No preview available
01. U-2005-20 Peter Ko CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: U-2005-20, ASA-2005-18, EA-2Q05-16 Agenda Date: December 20, 2005 Applicant: Peter Ko (for Sandhill Properties/Whole Foods Market) Owner: Paul & Barbara Weiss Location: 20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard, APN 316-31-018, -020 APPLICATION SUMMARIES: USE PERMIT to demolish structures associated with a former car dealership and construct a new 68,214 square foot one-story market with mezzanine level. ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL for a new 68,214 square foot one-story market with mezzanine level. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1. Recommend the granting of a negative declaration, file no. EA-2005-16 2. Recommend approving the Use Permit, file no. U-2005-20, based on the model resolution. 3. Recommend approving the Architectural & Site Approval, file no. ASA-2005-18, based on the model resolution. . Project Data: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: Site Area: Commercial/ Office/Residential P (Heart of the City) 5.68 acre Building Square Footage to be Demolished: Proposed Building Square Footage: Ground Floor: Mezzanine: Total Building Coverage: Floor to Area Ratio: Maximum Building Height: Actual Building Height: Required Parking: Store: Bar Seating: Café Seating: Provided Parking: Hours of Operation: 30,981 square feet (car dealership) 63,894 square feet 4.320 square feet 68,214 square feet 25.8% 27.6% 36 feet varies-35 feet maximum 68,214 sq. ft./250 sq. ft./parking stall = 22 seats/3 seats/ parking stall = 100 seats/4 seats/parking stall= 281 stalls 272.9 stalls 7.3 stalls (exempt, see Exhibit A) 376 stalls 8:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. I-I U-2005-20, ASA-2005-18 Pa~e no. 2 Projected Total Employees: 400 Projected Employees (at one time): 100 -125 Environmental Assessment: Mitigated Negative Declaration December 20, 2005 BACKGROUND: The applicant, Peter Ko, is requesting a use permit and architectural & site approval to demolish a former car dealership and' construct a 68,214 square foot grocery store with café. The 5.68 property consists of two parcels located near the northeast corner of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Stelling Road. The property is surrounded by a church/ daycare to the north, an office building to the east, small commercial buildings and a church to the south, and a gasoline service station and the City Sports Center to the west. De Anza College is located diagonally away at the southwest corner of Stelling Road and Stevens Creek Boulevard. DISCUSSION: Site Layout. The proposed building is situated on the eastern quarter of the property facing Stelling Road. There is one main north/ south driveway aisle that opens on Stevens Creek Blvd. The other driveway aisles run predominantly east/west and open on Stelling Road in two locations. There are two public entries - one on the southern third of the front elevation and the main entry on the northern third. The main public exit is centered between the entrances. Along the Stevens Creek Boulevard frontage, a café will be located at the corner of the building near the main driveway with a semi-circular outdoor eating area. The employee/ administration mezzanine level will have a balcony opening on the boulevard. A multi-aisle sunken loading dock is located at the northern end of the building at the rear of the property. The dock is completely enclosed and fitted with roll-up doors. No other buildings are being proposed with this application. Potential future building pads are shown merely to indicate how future redevelopment may integrate with this project. Architecture and Building Materials. The design was reviewed and approved by the City Architect, Larry Cannon. The building will be constructed of concrete masonry blocks with a sand color finish. The public sides of the building, the south and east sides, will be articulated horizontally and vertically and detailed with materials that will give the premises an "organic" look: a stone base, timber posts integrated with sloped metal canopies, slats made from recycled products to decorate roof ends and form cornices of building walls. One of the more interesting features are the timber I-~ 2 U-2005-20, ASA-2005-18 December 20, 2005 Page no. 3 posts at the café, which will have branching struts to evoke the appearance of trees. Unadorned sections of the wall on the public sides will be coated in stucco. Building Side Setback. The commercial building side setback in the Heart of the City Specific Plan calls for a minimum setback of 10 feet or 1/2 the height of the building wall, whichever is greater. The building is appropriately setback except for a 30-foot length of wall that is 28 feet tall and should be setback a minimum of 14 feet, instead of 12 feet. There are a number of design solutions to obtain compliance with the specific plan: 1) increasing the side setback to 14 feet, 2) reducing the height of the building element by two feet, or 3) clipping the wall height by two feet. A condition has been place in the resolution requiring the applicant to provide a design solution to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that will fix the side setback violation. Landscaping. No significant size trees will be removed with this project and about 130 new trees will be planted. Coastal Redwoods and Madrones will be planted in the setback areas to soften the appearance of the unadorned north and east building elevations. The southerly 40% of the east elevation is proposed not to be planted because of the screening provided by the adjacent office building and a row of mature Coastal Redwoods situated on the adjacent property between the existing office and proposed building. The parking lot will be populated by mainly London Plane trees, which are noted for large canopies and good shading characteristics. The parking lot swales shown on the site plan are there to detain and filter storm waters. Heart of the City landscape improvements will be installed along Stevens Creek Boulevard. A slightly modified version that mimics the street improvements in front of Peets Coffee and Panera Bread will be used of the potential for high pedestrian usage from De Anza College. This includes interlocking stone pavers set in the sidewalk and extending into the front landscape strip, and landscaped wells in lieu of a grassy strip to buffer the pedestrian lane from boulevard vehicular traffic. A series of independent trellises behind the Heart of the City landscape improvements and along the parking lot will visually tie the parking lot into the building. A flowering hedge row is not shown but has been made a condition of approval. Public Art. The recently adopted General Plan provided that such projects contribute 1/4 % of its construction valuation towardspublic art. The applicant has provided a section of the Stevens Creek Boulevard elevation for this public art, below the planned signage. Staff is concerned that this lower area will not be visible enough with the Heart of the City trees in front. Staff is recommending that the public art be placed \-3 3 U-2005-20, ASA-2005-18 December 20, 2005 Page no. 4 higher on the building or integrated with the planned signage. A condition has been added to the resolution. Parking and Traffic. Parking. The proposed 68,214 square foot building generates a parking requirement of 273 parking stalls. Added to this is the parking requirement for the bar seating, which is 8 stalls for a total of 281 parking stalls. Incidental food area seating is not charged against the grocery store parking requirement in accordance with Planning Commission resolution no. 4333 (Exhibit A). Even if an additional 25 parking stalls were required for the café seating (100 seats), the 376 stalls more than compensate for any perceived excess parking demand. There is on-street parking on Stevens Creek Boulevard in front of this property. Some of this parking west and east of the driveway entrance will likely need to be removed to facilitate truck turning movements and possible extended left turn pockets on Stevens Creek Boulevard. Truck Route. Stelling Road is not a truck route. The store operator will need to plan a truck route for deliveries, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director, and inform all of its delivery contractors. A condition has been placed in the resolution. General Traffic. A project traffic report has been prepared by Pang Engineers, Inc. and reviewed by Public Works Department staff (Exhibit B). The report was prepared to comply with City transportation level of service (LOS) policies and also Congestion Management Program (CMP) standards. The net peak hour traffic trips (excludes car dealership trips) is 2,929 daily trips with 57 trips during the AM peak hour and 328 trips during the PM peak hour. Looking at the affected signalized intersections for "Existing Traffic," "Background Traffic," and "With Project Traffic" conditions, all studied intersections continue to meet City LOS and CMP LOS standards. The traffic report did identify traffic operational deficiencies at the Stevens Creek and Stelling Road intersection that would be worsen with the Whole Foods project, but not to a point that degraded LOS below City standards. The traffic consultant recommended that the applicant study the possibility of lengthening the left turn pockets on westbound Stevens Creek Boulevard andj or lengthening the left turn pocket on southbound Stelling Road. A condition has been placed in the resolution. In addition to this study, there appears to be an unused Stelling Road "duck out" lane in front of the subject project and the church to the north. The need for this lane should be evaluated by the applicant and the Public Works Department and modified or incorporated in the project as needed. A condition has been placed in the resolution. 1-4 4 U-2005-20, ASA-2005-18 December 20, 2005 Page no. 5 Cut-Through Traffic. Staff is concerned about the potential for project traffic cutting easterly through Alves Drive. This potential cannot be studied until after the project is occupied and traffic patterns have had a chance to normalize. The neighborhood is also involved in the study. Staff is recommending that the applicant pay for this study and set aside funds to construct necessary traffic improvements. Noise. Potential noise sources include truck deliveries and roof equipment noise. Staff feels that disturbances to residential neighbors (Alves Drive) would be unlikely as the nearest residential neighbor is 260 feet away to the north. Loading dock noises will be minimized as the facility will be enclosed. In addition the building is being designed to place the majority of rooftop equipment on the southern portion of the building. Environmental Review. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) reviewed this project on December 14, 2005. It recommended a mitigated negative declaration for this project conditioning it with the traffic engineering studies for the left turn pockets and potential neighborhood cut-through traffic previously mentioned by staff. In addition, the ERC recommended a plan for the recycling of demolition materials and the siting of the bicycle racks in a usable location. Enclosures: Model Resolutions Exhibit A: Planning Commission Resolution No. 4333 Exhibit B: Traffic Report prepared by Pang Engineers, Inc. dated 10/28/05 Initial Study and ERC Recommendation Plan Set Submitted by: Colin Jung, Senior Planner C' Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developmen~:)~.L~_ G: CupertinoNT /PlanningIPDREPOR T/pcUsereports/2005ureports/U-2005-20.doc 1-5 5 U-2005-20 Cl1Y OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE Cl1Y OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT TO DEMOLISH A FORMER CAR DEALERSHIP AND CONSTRUCT A 68,214 SQUARE FOOT MARKET WITH CAFE AT 20955 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; ànd has satisfied the following requirements: 1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; 2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of this title; and 3) The proposed development is consistent with the Heart of the City Specific Plan NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Use Permit is hereby approved, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this' Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. U-2005-20 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of December 20, 2005, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. I-SA Resolution No. Page 2 U-2005-20 December 20, 2005 SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: U-2005-20 Peter Ko (Sandhill Properties/Whole Foods) 20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The recommendation of approval is based on Exhibits titled: "WHOLE FOODS MARKET /20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, CA 95014" dated 11/10/05 and consisting of 13 sheets labeled ASO.O, ASO.l, ASl.O,ASl.l, AS2.0, AS4.0, AS4.1a,AS4.1b, AS4.2, AS4.3, AS4.4, AS5.0,AS6.0, except as may be amended by the Conditions contained in this Resolution. 2. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION APPROVAL A development allocation of 68,214 square feet of Heart of the City commercial development potential is granted less the existing building area of the car dealership (30,981 square feet). 3. BICYCLE RACK LOCATION Prior to building permit approval, applicant shall identify an adequate location for a bicycle rack. 4. BUILDING DESIGN CHANGES At the building permit stage, the applicant shall revise the southeast corner of the building or change the side setback to conform to Heart of the City Specifi Plan side setback for a commercial building. Design change shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. 5. LANDSCAPING CHANGES The applicant shall modify the landscape plan to comply with the Heart of the City landscape standards, including the planting of 36" boxed trees along Stevens Creek Boulevard and the planting of a low profile flowering shrub row at the perimeter of the parking facing Stevens Creek Boulevard. The landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director concurrent with a building permit application \-SB Resolution No. Page 3 U-2005-20 December 20, 2005 6. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS. RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. 7. PUBLIC ART The Applicant shall contribute %% of the construction valuation toward onsite public art. If the artwork is located on the Stevens Creek Boulevard elevation, it shall be mounted high enough to be visible through the landscape improvements and potentially incorporated with the planned building signage. 8. SIGNAGE Signage is not approved with this use permit application. Signage shall conform to the City Sign Code. Applicant may apply for a sign exception as needed. 9. COVENANT OF RECIPROCAL INGRESSÆGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed restriction for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easement between the subject property and the abutting corner property at Stevens Creek Boulevard and Stelling Road, to be implemented at such time that the City can require the same of adjacent property owners, subject to approval of the City Attorney. The covenant of easement shall be recorded prior to issuance of building occupancy. SECTION IV: CONDmONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 10. STREET WIDENING Street widening, improvements and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 11. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. 12. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City. \-5<:... Resolution No. Page 4 U-2005-20 December 20, 2005 13. TRAFFIC SIGNS, DETAILS AND LEGENDS Traffic control signs, details and legends shall be placed at locations specified by the City. All improvement plans shall include all necessary signage, details and legends along with traffic control plans. 14. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. 15. GRADING Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/ or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 16. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Pre and Post- development calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional stonn water control measures are to be installed. 17. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. 18. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits. Fees: a. Checking & Inspection Fees: b. Grading Permit: c. Development Maintenance Deposit: d. Storm Drainage Fee: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost $ 5% of On-Site Improvement Cost $ 1,000.00 $ 13,180.60 \-5 b Resolution No. Page 5 U-2005-20 December 20, 2005 e. Power Cost: f. Map Checking Fees: g. Park Fees: ** N/A N/A Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements b. Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. ** Developer is required for one-year power cost for streetlights 19. TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. 20. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water for water service to the subject development. 21. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in your grading and street improvement plans. 22. AMENDED DEVELOPMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP) REOUlREMENTS In addition, the applicant must include the use and maintenance of site design, source control and stormwater treatment BMP's, which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. The property owners with treatment BMPs will be required to certify on-going operation and maintenance. 23. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT The applicant must obtain a notice of intent (NOI) from the State Water Resources Control Board, which encompasses a preparation of a Storm Water Pollution \-s ~ Resolution No. Page 6 U-2005-20 December 20, 2005 Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMP' s) to control storm water runoff quality and BMP inspection and maintenance. 24. EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on-site. Erosion Control notes shall be stated on the plans. 25. TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Department. Clearance by the Public Works Department is needed prior to obtaining a building permit. 26. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The developer shall enter into a maintenance agreement with the City to maintain all non-standard items in the City's Right-of-way. 27. TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT The applicant shall submit a traffic control plan to the City to be approved to the satisfaction of the Traffic Department. 28. WORK SCHEDULE A work schedule shall be provided to the City to show the timetable for all grading/ erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 29. FLOOR PLAN FOR STORAGE, SORTING AND PROCESSING OF MATERIALS, TRASH AND RECYCLABLES Prior to building permit approval, the applicant shall submit a floor plan providing for adequate storage, sorting and processing of materials, trash and recyclables in the interior of the building. Outside storage of materials, trash and recyclables is prohibited, other than items for retail display, customer outdoor furniture and shopping carts. Plan shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. 30. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STUDY FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS Applicant shall conduct a traffic engineering study to examine on-street parking on Stevens Creek Boulevard and the potential extension of the left turn pockets and lanes on Stevens Creek Boulevard and Stelling Road as described in a traffic report prepared by Pang Engineers Inc. and dated 10/28/05. The utility of the "duck-out" Stelling Road lane fronting the project shall also be evaluated. Work shall be coordinated through and approved by the Public Works Department. Street improvements as needed shall be constructed by the applicant to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. \-5 ~ Resolution No. Page 7 U-2005-20 December 20, 2005 31. TRAFFIC STUDY FOR POTENTIAL CUT-THROUGH TRAFFIC Applicant shall fund a study to examine potential neighborhood cut-through traffic resulting from the project. Applicant shall pay for necessary traffic improvements to alleviate project neighborhood traffic impacts. Work shall be coordinated through the Public Works Department. 32. PLAN FOR RECYCLE AND/OR REUSE OF DEMOLITION MATERIAL Prior to demolition permit approval, the applicant shall submit a plan for the reuse And recycling of demolition debris. 33. MERGING OF PARCELS Prior to building occupancy, the property owner shall merge the two parcels into one lot. 34. TRUCK ROUTE PLAN The applicant shall develop a truck route plan to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The applicant shall ensure that the market and its suppliers abide by the truck route plan. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of December 2005, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABST AlN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Gilbert Wong, Chairperson Planning Commission G :Cupertino/planning/PD Reporf/RES¡U-2005-20 \-s- C) ASA-200S-18 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN ARCHITECTURAL & SITE APPROVAL FOR A 68,214 SQUARE FOOT MARKET AND CAFÉ AT 20955 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: ASA-2005-18 Peter Ko (Sandhill Properties/Whole Foods Market) 20955 Stevens Creek Blvd., APN 326-31-018 & -020 SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following requirements: 1. The proposal, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; 2. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of this chapter, the General Plan, and zoning ordinance; 3. The proposal will use materials and design elements that compliment neighboring structures; and 4. The proposal is consistent with the standards and design guidelines of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Architectural and Site Approval, File No. ASA- 2005-18, is hereby approved, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and \-6 ~ Resolution No. Page 2 ASA-2005-l8 December 20, 2005 That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. ASA-2005- 18 set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of December 20, 2005, and are incorporated by reference herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The recommendation of approval is based on Exhibits titled: "WHOLE FOODS MARKET/20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, CA 95014" dated 11/10/05 and consisting of 13 sheets labeled ASO.O, ASO.l, ASl.O,ASl.l, AS2.0, AS4.0, AS4.1a,AS4.1b, AS4.2, AS4.3, AS4.4, AS5.0,AS6.0, except as may be amended by the Conditions contained in this Resolution. 2. DEVELOPMENT ALLOCATION APPROVAL A development allocation of 68,214 square feet of Heart of the City commercial development potential is granted less the existing building area of the car dealership (30,981 square feet). 3. BICYCLE RACK LOCATION Prior to building permit approval, applicant shall identify an adequate location for a bicycle rack. 4. BUILDING DESIGN CHANGES At the building permit stage, the applicant shall revise the southeast corner of the building or change the side setback to conform to Heart of the City Specifi Plan side setback for a commercial building. Design change shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. 5. LANDSCAPING CHANGES The applicant shall modifY the landscape plan to comply with the Heart of the City landscape standards, including the planting of 36" boxed trees along Stevens Creek Boulevard and the planting of a low profile flowering shrub row at the perimeter of the parking facing Stevens Creek Boulevard. The landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director concurrent with a building permit application. 6. NOTICE OF FEES. DEDICATIONS. RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to I -S .:L Resolution No. Page 3 ASA-2005-18 December 20, 2005 Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90- day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. 