.49    3734627.53        0.10305                      421959.87     3734627.53        0.09404                                   421971.25    3734627.53        0.08611                      421982.63     3734627.53        0.07909                                   421994.01    3734627.53        0.07283                      422005.39     3734627.53        0.06721                                   422016.77    3734627.53        0.06214                      422028.15     3734627.53        0.05753                                   422039.53    3734627.53        0.05334                      422050.91     3734627.53        0.04950                                   422062.29    3734627.53        0.04600                      422073.67     1 - 104 3734627.53        0.04279                                   422085.05    3734627.53        0.03986                      422096.43     3734627.53        0.03717                                   422107.81    3734627.53        0.03471                      422119.19     3734627.53        0.03245                                   422130.57    3734627.53        0.03039                      421937.11     3734636.20        0.11073                                   421948.49    3734636.20        0.10086                      421959.87     3734636.20        0.09220                                   421971.25    3734636.20        0.08457                      421982.63     3734636.20        0.07781                                   421994.01    3734636.20        0.07178                      422005.39     3734636.20        0.06636                                   422016.77    3734636.20        0.06145                      422028.15     3734636.20        0.05699                                   422039.53    3734636.20        0.05293                      422050.91     3734636.20        0.04921                                   422062.29    3734636.20        0.04580                      422073.67     3734636.20        0.04267                                   422085.05    3734636.20        0.03980                      422096.43     3734636.20        0.03716                                   422107.81    3734636.20        0.03474                      422119.19     3734636.20        0.03252                                   422130.57    3734636.20        0.03048                      421937.11     3734644.87        0.10818                                   421948.49    3734644.87        0.09868                      421959.87     3734644.87        0.09036                                   421971.25    3734644.87        0.08302                      421982.63     3734644.87        0.07652                                   421994.01    3734644.87        0.07071                      422005.39     3734644.87        0.06548                                   422016.77    3734644.87        0.06074                      422028.15     3734644.87        0.05643                           *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE  13  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                    *** THE ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATION    VALUES AVERAGED OVER   5 YEARS FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL      ***                                   INCLUDING SOURCE(S):     L0000001    , L0000002    , L0000003    , L0000004    , L0000005    ,                   L0000006    , L0000007    , L0000008    , L0000009    ,                                               *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS *** 1 - 105                                         ** CONC OF DPM      IN MICROGRAMS/M**3                          **        X‐COORD (M)   Y‐COORD (M)        CONC                       X‐COORD (M)    Y‐COORD (M)        CONC  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐          422039.53    3734644.87        0.05248                      422050.91     3734644.87        0.04887                                   422062.29    3734644.87        0.04555                      422073.67     3734644.87        0.04250                                   422085.05    3734644.87        0.03970                      422096.43     3734644.87        0.03712                                   422107.81    3734644.87        0.03475                      422119.19     3734644.87        0.03256                                   422130.57    3734644.87        0.03055                      421925.73     3734653.54        0.11599                                   421937.11    3734653.54        0.10560                      421948.49     3734653.54        0.09649                                   421959.87    3734653.54        0.08851                      421971.25     3734653.54        0.08147                                   421982.63    3734653.54        0.07522                      421994.01     3734653.54        0.06962                                   422005.39    3734653.54        0.06457                      422016.77     3734653.54        0.06000                                   422028.15    3734653.54        0.05583                      422039.53     3734653.54        0.05201                                   422050.91    3734653.54        0.04850                      422062.29     3734653.54        0.04528                                   422073.67    3734653.54        0.04231                      422085.05     3734653.54        0.03957                                   422096.43    3734653.54        0.03705                      422107.81     3734653.54        0.03472                                   422119.19    3734653.54        0.03258                      422130.57     3734653.54        0.03060                                   421925.73    3734662.21        0.11286                      421937.11     3734662.21        0.10298                                   421948.49    3734662.21        0.09429                      421959.87     3734662.21        0.08666                                   421971.25    3734662.21        0.07991                      421982.63     3734662.21        0.07390                                   421994.01    3734662.21        0.06851                      422005.39     3734662.21        0.06365                                   422016.77    3734662.21        0.05923                      422028.15     3734662.21        0.05520                                   422039.53    3734662.21        0.05150                      422050.91     3734662.21        0.04810                                   422062.29    3734662.21        0.04497                      422073.67     3734662.21        0.04208                                   422085.05    3734662.21        0.03941                      422096.43     1 - 106 3734662.21        0.03694                                   422107.81    3734662.21        0.03467                      422119.19     3734662.21        0.03256                                   422130.57    3734662.21        0.03062                      421925.73     3734670.88        0.10923                                   421937.11    3734670.88        0.09997                      421948.49     3734670.88        0.09179                                   421959.87    3734670.88        0.08456                      421971.25     3734670.88        0.07814                                   421982.63    3734670.88        0.07241                      421994.01     3734670.88        0.06726                                   422005.39    3734670.88        0.06260                      422016.77     3734670.88        0.05835                                   422028.15    3734670.88        0.05447                      422039.53     3734670.88        0.05090                                   422050.91    3734670.88        0.04762                      422062.29     3734670.88        0.04459                                   422073.67    3734670.88        0.04178                      422085.05     3734670.88        0.03919                                   422096.43    3734670.88        0.03679                      422107.81     3734670.88        0.03456                                   422119.19    3734670.88        0.03250                      422130.57     3734670.88        0.03059                                   421925.73    3734679.55        0.10561                      421937.11     3734679.55        0.09697                                   421948.49    3734679.55        0.08928                      421959.87     3734679.55        0.08246                                   421971.25    3734679.55        0.07635                      421982.63     3734679.55        0.07090                                   421994.01    3734679.55        0.06598                      422005.39     3734679.55        0.06152                                   422016.77    3734679.55        0.05745                      422028.15     3734679.55        0.05372                                   422039.53    3734679.55        0.05029                      422050.91     3734679.55        0.04712                                   422062.29    3734679.55        0.04418                      422073.67     3734679.55        0.04147                           *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE  14  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                    *** THE ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATION    VALUES AVERAGED OVER   5 YEARS FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL      ***                                   INCLUDING SOURCE(S):     L0000001    , L0000002    , L0000003    , L0000004    , L0000005    ,                   L0000006    , L0000007    , L0000008    , L0000009    ,  1 - 107                                              *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***                                         ** CONC OF DPM      IN MICROGRAMS/M**3                          **        X‐COORD (M)   Y‐COORD (M)        CONC                       X‐COORD (M)    Y‐COORD (M)        CONC  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐          422085.05    3734679.55        0.03894                      422096.43     3734679.55        0.03660                                   422107.81    3734679.55        0.03443                      422119.19     3734679.55        0.03242                                   422130.57    3734679.55        0.03055                      421914.35     3734688.22        0.11117                                   421925.73    3734688.22        0.10207                      421937.11     3734688.22        0.09399                                   421948.49    3734688.22        0.08679                      421959.87     3734688.22        0.08036                                   421971.25    3734688.22        0.07460                      421982.63     3734688.22        0.06941                                   421994.01    3734688.22        0.06472                      422005.39     3734688.22        0.06045                                   422016.77    3734688.22        0.05655                      422028.15     3734688.22        0.05296                                   422039.53    3734688.22        0.04965                      422050.91     3734688.22        0.04659                                   422062.29    3734688.22        0.04375                      422073.67     3734688.22        0.04112                                   422085.05    3734688.22        0.03867                      422096.43     3734688.22        0.03640                                   422107.81    3734688.22        0.03428                      422119.19     3734688.22        0.03231                                   422130.57    3734688.22        0.03048                      421914.35     3734696.89        0.10719                                   421925.73    3734696.89        0.09871                      421937.11     3734696.89        0.09114                                   421948.49    3734696.89        0.08438                      421959.87     3734696.89        0.07831                                   421971.25    3734696.89        0.07286                      421982.63     3734696.89        0.06793                                   421994.01    3734696.89        0.06346                      422005.39     3734696.89        0.05937                                   422016.77    3734696.89        0.05563                      422028.15     3734696.89        0.05219                                   422039.53    3734696.89        0.04900                      422050.91     3734696.89        0.04605                                   422062.29    3734696.89        0.04331                      422073.67     1 - 108 3734696.89        0.04076                                   422085.05    3734696.89        0.03839                      422096.43     3734696.89        0.03618                                   422107.81    3734696.89        0.03412                      422119.19     3734696.89        0.03219                                   422130.57    3734696.89        0.03040                      421902.97     3734705.56        0.11236                                   421914.35    3734705.56        0.10343                      421925.73     3734705.56        0.09548                                   421937.11    3734705.56        0.08838                      421948.49     3734705.56        0.08202                                   421959.87    3734705.56        0.07628                      421971.25     3734705.56        0.07113                                   421982.63    3734705.56        0.06645                      421994.01     3734705.56        0.06219                                   422005.39    3734705.56        0.05829                      422016.77     3734705.56        0.05471                                   422028.15    3734705.56        0.05141                      422039.53     3734705.56        0.04835                                   422050.91    3734705.56        0.04550                      422062.29     3734705.56        0.04286                                   422073.67    3734705.56        0.04038                      422085.05     3734705.56        0.03808                                   422096.43    3734705.56        0.03593                      422107.81     3734705.56        0.03393                                   422119.19    3734705.56        0.03205                      422130.57     3734705.56        0.03030                                   421902.97    3734714.23        0.10817                      421914.35     3734714.23        0.09976                                   421925.73    3734714.23        0.09232                      421937.11     3734714.23        0.08567                                   421948.49    3734714.23        0.07970                      421959.87     3734714.23        0.07432                                   421971.25    3734714.23        0.06944                      421982.63     3734714.23        0.06500                                   421994.01    3734714.23        0.06094                      422005.39     3734714.23        0.05722                                   422016.77    3734714.23        0.05379                      422028.15     3734714.23        0.05061                                   422039.53    3734714.23        0.04767                      422050.91     3734714.23        0.04493                           *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE  15  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*                    *** THE ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATION    VALUES AVERAGED OVER   5 1 - 109 YEARS FOR SOURCE GROUP: ALL      ***                                   INCLUDING SOURCE(S):     L0000001    , L0000002    , L0000003    , L0000004    , L0000005    ,                   L0000006    , L0000007    , L0000008    , L0000009    ,                                               *** DISCRETE CARTESIAN RECEPTOR POINTS ***                                         ** CONC OF DPM      IN MICROGRAMS/M**3                          **        X‐COORD (M)   Y‐COORD (M)        CONC                       X‐COORD (M)    Y‐COORD (M)        CONC  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐          422062.29    3734714.23        0.04238                      422073.67     3734714.23        0.03999                                   422085.05    3734714.23        0.03776                      422096.43     3734714.23        0.03568                                   422107.81    3734714.23        0.03372                      422119.19     3734714.23        0.03190                                   422130.57    3734714.23        0.03019                      421902.97     3734722.90        0.10408                                   421914.35    3734722.90        0.09628                      421925.73     3734722.90        0.08932                                   421937.11    3734722.90        0.08308                      421948.49     3734722.90        0.07747                                   421959.87    3734722.90        0.07239                      421971.25     3734722.90        0.06778                                   421982.63    3734722.90        0.06355                      421994.01     3734722.90        0.05969                                   422005.39    3734722.90        0.05614                      422016.77     3734722.90        0.05286                                   422028.15    3734722.90        0.04982                      422039.53     3734722.90        0.04699                                   422050.91    3734722.90        0.04436                      422062.29     3734722.90        0.04189                                   422073.67    3734722.90        0.03959                      422085.05     3734722.90        0.03743                                   422096.43    3734722.90        0.03540                      422107.81     3734722.90        0.03350                                   422119.19    3734722.90        0.03172                      422130.57     3734722.90        0.03005                           *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE  16  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U* 1 - 110                                    *** THE SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM ANNUAL RESULTS  AVERAGED OVER   5 YEARS ***                                     ** CONC OF DPM      IN MICROGRAMS/M**3                          **                                                                                                              NETWORK GROUP ID                       AVERAGE CONC                RECEPTOR  (XR, YR,  ZELEV, ZHILL, ZFLAG)  OF TYPE  GRID‐ID ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐  ALL       1ST HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.11599 AT (  421925.73,  3734653.54,     36.00,    36.00,    7.00)  DC                     2ND HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.11329 AT (  421937.11,  3734627.53,     36.00,    36.00,    7.00)  DC                     3RD HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.11286 AT (  421925.73,  3734662.21,     36.00,    36.00,    7.00)  DC                     4TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.11236 AT (  421902.97,  3734705.56,     36.45,    36.45,    7.00)  DC                     5TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.11117 AT (  421914.35,  3734688.22,     36.26,    36.26,    7.00)  DC                     6TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.11073 AT (  421937.11,  3734636.20,     36.00,    36.00,    7.00)  DC                     7TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.10963 AT (  421948.49,  3734601.52,     36.00,    36.00,    7.00)  DC                     8TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.10923 AT (  421925.73,  3734670.88,     36.08,    36.08,    7.00)  DC                     9TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.10818 AT (  421937.11,  3734644.87,     36.00,    36.00,    7.00)  DC                    10TH HIGHEST VALUE IS       0.10817 AT (  421902.97,  3734714.23,     36.54,    36.54,    7.00)  DC            *** RECEPTOR TYPES:  GC = GRIDCART                       GP = GRIDPOLR                       DC = DISCCART                       DP = DISCPOLR  *** AERMOD ‐ VERSION  19191 ***   *** C:\LAKES\AERMOD VIEW\1660 E FIRST ST\1660  E FIRST ST.ISC             ***        06/05/20  *** AERMET ‐ VERSION  16216 ***   ***                                                                      ***        02:17:27                                                                                                                        PAGE  17  *** MODELOPTs:    RegDFAULT  CONC  ELEV  FLGPOL  URBAN  ADJ_U*  *** Message Summary : AERMOD Model Execution *** 1 - 111   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Summary of Total Messages ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐     A Total of            0 Fatal Error Message(s)  A Total of            2 Warning Message(s)  A Total of         1864 Informational Message(s)  A Total of        43848 Hours Were Processed  A Total of         1500 Calm Hours Identified  A Total of          364 Missing Hours Identified (  0.83 Percent)           ******** FATAL ERROR MESSAGES ********                 ***  NONE  ***                    ********   WARNING MESSAGES   ********   ME W186      99       MEOPEN: THRESH_1MIN 1‐min ASOS wind speed threshold used           0.50  ME W187      99       MEOPEN: ADJ_U* Option for Stable Low Winds used in AERMET                   ************************************     *** AERMOD Finishes Successfully ***     ************************************ 1 - 112 EXHIBIT 12 1 - 113 REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT 4TH AND CABRILLO MIXED-USE PROJECT CENTRAL POINTE Santa Ana, California July 30, 2020 (Original dated August 27, 2019) Prepared for: ARNEL & AFFILIATES 949 South Coast Drive, 6th Floor Costa Mesa, CA 92626 LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 Prepared by: Under the Supervision of: Shane S. Green, P.E. Richard E. Barretto, P.E. Transportation Engineer III Principal & Megan Lam Transportation Engineer II 1 - 114 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc i TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Scope of Work ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Study Area ............................................................................................................................ 2 2.0 Project Description ..................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Site Access ............................................................................................................................ 4 2.2 Pedestrian Circulation ........................................................................................................... 4 3.0 Existing Conditions ..................................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Existing Street System .......................................................................................................... 6 3.1.1 Public Transit .............................................................................................................. 7 3.2 Bicycle Master Plan .............................................................................................................. 7 3.3 Existing Traffic Volumes ...................................................................................................... 8 3.4 Existing Intersection Conditions ........................................................................................... 8 3.4.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Method of Analysis ..................................... 8 3.4.2 Highway Capacity Manual 6 (HCM 6) Method of Analysis (Unsignalized Intersections) ......................................................................................................................... 9 3.4.3 Level of Service Criteria ........................................................................................... 12 3.5 Existing Level of Service Results ....................................................................................... 12 4.0 Traffic Forecasting Methodology ............................................................................................ 15 5.0 Project Traffic Characteristics ................................................................................................ 16 5.1 Project Traffic Generation .................................................................................................. 16 5.2 Project Traffic Distribution and Assignment ...................................................................... 16 5.3 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................................ 17 6.0 Future Traffic Conditions ........................................................................................................ 20 6.1 Ambient Traffic Growth ..................................................................................................... 20 6.2 Related Projects Traffic Characteristics .............................................................................. 20 6.3 Year 2040 Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................. 25 6.4 Year 2025 and Year 2040 Traffic Volumes ........................................................................ 25 6.4.1 Year 2025 Traffic Volumes ...................................................................................... 25 6.4.2 Year 2040 Traffic Volumes ...................................................................................... 25 7.0 Traffic Impact Analysis Methodology .................................................................................... 26 7.1 Impact Criteria and Thresholds ........................................................................................... 26 7.2 Traffic Impact Analysis Scenarios ...................................................................................... 27 8.0 Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ............................................................................. 28 8.1 Existing Plus Project Analysis ............................................................................................ 28 8.1.1 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions .................................................................. 28 8.2 Year 2025 Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................. 32 1 - 115 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc ii TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) SECTION PAGE 8.2.1 Year 2025 Cumulative Traffic Conditions ............................................................... 32 8.2.2 Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Conditions ....................................................... 32 8.3 Year 2040 Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................. 37 8.3.1 Year 2040 Traffic Conditions ................................................................................... 37 8.3.2 Year 2040 Plus Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................... 37 9.0 State of California (Caltrans) Analysis ................................................................................... 42 9.1 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Method of Analysis (Signalized Intersections) ......... 42 9.2 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................................ 44 9.2.1 Existing Traffic Conditions....................................................................................... 44 9.2.2 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions .................................................................. 44 9.3 Year 2025 Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................. 46 9.3.1 Year 2025 Cumulative Traffic Conditions ............................................................... 46 9.3.2 Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions ........................................... 46 9.4 Year 2040 Traffic Conditions ............................................................................................. 48 9.4.1 Year 2040 Buildout Traffic Conditions .................................................................... 48 9.4.2 Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions ................................................ 48 10.0 Site Access and Internal Circulation Evaluation ................................................................... 50 10.1 Site Access .......................................................................................................................... 50 10.2 Queuing Analysis ................................................................................................................ 50 10.2.1 Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions .......................................... 50 10.3 Internal Circulation Evaluation ........................................................................................... 54 10.4 Sight Distance Evaluation ................................................................................................... 54 11.0 Recommended Intersection Improvements ............................................................................ 55 11.1 Planned and/or Recommended Improvements ................................................................... 55 11.1.1 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions ............................................................ 55 11.1.2 Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions ..................................... 55 11.1.3 Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions .......................................... 56 11.2 Project-Specific Improvements ........................................................................................... 56 11.3 Recommended Circulation Enhancement ........................................................................... 56 11.4 Project-Related Fair-Share Contribution ............................................................................ 57 12.0 Congestion Management Program (CMP) Compliance Assessment ................................... 59 13.0 Summary Of Findings And Conclusions ................................................................................ 61 1 - 116 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc iii APPENDICES APPENDIX A. Traffic Study Scope of Work B. Existing Traffic Count Data C. Year 2040 Modeling Worksheets D. Intersection Level of Service Calculation Worksheets E. Caltrans Intersection Level of Service Calculation Worksheets F. Project Driveway Level of Service Calculation Worksheets G. Queueing Worksheets H. Signal Warrant Worksheets 1 - 117 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc iv LIST OF FIGURES SECTION—FIGURE # FOLLOWING PAGE 1-1 Vicinity Map ....................................................................................................................... 2 2-1 Existing Aerial Site Photograph ......................................................................................... 4 2-2 Proposed Site Plan ............................................................................................................... 4 3-1 Existing Roadway Conditions and Intersection Controls ............................................... 7 3-2 OCTA Transit Map ............................................................................................................ 7 3-3 Transit Stop Locations ....................................................................................................... 7 3-4 City of Santa Ana Bikeway Master Plan .......................................................................... 7 3-5 Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ....................................................................... 8 3-6 Existing PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes ...................................................... 8 5-1 Project Traffic Distribution Pattern ................................................................................ 19 5-2 AM Peak Hour Project Traffic Volumes ....................................................................... 19 5-3 PM Peak Hour and Daily Project Traffic Volumes ...................................................... 19 5-4 Existing Plus Project AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................... 19 5-5 Existing Plus Project PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes .............................. 19 6-1 Location of Cumulative Projects ..................................................................................... 20 6-2 AM Peak Hour Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes ................................................... 20 6-3 PM Peak Hour and Daily Cumulative Projects Traffic Volumes .................................. 20 6-4 Year 2025 Cumulative AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................ 25 6-5 Year 2025 Cumulative PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes ........................... 25 6-6 Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ...................... 25 6-7 Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes ..... 25 6-8 Year 2040 Buildout AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ................................................. 25 6-9 Year 2040 Buildout PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes ................................ 25 6-10 Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ........................... 25 6-11 Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project PM Peak Hour and Daily Traffic Volumes .......... 25 10-1 SU-30 Truck Turning Analysis ...................................................................................... 54 10-2 Project Driveways Sight Distance Analysis.................................................................. 54 11-1 Planned and Recommended Improvements .................................................................. 57 11-2 Conceptual Improvement Plan: 4th Street from I-5 NB Ramps to Cabrillo Park Dr ..... 57 1 - 118 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc v LIST OF TABLES SECTION—TABLE # PAGE 2-1 Project Development Summary .......................................................................................... 5 3-1 Level of Service Criteria For Signalized Intersections ................................................ 10 3-2 Level of Service Criteria For Unsignalized Intersections ............................................ 11 3-3 Existing Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis .................................................. 13-14 5-1 Project Traffic Generation Rates and Forecast ............................................................... 18 5-2 Project Directional Distribution Pattern .......................................................................... 19 6-1 Location and Description of Cumulative Projects ..................................................... 21-22 6-2 Cumulative Projects Traffic Generation Forecast ...................................................... 23-24 8-1 Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ............................. 29-31 8-2 Year 2025 Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis .......................... 34-36 8-3 Year 2040 Buildout Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ............................... 39-41 9-1 Level of Service Criterial for Signalized Intersections (HCM) ..................................... 43 9-2 Existing Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis - Caltrans ................. 45 9-3 Year 2025 Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis - Caltrans .............. 47 9-4 Year 2040 Buildout Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis - Caltrans ................... 49 10-1 Project Driveway Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis ........................................ 