The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Bill 4.F Part 3 07/14/2003ZANDER ASSOCIATES Environmental Consultants • • March 14, 2003 Mr. Matt Hudson Hudson & Scharer Realty 6 Petaluma Boulevard. North, Suite. B. -11 Petaluma, CA. 94952 Biological Resources Reconnaissance Gatti Nursery Properly Petaluma, California Dear Matt: Vi ` +_JJ'l4�� !�::��Gl� Zander Associates visited the Gatti Nursery property on April 26, 2002 to evaluate the site's general biological resource characteristics relative to a proposal for build out of the site in conformance with the Corona -El S' ecific Plan. Prior to our visit we consulted the California Drversit Data Base CNDDB. and other back ound sources to determine Natural y ( y p ) gr what species of special - status plants and animal's had been recorded in the general project area. During our visit, we systematically checked all areas of the site to characterize general habitat conditions, with an emphasis on any areas that might support any of these species. Following is our preliminary assessment. General Site Characteristics The property comprises approximately 17.25 acres located along° Sonoma Mountain Parkway just northwest of the Santa Rosa Junior College Petaluma campus near the northeastern corner of the City of Petaluma. Capri Creek, an, ephemeral tributary to the Petaluma River borders the site on the southeast side, defining the property boundary with the junior college. Recently developed .,and developiing'iesidential and commercial areas are, located westerly and. southerly of the site, with remaining rural'undeveloped lands beyond the northerly property line. The site has °been, and,continues to be used as a commercial wholesale nursery with rows of large greenhouses and - related buildings covering most of the property. The access road to the ' Creek which � d pines, probably planted for visual introduced ornamental Capri is dined with a vane of non n g . tY site parallels Ca _ n Cr Benin and windbreak acacias, cypresses an p , p y p g trees including a purposes. A taller ro i of cypress, probably planted for the same reasons, s located along: the top w . (northeasterly boundary) of the property. A man-made water storage pond and pumphouse are located adjacent to this. row of cypresses above the greenhouses along the northerly boundary of the :site. The pond and the; Capri Creek drainage channel are the primary areas on the property that might be considered of some value as habitat. The large cypress could also potentially_ 150 Ford Way,-Suite 101, Novato, CA 94945 Mr. Matt Hudson March 14, 2003 Page 2 Zander Associates support nesting raptors ,(birds .of prey). Otherwise, what little undeveloped land remains on the site is best characterized as nursery yard area supporting ruderal habitat dominated by non- native grasses and weeds. Water Storage Pond The pond is an approximately 100 ft. by 200 ft. rectangular basin of undetermined that was excavated over 20 years ago to provide water storage for the nursery operation. The interior banks ofthe pond are relatively steep (greater than 21 slope,) with a continuous perimeter fence around the. top of the bank. A well and pump house adjacent to the pond supply groundwater that is stored in the pond and replenished, as the water.,level drops (through the operation of `a float valve). Common non- native pasture grasses and other native and rion- rative herbaceous plants such as dock ()?umex crispus and R. acetosella), knotweed (Polygonum sp.), and rabbitsfoot grass (Polypogon monspeliensis) have colonized the banks of the pond, and some aquatic plants like rushes (Scirpus sp.) and cattails (Typha sp) are rooted below the "waterline. The,pond has been stocked with bass and is often.a.destination for unauthorized fishing, (Ric_ h Gatti, pers. comm.). The pond also attracts a range of waterfowl. .Capri. Creek The line of non - native trees along the °northwest side of Capri Creek provide some limited:cover along the creek channel, but do not constitute �a natural riparian habitat. The. creek was - dry at the time of the. site visit and appears to 'sustain flow only in response to storm" events. Little developed stream = related habitat or hydrophytic (moisture- tolerant) vegetation; was ob served .in the channel adjacent to the property. However, downstream :along the entrance, drive to. the site; more abundant wetland plants, including, clumps of low - growing willows (Salix sp.). were seen in the channel and other small treessuch;as live oaks (Quercus agrifolia) -;and buckeyes (Agsculus californica) were growing on the adjacent banks. It appears that efforts at stream restoration, or at least native landscaping, have been underway on the junior college side of the channel:: oak trees and other native species indigenous to the area have been planted along the banks on the south side of the creek. Special- Status Plant. Species We did not observe any special- status plants or areas on the.site thatmight support habitat. for any of the plant species ,listed by CNDDB or otherwise known from the general vicini Given the disturbed and developed nature of the site. no special- status plant species are expected to occur on the Gatti Nursery property. Special Status Animal Species Three special- status; animals, the California red - legged frog (Rana aurora. draytonii)', the California tiger, salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum californiense) and the westerntpond turtle (Glemmys marmorata), have been recorded from•ponds and other aquatic'habitats in the greater Petaluma (and southern . Sonoma County) area. Those records are typically from naturally Mr. Matt Hudson March 14, 2003 Page 3 Zander Associates Y for the California ti onded areas , usualh (f6 the'red- legged frog and the P western pond turtle) and pools ( s or water courses g salamander). The pond above the greenhouses on the Gatti Nursery property is an artificially excavated reservoir on high ground isolated from any watercourse and supplied by pumped groundwater. The pond is exposed and does,, not., support well- developed aquatic or woody bank vegetation that could provide cover for red- legged-frogs or pond turtles, nor would the adjacent developed nursery property provide suitable retreat opportunities for the California tiger salamander. Finally, the pond supports a population of bass that would pose a serious threat (through aggressive predation of larvae and young) to the successful colonization of these species. These conditions make it highly unlikely that any of these aquatic species could successfully become established in the pond. The reach of Capri Creek along the southeastern property line appears: to provide only marginally aquatic habitat in response to storms. While we cannot dismiss the possibility that aquatic species like the red- legged frog might use the drainage course, primarily as a movement corridor, the likelihood is low. The absence of sustained flows in the creek, its lack of well developed cover and its isolation. (passing as it does through developed, parts of Petaluma) and distance from the Petaluma River make this reach of Capri Creek less'than>an ideal migration corridor. Conclusions We understand that specific plan build out of the Gatti Nursery property will not extend into the area where the water supply, pond is located and that there will be a 70 -foot setback from Capri Creek. While we believe that use' of the pond area for other purposes would not necessarily compromise any significant aquatic habitat values and probably would be exempt from formal regulation as a wetland, maintaining the pond as an amenity for'the area could also provide an opportunity for enhancement of its habitat. Riparian and wetland vegetation could be planted on its banks and oak woodland elements could be introduced along the top of the berm to provide a buffer between developed area& and` the pond. Continued groundwater pumping would be required to maintain the aquatic conditions in the pond and the bass population could either be retained or eliminated, depending on management goals. The 70 -foot setback.from Capri Creek seems ample, given.the nature of the resource at this location. The setback, also allows an opportunity to introduce amore natural habitat along the project side of "this reach of the creek corridor. The line of non - native trees along the channel should bey removed and replaced. with native trees and shrubs adapted to local conditions. Other measures,(e.g. trails., split rail fencing) could further enhance the aesthetics of the area and better define the riparian corridor. If construction on the site is scheduled to commence during the spring or early summer months, the larger cypress trees at the top of the site should be checked by a qualified biologist to assure that no . p a need to be established e ed, appropriate setbacks g Y from the trees or modified scheduling tu bed. If active nests are o se consultation with the biologist. Mr. Matt Hudson March 14, 2003 Page 4 Zand&'Associates' We trust that this preliminary assessment will allow you to proceed with. your City processing. Zander Associates remains available to assist you with follow -up activities .as directed. Please call us if you have any questions Sincerely M all Zander . Principal Copies furnished: Pete Dellavalle Kleinfelder Tiffany Robb, City of Petaluma • 4; Y 1 Robert S. Harris (707) 571 -8961 Voice (707) 571 -8688 Fax I I LLLLA I I l Harris & Lee Environmental Sciences P. O. Box 8369 Santa Rosa, CA 95407 Jack M. Lee Voice (707) 766.9242 Fax (707) 766` 80 36 Environmental Site Assessment, Phase 1 Investigation 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway Petaluma, California APN 137 - 070 -079 Prepared for. Mardell, LLC 2552 Stanwell Street, Suite 203 Concord, California 94520 Prepared by: Harris & Lee Environmental Sciences Robert S. Harris, REA #4966 i March 7, 2002 =ws.` AUG 2 9 2001 PLANNCNIC, ;_ Mt".xiOINS' Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page H 710 Sonoma Mountain. Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- iv 2.0 INTRODUCTION ------------------- - - - - -- --------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -1 2.1 Purpose --------- --- ---------------------- ------- - --- ---------------------- ��----------- - - - - -1 2.2 Scope of Services------------------------------------------------ -- =---------------------- - - - - -1 2.3 Significant Assumptions -------------------------------------==------------------------ - - - --2 2.4 Limitations and Exceptions ----------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -3 2 .5 User Reliance --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -3 2.6 Involved Parties ------- ---------------------- - ------------------------ - ------- - --- =-- ---------------- 3 3.0 GENERAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS ------- --- ----- --- --------------- -- ----- - --------------- ---- ------- 3 3.1 Site Locations and Legal Description ------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -4 3.2 Site and Vicinity General Characteristics--------- - - - - -- ---------------------- - - - - -4 3.3 Current Use of the Property - ----------------------------------------------=------------ - - - - -4 3.4 Descriptions of Improvements --- -------------- - ---- -- ---- - ---- ---- _-- ---- --- ------------- 4 3.4.1 Structures ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - 4 3.4.2 Roads ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - --4 3.4.3 Sewage Disposal ---------------------------- ------- -- ------------------ - --------------- 5 3.4.4 Water Supply------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -5 3.4.5 Heating and Cooling Systems ------------------------------------------------ - - - - -5 3.4.6 Utilities-------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -5 3.5 Current Use of the Adjoining Properties---------------------------------------------- - - - - -6 4.0 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION ------------ ------------- ---- ---- - - --- -- ------------------- - - - - -7 4.1 Title Records / Environmental Liens / Use Limitations ---------------------------------- - - - - -7 4.2 Valuation Reduction °for Environmental Issues------------------------------------------ - - - - -7 4.3 Owner, Property Manager and Occupant Information -- -------------- - - - - -7 4.4 Reason for Performing .Phase I ---=--------------------------------------------------- - - - - -7 5.0 RECORDS REVIEW ------------- -------- - ----------------------- -- ---------------------- - ------- - --------- 7 5.1 Standard Environmental Record Sources --------------- ------ =------------------ - ------------- 8 5.2 Additional Environmental Record Sources----------------------------=----------------- - - - -11 5.3 Physical Setting----------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - -11 5.3.1 Regional Physiographic Conditions ---------------------------------------- - - - -11 5.3.2 Soil Conditions=--- ------- - ------------------ ----------------- --- ------------------- 12 5.3.3 Geologic Conditions ---------------------------------------------------------- - - - -12 5.3.4 Groundwater Conditions ------------------------------------------------------ - - - -13 5.4 Results of Site History, and Land Use Review------------------------------------ - - - -14 5.4.1 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps 14 5.4:2. City Directory------------------------------------------------------ - - - -14 5.4.3 County and City Records Review---------------------------------- - - - -15 5 .4.4 Personal' Interviews-------------------------------------------- - - - -17 5:4:5 Aerial Photographs 17 5.4.6 Synopsis of Previous and Current Environmental Investigations -------- - - -1!8 6.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE ------- - ------ - ----------- -- -------- - --- - ----------- _-- _------- - - - -18 6.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions--=--------------- - - - - -- ----------- - - -1'9 6.2 General Site Setting -------------------------------------------------------- - - - -19 6 .3 Subject Property----------------------------------------------------------------- - - - -19 6.4 Adjacent Properties -- ----------- ---- - - - - -- ------------------ __--------- - - - -21 7.0 INTERVIEWS -=---------------=----------------- - - - - -- ---------------- - - - - -- 21 7.1 Interviews with Owner,and Site Manager ---- 21 7.2 Interviews-with Local Government Officials---- ____�____ 7.3 Interviews with Others ----------- ---- -- - -- ---------- - - - -22 8.0 FINDINGS ------------------------------------- - - - - -- --- --------- - _-- __ - - -- 22 9 .0 CONCLUSIONS--------------------------------- -- - - -- ---------------------- - - - - -- 22 10.0 OPINION --------------------____------------__---- ------ - ----- -- ----- ------ - - - -22 D:\ PROJECTS \HUDSON \710SON. OMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY = 710.DOC Phased Environmental Site Assessment 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 AP N: 137- 070 -079 Page iii 11.0 DEVIATIONS --- ----=---------------=------------ - - -:23 12.