7. PUBLIC ART The Applicant shall contribute 1/4% of the construction valuation toward onsite public art. If the artwork is located on the Stevens Creek Boulevard elevation, it shall be mounted high enough to be visible through the landscape improvements and potentially incorporated with the planned building signage. 8. SIGNAGE Signage is not approved with this use permit application. Signage shall conform to the City Sign Code. Applicant may apply for a sign exception as needed. 9. COVENANT OF RECIPROCAL INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed restriction for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easement between the subject property and the abutting corner property at Stevens Creek Boulevard and Stelling Road, to be implemented at such time that the City can require the same of adjacent property owners, subject to approval of the City Attorney. The covenant of easement shall be recorded prior to issuance of building occupancy. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. 10. STREET WIDENING Street widening, improvements and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 11. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the City Engineer. 12. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City. 13. TRAFFIC SIGNS. DETAILS AND LEGENDS Traffic control signs, details and legends shall be placed at locations specified by the City. All improvement plans shall include all necessary signage, details and legends along with traffic control plans. 14. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. 1-5 0 Resolution No. Page 4 ASA-2005-l8 December 20, 2005 15. GRADING Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/ or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 16. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Pre and Post- development calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be installed. 17. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the City Engineer. 18. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits. Fees: a. Checking & Inspection Fees: b. Grading Permit: c. Development Maintenance Deposit: d. Storm Drainage Fee: e. Power Cost: f. Map Checking Fees: g. Park Fees: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost $ 5% of On-Site Improvement Cost $ 1,000.00 $13,180.60 ** N/A N/A Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements b. Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. -The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. 1-5 ( Resolution No. Page 5 ASA-2005-18 December 20, 2005 .. Developer is required for one-year power cost for streetlights 19. TRANSFORMERS Electrical transformers, telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. 20. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water for water service to the subject development. 21. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMP's), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in your grading and street improvement plans. 22. AMENDED DEVELOPMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP) REQUIREMENTS In addition, the applicant must include the use and maintenance of site design, source control and stormwater treatment BMP's, which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. The property owners with treatment BMPs will be required to certify on-going operation and maintenance. 23. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT The applicant must obtain a notice of intent (NOI) from the State Water Resources Control Board, which encompasses a preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMP's) to control storm water runoff quality and BMP inspection and maintenance. 24. EROSION CONTROL PLAN The developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on-site. Erosion Control notes shall be stated on the plans. 25. TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Department. Clearance by the Public Works Department is needed prior to obtaining a building permit. 26. MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The developer shall enter into a maintenance agreement with the City to maintain all non-standard items in the City's Right-of-way. 1-5 L- Resolution No. Page 6 ASA-2005-18 December 20, 2005 27. TRAFFIC DEPARTMENT The applicant shall submit a traffic control plan to the City to be approved to the satisfaction of the Traffic Department. 28. WORK SCHEDULE A work schedule shall be provided to the City to show the timetable for all grading/ erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 29. FLOOR PLAN FOR STORAGE. SORTING AND PROCESSING OF MATERIALS, TRASH AND RECYCLABLES Prior to building permit approval, the applicant shall submit a floor plan providing for adequate storage, sorting and processing of materials, trash and recyclables in the interior of the building. Outside storage of materials, trash and recyclables is prohibited, other than items for retail display, customer outdoor furniture and shopping carts. Plan shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. 30. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STUDY FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS Applicant shall conduct a traffic engineering study to examine on-street parking on Stevens Creek Boulevard and the potential extension of the left turn pockets and lanes on Stevens Creek Boulevard and Stelling Road as described in a traffic report prepared by Pang Engineers Inc. and dated 10/28/05. The utility of the "duck-out" Stelling Road lane fronting the project shall also be evaluated. Work shall be coordinated through and approved by the Public Works Department. Street improvements as needed shall be constructed by the applicant to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 31. TRAFFIC STUDY FOR POTENTIAL CUT-THROUGH TRAFFIC Applicant shall fund a study to examine potential neighborhood cut-through traffic resulting from the project. Applicant shall pay for necessary traffic improvements to alleviate project neighborhood traffic impacts. Work shall be coordinated through the Public Works Department. 32. PLAN FOR RECYCLE AND/OR REUSE OF DEMOLITION MATERIAL Prior to demolition permit approval, the applicant shall submit a plan for the reuse And recycling of demolition debris. 33. MERGING OF PARCELS Prior to building occupancy, the property owner shall merge the two parcels into one lot. 34. TRUCK ROUTE PLAN The applicant shall develop a truck route plan to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. The applicant shall ensure that the market and its suppliers abide by the truck route plan. )-5 rn CITY OF CUPERTINC 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 EXHIBIT A RFSOIUI'ION NO. 4333 OF THE PIANNING OJMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERl'INO INI'ERPREl'ING THE INCIDENTAL PROVISION OF INDOOR FOOD SERVICE AREA SEATING AS A PERMITl'ED USE IN A REI'AIL GROCERY OurLEI' UNDER DEFINID CIRCUMSrANCES 'Ihe Director of Community Development may allow irrloor seatin3" without securing a Use permtit for =nslIDÇtion of food items purchased on the premises of a retail gr=ery outlet when the following guidelines are met: 1) Availability of the seating area cannot be advertised, and table side waiter/waitress service may not be offered. 2) Food items for on premises =nslIDÇtion ItIUSt be purchased at the regular checkout =unter. (Exception: If the food item is purchased at an in-store deli =unter or similar sales area which is under the same management =ntrol as that of the main sales floor, it may then be purchased at a satellite cash register.) 3) Hours of availability for the seating area =incide with hours of operation for the grocery sales floor. 4) Management of the seating area remains the responsibility of the grocery operator including removal of litter. 5) 'Ihe exist;in3" parking space inventory for the grocery outlet site is =nsistent with City Ordinance requirements at the time the seatin3" area is installed. 6) the ability to provide incidental food service seating does not apply to "convenience markets" as defined in Section 4.2 of Ordinance 1344. 7) total seatin3" does not exceed a ratio of one (1) seat for every 500 s.f. of gross floor area. 8) no al=holic beverages will be =nsumed in the seating area. 'Ihe Director of Community Development may still require an application for a Use pernú.t in any specific case to address explicit matters of community =ncern, even when it appears that the above-stated =iteria can be met. PASSED AND ADOPI'ED this 25th day of March, 1991 at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the city of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN : ABSENT: OJMMISSIONERS: OJMMISSIONERS : OJMMISSIONERS : OJMMISSIONERS : Austin, Mahoney, Fazekas, Chrron. Mackenzie None None Mann ATI'EST: APPROVED: Isl Mark Cauqhey Mark Caughey city Planner Isl Donald Mackenzie Donald Mackenzie, Chairman CUpertino Planning Commission \pcresos\reso1344 I -LP TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................i, ii TABLE II SUMMARY - LEVEL OF SERVICE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS ..................................................iii I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... I II. SITE CONDmONS ....................................................................................... I III. TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS .................................................................... 4 A. Trip Generation.................. ................................ ................... ..... ........ .........4 B. Trip Distribution and Assignment ...............................................................7 C. Level of Service ........................................................................................ II D. Operational Deficiencies........................................................................... 15 E. Access and Circulation.............................................................................. 19 F. Public Transit ............................................................................................ 20 G. Bicycle Routes .......................................................................................... 23 IV. IMPROVEMENTS ......................................................................................... 23 V. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................ 25 APPENDIX Site Plan Intersection Counts Approved Trips Inventory Level of Service Descriptions Level of Service Calculations Street Improvements \-5 PLATE I PLATE 2 PLATE 3A, 3B PLATE 4 PLATE 5 TABLE I TABLE II LIST OF PLATES Page VICINITY MAP............................................ ................ 3 TRIP DISTRIBUTION.......................................... ........ 8 TRIP ASSIGNMENT PM PEAK HOUR................................................... ....... 9, 10 BUS ROUTES........................................................... ....22 BICYCLE ROUTES........................................................ 24 LIST OF TABLES Page TRIP GENERATION.................................................... 5, 6 SUMMARY LEVEL OF SERVICE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS.................................... 14 I-i EXECUTIVESU~RY SANDHILL PROPERTY COMPANY proposes to develop a Whole Foods Market on the northeasterly quadrant of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Stelling Road on the former Anderson Chevrolet dealership site. This project expects to generate about 4,171 daily trips, with 133 AM peak hour trips and 426 PM peak hour trips. The existing land use on the site has a trip credit of 1,242 daily trips, 76 AM peak hour and 98 PM peak hour trips. The net total trips expected are 2,929 daily trips and 57 AM and 328 PM peak hour trips. Seven intersections were analyzed for traffic impacts from the proposed project for the PM peak hour with the Highway Capacity Manual delay methodology for signalized intersections. The AM peak hour was not analyzed since the expected net project trips will not e.xceed the 100 trip peak hour threshold. Six intersections are along Stevens Creek Boulevard at State Route 85 southbound ramp (W) and State Route 85 northbound ramp (E), Mary A venue, Stelling Road, Saich Way and De Anza Boulevard. The seventh intersection is at Stelling Road and Greenleaf Drive. The Stevens Creek Boulevard at SR-85 SB ramp (W) and NB ramp (E) intersections, and at Stelling Road and at De Anza Boulevard are Congestion Management Program intersections. The three City of Cupertino signalized intersections will operate at a "D" or better level of service for the "Existing", "Existing + Approved Projects" or "Background", and "With Project" conditions. These results satisfy the City of Cupertino's level of service policy of a "D" or better LOS. The four CMP intersections will operate with a "D" or better leveI of service for the "Existing", "Existing + Approved Projects" or "Background", and "With 1-10 ~~<¡n~l1~m~~~.w~ 1 Project" conditions,and satisfies the CMP threshold requirements of an "E" or· better LOS. . The. sl1gg~sted ,StrreJ iInptovemen~,a "e,t() wi~entÞe .l1o®,si4eof.ê~eY~l1sç:~~1< ' Boulevard to City of Cupertino stancµu-çls, Tht\inte,l)tis toimproye operatioIlal - --0'" . _ ~ . ., . ~__~'.__. ..,. - --- deficiencies along StevenS Creek BouleVärd by. providin.g an increased Ie" ngth for ," ,.", ':-"""'.._"._.-;-~'.-'. <".,-' ""':'-'- . .....-.. -., : :., -, - ..' . .' . .. . . -- , . -. . . , ,- 'c- ..,,-...--.... .:-..-,,,<...,- < . .. the westbo1.llld 1eftturn lane. The traffic analysis report concludes that there is adequate capacity in the existing transportation system to develop the entire project as proposed. ii I-I \ ~~(¡)~;Jl~~~~~~ TABLED SUMMARY LEVEL OF SERVICE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS * EXISTING'" BACKGROUND") WI1H PROJECT IN1ERSECTION Count Interscct'n Intersect'n Intersect'n Date Delay(3) LOS VlC4' Delay(3) LOS V/C'4' Delay(3) LOS VlC(4) (seclveh) (seclveh) (seclveh) I. SR85 W Ramps I Stevens Creek Boulevard pM 9/29/04 27.1 C 0.728 27.4 C 0.735 27.7 C 0.742 2. SR85 E Ramps I Stevens Creek Boulevard PM 9n8104 35.1 D+ 0.731 35.2 D+ 0.736 35.5 D+ 0.748 3. Mary I Stevens Creek Boulevard PM 1016105 34.3 C- 0.656 34.2 C- 0.664 36.0 D+ 0.677 4. Stevens Creek Blvd I Stelling Road PM 10121104 48.8 D 0.814 48.9 D 0.829 52.5 D- 0.876 With Improvements: Alternative 1 51.4 D- 0.876 Alternative 2 50.0 D 0.849 Alternative 3 49.1 D 0.849 5. Saich Way I Stevens Creek Boulevard PM 10/6/05 18.7 B- 0.543 18.6 B- 0.547 18.4 B- 0.553 6. De An2a Blvd.! Stevens Creek Boulevard PM 10/21/04 41.3 D 0.796 42.0 D 0.809 42.3 D 0.819 7. Greenleaf I Stelling Road PM 1016105 187.3 F 1.100 WI CIP 1016105 22.7 C+ 0.673 22.7 C+ 0.673 23.2 C 0.689 16 * * * \ ~ J 1.:..:. Footnotes: LOS = Level of Service * Congestion Management Program (CMP) Intersection (1) Existing= represents lane configuration for "Background" and "With Project" conditions (2) Existing + Approved Projects = "Background Traffic" condition. (3) Intersèction delay = average delay for the whole intersection (4) VIC = critical volume I capacity ratio LOS calculations with 1RAFFIX per Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority I _ I ':'I . Congestion Management Program Guidelines. 0<...../ Q~<¡nJfll~~¡~~.æm #0512 10/24105 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS REPORT I. INTRODUCTION SANDHilL PROPERTY COMPANY proposes to develop a Whole Foods Market on the northeasterly quadrant of Stevens Creek Boulevard and Stelling Road on the former Anderson Chevrolet dealership. The objective of this report is to analyze the existing and future traffic conditions, provide an estimate of traffic generation for the project, assign and distribute the trips to critical intersections, and suggest possible street improvements and I or mitigation measures if required. II. SITE CONDITIONS The subject property was recently vacated by an automobile dealership with approximately 37,250 square feet of gross floor area (GFA). Stevens Creek , Boulevard is a 6 lane major east-west arterial street with a posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour (mph). Stelling Road is a major north-south 4 lane street south of Stevens Creek Boulevard with a posted speed of 35 mph. Stelling Road north of Stevens Creek Boulevard narrows down from 4 to 2 lanes north of the project site with a posted speed of 30 mph. State Route 85 is a 6 lane freeway with 2 of the lanes operating as High Occupancy Vehicle (HOY) lanes, and with a posted speed of 65 mph. 1-280 is an 8 lane freeway with 2 of the lanes operating as HOV lanes, and with a posted speed of 65 mph. Mary Avenue is a two lane north-south street. Saich Way )-1 'b I is a 2 lane north-south street. De Anza Boulevard is a 6 to 8 lane north-south major arterial street south of Stevens Creek Boulevard, and an 8 lane street north of Stevens Creek Boulevard, with a posted speed of 40 mph. The site is bounded on the south by Stevens Creek Boulevard and southerly thereof with commercial retail uses such as Panda Express, T-Mobile, Starbucks, J&J Hawaiian BBQ, etc. Southwest of the project site is De Anza College. Westerly of the project site is Stelling Road and the Cupertino Sports Center. To the north is the N.C. Abundimt Church and single farrùly residences. To the east are office buildings ego Stevens Creek Office Center (Plate 1). } -Itr 2 m. TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS A. Trip Generation The Whole Foods Market is planned for a maximum of 68,000. square feet.(I) The project is expected to generate about 4,171 trips per day. During the AM peak hour, 133 trips will occur with 81 inbound and 52 outbound. For the PM peak hour, 426 trips are expected with 217 inbound and 20.9 outbound. The "existing" land use on the site is an automobile dealership with about 37,250. square, and has a trip credit of 1,242 daily trips, 76 AM and 98 PM peak hour~ trips., /, l / ,fit,> \!.,~- 11.\' " ('.' :. _/''' "II, 0ìll '! ' "f''','I'' "1-/1',.,(,,' i"i (, ,?? ,-, ','_ "- - - 1" i The net total trips expeCted is thus 2,929dàilytrip;: During the AM peak hour, about ' 57 trips are expected with 25 inbound and 32 outbound. The AM peak hour is not evaluated since the 100 peak hour trip threshold is not satisfied.(2) For the PM peak hour, about 328 trips are expected with 179 inbound and 149 outbound (Table I). The PM peak hour is evaluated for the "worst case" condition. (I) The preliminary site plan shows 67,542 square feet, early October, 2005. (2) Ref. : City of Cupertino, Public Works Department and Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Guidelines. 4 \ - \Cp Table I TRIP GENERATION (continued... ) . LAND USE UNIT TRIP DAILY AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR RATE TRIPS TRIPS TRIPS IN OUT IN OUT EXISTING LAND USE (CREDITS): 1. Automobile Dealership 37,250 33.34 (a) 1242 74% 26% 39% 61% sq.ft. AM .......... 2.05(b) .......... 56 20 76 PM .......... 2.64 (b) .......... .......... .......... 38 60 98 NET PROJECT: DAILY 2929 AM .......... .......... .......... 25 32 57 PM .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 179 149 328 AM = Morning Peak Hour PM = Evening Peak Hour sq.ft. = square feet Ref.: (I) Institute of Transportation Engineers, "Trip Generation", Seventh Edition, 2003 (2) San Diego Association of Governments, ''Traffic Generators", April, 2002 (with 40% Passby Trips) (a) Per 1,000 square feet per day (b) Per 1,000 square feet per peak hour 10-5-05 #0512 \-\ß &1,~IiiM<:iÄ¡¡~~~~ Page 2 of2 B. Trip Distribution and Assignment The trips are distributed and assigned based on existing traffic volumes, and other projects in the proximity of this development. The trip distribution is shown below and on Plate 2. A summary of the trip distribution is as follows: 1. North (35%) State Route 85 10% Stelling Road 15% De Anza Boulevard 10% 2. West (15%) Stevens Creek Boulevard 15% 3.~ (5%) Stevens Creek Boulevard 5% 4. South (45%) State Route 85 10% Stelling Road 20% De Anza Boulevard 15% -' TOTAL 100% The trips are more specifically assigned on Plates 3A and 3B for the PM peak hours. \-,o¡ 7 'Ó U 'Ó > :z; > ãi - ãi ~ ~ " ; " ~ " tJ ... () L- - 0> fI '" ~ "" fI <: .a LO ¡ " ~ <: > E C> " " > <ñ :J 1--'- ~ ., .... z VI De Anza Blvd. Ül Mary Ave. 11 c: t 0 ~, :¡:; u '" I') ~ ., to L- '" .... CI c: Z 6) W @ <.:> e w ...J 'Ó 'Ó > > ãi ãi ~ ~ ., ., I!! LO ..... I!! () Jf tJ ..... L fI fI ï <: <: co " ., ~ > -"" > ., "" ., .... RT. 85 .... VI Stellinc¡ Rd. VI (East Ramp) Saich Way t ...: t to_ o "" - 0 LO I') ., .q- "" c: ., " ... c.:> 8 (0) 8 'Ó '0 > > ãi ãi ",,0 I') ~ I- ~ LO I') "" ., ., I LV I!! Z 0::: "" LO ., ... tJ W ::> "" ~ () ., ¡ L '" m ~ 0 fI > fI <: :;;: <: _I') t") Z I ., ., to > .... > <..9 ., C ".";,,, eo. ~ w ~ RT. 85 .... VI (f) VI I- « (West Ramp) tO~ l « (f) w I "" -! « 0.. ro--.J . 0.. "" 0.. ""- I') ~ ~ ..... to 0::: "" 0.. l- e e \ -d~ .. i C. Level of Service A maximum of seven signalized intersections in the vicinity of the project site were selected by the City of Cupertino's Department of Public Works for level of service analyses for the PM peak hour. The intersections were evaluated with the TRAFFIX(I) software program for several conditions: 1. Existing (year 2004 I 2005); 2. Existing + Approved Projects ("Background Traffic"); 3. "Background Traffic" + Project ("With Project"). A Congestion Management Program analysis was performed at four of the seven signalized critical intersections, namely Stevens Creek Boulevard at State Route 85 southbound ramp CW), State Route 85 northbound ramp (E), Stelling Road and De Anza Boulevard, for the above three conditions. A fourth condition "Cumulative" or "With Growth" which represents the near term growth of traffic, was also considered. The "Existing" calculations and list of approved and pending projects were supplied by the City of Cupertino. The approved projects were reviewed and consist of the following projects in proximity to the project site: 1. Cupertino City Center with 205 apartments, 7,000 square feet retail, and a hotel with 217 units. (2) (I) Traffic Impact Analysis Software, Dowling Associates, Inc. (2) The approved trips inventory (A TI) was reviewed and where discrepancies were found, the higher volumes were used to denote a "worsl case" condition. 11 \ -J3 The pending projects list were reviewed and there were no projects in the proximity of the project site that were significant in nature. All of the above approved and pending projects were reviewed and the PM peak hour trips assigned to the critical intersections. The critical volume to capacity (VIC) ratios, average delay and level of service (LOS) were calculated based on the Highway Capacity Manual Delay Methodology for signalized intersections. The City of Cupertino's Transportation Policy requires a minimum standard LOS of "D". A significant impact is defined as the proposed project causes the LOS to deteriorate from LOS "D" or better under the "Background" condition to the unacceptable "E" or "F" - LOS. For intersections operating at the unacceptable "E" or "F" _ LOS under the "Background" condition, a significant impact is defined as the proposed project causes: 1. an increase in critical delay value of 4.0 or more seconds, AND 2. an increase in the critical VIC ratio of 0.010 or more. Six of the seven intersections are assumed to operate with the existing lane patterns and signal timing. For the Stelling Road I Greenleaf Drive intersection, the City of Cupertino has in progress a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to convert the shared left-thru-right movements along Stelling Raod to a separate left, and a shared thru-right lane pattem. Additionally, the traffic signal and its operations will be modified e.g., an increase in the cycle length from 60 to 90 seconds. These CIP improvements are considered as part of the "Existing", "Background" and "With Project" conditions. 