Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-03-12 - Planning Board Meeting Documents 445 CUDDY& W to P alilns,New York 1 06011oor LLP Tel 914.761.1300 Fax 914.761.5372 FEDEINwww.cuddyfeder.com February 10, 2015 BY HAND Hon. Paul S. Rosen, Mayor, and Members of the Board of Trustees Village of Rye Brook 938 King Street Rye Brook,New York 10573 Re: Buckingham Partners/Sun Homes (Phase 3 Reckson Executive Park) Petition Requesting Text Amendment to Zoning Ordinance and Application for Re-Mapping of Premises into the Planned Unit Development District (Premises: 1100 King Street, Section 129 25 Block 1 Lot 1) Dear Mayor Rosen and Members of the Board of Trustees: On behalf of Buckingham Partners and Sun Homes (collectively the"Applicant"),as authorized by Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P. as owner, we respectfully submit this Petition to Amend the Zoning Ordinance,pursuant to Section 250-14, and Application to map the Premises in the Planned Unit Development District("PUD") in accordance with Section 250-7.E. of the Zoning Ordinance. This Petition and Application requests permission to develop the Premises as a residential community of one hundred ten(110) dwellings of which ten(10) dwellings would qualify as Affordable Housing that affirmatively furthers fair housing ("AFFH") as such terms are set forth in the Stipulation and Order entered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in the case between the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and the County of Westchester(Index No. 06 Civ. 2860 (DLC)).The Affordable Housing units would be marketed for sale to families in the eighty (80)percent of Westchester median family income range. Similar to the Applicant's award-winning Kensett development in Darien, Connecticut, the Applicant seeks to create a new community of homes able to enjoy the special beauty of the Premises and the benefits of living in this Village,including a convenient commute to New York City and a well-regarded school district. The location of the Premises, design of the townhouses, scale of the streetscape and sensitive landscaping will make this new Residential Community an inviting place to live. We look forward to arranging a site visit for this Board and members of the Planning Board to view the Applicant's Kensett development. The proposed new Residential Community would be situated on approximately 31.56 acre(i.e., the Phase 3 parcel)of the Reckson Executive Park, which totals approximately 79.5 acres.' The Premises are located on the westerly side of King Street and bounded on the west by Purchase College of the State University of New York, on the north by BelleFair at Rye Brook, and on the 'Approximately 75.5 acres of the Reckson Executive Park is located in the Village of Rye Brook,with approximately 3.5 acres thereof situated in the Town of Greenwich,Connecticut,and approximately 0.5 acres within the Town/Village of Harrison,New York. C&F:2640298.8 ATTORNEYS AT LAW White Plains Fishkill New York City Stamford CUDDY& FEDER"r February 10, 2015 Page 2 south by Doral Greens at Arrowwood and the Arrowwood Conference Center. The Rye Brook portion of the Premises, including Phase 3, is classified in the OB-1 (Campus/Office Building) District in accordance with the Village's Zoning Ordinance. The Phase 3 parcel has been approved for construction of a 280,000 square foot office building with 1,120 parking spaces. The development and construction of the Phase 3 improvements have not proceeded to completion, despite efforts by Reckson to secure major tenants to occupy the proposed office building and alternative development concepts also have been proposed, but withdrawn.2 Despite this fact, Reckson has invested significant monies and made meaningful improvements to the Reckson Executive Park, including substantially completing the detention and water quality basins, as well as planting of the basins and site earthwork on the Phase 3 parcel. Further, the Phase 3 parcel has access via International Drive at a signalized intersection with King Street. It is respectfully submitted that the evaluation of potential traffic and other environmental impacts for SEQRA purposes of the build-out of the proposed Residential Community should be analyzed in comparison to the development of the Phase 3 parcel with the 280,000 square foot office building previously approved thereon. Given the alternative opportunities for development of the Premises and the compatibility of residential use of the site,we respectfully submit that it would be appropriate for the Village to remap the Premises from the OB-1 (Campus/Office Building)District to the PUD District in accordance with Section 250-7.E. The residential development of the site would be wholly consistent with surrounding properties and would satisfy the purposes of the PUD District, as set forth in Section 250-7.E.(1) of the Zoning Ordinance, as detailed below. The Zoning Ordinance permits development of the Premises at a density of 6 units per acre, or more than 180 dwelling units,whereas this proposal seeks approval of a total of 110 residential dwelling units as a Planned Unit Development(PUD). We respectfully submit that the Premises qualify for placement in the PUD (Planned Unit Development) District, which action is governed by the Village Board. The PUD Overlay may be applied to properties of at least 30 acres located north of the Hutchinson River Parkway. In the PUD District,the density of development permitted is 9,000 square feet per acre, but no more than 6 dwelling units per acre. As noted above, this proposed Residential Community would have only half that density although we are asking the Village to amend the Zoning Ordinance to permit additional floor area for Affordable Housing, attached garages and walk-out basements, where Affordable Housing is provided at a rate of ten (10%) of the market-rate units. 2 A proposal to construct a private school(The Stanwich School)was withdrawn in 2002. Thereafter,major corporate office tenants that were interested in occupying Phase 3 ultimately chose to move to Connecticut,rather than Reckson Executive Park in Rye Brook. Most recently,a four-rink ice skating facility was proposed on a portion of the Phase 3 property,but that proposal was withdrawn in 2013 following a lengthy review process and considerable opposition. C&F:2640298.8 CUDDY FEDE LLP February 10,2015 Page 3 While the PUD regulations require at least 150 feet of frontage on a State, County or major Village road that requirement was earlier waived when the overall office park was subdivided in June 17, 1986 by the Village Board of Rye Brooks(a copy of the relevant Town of Rye Resolution is attached). Further of interest is that the Affordable Housing requirements (i.e., approximately 1 per 10 units)that apply to residential development in the Village do not apply to, among other things, subdivisions proposed in the OB-1 District." The relevant provisions of the Rye Brook Code confirm that there is a two step process (Conceptual & Detailed) for the mapping of the Premises in the PUD District with the Village Board of Trustees being the principal agency involved in issuing any decisions. This Application commences that process and we look forward to working with the Village to enable this new Residential Community to become a part of the broader Rye Brook community. PETITION TO AMEND ZONING ORDINANCE This letter Petition asks to amend Section 250-7.E.