HomeMy WebLinkAboutCounty of Mendocino 2004-09-14 Active - - ��pS �E�IENT ���' '��..r:��'��'���� �-...e
�i_ �� � 1`����I ,PP� + �fir`.�!%`i, l, '���4
�"� ,, �L� ,�\
• ��I �'� •�y/W(rs z�
3 C� c
P �'r �
ROAD IMPROVEMENT AND LAND USE AGREEMENT—�7/y1�9-/04�;,: � ��'���;
+ � .. "r,t� �.,
This Agreement is made and entered on ��'�.k 2004 ("Effective`I�at�e,), irr�.Tkiah, �
California, by and between the City of Ukiah ( Crty ), a general law municipal co`rp. ���__,�d.�
the County of Mendocino ("County"), a political subdivision of the State of California.
RECITALS:
1. The City has under review the construction of certain improvements which will
consist of constructing a bridge over Orrs Creek and extending Orchard Avenue to Brush Street.
These improvements are more particularly described in the attached E�ibit A, which is
incorporated herein by this reference ("Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements").
2. The City has prepaxed a Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report("RDEIR"),
dated October 2002, for the Orrs Creek Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension project under the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA") which has determined that the
construction of the Orrs Creek Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension will promote commercial
development in an unincorporated area("Brush Street triangle"), depicted and described in the
attached Exhibit B which is incorporated herein by this reference.
3. According to the RDEIR, commercial development within the Brush Street triangle
will have adverse impacts on traffic and other adverse environmental impacts within the
incorporated limits of the City of Ukiah.
4. Both parties also acknowledge that potential commercial development outside the
Brush Street triangle, including within the City of IJkiah, may have adverse traffic impacts within
the Brush Street triangle.
5. Under its current zoning designation and the applicable provisions of the Mendocino
County zoning ordinance, some commercial and industrial development in the Brush Street
triangle can be constructed on existing parcels subject only to obtaining building permits from
the County. No discretionary permits, such as use or site development permits, are required. As
a consequence,unless the County imposes additional land use regulations in the Brush Street
triangle,property owners may construct some commercial and industrial development with
potentially adverse environmental impacts within the incorporated limits of the City without
adequate means currently in place to assess or mitigate those impacts.
6. The City takes the position that under the requirements of CEQA it cannot certify the
RDEIR and undertake the construction of the Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements, unless it
can find that cumulative adverse environmental impacts within the City of Ukiah from
construction of the Orr Creek Bridge, including development in the Brush Street triangle, as
identified in the RDEIR or as may be identified in future evaluations of specific projects, are
reduced to the point below the threshold of significance through changes to the proj ects or the
adoption of enforceable conditions to the approval of those projects.
1
�
7. Pursuant to Streets and Highways Code § 1810, the County has no obj ection to the
City acquiring right of way and constructing the Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements partially
within the unincorporated area.
AGREEMENT:
Wherefore, in consideration of the above-recited facts and the terms and conditions as
further stated herein, the parties hereby agree as follows.
1. Consent to Construction of Improvements. The County hereby consents to the
construction of those Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements which will be within the
unincorporated areas of the County and within any right of way acquired for the extension of
Orchard Avenue or for the construction of the Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements, lying north
of the LJkiah City limits.
2. Dedication to the County. The City shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the County
the constructed improvements north of the north bridge abutment and all acquired rights of way
north of the north bridge abutment not already owned by the County which are part of the
extension of Orchard Avenue within the unincorporated area. The County shall accept the rights
of way and improvements as part of the County Maintained Road System and shall assume
maintenance responsibility for the Orchard Avenue Road Improvements located outside City
limits, north of the north bridge abutment. That acceptance shall occur within sixty (60) days
after the improvements have been completed in compliance with the plans and specifications for
their construction.
3. Maintenance, Rehabilitation and Replacement of Orchard Avenue Bridge. AS
long as the Orchard Avenue Bridge remains within the jurisdictional boundaries of both the City
and the County,the expense of maintenance of the bridge shall be borne equally by the City and
the County. Maintenance of the bridge shall be the responsibility of the City and shall occur on
an as needed basis. Annually, after completion of the bridge, the City shall submit an invoice to
the County setting forth the actual expenditure for the maintenance of the bridge for the previous
twelve (12) months, indicating County's share as one-half the expenditure amount. The County
shall pay the invoice within sixty(60) days of its submission. As long as the bridge remains
within the jurisdictional boundaries of both the City and the County,the cost of rehabilitation and
replacement of the bridge shall be borne equally by the City and the County. If the Brush Street
triangle, or any portion contiguous to the bridge, is annexed into the City,the Orchard Avenue
Bridge shall also be annexed and all future maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement costs
shall be borne entirely by the City; likewise, if the entire bridge is annexed into the County, all
future maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement costs shall be borne entirely by the County.
4. Construction of improvements. The City shall construct the Orchard Avenue Bridge
and Orchard Avenue Extension in accordance with the construction schedule set forth in the
contract documents for the construction of these improvements, unless the time for completion is
extended with the approval of the City or as a result of the contractor's performance.
2
5. Future County land use approvals. Prior to issuing any building permit for
construction within the Brush Street triangle,the County agrees to adopt and apply to each
development proposal in the Brush Street triangle land use regulations that: (1) require
discretionary approval by the County of any commercial development or other development with
potentially significant adverse environmental impacts (either individually or cumulatively)within
the City of Ukiah("a Project") and to evaluate such impacts in accordance with the requirements
of CEQA prior to approving any such Project; and (2) applies the design principles contained on
Pages 18 through 22 (Design Guidelines-Commercial Projects Outside the Downtown Design
District) of the Commercial Development Design Guidelines attached hereto as E�ibit C. The
discretionary approval by the County for commercial developments shall, at a minimum, include
findings as set forth in Exhibit D. Any such discretionary approval shall provide the County with
d:-.. .
sufficient authority to impose conditions or take other actions to adequately mitigate any adverse
environmental impacts identified during the evaluation of the Project in compliance with CEQA.
6. Process by which County adopts land use approvals. The County will proceed to
amend its zoning ordinance providing discretionary approval authority as described in paragraph
5 of this Agreement. Within 90 days of receipt by the City of the land use regulations adopted by
the County pursuant to this paragraph 6 and upon the City's satisfaction therewith, the City shall
take final action on the Revised Draft EIR for the Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements.
Within 45 days of its receipt of said land use changes,the City shall notify the County in writing
as to whether or not it is satisfied that those changes comply with the requirements of this
Agreement. If the City is not satisfied with the amended land use regulations, the notice shall
include the reasons for the City's dissatisfaction.