12 \ -J 4- A summary of the LOS results are contained on Table n. For the "With Project" condition, the three City of Cupertino signalizeçl intersections at Stevens Creek Boulevard I Mary Avenue, Stevens Creek Boulevard I Saich Way and Stelling Road I Greenleaf Drive will operate with a "D" or better LOS for the "Existing", "Existing+Approved Projects" or "Background", and "With Project" conditions (Table 11). For the four CMP intersections, namely Stevens Creek Boulevard I State Route 85 SB ramp fYi), and Stevens Creek Boulevard I State Route 85 NB ramp (E), Stevens Creek Boulevard I Stelling Road, and Stevens Creek Boulevard I De Anza Boulevard, the significance criteria is defined differently. The minimum standard is an "E" - LOS. A significant impact is defined as the deterioration from LOS "E" or better under the "Background" condition to the unacceptable "F' LOS. For intersections operating at the unacceptable "F' - LOS under the "Background" condition, a significant impact is defined as the proposed project causes: I. an increase in critical delay value of 4.0 or more seconds, AND 2. an increase in the critical V/C ratio of 0.010 or more. A summary of the CMP - LOS results are also contained on Table n. For the "Existing", "Existing+Approved Projects" or "Background" and "With Project" conditions, the four CMP intersections will operate with a "D" or better LOS. 13 \-d5 TABLE II SUMMARY LEVEL OF SERVICE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS * EXISTING(l) BACKGROUND(2) WITH PROJECT INTERSECTION Count Intersect'o Intersect'" Intersect'n Date Delay(3) LOS V/C(4) Delay(3) LOS V/C(4) DelayO> LOS VIC(4) (seclveh1 (seclveh 1 ( seclveh) 1. SR85 W Ramps I Stevens Creek Boulevard PM 9/29/04 27.1 C 0.728 27.4 C 0.735 27.7 C 0.742 2. SR85 E Ramps 1 Stevens Creek Boulevard PM 9/28/04 35.1 D+ 0.731 35.2 D+ 0.736 35.5 D+ 0.748 3. Mary 1 Stevens Creek Boulevard PM 10/6/05 34.3 C- 0.656 34.2 C- 0.664 36.0 D+ 0.677 4. Stevens Creek Blvd 1 Stelling Road PM 10/21/04 48.8 D 0.814 48.9 D 0.829 52.5 D- 0.876 With Improvements: Alternative I 51.4 D- 0.876 Alternative 2 50.0 D 0.849 Alternative 3 49.1 D 0.849 5. Saich Way I Stevens Creek Boulevard PM 10/6/05 18.7 B- 0.543 18.6 B- 0.547 18.4 B- 0.553 6. De Anza Blvd.! Stevens Creek Boulevard PM 10/21/04 41.3 D 0.796 42.0 D 0.809 42.3 D 0.819 7. Greenleaf 1 Stelling Road PM 10/6105 187.3 F 1.100 W/CTP 10/6105 22.7 C+ 0.673 22.7 C+ 0.673 23.2 C 0.689 * * * Footnotes: LOS = Level of Service * Congestion Management Program (CMP) Intersection (I) Existing= represents lane configuration for "Background" and "With Project" conditions (2) Existing + Approved Projects = "Background Traffic" condition. (3) Intersection delay = average delay for the whole intersection (4) VIC = critical volume 1 capacity ratio LOS calculations with 1RAFFlX per Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Congestion Management Program Guidelines. ) -;)tp Q~<¡~~~~ #0512 10/24/05 A detailed freeway analyses was not performed for the project. By observation, the capacity on SR-85, which contains two mixed flow and one high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction has a capacity of approximately 5500 [(2x2200)+(lxllOO)]. The maximum directional peak hour project trips expected on SR-85 for example is 18. This represents 0.33% (18/5500) or less than 1% of the directional freeway capacity. Thµ~;'lli~rç~ís'n¡;'fi~~W~YXrtipåhf:irôñ1.'lliis" ~~Þ~2j§t;" i:ThR/!,¡:he],®äJysjS' jn,dic~te~lliåith~,'~jtY'o(çupeítinô·s'];þ§.,·pçHçY·,.is' ,satiSfied', '.:':''''.'' :,':;:,-''',.~'~,;.';.'.i':<,\.,:;,;:,."c_,;".,_",;_':',_,,' ";'.'." -.:.':<-:<~. '..-: ".'_·c.,.,,,--" """ -, ., .. ."'.".,', " ,'wi¡:h no significant ,traffic'"impaC~s.an:dµ¡atthe"ÇMP's" hO§Ì'o!icýis3.1so ' " satisfied. , D;',Q"',EJ,µ1JQl'I~D,EFJCIENqES " ;-,,:. ,-;",., The Stevens Creek Boulevard I Stelling Road critical intersection operates with a LOS of "D" and "D-" for the "Background" and "With Project" conditions respectively for the PM peak hour. WWl[t!i.if~~~r¢1:i!>*,sa.ti~f.i~~t:h¡:"·:p'Yor '{)(:tte~,Ǻ$;llii"ésli~ld;iliéIéftan(fag:¡:lttú@.ftôïuht~~'¡j¡:è-ritþer:high:;;;'In an': attè~p.t,t!'!t!111'!9y~,~,~þp~t!!t,ióíis¡¡,t ¡:hiS,ï,ntè~eCt,ion~- théleftìiñ(right: turn i "stora.gelC:fI~sllJ.~y "þc;c~!1;lp~eH.\"dt:htl1Ë ,\';Çt1lª.lgC::fI1and teCJ.uirellJ.ents. " ..... -_'0-'" _, .:". ___ c. '__''':' _"'.:'''"-:. ·'!':.-~~·__'c·:·-êL':~":::'-' _"~:__'._;_.._ .--:.. :"..,' ,,-'---- --- -'-.. -- \ - J1- 15 Stevens Creek Boulevard . Westbound Eastbound Remarks , Volume Storage (ft) Volume Storage (ft) ""Ó I 1 ""Ó S ~ ... Õ r:: ... u ::> u ~ bO <) <) bO ~ <) .= r:: 'õ' ]> 'õ' .]3 .= ~ 'p ~ '" ~ ~ '" g .- g .- g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Left 563 616 200 260* 280* 310 373 250 320* 380* * Turn (2 (2 (2 Deficiency each) each) each) Right 208 208 0 0 0 273 273 0 I 0 0 No existing Turn separate right turn lane. Stelling Road Northbound Southbound Remarks Volume . '. Storage (ft) Volume Storage (ft) ""Ó ""Ó ""Ó "0 r:: ... g õ S ... S ... ::> u u u 0 <) bO <) ~ <) bO ~ <) ]> .= .S I .= 'õ' r:: .= ~ ... e ~ 'p e '" ~ '" ~ g .- g .- g >< ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Left 219 219 320 240 240 276 302 210 280* 320* * Turn Deficiency Right 249 249 0 0 0 271 271 0 0 0 N 0 ~xisting Turn separate right turn lane. 16 \-dß The Stevens Creek Boulevard double westbound left turn lanes have a demand of 260 feet(l) for each lane or 520 feet for the "Background" condition, and 280 feet for each lane or 560 feet for the "With Project" condition. This may be compared to about 200 feet for each of 2 lanes or 400 feet total for the "Existing" condition. While there is a current deficiency of 60 feet per lane or 120 feet, the project will _ add another 20 feet per lane or 40 feet deficiency. Thus, the total left turn lane length should be increased by 160 feet. Since the median island cannot be relocated due to existing poles and overhead lines, the 160 feet may be added only with the extension of the outside left turn lane. With the existing on-street parking in front of the project site recommended for removal, a restriping and I or widening plan for Stevens Creek Boulevard in the westbound direction is suggested. A preliminary pre-design sketch of potential improvements is shown in the Appendix. It appears that about a 3 foot pavement widening to the north on Stevens Creek Boulevard will be required to implement the increased dual westbound left turn lane requirements at the Stevens Creek Boulevard I Stelling Road intersection. The outside left turn lane will be lengthened with the proposed improvements. With this suggested improvement, the LOS will remain the same, with the left turns operating more efficiently. Similarly, the Stevens Creek Boulevard eastbound left turn lane has a demand of 320 feet for the "Background", and 380 feet for the "With Project" condition. The existing left turn storage is 250 feet. Thus, there is a current deficiency of 70 feet and a future deficiency of an additional 60 feet. The 130 feet total deficiency can only be accommodated with a second left turn lane. With the median island fixed in place due to the existing poles and overhead lines, a second left turn lane is impractical. A suggestion (Alternate I) would be to restripe the eastbound lanes along Stevens Creek Boulevard so that the outside travel lane is II feet with a 9 foot wide bike lane. The wide bike lane would operate as a separate right turn (1) Assumes 20 feet per vehicle including headways, and a poisson distribution for which 95% of the time "X" or fewer vehicles will arrive. 17 \ -.r] lane. The existing traffic signal inductor loops may require relocation to "center" within the restriped lanes. While the eastbound left turn lane storage deficiency is not directly addressed, the inclusion of a separate eastbound right turn lane would improve the intersections' average delay from 52.5 to 51.4 seconds with the LOS remaining at D-. The Stelling Road southbound left turn lane has a demand of 280 feet for the "Background" and 320 feet for the ''With Project" condition. The existing left turn lane is about 210 feet. Thus, there is a current deficiency of 70 feet and a future deficiency of another 40 feet. The 110 feet total deficiency may be accomplished by lengthening the existing left turn lane. However, the existing median landscaping would be removed and there could be a conflict with the northbound left turn lane at Alves Drive. A suggestion (Alternate 2) would be to widen Stelling Road southbound by about 2 feet to create an outside 9 foot wide bike lane. The wide bike lane would operate as a separate right turn lane. This suggested improvement may require traffic signal poles to be relocated. Again, while the southbound left turn lane storage deficiency is not directly addressed, the inclusion of a separate right turn lane would improve the intersections' average delay from 52.5 to 50.0 seconds with the LOS slightly improved from D- toD. Combining Alternate I and Alternate 2 would create Alternate 3. With both of these suggested improvements, the intersections' average delay would be improved from 52.5 to 49.1 seconds, and the LOS from D- to D. The above three..alternatives are suggested operational and street improvements, and include the widening along the north side of Stevens Creek Boulevard and restriping to create sufficient westbound left turn storage capacity. All of these suggestions are operational improvements which if implemented, would minimize 18 I-~O the operational deficiencies at the Stevens Creek Boulevard I Stelling Road intersection, and along Stevens Creek Boulevard itself. E. ACCESS AND CmCULATION Vehicular access to and from the project site is planned with two new driveways along Stelling Road to replace the existing two driveways, and one new driveway on Stevens Creek Boulevard to replace the three existing driveways. The two driveways on Stelling Road are primarily for automobiles. The one driveway on Stevens Creek Boulevard is planned for both automobiles and large delivery trucks. The intent is for the large delivery trucks to enter only from Stevens Creek Boulevard with a right turn and travel northerly in front of the Whole Foods Market, then turn left and back in to the truck dock. Thûs,itj:dmperâtive/ th~t'. th~~~stil1g···.()~istfëÿ\·~¥~g~J~\~.,~~g~!?9~~i~H.s.·ô~tþ~;iíörtJi'~!gËqf/ Stevens Creek, BOulevard be iemovè~tqiIn,p'rqve ~'v~hi~~I,¡µ,ac~c:ss.;~The trucks would unload and then exit either to Stevens Creek Boulevard or Stelling Road. If the egress is on Stelling Road, the trucks must tum north where there is no apparent left turn lane available to accommodate U-turns and the trucks would enter into a residential area. Stelling Road is not a current designated truck route. (I) If the trucks enter on the northerly driveway on Stelling Road, there could be a truck turning issue both off-site and on site. Perhaps the trucks would back in from Stelling Road and create vehicular conflicts on Stelling Road itself. Additionally, trucks backing in on the long east-west aisle to the truck dock could create on-site vehicular conflicts. ,q:bµ~;~þ¡¿,aþ~s.rc:m,¡ûtiª"M,Js.s).!~thafÎiC:~c!s ,è' i ~,':, t ;':::";;·'f( ;;~~:::\:<:;;:,:,\;:,_:,:: ::i_-,"" ;,'_<_ '_)'~':: /, _::,;:,<.,':'-,' <:>' ':',:i,;,,'~" :,..: :::,: '·c'··>-:)'," ::',: additional clarification fronltheappli<:¡¡nÚi~f~rtiilie $it~"pi~i~itl1~ÞiÞI>\;~giJ()' (I) Ref.: City of Cupertino, Public Works Department 19 \ -3\ The street improvements fronting the property along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Stelling Road should be constructed to the City of Cupertino standards. Sidewalks should be provided in the border area between the property line and face of curb, and existing driveways closed and new driveways constructed. F. PUBLIC TRANSIT The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (SCVTA) supplies bus service on Stevens Creek Boulevard and Stelling Road in proximity to the project site. The routes, approximate hours of operation, and headways, are as follows: Routes Hours of Operation (weekday) Stevens Creek Boulevard 23 5:00 AM to Midnight 6:00 AM to Midnight 25 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM 7:30 AM to 7:30 PM 53 6: 15 AM to 6:20 PM Stelling Road 54 6:00 AM to 8:30 PM 8:30 AM to 7:30 PM 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM 8:00 AM to 7:00 PM 55 20 Headways (minutes) 15 weekdays 15 Saturdays 20 Sundays 30 weekdays 30 Saturdays 60 Sundays 60 weekdays only 30-45 weekdays . 60 weekends 20-30 weekdays 30 Saturdays 45 Sundays I - 3 a..." The average daily bus loadings (I) as of October, 2005 are as follows: LINE ON OFF TOTAL I. Eastbound Stevens Creek Boulevard far side Stelling Road 23 193 86 279 25 55 2. Westbound Stevens Creek Boulevard far side Stelling Road 23 49 152 201 53 3. Northbound Stelling Road near side Stevens Creek Boulevard 25 23 29 52 54 55 4. Northbound Stelling Road far side Stevens Creek Boulevard 53 72 9 81 54 5. Southbound Stelling Road near side Stevens Creek Boulevard 53 0 15 15 54 6. Southbound Stelling Road far side Stevens Creek Boulevard 25 156 61 217 54 55 TOTAL 493 352 845 Refer to Plate 4 for the bus routes. (I) Source: Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, Service Development Department. 21 \ -3? G. BICYCLE ROUTES The City of Cupertino Bicycle Routes in the vicinity of the project site are shown on Plate 5. "i'Ìv}:'OOROVEMÊNTS·C The following street improvements relate to suggestions to improve access, minimize congestion and enhance the traffic carrying capability of streets in the proximity of the development. .. Improve to City of Cupertino, Department of Public Works standards, the frontage improvements on Stevens Creek Boulevard and Stelling Road, including the border area between the face of curb and the property line with a sidewalk, and the closure of existing driveways and construction of new driveways. <to Restripe westbound Stevens Creek Boulevard from Stelling Road to easterly of the project site to provide for increased left turn storage capacity. This improvement may require the widening of Stevens Creek Boulevard by approximately 3 feet. ,"3. Clarify the truck ingress and egress movements with a clear and concise truck operations plan. 23 \- 3S V. CONCLUSIONS The peak period traffic impacts have been evaluated for Whole Foods Market project. Several conclusions may be extracted from this report. They are related to trip generation, circulation and access, and intersection levels of service. I. This project is expected to generate about 4, I 71 trips per day, and 133 trips during the AM peak hour, and 426 trips during the PM peak hour. With the trip credit for existing automobile dealership land use, the net total estimate is 2,929 daily trips and 57 AM peak hour and 328 PM peak hour trips. 2. Three of the City of Cupertino's critical signalized intersections along Stevens Creek Boulevard at Mary Avenue and Saich Way, and at Stelling Road I Greenleaf Drive will operate with a "D" or better level of service for the "Existing", "Background", and "With Projett" conditions. , Thus, the City of Cupertino's "D" or better LOS policy is satisfied with an insignificant impact.' 3. The four CMP critical intersections, namely Stevens Creek Boulevard I State Route 85 SB ramp ('N), Stevens Creek Boulevard I State Route 85 NB ramp (E), Stevens Creek Boulevard I Stelling Road, and Stevens Creek I De Anza Boulevard will operate with a "D" or better level of service for the "Existing", "Backgrourid" and "With Project" conditions. Thus, the CMP's LOS policy of an "E" or better LOS is satisfied. 25 I-~T 4. Operational deficiencies at the Stevens Creek Boulevard I Stelling Road intersection, and along Stevens Creek Boulevard westbound along the project frontage would be improved with street widening and restriping. 5. Vehicular access and circulation as proposed on the site plan appear adequate for automobiles with the suggested improvements in place. However, truck access requires conditions of approval for selected ingress and egress movements to predetermined driveways. The traffic analysis report concludes that there is adequate capacity in the existing transportation system to develop the entire project as proposed. 26 1- 3<ô /-·0.. /-. í 1- ( \' , -... ),........._' \ ),~, /' '\::-(It,..! ---"'-.) i ¡'- Or' ,-_/ ~~, í w(/)I- ...JeW oo~ J:oO:: ?!:u..~ ~ ~ J ¡¡ 28 - ~~ ~ ~ ~ Ii! ~ ~ u i U ~ ~ ~··W I ¡ i!~'-i ~ 33 fl~UL¡ ~ ! i1iJLh ~ ~i Idhi~ Ii 1- lUll ~U~ ItI 1$ I i I ~ I .... · . ~ -..-= I . I > , ¡¡U) . L · II I i c:( · ~ I ~ I ! EB I¡!~ b d s z ÿ-) .J.-.. II ! ~ n ~ w ! ~ f) iË 0 r' n . . . . . . . I' h~ . I I I I I I I ¡I Q '" .. > w -' " o " " w w '" U """" ~ . +0 +0 + 0 0: ',: 00 o. ~ ,J. (.:t~¡; () j-l I~): _1-:'1 " I " II! ; ~, ) ~!~_/.~~---~~ ---'=._--- m -¡r- ..I O"tOè!!l ÐNI"a.LlØ H.Lè!!ION 11 !III " ¡ ¡ ~ z w > w >- ~ . 'I Ii ! \-41 BA YMETRICS TRAFFIC RESOURCES INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT SUMMARY PROJECT: CUPERTINO TMC N-S Approach: MARY - DE ANZA COLLEGE ENT. E-W Approach: STEVENS CREEK PEAK HOUR I 05:00 PM I TO I 06:00 PM I SURVEY DATE: to /6/2005 SURVEY TIME: 4:00 PM CITY: CUPERTINO t ~ I 221 I 1.111 TOTAL 13,752 1 North :)L 205 I .,:>...", .~.,' :: 915 I .- 292 I ',',','..~,..' " "~' r >',- .- '-. '. -.- '-; - , ';_ .-" ,~~.'.- '.:i-,. -, ' " I 304 STEVENS CREEK ~ MARY - DE ANZA COLLEGE ENT. From TIME PERIOD To 04:00 PM 04:15 PM 04:30 PM 04:45 PM 05:00 PM 05:15 PM 05:30 PM 05:45 PM ! 04:00 PM 04:15 PM 04:30 PM 04:45 PM 05:00 PM 05:15PM 05:30 PM 05:45 PM 04:00 PM 04:15PM 04:30 PM 'I 04:45 PM I 05:00 PM II - 04:15 PM I 36 04:30 PM 80 04:45 PM 132 05:00 PM 191 05:15 PM 238 05:30 PM 300 05:45 PM 354 06:00 PM 401 - - - - - - - - 04:15PM ' 36 04:30 PM 44 04:45 PM 52 05:00 PM 59 05:15 PM 47 05:30 PM 62 05:45 PM 54 06:00 PM 47 -- - - - - - - 05:00PM 191 14 05:15 PM 202 21 05:30 PM 220 21 05:45 PM 222 22 06:00 PM 210 23 East Bay: (510) 232-1271 - - - - - 3 8 10 14 24 29 32 37 3 5 2 4 10 5 3 5 24 23 18 18 19 DAY: THURSDAY TO 6:00 PM FILE: SCMRCPM ARmV AL / DEPARTURE VOLUMES PHF= I 0.97 I 190 399 632 896 1,154 1,437 1,732 2,007 I PHF= I 0.90 I ~ 449 I ',~ t'- ŒÐ 252 I ~ Œ!IF=l Œ![] 1,412 1,377 I WESTBOUND Left Thru Ri.ht TOTAL 32 61 102 157 224 306 381 461 24 58 101 147 206 281 364 , 439 193 424 643 851 1,093 1.320 1,536 1,766 193 231 219 208 242 227 216 230 896 157 147 851 128 964 192 182 900 155 1,038 245 223 896 177 1,100 279 263 893 200 1,111 304 , 292 915 205 I SF/Peninsula: (4151 750-1.'117 190 209 233 264 258 283 295 275 32 29 41 55 67 82 75 80 24 34 43 46 59 75 83 75 " J,;" ik "'8..~:", . ,,·._'.r,.'"'' c. '-"3:::"'-', ';"--:'-"""-", ;-:t;~~. NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Ri.ht SURVEY DATA 5 43 2 29 37 15 83 3 67 82 18 134 7 102 123 24 199 10 130 173 28 254 16 175 235 33 326 32 212 293 36 394 58 240 341 43 446 71 274 , 394 TOTAL BY PERIOD , 5 43 2 29 37 10 40 1 38 45 3 51 4 35 41 6 65 3 28 50 4 55 6 45 62 5 72 16 37 58 3 68 26 28 48 7 52 13 34 53 HOURLY TOTALS 199 10 130 173 211 14 146 198 243 29 145 211 260 51 138 218 247 61 144 , 221 ,\i",,;~,·I-,·, 1,269~~,', '"",'):'''''' ,.. 'I~ " 1.636......... ,........,..' 28 52 85 128 183 229 285 333 622 /.332 2,089 2,920 3,830 4.798 5,753 I 6,672 28 24 33 43 55 46 56 48 622 7/0 757 831 9/0 968 955 9/9 2,920 3.208 3,466 3,664 3,752 1-4~ BAYMBTRICS TRAFFIC RBSO UR CBS INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT SUMMARY PROJECT: CUPERTINO TMC SURVEY DATE: 10/6 / 2005 DAY: THURSDAY N-S Approach: SAICH SURVEY TIME: 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM E-W Approach: STEVENS CREEK CITY: CUPERTINO FILE: SCSACPPM PEAK HOUR t ARRIVAL/ DEPARTURE VOLUMES I 04:30 PM I TO I 05:30 PM I ~ North I PHF= I 0.76 I "1:i/,Ii,)Ii4.'. ~ "," :i.._,;",,';;'_'¡""-';'--""'-_'," "_';- - "',', --. '.;' -, ., .... '-"- "'" -, ,.,',.:':...~, 'i"I ~ --1(, . " - . ",!:",-,.,-,..;:,-,., I 263 57 I ""--.",,"-,-:,- ",' ""~ 0.91 TOTAL . t>.: ,,J:\.:-:'''~~:::{;' :t:!; I 1,235 . ~ "!Ii 1,258 I 1,456 ~ g~';~2 1,315 '.., ··.·.c'.--· - I 0 ~ .,»£:', 0 1,498 ". 'Jlf ·'.'Jili' 1,297 " t l"·if"· , ,!f {. _; ~". F.":':'; . :....": PHF= I . . - . , . 0.97 I STEVENS CREEK ~ Œ::ID SAleH I PHF= I ERR I TIME PERIOD NORTHBOUND SOUTllBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND From To , Left Thru Right Left Thru Ri.ht Left Thru Ri.ht Left Thru Ri.ht TOTAL. 34 , , 04:00 PM - 04:15 PM 0 0 0 15 0 56 254 0 0 249 16 614 04: 15 PM - 04:30 PM 0 0 0 35 0 62 117 530 0 0 527 26 /,197 04:30 PM - 04:45 PM 0 0 0 49 0 104 189 835 0 0 829 34 2,040 04:45 PM - 05:00 PM 0 0 . 0 66 0 157 247 1,164 0 0 1,109 47 1,790 05:00 PM -- 05: 15 PM 0 0 0 79 0 204 320 1,455 0 0 1,440 68 3,566 05: 15 PM - 05:30 PM 0 0 0 97 0 260 380 1,765 0 0 1,785 83 4,370 05:30 PM - 05:45 PM 0 0 0 119 0 323 434 2,049 0 0 2,031 100 5,056 05:45 PM - 06:00 PM , 0 0 0 135 0 370 495 2,352 0 0 2,363 120 5,835 SUR VEY DA TA 0 0 34 I 56 254 , 0 . 614 04:00 PM - 04: 15 PM 0 15 0 0 249 16 04:15 PM - 04:30 PM 0 0 0 20 0 28 61 276 0 0 278 10 673 04:30 PM - 04:45 PM 0 0 0 14 0 42 72 305 0 0 302 8 743 04:45 PM - 05:00 PM 0 0 0 17 0 53 58 329 0 0 280 13 750 05:00 PM -- 05:15 PM 0 0 0 13 0 47 73 291 0 0 331 21 776 05:15 PM - 05:30 PM 0 0 0 18 0 56 60 310 0 0 345 ]5 8N 05:30 PM -- 05:45 PM 0 0 0 22 0 63 54 284 0 0 246 17 686 05:45 PM - 06:00 PM . 0 0 0 , 16 0 47 61 303 0 0 332 20 779 I HOURLY TOTALS ! , . 04:00 PM - 05:00 PM 0 0 0 66 0 157 247 1,164 0 0 1,109 47 1,790 04:15 PM - 05:15PM 0 0 0 64 0 170 264 1,201 0 0 1,191 52 2,942 04:30 PM - 05:30 PM 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1,235 0 0 1,258 57 3,073 I 04:45 PM - 05:45 PM 0 0 0 70 0 219 245 1,214 0 0 1,202 66 3,0/6 05:00 PM - 06:00 PM . 0 0 0 , 69 0 213 248 1,188 0 0 1,254 73 3,045 I F.a.'t Rav: (J10) 232-1271 SF /Peninsula: (415) 750-1317 I TOTAL BY PERIOD -44 BAYMETRICS TRAFFIC RESOURCES INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT SUMMARY PROJECT: CUPERTINO TMC SURVEY DATE: 10/6/2005 DAY: THURSDAY N-S Approach: STELLING SURVEY TIME: 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM E-W Approach: GREENLEAF CITY: CUPERTINO FILE: STGLCPPM PEAK HOUR t ARFUVAL/DEPARTURE VOLUMES I 04;45 PM I TO I 05;45 PM I ~ North I PHF= I 0.92 I ~·:I:\";'~"""··~ ~, ..,; """""'.¡' .'" ,y;~!' :ff;_::'~.2:~' tH,"- -:'-,':: :-"';'; '.' i'?('" ""',' . .' ~ 't't ~ I 49 44 I '. ," 0.46 . __ ' r:' ,_, . , ",." ;':",', TOTAL I 30 ---..... ~ ........ 35 I 89 I.......' t~;.'.,·· 115 . I 48 ~ .¡¡::-;: 36 I 127 ~ :'>:Þì: 62 '.-<-".,.<' , l'··"'r";'·" " i''f'' . -' , ' ~ - ' -', -'. . ,',- .' " . .:: -.. '-', ...,',,". -cc .-',,,' . '" ,- ,.-~ ,_ '0" _',"" _~ _, PHF= 0.9] , ", GREENLEAF \ ~ ~ STELL[NG I PHF= I 0.46 I TIME PERIOD NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND From To Left Thru Ri.ht Left Thru Ri.ht Left Thru Ri.ht Left Thru Right TOTAL', I SUR VEY DATA -J 04;00 PM - 04;15 PM I 0 95 2 4 113 2 10 2 3 T 5 5 10 251 04; 15 PM - 04;30 PM 2 211 2 7 243 6 18 5 13 12 13 19 551 04:30 PM - 04:45 PM 3 320 3 [2 405 9 25 10 21 22 20 26 876 04;45 PM - 05:00 PM 5 462 4 22 589 19 37 18 36 28 32 39 1,291 05;00 PM - 05:15 PM 5 567 7 25 812 26 53 22 47 36 39 54 1,693 05;15 PM - 05;30 PM 9 700 10 33 996 41 62 33 55 49 49 62 2,099 05:30 PM - 05:45 PM II 841 12 35 1,192 55 74 40 69 58 55 70 2,512 05;45 PM 06:00 PM 13 966 15 39 1,377 65 88 49 76 64 63 83 2,898 TOTAL BY PERIOD I 04;00 PM - 04;15 PM 0 95 2 4 113 2 10 2 3 5 5 10 251 04:15 PM - 04;30 PM 2 116 0 3 130 4 8 3 10 7 8 9 300 04;30 PM - 04;45 PM 1 109 1 5 162 3 7 5 8 10 7 7 325 04:45 PM - 05;00 PM 2 142 1 10 184 10 12 8 15 6 12 13 415 05;00 PM - 05; 15 PM 0 105 3 3 223 7 16 4 11 8 7 15 402 05;15 PM - 05;30 PM 4 133 3 8 184 15 9 11 8 13 10 8 4U6 ' 05;30 PM - 05;45 PM 2 141 2 2 196 14 12 7 14 9 6 8 413 05:45 PM - 06:00 PM 2 125 3 4 185 10 14 9 7 6 8 13 386 HOURLY TOTALS 04;00 PM - 05:00 PM 5 462 4 22 589 19 37 18 36 28 32 39 /,291 04:15 PM - 05: 15 PM 5 472 5 21 699 24 43 20 44 31 34 44 1,442 04;30 PM - 05;30 PM 7 489 8 26 753 35 44 28 42 37 36 43 1,548 04;45 PM - 05;45 PM 8 52] 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 1,636 05;00 PM -. 