52 10-2 Year 2040 Buildout Peak Hour Queueing Analysis ....................................................... 53 11-1 Year 2040 Buildout Project Fair-Share Contribution ..................................................... 58 12-1 Project Percentage Radius of Influence CMP Analysis ................................................. 60 1 - 119 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 1 REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT 4TH AND CABRILLO MIXED-USE PROJECT CENTRAL POINTE Santa Ana, California July 30, 2020 (Original dated August 27, 2019) 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Traffic Impact Analysis report addresses the potential traffic impacts and circulation needs associated with 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, formally named Central Pointe, (hereinafter referred to as Project) in the City of Santa Ana. The project proponent, Arnell & Affiliates, proposes to develop up to 644 apartment units, and up to 15,200 square-feet (SF) of retail/commercial floor area consisting of 3,500 SF of restaurant use and 11,700 SF of retail space. The Project site is an 8.35-acre vacant parcel of land within the Metro East Mixed-Use Overlay Zone that is generally located north of 4th Street, east of the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway, and west of Cabrillo Park Drive. 1.1 Scope of Work This traffic report documents the findings and recommendations of a traffic impact analysis conducted by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) to determine the potential impacts associated with the proposed Project. The traffic analysis evaluates the existing operating conditions at twenty-five (25) key study intersections within the project vicinity, estimates the trip generation potential of the proposed Project, and forecasts future near-term (Year 2025) and long-term (Year 2040) operating conditions without and with the proposed Project. Where necessary, intersection improvements/mitigation measures are identified. This revised traffic report satisfies the traffic impact requirements of the City of Santa Ana and is consistent with the current Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Orange County and addresses comments of City staff based on review of the draft traffic study. The Scope of Work for this traffic study, which is included in Appendix A, was developed in conjunction with and reflects input City of Santa Ana Public Works Department staff. The project site has been visited and an inventory of adjacent area roadways and intersections was performed. Existing weekday peak hour traffic count information has been collected at twenty-five (25) key study intersections for use in the preparation of intersection level of service calculations. Information concerning cumulative projects (planned and/or approved) in the vicinity of the proposed Project has been researched at the City of Santa Ana and City of Tustin. Based on our research, there are twenty-eight (28) related projects located in the City of Santa Ana and two (2) related projects located in the City of Tustin. The thirty (30) related projects were considered in the cumulative traffic analysis for this project. This traffic report analyzes existing and future weekday daily, AM peak hour and PM peak hour traffic conditions for a near-term (Year 2025) and long-term (Year 2040) traffic setting upon 1 - 120 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 2 completion of the proposed Project. Near-term (Year 2025) cumulative daily and peak hour traffic forecasts were projected by incorporating a one percent (1.0%) annual growth rate and the trip generation potential of thirty (30) related projects. Long-term (Year 2040) daily and peak hour traffic forecasts were projected based on modeled traffic projections prepared by OCTA utilizing the OCTAM 4.0 Year 2040 Model. 1.2 Study Area Based on a “50 trip threshold” for analysis and collaboration with City staff, twenty-five (25) key study intersections have been identified for evaluation. The twenty-five (25) intersections listed below provide regional and local access to the study area and define the extent of the boundaries for this traffic impact investigation. Key Study Intersections 1. Elk Lane at First Street (Santa Ana) 14. SR-55 NB Ramps at 4th Street (Tustin/Caltrans) 2. I-5 SB On-Ramp at First Street (Santa Ana/Caltrans) 15. Yorba Street at 4th Street (Tustin) 3. Cabrillo Park Drive at First Street (Santa Ana) 16. Cabrillo Park Drive at State Fund Access Road (Santa Ana) 4. Golden Circle Drive at First Street (Santa Ana) 17. Cabrillo Park Drive at Xerox Center Access Road (Santa Ana) 5. Tustin Avenue at First Street (Tustin) 18. Cabrillo Park Drive at 17th Street (Santa Ana) 6. Yorba Street at First Street (Tustin) 19. Cabrillo Park Drive at Wellington Avenue (Santa Ana) 7. I-5 SB On-Ramp/Mabury Street at 4th Street (Santa Ana/Caltrans) 20. Tustin Avenue at Wellington Avenue (Santa Ana) 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street (Santa Ana/Caltrans) 21. Mabury Street at Fruit Street (Santa Ana) 9. Cabrillo Park Drive at 4th Street (Santa Ana) 22. Cabrillo Park Drive at Fruit Street (Santa Ana) 10. Golden Circle Drive at 4th Street (Santa Ana) 23. Park Center Drive at Fruit Street (Santa Ana) 11. Park Center Drive at 4th Street (Santa Ana) 24. Tustin Avenue at Fruit Street (Santa Ana) 12. Tustin Avenue at 4th Street (Santa Ana) 25. Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place (Santa Ana) 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street (Santa Ana/Caltrans) Figure 1-1 presents a Vicinity Map, which illustrates the general location of the Project and depicts the study locations and surrounding street system. The Level of Service (LOS) investigations at these key locations were used to evaluate the potential traffic-related impacts associated with area growth, cumulative projects and the proposed Project. When necessary, this report recommends intersection and/or roadway improvements that may be required to accommodate future traffic volumes and restore/maintain an acceptable Level of Service, and/or mitigates the impact of the project. 1 - 121 1 - 122 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 3 Included in this Traffic Impact Analysis are: ▪ Existing traffic counts, ▪ Estimated project traffic generation/distribution/assignment, ▪ Estimated cumulative project traffic generation/distribution/assignment, ▪ AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for existing conditions, ▪ AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for existing plus project conditions, ▪ AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for future near-term (Year 2025) traffic conditions without and with the proposed Project, ▪ AM and PM peak hour capacity analyses for future long-term (Year 2040) traffic conditions without and with the proposed Project, ▪ Caltrans Analysis, ▪ Site Access Evaluation, ▪ Queueing Analysis, ▪ Internal Circulation and Sight Distance Evaluation, ▪ Recommended Intersection Improvements, ▪ Congestion Management Program Compliance Assessment, and 1 - 123 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 4 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project site is an 8.35-acre vacant parcel of land within the Metro East Mixed Use Overlay Zone that is generally located north of 4th Street, east of the Santa Ana (I-5) freeway, and west of Cabrillo Park Drive. Figure 2-1 is an existing aerial photograph of the Project site. Table 2-1 summarizes the project development totals. The proposed Project includes the development of up to 644 apartment units, 3,500 SF restaurant uses and 11,700 SF of retail space. The proposed Project will provide a total of 1,300 parking spaces within two buildings along with 18 surface parking spaces. “Building A” is proposed as a five-story apartment podium with up to 325 apartment homes consisting of approximately 19 (±5.8%) studio units, 162 (±49.8%) one-bedroom units, 121 (±37.2%) two-bedroom units and 23 (±7.1%) three-bedroom units and approximately 6,100 SF of ground floor retail/commercial space and 3,500 SF restaurant space “wrapped” around an eight-level partial subterranean parking structure with a total of approximately 650 spaces along with 9 ground floor spaces for retail/leasing. “Building B” is proposed as a five-story apartment podium with up to 319 apartment homes consisting of approximately 20 (±6.3%) studio units, 164 (±51.4%) one-bedroom units, 127 (±39.8%) two-bedroom units and 8 (±2.5%) three-bedroom units and approximately 5,600 SF of ground floor retail/commercial space “wrapped” around a eight-level partial subterranean parking structure with a total of approximately 650 spaces along with 9 ground floor spaces for retail/leasing. On-site facilities/amenities of the proposed Project include a leasing office, a lounge/lobby, business center, pool/spa, and a fitness center for residents. Figure 2-2 presents the preferred Project site plan, prepared by KTGY. The Project is expected to be constructed and completed by Year 2025, which has been utilized to assess the Project’s potential traffic impacts at full occupancy of the project within an opening year traffic setting. 2.1 Site Access Vehicular access to the proposed Project will be provided via one (1) full access unsignalized driveway along Park Court Place and one (1) right in/out only driveway located along 4th Street. As part of the proposed Project’s design features, an exclusive southbound right-turn lane will be constructed at the intersection of Cabrillo Park Drive/4th Street. Additionally, Project’s curb face is planned to be set back far enough to accommodate improvements at I-5 NB Ramps/4th Street, which include the construction of an additional right-turn lane. 2.2 Pedestrian Circulation Pedestrian circulation for the proposed Project would be provided via existing public sidewalks along Park Court Place, Cabrillo Park Drive, and 4th Street within the vicinity of the Project. The existing sidewalk system within the Project vicinity provides direct connectivity to the existing development located along major thoroughfares. Pedestrian access to both the residential and retail components of the Project will be provided via building entries/exits located on Park Court Place and 4th Street. 1 - 124 1 - 125 1 - 126 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 5 TABLE 2-1 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Land Use / Project Description Project Development Totals1 4th & Cabrillo Apartments ❑ Building A o Studio Units 19 Units (5.8%) o 1 Bedroom Units 162 Units (49.8%) o 2 Bedroom Units 121 Units (37.2%) o 3 Bedroom Units 23 Units (7.1%) ❑ Building B o Studio Units 20 Units (6.3%) o 1 Bedroom Units 164 Units (51.4%) o 2 Bedroom Units 127 Units (39.8%) o 3 Bedroom Units 8 Units (2.5%) Total Residential Units: 644 Units ❑ Building A Retail 6,100 SF ❑ Building A Restaurant 3,500 SF ❑ Building B Retail 5,600 SF Total Retail Space: 15,200 SF Parking Supply ❑ Parking Structure o Building A o Building B ❑ Surface Parking Lot o Retail/Leasing 650 spaces 650 spaces 18 spaces Total Parking Supply: 1,318 spaces 1 Source: Conceptual Site Plan, prepared by KTGY, dated February 28, 2020. 1 - 127 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 6 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 Existing Street System The principal local network of streets serving the project site is First Street, 4th Street, 17th Street, Park Court Place, Cabrillo Park Drive, and Tustin Avenue. The following discussion provides a brief synopsis of these key area streets. The descriptions are based on an inventory of existing roadway conditions. First Street a four to six-lane, divided roadway in the vicinity of the project, oriented in the east- west direction that provides two or three lanes in each direction separated by a raised median island. The posted speed limit on First Street is 35 mph. On-street parking is not permitted along this roadway. A traffic signal controls the study intersections of First Street at Mabury Street/Elk Lane, I-5 SB On Ramp, Cabrillo Park Drive, Golden Center Drive, Tustin Avenue, and Yorba Street. 4th Street is a six-lane, divided roadway oriented in the east-west direction that provides three eastbound and three westbound travel lanes separated by a raised median island. The posted speed limit on Fourth Street is 40 miles per hour (mph). On-street parking is not permitted along this roadway in the vicinity of the project. Traffic signals control the study intersections of Fourth Street at I-5 SB Off-Ramp, I-5 NB On-Ramp, Cabrillo Park Drive, Golden Circle Drive, Park Center Drive, Tustin Avenue, SR-55 SB Ramps, SR-55 NB Ramps and Yorba Street. East of the SR-55 Freeway, Fourth Street is known as Irvine Boulevard within the City of Tustin. 17th Street is a six-lane, divided roadway oriented in the east-west direction. The posted speed limit on 17th Street is 40 mph. On-street parking is not permitted on either side of this roadway in the vicinity of the Project. A traffic signal controls the study intersection of 17th Street at Cabrillo Park Drive. Park Court Place is a two-lane, divided roadway oriented in the east-west direction. The posted speed limit on Park Court Place is 25 mph. On-street parking is not permitted on either side of this roadway in the vicinity of the Project. Cabrillo Park Drive is a four-lane, divided roadway that borders the project site to the east, oriented in the north-south direction. The posted speed limit on Cabrillo Park Drive is 35 mph. On-street parking is not permitted along this roadway in the vicinity of the project. Traffic signals control the study intersections of Fourth Street, State Fund Access Road, Xerox Centre Access Road, and First Street. Tustin Avenue is a six-lane, divided roadway, oriented in the north-south direction. On-street parking is not permitted along this roadway in the vicinity of the project. The posted speed limit on Tustin Avenue is 40 mph. Traffic signals control the study intersections of Tustin at Fourth Street, First Street, Wellington Avenue, and Fruit Street. 1 - 128 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 7 Figure 3-1 presents an inventory of the existing roadway conditions for the arterials and intersections evaluated in this report. This figure identifies the number of travel lanes for key arterials, as well as intersection configurations and controls for the key area study intersections. 3.1.1 Public Transit Public transit bus service is provided in the project area by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). Four (4) OCTA bus routes operate within the vicinity of the project site on First Street, 4th Street, 17th Street, and Tustin Avenue, which consists of the following: ▪ OCTA Route 60: The major routes of travel include 17th Street and Tustin Avenue. Nearest to the project site are bus stops located on 17th Street at Cabrillo Park Drive in the northwest and southwest corners. Route 60 operates on approximate 30-minute headways during weekdays and 20-minute headways on weekends. ▪ OCTA Route 64: The major route of travel is First Street. Nearest to the project site are bus stops located on First Street at Cabrillo Park Drive in the southeast and northeast corners. Route 64 operates on approximate 30-minute headways on the weekdays and 20-minutes on the weekends. ▪ OCTA Route 71: The major route of travel is Tustin Avenue. Nearest to the project site are bus stops located on Tustin Avenue at 4th Street in the northeast and southwest corners. Route 71 operates on approximate 30-minute headways on the weekdays and 45-minute headways on the weekends. ▪ OCTA Route 463: The major route of travel is 4th Street. Nearest to the project site are bus stops located on 4th Street at Cabrillo Park Drive in the northeast and southeast corners. Route 463 operates on approximate 25-minute headways on the weekdays and no bus service on the weekends. Figure 3-2 graphically illustrates the transit routes of OCTA within the vicinity of the project. Figure 3-3 identifies the locations of the existing bus stops in proximity to the Project site. 3.2 Bicycle Master Plan The City of Santa Ana promotes bicycling as a means of mobility and a way in which to improve the quality of life within its community. The Bikeway Master Plan recognizes the needs of bicycle users and aims to create a complete and safe bicycle network throughout the City. Currently, not many bicycle facilities exist in the study area. However, review of Figure 3-4, which presents the City’s Bikeway Master Plan, shows that a Class I bike path is proposed to be built along Tustin Avenue within the vicinity of the Project. 1 - 129 1 - 130 1 - 131 1 - 132 1 - 133 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 8 3.3 Existing Traffic Volumes Twenty-five (25) key study intersections have been identified as the locations at which to evaluate existing and future traffic operating conditions. Some portion of potential project-related traffic will pass through each of these intersections, and their analysis will reveal the expected relative impacts of the project. These key locations were selected for evaluation based on discussions with City of Santa Ana staff and in consideration of Orange County CMP requirements. Existing daily, AM peak hour and PM peak hour traffic volumes for the twenty-five (25) key study intersections evaluated in this report were obtained from manual turning movement counts conducted by National Data and Surveying Services in May 2019. Figures 3-5 and 3-6 illustrate the existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the twenty-five (25) key study intersections evaluated in this report, respectively. Figure 3-6 also presents the existing average daily traffic volumes for twelve (12) key roadway segments in the vicinity of the proposed Project. Appendix B contains the detailed peak hour and daily traffic count sheets for the key intersections and roadway segments evaluated in this report. 3.4 Existing Intersection Conditions Existing AM and PM peak hour operating conditions for the twenty-five (25) key study intersections were evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology for signalized intersections and the methodology outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual 6 (HCM 6) for unsignalized intersections. 3.4.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Method of Analysis In conformance with Cities of Santa Ana, Tustin and Orange County CMP requirements, existing AM and PM peak hour operating conditions for the key signalized study intersections were evaluated using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method. The ICU technique is intended for signalized intersection analysis and estimates the volume to capacity (V/C) relationship for an intersection based on the individual V/C ratios for key conflicting traffic movements. The ICU numerical value represents the percent signal (green) time, and thus capacity, required by existing and/or future traffic. It should be noted that the ICU methodology assumes uniform traffic distribution per intersection approach lane and optimal signal timing. Per City of Santa Ana requirements, the ICU calculations use a lane capacity of 1,700 vehicles per hour (vph) for through lanes and 1,600 vph for left-turn lanes and right-turn lanes. A clearance adjustment factor of 0.05 was added to each Level of Service calculation. Per City of Tustin requirements, the ICU calculations use a lane capacity of 1,700 for through and all turn lanes. A clearance adjustment factor of 0.05 was added to each Level of Service calculation. The ICU value translates to a Level of Service (LOS) estimate, which is a relative measure of the intersection performance. The ICU value is the sum of the critical volume to capacity ratios at an intersection; it is not intended to be indicative of the LOS of each of the individual turning 1 - 134 1 - 135 1 - 136 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 9 movements. The six qualitative categories of Level of Service have been defined along with the corresponding ICU value range and are shown in Table 3-1. 3.4.2 Highway Capacity Manual 6 (HCM 6) Method of Analysis (Unsignalized Intersections) Two-way stop-controlled intersections are comprised of a major street, which is uncontrolled, and a minor street, which is controlled by stop signs. Level of service for a two-way stop-controlled intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay. The control delay by movement, by approach, and for the intersection as a whole is estimated by the computed capacity for each movement. LOS is determined for each minor-street movement (or shared movement) as well as major-street left turns. The worst side street approach delay is reported. LOS is not defined for the intersection as a whole or for major-street approaches, as it is assumed that major-street through vehicles experience zero delay. The HCM control delay value range for two-way stop- controlled intersections is shown in Table 3-2. 1 - 137 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 10 TABLE 3-1 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS (ICU METHODOLOGY) Level of Service (LOS) Intersection Capacity Utilization Value (V/C) Level of Service Description A  0.60 EXCELLENT. No vehicle waits longer than one red light, and no approach phase is fully used. B 0.61 – 0.70 VERY GOOD. An occasional approach phase is fully utilized; many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within groups of vehicles. C 0.71 – 0.80 GOOD. Occasionally drivers may have to wait through more than one red light; backups may develop behind turning vehicles. D 0.81 – 0.90 FAIR. Delays may be substantial during portions of the rush hours, but enough lower volume periods occur to permit clearing of developing lines, preventing excessive backups. E 0.91 – 1.00 POOR. Represents the most vehicles intersection approaches can accommodate; may be long lines of waiting vehicles through several signal cycles. F > 1.00 FAILURE. Backups from nearby locations or on cross streets may restrict or prevent movement of vehicles out of the intersection approaches. Potentially very long delays with continuously increasing queue lengths. 1 - 138 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 11 TABLE 3-2 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS (HCM 6 METHODOLOGY)2 Level of Service (LOS) Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Delay Per Vehicle (seconds/vehicle) Level of Service Description A  10.0 Little or no delay B > 10.0 and  15.0 Short traffic delays C > 15.0 and  25.0 Average traffic delays D > 25.0 and  35.0 Long traffic delays E > 35.0 and  50.0 Very long traffic delays F > 50.0 Severe congestion 2 Source: Highway Capacity Manual 6, Chapter 20: Two-Way Stop-Controlled Intersections. The LOS criteria apply to each lane on a given approach and to each approach on the minor street. LOS is not calculated for major-street approaches or for the intersection as a whole. 1 - 139 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 12 3.4.3 Level of Service Criteria According to the Cities of Santa Ana and Tustin, LOS D is the minimum acceptable condition that should be maintained during the peak commute hours. However, the City of Santa Ana has defined exceptions to this criterion at specific locations within the study area. The City of Santa Ana has defined major development areas where LOS “E” is considered acceptable. Based on the above, the following summarizes the LOS required for each key study intersection: ➢ LOS “D” Requirements: 1. Elk Lane at First Street 15. Yorba Street at 4th Street 2. I-5 SB On-Ramp at First Street 18. Cabrillo Park Drive at 17th Street 5. Tustin Avenue at First Street 19. Cabrillo Park Drive at Wellington Avenue 6. Yorba Street at First Street 21. Mabury Street at Fruit Street 7. I-5 SB On-Ramp/Mabury Street at 4th Street 22. Cabrillo Park Drive at Fruit Street 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street 23. Park Center Drive at Fruit Street 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street 25. Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place 14. SR-55 NB Ramps at 4th Street ➢ LOS “E” Requirements: 3. Cabrillo Park Drive at First Street 12. Tustin Avenue at 4th Street 4. Golden Circle Drive at First Street 16. Cabrillo Park Drive at State Fund Access Road 9. Cabrillo Park Drive at 4th Street 17. Cabrillo Park Drive at Xerox Center Access Road 10. Golden Circle Drive at 4th Street 20. Tustin Avenue at Wellington Avenue 11. Park Center Drive at 4th Street 24. Tustin Avenue at Fruit Street 3.5 Existing Level of Service Results Table 3-3 summarizes the existing peak hour service level calculations for the twenty-five (25) key study intersections based on existing traffic volumes and current street geometrics. Review of Table 3-3 indicates that twenty-four (24) of the twenty-five key study intersections currently operate at an acceptable level of service during the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street currently operates at unacceptable LOS E during the AM peak hour. Appendix D presents the ICU/LOS and HCM/LOS calculation worksheets for the twenty-five (25) key study intersections for the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. 1 - 140 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 13 TABLE 3-3 EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Key Intersection Jurisdiction Minimum Acceptable LOS Control Type Time Period ICU/HCM LOS 1. Elk Lane at First Street Santa Ana D 4 Traffic Signal AM 0.599 A PM 0.716 C 2. I-5 SB On Ramp at First Street Santa Ana/ Caltrans D 2 Traffic Signal AM 0.599 A PM 0.716 C 3. Cabrillo Park Drive at First Street Santa Ana E 6 Traffic Signal AM 0.425 A PM 0.584 A 4. Golden Circle Drive at First Street Santa Ana E 5 Traffic Signal AM 0.450 A PM 0.544 A 5. Tustin Avenue at First Street Tustin D 6 Traffic Signal AM 0.331 A PM 0.324 A 6. Yorba Street at First Street Tustin D 5 Traffic Signal AM 0.396 A PM 0.418 A 7. I-5 SB On Ramp/Mabury Street at 4th street Santa Ana/ Caltrans D 3 Traffic Signal AM 0.448 A PM 0.526 A 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street Santa Ana/ Caltrans D 3 Traffic Signal AM 0.357 A PM 0.395 A 9. Cabrillo Park Drive at 4th Street Santa Ana E 6 Traffic Signal AM 0.429 A PM 0.774 C 10. Golden Circle Drive at 4th Street Santa Ana E 5 Traffic Signal AM 0.398 A PM 0.405 A 11. Park Center Drive at 4th Street Santa Ana E One-Way Stop AM 13.7 s/v B PM 16.2 s/v C 12. Tustin Avenue at 4th Street Santa Ana E 8 Traffic Signal AM 0.667 B PM 0.738 C 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street Santa Ana/ Caltrans D 3 Traffic Signal AM 0.978 E PM 0.748 C 14. SR-55 NB Ramps at 4th Street Tustin/ Caltrans D 3 Traffic Signal AM 0.670 B PM 0.689 B 15. Yorba Street at 4th Street Tustin D 6 Traffic Signal AM 0.561 A PM 0.605 B 1 - 141 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 14 TABLE 3-3 (CONTINUED) EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Key Intersection Jurisdiction Minimum Acceptable LOS Control Type Time Period ICU/HCM LOS 16. Cabrillo Park Drive at State Fund Access Road Santa Ana E 3 Traffic Signal AM 0.308 A PM 0.340 A 17. Cabrillo Park Drive at Xerox Centre Access Road Santa Ana E 3 Traffic Signal AM 0.271 A PM 0.308 A 18. Cabrillo Park Drive at 17th Street Santa Ana D 5 Traffic Signal AM 0.568 A PM 0.611 B 19. Cabrillo Park Drive at Wellington Avenue Santa Ana D Two-Way Stop AM 17.8 s/v C PM 17.9 s/v C 20. Tustin Avenue at Wellington Avenue Santa Ana E 5 Traffic Signal AM 0.574 A PM 0.411 A 21. Mabury Street at Fruit Street Santa Ana D All-Way Stop AM 7.7 s/v A PM 7.7 s/v A 22. Cabrillo Park Drive at Fruit Street Santa Ana D All-Way Stop AM 12.5 s/v B PM 11.5 s/v B 23. Park Center Drive at Fruit Street Santa Ana D Two-Way Stop AM 10.3 s/v B PM 10.5 s/v B 24. Tustin Avenue at Fruit Street Santa Ana E 2 Traffic Signal AM 0.509 A PM 0.446 A 25. Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place Santa Ana D Two-Way Stop AM 18.6 s/v C PM 24.3 s/v C 1 - 142 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 15 4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTING METHODOLOGY In order to estimate the traffic impact characteristics of the proposed Project, a multi-step process has been utilized. The first step is traffic generation, which estimates the total arriving and departing traffic on a peak hour and daily basis. The traffic generation potential is forecast by applying the appropriate vehicle trip generation equations or rates to the project development tabulation. The second step of the forecasting process is traffic distribution, which identifies the origins and destinations of inbound and outbound project traffic. These origins and destinations are typically based on demographics and existing/expected future travel patterns in the study area. The third step is traffic assignment, which involves the allocation of project traffic to study area streets and intersections. Traffic assignment is typically based on minimization of travel time, which may or may not involve the shortest route, depending on prevailing operating conditions and travel speeds. Traffic distribution patterns are indicated by general percentage orientation, while traffic assignment allocates specific volume forecasts to individual roadway links and intersection turning movements throughout the study area. With the forecasting process complete and project traffic assignments developed, the impact of the proposed project is isolated by comparing operational (LOS) conditions at selected key intersections using expected future traffic volumes with and without forecast project traffic. The need for site- specific and/or cumulative local area traffic improvements can then be evaluated and the significance of the project’s impacts identified. 1 - 143 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 16 5.0 PROJECT TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS 5.1 Project Traffic Generation Traffic generation is expressed in vehicle trip ends, defined as one-way vehicular movements, either entering or exiting the generating land use. Generation equations and/or rates used in the traffic forecasting procedure are found in the 10th Edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) [Washington D.C., 2017]. Table 5-1 summarizes the trip generation rates used in forecasting the vehicular trips generated by the proposed Project and presents the project’s forecast peak hour and daily traffic volumes. As shown in the upper portion of Table 5-1, ITE Land Use 221: Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise), ITE Land Use 820: Shopping Center, and ITE Land Use 932: High Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant trip rates were used to forecast the trip generation potential for the proposed project. A review of the lower portion of this table indicates that the proposed Project, after adjustment for internal capture, is forecast to generate approximately 4,121 “net” daily trips, with 264 “net” trips (82 inbound, 182 outbound) produced in the AM peak hour and 344 “net” trips (205 inbound, 139 outbound) produced in the PM peak hour on a “typical” weekday. 5.2 Project Traffic Distribution and Assignment Figure 5-1 presents the traffic distribution pattern for the proposed Project. A tabular summary of the general directional Project trip distribution pattern is presented Table 5-2. Project traffic volumes both entering and exiting the project site have been distributed and assigned to the adjacent street system based on the following considerations: ▪ location of site access points in relation to the surrounding street system, ▪ the site's proximity to major traffic carriers and regional access routes, ▪ physical characteristics of the circulation system such as lane channelization and presence of traffic signals that affect travel patterns, ▪ presence of traffic congestion in the surrounding vicinity, ▪ ingress/egress availability at the project site (i.e. right-turn restrictions on 4th Street access and full access on Park Court Place driveway), ▪ distribution patterns contained within the Traffic Impact Study for the Metro East Overlay Zone in the City of Santa Ana, and ▪ input from City staff. The anticipated AM and PM peak hour project traffic volumes associated with the proposed Project are presented in Figures 5-2 and 5-3, respectively. Figure 5-3 also presents the daily Project traffic volumes. The traffic volume assignments presented in Figures 5-2 and 5-3 reflect the traffic distribution characteristics shown in Figure 5-1 and the traffic generation forecast presented in Table 5-1. 1 - 144 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 17 It should be noted that travel patterns are generally focused to major streets with larger roadway classifications and typically higher travel speeds. As such, it is forecast that the majority of project- related traffic will utilize 4th Street and Cabrillo Park Drive to Park Court Place to access the Project site, with Project traffic travelling to and from the north via Mabury Street for to be minimal when accessing the Project site. Based on Table 5-1 and Figure 5-1, it is anticipated that approximately 4% of Project traffic will utilize Mabury Street which translates to approximately 1 cars every 8 minutes and 1 car every 4 minutes in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. This added volume to the local residential network is considered nominal and would have little to no effect on the overall existing traffic patterns or operating conditions. 5.3 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions The Existing Plus Project traffic conditions have been generated based upon existing conditions and the estimated project traffic. These forecast traffic conditions have been prepared to assess the potential impacts of a Project upon the circulation system as it currently exists. This traffic volume scenario and the related intersection capacity analyses will identify the roadway improvements necessary to mitigate the direct traffic impacts of the Project, if any. Figures 5-4 and 5-5 present projected AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the twenty-five (25) key study intersections and two (2) Project driveways with the addition of the trips generated by the proposed Project to existing traffic volumes, respectively. Figure 5-5 also presents the Existing Plus Project daily traffic volumes. 1 - 145 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 18 TABLE 5-1 PROJECT TRAFFIC GENERATION RATES AND FORECAST3 Description Daily 2-Way AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Trip Rates: ▪ 221: Multifamily Housing Mid-Rise (TE/DU) 5.44 26% 74% 0.36 61% 39% 0.44 ▪ 820: Shopping Center (TE/1000 SF) 37.75 62% 38% 0.94 48% 52% 3.81 ▪ 932: High Turnover Sit-Down Restaurant (TE/1000 SF) 112.18 55% 45% 9.94 62% 38% 9.77 Trip Generation: ▪ 4th & Cabrillo Apartments (644 DU) 3,503 60 172 232 173 110 283 ▪ 4th & Cabrillo Retail (11,700 SF) 442 7 4 11 22 23 45 ▪ 4th & Cabrillo Restaurant (3,500 SF) 393 19 16 35 21 13 34 Total Project Trip Generation: 4,338 86 192 278 216 146 362 Internal Trip Capture (5%) -217 -4 -10 -14 -11 -7 -18 Total Net Project Trip Generation 4,121 82 182 264 205 139 344 Notes: TE/1000 SF = Trip End per 1,000 Square Feet of Gross Floor Area TE/DU = Trip End per Dwelling Unit 3 Source: Trip Generation, 10th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Washington, D.C. (2017). 