(3) of the Zoning Ordinance to better enable the Village Board to consider site specific characteristics of proposed PUD developments, flexibly addressing issues related to terrain,parcel configuration and building design while holding true to the need to conserve natural resources and to preserve open space,providing benefits to the community over and above that which the underlying district would otherwise provide, such as the previously approved 280,000 square foot office building. This letter Petition also requests the Village to provide an incentive for including Affordable Housing within PUD developments. There are four specific design issues that require the Village Board's consideration and have prompted this Petition to amend the Zoning Ordinance: 1. The waiver of a 100-foot"buffer setback otherwise required under the regulations, which buffer needs to be reduced internal to the Reckson property line for better design and function for the residential development. It should be noted that the current provisions of the Code permit the Village Board, upon recommendation of the Planning Board,to reduce the setback(down to 80 feet) or to increase such requirements (up to 120 feet) as noted below. However,the Village Board also has the latitude and legal authority to waive and reduce the buffer area beyond 20% provided the rationale underlying the need for such setback has resulted in the impacts being mitigated (as the Village Board may determine)."' 2. As noted above,the density of development per acre is"capped" at 9,000 square feet of floor area and 6 units per acre. Since the Premises is not required to provide Affordable Housing, but the Applicant nevertheless is willing to offer ten(10)units thereof, we are asking the Village Board to amend the Zoning Ordinance so that the Village Board could waive the 9,000 square foot limitation, if and when Affordable C&F:2640298.8 CUDDY& FEDER"r February 10, 2015 Page 4 Housing is provided in an amount equivalent to, or greater than ten(10%) of the market-rate units (the"Affordable Housing Incentive"). 3. The definition of floor area in Rye Brook's Code includes attached garages,but excludes detached garages (presumably to preclude the conversion into finished space of attached garages in existing houses). So, attached garages, are subject to the 9,000 square foot floor area limitation per acre in the PUD District,yet detached garages are not subject to such limitation. This diverse treatment encourages the construction of detached garages,despite the fact that they increase impervious coverage and expand the number of buildings needed to be provided in a development. To minimize site coverage, the Affordable Housing Incentive would apply in this instance to permit the Village Board to allow attached garages and to permit such additional floor area (beyond the 9,000 square foot limit per acre). 4. The Zoning Ordinance also includes basements within the 9,000 square foot floor area limitation, if they are walk-outs and result from grading of the site. Since the development of the Premises contemplates mass grading of the site, this Petition seeks to amend the Zoning Ordinance to permit the Village Board to allow walk-out basements as additional floor area(beyond the 9,000 square foot limitation per acre), the Affordable Housing Incentive also would address this situation. 5. The requirement for 150 feet of minimum frontage on a State or County road previously was addressed by the Village Board when it approved the subdivision of the Reckson Executive Park and determined that the Phase III parcel did not need independent street frontage, as set forth in its Resolution adopted on June 17, 1986. Accordingly, we are requesting confirmation that this PUD development would not need to conform to the 150 foot requirement for such frontage and, as a result, the Petition does not seek to modify the Zoning Ordinance to address that issue. A copy of the June 17, 1986 Resolution is enclosed for your convenience. For the reasons noted above,this Petition hereby requests that Section 250-7.E.(3) of the Zoning Ordinance be amended to read as follows [proposed new text is underlinedl: (3) Authority. The Village Board shall be the municipal authority designated to grant approval for rezoning to a PUD District, as well as the PUD concept plan, after recommendation of the Planning Board. The Village Board shall retain the jurisdiction to waive dimensional requirements of the Zoning Ordinance to allow for flexibilfty of design in the site plan, including but not limited to: (a) The Standards and requirements set forth in Section 250-7.E.(2)(d)rll may be waived to permit additional floor area to be developed in such PUD development, beyond the 9,000 square foot limit, if the development provides Affordable Housing equivalent to ten(10)percent in number of C&F:2640298 9 C U D DYE. FEDER"r February 10, 2015 Page 5 the market-rate dwelling units in such development, provided that such Affordable Housing is restricted for a fifty (50)year term consistent with the Westchester County settlement and is marketed in accordance with the terms of such settlement. (b) The Buffer areas set forth in Section 250-7.E.(2)env be reduced where the PUD development abuts commercial office improvements. These proposed text revisions would allow for a more flexible approach to the design and development of the proposed Residential Community on these Premises, but would also serve the interests of the community by allowing the Village Board, with input from the Planning Board,to recognize the unique characteristics of each site and allow the Village to balance the requirements of the site, while meeting the purposes of the PUD District and encouraging Affordable Housing to be developed through the Affordable Housing Incentive. A Zoning Compliance Table for this proposed Residential Community(which notes the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance) is annexed hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A. THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT The new Residential Community will have Open Space surrounding it and yards for homeowners within it, as well as a walking/jogging path available for all homeowners to enjoy. There will be one hundred(100)market-rate,townhouse units, some of which will be detached and the balance will be attached units of three together. The Residential Community is anticipated to be completed within 4 to 5 years. All market-rate units will have their own attached garage and some units may have the option of finished walk-out basements. The market-rate units will range in size from approximately 2,300 to 3,300 square feet, not including the optional finished basement. There also will be a clubhouse and swimming pool as part of the amenity package available to these homeowners for an additional monthly fee. Affordable Housing townhouses will be constructed consisting of ten(10%)percent of the market-rate units, or ten(10) Affordable Housing townhouses situated within the Residential Community,each with a detached garage. Of these ten Affordable Units, four(4) will be three (3)bedroom units of approximately 1,500 square feet in size and six(6) will be two (2)bedroom units of approximately 1,200 square feet in size. In support of this Application, we respectfully enclose eighteen(18) sets of the following documents detailing the design of the Residential Community and the potential impacts thereof for environmental review by the Village: 1. Drawings prepared by Divney Tung Schwalbe, LLP, as follows: a. "Illustrative Plan," dated February 9, 2015 (11x17); C&F:2640298.8 C'1 �'UD D1� om. Y T 1 E D $�L g'LLP February 10, 2015 Page 6 b. (SP-1.0) "Conceptual Site Plan,"dated February 9, 2015 (Scale: 1"=60') (24"06" size); and c. (SP-2.0) "Conceptual Grading& Utility Plan"'dated February 9, 2015 (Scale: 1"=60') (24"x36" size). 