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES - - -- ---------------=------------------------------------- - - - -23 1 REFERENCES ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 23 111 Puklished References---------------------------------------------------------- - --- -- -- =23 13.2 Unpublished References------ - - - - -- --------------------------------------------- - - - -24 14.0 QUALIFICATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS ---------- — -------- — -------------- 25 List of Exhibits: Exhibit A: Site (Vicinity) Map Exhibit B: Assessor's Parcel Map Exhibit C: USGS 7.5- Minute Topographic Map, Exhibit D: Site Photographs Exhibit E; His Aerial'�Photographs Exhibit F: Restricted Materials P,ermit,,Agric. Commissioner's Office Exhibit G: Environmental Data Resources Radius Reports • 0 • DAPROJECTS \HUDS014\710 sONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA'MT PARKVVAY_710.130C Phase l Environmental Site'A "ssessrhent Page Iv 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway,'Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Pursuant to the request and assignment of Mardel LLC,, Harris & Lee Environmental Sciences has performed a `Phase I Environmental Site,, Assessment on the property identified as Sonoma County Assessor's Parcel Number 137- 070 -079 in the City of Petaluma, County of Sonoma, California. The street address for this property is 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, California 94954. The purpose of this report is to provide information as to the Recognized Environmental Conditions on or near the aforementioned property. This Environmental Site Assessment follows the guidelines established by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) in the document entitled "Standard Practice for 'Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process" and designated. E 1527 -00. The Scope of Service for this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment consists of four overall tasks: ➢ Task I: Research and review of regulatory information. Task Il: A site reconnaissance of subject and nearby property. ➢ Task Ill: Interviews of persons with knowledge of subject and surrounding property. ➢ Task IV: Preparation of the final Environmental Site Assessment report. The use of the property has been as a hay growing pasture for most of the recorded history of the property-. From approximately 1980 the property was developed as part of a commercial nursery operation in which ornamental. plants, principally azaleas were propagated. Harris & Lee Environmental Sciences has performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Standard of Practice E 1527 -00 of the property identified as APN 137 -070 -079; the street address is 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, California 94954. This assessment has ,revealed no Recognized Environmental Condition in connection with the property as defined by the ASTM (Section 2.1 of this report). This report is governed by the Limitations set forth in Sections 2.4 and 2.5 of this report. This Executive Summary is not to 'be used without the accompaniment of the entire report. D: \PROJECTS \HUDSON \710 SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY ' 71 Phase I Environmental Site "Assessment Page 1 71'0 Parkway, Peta.I.uma,;CA'94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.1 Purpose Pursuant to the request and assignment of Mardel LLC, 'Harris & Lee Environmental Sciences has performed a Phase [Environmental, Site Assessment on the property identified as Sonoma County Assessor's Parcel Number 137 -070 -079 in the City of Petaluma, California. The street address for this property is 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, California 94954. The purpose of this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is to provide information as to the Recognized Environmental `Conditions on or near the subject property noted above. Recognized Environmental Conditions are defined with respect to the range of contaminants within the scope of -the Comprehensive 'Environmental Response, 'Compensation and Liability Act ( CERCLA) and petroleum products. This Environmental Site Assessment follows the guidelines established by the American Society for Testing and Materials :(ASTM) in he� document entitled "Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process" and designated E 1527=00. Recognized Environmental. Conditions are defined as: The presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any' hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures on the property ror into the ground, ground water, or surface water of the property., The term includes hazardous substances or petroleum products even under conditions in compliance with laws. 'The term is not intended to include de minimis conditions that generally do not present a material risk of harm to public health or the environment and ' that generally would' not:be the subject of an enforcement action ; if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies!, Conditions determined to be de °minimis are not` recognized environmental conditions. " (ASTM E 1527 -00 & E 15281.1.1) Pursuant to the ASTM E -1527 Standard of Practice, Recognized Environmental Conditions do not include Asbestos Containing Materials or Lead -base paint or other non - CERCLA related conditions (i.e.., regulatory compliance, wetlands, indoor air quality, :etc.). 2.2 Scope ofServices The Scope of Services for this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment consists of four overall tasks! D:TROJECTSIHUDSON1710 SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY 71O.DOC Phase l Environmental Site Assessment Page 2 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 AP N: 137- 070 -079 ➢ Task I: Research and review of regulatory information. ➢ Task 11: A site reconnaissance of subject and ,nearby properties., ➢ Task III: Interviews of persons with knowledge of subject and 'surrounding property. ➢ Task IV: Preparation of the final Environmental Site Assessment `report: The Scope of Services for this Phase, 1, Environmental Site Assessment. follows - the Standard Practice for Environmental Site, Assessments designated as E 152,7 -00 of the ASTM. Accordingly, the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is targeted towards the range. of contaminants within the scope of- the Comprehensive Environmental 'Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERC,LA) and petroleum. products, As such, all appropriate inquiry into the previous ownership, and uses of the property 'consistent with good. commercial or customary practice" as 'defined in 42 USC 960'1,(35)(6). is applied. However, an evaluation .of business environmental risk associated with :a parcel of commercial .real estate may necessitate investigation beyond -that identified in this assessment..,. The Scope rof' Services includes observations for Recognized Environmental Conditions, as, well as information that can be obtained from regulatory files that: are obtainable without investigation into archives of the various : agencies. Accordingly, it cannot be, guaranteed that all files are examined or, that every contingency is. investigated. These limitations. are in conformance with the stated guidelines of ASTM Standard 'of Practice E 1527 -00 Sections 7.1.4.1, 7.1.4.2 and 7.1.4.3: The Records Review includes. files available at State, County, and City° Offices listed in Section r5.2 of this :report. In some cases .the status of a site is determined from telephone interviews of staff persons of these offices. The site reconnaissance consists of the subject property and the ideptification . of nearb properties. Interviews are conducted of persons reasonably available at the time of the site reconnaissance, and on occasion, by telephone when such interviews., are. possible.. The report 'follows the guidelines of the ASTM E- 1527 -00 Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. The,. Scope of Services for this Phase 'I Environmental 'Site Assessment 1does not include analysis of. Asbestos, Containing. Materials (ACM), although if obvious visual indications of ACM are observed, they are reported'. Neither does the Scope of Services, include analysis, of the building constituents for Lead based paint or other" non- CERC.LA related conditions (i.e., regulatory compliance,, wetlands,, indoor air quality, etc.). If there is suspicion that`those substances or conditions may be present; professionals licensed to assess their presence should be contacted. Harris & Lee Environmental Sciences can supply referenced for =such professioonals, if requested: 2.3 Significant Assumptions The ,Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is intended to assess the environmental conditions - of a specific parcel of comm ercial real estate. It is'intended to constitute D :\PROJECTS \HUDSON \710 SONOMA MTN PRKWY\S.ONOMA MT PARKWAY 710:DOb 1 � U Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page 3 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137 -070 -079 appropriate inquiry for purposes of CERCLA s innocent;,aandowner defense; however, it is not intended to be limited to that purpose. This Phase I is intended to reflect a commercially prudent and reasonable inquiry designed `to recognized environmental conditions in connection with, a. property. 2.4 Limitations and Exceptions The Scope of Services performed to complete this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment _was limited in nature. While we consider work of this type to be valuable in the preliminary evaluation of potential hazardous materials or waste at the site, we also must alert the Client thati this study may not reveal hazardous materials releases that have occurred. Also, the, site conditions can change with time, and our assessment was not intended to predict future site conditions. Because. of the limited nature of this assessment, this report is not a'ri.sk assessment and the Scope of Services does not include a determination of the extent of business environmental risk nor the public health impact of, known or suspected hazardous materials or wastes. This service has been performed in accordance with generally accepted environmental investigation practices for similar investigations conducted at, this time and' in this geographic area. No' other guarantees or warranties, expressed or implied are provided. It is understood by the parties hereto that the Client who has requested this assessment will use the assessment (in addition to other information) to provide information to a lender, investors in the property, for the purposes of refinancing or purchasing said property or to satisfy regulatory agency requirements. Consultant intends no other use or disclosure. Client a' tees g to hold Consultant harm less'for any inverse condemnation or devaluation of said property that may result if the. Consultant's report or information generated is used for other purposes. Also, this report is issued with the understanding that it is to be used only in its entirety. 2.5 User Reliance Only ;Mardel ; ,LLC may rely upon this report. No other person or entity may have reliance upon this report without the express written consent of Harris & Lee Environmental Sciences. 2.6 Involved Parties The parties involved in th proposed transaction are Mardel LLC who retained Harris & Lee Environmental Sciences to conduct this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and,Richard Gatti, Gatti's Nursery Inc., the property owner as of the date of this report. 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION D: \PROJECTS \HUDSON \710 SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY 71 Phase .I Environmental Site Assessment 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 AP N: 137- 070 -079 3.1 Site Locations and. Legal Description Exhibit,A is a 'vicinity map of the general area of subject property. Exhibit B presents an Assessor's Parcel: Map for the' subject property. The Assessor's Parcel Number is 137= 070 -079. The 'total size of the parcel `is approximately 17.3 acres. The legal description of this easement may be found in'the title report for the subject property and is not included in this report. 3.2 Site and''Vici 'ity General Characteristics The subject, property is located in the city limits of Petaluma on the .east side of U S. Highway 101.. It is approximately 0.9 mile to'the northeast of U'. S. Highway 101, 1.3 miles northwest of East Washington Avenue, and approximately 0.75 mile southeast of Corona Road. The :site is within `the riortheastem section of Petaluma City' limits. The general characteristic of the. property's vicinity is rural residential and` agricultural surrounded by newer single- family residential' developments. The subject property's zoning designation is.Agriculture. 3.3 Current; Use .of the Property 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway is the address of a commercial wholesale nursery known as Gatti';Nursery Inc. This business grows houseplants in greenhouses and sells Wholesale to retailers. Mr. : Richard Gatti purchased the vacant property in 1978. In 1980, Mr Gatti built the present nursery and moved ;his existing nursery business from San Francisco to the present .location, Gatti ,Nursery grows :and propagates houseplants, primarily assorted: varieties of azaleas. 3.4 Descriptions of Improvements 3.4.1 Structures Gatti Nursery o.ccupies.approxirnately six.acres of the 17.25 acres (APN #137- 070 -079). Their entire operation is conducted inside of a warehouse and 27 greenhouses. No residential units are on this property: 3.4.2 Roads r Sonoma :Mountain Parkway is a divided 'four -lane roadway that traverses front, the northwest to the southeast at the junction of the subject property. Parkway Plaza, a neighborhood pp` g nter is at the corner of Sonoma Mountain Parkway and Riesling Road. At this junction, Sonoma Mountain Parkway veers to the west and Ely Road continues northwest. Page 4 DAPROJECTSWUDSON17fO sONOMA,MTN PRKWYWNOMA,MT`;PARKWAY_710'.DOC Phase I Environmental. Sit Page 5 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 The nearest cross street is approximately. 1000 feet northwest at Riesling Road. The nearest cross street to the southeast is about 1100 feet at Rainier Circle. 3.4.3 Sewage Disposal Sewage disposal is'by septic tank and leach field system; the leach field is located in the urban separator west of the subject'property. Mr. Gatti previously owned this land; it is now owned by the City of Petaluma and is designated to be parkland. A series of storm drains are located :along the downspouts around the perimeter of the greenhouses. There .are, also storm drains located- 'inside of each greenhouse. The storm drains collect rainwater and drainage water, which 'is routed through a series of underground pipes into the 'nearby Capri Creek. Caprir Creek is located along the southeast property line. 3.4.4 Water Supply The drinking water supply is from an individual well. A water reservoir, a pump house, and a well house are also present at the subject property. The water reservoir holds • approximately 1,250,000: gallons. The water from the reservoir is used to provide irrigation water for the nursery. The reservoir is fenced all around. An eight -inch diameter well with a total depth of 456 feet deep is the main source of water for the reservoir and for domestic purposes. The well is located inside a shed next to the power generator shed. A water tank with associated pumps constitutes the drinking water system. Water from the well is untreated. ;Routine microbiological testing of the water quality has consistently been reported to ' be . negative with respect to coliform bacteria. Chemical quality parameters have never been tested. 3.4.5 Heating and cooling systems Hee tin4and Cooling- system A total of 54 overhead heaters serve the greenhouses, two heaters for each greenhouse. Cooling is by natural ventilation and by mechanical fans. The greenhouses are constructed such that panels may be mechanically opened. There are two Valk-in coolers with compressors. Both are maintained at 40 F; these walk -in coolers serve to retard or control the bloom period of the azalea plants. 