06:00 PM 8 504 11 17 788 46 51 31 40 36 31 44 1,607 I East Bap: (510) 232-1271 SF /Peninsula: (415) 75º-13F ----- I l-f5 Level of Service Descriptions (Signalized Intersections) Average LOS Control Delay VIC Ratio - Description (Seconds) A .:::; 10.0 < 0.600 Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression an lor short cycle lengths. B+ 10.1 - 12.0 Operations with low delay occurring with good B 12.1 - 18.0 0.600-0.699 progression and/or short cycle lengths. B· 18.1- 20.0 C+ 20.1 - 23.0 Operations with average delays resulting from fair C 23.1 - 32.0 0.700-0.799 progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual C· 32. I - 35.0 cycle failures begin to appear. D+ 35.1 - 39.0 Operations with longer delays due to a D 39. I - 51.0 0.800-0.899 combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle D- 51.1 - 55.0 lengths, and high V IC ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable. E+ 55.1 - 60.0 Operations with high delays values indicating poor E 60.1 - 75.0 0.900-0.999 progression, long cycle lengths, and high VIC E- 75.1 - 80.0 ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. F >80.0 ;;:: 1.00 Operations with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to over-saturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths. Notes: LOS: Level of Service V/C: Volume to Capacity Ratio Reference: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000 \-49 Q~o~~aQ!~A COMPARE Man Oct 1715:50:52 2005 Paae3-13 City of ClIpertino CMP 2004 - ExIstIng PM Peak Hour Level Of SeMce Computation Report 2000 HCM Operallons (Base VoItme AltemaUve) ""'",,"(PM) Intersection #219: SRSS W Ramps/Stevens Creek Blvd 1642-219 [(CMP 2004)] Slgnal.SpJItIRights-fnclude Final Vol: 777""' 3 1267 lanes: 1 0 0 1 2 ~ ...{ . ~ ~ Signa_Protect Slgna/o=Protect Final Vol: lanes: Rights=lnclude Vol Cnt Dale: 9129/2004 AI ¡ls-Include lanes: Anal Vol: J- Cycle TIme (see): 110 ~ O'~ 0 0 0 ~ loss Time (see): 9 J.- 0 0 941 3 ----þo- Critical VIC: 0.728 -<4- 2 ....- =f Avg Crlt eel (seclveh): 27.4 r 0 2S7 0 Avg Delay (seclveh): 27.1 2 181 LOS: C ~ ~ t ~ rt'" Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 Filial Vol: 0 0 0 SignalaSpUIIRlghts-lnclude ~treet Name: SR 85 W. Ramp Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green, 0 0 0 7 10 10 0 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module, » Count Date, 29 Sep 2004 « 5,30-6,30 PM Base Vol, 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 841 257 181 854 Growth Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse, 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 841 257 181 854 User Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume, 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 841 257 181 854 Reduct Vol, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol, 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 841 257 181 854 peE Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1~00 Final Vol., 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 841 257 181 ~54 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 o 1.00 o 1.00 1.00 o o o 1. 00 1.00 o Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.87 0.95 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.95 0.83 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 0.'00 0.00 0.00 2.99 0.01 1.00 0.00 3.03 0.97 2.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat. : 0 0 0 4938 12 1750 0 5742 1755 3150 3800 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat, 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.44 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.22 0.00 Cri t Moves: **** **** **** Green Time: 0.0 0.0 0.0 67.1 67.1 67.1 0.0 23.7 23.7 10.3 33.9 0.0 Volume/Cap' 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.73 0.00 0.68 0.68 0.61 0.73 0.00 Delay Neh, 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.4 11.4 17.6 0.0 40.9 40.9 51. 8 36.3 0.0 User DelAdj: 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 AdjDel/Veh, 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.4 11.4 17.6 0.0 40.9 40.9 51. 8 36.3 0.0 HCM2kAvg, 0 0 0 8 8 19 0 10 9 4 14 0 1-5\ . .... -... - .. . . ,------',- ~..,... ................... ...... COMPARE Sal Oct 22 00:16:40 2005 Paqe3-11 Street Name: SR 85 W. Ramp Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------I-----------~---I 1---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 Min. Green: 0 0 0 7 10 10 0 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Sep 2004 « 5:30-6:30 PM Base Vol: 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 841 257 181 854 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 841 257 181 854 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ATI: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 0 24 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 885 257 181 878 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 885 257 181 878 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 885 257 181 878 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 885 257 181 878 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 I-~-------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.87 0.95 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.95 0.83 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.99 0.01 1.00 0.00 3.06 0.94 2.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 4938 12 1750 05809 1687 3150 3800 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.44 0.00 0.15 0.15 0.06 0.23 0.00 Crit Moves: Green Time: 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 De1ay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 0.0 0.0 HCM2kAvg: 0 0 aty of cupertino CMP 2004 PM Peak Hour l.ev8I Of Service Computøtlon Report 2000 HeM Operations (Future Volume AIIematlve) "_(PM) Intersection #219: SR8S W Ramps/Stevens Creek Blvd 1642·219 [(CMP 2004)] SignalaSpßtJRIghtÞ&nclude Final Vol: 777""' 3 1267 Lanes: 1 . 0 1 2 ..-J 4 . .}Þ. ~ Slgnal-Þrotect SIgnaÞFroled FlflalVoI: lanes: Rlghts-lnclude Vol Cnl Dale: 912912004 Rlgh~nclude Lanes: Final Vol: J- Cycle llme (see): 110 -t. 0··· . 0 . ~ Loss TIme (see): . J.- . 0 ... 3 --II>- Critical VJC: 0.735 +- 2 878- r Avg Crt! Del (secIveh): 27.7 r 0 257 0 Avg Delay (secIveh): 27.' 2 ,., LOS: C ~ ~ t ~ ~ Lanes: . 0 0 0 0 Final Vol: . 0 0 SlgnaÞ:SpliURIghls-lnelude **** **** 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 66.4 0.42 11.7 1.00 11.7 8 10.2 0.62 52.1 1.00 52.1 4 66.4 0.42 11.7 1.00 11.7 8 66.4 0.74 18.2 1.00 18.2 19 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 24.4 0.69 40.5 1.00 40.5 10 24.4 0.69 40.5 1. 00 40.5 10 **** 34.6 0.74 36.1 1.00 36.1 14 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o I-S~ - .- - - --.- ~___ .~_,-, ... _~_~ "'_h~'__ A____._._. ,__ ,._____..._"'....""'''''.'1'''..''''''''''''''-' ,....... COMPARE Sat Oct 22 22:41:18 2005 Paae3-6 Street Name: SR 85 W. Ramp Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------11---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 0 0 0 7 10 10 0 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------11---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 29 Sep 2004 « 5:30-6:30 PM Base Vol: 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 885 257 181 878 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 1267 3 777 0 885 257 181 878 0 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W/PROJECT: 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 27 0 15 22 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 1285 3 777 0 912 257 196 900 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 1285 3 777 0 912 257 196 900 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 1285 3 777 0 912 257 196 900 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 1285 3 777 0 912 257 196 900 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.87 0.95 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.95 0.83 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.99 0.01 1.00 0.00 3.08 0.92 2.00 2.00 0.00 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 4938 12 1750 05848 1648 3150 3800 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Mo~ule: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.44 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.06 0.24 0.00 Cri t Moves: Green Time: 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 De1ay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 0.0 0.0 HCM2kAvg: 0 0 CIty of cuper&o CUP 2004 PM Peak Hour Level Of ServIce Computation Report 2000 HeM Operation. (Future Volume Alternative) ProJect (PM) Intersection #219: SR85 W Ramps/Stevens Creek Blvd 1642-219 [(CMP 2004)] SIgnaI..split/Right8alnclude Final Vol: 777'~ 3 1285 Lane« 1 0 0 , . -.J 4 . ~ ~ Slgnal-Protect Slgnal-Proled. Final Vol: Laneo: Alghtþlnclude Vol em Dale: 912912004 RIghtsalnclude lanes: FInal Vol: ~ Cycle Time (see): 110 ~ 0'- 0 0 0 ~ Loss Time (see): 9 J.- 0 0 9" 3 ---... CrItical VIC: 0.742 ...- 2 9OO'~ r AvgCrilDel (seclveh): 28.0 r 0 257 0 AvgDelay(seclveh): 27.7 . '96 LOS: C ~ ~ t t-- ~ Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 RnalVoI: 0 0 0 Slgnal.SpllllRJghtszlnclude **** **** 0.0 0.00 0.0 1. 00 0.0 o 65.9 0.43 12.1 1. 00 12.1 8 65.9 0.74 18.8 1.00 18.8 20 0.0 0.00 0.0 1. 00 0.0 o 25.0 0.69 40.2 1.00 40.2 10 25.0 0.69 40.2 1. 00 40.2 10 65.9 0.43 12.1 1.00 12.1 9 10.2 0.67 54.3 1. 00 54.3 5 **** 35.1 0.74 35.9 1.00 35.9 15 0.0 0.00 0.0 1. 00 0.0 o \ -5:' - .~ --"~~... I"......".;nhl f..1 ?nn... nnwllrvo 4.......,¡.,... IIV! Ucensed 10 PANG ENGINEERS. INC. COMPARE Moo Oct 17 15;50:52 2005 Page 3-15 City of CUpertino CMP 2004· ExIsting PM Peak Hour Level Of ServIce Computation Report 2000 HCM OperatIons (Base VolLm8 AItemaUve) "'''''.(PM) Intersection #220: SR 85 E Ramps/Stevens Creek Blvd 1643-220 [CMP 2004· Existing] Signal..SplltIRIghts..nclude Final Vol: 0 22'- 103 Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 .,..J -4 .¡. .þ. ~ Signai=P1otect Slgnal-Protect Flf1alVol: lanes: Alghts=lnclude Vol Cnt Dale: 9f2B12004 Righls-lgnore Lanes: FlnalVot: j- Cyde Time (see): 110 ~ 515*- 2 0 ~ Loss Time (see): 9 .t- O 0 1594- 3 -+- CrlUcalV/C: 0.731 ..- 3 775*** 0 T Avg Crit Del (seclveh); 41.6 r 0 0 0 Avg Delay (secfveh): 35.1 0 0 LOS: D+ ~ ~ t ~ ~ Lanes: 0 0 11 0 FII1a1Vot: 266 .- 447 SignalaSplitIRI{,i\ts-lnclude Street Name:SR 85 E. Ramp De Anza Campus Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 28 Sep 2004 « 5:00-6:00PM Base Vol: 266 8 447 103 221 0 515 1594 0 0 775 837 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 266 8 447 103 221 0 515 1594 0 0 775 837 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 PHF Volume: 266 8 447 103 221 0 515 1594 0 0 775 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 266 8 447 103 221 0 515 1594 0 0 775 0 peE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 MLF Adj: 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0.00 Final Vol.: 266 8 447 103 221 0 515 1594 0 0 775 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.95 0.99 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 0.53 0.02 1.45 0.65 1.35 0.00 2.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 936 28 2536 1176 2523 0 31505700 0 0 5700 1750 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 I----------~----I I-~-------------I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.28 0.28 0.18 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.16 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 42.8 42.8 Volume/Cap: 0.73 0.73 De1ay/Veh: 31.5 31.5 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 31.5 31.5 HCM2kAvg: 15 15 42.8 0.45 25.1 1. 00 25.1 8 13 .2 0.73 52.8 1.00 52.8 7 **** 13.2 0.73 52.8 1. 00 52.8 7 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o **** 24.6 0.73 43.6 1. 00 43.6 10 45.1 0.68 27.5 1. 00 27.5 15 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 0.0 0.00 0.0 1. 00 0.0 o **** 20.5 0.73 44.8 1.00 44.8 10 0.0 0.00 0.0 1. 00 0.0 o \ -54- - ... ------ ............¡......,,,\?IV'I'ilf'\nwlln"'A...,....¡..t...lnr. Ucensed 10 PANG ENGINEERS. INC. COMPARE Sat Oct 22 00:16:40 2005 PaQ83-13 CUy of CUpertino CMP 2004 PM Peak Hour level Of Setvlce CfJn1:JutaUon Report 2000 HeM Operations (Future Volume AllemaUve) Background (PM) Intersection #220: SR 85 E Ramps/Stevens Creek Blvd 1643-220 [CMP 2004 - ExIsting] SignaÞSplll/RlghtÞInclude Final Vol: 0 221- 103 Lanes: 0 0 1 1 0 .,.J 4 t ~ ~ Signal-Prolecl SIgnaI-Prolect Final Vol: Lanes: Rights=!nclude Vol Cnt Dal&: 912812004 RlghlÞlgnore Lanes: Final Vol: J- Cycle Time (see): 110 ~ 515-· 2 0 ~ Loss Time (see): 9 ..t.- O 0 1638 3 -... CritlcalVlC: 0.736 +- 3 ,..- 0 r Avg GrIt Del (seclveh): 41.7 T 0 0 0 Avg Delay (seclveh): 35.2 0 0 LOS: D+ ~ ~ t ~ ,-. Lanes: 0 0 11 0 Final Vol: 266 .-. 447 Slgnal=SpiillRlghts=lnclude Street Name:SR 85 E. Ramp De Anza Campus Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------11---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 28 Sep 2004 « 5:00-6:00PM Base Vol: 266 8 447 103 221 0 515'1594 0 0 775 837 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 266 8 447 103 221 0 515 1594 0 0 775 837 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ATI: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 0 24 0 Initial Fut: 266 8 447 103 221 0 515 1638 0 0 799 837 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 PHF Volume: 266 8 447 103 221 0 515 1638 0 0 799 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 266 8 447 103 221 0 515 1638 0 0 799 0 PeE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Final Vol.: 266 8 447 103221 0 5151638 0 0 799 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.95 0.99 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 0.53 0.02 1.45 0.65 1.35 0.00 2.003.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 936 28 2536 1176 2523 0 3150 5700 0 0 5700 1750 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.28 0.28 0.18 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.16 0.29 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 42.5 42.5 Volume/Cap: 0.74 0.74 De1ay/Veh: 31.9 31.9 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 31.9 31.9 HCM2kAvg: 16 16 **** 42.5 0.46 25.3 1.00 25.3 8 13.1 0.74 53.2 1.00 53.2 7 13.1 0.74 53.2 1.00 53.2 7 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 24.4 0.74 43.9 1.00 43.9 10 **** 45.4 0.70 27.5 1.00 27.5 16 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o **** 21.0 0.74 44.6 1.00 44.6 10 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o \-Ss -...- -..-...--- ...- COMPARE Moo Oct 24 09:26:46 2005 Page 3-7 Street Name:SR 85 E. Ramp De Anza Campus Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------11---------------11---------------11---------------1 Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 28 Sep 2004 « 5:00-6:00 PM Base Vol: 266 8 447 103 221 0 515 1638 0 0 799 837 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 266 8 447 103 221 0 515 1638 0 0 799 837 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W/PROJECT: 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 45 0 0 37 15 Initial Fut: 266 8 465 103 221 0 515 1683 0 0 836 852 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 PHF Volume: 266 8 465 103 221 0 515 1683 0 0 836 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 266 8 465 103 221 0 515 1683 0 0 836 0 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00,0.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1..00 1.00 0.00 Final Vol.: 266 8 465 103 221 0 515 1683 0 0 836 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.95 0.99 0.92 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 Lanes: 0.52 0.02 1.46 0.65 1.35 0.00 2.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 919 28 2553 1176 2523 0 3150 5700 0 0 5700 1750 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.29 0.29 0.18 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.16 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 42.5 42.5 Volume/Cap: 0.75 0.75 De1ay/Veh: 32.3 32.3 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 32.3 32.3 HCM2kAvg: 16 16 cttyofCupertlno CMP 2004 PM Peak..... Level Of SeMce ComputaUon Report 2000 HCM 0p&raØ0n8 (Future V~ume AltemaUve) Project (PM) Intersection #220: SR 85 E Ramps/Stevens Creek Blvd 1643-220 [CMP 2004] Signal..SplltlRlghl8-1nc1ude FInal Vol: 0 221·" 103 Lanes; 0 0 1 1 0 ..; 4 ~ ~ ~ SignaI-Protect Slgnal=Protecl Final Vol: lanes; Rlghts=lnctude Vol Cnt Date: 9/28flOO4 Rlgh1Þlgnore lanes: Final Val: J- Cycle Time (see): 110 ~ 515.... 2 0 ~ Loss Time (see): 9 J- 0 0 1683 3 ----- CriUeal Vie: 0.748 ~ 3 9"- 0 r Avg Grit Del (sec/veh): 42.1 r 0 0 0 Avg Delay (seclveh): 35.5 0 0 LOS: D+ ~ ~ t ~ ~ lanes: 0 0 11 0 1 Final Vol: 2.. .- 465 Slgnal..spllVRlghls-fnclude **** **** 42.5 0.47 25.5 1.00 25.5 8 12.9 0.75 54.1 1.00 54.1 7 12.9 0.75 54.1 1.00 54.1 7 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 24.0 0.75 44.7 1.00 44.7 10 45.6 0.71 27.8 1.00 27.8 17 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o **** 21.6 0.75 44.5 1.00 44.5 10 0.0 0.00 0.0 1. 00 0.0 o \-Slo - - _.-~..._--- ...- COMPARE Moo 0cI17 15:50:52 2005 Page 3· 1 CIIy of CtJpertino CMP 2004· Existk1g PM Peak Hour lev8J Of ServIce Computetlon Report 2000 HCM Operations (8ase Volume Ahematfve) ExIsting (PM) Intersection #3: Mary Avenue I Stevens Creek Blvd. Final Vol: Lanes: Slgnal--ProtectlRlghts-lnclude 144 61 24r- ~'4 ~ ~\.. Slgnal=Protect SIgna/-Protect Final Vol: Lanes: Rlghls-lnclude Vol Onl Date: lom12OO5 Rlghls=lnclude lanes: Anal Vol: j- Cycle Time (see): 110 ~ 221 0 205 ~ Loss Time (see): 12 .t- O 1111"- 2 ---.... CrlUcaI VIC: 0.656 -<II- 2 915 --:t Avg Cm Del (seclveh): 35.3 r 0 304 0 .. Avg Delay (secIveh): 34.3 292- LOS: C- ~ ~ t ~ ~ Lanes: Final Vol.: 2 0 0 0 210 23- 19 Signal=ProtectlRlghlÞlnclude Street Name:De Anza Campus Mary Avenue Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------I------------~--I 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 6 Oct 2005 « 5:00-6:00 PM ~ase Vol: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1111 304 292 915 205 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1111 304 292 915 205 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00. 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1111 304 292 915 205 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1111 304 292 915 205 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1111 304 292 915 205 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.83 0.95 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.92 0.99 0.95 Lanes: 2.00 0.55 0.45 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.33 0.67 1.00 2.43 0.57 Final Sat.: 3150 986 814 1750 1900 1750 17504395 1203 1750 4574 1025 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.02 0.02 0.14 0.03 0.08 0.13 0.25 0.25 0.17 0.20 0.20 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 13.6 10.0 Volume/Cap: 0.54 0.26 Delay/Veh: 46.8 47.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 46.8 47.4 HCM2kAvg: 4 2 **** **** 39.7 0.70 31.2 1.00 31.2 14 26.2 0.70 43.6 1. 00 43.6 10 **** 40.4 0.55 27.9 1. 00 27.9 10 40.4 0.55 27.9 1.00 27.9 10 -51- T................... 10.0 0.26 47.4 ,1.00 47.4 2 22.1 0.70 47.0 1.00 47.0 9 18.5 0.19 39.6 1.00 39.6 2 18.5 0.49 42.7 1.00 42.7 5 25.5 0.55 38.7 1. 00 38.7 7 39.7 0.70 31.2 1.00 31.2 15 (".......orInhl(,.\.,~n.......I......A....,....¡.I...Inr. I \t!Qn_rt to PANe:;. I=N(;INF¡::RS. 1Nr. COMPARE Sat Oct 22 00:16:402005 PaQ83-1 CIty of CUpertho CMP 2004 PM Peak Hour level Of ServIce Compuhdton Report 2000 HCM Operations (Fulure Volwne Allamallve) Background (PM) Intersection #3: Mary Avenue I Stevens Creek Blvd. SignaI-ProlectlRlghts-lnclude FInal Vol: 144 61 247**" Lanes: 10 1 01 ..v4+~~ SlgnaI-Protect Slgnal-ProIecI FnaI Vol: Lanes: Alghts.=lnctude Vol Cnt Date: 101612005 Alghts-lnclude Lanes: FInal Vol: -+ Cycle TIme (see): 110 ~ 221 0 205 Á loss Tim, (see): 12 J..- 0 1155- 2 ----þÞ- CrItical VIC: 0.664 ~ 2 .'" r Avg CrlI Del (secfveh): 35.' 1= 0 304 0 Avg Delay (secIveh): 34.2 292- LOS: C- ~ ~ t ~ ~ Street Name:De Anza Campus Mary Avenue Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 6 Oct 2005 « 5:00-6:00 PM Base Vol: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1111 304 292 915 205 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1111 304 292 915 205 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ATI: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 0 24 0 Initial Fut: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1155 304 292 939 205 User Adj: 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1155 304 292 939 205 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1155 304 292 939 205 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1155 304 292 939 205 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.83 0.95 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.92 0.99 0.95 Lanes: 2.00 0.55 0.45 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.35 0.65 1.00 2.44 0.56 Final Sat.: 3150 986 814 17501900 1750 17504432 1166 17504595 1003 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.07 0.02 0.02 0.14 0.03 0.08 0.13 0.26 0.26 0.17 0.20 0.20 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 13.5 10.0 Volume/Cap: 0.54 0.26 Delay/Veh: 47.0 47.4 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 47.0 47.4 HCM2kAvg: 4 2 Lanes: 2 0 0 0 Final Vol: 210 23"· 19 SlgnaI-ProlectlRlghts-lnc!uda **** **** 10.0 0.26 47.4 1.00 47.4 2 21. 8 0.71 47.9 1.00 47.9 9 25.3 0.55 39.0 1.00 39.0 7 40.3 0.71 31.0 1.00 31.0 15 18.4 0.19 39.7 1.00 39.7 2 18.4 0.49 42.9 1.00 42.9 5 40.3 0.71 31.0 1. 00 31.0 15 25.8 0.71 44.4 1.,00 44.4 10 **** 40.9 0.55 27.6 1. 00 27.6 10 40.9 . 0.55 27.6 1. 00 27.6 10 \-X> T....m..77Mtl> Coovriaht fe) 2003 Dowllna AssocIates. Ino. licensed 10 PANG ENGINEERS. INC. COW'ARE Sat Oct 22 00:16:40 2005 Page 3-2 City of Cupertino CMP 2004 PM Peak Hour Level Of ServIce ~on Report 2000 HCM OperaUons (Future Vol.... AIIematlve) -_(pM) Intersection #3: Mary Avenue I Stevens Creek Blvd. SlgnalsProtecllAlghts-lnclude Final Vol: 144 61 24r- Lanes: 10101 ~4+.þ.~ SIgnaI-Prolect Slgnal-Protect Final Vol: Lanes: Rights-Include VoICrltDal8: 101612005 Rights-l'ncluda lanes: Final Vol: ~ Cycle TIme (see): 110 1 221 0 20S ~ Loss Ttme (see): '2 0 , 1218-- 2 -.... Crit/caIVIC: 0.677 -<If- 2 991 r Avg CrR Del (secfveh): 37.3 r 0 30' 0 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 36.0 292- LOS: I><- ~ ~ t ~ r"'" Street Name:De Anza Campus Mary Avenue stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------11---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ------------I---~-----------I 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 6 Oct 2005 « 5:00-6:00 PM Base Vol: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1155 304 292 939 205 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1155 304 292 939 205 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WITH PROJEC: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 63 0 0 52 0 Initial Fut: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1218 304 292 991 205 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1218 304 292 991 205 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 210 23 19 247 61 144 221 1218 304 292 991 205 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 210 23 19 247 61 144 2211218 304 292 991 205 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.83 0.95 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.92 0.99 0.95 Lanes: 2.00 0.55 0.45 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.38 0.62 1.00 2.47 0.53 Final Sat.: 3150 986 814 1750 1900 1750 17504480 1118 1750 4639 960 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1)---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: vol/Sat: 0.07 0.02 0.02 0.14 0.03 0.08 0.13 0.27 0.27 0.17 0.21 0.21 crit Moves: **** Green Time: 13.3 10.0 Volume/Cap: 0.55 0.26 De1ay/Veh: 51.2 50.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 51.2 50.3 HCM2kAvg: 4 2 Lanes: 2 0 0 0 Final Vol: 210 23- 19 Slgnsl",protect/Righls=lnclude **** 10.0 0.26 50.3 1.00 50.3 2 21.4 0.72 54.2 1. 00 54.2 9 18.1 0.50 47.9 1.00 47.9 5 18.1 0.19 41. 0 1. 00 41. 0 2 *1t** **** 41. 8 0.56 27.9 1. 00 27.9 11 41.8 0.56 27.9 1. 