2. Renderings and Floor Plans prepared by Bill McGuinness, architect, entitled as follows: a. "Proposed Detached Homes - Reckson Phase III Site—Sun Homes" (Norwood Unit) showing: i. "Rear" and"Front;" and ii. Floor Plans of Detached Homes of approximately 3,300 sq. ft. (25 Norwood Units of 100 homes); and b. "Proposed Attached End Homes—Reckson Phase III Site— Sun Homes" (Chester Unit) showing: i. "Rear" and "Front;"and ii. Floor Plans of attached end homes of approximately 2,800 sq. ft. (50 Chester Units of 100 homes); and c. "Proposed Attached Interior Homes—Reckson Phase III Site—Sun Homes" (Avon Unit) showing: i. "Rear" and"Front;"and ii. Floor Plans of approximately 2,350 sq. ft. (25 Avon Units of 100 homes); and d. "Proposed Affordable Homes—Reckson Phase III Site—Sun Homes" showing: i. "Front Elevations"and"Rear Elevations;" and ii. "Main Floor Plan"and"Upper Floor Plan" detailing the layout of the 10 Townhouse Units of approximately 1,400 sq. ft. 3. Survey prepared by Joseph R. Link entitled, "ALTA/ASCM Land Title Survey of Property situate in the Village of Rye Brook, Town of Rye and the Town of Harrison, Westchester County,New York,"dated March 23, 2002, last revised January 21, 2015. 4. A Full Environmental Assessment Form, including a supplemental Traffic Impact Study and Report regarding Potential School Children Generation, all in compliance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder at 6 N.Y.C.R.R. Part 617 (collectively "SEQRA"), including the following supplemental reports: a. "Traffic Impact Study for Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park,Rye Brook, Westchester County,New York," dated January 14, 2015,prepared by Maser Consulting P.A.; and b. A Report prepared by Divney Tung Schwalbe, LLP entitled"School Aged Children, Sun Homes, Rye Brook." C&F:2640298.8 CUDDY& FEDER"r February 10, 2015 Page 7 5. Notarized Authorization of Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P., as owner of the Premises, authorizing Applicant's submission and processing of this Petition and Application. 6. Checks payable to the "Village of Rye Brook"for the following:3 a. PUD Application and Site Plan Fee of$17,825 ($575/acre @ 31 acres); and b. An Escrow Deposit of$5,000. COMPLIANCE WITH PUD PURPOSES The Zoning Ordinance recognizes that this Residential Community is subject to the approval of the Village Board in accordance with Section 250-7.E.thereof governing PUD Developments. For your convenience,the relevant provisions of the Zoning Ordinance applicable to this use are set forth below with information indicating this Application's compliance therewith: Section 250-7.E.(1): (a) To provide, where appropriate a mixture of single family residences, senior living facilities, excluding nursing homes, townhouses, apartments and limited commercial, retail and institutional uses,pus related accessory uses. For purposes of this§250-7E, a nursing home shall have the same definition as "nursing home" as set forth in Title 10, New York Codes, Rules and Regulations, Section 700.2. The proposed Residential Community will be situated on an approximately 31.56 acre parcel of land, which in size and character is both compatible and in harmony with Doral Greens at Arrowwood, the Arrowwood Conference Center,BelleFair and the Reckson Executive Park. The site for the new Residential Community is westerly of the existing office buildings and at a lower elevation than the nearest residential buildings. The area around the new Residential Community will be suitably landscaped. (b) To provide flexibility of design by coordinating site plan, subdivision and zoning review and other government regulations and review procedures. The new Residential Community has been designed to fit within the area previously designated for development of the 280,000 square foot office building and 1,120 space parking lot,while substantially reducing the impervious coverage of the Premises. The lower-scale of the residential units will permit landscaping s While Applicant is submitting checks in payment for the requisite Application fees,it is understood that,subject to authorization from Reckson,these Application fees instead will be deducted from the credit account that the Village is holding for the benefit of Reckson in connection with a Real Estate Tax Refund,and in such event,the amount of the enclosed checks would be refunded by the Village to the Applicant. In addition,though not included in the summary of requisite fees presented herein,we respectfully submit that any other fees,n¢luding the Consultant Review(Environmental)fee should also be drawn from the abovereferenced credit account. C&F:2640298.8 CUDDY. FEDER"r February 10, 2015 Page 8 within the site and around its perimeter, including a walking/jogging path for enjoyment of the residents. The stormwater management basins required for the larger office development will be completed and utilized as additional buffer areas benefiting the new residents. (c) To conserve natural resources and to preserve open space. The conversion of the use of the Premises from office to residential will allow for more landscaping and open space than feasible previously. As noted,the homes will have private areas accessible to them and the community will enjoy the surrounding natural landscape and new planting areas to be created as part of the development. (d) To provide benefits to the community over and above that which the underlying zoning district provides for, such as but not limited to increased recreational opportunities and reduced traffic impact. The compatibility of a new residential community between Belle Fair and Doral Greens is inarguable and beneficial to the community, including a reduction in the traffic impact compared to a 280,000 square foot office building, as detailed in the accompanying Traffic Impact Study. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth herein,we respectfully request that this Board initiate the formal review of this Petition and Application by forwarding it to the Planning Board for its consideration and report, as well as being forwarded to the Westchester County Planning Board and to both the Town/Village of Harrison and the Town of Greenwich, Connecticut for their review and comment. We also request that a Public Hearing be scheduled on this Application at your earliest convenience. We look forward to appearing before this Board to address any questions and thank you for your consideration herein. Resr�U � Wil WSN:yp Enclosures cc: Edward Beane, Esq.; Mr. Christopher Bradbury, Village Manager; Messrs. Robert Dale, Bill McGuinness and Rudolf Hutter; Mr. John Barnes; Messrs. Gerhard M. Schwalbe and Matthew Steinberg; Dr. John Collins; Mr. Ronald P. Rieman; and Ms. Norma Drummond C&F:2640298.8 CUDDY& FEDER"r February 10, 2015 EXHIBIT A SUN HOMES RYE BROOK,NEW YORK ZONING COMPLIANCE TABLE SECTION"' ZONING REQUIREMENTS PUD PROPOSED 250-7E(2) (b) h1inimum Area 30 acres 31.5 acres (c) Location Frontage 150 it <150 It t� (d) Residential Use 111 Maximum Density 9.000 st f acre >9,000 st i acre(3) 6 units I acre 3.6 units 1 acre Maximum Height 30 it <_30 ft (e) Buffer Areas Ill [a] Along property line abutting 150 a -- existing road [b] Along property line abutting any 100 it(Perimeter) district 100 R <100 R(Internal Campus)tot (f) Open Space [1] Private Common Space — Provided [1] Public Space 10%torr fee 1n Fee in Lieu 260-6G[3] Ott Street Parking Spaces Per Dwelling Unit(DU) 2 2 Garage Spaces per Unit 2 Spaces I Affordable Unit Plus One Parking Space per DU 1 50 Spaces In Common Pius 200 Spaces in Driveways {� Chapter 250(Zoning)of the Village of Rye Brook(October 2001). m This requirement waived when the overall office park was subdivided in June 17,1986 by the Village Board of Rye Brook m Applicant requesting Village Board to amend the Zoning Ordinance to permit Village Board to waive the 9.000 square foot requirement if and when Affordable Housing is provided in an amount equivalent to,or greater than ten(109k)of the market-rate units. (4)Applicant requesting Village Board to amend the 100-foot buffer setback otherwise required under the regulations,which buffer needs to be reduced internal to the Office Campus property fine for better design and function for the residential development. 