7. Mitigations.
7.1 The parties acknowledge that the Mendocino Council of Governments
("MCOG"), at their request, commissioned a technical study, entitled Brush Street
Triangle Transportation Study (W-trans;May 30, 2003) which can be used as deemed
appropriate by the parties to develop for adoption by the County and the City resolutions
imposing off-site capital improvement fees sufficient to fund capital improvements
necessary to mitigate traffic impacts from development within the "MCOG study area,"
which includes the Brush Street Triangle Development Area, as well as other
development areas, all as depicted and described on pages 1-5 and 16 of the MCOG
Study, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit E and incorporated
herein by reference. The County and the City shall endeavor to adopt off-site capital
improvement fees as authorized by the Mitigation Fee Act to fund capital improvements
in the City and the County necessary to adequately fund mitigations for traffic impacts
from developments that will generate additional traffic within the MCOG study area.
This Agreement does not obligate either the City or the County to accept or use the study
in the form approved by MCOG. Each jurisdiction shall have discretion to adopt a study
that it determines fairly and adequately apportions among affected parcels of land the cost
of constructing improvements to adequately mitigate off=site adverse environmental
impacts of new development within the MCOG study area, but the parties shall endeavor
to coordinate their studies and to make them compatible.
3
7.2. In evaluating the environmental impacts of a project that will generate
additional traffic within the MCOG study area(as defined in paragraph 7.1 above), the
County and the City shall consider the EIR certified by the City for Orchard Avenue
Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension and shall, in compliance with CEQA, mitigate
project-related traffic impacts within the City as well as in the unincorporated area,
comprising the MCOG study axea. In evaluating the impacts of any individual such
projects within the MCOG study area,the County and the City shall include an evaluation
of the cumulative impacts from all potential new development that may generate
additional traffic within that area. Neither the City nor the County shall rely on its lack of
jurisdiction within the other jurisdiction to find that it is infeasible to mitigate an adverse
environmental impact in the other jurisdiction. The County and the City shall take steps
to fund improvements in the other jurisdiction deemed necessary to mitigate adverse
environmental impacts from full development of projects that will generate additional
traffic within the entire MCOG study area. Subject to Section 7.3,below, neither the
County nor the City shall approve any project that will generate additional traffic within
the MCOG study area,unless such steps have been taken to fund that project's
proportionate share of the costs to mitigate such environmental impacts. The amount
contributed by or on behalf of such projects shall satisfy the proportionality requirements
of the Mitigation Fee Act(Cal. Gov't Code § 66000 et seq.).
7.3. The MCOG Study identifies a series of recommended mitigations to address
cumulative traffic impacts of development within the MCOG study area. The parties
agree that these mitigations should be prioritized with some performed before others, and
that some of the proposed mitigations may require revision or modification based on the
infeasibility of the mitigations or development of a better alternative. The parties also
recognize that development in the portions of the MCOG study area located within the
City and within the unincorporated area of the County is likely to take place at different
rates. The parties shall determine a schedule tied to increased levels of traffic for
constructing the recommended traffic mitigations or any agreed upon modifications of
such mitigations. Those mitigations, including any agreed upon modifications, shall
either (1) be constructed when called for under the agreed upon schedule, or (2)the
project shall not be approved, if sufficient funding is not available to construct the
mitigations as scheduled; or, the jurisdiction or jurisdictions where the development
triggering the need for the mitigations has occurred may proportionally fund the shortfall
with a right of reimbursement from the fees paid by future developments; or, the
jurisdiction may require a given project, in lieu of paying its full share of each mitigation
identified in the MCOG study (or other study referred to in paragraph 7.1), to pay a higher
proportional share of a specific mitigation, provided that each project pays its
proportional share of the total mitigation costs identified in the MCOG study or other
study under paragraph 7.1.
7.4. The foregoing provisions of this paragraph shall not preclude either the City
or the County from adopting a statement of overriding consideration for specific projects
that the City or County approves prior to the adoption of off-site capital improvement
4
L
fees under the Mitigation Fee Act for projects within the MCOG study area; provided
however the City or County complies with its obligations under Section 7.3 above and
further provided each project pays its proportional share of the mitigation costs identified
in the MCOG study or other study under paragraph 7.1.
8. Modifications. City or County may, from time to time, request changes in the terms
of this Agreement. Such changes, which are mutually agreed upon by and between City and the
County, and approved by the City Council and the Board of Supervisors, shall be incorporated in
written amendments to this Agreement.
9. Assignment. City and County shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and
shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assigntllent or novation), without the prior
written consent of the other party.
10. Application of Laws. The parties hereby agree that all applicable Federal, State and
local rules, regulations and guidelines not written into this Agreement shall hereby apply to the
parties' performance under this Agreement.
11. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of California, and any legal action concerning the agreement must be
filed and litigated in the proper court in Mendocino County.
12. Attorneys fees. In any action to enforce the provisions of this Agreement the
prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party, its reasonable attorneys' fees in
addition to its costs of suit.
13. Severability. If any provision of the Agreement is held by a court of competent
jurisdiction to be invalid, void, ar unenforceable,the remaining provisions shall nevertheless
continue in full force and effect without being impaired or invalidated in any way.
14. Integration. This Agreement contains the entire agreement among the parties and
supersedes all prior and contemporaneous oral and written agreements, understandings, and
representations among the parties. No amendments to this Agreement shall be binding unless
executed in writing by both of the parties.
15. Waiver. No waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed, or
shall constitute a waiver of any other provision, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing
waiver. No waiver shall be binding unless executed in writing by the party making the waiver.
16. Notice. Whenever notice, payment or other communication is required or permitted
under this Agreement it shall be deemed to have been given when personally delivered or when
deposited in the United Sates mail as certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, and
addressed as follows:
5
COUNTY jJ��
County of Mendocino City of Ukiah
c/o: County Administrator c/o: City Manager
County Administration Center Civic Center
501 Low Gap Road 300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA. 95482 Ukiah, CA 95482
17. Paragraph headings. The paragraph headings contained herein are for convenience
and reference only and are not intended to define or limit the scope of this Agreement.
18. Duplicate originals. This Agreement may be executed in one or more duplicate
originals bearing the original signature of both parties and when so executed any such duplicate
original shall be admissible as proof of the existence and terms of the Agreement between the
parties.
19. No third party beneficiaries. This Agreement is for the exclusive benefit of City
and County and confers no rights or benefits on any persons or entities not a signatory to this
Agreement. No third party beneficiaries are intended or established by this Agreement.
WHEREFORE,the parties have entered this Agreement on the date first written above.