00 27.9 10 \-54 - -- -- ---- 24.7 0.56 43.5 1,00 43.5 7 41.3 0.72 31.7 1.00 31.7 16 41.3 0.72 31.7 1. 00 31.7 15 25.3 0.72 49.9 1.00 49.9 11 1"__......... I_'.........~ n-...,~_ ..~~....,¡...._ I~ INooncowi In PA~ FNr,INFFR~ 1Nt": COMPARE Man Oct 1715:50:52 2005 Page 3-11 Street Name: Stelling Road Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 I-~-------------I Volume Module: » Count Date: 21 Oct 2004 « 5:30-6:30 PM Base Vol: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 862 273 563 907 208 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 862 273 563 907 208 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF volume: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 862 273 563 907 - 208 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 862 273 563 907 208 peE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 862 273 563 907 208 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.95 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.83 0.99 0.95 Lanes: 1.00 1.07 0.93 1.00 1.35 0.65 1.00 2.25 0.75 2.00 2.42 0.58 Final Sat.: 1750 2024 1674 17502528 1171 17504251 1346 3150 4554 1044 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.23 0.23 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.20 0.20 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 18.4 25.5 Volume/Cap: 0.81 0.70 De1ay/Veh: 66.2 46.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 66.2 46.5 HCM2kAvg: 10 11 CftyolCUpeI1lno CMP 2004 - ExtStlng PM Peak Hour Level Of ServIce Computation Report 2000 HCM Operatlonll (Base Volume Alternative) ""'.... (PM) Intersection #217: Stevens Creek Blvd/Stelling Rd 1613-217 [CMP 2004] Slgnai-ProtecIIRIghts-lnclude FlnelVol: 271 585- 276 Lanes: 0 1 1 0 1 ~ 4 t .}... ~ SlgnalsProtect SlgnalsProted. Final Vol: Lanes: Righls><lnclude Vol em Dale: 1012112004 Rightsoolncludø Lanes: FInal Vol: J- Cycle TIme (see): 120 -t. 310"· 0 208 ~ loss TIme (see): 12 J- 0 1 862 2 -+ CrRlcalVIC: 0.814 ...- 2 SOT" r Avg CrR Del (secIv&t1): 49.1 '} 0 273 0 Avg Delay (sec:Iveh): .... 2 ..3 LOS: D ~ ~ t ~ ~ lanes: 0 1 0 FInal Vol: 219- 301 24' Slgnal.protectIRI~s-Include **** **** 25.5 0.70 46.5 1.00 46.5 10 27.0 0.70 48.3 1. 00 48.3 11 34.1 0.81 45.0 1.00 45.0 17 34.1 0.81 45.0 1.00 45.0 16 26.1 0.81 57.3 1.00 57.3 13 29.5 0.83 47.1 1.00 47.1 16 29.5 0.83 47.1 1.00 47.1 15 26.0 0.83 53.0 1. 00 53.0 12 **** 29.3 0.81 46.6 1. 00 46.6 15 29.3 0.81 46.6 1.00 46.6 15 \ -loO TNlID.,77.o.o;15 CopyrIght (cl 2000 Dowling AsSCJÇ\atn, Inc. LJcensed to PANG ENGINEERS, INC. COMPARE Sat Oct 2200:16:40 2005 Page 3- 9 Street Name: Stelling Road Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R -----------~I---------------I 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 21 Oct 2004 « 5:30-6:30 PM Base Vol: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 862 273 563 907 208 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 219 301 249 276 5B5 271 310 B62 273 563 907 20B Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ATI: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 0 24 0 Initial Fut: 219 301 249 276 5B5 271 310 906 273 563 931 20B User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 219 301 249 276 5B5 271 310 906 273 563 931 20B Reduct Vol: 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 219 301 249 276 5B5 271 310 906 273 563 931 20B peE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 219 301 249 276 5B5 271 310 906 273 563 931 20B ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.95 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.B3 0.99 0.95 Lanes: 1.00 1.07 0.93 1.00 1.35 0.65 1.00 2.2B 0.72 2.00 2.43 0.57 Final Sat.: 17502024 1674 1750 252B 1171 17504302 1296 31504576 1022 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.23 0.23 O.lB 0.21 0.21 O.lB 0.20 0.20' Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 18.1 25.1 Volume/Cap: O. B3 0.71 De1ay/Veh: 6B.6 47.3 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 6B.6 47.3 HCM2kAvg: 10 11 Cllyofeupe<t!no CMI' 2004 PM Peak Hour LevelotSeMoo"""""""IIon_ 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume AftemattYe) 8acI<ground (PM) Intersection #217: Stevens Creek Blvd/Stelling Rd 1613-217 [CMP 2004] Signal=Prolect/R~nclude Final Vol: 271 585- 276 lanes: . 1 1 . 1 .; 4 t .þ. ~ Slgnal-Proteçt S91aW>roted Final Vol: Lanes: AIghts=Jnclude Vol Cn! Dale: 1012112004 Alghts-lnclude Lanes: Final Vol: J- Cycle TIme (see): 12. ~ 31. . 208 Á loss T1me (see): 12 .t- . 1 906··· 2 -þo- Critical VIC: 0.829 +- 2 .31 =f Avg Crtl Cej (secIveh): 49.5 r . 273 . Avg Delay (secfveti): 48.. 2 ...- LOS: 0 ~ ~ t ~ ~ Lanes: . . Final Vol: 219-· 3.' 2.. SlgnalmProtectlAlghts-lnclude **** **** **** 25.1 0.71 47.3 1.00 47.3 10 26.6 0.71 49.3 1.00 49.3 11 33.5 0.B3 46.3 1. 00 46.3 17 30.5 0.B3 46.5 1.00 46.5 16 30.5 0.B3 46.5 1.00 46.5 15 25.9 O. B3 53.3 1. 00 53.3 12 33.5 0.B3 46.3 1.00 46.3 17 26.2 0.B1 56.7 1.00 56.7 13 30.1 0.81 45.9 1. 00 45.9 15 30.1 0.B1 45.9 1.00 45.9 15 I-lp \ . _n_ _ .. . "_____...-........."'.......,...........,.'" COMPARE Moo Cd 24 09:18:37 2005 PaQe3-5 City of Cupertino CMP 2004 PM Peak Hour Level Of Service Con1Jütation Report 2000 HeM Operations (Future VoIlm8 Ahemallve) P_(PM) Inte",ection #217: Stevens Creek Blvd/Stelling Rd 1613·217 rCMP 2004] Slgnal",ProtectlRlghts-lnclude FlnalVot: 271 607""" 302 Lanes: 0 1 1 0 1 ~ 4 ... .þ. ~ Slgnal-Protecl SlgnaiaProtecI: Anal Vol; lanes: Rights-Include Vol Cnt Dale: 1012112004 RlghfÞInclude lanes: Final Vol: -+ Cycle TIm8 (see): 120 "'l 373- 0 20S ~ Loss TIme (see): 12 .t- O 906 2 -'Þ- CrlUcaIVIC: 0.876 +- 2 .83- r Avg Crtt Def (secIveh): 54.3 r 0 273 0 Avg Delay (seclveh): 52.5 2 ". LOS: 0- ~ ~ t ~ rJ-" Lanes: 0 0 Final Vol: 219...· ... 24. Slgnal-Protect/Rlghts-lnclude Street Name: Stelling Road Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 0 0 0 10 10 10 0 10 10 7 10 0 ----------"-1---------------11---------------1 1---------------1 I-~-------------I Volume Module: » Count Date: 21 Oct 2004 « 5:30-6:30 PM Base Vol: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 906 273 563 931 208 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 906 273 563 931 208 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WITH PROJEC: 0 63 0 26 22 0 63 0 0 53 52 0 Initial Fut: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLFAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 I--------~------I 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: . Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.83 0.99 0.95 Lanes: 1.00 1.17 0.83 1.00 1.37 0.63 1.00 2.28 0.72 2.00 2.46 0.54 Final Sat.: 1750 2196 1502 1750 2557 1142 1750 4302 1296 3150 4621 978 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.24 0.24 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 0.21 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 17.1 24.3 Volume/Cap: 0.B8 0.82 De1ay/Veh: 77.7 52.7 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 77.7 52.7 HCM2kAvg: 11 13 **** **** 24.3 0.82 52.7 1.00 52.7 13 25.3 0.82 58.4 1.00 58.4 13 32.5 0.88 50.6 1.00 50.6 19 32.5 0.88 50.6 1.00 50.6 18 29.2 0.88 61.7 1.00 61. 7 16 30.3 0.84 47.0 1.00 47.0 16 30.3 0.84 47.0 1.00 47.0 16 28.1 0.84 52.0 1. 00 52.0 13 **** 29.1 0.88 50.4 1. 00 50.4 17 29.1 0.88 50.4 1.00 50.4 17 \ -(P¿¿' COMPARE Moo Oct 24 21:46:15 2005 PaQe3-1 Street Name: Stelling Road Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 0 0 0 10 10 10 0 10 10 7 10 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 21 Oct 2004 « 5:30-6:30 PM Base Vol: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 906 273 563 931 208 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 906 273 563 931 208 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WITH PROJEC: 0 63 0 26 22 0 63 0 ' 0 53 52 0 Initial Fut: 219 364 249 302 607 271 ,373 906 273 616 983 208 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF volume: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol. : 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 6,16 983 208 ------------1---------------1 1-------·-------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.99 0.95 Lanes: 1.00 1.17 0.83 1.00 1.37 0.63 1.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.46 0.54 Final Sat.: 17502196 1502 17502557 1142 17505700 1750 31504621 978 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.24 0.24 0.21 0.16 0.16 0.20 0.21 0.21 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 17.1 24.3 Volume/Cap: 0.88 0.82 De1ay/Veh: 77.7 52.7 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 77.7 52.7 HCM2kAvg: 11 13 CltyolCUperttno CMP 2004 PM Peak Hour level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HeM Operallons (Future Volume Allernatlve) _(PM) Intersection #217: Stevens Creek Blvd/Stelling Rd 1613-217 [CMP 2004 w/IMP (All 1)] Slgnal_ProtectlRights-lnclude Anal Vol: 271 607··· 302 Lanes: 0 1 1 0 1 ~ 4 t .þ. ~ Slgnal-=Proted Slgnal-Prolecl FInal Vol: lanes; Alghts=lnclude Vol Cnt Dale: 1012112004 Rights_Include lanes: FmalVol: J- Cycle T1me (see): 120 ~ 373- 0 208 ~ loss TIme (see): 12 .t- O 1 906 3 --JIoo- CrlticalVIC: 0.876 ...- 2 983·- 0 { Avg Crll Del (secfveh): 54.3 r 0 273 Avg Delay (sec/Veh): 51.4 2 .,. LOS: D· ~ ~ t ~ ~ Lanes: 1 0 0 Final Vol: 219"- 364 249 Slgnal_ProtecllRlghts-lnclUcle **** **** 24.3 0.62 52.7 1.0Ó 52.7 13 25.3 0.82 58.4 1.00 58.4 13 32.5 0.88 50.6 1.00 50.6 19 29.2 0.88 61.7 1. 00 61.7 16 26.2 0.73 45.9 1.00 45.9 12 32.2 0.73 43.2 1.00 43.2 12 26.2 0.72 49.8 1.00 49.8 11 32.5 0.88 50.6 1. 00 50.6 18 **** 29.1 0.88 50.4 1. 00 50.4 17 29.1 0.88 50.4 1.00 50.4 17 \ -lo~ _ _'-L.,_,~..........._...,__ ._u_..... .__ . ,_~_......_ "AU'" c",r.:.IAlC¡;O~ 1M,.. COMPARE Men 0cI24 21:46:15 2005 Page 3-2 Street Name: Stelling Road Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 0 0 0 10 10 10 0 10 10 7 10 0 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 21 Oct 2004 « 5:30-6:30 PM Base Vol: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 906 273 563 931 208 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 906 273 563 931 208 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WITH PROJEC: 0 63 0 26 22 0 63 0 0 53 52 0 Initial Fut: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 peE Adj: 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.'00 1. 00 1. 00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.83 0.99 0.95 Lanes: 1.00 1.17 0.83 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.28 0.72 2.00 2.46 0.54 Final Sat.: 17502196 1502 17503800 1750 17504302 1296 31504621 978 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.20 0.21 0.21 crit Moves: **** Green Time: 21.0 23.4 Volume/Cap: 0.71 0.85 Delay/Veh: 54.5 55.9 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 54.5 55.9 HCM2kAvg: 9 14 CI1y of Cupertino CMP 2004 PM Peak Hour Level Of SeMC8 CoqMatlon Report 2000 I-tdM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) Projod (PM) Intersection #2172: Stevens Creek Blvd/Stelling Rd 1613·217 [CMP 2004 w/IMP (All. 2)] Slgnal=Pmlec1lRlghls-lnclude FinaiVoI: 271 607 30.2- Lanes: 1 0 2 0 , ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ Signai~rot&Ct Slgnai-Protecl Final Vol: Lon"" RI¡tIt~nclude Yol Cnt Date: 1012112004 Rl¡tItso=inctude Lanes: FU1a1Yol: j- Cycte T1me (see): 120 ~ 373"· 0 208 ~ loss TllTle (see): 12 J.- 0 906 2 -... CrltlcatVIC: 0.849 -+- 2 983-· r Avg Crt! Del (secfveh): 53.2 1= 0 27' 0 Avg Deray (seclveh): SO.O 2 6'6 LOS: D ~ ~ t ~ ~ Lanes: 0 0 Final Vol: 21" 364- 249 Slgna~rotect/RlghtÞ!nclude **** **** 23.4 0.85 55.9 1. 00 55.9 13 24.4 0.85 63.3 1.00 63.3 13 26.8 0.69 48.1 1. 00 48.1 10 30.1 0.85 57.2 1.00 57.2 16 31.2 0.81 45.1 1.00 45.1 16 31.2 0.81 45.1 1. 00 45.1 15 26.8 0.71 46.0 1. 00 46.0 12 29.0 0.81 49.4 1. 00 49.4 13 **** 30.1 0.85 47.9 1.00 47.9 17 30.1 0.85 47.9 1.00 47.9 16 \ -(o.t\ ~__.nu"""'e.e (".nDvrlaht (e\ 2003 DowIlna As80ctates, Inc. licensed to PANG ENGiNEERS, iNC. COMPARE Man Oct 24 21:46;15 2005 Page 3-3 CIty of CUpeftino CMP 2004 PM Peak: Hour Level Of ServIce Coft1Matfon Report 2000 HCM Operallons (Future VolOOUJ Altemallvø) _(PM) Intersection #2173: Stevens Creek Blvd/Stelling Rd 1613-217 [CMP 2004 wi IMP (All. 3)] Signat-ProtectJRl( tlls-lnclude FInal Vol: 271 607 30'- lanes: 1 0 , 0 1 ~ 4 t .þ- ~ Signal=Prolecl SlgnaI-Prolect Final Vol: Lanes: Rlghts-lnclude Vol Cot Dale: 10/2112004 R/d1lÞ1nc1ude Lanes: Final Vol: J- Cycle TIme (see): 120 ~ 373- 0 '08 ~ loss TIme (see): 12 ..t.- O ... 3 -.... Critical VIC: a.849 .- , ""'- 0 r Avg Crit Del (secfveh): 53~ 1= 0 .73 Avg Delay (sec/veh): 49.1 . 616 LOS: 0 ~ ~ t t+ r+ Lanes: 1 0 0 Final Vol: .19 364*·· .4. Slgna¡'ProlectJRlghls-lnclude Street Name: Stelling Road Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R --------------------------- 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 0 0 0 10 10 10 0 10 10 7 10 0 ------------1---------------11---------------11---------------1 I-~-------------I Volume Module: » Count Pate: 21 Oct 2004 « 5:30-6:30 PM Base Vol: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 906 273 563 931 208 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 219 301 249 276 585 271 310 906 273 563 931 208 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WITH PROJEC: 0 63 0 "26. 22 0 63 0 0 53 52 0 Initial Fut: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 peE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 219 364 249 302 607 271 373 906 273 616 983 208 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.99 0.95 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.99 0.95 Lanes: 1.00 1.17 0.83 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.46 0.54 Final Sat.: 17502196 1502 17503800 1750 17505700 1750 31504621 978 ------------1---------------11---------------11---------------11---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.13 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.16 0.15 0.21 0.16 0.16 0.20 0.21 0.21 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 21.0 23.4 Volume/Cap: 0.71 0.85 Delay/Veh: 54.5 55.9 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 54.5 55.9 HCM2kAvg: 9 14 **** **** 23.4 0.85 55.9 1. 00 55.9 13 24.4 0.85 63.3 1.00 63.3 13 26.8 0.69 48.1 1. 00 48.1 10 30.1 0.85 57.2 1. 00 57.2 16 27.0 0.71 44.7 1.00 44.7 11 26.8 0.71 46.0 1.00 46.0 12 27.0 0.69 48.0 1.00 48.0 10 33.2 0.71 41.7 1.00 41.7 11 **** 30.1 0.85 47.9 1.00 47.9 17 30.1 0.85 47.9 1. 00 47.9 16 '\ -loS Traffbc7.7.0515 Copynght (c) 2003 Dowling Assoclales. Inc. licensed to PANG ENGINEERS, INC. COMPARE Tue Oct 1810:55:56 2005 Page 3-2 City of Cupertino CMP 2004· ExIsting PM Peak Hour Level Of SeMce Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Bue Volume Alternative) ExI"Ing(PM} Intersection #5: Saleh Way I Stevens Creek Blvd. S91aI-Proleçt/R ghts-lnclude Final Vol: 19w- 0 62 lanes: 10001 .,.J4.~'+ Slgnal-Protecl Slgnat-Prolecl F'lI'IalVol: Lanes: Rlghts-lnclude Vol CntDate: 101612005 RIghts-Include Lanes.: Anal Vol; j< Cycle Time (see): 110 ~ 263··· 0 57 ~ loss Time (see): . ..t- O 1 1235 3 -. CriIicalVIC: 0.543 ...- 2 1258- 0 T Avg CrIt Del (secIveh): 27.0 1= 0 0 0 Avg DeJay (secIveh): 18.7 0 0 lOS: B· ~ ~ t fÞ- r+ Street Name: Saich Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ~-----------I---------------II---------------I 1---------------11---------------1 Min. Green: 0 0 0 10 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------11---------------11---------------11---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 6 Oct 2005 « 4:30-5:30 PM Base Vol: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1235 0 0 1258 57 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1235 0 0 1258 57 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1235 0 0 1258 57 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1235 '0 0 1258 57 peE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 62 0 198 2631235 0 0 1258 57 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.95 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 2.87 0.13 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1750 0 1750 1750 5700 0 0 5357 243 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Mòdule: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.11 0.15 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.23 Cri t Moves: Green Time: 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 Delay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 User DèlAdj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 HCM2kAvg: 0 0 Lanes: 00000 Anal Val: 0 0 0 Slgnal-ProtectIRights=lnclude **** **** 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 22.9 0.54 40.5 1.00 40.5 7 78.1 0.31 6.0 1.00 6.0 5 22.9 0.17 35.9 1.00 35.9 2 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 30.5 0.54 35.1 1.00 35.1 8 0.0 0.00 0.0 1. 00 0.0 o 0.0 0.00 0.0 1. 00 0.0 o **** 47.6 0.54 23.4 1.00 23.4 11 47.6 0.54 23.4 1.00 23.4 11 \ -(pCp TrafliK7.7.0515 CopyrIghI (oj 2003 Dowling Associates, Ino. Ucensed 10 PANG ENGINEERS, INC. COMPARE SaI Oct 22 00:16:40 2005 Page 3· 3 CIty of Cupertino CM1' 2004 PM Peak Hour Level Of ServIce ~utatIon Repcxt 2000 HeM OperatIons (Future Volume Alternative) Background (PM) Intersection #5: Swch Way / Stevens Creek Blvd. FmalVol: Lanes: Slgnal-ProtecURighls-lnclude 198·.... 0 62 ~'4 ¡ .þ.'~ SIgnaI=Protect SlgnelaProtect Final Vol: Lanes: Aighls=lnclude Vol Cnt Date: 10J612oo5 Alghts-lnclude Lanes: Anal Vol: J- CyçIe Thne (see): 110 ~ 263....· 0 57 ~ Loss Tlme (see): . . J.- 0 1 1279 3 ---... CrillcaiVJC: 0.547 +- 2 1282....· 0 =r Avg Cril Del (seclveh): 26.9 1= 0 0 0 Avg Delay (seclveh): 18.6 0 0 LOS: .. ~ +t t ~ ~ Street Name: Saich Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 0 0 0 10 10 10 7 10 10 '7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 volume Module: » Count Date: 6 Oct 2005 « 4:30-5:30 PM Base Vol: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1235 0 0 1258 57 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1235 0 0 1258 57 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ATI: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 0 24 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1279 0 0 1282 57 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1279 0 0 1282 57 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1279 0 0 1282 57 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 .1.00'1.00 1.00 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1279 0 0 1282 57 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 I-~-------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 '1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ,1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.95 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 '1.00 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 2.87 0.13 Final Sat.: 0 0 0 1750 0 1750 1750 5700 0 0 5361 238 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.11 0.15 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 crit Moves: Green Time: 0.0 0.0 Volume/Cap: 0.00 0.00 De1ay/Veh: 0.0 0.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 0.0 0.0 HCM2kAvg: 0 0 Urnes: Anal Vol: o 0 0 0 0 000 Slgnai-Protect/Rights-lnclude **** **** 0.0 0.00 0.0 1. 00 0.0 o 22.7 0.17 36.1 1.00 36.1 2 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 22.7 0.55 40.8 1.00 40.8 7 30.2 0.55 35.4 1.00 35.4 8 78.3 0.32 5.9 1.00 5.9 5 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o **** 48.1 0.55 23.2 1.00 23.2 11 48.1 0.55 23.2 1.00 23.2 11 \ -(Pi- Traffix7.7.0515 Copyright (c) 2003 Dowling Associates. Inc. Lk:ensed to PANG ENGINEERS, iNC. COMPARE Man Oct 24 09: 1 8:37 2005 . Page 3-2 City of Cupertino """2004 PM Peek Hour level Of Servk:e Computetlon Report 2000 HCM Operetlons (Future Volume AnemaUve) P_ (PM) Intersection #5: Saleh Way I Stevens Creek Blvd. SlgnaIaProtectlRights-Include Rnal Vol: 198- 0 62 Lanes: 10001 .,.J4+~~ Signal_Protect SIgna_ Final Vol: lanes: Righls=lnclude Vol Cnt Dale; . 911512004 RighlÞfnclude lanes: Final Vol: J- Cycle TIme (see): 11. ~ 263- · 57 ~ loss TIme (see): . J.- · 1 '302 3 -JIo- CrltIcaIVIC: 0.553 -<if- 2 ,...- · r Avg CrIt Del (seclvet1): 26.8 1= · . · Avg Delay (secIveh): 16.4 · . LOS: 9- ~ --t t t--- ~ lanes: 00000 Final Vol: 0 0 0 Slgnal-ProlectJFUghls=loclude Street Name: Saich Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------11---------------11---------------11---------------1 Min. Green: 0 0 0 10 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 15 Sep 2004 « Base Vol: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1279 0 0 1282 57 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1279 0 0 1282 57 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WITH PROJEC: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 27 0 Initial Fut: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1302 0 0 1309 57 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1302 0 0 1309 57 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1302 0 0 1309 57 peE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 0 0 0 62 0 198 263 1302 0 0 1309 57 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.98 0.95 Lanes: 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 2.87 0.13 Pinal Sat.: 0 0 0 1750 0 1750 17505700 0 05366 234 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.11 0.15 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.24 Crit Moves: Green Time: Volume/Cap: Delay/Veh: User DelAdj: AdjDe1/Veh: HCM2kAvg: **** 0.0 0.00, 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 0.0 0.00 0.0 1. 00 0.0 o 22.5 '0.17 36.3 1.00 36.3 2 22.5 0.55 41.1 1.00 41.1 7 **** 29.9 0.55 35.7 1. 00 35.7 8 78.5 0.32 5.9 1.00 5.9 5 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 0.0 0.00 0.0 1. 00 0.0 o **** 48.6 0.55 23.0 1. 00 23.0 11 48.6 0.55 23.0 1. 00 23.0 11 \ -Co5 ....~............."'.'" 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o 0.0 0.00 0.0 1.00 0.0 o ,.........,..;....., t...\ .,Mr.I. nnwlinn A""""'¡,,t_ fIf1 Ucensed to PANG ENGINEERS. INC. COMPARE Man Oct 17 15:50:52 2005 Page3-9 City of CUpertino CMP 2004 - existing PM Peak Hour Level Of Servtc& Computation Report 2000 HeM Operalfons (Base Volume Altematlve) existing (PM) Intersection #211: De Anza Blvd.fStevens Creek Blvd 1638-211 [CMP 2004J SlgnaI-ProIect/Rlghts-lnclude RnalVol: 278 1778- .., Lanes: 0 1 3 0 2 ~ -4 t .þ.. ~ Slgnal=Protecl Slgnal-Protecl Final Vol: Lanes: Rights-Overtap Vol Cnt Date: 10121f.ZOO4 Rlghts-Jnclude Lanes: Final Vol: ..f Cycle TIme (see): "8 -t. 269- 2 0 255 Á Loss TIme (see): 12 J- 0 7" 3 ---... CrltlcatV!C: 0.796 ...- 2 8190.. 0 =r Avg erlt De( (seclveh): 42." 1= 0 506 Avg Delay (sedveh): 41.3 2 368 LOS: 0 ~ ~ t ~ ~ Lanes: 2 0 3 0 1 Final Val: 515- 1017 318 Slgnal-ProtectlRJghts-Overlap Street Name: De Anza Boulevard Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 21 Oct 2004 « 5:15-6:15 PM Base Vol: 515 1017 318 491 1778 278 269 788 506 368 819 255 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 515 1017 318 491 1778 278 269 788 506 368 819 255 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 515 1017 318 491 1778 278 269 788 506 368 819 255 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 515 1017 318 491 1778 278 269 788 506 368 819 255 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF,Adj: 1.001.00 1.00 1.001.00 1.00 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 515 1017 318 491 1778 278 269 788 506 368 819 255 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.99 0.95 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.99 0.95 Lanes: 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.44 0.56 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.26 0.74 Final Sat.: 3150 5700 1750 3150 6484 1014 31505700 1750 3150 4269 1329 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.16 0.18 0.18 0.16 0.27 0.27 0.09 0.14 0.29 0.12 0.19 0.19 Crit. Moves: **** Green Time: 24.2 34.6 Volume/Cap: O.BO 0.61 De1ay/Veh: 51.3 36.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 51.3 36.5 HCM2kAvg: 11 11 **** **** 53.5 0.40 21.9 1. 00 21. 9 8 40.7 0.80 36.7 1.00 36.7 lB 22.3 0.73 47.7 1.00 47.7 10 12.7 0.80 63.8 1.00 63.B 7 30.3 0.61 40.0 1.00 40.0 9 40.7 O.BO 36.7 1.00 36.7 19 46.5 0.73' 34.5 1. 00 34.5 17 18.B 0.73 52.7 1. 00 52.7 8 **** 28.4 O.BO 45.4 1. 