1 - 146 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 19 TABLE 5-2 PROJECT DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION PATTERN Distribution Percentage Orientation/Direction 15% To/from the north via I-5 Freeway 17% To/from the south via I-5 Freeway 10% To/from the north via SR-55 Freeway 10% To/from the south via SR-55 Freeway 6% To/from the north via Cabrillo Park Drive 4% To/from the north via Parkcourt Place/Marbury Street 5% To/from the north via Tustin Avenue 3% To/from the south via Elk Avenue 10% To/from the east via Fourth Street/Irvine Boulevard 10% To/from the west via Fourth Street 5% To/from the east via First Street 5% To/from the west via First Street 100% Total 1 - 147 1 - 148 1 - 149 1 - 150 1 - 151 1 - 152 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 20 6.0 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 6.1 Ambient Traffic Growth Horizon year, background traffic growth estimates have been calculated using an ambient traffic growth factor. The ambient traffic growth factor is intended to include unknown and future related projects in the study area, as well as account for regular growth in traffic volumes due to the development of projects outside the study area. The future growth in traffic volumes has been calculated at one percent (1.0%) per year. Applied to the Year 2019 existing traffic volumes, this factor results in a 6.0% growth in existing volumes to the near-term horizon year 2025. 6.2 Related Projects Traffic Characteristics In order to make a realistic estimate of future on-street conditions prior to implementation of the proposed Project, the status of other known development projects (related projects) within a two- mile radius of the proposed project has been researched at the Cities of Santa Ana and Tustin. With this information, the potential impact of the proposed Project can be evaluated within the context of the cumulative impact of all ongoing development. Based on our research during the scoping process, there are twenty-eight (28) related projects in the City of Santa Ana and two (2) related projects in the City of Tustin that are being processed for approval. These thirty (30) related projects have been included as part of the cumulative background setting. Table 6-1 provides a brief description for each of the thirty (30) related projects. Figure 6-1 graphically illustrates the location of the thirty (30) related projects. These related projects are expected to generate vehicular traffic, which may affect the operating conditions of the key study intersections. Table 6-2 summarizes the trip generation potential for all thirty (30) related projects on a daily and peak hour basis for a typical weekday. As shown, the related projects are expected to generate 45,942 daily trips, with 3,033 trips (1,458 inbound, 1,575 outbound) anticipated during the AM peak hour and 3,837 trips (1,927 inbound, 1,910 outbound) produced during the PM peak hour. The AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes associated with the thirty (30) related projects in the Year 2025 are presented in Figures 6-2 and 6-3, respectively. Figure 6-3 also presents the daily related project traffic volumes. 1 - 153 1 - 154 1 - 155 1 - 156 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 21 TABLE 6-1 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF CUMULATIVE PROJECTS4 No. Cumulative Project Location/Address Description City of Santa Ana 1. Starbucks 2701 North Grand Avenue 907 SF coffee shop with drive-thru 2. Starbucks with Drive-thru 2301 North Tustin Avenue 3,567 SF coffee shop with drive-thru 3. Hampton Inn Hotel 2056, 2058, 2115, 2129 and 2129 North Main Street 2,657 SF commercial, 135 room hotel, and 1,619 SF existing office demolition 4. North Grand Car Wash 1821 North Grand Ave 5,243 SF carwash and 6,592 SF existing restaurant demolition 5. Rocket Express Car Wash 1703 East 17th Street 4,292 SF carwash 6. Tustin Service Station and Car Wash 2230 North Tustin Avenue 3,600 SF commercial 7. Sexlinger Homes and Orchard 1584 East Santa Clara Avenue 23 DU single-family detached 8. Arts Collective Meta Housing Adaptive Reuse 1666 North Main Street 58 DU residential apartments 9. The Orleans Adaptive Reuse Apartments 1212 North Broadway Avenue 24 DU residential apartments 10. One Broadway Plaza 1109 North Broadway 518,000 SF office tower with 16,000 SF restaurant 11. Bridging the Aqua 317 East 17th Street 57 DU residential apartments 12. First Street Family Apartments 1440 East 1st Street 69 DU residential apartments, 47,040 SF existing office demolition 13. 1660 First Street Elks Apartments 1660 East 1st Street 603 DU residential apartments and 20,671 SF retail 14. Elk’s Lodge 1751 South Lyon Street 52,453 SF commercial/lodge 15. Russell Fisher Commercial 301-325 North Tustin Avenue 10,195 SF commercial, 1,780 SF existing carwash demolition and 3,440 SF existing restaurant demolition 16. Ednovate Charter High School Adaptive Reuse 1450 East 17th Street 29,368 SF charter high school 17. Kiddie Academy of Santa Ana 1345 North Grand Avenue 7,657 SF childcare 18. Target Shopping Center 1330 East 17th Street 9,112 SF commercial Notes: ▪ SF = Square-feet ▪ DU = Dwelling units 4 Source: City of Santa Ana and City of Tustin Planning Department. 1 - 157 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 22 TABLE 6-1 (CONTINUED) LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF CUMULATIVE PROJECTS5 No. Cumulative Project Location/Address Description City of Santa Ana (Continued) 19. Raising Cane’s Restaurant 2250 East 17th Street 3,935 SF restaurant and 10,000 SF existing restaurant demolition 20. 888 Adaptive Reuse 888 North Main Street 146 Condominiums and 3,700 SF commercial 21. Legacy Square Mixed-Use Development 609 North Spurgeon Street 93 DU residential apartments and 6,335 SF commercial 22. First American Plaza 421 North Main Street /114 East 5th Street 220 DU multifamily (mid-rise) and 12,350 SF retail 23. 4th and Mortimer (Block A & B) 409/ 509 East 4th Street 133 DU residential apartments, 105,812 SF commercial and 22,330 SF demolition of commercial building 24. 201 E 4th Street 401 North Bush Street 24 DU residential apartments 25. Tom’s Trucks Residential Development 1008 East 4th Street 133 DU single-family residences 26. East First Street Apartments 2222 East 1st Street 418 DU senior residential apartments 27. The Madison 200 North Cabrillo Park Drive 260 DU apartments, 6,561 SF commercial and 2,507 SF retail component of live/work 28. 2114 East First Apartments 2114 East 1st Street 552 DU affordable apartments, 10,000 SF commercial City of Tustin 29. Service Station 1001 Edinger Avenue 6 fueling stations 30. Vintage 420 West 6th Street 140 DU condominiums Notes: ▪ SF = Square-feet ▪ DU = Dwelling units 5 Source: City of Santa Ana and City of Tustin Planning Department. 1 - 158 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 23 TABLE 6-2 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRAFFIC GENERATION FORECAST6 Cumulative Project Description Daily 2-Way AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total 1. Starbucks7 372 20 20 40 10 9 19 2. Starbucks with Drive-thru 1,463 81 77 158 39 38 77 3. Hampton Inn Hotel7 1,228 38 27 65 46 45 91 4. North Grand Car Wash7 Rocket Express Car Wash Tustin Service Station and Car Wash Sexlinger Homes and Orchard Arts Collective Meta Housing Adaptive Reuse The Orleans Adaptive Reuse Apartments YCU Conversion of SFD to office Use One Broadway Plaza Bridging the Aqua First Street Family Apartments 1660 First Street Elks Apartments McFadden Village Chevron Elk’s Lodge Softscapes New Building Russell Fisher Commercial Ednovate Charter High School Adaptive Reuse 740 0 0 0 37 37 74 5. Rocket Express Car Wash 610 0 0 0 31 30 61 6. Tustin Service Station and Car Wash 3,247 64 64 128 114 114 228 7. Sexlinger Homes and Orchard 217 4 13 17 14 9 23 8. Arts Collective Meta Housing Adaptive Reuse 425 6 21 27 20 12 32 9. The Orleans Adaptive Reuse Apartments 176 3 8 11 8 5 13 10. One Broadway Plaza7 6,660 595 149 744 150 535 685 11. Bridging the Aqua 417 6 20 26 20 12 32 12. First Street Family Apartments8 459 7 28 35 28 15 43 13. 1660 First Street Elks Apartments9 4,648 70 242 312 266 162 428 14. Elk’s Lodge 1,512 61 31 92 57 64 121 15. Russell Fisher Commercial7 346 5 4 9 13 13 26 16. Ednovate Charter High School Adaptive7 Reuse 413 70 29 99 15 13 28 17. Kiddie Academy of Santa Ana7 365 45 39 84 40 45 85 18. Target Shopping Center 310 5 3 8 11 12 23 19. Raising Cane’s Restaurant 926 41 40 81 33 31 64 20. 888 Adaptive Reuse7 1,209 17 53 70 59 37 96 21. Legacy Square Mixed-Use Development 2,833 43 54 97 110 101 211 22. First American Plaza7 1,420 26 59 85 70 52 122 23. 4th and Mortimer (Block A & B) 4,569 69 81 150 174 166 340 24. 201 E 4th Street 176 3 8 11 8 5 13 25. Tom’s Trucks Residential Development7 1,256 25 73 98 83 49 132 6 Unless otherwise noted, Source: Trip Generation, 10th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Washington, D.C. (2017). 7 Source: First American Plaza TIA, prepared by LLG, dated April 2019. 8 Source: First Street Family Apartments TIA, prepared by LLG, dated January 2016. 9 Source: 1660 E. First Street Elks Apartments TIA, prepared by LLG, dated June 2019. 1 - 159 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 24 TABLE 6-2 (CONTINUED) CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRAFFIC GENERATION FORECAST10 Cumulative Project Description Daily 2-Way AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total 26. East First Street Apartments 1,785 33 67 100 76 49 125 27. The Madison11 2,010 30 104 134 115 69 184 28. 2114 East First Apartments12 4,381 63 199 262 207 127 334 29. Service Station 744 13 13 26 24 25 49 30. Vintage 1,025 15 49 64 49 29 78 Cumulative Projects Total Trip Generation Potential 45,942 1,458 1,575 3,033 1,927 1,910 3,837 10 Unless otherwise noted, Source: Trip Generation, 10th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Washington, D.C. (2017). 11 Source: The Madison Mixed-Use Development TIA, prepared by LLG, dated August 2017. 12 Source: First American Plaza TIA, prepared by LLG, dated April 2019. 1 - 160 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 25 6.3 Year 2040 Traffic Conditions As coordinated with City staff, the Year 2040 traffic volume forecasts for this traffic study were development via the utilization of the OCTAM 4.0 Year 2040 traffic model provided by OCTA. Specifically, daily, AM peak period and PM peak period link traffic volumes were provided by OCTA for the existing base year (i.e. Year 2012) and for the Year 2040 year. The AM peak period corresponds to a three-hour morning commute period while the PM peak period corresponds to a four-hour afternoon commute period. Using the peak period model runs and the OCTA approved peak hour factors (i.e. AM = 0.3566 and PM = 0.2662), the one-hour peak hour link traffic volumes were determined. These future year 2040 link traffic volumes were post-processed based on the relationship of the base year validation model run output to the base year ground traffic counts resulting in Year 2040 without project daily traffic volumes for the AM peak hour/PM peak hour turning movements for the key study intersections. Copies of the model post-processing worksheets are contained in Appendix C. 6.4 Year 2025 and Year 2040 Traffic Volumes 6.4.1 Year 2025 Traffic Volumes Figures 6-4 and 6-5 present the AM and PM peak hour cumulative traffic volumes (existing traffic + ambient growth + related projects) at twenty-five (25) key study intersections for the Year 2025, respectively. Figure 6-5 also presents the Year 2025 daily cumulative traffic volumes. Figures 6-6 and 6-7 illustrate the Year 2025 forecast AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes, with the inclusion of the trips generated by the proposed Project, respectively. Figure 6-7 also presents the Year 2025 cumulative plus project daily traffic volumes. 6.4.2 Year 2040 Traffic Volumes Figures 6-8 and 6-9 present the Year 2040 AM and PM peak hour cumulative traffic volumes at the twenty-five (25) key study intersections, respectively. Figure 6-9 also presents the Year 2040 daily cumulative traffic volumes. Figures 6-10 and 6-11 illustrate the Year 2040 forecast AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes, with the inclusion of the trips generated by the proposed Project, respectively. Figure 6-11 also presents the Year 2040 buildout plus project daily traffic volumes. 1 - 161 1 - 162 1 - 163 1 - 164 1 - 165 1 - 166 1 - 167 1 - 168 1 - 169 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 26 7.0 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY The relative impact of the proposed Project during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour was evaluated based on analysis of future operating conditions at the twenty-five (25) key study intersections, without, then with, the proposed Project. The previously discussed capacity analysis procedures were utilized to investigate the future volume-to-capacity relationships and service level characteristics at each study intersection. The significance of the potential impacts of the Project at each key intersection was then evaluated using the following traffic impact criteria. 7.1 Impact Criteria and Thresholds 7.1.1 City of Santa Ana Based on the City of Santa Ana, impacts to local and regional transportation systems are considered significant if any of the following would occur: ▪ Project traffic would cause an intersection currently operating at an acceptable peak hour Level of Service (LOS) to operate at an unacceptable peak hour LOS. The City of Santa Ana considers LOS D to be the minimum acceptable LOS for all intersections, except for those locations located within the City’s defined major development areas, where LOS E is considered acceptable. Based on the above, the following summarizes the LOS required for each key study intersection: ➢ LOS “D” Requirements: 1. Elk Lane at First Street 19. Cabrillo Park Drive at Wellington Avenue 2. I-5 SB On-Ramp at First Street 21. Mabury Street at Fruit Street 7. I-5 SB On-Ramp/Mabury Street at 4th Street 22. Cabrillo Park Drive at Fruit Street 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street 23. Park Center Drive at Fruit Street 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street 25. Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place 18. Cabrillo Park Drive at 17th Street ➢ LOS “E” Requirements: 3. Cabrillo Park Drive at First Street 12. Tustin Avenue at 4th Street 4. Golden Circle Drive at First Street 16. Cabrillo Park Drive at State Fund Access Road 9. Cabrillo Park Drive at 4th Street 17. Cabrillo Park Drive at Xerox Center Access Road 10. Golden Circle Drive at 4th Street 20. Tustin Avenue at Wellington Avenue 11. Park Center Drive at 4th Street 24. Tustin Avenue at Fruit Street ▪ The project increases traffic demand by 1% of capacity (ICU increase  0.01) at a signalized study intersection forecast to operate at an acceptable LOS. ▪ At unsignalized intersections, an impact is considered to be significant if the project causes an intersection at LOS D or better to degrade to LOS E or F and the traffic signal warrant analysis determines that a signal is justified. 1 - 170 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 27 7.1.2 City of Tustin For those study intersections within the jurisdiction of the City of Tustin, impacts to local and regional transportation systems are considered significant if: ▪ An unacceptable peak hour Level of Service (LOS) at any of the key intersections is projected. The City of Tustin considers LOS D to be the minimum acceptable condition that should be maintained during the peak commute hours. For this analysis, if the project increases traffic demand at the study intersection by 1% of capacity (ICU increase  0.010), causing or worsening LOS E or F (ICU > 0.901), the impact is considered significant. 7.2 Traffic Impact Analysis Scenarios The following scenarios are those for which volume/capacity calculations have been performed at the twenty-five (25) key intersections for existing plus project, near-term (Year 2025) and long-term (Year 2040) traffic conditions: A. Existing Traffic Conditions; B. Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions; C. Scenario (B) with Improvements, if necessary; D. Near-Term (Year 2025) Cumulative Traffic Conditions, E. Near-Term (Year 2025) Cumulative plus Project Traffic Conditions; F. Scenario (E) with Improvements, if necessary; G. Long-Term (Year 2040) Future Traffic Conditions; H. Long-Term (Year 2040) Future Traffic Conditions plus Project Traffic; and I. Scenario (H) with Improvements, if necessary. 1 - 171 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 28 8.0 PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS 8.1 Existing Plus Project Analysis Table 8-1 summarizes the peak hour Level of Service results at the twenty-five (25) key study intersections for existing plus project traffic conditions. The first column (1) of ICU/LOS values and HCM/LOS values in Table 8-1 presents a summary of existing AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions (which were also presented in Table 3-3). The second column (2) lists existing plus project traffic conditions. The third column (3) shows the increase in ICU value and/or HCM value due to the added peak hour Project trips and indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have a significant impact based on the LOS standards and significant impact criteria defined in this report. The fourth column (4) presents the resultant level of service with the inclusion of recommended traffic improvements, where needed, to achieve an acceptable level of service. 8.1.1 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions Review of columns (2) and (3) of Table 8-1 indicates that traffic associated with the proposed Project will significantly impact one (1) of the twenty-five study intersections, when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. The impacted intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street is forecast to operate at LOS E during the AM peak hour. The remaining study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable level of service during the AM and PM peak hours. Review of column (4) of Table 8-1 indicates that the implementation of recommended improvements at the intersection will help offset the Project’s impact. Planned and recommended improvements are discussed in Section 11.0. Appendix D presents the existing plus project ICU/LOS and HCM/LOS calculations for the twenty- five (25) key study intersections. 1 - 172 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 29 TABLE 8-1 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Key Intersection Minimum Acceptable LOS Time Period (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions (3) Significant Impact (4) Existing Plus Project Plus Improvements Traffic Conditions ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS Increase Yes/No ICU/HCM LOS 1. Elk Lane at First Street D AM 0.599 A 0.604 B 0.005 No -- -- PM 0.716 C 0.725 C 0.009 No -- -- 2. I-5 SB On Ramp at First Street D AM 0.425 A 0.434 A 0.009 No -- -- PM 0.584 A 0.594 A 0.010 No -- -- 3. Cabrillo Park Drive at First Street E AM 0.450 A 0.458 A 0.008 No -- -- PM 0.544 A 0.558 A 0.014 No -- -- 4. Golden Circle Drive at First Street E AM 0.331 A 0.331 A 0.000 No -- -- PM 0.324 A 0.325 A 0.001 No -- -- 5. Tustin Avenue at First Street D AM 0.396 A 0.398 A 0.002 No -- -- PM 0.418 A 0.421 A 0.003 No -- -- 6. Yorba Street at First Street D AM 0.448 A 0.449 A 0.001 No -- -- PM 0.526 A 0.529 A 0.003 No -- -- 7. I-5 SB On Ramp/Mabury Street at 4th Street D AM 0.357 A 0.382 A 0.025 No -- -- PM 0.395 A 0.399 A 0.004 No -- -- 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street D AM 0.429 A 0.442 A 0.013 No -- -- PM 0.774 C 0.787 C 0.013 No -- -- 9. Cabrillo Park Drive at 4th Street E AM 0.551 A 0.547 A -0.00413 No -- -- PM 0.714 C 0.793 C 0.079 No -- -- Note: ▪ Bold ICU/LOS or HCM/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Cities LOS standards. ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 13 Negative V/C increase is due to Project-specific improvements as detailed in Section 11.0. 1 - 173 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 30 TABLE 8-1 (CONTINUED) EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Key Intersection Minimum Acceptable LOS Time Period (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions (3) Significant Impact (4) Existing Plus Project Plus Improvements Traffic Conditions ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS Increase Yes/No ICU/HCM LOS 10. Golden Circle Drive at 4th Street E AM 0.398 A 0.410 A 0.012 No -- -- PM 0.405 A 0.421 A 0.016 No -- -- 11. Park Center Drive at 4th Street E AM 13.7 s/v B 14.0 s/v B 0.3 s/v No -- -- PM 16.2 s/v C 17.0 s/v C 0.8 s/v No -- -- 12. Tustin Avenue at 4th Street E AM 0.667 B 0.667 B 0.000 No -- -- PM 0.738 C 0.751 C 0.013 No -- -- 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street D AM 0.978 E 0.991 E 0.013 Yes 0.521 A PM 0.748 C 0.761 C 0.013 No 0.706 C 14. SR-55 NB Ramps at 4th Street D AM 0.670 B 0.684 B 0.014 No -- -- PM 0.689 B 0.705 C 0.016 No -- -- 15. Yorba Street at 4th Street D AM 0.561 A 0.563 A 0.002 No -- -- PM 0.605 B 0.610 B 0.005 No -- -- 16. Cabrillo Park Drive at State Fund Access Road E AM 0.308 A 0.319 A 0.011 No -- -- PM 0.340 A 0.347 A 0.007 No -- -- 17. Cabrillo Park Drive at Xerox Centre Access Road E AM 0.271 A 0.282 A 0.011 No -- -- PM 0.308 A 0.315 A 0.007 No -- -- 18. Cabrillo Park Drive at 17th Street D AM 0.568 A 0.571 A 0.003 No -- -- PM 0.611 B 0.619 B 0.008 No -- -- Note: ▪ Bold ICU/LOS or HCM/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Cities LOS standards. ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 1 - 174 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 31 TABLE 8-1 (CONTINUED) EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Key Intersection Minimum Acceptable LOS Time Period (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions (3) Significant Impact (4) Existing Plus Project Plus Improvements Traffic Conditions ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS Increase Yes/No ICU/HCM LOS 19. Cabrillo Park Drive at Wellington Avenue D AM 17.8 s/v C 18.2 s/v C 0.4 s/v No -- -- PM 17.9 s/v C 18.3 s/v C 0.4 s/v No -- -- 20. Tustin Avenue at Wellington Avenue E AM 0.574 A 0.575 A 0.001 No -- -- PM 0.411 A 0.412 A 0.001 No -- -- 21. Mabury Street at Fruit Street D AM 7.7 s/v A 7.7 s/v A 0.0 s/v No -- -- PM 7.7 s/v A 7.7 s/v A 0.0 s/v No -- -- 22. Cabrillo Park Drive at Fruit Street D AM 12.5 s/v B 12.7 s/v B 0.2 s/v No -- -- PM 11.5 s/v B 11.9 s/v B 0.4 s/v No -- -- 23. Park Center Drive at Fruit Street D AM 10.3 s/v B 10.4 s/v B 0.1 s/v No -- -- PM 10.5 s/v B 10.6 s/v B 0.1 s/v No -- -- 24. Tustin Avenue at Fruit Street E AM 0.509 A 0.516 A 0.007 No -- -- PM 0.446 A 0.451 A 0.005 No -- -- 25. Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place D AM 18.6 s/v C 22.6 s/v C 4.0 s/v No -- -- PM 24.3 s/v C 32.4 s/v D 8.1 s/v No -- -- Note: ▪ Bold ICU/LOS or HCM/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Cities LOS standards. ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 1 - 175 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 32 8.2 Year 2025 Traffic Conditions Table 8-2 summarizes the peak hour Level of Service results at the twenty-five (25) key study intersections for the Year 2025 horizon year. The first column (1) of ICU/LOS and HCM/LOS values in Table 8-2 presents a summary of existing AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions. The second column (2) lists projected cumulative traffic conditions (existing plus ambient plus related projects traffic) based on existing intersection geometry, but without any traffic generated from the proposed Project. The third column (3) presents forecast Year 2025 near-term traffic conditions with the addition of Project traffic. The fourth column (4) shows the increase in ICU value and/or HCM value due to the added peak hour Project trips and indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have a significant impact based on the LOS standards and significant impact criteria defined in this report. The fifth column (5) presents the resultant level of service with the inclusion of recommended traffic improvements, where needed, to achieve an acceptable level of service. 8.2.1 Year 2025 Cumulative Traffic Conditions Review of column (2) of Table 8-2 indicates that the addition of ambient traffic growth and related projects traffic will adversely impact two (2) of the twenty-five key study intersections. The remaining study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable level of service during the AM and PM peak hours. The intersections forecast to operate adversely consist of the following: AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Key Intersection ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS 1. Elk Lane at First Street -- -- 0.921 E 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street 1.063 F -- -- 8.2.2 Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Conditions Review of columns (3) of Table 8-2 indicates that four (4) of the twenty-five study intersections are forecast to operate at unacceptable level of service during the AM and/or PM peak hours, based on the LOS standards and impact criteria specified in this report, with the addition of project traffic. The remaining study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable level of service during the AM and PM peak hours. The intersections forecast to operate adversely consist of the following: AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Key Intersection ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS 1. Elk Lane at First Street -- -- 0.929 E 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street -- -- 0.904 E 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street 1.074 F -- -- 25. Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place -- -- 45.9 s/v E 1 - 176 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 33 Review of column (4) of Table 8-2 indicates that two (2) intersections are significantly impacted by the Project under Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project traffic conditions, which include I-5 NB Ramps/4th Street and SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street. Review of column (5) indicates that the implementation of planned and/or recommended improvements at the intersections will help offset the Project’s impact. Planned and recommended improvements are discussed in Section 11.0. Although the intersection of Elk Lane/First Street operates adversely during the PM peak hour, the proposed Project adds less than 0.010 increment to the ICU value and is therefore not considered significantly impacted based on the LOS standards and impact criteria specified in this report. Although Cabrillo Park Drive/Park Court Place operates adversely during the PM peak hour, a traffic signal is not warranted during the PM peak hour and therefore the intersection is not considered significantly impacted based on the LOS standards and impact criteria specified in this report. However, a traffic signal is warranted during the AM peak hour and therefore it is recommended to implement improvements at the intersection to help achieve acceptable level of service. Review of column (5) indicates that the installation of a two-phase traffic signal at this intersection would help improve the intersection and result in an acceptable level of service. It should be noted that the installation of a two-phase traffic signal would be in place of previously identified improvements at the intersection (i.e. median diverters to prohibit cross-traffic) as documented in the Traffic Impact Study for the Metro East Overlay Zone in the City of Santa Ana. Appendix D also presents the near-term ICU/LOS and HCM/LOS calculations for the twenty-five (25) key study intersections. Appendix H presents the signal warrant worksheets for the intersection of Cabrillo Park Drive/Park Court Place. 1 - 177 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 34 TABLE 8-2 YEAR 2025 CUMULATIVE PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Key Intersection Minimum Acceptable LOS Time Period (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Year 2025 Cumulative Traffic Conditions (3) Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions (4) Significant Impact (5) Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Plus Improvements Traffic Conditions ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS Increase Yes/No ICU/HCM LOS 1. Elk Lane at First Street D AM 0.599 A 0.748 C 0.753 C 0.005 No -- -- PM 0.716 C 0.921 E 0.929 E 0.008 No -- -- 2. I-5 SB On Ramp at First Street D AM 0.425 A 0.517 A 0.527 A 0.010 No -- -- PM 0.584 A 0.681 B 0.691 B 0.010 No -- -- 3. Cabrillo Park Drive at First Street E AM 0.450 A 0.563 A 0.571 A 0.008 No -- -- PM 0.544 A 0.716 C 0.730 C 0.014 No -- -- 4. Golden Circle Drive at First Street E AM 0.331 A 0.384 A 0.385 A 0.001 No -- -- PM 0.324 A 0.381 A 0.382 A 0.001 No -- -- 5. Tustin Avenue at First Street D AM 0.396 A 0.487 A 0.489 A 0.002 No -- -- PM 0.418 A 0.476 A 0.478 A 0.002 No -- -- 6. Yorba Street at First Street D AM 0.448 A 0.524 A 0.525 A 0.001 No -- -- PM 0.526 A 0.610 B 0.613 B 0.003 No -- -- 7. I-5 SB On Ramp/Mabury Street at 4th Street D AM 0.357 A 0.413 A 0.437 A 0.024 No -- -- PM 0.395 A 0.478 A 0.482 A 0.004 No -- -- 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street D AM 0.429 A 0.482 A 0.495 A 0.013 No 0.495 A PM 0.774 C 0.891 D 0.904 E 0.013 Yes 0.573 A 9. Cabrillo Park Drive at 4th Street E AM 0.551 A 0.633 B 0.620 B -0.01314 No -- -- PM 0.714 C 0.817 D 0.881 D 0.064 No -- -- Note: ▪ Bold ICU/LOS or HCM/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Cities LOS standards. ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 14 Negative V/C increase is due to Project-specific improvements as detailed in Section 11.0. 1 - 178 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 35 TABLE 8-2 (CONTINUED) YEAR 2025 CUMULATIVE PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Key Intersection Minimum Acceptable LOS Time Period (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Year 2025 Cumulative Traffic Conditions (3) Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions (4) Significant Impact (5) Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Plus Improvements Traffic Conditions ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS Increase Yes/No ICU/HCM LOS 10. Golden Circle Drive at 4th Street E AM 0.398 A 0.447 A 0.459 A 0.012 No -- -- PM 0.405 A 0.469 A 0.483 A 0.014 No -- -- 11. Park Center Drive at 4th Street E AM 13.7 s/v B 15.6 s/v C 15.8 s/v C 0.2 s/v No -- -- PM 16.2 s/v C 20.9 s/v C 22.2 s/v C 1.3 s/v No -- -- 12. Tustin Avenue at 4th Street E AM 0.667 B 0.779 C 0.785 C 0.006 No -- -- PM 0.738 C 0.843 D 0.856 D 0.013 No -- -- 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street D AM 0.978 E 1.063 F 1.074 F 0.011 Yes 0.610 B PM 0.748 C 0.834 D 0.847 D 0.013 No 0.810 D 14. SR-55 NB Ramps at 4th Street D AM 0.670 B 0.771 C 0.785 C 0.014 No -- -- PM 0.689 B 0.802 D 0.818 D 0.016 No -- -- 15. Yorba Street at 4th Street D AM 0.561 A 0.614 B 0.616 B 0.002 No -- -- PM 0.605 B 0.664 B 0.668 B 0.004 No -- -- 16. Cabrillo Park Drive at State Fund Access Road E AM 0.308 A 0.347 A 0.359 A 0.012 No -- -- PM 0.340 A 0.386 A 0.393 A 0.007 No -- -- 17. Cabrillo Park Drive at Xerox Centre Access Road E AM 0.271 A 0.350 A 0.362 A 0.012 No -- -- PM 0.308 A 0.398 A 0.400 A 0.002 No -- -- 18. Cabrillo Park Drive at 17th Street D AM 0.568 A 0.624 B 0.628 B 0.004 No -- -- PM 0.611 B 0.697 B 0.705 C 0.008 No -- -- Note: ▪ Bold ICU/LOS or HCM/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Cities LOS standards. ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 1 - 179 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 36 TABLE 8-2 (CONTINUED) YEAR 2025 CUMULATIVE PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Key Intersection Minimum Acceptable LOS Time Period (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Year 2025 Cumulative Traffic Conditions (3) Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions (4) Significant Impact (5) Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Plus Improvements Traffic Conditions ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS Increase Yes/No ICU/HCM LOS 19. Cabrillo Park Drive at Wellington Avenue D AM 17.8 s/v C 22.0 s/v C 22.6 s/v C 0.6 s/v No -- -- PM 17.9 s/v C 21.7 s/v C 22.2 s/v C 0.5 s/v No -- -- 20. Tustin Avenue at Wellington Avenue E AM 0.574 A 0.612 B 0.613 B 0.001 No -- -- PM 0.411 A 0.443 A 0.445 A 0.002 No -- -- 21. Mabury Street at Fruit Street D AM 7.7 s/v A 7.8 s/v A 7.8 s/v A 0.0 s/v No -- -- PM 7.7 s/v A 7.7 s/v A 7.8 s/v A 0.1 s/v No -- -- 22. Cabrillo Park Drive at Fruit Street D AM 12.5 s/v B 13.9 s/v B 14.2 s/v B 0.3 s/v No -- -- PM 11.5 s/v B 12.9 s/v B 13.3 s/v B 0.4 s/v No -- -- 23. Park Center Drive at Fruit Street D AM 10.3 s/v B 10.5 s/v B 10.6 s/v B 0.1 s/v No -- -- PM 10.5 s/v B 10.7 s/v B 10.8 s/v B 0.1 s/v No -- -- 24. Tustin Avenue at Fruit Street E AM 0.509 A 0.543 A 0.550 A 0.007 No -- -- PM 0.446 A 0.480 A 0.485 A 0.005 No -- -- 25. Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place D AM 18.6 s/v C 21.4 s/v C 26.6 s/v D 5.9 s/v No 0.487 A15 PM 24.3 s/v C 31.7 s/v D 45.9 s/v E 6.6 s/v No 0.414 A15 Note: ▪ Bold ICU/LOS or HCM/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Cities LOS standards. ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 15 Although the intersection is not considered significantly impacted, it is forecast to operate at unacceptable level of service. Therefore, recommended mitigation measures have been included in this analysis for informational purposes. Recommended mitigation includes the installation of a two-phase traffic signal. 1 - 180 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 37 8.3 Year 2040 Traffic Conditions Table 8-3 summarizes the peak hour Level of Service results at the twenty-five (25) key study intersections for the Year 2040. The first column (1) of ICU/LOS and HCM/LOS values in Table 8- 3 presents a summary of existing AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions. The second column (2) lists projected Year 2040 long-term traffic conditions based on existing intersection geometry, but without any traffic generated from the proposed Project. The third column (3) presents forecast Year 2040 long-term traffic conditions with the addition of Project traffic. The fourth column (4) shows the increase in ICU value and/or HCM value due to the added peak hour Project trips and indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have a significant impact based on the LOS standards and significant impact criteria defined in this report. The fifth column (5) presents the resultant level of service with the inclusion of recommended traffic improvements, where needed, to achieve an acceptable level of service. 8.3.1 Year 2040 Traffic Conditions Review of column (2) of Table 8-3 indicates that projected long-term (Year 2040) without project traffic will adversely impact four (4) of the twenty-five key study intersections. The remaining study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable level of service during the AM and PM peak hours. The intersections forecast to operate adversely consist of the following: AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Key Intersection ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS 1. Elk Lane at First Street -- -- 0.964 E 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street -- -- 0.960 E 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street 1.111 F 0.934 E 25. Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place -- -- 37.2 s/v E 8.3.2 Year 2040 Plus Project Traffic Conditions Review of columns (3) of Table 8-3 indicates that four (4) of the twenty-five study intersections are forecast to operate at unacceptable level of service during the AM and/or PM peak hours, based on the LOS standards and impact criteria specified in this report, with the addition of project traffic. The remaining study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable level of service during the AM and PM peak hours. The intersections forecast to operate adversely consist of the following: AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Key Intersection ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS 1. Elk Lane at First Street -- -- 0.972 E 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street -- -- 0.973 E 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street 1.123 F 0.948 E 25. Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place -- -- 56.9 s/v F 1 - 181 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 38 Review of column (4) of Table 8-3 indicates that two (2) intersections are significantly impacted by the Project under Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project traffic conditions, which include I-5 NB Ramps/4th Street and SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street. Review of column (5) indicates that the implementation of planned and/or recommended improvements at the intersections will help offset the Project’s impact. Planned and recommended improvements are discussed in Section 11.0. Although the intersection of Elk Lane/First Street operates adversely during the PM peak hour, the proposed Project adds less than 0.010 increment to the ICU value and is therefore not considered significantly impacted based on the LOS standards and impact criteria specified in this report. Although Cabrillo Park Drive/Park Court Place operates adversely during the PM peak hour, a traffic signal is not warranted during the PM peak hour and therefore the intersection is not considered significantly impacted based on the LOS standards and impact criteria specified in this report. However, a traffic signal is warranted during the AM peak hour and therefore it is recommended to implement improvements at the intersection to help achieve acceptable level of service. Review of column (5) indicates that the installation of a two-phase traffic signal at this intersection would help improve the intersection and result in an acceptable level of service. It should be noted that the installation of a two-phase traffic signal would be in place of previously identified improvements at the intersection (i.e. median diverters to prohibit cross-traffic) as documented in the Traffic Impact Study for the Metro East Overlay Zone in the City of Santa Ana. Appendix D also presents the long-term ICU/LOS and HCM/LOS calculations for the twenty-five (25) key study intersections. Appendix H presents the signal warrant worksheets for the intersection of Cabrillo Park Drive/Park Court Place. 1 - 182 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 39 TABLE 8-3 YEAR 2040 BUILDOUT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Key Intersection Minimum Acceptable LOS Time Period (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Year 2040 Buildout Traffic Conditions (3) Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions (4) Significant Impact (5) Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Plus Improvements Traffic Conditions ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS Increase Yes/No ICU/HCM LOS 1. Elk Lane at First Street D AM 0.599 A 0.785 C 0.791 A 0.006 No -- -- PM 0.716 C 0.964 E 0.972 E 0.008 No -- -- 2. I-5 SB On Ramp at First Street D AM 0.425 A 0.541 A 0.550 A 0.009 No -- -- PM 0.584 A 0.713 C 0.722 C 0.009 No -- -- 3. Cabrillo Park Drive at First Street E AM 0.450 A 0.652 B 0.660 B 0.008 No -- -- PM 0.544 A 0.750 C 0.764 C 0.014 No -- -- 4. Golden Circle Drive at First Street E AM 0.331 A 0.403 A 0.404 A 0.001 No -- -- PM 0.324 A 0.390 A 0.391 A 0.001 No -- -- 5. Tustin Avenue at First Street D AM 0.396 A 0.506 A 0.508 A 0.002 No -- -- PM 0.418 A 0.557 A 0.559 A 0.002 No -- -- 6. Yorba Street at First Street D AM 0.448 A 0.626 B 0.628 B 0.002 No -- -- PM 0.526 A 0.684 B 0.686 B 0.002 No -- -- 7. I-5 SB On Ramp/Mabury Street at 4th Street D AM 0.357 A 0.432 A 0.457 A 0.025 No -- -- PM 0.395 A 0.503 A 0.517 A 0.014 No -- -- 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street D AM 0.429 A 0.528 A 0.541 A 0.013 No 0.541 A PM 0.774 C 0.960 E 0.973 E 0.013 Yes 0.626 B 9. Cabrillo Park Drive at 4th Street E AM 0.551 A 0.669 B 0.661 B -0.00816 No -- -- PM 0.714 C 0.846 D 0.915 E 0.069 No -- -- Note: ▪ Bold ICU/LOS or HCM/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Cities LOS standards. ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 16 Negative V/C increase is due to Project-specific improvements as detailed in Section 11.0. 1 - 183 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 40 TABLE 8-3 (CONTINUED) YEAR 2040 BUILDOUT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Key Intersection Minimum Acceptable LOS Time Period (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Year 2040 Buildout Traffic Conditions (3) Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions (4) Significant Impact (5) Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Plus Improvements Traffic Conditions ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS Increase Yes/No ICU/HCM LOS 10. Golden Circle Drive at 4th Street E AM 0.398 A 0.466 A 0.478 A 0.012 No -- -- PM 0.405 A 0.490 A 0.503 A 0.013 No -- -- 11. Park Center Drive at 4th Street E AM 13.7 s/v B 16.2 s/v C 16.5 s/v C 0.3 s/v No -- -- PM 16.2 s/v C 22.7 s/v C 24.3 s/v C 1.6 s/v No -- -- 12. Tustin Avenue at 4th Street E AM 0.667 B 0.820 D 0.826 D 0.006 No -- -- PM 0.738 C 0.961 E 0.961 E 0.000 No -- -- 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street D AM 0.978 E 1.111 F 1.123 F 0.012 Yes 0.635 B PM 0.748 C 0.934 E 0.948 E 0.014 Yes 0.903 E 14. SR-55 NB Ramps at 4th Street D AM 0.670 B 0.835 D 0.849 D 0.014 No -- -- PM 0.689 B 0.851 D 0.890 D 0.039 No -- -- 15. Yorba Street at 4th Street D AM 0.561 A 0.752 C 0.754 C 0.002 No -- -- PM 0.605 B 0.715 C 0.719 C 0.004 No -- -- 16. Cabrillo Park Drive at State Fund Access Road E AM 0.308 A 0.362 A 0.374 A 0.012 No -- -- PM 0.340 A 0.403 A 0.409 A 0.006 No -- -- 17. Cabrillo Park Drive at Xerox Centre Access Road E AM 0.271 A 0.366 A 0.377 A 0.011 No -- -- PM 0.308 A 0.408 A 0.417 A 0.009 No -- -- 18. Cabrillo Park Drive at 17th Street D AM 0.568 A 0.652 B 0.655 B 0.003 No -- -- PM 0.611 B 0.730 C 0.737 C 0.007 No -- -- Note: ▪ Bold ICU/LOS or HCM/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Cities LOS standards. ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 1 - 184 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 41 TABLE 8-3 (CONTINUED) YEAR 2040 BUILDOUT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Key Intersection Minimum Acceptable LOS Time Period (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Year 2040 Buildout Traffic Conditions (3) Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions (4) Significant Impact (5) Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Plus Improvements Traffic Conditions ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS ICU/HCM LOS Increase Yes/No ICU/HCM LOS 19. Cabrillo Park Drive at Wellington Avenue D AM 17.8 s/v C 24.4 s/v C 25.2 s/v D 0.8 s/v No -- -- PM 17.9 s/v C 24.1 s/v C 24.7 s/v C 0.6 s/v No -- -- 20. Tustin Avenue at Wellington Avenue E AM 0.574 A 0.640 B 0.641 B 0.001 No -- -- PM 0.411 A 0.462 A 0.464 A 0.002 No -- -- 21. Mabury Street at Fruit Street D AM 7.7 s/v A 7.8 s/v A 7.8 s/v A 0.0 s/v No -- -- PM 7.7 s/v A 7.8 s/v A 7.9 s/v A 0.1 s/v No -- -- 22. Cabrillo Park Drive at Fruit Street D AM 12.5 s/v B 14.9 s/v B 15.2 s/v C 0.3 s/v No -- -- PM 11.5 s/v B 13.6 s/v B 14.0 s/v B 0.4 s/v No -- -- 23. Park Center Drive at Fruit Street D AM 10.3 s/v B 10.7 s/v B 10.8 s/v B 0.1 s/v No -- -- PM 10.5 s/v B 10.8 s/v B 12.0 s/v B 1.2 s/v No -- -- 24. Tustin Avenue at Fruit Street E AM 0.509 A 0.577 A 0.584 A 0.007 No -- -- PM 0.446 A 0.502 A 0.506 A 0.004 No -- -- 25. Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place D AM 18.6 s/v C 23.0 s/v C 29.2 s/v D 7.2 s/v No 0.514 A17 PM 24.3 s/v C 37.2 s/v E 56.9 s/v F 9.1 s/v No 0.423 A17 Note: ▪ Bold ICU/LOS or HCM/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Cities LOS standards. ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 17 Although the intersection is not considered significantly impacted, it is forecast to operate at unacceptable level of service. Therefore, recommended mitigation measures have been included in this analysis for informational purposes. Recommended mitigation includes the installation of a two-phase traffic signal. 1 - 185 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 42 9.0 STATE OF CALIFORNIA (CALTRANS) ANALYSIS In conformance with the current Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, dated December 2002, existing and projected peak hour operating conditions at the five (5) state-controlled study intersections within the study area have been evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual operations method of analysis. These state-controlled locations include the following study intersections: 2. I-5 SB On-Ramp at First Street (City of Santa Ana/Caltrans) 7. I-5 SB On-Ramp/Mabury Street at 4th Street (City of Santa Ana/Caltrans) 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street (City of Santa Ana/Caltrans) 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street (City of Santa Ana/Caltrans) 14. SR-55 NB Ramps at 4th Street (City of Tustin/Caltrans) Caltrans “endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS “C” and LOS “D” on State highway facilities”; it does not require that LOS “D” (shall) be maintained. However, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not always be feasible and recommends that the lead agency consult with Caltrans to determine the appropriate target LOS. For this analysis, LOS D is the target level of service standard and will be utilized to assess the project impacts at the state-controlled study intersections. The Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, dated December 2002 states that if an existing State-owned facility operates at less than the target LOS (i.e. LOS D); the existing service level should be maintained. Based on Caltrans Criteria, a Project’s impact is considered significant if the Project causes the LOS to change from an acceptable LOS (i.e., LOS D or better) to a deficient LOS (i.e. LOS E or F). 9.1 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Method of Analysis (Signalized Intersections) Based on the HCM 6th Edition operations method of analysis, level of service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of control delay, which is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption and lost travel time. The delay experienced by a motorist is made up of a number of factors that relate to control, geometries, traffic and incidents. Total delay is the difference between the travel time actually experienced and the reference travel time that would result during ideal conditions: in the absence of traffic control, in the absence of geometric delay, in the absence of any incidents and when there are no other vehicles on the road. In the HCM, only the portion of total delay attributed to the control facility is quantified. This delay is called control delay. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay and final acceleration delay. Specifically, LOS criteria for traffic signals are stated in terms of the average control delay per vehicle. The six qualitative categories of Level of Service that have been defined along with the corresponding HCM control delay value range for signalized intersections are shown in Table 9-1. 1 - 186 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 43 TABLE 9-1 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS (HCM)18 Level of Service (LOS) Control Delay Per Vehicle (seconds/vehicle) Level of Service Description A < 10.0 This level of service occurs when progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay. B > 10.0 and < 20.0 This level generally occurs with good progression, short cycle lengths, or both. More vehicles stop than with LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. C > 20.0 and < 35.0 Average traffic delays. These higher delays may result from fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, though many still pass through the intersection without stopping. D > 35.0 and < 55.0 Long traffic delays. At level D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable. E > 55.0 and < 80.0 Very long traffic delays. This level is considered by many agencies (i.e. SANBAG) to be the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high v/c ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. F  80.0 Severe congestion. This level, considered to be unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with over saturation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. It may also occur at high v/c ratios below 1.0 with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing factors to such delay levels. 18 Source: Highway Capacity Manual (Signalized Intersections). 1 - 187 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 44 9.2 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions Table 9-2 summarizes the peak hour Level of Service results at the five (5) state-controlled study intersections for existing plus project traffic conditions. The first column (1) of HCM/LOS values in Table 9-2 presents a summary of existing AM and PM peak hour traffic. The second column (2) lists existing plus project traffic conditions with current intersection geometry/lane configurations. The third column (3) shows the increase in delay value due to the added peak hour project trips and indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have a significant impact based on the significant impact criteria defined in this report. The fourth column (4) indicates the anticipated level of service with improvements, if any. 9.2.1 Existing Traffic Conditions Review of column (1) of Table 9-2 indicates that the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street currently operates at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour. The remaining state-controlled study intersections currently operate at LOS C or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hours. 9.2.2 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions Review of columns (2) and (3) of Table 9-2 indicates that the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street will continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour with the addition of project traffic. The remaining state-controlled study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable LOS C or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hours, with the addition of project traffic. Although the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street is forecast to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour, the intersection is not considered significantly impacted when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. Appendix E presents the existing plus project HCM/LOS calculations for the state-controlled study intersections. 1 - 188 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 45 TABLE 9-2 EXISTING PLUS PROJECT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY - CALTRANS Key Intersection Time Period (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions (3) Significant Impact (4) Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions with Improvements HCM LOS HCM LOS Yes/No HCM LOS 2. I-5 SB On Ramp at AM 7.2 s/v A 7.4 s/v A No -- -- First Street PM 7.2 s/v A 7.4 s/v A No -- -- 7. I-5 SB On Ramp/Mabury Street at AM 15.2 s/v B 16.1 s/v B No -- -- 4th street PM 13.3 s/v B 14.3 s/v B No -- -- 8. I-5 NB Ramps at AM 8.7 s/v A 8.6 s/v A No -- -- 4th Street PM 14.2 s/v B 14.4 s/v B No -- -- 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at AM 147.9 s/v F 151.8 s/v F No 26.8 s/v C19 4th Street PM 27.2 s/v C 27.6 s/v C No 24.8 s/v C19 14. SR-55 NB Ramps at AM 24.8 s/v C 25.6 s/v C No -- -- 4th Street PM 20.0 s/v B 20.7 s/v C No -- -- Note: ▪ Bold HCM/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Caltrans LOS standards. ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 19 Although the intersection is not considered a significant impact based on Caltrans criteria, level of service results at the intersection with the implementation of improvements discussed in Section 11.0 have been included for informational purposes. 1 - 189 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 46 9.3 Year 2025 Traffic Conditions Table 9-3 summarizes the peak hour Level of Service results at the at the five (5) state-controlled study intersections for the Year 2025 horizon year. The first column (1) of HCM/LOS values in Table 9-3 presents a summary of existing AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions. The second column (2) lists future Year 2025 cumulative traffic conditions (existing plus ambient growth traffic plus cumulative projects traffic), without any traffic generated by the proposed Project. The third column (3) presents future forecast traffic conditions with the addition of traffic generated by the proposed Project. The fourth column (4) shows the increase in delay value due to the added peak hour project trips and indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have a significant impact based on the LOS standards and significant impact criteria defined in this report. The fifth column (5) indicates the anticipated level of service with improvements, if any. 9.3.1 Year 2025 Cumulative Traffic Conditions Review of Column (2) of Table 9-3 indicates that the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street is forecast to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour. The remaining state-controlled study intersections are forecast to operate at LOS C or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hours. 9.3.2 Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions Review of columns (3) and (4) of Table 9-3 indicates that the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street will continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour with the addition of project traffic. The remaining state-controlled study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable LOS C or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hours, with the addition of project traffic. Although the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street is forecast to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour, the intersection is not considered significantly impacted when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. Appendix E presents the Year 2025 HCM/LOS calculations for the state-controlled study intersections. 1 - 190 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 47 TABLE 9-3 YEAR 2025 CUMULATIVE PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY - CALTRANS Key Intersection Time Period (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Year 2025 Cumulative Traffic Conditions (3) Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions (4) Significant Impact (5) Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions with Improvements HCM LOS HCM LOS HCM LOS Yes/No HCM LOS 2. I-5 SB On Ramp at AM 7.2 s/v A 7.7 s/v A 8.0 s/v A No -- -- First Street PM 7.2 s/v A 8.3 s/v A 8.6 s/v A No -- -- 7. I-5 SB On Ramp/Mabury Street at AM 15.2 s/v B 15.6 s/v B 16.4 s/v B No -- -- 4th street PM 13.3 s/v B 14.8 s/v B 15.6 s/v B No -- -- 8. I-5 NB Ramps at AM 8.7 s/v A 10.0 s/v A 9.9 s/v A No 9.2 s/v A20 4th Street PM 14.2 s/v B 20.6 s/v C 21.2 s/v C No 11.9 s/v B20 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at AM 147.9 s/v F 156.9 s/v F 160.7 s/v F No 25.7 s/v C20 4th Street PM 27.2 s/v C 31.4 s/v C 32.8 s/v C No 26.0 s/v C20 14. SR-55 NB Ramps at AM 24.8 s/v C 34.7 s/v C 36.2 s/v D No -- -- 4th Street PM 20.0 s/v B 26.8 s/v C 29.4 s/v C No -- -- Note: ▪ Bold HCM/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Caltrans LOS standards. ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 20 Although the intersection is not considered a significant impact based on Caltrans criteria, level of service results at the intersection with the implementation of improvements discussed in Section 11.0 have been included for informational purposes. 1 - 191 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 48 9.4 Year 2040 Traffic Conditions Table 9-4 summarizes the peak hour Level of Service results at the at the five (5) state-controlled study intersections for the Year 2040 buildout year. The first column (1) of HCM/LOS values in Table 9-4 presents a summary of existing AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions. The second column (2) lists future Year 2040 buildout traffic conditions, without any traffic generated by the proposed Project. The third column (3) presents future forecast traffic conditions with the addition of traffic generated by the proposed Project. The fourth column (4) shows the increase in delay value due to the added peak hour project trips and indicates whether the traffic associated with the Project will have a significant impact based on the LOS standards and significant impact criteria defined in this report. The fifth column (5) indicates the anticipated level of service with improvements, if any. 9.4.1 Year 2040 Buildout Traffic Conditions Review of Column (2) of Table 9-4 indicates that the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street is forecast to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour. The remaining state-controlled study intersections are forecast to operate at LOS C or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hours. 9.4.2 Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions Review of columns (3) and (4) of Table 9-4 indicates that the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street will continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour with the addition of project traffic. The remaining state-controlled study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable LOS C or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hours, with the addition of project traffic. Although the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street is forecast to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour, the intersection is not considered significantly impacted when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. Appendix E presents the Year 2040 HCM/LOS calculations for the state-controlled study intersections. 1 - 192 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 49 TABLE 9-4 YEAR 2040 BUILDOUT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY - CALTRANS Key Intersection Time Period (1) Existing Traffic Conditions (2) Year 2040 Buildout Traffic Conditions (3) Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions (4) Significant Impact (5) Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions with Improvements HCM LOS HCM LOS HCM LOS Yes/No HCM LOS 2. I-5 SB On Ramp at AM 7.2 s/v A 7.9 s/v A 8.1 s/v A No -- -- First Street PM 7.2 s/v A 8.9 s/v A 9.2 s/v A No -- -- 7. I-5 SB On Ramp/Mabury Street at AM 15.2 s/v B 16.6 s/v B 17.6 s/v B No -- -- 4th street PM 13.3 s/v B 16.8 s/v B 17.4 s/v B No -- -- 8. I-5 NB Ramps at AM 8.7 s/v A 10.2 s/v B 10.2 s/v B No 9.4 s/v A21 4th Street PM 14.2 s/v B 28.1 s/v C 29.1 s/v C No 13.8 s/v B21 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at AM 147.9 s/v F 170.3 s/v F 174.1 s/v F No 25.4 s/v C21 4th Street PM 27.2 s/v C 39.7 s/v D 41.7 s/v D No 32.2 s/v C21 14. SR-55 NB Ramps at AM 24.8 s/v C 48.2 s/v D 50.6 s/v D No -- -- 4th Street PM 20.0 s/v B 34.7 s/v C 37.0 s/v D No -- -- Note: ▪ Bold HCM/LOS values indicate adverse service levels based on the Caltrans LOS standards. ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 21 Although the intersection is not considered a significant impact based on Caltrans criteria, level of service results at the intersection with the implementation of improvements discussed in Section 11.0 have been included for informational purposes. 1 - 193 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 50 10.0 SITE ACCESS AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION EVALUATION 10.1 Site Access Access to the proposed Project will be provided via one (1) full access unsignalized driveway along Park Court Place and one (1) right in/out only driveway located along 4th Street. Table 10-1 summarizes the intersection level of service results for the two (2) proposed Project driveways under near-term (Year 2025) and long-term (Year 2040) traffic conditions at completion and full occupancy of the proposed Project. As shown, these key study intersections are forecast to operate at LOS D or better during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour. Appendix F presents the near-term and long-term HCM/LOS calculations for the two (2) Project driveways. 10.2 Queuing Analysis A queuing assessment has been completed to validate the driveway locations and egress from the site. In addition, as a result of the recommended improvements in Section 11.0, which identifies a second westbound right turn lane at I-5 NB Ramps/4th Street, the queueing analysis includes additional recommended improvements to help with existing congestion at Cabrillo Park Drive/4th Street. This evaluation is based on Synchro 10.0 SimTraffic 95th Percentile methodology. 10.2.1 Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions Table 10-2 presents the queueing analyses results for the AM and PM peak hours for Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project traffic conditions. Column (1) presents results for Year 2040 Buildout project traffic conditions and column (2) presents results for Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project traffic conditions with recommended improvements. Based on field observation it is apparent that congestion occurs at Cabrillo Park Drive/4th Street as a result of vehicles trying to enter the westbound right-turn lane along 4th Street. Due to the recommended second westbound right-turn lane along 4th Street, additional improvements are recommended for the northbound approach at Cabrillo Park Drive/4th Street. The additional recommended improvements consist of the following: ▪ Add signage to the northbound direction along with lane line extensions to direct the motorist in the left turn lane that they can enter the inner right-turn lane for access to the I-5 NB Ramp. The northbound left/thru lane should have signage and lane extensions to direct the motorist to use the outer right-turn lane for access to the I-5 NB Ramp. These improvements are subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana. Review of Column (1) of Table 10-2 indicates that the queues are generally adequate under Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project traffic conditions during both the AM and PM peak hours. However, the southbound right-turn lane at Cabrillo Park Drive/4th Street may exceed the storage provided. As an alternative, subject to review and approval of City staff, an option southbound through/right lane in 1 - 194 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 51 addition to the proposed southbound right-turn lane can be striped to provide additional queuing storage. Review of Column (2) of Table 10-2 indicates that with the implementation of improvements, the queues are generally adequate under Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project traffic conditions during both the AM and PM peak hours. However, the southbound right-turn lane at Cabrillo Park Drive/4th Street may exceed the storage provided. As an alternative, subject to review and approval of City staff, an option southbound through/right lane in addition to the proposed southbound right-turn lane can be striped to provide additional queuing storage. The implementation of the recommended improvements also helps to improve congestion and limit unnecessary weaving/merging of vehicles that need to enter the I-5 NB Ramp22. However, in the event that Fourth Street experiences “spikes” in congestion during the weekday AM and PM peak hours, residents will very likely re-route themselves (self-monitor) and utilize the northern Driveway on Park Court Place instead of the driveway on Fourth Street. The intersections of Cabrillo Park Drive/Park Court Place and Cabrillo Park Drive/Fourth Street have enough capacity to accommodate the additional trips. Appendix G presents the queueing worksheets for Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project traffic conditions. 22 Level of service results at Cabrillo Park Drive/4th Street with Improvements: Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project: AM Peak Hour: ICU 0.674, LOS B; PM Peak Hour: ICU 0.915, LOS E 1 - 195 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 52 TABLE 10-1 PROJECT DRIVEWAY PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Key Intersection Intersection Control Time Period (1) Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions (2) Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions HCM LOS HCM LOS A. Project Driveway 1 at Park Court Place One-Way Stop AM 9.5 s/v A 9.5 s/v A PM 9.3 s/v A 9.4 s/v A B. Project Driveway 2 at 4th Street One-Way Stop AM 16.6 s/v C 17.2 s/v C PM 29.1 s/v D 31.6 s/v D Notes: ▪ s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay) 1 - 196 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 53 TABLE 10-2 YEAR 2040 BUILDOUT PEAK HOUR QUEUING ANALYSIS23 (1) Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions (2) Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions with Improvements Key Study Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Storage Provided (feet) Max. Queue/ Min. Storage Required Adequate Storage (Yes/No) Max. Queue/ Min. Storage Required Adequate Storage (Yes/No) Max. Queue/ Min. Storage Required Adequate Storage (Yes/No) Max. Queue/ Min. Storage Required Adequate Storage (Yes/No) 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street Westbound Through 555’/215’24 196’ Yes 189’ Yes 204’ Yes 184’ Yes Westbound Right-Turn 555’/215’24 134’ Yes 171’ Yes 137’ Yes 188’ Yes 9. Cabrillo Park Drive at 4th Street Southbound Right-Turn 100’ 210’ No25 162’ No 176’ No25 126’ No25 A. Project Driveway 1 at Park Court Place Northbound Left/Right-Turn 90’ 58’ Yes 56’ Yes 61’ Yes 60’ Yes B. Project Driveway 2 at 4th Street Southbound Right-Turn 185’ 68’ Yes 79’ Yes 61’ Yes 60’ Yes 23 Queues are based on SimTraffic 95th Percentile methodology. 24 A storage of 555-feet is provided under existing traffic conditions while a storage of 215-feet represents the distance between the limit line and the proposed project driveway. 25 Please note that a right-turn storage is 100-feet with a 60-foot transition. Alternatively, subject to review and approval of City staff, an option southbound through/right lane in addition to the proposed southbound right-turn lane can be striped to provide additional queuing storage. 1 - 197 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 54 10.3 Internal Circulation Evaluation Access to the site is proposed via a right-turn in/out driveway along 4th Street. Access for small service/delivery trucks (i.e. UPS, FedEx, and trash trucks) and passenger vehicles for the Project site have been evaluated. Our evaluation of the on-site circulation shown on the Project site plan was performed using the Turning Vehicle Templates, developed by Jack E. Leisch & Associates and AutoTURN for AutoCAD computer software that simulates turning maneuvers for various types of vehicles. Figure 10-1 illustrates the turning movements required of a small delivery truck (SU-30) as it accesses the site from 4th Street. Review of Figure 10-1 shows overall the turning movements are considered adequate. After reviewing the design of Project Driveway 2 along 4th Street, it has been determined that the driveway throating is considered adequate. 10.4 Sight Distance Evaluation At intersections and/or project driveways, a substantially clear line of sight should be maintained between the driver of a vehicle waiting at the crossroad and the driver of an approaching vehicle. Adequate time must be provided for the waiting vehicle to either cross all lanes of through traffic, cross the near lanes and turn left, or turn right, without requiring through traffic to radically alter their speed. A sight distance evaluation has been performed for both project driveways. The Sight Distance Evaluation prepared for the project driveways are based on the criteria and procedures set forth by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the State’s Highway Design Manual (HDM). Corner sight distance was utilized for the evaluation. Corner sight distance is defined in the Caltrans HDM to be the distance required by the driver of a vehicle, traveling at a given speed, to maneuver their vehicle and avoid an object without radically altering their speed. Line of sight for corner sight distance is to be determined from a 3½ foot height at the location of the driver of a vehicle on a minor road to a 4¼ foot object height in the center of the approaching lane of the major road. Based on the criteria set forth in Table 405.1A of the Caltrans HDM and a posted speed limit of 25 mph on Park Court Place, a corner sight distance of 275 feet is required for left-turn at Project Driveway 1 and 239 feet for right-turn at Project Driveway 1. Based on the criteria set forth in Table 405.1A of the Caltrans HDM and a posted speed limit of 40 mph on 4th Street, a corner sight distance of 382 feet is required for right-turn at Project Driveway 2. Figure 10-2 presents the results of the sight distance evaluation for the Project driveways based on the application of the corner sight distance criteria. The figure illustrates the limited use areas. As shown, the sight lines at the proposed Project driveways are expected to be adequate as long as obstructions within the sight triangles are minimized. 1 - 198 1 - 199 1 - 200 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 55 11.0 RECOMMENDED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS For those intersections where projected traffic volumes are expected to result in unacceptable operating conditions, this report recommends (identifies) improvement measures that change the intersection geometry to increase capacity. These capacity improvements involve roadway widening and/or re-striping to reconfigure (add lanes) to specific approaches of a key intersection. The identified improvements are expected to: ▪ mitigate the impact of existing traffic, Project traffic and future non-project (ambient traffic growth and cumulative project) traffic and ▪ improve Levels of Service to an acceptable range and/or to pre-project conditions. 11.1 Planned and/or Recommended Improvements 11.1.1 Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions The results of the intersection capacity analyses presented previously in Table 8-1 shows that the proposed Project is expected to have a significant impact at one (1) of the twenty-five (25) key study intersections under Existing Plus Project traffic conditions. As such, the following intersection improvements are recommended to mitigate the impacts of the proposed Project under these conditions. ▪ No. 13 – SR-55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street: Modify the eastbound shared through/right- turn lane to construct a free-right turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal as necessary. This improvement is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana and Caltrans. Per City requirements, the Project may be expected to pay a fair-share/local fee to cover the Project’s fair share of the full construction costs needed to implement these mitigation measures. 