'The Village Board of the Village of Rye Brook adopted a Resolution on June 17, 1986,which among other things, stated: . . .the Board of Trustees hereby waives the requirement that all lots have frontage on and direct access to King Street,subject to a deed restriction or other covenant satisfactory to the Village Attorney assuring that the uses and occupants of all lots in the Resubdivision will be provided with right of access between,in and from King Street and each individual lot with the right to travel over adjacent lots as necessary and as indicated on previously approved site plans." The Village of Rye Brook's Code sets forth the affordable housing requirements at§219-27.1 entitled,"Required affordable housing component' A.AFFH Units,as defined in§250-26.1D,shall be provided as set forth in the table below when a subdivision of a minimum of 11 lots is proposed. C&F:2640298 8 CUDDY& FEDER"r February 10,2015 Page 10 Number of Proposed Lots Required AFFH Units 11 to 20 1 21 to 30 2 31 to 40 3 41 to 50 4 Continuing in like increments 1 additional AFFH Unit shall be required for each additional increment of 10 lots or part thereof B.The requirement to provide AFFH Units,as set forth above,shall not apply to the following: (1)Subdivision applications submitted prior to the effective date of this provision. (2)Subdivisions approved prior to the effective date of this provision,including any amendments to an approved subdivision,whether such amendments are submittedprior to or after the effective date of this provision. (3)Subdivisions proposed in the following districts: OB-1,OB-2,OB-3,OB-S, C1-P,C-1 and H1. C.The requirements set forth at§250-26.1F(3)(d)through and including 250-26.1M shall apply to any subdivision with AFFH Units. Section 250-7.E. Special supplementary Regulations (e)Buffer areas. [1]There shall be required a buffer area around the perimeter of the site totaling no less than 25%of the total site.The buffer requirements may be increased or decreased by a maximum of 20%of the computed buffer area by the Village Board after the recommendation of the Planning Board,based upon health, welfare and aesthetic considerations.The following shall be minimum standards for buffer areas on the perimeter of the PUD site: [a]No less than 150 feet along the property line abutting any existing road. [b]No less than 100 feet along the property line abutting any district. [c]For projects incorporating senior living facilities,no less than 50 feet along the property line abutting any office development or industrial development,including airport facilities,provided that there is adequate landscaping as determined by the Village Board. [Added 9- 23-1997 by L.L.No.6-1997] [d]Provided that adequate landscaping and other appropriate mitigation measures are provided which, at the sole discretion of the Village Board,satisfactorily mitigate potential visual impacts while preserving the character of the surrounding area,the Village Board shall have the authority to reduce the buffer in specific areas. [Added 9-23-1997 by L.L.No.6-1997] [2] Such buffer areas shall remain in common ownership and shall not be disturbed,except for permanent entrances/exits utilizing minimum buffer space, C&F:2640298 8 CUDDYE. FEDER"' February 10, 2015 Page 11 signage,passive recreation,landscaping,roads and for the provision of utilities. Parking within buffer areas shall be permitted subject to provision of adequate screening and provided that such parking is bcated at least 100 feet from the perimeter property line of the PUD site.Notwithstanding the foregoing,parking located within a buffer area may be owned privately and need not be in common ownership,and the lot on which such parking is located may extaid into the buffer area up to a maximum of 50 feet.To the extent that parking is located within a buffer area,such use of the buffer area shall be limited to a buffer area abutting an existing road and shall not exceed 15%of the overall length of such buffer area. [Amended 9-23-1997 by L.L.No.6-1997] C&F:2640298.8 000005 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING HELD ON JUNE 17th, 1986 AT THE VILLAGE OFFICE•AT 8P.M. Present: Mayor Kabcenell, Trustees Nardi, Cresenzi, Zak Attorney Kramer, Treasurer Cortese, Clerk Smith. Absent: Trustee Meiskin Minutes of'the meetings held May 27th and June loth were accepted as submitted. 'COMMUNICATION FROM RECREATION. Tom Hroncich reported that we will be having our Birthday Run and celebration• on June 21st. General Foods is our large sponsor and contributes. $8,795 for the Run plus many other giveaways, the Hilton provides several large birthday cakes, and Arrowwood will be providing us with barbecued cold chicken for over 1200 people and London & Leeds has given $2500.00 for the celebration. PUBLIC HEARING — Subdivision Application of Phase II; Royal Executive Park into two parcels to be known as Royal Executive Park I1(18.2 acres) and Royal Executive Park III (31 acres). Mayor Kabcenell read extracts from a Letter from the Rye Brook Assessor stating that the property had been separated into two parcels for tax purposes as a courtesy, however that is not final until the Board takes the action to subdivide the property. This tax split made no difference in taxes while the land was still undeveloped. Our Consultants, Frederick P. Clarke Associates recommend approval of the subdivision. Recreation fees requirements have been fulfilled at the time of the original subdivision approval.. The jogging and fitness course which is half completed should be completed and will be open to the public as agreed. WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook has reviewed a proposed subdivision plat accompanying a subdivision application dated 4/22/86 signed by Joel H. Sachs Esq., and WHEREAS, said proposed subdivision is shown on a drawing or plat entitled "Resubdivision Plan of Royal Executive Park in the Village of Rye Brook and the Towns of Rye, New York, Harrison, New York, Greenwich, Connecticut", Sheet 1 of 2, and WHEREAS, a portion of said subdivision is also shown on an accompanying map entitled "Easement Plan for Resubdivision Plan of Royal Executive Park in the Village of Rye Brook and the Towns of Rye, New York, Harrison, New York, Greenwich, Connecticut", scale 1" = 40', and WHEREAS, the above maps are further identified as Sheets i and 2 of property designated in the Westchester County map files as Block #7437, Sheets # 87 and 88, prepared by Edward J. Crothers, N.Y.L.S. #41474, in the offices of J.A. Kirby Company, Civil Engineers and Surveyors, Port Chester, New York, and 000001 3. The conditions and stipulations set forth in the Royal Executive Park Phase 1B Resolution of Site Plan Approval adopted on or about 10/22/84, shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be abrogated or diminished in force and effect by the terms and conditions of this resolution of resubdivision approval. 