00 45.4 14 2B.4 0.80 45.4 1.00 45.4 14 1-<cJ1 T_"'~"''''tu<... C'.nnvrinhllc\ 2003 DowIino Associates. Inc. Licensed to PANG ENGINEERS, INC. COMPARE Sat Oct 22 00:16:40 2005 PaQe3-7 CIty of Cupertfno CMP2004 PM Peak Hour Level Of Service ComputaIlon Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future V~ume Alternative) Background (PM) Intersection #211: De Anza BlvdJStevens Creek Blvd 1638-211 [CMP 2004] Slgnal-ProtectIRIghts-lnclude FlnalYoI: 278 1803·- 544 Lanes: 0 1 . 0 2 -.J ..{ -4. ~ ~ Slgnal-Protect Sign",""""",, FinalYol: Lanes: Rlghts..overlap Vol Cnt Date: 1012112004 Rlghts-lnclude Lanes: FlnalYaI; .J- Cycle TIme (see); 118 ~ 269-·· 2 0 271 -.\. Loss TIme (søc): 12 J.- 0 1 81' . -... Critical VIC; 0.809 +- 2 834·- 0 =r Avg Crlt Del (aeclveh): 43.5 r 0 52' Avg Delay (aeclveh): 42.0 2 372 LOS: 0 ~ ~ t ~ r+ Lanes: 2 0 . 0 FlnalYoI: 524- 103. 338 Slgnal_ProtectlRigtlts-Overlap Street Name: De Anza Boulevard Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------11---------------1 Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 21 Oct 2004 « 5:15-6:15 PM Base Vol: 515 1017 318 491 1778 278 269 788 506 368 819 255 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1:00 Initial Bse: 515 1017 318 491 1778 278 269 788 506 368 819 255 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ATI: 9 16 18 53 25 0 0 26 18 4 15 16 Initial Fut: 524 1033 336 544 1803 278 269 814 524 372 834 271 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 524 1033 336 544 1803 278 269 814 524 372 834 271 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 524 1033 336 544 1803 278 269 814 524 372 834 271 PeE Adj: 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1..00 1. 00 1. 00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 524 1033 336 5441803 278 269 814 524 372 834 271 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 I----~----------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.830.99 0.95 0.831.00 ,0.92 0.83 0.99 0.95 Lanes: 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.44 0.56 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.24 0.76 Final Sat.: 31505700 1750 31506496 1002 31505700 1750 3150 4225 1373 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.17 0.28 0.28 0.09 0.14 0.30 0.12 0.20 0.20 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 24.3 33.2 Volume/Cap: 0.81 0.65 De1ay/Veh: 52.2 38.2 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 52.2 38.2 HCM2kAvg: 11 12 51. 8 0.44 23.4 1.00 23.4 8 31.6 0.65 40.0 1.00 40.0 10 **** 40.5 0.81 37.3 1. 00 37.3 19 40.5 0.81 37.3 1.00 37.3 18 **** 12.5 0.81 65.3 1.00 65.3 7 22.6 0.75 47.9 1.00 47.9 11 46.8 0.75 35.3 1.00 35.3 18 18.7 0.75 53.5 1.00 53.5 8 **** 28.8 0.81 45.7 1.00 45.7 15 28.8 0.81 45.7 1.00 45.7 14 \-10 ...-...-............" r.tv'lVrimt lc\ 2003 DowIino Assoclales. Inc. Ucensed to PANG ENGINEERS. INC. COMPARE Moo Oct 2411:05:49 2005 Page 3-4 atyofCupertino CM> 2004 PM Peak Hour level Of ServIce Computalloo Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Volume Alternative) project (PM) Intersection #211: De Anza Blvd.lStevens Creek Blvd 1638-211 [CMP 2004] SIgnet..protect/AlghlÞlnclude FInal Vol: 296 1803-* 5" lanes: 0 1 3 0 2 ~ 4 + .þ. ~ Slgnal=Protecl Slgnal-Protecl rll'lalVel: Lanes: Rlgh(ÞOverlaP Vol Cnl Cate: 10121/2004 Rights-Include lanes; Final Vel: J- Cycle Time (see): 119 ~ 284*- 2 0 271 --\. Loss TIme (see): 12 J-- 0 1 922 3 ----þo- Critical VIC: 0.819 <IIf- 2 ...-. 0 =f Avg CrR Del (seclveh): ".0 1= 0 524 Avg Delay (seo'v&h : 42.3 2 372 LOS: 0 ~ ..et t fÞ- rÞ> Lanes: 2 0 3 0 RnalVoI: 5240- 1033 336 Slgnal_ProlectlRlghts-Overlap Street Name: De Anza Boulevard Stevens Creek Boulevard Approach: North" Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 ___________~I---------------II---------------II---------------11---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 21 Oct 2004 « 5:15-6:15 PM Base Vol: 524 1033 336 544 1803 278 269 814 524 372 834 271 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 524 1033 336 544 1803 278 269 814 524 372 B34 271 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W/PROJECT: 0 0 0 0 0 18 15 8 0 0 9 0 Initial Fut: 524 1033 336 544 1B03 296 284 822 524 372 843 271 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 524 1033 336 544 1B03 296 2B4 822 524 372 843 271 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 524 1033 336 544 1803 296 2B4 B22 524 372 843 271 FeE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 5241033 336 5441803 296 284 822 524 372 843 271 ------------1---------------11---------------1 1---------------1 I----~----------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.B3 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.99 0.95 0.83 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.99 0.95 Lanes: 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 3.41 0.59 2.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.24 0.76 Final Sat.: 3150 5700 1750 3150 6441 1057 3150 5700 1750 3150 4236 1362 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vo1/Sat: 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.17 0.28 0.28 0.09 0.14 0.30 0.12 0.20 0.20 crit Moves: **** Green Time: 24.0 32.9 Vo1ume/Cap: 0.82 0.65 De1ay/Veh: 53.1 38.4 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 53.1 38.4 HCM2kAvg: 11 12 **** 51.7 0.44 23.5 1.00 23.5 8 31.4 0.65 40.2 1.00 40.2 10 40.3 0.82 37.7 1.00 37.7 19 40.3 0.B2 37.7 1. 00 37.7 19 **** 13.0 0.82 65.5 1.00 ,65.5 7 22.9 0.74 47.5 1.00 47.5 11 46.9 0.75 35.3 1.00 35.3 17 18.B 0.74 53.2 1.00 53.2 8 **** 2B.7 0.82 46.2 1. 00 46.2 15 28.7 0.82 46.2 1.00 46.2 14 \-~ \ ....._.....,.,....~*" .............v.h.,..\""""'nn-I'"'...a......Iot...I..... lIMon....... In Þ4NA .,:Nt::IN¡:¡:R~ INr. COMPARE Tue Oct 1810:55:562005 Page 3- 3 CIty of CUpertino CMP 2004 - EIdstIng PM Peak Hour Lever Of SeMce Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations (Base Volume Alternative) ExtotIng(PM) Intersection #71: Greenleaf I Stelling Rd. [CMP 20041 Slgnal_Prot&etlRIghts=llIclude Final Vol; 46 787 23'" Lanes; 0 0 11 0 0 ~4+~~ Slgnal-Protect Slgnal-Prolect Final Vel: Lanes: Rights_Include Yol Cnt Date: 101612005 Righls..cncfude lanes: FlnaIYoI: j> Cyçle TIme (sec): 60 ~ 49-' 0 0 44 ~ Loss 11me (see): . .t- O 0 30 11 -ÞO- CriUcalVlC: 1.100 -<if- 11 35- 0 =r Avg crn Del (sødveh): 187.6 1= 0 49 0 Avg Delay (seclveh): 187.3 0 36 LOS: F ~ ~ t ~ r+ Lanes; 001100 FnalYel: 8 521- 9 Slgl\8.l-ProtectJRlghts=lnclude Street Name: Stelling Road Greenleaf Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green, 10 10 10 10 10 10 ' 7 10 7 7 10 7 ------------1---------------1 1---------------11---------------11---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 6 Oct 2005 « 4:45-5:45 PM Base Vol: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 Growth Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse, 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 User Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume, 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 Reduct Vol, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol, 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 PCE Adj, 1. 00 1. 00 1,.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 LOO 1. 00 1. 00 MLF Adj, 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol., 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 ------------1---------------11---------------11---------------11---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: . Sat/Lane, 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment, 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Lanes, 0.01 0.97 0.02 0.03 0.92 0.05 0.38 0.24 0.38 0.31 0.30 0.39 Final Sat.' 26 1695 29 47 1609 94 675 413 661 548 533 670 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat, 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 13.1 13.1 Volume/Cap: 1.41 1.41 De1ay/Veh, 221.1 221 User De1Adj, 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh, 221.1 221 HCM2kAvQ' 31 31 **** **** 10.0 0.44 23.5 1. 00 23.5 3 7.0 0.56 28.6 1.00 28.6 3 **** 10.0 0.39 p.2 1. 00 23.2 2 10.0 0.39 23.2 1.00 23.2 2 \-1~ - .- ----,- 13.1 1.41 221.1 1.00 221.1 31 20.9 1.41 211. 9 1.00 211.9 48 20.9 1.41 212 1.00 212 48 20.9 1.41 211.9 1.00 211.9 48 7.0 0.62 31.1 1.00 31.1 3 10.0 0.44 23.5 1.00 23.5 3 ...._...._...._,...................__A___.._.__._. ..-----.... ........................-...... ...... COMPARE Tue Oct 18 10:55:562005 Page 3· 9 City of Cupertino CMf' 2004 - Exlstlng PM Peak Ho\W Level Of ServIce Computation Report 2000 HCM Operallons (Base Volume Alternative) E>i""'" (PM) Intersection #722: Greenleef / Stelling Rd. [WIth CIPJ Slgnal..protecllRlghtS;;lnclude FInal Vol: 48 78"- 23 Lanes: 01 0 01 ~4t~~ Signal_Protect SlgnaI-Protect Final Vol: Lanes: RightS:=lnclude Vol Cnt Dale: '''''''''005 Rights_Include lanes: Final Vol: ~ Cycle Time (see): 9. ~ 490.. · · 44 ~ loss Tine (see): 9 $- · · 30 11 ---J¡o. CtftlcalV/c: 0.673 -+- 11 35-' · =r Avg Crit Del (sealveh): 26.4 1= · .9 · Avg Delay (secJveh): 22.7 · 30 LOS: C+ ~ ~ t ~ rt'" Street Name: Stelling Road Greenleaf Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 7 10 7 7 10 7 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 6 Oct 2005 « 4:45-5:45 PM . Base Vol: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 peE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Låne: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 0.98 0.02 1.00 0.94 0.06 0.38 0.24 0.38 0.31 0.30 0.39 Final Sat.: 1750 1769 31 1750 1701 99 675 413 661 548 533 670 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.01 0.46 0.46 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 10.0 45.5 Volume/Cap: 0.04 0.58 De1ay/Veh: 35.8 16.5 User De1Adj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDel/Veh: 35.8 16.5 HCM2kAvg: 0 11 Lanes: 0 0 0 Final Vol: 8-- 521 9 Slgnat-ProleålRlghta=lnclude **** 45.5 0.58 16.5 1.00 16.5 11 52.7 0.79 18.5 1.00 18.5 19 17.2 0.07 29.9 1.00 29.9 1 52.7 0.79 18.5 1.00 18.5 19 **** 8.3 0.79 62.6 1. 00 62.6 6 10.7 0.61 42.7 1.00 42.7 4 10.7 0.61 42.7 1.00 42.7 4 7.5 0.79 64.4 1. 00 64.4 5 **** 10.0 0.59 42.8 1.00 42.8 4 10.0 0.59 42.8 1. 00 42.8 4 \-·1~ COMPARE Sat Oct 22 00:16:40 2005 Page 3- 5 CIty of Cupertino CMP 2004 PM Peak Hour' Level Of Service Computallon Report 2000 HCM Operations (Future Yolume All:emaUve) Background (PM) Intersection #7: Greenleaf I Stelling Rd. [WIth CIP] Final YoI: lanes: Slgnal-ProtectlAlghls=lnclude 46 78r- 23 ~04 ¡ .þ.'~ Slgnal.Protect Slgnal-Protect FlnalYoI: Lanes: Rlghls=Jnclude Vol Cnl Dale: 1C116fZOO5 Aights..include Lanes: Final Vol: j> Cycle Time (see): 90 ~ 49'·· 0 0 .. --t Loss Time (see): . .t- O 0 30 11 -JIoo- Critical YIC: 0.673 1- 11 35- 0 r Avg Crit Del (seaIveh): 26.4 r 0 .. 0 Avg Delay (seclveh): 22.7 0 36 LOS: C+ ~ ~ t ~ rÞ- Lanes: Final Vol: o 0 0 8...· 521 9 Slgnal-ProlectlAlghls..tnclude Street Name: Stelling Road Greenleaf Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 7 10 7 7 10 7 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 6 Oct 2005 « 4:45-5:45 PM Base Vol: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ATI: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 peE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.001.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 I-----------c---I I-~-------------I Saturation Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 0.98 0.02 1.00 0.94 0.06 0.38 0.24 0.38 0.31 0.30 0.39 Final Sat.: 17501769 31 17501701 99 675 413 661 548 533 670 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.01 0.46 0.46 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 10.0 45.5 Volume/Cap: 0.04 0.58 De1ay/Veh: 35.8 16.5 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 35.8 16.5 HCM2kAvg: 0 11 **** **** 10.7 0.61 42.7 1.00 42.7 4 10.7 0.61 42.7 1.00 42.7 4 7.5 0.79 64.4 1.00 64.4 5 **** 10.0 0.59 42.8 1.00 42.8 4 10.0 0.59 42.8 1.00 42.8 4 \ -'+4 T_..........."..... 45.5 0.58 16.5 1. 00 16.5 11 17.2 0.07 29.9 1. 00 29.9 1 52.7 0.79 18.5 1.00 18.5 19 52.7 0.79 18.5 1.00 18.5 19 8.3 0.79 62.6 1.00 62.6 6 ",__.........,_' """'" ..._..~,__ A___-'_.__ .__ .,-----....-............."................." COMPARE Sat Oct 22 00:1f1;4O 2OÒ5 Page3-fI eliI' of "-""" CNP 2004 PM Peak Hour lev8I Of Service Computation RepOO 2000 HCM OperaIfons (Future VoIUITIII AlI.maUve) p<O eot(PM) Intersection #7: Greenleef / Stelling Rd. (With CIP] Signal=ProtectfRlghts-lnclude Finat Vol: 46 81J- 23 lanes: 01001 ~4t~~ SIgnaI-Protect Slgnal-Protect Final Vol: lanes: Rights_Include Vol Cnl Date: 1013112005 AIghtÞ;lnclude lanes: Final Vel: ..+ Cycle TIme (sac): 90 ~ 49'- 0 0 44 ~ Loss TIme (see): . .t- O 0 30 11 -.. CrlUcaIVlC; 0.689 .04- 11 35"· 0 r Avg Cril Del (seç/veh): 27.4 1= 0 48 0 Avg Delay (secfveh): 23.2 0 36 LOS: C ~ ~ t ~ ~ Street Name: Stelling Road Greenleaf Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L T R L T R L T R L T R ------------1---------------11---------------1 1---------------11---------------1 Min. Green: 10 10 10 10 10 10 7 10 7 7 10 7 ------------1---------------11---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Volume Module: » Count Date: 31 Oct 2005 « 4:45-5:45 PM Base Vol: 8 521 9 23 787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 8 521 9 23 ·787 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 Added Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W/PROJECT: 0 22 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Fut: 8 543 9 23 813 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 8 543 9 23 813 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 8 543 9 23 813 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 peE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Vol.: 8 543 9 23 813 46 49 30 48 36 35 44 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Saturat~on Flow Module: Sat/Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 19,00 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.92 0.95 0:95 0.92 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Lanes: 1.00 0.98 0.02 1.00 0.95 0.05 0.38 0.24 0.38 0.31 0.30 0.39 Final Sat.: 1750 1771 29 1750 1704 96 675 413 661 548 533 670 ------------1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 1---------------1 Capacity Analysis Module: Vol/Sat: 0.00 0.31 0.31, 0.01 0.48 0.48 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 Crit Moves: **** Green Time: 10.0 46.2 Volume/Cap: 0.04 0.60 De1ay/Veh: 35.8 16.4 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 AdjDe1/Veh: 35.8 16.4 HCM2kAvg: 0 11 Lanes: 0 0 0 Anal Vol: 8"· 543 9 Slgnal-ProtectlAighls-lnclude **** **** 46.2 0.60 16.4 1. 00 16.4 11 16.7 0.07 30.3 1.00 30.3 1 52.9 0.81 19.4 1.00 19.4 21 52.9 0.81 19.4 1.00 19.4 21 8.1 0.81 66.5 1.00 66.5 6 10.6 0.62 43.2 1.00 43.2 4 10.6 0.62 43.2 1.00 43.2 4 7.4 0.80 66.1 1.00 66.1 5 **** 10.0 0.59 42.8 1.00 42.8 4 10.0 0.59 42.8 1.00 42.8 4 '\-15 . .... ___~ ....~._... .. . u__._.u .__ . .-- --....- ......... ...........~~....... ....... ~111\¡lgll PGEBO~ II \1 ~ I ! II l I II EXISTING I I I S' SIDEWALK I I ¡ I ~ ¡ .-'1 DJ I ! I ~! Ñ F! ÞotO:la¡ 113'12 !U, ! I I!! I ! : I I II I i 1\ .. ! I!l~tj L L _J '-' \ ~;;;;;~=~~;=:;~~~;~~~;~~:>::_j --------------------Ì"~¡===---LJtsrrÆl:=:=-- I I;~ 11' 90' 250' ----- ! ! .. 11· ----I I 11' F ·1' I I I ¡~--!~:..----------- -,---",11' --------- ----------------.-._ I I '.e la' ... ---' -'-.:J I I , ,.- __ ""-_____________.____ , I ..ç IQ ____...-. _..-'.,- 111'\ It' ~ I l.c:1=~=:=::::¡:=:::~=--:..-::::=::=:==:::-1------------j __ . ___~r----·_--------·-------of ...... . i 12' \ 11'.... i ! I.&: ..... 1 11" 11'''' I I 'I 200' 90' . 1 I . ~ 12' ! 11'..... ! I j I lj\=i~~~~fi!¡¡J(---"~-~:=-~~~;.:~:~ \_ EXISTING 1 0 SlOEWALK 3i II i-'i LANE WIDTHS ~ i i !~ I iiiI " liñl :! !I ¡:"I I t I. I: lUll . 1° II ! i ¡f;t II : II II I II I! : I I 4'" I I! Uha 11' II'! II I I II II. . II I . II I I II I lå 11\ I I· I \ I I I I, I I ! -I- t NO SCALE EXISTING 7' BIKE LANE PillS 2' WIDENING (9' TOTAL) CONCEPTUAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD / STELLING ROAD c < C II< (.!) z la 0- ut PROJECT SITE ~I 5' BIKE LJ.HE~ 3' SHIFT or CURa AND GUTTER TO !HE NORTH 65' TRANsmCN __ _) SHELL GAS STATION 145':1: -1'1' 11' IIrII~C¡ "'12 \ -11- :.:: .., .., Ire 00: I ~~ ..,~ \ I >::1 . þ!o i enm I I I 110 J -It I ~o i! ¡I ~ " I: I !;:!I I :1- I I ~i:::: :: ~~!IV II ¡ l " ¡I! I , j._~ltitl~~J- -- -.-l. . ---------.... -..-.....~...._---'"~...,..... .----------------- '.........----.---------. oJ ~ Ii! ;j =>0 '" u.... ~~ ... ~~~ -ox ¡¡¡au ... i!ii ï= t; ..,.... ,.... 0- a:: VI a... ~~ò Z"", oJ x :S ~ ¡;; ..... i3~ ~œ o~~ 1::,.0 :_z "'~... - " ~ - ld en <C ClZ -,0 -'- ..,1- J:~ "'''' 3Hn H:llyn ;., ~ " 0 , , ¡' : ,I I I I : ! 11..,_ _I r---,{ ; r~,o :J= ~1 0", I II z_ I' ~~ I W"" "" "" 1/ w J ...1..... - ... I I it' ~ r I I : I I o .. I III I : I o I I , j I ~! I I' : , I . I ,L \1 r- :J\1\j ~ \ I 1+ __ II I " i ill: i ~ I I I" ¡ ~ ~ iI ò ¡;: ov~ ~NI113.LS 00 ¡ I o I I : ! I : I i I I ! I j I ! Ii! I I rli: II I :.. .. .. l'bl .. : :~ ~ ~:-: "'!JI! I I I !i!:5. I~I ~ I I '.' !:Iii! I I I , , ; I II 00 00 II II II , , , , I ... *. ~ ~. ~ .. ~ o z: . i I I , , 0 00 0' 0' 0' II 'I : i I I I '" .., .., Ir 00 œ: ",<C z> ..,.., >-' ..,::1 1-0 VIm en I- z......... W ~o We:: ><1: 0> O::w ß.....Jo ~::><I: -00 I- CD 0:: W w~ (;) O::Wz -w- eno:::..J ü..J ~ en ~ ::> z en :ï:~ ~~ zen o u , -1ß City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3251 FAX (408) 777-3333 Community Development Department CUPEIQ1NO PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Project Title: 'Ai lí'l \p, F9-0~ C; Project Location:....2.fR !5S- Pro'ect Description: EAFileNo. EA---W)<;,"-!b ase File No. () -wc$""- 2 AsA- ~,;-- , go , ttachments " 3·'2.-b- '3 i - 01 'i( .-02.0 > I . . _ Sh~p _ " 1.1 fl\~:z..'"1..q,I'\'~ """J"Þ.t w'r\'~ l'I'\e:z..'Uv,¡"-l, ìj 1#T . f<JbJ,(. ~ PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Site Area (ac.) - 5'.f..,Q, Building Coverage - Z?,g % Exist. BUildinQ3d.1:i1s:f.. Propose.!! I -t- Bldg. b5l?-ILt sJ. Zone -_f" . G.P. Designation - Cr,t>n_.rc-\c'f[Offi>Y¿/ R,e-.s¡(.t2MJiJ Assessor's Parcel No. -3'2b-~ I - O\~ -D"2-0 ) If Residential, Units/Gross Acre - Total# Rental/Own Bdrms Total sJ. Price Unit Type #1 Unit Type #2 Unit Type #3 Unit Type #4 Unit Type #5 Applicable Special Area Plans: (Check) o Monta Vista Design Guidelines o S. De Anza Conceptual o N. De Anza Conceptual o S. Sara-Sunny Conceptual )il Stevens Crk Bivd. Conceptual o Stevens Creek Blvd. SW & Landscape If Non-Residential, Building Area - ,~ 2.1 '+-_sJ. FAR - ~ 7'.,Max. Employees/Shift _I OD'I~arking Require'd -..J 3Q5"' 5 r' Parking Provided 37...fIL, Project Site is Within Cupertino Urban Service Area - YES JiI( NO 0 i -1-C¡ A. CUPERTINO GENERAL PLAN SOURCES D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES (Continued) 1. Land Use Element 26. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 2. Public Safety Element 27. County Par1<s and Recreation Department 3. Housing Element 28. Cupertino Sanitary District 4. Transportation Element 29. Fremont Union High School District 5. Environmental Resources 30. Cupertino Union School District 6. Appendix A- Hillside Development 31. Pacific Gas and Electric 7. Land Use Map 32. Santa Clara County Fire Department 8. Noise Element Amendment 33. County Sheriff 9. City Ridgeline Policy 34. CALTRANS 10. Constraint Maps 35. County Transportation Agency 36. Santa Clara Valley Water District B. CUPERTINO SOURCE DOCUMENTS 11. Tree Preservation ordinance 778 E. OUTSIDE AGENCY DOCUMENTS 12. City Aerial Photography Maps 37. BAAQMD Survey of Contaminant 13. 'Cupertino Chronicle' (Califomia History Excesses Center, 1976) 38. FEMA Flood Maps/SCVWD Flood Maps 14. Geological Report (site specific) 39. USDA, "Soils of Santa Clara County" 15. Par1<ing Ordinance 1277 40. County Hazardous Waste Management 16. Zoning Map Plan 17. Zoning Code/Specific Plan Documents 41. County Heritage Resources Inventory 18. City Noise Ordinance 42. Santa Clara Valley Water District Fuel Leak Site C. CITY AGENCIES Site 43. CalEPA Hazardous Waste and 19. Community Development Depl List Substances Site 20. Public Wor1<s Depl 21. Par1<s & Recreation Department F. OTHER SOURCES 22. Cupertino Water Utility 44. Project Plan Set/Application Materials 45. Field Reconnaissance D. OUTSIDE AGENCIES 46. Experience wlproject of similar 23. County Planning Department scopelcharacteristics 24. Adjacent Cities' Planning Departments 47. ABAG Projection Series 25. County Departmental of Environmental Health A. Complete all information requested on the Initial Study Cover page. LEAVE BLANK SPACES ONLY WHEN A SPECIFIC ITEM IS NOT APPLICABLE. B. Consult the Initial Study Source List; use the materials listed therein to complete, the checklist, information in Categories A through O. C. You are encouraged to cite other relevant sources; if such sources are used, job in their title(s) in the "Source' column next to the question to which they relate. D. If you check any of the "YES" response to any questions, you must attach a sheet explaining the potential impact and suggest mitigation if needed. E. When explaining any yes response, label your answer clearly (Example "N - 3 Historical") Please try to respond concisely, and place as many explanatory responses as possible on each Daoe. F. Upon completing the checklist, sign and date the Preparer's Affidavit. G. Please attach the following materials before submitting the Initial Study to the City. ,(Project Plan Set of Legislative Document ,(Location map with site clearty marked (when applicable) 1-80 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: :-'''' 0 c'" _c C ë c;:; c -CIS'" CIS CIS 0 CIS CIS CIS'" 1> .!!t)t) oC(J -. .ct)t) ISSUES: ...¡¡:~ 1-¡¡:=ñiO I-¡¡:CIS o CIS c_ 1I)·--¡ClQ. II) .- Q. zQ. [and Supporting Information Sources] GI c E ClJC -- II) C E E õ~- GlCI ~o GI.E'- ...J .- :æ: t) D.u) U) .5 ...JU) I. AESTHETICS .- Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a 0 0 0 ./!if scenic vista? [5,9,24,41,44] b) Substantially damage scenic resources, 0 0 0 ßI including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? [5,9,11,24,34,41,44] c) Substantially degrade the existing visual 0 0 0 -~ character or quality of the site and its surroundings? [1,17,19,44] d) Create a new source of substantial light or 0 0 0 a glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? [1,16,44] , II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing irnpacts I· ,. on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: I· a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique 0 0 0 ~ 1 Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide I Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural. use? [5,7,39] b) Conflict with existing zoning for 0 0 0 )i: agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? [5,7,23] c) Involve other changes in the existing 0 0 0 tiiI. environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? [5,7,39] I 1- ß \ ».... 0 c.... c.... c- _c caC 0.... c -"'.... '" '" "'",- ~ .!!! (,) (,) ..c u.s::..- ... .c(,)(,) ISSUES: ....;¡::~ I-;¡::....ñi° I-;¡::'" 0'" c_ 1/)-'- ClC. 1/)'- C. zC. [and Supporting Information Sources] GI C E I/) C :=.-... .. C E .5 õ.2»- GlCI ~o GI CI_ ...1- :E(,) .- o..e/) e/) .5 ...Ie/) III. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of 0 0 0 i?J. the applicable air quality plan? [5,37,42,44] b) Violate any air quality standard or 0 0 0 ,ß. contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? [5,37,42,44] , . c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net 0 0 0 )Sit increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? [4,37,44] , d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial 0 0 0 ~ pollutant concentrations? [4,37,44] ,; e) Create objectionable odors affecting a 0 0 0 .IS. substantial number of people? [4,37.44] . IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would " the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either 0 0 0 S· directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the Califomia Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? [5,10.27.44] b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any 0 0 0 jõf riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans. policies, regulations or by the Califomia Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? [5,10,27,44] c) Have a substantial adverse effect on 0 0 0 ~ federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (includina, but not limited to, marsh, vernal 1- 'ÔóL- »... C'" 0 cë _ c c c:¡:; -IG'" IG IG 0 IG IGIG'" ... .! U U .s::.u.c"-'" .cUU U ISSUES: "'c¡: ~ I-c¡:...1iio I-;¡:IG o IG c._ f1 -'- C)a. f1 - a. za. [and Supporting Information Sources] CI> c ë f1 c:=-" f1 c ë ë õ.2»- CI) CD ~ 0 CI> .gI- ...J- :Eu D..