CITY OF UKIAH
By ;�'- �>
M or
�TT�ST:
��,� ��� �������� J
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
�� �
Ci orney ; h�reby c�!1ity tra�t�cc�s�irig�o the
provssions o9�Cov�e�nrs��,�t;ade
Section�25103, delivery of�h;s
COUNTY O. ENDOCINOc_____ document has r��en m�de.
� � � NCt�i-l�T9 F p�'�AAe�I
�,� �''"`����.y�.�,., C;ler,kroF�h B�
$ �\ P/ 1 � p ��V�/
y� �____ ���L�� ���
Chairman of the B°oard of Supervisors �� � -��.-��+TY
6
,
ATTEST:
�G��lov�- ����1.�---�'
Clerk of the Board
Approved as to form:
� , ...ti ,,F.. � ���"•T_�"'/
COUT21y COUriSe7 ?
7
• 6O���tl���� � �f/C��r
Road �mpravemenfi and L�nd Use �gr�err�er��
� ORCHARD /�VENUE BRIDCE INiPROVEh�f�NT�
The City of Ukiah is proposing to construd a roadway improvement project This project
was proposed as'projed enhancements" _when the City approved the KAnAR7'proje�t on
Ordiard Avenue to the south of the Study Area. The K1v1ART project resufted in traffic
traveling through residentia(areas north and west of tfie KMAFZT Store. The City agreed
to investigate the possibility of construding tt�e cuRenUy proposed project as a means of
alleviating those traffic effeds. 7his EIR is the futfiilment of the CitYs irrtent�on regarding
that past projed The proposed project improvements (as shown on Figures 4 and 5)
indude the foflowing:
1. Extend Orchard Avenue to Hrush Street from its current northem terminus at Ford
Sfreef. Improve Orchard Avenue from Ford St�eet to the bridge to provide two
travel lanes and dirt shoulders plus adequate.taper to the bridge.
2. Construci a conuete bndge auoss OR Creek. The bndge would be
appro�matety 95 feet long. It would have a total width of 62 feet to aliow (our
iravel lanes plus 4-foot wide bike lanes and 5-foot wide sidewalks on both sides.
Initially,onfy two travel lanes would be construdeci on the bridge.
The bridge would inciude a middfe support which would be construded in the
lower portion of the north bank as shovm on Figure 5. The support would be a
"pile bent" system (.e., piers set in the ground to suppoR the bridge sWc#ure)
using 13 15-inch diameter piies piaced in a single row parallel with the stream
cf�anneL
It is possib{e that the final geotechnicai design repart wiil recommend armoring of
the north bank to prevent erosion.
3. North of the bridge, Orchard l�venue woufd be exlended to Brush 5treet. The
extension would include two 12-toot wide travel lanes with 6-foot wide di�t
shouiders.
4. South of the southem bridge abutment, ramps would be construded on the east
and west side of Orchard Avenue. The 16-foot wide ramps would be
construded to ailow City maintenance vehicle access to City-owned property on
the south side of Orr Creek. The ramps would be gated and not ailow public
access.
5. A storm drain would be constructed thaf would collect runoff from ditches south
04 Brush Street and north of Orr Creek. Roadside diiches wouid be consWded
adjacent to the Orchard Avenue Extension north of Orr Creek. The runoff +n
these d'Rches would be direc(ed fo a sform drain in(et locafed abouf 120 feel south
oi Brush Street. A 48-inch underground storm drain wou�d then transport runoff
to a discharge point beneath the north abutrnent of the proposed bridge: Runoff
would then discharge down the north bank of the creek beneath the bridge to Orr
Cr�ek A rodc outtall would be construcled beneath the storm drain outlet to
prevenl streambank erosion. The drainage pipe has been designed to handle
flows from possible future development in the Study Area.
6. A 12-inch wafer line would be ektended from its cuRent norlhem terminus on
Orchard Avenue north to Brush Street along the east side of the future Orchard
Avenue ExtensionlPublic lttility Easement right-of-way, The water line would be
attached to the east side of the bridge above the 100-year flood elevation. The
new water line is proposed to provide adequate fireflows a�ong Ford Street (i.e.,
allowing the water lines to be "looped"), Ho new service would be provided off
this new water line.
7. A 130-foot retaining wail would be construded along a portion of the west side
of the Orchard Avenue F�ctension. The retaining wall would start 2bout 270 feet
north of Ford Street and extend about 115 feet north and then tum west for about
30 feet along the south side of the proposed maintenance ramp road. The
retaining wall would have a maximum elevation of about 5 feeL
8. The bridge sirudure would inGude conduits to accommodate future electrical and
' communication lines.
EXHIBIT B
Road Improvement and Land Use Agreement
.,
\`\ � � � .
�` �'
\ . ' m �
`�- E E
� . E �
V � � `� � ° �
\`\ , ` U U
` `\ �' • > m
� .� � m x .
_._---_�_ ��.�\ o s �
�---- �
U �� q
' ' �� il v �
. \,��\ � _ �
, �, . .
� . \, ,
� � �,
�� ��, �,,�
. . � � � �,
o �. ,
.���_-- , -,�� �.
-- i � m o
� V � � f�� �
g = ' � i. . �.
m
� ', � '�m� y
V �
� � � v v �4� `�
Z v � = r s�
.2 � , � . o \
� � �� �
, � a
I _ - ,�\ ;
. �� �
V �T � � � t� \ ,
_ ' i I _ � „ ��` `
v U c� � � `
,
ti v � j �.
_ _ _ � v. �
,
- ,r---- ��4S 4�9�------ '� 1 :
� � ( v ` i
m
� � � � � .
� i
0
� i
f '
x�'��° {
. . �
NOTE: The source of this map is Figure 6 of the Revised braft EIR dated October 2002.
. - ��CHIE31�° C
� Road lmprovement and Land Use Agree�ment
� �
� . � b ' .
� � . .
� � • S ' • �
.
� Purpose & [ntent
On May 20, I 99Z,the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency adopted Design Guidelines for the
Downtown Design Distrrct. Three years later, in 1995,the City adopted a new General.
P(an,which cal(ed for the adoption of Design Guidelines for all commercial development
within the City limics. Aher considerable discussion, it was decided that the most `
appropriate way to proceed was to simply augment the existing Do�vntown Design
Guidelines for application to commercial devefopment projects outside the existing
� � Downtawn Desrgn Distrid.
i
The existing Design Guidelines for the downtown area remain unchanged and are
included in this document as they were adopted in 1992. They will continue to be
applied within the Downtown Design Drstrictas they have since their formal adoption.