3.4.6 Utilities The greenhouses have overhead natural gas heaters in addition to natural heat from the greenhouse effect. i DAPROJEGTS \HUDSON\710 SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY_710:130C Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page 6 710 SonomaWounta - in Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137-070-079 There are three large transformers on asingle power pole located along the southeast property line., These transformers are unlabelled. Unlabelled transformers: usually indicate the transformers have not been tested for PCBs. Generally transformers owned by !Pacific Gas & Electric and installedafter 1979 were of the non-PCB ty pe.. An emergency generator is located in a shed near the water well Shed;, The -emergency generator has a. 60-65-gallon capacity diesel fuel tank. The - design of the generator is such that the . sits on to of the ;diesel tank, Which is constructed' - with he steel plate of about, 3 /16. inch thickness (Mr. Steye, Phillips). This tank design: is of a type known as a, "Skid tank." The base of the tank serves as the main foundation for the generator. The entire system : sits on top of concrete paid. The present.:,gqnerator is a "rebuilt". generator and :is about one year old. It replaced an older similar type generator that Was in USefor approximatelyzix years. The emergency generator is. operated less than one hour per month. 3.5 Current Use of the Adjoihihg Properti,es The table 'below lists the current adjoining, properties and their uses as listed in the Sonoma County Astessor's Office, Table 1'. List of Adjoining Properties Dirdctidn F A _PN Ad0ress Recorded Owner F_STz_e_ F Ulst Site 7O 7 — 1- 71 0,Sonoma ursery. Inc. 1 7 . 2 5 5 'Wholesale nursery [ 7 'Mountain .Ac r es Parkway (PE) Northwest 909. Mustang 137-070- F F Rohald: Hayes .Malone et [ 2.4 Rural Residential I 019 Ct. (UN) al Acres L Granny Unit East rlWF-120- 680, 'Sonoma Santa Rosa: Junior 39. 6 , 6 �' Crops [76 071' Mo untain untain College District, Acre [Field Acres Parkway (PE)" South Sonoma 120' Public Street Mountain wide 4- Parkway lane Street. South (PE) o _ ok Subdivision Single family dwelling West 1 0 So'hdma o Petaluma 2.0 Vacant city land, 060 Mountain Acres Parkway (PE) West 137- 070 - 0 Sonoma City of Pe"ta lu ma 2.65 C_ ity Park/other ,[074 Mountain [Acres [recreation facility Parkway (PE) West 1 37-070-, 0 Sonoma City Pack/other F 66 o Mountain Acres� recreation facility Parkway (PE) • D:\PROJECTSXHUDSON\710 SONOMA MTNRRKWY\SONOMA mf PARKWAY-7-10,.DOC TJ f 11i s;. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 710 Sonoma. Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, 'CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 F Diieci ion F APN - Address R ecorded. Owner Size Use West J �l 3 7 -070- 1900 Sestri Capri Creek Associates 470 Apartmerts: 41- 78 Lane (PE) LLC Acres 100 unit's West 137 -43 PE Herita a Subdivision Single family �- ( ) 9 � dwelling Y West l 137 -070- 071 (PEJ City of Petaluma 7.50 Ac r e s City Park/other recreation facility Abbreviation: (PE) Petaluma City Limits (UN)- Unincorporated, SonomwCounty 4.0 USER PROVIDED INFORMATION Page 7 The purpose of this section is to identify general tasks that will help identify .the possibility of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. These tasks do not require technical expertise and are not generally included in a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. These tasks are. generally the responsibility of the client. 4.1 Title Records / Environmental Liens / Use Limitations As of the date of this report, no environmental liens were discovered in connection with the subject property. First American Title Company provided a Preliminary Title Report for review. The report Order Number is 2169 and is dated November 27 2001. 4.2 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues No Appraisal Reports were provided for review. 4.3 Property Managers, and Occupant Information The owner and manager of the subject property is Richard Gatti. David and, Steven Gatti assist him. 4.4 " Reason for Performing Phase I This Environmental Site Assessment, Phase I Investigation is being performed as part of an overall due diligence process. 6.0 REC RD S REUIEVN The purpose of °the, record's review is to obtain and review records that will help identify recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property. DAPROJECTSIHUDSON1710 SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY_710.DOC Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page 8 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 5.1 Standard Environmental Record Sources The standard -environmental record sources were obtained through, ;a computer data bank search company, Environmental Data Resources, Inc. "of .Southport, Connecticut. Computer data bank searches for active,;, can be. extremely useful in locating, sites that may _have the potential to adversely impact the subject site. It is important to keep in mind that computer database searches provide general overview data and may not be precise in the data that is presented. ,Consequently., an investigator ;needs additional familiarity with active sites to properly interpret the data that is provided`. The . Environmental Data Resources -Report 'is dated February 8, 2002 with Inquiry Number: 73.3227.3s. The report accessed a number of active federal,,, ;state, and local databases. A comprehensive listing of government :records searched are listed 'in the Appendix. The pertinent lists of' the databases accessed and reviewed include the following. U.S. Federal Standard Databases: ➢ United States Environmental Protection Agency Superfund Sites (NPL). ➢ United States Environmental'' Protection Agency Potential Supefund Sites (CERCL"IS. and CERC- NFRAP). ➢ ERNS – Emergency Response NotificationSystem. ➢ Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System – Treatment; Storage and Disposal Facilities (RCRIS – TS LQ, SM). ➢ CORRACTS Corrective Action .Report identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity. California State Standard Databases. ➢ CAL -SITES —California Environmental, Protection Agency (CALEPA) Department of Toxic Substance Control: Annual Work Plan Program (AWP), this is the former Bond Expenditure Plan (BEP), Also included in this database are the potentially or confirm contaminafed sites..unde.r the Abandoned Site Program (ASPIS). ➢ CHMIRS –California Hazardous Material;Incident Report System. ➢ SWFILS - California Integrated Waste Management Board: this, database consists of active,, closed, and inactive Landfills and Disposal Sites. ➢ Toxic Pits – California State Water Resources :Control Board: This database is managed by the local Regional .Water Quality Control Board (RWOCB) and identifies :pits and bodies of `water sites suspected of containing hazardous substances where cleanup has not yet been completed. This program is also known as TPCA. ➢ WMUDS %SWAT - California State Water Resources Control Board: managed by the,local RWQCB. This program tracks the waste management units (solid''waste disposal' sit - es and facilities). Solid Waste Analysis Testing (SWAT) report summary information. 0 OAPROJECTS \HUOSONW%SONOMA.MTN PRKW`I\SONOMA MT'PARKINAY 71'O:DOC Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page 9 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway,. Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137 -070 -079 ➢ LUST - California State Water Resources Control Board: the local RWQCB manages this database. It is an inventory of reported leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Report. ➢ CORTESE — CALEPA Office of Emergency Information: these sites are designated by the State Water Resource Control Board (LUST database), the Integrated Waste Management Board (SWF /LS database), and the Department of Toxic Substance Control (Cal- Sites database)., ➢ CA FID UST - The Facility. Inventory Database (FID) contains a historical listing of active and inactive underground storage tank locations from the State Water Resource.Control Board. Refer to local /county source forcurrent data. ➢ HIS UST - The Hazardous Substance Storage Container Database is a historical listing of UST sites. California State Databases (ASTM Supplemental) ➢ CLEANERS A list of drycleaner related facilities that have EPA ID numbers. These are facilities with certain SIC codes: power laundries, family and commercial; garment pressing and cleaner's agents; linen supply; coin - operated laundries and cleaning; dry cleaning plants, except rugs; carpet and upholster cleaning; industrial launderers; laundry and garment services. ➢ SLIC — Local Regional Water Quality Control Board This database is the Spill • Leaks Investigation Cleanup (SLIC) and is classified as voluntarily cleanup status by the responsible party wifh RWQCB oversight. Relevant findings of. the EDR database search within the minimum radius search distance of the property as specified by ASTM E1527 -00, Section 7.2.1.1. U. S. Federal Databases (ASTM Standard) 1 mile----=---------- - - - - -- -- - 0 CERCLIS--------------- --- --- - ----- 0.5 mile-------------------=-------- : - -: -- 0. CERCLIS NFRAP ---- ------------- property; adjoining properties - - - - -.0 RCRIS TSD---------- --------- - - - - -- property; adjoining properties - - - -- 0 RCRIS_LQ,G --------------- --- - - - - -- property; adjoining properties - - - -- 0 RCRIS _SQG ---- =------------------- property; adjoining properties - - - -- 0 ERNS ------------------=------- - - - - -- property only -------------------- - - - - -- 0 CO R RACTS -=--=-------------- - - - - -- 1 mile------------------------------- - - - - -- 0 California. State Databases (ASTM Standard) Cal -Sites ----------=----------- - - - - -- 1 mile------------------------------ - - - - -- 0 Ca Bond Ex Plan 1 mile------------------- - - - - -- - 0 CHMIRS - - - == = - - - - -- � ---- - - - - =- property --------------------------- - - - - -- 0 SWF /LS= -- = -- - --- -------- - - - - -1 mile ------------------------------- - - - - -0 TPCA-:-------=-------- ------------- - -- 1 mile ----------------------------- - - - - -0 • WMUDS /SWAT -------- - - - - -- 0.5 mile ----- - - - - -- -------- --- - -- 0 CORTESE --------------------------- 1 mile---------- - - - - -- ------------- - - - - -- 7 LUST --------------------------- - - - - -- 0.5 mile --------------------------- - - - - -- 2 D: \PROJECTS \HUDSON \710 SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY 710 DM Phase l Environmental Site Assessment 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 CA FID UST------------------- - - - - -- property; adjoining properties - - -_- 0 HIS UST----==---------------- - - - - -- property; adjoining properties - - - -- 0 California State,Databases (ASTM Supplemental) CLEANERS -- --------=-------- - - = - -- 0.5 mile----------------------------- - - - - - 0 SL I C --- ----- --------------------------- 0.5 .mile -- - - - - -- - - - - - -- Proprietary Databases Coal' Gas Sites - -- mile----------- --------------------- - - - - -0 Summary of EDR Database Search Page 10 The Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) Report is included in thi& report. The relevant summary of those sites in 'the EDR report that are pertinent for the subject property are discussed :as follows: Subject Property The subject property is not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR. Surrounding .Properties U. S. Federal Databases (ASTM Standard) No surrounding sites-within the ASTM Standard radius were listed in the EDR Radius Report. California State Databases (ASTM Standard) C O RT E S E--------------------- - - - - -- 1 mile------------------------------- - - - - -- 7', LUST - - -- ---------------------- - - - - -- 0.5 mile ---------------------- - - ------ - -- 2 CORTESE: This database identifies. public drinking, water' wells with detectable <levels of contamination, hazardous substance sites selected for remedial action, , sites with known toxic material identified through the abandoned site assessment program, sites with USTs having .a reportable release and all solid -waste disposal facilities from which there is known migration. The source is the California Environmental Protection Agency /O.ffice of Emergency Information. A review of the - CORTESE .list, as provided by EDR, has revealed that there are 7 CORTESE sites within approximately one mile of the subject property. According to ASTM Standard .Practice, only LUST sites less than 0.5 7mile need to be further evaluated. Of the 7' sites listed., all are On 'thls database because they are listed as LUST sites. Six of the listed sites :are located greater than, 0.5 -mile from the subject property. The, one site less than. 0.5 -mile to the subject property is Empire Egg DAPROJECTMHUDSON\710 SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA :MTPARKWAY 7.10 DOC r Phase I Environmental Site Assessment'' 710'Sonoma..Mountain Parkway„ Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 Page 11 Company at, 539. Ely Roads This LUST site was closed,'in September , 14; 1992. None of the LUST sites on the CORTESE list are a threat to the subject property. LUST. The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports contain an inventory of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data come from the State Water Resources Control Board Leaking Underground' Storage Tank Information System. A review of the LUST lists, as provided by EDR, and dated August, 7, .2001 has revealed that there are two LUST .sites, within approximately 0.5 mile of the target property. Empire Egg pan is listed" Twice. The status of this site is listed as "Signed off, Com � remedial action completed or , deemed unnecessary." This site does not represent a likely threat to the subject property. California State Databases (ASTM"Supplemental) No surrounding sites within the ASTM Standard radius were listed in the EDR 'Radius Report. 5.2 Additional Environmental Record Sources Other sources contacted for information pertaining to the subject and nearby properties were as follows: ➢ United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX ➢ California Environmental Protection Agency, * Department of . Toxic Substances Control ➢ California Department of Water ' Resources, San Francisco Bay Region, Regional Water Quality Control Board ➢ County of Sonoma, Department of Health Services, Environmental Health Division ➢ County of .Sonoma; Agricultural Commissioner's Office Petaluma Fire -Marshal's, Office ➢ Petaluma Community Development Department 5.3 Physical?S'e'tting 5.3.1 Regional Physiograph`ic Conditions Exhibit. C is the , ,U. S. Geological Survey, Cotati 7.5- Minute Quadrangle topographic map. This topographic map indicates that the-subject property is primarily flat with a gentle slope to the .southwest. The site elevation ranges from approximately 84 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL) atIhe: east corner, 64 feet MSL at the north corner, 62 feet MSL at the west corner, and. 56 feet MSL at south corner near the driveway entrance from Sonoma Mountain Parkway. 1 D: \PR0JECTS \HUDS0N \710 SONOMA,MTN.PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY_71'0.130C' Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page 12 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 Capri; Creek borders the subject property to the southeast. Lynch Creek is approximately 0.8 -mile to the 'southeast: Corona Creek. is about 0.6 -miles to the northwest. All the .drainage systems are mapped' as intermittent streams that drain :into the Petaluma River, which is approximately 1.mile downstream. and to the: 5.3.2 Soil-Conditions Soil Survey, Sonoma County, California (U. S. Department of Agriculture) classifies the soil on this portion of the subject property area as predominantly in the Clear Lake series: The Clear Lake series: consists of, clays that formed under,' poorly drained conditions. These soils are underlain by alluvium from basic and sedimentary rock. More specifically, the classification of the subject property is predominantly. in Clear- Lake clay, 0 to 2 percent slopes (CeA). Description of the Clear Lake clay 'A" horizon ranges from dark gray to: black. in color and from strongly acid to neutral in reaction. The "C" horizon ranges from Ilght,brownish gray to gray to light gray and white in color and 'from( clay to sandy clay loam in texture: Lime is usually encountered in the upper "G" horizon. The gravel in the "C "' horizon is variable but not more than 15 percent: Permeability is slow. Runoff is slow,, and the, hazard of erosion is slight. This. soil, is -used mainly for oat= vetch hay or oat hay forfeeding cattle and horses. 