(/) (/) .E ...J(/) pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? [20,36,44] d) Interfere substantially with the movement 0 0 0 ~ of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? [5,10,12,21,26] e) Conflict with any local policies or 0 0 0 'ý:l ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ' . ordinance? [11,12,41] f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural 0 0 0 ~ Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? [5,10,26,27] V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: , a) Cause a substantial adverse change in 0 0 0 $I the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? [5,13,41] b) Cause a substantial adverse change in 0 0 0 Ji'J the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? [5,13,41] I c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique 0 0 0 A I paleontological resource or site or unique geologicfeature? [5,13,41] d) Disturb any human remains, including 0 0 0 ~ those interred outside of formal cemeteries? [1,5] I VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk I of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as 0 0 0 ).it delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the I-55 >0,- 0 c<;: _c C ë c:¡:: -1'11- I'll I'll 0 I'll 1'111'11- 1) .!!! U U .cu.c"-'" .cuu ISSUES: -r¡::Ë I-r¡::_~o 1-r¡::1'II o I'll c_ 1/)'-'¡ClQ. I/) - Q. zQ. [and Supporting Information Sources] .scE II) C .- "- I/) C E E o~- alCI :1::0 aI .'lJ- ...J- :¡¡u Q.I/) I/) C ...JI/) State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. [2,14,44] ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 0 0 ISl [2,5,10,44] iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including 0 0 0 Ji!l liquefaction? [2,5,10,39,44] iv) Landslides? [2,5,10,39,44] 0 0 0 1!9.. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the 0 0 0 ¡:( loss of topsoil? [2,5,10,44] c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is 0 0 0 ~ unstable, or that would become unstable as a result ofthe project, and potentially result ' , in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? [2,5,10,39] d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined 0 0 0 .a., in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? [2,5,10] e) Have soils incapable of adequately 0 0 0 0 supporting the use of septic tanks or N/Ä altemative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? [6,9,36,39] VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or 0 0 0 Jì11. the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? [32,40,42,43,44] b) Create a significant hazard to the public or 0 0 0 ø. the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions . I involving the release of hazardous materials , into the environment? [32,40,42,43,44] c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle 0 0 0 .&. hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile I-B~ ;..- 0 c~ _c C'E C·- 'iica'Ü carIS o1iÍ OS OS- ~ ._ u .c u .-.... .cuu ISSUES: -;¡::g 1-._;1iio I-;¡::os o os c._ (1):='- ClQ. II) - Q. zQ. [and Supporting Information Sources] GI C E II) C ¡:.-.. II) C E .E õ~- CDO) :=0 GI .g¡- ..J- :=u 1I..(f) (f) C ..J(f) of an existing or proposed school? [2,29,30,40,44] d) Be located on a site which is included on a 0 0 0 0 list of hazardous materials sites compiled, pursuant to Government Code Section N/I't 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? [2,42,40,43] e) For a project located within an airport land 0 0 0 0 use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport IV / fr or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? [ ] f) For a project within the vicinity of a private 0 0 0 -0 airstrip, would the project result in a safety NjPr hazard for people residing or working in the project area? [ ] g) Impair implementation of or physically 0 0 0 J? interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? [2,32,33,44] h) Expose people or structures to a 0 0 0 ß1 significant risk of loss, injury or death .I I involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or I where residences are intermixed with wildlands?[1,2,44] I VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY i I I .. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or 0 0 0 JQ: I I waste discharge requirements? [20,36,37] I b) Substantially deplete groundwater 0 0 0 B. supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level I which would not support existing land uses I or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? [20,36,42] i I-55 »- 0 e- _e C ë c;:::; e -lU- lU IU 0 IU 1U1U_ - .!!!UU .cU.c-'" .cUU U ISSUES: -=s 1-=_1i!o I-=IU OIU' e ._ 1/)'-'- CIa. I/)-a. za. [and Supporting Information Sources] seE I/)e~-'" I/) e E .5 o!i!/- 41C) ::0 GI .~- ....1.- :æ U 1I.f/) f/) .5 ....If/) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage 0 0 0 ~ pattem of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion of siltation on- or off-site? [14,20,36] d) Substantially alter the existing drainage 0 0 0 )'( pattem of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or , amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site [20,36,38] e) Create or contribute runoff water which 0 0 0 )¡( would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? [20,36,42] f) Otherwise substantially degrade water 0 0 0 ~ quality? [20,36,37] g) Place housing within a 1 OO-year flood , 0 0 0 0 hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate N/A Map or other flood hazard delineation map? [2,38] h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area 0 0 0 0 I . structures which would impede or redirect NIp, flood flows? [2,38] i) Expose people or structures to a significant 0 0 0 ~ risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? [2,36,38] j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or 0 0 0 J<f mudflow? [2,36,38] IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING· Would the project: a) Physically divide an established 0 0 0 ~ community? [7,12,22,41] b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, 0 0 0 ø.. policy, or regulation of an aaency with -5lo »... 0 C'" _C C ë c::¡:: C -ns" ns ns 0 ns nsns'" ti .!uU .cu.c"-· .cuu ISSUES: "'r¡::~ 1-r¡::~1io I-r¡::ns o ns c_ 01'-' Cle- 01'- c. zc. [and Supporting Information Sources] SCE mC ¡:.- 01 C E E 0.2'- CD CI ~ 0 CD .2'- 0-1/) ...J'- :æ: u ...JI/) I/) .E jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? [1,7,8,16,17,18,44] c) Conflict with any applicable habitat 0 0 0 ß. conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? [1,5,6,9,26] X. MINERAL RESOURCES .. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known 0 0 0 ~ mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? I. [5,10] b) Result in the loss of availability of a 0 0 0 R locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? [5,10] XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, 0 0 1i 0 noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? [8,18,44] I b) Exposure of persons to or generation of 0 0 .Bi 0 I excessive groundbome vibration or I I groundborne noise levels? [8,18.44] c) A substantial permanent increase in 0 0 J&t 0 ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [8,18] d) A substantial temporary or periodic 0 0 )~ 0 increase in ambient noise levels in the I project vicinity above levels existing without the project? [8,18.44] e) For a project located within an airport land 0 0 0 0 use plan or, where such a plan has not been I adopted, within two miles of a public airport N/ft I or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the 1-'81- >0'" 0 e'E c..... c- _e caC 0..... -II'" .cll II 1111'" '1) .!!UU U - "- .cuu ISSUES: "'q::~ 1-1;:£:1;0 I- .- II o II e ._ III .- "i CI Do U):t::o. ZDo [and Supporting Information Sources] seE III e .- "- III e E E 0,2)- CI) CI ~o CI),2)- I1.m ...1- ::æu ...1m m e project area to excessive noise levels? [8,18,44] f) For a project within the vicinity of a private D D D D airstrip, would the project expose people Nlft residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? [8,18] XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an D D D )i!1. area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? [3,16,47,44] b) Displace substantial numbers of existing D D D ~ housing. necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [3,16,44] c) Displace substantial numbers of people, D D D I)( necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [3.16,44] XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered govemmental facilities, need for new or physically altered govemmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain I acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? [19,32,44] D D D :Ø Police protection? [33,44] D D 0 .;8 Schools? [29,30,44] D 0 D jíJ Parks? [5,17,19,21.26,27,44] 0 0 0 Iã Other public facilities? [19,20,44] D D 0 )!i{ XIV. RECREATION -- a) Would the project increase the use of D D 0 þj( existing neighborhood and reaional parks or 1-8ß ».. 0 c" _c cë c;; c -01" 01 01 0 01 0101" ~ .!! U U .s:::. u -- .cuu ISSUES: ..¡¡::~ 1-¡¡::~1i!o I- .- 01 o 01 C ._ en·-¡:CIIQ. U) :!:: C. zQ. [and Supporting Information Sources] SCE II) C - "- en C E .§ o~- GI CII :!:: 0 GI .2'- ..J- æU Q.(/) (/) .E ..J(/) other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? [5,17,19,21,26,27,44] b) Does the project include recreational 0 0 0 0 facilities or require the construction or NIP, expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? [5,44] XV. TRANSPORTATIONrrRAFFIC- Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is 0 0 ^ 0 substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (I.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? [4,20,35,44] b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, 0 0 'j( 0 a level of service standard established by the , county congestion management agency for .. I designated roads or highways? [4,20,44] c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, 0 0 0 -;a.. including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in locatiòn that results in substantial safety risks? [4,?] d) Substantially increase hazards due to a 0 0 0 ß. I I design feature (e.g., sharp curves or I dangerous intersections) or incompatible I uses (e.g., farm equipment)? [20,35,44] I I e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 0 0 0 J;&.. [2,19,32,33,44] f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 0 0 0 .E{ [17,44] g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or 0 0 0 .8l programs supporting alternative I transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle I racks)? [4,34] I XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS - I Would the project: 1,6'1 ».. c" 0 cë _c c c;:¡: -I'll" 1'111'11 0 I'll 1'111'11" 1:) .!uu .cu.c-~ .cuu ISSUES: ..¡¡::~ 1-¡¡::..1;;0 I-¡¡::I'II o I'll C ._ I/I'-'¡:: CÐQ. 1/1'- Q. zQ. [and Supporting Information Sources] GI c E CI) c - ~ 1/1 C E E õ~- GlCÐ ::0 GI CÐ_ D..II) ..J- ::æu ..JII) II) .5 a) Exceed wastewater treatment 0 0 0 Q.. requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? [5,22,28,36,44] b) Require or result in the construction of 0 0 0 ¡:&. new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? [36,22,28,36] c) Require or result in the construction of 0 0 0 ~ new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? [5,22,28,36,44] e) Result in a determination by the 0 0 0 .')í(. wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? [5,22,28,36,44] f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient 0 0 0 ; fiit permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? I?] g) Comply with federal, state, and local 0 0 0 ~ statutes and regulations related to solid waste? I?] I-qo a) Does the project have the potential to 0 0 0 )!á degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? [] b) Does the project have impacts that are 0 0 0 Jt{ individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? [] c) Does the project have environmental 0 0 0 ø. effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? [] I hereby certify that the information provided in this Initial Study is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief; I certify that I have used proper diligence in responding accurately to all questions herein, and have consulted appropriate source references when necessary to ensure full and complete disclosure of relevant environmental data. I hereby acknowledge than any substantial errors dated within this Initial Study may cause delay or discontinuance of related project review procedures, and hereby agree to hold harmless the City of Cupertino, its staff and authorized agents, from the consequences of such delay or discontinuance. Print Preparer's Name GiI:R rl' 7J L-o \ ,,"J7 J Preparer's Signature I-~ \ ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 0 Aesthetics 0 Agriculture Resources 0 Air Quality 0 Biological Resources 0 Cultural Resources 0 Geology ISoils 0 Hazards & Hazardous 0 Hydrology I Water 0 Land Use I Planning Materials Quality 0 Mineral Resources 0 Noise 0 Population I Housing 0 Public Services 0 Recreation ~ TransportationfTraffic 0 Utilities I Service 0 Mandatory Findings of Systems Significance DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) finds that: 0 The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. IØ Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ,ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 0 The proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. 0 Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. /2./ IL/ I oS- Date I 1·:L~Db Date I ~Cf'N DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FROM WHOLE FOODS MARKET PROJECT FILE NOS. U-2005-20, ASA-2005-18, EA-2005-16 Traffic and Circulation Impacts Truck Route. Market truck traffic must be confined to the major arterial streets. Stelling Road is not a truck route. The store operator will need to plan a truck route for deliveries, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director, and inform all of its delivery contractors. General Traffic. A project traffic report was prepared by Pang Engineers, Inc. and reviewed by Public Works Department staff (Exhibit B). The report was prepared to comply with City transportation level of service (LOS) policies and also Congestion Management Program (CMP) standards. The net peak hour traffic trips (excludes car dealership trips) is 2,929 daily trips with 57 trips during the AM peak hour and 328 trips during the PM peak hour. Looking at the affected signalized intersections for "Existing Traffic," "Background Traffic," and "With Project Traffic" conditions, all studied intersections continue to meet City LOS and CMP LOS standards. The traffic report did identify traffic operational deficiencies at the Stevens Creek and Stelling Road intersection that would be worsen with the Whole Foods project, but not to a point that degraded LOS bel~w City standards. The traffic consultant recommended that the applicant study the possibility of lengthening the left turn pocket and lane on westbound Stevens Creek Boulevard and/ or lengthening the left turn pocket on southbound Stelling Road. Cut-Through Traffic. There is a potential for project traffic cutting easterly through Alves Drive, a residential neighborhood. This potential cannot be studied until after the project is occupied and traffic patterns have had a chance to normalize. The neighborhood is also involved in the study. A study will need to be funded and funds set aside to construct necessary traffic improvements. \-q3. CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE December 14, 2005 As provided by the Environmental Assessment Procedure, adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino on May 27, 1983, as amended, the following described project was reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee of the City of Cupertino on December 14, 2005. PROTECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION Application No.: Applicant: Location: U-2005-20, ASA-2005-18 (EA-2005-16) Peter Ko 20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard DISCRETIONARY ACTION REOUEST Use Permit to demolish a former car dealership and construct a new 68,214 square foot market and café Architectural & Site Approval to construct a new 68,214 square foot market & cafe FINDINGS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE The Environmental Review Committee recommends the granting of a Mitigated Negative Declaration finding that the project is consistent with the General Plan and has no significant environmental impacts with the following mitigations incorporated in the project. 1) Prepare a traffic engineering study to evaluate the feasibility of lengthening the left turn pocket and left turn lane on westbound Stevens Creek Boulevard and/ or the left turn pocket on southbound Stelling Road. Fund improvements as needed. 2) Fund a neighborhood cut-through traffic study for the east side of Alves Drive. Fund any necessary traffic improvements. r I e a plan for the recycling and/ or reuse of construction debris. D te . e adequate location for bicycle rack. Ste e PI secki Director of Community Development G:\Planning\ ERC\Rec\2005\REC ea200516.doc \ -,t11 WHOLE FOODS MARKET CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY II Ko Architects. Inc . 900 High Street, Suite 1 Palo Alto, CA 94301 p:650.853.1908 f:650.853.1645 Rr~I~ION Fl.Atf4rN:::.:15UBMITTAL SEP'l'EM6ER23.2~ PL,/IHIjINl:;¡ I"!E5U6MITTAL OCToeEii! 24, 2øøs REV151Q>¡S PER Clrr NO\.19'1eER IØ, 200:. - - - - - - PIiOJECT NO. Ø5-3i3 OUE Al.tillJ5T 4,2005 ORþ,.WN BY S~LE - COVER SKEET SlEET ASO.O ~\ @ KO "RC~ T[CTS IIIe WHOLE FOODS MARKET 20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino. California 95014 SCOPE OF WORK T~E PROJECT u;¡...¡OLE FOODS. MARKET 15 LOCATED AT T~E NORTHUJE5T CORNER OF 5TEVEN5 CREEK BOULEVARD AND NORTH STELLING: ROAD. THE PROJECT ADD!'æ55 15 2Ø$S 5TE\lEN5 CREEK BOULEvARD. CUPERTINO, CA ~;ØI4. THE SCOPE OF TI-tE PROJECT 15 TO CONSTRUCT A NEW ONE-5TO!'õ1;'r 64,øØØ 5Q. FT. RETAIL BUILDING - GROCERY MARKET BUILDING. PROJECT ADDRESS 2Ø9SS STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD CUPERTINO. CA '=!SiZl14 OCCUPAN'r GROUP M TYPE CON.5TRUCTION V-N 5PRINKLERED YE& CODE REFERENCES 24>Ø1 CAL~IA I!UILOINa. CODE (cee) 2"1 CALII"OIõ!NIA Hl!CI-IA,NICAL coœ (CMC) 2iZIØI CAL~IA ~1J'1e1NGo COOE (Cf"eJ 2"1 CAL~IA El.ECTR1CAL CODE (eEC) 2ÐØI C.AL~IA EN.eF<l:1oT REa.uLATION& 1~"I!'iIECOOI!(C;C;) AU. CITY AOOPTEC ORDIN.ðNGE& RELATINCO TO elJlLÞINCr c;o.j&TRlCTIQ>I A PROPOSED NEW PROJECT BY: SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY C U RA COveR 5HEET PROJECT SUMMARY TABLE, VICINITY EXISTING CONDITIONS PFæLIMINAR"'" 51TE PLAN t Sf..IELL BUILDiNG! FLOOR PLAN FÆLIMINARY ROÇf PLAN OVERALL SCI-IEMATIC 6UILDINC2 ELEvATIONS SC¡"¡EMATIC STREET ELEVATION· 5TEYEN5 CREEK 60ULEvARD 5C¡"¡EMATIC 5TREET ELEVATION - 5TEYENS CREEK BOULEvARD 5CJ- EMATIC ENTRY FACADE ELEVATION - MAIN ENTRY ENLA~D PARTIAL ELEVATIONS - ENTRIES ENLA~ED PARTIAL ELEvATIONS· WOOD CANoPY DETAIL CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN PAR!<INC2 LOT 1..IGI-ITIN(;, STUD"'" SHEET INDEX AEF<:IAL MAPS AS4.1a AS4.1b AS4.2 AS4.3 AS4.4 AS5.0 AS6.0 C H ASO.O ASO.1 AS1.0 AS1.1 AS2.0 AS4.0 A PROJECT TEAM DEVELOPER/OWNER SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY A-,onl!¡!, (¡ó!:>Ø) .344-15ØØ .3Ø E. FOURif..l AVENUE Fax, (b!:>Ø) .344-Øb52 SAN MATEO, CA 'M4Ø1 Cof¡tact: JO~ YU ~"~cc:>.cc:>m ""' NGoO k.ngO"6rpCO.~ ARC HIT E C T KO ARCHITECTS INC. Fhone: (b5oØ) 85.3·IS€le wø ¡"¡IG¡"¡ STREET, 5UITE I Fax: (b5oØ) 85.3-1645 PALo ALTO. CA ~.3øt COf'Itacb PETER 1<0, AlA de6lan~arch.com MARK MUNOZ mo!!rkfil~arc::h.cO!T1 T.I. ARC HIT E C T 8ECKHAM DESIGN GROUP ARCHITECTS (80GA) Phone, (5012) 34.3-2225 &1Ø5o 5+-IOAL CREEK BLVD., f2IØ Fo!!x: (512) 34.3-&1250 AU5TIN, TX 151&1 COf'Ito!!ct: JOf..lN 6ECKJ..IAM j"fTlbeGkhamfilbd9",chlteCt6.c.om TEN ANT WHOLE FOODS MARKET CALIfORNIA, INC. FhoI1e: (5IØ) 42&-144~ S'3ðØ I-IORTON STREET, 5UITE 200 Fax: (5oIØ) 42&-14% EMERYVILLE, CA ~bØ& C"ntact, DEBRA MARINOZZI deb\' ðJnarll'lOzzlfilwhc;¡lef""d&.c.c>m G E 0 TEe H N I C A L E N GIN R UNITED SO!L ENGINEERING, INC. f"t-c¡,e: (408) 9ð8-2~sø 3418 EDWARD Al/ENUE Fax: (406) ~-1:;3b SANTA CLARA, CA 'aSØ54 COf'It/!ct: 5EAN DElvERT &delvertfilun¡ted&"II.~ WHOLE FOODS MARKET CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY Iœ Ko Architects. Inc, . 900HighSlreet, Suite 1 PaloAlto,CA 94301 p:650_653.19Oð f: 650.853.1845 REvISIO~ PLA*j1N:;; SUBMITTAL 5EPTEM6ER 23, 200;. FLA/fI!m REeueMfTTAL OCTOSEF!: ~4, 200:. 1i£V151a.1& FER CITY NO'vëM6ER IØ, 2ØØ& PROJECT NO. œ·313 ,'" AI..IOOST 4. 2ØØ5 DRAWN BY SCALE PROJECT SHE!! SUMMARY ASO.1 TABLE " MAPS © KO.I!CHIT[C~INC. PROJECT SUMMARY TABLE - - - II SITE AREA (SQ. FT AND ACRES) I -.-. II NET AREA ±24"'1,56Ø SF. = ±5h6 ACRES Ii GROSS AREA '24l)%>" SF . ±:'>hÐ ACRES i ----------< TOTAL eUILDIN<:I AREA h6,214 &.F I ! PROPOSED BuiLDING AREA I GROUND LEVEL b3,6~4 SF. FUTURE MEZZANINE LEVEL I 4)2Ø SF FLOOR AREA RATIO Ø16 (26 %) BLDG AREA I NET SITE AREA 63,e~4 5F ! 241,56Ø SF . Ø26 NUMBER OF 5TORIE5 ONE-STORY WITI-i A FUTURE MEZZANiNE LEVEL I-IElc,l-Ir 45' MAX. eUllDING PAD ELEvATION I 261,12 - 2b4øa ! i + 12'.12 FROM CURS TO FINIS!-I FLOOR (2% SLOPE) CURB ELEVATION vARIES, :!:26Ø.4Ø - 2E:>336 A:;' EXI;'TING ALONG STEVEN5 CREEK BOULEvARD NUMBER Of' EMPLOYEE:;' PROJECTED 4Øø Tor AL TEAM MEMBER5 (EMPLOYEE&) IØØ-12S TEAM MEMBER5 LUORKINc:. AT ANY ONE TIME NUMBER OF &EAT& PROJECTED In 6AR SEA 1'& (INDOOR), n NON-BAR &EAT5 (INDOOR' OUTDOOR CAFE TABLES); "'" I PARKING: REQUIRED 200 STALL:;' I A&5UME AVERAGE OF 1 SPACE PER 2SØ SF FOR CsENERAL COMMERCIAL 11;~SØ ! 2SØ . 2ðð SPACES REQUIRED PARK.ING: PROviDED 316 51' AL"5 OFF-5TREET (S 5T ALL5 F'ER I,ØØØ 5F.J STANDARD PARK.ING (6Ø%): 2125TALLS I COMPACT PAFð<ING (4Ø%), 156 STALL5 I ACCE5516LE F'ARK.ING: 1 STALLS } ACeE"'ElLE vAN ACCES&. PARK.ING, I &TALL I !-lOURS Of' OPERATION 8:ØØ AM TO IØ,ØØ PM EXISTING U&E. COMMERCIAL PROPOSED USE GROCERY / RETAIL AND CAFE ZONING DE51GNATION PLANNED DEVELOPMENT GENEAAL PLAN DE51GNATION COMME~IAL/OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL PAviNG AREA tlbl,ØØ2 5F. (E:>S"~ Of' NET LOT AREA) LAND5CAPE AREA t24,4Ø8 SF. (lø"~ OF NET LOT AREA) 51GNAGlE ALLOLLlED - PRELIM CALCULATION5 TOTAL 8n 5F FER SPECIFIC PLAN, 15 SF PER. ONE FARKING LOT 348'-Ø" x 1.50 ~ 5022 5F LINEAR FOOT 5TEvENS CREEK 2ØØ'-Ø" x 15 : 3ØØ SF SIGNAGlE PROPOSED - NOT A PART TOTAL 12,& 5F MAIN ENTRY 51GNAGIE (pARKING LOT): S'-2" TALL LETTER;' ~ 3ØS SF SIGN 5TACKED LOOO 51GNAGlE (PARK.ING lOT): I 3'-'3" TALL LETTER.5 . 112 SF SIGN STACKED LOGO SIGNAGlE (&TEVEN& CREEK), 4'-1" TALL LETTERS. 24'3 SF 51GN pARJ<.ING LOT INTERIOR LANDSCAPING 12% LANDSCAPING Î (13,62:2 SF LAND6CAFING / 118,28.3 5F pAviNG) 3 NTO AERIAL MAP œ AL vESIDR ~ ã! ~ N ~ w Q ~ ~ ~ ro ~ ~ w Q z SITE VICINITY MAP (NTS) AERIAL MAP (NTS) 85 STEVENS Mc:CLELLAN PROJECT SUMMARY TABLE 2 NT' VICINITY MAP WHOLE FOODS MARKET CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY II Ko Architects. Inc, . 900HighStreel,Suite1 PaloAlto,CA 94301 p.650.853.1908 f:650.853.1845 CI-IURC¡"'¡ EXl5TlNú elIlLDING EXl5TlNú BUILDING / -I , i I ~~- ~"7 2~' ~ S~"'v 'I -- - ~ N; '<57_""" ~ 258-~ r----25S____ ", ~m '",5$1 "" IN MONU~~NT WELL '~.oo'" PTN PARCEL ONE I of 1'374.q.ft.~ 0.0315 aer.15 [j , ~I~ I~ . z ~I ::I~ ~I~ ~ .; " , . 1!1.~ ',M ó<. 156.9 ,~ BUILDING:! 1 STORY BUtwNG AREA:'.~SQ.FT. (E) DAYCARE LITTLE VIU..AGE '. I / <.\ \ ,~ if, \ \ \ \ \ \ EAST "9 ..... ... ""~"!.-, "., -, 'I< -" I ' I I ~.. \-.. if" I .......--~< \ ! \ Î---~ \\ . ..