4. Pursuant to Section 1..5 of the Land Subdivision Regulations, because of the special circumstances of this particular rezoning request, extraordinary hardship would result from the strict compliance of the applicant with Section 5.1.4. — Frontage on Improved Streets, the Board of Trustees hereby waives the require— ment that all. lots have frontage on and direct access to King Street subject to a deed restriction or other covenant satisfactory to the Village Attorney assuring that the uses and occupants of all. Lots in the resubdivision will be provided with right of access between, to and from King Street and each individual lot with the right to travel over adjacent lots as necessary and as indicated on previously approved site plans. 5. The requirement that jogging and fitness trails be maintained by the owner in good condition, for public use. 6. Four complete sets of final prints bearing the signature of the owner and applicant: and the Village Mayor shall be presented to the Village Clerk and receipt received from the Clerk for same prior to the issuance of any further site plan review or approval or building permits for further development of the proposed lots. 7. The approved linen copy of the resubdivision plat shall be filed with the County Clerk by the applicant. A certified copy of same shall be presented to the Village Clerk for filing. Trustee Nardi voting AYE Trustee Cresenzi voting AYE Trustee 'Zak voting AYE Mayor Kabcenell voting AYE Trustee Me:iskin ABSENT Mayor Kabcenell asked that Recreation Superintendent Tom Hroncich put an item in the next newsletter about the jogging and fitness course. In response to a question from Resident Ken Heller regarding responsibility for liability in case of accidents on the jogging and fitness course, Mayor Kabcenell suggested that belonged to the owner, — Attorney Joel Sachs thought that possibly the Village could be named as an additional "Insured" in their policy. The Mayor asked that Mr. Sachs work it out with the Village Attorney. MOBIL OILCORPORATION — RIDGE/BOWMAN RECONSTRUCTION APPLICATION. Mayor Kabcenell said that a proposal to redesign the gas station has been submitted. George Morrow reported that the proposal. is being reviewed by the Building Department, and suggested it be reviewed by the Attorney, and then sent to the Planning Board for recommendations and report. Completed site plans are not yet ready, but they wanted to get the process started. Mayor Kabcenell suggested that the Architectural Board of: Review make recommendations. Trustee Nardi commented that there seemed to be plans to carry sodas and other items in a walk—in cooler, and was concerned with the size of it. Trustee Cresenzi questioned the rear yard setback of 5 feet which was proposed. RECSSON OPERATING PARTNERSHIP,L.P. 420 LEXINGTON AVEI\7UE NEw Yoxx,NY 10170 February 10,2015 BY EMAIL: wnullAcuddyfeder.com William S.Null,Esq. Cuddy&Feder LLP 445 Hamilton Avenue, 10 Floor White Plains,New York 10601 RE: Premises: Reckson Executive Park,Phase III Authorization of Sun Homes to File Petition/Application to: (a)Amend Zoning Ordinance:and(b)Map the Premises in the PUD District Dear Mr.Null, We are the owner of premises known as Phase III of the Reckson Executive Park,Rye Brook, New York(the"Premises"),which Premises consists of about approximately 31.56 acres of land in the Reckson Executive Park("REP"), which REP totals approximately 79.5 acres. This letter confirms that you are authorized to submit and process the Application detailed in your letter dated February 10,2015 addressed to Hon. Paul S.Rosen,Mayor,and Members of the Board of Trustees of the Village of Rye Brook(the"Application Letter"). Further,you are authorized to seek Site Plan Approval for the development of the Premises for residential purposes,as described in such Application Letter. This letter is being delivered to you with the understanding that it will be submitted to the Village of Rye Brook,among other governmental entities,when any Applications are filed. Nevertheless,Reckson Operating Partnership LLC reserves the right to withdraw this Authorization at any time and to direct you to withdraw any applications filed pursuant thereto. Very truly yours, RECKON O RA G PARTNERSHIP,L.P. Byt Its: Cc:Mr.Robert Dale; and Mr.Bill McGuiness Sworn to before me this 10th day of February 2015 !A1,111- [Al NotaryPV Publ' In Quem()oM `rOwAug.ft g C&T.2671313.2 s, ell 40 U H ME W Al SAN Alf / e � Y Nr" v - :- . FRONT PROPOSED DETACHED HOMES RECKS tt ti --�� _��-�Ittl�til ►�'lllllllll �1i��-' � III 111111�I+I �i�ill a_�I 1�; 11 11 li •1 it •i �~ � I I 1111 I I � II Ir .n Ilill�l�i� Ids IOhl�Ni�i�; ��11�11�11 11��11 •�_ ulil YYIn�gIIIpIui�ij ij�� V 1 I u 1 1 I I I 1 II SII Illh Il�I1 .-. � •. ^`II^_if f i If a.l ��"��'�� •��.,� a �Ih�li 1j�1 iP r 1111 111 �I'► I I- -'� ". lily I �i�ll 111 1�1� '�'� ' ■' �... �'�"'__ - ,1 � -�_�1111 �,� �I� '�lli :1 ` ti.;`•' �.�!; !.jrir;' 111 I p • HOMES PATIO KITCHEN FAMILY FRM MASTER RM BEDROOM DINING ¢R RM iY DOUBLE BEDROOM BEDROOM GARAGE DEN PROPOSED DETACHED HOMES (3300 sq. ft.; 25 of 100) RECKSON PHASE III SITE - SUN HOMES ' = = FRONT REAR °`a► -ate jar; PROPOSED ATTACHED END HOMES RECKSON PHASE III SITE - SUN HOMES L/I Eli MASTER BEDROOM '- BEDROOM — HEARTH Rm _ LOFT ' DINING _ ROOM n DOUBLE GARAGE _- - —— — BEDROOM DEN PROPOSED ATTACHED END HOMES (2800 sq. ft.; SO of 100) RECKSON PHASE III SITE - SUN HOMES FRONT REAR PROPOSED ATTACHED INTERIOR HOMES RECKSON PHASE III SITE - SUN HOMES PATIO DINING RM MASTER BEDROOM LIVING RM KITCHEN HOME LAUNDRY OFFICE ir DOUBLE GARAGE BEDROOM BEDROOM ENTRY PROPOSED ATTACHED INTERIOR HOMES (2350 sq. ft.; 25 of 100) RECKSON PHASE III SITE - SUN HOMES FRONT ELEVATIONS r - r REAR ELEVATIONS )XI \ PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOMES RECKSON PHASE III SITE - SUN HOMES rt -f PATIO - k MAIN - A d UPPER FLOOR FLOOR PLAN DININGIN } MASTER PLAN BEDROOM KITCHEN W/D n M LIVING BEDROOM BEDROOM ENTRY s r 20'-0" PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOMES (10 UNITS @ 1400 SQ FT) RECKSON PHASE III SITE - SUN HOMES Full Environmental Assessment Form Part 1 -Project and Setting Instructions for Completing Part 1 Part 1 is to be completed by the applicant or project sponsor. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding, are subject to public review,and may be subject to further verification. Complete Part 1 based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item,please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information;indicate whether missing information does not exist, or is not reasonably available to the sponsor;and,when possible,generally describe work or studies which would be necessary to update or fully develop that information. Applicants/sponsors must complete all items in Sections A&B. In Sections C,D&E,most items contain an initial question that must be answered either"Yes"or"No". If the answer to the initial question is"Yes", complete the sub-questions that follow. If the answer to the initial question is"No",proceed to the next question. Section F allows the project sponsor to identify and attach any additional information. Section G requires the name and signature of the project sponsor to verify that the information contained in Part lis accurate and complete. A.Project and Sponsor Information. Name of Action or Project: Sun Homes Rye Brook(Phase 3 of Reckson Executive Park) Project Location(describe, and attach a general location map): 1100 King Street, Rye Brook, NY(Section 129.25, Block 1,Lot 1) Brief Description of Proposed Action(include purpose or need): Application for text amendments to Section 250-7.E.