5.3.3 Geologic' Conditions Geomorphic ,Provinces California is divided into eleven geomorphic provinces. The subject property in Sonoma County lies withih geomorphic province known as the Coast Range,, Thee California Division of Mines and Geology describes the Coast Range as follows: "The. Coast_ Range are mountain; ranges (2 occasionally 6,000 feet elevation above sea level) and valleys. The ranges and valleys trend northwest, ,subparallel`to the San Andreas Fault. The province terminates on the east, Where strata dip beneath alluvium of the Great. Valley; on the west by the Pacific Ocean with mountains rising sharply from uplifted and terraced, wave -cut coast on the north by South Fork Mountain,, which has the characteristic trend of the Coast Ranges, and on the south by the Transverse Ranges.. The Coast Ranges is composed of thick late Mesozoic and Cenozoic sedimentary strata. The northern and the southern ranges are:sepatated by a depression containing the San Francisco Bay. Offshore, the continental shelf is tra isected .by submarine canyons. The Monterey submarine, canyon, 10,000 feet deep, is apparently :a submerged ;river canyon. The no Coast R_arges are; dominated by irregular, knobby, landslide topography of the 'Franciscan Formation: The eastern border is characterized, by strike - ridges and valleys in Upper Mesozoic strata;. In several areas, Franciscan rocks are overlain 'by volcanic cones and flows of the- Quien S'abe Sonoma, 'and Clear Lake volcanic fields. The Coast Ranges is subparaflel to the rift UTROJECT&HUDSONV10,SONOMA MTN`PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY 710.DOC Phase l En*onmenfal Site Assessment Page 13 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway,, Petaluma, CA.94954 AP N 137 -070 -079 I _. valley of the active ;San Andreas 'Fault. The San Andreas is more than 600 miles long, extending from Pt. Arena to the Gulf of California.. The S.alinian block to the west of the San Andreas has a granitic core, extending from the southern extremity of the Coast Ranges to north of the Farallon. Islands." Based on review 'of the California Department of Water Resources Bulletin 118 -4, Evaluation of Ground Water Resources, Sonoma `County, Volume 3: Petaluma Valley 6/82, Meacham Hill Fault cross Ely Road /Sonoma Mountain Parkway near the subject property. To the southwest is Cinnabar School Fault. Groundwater Basin The subject property is located in the northern portion of the Petaluma Valley ground water basin. Based on review of the Geology of Petaluma Valley map, (Evaluation of Ground Water Resources: Sonoma County Volume 3': Petaluma Valley; Bulletin 118 -4, June 1982)., the area of the subject property is predominantly mapped as Alluvial Fan Deposits. Alluvial Fan Deposits of Pleistocene and Holocene age `form a. nearly continuous blanket over the northern Petaluma Valley and along the eastern edge of the southern Petaluma Valley. The deposits consist of poorly sorted coarse sand and gravel and moderately sorted fine sand, silt,,'�and silty clay; gravel content increases near the heads of the fans. Lenses of very fine sand within the alluvial fan deposits frequently cause sanding problems in water wells. This sand is similar to the very fine - grained sand present in the Merced Formation; the Merced may be, in part, a source of this alluvial fan sand. Minor amounts of methane gas have 'been noted in fan deposits. The gas may have risen from an underlying formation, such as the Merced, and been trapped within the fan deposits by overlying impermeable clay. 5.3:4 � Groundwater Conditions Based on review of the California Department of Water Resources Bulletin 118 -4, Evaluation of Ground r Water Resources, Sonoma County, Volume; 3: ; Petaluma Valley 6/82, the regional groundwater flow direction in the vicinity of the subject property is toward the south southwest and towards the Petaluma River determined during the Fall of 1980. The , Tegional ground water flow can vary seasonally. Water well identification system used by the State of California is based on Township, Range, and � Section: number referenced to the Mount Diablo" base and meridian. Utilizing this system, the subject property may be located as'Township 5 North, Range 7 West, Sectio 61and within the quarter- quarter section of M (T5NR7W16M). D:\ PROJECTS \HUDSON \71o MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY_710.DOC Phase I Environmental `Site Assessment Page '14 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 A review of the California. Department of Water Resources, Division of Planning and Local Assistance Website shows that there .are three nearby wells. The data `from these wells as they relate to the subject property are summarized below in Table 5.3:4:: Table 5.3.4. Water Level :data from nearby wells Well ID_- Elevation (Ft) above MSL High Water (Ft) Date ''Low Water (Ft) D r 16KR7W (155 12.7 x3/19/91 P6.0 T5NR7W- 118 22.0 1/29/9T 89:0 T5N R7VV- 65 21 H 27.4 3/19/91 32.7 (� T5NR7W- 16M Source: California Department of Water Resources; Divisioi http : / /well.Water.ca.gov/ 5.4 - Results of Site History Arfd Land Use Review The ASTM: standard requires a review of reasonabl ascertainable standard historical. sources. Reasona'bl ascertainable is defined ; as 'information that is publicly available, obtainable from a source with reasonable time and cost constraints,, and practically reviewable. The following standard. historical sources f or the subject; property were reviewed: Sanborn Fire Lnsurance Maps; City Directory, County Records Review, personal interviews, historical aerial photographs, and previous environmental investigations. 5.4.1 Sanborn Fire. Insurance Maps Environmental Data Resources (EDR) of Southport, Connecticut investigated the historic Sanborn Fire. Insurance. Maps; this report is documented, in, their EDR Sanborn Map Report dated February 8, 2002 with Inquiry Number: 733227.4S.: The EDR document reports that the largest and most comp ete` collection of Sanborn fire insurance maps has been reviewed, and fire insurance maps depicting: ahe subject property at'the address were notidentified'. The report prepared by EDR is attached to this Environmental Site Assessment as a component .of Exhibit G. 5.4.2 City'Directory D:IPROJECTS \HUDSON\71 O.SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY210.DOC Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070-079 Page 15 Environmental. Data Resources (EDR) of Southport, Connecticut investigated historic City Directory report is documented in their EDR, -City .Directory Abstract Report dated February 13, 2001 with Inquiry Number: 733227 -7. The report prepared by EDR is attached to this Environmental Site Assessment as a component of Exhibit F. The document reports that EDR searched national repositories of business and residential directories. Gatti's Nursery, Inc., is listed in 1995. This data was found in the Haines: Criss Cross Directory. Prior to this date no record was found for this address. 5.4.3 County and City Records. Review Sonoma County Permit and Resource Department Sonoma County Permit' and Resource Department's records were reviewed. The subject property was annexed to the City of Petaluma in 1990. No records were on file concerning the subject. property. Sonoma County, Agricultural.Commissioner's Office Gatti Nursery has a total of 240,000 square feet of planted area. All the planted areas are within greenhouses covering approximately six acres. Copies of the Restricted Materials Permit for the year 2001 from Agricultural Commissioner's Office are presented in Exhibit F. Although Gatti Nursery has -a permit to apply restricted chemical materials, a permit does not mean that restricted chemicals were applied. It only means that restricted chemical s'may be 'applied if needed. Pesticide usage is more revealing by reviewing the monthly `u Consequently, monthly Pesticide Use Reports supplied by Mr. Gatti and by Sonoma County Agricultural Commissioner's Office were reviewed. Table 5.4.3a below lists the various agriculture pesticides used for the year 2001. Table 5.4.3b lists the pesticides used for 19,93 -1995. Ta ble 5.4.3' C ompound,s used at G atti's Nurs for 2001. �m - - - -- Product/IVlanufactuter EPA/CA Reg. No. Rate of Application Phyton 27 495382 40 oz/150 gal JMS Stylet Oil 655 -64 -1 l oz/1 gal Ornazin, 3% 5481 -476 10 oz/100 gal Avid % MSD, AG -vet 618 -96 -000 4 oz/100,gaI OrtheneNalent 59639 -91 12 oz/100 gal Kelthane 35 WP /Rohm Naas 707205 F Ib /100 ga Duroguard ME/Whitmire 499 -367 1270-7/1 00 gal Sevin XLR Plus /Rhone -Poule 264 -333 32 oz/100 gal Tals Nur /FMC 279 -3155 F12 oz/1 gal D: \PROJECTS \HUDSON \710 SONOMA -MTN PRKWY \SONOMA MT PARKWAY_710.00C Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 Page 16_ Table 5.4.3b Agricultural chemicals reported" for the ears 1993 -1995. 9 p Y F_ Product EPAlCA Reg. No. Rate of'Applicat 6 Kelthane 707- 205 -AA - - - -- Dursban 6271.9 -255 16 oz 1100..gal JMS Stylet oil 65564 -1" 1 oz 1 gal, AVID 618 4.oz./ 1:00 gal Pentac Aqua 'Flow 55- 947 -0 -97' 8 oz/ 100 gal Margosan -O 11688 -5 -58185 $0 oz % 10.0,gal Orthene 1 16 oz /100 gal. Tempo 20 ,WP FTf2 5 -38:0 2 oz./ 100 gal �Ornalin 7969 -62- 58185 10 oz /'100 ; gal Chipc6laliette WDG 264 515AA 5 Ibs /.1,50 ,gal TTalstar 279 -3105 1 "2 oz 100 gal Curalan 7969 -62' 10 oz /' 1100'gal Dithane x707 -180 1.5 lbs / :gal - Karmex* 352= 508 =AA 5 lbs / 100 gal Sevimol ** L 264. 321 -AA 32 oz 11 gal K a r mex is a, restricted tOr ground water zone * *Seu,imol is a restricted material; only one application was noted. City of'Petalt ma Community Development Department, Planning Division The city zoning designation for the: subject property isAgriculture.-Accordi ig to the City Code Enforcement Officer (Jane K. Thomson), there are no known complaints concerning land use on the subject property. City of Petaluma Fire Marshal's Office Gatti Nursery was annexed into Petaluma City limits in 1990: However, Petaluma Fire' Marshal's Office did. 'not .become the lead. regulatory agency for Hazardous ;Materials Management Program until 1996. Prior to- :this date ' jurisdiction belonged to the Sonoma .County Agricultural Gomrnissioner 'Office. All the records at the county's office have been transferred to the Petaluma Fire Marshal's Office. Gatti Nursery initially complied with the Hazardous, Materials Managernent 'Program in were submitted as required, I'n Janua ry'1993 Gatti Nursery a Site Plan ry pR .and q ry tt se a February 199,0. A Hazardous Materials Inventory Statement, a Floor .Plan., l a n for an D: \PR0JECTS \HUDS0N\71.0 ^SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT`PARKWAY 710.DOC Phase l Environmental Site Assessment Page 17 710 Sonoma, Mountain Parkway, Petaluma,. CA 94954 APN: 137 -070 -079 " exemption from,, the Hazardou" s Materials. Management Program under the quantity p g ry. November 1993, the Office of the Agricultural Commissioner's exemption sate o On Novemb inspected the facility and the exemption was confirmed. Lonnie Armstrong of the Fire Marshal's Office was consulted on February 13, 2002. Gatti's Nursery, Inc. at 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway has a Hazardous Materials Management Business Plan on file. The initial plan was filed in 1993, They are listed as a Range 2 Hazardous Materials Business User. This means that they have or use on their premise hazardous materials ranging from 501- 5,000 pounds, 56 -550 gallons, and /or 201 -.2000 cubic feet of compressed gas of hazardous materials. Their business plan does not show any hazardous wastes generated. 5.4.4 Personal Interviews Mr. Richard Gatti, the' :owner" of Gatti's Nursery Inc. was :interviewed. He provided the following information' concerning the history of the subject property. ➢ Prior to the operation H of Gatti's Nursery, the property usage, was essentially agricultural, being primarily hay production. ➢ Mr. Gatti purchased the.vacant property in 1978. At the time of purchase, there were virtually no other developments in the area. All the surrounding properties were in agricultural land. ➢ The water well was drilled in 1978; and the reservoir was constructed in 1978. ➢ In 1980, Mr,., Gatti began the construction of the present nursery. He moved his existing nursery business from San Francisco to the present location. Gatti Nursery grows and propagates houseplants the main plants being assorted varieties of azaleas. Gatti Nursery'' occupies approximately six acres of the subject property. The remaining portion of the property was left in hay production. ➢ The entire operation is conducted inside of the warehouse and 27 greenhouses. No residential units arei on this property. ➢ The construction of the greenhouses occurred in stages. The final completion of the greenhouses was in 1987. ➢ Gatti Nursery greenhouse operations consist primary of potting and growing of houseplants', primarily azaleas. Other houseplants include tropical ornamental plants. 5.4.5 Aerial Photographs D:\PR0JECTS \HUDS0N \710 SONOMA MTN`PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY_710.DOC Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page 18 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 The EDR- Aerial 'Photography Print Service provided four historic aerial photographs for Mardel,, LLC with Inquiry Number 7332.27 -5 and dated' February 13,,2002. Observations are detailed in Table. 5.4,5 below. Copies of these historic aerial photographs are presented in Exhibit E of this report. Table 2. Description of the subject property from aerial photographs is.,pres.ented below.. DATE FLYER SCA LE ON SITE DESCRIPTION, OFFSITE DESCRIPTION 1953 The property appears to be. North: Undeveloped. Pacific.Air undeveloped. ' East: Undeveloped. Scale: South: Undeveloped. =,833' West: Undeveloped. 1965 Same as above. North: Same as above. Chicken Coop to Cartwright theJar north. ;Scale: East: Undeveloped. Capri Creek not v = 666' discernible. South: Undeveloped. West: 'Undeveloped. 1982 . Four structures on site; appears -to be North: Undeveloped., . Western warehouses. Formation of a, surface East: Undeveloped. State Aerial impoundment appears. Driveway to the South- Undeveloped; Scale: warehouses. West: Undeveloped. To a far south, i"=690! res idential developme appears. „ `'1994 Surface, present. North: Same as above ". USGS Approximately 26 'greenhouse East: ° Santa Rosa.Junior'Gollege, Scale: structures with one cover structure Petaluma, Branch developed. Far east, 1" =666' appear. Some landscaping around the single- family developments appear. perimeter appears. South; Sarne as above. Far south single= family developments<appear. West: Same as above. 5.4.6 Synopsis of Previous, and Current Environmental Investigations Harris & :Lee Environmental Sciences_ (previously known as American Technologies) performed a Phase I Environmental -Site Assessment for 210 Sonoma Mountain Parkway. utilizing the format; requited by Wells Fargo Bank in 1997'. This investigation was centered on the undeveloped portion that was split from the nursery operation. No Recognized Environmental Conditions were reported at that time. Since that time, the land has been developed into residential subdivisions. 6.