11.1.2 Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions The results of the intersection capacity analyses presented previously in Table 8-2 shows that the proposed Project is expected to have a significant impact at two (2) of the twenty-five (25) key study intersections under Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project traffic conditions. As such, the following intersection improvements are recommended to mitigate the impacts of the proposed Project under these conditions. No. 8 – I-5 NB Ramps at Fourth Street: Construct an additional westbound right-turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal as necessary, inclusive any modifications to the traffic signal phasing. This improvement is consistent with the Traffic Impact Study for the Metro East Overlay Zone in the City of Santa Ana. This improvement is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana and Caltrans. The proposed Project is expected to pay the full construction cost needed to implement these mitigation measures, which are reflected in the Project site plan and is considered a “design feature”. ▪ No. 13 – SR-55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street: Same as those identified in Section 11.1.1 – Modify the eastbound shared through/right-turn lane to construct a free-right turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal as necessary. This improvement is subject to the review and 1 - 201 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 56 approval of the City of Santa Ana and Caltrans. Per City requirements, the Project may be expected to pay a fair-share/local fee to cover the Project’s fair share of the full construction costs needed to implement these mitigation measures. 11.1.3 Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions The results of the intersection capacity analyses presented previously in Table 8-3 shows that the proposed Project is expected to have a significant impact at two (2) of the twenty-five (25) key study intersections under Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project traffic conditions. As such, the following intersection improvements are recommended to mitigate the impacts of the proposed Project under these conditions. ▪ No. 8 – I-5 NB Ramps at Fourth Street: Same as those identified in Section 11.1.2 – Construct an additional westbound right-turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal as necessary inclusive any modifications to the traffic signal phasing. This improvement is consistent with the Traffic Impact Study for the Metro East Overlay Zone in the City of Santa Ana. This improvement is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana and Caltrans. The proposed Project is expected to pay the full construction cost needed to implement these mitigation measures which are reflected in the Project site plan and is considered a “design feature”. ▪ No. 13 – SR-55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street: Same as those identified in Sections 11.1.1 and 11.1.2 – Modify the eastbound shared through/right-turn lane to construct a free-right turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal as necessary. This improvement is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana and Caltrans. Per City requirements, the Project may be expected to pay a fair-share/local fee to cover the Project’s fair share of the full construction costs needed to implement these mitigation measures. 11.2 Project-Specific Improvements The following improvements are being implemented as part of the proposed Project, which the Project is expected to pay the full construction costs: ▪ No. 9 – Cabrillo Park Drive at Fourth Street: Construct an exclusive southbound right- turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal as necessary. This improvement, which has been incorporated in the Project site plan as a Project “design feature” is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana. As an alternative to the above mentioned improvement, subject to review and approval of City staff, an option southbound through/right lane in addition to the proposed southbound right-turn lane is proposed to minimize the southbound right-turning vehicles from impeding the through traffic. 11.3 Recommended Circulation Enhancement The following improvements are recommended to be implemented to enhance circulation within the Project Vicinity, thereby maintaining acceptable operating conditions: 1 - 202 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 57 ▪ No. 25 – Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place: Install two-phase traffic signal and implement all necessary signing and striping improvements. This improvement is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana. Figure 11-1 graphically illustrates the recommended and project specific improvements, as well as recommended circulation enhancements. Figure 11-2 presents a conceptual improvement plan for 4th Street between the I-5 NB Ramps and Cabrillo Park Drive that illustrates recommended signage and striping to inform motorists of availability of lanes to access the I-5 NB ramps and/or continue on 4th Street. The improvements are consistent with those recommended in Section 10.2 of this report. Please note that the proposed Project may be expected to pay the full construction cost needed to implement the signage and striping for the proposed freeway wayfinding at 4th Street and Cabrillo Park Drive. However, it is assumed that the City and/or Caltrans will provide maintenance of these improvements. 11.4 Project-Related Fair-Share Contribution The transportation impacts associated with the development of the Project were determined based on the Existing Plus Project, Year 2025 and Year 2040 Buildout traffic analyses. As summarized in Tables 8-1, 8-2 and 8-3, the development of the Project is anticipated to have a significant impact at two (2) locations. While the proposed Project is expected to pay the full constructions costs for the intersection of I-5 NB Ramps/Fourth Street, the Project can be expected to pay its fair share of the improvement costs at the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/Fourth Street to offset the Project’s incremental traffic impact at these intersections. Although the intersection of Cabrillo Park Drive/Park Court Place is not considered significantly impacted, it was determined that the implementation of improvements at this location would help improve the level of service at this location, thereby enhancing access and circulation through this intersection for local area traffic as well as Project-related traffic. Therefore, based on collaboration with City staff, the proposed Project is expected to pay the full construction cost or install a traffic signal at this location. Table 11-1 presents the Project’s fair-share contribution to construct the recommended improvements at the two (2) study intersections. As presented in this Table 11-1, the first column (1) presents a total of all intersection peak hour movements for existing conditions. The second column (2) presents Project-related added traffic volumes during AM peak hour and PM peak hour. The third column (3) presents Year 2040 Buildout traffic conditions with Project traffic. The fourth column (4) represents what percentage of total added intersection peak hour traffic is Project-related traffic. Review of Table 11-1 shows that the proposed Project’s percentage of net traffic impact ranges from 12.30% to 100.00%. This percentage represents the Project’s “fair-share” cost responsibility associated with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. 1 - 203 1 - 204 1 - 205 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 58 TABLE 11-1 YEAR 2040 BUILDOUT PROJECT FAIR-SHARE COST CONTRIBUTION Key Intersection City/ Jurisdiction Time Period (1) Existing Traffic (2) Project Traffic (3) Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic (4) Project Fair-Share Percent26 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street Santa Ana/ Caltrans AM 3163 78 3,797 12.30% PM -- -- -- -- 25. Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place Santa Ana AM -- -- -- -- PM -- -- -- 100.00%27 26 Project fair-share percentage Column (4) = [Column (2)] / [Column (3) – Column (1)]. 27 As the intersection is not considered significantly impacted, the installation of the two-phase traffic signal shall be fully paid by the Project or the Project will implement the improvement. 1 - 206 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 59 12.0 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (CMP) COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT This analysis is consistent with the requirements and procedures outlined in the current Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP). The CMP requires that a traffic impact analysis be conducted for any project generating 2,400 or more daily trips, or 1,600 or more daily trips for projects that directly access the CMP Highway System (HS). As noted in Section 5.0 of this traffic study, the proposed Project is forecast to generate approximately 4,121 daily trip-ends and thus meets the criteria requiring a CMP TIA. The CMPHS includes specific roadways, which include State Highways and Super Streets, which are now known as Smart Streets. Therefore, the CMP TIA analysis requirements relate to the potential impacts only on the specified CMPHS, which in this case includes First Street west of the I-5 SB On-Ramp. As described in the "Radius of Development Influence" section of the CMP TIA, the study area (i.e. CMP intersections) is recommended to be defined by the CMP links which have a project impact of three percent, or more, of their daily LOS "E" capacity. There is one (1) CMP intersection in close proximity to the site which is as follows: Study Intersection Location 13 I-5 SB On-Ramps at First Street Table 12-1 summarizes the Project percentage impact CMP analysis for three (3) key roadway segments in the vicinity of the proposed Project along First Street. Column one (1) of Table 12-1 shows the CMP LOS “E” Capacity for each roadway segment, column two (2) shows the Project ADT for each roadway segment, column three (3) shows the Project ADT LOS "E" capacity percentages for each roadway segment and column (4) shows whether or not added project traffic meets or exceeds the “three percent” limit. Review of Table 12-1 shows that the three percent limit is not exceeded at any of the three (3) key roadway segments and therefore a CMP analysis is not required. 1 - 207 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 60 TABLE 12-1 PROJECT PERCENTAGE RADIUS OF INFLUENCE CMP ANALYSIS Roadway Segment (1) CMP LOS “E” Capacity (2) Project ADT (3) Percentage (3) = (2)  (1) (4) Radius of Influence (Yes/No) 1. First Street, west of Elk Lane/Mabury Street 56,300 206 0.4% No 2. First Street, between Elk Lane/Mabury Street and I-5 SB On-Ramp 56,300 495 0.9% No 3. First Street, between I-5 SB On-Ramp and Cabrillo Park Drive 56,300 515 0.9% No 1 - 208 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 61 13.0 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ▪ Project Description – The Project site is an 8.35-acre vacant parcel of land within the Metro East Mixed Use Overlay Zone that is generally located north of 4th Street, east of the Santa Ana (I-5) freeway, and west of Cabrillo Park Drive. The proposed Project includes the development of up to 644 apartment units, 3,500 SF restaurant uses and 11,700 SF of retail space. The proposed Project will provide a total of 1,300 parking spaces within two buildings along with 18 surface parking spaces. “Building A” is proposed as a five-story apartment podium with up to 325 apartment homes consisting of approximately 19 (±5.8%) studio units, 162 (±49.8%) one-bedroom units, 121 (±37.2%) two-bedroom units and 23 (±7.1%) three-bedroom units and approximately 6,100 SF of ground floor retail/commercial space and 3,500 SF restaurant space “wrapped” around an eight-level partial subterranean parking structure with a total of approximately 650 spaces along with 9 ground floor spaces for retail/leasing. “Building B” is proposed as a five-story apartment podium with up to 319 apartment homes consisting of approximately 20 (±6.3%) studio units, 164 (±51.4%) one- bedroom units, 127 (±39.8%) two-bedroom units and 8 (±2.5%) three-bedroom units and approximately 5,600 SF of ground floor retail/commercial space “wrapped” around an eight- level partial subterranean parking structure with a total of approximately 650 spaces along with 9 ground floor spaces for retail/leasing. On-site facilities/amenities of the proposed Project include a leasing office, a lounge/lobby, business center, pool/spa, and a fitness center for residents. Vehicular access to the proposed Project will be provided via one (1) full access unsignalized driveway along Park Court Place and one (1) right in/out only driveway located along 4th Street. As part of the proposed Project, an exclusive southbound right-turn lane will be constructed at the intersection of Cabrillo Park Drive/4th Street. Additionally, the project’s curb face is planned to be set back far enough to accommodate improvements at I-5 NB Ramps/4th Street, which include the construction of an additional right-turn lane. ▪ Study Scope – The following twenty-five (25) key study intersections were selected for detailed peak hour level of service analyses under Existing Traffic Conditions, Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions, Year 2025 Cumulative Traffic Conditions, Year 2025 Cumulative plus Project, Year 2040 Buildout Traffic Conditions, and Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions. Key Study Intersections 1. Elk Lane at First Street (Santa Ana) 14. SR-55 NB Ramps at 4th Street (Tustin/Caltrans) 2. I-5 SB On-Ramp at First Street (Santa Ana/Caltrans) 15. Yorba Street at 4th Street (Tustin) 3. Cabrillo Park Drive at First Street (Santa Ana) 16. Cabrillo Park Drive at State Fund Access Road (Santa Ana) 4. Golden Circle Drive at First Street (Santa Ana) 17. Cabrillo Park Drive at Xerox Center Access Road (Santa Ana) 5. Tustin Avenue at First Street (Tustin) 18. Cabrillo Park Drive at 17th Street (Santa Ana) 6. Yorba Street at First Street (Tustin) 19. Cabrillo Park Drive at Wellington Avenue (Santa Ana) 1 - 209 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 62 7. I-5 SB On-Ramp/Mabury Street at 4th Street (Santa Ana/Caltrans) 20. Tustin Avenue at Wellington Avenue (Santa Ana) 8. I-5 NB Ramps at 4th Street (Santa Ana/Caltrans) 21. Mabury Street at Fruit Street (Santa Ana) 9. Cabrillo Park Drive at 4th Street (Santa Ana) 22. Cabrillo Park Drive at Fruit Street (Santa Ana) 10. Golden Circle Drive at 4th Street (Santa Ana) 23. Park Center Drive at Fruit Street (Santa Ana) 11. Park Center Drive at 4th Street (Santa Ana) 24. Tustin Avenue at Fruit Street (Santa Ana) 12. Tustin Avenue at 4th Street (Santa Ana) 25. Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place (Santa Ana) 13. SR-55 SB Ramps at 4th Street (Santa Ana/Caltrans) ▪ Existing Traffic Conditions – Twenty-four (24) of the twenty-five key study intersections currently operate at an acceptable level of service during the AM and PM peak hours. The intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street currently operates at unacceptable LOS E during the AM peak hour. ▪ Project Trip Generation – The proposed Project, after adjustment for internal capture, is forecast to generate approximately 4,121 “net” daily trips, with 264 “net” trips (82 inbound, 182 outbound) produced in the AM peak hour and 344 “net” trips (205 inbound, 139 outbound) produced in the PM peak hour on a “typical” weekday. ▪ Related Projects Traffic Characteristics – Thirty (30) related projects were considered as part of the cumulative background setting. The thirty (30) related projects are forecast to generate 45,942 daily trips, with 3,033 trips (1,458 inbound, 1,575 outbound) anticipated during the AM peak hour and 3,837 trips (1,927 inbound, 1,910 outbound) produced during the PM peak hour. ▪ Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions – Traffic associated with the proposed Project will significantly impact one (1) of the twenty-five study intersections, when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. The impacted intersection of SR- 55 SB Ramps/4th Street is forecast to operate at LOS E during the AM peak hour. The remaining study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable level of service during the AM and PM peak hours. The implementation of recommended improvements at the intersection will help offset the Project’s impact ▪ Year 2025 Cumulative Traffic Conditions Plus Project – Traffic associated with the proposed Project will significantly impact two (2) of the twenty-five study intersections, when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report, which include I-5 NB Ramps/4th Street and SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street. The remaining study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable level of service during the AM and PM peak hours. The implementation of recommended improvements at the intersection will help offset the Project’s impact. ▪ Year 2040 Buildout Traffic Conditions Plus Project – Traffic associated with the proposed Project will significantly impact two (2) of the twenty-five study intersections, when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report, which include I-5 NB Ramps/4th Street and SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street. The remaining study intersections are 1 - 210 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 63 forecast to operate at acceptable level of service during the AM and PM peak hours. The implementation of recommended improvements at the intersection will help offset the Project’s impact. ▪ Caltrans Existing Traffic Conditions – The intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street currently operates at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour. The remaining state-controlled study intersections currently operate at LOS C or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hours. ▪ Caltrans Existing Plus Project Traffic Conditions – The intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street will continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour with the addition of project traffic. The remaining state-controlled study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable LOS C or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hours, with the addition of project traffic. Although the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street is forecast to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour, the intersection is not considered significantly impacted when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. ▪ Caltrans Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Conditions – The intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street will continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour with the addition of project traffic. The remaining state-controlled study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable LOS C or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hours, with the addition of project traffic. Although the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street is forecast to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour, the intersection is not considered significantly impacted when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. ▪ Caltrans Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Traffic Conditions – The intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street will continue to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour with the addition of project traffic. The remaining state-controlled study intersections are forecast to operate at acceptable LOS C or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hours, with the addition of project traffic. Although the intersection of SR-55 SB Ramps/4th Street is forecast to operate at unacceptable LOS F in the AM peak hour, the intersection is not considered significantly impacted when compared to the LOS standards and significant impact criteria specified in this report. ▪ Queuing Analysis – Based on field observation it is apparent that congestion occurs at Cabrillo Park Drive/4th Street as a result of vehicles trying to enter the westbound right-turn lane along 4th Street. Due to the recommended second westbound right-turn lane along 4th Street, additional improvements are recommended for the northbound and southbound approaches at Cabrillo Park Drive/4th Street. The additional recommended improvements consist of the following: 1 - 211 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 64 ➢ Add signage to the northbound direction along with lane line extensions to direct the motorist in the left turn lane that they can enter the inner right-turn lane for access to the I-5 NB Ramp. The northbound left/thru lane should have signage and lane extensions to direct the motorist to use the outer right-turn lane for access to the I-5 NB Ramp. These improvements are subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana. With the implementation of improvements, the queues are generally adequate under Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project traffic conditions during both the AM and PM peak hours. However, the southbound right-turn lane at Cabrillo Park Drive/4th Street may exceed the storage provided. As an alternative, subject to review and approval of City staff, an option southbound through/right lane in addition to the proposed southbound right-turn lane can be striped to provide additional queuing storage. The implementation of the recommended improvements also helps to improve congestion and limit unnecessary weaving/merging of vehicles that need to enter the I-5 NB Ramp. However, in the event that Fourth Street experiences “spikes” in congestion during the weekday AM and PM peak hours, residents will very likely re-route themselves (self-monitor) and utilize the northern Driveway on Park Court Place instead of the driveway on Fourth Street. The intersections of Cabrillo Park Drive/Park Court Place and Cabrillo Park Drive/Fourth Street have enough capacity to accommodate the additional trips. ▪ Existing Plus Project Recommended Improvements – The following intersection improvements are recommended to mitigate the impacts of the proposed Project under these conditions. ➢ No. 13 – SR-55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street: Modify the eastbound shared through/right- turn lane to construct a free-right turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal as necessary. This improvement is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana and Caltrans. Per City requirements, the Project may be expected to pay a fair-share/local fee to cover the Project’s fair share of the full construction costs needed to implement these mitigation measures. ▪ Year 2025 Cumulative Plus Project Recommended Improvements – The following intersection improvements are recommended to mitigate the impacts of the proposed Project under these conditions. ➢ No. 8 – I-5 NB Ramps at Fourth Street: Construct an additional westbound right-turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal as necessary inclusive any modifications to the traffic signal phasing. This improvement is consistent with the Traffic Impact Study for the Metro East Overlay Zone in the City of Santa Ana. This improvement is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana and Caltrans. The proposed Project is expected to pay the full construction cost needed to implement these mitigation measures. ➢ No. 13 – SR-55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street: Modify the eastbound shared through/right- turn lane to construct a free-right turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal as necessary. 1 - 212 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 65 This improvement is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana and Caltrans. Per City requirements, the Project may be expected to pay a fair-share/local fee to cover the Project’s fair share of the full construction costs needed to implement these mitigation measures. ▪ Year 2040 Buildout Plus Project Recommended Improvements – The following intersection improvements are recommended to mitigate the impacts of the proposed Project under these conditions. ➢ No. 8 – I-5 NB Ramps at Fourth Street: Construct an additional westbound right-turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal as necessary inclusive any modifications to the traffic signal phasing. This improvement is consistent with the Traffic Impact Study for the Metro East Overlay Zone in the City of Santa Ana. This improvement is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana and Caltrans. The proposed Project is expected to pay the full construction cost needed to implement these mitigation measures. ➢ No. 13 – SR-55 SB Ramps at Fourth Street: Modify the eastbound shared through/right- turn lane to construct a free-right turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal as necessary. This improvement is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana and Caltrans. Per City requirements, the Project may be expected to pay a fair-share/local fee to cover the Project’s fair share of the full construction costs needed to implement these mitigation measures. ▪ Project Specific Improvements – The following improvements are being implemented as part of the proposed Project, which the Project is expected to pay the full construction costs: ➢ No. 9 – Cabrillo Park Drive at Fourth Street: Construct an exclusive southbound right-turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal as necessary. This improvement is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana. As an alternative to the above mentioned improvement, subject to review and approval of City staff, an option southbound through/right lane in addition to the proposed southbound right-turn lane is proposed to minimize the southbound right-turning vehicles from impeding the through traffic. ▪ Recommended Circulation Enhancement: The following improvements, which are expected to be implemented or paid for by the Project, are recommended to be implemented to enhance circulation within the Project Vicinity, thereby maintaining acceptable operating conditions: ➢ No. 25 – Cabrillo Park Drive at Park Court Place: Install two-phase traffic signal and implement all necessary signing and striping improvements. This improvement is subject to the review and approval of the City of Santa Ana. 1 - 213 LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 2-19-4141-1 4th and Cabrillo Mixed-Use Project, Santa Ana N:\4100\2194141 - 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use, Santa Ana\Report\4141 4th & Cabrillo Mixed-Use Center Point TIA, Santa Ana 7-30-2020.doc 66 ▪ Project-Related Fair-Share Contribution – The proposed Project’s percentage of net traffic impact ranges from 12.30% to 100.00%. This percentage represents the Project’s “fair-share” cost responsibility associated with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures. ▪ CMP Compliance Assessment – The three percent limit is not exceeded at any of the three (3) key roadway segments and therefore a CMP analysis is not required. 1 - 214 EXHIBIT 13 1 - 215 MARKET & FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSES FOR A MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT IN SANTA ANA, CA (4TH & CABRILLO PARK DRIVE) FINAL REPORT AUGUST 10, 2020 PREPARED FOR: ARNEL DEVELOPMENT CO. 369 SAN MIGUEL DRIVE, SUITE 265 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660 PHONE 949.717.6450 251 KEARNY STREET, 6TH FLOOR SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94108 PHONE 415.397.5490 1170 PEACHTREE STREET NE, SUITE 1200 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30309 PHONE 404.879.5000 641 LEXINGTON AVENUE, SUITE 1400 NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10022 PHONE 646.354.7090 11 - 216 ARNEL DEVELOPMENT CO. May 2020 Santa Ana – 4th & Cabrillo Park Drive 20233.00 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY MARKET ANALYSIS 1. Recommendations 2. MF Rent Positioning A. Rent to Size Graph B. Absolute Rent 3. Retail / Office Rent Positioning 4. Project Location A. Regional B. Median Income C. Local Setting D. Surrounding Land Uses E. Traffic Counts 5. Site Plan 6. Demographics 7. MF Macro-Market Performance A. Inventory & Deliveries B. Occupancy & Rents 8. MF Inventory A. Location & Performance B. Vacancy by Unit Type C. Floor Plan Mix D. Amenities 9. Retail Performance 10. Office Performance 11. Mixed-Use Analogs FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS APPENDIX A. Survey – Apartments B. Survey – Retail Leases C. ULI – Emerging Trends in Real Estate 21 - 217 The Concord Group EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 31 - 218 Arnel Development Co. August 2020 Santa Ana – 4th & Cabrillo Park Dr 20233.00 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ To: Arnel Development Co. From: The Concord Group Date: August 2020 Re: Market & Fiscal Impact Analyses for a Mixed-Use Development in Santa Ana, CA (4th & Cabrillo Park Dr) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Arnel Development Co. (“Arnel”) is evaluating the development potential of a mixed-use project in the central Orange County community of Santa Ana. The project site is located at the eastern edge of the city, immediately opposite Interstate 5. The project is planned for 644 upscale apartment units and 15,200 square feet of commercial space, in a five-story building. In support of strategic planning and underwriting due diligence, Arnel required market and fiscal impact input to identify the highest and best use of the project under the current MEMU zoning and demonstrate the financial viability of the development. To this end, The Concord Group (“TCG”) and RSG were engaged to conduct market and fiscal feasibility analyses for the project. The following text highlights the key findings and conclusions generated by the analysis, supported by an exhibit package of tables, maps and graphs. Project Overview  The project is well located near Interstate 5, Southern California’s primary north / south connector, and is just over a mile from the city’s Downtown and associated food, dining, service and employment amenities (Exhibit 4).  A total of 644 apartments are planned in a five-story building with 15,200 square feet of ground floor retail, located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Cabrillo Park Drive (Exhibits 1 and 5).  The project’s elevated regional accessibility, close proximity to Downtown’s cultural amenities and major County job nodes, combined with a top-of-market community amenity and interior unit specification package, merits a near top-of-market multi-family rent positioning strategy (Exhibit 2).  The scale of the commercial retail planned within the project’s mixed-use context is in alignment with other multi-family focused mixed-use projects in Orange County, who’s commercial retail footprints range from 8,500 to 14,000 SF (Exhibit 11). 41 - 219 The Concord Group ARNEL DEVELOPMENT CO. August 2020 Santa Ana – 4th & Cabrillo Park Dr 20233.00 Marketability The project’s marketing strengths are as follows:  Regional Accessibility – the project site is easily accessible to the target renter and consumer base, with freeway and rail access each less than a mile away (Exhibit 4C).  Proximity to Jobs – several major Orange County office employment nodes are within a five-mile radius of the project, including Downtown Santa Ana, South Coast Metro, Irvine Business Complex and Town and Country, driving demand for both apartments and commercial space.  Cultural and Entertainment Amenities – the Project is located proximate to the city’s Downtown and Artists Village, home to numerous galleries and popular restaurants that possess regional draws (Exhibit 4C).  Shortage of State-of-the-Art Apartments – Santa Ana is under-supplied with Class A rental apartment product, evidenced by high rates of occupancies and rapid rent growth over the past five years (Exhibit 7). The project’s marketing challenges are as follows:  Distressed Retail Environment – the rise of e-commerce has had a significant negative impact on “brick- and-mortar” retailers, leading to store closures across the retail landscape. The negative effects of e-commerce have been especially apparent during the current pandemic which has served to accelerate store closings and overall retail contraction (Appendix C). Apartment Market Performance  TCG surveyed eight comparable rental projects in the CMA, representing best-in-class product in the cities of Santa Ana, Costa Mesa, Irvine, Tustin, Orange and Anaheim (Exhibit 8A).  The average base rent (ie. an average of the lowest listed rent for each floorplan, excluding premiums for views, orientation and elevation) of the eight comparables surveyed is $2,606, or $2.88 per square foot (“PSF”) – top of market rents include Skyloft (average base rent of $3,024, $3.32 PSF) and Eleven 10 ($2,571, $3.12). 51 - 220 The Concord Group ARNEL DEVELOPMENT CO. August 2020 Santa Ana – 4th & Cabrillo Park Dr 20233.00  The overall rental apartment market is performing strongly, evidenced by: o Surveyed occupancy of 94% in stabilized projects (ie. not in lease-up), slightly below 95% stabilization, but high relative the Covid-19 market environment (Exhibit 8A). o Elevated rent growth – rents in Santa Ana have increased an average of 4.0% per year since 2014 (Exhibit 7B). Commercial Market Performance  Neither 4th Street nor Cabrillo Park Drive are established retail corridors in the project’s neighborhood around I-5 (Exhibit 4D).  The local 3-mile radius trade area is in general equilibrium, with 44 SF of retail per capital, a ratio on par with the County average (also 44, per Exhibit 6).  There has been limited demand for new retail in the site’s 3-mile radius trade area. While the trade area has added only 100,000 SF of new retail 10-years (current inventory of 12.2M SF), occupancy has not changed during the timeframe (Exhibit 9)  The mixed-use character of the multi-family driven projects is limiting to the overall scale of retail opportunity. Successful, large-scale commercial retail projects require anchor tenancy (grocery, department store, etc), a characteristic that cannot be met within the mixed-us context of the site. o Two of the three analog mixed-use multi-family / commercial projects surveyed suffer from poor occupancy, each below 50% (Exhibit 11). o The two low occupancy analogs share both a similar walk score as the subject (60-69 range) and overall scale (13,000 SF average) (Exhibit 11).  Without a critical mass of retail near the site, the project will be challenged to attract a significant scale of retail tenancy.  The 15,200 SF of commercial retail planned is at the upper end of the range supportable on site o Target tenant types will require smaller unit footprints, ranging from 500 to 2,500 SF. o Target tenant types include hairdressers, dry cleaners, craft food store, small professional service businesses, etc. 61 - 221 The Concord Group ARNEL DEVELOPMENT CO. August 2020 Santa Ana – 4th & Cabrillo Park Dr 20233.00 Apartment Rent Recommendations  TCG recommends an average base rent of $2,731, or $3.14 PSF, placing the project at the near the top of the CMA (Exhibit 2B).  Rent premium garners for elevation, courtyard and views generate an additional $82 in premium revenue for an average project rent of $2,813 ($3.23 PSF). Commercial Rent Recommendations  In-line commercial tenancy will achieve rents ranging from $28 to $32 PSF per year (NNN), in line with mixed-use analogs (Appendix B) and at the top of the local 4th Street / Irvine Boulevard commercial corridor. 71 - 222 The Concord Group ARNEL DEVELOPMENT CO. August 2020 Santa Ana – 4th & Cabrillo Park Dr 20233.00 Market Conclusions  The current development plan represents the highest and best use for the project.  Multi-family residential possesses the greatest level of marketability of the MEMU permitted land uses. A regional under-supply of Class A residences is evidenced by high rates of occupancy and rent growth within the product type (Exhibit 7B). The project location, just of I-5 and proximate to Downtown Santa Ana, will be highly desirable to prospective residents seeking convenient access to both jobs and entertainment.  