(3)of the Zoning Ordinance,to map Project Site in the Planned Unit Development District(PUD),and to develop one hundred ten(110)dwellings of which ten(10)dwellings would qualify as Affordable Housing that affirmatively furthers fair housing (AFFH) on a 31.56 acre parcel(Phase 3)of the Reckson Executive Park. The Project Site(Phase 3 parcel)has been previously approved for construction of a 280,000 square foot office building with 1,120 parking spaces. The development and construction of the Phase 3 improvements have not proceeded. Name of Applicant/Sponsor: Telephone:845-855-9400 Sun Homes,William McGuinness E-Mail: bmcguinness@sunhomes.com Address:3 Memorial Avenue City/PO:Pawling State: NY Zip Code:12564 Project Contact(if not same as sponsor;give name and title/role): Telephone: same as applicant E-Mail: Address: City/PO: State: Zip Code: Property Owner (if not same as sponsor): Telephone: 914-750-7200 Reckson Operating Partnership, L.P. E-Mail: Address: 360 Hamilton Avenue City/PO: White Plains State: NY Zip Code:10601 Page 1 of 13 B.Government Approvals B. Government Approvals,Funding,or Sponsorship. ("Funding"includes grants, loans,tax relief,and any other forms of financial assistance.) Government Entity If Yes:Identify Agency and Approval(s) Application Date Required (Actual or projected) a. , ®YeS❑No Amend Zoning Ordinance; Re-Mapping Premises or Village Board of Trustees b. Gity,Tawtte Village ®Yes❑No Review and recommendations Planning Board or Commission c. City Council,Town or ❑Yes®No Village Zoning Board of Appeals d. Other local agencies ®Yes❑No Building Department-Building Permits e. County agencies ®Yes❑No Backflow prevention f.Regional agencies ❑Yes®No g. State agencies ®Yes❑No NYSDEC-SPDES Permit h.Federal agencies ❑Yes®No i. Coastal Resources. i. Is the project site within a Coastal Area,or the waterfront area of a Designated Inland Waterway? ❑Yes®No ii. Is the project site located in a community with an approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program? ❑Yes®No X. Is the project site within a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area? ❑Yes®No C.Planning and Zoning C.I.Planning and zoning actions. Will administrative or legislative adoption, or amendment of a plan,local law,ordinance,rule or regulation be the ❑Yes®No only approval(s)which must be granted to enable the proposed action to proceed'? • If Yes,complete sections C, F and G. • If No,proceed to question C.2 and complete all remaining sections and questions in Part 1 C.2.Adopted land use plans. a.Do any municipally-adopted (city,town,village or county)comprehensive land use plan(s)include the site ®Yes❑No where the proposed action would be located? If Yes,does the comprehensive plan include specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action ❑Yes®No would be located? b.Is the site of the proposed action within any local or regional special planning district(for example: Greenway ❑Yes®No Brownfield Opportunity Area(BOA); designated State or Federal heritage area; watershed management plan; or other?) If Yes,identify the plan(s): c. Is the proposed action located wholly or partially within an area listed in an adopted municipal open space plan, ❑Yes®No or an adopted municipal farmland protection plan? If Yes,identify the plan(s): Page 2 of 13 C.3. Zoning a. Is the site of the proposed action located in a municipality with an adopted zoning law or ordinance. ®Yes❑No If Yes,what is the zoning classification(s)including any applicable overlay district? OB-1 (Campus/Office Building) b. Is the use permitted or allowed by a special or conditional use permit? ®Yes❑No c. Is a zoning change requested as part of the proposed action? ®Yes❑No If Yes, i. What is the proposed new zoning for the site'? PUD-Planned Unity Development District CA.Existing community services. a.In what school district is the project site located?Blind Brook-Rye UFSD b.What police or other public protection forces serve the project site? Rye Brook c.Which fire protection and emergency medical services serve the project site? Port Chester Fire District d. What parks serve the project site? Harkness Park D.Project Details D.I.Proposed and Potential Development a. What is the general nature of the proposed action(e.g.,residential,industrial,commercial,recreational;if mixed,include all components)? Residential b. a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? 31.5 acres b.Total acreage to be physically disturbed? approx.27 acres c. Total acreage(project site and any contiguous properties)owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? 76.4 acres c. Is the proposed action an expansion of an existing project or use? ❑Yes®No i. If Yes,what is the approximate percentage of the proposed expansion and identify the units(e.g.,acres,miles,housing units, square feet)? % Units: d.is the proposed action a subdivision,or does it include a subdivision? ❑Yes®No If Yes, i. Purpose or type of subdivision?(e.g.,residential,industrial,commercial; if mixed, specify types) ii. Is a cluster/conservation layout proposed? ❑Yes®IVo iii. Number of lots proposed? iv. Minimum and maximum proposed lot sizes? Minimum Maximum e. Will proposed action be constructed in multiple phases? ❑Yes®No i. If No,anticipated period of construction: 48-60 months ii. If Yes: • Total number of phases anticipated • Anticipated commencement date of phase l (including demolition) month year • Anticipated completion date of final phase month year • Generally describe connections or relationships among phases,including any contingencies where progress of one phase may determine timing or duration of future phases: Page 3 of 13 f.Does the project include new residential uses? ®Yes❑No If Yes, show numbers of units proposed. One Family Two Family Three Family Multiple Familyf( our or more Initial Phase -- -- -- 110 At completion of all phases -- -- -- -- g.Does the proposed action include new non-residential construction(including expansions)? ®Yes❑No If Yes, Proposed residential clubhouse i. Total number of structures 1 ii. Dimensions(in feet)of largest proposed stricture: 30 height; 32 width; and 60 length iii. Approximate extent of building space to be heated or cooled: 2.500 square feet h.Does the proposed action include constriction or other activities that will result in the impoundment of any ®Yes❑No liquids,such as creation of a water supply,reservoir,pond,lake,waste lagoon or other storage? If Yes, i. Purpose of the impoundment:Completion of two stormwater basins and several rain gardens ii. If a water impoundment,the principal source of the water: ❑ Ground water©Surface water streams ❑Other specify: iii. If other than water,identify the type of impounded/contained liquids and their source. iv. Approximate size of the proposed impoundment. (ea)Volume: 0.479 million gallons; surface area: 0.41 acres v. Dimensions of the proposed dam or impounding structure: 5.5 height; loo length vi. Construction method/materials for the proposed dam or impounding structure(e.g.,earth fill,rock,wood,concrete): Impounding structures already exist of soil/earth fill. Work includes reshaping and planting. D.2. Project Operations a.Does the proposed action include any excavation,mining,or dredging,during construction,operations,or both? ❑Yes©No (Not including general site preparation,grading or installation of utilities or foundations where all excavated materials will remain onsite) If Yes: i.What is the purpose of the excavation or dredging? ii. How much material(including rock,earth, sediments,etc.)is proposed to be removed from the site? • Volume(specify tons or cubic yards): • Over what duration of time? iii. Describe nature and characteristics of materials to be excavated or dredged, and plans to use,manage or