New guidelines more applicable to the outlying commercial areas and commercial
gateways have been prepared and are included as a separate chapte�in this document.
The purpose of the Design Guidelines for proiecu outside the Downtown Design District
• is ; � to imPlement the goais and policies of the Community Design Element of the
General Plan: ?! to provide design guidance and criteria for commercial development;
'� to provide site planning and architeccural excellence,as well as unity and integrity in
the commercial urbanscape outside of the Downtown core;and ��i to provide attractive
commercial areas along the major transportation corridors outside the downtown that
" will stimulate business and city-wide economic development. :�i to provide properry
owners, developers, architects, and project designers with a comprehensive guide for
� building dcsign.
Thc Design Guidclincs arc intcnded to address the concerns cxpresscd by thc Planning
Commission and City Council regarding a lack of design guidelines ior commercial
dcvclopmcnt within thc City, and to (ultill thc dircction containcd in thr Community
Dcsign Elcmcnt of thc Ukiah Gcnc�.al Plan.
Thc Dcsign Guidclincs arc applicablc to all commcrcial dcvcloprricnt ouuidc thc cxisting
Dcnvntown Dcsign Disrrict, and arc intcndcd to bc applicd in a fair and reasonablc
m�nncr, taking into considcration thc sizc, con(iguration,and location of affcctcd and
surrounding p�rccls,as wcll as thc sizc,scopc,and purE->osc of thc individual dcvclopment
; �
� �fO�CCLS.
Architccts, projcct dcsigncrs, and/or�rojcct applicants arc cxpcctcd to makc a strong
and si�ccrc c(fort �o comply with thc Dcsign Guidclincs and contr.ibutc to thc
improvement of the City's physical image. Projed applicants, with thc assistance of
their architects and building designers, are expected to put (orth a convincing creative
cffort whcn planning dcvclopmcnt and dcsigning buildings.
��t� P°l�nn�n�
Natural Site Features
Generally,a designer shouid plan a project to fit a site's natural conditions,rather than alter a site to accommodate a stock
building p(an.
�
Significant existing site features such as mature trees/landscaping,fot size and configuration,topography,and the relationship
to surrounding devefopment shou(d be compelling factors in determining tF�e deve[opment capacity and design of projects.
Al! required Grading and Dtainage Plans shal! be preparec! by a registered civil engineer or orher qualified professional
acceptable to the City Engineer. '
Parking
The number of parking stalls'and overall parking lot design shall generally comply with the requirements of_the Ukiah
Municipaf Code (UMC.). Deviation from the parking requirements of the UMC. can be approved through the discretionary
review process provided a finding is.made that there is a unique circumstance associated with the use of the property that
results in a demand for less parking than normally.expected. These circumstances may include uses that would attract
young teenagers, bicyclists, or a high number of drop-off patrons.
Parking faci(ities sf�a((be aestheticalfy screened and shaded with shrubs,trees,and short walfs and fences according to the
requirements of the Zoning District in which the p�operty is located.
The visual promineace of parking areas should be de-emphasized by separating parkingareas inTo smal!components. The
practice of placing the majority of parking areas beween the building(s) de-emphasized by separating parking areas into
small components. The practice of placing the majority of parking areas between the building(s) and the primary street
irontage.should be avoi.ded.
����.
: RECOMMENQED � � �,
� —�� _
�: ��� �������� � �n�
r v �
�.
� D
�� Rear Delivery � r I
� a �� £2
R Noise Screening . � - -� COf11fTlE'.f Cfa�
_ Around Air Conditioners 9a� Buifding �
�r Landscaping---� '
l.
�. Pleasant Sig.ns e'�a �
�
Parallel Pa�cing � �
,
Pccicstrian Oricntation
I'cdestrian walkw�ys should bc includrd (hat dirccUy link all parking arcas with huilding cn�ranccs, of(-sitc transportation
(acilitics,eswblishcd sidc�valks,and�djaccnt puhlic rights-of-way_Thcy should �{so hc consistcn with uscs and architccturc
(rom both a functional and acsthctic standpoinc.
Ouldoor pcdcstri�n sp�ccs should bc landscapcd and includcsuch fcatures as plantcrs along sidcwalks,pcdcstrian oricntcd
signs, attr�ctivc strcct iurniturc, low-Icvcl lighting, and outdoor sc�ting arcas.
, SI$� �EaCI�'lii7� (ContJ
�mpatibility With Surrounding Developra�ent
i he placement and Jayout of buildings, parking areas, landscaping, exrerior lighting, and other site design features shoutd
be compatible with surrounding land uses and architecture from both a fundional and aesthetic srandpoint.
Development should not create unattractive views for neighbors or traffic corridors. All exposed elevations should maintain
consistent architectural character. Service areas, trash enclosures, utility meters,and mechanical and electrical equipment
should be screened from view.
Property owners are strongly encouraged to develop shared facilities such as driveways,parking areas,pedestrian waikways,
and outdoor living areas to maximize usable areas and create unique design opportunities.
Setbacks for new development should consider the character of existing frontages. Setbacks deeper than the minimum
required are encouraged only in order to allow for sidewaik widening or the creation of special pedestriar� areas such as
entryways, courtways, outdoor cafes, and other features intended to enhance the pedestrian environment,
Building Design
Architectu re
Monotonous box-like strurtures devoid of variety and disfinctiveness, and without openings and changes in wa!! planes are
dixouraged. Architectural features such as arches, raised parapets, decorated cornices,eaves,windows,balconies,entry insets.
a variety of roof angles and pitches,and the inclusion of relief features in wall surfaces are strongly encouraged v✓hen tied into a
comprehensive design theme.
)!i4diitg Colors
i he use of strong or loud colors, especia�ly those with no tradition of local usage, should be reviewed in context with the overal
asthetic of ttie area.
Colors should be compatible with adjoining buildings.Co►or work on the side and rear walls should be compatiblewith the colors
on the front or street side walls. Decoration and trim should be painted in order to call attention to it_
Building Materials
The creative use of wood, stucco, masonry (brick, stone,ti(e),and recycled materials are strongly encouraged.The use of inecal
buildings is discouraged, unless they are designed in a creative and unique�vay, that meets the purpose and intent of the Design
Guideline's.
Concrete block and exposed concrete are generaUy acceptable building materials, provided they are treated, textured, painted,
and/or used in a plcasing acsthetic way consistcnt with the dcsign guidclincs.M�tcrials should bc selcctcd to crcate compatibility
betwccn th� building and adjoining buildings.