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE • is On February 22 and 25, 2002., a California Registered Environmental Assessor performed' a site reconnaissance of the subject property and nearby properties. Photo documentation of the property is presented in Exhibit D. D: \PROJECTS \HUDSON \710 SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY 710.DOC • • Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 6.1 Methodology an`d Limiting Conditions Page 19 The method used in conducting,. the site reconnaissance consisted of walking portions of the perimeter of the exterior 'and interior property line; reviewing the warehouse and greenhouse operations; and reviewing the documents known as Hazardous Materials Management Business !Plan and the Monthly Pesticide Use Reports. Visual observations of nearby prgperti'es were performed in an effort to identify conditions that potentially could negatively'irnpact the subject site. Weather condition during the site reconnaissance was dry; 'however, the site was extremely damp due to rainfall from the preceding week. The areas around the greenhouses were very limiting the site reconnaissance. 6.2 General Site Setting The general site setting is a warehouse with 27 greenhousesl adjacent to each other. This property is zoned "Agriculture" by the City of Petaluma. However, Single - Family Residential Units, City of 'Petal'uma !Park land, and the campus of Santa Rosa Junior College, Petaluma Branch, surround the property. 6.3 Subject Property Warehouse: The subject property consists of one centrally located warehouse. This warehouse is constructed of ,metal siding and concrete floors throughout. The dimension of the warehouse is about 50 feet wide and about 200 feet long. The main entrance to the warehouse faces southeast, and the warehouse sits southeast to northwest. There are two large rollup entrance doors where shipping vehicles may enter for loading or unloading of merchandise. Centrally located in the warehouse is the packing area for shipping. South of the entrance is the walk =in cooler maintained at about 40 Fahrenheit. Plants are kept inside of the cooler in trays that are mounted on wheels. - To the southwest' is the entrance to the southwest quadrant greenhouses. The southwest corner of the warehouse also includes "a':, small office'To the west is a dry goods storage. room. Near the western the corner are a series of bins used to store topsoil, perlite, peat moss, etc., for potting mix. To the northwest is the entrance leading to the northwest quadrant greenhouses. Near the north corne r of the warehous a is a 10 by 10 -foot metal storage shed used °for storing chemicals. Northeast of the metal storage shed is the entrance to the northeast quadrant ,greenhouses. growth retardant, plant shine and iron chelate. Chemical storage shed: Located along the north corner of the warehouse is a metal storage shed approximately 10 by 10 feet in size. Chemicals used in the- business are stored Inside this- shed. On this day, very few chemicals were in stock. Most were DAPROJECTS \HOSO4\710 soNOMA� MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY_710:DOC Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page 20 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079 Some used hazardous materials are stored .a ` _ _long the no wall between the chemical storage shed and the entrance to the northeast greenhouse quadrant. The used hazardous materials are mainly paints, some small containers of fuel and bags of soluble fertilizers. Dry Goods..Storage Room The dry goods storage is located in the:west corner of the warehouse. An employees' room with ;kitchen .stoves and rnicrowave.,oven is located within the dry storage room. Dry goods storage ii ncludes ,sprinkler.heads, pots, boxes, and an iassortment of nursery items. Within the storage room is an area,,sectioned off as an employee room. There aret two stoves, microwave ovens, and �refrigecators along with tables and chairs. Employee's lockers are also provided. Greenhouses There are 27 greenhouses. The dimensions' are similar for all .of them; approximately 200 ,feet, long by 42 feet wide. There are eight greenhouses in the northeast quadrant, eight in the southwest quadrant, and 11 in the northwest,.quadrant. They are all inner - connected to each other -and with -the warehouse- in the center. The greenhouses appearto be a single building, With,adjoining pathways. All the greenhouses are similarly constructed. Panes of frosted fiberglass panels on steel structural frames 'constitute the roof, and wall .areas. Many are of the, panels are adjustable, they can be mechanically opened or shut for controlling the temperature within the greenhouse. Each greenh:ouse� is equipped with two ,overhead d gas ,heaters each is capable of generating 4:00 .BTUs. Ducting for the gas. Heaters- is, essentially plastic sheeting that helps disperse the.heaf evenly throughout the, reenhouse. The floor areas of the greenhouses are constructed with central' concrete pathways about 42 -feet wide. Smaller concrete pathways branch. from the main pathway to neither side of , the greenhouse. Between thee pathways and on both sides of the greenhouses the plants are stored on benches or on the ground. The ground where plants are: stored is constructed of 2 -3 inches_ of gravel over native soil and covered with fabric liners to facilitate drainage. Overhead. piping system in each greenhouse has wrapped. PVC pipes for water, treated water, natural gas, and electrical wiring, Water is "p'iped' to a series of overhead mist sprayers for - overhead watering of plants: Water is also piped underground through, a 1. series ' of hose bids located throughout the nursery. Plants are, frequently watered through the overhead spray .or through a flooding, system `with the "host) bids. There are two areas where water is mixed with various maintenance chemicals. Chemicals, growth hormones, soluble fertilizers, etc., are .prepared in two locations. They are then pumped through `a series, of. PVC pipes to! the various greenhouses to where the application is.intended. To. supplement the overhead piping system,. there is a portable Agri -Tank on a trailer for chemical treatment of nursery plants.. The .mixing tank areas are in the .northwest and the northeast greenhouse quadrants. D:\PROJECTS \110DSON \710,SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA,MT PARKWAY_71.0:DOC Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 1.37- 070 -079 The predominant plants are azaleas in all the greenhouses in various stages of growth. However, approximately four of the front greenhouses in the southwest quadrant contain a variety of indoor or outdoor ornamental plants. Page 21 Cold Storage: There are two walk -in coolers. The larger of`the two is located near the southeast corner of the main warehouse. This cooler is about 100 feet by 30 feet in dimension. The second and smaller walk -in cooler is located in the southwest greenhouse quadrant. This cooler is about 50 by 30 feet in size. Solid Waste Solid waste is stored in 55- gallon drums. These drums are hauled to the county landfill routinely. The solid waste storage area is located behind the warehouse to the northwest. Outer Perimeter The reservoir is located along the northeast corner of the property. It is secured with a locked gate and ,a fence that surrounds the reservoir. The pump house for the reservoir is located on the southwest corner. Two sheds are located on the road to the reservoir. The- sheds are adjacent to each other. The northern shed is , the well' location along with the power panel. The southern shed is the emergency generator location. • Along he southeastern property line are old wooden shelves and pallets. 9 P p Y P There are several stockpiles of composted material alorig the northwest side of the driveway to the nursery. The stockpiles are overgrown with weeds. Trirnmings from the azaleas are evident along these stockpiles. Surrounding the greenhouses around the outer perimeter is a dirt pathway/driveway. A series of old 55- gallon drums, purported to be full of rainwater, serves as a barrier to protect the greenhouses from vehicle mishaps. 6.4 Adjacent Properties No indications' :of conditions on nearby properties that would adversely affect the subject property were observed in the course of the site reconnaissance. 7.0 INTERVIEWS Mr. Steve Phillips (707 -795- 7425): He installed the emergency generator on site. 7A Interviews'with Owner and Site Manager Mr. Richard Gatti, Gatti's Nursery Inc. was interviewed. In addition, Mr. Steven Gatti and Mr. David Gatti were interviewed. DAPROJECTS \HUD SON \710 ONOMNMTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT"PARKWAY_710.D0 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page 22 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137 -070 -079 7.2 Interviews with, Local Government, Officials Staff at the County of Sonoma Assessor's Office. ➢ Staff at the County.of Sonoma Permit and, Resource Management Office: ➢ Staff at the' County of Health Services,. Division of Environmental Health.. ➢ Staff at the County of Sonoma-, Agricultural Commissioner's Office. (Mr. P. Gadd) ➢ Staff . at the. City of Petaluma, Community 'Development Department. (Ms. Jane Thomson) - ➢ Staff at the City of Petaluma, Fire Marshal's Office. (Mr. Lonnie Armstrong and Mr. Cary Fergus) 73 Interviews with Others Various individuals encountered. while conducting the site reconnaissance .of the site Were interviewed. These brief interviews were conducted in a casual' conversational manner in an attempt to determine if there are any historic .factors that would indicate an impact on the property. 8.0 FINDINGS The subject property consists one warehouse and 27 greenhouses. The. operation of . Gatti's Nursery Inc. ;is a commercial nursery that.specl alizes in azaleas, with some other ornamental houseplants. The operation involves the propagation and growing of plants. This, is a labor- intensive operation that includes, the application of chemical fertilizers and chemical treatment with pesticides. Although a variety of chemicals are used, no recognized environmental conditions were identified. The subject property is zoned Agriculture but it is bordered by various residential subdivisions within the City Limits of Petaluma, California. There are no commercial or industrial properties in the immediate' vicinity of the subject property. 9:0 CONCLUSIONS Harris & Lee Environmental Sciences has performed a ; Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Standard of Practice E 1527 =00 of the property within the designated address of 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, ;,Petaluma, California '(Sonoma County ASSesSOr's Parcel Number 137= 070 =0,79 also designates the property). In the course: of performing this Environmental Site Assessment, Phase I Investigation no recognized environmental conditions were identified. 10.0 OPINION Although no recognized environmental conditions were identified, Harris & Lee Environmental Sciences recommends the following: DAPROJECTSWUDSOW710 'SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA.MT PARKWAY21 O;DOC Phase l Environmental Site Assessment Page 23 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954 APN: 137- 070 -079' I ` ➢ The chemical' quality of the well water should be tested. ➢ Ideally, secondary containment should be provided for the diesel tank of the generator, although this may be difficult because of the skid pad design. ➢ All drums should be labeled, including drums used to store rainwater as barriers against vehicles. ➢ It is always prudent: to maintain care in handling chemicals and any hazardous materials in any building, or any property. Current and future tenants should be required to verify that they °are complying with the regulations that pertain to waste disposal, storage of hazardous materials and any health and safety issues. It is pertinent to be reminded that the building / property owner is ultimately responsible for the environmental compliance that occurs in any building or on'any property. Thus, if a tenant is not in compliance, the owner, who has nothing to do with the tenant's operations, can be held responsible. 11.0 DEVIATIONS There are no deviations in the Environmental Site Assessment from the ASTM Standard • of Practice E- 1527 =00 for °such assessments. 12.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES No additional services beyond the ASTM Standard Of. Practice were added to this report. 13.0 REFERENCES 13.1 Published References ASTM 2000, . Standard Practice for Environmental -Sitel Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Standard of Practice E 1527 ='00, Bailey, Edgar H. 1'966; Geology of Northern California. Bulletin 190, California .Division of Mines and Geology, San Francisco. Fox, K. F., et al, 1973 "Preliminary Geologic Map of Eastern Sonoma County and Western Napa County California ". San Francisco Bay Region Environment and Resources Planning 'Study: U. S. Geological Survey. Basic Data Contribution 56. USGS Map MF -48.3. W. Kunkel, R and J. E. 'Upson 1960, Geology and Ground 'Water in Napa and Sonoma Valleys, Napa . and 'Sonoma Counties, California. Geological Survey, Water Supply DAPR0JECTS\HUDSON1710,SONOMA MTN PRKWY\SONOMA MT PARKWAY_71o.noC Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Page 24 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, .CA 94954 } APN:137 -070 -079 Paper 1495. Jennings, Charles W. 1977, Geologic `Map of California, Scale 1 750: California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map #2 1991 printing. State of California Department of Water Resources, June 1,9182 Bulletin 1118 -4,. Evaluation of Ground"Water Resources Sonoma County Volume 3: Petaluma Valley. USDA, Soil Conservation Service, January 1991, Soil Survey of Sonoma County, California. U. S. Geological Survey, 7.5- Minute Cotati Quadrangle Topographical Map: Scale 1:24;000. 13.2 U;npublis;hed, References Environmental Data Resources, Inc, The EDR - Radius Map, Inquiry Number 733227.3s for Mardel LLC, 710 'Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94:954, February 8, 2002. Environmental Data Resources, Inc., The EDR -City .Directory Abstract, Inquiry.'Number 733227 -7 for Mardel LLC, 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma,, CA 94.954, February 13, 2002. Environmental Data Resources, Inc., Sanborn, Map Report, Inquiry Number 733227.45 for Mardel L.LC, 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94'954, February 8, 2002. . Environmental Data Resources, Inc., EDR- Aerial Photography Print Service, Inquiry Number 733227-5 for Mardel LLC, 710 Sonoma Mountain Parkway, Petaluma, CA 94954, February 13, 2002. Califorria Department of Water Resources, Division of Planning and Local Assistance Website at http`. / / well'.water.ca`.goy / California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology Website at. http : / / www.cOnsrv.ca.goV /ding /pubs /notes /36 /index.htm • D.: \PROJECTS \HUDSON \710 SONOMA MTN'PRKVVY\SONOMA MT' PARKWAY_ 710. Doc The enclosed channel calculations have been provided to show that contains the 100- the Capri Creek, channel c r storm event within the Y Y p r channel banks.. H draulic information for Ca n Creek was obtained from the Sonoma County Water Agency. All applicable data has been included herein. Based on the stationing used for the hydraulic calculations, it can be seen that the proposed subdivision is within stations 17 +50 and 26 +50. This is found by taking the distance from Sonoma Mountain Parkway to be the proposed project begins and ends. Refer to the description included -the (VOTE TO FILEthat is past of the original Capri Creek calculations. A 100 -year flow of 245 cfs was utilized to determine the channels capacity. This value was determined by taking the 10 -year flow of 175 cfs used in the original Capri Creek calculations (see NOTE TO FILE and multiplying it by 1.4. This 40% increase is what is accepted as the. difference b originally y, nd 100 -year flows. 