The modest scale of commercial land uses planned is appropriate for the mixed-use orientation of the project. The scale of commercial (15,200) is in alignment with similar scope, multi-family anchored projects elsewhere in Orange County (Exhibit 11). Fiscal Impact Findings (RSG)  The multi-family / commercial mixed-use development at the site will provide significantly more fee and tax revenue to the City of Santa Ana as compared to the existing office land use: o Approximately $41.3 million ($23.1 million in net present value [2020 dollars], discounted at four percent) in additional City General Fund Revenue, including construction period revenues, recurring site-specific tax and other project revenues o Approximately $541,400 in property tax revenue per year, as opposed to the current $11,700. The site development would generate approximately $10.3 million after 25 years (discounted) o Over the same 25-year period, the City General Fund expenditures associated with the project total $7.0 million (discounted) o As a result, the net new General Fund revenue is projected to be approximately $28.1 million ($16.1 million in 2020 dollars) from the acquisition and development of the project  The Development will generate more revenue to the City in one year than the existing use is projected to generate over the next 25 years 81 - 223 The Concord Group ARNEL DEVELOPMENT CO. August 2020 Santa Ana – 4th & Cabrillo Park Dr 20233.00 Net New Recurring General Fund Fiscal Impacts The entire fiscal impact study, in detail, is available for review in Section II of this report. * * * * This assignment was completed by Michael Reynolds in association with RSG. We have enjoyed working with you on this assignment and look forward to our continued involvement. 91 - 224 The Concord Group MARKET ANALYSIS 101 - 225 EXHIBIT 1 RECOMMENDATIONS SANTA ANA - CENTRAL POINTE MAY 2020 Project Summary Location:• Central Orange County, in the City of Santa Ana ◦Santa Ana is the County seat, with county, state and federal offices all located in Downtown ◦Eastern edge of the city, just east of I-5, at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Cabrillo Park Drive • I-5, the West Coast's primary north/south connector, directly fronts the site, connecting renters to major job centers throughout Orange and LA Counties ◦Santa Ana Metrolink Station is just under a mile northeast of the property, linking the site to Southern California's growing rail hub • Downtown Santa Ana, a major regional food and entertainment destination, is just over a mile west of the project Description:• 644 apartment units and 15,200 of street level retail in two 5 story, wrap style buildings ◦7 stories of parking (with semi-sub); some street front surface parking for retail ◦8.35-acre site - 80.9 dwelling units per acre • Extensive community amenity program include two roof top courtyards with pools and large community park central to the project • Interior unit specifications on par with best-in-class, Orange County Class "A" rental market Marketability Metrics Market •Regional Accessibility ◦I-5 and the Santa Ana Metrolink Station are both proximate to the site Strengths: •Proximity to ◦In addition to downtown Santa Ana, multiple major Orange County employment cores are located within a White Collar Jobs five-mile radius, including South Coast Metro, Irvine Business Complex and Anaheim/Orange •Arts and Dining ◦Project is located proximate to the city's Artists Village, home to numerous galleries and popular restaurants that Destination possess regional draws •Lack of Class A ◦The city is under-supplied with luxury, "Class A" apartment product Institutional Supply ◦Santa Ana's gentrification to date has focused primarily on retail and office redevelopment ◦Indicative of the City's housing shortage, the City boasts a jobs to housing ratio of 1.2, higher than the County average of 1.1 Market •Distressed ◦The rise of e-commerce has had a significant negative impact on “brick- and-mortar” retailers, leading to store Challenges Retail Environment closures across the retail landscape. The negative effects of e-commerce have been especially apparent during the current pandemic which has served to accelerate store closings Multi-Family Program & Recommended Rents Positioning • Subject site base rents are positioned slightly below the top of upscale, low-rise competitive set in Central Orange County Thesis:◦Top-of-market positioning is merited by the project's downtown Santa Ana location, Orange County's only authentic, walkable Downtown neighborhood, accessibility to the 5 freeway, planned high level of amenities, and interior unit specifications ◦Average base rent of $3.14 PSF positions the project generally in line with Eleven 10 ($3.12), a project with a superior location in the Platinum Triangle in Orange Arnel Program TCG Recommended Rents MF Unit Mix Den/Unit Base Rent Avg. Premium Average Rent Program: Floorplan Num. Perc. Beds Loft Bath Size $ $/sf $ % $ $/sf S1 19 3% 0 --- 1 518 $2,080 $4.02 $62 3.0% $2,142 $4.14 S2 20 3% 0 --- 1 543 $2,120 $3.90 $64 3.0% $2,184 $4.02 1B - 1 122 19% 1 --- 1 683 $2,425 $3.55 $73 3.0% $2,498 $3.66 1B - 2 176 27% 1 --- 1 726 $2,485 $3.42 $75 3.0% $2,560 $3.53 1B - 3 3 0% 1 --- 1 728 $2,590 $3.56 $78 3.0% $2,668 $3.66 1B - 5 5 1% 1 --- 1 750 $2,545 $3.39 $76 3.0% $2,621 $3.50 1B - 4 20 3% 1 --- 1 752 $2,550 $3.39 $77 3.0% $2,627 $3.49 2B - 1 140 22% 2 --- 2 1,066 $3,061 $2.87 $92 3.0% $3,153 $2.96 2B - 3 68 11% 2 --- 2 1,071 $3,069 $2.87 $92 3.0% $3,162 $2.95 2B - 2 40 6% 2 --- 2 1,148 $3,195 $2.78 $96 3.0% $3,291 $2.87 3B - 1 25 4% 3 --- 3 1,274 $3,400 $2.67 $102 3.0% $3,502 $2.75 3B - 2 6 1% 3 --- 3 1,339 $3,680 $2.75 $110 3.0% $3,790 $2.83 Total 644 100%560,650 $1,758,803 $1,811,567 Average 871 $2,731 $3.14 $82 $2,813 $3.23 Commercial Program and Recommended Rents Commercial • TCG recommends an average rent of $30 PSF per year (NNN) for the 15,200 SF of retail Program:• Rent recommendations are in line with mixed-use analogs in Orange County - namely Pinnacle at MacArthur Place (local to Santa Ana) and Pinnacle at Fullerton (downtown Fullerton address) • Recommended rents are positioned at the top of the 4th Street / Irvine Boulevard corridor • TCG projects a slow to moderate paced lease-up, based primarily on the relative low rate of occupancy at the Pinnacle at MacArthur Place project 20233.00 RecComps: Rec The Concord Group 11 1 - 226 EXHIBIT 2AMF RENT POSITIONING - RENT TO SIZE GRAPHSANTA ANA, COSTA MESA, ORANGE AND TUSTINMAY 2020Source: Appendix A$1,800$1,900$2,000$2,100$2,200$2,300$2,400$2,500$2,600$2,700$2,800$2,900$3,000$3,100$3,200$3,300$3,400$3,500$3,600$3,700$3,800$3,900$4,000500 600 700 800 900 1,000 1,100 1,2001,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700TCG - Central PointeBroadstone Arden (2020)The Charlie (2019)Nineteen01 (2016)Amalfi (2014)Residences on Jamboree (2017)Skyloft Apartments (2019)AMLI Uptown Orange (2016)Eleven 10 (2018)Color = LocationRed = Santa Ana / Costa MesaBlue = IrvineGreen = Anaheim / Orange728 SF floor plan has premium due to elevation1,339 SF floor plan has premium due to elevation20233.00 RecComps: RSThe Concord Group121 - 227 EXHIBIT 2BMF RENT POSITIONING - ABSOLUTE RENTSANTA ANA, COSTA MESA, ORANGE AND TUSTINMAY 2020Rents listed are "base" - an average of the lowest listed rents per floorplanProject Averages (Size and List Rent)Unit Mix Overall Studios One-Bedrooms Two-BedroomsMap Year (by Bed Count) Unit Base Rent Unit Base Rent Unit Base Rent Unit Base RentKeyProject Name UnitsBuiltOcc.012Size $ $/sfSize $ $/sfSize $ $/sfSize $ $/sf1-Bed SortABroadstone Arden335202026%26%19%53%1,023$3,063$2.99800$2,676$3.34881$2,769$3.141,157$3,312$2.86FSkyloft Apartments388201919%8%54%36%910$3,024$3.32571 $2,531 $4.43768$2,713$3.531,165$3,513$3.02TCG - Central Pointe871 $2,731 $3.14 531 $2,101 $3.96 712 $2,468 $3.47 1,081 $3,085 $2.85HEleven 10260 2018 93% 21% 51% 28% 825 $2,571 $3.12 515 $2,103 $4.08 764$2,463$3.22 1,167 $3,118 $2.67GAMLI Uptown Orange 334 2016 93% 3% 45% 51% 930 $2,663 $2.86 570 $2,101 $3.69 782$2,307$2.95 1,071 $2,986 $2.79DAmalfi542 2014 95% 12% 69% 19% 785 $2,268 $2.89 584 $2,035 $3.48 748$2,242$3.00 1,046 $2,510 $2.40EResidences on Jamboree 381 2017 96% 18% 43% 33% 897 $2,447 $2.73 690 $1,994 $2.89 724$2,132$2.95 1,134 $2,906 $2.56BThe Charlie 228201913%10%40%42%875$2,373$2.71 542$1,848$3.41 708$2,060$2.91 1,048$2,633$2.51CNineteen01261 2016 90% 0% 46% 50% 1,072 $2,495 $2.33 --- --- --- 831$2,056$2.47 1,235 $2,804 $2.27Total/Average:2,729 2017 68% 12% 48% 37% 904 $2,606 $2.88 645 $2,236 $3.47 765 $2,329 $3.04 1,130 $3,010 $2.66Excluding Lease-Ups:1,77894%2-Bed SortFSkyloft Apartments388201919%8%54%36%910$3,024$3.32571 $2,531 $4.43768$2,713$3.531,165$3,513$3.02ABroadstone Arden335202026%26%19%53%1,023$3,063$2.99800$2,676$3.34881 $2,769$3.141,157$3,312$2.86HEleven 10260 2018 93% 21% 51% 28% 825 $2,571 $3.12 515 $2,103 $4.08 764 $2,463 $3.22 1,167$3,118$2.67TCG - Central Pointe871 $2,731 $3.14 531 $2,101 $3.96 712 $2,468 $3.47 1,081 $3,085 $2.85GAMLI Uptown Orange 334 2016 93% 3% 45% 51% 930$2,663 $2.86 570 $2,101 $3.69 782 $2,307 $2.95 1,071$2,986$2.79EResidences on Jamboree 381 2017 96% 18% 43% 33%897 $2,447 $2.73 690 $1,994 $2.89 724 $2,132 $2.95 1,134$2,906$2.56CNineteen01261 2016 90% 0% 46% 50% 1,072 $2,495 $2.33 --- --- --- 831 $2,056 $2.47 1,235$2,804$2.27BThe Charlie 228201913%10%40%42%875$2,373$2.71 542$1,848$3.41 708$2,060$2.91 1,048$2,633$2.51DAmalfi542 2014 95% 12% 69% 19% 785 $2,268 $2.89 584 $2,035 $3.48 748 $2,242 $3.00 1,046$2,510$2.40Studio SortABroadstone Arden335202026%26%19%53%1,023$3,063$2.99800$2,676$3.34881 $2,769$3.141,157$3,312$2.86FSkyloft Apartments388201919%8%54%36%910$3,024$3.32571$2,531$4.43768$2,713$3.531,165$3,513$3.02HEleven 10260 2018 93% 21% 51% 28% 825 $2,571 $3.12 515$2,103$4.08 764 $2,463 $3.22 1,167 $3,118 $2.67TCG - Central Pointe871 $2,731 $3.14 531 $2,101 $3.96 712 $2,468 $3.47 1,081 $3,085 $2.85GAMLI Uptown Orange334201693%3%45%51%930$2,663$2.86570$2,101$3.69782$2,307$2.951,071 $2,986$2.79DAmalfi542 2014 95% 12% 69% 19% 785 $2,268 $2.89 584$2,035$3.48 748 $2,242 $3.00 1,046 $2,510 $2.40EResidences on Jamboree 381 2017 96% 18% 43% 33% 897 $2,447 $2.73 690$1,994$2.89 724 $2,132 $2.95 1,134 $2,906 $2.56BThe Charlie 228201913%10%40%42%875$2,373$2.71 542$1,848$3.41 708$2,060$2.91 1,048$2,633$2.51Source: Appendix AColor = LocationRed = Santa Ana / Costa MesaBlue = Irvine / TustinGreen = Anaheim / Orange20233.00 RecComps: PosThe Concord Group131 - 228 EXHIBIT 3RETAIL / OFFICE RENT POSITIONINGORANGE COUNTY AND LOCAL THREE-MILE TRADE AREAJANUARY 2017 THROUGH JULY 2020 - 3.5-YEARSSource: Appendix B$16$18$20$22$24$26$28$30$32$34TCG - Retail / ServicesCreekside Plaza17400 Irvine Blvd2000 E. 4th St17772 Irvine Blvd17671 Irvine Blvd1901 E. 4th StPinnacle at MacArthur PlacePinnacle at FullertonPositioning - Annual Lease RateColor = LocationRed = Local 4th St / Irvine Blvd CorridorBlue = Mixed Use Analogs20233.00 RecComps: rPosThe Concord Group141 - 229 EXHIBIT 4APROJECT LOCATION - REGIONALORANGE COUNTYMAY 2020Map: MaptitudeThe subject site is located in the city of Santa Ana (dark maroon shading), the County seat and its geographic center.Anaheim/OrangeFullertonIrvineCostaMesaSanta Ana20233.00 Maps: RegThe Concord Group151 - 230 EXHIBIT 4BPROJECT LOCATION - MEDIAN INCOMEORANGE COUNTYMAY 2020Source: ESRI3-MileRadius1-MileRadiusMedian Income ($)20233.00 Maps: IncomeThe Concord Group161 - 231 EXHIBIT 4CPROJECTION LOCATION - LOCAL SETTINGSANTA ANA / TUSTINMAY 2020Map: BingMapsDowntownSanta AnaOld TownTustinMetrolinkStationI-555Freeway20233.00 Maps: LocalThe Concord Group171 - 232 EXHIBIT 4DPROJECTION LOCATION - SURROUNDING LAND USESSANTA ANAMAY 2020Map: BingMaps20233.00 Maps: AerialThe Concord Group181 - 233 EXHIBIT 4EPROJECTION LOCATION - TRAFFIC COUNTSSANTA ANAMAY 2020Map: CoStar20233.00 Maps: TrafficThe Concord Group191 - 234 EXHIBIT 5SITE PLAN4TH AND CABRILLO - SANTA ANAMAY 202020233.00 Maps: SitePlanThe Concord Group201 - 235 EXHIBIT 6 DEMOGRAPHICS ORANGE COUNTY 2019 Local Radii 1.0-Mile 3.0-Mile Santa Ana Orange County U.S. Geography:Num. Perc. Num. Perc. Num. Perc. Num. Perc. Num. Perc. Population 2019 34,761 280,411 340,347 3,252,459 332,417,793 2024 35,921 287,653 349,390 3,368,861 345,487,602 Gr./ Yr. 232 0.7% 1,448 0.5% 1,809 0.5% 23,280 0.7% 2,613,962 0.8% Households 2010 9,395 71,438 73,123 992,781 116,716,292 2019 9,853 73,769 75,607 1,060,886 125,168,557 Gr./ Yr. 51 0.5% 259 0.4%276 0.4% 7,567 0.7% 939,141 0.8% 2024 10,107 75,335 77,346 1,095,455 129,922,162 Gr./ Yr. 51 0.5% 313 0.4%348 0.5% 6,914 0.6% 950,721 0.7% Renters ('19)6,615 67% 41,031 56% 41,674 55% 458,189 43% 45,709,279 37% HH Size ('19)3.5 3.8 4.5 3.1 2.7 1 Person 2,026 21% 12,535 17%9,533 13% 222,107 21% 33,464,681 27% 1-2 Persons 4,178 42% 29,106 39% 22,207 29% 532,561 50% 74,476,732 60% 3+ Persons 5,675 58% 44,663 61% 53,400 71% 528,325 50% 50,691,825 40% Family HHs 7,128 72% 56,102 76%61,665 82% 757,094 71% 83,153,401 66% Median Income (000s) 2019 $53 $67 $60 $88 $61 2024 $60 $78 $71 $103 $69 Gr./ Yr. $1.2 2.2% $2.3 3.3% $2.2 3.5% $2.9 3.0% $1.7 2.7% Income Profile ('19) Over $50K 5,396 55% 46,846 64% 45,254 60% 771,621 73% 73,892,464 59% Over $75K 3,124 32% 33,370 45% 29,958 40% 614,698 58% 51,974,116 42% Over $100K 1,732 18% 23,171 31% 19,230 25% 475,348 45% 36,152,986 29% Over $150K 706 7% 11,239 15% 7,697 10%269,674 25% 17,309,482 14% Over $200K 299 3% 5,690 8% 3,201 4%156,471 15% 9,153,435 7% Age Profile ('19) Median - Pop. 30 32 31 37 39 Householder Under 25 462 5% 2,556 3% 2,435 3% 30,673 3% 5,004,274 4% 25-34 2,032 21% 12,762 17% 13,551 18% 153,712 14% 19,381,040 15% 35-44 2,305 23% 15,575 21% 16,632 22% 190,990 18% 20,976,243 17% 45-54 1,984 20% 15,337 21% 16,677 22% 209,921 20% 22,103,882 18% 55-64 1,493 15% 12,785 17% 12,992 17% 207,275 20% 24,301,863 19% 65 Plus 1,576 16% 14,754 20% 13,321 18% 268,296 25% 33,399,611 27% Retail Inventory SF (000s) (QTD) 1,198 12,231 12,117 143,250 SF per Person 34 44 36 44 Source: ESRI 34 44 36 44 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Retail PSF Retail per Capita 1.0-Mile 3.0-Mile Santa Ana Orange County 20233.00 DemoRetail:DemoCL THE CONCORD GROUP 21 1 - 236 EXHIBIT 7AMF MACRO-MARKET PERFORMANCE - INVENTORY & DELIVERIESORANGE COUNTY2000 THROUGH FIRST QUARTER 2020YTD - Apr-20ValuesAnnualAnnual AverageU/Cin 000s2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 5-Yr 10-Yr 15-Yr 1Q20 Num. %InvJob GrowthOrange County 3.1%1.8%-0.7%1.9%2.0%2.4%1.9%-0.2%-2.0%-7.1%-1.2%1.2%2.7%2.7%2.3%3.2%2.6%2.1%2.0%1.3%0.9%Inventory (000s)Orange County 204.6 207.7 210.5 212.3 214.1 216.7 218.9 219.4 222.0 225.9 229.6 230.1 232.2 234.6 237.4 240.6 243.4 248.5 252.6 256.1260.4Santa Ana 19.7 19.7 19.9 19.9 19.9 19.9 19.9 19.7 19.8 20.1 20.1 20.1 20.1 20.0 20.3 20.3 20.5 20.6 20.8 20.822.2% County9.6%9.5% 9.5% 9.4% 9.3% 9.2% 9.1% 9.0% 8.9% 8.9% 8.7% 8.7% 8.6% 8.5% 8.6% 8.4% 8.4% 8.3% 8.2% 8.1%8.5%Completions (000s)YTDU/COrange County 1.66 4.89 0.70 2.52 1.71 2.82 1.51 0.90 3.85 5.77 1.150.09 3.34 2.64 2.98 3.47 2.07 5.62 4.22 5.07 4.09 3.28 3.03 1.65 3.221.2%Santa Ana 0.000.000.250.000.000.000.000.000.350.000.000.000.000.000.300.000.260.000.180.23 0.130.110.09 1.220.221.0%% County 0% 0% 36% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 9% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 13% 0% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 74% 7%Source: Jobs - BLS; Apartment - CoStar (for projects that are 5+ units) Note: "U/C" - under construction-8%-6%-4%-2%0%2%4%6%8%01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0002000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Completions (bar) and Job Growth (line)Santa AnaRem. Orange CountyOrange County (left axis)20233.00 Macro: ScaleThe Concord Group221 - 237 EXHIBIT 7BMF MACRO-MARKET PERFORMANCE - OCCUPANCY & RENTSORANGE COUNTY2000 THROUGH FIRST QUARTER 2020ValuesHistoricalAnnual Average1-Yearin 000s2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 5-Yr 10-Yr 15-Yr 1Q19 1Q20Job GrowthOrange County 3.1% 1.8% -0.7% 1.9% 2.0% 2.4% 1.9% -0.2% -2.0% -7.1% -1.2% 1.2% 2.7% 2.7% 2.3% 3.2% 2.6% 2.1% 2.0% 1.3%0.9%Asking Rent ($)Orange County 1,238 1,302 1,321 1,328 1,358 1,428 1,520 1,598 1,626 1,555 1,518 1,537 1,584 1,640 1,705 1,788 1,875 1,938 1,988 2,050 2,013 2,053Gr/Yr 5.2% 1.4% 0.5% 2.3% 5.1% 6.5% 5.1% 1.8% -4.4% -2.4% 1.3% 3.1% 3.5% 3.9% 4.9% 4.9% 3.4% 2.6% 3.1% 3.8% 2.8% 2.8% Y/Y: 2.0%Santa Ana 1,096 1,152 1,173 1,183 1,204 1,260 1,339 1,403 1,425 1,367 1,331 1,353 1,395 1,439 1,512 1,590 1,669 1,731 1,779 1,838 1,813 1,859Gr/Yr 5.1% 1.8% 0.8% 1.8% 4.6% 6.3% 4.8% 1.6% -4.1% -2.6% 1.6% 3.1% 3.2% 5.0% 5.2% 5.0% 3.7% 2.8% 3.3%4.0%3.0% 2.9% Y/Y: 2.5%Asking Rent ($/SF)Orange County 1.41 1.49 1.51 1.52 1.55 1.63 1.74 1.83 1.86 1.78 1.73 1.75 1.81 1.87 1.95 2.04 2.15 2.22 2.27 2.34 2.30 2.35Gr/Yr 5.3% 1.3% 0.5% 2.3% 5.3% 6.4% 5.0% 1.9% -4.6% -2.4% 1.2% 3.1% 3.6% 4.0% 4.9% 5.0% 3.4% 2.5% 3.1% 3.8% 2.8% 2.8% Y/Y: 2.2%Santa Ana 1.32 1.39 1.41 1.43 1.45 1.52 1.62 1.70 1.72 1.65 1.61 1.63 1.69 1.74 1.83 1.92 2.02 2.09 2.15 2.22 2.19 2.25Gr/Yr 5.1% 1.8% 0.9% 1.9% 4.6% 6.4% 4.8% 1.5% -4.2% -2.6% 1.7% 3.2% 3.0% 5.2% 5.3% 5.1% 3.6% 2.7% 3.3%4.0%3.0% 2.9% Y/Y: 2.7%OccupancyOrange County 97% 96% 95% 95% 95% 96% 96% 95% 95% 94% 94% 94% 95% 95% 96% 95% 96% 95% 95% 95% 96% 95% 95% 95.1% 94.0%Santa Ana 98% 97% 96% 96% 96% 96% 96% 96% 95% 94% 95% 96% 96% 96% 96% 97% 96% 96% 96%95%96% 96% 96% 95.4% 90.9%Source: Jobs - BLS; Apartment - CoStar (for projects that are 5+ units)5%2%1%2%5%6%5%2%-4%-3%2%3%3%5%5%5%4%3%3%-8.0%-6.0%-4.0%-2.0%0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%-8%-6%-4%-2%0%2%4%6%8%2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Rent Growth (bar) and Job Growth (line)Santa AnaOrange CountyOrange County ( right axis)20233.00 Macro: RentThe Concord Group231 - 238 EXHIBIT 8A MF INVENTORY - LOCATION & PERFORMANCE SANTA ANA, COSTA MESA, ORANGE AND TUSTIN MAY 2020 Rents listed are "base" - an average of the lowest listed rents per floorplan Project Averages (Size and List Rent) Unit Mix Overall Studios One-Bedrooms Two-Bedrooms Map Year (by Bed Count) Unit Base Rent Unit Base Rent Unit Base Rent Unit Base Rent Key Project Name Units Built Occ. 0 1 2 Size $ $/sf Size $ $/sf Size $ $/sf Size $ $/sf F Skyloft Apartments 388 2019 19%8%54%36%910 $3,024 $3.32 571 $2,531 $4.43 768 $2,713 $3.53 1,165 $3,513 $3.02 H Eleven 10 260 2018 93% 21% 51% 28% 825 $2,571 $3.12 515 $2,103 $4.08 764 $2,463 $3.22 1,167 $3,118 $2.67 A Broadstone Arden 335 2020 26%26%19%53%1,023 $3,063 $2.99 800 $2,676 $3.34 881 $2,769 $3.14 1,157 $3,312 $2.86 D Amalfi 542 2014 95% 12% 69% 19% 785 $2,268 $2.89 584 $2,035 $3.48 748 $2,242 $3.00 1,046 $2,510 $2.40EResidences on Jamboree 381 2017 96% 18% 43% 33% 897 $2,447 $2.73 690 $1,994 $2.89 724 $2,132 $2.95 1,134 $2,906 $2.56 G AMLI Uptown Orange 334 2016 93% 3% 45% 51% 930 $2,663 $2.86 570 $2,101 $3.69 782 $2,307 $2.95 1,071 $2,986 $2.79 B The Charlie 228 2019 13%10%40%42%875 $2,373 $2.71 542 $1,848 $3.41 708 $2,060 $2.91 1,048 $2,633 $2.51 C Nineteen01 261 2016 90% 0% 46% 50% 1,072 $2,495 $2.33 --- --- --- 831 $2,056 $2.47 1,235 $2,804 $2.27 Total/Average: 2,729 2017 68% 12% 48% 37% 904 $2,606 $2.88 645 $2,236 $3.47 765 $2,329 $3.04 1,130 $3,010 $2.66 Excluding Lease-Ups:1,778 94% Source: Appendix A Color = Location Red = Santa Ana / Costa Mesa Blue = Irvine / Tustin Green = Anaheim / Orange 20233.00 RecComps: Inv The Concord Group 24 1 - 239 EXHIBIT 8BMF INVENTORY - VACANCY BY UNIT TYPESANTA ANA, COSTA MESA, ORANGE AND TUSTINMAY 2020Vacancy RateYear 1BUnit SizesUnit CountUnit MixVac- By Unit TypeProject NameBuilt $/SF Units 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 ancy 0 1 2 3Eleven 102018 $3.22 260 515 764 1,167 --- 55 133 73 0 21% 51% 28% 0% 7% 4% 1% 0% ---Amalfi2014 $3.00 542 584 748 1,046 --- 65 374 103 0 12% 69% 19% 0% 5% 0% 5% 13% ---Residences on Jamboree2017 $2.95 381 690 724 1,134 1,452 69 164 126 23 18% 43% 33% 6% 4% 3% 2% 4% 13%AMLI Uptown Orange2016 $2.95 334 570 782 1,071 1,418 10 150 170 4 3% 45% 51% 1% 7% 10% 8% 5% 0%Nineteen012016 $2.47 261 --- 831 1,235 1,799 0 121 130 11 0% 46% 50% 4% 10% --- 3% 7% 18%Total/Average:2016 $2.88 1,778 601 762 1,127 1,092 198 941 601 38 11% 53% 34% 2% 6% 3% 4% 6% 13%(1) Excludes projects in Lease-up(2) Represents availability of units as per leasing agents and community websitesSource: Appendix A2.5%4.1%5.8%13.3%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%10.0%12.0%14.0%Studio1-Bed2-Bed3-BedVacancy (bar, left axis)Mix of Inventory (circle, right axis)Color = LocationRed = Santa Ana / Costa MesaBlue = Irvine / TustinGreen = Anaheim / Orange20233.00 RecComps: VacThe Concord Group251 - 240 EXHIBIT 8CMF INVENTORY - FLOOR PLAN MIXSANTA ANA, COSTA MESA, ORANGE AND TUSTINMAY 2020Units by Rent Range (Base)BedUnder $2,000 $2,100 $2,200$2,300 $2,400 $2,500 $2,600 $2,700 $2,800 $2,900 $3,000 $3,100 $3,200 $3,300 $3,400 $3,500 $3,600 $3,700$3,800TotalCount$2,000 $2,100 $2,200 $2,300 $2,400 $2,500 $2,600 $2,700 $2,800 $2,900 $3,000 $3,100 $3,200 $3,300 $3,400 $3,500 $3,600 $3,700 $3,800PlusNum. Share092876500223100220000220000034012%Share27% 26% 19% 0% 0% 6% 9% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%1851662482101965115387504008000800041,30448%Share7% 13% 19% 16% 15% 4% 12% 7% 4% 3% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0%200001631001079178983392107916637310181,01437%Share0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 10% 11% 9% 8% 10% 3% 9% 11% 9% 6% 4% 3% 0% 2%30000000000000992082222 713%Share 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%12%12%28%11%3%3%30%Total177 252 313 210 197 135 283 194 141 141 98 41 92 116 122 94 45 33 2 43 2,729 100%Cumulative6% 16% 27% 35% 42% 47% 57% 65% 70% 75% 78% 80% 83% 88% 92% 95% 97% 98% 98% 100%Units by Floor Plan Size RangeBedUnder 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1,000 1,050 1,100 1,150 1,200 1,250 1,300 1,350 1,400 1,450 1,500TotalCount600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1,000 1,050 1,100 1,150 1,200 1,250 1,300 1,350 1,400 1,450 1,500 Plus Num. Share02030722200220022000000000034012%Share60% 0% 21% 6% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%127101944142852444237311200080000001,30448%Share2% 1% 15% 32% 22% 19% 3% 3% 2% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%20000000054146249231197544702202131,01437%Share0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5% 14% 25% 23% 19% 5% 5% 0% 2% 0% 0% 1%300000000000001800028322 713%Share 0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%0%25%0%0%0%40%5%31%Total230 10 266 435 285 244 64 37 85 179 249 231 197 79 47 0 22 28 5 35 2,729 100%Cumulative8% 9% 19% 34% 45% 54% 56% 58% 61% 67% 76% 85% 92% 95% 97% 97% 98% 99% 99% 100%Source: Appendix A050100150200250300350$2,000-$2,100$2,200-$2,300$2,400-$2,500$2,600-$2,700$2,800-$2,900$3,000-$3,100$3,200-$3,300$3,400-$3,500$3,600-$3,700$3,800-PlusUnit Count by Rent Range (Base)Studio1 Bed2 Bed3+ Bed20233.00 RecComps: MixThe Concord Group261 - 241 EXHIBIT 8D MF INVENTORY - AMENITIES SANTA ANA, COSTA MESA, ORANGE AND TUSTIN MAY 2020 Project:Nineteen01 Broadstone Arden Eleven 10 Community Summary City Santa Ana Santa Ana Orange Address 1901 E 1st St 1951 E Dyer Road 1110 W. Town and Country Rd Year Built 2016 2020 2018 Elevation555 Units 261 335 260 Average Rent ($)$2,495 $3,063 $2,571 Average Rent ($/sf)$2.33 $2.99 $3.12 % 1-Beds 46%19%51% % 2-Beds 50%53%28% Community Amenities Concierge Service No Yes Yes Business Center Yes Yes Yes Conference Room No Yes Yes Fitness Center Yes Yes Yes + Outdoor Athletic Terrace Cardio Room Combined Spin Studio Combined Weight Room Combined Yes Combined Yoga/Stretch Room ---Yes Outdoor Area Game Room Yes Outdoor, Ping Pong / Billiards Billiards / Shuffleboard Kitchen/Clubhouse Catering Kitchen / Games Large, Catering Kitchen Catering Kitchen Pool Rooftop / Cabanas Resort Pool, Salt Room Resort-Style Pool and Spa Theater TV Room Outdoor Pool Theatre No Wi-Fi Yes Yes Yes Other Areas Car Wash Station Golf Simulator Pet Spa and Dog Park Pet Spa and Dog Park Coffee Lounge Amazon parcel locker system Outdoor Cabanas w/ TVs Day Spa Outdoor Cabanas Bike Storage Storage Units Interior Spec Kitchen Appliance Stainless Steel Stainless Steel Stainless Steel Counters Quartz/Marble Quartz Quartz Floor Wood-Grain Finish Wood Plank Style Wood-Style Cabinets Contemporary Contemporary Contemporary Backsplash Full Full Full Washer/Dryer In Unit Stacked Stacked Stacked Flooring (common)Wood-Grain Finish Wood Plank Style Wood-Style Balcony/Patio In most units Private Patios In most units Pictures 20233.00 RecComps: Amenities The Concord Group 27 1 - 242 EXHIBIT 9RETAIL PERFORMANCEORANGE COUNTY2006 THROUGH SECOND QUARTER 2020Annual Annual Average Quarterly Under Const.Period: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 5-Yr 10-Yr 1Q20 2Q20 Num. %InvInventory SF (MMs)Growth (#)Orange County 138.6 139.8 141.3 142.1 142.3 141.8 141.8 141.5 141.6 142.1 142.6 143.0 143.2 143.3 0.33 0.11 143.3 143.3 0.16 0.1%Santa Ana 12.0 12.1 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.1 12.112.1 12.1 12.1 12.1 12.1 (0.00) (0.01) 12.1 12.1 0.1 0.5%3.0-Mile 12.0 12.0 12.1 12.1 12.1 12.1 12.1 12.1 12.112.1 12.1 12.1 12.2 12.2 0.03 0.01 12.2 12.2 0.01 0.0%1.0-Mile 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.01 0.00 1.2 1.2 0.00 0.0%% Santa Ana 9% 9% 9% 10% 10% 9% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% -187% -24% 10% 10% 0%OccupancyOrange County 96.3% 96.6% 96.0% 94.2% 93.6%94.0% 93.9% 94.4% 95.4% 96.0% 96.2% 95.9% 96.2%96.2%96.1% 95.2% 96.0%95.8%Santa Ana 96.3% 96.8% 96.3% 95.4% 94.1% 94.2% 93.9% 93.4%94.9% 95.6% 95.8% 95.7% 96.6% 96.3% 96.0% 95.0% 95.9% 96.3%3.0-Mile 95.0% 96.7% 97.2% 95.8% 94.0% 93.8% 94.3% 94.1%94.9% 94.7% 94.6% 95.3% 96.6% 96.1% 95.4% 94.8% 95.8% 95.8%1.0-Mile 97.9% 97.6% 96.1% 92.4% 91.6% 92.0% 94.2% 94.9%92.7% 93.3% 96.1% 96.7% 97.7% 97.1% 96.1% 94.6% 97.3% 97.1%Absorption SF (000s)Orange County 987 1,965 (97) (2,323) (312) 100 295 790 1,206 1,685 47 145 716 (394) 440 428Santa Ana 134 64 60 (227) 3 (94) (5) 27 52 111 (43) (44) 134 (67) 18 73.0-Mile 96 276 46 (255) (102) 17 69 45 (87) 43 (24) 226 76 (74) 49 191.0-Mile 18 (12) (7) (0) (18) 7 46 (6) (42) 46 15 28 (1) 3 18 8Lease RateGrowth (%)Orange County $24 $27 $29 $26 $23 $22 $22 $22 $23 $24 $25 $26 $26 $27 3.8% 0.6% $28.26 $28.62Santa Ana $25 $26 $25 $22 $19 $19 $19 $18 $20 $22 $21 $23 $24 $26 4.8% 1.7% $26.97 $27.113.0-Mile $23 $24 $24 $21 $19 $19 $19 $19 $20 $22 $23 $23 $24 $25 5.4% 2.1% $26.37$25.801.0-Mile $16 $37 $31 $27 $22 $22 $22 $21 $23 $26 $25 $26 $26 $27 3.0% 0.1% $27.11$30.23Source: CoStar$0$5$10$15$20$25$30(300)(200)(100)01002003004002006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2Q203.0-Mile - Absorption (MMs SF) and Lease Rate ($/SF/Yr)AbsorptionLease Rate20233.00 DemoRetail: RetailThe Concord Group281 - 243 EXHIBIT 10OFFICE PERFORMANCEORANGE COUNTY2006 THROUGH SECOND QUARTER 2020Annual Annual Average Quarterly Under Const.Period: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 5-Yr 10-Yr 1Q20 2Q20 Num. %InvInventory SF (MMs)Growth (#)Orange County 146.3 149.8 153.2 153.9 153.9 154.0 154.4 154.0 154.7 154.9 155.4 156.5 158.1 158.9 0.83 0.50 159.1 159.1 1.38 0.9%Santa Ana 19.6 19.6 19.7 19.7 19.7 19.8 19.8 19.6 19.519.5 19.5 19.5 19.5 19.4 (0.02) (0.03) 19.4 19.4 0.0 0.0%3.0-Mile 21.6 21.7 21.8 21.9 22.0 22.0 22.0 21.8 21.721.8 21.8 21.9 21.9 21.9 0.03 (0.01) 21.8 21.8 0.19 0.9%1.0-Mile 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 0.00 (0.01) 5.4 5.4 0.00 0.0%% Santa Ana 27% 27% 27% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 28% 0% 20% 28% 28%OccupancyOrange County 93.1% 91.1% 87.8% 86.0% 84.5%85.8% 87.0% 88.5% 89.1% 90.5% 91.4% 91.2% 90.5%90.4%90.8% 88.9% 90.4%90.3%Santa Ana 93.8% 92.3% 90.0% 87.8% 87.5% 88.0% 87.4% 86.9%87.0% 87.5% 87.6% 89.8% 90.1% 89.2% 88.8% 88.1% 88.5% 88.0%3.0-Mile 94.4% 93.6% 91.6% 90.5% 89.2% 89.3% 88.6% 88.4%89.5% 89.8% 88.8% 90.2% 91.0% 90.7% 90.1% 89.5% 90.7% 90.4%1.0-Mile 95.7% 93.5% 89.1% 87.3% 85.0% 86.2% 85.0% 86.5%88.1% 88.6% 89.1% 88.4% 89.2% 88.4% 88.7% 87.4% 87.7% 87.0%Absorption SF (000s)Orange County 700 (852) (1,001) (3,581) (472) 2,900 2,054 1,193 2,880 1,572 1,582 243 620 245 852 1,282Santa Ana 86 (586) (167) (338) 33 58 (25) (487) 244 (162) 393 333 (115) (392) 12 (12)3.0-Mile 276 (432) 47 (308) (128) 99 (285) (193) 463 (179) (8) 497 (61) (42) 41 161.0-Mile 154 (267) (43) (99) (4) 40 (55) 1 85 (43) 160 (77) (15) (53) (5) 4Lease RateGrowth (%)Orange County $28 $30 $29 $26 $24 $23 $22 $22 $24 $26 $27 $29 $31 $32 5.9% 2.0% $32.26 $32.76Santa Ana $24 $25 $25 $22 $21 $20 $19 $19 $20 $21 $22 $23 $25 $27 6.1% 1.9% $28.13 $27.823.0-Mile $23 $25 $24 $22 $21 $20 $19 $20 $21 $21 $22 $24 $26 $27 5.3% 1.9% $27.30$28.011.0-Mile $23 $23 $23 $23 $21 $19 $19 $19 $20 $21 $20 $22 $24 $26 5.2% 1.3% $28.24$28.69Source: CoStar$0$5$10$15$20$25$30(600)(400)(200)02004006002006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2Q203.0-Mile - Absorption (MMs SF) and Lease Rate ($/SF/Yr)AbsorptionLease Rate20233.00 DemoRetail: OfficeThe Concord Group291 - 244 EXHIBIT 11MIXED-USE ANALOGSSANTA ANA, LAGUNA HILLS AND FULLERTONMAY 2020Project Name Central Pointe Pinnacle at MacArthur Place Reata Oakbrook Village Pinnacle at FullertonCity Santa Ana Santa Ana Laguna Hills FullertonStreet 4th & Cabrillo Park Dr 31 E. MacArthur Cres24391 Avenida de la Carlota 229 E. Commonwealth AveProject DescriptionYear Built TBD 2001 2016 2004Elevation 5-stories 4-stories 4-stories 4-storiesApartments 644 253 289 192Retail (SF) 15,200 14,000 12,000 8,500ParkingGarage Wrap - 7-stories Semi-Sub Podium Semi-Sub Podium Semi-Sub PodiumStreet 20-spaces 25-spaces Unlimited Spaces 8-spacesRetail PerformanceOccupancyTBD 44% 30% 90%VisibilityPrimary Frontage Street 4th Street MacArthur BoulevardAvenida de la CarlotaCommonwealth AvenueWalk Score67636596Traffic Count23,00036,00015,00024,000PictureSource: CoStar; OCTA; TCG44%30%90%676365960204060801001200%20%40%60%80%100%Central PointePinnacle at MacArthur PlaceReata Oakbrook VillagePinnacle at FullertonBar = Retail Occupancy --- Circle = Walk Score20233.00 Analogs: SummThe Concord Group301 - 245 The Concord Group FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 311 - 246 June 3, 2020 Via Electronic Mail Michael D. Reynolds, Principal THE CONCORD GROUP 369 San Miguel Drive, Suite 265 Newport Beach, CA 92660 DEVELOPMENT FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS CENTRAL POINTE MIXED-USE PROJECT, SANTA ANA Dear Mr. Reynolds: RSG, Inc. (“RSG”) was retained by The Concord Group (“TCG”) to perform a fiscal and economic impact analysis for the development of a proposed mixed-use apartment and retail project (“Project”) in Santa Ana, California. TCG obtained this analysis on behalf of the property owner/developer, Arnel & Waterford Property Company (“Developer”), which recently submitted an application for redevelopment of the subject property with the City of Santa Ana’s (“City”) Planning and Building Services Department. The Project site sits along 4th Street, between the Santa Ana (Interstate 5) Freeway (“I-5”) and Cabrillo Park Drive. The gross site area is approximately 8.35 acres, and is made up of four vacant parcels. If approved, the Project would consist of two five-story mixed-used buildings divided by a central park and open walk space. Attached to the buildings would be two seven-story parking structures. On the ground floor of each building would be a total 15,200 square feet of retail space. This letter describes our analysis, methodology, and anticipated recurring fiscal impacts resulting from development of the Project. As is typical at this stage, our conclusions could evolve as the application moves forward through the design and environmental review process. As is consistent with other Santa Ana projects analyzed by RSG, the construction period was assumed to be over three years. Part of the work would begin in 2021 (36 percent), with a majority taking place in 2022 (51 percent), leading to the remainder in 2023 (13 percent). The Project would open in the third construction year. Fiscal impacts from that year are reduced to reflect a partial year. Overall, RSG anticipates the following fiscal outcomes over a 25-year forecast period: • Gross General Fund revenues of approximately $23.1 million, (net present value, discounted at 4 percent), including: o $10.3 million (net present value, discounted at 4 percent) in net new property tax revenues to the City General Fund. o A combined $3.6 million in sales taxes that includes $1.8 million from the City’s base rate, as well as an additional $1.8 million from the City’s Measure X additional tax rate through the sunset in 2039 (net present value, discounted at 4 percent). 32 1 - 247 o A total of $23.1 million (net present value, discounted at 4 percent) in additional City General Fund revenue, including construction period revenues, recurring site- specific tax, and other Project impacts. • City General Fund expenditures associated with the Project total $7 million (net present value, discounted at 4 percent) • As a result, the net new General Fund revenue (revenues less expenditures) is projected to be approximately $16.1 million (net present value, discounted at 4 percent) if the Project were developed as proposed. Table 1 summarizes the 25-year fiscal impact of the Project. Table 2 provides the corresponding forecast of the same impacts on the following page. Table 1 Revenue Category Nominal NPV 4.0% Property Tax $ 18,505,380 $ 10,333,353 Property Tax In-Lieu 12,096,754 6,756,731 Utility User Tax 3,537,877 1,884,715 Sales Tax 3,479,170 1,853,440 Measure X (2018) Sales Tax Increase 2,753,009 1,786,920 Business Tax 927,121 493,901 Total Revenues $ 41,299,312 $ 23,109,059 Less City Expenditures $(13,214,039) $ (7,026,724) NET NEW REVENUE TOTAL $ 28,085,273 $ 16,082,335 25-Year Recurring NET NEW RECURRING GENERAL FUND FISCAL IMPACTS Central Pointe, Santa Ana Sources: City of Santa Ana, County of Orange, California State Board of Equalization, ESRI Business Analyst Online, and RSG, Inc. 33 1 - 248 Net New Property Tax Property Tax In-Lieu Utility User Tax Sales Tax Measure X (2018) Additional Sales Tax Business Tax Gross Revenue City Expenditures Net New Total CY1 2021 205,735$ 138,575$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 344,309$ -$ 344,309$ CY2 2022 462,569 302,985 - - - - 765,554 - 765,554 CY3 2023 529,747 346,150 91,766 90,244 135,366 24,048 1,217,321 (307,968) 909,354 1 2024 540,342 353,073 94,519 92,951 139,427 24,769 1,245,082 (353,986) 891,096 2 2025 551,149 360,135 97,355 95,740 143,609 25,512 1,273,500 (364,606) 908,895 3 2026 562,172 367,337 100,276 98,612 147,918 26,278 1,302,593 (375,544) 927,049 4 2027 573,416 374,684 103,284 101,570 152,355 27,066 1,332,375 (386,810) 945,565 5 2028 584,884 382,178 106,383 104,617 156,926 27,878 1,362,866 (398,414) 964,451 6 2029 596,582 389,821 109,574 107,756 161,634 28,715 1,394,081 (410,367) 983,714 7 2030 608,513 397,618 112,861 110,988 149,668 29,576 1,409,225 (422,678) 986,547 8 2031 620,684 405,570 116,247 114,318 154,158 30,463 1,441,440 (435,358) 1,006,082 9 2032 633,097 413,682 119,734 117,748 158,783 31,377 1,474,421 (448,419) 1,026,002 10 2033 645,759 421,955 123,326 121,280 163,546 32,318 1,508,186 (461,872) 1,046,314 11 2034 658,674 430,394 127,026 124,918 168,453 33,288 1,542,754 (475,728) 1,067,026 12 2035 671,848 439,002 130,837 128,666 173,506 34,287 1,578,146 (489,999) 1,088,147 13 2036 685,285 447,782 134,762 132,526 178,711 35,315 1,614,382 (504,699) 1,109,682 14 2037 698,990 456,738 138,805 136,502 184,073 36,375 1,651,483 (519,840) 1,131,642 15 2038 712,970 465,873 142,969 140,597 189,595 37,466 1,689,470 (535,436) 1,154,034 16 2039 727,230 475,190 147,258 144,815 195,283 38,590 1,728,366 (551,499) 1,176,867 17 2040 741,774 484,694 151,676 149,159 - 39,748 1,567,051 (568,044) 999,007 18 2041 756,610 494,388 156,226 153,634 - 40,940 1,601,798 (585,085) 1,016,713 19 2042 771,742 504,276 160,913 158,243 - 42,168 1,637,342 (602,638) 1,034,704 20 2043 787,177 514,361 165,740 162,990 - 43,433 1,673,702 (620,717) 1,052,985 21 2044 802,920 524,648 170,713 167,880 - 44,736 1,710,898 (639,338) 1,071,559 22 2045 818,979 535,141 175,834 172,916 - 46,078 1,748,949 (658,518) 1,090,431 23 2046 835,358 545,844 181,109 178,104 - 47,461 1,787,876 (678,274) 1,109,602 24 2047 852,066 556,761 186,542 183,447 - 48,885 1,827,700 (698,622) 1,129,078 25 2048 869,107 567,896 192,139 188,950 - 50,351 1,868,443 (719,581) 1,148,862 TOTAL 18,505,380$ 12,096,754$ 3,537,877$ 3,479,170$ 2,753,009$ 927,121$ 41,299,312$ (13,214,039)$ 28,085,273$ NPV 4.00%10,333,353$ 6,756,731$ 1,884,715$ 1,853,440$ 1,786,920$ 493,901$ 23,109,059$ (7,026,724)$ 16,082,335$ Inflation Rate 2.0% 2.