~ ~ :s-{:- ~'- e,., ;J, \ ~... .?~ , ''. .... ...... , ( '-., -- ~. . .. \ .~ ? r ""'!.~ ..... " .... ;.>~"'\ 'I-«nftII: .... "I .... .. '" ~. - $ ,,; ;~ ) ...., 328-31-!" g. .; ;EL TWO ~I o sq.ft. ~ o acres ;r::] ~'" ~I .. rE)!We. STOP TOIõ$HAIN . OC THE PU8LIC , " o " o , o ~. ,. POBPAAC!:L EXCEPl10N PTN PARCEL ONE 71Zsq.ft. , 0.0163 _ere. ~r ,d~', "'" C>o./ ,-;,g: . "\ ....'. ", 10;4.:.; .... EXI&TINú BUILDING ,\.1 Bun.DlNG' 1STCIRYBUÞWNG HElCHT:18.8' AAEA:2O,52:5SQ.fT. "-'-< ,å ,", . , H...8'~-/ o , 5EF'1'EMBERB,2ØØ5 OCToee~ ~4, ~øøs NOvEI'eER III', ~ØØ5 REr. ~I " ~O. 0S-313 - - EB DATE AlI::;UST 4, ~ØØ5 DR.W~ er IJ ~c.u: I".W'-Ø" EXISTING SHEET C0NDfT10NS AStO @ ~o AJIC~ITECTS INC. REVISIOI PL..w.IING 5UeMITT AL PLA)\N .t,; fi!E5UE!MITTAL REvl51ct-15 ÆR CITY EXISTINCo: SUILDINÚI ---- / / EXISTING CONDITIONS \ \ ~ ",TeVENS CI'iIEEK ~\tP REQUllõæD 2"'-Ø" l.ANDecAPE eET!lACK 1":3Ø' (7)1111 }III{IIII( L ..." 475.62' ðtD GRAPHIC SCALE . . " (INFEET iJ>oh ~ 30 8 ~ ~t '~, ~ "'''~'S ~, H'.'. '3", S8fr53'30"W_ ;' :c.:. , <'88::::::,. ~; [! -, L:-, / , ß .- \ /, /~_/ ~"" , /<.... ;0/ /' EXISTING: G:AS \ ~ STATION TO \ / RE:H.AIN~ 13 '. ~WEST 1/4 SEe T7S, R2W WOt.I S eaV1e" W W 11. FD BRASS DISK z .. WON lIEU. ..... S 88'S2'10" W II ~ '" '~ " " · < > ar <" aO "' Qr z< 3' "" "a ." 09 00 Zu o · o · eo, P.tJ¡Œl.ONI poep.tJ¡CEl~E E~œp'i1ON T\Io\J WHOLE FOODS MARKET CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY [I Ko Architects. Inc, . 900 High Street, Suite 1 PaloAlto,CA 94301 p:650.853,1908 f:650.853.1845 - - ~ ~ ~ ~ - r,NOR" KEY MAP EB PROGRESS PRINT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION R£VISIO~ F'!..Al+IING: 5UeMITTAL 5EF'TÐ16EF<:23,2t1œ p ,.AI+4IN::s 1i£6l.eMITTAL OCTœER 24, 2ØÐS REY151ON6 PER CITY NO'ÆM6ER IØ,2øøs REf.NOFITH PROJECT NO. øs-31) EB DATE ~T4.2øøs ORAWNII'r IJ SCAl.£ 1"-;3Ø'·Ø" PR~RY ¡mT SITE PLAN AS1.1 & SIELL BLDG PLAN @ ~o AIIC~ITECTS 11tC. 1 EXI&TING. eUILDINC:I EXISTING BUILDING: \" 1 EXISTING C¡,;URCI-I - - (Ei DAYCARE LITTLE vlu..AG:e REMOVE lEI WALL!!> lEi e<JS STOP TO ~AIN 4'-.:1>" II.IA1-KWAY FROM BU6 STOP TO STOIõf:EN~ PAIõa<I1<6 LOT T~ES TO HAVE ¡<IGO< ~OFIE5 TO PROVIDE &><ADE AND ~ NICE &ll'æIH5CAF'E. TTP 4 1'-&" OVEI'!J.<ANG C* ve:i-<ICJ..ES ¡¡';¡!;'-2" ~ !õEQUIREÞ LANDSCAPE ðETaACK IØ$'-Ø" ~'-Ø"HIN - - - - II! II i i \ i ' ~ ? ~ f II, I L "" I '1\1 :=,-~'''' ":~,.- nll¡-' !¡~ li I !:HA,; IoIALL ß'''''''~~''''' " . I '" " J [", . g I 'J' ...." ..~ , T J"S' I : 'I : :18 . "-',- Y-"- T I I· ¡...¡ I ~ + ~ ~ ~ TAl ~ 'I ~ L.EVEL 3 th3.e~ SF. ~ i 18 E LEVEL = 4,32 SF "t AL . 1&8,214 SF. ~ ""'N<> . >10 0 AllO -I~"r. ".~.,j \j W"'" ., .: ì'~ '. " !\,-- ' I 1111' .-,\ ~ ~C-;'-:' eIC""CLI! RACK .. TI ~ CONCÆTE ~ANTERS U CONT1NI.IOJS S1.0f"'E ~ SRiy¡;¡: WlLOW I"'!..ANTIN::i$. P. I ,:~ . EXISTING I I I ¡DEMO KITCI-IEN SUlLO INo::;. , , I · I ~ ~t- , I , t 20" LOW WALL WIT\-< LANC>ecAprNc:"s (e¡;:~) ~ r-"'~F I I I I ' I ~--- -'--~ , I '. 11 ------ --- - J 11.. I _ __i_~ ~ '1.,,,,,..( Ii·" " . ." '.' _ '\ 0 ~, . " 0 ,j '\' ,. ,'- ,,>._ .. '-'" ". . . ,,"'.~-=~'¥é',;;,~~"t~,:':._ ,'<: _~,C.:2-_\: ~ ç ¡ 4.., Q\'Y"}1';'>, -'f'·~-;~.:·Ôl.~ -""" "~ ~ -W*::'-',oil;:Ä<"<' .~,,'- >;;--</:_~" ,,/.~o - ',~--;; --~.. 2&'_4" 122'-Ø" _ ~ IIJC:)IIõK FENCE WIT'" VINES ~'_ø" SIDEWALK TO UJlDEN AND AJ....1<iN WI". - - - - - _ _ 'T'I-IE EXI5TfNao ~I!!C'TEO 61DEWAl..K IN :ReEK 6LYD !'i:EQ,JII'<ED FRONT Cf' TI-E EXI6TIN::". GM STATION _ ~ 41e>'_&" 1D1!GAf'E e.EreA.CK )'-Ø" LANC>I!GAPI~ MOlJ'>ID (e!:JIit1ðJ -. I"'EOE6~AN UlALKWA'T" '1ER PAP \ I,LFM ¡HACKED LOGO M~ 5fGN - NOT A p,,¡,Rt _ A AeOVE \ NEW TRELLIS ELEMENT Al-0Na. pAl'!KrNCs LOT _ e.EE ~ r:. &TE\IENð CREEK et.vo STEVENS CREEK 9+-IEETA&4.1i:> ON I"'!..ANE:TREEf>,T'r"P. , ·,,,,T ~, ~ PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN i , I ,--- ---_._--~_. TABULATIONS -- SITE AREA· 5b8 ACRES (:241,56oØ 51") NEW RETAIL AREA, ,.41 ACRES (603,8S4 SF) NEW FLOOR AREA, 151 ACRE5 (606,214 5f) PARt(iNG, 3160 5TALL5 TOTAL 5T ANDARD PARKIN"': 21:2 5TALL5 COMFACT PARt(ING (4Ø%, 15E:> STALL5 ACCES516LE PARKING, "15TALL6 vAN ACCE55. FARt<:ING, 551 5T ALLS PER 1,øØØ 51" MiNoT 12'-"" T -, BOULEVARD ~ ~ ~ o « o tt: 19 z ...J ...J W f- (/J I f- tt: o Z , J NOTE, WHOLE T'-IE ~OP EQlJIR'1ENT INFOI<t1ATICN INDICATED ON T~15 PlAN 15 FOR ORDER OF MAéoINITUDE AND C£NERAl. IDEA OF FOODS l.OCATICt./ Œ EQUIPMENT CNl. -r - T~E INFORMATICN GIVEN 15 NOT SPECIFIC TO TIoI15 PROJECT MARKET CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY Iœ Ko Architects, Inc, . 900 High Street, Suita 1 PeloAlto, CA 94301 p:650.853.1908 2Ø x 2Ø ROCf OPENING, T'T"P. f:650.853.1845 FRfl.IMINAR'T" ROCf EQJIFtlENT. ITP. I NORTI-I FAGIN(. Cl.ERE5TORT ROŒ MONITOR. T'T"P. "-.- REfN01!1 KEY MAP E9 ~EN5i1'i:.i UNIT FOT LT. FWCf1 /~-'\ ,~, ;/ ,,--,) , ,~ ~; { V - "- f'REl.IMfNAR-r ROOF EQJIR1ENT. TYF \ -\ TWO 1<1" x 12' ID. ROCf ROCf SCREEN , AIR INTA,i(E I-IOOD, Sø x 100 ROCf OFENI~ 7 .., ;1 x 51 ROOF OPENI~ .{VISIO~ -' ROOF I-IATC~ OPENiNG. L.OCATION, 51ZE PER LMA PLANNING 5UBMITTAJ.. 5EFTEM6ER 23. 20ØS 14 x 14 ROŒ OPENING INTAKE PL~INGI RE5UeMITTAL OCTOBER 24, 20ØS REviSICN5 PER Cln- NOv81BER 1Ø,2ÐØE> Io:! x Io:! ROOF OPENING FRELlMINART ROOF EQUIFtlENT, TTF. ~ENSING L.NIT FOR r¡:¡!AININ::;, Io:! X I~ ROOF OFENIN;:; REf. NORTH PROJECT NO. Ø5-313 14 x 14 ROCf OFENINCs INTAKE œ D"'TE AU:S.l5T4,200s DRAWN BY IJ ;¡Ø x ;¡Ø ROCf OFENINC:J. Tr"P. SCJ.L£ l"m2Ø'-Ø" PRELIMNARY SHm SA!..CONT ROOF AS2.0 "--.. . METAL 'ZINC' ROOF t-rp PLAN \-~.,~/ ' . " '" Is.. STACKED l.C60 SIGN - NOT A pART - PRELIMINARY ROOF PLAN 1"_2Ø' @KO.ulCHITtCTSn iJj;' r~ æ - - )- {~~J' G'::J~-' ,~, (C~, ('~'" ;~~., /~~ '" \ 0'1 o'lo)j () \' c - "~f/' ~/ ~_,:~:/' \,,-=.-J I \'0_ ./ _ I ,I ~ r- 1 I ~ , I L ,>E ~ : I~- ~ I" _~:~L] , - r , I \ I i 1 . I ~ , . I I 'cn- f?j ¡'e".1 L::~ I ¡-.--. í I I' ) t I I. - l-~-~ ' I I \ ' I I ------- --- I----L I ----~ I f:> @ .' l .,' '" I ,', '" I "', .~ ... ..) ".< "'-'-".' o!-. I ". ~ " '" I ! , , i eUll T -UF ROOFtNG \ ø ø o ~ (E) D.A'T"CARE l.ITTLE viLLAGE ""~O" . .~ . - ...-=~ :,>. . J¡, (0 ).Ç-'---"-,rr- ''\ ~;C""\;" "e' -, ; 0 1; 0 1 5 " Q) -,- ._ì\,~~ \~' ,,"'-"~~._,~--_._----~- '-, , '" !!! --------'----'- ~-'--¡--- c ~Ñ ~0<" SK'T"llc.t.lTS AT LOADING DOCK SU!LT-UF ROOFING AT LOADIN(;¡ DOCK - ~" " ~ . " MASS WALL, "ONE COYE""D ~~ . " ~ '1 "'IDOOR MA"""T "AlL UNDER ROOF , CURYED c.iLU-l.AM FACtA ~ ~n L- 'I SUIl. T -up ROOF· -R--h-- SIGN SAND - SICsNAG:E NOT A PART· ~ , if lJL SKTl.IG:I-ITS IN CANOFT"' ~~ -4.0 NATURAL WOOD POSTS. TIP. - --- ':i I-EAY1' TIM6ER5 FOR SEAJ'1 FRAMrNG, T"fP. -iI- --- ~ J METAL 'ZINC' ROOF, TrP. --- a IT ±± ' , ~= PÆLIMINARr" ROOF EQUIPMENT. TTF. "-. * 1;~ ~ . o o ! I ¡ " ~ ~:~ ';\' (~" ~co., . t 0, , ~,~J 0\ r~~/Ç- CREEK BOULEVARO --- ,-~; ,\, ~--'-\,,€ METAL 'ZINC' ROOF, Tr"P. TRELLIS soocru¡¡æ ASOvE TO LET 5UNLlG~T FILTER TH~ AT EDGE C1F CANOP"r 5KTLIGI-IT oveR CAFE OUTDOOR 5EATIN:::~ STEVENS EI IliAl-k TO REMAIN ,~ :"OADIN<;;.DOCI< WHOLE , / r"""'" -l FOODS / - - - - - - "..* MARKET ~\" ....J' .. ..~(, I 2<1'-<:)" J ~~ ~7V):, I (~~~ .-- .1"'-- /'~ ¡<.>'-w-' F'ROPE~T CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA . '"'' f1= " ,.. }- -- ··~~~~~~ocx- ',f SAND HILL 2<1'-)" ~'-IØ" PROPERTY COMPANY MAI'/KET HALL GlA!õPENCSNTER TDOOR &eATI fllDelU.4l..K flWva-ð fRSEK 6Ç\JLEVARD - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '-PROÆRtT . ~ - )4ð'·ø" ''''' - ~ - - PARKING LOT SIDE WITH ENTRY FEATURE· WEST ELEVATION 1116" 1 - - - tœ Ko Architects. Ine, ¡@ . 900 High Street. Suite 1 ~ Palo Alto, CA 94301 p: 650.853,1908 { f: 650.853.1845 I - - - - - - - - - í . - - ---- d ~ ~~:::"'--:--=::---=------E--- - - , 1 I I I - - :J'i :.~ 1 ';" ~..,.. \:l ..- '·5 ~ t1 ~ '\( I ~ ~ ~- - -)'!- - ~ 4-1 1,\ -~ y. .. " - ~ ,. ~"-ø" 4Ø'-Ø" r.r_ø" J NEW ~LkIS EUõMENT ALON:;. $TEVENS CÆEK BL YO PAIõll<JNGI LOT "ACE K1TCi-4EN WIT.. TRAN9I.1JCa{T WINDO.I.I!I aALec::NT .ABOVE WIWINJ:>OIJ.e flETeAC - ---- - -PR0P5:-LjNE U 2Ø1t)··Ø" - ø - r.tIOR· - - KEY MAP EB STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD STREET SIDE· SOUTH ELEVATION III'" 2 PROGRESS PRINT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SE~23. 2ØØ& OCToeER: 24. 2ØØ& NOvEMeER: IØ. 200s OVERALL IN :'~TIC AS4.0 ELEVATIONS RE~ISIOI F1.AMllOO' fœMITTAL. F'LA\IIIINCiJ ~5UBHITTAL REV15100s PER: CITY D~Tt .4IJGOOT 4. 2M DRJ.WN BY I) SC~LE 1/16" = I'·Ø" "..* .<1'·11' (EiWALL TO """''' III",' 3 REAR SIDE· EAST ELEVATION """"'" '""""""" """ "...~ '4'-If)" '0' !"AI"i!<INGI ~ MAIN DRIvEWAY flTONE LUAl-L AT MAIN ENTRANCE BY LOADING! D=< ~ ~ '<1'-11'/4" WIT.. ~NEWTfõ£ES WOOO LOUY£R !!ÞCIæEN I CHU I!JALL AT BACKSIDE -fl~COL~ m ~ - ~ ~.....~..~'"' £ ª ~ . '~"-~:~_:'-~{ ,,:;,.::--;-,,:,. " ~~¿~l~~ " ~L é:;'; ~ '" iíE ~ ~ :::~l - =.,¡;; ~ - - 326'-,,· - ~ - ~'·II" - ~ - - - ~ - - - ~ REMAIN NEWTFiiE!:S _O"1IJWALLATBAoCKSID!: FU<.L ENCLO&JF<E AT I-OAC>ING OOCK :~:";;; ,....,.. ~2"?'$ ~~ ¡¡§,;; ¿-~":;,.~ ~':C' "---.. 'ß~ 234··~· """"'""""""'" STUCCO OVER CMU """"''''' """ W'-I!?" """,",,' í~ t" 'fl'-a 3/'" SIOewALK ""''''' " f e'ÆVeNfI c:REE:K 6 ,.\fP " ~RC~ITECrs " @ 4 1/1& REAR SIDE WITH LOADING DOCK· NORTH ELEVATION CMU WALLe. WIT~ PAINTED 5TUCCO FINI5H, T'T"F, "CUFERTINO QRCI-IARD TJ..4EHE" MOSAIC ARTWORK. TO BE PROViDED BY OUNEI< 5LOPED METAL CANOPY r MEZZANINE BALCONY FOR FOR SUN ffiQTECTION. ADMINISTRATION OFFICES TYF. NATURAL TIMBeR r LATTICE WOIOl< FOI< FOLEô(SEALED> WIT~ FLOWERING viNES CONCRETë BASES. TYF. -ø" +3Ø'-Ø" . 3&" 1-11<::;1-1 STONE ,.-..~ 6AðE, TYP. "" 2&'_Ø" , - - ~2'-Ø" - ..¡ø'-ø' 1 12'-Ø· > KITCI-IEN WITI-I BALCONY ASOVE WIT~ SETBACK I TRANSLUCENT U.IINDOW5 WINDOWS - - - SCHEMATIC ELEVATION @ STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD 3(32 PROGRESS PRINT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 6EPTEMeER 23. 2~ OCTOBER 2-4, 200s NO\oÐ16ER IØ. 2ØØ5 AlX:dJ5T4,200:. - - 8Y IJ - - 3(32" ·0" WHOLE FOODS MARKET CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY tI Ko Architects, Inc, . 900 High Street, Suite 1 PaloAlto,CA 94301 p:650.853.1908 f: 650.853.1845 - - ~ ~ ~ ~ f,NORl KEY MAP ED oArt D~AWN ~~, R£\I151' PI...Att4~ 9JBMITTAL PLAH-I~ Ii£5UeMITTAl ÆY1810N5 PER cm' I I I I I I I ;, " ;, 'L- BALCONY ABOVE I UNIT pAVING!' TREE WELL WIT~ CUReS I \ I \ I ' +- ~ SFECIALTY~\ I I FUTURE MEZZANINE AREA ]ð'.ot:''' TEOF EI< _ pAD ~ -'. "II ~. ., ~"-----~~~- -- ,-~, -- -' ~' v .¡c '4; -."--' ...,.. \ \ ì \<-- BAKERY-, \--- PREF. !=OODS -, \ \ I \ -.----------~--.__L__-----..-~.--"___ ---- --~- '----~.---- ----'-·-T'- WOMEN'S I "-- KlTC"EN ~\ MEN'S ~E>'-ø" MA55AC:rE :;6'-0::;>" 51b'·1I)" - - ~ ~ ~ , -:::J-""~- LO<::isO SIGN AREA ABOVE SIGNAGE NOT A pART ROOF LINE ABOve 2Ð" LOW WALL WITI-I LANDSCAPING STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD L.OC=O SIGN - NOT A pART OF 5UBMITT AL. \ , SIN. CORNICE COMPRISED OF SLA rs, TO MATCI-I SL.ATS USED ON PROJECT AT ENTRY AND SlINSCREEN50-HAINTAIN A TI-jEME OF MATERIAL.5., TYFICAL OF ALL CORNICES SI-IOI.!.N. INDOOR SEATING CAFE ~ " ii ~ n- '0~'> V OFEN SLAT TRELLIS AT END OF ROOF 5oTRUCTURE. "EON" 5LATS -RECYCLEDPROD~T(A "GREEN" BUILDING PRODUCT) SLOPED METAL CANOFY "ZINC" COLOR, "GREEN" BUIL.DING- PRODUCT STRUCTURAL "TREES" - NATURAL WOOD POLE CONSTRUCTION WITI-I WOOD 5TRUT5 (6RANCI-IE&) FOLDING STOREFRONT SYSTEM - "NANA WALL"-TO OFEN INDOOR TO OUTDOOR " , \i ~ f~: , "ftii 2ð'·!!>" DRIVEWAY SCtEMATIC :=ON AS4.1a INC. H OAltClIJTECrs @ FACE 42'-Ø" L060 SIGN CAFE WITI-I OUTDOOR SEATING -------- PROGRESS PRINT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION WHOLE FOODS MARKET CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY Iœ Ko Architects. Inc, . 900 High Street, Suite 1 Palo Alto, CA 94301 p.650.853.1908 1:650.853.1845 - - - - ~ ~ - ~ - - - 0- f. NO~' KEY MAP E9 (. PARKING, LOT ! , ~ 14'_4' TYF' rii , - - + =- ~ ~ ~~-,- , .,\ 1 '0Jl,;' V ~ , L nõ:ELL 15 ELEMENT NATURAL TIMBER "---- LOOO MQNL..'MENT SICSNA6E I CURS5 ALONG STEvENS FOLE&<'5EALED) UJITI-! SIGNAGE NOT A PART CFœEK 6LVD. TYP. CONCRETE 6ASE&, TYF. STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD ~ "'-.' ~ TYF NA rURAL TIMBER W'-.· ~ - -lT~~~-~ r - - - 21O'-¡ZO' ~ It ~c fO I t .-.. : 11'·"," , 1 ' -, "'f' _ - ; .~ ,~ ~L:~ ". ~. .Q ~~~ " I,; '~(i.,' '0 ~.c i,'t .:'1 '~,,' -~---,.>--, - - -- 2e'_5" WALKWAY ALONG: STEVENS CREEK BLVD LUITI-f PAFö:KIN::;¡ LOT BEYOND DRIVEWA T t~- I I ~'·2,'!1.· CAFE WIT¡'¡ OUTDOOR SEATING '" b TRELLI5 ELEMENT ~ ALONG STEVENS CFõ£EK 6l YD, TYP. .~ 3/::12" SCHEMATIC ELEVATION @STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD 5EPTEHBEF<.23,200s OCToeER 24, 2ØtZ'JS NGÆI'16E~ IØ, 2ØØ!> R(VISIOI ~~ 5U6MITTA!. F'!.~IN::J Æ"sueMITTAL REY15ICNS FEP<: CITY NATURAL TIMSER FOLE5(5EALED) li.IlTI-I CONCRETE BA&ES>, TYP. NA TU~L TIMBER POLE:;(&EALED) UJITI-I CONCRETE BAS>ES>, TYP. .¡ø'-Ø" ;¡'-Ø" - DATE AlIGUST4,2ØØ; D~"'_ BY Ij ~" "I " ~I ~I ~ ~ . H SCHEMATIC STREET ELEVATION ~ .. , o ~ ;- . -- ~-- ~-~- -"-- ~~ ,~~'( T!~ti:rTJ:) r____ ,::=-___:___' . , ~ ;- ~ ~ . ~ . , AS4.1b ,~ ...~III @ 2 1/4" COT ENLARGED TRELLIS SIDE ELEVATION @ PARKING LOT ALONG STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD PARKINC;J S>ETBACK REQUIRED S>TE\ÆN& CREEK BLVD S>TEVEN& CREEK BLVD 3 '/4' TYPICAL TRELLIS ELEVATION @ STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD PROGRESS PRINT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION WHOLE FOODS MARKET CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY ~ Ko Architects, Inc, . 900 Hi,9h Slresl,Suile 1 PaloAltO,CA 94301 p:650853.' 1:650.853. - - - - [ ~ ~ ~ ~ - " ~ORl KEY MAP EB i j oj I I PASTRY ,I MASSAGE J;oHEN'5 MEN'S / J INDOOR ~ 5EATIN", I Cl èAfE INDOOR 5E'A riNG I ~ -Ø" ~ ~ ... """'¡¡¡ OUTDOOR &EATING OUTDobR:5EATI~ t"" . 'I I" \ .,..-, r-7---r ri--'-T ".~'c, r';" I , .;'... ioI'~-==l.''-__-'-'''-I'£L=-==: If ,,.T===.- .-¡o¡. ' -.. II~ ~----, '.'--- 'r --;i'e.,,--n '-r'--\~~"---'----';- ~'L__ ~_,_,.: - " . ."'- - ~ . ~ CQG<>&'OOIAEIOVO - ' -::t:"'- " =: !:ID~~t:A.EAAf::::~~_ r- ROOF LINE ABOVE. TYF. \ OUTDOOR 5EATING ~ ORGANICALLY 5l-iAPED FLANTERS '\ \L-- 2Ø" LOW WALL AROUND COLUMN AT :2ø" WITH LOW PLANTING AND SEATING LANDðCAFING UF TO 2Ø" LOW WALL ROUND CONCRETE FLANTER5 W/LOW F'lANTINC:s5, T'r'F. - '1iiiiI r=-' CGNT~5L.OÆ .,', '- """rrD,"'Y' .- -- .. '," . in: _,_ .,., /) <~ <, ~', '. ,;/ - BIC'!' ,E ¡- RACK, TYP. / -- ~ I " i I , 1 ! I \ C~EC~T-:NP E IT t ¡". INDOOR SEA TINe;. - -- LOT PARKIN(: , 1 \ DOU6l- I, \ c:.l-A5S ~~l-l--UP ! c:.ARD OR€> AT , EN CENTER i . I ,\ FL~j;.';EPT I' . I '\'t-"'~'" 41 'I V 'I' ~ 7-¡/1 L- -+--, " ' ' --- ' I,' MA'N ,'I","¡ ~~ q-. -'> I' ENTRY ! ' [, ' I ¡ I · , ii' ,I' I - ,I' , ',I, 'I" I I, . , ' ,OU ' .-=~ ;1, " '\: TDOOR I I I ," 'I, ,I ' OA!<DEN ' 'I" I I, C_ :I,,' ~ ,I" CENTE.I " " ! -II' ' ' I .¡ I' I c, ¡I' I' !' ,. ,," ,,- I // , _ 'II "OU1DOOO I, ,!, - ",' "f:' , , 0' "._' ., ,,/,1 I-, " ,1, _ I, "I,A'/ ' "I'\~~~~~"-' ~J l _ ',I' 'I'· ,I, <_,.--,' ' " r=:"'~~ 0]",/'''1'''' ,,'~' ¡¡I ,I,' '.. 'l-" ~""", " -I,' '-,' - /', -''''',~-'' ""..." ~ 'I' '- ",1 I' "'1;;' " ,,(.'"' "UCEDI5PLATSi' ',. " ',\1 ' 0 I' ""~ ,~. , , ",~" ,~= t~ 1,:1 ~ I, I ¡0 ~ 'Ir>~'" __, ";,~LJ' 8;1 i,l ra T l -J:::f \ ~-- lLd I ,~/' ~ " ////' , ~,'j-'»-~-~- -- -- --- ;~~?,/""?"---- ----~ .~ ~1J - II;" ",I " ~' ': -- ~ .- \ f I I PRODUCE -....:::, --, CORNICE COMPRISED OF &l-ATS, TO MATC¡"¡ Sl-ATS USED ON PROJECT AT ENTRY AND SUNSCREEN5·MAINTAIN A T¡"¡EME OF MATERIAl-5., TTF'ICAL OF ALl- COI"!'NICE5 SHOIJ.N. -~" ",,,. ~ TYP. 51c:.NAGE NOT A PART UP LIG~TING eN ENTRY FEATURE LOUVER5 AND INTEI<NALL Y LIT 51GNA6E I,l).¡OLE FOODS LC60 SIGN - NOT A PART f CURVED GLi.l-LAJ1 5LOI ET AL CANOPY ROUND CONCFæTE F'LANTERS, I4ORZONTAL SLATILOUvER:5 TO MATC~ FOR PROTECTION WfLOJ.J PLANTlNG$, TYP. ¡. QRIZGWTAL 5lN ~ADE5 U5ED AT ADJACENT CANOPY - RECYCLED FLASTIC I.I.IOOD PRODUCT veRTIcAL SoLA T5 ~ , I (""",,,EN" BU'LDI<; FOODUCT! /, TlMSI :OLE5 WIT" ""ST ôUN "ROTECTlON I ' CONe: E 6A5E, TYP. FOF<: WIND0W5 I WOOD mJ55 WIT¡.j METAL CANOP"r ! SUIL T -UF ROOF BEYOND :t.IN5COTT + 2ð'~, ',-.~. ,::.-::'.: ric','" <, 1Ø1'-4" C¡"¡ECK STAND EXIT ¡5TG'WE COVERED MA55 WALL I ,- ~ORIZCNTAL SLAT5ILOUVERS - RECYCLED I PRODUCT ("GF<I:EN' 6UILDIN:;, PRODUCT) I 3!)' TALL NATURAL lI.kXJD POLE ~[V'SIOIl PLAI+!~ 5lIeMITTAL SEPiEM6E~ 23, 2ØØ5 PL~m Fif&UeMITTAL OCTOBER 24, 2005 REv151CN5 PER clrr NOVEMBER IØ. 2Ø0S p~OJEcr NO. ø:>-3G DUE ALI:ilI5T4,:1øø¡; DRAWN B~ IJ SCAlE 3/32" . 1'-Ø" SCHEMATIC SHEET ENTRY AS4.2 FACADE aEV ATION ® ~o ARtHrKc-rs II ---- 32'-'"-''' OUTDOOF<: SeATING ~ ---- , I" I / - ,. --..-, - - 33'-Ø" DEMO KITc¡"¡EN @- 2S'·Ø" 3Ø'-Ø' , / ! " ~- ~ I Á" I: I T 'p' < I,'" J: i ~ 111,,,1;1;, IU.i ~I ~,r"-;-'1H :-"""""-"""""$.:..... ,. " ~ "'-I .. .. .... ... . J~'·Ø" ENTRY :, -@ ) - """,D ~ -r ~ _ _MA~~~ _ _ ~I<D~CE~ êÎ\, ~'fl ----- , o , , '.....; ":i-I , 1 I SCHEMATIC ELEVATION@MAINENTRY I.m UP LI~T~ ~ ENTRY FEATURE LOJVERS AND rNTERNALL r LIT $fGNAGE l1JI..IOLE FOODS L060 SIGN . NOT A PART OJRvED GLU·LAM ~Al 5LATILOJVERS TO MATC¡"¡ ¡. ÇIRIZONTAL 5UN ~ADE5 U5ED AT ADJACENT CANOPr . RECYCLED PLASTIC iOCIOD PRODUCT (\¡ .¡ ;1,; _ _ _ _ ("6!OEEN' SUILD',.. PI<OO\!::TJ I f'(;'..U ::-::"1 / / = TIOJS& WIT" METAL CANOPY ...---1-. SlJIL T -UP ROOF 6EYCiND F-- r:= ~ L ,...." ;----- --- ;.. --"L "___,_ .. _. I . - ~ ~- ---. _.:- -: 50 ~ ~! \ l.--- _ ~ ~ : i ~ ~ ~ _ r 1 +--_ : ¡ _~ ;~- , - E --~ r- I "----'!'" - ==<T ___~ r------- -::! ~-----'. ___________ -.....J CART COOR.Al A""A ~ ( md ;-L"--.I. -,,~:_'-_"~r ,,' .~.. -:-1 ': _ __~"" ···-..::'~···c1,:' =._,_._ ____ e'·It'" WHOLE FOODS MARKET CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY Iœ Ko Architects. Inc. . 900 High Street, Suite 1 PaloAllo,CA 94301 p:650.853.1908 1:650.853.1845 - - ~ ~ ~ - f.¡,¡oR" KEY MAP EB 2 . T 5LOPED METAL CANOPY . OPEN WOOD 5LAT TRELliS -- --' / "ORC¡..¡ARD·' CANOPY "TREE;''' POLE CONSTRUCTiON lJ,IIT~ WOOD STRUT:;' (BRANCI-IES) r-~~ - ---I ~ "1 I.. ..±'._ ~ ~_. '_.~ --~'---'-'" ---, - --- " -~::::::'r-'-'-."--"-" . _._:==;~~. .... ". f TRAN5FARENT5TOREFRONT DOOR: SY5TEM - NANA WALL I SYSTEMS - - , , ,>c',c' I A:·l ê:~s;'< : \' _¡~; r ,.j ~. .;" -., - ~ ~ ""~~";:1~¥-15-~""- -",." ~'- ~-:",.:.': .-- -- -, ;1:'" -Ii<'~ !ft'.- ",:! " ." ._"." ."'¡ij;c'Í !'" .. .,. -¡;" _ ~~ -- --- --- , SCHEMATIC ELEVATION@CAFE ENTRY TV4' /"'-. -~ :-i/ -- kt¡i~, o£J --.- ROUND CONCRETE FLANTER!:> LJ.J/LOLJ.J PI...ANTING5. TYF , , /"-.' . . -----I ..'. ! : , .~',. ,:~' , - ::z:-:-:p;~~ , L _ "--- 1 h - .---- --p- , _n ~~;d~~_~ª --, - . . 11 r1 . . j \.... En -"J V ' n "E :;¡ 1: ~ L'~ ~ PROGRESS PRINT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION IIKJOD STONE COV$RED MASS WAll. I-IORIZONTAI. SI.AT5I1..OUYER5 - RECYCLED PRODUCT ('GREEN' SUILDINCs PRODUCT) - - - -I-~''''-=~ E-ø'-ø" , , , .~ ~ 5EFTEI"IBER 2~, 2ØØ& OCToeER 24, 200s NO'ÆM6ER iØ,2øøs RtVIS<ON FLM. ~ SU6MITTAL FlANNN:š ~5U6M TT AL ~V!5ICN5 PER CITY ,. ¡It I ~ - ;61 ~ =::;;;¡ . ¡ \------ L ~~ -~ T¡ ---.J I , , -----,- ,- ,- ,... EN.ARGED 5M ~:~ AS4.3 - ENTRES @ ~o ARC~IT[Cts INC. AlI::"iJ5T4, BY IJ DATE D~AW" SCAU' 1 T Tl/4' ~ ~ 6'-4''' SCHEMATIC ELEVATION@MAINENTRY , , / ~, ~ . -- . o - = J' ~- : .!E-- = t::_~'~~ ~~ o , ..,. 16'-Ø"T'T"f". , o RtvlS11II FLA*!IN::I ðUSMlTT AL SEP'!EI1I3ER23,2ØØ5 FLA*!N:;. !õ£5UeMITT AL OCTOBER 24, 2005 REvl81GNS FER CITY NOVEMBER lIZ!, 2005 PROJ(CT NO. øs-~~ CATE ~T4.2øøs DRAWNBT IJ ,~" 112" = I'~Ø" 2,,'-0 STEveNS CREEK SETBACK STEVENS CREEK I ENLARGED SHm PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY SLVD PARTIAL AS4.4 ELEVATION - CAFE ENTRY ~ - - WOOD CANOPY DETAIL@ CAFE ENTRY "' @KDARCNITECT'SIN(:. WHOLE FOODS MARKET CUPERTINO. CALIFORNIA SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY 1:1 Ko Architects, Inc, . 900 High Street, Suite 1 Palo Alto, GA 94301 p:650.853.1908 f:650.853.1845 - - ~ ~ ~ - f.ND ; KEY MAP EB PROGRESS PRINT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION _ )Ø'_Ø" ~ 211'-Ø' Eþ SLOPED METAL CANOPY , OPEN WOOD SLAT TRELLIS / ! / / , .A'_ 2"'·"· Eþ ilÓ'-Ø I" " / Q , Q N . / / (/ I, '/./~ ' /;~/ \ .//// ' {' , ! /" / ,j /,/ i ¡ I' /// i I L( .// 1"';'1/ / tj{~f' I I I ! I'" Ì'~ ~I \ II '" , '" \ \ TRANSPARENT STOREFRONT DOOR SYSTEM - NANA UJALL S15TEM "ORCI4ARD" CANOPY "TREE5" POLE CON5TRUCTION WITI4 WOOD STRUTS (BRANCHES) - OUTDOOR 5EA TING: AT CAFE ---- -" -0 14 14 ,-, WHOLE FOODS MARKET CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY Greg G. Ing & Associates Landscape ArchitectwY! 1585 TheAJamed", Suite201 San!""",c.JJfomia9S126 -/Œ.941i1»1'J, F..,41J8.29S.4- /i(J ~ ) , I' '. " , , - " "J.:J.:..l.:. T1 <f,'-' o '~<., , ~",,- $$$$ , .,n'l~,·' , , ,:} ~'.,".'Y i : : !] "" " '0" ¡ ,liD J ~(ij) '-:çÐ) F ::;;'1 c:! ;& ~ ~ ;¿;¿; 1-$ w o z w > < ~ z ~ ~ w ~ ~ ó z EB KEY MAP ---::::1 ~ _1"& I,-~ .! i I I' " '_'~' 1,- "!j' ; , I "¥J I·.·..·.·~ ~~ , , F'A'lERSTONE ""'~ S T EVE N 5 eRE E K BOULEVARD "TREE PLANTER ISlANDS"-T'tP. REVISION PLANNING 5leMITTAL SEPl'EI16fR 23, 2ØØ5 PLANNm 1i:E5IJ8MITTAL ocroeeR 24, 200& fi!Evl$lCN5 FER CITY NOY6'16ER 1Ø,2M PROJECT NO. Ø!;·3ß D~TE A1J5U5T 4, 2005 OR~WN BY " ED - .... " """"-""" ---, PworfUyofltlolNlo I , Farinl\lhtlly , Dajll, r TtoIIlntl<o>t... I ~ I ~-~ P>qI.F_!oI/I~ HjI>rIo'FI.. H !Io'foIFI.. "~ Dk.RH.....Wrn"So>go w..~Sao¡. ,.- s.."I¡ICcI1!e >- - S'I"IIIIa.. gz£ BOTANICALNAIIE !~.17I~5 --+----____ \dY"~'^-c,1 ,QaI.:.o..¡op""lhwIa'PoIø"Þm' } SG<a. DIooIOO'IOQO\O ~"",.v'~~ 1Go!. H....O."IO.~Y_ ,Gal. I.onlan.m.·~· 1..... ~¡"op. \ Gel. limon"'", po<u!I 'Cd. _"IMtum..·~m· 5_ ""....kJmt·lIr<>o..lkbi ~ Gal Ph"""..... ~ .~.... 0..-' 1G<>1 H-....,u...'I;vo!):,otooc..p.t' IGoI SOI""_Q"Cao:i<c.,,,cor· , Go!. 9d~. I......tn. FI.to __.·M.....CI..toro· 'GoI. TuIbol¡Io;4ol0Q00 f\oto 1'10""'..... 'GoI. MIoconIYMl._oio 801AN1CAlNAME ~ iCOUMEN1'S =-~-------r- -- ----L__ : ~.,~ "~, I ,~'.....~ Ig-.~I "-:j!larborry ....)'>I )n.""ogo!' '_~...... SIrotIRMt__. ~..."'-v' I 'M>~__ ~opI>loIoplo '101_' I II-' Y_ H...tMrn I'b.""""L"SpmgIklo.....'· """"'"'" 9ou~1n.....·St:w>~~od· s...........1oo ~1o'N......Dworl' O'orlEoooII..... Loro$o.t.lumc,·__ PwpI"""eoF1_ Plltooponomtoblr<l'Tumor'.Cw<II1' YcrloqotoOCwcrfTctWo Nor><I1noQ.·GutlSu-,,· Ç,S.H.._Ij-llarnboo = '." ,~, ,~, .~ .- ,~ ,~ ,~, ,~ ,~ ,~ ~ M£D.-_~~ \;"'----_." '\ , '. }' o.'''__'''''._.,~~, COI.I\lDlTS "'-1 ""'""'....... &"",..t.oquot 20"_ ~_Io!.'T...........' La_,,", ~)t>rIIIQ-.,po ...,rtI. 2."&0. P)'N.c,·AoOopr.,' Rodop...cmo-......loIP_ 1",,-,,- "_100,....01 2."9., PIola-iuo~_!d1o l...óoo,....../S)'CCm"... Plant Legend .~ BOTANlC....NAUE - COUMONH.....£ H)t>rIII...._. CoootRod.oo' ~'I M>oI..\I"",.. GoI. s.quolo.........I)" ~.~ lRtESI o o @ o -. ". HE AS5.0 @ AACHITECTS'HC. <0 CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN ,-~ CCI.OR£D.IJOOIIIIDCQ;CRI1't ¡m Paving Legend lI<1OUIC:I<Q ap.\lQltS1tOC_~"""'OI:UII!"""" ~ PA""'S1tM:_&<RTHIOi<<:c:t.aO"""" mil TAU. SCIIEEN SllrlUBS :-~ -- =-=F~~~-.==" -.==_'+__=---=--=--==~-~-___=-=__= " 1 o I ~CI.I. I Ab_grondftoro ðGol. I ~oIjo<I"'l_ I ' ,5;01 """"'.1...........011. 5;00 lmol....tllurlngl_'R_· 5Go1. ~_o.',"-._' ~CcIl. _tmgIom..-"" Qloooy_1o -........ Engll'" Lwrol T_Uoa"" T_ _ ~_...~ --~ q co en ~ " 0, z! f--: w w :r: if) ~I w -' <{ o if) I::i r-r¡ g; '<:j- w 0 01(.() Q:::: t"") (1")(,0 tn;;!;~c¡ ~«a;~ o u ...-...CO 81 ó ~S :z: I- '-0 Ii") ~ <i ---!£- >- .. OW, r-- ---I z: X I..D«O« o Q Il.J.... ..- CL ~ i .... ~ I i:õ I , ~ I .. .... W 0 -' .... Ë ¡ tJ I W :r: if) u z u Cì": f- U W --.J W Ü Z o 3= <{ o Ó z ¡:: ex: w 0.. ::J o f- W :::è 0::: « ~ (j) o o o lL. ':':Jw f-- ...J ¡::o f-- I ~~ 0, '" 0.. , > , . , ,; ,; 1> \';¡<~ :. = '" ¡I ' f€ ~ ~.:I .. ;!¡ t¡ ~ +> ~ s:. ""i ~VJ IJ1 -f!:3' ¡¡) ~.;¡ ~ .~ .- 'ö +' .c !i:: .:a.;; _ ~ .~~g~+>~ ~m . ~~~L..wðci ':!;J :: 00\ (l¡ ~ .". -º"6§õg'"t21 .!:;, ~ -'='I J.: ¡:Q .£ 0 C1J d > a.. ú-:3):::3: ~ .;1 ~ ;¡;¡ .:¡ .N ..:ì ;I .;¡.fl ;! .~ '" ;; .. · . ;I,) ~,:.!; , · . . " .. " .. +.fl ;!+"'.¡.:J .:¡ · > . · . ,: .:I .. ;J ~ :J.:I ~ .:¡ ~ ~ .:I ~ .;¡ .:I ;¡ ~ ;¡... ....:¡... ~ · > . ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,'.,.. 1 .. -.:f j~l¡ ; liil¡ i! f~I~" ~ JU¡! Jj OQ--ÎJÖ /18 ¡; L I 1- k ~ ÁJ'OUo uuo 00 . . . > > > if), f-- z: <{' f-- --.J¡ ::J if) Z 0, o \ ~ , 1 , ¡ i ! ¡ ì ! I , '- I ! ¡ If. ~ . ; , i ! , I ì ¡ I , '- I i , o , ; ¡ ¡ , , I I I , , I i I i t i i ¡ ! . I. ! ¡ ¡ ! ; , ! , ; ~ ! ! j! I ¡ , , , ï . t I ¡