Lighting
Extcrior lighting should bc dcsigncd to cnhancc buifding dcsign and landscaping,as wcll as providc safrty�nd sccurity.Gencrally,
cxtcrior lighting should bc suhducd. It should not spi(I out and crcate glarc on adjoining propcnics, and should not bc directcd
towards thc night sky. '
Lighl standard hcights shuuld bc prcdic�tcd on thc lighting nccd o( thc particular Ioration and usc. Tall
lighting fixlures th�t illumin�tc I�rgc arc�s shuu(d hc avoidcd.
� -_
�ighting fixtures, stand�rds, �nd �If cx�ascd acccssorics shoufd bc harmonious with building dcsign, and prc(crably
historic and innovative in style.All pedestri�n and huilding access areas shoutd be adequatefy lighted to provide safety,security,
and acsthetic qua(ity. .
�ItE` P��1C11CfIClg (Cont.) . :
Energy Conservation
Both active solar(collectors)and passive solar(buifding orientation,landscaping,etc.)design are encouraged. Natural ventilation
and shading should be used to cool buildings whenever possible,and the use of sun(ight should be usedfor direct heating and
illumination whenever possible. �
Solar heating equipment need not be screened, but should be as unobtrusive as possible and complement the building design.
Every effort should be made to integrate solar panels into the roof design, flush with the roof slope.
RECOMMENDED NOT '
O I O RECOMMEtdDED
�
�
�
I
;
I
j
L7 n
�
Solar coilector cannot � Sofar coilector
� be seen from street. � is visible from street.
�
:l•3;M.Y'fiIIOYS`Yd0/a7.MF..Y7Fl.s:,YMR7`u'!l0'{;.Y10'S`Y4%11CAR167.iRiE4b:d�19:L'/.JC�I.'.JpABlG1r'.RtA'AfMQ(�JUY.J'fMY%7�.AK.67.atAh.`LYWri:�9FAMR3&mL7�9W;Z�R'k42/IDf' .
Signs
��,_
7he amount, type,and location of signage on a site shal(generally comply with the requirements of ihe Ukiah Municipal Code_
However, sign programs should be designed tastefuily and in a way where the overall signage does not
dominate the site.
Sandwich board signs shall conform to the requirements of the Ukiah Municipa! Code, and shail be tastefully
des,lgned with subdued colors,minimal sign lettering,and a creative appearance. Every sign should be designed in scale and
proportion with the surrounding built environment. Signs should be designed as an in[egra) architectural element of the
building and site to which it principally relates.
Thc colors, matcrials,and lightingof evcry sign should be restrained and harmonious with thc buildingand site.No sign shall be
placed within thc public right-of-way�vithout thc sccurcmrnt of an Encroachmcnt Pcrmit.
Outdoor Storage & Service Areas
S�oragc arcas should bc limitcd�o thc rcar o(a sitc,and frum public vicw with a solid (cncc or wall using concrctc,wood, stonc.
brick, or othcr similar m�tcri�l �nd should bc scrccncd_ All outduor storagr �rc�s and cnclosures should bc scrccncd. �vhcn
�ossiblc,with landsc��ing.
1f trash and recycling arc�s arc rcyuircd in thc discrctionary rcvicw�roccss. thr dcsing and building m�tcrials for�hcsc arc?�
shall bc consistcnt with thc buildings�nd landscaping on thc sitc: It shall alsu bc consistcnt with thc rcquircmcnts o(thc Uk
Municip�l Codc_
Where common mai(boxcs arc provided, chey should be closc to thc front ent��ncc of building(s), in a location approved by �hc
US Post Officc. Thc architcctural charactcr should bc similar in furm, matcrials,and colors to �hc surrounding buildings.
Y
• Fenc�s � Vt!'�0ls
nll sides of perimeter fencing exposed to public view should be
HtYx�pla We Fot`,Xrecl SiO s Nd F.o[z:plaWa Fot Sb«l 5"des
finished in a manner compatible with a project's materia(s, � � �, � �, ���_ _
,--��•-�•,_. ,
i i i i � � �. ,,,� ��
finishes,colors,and architectural sryling. Large blank fence walls, �� �� `�� � �;�_�;
�� (1 I, i; � li;i ':�
and fences and walls that create high visual barriers are strongly y; i I :; ;'; ;; : ;Rl`:::-;�;'�;;` ;�' :-`-
,, + �� .. •,_..t` .:� .;-.
dlscouraged. AJl proposed unpainted wood surfaces should be -.�—�-' � � `�'-°—
PickEt Chain Link
treated or stained to preserve and enhance tF.eir natural colors. � �
�; �� � �� ; �_�_
No ortion of a wall or fence should be used for advertisin or �i '�' ,` �' � ! 1 I � � `` ��-� �
P g I, �i � � _� � �._ r-
display. No barbed wire,concertina wire,orchain link should be -�-�--1-��...:_� ' ����,���
used as fencing matenal if the fence is visible from xhe pub(ic �`� . ; 4 WO°d 8�w're
right-of-way. All fencing and walls shail comply with the ;
provisions of the Ukiah Municipal Code.No fencing or wall shall � , �I
- 1�"
obstruct the sight distances of motorists, as determined b the � `. .1{�----=��'
Y . � i �.F---�..4 ,.�.
City Engineer. (See Illustration) Wroug�`F�t I nn po�g�;�
Landscaping
All landscaping shall comply with zoning code requirements. Landscaping shafl be proportional to the uui(ding elevations.
Landscape p(antings shail be those which grow we11 in Ukiah's climate without extensive irrigation. Native, habitat-friendly
flowering plants are strongly encouraged. Al! plantings shall be of sufficient size, health and intensity so that a viable and
mature appearance can be attained in a reasonably short amount of time.
Deciduous trees shall constitute the majority of the trees proposed along the south and west building exposures; non-
deciduous street species shall be restricted to areas that do not inhibit so(ar access on the project site or abutting properties_
AfI new deveioPments shall include a landscaping �overage of 2o percent (20%) of the gross area of the parcel, unless
because of the sma(I size of a parcel, such coverage would be unreasonable. A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the
landscaped area shall be dedicated to live plantings.
Projects involving the redevelopment/reuse of existing buildings shall provide as much landscaping as feasible. Landscaping
Plans shall include an automatic irrigation system and Ligf�ting Pfan. All requ9red (andscaping for commercial development
projects sf�aff be adequatety maintained in a viabte condition.
Parking Lots .
Parking lots with twclvc (12) or more parking stalls shall havc a trce placed between cvery four (4) parking stalls with a
continuous linear planting strip, rather than individual planting wells, unless clearly infeasible. Parking lot trees shall
primarily be dcciduous specics,and shall be designcd to providc a trec canopy coverage of 50% ovcr all pavcd areas within
tcn ycars of plan[ing_ L;ascd upon thc dcsign of thc parking lot, a rcduccd numbcr of trecs may be approved through thc
discrctionary rcvicw proccss.