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%3.0% Year 25-YEAR NET NEW RECURRING FISCAL IMPACT PROJECTIONS Central Pointe, Santa Ana Table 2 34 1 - 249 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project site is situated just east of the I-5 Freeway on 4th Street at Cabrillo Park Drive, south of Parkcourt Place. The Project sits at the northern border of the MEMU zone. It is 1.7 miles east of Downtown Santa Ana. Santa Ana’s Saddleback View neighborhood lies across I-5 to the west while Marbury Park neighborhood is to the north. Office/professional uses are located to the east, and located south across 4th Street is the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 12 office building and other uses. The Project is also one block away from the relatively new Nineteen01 multifamily project at the corner of First Street and Cabrillo Park Drive. Figure 1 shows the location of the Project Site. Figure 1: Project Site Source: Google Maps According to the Developer this is the City’s Metro East Mixed-Use (“MEMU”) Overlay Zone, as well as its Active Urban District. The MEMU zone was created in 2007 by the Santa Ana Planning Commission to foster the development of more active commercial and residential projects. The zone encourages the construction of modern and urban architecture, with plentiful open space. Project Site 4th Street Cabrillo Park Drive Saddleback View Marbury Park I-5 Golden Circle Caltrans Parkcourt Place 35 1 - 250 As shown in Figure 2, the 576,000 square foot (gross building area) Project would result in the construction of 644 market rate multifamily units, 15,200 square feet of ground floor retail space, and two seven-story parking structures with a combined 1,318 spaces. Both buildings contain similar amenities. The eastern structure, building A, would host 318 units, 580 parking spaces, and retail space of 9,600 square feet. Five courtyards checker this building’s outdoor open space. The western structure (building B) would host 319 units and 638 parking spaces. The building would also have 5,600 square feet for retail on the ground floor. Just outside of the building would be open space divided into four courtyards, an Emergency Vehicle Access lane (“EVA”), a small dog run, and a park looking out on the I-5 Freeway. Between both buildings would be a resident park and paved pedestrian walkways leading to 4th Street and Parkcourt Place. Figure 2: Site Plan Source: KTGY Group Inc., Arnel & Waterford Property Co. Figure 3 presents a rendering of the project as currently proposed: 36 1 - 251 Figure 3 The proposed 644 unit market-rate project includes 39 studios (6 percent of all units), 326 one- bedroom (51 percent), 284 two-bedroom (39 percent), and 31 three-bedroom (5 percent) units. Figure 4 exhibits the unit mix: Figure 4 Source: KTGY Group Inc., Arnel & Waterford Property Co. Studio 39 1 BR 326 2 BR 248 3 BR 31 Central Pointe Unit Breakdown Studio 1 BR 2 BR 3 BR 37 1 - 252 RECURRING FISCAL IMPACTS Property Tax Revenue All property taxes in the state of California are levied at a rate of 1 percent. The City’s share of the 1 percent property tax levy is 19.4%, as provided by the County of Orange (“County”) Auditor-Controller. The Developer provided RSG with the Project costs that consisted of $42 million for land, and $203 million for hard and soft costs. This $245 million adjusted for inflation over the construction period, would amount to an assessed valuation of $279 million at buildout. To accurately portray the effect of the Project to the City, property tax revenues presented in this report are net of any existing revenues. The existing site is currently valued at $5.5 million. When adjusted for inflation over the construction period the value is $6 million, providing the City an estimated $11,691 in year 2023 absent the construction of the Project. The new development would provide $541,438 to the City in that same year. Therefore, the net new property tax revenues to the City would be $529,747 at buildout. Table 3 To project future property taxes, RSG assumed 2 percent inflation on property tax revenues over the 25-year projection period, resulting in $10.3 million (net present value, discounted at 4 percent) in net new property tax revenues for the City General Fund. Property Tax in-lieu of Motor Vehicle License Fee Revenue Established in 1935, the Motor Vehicle License Fee (“MVLF”) was essentially a tax on vehicle ownership. It is collected by the State annually when vehicles are registered and was historically allocated to cities and counties based upon a statutory formula. In 2004, during the State’s budget crisis, about 90 percent of each city’s MVLF revenue was replaced with property tax revenue, and cities in particular began to receive an allocation of property tax from the Educational Revenue NET NEW PROPERTY TAX REVENUE Central Pointe, Santa Ana At Buildout Existing Assessed Value 6,026,240$ Proposed Project Assessed Valuation1 279,091,931 Net New Value 273,065,691$ City Property Tax Rate 19.4% Annual Estimate Existing Property Tax Revenues 11,691$ New Property Tax Revenues 541,438$ Net New Property Tax Revenues 529,747$ Source: County of Orange Auditor Controller, RSG, Inc. 1 Inflated pursuant to the construction schedule 38 1 - 253 Augmentation Fund (“ERAF”) in an amount equal to what they would have received in MVLF under an older MVLF allocation formula. Under current law, the property tax in-lieu of MVLF revenue increases based on assessed value growth in a jurisdiction, so estimated revenues are based on changes in assessed value created by the Project. Based on the City’s 2019-20 secured property tax roll, the total assessed value of all Property in the City is $26.3 billion. When adjusting for inflation during the construction period, the Project’s net new assessed valuation ($273 million) increases the City’s assessed value by 1.06 percent. The MVLF increase from the Project is calculated from the percent increase in assessed value. This gives us $346,150 in estimated In-Lieu MVLF revenues at build-out (see Table 4). As depicted above, the City is expected to receive $6.8 million (net present value, discounted at 4 percent) in In-Lieu MVLF revenues through 2048. Table 4 Utility User Tax The City assesses a utility user tax of 5.5 percent on electricity, gas, water, and telephone revenues generated within Santa Ana. Utility costs were estimated by RSG based on a review of similar projects and utility costs in Orange County. Residential utility expenditures were assumed to be: $104 per month for phone, $75 for electricity, $23 for gas, and $38 for water. This amounts to $3,260 annually in 2020 dollars. From the Developer’s estimates of 15,200 square feet of retail, RSG was able to use US Energy Information Administration (“EIA”) estimates to extrapolate commercial utility expenses. Retail establishments average around $1.50 per square foot in energy expenses, amounting to $22,797 annually for the Project. Based on these assumptions, RSG estimates that utility user tax revenues generated by the Project, reduced to account for a partial year, would be an estimated $91,766 at buildout. This adds up to $1.9 million (net present value, discounted at 4 percent) over the 25-year projection period (see Table 2). Central Pointe, Santa Ana 2019-20 City Assessed Value 26,369,891,977$ Project Assessed Value 1 279,091,931 City Assessed Value with Project 26,648,983,908 Increase in Assessed Value 1.06% Santa Ana 2019-20 VLF 32,705,877 Santa Ana VLF with Project 33,052,028 Annual Estimate Property Tax In-lieu Revenue 346,150$ PROPERTY TAX IN-LIEU OF MOTOR VEHICLE LICENSE FEES Source: County of Orange Auditor Controller, RSG, Inc. 1 Inflated pursuant to the construction schedule 39 1 - 254 Table 5 showcases the Utility User Tax at buildout below. Table 5 Sales Taxes The Project is expected to increase sales taxes through both the new businesses and new residents. The methodology and assumptions for both differ but are necessary for accuracy. Resident-Derived Sales Tax To determine the resident share, RSG obtained average annual household expenditures for households within a 1-mile radius of the Project from ESRI Business Analyst. By adjusting the household expenditures based on taxable and non-taxable sales, RSG estimates that each household would spend an average of $17,836 at buildout. Based on experience with previous projects in the City, an estimated 60 percent of those expenditures would be subject to Santa Ana’s sales tax. The State and County sales tax receive 6 percent and 0.75 percent of taxable sales, respectively. In addition, the City levies its own sales tax at a rate of 1 percent. In 2018, Santa Ana voters approved an additional sales tax of 1.5 percent that would then decrease to 1 percent in 2029 until sunsetting in 2039. RSG took this increase into consideration when analyzing the affects the new residents would have on the City’s General Fund. Using ESRI’s Business Analyst Online software, RSG was able to estimate the amount of taxable expenditures the average new household would make in the City. That number was then multiplied by the number of occupied households (581). This provided an estimate of total taxable sales of $6.2 million. From there, the taxable sales were multiplied by both the City’s base tax rate and the Measure X additional rates (1 percent and 1.5 percent). Therefore, the residential derived sales tax revenue from the base tax rate is an estimated $62,205 at buildout. The Central Pointe, Santa Ana Energy Expenditures per Household 3,260$ Occupied Households 581 Total Residential Energy Expenses 1,894,998$ Total Commercial Energy Expenses1 22,797$ City Tax Rate 5.5% Full-Year Buildout Revenues 105,479$ Partial-Year Buildout Revenues 91,766$ UTILITY USER TAX REVENUE Sources: US Energy Information Administration, RSG, Inc., ESRI BAO 1EIA estimates of $1.50 per SF for Retail 40 1 - 255 additional tax from Measure X would yield $93,307 at buildout and decrease to $74,276 in 2029 (adjusted for 3% inflation) before ceasing in 2039. Table 6 Business-Derived Sales Tax The Project includes 15,200 square feet of retail space. The new businesses would generate sales taxes separate from the new residents. Since the Developer does not yet know the exact tenants that would fill the space, RSG estimated an average of $250 of sales per square foot for the space. As a result, the retail businesses would generate taxable sales of $3.8 million at buildout. RSG estimates the base sales tax revenues at buildout to be $41,524. Table 7 below presents this information. In addition, Measure X would generate $62,285 for that year as well. However, in 2029 Measure X revenues would decrease to $51,069 before being eliminated altogether in 2039. Households and Sales at Buildout Average Household Taxable Expenditures 17,836$ Occupied Households 581 Percent within Santa Ana 60% Total Taxable Sales 6,220,479$ City Share of Sales Tax 1% Measure X (2018) Additional Sales Tax1 1.5% Resident-Derived Sales Tax Revenues Annual Estimate (Base Rate)62,205$ (2018 Addition)93,307$ (2029 Decrease to 1%)74,276$ 1Measure X additional sales tax decreases from 1.5% to 1% in 2029 RESIDENT-DERIVED SALES TAX REVENUE Central Pointe, Santa Ana Source: ESRI BAO, City of Santa Ana 41 1 - 256 Table 7 For the City base rate, combined resident and business sales taxes at buildout would be an estimated $90,244. Measure X combined taxes would be $135,366. Both are adjusted for inflation during the construction period and for the partial year at opening. This provides for a 25-year total of $1.8 million from the base rate and $1.8 million from Measure X (net present value, discounted at 4 percent). Business Tax The City assesses a business tax on retail stores and residential property management companies. Table 8 below showcases the new revenues from the Project. Retail business taxes are assessed based on annual sales while management company business taxes are assessed based on unit count. The combined business tax revenues are an estimated $24,048 at buildout, or $493,901 over 25 years (net present value, discounted at 4 percent). Table 8 Central Pointe, Santa Ana Sales at Buildout General Retail 3,800,000$ City Share of Sales Tax 1% Measure X (2018) Additional Sales Tax1 1.5% Business-Derived Sales Tax Revenues Annual Estimate (Base Rate)41,524$ (2018 Addition)62,285$ (2029 Decrease to 1%)51,069$ Source: California State Board of Equalization, RSG, Inc. 1Measure X additional sales tax decreases from 1.5% to 1% in 2029 BUSINESS-DERIVED SALES TAX REVENUE Central Pointe, Santa Ana Multifamily Residential Tax 24,739$ Retail Tax 2,902 Full-Year Business Taxes at Buildout 28,786$ Partial-Year Business Taxes at Buildout 24,048$ Sources: City of Santa Ana, RSG, Inc BUSINESS TAX REVENUES 42 1 - 257 CITY EXPENDITURES RSG estimated the additional population that would move into the Project to estimate the total added expenditures to the City General Fund for servicing the new residents. Consistent with other recent analyses prepared by RSG on projects in Santa Ana, RSG assumed that each studio would house 1.25 residents, each one-bedroom unit would house 1.75 residents, each two- bedroom unit would house 3.25 residents, and each three-bedroom unit would house 4 residents. Overall, this works out to an average household size of 2.41 residents per unit, which RSG considers reasonable for this particular Project. RSG estimates at full occupancy the Project could hold 1,550 residents. Taking into account that a small percentage of the units will normally be vacant due to turnover, we estimate the fiscal impacts based on residents’ time spent in the City. This is done by calculating the full-time equivalent (FTE) residents, defined as those who spend a vast majority of their daily consumption in Santa Ana. The assumption being that new residents who work out of the City, do not consume products in the City during the time they are gone. RSG gathered data from the US Census and ESRI Business Analyst Online to estimate the FTE residents of the Project. Approximately 13 percent of Santa Ana residents work within Santa Ana, which, in effect means that the City is servicing these resident-employees 100 percent of the time. Another 37 percent of Santa Ana residents work outside the city. Assuming the residents that work outside of the city are outside City limits from 9 am to 5 pm, Santa Ana is servicing these residents approximately 73 percent of the time. The city’s remaining residential population (about 51 percent), is serviced by the City 100 percent of the time. Accounting for all residents and employees based on the percent of time spent in the city, the Project would generate a daily (24/7) population of 1,399 persons. RSG identified variable costs, as opposed to fixed costs, by department in the City of Santa Ana FY 2019-20 Adopted Budget. Variable costs are City expenditures that increase or decrease based on the resident and employee population. The City Manager and City Attorney offices, for example, are fixed costs that would not vary based on population, but the Police and Fire departments would vary based on population. With that said, RSG estimates expenditure increases of $353,986 during the first full year of operations. Over a 25-year projection period, the Project would add $7 million in City expenditures (net present value, discounted at 4 percent). 43 1 - 258 Table 9 EMPLOYMENT Development and ongoing operation of the Project would generate employment opportunities, add labor income to the market area, and add value to the gross regional product. For this analysis, RSG used the IMPLAN model to measure the economic impacts of the Project using County-wide data. IMPLAN is an input-output analysis software tool that tracks the interdependence among various producing and consuming sectors of the economy. According to MIG, Inc., the creators of IMPLAN, the software measures the relationship between a given set of demands for final goods and services and the inputs required to satisfy those demands. IMPLAN publishes countywide data on an annual basis; this analysis utilized the most recent available County of Orange dataset (2018) to calculate direct, indirect, and induced impacts. The IMPLAN inputs are investment (development costs) and gross business operating income of the Project and the resulting outputs are economic impacts, including employment generation, labor income, and gross regional product. Jobs are the primary impacts calculated by IMPLAN. RSG analyzed both temporary and permanent economic impacts. For temporary construction impacts the Developer’s Project costs exclusive of land costs were used ($203 million). From there construction costs were divided based on the gross building area for the between multi- City Department Current City Expenditures2 Project-derived City Expenditures Total City Expenditures3 Percent Increase City Manager's Office 2,708,440$ -$ 2,708,440$ 0.00% Non-Departmental & Interfund Transfers 61,098,660 - 61,098,660 0.00% Clerk of the Council Office 1,682,560 50 1,682,610 0.00% City Attorney's Office 3,219,780 - 3,219,780 0.00%Personnel Services 2,490,360 148 2,490,508 0.01% Finance & Management Services 9,671,190 671 9,671,861 0.01% Bowers Museum Corporation 1,473,430 - 1,473,430 0.00%Parks, Recreation and Community Services 26,836,790 4,560 26,841,350 0.02% Police Department 131,568,820 223,291 131,792,111 0.17% Fire Services 45,640,920 95,156 45,736,076 0.21% Planning & Building Agency 13,227,380 71 13,227,451 0.00% Public Works Agency 13,155,830 - 13,155,830 0.00% Community Development Agency 3,353,520 - 3,353,520 0.00% Total in FY 2020-21 316,127,681$ 323,947$ 316,451,627$ 0.10% Total in 2023-24 353,986$ 3 Sum of current City expenditures and project-derived City expenditures. Assuming project opened in 2020-21. 2 Current expenditures are based on adopted expenditures in the City of Santa Ana's FY 2019-20 Budget. Sources: City of Santa Ana, RSG, Inc., US Census Bureau 1 For this analysis, RSG identified departmental costs in the City of Santa Ana FY 2019-20 Budget that are variable costs, as opposed to fixed costs. Variable costs are expenditures by the City that increase or decrease based on the residential and employee population in the City. For example, City Council and Human Resources salaries and wages generally are fixed costs that do not vary based on population. Meanwhile, the Fire Services and Parks & Community Services departments will likely experience service cost increases due to the added population. SUMMARY OF RECURRING CITY EXPENDITURES1 CITY OF SANTA ANA Central Pointe, Santa Ana 44 1 - 259 family (97 percent) and non-residential (3 percent) components. For permanent impacts, the estimated sales from the residential complex, and the retail space were used. IMPLAN breaks down the resulting employment and other effects into three categories: direct, indirect, and induced: • Direct Effects – Refers to the direct effects that occur on the Project site may result from development costs and operational sales revenue. • Indirect Effects – Changes in sales, jobs, and/or income within the businesses that may supply goods and services to the Project. Indirect effects do not occur directly on the Project-site but are an indirect effect to surrounding or related businesses. • Induced Effects – Regional changes resulting from additional spending that may be earned either directly or indirectly from the Project. RSG utilizes the FTE conversion of total employment generally preferred in Public Policy. FTE employment numbers, as opposed to residents, present total employment through the lens of hours worked; summarizing then dividing by how many 40-hour work weeks are generated by the investment. The IMPLAN analysis concludes that the temporary construction component of the Project would result in 1,300 direct FTE jobs, 117 indirect FTE jobs, and 544 induced FTE jobs the majority of which would be in Santa Ana. The permanent impacts attributed to the Project are 69 FTE jobs related to the operations of both the residential building itself, as well as the retail component of the Project. This includes 48 direct, 8 indirect, and 13 induced jobs to the region. Table 10 outlines the aforementioned FTE jobs generated by the Project. 45 1 - 260 Table 10 In closing, it is our privilege to assist The Concord Group and your client Arnel & Waterford Property Company with predevelopment activities on this project. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments pertaining to the findings of this report. Sincerely, James Simon, Principal Temporary (Construction) Jobs Direct 1300 Indirect 117 Induced 544 Subtotal 1961 Permanent Jobs Direct 48 Indirect 8 Induced 13 Subtotal 69 Total Temporary & Permanent Jobs Direct 1349 Indirect 125 Induced 556 Total 2030 Source: IMPLAN PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT (FTE) 4th and Cabrillo 46 1 - 261 The Concord Group APPENDIX 471 - 262 APPENDIX A SURVEY - APARTMENTS SANTA ANA, COSTA MESA, ORANGE AND TUSTIN MAY 2020 Occ./ Project Name/ Year Floorplans Manager/Units/ Built/ Units Bed/ Unit Base Rent Address Elev. Reno. Mix Vac. Bath Size $ $/sf Santa Ana / Costa Mesa Broadstone Arden 335 26% 7% 5 0 / 1.0 584 $2,095 $3.59 Alliance 5 2020 7% 1 0 / 1.0 744 $2,405 $3.23 1951 E Dyer Road 7% 0 / 1.0 864 $2,856 $3.31 Santa Ana 7% 2 0 / 2.0 1,009 $3,345 $3.32 92705 2% 4 1 / 1.0 1,000 $3,410 $3.41 2% 5 1 / 1.0 907 $2,825 $3.11 2% 2 1 / 1.0 956 $2,880 $3.01 2% 5 1 / 1.0 689 $2,381 $3.46 2% 5 1 / 1.0 745 $2,496 $3.35 3% 2 1 / 1.0 770 $2,575 $3.34 2% 2 1 / 1.0 782 $2,551 $3.26 2% 1 / 2.0 1,215 $3,056 $2.52 7% 5 2 / 2.0 1,089 $3,205 $2.94 7% 5 2 / 2.0 1,087 $3,115 $2.87 7% 3 2 / 2.0 1,109 $3,250 $2.93 7% 5 2 / 2.0 1,077 $3,200 $2.97 7% 2 2 / 2.0 1,184 $3,375 $2.85 7% 2 / 2.0 1,189 $3,595 $3.02 7% 4 2 / 2.0 1,239 $3,400 $2.74 7% 3 2 / 2.0 1,284 $3,355 $2.61 1% 5 3 / 2.0 1,454 $3,915 $2.69 1% 3 / 2.0 1,956 $4,631 $2.37 The Charlie 228 13% 9% 5 0 / 1.0 523 $1,840 $3.52 Alliance 4 2019 2% 2 0 / 1.0 651 $1,895 $2.91 3630 Westminster Avenue 11% 1 / 1.0 681 $1,995 $2.93 Santa Ana 3% 1 1 / 1.0 684 $2,015 $2.95 92703 22% 6 1 / 1.0 696 $2,055 $2.95 2% 5 1 / 1.0 844 $2,230 $2.64 2% 3 1 / 1.0 860 $2,300 $2.67 6% 5 2 / 2.0 997 $2,455 $2.46 6% 5 2 / 2.0 1,041 $2,530 $2.43 18% 8 2 / 2.0 1,052 $2,670 $2.54 6% 4 2 / 2.0 1,066 $2,680 $2.51 6% 2 2 / 2.0 1,079 $2,765 $2.56 4% 5 3 / 2.0 1,236 $3,230 $2.61 4% 5 3 / 2.0 1,239 $3,305 $2.67 20233.00 RecComps: Comps Page 1 of 5 The Concord Group 48 1 - 263 APPENDIX A SURVEY - APARTMENTS SANTA ANA, COSTA MESA, ORANGE AND TUSTIN MAY 2020 Occ./ Project Name/ Year Floorplans Manager/Units/ Built/ Units Bed/ Unit Base Rent Address Elev. Reno. Mix Vac. Bath Size $ $/sf Nineteen01 261 90% 3% 1 1 / 1.0 770 $1,915 $2.49 Greenwood & McKenzie 5 2016 3%1 / 1.0 773 $1,925 $2.49 1901 E 1st St 16% 2 1 / 1.0 774 $1,905 $2.46 Santa Ana 3% 1 / 1.0 795 $1,950 $2.45 92705 6% 1 / 1.0 826 $2,030 $2.46 2% 1 / 1.0 848 $2,090 $2.46 2% 1 / 1.0 860 $2,110 $2.45 2% 1 / 1.0 864 $2,125 $2.46 2% 1 1 / 1.0 890 $2,200 $2.47 3% 1 / 1.0 948 $2,455 $2.59 3% 1 / 1.0 967 $2,385 $2.47 2% 1 / 1.0 974 $2,397 $2.46 3% 1 2 / 2.0 982 $2,500 $2.55 0% 2 / 2.0 1,034 $2,665 $2.58 2% 1 2 / 2.0 1,058 $2,550 $2.41 0% 2 / 2.0 1,081 $2,375 $2.20 0% 1 2 / 2.0 1,085 $2,775 $2.56 7% 1 2 / 2.0 1,122 $2,580 $2.30 6% 2 / 2.0 1,380 $3,050 $2.21 4% 1 2 / 2.0 1,142 $2,655 $2.32 9% 2 / 2.0 1,156 $2,659 $2.30 5% 2 / 2.0 1,180 $2,714 $2.30 0% 1 2 / 2.0 1,193 $2,750 $2.31 2% 1 2 / 2.0 1,195 $2,705 $2.26 2% 2 / 2.0 1,260 $2,885 $2.29 2% 1 2 / 2.0 1,265 $2,895 $2.29 1% 2 / 2.0 1,284 $2,959 $2.30 0% 2 / 2.0 1,391 $3,068 $2.21 1% 2 / 2.0 1,476 $3,120 $2.11 2% 2 / 2.0 1,639 $3,468 $2.12 2% 1 2 / 2.0 1,712 $3,415 $1.99 2% 2 / 2.5 1,760 $3,663 $2.08 2% 1 3 / 2.0 1,510 $3,465 $2.29 0% 3 / 2.0 1,632 $3,456 $2.12 2% 1 3 / 2.5 2,020 $3,865 $1.91 20233.00 RecComps: Comps Page 2 of 5 The Concord Group 49 1 - 264 APPENDIX A SURVEY - APARTMENTS SANTA ANA, COSTA MESA, ORANGE AND TUSTIN MAY 2020 Occ./ Project Name/ Year Floorplans Manager/Units/ Built/ Units Bed/ Unit Base Rent Address Elev. Reno. Mix Vac. Bath Size $ $/sf Irvine / Tustin Amalfi 542 95% 12%0 / 1.0 584 $2,035 $3.48 Irvine Company 3 2014 5%1 / 1.0 552 $2,090 $3.79 16000 Legacy Rd 4% 3 1 / 1.0 681 $2,095 $3.08 Tustin 3% 1 1 / 1.0 695 $2,195 $3.16 92782 5% 2 1 / 1.0 730 $2,295 $3.14 12%1 / 1.0 741 $2,320 $3.13 8% 2 1 / 1.0 746 $2,165 $2.90 12% 5 1 / 1.0 751 $2,145 $2.86 7% 3 1 / 1.0 760 $2,195 $2.89 5%1 / 1.0 800 $2,295 $2.87 3%1 / 1.0 813 $2,325 $2.86 4%1 / 1.0 906 $2,525 $2.79 2% 2 1 / 1.0 955 $2,595 $2.72 2%2 / 2.0 963 $2,500 $2.60 9% 4 2 / 2.0 1,021 $2,495 $2.44 8% 9 2 / 2.0 1,095 $2,530 $2.31 Residences on Jamboree 381 96% 1% 1 0 / 1.0 662 $1,970 $2.98 UDR 5 2017 17% 1 0 / 1.0 692 $1,995 $2.88 2801 Kelvin Ave 10% 1 / 1.0 687 $2,144 $3.12 Irvine 3% 1 / 1.0 698 $2,214 $3.17 92614 11% 1 1 / 1.0 701 $2,124 $3.03 https://www.udr.com/orange-county-apartments/irvine/the-r 8%1 / 1.0 757 $2,224 $2.94 10% 3 1 / 1.0 762 $2,014 $2.64 1%1 / 1.0 782 $2,319 $2.97 7% 1 2 / 2.0 1,063 $2,724 $2.56 3%2 / 2.0 1,108 $2,789 $2.52 20% 2 2 / 2.0 1,147 $2,979 $2.60 1% 2 2 / 2.0 1,165 $2,699 $2.32 2%2 / 2.0 1,284 $3,099 $2.41 4% 3 3 / 2.0 1,426 $3,499 $2.45 2%3 / 2.0 1,503 $3,599 $2.39 20233.00 RecComps: Comps Page 3 of 5 The Concord Group 50 1 - 265 APPENDIX A SURVEY - APARTMENTS SANTA ANA, COSTA MESA, ORANGE AND TUSTIN MAY 2020 Occ./ Project Name/ Year Floorplans Manager/Units/ Built/ Units Bed/ Unit Base Rent Address Elev. Reno. Mix Vac. Bath Size $ $/sf Skyloft Apartments 388 19% 8%0 / 1.0 571 $2,531 $4.43 Legacy Partners 5 2019 1%1 / 1.0 690 $2,628 $3.81 2700 Main St 4%1 / 1.0 712 $2,658 $3.73 Irvine 17%1 / 1.0 733 $2,698 $3.68 92614 10%1 / 1.0 749 $2,747 $3.67 3%1 / 1.0 762 $2,797 $3.67 1% 1 / 1.0 780 $2,812 $3.61 3% 1 / 1.0 781 $2,813 $3.60 3% 1 / 1.0 784 $2,829 $3.61 11% 1 / 1.0 836 $2,555 $3.06 1% 1 / 2.0 1,039 $3,840 $3.70 1% 2 / 2.0 1,019 $3,083 $3.03 2% 2 / 2.0 1,095 $3,168 $2.89 11% 2 / 2.0 1,132 $3,363 $2.97 1% 2 / 2.0 1,137 $3,817 $3.36 6% 2 / 2.0 1,162 $3,623 $3.12 5% 2 / 2.0 1,185 $3,479 $2.94 3% 2 / 2.0 1,188 $3,499 $2.95 1% 2 / 2.0 1,217 $3,473 $2.85 3% 2 / 2.0 1,222 $3,513 $2.87 2% 2 / 2.0 1,248 $4,100 $3.29 1% 2 / 2.0 1,296 $4,212 $3.25 2% 3 / 3.0 1,438 $4,391 $3.05 20233.00 RecComps: Comps Page 4 of 5 The Concord Group 51 1 - 266 APPENDIX A SURVEY - APARTMENTS SANTA ANA, COSTA MESA, ORANGE AND TUSTIN MAY 2020 Occ./ Project Name/ Year Floorplans Manager/Units/ Built/ Units Bed/ Unit Base Rent Address Elev. Reno. Mix Vac. Bath Size $ $/sf Anaheim / Orange AMLI Uptown Orange 334 93% 3% 1 0 / 1.0 570 $2,101 $3.69 AMLI 4 2016 3% 2 1 / 1.0 626 $2,241 $3.58 385 S. Manchester Ave 4% 1 1 / 1.0 711 $2,233 $3.14 Orange 4% 1 / 1.0 716 $2,416 $3.37 92868 3% 1 1 / 1.0 745 $2,484 $3.33 3% 1 / 1.0 748 $2,485 $3.32 4% 4 1 / 1.0 802 $2,267 $2.83 4% 1 / 1.0 816 $2,300 $2.82 3% 1 / 1.0 823 $2,320 $2.82 3% 4 1 / 1.0 829 $2,216 $2.67 3% 1 / 1.0 837 $2,238 $2.67 3% 1 / 1.0 840 $2,238 $2.66 3% 1 / 1.0 857 $2,275 $2.65 3% 1 / 1.0 862 $2,278 $2.64 3% 1 2 / 2.0 978 $2,717 $2.78 3% 2 / 2.0 993 $2,760 $2.78 4% 1 2 / 2.0 1,002 $3,214 $3.21 4% 2 / 2.0 1,010 $3,220 $3.19 4% 1 2 / 2.0 1,047 $2,883 $2.75 4% 2 / 2.0 1,049 $2,626 $2.50 3% 1 2 / 2.0 1,050 $2,890 $2.75 3% 2 / 2.0 1,054 $2,900 $2.75 3% 2 / 2.0 1,063 $3,186 $3.00 3% 2 / 2.0 1,122 $3,299 $2.94 4% 3 2 / 2.0 1,131 $2,874 $2.54 3% 2 / 2.0 1,133 $2,890 $2.55 1% 2 / 2.0 1,142 $2,900 $2.54 1% 1 2 / 2.0 1,147 $2,988 $2.61 1% 2 / 2.0 1,175 $3,050 $2.60 1% 2 / 2.0 1,211 $3,556 $2.94 1% 2 / 2.0 1,236 $3,304 $2.67 1% 3 / 2.0 1,404 $3,655 $2.60 1% 3 / 2.0 1,431 $3,710 $2.59 Eleven 10 260 93% 21% 2 0 / 1.0 515 $2,103 $4.08 Piceme Residential 5 2018 5%1 / 1.0 665 $2,200 $3.31 1110 W. Town and Country Rd 23% 0 1 / 1.0 737 $2,387 $3.24 Orange 20%1 / 1.0 811 $2,596 $3.20 92868 7% 0 2 / 2.0 1,027 $2,826 $2.75 2%2 / 2.0 1,357 $3,600 $2.65 3% 1 1 / 1.0 819 $2,596 $3.17 19% 0 2 / 2.0 1,199 $3,175 $2.65 20233.00 RecComps: Comps Page 5 of 5 The Concord Group 52 1 - 267 APPENDIX B SURVEY - RETAIL LEASES ORANGE COUNTY AND LOCAL THREE-MILE TRADE AREA JANUARY 2017 THROUGH JULY 2020 - 3.5-YEARS Building Lease Map Year Sign Rate Key Shopping Center City Street Address Built Elev. GLA Suite / Tenant SF Date Type Rent 4th Street / Irvine Blvd Corridor - Grand Ave to Prospect Ave A Creekside Plaza Santa Ana 2321 E. 4th St 2003 1s 8,818 Country Café (#A) 1,200 Dec-18 NNN $30 Suite D 1,500 Oct-17 NNN $30 Average:$30 B 17400 Irvine Blvd Tustin 17400 Irvine Blvd 1968 1s 17,600 Medical (#M)1,100 Aug-20 FSG $29 Medical (#F) 2,256 Aug-20 FSG $29 Average:$29 C 2000 E. 4th St Santa Ana 2000 E. 4th St 1982 3s 34,080 Suite 350 1,663 Oct-19 FSG $26 Suite 110 1,327 Apr-19 FSG $25 Suite 202 1,470 Feb-19 FSG $25 Suite 304 2,074 Nov-18 FSG $25 Suite 320 2,270 Sep-18 FSG $23 Average:$25 D 17772 Irvine Blvd Tustin 17772 Irvine Blvd 1973 2s 16,325 Suite 102-8 145 Sep-19 FSG $25 Suite 102-1 245 Dec-19 FSG $25 Average:$25 E 17671 Irvine Blvd Tustin 17671 Irvine Blvd 1972 2s 32,777 Suite 112 237 Sep-17 FSG $24 F 1901 E. 4th St Santa Ana 1901 E. 4th St 1974 3s 39,699 Suite 312 1,622 Dec-19 FSG $23 Suite 350 1,572 Aug-19 FSG $23 Average:$23 Mixed-Use Analogs # Apts Pinnacle at MacArthur Place Santa Ana 31 E. MacArthur Crescent Dr 2001 4s 253 MF Suite 107 1,714 Nov-19 NNN $30 Suite 105 941 Jul-19 NNN $30 Suite 101 1,143 Apr-19 NNN $30 Suite 106B 869 Oct-18 NNN $30 9Round (#108) 1,428 May-18 NNN $30 Braizen Sandwiches (#102)1,126 Aug-17 NNN $30 Average:$30 Pinnacle at Fullerton Fullerton 229 E. Commonwealth Ave 2004 4s 192 MF End Cap 875 May-19 NNN $33 Suite A 2,526 May-19 NNN $30 Heere Tea (#E)1,888 Jul-18 NNN $30 Average:$30 Source: CoStar 20233.00 RecComps: Leases The Concord Group 53 1 - 268 APPENDIX C 54 1 - 269 55 1 - 270 56 1 - 271 57 1 - 272 58 1 - 273 EXHIBIT 14 1 - 274 City of Santa Ana Review of Market & Fiscal Impact Analyses for Mixed- Use Development on 4th and Cabrillo Final Report October 22, 2020 1 - 275 4th and Cabrillo Peer Review Draft AECOM Economics General Limiting Conditions AECOM devoted the level of effort consistent with (i) the level of diligence ordinarily exercised by competent professionals practicing in the area under the same or similar circumstances, and (ii) consistent with the time and budget available for the Services to develop the Deliverables. The Deliverables are based on estimates, assumptions, information developed by AECOM from its independent research effort, general knowledge of the industry, and information provided by and consultations with Client and Client's representatives. No responsibility is assumed for inaccuracies in data provided by the Client, the Client's representatives, or any third-party data source used in preparing or presenting the Deliverables. AECOM assumes no duty to update the information contained in the Deliverables unless such additional services are separately retained pursuant to a written agreement signed by AECOM and Client. AECOM’s findings represent its professional judgment. Neither AECOM nor its parent corporations, nor their respective affiliates or subsidiaries (“AECOM Entities”) make any warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, with respect to any information or methods contained in or used to produce the Deliverables. The Deliverables shall not to be used in conjunction with any public or private offering of securities, debt, equity, or other similar purpose where it may be relied upon to any degree by any person other than the Client. The Deliverables shall not be used for purposes other than those for which they were prepared or for which prior written consent has been obtained from AECOM. Possession of the Deliverables does not carry with it any right of publication or the right to use the name of "AECOM" in any manner without the prior express written consent of AECOM. No party may reference AECOM with regard to any abstract, excerpt or summarization of the Deliverables without the prior written consent of AECOM. AECOM has served solely in the capacity of consultant and has not rendered any expert opinions in connection with the subject matter hereof. Any changes made to the Deliverables, or any use of the Deliverables not specifically identified in the Agreement between the Client and AECOM or otherwise expressly approved in writing by AECOM, shall be at the sole risk of the party making such changes or use. The Deliverables were prepared solely for the use by the Client. No third party may rely on the Deliverables unless expressly authorized by AECOM in writing (including, without limitation, in the form of a formal reliance letter. Any third party expressly authorized by AECOM in writing to rely on the Deliverables may do so only on the Deliverable in its entirety and not on any abstract, excerpt or summary. Entitlement to rely upon the Deliverables is conditioned upon the entitled party accepting full responsibility for such use, strict compliance with this Agreement and not holding AECOM liable in any way for any impacts on the forecasts or the earnings resulting from changes in "external" factors such as changes in government policy, in the pricing of commodities and materials, changes in market conditions, price levels generally, competitive alternatives to the project, the behavior of consumers or competitors and changes in the Client’s policies affecting the operation of their projects. The Deliverables may include “forward-looking statements”. These statements relate to AECOM’s expectations, beliefs, intentions or strategies regarding the future. These statements may be identified by the use of words like “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “project,” “will,” “should,” “seek,” and similar expressions. The forward-looking statements reflect AECOM’s views and assumptions with respect to future events as of the date of the Deliverables and are subject to future economic conditions, and other risks and uncertainties. Actual and future results and trends could differ materially from those set forth in such statements due to various factors, including, without limitation, those discussed in the Deliverables. These factors are beyond AECOM’s ability to control or predict. Accordingly, AECOM makes no warranty or representation that any of the projected values or results contained in the Deliverables will actually occur or be achieved. The Deliverables are qualified in their entirety by, and should be considered in light of, these limitations, conditions and considerations. 1 - 276 4th and Cabrillo Peer Review Draft AECOM Prepared for: City of Santa Ana Prepared by: AECOM AECOM 401 West A Street Suite 120 San Diego, CA 92101 aecom.com Copyright © 2020 by AECOM All rights reserved. No part of this copyrighted work may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior written permission of AECOM. 1 - 277 4th and Cabrillo Peer Review Draft AECOM Table of Contents 1. Summary of Findings ............................................................................................ 5 2. Assessment .......................................................................................................... 6 Appropriateness of Methodology.................................................................................................................................... 6 Multi-Family Market Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Retail Market Analysis .................................................................................................................................................... 6 Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 8 3. Appendix ............................................................................................................ 12 Figures Figure 1: Retail Vacancy ................................................................................................................................................ 7 Tables Table 1: Mixed Use Projects .