5 s value 0 and is an It must be noted that the 1 extremely conservative value, see NOTE TO FILEfor explanation. The actual 10 -year value. is more accurately 110 Is. The channel calculations shown 'herein indicate the conservative value is contained within the channel. • 5ta 17 - calcs.txt 5TA 1 +50 Channel Calculator Given Input Data: 3.3579 ft --------- - - - - -- Channel hieq t is 5.GO', more than 2G.5' p ................ pezoidal 5olvi g for ..................... De p th -of Flow Flowrate ......................... . 245.0000 cfs --- - - - - -- 154 cfs (see attached note to file) 873.4699 cfs Slope ........................... 0.0089 ft/ft Manning's n ..................... . 0.0500 height .......................... 5.6000.'ft Bottom width .................... 3.0000 ft Left slope ...................... 0.4000 ft/ft W/11) 0 K Right slope ..................... O. 1.600 ft/ft (V/H) o iz. Extremely conservative, actual flow 15 less than Computed Results: 3.3579 ft --------- - - - - -- Channel hieq t is 5.GO', more than 2G.5' Depth ........................... 0.0335 ft/ft freebaord G.77G4 fps Velocity ..........__ ..............; 4.1244 fps Full Flowrate .................. 873.4699 cfs Flow area ...................... 59. ft2 .. Flow perimeter .................. 3`3.294.`8 ft 1lydraulic radius ................ 1 .784 1 ft Top width ....................... 32.3812 ft Area 154.0000 ft2 ............................ Perimeter ....................... 53.523G ft Percent full .................... 59.9G I G % Critical Information • Critical depth .................. 2.5522 ft Critical slope .................. 0.0335 ft/ft Critical velocity ............... G.77G4 fps Critical area ................... 3G. 1547 ft2 Critical perimeter .............. 2G.02G4 ft Critical hydraulic radws ....... 1.3892 ft Critical top width .............. 25.3320 ft 5pecific energy ................. 3.G222 ft Minimum energy .................. 3.8283 ft Froude number ................... 0;5309 Flow condition .................. 5ubcritical ' vitiCv - �IdN�? (B ` Z LG /�fr Page I NOTE TO KT February 6 19912 Output files .reveal differences in. 'the CWSELs between the initial ( "no obstruction") and second ( "encroached`) HEC - -2 runs: Gu,tput data can b e observed on pages a -14 anal, pages 43 -49 _ The second run yields CWSELs that are 0 to 0.24" lower than the initial run: Cross section input data the same -, with h e e:ptii on i af right and le: t bank locations_ Th banks were moved inwards creating,,an overbank situation_ This is done because the HEC prog,r. - gym will not allow encro'achment,s to fall Wi - hin the main channel (page IT -3 of HEC' -2 Users Manual) These changed parameters can be observed in the X1 card for both the initial and second HEC -2 runs_ S nce - flow. used through was the entire run (both) con servative (Q 175 cfs, whereas b S�A, +0 Q :ZS actually I10 cfs) and input :_ data fob both. rins , entcal ° (with the` above`'exciep ion), the C on pages 73 -75 are acceptable 7 r 0 • V /i Z� �* ' r'h rZ�v�;ffr✓ 1 7,%s ` J�, 0 1-t so ,.(:.d ,.. ,+- r-c 17-4. .,13 k-' u ; . ,:.� � P /2 r`-! r r l ,�IL'w 7 - ,L .:i"S G e15 IS — iA,Z*4- 11.{(, �/N /�g4� Wit' L'-;!r7'1 T 5 /7 , � _ 2 ", C STA: 2G +50 Channel Calculator 5ta2G -50 talcs txt Given Input Data: Shape ........................... Trapezoidal 5oiving for ..................... Depth of Flow 245:0000 cfs ---- - - - - -- Extremely conservative, actual flow is less than Flowrate ........................ . 154 cfs (see attached note to file) Slope ........................... 0.023G ft/ft Manning's n ..................... 0'.0500 Height .......................... 3,..7500 ft 5ottom width .......... 0.0000 ft Left slope ...................... 0.3300 ft/ft (V/H) i2 - 3. Rght slope... .................,.. 0.3' 100 ft/ft (V/H) 0 Z Computed Re5uit5: 3.4949 ft --------- - - - - -- Channel hieght is 3.75', more than 3' freebaord Depth ........................... Velocity ..................... 1.23 fps Full Flowrate ......_............ 29;5.G2G8 cfs Flow area ....................... 38.2079 ft2 Flow perimeter ............. 22.0558 ft Hydraulic radius ................ I . G644 'ft Top width .................... 21 .8647' ft Area ............................ . 43.9:883 ft2 Perimeter ....................... Percent full .................... 24.G3 1 - I ft 93,. 1984 % Critical Information Critical depth .................. 3.2829 ft Critical slope .................. 0,0330 ft/ft Critical velocity ............... 7.2G72 fps Critical area ................... 33.7130 ft2 Critical perimeter .............. 2 1.5G3,2 ft Critical hydraulic radius ....... 1.5C.34 ft Critical top width .............. 20:5384 ft 5pecific energy ................. 4.1330 ft Minimum energy .................. 4.9244 ft Froude. number .................. 0.8552 Flow condition ..... 5ubcritical Cl '� �Voti! - �rn4 i� ' G' Page I illxxxxxxxzxzxxxxxxxxxxxxxxzxxxxxxxixxxxxxxxixxxxx T :rIN �ICTE SLIFTA FY N TO 'No X c "I 7 1 1 1 1;7 5 . 00 L - .7 71 C. 2 L 0 Ci LI 2 no- J 77 "11; 7 7 7 �.n 7 r 73� U it r, a. T 7 4 .00 7 0 i L t 7 i 7 -4 22 1 0 74 I J • 75 —C k'oll) ,PLC;' „A:._ - :'•i;, i C' : .6.1- ;LG nn C • 75 i - Storm Frequencc_ 10 years, Open & Closed System Calculations. Sonoma County Method ' Mean Annual Precipitation 25.00 inches C:.PRI CREEK.APTS Project:9701 Free Board Requirement . .1.00 feet Desimn ..: G�� iM '" �y Dater ll -03 -1998 Time :i 09:11:26am File - C: \Hh \Tlw \Data \9 "LW d Hvr Hydrology Hydraulics Page 1 of a - v 'sion 2.01 d Pt. Area dA C. dCA Sum Sum Time £nten. Q w / =Dia/ Sf Length Vol. Sect Frict Minor HGL MTC Plan Flow A dCA of 'a' c:A SS Width Sp On Time :oss Lose HGL* T.C. - -ono. Oescr. (Acres) (Acres)(Ac =es) Conc. (cfs) (in. /ft.) (ft.) (fps) ;min)(ft.) (ft.) (ft.) F.B. P -L. to Pt. A22 HRTG 97.05 0.38 36.76 97.05 36.76 37.4 0.88 0.00 50.08 Si.08 55.20 SW 0.014 32.50 -= 36.0 .1028 53 4.6 0,.2 0..15' •�� 47.60 .0048 Does not apply \ A21 DIA1 Al 0.30 0.65 •0.20 0.30 0.20 10..0 1 .77. 0.04 52.75 53.75 57.50 9B� 0.014 0..35 1- 15.0 0.0000 52 0.3 3.1 0.00 :2.50 0.0103 0.21 2.6 0..3 O IA2 DLA2 A2 0.30 0.65 0.20 0.60 0.39 10.3 1.75 0.29 52.53 53.53 57.:0 PM+ 0.014 0.68 1= 15.0 0.0001 70 0.6 2.1 0.01 51.96 0.0102 0.28 3.3 0.4 DIA3 DIA3 A3 0.70 0.65 0.45 1.30 0.84 10.7 1_111 0.36 52..12 53.12 56.40 PM' 0.014 1.45 1= 1S.0 0.0006 9.6 1.2 1.4 0.06 51.24 0.0103 0.42 '4.1 0.4 DIES DIM AS 0..00 0.65 0.00 1.30 O.a4 1'1.1 1.68 0.19 50.76 51.76 55.50 ?M- 0.014 1.45 1= 15.0 0.0006 63 1.2 0.9 0.04 \ 50.23 0.0221 0.34 5.4 0.2 A21 'A21 0.00 0.50 0.00 98.35 37.61 37.6 0.88 0.03 49.93 50.93 54.90 BW 0.014 33.16 la 36.0 0.0029 .180 4.7 0..6 0.52 47.30 0.0046 Does not apply MH7 0.07 51 -65 52.65 57.50 BB CC56 OFF 1.70 0.65 1.10 1.70 1..10 ,10.0 1.77 - 0.014 1.96 1r la.0 0.0004 204 1.1 3.1 0.06 51.03 y 0.00E0 0.55 3.4 1.0 C53A 1� � Y'• :! 0.00 50.66 51.66 56.34 8N C53B ST. 0.12 0.90 0. 0.12 0.11 10. -0 4.77 ,w ,.. ��,;, 0.014 0.19 ty 18.0 0.0000 35 . . 0.1 54 0.00 50.39 0.0030 Does not apply C53A 0.00 50.66 51.66 56.34 BW C53A ST 0.20 0.65 0.131 2.02 1.34 15.4 1.41 0.014 1.96 1- 24.0 0.0001 32 0..6 0.9 0.00 50.01 0.0095 Does not apply MH53 ,'. 0.32 0.50 0.32'-10.0 1. %7 0_06 53.14 54.'_4 58.50 5B* 3IB2 B1 0. 50 0..65 _ 0.014 0.58 1= 15.0 0..0001 52 0.5 1.8 0.00 52.a2 0.0094 0.26 3.1 0.3 DIB3 0.04 52.7 S3.71 58.00 Ph .7IB3 B2 0.10 0.65 0.06 0,:60 0.39' 10.3 i. 75 .1 0.014 0.68 1. 15.0 0.0001 133 0.6 4..0 0.02 52'33 0.0050 0.. 2.6 0.9 DIBS 0.00 52.05 S - 2.05 57.70 BW 7185 d3 0.30 0.65 0.20 0.90 0.58 11.2 1.67 0.014 0.98 1= 15.0 0.0003 52 0.8 .1.1 0.01 Si•66 0.0050 Does not apply DIg6 DID1 01 0.40 0.65 0.26 0•.40 0.26 10_0 1.77 0.03 54.53 55.53 58.70 3B 0.014 0.46 1� 12.0 0.0002 197 0.6 5.6 0.04 54.20 0.0050 0.30 2.3 1.4 OID • GODFRSY ENGINEERING 2460 W. THIRD ST.,SUZi= 245 SANTA ROSA CALIpORNI.A 95401 (707) 575 -5515 ARk Storm Prequencl 100 years Open Closed System Calculations Sonoma Couac/ Method. HHRZTA62 . Projecr-:9609 i an Annual Precipitation = 25.00 inches ree Board Requirement. = 1:..50 fees TOTAL 'HM .- SMP (100 yr) Design :SG' - Darr: 09- 29 -1e998 Time: 12:01:58om le = C: \Hh\T1w\DaCa \96091003. - .,A H Hydrology- Hydraulics Page 3of 15. version 2.01d y dA •C• ddT. Sum Sum Time Inten. Q # / -Dia/ Sf Length Vel. Sect Prict Minor HGL MTC Plan Flow Area A dCG of. 'n' CiA SS Width Sp Dn Time Lose -Lose HGL+ T.C. Cond. D Area (Acres) (Ac=esC ') (A"6) Conc. (c- (in. - /�ft. ) (ft.) (fps) (min) (ft. ) (ft.) (ft. ) P..9. P.L. to Pt. 7. 12 TO 11 IS PIPE THRU FUTURE DSVBLOPSD GATTI AREA. 0.00 57 - -10` 58.60 68.00 BW 03 3.40 0.35 1.19 3.40 1_19 26.1 1.50 • 0.014 1.78 1= 8.;o 0.0003 500 1.0 8.3 0.17 57:00 0.0070 Does not apply D12 "i13 REDS 3.40 0.50 1.70 6. 30 2.89 34.4 1.30 0•..06 56.93 58.43 61.110 BW 0.014 3.75 1= 24. -.0 0..0003 64 1.2 1,..2 0.,03 51.50 0..0059 Does not apply 012 35B SDCB 0.90 0.50 0.45 0.90 0.45 10.0 s'.49 0.00 56.94 58.44 58.56 BW 52.00 0.014 1.i2 'l= 1B. 0" 0.0001 35 0.6 0.9 0.00 0.0030 Does not apply A35A .:35A SDCB 1.30 0.50 0.65 2.30 1.10 10.9 2.38 0.07 56.94 58.44 5B.56 BW 0.014 2.62 1.19,] _.4 0.03. S1.B0 -eu not apply D12 0.04 56.84 58.34 58.20 BW Z12 SDMH 0.00 0.50 0..00 9.00 3.99 35.6 1.27 - -- __ 0..014 5. -09 1= 4,0 0.0006 165 1.6 1.7 0..10 51.00 0.,.0091 Dose not apply :lOB SDCB 0.15: 0.50 - 0. 08 0.15 0:.08 10.0 2.49 0.100 56.70 58.10 56.36 0.014 0.19 1= 18 -.0 0,..0000 35 0.1 5.5 0.00 50.10 0,.0030 Does not apply D10A 0.01 56.70 58.,20 56 BW :10A SDC3 0,40 0.50 0.20 9..55 4.2:7 37.3 1.24 . : 0.014 5.30 1= 24.0 0.0006: 66 1.7 0.7 0.04 49.50 0.6061 Does not apply A24 A24 PT -.9 0.30 0.50 0 „15 38.25 14.64 38.0 1.23 0. 52 56..65 58.15 56.70 BW 0.014 18,00 1e 24.0 0.0073 176 5.7 0.5 1-.31 49.00 0.0034 Does not apply A22 0.77' 54 56.31 55.20 'BW A22 PT.S '0.00 0..50 0.00 95.55 36.24 38.5 1.22 _ 0.614 44.25 1'= 36.,.0 0..0051 53 6.3 0.'_ 0.2 47.60 0 -.0049 Does not apply A21 0.06 53.77 55.27 55..00, BW, A21 CCAA 1.30 0.65 0.84 96,.85 37.08 38.6 1..22 - 47 0.014 '45.22 1 =36.,00..0053 142 6•.4 0.4 0.76 .35 . 0.0048 .Does not apply NH7 PT. CC56 IS PICK UP, POINT AT @W 'OP G9PRI COURT. 0.00 53.65 55..15 57.50 BW =56 31 1.70 0.65' 1 -.10 1.70 1.10 10..0 2.49 ' 0.014 2.75 1= 18.0 0.0008 204 1.6 2.2 0,16 51.03 0.0050 Does not apply CC53 GODFRgY ZNGINEIRING 2460 W. THIRD _ST.,SU= 245 ,SANTA RGSA CALIFORNIA 95401 (707) 575 -.5515 l l �ib Storm Frequency 10 yearn open & Closed System Calculations Sonoma County Method ,MWual Precipitation a 25.00 inches , CAPRI CREEK APTS Project:9701 Free Board Requirement - 1.00 feet Design :SG Pile = C: \Hh \Tlw \Data \9701_2 Date: 11 -03 -1998 Time: 09:11:26am TLa_Hydr Hydrology Hydraulics Page 2 of a - version 2.01d Pt. Area dA . C. dCA Sum Sum Time Inten. Q # / =Dia/ Sf Length Vel.. Sect Prict Minor HGL MTC Plan Flow Descr. A dCA of •n• CiA SS Width Sp Dn Time Lose Lose HGL, T.C. Cond. (Acres) (Acres) (Acres) ;Conc.,, ,. (cfs) (in. /ft.) (ft.) (.fps) (min) (ft.) (ft.) (ft.) F.B. F.L. to Pt. DID4 04 0.10 0.65 0.06 0.50 0.32 11..4 1.66 0.09 53..64 54.64 58.00 PM 0.014 0.54 1= 12.0 0.0003 86 0.7 2.1 0.02 `\ 53.22 0..0050 0.33 2,. 0..6 DIB6 DIB6 B4 0.00 0.65 0.00 1.40 0,.91, 12..3 1.59 0.14 52.04 53.04 .57.30 PM 0.,014 1.45 1= 15.0 0.0006 97 1_2 1.4 0.06 51.40 0.0050 0..50 3.1 0.5 DIB7 DIS1 81 0.50 0.65 0.32 0 -50 0.,32 10.0 1. 77 0..04 52.54 53.54 59.00 nB 0.014 0.58 1= 12.0 0.0003 132 0.7 3.0 0.04 52.16 0.0050 0.34 2.5 0.9 . DIB7 DIB7 B5 0.40 0.65 0.26 2.30 1.49 12.8 1.56 0.21 51.79 52.79 56.90 PM 0.014 2.33 1. 15.0 0.0015 77 1.9 0.7 0.12 50.92 0..0050 0..66 3.5 0.4 MH53 MH53 0.00 0.65 0.00 4.32 2.84 16.3 1.37' 0_ SD.66 51.66 55.90 SB- 0.01'4 3.99 1= 24.0 0.0003 227' 1..2 3.1 0..08 49.70 0.0095 0.59 5.0 0.8 CSLA DI 0.50 0.65 0.32 0.50 0.32 10.0 1.77 0.00 49.47 50.47 5S.00 BW 0.014 0.58 1. 12.0 0..0003 100 0.7 2.3 "0.03 48.88 0.0070 Does not apply CS1A " ST ..0.16 0.90 0.14 0.16 0.14 10.0 1-.77 0.00 49.44 50.44 53.86 BW 0.014 0.26 1e 18.0 0.0000 35 0.1 4.0 0.00 48.20 0.0030 Does not :apply CS1A CSIA'ST 0.70 0.65 0.45 5.68 3.76 17.1 .1.34 0.00 49.44 50.44 53.86 BW 0.014 5.03 1- 24.0 0.0006 311 1..6 1.2 0.06 47.59 0..0030 Does not apply MH7 MH7 4. 0.40 0.50 0.20 104.43 41..57.38.2 0.87 0.15 49..38 50.38 53.96 BW ,0,.014•.36,.34 1- 36.0 0.0034 155' S'.1 0.5 0_53 46.27 0.0056 Does not apply SND Beginning Water Surface 48.70 GODFRBY SNGIXIMMING' 2460 W. THIRD ST.,S=3 245 SANTA ROSH CALIFORNIA 95401 (707) 57S -5515 Gatti Subdiv n Tra clmpact A nalYsis fffl in the City ®f Petaluma April 22, 2003 WHITLOCK & WEINBERGER TRAN S PORT ATION INL enn - --f r e Y� C / A e)c Ant . 1 707 1 F A?,01:nf) -, CA V f7071 C A'7 Cnn Table OtContents Page Introduction and Summary ..................... ..... 1 Study Parameters ........ .... ............................... ... . ....... ......3 Existing Conditions ...... ...... ............................... . ... 6 Future- Conditions . .. ... .. 10 Conclusions and Recommendations .......................... ..... .. .. 18 Study Participants and References .....:........ ............................... 19 Figures 1 Study Area and.`Existing Traffic Volumes ........... .................. ...... 7 2 Site Plan ... .. ............ . ............................... 11 3 Existing plus Project Traffic Volumes ............................................ 1.3 4 Future Traffic Volumes .................. ........... ......... 15 5 Future:plus Project Traffic Volumes ................ ..... .. 17 Tables 1 Summary-of Existing Intersection Level of Service Calculations ........................... 8 2 _ Trip Generation Summary .... ........................ ................ 10 3 Trip Distribution/Roadway Segment Vehicle Trips .... ............................... 12 4 Roadway S:egmentDaily`Traffic Vol "umes ........................... 12 5 Summary of Future,Intersection Level of Service Calculations .......................... 