Parking lots shall havc a perimctcr planting strip with both trccs and shrubs. Thc planting o( la�vn arcas with thc trccs and
shrubs is acccptablc, providcd thcy do not dominatc thc planting strips.
1'arking lots with twclvc (I 2) or morc p�rking stalls shall havc dcfincd �cdcstri�n sidcwalks or markcd pcdcstrian facilitics
within I�ndscaped areas�nd/or scparated from automohilc travcl iancs. Ctascd upon thc dcsign of thc �arking lot, and thc
usc that it is scrving, rclic( from this rcquircmcnt may bc approvcd through thc discrctionary rcvicw �roccss.
'Strcc� trccs arc rryuirrd. ��hcy may bc placcd on �hc pro�crty �+ro�oscd for dcvclopmcnt instcad o(within ihc public right-
of-way if thc location is ap�rovcd by thc City Enginccr, b�scd upon s�fcty and maintcnancc (actors.
;pccics of strcct trccs sh�ll bc scicctcd from thc Ukiah Mastcr Trcc List with thc consultation of tF�c Ci�y s�a(f. All strcet trccs
shall 6c �lanted consistcnt with thc Scandard Pl�ncing Dctail on (ilc �vith thc City L`nginccr.
�.,. .�,��.. ..
EXHIBI.T D
Road tmprovement and Land Use Agreement
The Zoning Administrator andlor Planning Commission shall make findings when acting
to approve any discretionary permit within the Brush Street triangle. The finclings shall not be
vague and conclusionary. The findings shall be sufficiently detailed to apprise a reviewi_ng court
of the basis of the action by bridging the gap between the evidence and the decision-maker's
conclusions, and shall be based upon evidence contained in the admin.istrative record. Failure to
make findings that support the following determinations sball result in a denial of the site
development permit application:
1. The proposal is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the County General
Plan.
2. The.location, size, and intensity of the proposed project will not create a hazardous or
inconvenient vehicular or pedestrian tr�c pattern.
3. The accessibility of off-street parking areas and the relation of parking areas with respect
to trafFc on adj acent streets will not create a hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent or
sLU7ounding uses.
4. Sufficient landscaped areas have been reserved for purposes of separating or screening
the proposed structure(s) from the street and adjoisung building sites, and break.ing up and
screening large expanses of paved areas.
5. The proposed development wiI1 not restrict or cut out light and air on the property,or on
the property in the neighborhooci; nor wi11 it hinder the development or use of builclings in tbe
neighborhood; or impair the value thereo£
6. The improvement of any commercial or i.ndustrial structure will not have a substantial
detrimental impact on the character�r value of an adjacent residential zoning district.
7. The proposed development will not ezcessively damage or destroy natural features,
includi.ng trees, shrubs, creeks, and the natural grade of the site.
8. There is sufficient variety, creativity, and articulation to the architecture and design of the
structure(s) and grounds to avoid monotony and/or a box-like uninteresting external appearance.
� EXFi I B IT E
Road Improvement and Land Use Agreement
,--
Introduction and Summary
,
' Introduct'ron �
This report presents an analysis of the anticipated traffic impacts anticipated in the northeast area of Ukiah
due to cumulative land use development and completion of an extension of Orchard Avenue from Ford Street
to Brush Street. Cti.imulative development included a number ofundeveloped parcels in this area of the City
as well as the development of a 95-acre area in the Brush Street Triangle area which is generally bounded by
U.S. 101 to the north and east, Orr Creek to the south and the railroad right-of-way to the west. The traffic
study was completed in accordance with evaluation criteria specified by the. Mendocino Council of
Government(MCOG), and is consistent with standard h-affic engineering techniques. This plan includes a
property assessment/fee structure and an associated draft AB 1600 ordinance which provides a�structure for
funding the recomme.nded improvements.
A previous traffic analysis for this area was completed as part of the Orr CreekBridge and Orchard Avenue
Extension Revised Draft EIR, Leonard Charles and Associates, October 2002 (Section 3.5 - Traffic and
Circulation,completed by Crane Transportation Group). A peer review of this previous traffic analysis was
completed as part of this process and is included in Appendix A.
Summary
Traffic Growth Assumptions
City of Ukiah staff provided a list of undeveloped parcels within the study area that could potentially increase
traffic levels within the study area. These parcels are projected to generate approximately 12,165 new trips
to the surrounding s�eet network on a daily basis.
Since no traffic model is currently available for the City of Ukiah,long-term background tra�c growth was
determined through the use of a growth factor, A background growth rate of 1.0 percent peryear for 10 years
(total growth increase of approximately 10 percent)was applied to the existing traffic volumes. This growth
rate is intended to represent land development in other areas of iJkiah and intensification of existing uses.
I Three altemative land use pattems were developed for the traffic analysis of the Brush Street Triangle area.
The alternatives were crafted in order to obtain a range in vehicle trip generation and travel patterns to/from
the site,and to assist with prioritizing the.improvement projects of the circulation plan. It was assumed that
! the Brush Street Triangle area includes 95.71 acres of gross land area. The three altemarives consisted of the
� following.
j Alternative 1—DEIR Land Use: The first alternative represents the same land use thatwas evaluated in
' the Orr Creek Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension Revised Draft EIR. This land use consisted of
641,728 square feet of retail space, 241,461 square feet of industrial space and 56 apartment units.
; Development of Alternative 1 would be expected to result in approximately 18,189 new vehicle trips per
• day on the surrounding street network.
A Alternative 2 — Airport Business Park 2002 Equivalence: In order to assess a less intense retail
Q altemative,or one which represents an earlier phase ofAltemative 1,it was assumed that the Brush Street
Triangle area may experience comparable 10-year levels of development as the Airport Business Park.
� In the 10 years since its initiation, 37.80 acres have been developed at the Aitport Business Park. The
� resulting 326,330 square feet of new building space was assumed to consist of both retail and industrial
� B�ush Street Triangle Transportation Study Mendocino Council of Governments
Whitlock&Weinberger Transportation, Inc. Page 1 May 30,2003
;� �
:>;�
t;�
t.