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Table 2: Retail Leakage/Surplus .................................................................................................................................... 8 Table 3: Net Supportable Retail Demand Model ............................................................................................................ 8 Table 4: Adjusted Fiscal Revenue Estimate for Sales Tax .............................................................................................. 9 Table 5: Adjusted Fiscal Expenditure Estimate ............................................................................................................ 10 Table 6: Adjusted Fiscal Revenue and Expenditure Estimates .................................................................................... 10 Table 7: 25-Year Recurring Adjusted Fiscal Impact ...................................................................................................... 11 Table 8: Retail Demand Model for the Project Site ....................................................................................................... 12 1 - 278 4th and Cabrillo Peer Review AECOM 5 1. Summary of Findings At the request of the City of Santa Ana (“City”), AECOM has conducted an independent review of a report (“Report”) prepared for Arnel Development Co. by The Concord Group (“TCG”) titled Market & Fiscal Impact Analyses for a Mixed-Use Development in Santa Ana, CA (4th & Cabrillo Park Dr). Arnel Development Co. (the “Developer”) has proposed a mixed-use project (“Project”) for a site in the City with 644 apartment units and 15,200 square feet of commercial space. The Project, located at 4th & Cabrillo Park Drive, is to be located in the MEMU (Metro East Mixed-Use) Overlay District in the City of Santa Ana. The Developer engaged TCG (in association with a second firm RSG) to “conduct market and fiscal feasibility analyses for the project” in order to “identify the highest and best use for the site” and “demonstrate the financial viability of the development.” AECOM’s findings are summarized below. 1. The Report presents strong evidence for the market feasibility and fiscal impacts of the Project, but it does not clearly establish the highest and best use or financial viability of the Project. 2. The Report’s conclusions about support for multi-family residential Market are substantiated by market data. The rents represent the higher end of the potential range but are reasonable based on location, proposed amenities, and unit mix. 3. The Report’s retail market analysis concludes that 15,200 retail square feet is supportable in the market based on an assessment of three comparable mixed-use developments. AECOM supplemented this analysis and found further evidence to validate the potential range of supportable retail for the Project. However, neither the Report nor AECOM’s analysis can fully forecast whether long-term retail demand patterns may fundamentally change as a result of the pandemic. 4. The estimates for potential property tax, utility users’ tax, and business taxes apply commonly accepted methodology, and the estimates are validated in the Report’s analysis. 5. In estimating potential sales taxes, the Report assumes different retail capture rates and retail sales yields than used in comparable studies. However, an alternate analysis prepared by AECOM using the adjusted input assumptions validates the Report’s estimates, which are slightly lower—and therefore more defensibly conservative—than those calculated in the alternative.1 6. The Report’s estimate of City fiscal expenditures that would result from the Project appears low. The Report estimates that on a pro-rata basis, the fiscal expenditure for each member of the service population is approximately $250, while AECOM in a separate report recently estimated such costs at $480 per service population member. Applying the AECOM pro-rata measure results in an estimated 104 percent increase of fiscal expenditures resulting from the Project. 7. Net fiscal revenue is the difference between estimated fiscal revenues and fiscal expenditures. Applying AECOM’s adjusted input assumptions for calculating fiscal revenues and fiscal expenditures results in a net present value net fiscal revenue estimate of $10.3 million, which represents a decrease of $5.7 million from the $16 million estimated provided by the TCG Report. 8. The Report’s estimate of the Project’s economic impacts on employment in the Region use IMPLAN input- output modelling for both the construction and stabilized buildout stages of the project. AECOM reconstructed the model and found no significant deviations in results. 1 While not material to overall sale tax estimate, the TCG Report, in Tables 2, 6, and 7 show an inconsistency that should be explained if intended or corrected if in error. This inconsistency is discussed further in the analysis below. 1 - 279 4th and Cabrillo Peer Review AECOM 6 2. Assessment Appropriateness of Methodology In the preamble, the Report states as its goal to “identify the highest and best use of the project under current MEMU zoning and demonstrate financial viability of the development.” Identification of highest and best use typically involves comparison of multiple potential land uses using proforma analysis to estimate potential project returns or residual land value. Determination of financial viability may also rely on proforma analysis to estimate Net Operating Income (NOI) and development costs. While the Report features multiple exhibits that demonstrate key inputs and parameters that could be incorporated into proforma analysis, no such additional analysis is conducted to test for highest best use and financial viability. Multi-Family Market Analysis The Multi-Family Residential (MFR) market analysis clearly demonstrates potential achievable rents for the units proposed in the project. The Report’s assumptions and data are consistent with previous analysis conducted by AECOM of the residential market, and the Report’s conclusions are supported by the analysis. The rents, absorption rates, vacancies, and unit mixes presented in the comparative analysis are broadly representative of the competitive market area. While the proposed rents represent the upper range for the market areas examined, they may be justifiable by the desirable location and the quality of proposed amenities. The Project unit mix, which emphasizes 1-BR units (51 percent) and 2-BR units (39 percent), appears to be optimized to take advantage of market area trends, which indicate that smaller units command higher rents (on a square-foot-basis) and achieve lower vacancy rates than 3-BR units. Retail Market Analysis The City is particularly interested in the potential for the Project to include retail space to support the mixed-use nature of the MEMU land use designation. The proposed Project currently contains 15,200 square feet of retail space, and the Report justifies this quantity through arguments regarding Project location, general retail market trends, and comparison with other established mixed-use projects. AECOM has supplemented this analysis with retail leakage/surplus analysis and a retail demand model and concurs that under normal market conditions,15,200 square feet is supportable. However, as the long-term market impact of COVID-19 on retail performance is not known, caution regarding retail expansion is warranted. The Report features a comparison with three existing mixed-use projects in Orange County that highlight the potential difficulty the Project may face attracting and retaining retail tenants. Two of these comparison projects, which have a similar walkability score as the Project, show vacancy rates of 70 percent and 56 percent. However, such rates are not typical for retail in Orange County, as indicated by Figure 1, which shows retail vacancies fluctuating between 2.5 percent and 6.5 percent between 2006 and 2020 in Orange County and within the 3-Mile Radius surrounding the Project. While the comparison projects illustrate the potential difficulties of sustaining retail tenants in mixed-use projects, the general retail market in Orange County has remained stable in the recent past. 1 - 280 4th and Cabrillo Peer Review AECOM 7 Figure 1: Retail Vacancy Source: Costar There are three other mixed-use residential and retail projects in the development pipeline with program retail ranging from 6,000 to 24,290 square feet contributing 1.4 percent to 3.5 percent of total Gross Building Area (GBA). The Project’s 15,200 square feet of retail space represents approximately 2.6 percent of GBA, which falls within the range of both pipeline projects and similar projects under development within a half mile of the Project’s site, as shown in Table 1. Table 1: Mixed Use Projects Retail leakage/surplus analysis offers another perspective on retail potential. Leakage/surplus analysis compares estimated potential retail spending with estimated actual retail spending to determine whether there is a variance. A surplus variance, where estimated retail spending exceeds estimated demand, indicates the area is drawing retail spending from outside its boundaries, whereas a deficit variance suggests retail “leakage” where residents are leaving the area for retail spending. Leakage can indicate an undersupply of retail space and a potential opportunity for retail development (although not always: if substantial retail supply exists just outside of the boundaries of an area showing leakage, then new supply within the area risks oversupplying the market and diluting sales). AECOM conducted a retail leakage/surplus analysis for both the City of Santa Ana and the 2-Mile Radius2 around the site and found that both geographies capture a significant surplus of retail spending. While the surplus is a net benefit to the City, which benefits from the resulting sales taxes, it also suggests the area is already well supplied and may not have capacity to absorb much more. While the new on-site residential population will help absorb some of this demand, the proposed retail also needs to be unique and differentiated enough to continue to draw shoppers from outside the area to avoid diluting the performance of existing retail supply. Table 2 shows that the 2-Mile Radius has a 2 AECOM uses standard geographies for retail demand assessment, typically a half mile and 2-mile radius around the site that represent the immediate opportunities for pedestrian traffic and a short car ride respectively. Project Name Project Adress Dwelling Units Total GBA (SF) Retail Space (SF)% Retail Madison 200 N Cabrillo Park Dr.260 186,000 6,500 3.5% AMG First Point 2112 & 2116 E. First St.552 700,000 10,000 1.4% Elan 1600 E. First St.603 650,000 20,000 3.1% Project 4th and Cabrillo 644 576,000 15,200 2.6% Source: Costar, City of Santa Ana, AECOM Comparison of Mixed-Use Projects Under Development within Half-Mile of the Project 1 - 281 4th and Cabrillo Peer Review AECOM 8 retail surplus of over $640 million in sales, while the City of Santa Ana has a surplus of approximately $1.2 billion in sales. Table 2: Retail Leakage/Surplus As a final test of supportable retail supply, AECOM prepared a retail demand model that quantifies supportable retail based on a region’s demographics, socio-economic trends, and the current development pipeline. The model assumes capture rates for residents and employees based on their proximity to the site and data on retail spending patterns. Based on current demographics and projects in the development pipeline, the model estimates the Project could support between 10,000 and 21,000 square feet of retail space. This indicates that the 15,200 square feet currently proposed falls well within the range of supportable retail at the site. The calculation of net supportable square feet, as shown in Table 3, is based on an estimate of total supportable square feet less the approximately 40,890 square feet of retail space in several mixed-use projects currently proposed or under construction within a half mile of the Project’s site. An extended table showing the model’s assumptions is found in Appendix A. Table 3: Net Supportable Retail Demand Model These findings support TCG’s analysis in the Report and offer validation that the proposed 15,200 square feet of retail could be supported under normal market conditions. Fiscal and Economic Impact Analysis The Report estimates fiscal impacts on City’s General Fund that may result from the Project. Fiscal impacts are comprised of fiscal revenues and fiscal expenditures. Fiscal revenues considered by the Report include Property Tax, Property Tax in-Lieu of VLF, Sales Tax (Direct and Indirect), Utility User Tax, and Business Tax, while fiscal expenditures include Police, Fire, Parks/Recreation/Community Services, Finance & Management Services, Planning & Building Agency, Personnel Services, and the Clerk of the Council. Property Tax Estimated Property Tax revenues are based on an estimate of assessed value of the Development at full buildout. This approach to property valuation is widely accepted and suitable for the Project in its current stage of development. The estimate of Property Tax in-lieu of VLF uses a proportional approach, in which estimated Project assessed value is compared to Citywide assessed value, and the proportional increment of new value is applied to the previous year’s Property Tax in-lieu of VLF payment to estimate the new incremental tax revenue. This is a common and generally accepted estimation methodology. Demand Supply Retail Gap Leakage/Surplus Number of (Retail Potenital)(Retail Sales)Factor Businesses Retail Trade $1,124,811,711 $1,655,118,799 -$530,307,088 -19.1 895 Food & Drink $124,997,520 $235,536,446 -$110,538,926 -30.7 395 Total $1,249,809,231 $1,890,655,245 -$640,846,014 -20.4 1,290 Demand Supply Retail Gap Leakage/Surplus Number of (Retail Potenital)(Retail Sales)Factor Businesses Retail Trade $2,311,832,197 $3,452,949,815 -$1,141,117,618 -19.8 1,606 Food & Drink $255,926,740 $405,314,351 -$149,387,611 -22.6 646 Total $2,567,758,937 $3,858,264,166 -$1,290,505,229 -20.1 2,252 2-Mile Radius Retail Leakage/Surplus Anlysis City of Santa Ana Retail Leakage/Surplus Anlysis Source: ESRI, AECOM Total Supportable Current Pipeline Net Supportable High Scenario ($350/SF)61,500 40,890 21,000 Low Scenario ($425/SF)50,600 40,890 10,000 Retail Demand Model Net Supportable Retail at 4th and Cabrillo Source: ESRI, BLS, LEHD, Costar, California DOF, ICSC, AECOM 1 - 282 4th and Cabrillo Peer Review AECOM 9 Sales Tax Estimates for indirect Sales Tax rely on several assumptions regarding household/employee spending habits and the City’s capture of this spending. The Report estimates a City capture rate of 60 percent of taxable spending for new households. Capture rates in comparable studies from AECOM (2018), Economic and Planning Systems (2016) and Keyser Marston Associates (2018) show a range from 25 percent to 50 percent with greater capture rates for developments near the commercial center of larger cities. Precedents from other studies suggest that the 60 percent capture rate for new households may be high considering the Project’s central in Orange County with numerous shopping centers in neighboring jurisdictions. A more conservative and defensible capture rate would be between 30 percent and 40 percent. The estimate of taxable sales for households is within the range of several data sources. The Bureau of Labor Services Consumption Survey for the Los Angles Metro Area estimates taxable sales of approximately $22,000 per household in the region, while ESRI estimates approximately $18,000 for the City. Because of the small average size of the households projected to occupy the principally 1-BR and 2-BR dwelling units, the Report’s approximate annual household spending of $17,800 is a reasonable estimate. For the business-derived sales tax, the Report assumes a rate of $250 per square foot of retail space to estimate total sales. According to an eMarketer survey of retail locations in Southern California, sales per square foot averaged $436 in 2018 with a median of $322. Consequently, assuming a higher sales tax rate may be defensible. The Report shows inconsistency in the sales tax estimates as indicated in Table 2 and Tables 6 and 7 of the Report. Table 2 in the Report, which shows a cashflow analysis representing the 25-year net new recurring fiscal impact projections of all estimated revenue streams and expenditures, lists the base rate sales tax at buildout at $90,244 and the Measure X sales tax at $135,366. These figures are consistent with the concluding text on page 42 of the Report that summarizes the fiscal impacts of sales tax. However, Tables 6 and 7 in the Report and the accompanying text show a combined $103,700 for base rate sales tax at buildout and $155,550 for Measure X sales tax at buildout. These measures are approximately 15 percent higher than the measures shown in the cashflow analysis in Table 2 of Report on which the net fiscal revenue calculations are based. In a final version of the Report, TCG should explain this discrepancy if intended or correct it if an error. In order to test the impacts of observations above about different input assumptions for calculating fiscal revenues and fiscal expenditures, AECOM prepared an alternate estimate that assumes $350/square foot in retail sales and a capture rate of 40 percent. In addition, to explore whether the data discrepancy discussed above might also have a meaningful impact, AECOM prepared an alternate version of the Report’s estimate: as shown in Table 4 below, “Report” represents TCG’s base estimate, which uses the cashflow shown in the Report’s Table 2. The “Report Alternative” estimate is based on the sales tax measures shown in the Report’s Tables 6 and 7. The results of these alternate calculations show the Report’s original estimate to be the lowest and most conservative, with a net present sales tax value (NPV at 4% discount rate) of approximately $3.6 million. The AECOM alternative, with a higher sales yield per square foot but lower capture rate, is higher at approximately $4.1 million. Finally, the Report Alternative is highest at approximately $4.3 million. From this, it may be concluded that the Report’s original finding is defensible but that higher Project fiscal revenues may be achievable. Table 4: Adjusted Fiscal Revenue Estimate for Sales Tax Sales Tax Base Rate1 Sales Tax Measure X1 Total Sales Tax1 25-Year Recurring Sales Tax (NPV at 4% Discount Report2 $90,244 $135,366 $225,610 $3,640,360 Report Alternative3 $103,700 $155,550 $259,250 $4,298,055 AECOM $99,584 $149,376 $248,960 $4,127,459 Souce: TCG, RSG, AECOM Fiscal Impact of Sales Tax Assumptions (1) Annual revenues at first year of buildout of the Project (2) Cash Flow Analysis from Table 2 in the Report (4) Assumes 40% capture rate for Project residents and $350 per square foot for Project retail space (3) Derived from Tables 6 and 7, based on the methodology described in the Report 1 - 283 4th and Cabrillo Peer Review AECOM 10 Utility User, Franchise and Business Taxes The Report estimates Utility Users Taxes based on household data for phone, electricity, gas, and water expenditures for Project residents and Energy Information Association (EIA) estimates of utility expenditures for retail properties for the Project’s retail space. Business Tax estimates are based on annual sales of the retail future retail tenants and business activities of the property management company. These are acceptable methodologies, and the predictions are in line with assumptions made in comparable studies. Fiscal Expenditures The Report applies a standard pro rata fiscal expenditure for the service population of the Project (which is derived from commuting patterns of the City’s residents and workforce. Based on estimated demand for City services from people living and working in Santa Ana (with demand adjusted to reflect time spent in the City as it varies between full-time residents and in-commuters), the Report estimates a service population of 1,399 persons for the Project. This methodology is a standard practice and widely accepted for general planning purposes. The Report estimates that City expenditures for the service population would result in an increase of approximately $354,000 for the first full year of buildout, or approximately $253 per person. This estimate is based on the City budget for Fiscal Year 2019-2020 and considers whether expenditures are variable versus fixed costs. The estimate excludes costs such as the City Manager’s office and City Attorney’s Office but scales up services such as the Police and Fire Departments. AECOM recently conducted a series of fiscal analyses for the City that adopted a similar approach that combined budgetary and demographic analysis with interviews with City staff. The most recent report (March 2020) estimated a pro-rata expenditure of $487 per member of the service population. The AECOM estimate represents an increase of $234 over the Report’s estimate, a variance that if applied to the overall estimate has a substantial impact on the Gross Expenditures and Net New Revenues from the Project. Using the same assumptions as the Report in calculating the rolling 25-year impact (Net Present Value at a discount rate of 4 percent), AECOM estimates fiscal expenditures at approximately double of that estimated by the Report. The results of these estimates are shown in Table 5. Table 5: Adjusted Fiscal Expenditure Estimate This adjusted fiscal expenditure estimated carries over to the estimate of Net New Revenue. As shown in Table 6, estimated adjustments to annual fiscal revenues (sales tax) and expenditures result in net new fiscal revenues of approximately $540,000 compared to $890,000 for the first year of buildout out. As shown in Table 7, estimated adjustments to fiscal revenues and fiscal expenditures result in a net present value estimate of $10.3 million, compared with the Report’s estimate of $16 million. Table 6: Adjusted Fiscal Revenue and Expenditure Estimates Service Population Pro Rata Share Total Annual Expenditures at Buildout 25 Year Net Recurring (NPV at 4%) Report 1,399 $253 $353,986 $7,026,724 AECOM (2020)1,399 $487 $681,313 $14,354,016 Pro Rata City Expenditure Estimates Source: US Census LEHD, ESRI, Santa Ana 2019-20 Adopted Budget, AECOM Sales Tax at First Year Buildout Fiscal Expenditures at First Year Buildout Net New Fiscal Revenues at First Year Buildout Report1 $225,610 -$353,986 $891,096 AECOM $248,960 -$681,313 $540,418 Adjusted Annual Fiscal Impacts at Project Buildout (1) Assumes Sales Tax cash flow analysis from Table 2 in the Report Source: TCG, RSG, AECOM 1 - 284 4th and Cabrillo Peer Review AECOM 11 Table 7: 25-Year Recurring Adjusted Fiscal Impact Economic Impacts The Report only considers the impacts on employment for the “Region,” which is not specified (but is likely to be Orange County). The Report derives an estimate of construction phase jobs from construction costs. The estimate of permanent jobs is derived from rate assumptions that associate employment with retail square footage and dwelling units. The analysis uses IMPLAN software that draws on data from several local, state and federal sources, including the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), and the California Department of Finance. This software package is used widely for estimating economic impacts across a wide array of industries and economic settings. To test the estimated economic impacts shown in the Report, AECOM conducted a parallel IMPLAN input/output analysis using the Report’s inputs for Project construction costs and full-time positions. The outputs of AECOM’s model were close to those of the Report and validate the Report’s employment estimates. 25 year Recurring Fiscal Revenues 25 year Recurring Fiscal Expenditures 25 year Recurring Net New Impact Report1 $23,109,060 $7,026,724 $16,082,335 AECOM $24,679,077 $14,354,016 $10,325,061 (1) Assumes Sales Tax cash flow analysis from Table 2 in the Report Source: TCG, RSG, AECOM 25-Year Recurring Net New Fiscal Impacts (NPV at 4% discount rate) 1 - 285 4th and Cabrillo Peer Review AECOM 12 3. Appendix Table 8: Retail Demand Model for the Project Site Current Buildout2 Current Buildout2 Current Buildout2 Households 2,216 4,271 35,204 35,746 37,420 40,017 On-Site3 0 612 0 0 0 612 Site Capture(%)7.5%7.5%0%0%0%0% Off-Site 2,216 3,659 35,204 35,746 35,204 39,405 Site-Capture(%)5.0%5.0%2.5%2.5%2.5%2.5% Median HH Income $60,500 $60,500 $60,500 $60,500 $60,500 $60,500 HH Retail Expenditures4 $15,125 $15,125 $15,125 $15,125 $15,125 $15,125 Estimated Household Sales Capture $1,675,850 $3,461,281 $13,045,282 $13,246,127 $13,045,282 $16,707,408 Employees 5,900 5,900 54,700 55,272 60,600 61,172 On-site 48 48 0 0 48 48 Annual Expenditures5 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 Site Capture (%)5.0%5.0%0%0%0%0% Off-site 5,852 5,852 54,700 55,272 60,552 61,124 Annual Expenditures5 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000 Site Capture (%)4%4%2%2%2%2% Estimated Business Sales Capture $852,288 $852,288 $3,938,400 $3,979,606 $4,790,688 $4,831,894 Total Estimated Retail Capture $2,528,138 $4,313,569 $16,983,682 $17,225,733 $19,511,820 $21,539,302 Supportable Retail SF ($350/SF)6 7,223 12,324 48,525 49,216 55,748 61,541 Supportable Retail SF ($425/SF)6 5,949 10,150 39,962 40,531 45,910 50,681 (4) BLS assumes 20%-30% of median income is spent on all retail categories, site capture adjusted for retail type (5) Based on ICSC data for average workday spending for office/retail workers, excluding transportaiton, grocery, and warehouse expenditures (1) 2 Mile Radius is exclusive of 1/2 Mile Radius to avoid double counting Source: ESRI, BLS, LEHD, Costar, California DOF, ICSC, AECOM (6) Gross supportabel retail before adjustment for retail developmentin the current pipeline (2) Assumes stable occupancy of all known current development pipeline (3) Assumes 95% Occupancy of the Project Estimated 4th and Cabrillo Capture of Household Retail Expenditures 1/2 Mile Radius 2 Mile Radius1 Total 1 - 286 EXHIBIT 15 1 - 287 CITY OF SANTA ANA October 2020 4th and Cabrillo Project 20233.00 __________________________________________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM To: City of Santa Ana From: The Concord Group Date: October 22, 2020 Re: Viability of a Grocery Store and Market Optimal Scale of Retail for the 4th and Cabrillo Project in Santa Ana, CA __________________________________________________________________________________________________ In August 2020, The Concord Group (“TCG”) completed a highest and best use analysis for the 4th and Cabrillo project in Santa Ana. It was TCG’s conclusion that the current plan set forth by the developer, which includes 644 apartments and 15,200 square feet of retail, is the highest and best use for the property. Per preliminary feedback from the Planning Commission, we understand the City would like further explanation with regards to two key conclusions in the analysis: 1. A grocery store is not supportable on site; 2. The +/- 15,000 square feet of retail planned is the maximum marketable retail square footage that the project can support. Grocery Store A grocery store is not viable in the project. Grocery stores require: (1) a high degree of marketing visibility; (2) high density of nearby rooftops with strong incomes; and (3) and convenient accessibility. 1. With regards to point 1, the project possesses attractive visibility along 4th Street, with up to 30,000 cars passing by the site daily. However, with regards to points 2 and 3, the project fails. 2. The density of rooftops and associated incomes is insufficient to attract a grocery tenant. Within a one-mile radius of the project, there are only 9,800 households, with incomes well below the County median. 3. Only in the most urban settings (ie. downtown Los Angeles, Santa Monica), will grocery operators consider structured parking for their shoppers. Grocery shoppers seek “easy in / easy out” accessibility. The large amount of surface parking required for a grocery store would render the mixed-use character of the project financially infeasible. Scale of Retail The current scale of retail planned for the project is the maximum that can be supported on the site. There are several marketing concerns limiting the market viability of more retail on site: 1. There is limited demand for new retail in the site’s trade area. Over the last ten years, only 100,000 square feet of retail has been added, with no improvements to retail occupancy during the timeframe. 2. Secondly, successful, large-scale commercial shopping destinations require anchor tenancy – typically a grocery – which is not viable on site. Anchor tenants are the “draw” that attract consumers to the smaller, in-line tenant spaces. 3. Lastly, while mixed-use retail and residential is common in the most densely populated urban settings, a large scale of ground floor retail is not viable in a suburban setting. TCG surveyed three mixed-use projects in Orange County, with ground level retail footprints ranging from 8,500 to 14,000 square feet. Two of the three projects were considered distressed, with elevated rates of retail vacancy (54% and 70%). Like the subject, each mixed-use analog lacks an anchor tenant magnet to attract consumers. In summary, TCG considers the current land plan to be the highest and best use for the 4th and Cabrillo site. * * * The above assignment was completed Michael Reynolds and David Prokopenko. Should you have any questions regarding the data or conclusions generated by the analysis, feel free to contact us at (949) 717-6450. 1 - 288 EXHIBIT 16 1 - 289 130 Newport Center Drive, Ste. 230 Newport Beach, CA 92660 CENTRAL POINTE, 4th St. & Cabrillo Park Sunshine Ordinance Meeting Meeting Minutes Date & Time: Thursday, August 15, 2019, 6:00 PM Location: Creekside Plaza, 505 N. Tustin Ave., Suite 243, Santa Ana, Ca 92705 Purpose: Community meeting in compliance with the Sunshine Ordinance for Central Pointe at 4th St. & Cabrillo Park in Santa Ana In Attendance: City Representatives: Vince Fregoso, Selena Kelaher, Scott Kutner, Mark McLoughlin Applicant: Sean Rawson and Consultant Team (KTGY/Architect, MJS/Landscape Architect and Debra Pember/Asst. Project Manager Members of the Public: 15 members were in attendance The meeting began at approximately 6:05 pm. Sean Rawson, the applicant, introduced himself and his team. He provided an overview of the proposed project with a power point slide presentation, illustrating the conceptual elevations, floor plans, finishes, amenities and open space. It was emphasized that this is only a conceptual plan at this time. This is the first opportunity to get public feed-back. The following information was shared, followed by questions and comments.  Project Zoning: The intent of the MEMU (Metro East Mixed-Use Overlay District) was explained and how the project complies with the zoning.  Type of Project: 650 unit mixed-use residential project located in the Active Urban District. The mixed-use will include retail space on the first floors facing 4th Street. The project will create 500 jobs and bring $36 million to the City in short-term income.  Project has just recently been submitted to the City and no City feedback has been received since submittal.  Project Amenities: The Landscape Architect, Matt Jackson, described the green open space open to the public and some of the roof top amenities that will be available to the residents, such as pools, fitness and clubrooms. A dog park is also being planned for the residents.  Number of Units: Two buildings that total 650 luxury apartment units for rent, made up of studio units, one, two and some three-bedroom units. It was emphasized that this is conceptual as this point in time, until public and City feedback is received. 1 - 290 Central Pointe, 4th St. & Cabrillo Park August 15, 2019 Sunshine Ordinance Community Meeting Page 2 Questions, Comments, Answers:  Q. Target demographics? A. Millennial renters and empty nesters. Project will also comply with HOO (Housing Opportunity Ordinance).  Q. Will there be affordable units on site? A. Reviewed options that support HOO and which option to pursue is being considered and not yet determined.  Q. What types of businesses will occupy the retail component? A. Too soon to determine. Generally, the project needs to be built first and marketing for tenants will follow.  Q. When will the project be started? What is the time frame for completion? A. We just started the entitlement process, which could take 10 to 12 months. After project is approved, the construction document phase starts, which with plan check, could take 8 to 10 months and then 30 months to build out.  Q. Concern over dust impacts during construction. A. The EIR will identify all impacts and have specific requirements for mitigation.  Q. Parking concerns: 650 units is 1,400 cars; project will have 2-3 residents per unit. What is the parking? Concern over parking spilling over into the neighborhoods (like Mabury cul-de-sacs) where not enough parking currently exists. Need to increase parking ratio. Is there parking onsite? What about visitors parking? What about parking for the retail? A. Parking is 1.82 spaces per unit and is consistent with the zoning. There is a parking structure for each building; it’s considered a wrap design. We’re hearing your concerns and the parking will be further studied through the entitlement period.  Q. Concerns over traffic: Number of cars per unit; 650 units is 1,400 cars. Concerns with traffic using Mabury as a thorough fare to and from 17th St. A. A traffic study is being done. Everyone’s comments and concerns will be considered and addressed.  Q. Queuing going west on 4th St. is already difficult. How will this affect that? A. An additional traffic lane is being added.  Q. Will there be consideration to add a bus route on 4th St.? Is it transit oriented? A. That’s a question more for CalTrans. However, we are considering a shuttle service to/from the train station.  Q. Will there be a sound wall along the freeway side? A. We don’t know yet. Those are details that still need to be worked out through the process.  Q. Utility poles, what’s the status? A. They’ll be undergrounded. 1 - 291 Central Pointe, 4th St. & Cabrillo Park August 15, 2019 Sunshine Ordinance Community Meeting Page 3  Q. What is the roadway to west used for (on site plan)? A. That’s actually a gated access for emergency vehicles only.  Q. What is the sidewalk width going to be around the project? A. Not sure exactly, but those details will follow.  Q. Will there be security on site? A. Some areas will be gated.  Q. How far was the outreach? 500’ is not enough, doesn’t cover everyone. Should consider reaching out to neighboring communities. One couple talked about how they found out about the meeting through “Next Door”. When is next meeting? How was it posted? A. Rules were followed within the City’s guidelines for Sunshine Ordinance. It was posted in the paper, meeting notices mailed and posted signs on the property.  Signs should also be posted at the Mabury curve.  Q. When is the next meeting? A. The next meeting with the community will be hosted after the traffic study is complete.  Q. What kind of landscaping is being proposed? (Desi) I don’t like palm trees; they get tall and lose their value. I think you should plant pine trees; also wants boulders and some type of public art. A. Matt Jackson, project’s landscape architect addressed the question. Tall, fuller type trees, vegetation will be placed along the freeway and other areas. However, typically, palm trees work well along storefronts or other commercial buildings, because they don’t have a tendency to hide the signage.  Q. Could you please bring more displays? A. Yes, definitely.  Q. Will we be kept informed of all activities? A. Yes.  Q. Could we have the next community meeting at the Cabrillo Park, maybe the tennis court area? A. Yes, we’ll work on that.  Additional comment: Desi stated his concerns, but added that “overall, likes the project”. Meeting adjourned approximately 7:15 PM 1 - 292 1 - 293