16 Appendices A 'Level 'of Service Calculations Gatti Subdivision Traffc.7mpac"t Analysis City of Petaluma Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. Page i April 22, 2003. • • • P l • 'Introduction and Summary Introduction This report presents an analysis of the anticipated traffic impacts associated with construction of the Gatti Subdivision in the City ofPetaluma. The traffic study was completed,in accordance with standard criteria, and is consistent with previous analyses' and standard traffic engineering techniques. Operating conditions were evaluated under four scenarios, including Existing, Existing plus Project, Future and Future plus Project. Summary Existing Conditions Under Existing Conditions all of the study intersections are operating,at LOS C or better during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Proiect,Tri12 Generation The proposed Gatti Subdivision,project,is anticipated to generate an average of 772 new daily vehicle trips, including 60 trips during the morning peak hour and 78 during the evening peak hour. Existing _ lup s Project Conditions With the addition of traffic associated with the proposed project all of the study intersections are expected to continue operating acceptably during both the morning and evening commute periods. Future Conditions Based on proj ected future trafficvolumesall of the study intersections will continue operating acceptably at LOS C or better. Future plus Project Conditions Under Future plus Project Conditions the study intersections will continue to operate at LOS'C or better. Conclusions A pedestrian warning -sign should be added at the Riesling Road mid -block crossing for westbound traffic. The sign should be installed -in the existing median so as to be more visible to through traffic on Riesling Road. • Under Existing;plus Proj ectConditions all of the study intersections are expected to continue operating at acceptable levels. Gatti Subdivision Traffic'Impact Analysis City of Petaluma Whitlock & Wein,'bergerfiTiansportation, Inc. Page 1 April 22, 2003 Traffic volumes on local residential streets including Se.stri Lane, Casella Court and Yorkshire'Road would. be expected to ornear:1,000 vehicles per day with the additionof'the project. This amount of'traffic is below thresholds for acceptable traffic volumes on "livable." streets, which are generally considered to'have no greater than. 1,500 ADT. • Under Future plus Pro ectConditions:all of the study intersections are expected to continue operating at acceptable levels: Adequate pedestrian, bicycle and transit.access to the site will be available upon ,completion ; of,planned, site improvements. • 0 Gatti Subdivision Traffie Impact Analysis: City of Petaluma Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. Page 2 April 22, 2003 • Study Parameters Prelude The purpose of a traffic impact study is to provide City staff and policy makers such as Planning Commissioners and City Council members with data which they can use to make an informed decision regarding the potential traffic impacts of a proposed project, and any associated improvements which would be required in order to mitigatethese impacts to a level of insignificance as definedby the City's General Plan. Traffic impacts are typically evaluated "by determining the number of trips the new use would be expected to generate, distributing the new trips to the surrounding street system based on existing travel patterns or anticipated travel patterns specific to the proposed project, then analyzing the impact the new traffic would be expected to have on critical intersections included in the study. Setting The Transportation. Element oft he City of Petaluma General Plan contains'information on existing circulation conditions, as well as goal's and policies;for the development of future circulation systems within the City. The general objectives of the Transportation Element are to improve traffic flow,,,provide easy and convenient access to all areas of the community, and improve connections between the east and west sides of the City. Study Intersections ® The following intersections"' were includedin this analysis. Sonoma Mountain Parkway /Junior College • Sonoma Mountain Parkway /Shopping Center entrance • Sonoma Mountain °Parkway /Riesling Road • Sonoma Mountain Parkway /Ely Road - Colombard Road • Riesling Road/Casella Court Study Periods Conditions during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak periods were,ana'lyzed. Typically the a.m. peak hour is the highest volume.hourbe.tween 7:00 and 9:00 a.m., and the p.m. peak hour is between 4:00 and 6;00 p.m. Study Scenarios Four scenarios are evaluated in this study.including Existing Conditions,:.Existing plus Project Conditions, Future Conditions, and Future plus Project Conditions. The ExistingConditions scenario is an evaluation of current traffic operations based on data collected in the field and available in other planning documents. In the Existingplus .Project conditions scenario the potential traffic impacts'that would be expected to occur with the addition of the proposed project:are evaluated. The Future Conditions scenario presents an evaluation of the conditions under which traffic would be expected to operate with buildout of the surrounding area while the Future plus. Project Conditions indicates the potential impacts that are likely with the addition of the proposed project to these future traffic volumes. Gatti Subdivision Traffic Impact.Analysis City of Petaluma Whitlock & Weinberger. Transportation, Inc. Page 3 April 22, 2003 Level of Service Methodologies. Level of Service (LOS) i's used toxanktraffic operation onvarioustypes of facilities based ffi ..on traffic volumes and roadway capacity, using a series of letter designations rangingfrom A to.F. Generally, Level of Service A represents free,flow conditions:and.Level :of Service F.represents,forced flow or breakdown conditions. The LOS designation, is generally accompanied by a unit of measure which indicates a level of delay. I - The study intersections were analyzed using methodologies from,the Highway Capacity Manual 2000. This source contains methodologies for various types Hof intersection control, all of which are related to a measurement of delay in average number of seconds per vehicle. The ranges of delay associated with,the various levels of service ,are indicated in the following table. Intersection Level of Service Criteria LOS Unsi nalized., Intersections Signalized Intersections, A Delay of 0 to 1'0 seconds. Gaps in traffic are readily belay of 0 to 10 seconds Most vehicles arrive . available for drivers exiting the minor street. during the green phase, so do'not stop at all. '13 Delay of 15 seconds. Gaps in traffic are somewli'at Delay of 10 to 20 seconds. More vehicles stop'than less readily available than with LOS A, but no queuing with LOS A, but many drivers still''do not have to occurs on the minor 'street. stop. C Delay of 15 to 25 seconds. Acceptable gaps in traffic are Delay of 20 to 35 seconds. The•number of vehicles less; frequent, and drivers may approach while another stopping is significant, although many still,pass vehicle is already waiting to exit the- side'street. through without stopping. D Delay of 25 to 35 seconds. There are fewer acceptablelgaps Delay of 35 to 55 seconds. The influence of in traffic,; and' drivers may enter a queue of one or two congestion is.noticeable, and most vehicles have to vehicles on the side street. stop. E Delay of 35 to-50 seconds., , acceptable gaps in traffic Delay of 55 to 80 seconds. 'Most if not all, vehicles are available,,and longer queues may form on the side street. must stop and drivers consider.the delay excessive.. F Delay of.` more than 50 seconds. Drivers may wait for long Delay of more than 80 seconds. Vehicles may wait periods.before there is an acceptable gap in traffic, for exiting through more than one cycle to clear the intersection. the side streets, creating long queues:. Reference: Highway. CdpdEity Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board 2000. The signalized intersection rnethodologyis based;onfactorsincludiing traffic volumes, green time.for. each movement, phasing whether ornot the signals are coordinated, iruck.traffic, andpedestrian activity..Ayerage stopped delay per vehicle:in seconds is used as, the'basis for evaluation.in.this LOS methodology.. It should be noted that,the levels of service for this study were calculated using optimized signal timing. The,Levels of Service for the intersect ons.with sideistreetstop con t rols,.orthose which are "unsignalized," were analyzed;using the unsignalized intersection capacity method. This method determines a level of service for each minor turning movement by estimating the level_ of average delay in seconds pe r vehicle. The movement with the, highest' level of delay is presented as the Worst Case. Level' of Service. The through Gatti Subdivision Traff c Impact,Analysis Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation Inc. Page 4 City of Petaluma April'22, 2003 • u • • movements on the main street are" assumed to operate at free flow and a Level of Service A. The g y intersection of Rieslin Road /Casella Court is currently controlled b y A roundabout, but was analyzed as an all -way stop controlled intersection which has lower capacity level's than a roundabout. Standards of Significance ` The General Plan's adopted Level,of Service (LOS) standard for streets, indicates the minimum acceptable operation is LOS C. Mitigation, is required at any study intersection in,the City of Petaluma where the project results in delay worse than LOS D. Additionally, a project impact may be considered significant if any of the following conditions are met. • At any unsignalized intersection.or driveway approach with significant traffic volumes, the project results in congestion for the side street exceeding LOS E; • Access at site driveways causes significant delay to trafficf1ow on public streets; The onsite circulation plan,provides inadequate circulation or is potentially unsafe; or Site design circulation aspects are inconsistent with local guidelines. On sections of certain,arterial streets it`is typical to have all of the side streets operating at LOS E or F with long traffic delays,.even wh_ereside street volumes are very low. Itma y be operationally, physically, and/or financially infeasible to provide mitigation which would allow Level of Service D conditions or better from all side streets during peak hours. The; most typical mitigation measures used to improve operation for the side street is a traffic signal, and it is both operationally and financially undesirableto provide a traffic signal at every intersection along a street. The need for a traffic signal was. therefore considered if operation was at LOS E or F, however the overall impact on the intersection was also evaluated in determining whether or not to recommend such an improvement. The Community Character Element of the General Plan also contains circulation- related objectives and policies. This element directs.thatpedestrian and bicycle circulationbe:integrated into street designs and improvements. It also states that the amount.of paving and "the apparentwidth of streets should be reduced where possible. This section includes a description of the.existing traffic and circulation conditions, including transit, pedestrianand cyclist,: around the project site, and an analysis of the potential impacts the projectmay be expected to have :on these conditions. '® Gatti Subdivision Traffic Impact Analysis City of Petaluma Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. Page 5 April 22, 2003 Existing Conditions Description of Study Area The followings a summary of the study yarea selected in consultation with staff at,the'City of Petaluma for study in considering the potential impacts of the, proposed project. Sonoma.Mounta h Parkway is a four -lane parkwa y with alandscaped median and`limited,access. Connecting local streets provide access to residential subdivisions. The Santa Rosa,Junior College,(SRJC) Petaluma Campus is located; on the,east side:of Sonorna Mountain Parkway near the south side,of the study area. On the southeast comer of-Sonoma Mountain.Parkway/Riesling Road is the_G &G Market neighborhood shopping center with right -turn access only on Sonoma Mountain:Parkway and full access on Riesling. Road. Riesling Road is a' two -lane collector street which provides access to the G &G shopping center and residential areas to the east: There are residential units fronting , iesling Road along the north side of the streetbbetwe.en Sonoma.Mountain Parkway and Casella Court., These unitsare separated from the through traffic lanes "by a narrow landscaped median with access points.just,west of Casella Court and east of Sonoma Mountain Parkway. The "tee" intersection,of Sonoma Mountain Parkway /Junior:Colleue is signalized. Thewestbound approach has one shared leftturn- rightturn lane. The northbound approach has one right turn, lane, two. through lanes and a U -Turn lane. The southbound approach has two through lanes and one `left turn lane. At`the Sonoma 'Mountain, Parkway /Shopping�Center driveway location, there is,a median on Sonoma Mountain Parkway which makes the shopping,cenier- entrance right.tutn in, ,right turn out only. The exiting right turn is controlled by a stop sign. Sonoma Mountain- Parkway /Riesling Road is,a. signalized'" tee "' intersection. There two,.t ugh lanes and one left turn,lane in the southbound direction. The:northbound approach has twothrough lanesand one U- Turn lane. The Riesling Road westbound approach ha "s one -left turn lane and one right turn lane., The intersection of SonomaMountainParkway /Ely'Road- Colombard Road asignalized intersection with split phasing on the eastbound and westbound Ely- Colombard Road approaches.. The approach has°one,shared through =right turn lane, one ;through lane and alert turn lane. The northbound�approach has one left turn lane, two throughlanesand one right turn. lane'. `The eastbound Colombard Road approach has one shared lane for <all directions while tfie westbound Ely Road.approach has one left.turn:lane and ;a shared through right turn lane. Riesling Road/Casella Court is controlled by a single,= lane; roundabout. The locations of the, study area intersections are shown in Figure 1. Existing Conditions In the Existing Conditions sc6hario:operation is ased on current.traffic volumes duringthe a.m. . and p.m. peak periods. Turning movement volumes for the study intersections were obtained specifically for Gatti Subdivision Traffic Impact Analysis City of Petaluma Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. Page 6 ' April. 22, 2003 3 7/02 O 'N c n' Cl) °Na- (17) `- 14(11) i 148(137) L. r 186(171) "1 t f o M :1 . •. L tiC '0: o 4 7102 o N c n' 4 17 °Na- (17) `- 14(11) .1 j 1, f - 303(209) (18)36 "1 t (8) 9 _' :1 (35)34 L 5 7/02 N i 4 CD `r .(5) d - 23(21) . •) (► I 1 ( (31)20 "1 t (12)10 Z. 5 Z (9) 2 a :s S LEGEND ® Study Intersection ____ Future Roadway xx A.M. Peak Hour Volume (xx) P.M. Peak Hour Volume F ure.1 Study Area and Existing Traffic Volumes Gatti Subdivision Traffic Impact Analysis WTRANS Whitlock & We! n berge r Tra n s portation Inc. City Of Petaluma PET067.al 12./02 this analysis on July 19, 2002. Because the SRJC`was in.its summer session, traffic counts in the study area were adjusted to account forhigher attendance during the fall semester. Based-on Fall SRJC attendance conditions, Sonoma Mountain Parkway carries approximately 1:1,90.0 vehicles per day. Riesling,Road;carries approximately 5,500 vehicles.per day between Sonoma MountainTarkw. ay and the entrance to the G &G market. Residential street to the east of the shopping center each carry less than 1,000 vehicles per day. Under existing fall traffic volumes,,all of the study signalizedintersections are operating.acceptably at LOS C or better during the a. in; and p.m. peak periods. The existing volumes are shown inTigure The Level of Service calculations are summarized in Table l,.and copies are provided in.Appendix A. Table 1 C'rntinYnarv'nf F.xictin'o TntPrCP.etinn.T . evel of Service'Calculatioils .Intersection Existing Conditions Existing plus Project " A.M. Peak P.M. Peak A.M. Peak P.M. Peak Approach Delay ;LOS. Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay .LOS Sonoma Mountain Pkwy /Junior College 14..1 ;B 15.6 B 13.8 B 15.3, B Sonoma Mountain Pkwy /Shopping Cente Westbound right 9.3 A 9.9 A 9.3 A 10.0 A Sonoma'Mountain Pkwy/Riesling Rd .19.3 B 18.1 B 20.1 C 19.1 B Sonoma Mountain Pkwy /Ely Rd 22.8 Q 22.5 C 22.6 C 215 C Riesling Rd/Casella Ct 7:Q A 7.1 A 7.2 A 7.3 A Notes: Delay is *in average number of seconds per vehicle LOS =1 Level of 'Service There are two traffic circulation issues of note in the study. area. The existingmedian, on Riesling.Road buffering the homes from the shopp ng isplacedso "as;Wresult in potential, confusion for drivers exiting the roundabout in the westbound direction.. There is some dashed striping directing vehicles to the left of the median and . the primary_through traffic >route for Riesling Road. However, most drivers' instinctisto travel to the rightof the median. Given thatthe majority of the;drivers utilizing this movementaraxesidents,of the neighborhood, driversShould become familiar with the,rouie. Second, on Riesling Road .there is a mid - block crossing between the neighborhood and the shopping center marked by pedestrian crossing signs for both directions of travel. However, the warning,sign for westbound drivers is located adjacent to the houses rather than on the median, so its visibility is limited. Alternative Transportation Modes _ Transit • Public transit in the study area is provided by the'Petaluma Transit and Golden Gate Transit. Petaluma Gatti Subdivision Traffic; Impact Analysis City of Petaluma Whitlock & Weinberger' Transportation, Inc. Page 8 April 22, 2003 • Transit Route 3 operates on Sonoma Mountain Parkway-near Riesling Road and provides access to downtown Petaluma. Golden Gate Transit Route 76 provides access between Rohnert Park and San Francisco with stops along Sonoma Mountain Parkway. Bicycles Sonoma Mountain Parkway has'ClasslI'bike lanes in the form of six foot concrete aprons. Class II striped bicycle lanes currently exist on Riesling Road between Sonoma Mountain Parkway and Casella Court. Pedestrians There are existing sidewalks within the, residential study area and along the Sonoma Mountain Street frontages except for the parcel south of the shopping center. Gatti Subdivision. Traffic Impact Analysis Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. Page 9 City of Petaluma April 22, 2003 Future_ Conditions Project Description The proj ec tsite i s located southeast of the roundabout= controlled intersection of the Riesling Road.and Casella Court. The site is currently occupied by the Gatti `Nursery which includes a series of ; greenhouses. The proposed prof ectwoul'd include construction of-50 single- family residential houses and:50 townhouse units. Access to the sitewould be'proyided via the existing southern terminus of CasellaCourt and Yorkshire Road. The. existin&Gatti'Nursery access to Sonoma Mountai h?arkway would-be closed with the roadway dedicated to the future park site. The site. plan is shown in Figure 2. Project Trip Generation For purposes of estimating the number of new °trips -that the project can.be expected to generate, Trip .Generation 6` 1 ' Edition, :Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997, was used. This manual is a standard reference.used by jurisdictions throughout the country, and is based on actual trip generation studies performed; at numerous locations in areas of various populations. Trip generation rates for Single Family Detached use. ( #2 i.0) and Residential Condominium/Townhomes use ( #230) were used to determine the expected trip generation for the project: As;shown in Table 2, the ro .osed project is expected to, enerate 772 new daily vehiciclri` s which includes P p' p J P g y p 60 new a.m. peak -hour °trips and 78 new p.m. peak -hour trips. Table .2 TY1T / nrnl-inn '.Q11 Land Use Units Daily:. A.M..P.eak` Hour P.M. Peak Hour Rate Trips 'Rate Trips In Out Rate Trips In Out Single Family Housing 50 9.57 479 0.75 38 10 28 1, 51 33 18 Condos /Townh_omes 50! 5.86 293 0.44 22 4 1.8 0.54 21 18 9 Total 772: 60 14 46 78 51 27 Project Trip Distribution:and Assignment The proposed Gatti: Subdivision is anticipated to have similartravel patterns as observed;in :the area: They project trip'distribution and assignmentto streets and highways is expected, therefore, to besirnlar'to current travel patterns. Trip:distribution percentage assumptions:for the project and traffic volume:projections are summarized iri Table'3. Table 4 summarizes' link volumes addition of the projectgenerated traffic. ` j • ;generated by the 52 The traffic.asstgnment was based on the assumption.. that the majority of the traffic single- family residential.units- wouldutilize the YorkshireRoad,to Sestri Lane to the Riesling Road /Casella Court roundabout route while traffic from the .55 proposed townhouses would access Riesling Road via Casella Court. Gatti Subdivision Traffic Impact Analysis City- of Petaluma Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. Page 10 April 22,:2003 • • 0 .. j E �f P� Source: Riechers Spence & Associates , " W lm Figu re 2 Gatti Subdivision Traffic ImpactAnalyss w - TRANS Whitlock &;Weinb&� erTransgortationInc. 12/02 Site Plan City of Petaluma PET067.al 12/02 Table'"3� T_. T:s...7lR..4i - „m.,,., w ov.:CoaFttent Ve hicle T rins; l.l'l LlJll:lV Ua�vu!.�v IDii,tributioill .a.••� •+�. --- %'.- - -- Vehicle Trips Generated (one way) A.1VI. peak P.1VL Peak. Daily' Route Percent Sestri Lane. 500 Hour Hour Riesling Road (SMP to Casella.Court) In Out In Out Both Sonoma Mountain Parkway,north of Riesling 11,860 Casella Court 39 5 18 20 10 301 Sestri Lane 61 9 28 3'1, 17 471 Riesling Road (SMP to Casella Court) 100 14 46 51 27 772 Sonoma Mountain Parkway north of.Rieslin 50 7 23 25 13 386 Sonoma'Mountain Parkway south of Riesli'n 50 7 23 25 13 386. Tattle 4 entry gmt n'lv'Tenffir Vnlumes Route Existing Project Existing plus Project Casella Court 23.0 303 533 Sestri Lane. 500 469 909 Riesling Road (SMP to Casella.Court) 5,450 772 6,222 Sonoma Mountain Parkway,north of Riesling 11,860 386 12,246 Sonoma Mountain Parkwa south ofRieslin 11-,:930 3$6 12 316 Existing plus Project Conditions The Existing plus Project Scenario presents an"evaluation of the probable traffic imp acts, associated with adding project - generated traffic to existing am and pm. peakho"ur volumes. Under these conditions„ all"of the study intersections are expected, to continue operating at acceptable levels. The traffic volumes -for Existing plus, Project "Conditionsare:shown;inF-ig 3. Summarized in Table 1 are the projectedvehicledelay and the 'Levels-of 'Service under these anticipated volumes. = It should be noted thatwith the a _ n. project- generated.tra.ffic, the weighted average delay for some of the study intersections as a whole actually decreases. hile that Average delay should increase;as volumes increase, the assignment of"tlitproj W ecttfips`results in increased volumes onmovements that have average delays. below the overall intersection average. Because thisincreases the weighting of these below - average moveents the overaltaverage in thereby The conclusion could incorrectly m be drawn that theprojectactually improves operation based on data.alone, however., it is none appropriate to conclude that the project trips':are expected 1tomAke use of excess capacity at intersections such as Sonoma Mountain Parkway /Junior 'College and Sonoma: Mountain .Parkway."/Ely Road so drivers will experience little, if any, change in conditions as a result,of the'project. • Ga0i' Traffic Impact Analysis City of ;Petaluma Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation,'Inc. Page l2 April, 2003 ' 22 o� LEGEND ® Study Intersection roc A.M. Peak Hour Volume (roc) P.M. Peak Hour Volume Figure 3 Existing plus Project Traffic Volumes Gatti Subdivision Traffic Impact Analysis Whitlock & WeinbergerTransportation Inc. City of Petalu PET067.al 12/02 5 3 N v CO M "�r U13 UO L 17 (17) 04 '-T d- 14(11) 1, 172(151)„ (18)36 r 210(186)' 00 0 C =) CD o� LEGEND ® Study Intersection roc A.M. Peak Hour Volume (roc) P.M. Peak Hour Volume Figure 3 Existing plus Project Traffic Volumes Gatti Subdivision Traffic Impact Analysis Whitlock & WeinbergerTransportation Inc. City of Petalu PET067.al 12/02 5 4 N v v fO. CO N M "�r 51(39) L 17 (17) 04 '-T d- 14(11) 1, 306(220) (18)36 ' (8) 9— (35)34 :t Y, t CO ��L 5'�- o� LEGEND ® Study Intersection roc A.M. Peak Hour Volume (roc) P.M. Peak Hour Volume Figure 3 Existing plus Project Traffic Volumes Gatti Subdivision Traffic Impact Analysis Whitlock & WeinbergerTransportation Inc. City of Petalu PET067.al 12/02 5 N v ' (5) M "�r 51(39) (31)20 ') 4 (45)20' ' L (27) 6 Alternative Transportation :Modes i Transit A small portion.of thelrips to the site would'be via public °transit.. The existing routesprovided.byPetaluma Transit and Golden Gate Transit would be adequate in serving this demand. Bicycle Bicycle trips generated by the project wll.be served bybike lanes on Riesling Road and Sonoma Mountain Parkway. Bike lanes within the subdivision are not recommended io .maintain consistency with, other residential streets in.the area. Pedestrians The project as,proposed,includes sidewalks within`the subdivision. Many of the sidewalk sections within the project also included landscape strip buffer between: the, sidewalk and road. There; are several sections which do not have.a buffer with the, sidewalk adjacentto the roadway. The 'absence of thebuffer sections is acceptablegiventhat traffic volumes on these streets would be very low and these sections all have parking adjacent to the sidewalk which'would act as a buffer between the sidewalk. and:the.movingtraffic. Residential Street Impacts residential streets east of sho in center would be expected to remain ;below Traffic volumes omthe rend. e _ pp g 1,000 vehicles,per day with ihe- addition of traffic from the proposed project. 'These streets include �Sestri Lane, Casella,Court,and Yorkshire Road. This amount of traffic is below thresholds; for, acceptable traffic volumes on' "livable §treets, which,are generally considered to have no greater than 1,500 ADT: A "livable ' street can be defined as one that maintains a pleasant neighborhood environment, supporting`pedestrian activity and encouraging neighborhood interaction without being negatively impactedby;excessive traffic volumes Because traffic volumes are projected to remain within levels appropriate fora residential neighborhood, the Gatti project is not expected to generate traffic volumes that would cause livable street standards to be exceeded. Future Conditions Future traffic volumes: forthe, study�area were obtained therecently developed'City of Petaluma Traffic Model. The model:projects future traffic demand ofihe current City ofPetaluma.General Plan °accumulation to the year 2020 and :development of the Central Petaluma Specific Plan together with completion ' of circulation ' investmentsidentified :in the General ,Plan. This- traffic inodelprojectedtha tpm;peakhourtraffic into andoutof the-Junior College would double over the;next 20years. Therefore, Junior College's plans to triple the,student population`appear to,have been included inthei traffic: modelimpacts. Future traffic volumes were obtained by comparing previous' buildouttraffic .pr"ojectionswith:current traffic volumes. Itwas found that'there could 'beas much as an 24 percent increase.in traffic: "along Sonoma Mountain Parkway between the Junior College campus and 'Ely Road. Tliis�growth factor wasapplied to volumes on,Sonoma Mountain' 'F 4 and` y g stare shown:in El' Road4o obtain future traffic conditions: �Tbe resulting future,tra is vo ume Gatti Subdivision Traff e Impact Analysis City, of.Petaluma Whitlock & Weinberger`Transportation, Inc. Page'14 Apr1.22 2003 o. <v� 4 0 a e a a U d d o aa z ,3. 1 1 N C1 CAD Co v N LL7 Ch 1� 0 4 CO CO 53(73) (21) 4 (111) .- 17(14) �J L. 376(259) � .0 V CV 2 0 L 1(5) tf CV U') Cn CV Cn V' 4 3 v CO CV LL7 Ch 1� 21 (21) Ito .- 17(14) �J L. 376(259) 148(137) 4 186(171) � t � LO N E t'O 2 0 L 1(5) tf CV U') Cn CV Cn V' 4 v LL7 Ch 1� 21 (21) Ito .- 17(14) �J L. 376(259) (22)45 t (10)11 � (43)42 � LO N C "E 5 4 (5) • `r 23(21) (31,)20 � �1 (12)10 -� I - (9) 2 v LEGEND ® Study Intersection r figure4 Gatti Subdivision Traffic Impact Analysis v -Taaru Whitlock '& Weinberger Tra nsportation Inc. A d\ �dy - - -- Future Roadway roc A.M. Peak Hour Volume (xx) P.M. Peak Hour Volume Future Traffic Volumes City of Petaluma PET067.ai 4/03 Under Future,Conditions all of the study intersections are expected to continue operating atLOS C orbetter Table 5. surnrnarizes the intersection level of service conditions under future traffic volumes. Table 5 Surnmary of Future Intersection Level of`Service Calculations Intersection Future Conditions Future plus Project A.1VI.'Peak, P.M. Peak A.M. Peak : P.M. Peak. Approach . Delay LOS: Delay LOS Delay LOS 'Delay :LOS: Sonoma Mountain Pkwy /Junior College 17.7 B . 20.7 C 17.4 B 20.5 C Sonoma Mountain Pkwy /Shopping Cente Westbound right 9.5 -A 10.4 B 9.5 A 10.5 B Sonoma, Mountain Pkwy /Riesling Rd 18.1 B' 16.8 B 19.0 14 17.8 B Sonoma MountainAwy /Ely Rd 23.8 C 23.2 C 23.7 C 23.3 C Riesling :Rd/Casella Ct, 7.0 A 7..1 A 7.2 A 7.3 A Notes Delay:is in average number of- seconds per vehicle LOS = Level of Service Future plus Project Conditions With the addition of the project, generated trips, all of the study intersections are; .expected to continue operating at the -same service levels as anticipated for Future Conditions. Minor incremental increases: in vehicle delay are expected, however, intersectiondevels of service will remain unchanged with the added project traffic. It should be noted that the average delay: at the intersection. of :Sonoma, Mountain Parkway /Junior College access decreases - with the. addition, of project related traff c volurries. While this intuitively !appears to be a contradiction, this condition occurswhena project adds trips to. movements- which are underutilized or have delays that are below the iritersection.average, resulting in a better:balance between approaches and lower overall average delay. The Future plus Project:Conditions .traffic volumes are shown-in Figure 5. Su . mmarized in Table 5 are the projected vehicle delay and the Level's of Service under these anticipated volumes. • • • Gatti. Subdivision TraffclriipactAnalysis City of Petaluma Whitlock & Weinberger' Transportation, Inc'. Page 16 Apri1.22', 2003 `4 a m 0 a: P m .o 0 0 U 4e fj. a a I as �o 4 t� N 172(151) CO 53(73) 1. 3 (45 )20 — I 3 1 CO ( N 4 t� N 172(151) CO 53(73) 1. X4(111) (45 )20 — t r 21(21) O r.- CO r O cf N O Cm ifl O � v � 3 C C X 4(5) 4 Cn 172(151) �CO (31)20 210(185) (45 )20 — t r 21(21) to 0 S 0 CD C" N U3 n S 0 � a 5 X 4(5) 4 a 51(39) �CO (31)20 ��t f (45 )20 — N :" 21(21) v CO � 17 (14) .1 1, 379(270) (22)45 -� `1 (' (10)11 (43)42 CO LO , L" - N S 0 � a 5 X 4(5) CD a 51(39) (31)20 ��t f (45 )20 — N :" (27) 6 —3 v LEGEND ® Study Intersection - - -- Future Roadway roc A.M. Peak Hour Volume (xx) P.M. Peak Hour Volume Figure S Future plus Project Traffic Volumes Gatti Subdivision Traffic Impact Analysis VJ TRANS Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation Inc City of Petaluma PET067ai 4103 Conclusions and Recommendations • A pedestrian warning sign, should be addedat .the Riesling Road mid -block crossing for westbound traffic. The sign should be installed in the existing median so as to be more visible- to:through traff c onRiesling Road. • Under Existing plus Project Conditions all of the, study intersections are expected -to continue operating at acceptable levels. • Traffic volumes on the local ; residential streets including Sestri Lane, Casella , Court and Yorkshire Road would "to remain below or near. 1,000 vehicles.per day with the addition of projecttraff c. This amount of traffic is below thresholds for'acceptable:traffic volumes on "livabl'e" streets, which are generally considered to have no greater than 1,500 ADT. • UnderF,uture plus Project- Conditions all of the study intersections are expected to..continue at; acceptable levels. Adequate pedestrian, bicycle and transit accessto the site will be available upon co"mpletibn.ofplanned site improvernents. • There'are: several sections which do not have a,buffer with the sidewalk.adj aceato the roadway. The absence of the buffer sections is acceptable given that traffic volumes,onthese,streets would be very low and these sections all have :parking adjacent to the sidewalk which would actas a buffer between the - sidewalk and the moving traffic. 0.. Gatti,Subdiv"is'idn Traffic Impact Analysis. City .of Petaluma Whitlock: &Weinberger Transportation, Inc. "Page 18 April 22, 2003 Study Participants Project Engineer: Report Review: Technician/Graphics: Report, Production: Data Collection: References Study Participants and Refe rences Steve Weinberger, P.E.,.P.T.O.E. Dalene J. Whitlock, P.E., P.T.O.E. Debbie Dunn Ginger Carney Noah Garcia Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000 Trip Generation, 6 11, Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997 Traffic Manual, Caltrans City of Petaluma General Plan Petaluma Zoning Ordinance 11 0 Gatti Subdivision .Traffic Impact Analysis City of Petaluma Whitlock & Weinberger' Transportation, Inc. Page 19 April 22, 2003