_. _... .... _,r`=
uses at a similar ratio to Altematives 1. Altemative 2 is projected to generate substantially fewer trips,
at approximately 8,218 vehicle trips per day,
Alternative 3—Mixed Use: The third land use altemative is based on a mixeduse concept consisting of ��:
50 percent residential uses(47.9 acres),2S percent commercial uses(23.9 acres)and 25 percent industrial �
uses(23.9 acres). The resulting land use mix consists of 536 multi-family units,48 single-family units, "
312,720 square feet of retail uses, and 208,480 square feet of industzial uses which would be expected
to generate approximately 12,251 trips per day. �
Need for Interchan�e Modifications �
In order far the Perkins Street interchange area to operate with acceptable conditions between Orchard
Avenue and the U.S. 101 ramps, one of the following rivo alternatives would need to be implemented. �
L.
A)All conflicting movements at the Perlans Street/U.S. 101 southbound ramps intersection would need
to be prohibited through the use of a median on Perkins Street.
;
B) The southbound ramps at the Perkins Sh�eet interchange would be eliininated, and new southbound
off and on ramps would be relocated to the eastern tenrli.nus of Brush Street.
Due to the high cost of this alternative and Iong Iead time in completing modifications to the State Highway
system, it is recommended that mitigahon ineasures to serve traffic growth in northeasfem Ukiah be .
formulated to operate with ramp altemative"A"first, followed by alternative`B"in the future.
Recommended Miti�arion Measures
Based on the operational analysis presented in the report, the following intersection improvements were
recomrnended.
North State Street/U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps—Install a traffic signal.
North State Street/U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps—Consider pro}ubiting the left-turn movement from the
off-ramp.
North State Sireet/Brush Street-Low Gap Road— Widen the westbound approach to two tanes and
provide forprotected left turn signal phasing
Main Street/Perkins Street—Either install a traffic signal or modern roundabout.
Main Street/Gobbi Street—Install either a tra�c signal or a single-lane modem zoundabout to mitigate
deficient operation. A roundabout with an inscribed diameter of 110 feet would operate acceptably.
Orchard Avenue/Brush Streez—Install a modem roundabout.
Orchard AvenueJFord Street and Clara flvenue —Provide a center two-way left-hu-n lane on Orchard
Avenue to facilitate left tums onto Ford Street and Clara Avenue.
Orchard.4venue/Perldns Street—Widen the eastbound and westbound approaches to provide separate
right-tzu-n ianes and implement right-turn overlap signal phasing on all four approaches.
Brush Street Tnangle Transportation Study Mendocino Council of Govemments
Whitlock&Weinberger Transportation,Inc. Page 2 May 30,2003
:i •
-��
j
Orchard Avenue/Gobbi Street—Either install a traffic signal or modem roundabout.
Perkins Sireet/U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps—Install a raised median on Perkins Street to eliminate a11
conflicting movements. Most of the prohibited movements could be accommodated via a retum U-turn
on the east side of the interchange. Begin the process ofrelocating the southbound ramps to the terininus
of Brush Street and closing the southbound U.S. 101/Perkins Street ramps. It is expected that this process
would take approximately 10 years.
Perkins Street/U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps—Install a modem roundabout to serve U-tum movements
back to the southbound ramps.
Gobbi Street/U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps—Install a traffic signal. ;
; Miti�ation Fundin�
The total mitigation cost varies from$6,880,000 to$7,550,000.Almost one-half of this cost, $3,300,000 is
for the interchange ramp relocation to Brush Street. The cost to provide acceptable traffic operation at all of
the study intersections is essentially the same under all three land use alternatives for the Triangle Area.
In order to finance the mitigation measures which would be required to accommodate the future traffic
growth,traffic impact fees have been developed. It is assumed that the cost of the mitigation rneasures would
be allocated to anticipated development in the study area including:
' - identified potential projects on vacant parcels in the City of LTkiah
- � development at the Brush Street Triangle area
' - background land use intensification in the City or County which impacts the study area
Assuming that local development would not fund any of the interchange ramp relocation to Brush Street,the
j resulting fee varies between$1,149 and$1,547 per p.m.peak hour trip generated. If the local development
�'. fiuids 50 percent of the $3,300,000 interchange relocation cost, the fee would vary between $1,596 and
$2,148 per p.m.peak hour trip. In order to gain adequate funds to complete the capital projects and due to
the uncertainty of the amount and type of land use to be developed on the Brush Street Triangle site, it is
;; recommended that the traffic impact fees be based $2,148 per p.m.peak hour trip.
4�
,
�!
�'
i�
�.�.
��'
J;
Brush Street Triangle Transportafion Study Mendocino Council of Govemments
�I. J
Whitlock&Weinberger Transportation, Inc. Page 3 May 30, 2003
. �, ' ::;�
:��
. . � . , . . . . . .:�;La
;'i
Study Parameters -,�
Study Area � -
..:._.......-�---- - 'I
The study area is located in the northeast section ofthe City ofUkiah including U.S. 101 and the City arterials
of North State Street,East Perkins S�eet and Gobbi Street. The Brush Street Triangle development site is �
bounded by U.S. 101 to the north and east, Orr Creek to f.he south and the railroad right-of-way to the west 1
is unincorporated County of Mendocino land.
Freewa �
l
U.S. 101 provides travel two lanes in each direction and serves as the primarily linlc to other regions to the
north and south. �Interchanges in the study area include North State Street,Perkins Street,and Gobbi Street. �
All of the ramp intersections at the three interchanges are uncontrolled on the main street with stop controls �
on the ramp approaches to the arterials.
Arterial Streets �
State Street is tbe primary north-south arterial in the City of Ukiah. This arterial intersects with the U.S. 101
interchange at the north end of the City and extends to an interchange with U.S. 101 at the south end of
Ukiah. Within the study area, State Street provides four travel lanes.
Perkins Street is an east-west arterial providi.ng access between U.S. 101 and residential areas to the west. �
East ofU.S. 101,Perkins Street becomes Vichy Springs Road which provides access to lazge unincorporated
residential areas. Between State Street and Orchard Avenue there are four travel la.nes. East of Orchard �
Avenue, Perkins Street includes two travel lanes.
Gobbi Street is a two-lane arterial providing access between U.S. 101 and residential.areas to the west.
Collector Streets �
Orchard Avenue is a two-lane major collector providing north-south access between Ford Street and
� residential areas south of Gobbi Street. This study assumes the extension of Orchard Avenue from Ford �
Street north to Brush Street.
Fmpire Drive - Ford Road is an east-west two-lane minor collector providing access at the north-end of
LTkiah. It is assumed that Orchard Avenue will be extended north from Brush Street to an intersecrion with
Ford Road near an overcrossing of U.S. 101.
Low Gap �Zoad - Brush Street is a two-Iane major collector street providing east-west access from
unincorporated areas to the west,the high school,County Administration Center and residential azeas to the
development area known as the Brush Street Triangle Area.
Clara .4venue, which is classified as a minor collector street, provides access through a residential
neighborhood from North State Street to Orchard Avenue.
Residential Streets
Ford Street is classified as a residential street and provides access through a residential neighborhood from
North State Street to Orchard Avenue
Brush Street Triangle Transportation Study Mendoci:no Council of Governments
Whitlock&Weinberger Transportation, Inc. Page 4 May 30, 2003
�
Orr Street is a minor residential street over Ort Creek which currently serves as a diversion route from
� Orchard Avenue to State Street. The extension of Orchard Avenue is expected to relieve this street from
through traffia
The study area includes the following study intersections and is shown in Figure 1.
1. North State StreetlU.S. 101 NB Ramps 11. Orchard Avenue/Ford Road(future}
2. North State Street/U.S. 101 SB Ramps 12. Orchard AvenueBrush Street(future)
3. North State Street/Ford Road-Empire Drive 13. Qrchard Avenue/�ord Street
4. North State StreetBrush St-Low Gap Road 14. Orchard Avenue/Clara.Avenue
5. North State Street/Ford Street 15. Orehard Avenue/Perldns Street
6. North State Street/Clara Street 16. Orchard Avenue/Gobbi Street •
7. North State StreetlPerkins Street 17. Ferkins Stre�t/U.S. 101 SB Ramps
8. South State Street/Gobbi Street 18. Perkins Street/U.S. 101 NB Ramps
9. Main StreetlPerkins Street 19. Gobbi Street/U.S. 101 SB Ramps
10. Main StreedGobbi Street 20. Gobbi Street/U.S. 101 NB R.amps
As shown in Figure 1,study intersecrions which are controlled by traffic signals include North State Street/
Ford Road-Empire Drive,North State StreetBrush Street-Low Gap Road,North State Street/Perkins Street,
South State StreetlGobbi Street,and Orchard Avenue/Perkins Street. Intersections controlled by all-way stop
signs include Main Street/Perkins S�eet,Main Street/Gobbi Street and Orchard Avenue/Gobbi Street. The
remaining study intersections have uncontrolled conditions on the main street and are controlled by stop signs
on the minor street approaches. Intersection tum lane configurations for the study intersections are included
in Appendix B.
t Time of Day Analysis Periods
This analysis focused on intersecrion operation during two peak hours of the day. Based on an analysis of
existing traffic counts,which is shown in the following section, the a.m.peak hour volumes are generally
15 to 30 percent lower than the p.m.peak hour volumes while the midday volumes range from 5 percent less
to 5 percent higher in some cases in comparison with the p.m.peak hour volumes. Therefore,the weekday
midday and p.m.peak hours were included in the analysis. Typically the midday peak hour occurs between
' 12:00 noon and 1:00 p.m.while the p.m.peak hour is the highest volume hour between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m.
Study Analysis Scenarios
The following scenarios were assessed in the traffic analysis.
I. Existin�Traffic Operations—These conditions are based on existing weekday p.m.peak hour volumes
that were first collected in August of 2002 and were sample counted again in January of 2003 together with
midday peak hour traffic counts derived from the previous p.m. peak hour counts as well as daily machine
counts collected at sample locations in January of 2003.,
II Existin�plus Cumulative Citv Projects—This scenario includes the addition of the traffic anticipated
' to be generated by the development of ctu�rently undeveloped parcels in the northeast study area of the City.
! The extension of Orchard Avenue from Ford Street to Ford Road and its associated traffic diversion was
assumed to be completed for this scenario.
�;
IJ ! _ III Future without Trian�le Development — This scenario, which does not include the Triangle Area
development, includes the addition of cumulative traffic anticipated to be generated by the undeveloped
.J Bncsh Street�'rian le Trans ortation Study Mendocino Council of Governments
g P
Whitlock&Weinberger Transportation,Inc. Page 5 May 30;2003
IJ r
.
� . ���
. \ —, .1�
Background Traffic Conditions �
Future Road Modif3cations •
�
For all future traffic analyses it was assumed that Orchard Avenue would be extended from Ford Street
through Brush Street to Ford Road. Traffic was d.iverted from several routes to this new connection including
Perkins Street to North State Street,.Orchard Avenue to Clara Avenue to North State Street,Orchard Avenue �;
to Ford Street to North State Sireet and Orchard Avenue to Ford Street to Brush Street via Orr Street. . '
Cumulative City Development Projects Trip Generation � .
City of Ukiah staff provided a list of undeveloped parcels within the study area that could potentially iriciease .
traffic levels wittiin the study area. These parcels,including their Assessor Parcel number and land use aze
summarized in Table 4.
B ased on the ITE trip generation rates,these 12 parcels are projected to generate approximately 12,165,new
trips to the surrounding street network on a daily basis,with 760 of these trips occurring during the a.m.peak
hour, 806 during the midday peak hour and 1,172 occurriug during the p.m, peak hour. These trips were
distributed to the surrounding street network in the traffic analysis. Additional cumulative development
project details including location maps and a trip generation summary aze included in Appendix E. For the
purposes of this study,it was assumed that these cumulative projects would develop within a ten year period.
Table 4
Cumulative Ci Deveto ment Pro'ects Tri Generation
P.M.Peak Hour
Site APN Land Use Units
Trip Rate Trips
1 001-36-034 General Light Industrial 141.06 ksf 0.98 138
_2 I 002=09_316^ _ Cburch I 12 ksf 0.66 S
_3 .I 002�03=005 _ Retail I 1437 ksf 2.43 35
4 002-03-006 Retail 94.09 ksf 2.43 229
---I--------------...—._ I I
5 I 002-16-012 &-013 I Medical Office I 79.80 ksf 3.66 292
6 I 002-16-010 I Medical Office 22.30 ksf 3.66 82
7 I002-20=038_ _IRetail 7.14 ksf I 2.43 17
Retail 29.45 ksf 1.94 57
g 002-23-212 &-213 Office 29.451csf 1.49 44
002-28-218 &-219
� Light Industrial 117.79 ksf 0.98 115
9 (several) 002=34-xxx Office 13.94 ksf 1.49 21
_-----I- ------------ I— I
10 I(several) 003-58=xxx Retail 26.14 ksf 1.95 51
11 003-04-070 &-075 Retail 22.30 ksf I 1.93 43 �
12 003-04-030 Apartment 64 units 0.62 40
Total Tri s 1,172
Note:APN=Assessor's Parcel Number
ksf=thousand square feet
�
Brush Street Triangle Transportation Study Mendocino Council of Govemments
Wbitlock&Weinberger Transportation,Inc. Page 16 May 30,2003