dispose of them. iv. Will there be onsite dewatering or processing of excavated materials? ❑Yes❑No If yes,describe. v. What is the total area to be dredged or excavated? acres vi. What is the maximum area to be worked at any one time? acres vii. What would be the maximum depth of excavation or dredging? feet viii. Will the excavation require blasting? ❑Yes❑No ix. Summarize site reclamation goals and plan: b.Would the proposed action cause or result in alteration of,increase or decrease in size of,or encroachment E]Yes❑No into any existing wetland,waterbody,shoreline,beach or adjacent area? If Yes: i. Identify the wetland or waterbody which would be affected(by name,water index number,wetland map number or geographic description):Work previously approved to encroach into wetland adjacent area necessary to complete the stormwater management systems. Approximately 26,066 SF will be altered to complete grading and planing. Permit issued as part of previously approved 280,000 SF office building. Page 4 of 13 ii. Describe how the proposed action would affect that waterbody or wetland,e.g. excavation,fill,placement of structures,or alteration of channels,banks and shorelines. Indicate extent of activities,alterations and additions in square feet or acres: No wetland work proposed. Work includes completion of two water quality stormwater basins and one stormwater detention basin originally constructed in the 1980s. iii. Will proposed action cause or result in disturbance to bottom sediments? ❑Yes®No If Yes,describe: iv. Will proposed action cause or result in the destruction or removal of aquatic vegetation? ❑Yes®No If Yes: • acres of aquatic vegetation proposed to be removed: • expected acreage of aquatic vegetation remaining after project completion: • purpose of proposed removal(e.g. beach clearing,invasive species control,boat access): • proposed method of plant removal: • if chemical/herbicide treatment will be used, specify product(s): v. Describe any proposed reclamation/mitigation following disturbance: The water quality and detention basin bottoms will be planted with both aquatic and semi-aquatic plants. c.Will the proposed action use,or create a new demand for water? ®Yes❑No If Yes: i. Total anticipated water usage/demand per day: approx.39,750 gallons/day ii. Will the proposed action obtain water from an existing public water supply? ®Yes❑No If Yes: • Name of district or service area: United Water Westchester • Does the existing public water supply have capacity to serve the proposal? ®Yes❑No • Is the project site in the existing district? ®Yes❑No • Is expansion of the district needed? ❑Yes®No • Do existing lines serve the project site? ®Yes❑No iii. Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to supply the project? ❑Yes ON If Yes: • Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: • Source(s)of supply for the district: iv. Is a new water supply district or service area proposed to be formed to serve the project site? ❑Yes®No If.Yes: • Applicant/sponsor for new district: • Date application submitted or anticipated: • Proposed source(s)of supply for new district: v. If a public water supply will not be used,describe plans to provide water supply for the project: vi.If water supply will be from wells(public or private),maximum pumping capacity: gallons/minute. d.Will the proposed action generate liquid wastes? ®Yes❑No If Yes: i. Total anticipated liquid waste generation per day: approx.36,150 gallons/day ii. Nature of liquid wastes to be generated(e.g., sanitary wastewater,industrial.;if combination,describe all components and approximate volumes or proportions of each): domestic sanitary wastewater iii. Will the proposed action use any existing public wastewater treatment facilities? ®Yes❑No If Yes: • Name of wastewater treatment plant to be used: Blind Brook Wastewater Treatment Plant • Name of district: • Does the existing wastewater treatment plant have capacity to serve the project? ®Yes❑No • Is the project site in the existing district? ®Yes❑No • Is expansion of the district needed? ❑Yes®No Page 5 of 13 • Do existing sewer lines serve the project site? ®Yes❑No • Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to serve the project? ❑Yes®No If Yes: • Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: iv. Will a new wastewater(sewage)treatment district be formed to serve the project site? ❑Yes®No If Yes: • Applicant/sponsor for new district: • Date application submitted or anticipated: • What is the receiving water for the wastewater discharge? V. If public facilities will not be used,describe plans to provide wastewater treatment for the project,including specifying proposed receiving water(name and classification if surface discharge,or describe subsurface disposal plans): vi. Describe any plans or designs to capture,recycle or reuse liquid waste: e.Will the proposed action disturb more than one acre and create stormwater runoff, either from new point Oyes❑No sources(i.e.ditches,pipes, swales,curbs,gutters or other concentrated flows of stormwater)or non-point source(i.e. sheet flow)during construction or post construction? If Yes: i. How much impervious surface will the project create in relation to total size of project parcel? 392,040 Square feet or 9 acres (impervious surface) 1,372,140 Square feet or 31.5 acres (parcel size) ii. Describe types of new point sources.No new point sources since stormwater basins already exist. New development will connect to existing basins. iii. Where will the stormwater runoff be directed(i.e. on-site stormwater management facility/structures,adjacent properties, groundwater,on-site surface water or off-site surface waters)? Surface water to be connected to existing stormwater quality basins and central detention basin. • If to surface waters,identify receiving water bodies or wetlands: Blind Brook • Will stormwater runoff flow to adjacent properties? ❑Yes®No iv. Does proposed plan minimize impervious surfaces,use pervious materials or collect and re-use stormwater? ®Yes❑No f. Does the proposed action include,or will it use on-site,one or more sources of air emissions,including fuel Eyes[-]NO combustion,waste incineration,or other processes or operations? If Yes,identify: i. Mobile sources during project operations(e.g.,heavy equipment,fleet or delivery vehicles) construction equipment ii. Stationary sources during construction(e.g.,power generation, structural heating,batch plant, crushers) Construction trailer to utilize natural gas or electric for heat and hot water. iii. Stationary sources during operations (e.g.,process emissions,large boilers,electric generation) Individual homes to utilize natural gas fired boilers for heat and hot water. g. Will any air emission sources named in D.2.f(above),require a NY State Air Registration,Air Facility Permit, ❑Yes®No or Federal Clean Air Act Title IV or Title V Permit? If Yes: i. Is the project site located in an Air quality non-attainment area? (Area routinely or periodically fails to meet ❑Yes❑No ambient air quality standards for all or some parts of the year) ii. In addition to emissions as calculated in the application,the project will generate: • Tons/year(short tons)of Carbon Dioxide(CO2) • Tons/year(short tons)of Nitrous Oxide(N2O) • Tons/year(short tons)of Perfluorocarbons(PFCs) • Tons/year(short tons)of Sulfur Hexafluoride(SF6) • Tons/year(short tons)of Carbon Dioxide equivalent of Hydroflourocarbons(HFCs) • Tons/year(short tons)of Hazardous Air Pollutants(HAPS) Page 6 of 13 h.Will the proposed action generate or emit methane(including,but not limited to, sewage treatment plants, ❑YesENo landfills,composting facilities)? If Yes: i. Estimate methane generation in tons/year(metric): ii. Describe any methane capture,control or elimination measures included in project design(e.g.,combustion to generate heat or electricity,flaring): i.Will the proposed action result in the release of air pollutants from open-air operations or processes, such as ❑YesiZNo quarry or landfill operations? If Yes: Describe operations and nature of emissions(e.g.,diesel exhaust,rock particulates/dust): Ji.Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels or generate substantial ❑YesRJNo new demand for transportation facilities or services? See Traffic Impact Study If Yes: i. When is the peak traffic expected(Check all that apply): ❑Morning ❑Evening ❑Weekend ❑Randomly between hours of to ii. For commercial activities only,projected number of semi-trailer truck trips/day: iii. Parking spaces: Existing Proposed Net increase/decrease iv. Does the proposed action include any shared use parking? ❑Yes❑No v. if the proposed action includes any modification of existing roads,creation of new roads or change in existing access,describe: vi. Are public/private transportation service(s)or facilities available within'/2 mile of the proposed site? ❑Yes❑No vii Will the proposed action include access to public transportation or accommodations for use of hybrid,electric ❑Yes❑No or other alternative fueled vehicles? viii.Will the proposed action include plans for pedestrian or bicycle accommodations for connections to existing ❑Yes❑No pedestrian or bicycle routes? k.Will the proposed action(for commercial or industrial projects only)generate new or additional demand N/A ❑Yes❑No for energy? If Yes: i. Estimate annual electricity demand during operation of the proposed action: ii. Anticipated sources/suppliers of electricity for the project(e.g.,on-site combustion,on-site renewable,via grid/local utility, or other): iii. Will the proposed action require a new, or an upgrade to,an existing substation? ❑Yes❑No 1.Hours of operation. Answer all items which apply.In accordance with Rye Brook Village Code Sec 158-4 i. During Construction:* ii. During Operations: • Monday-Friday: 8 am-6 pm • Monday-Friday: N/A • Saturday: 9 am-4 pm • Saturday: N/A • Sunday: none • Sunday: N/A • Holidays: none 0 Holidays: N/A Page 7 of 13 in. Will the proposed action produce noise that will exceed existing ambient noise levels during construction, 0 Yes❑No operation,or both? If yes: i. Provide details including sources,time of day and duration: Typical construction-related equipment,with duration limited to hours of operation in accordance with Village Code. ii. Will proposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a noise barrier or screen? ❑Yes 0No Describe: n.. Will the proposed action have outdoor lighting? 0 Yes❑No If yes: i. Describe source(s),location(s),height of fixture(s),direction/aim,and proximity to nearest occupied structures: Residential lighting fixtures. Lighting plan to be reviewed during site plan review process. ii. Will proposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a light barrier or screen'? ❑Yes 0No Describe: o. Does the proposed action have the potential to produce odors for more than one hour per day? ❑Yes 0No If Yes,describe possible sources,potential frequency and duration of odor emissions,and proximity to nearest occupied structures: p.Will the proposed action include any bulk storage of petroleum(combined capacity of over 1,100 gallons) ❑Yes 0No or chemical products 185 gallons in above ground storage or any amount in underground storage? If Yes: i. Product(s)to be stored ii. Volume(s) per unit time (e.g.,month,year) iii.'. Generally describe proposed storage facilities: q.Will the proposed action(commercial,industrial and recreational projects only)use pesticides(i.e.,herbicides, ❑Yes ❑No insecticides)during construction or operation? N/A If Yes: i. Describe proposed treatment(s): ii. Will the proposed action use Integrated Pest Management Practices? ❑ Yes ❑No r.Will the proposed action(commercial or industrial projects only)involve or require the management or disposal ❑ Yes [:]No of solid waste(excluding hazardous materials)? N/A If Yes: i. Describe any solid waste(s)to be generated during construction or operation of the facility: • Construction: tons per (unit of time) • Operation: tons per (unit of time) ii. Describe any proposals for on-site minimization,recycling or reuse of materials to avoid disposal as solid waste: • Construction: • Operation: iii. Proposed disposal methods/facilities for solid waste generated on-site: • Construction: • Operation: Page 8 of 13 s.Does the proposed action include construction or modification of a solid waste management facility? ❑Yes 0 No If Yes: i. Type of management or handling of waste proposed for the site(e.g.,recycling or transfer station,composting,landfill,or other disposal activities): ii. Anticipated rate of disposal/processing: • Tons/month,if transfer or other non-combustion/thermal treatment,or • Tons/hour,if combustion or thermal treatment iii. If landfill,anticipated site life: years t. Will proposed action at the site involve the commercial generation,treatment, storage,or disposal of hazardous ❑YesE]No waste? If Yes: i. Name(s)of all hazardous wastes or constituents to be generated,handled or managed at facility: ii. Generally describe processes or activities involving hazardous wastes or constituents: iii. Specify amount to be handled or generated tons/month iv. Describe any proposals for on-site minimization,recycling or reuse of hazardous constituents: v. Will any hazardous wastes be disposed at an existing offsite hazardous waste facility? ❑Yes❑No If Yes:provide name and location of facility: If No: describe proposed management of any hazardous wastes which will not be sent to a hazardous waste facility: E. Site and Setting of Proposed Action E.I.Land uses on and surrounding the project site a.Existing land uses. i. Check all uses that occur on,adjoining and near the project site. ❑ Urban ❑ Industrial 0 Commercial 0 Residential(suburban) ❑ Rural(non-farm) ❑ Forest ❑ Agriculture ❑ Aquatic 0 Other(specify):institutional; private recreation(golf course) ii. If mix of uses,generally describe: b.Land uses and covertypes on the project site. Land use or Current Acreage After Change Covertype Acreage Project Completion (Acres+/-) • Roads,buildings,and other paved or impervious 0•2 8.9 8.6 surfaces • Forested 10.2 4 (6.6) • Meadows,grasslands or brushlands(non- 14.6 0 (14.6) agricultural,including abandoned agricultural) • Agricultural (includes active orchards,field,greenhouse etc.) • Surface water features 0.5 0.5 0 (lakes,ponds,streams,rivers,etc.) • Wetlands(freshwater or tidal) -- -- -- • Non-vegetated(bare rock,earth or fill) • Other Describe:Landscape and Stormwater Basins 6 19 12.6 Page 9 of 13 c. Is the project site presently used by members of the community for public recreation? ❑Yes❑No i. If Yes: explain: d.Are there any facilities serving children,the elderly,people with disabilities(e.g.,schools,hospitals,licensed ®Yes❑No day care centers,or group homes)within 1500 feet of the project site? If Yes, i. Identify Facilities: Atria Rye Brook, 1200 King Street. Independent living facility. Located approximately 1,200 feet northeast of site. e. Does the project site contain an existing dam? ®Yes❑No If Yes: i. Dimensions of the dam and impoundment: • Dam height: 5.6 feet • Dam length: 660 feet • Surface area: 1.49 ac. (proposed)0.73 ac(existing) acres • Volume impounded: 16.98 (proposed)gallatts 0 acre-feet ii. Dam's existing hazard classification: iii. Provide date and summarize results of last inspection: Dam is not regulated since dam height is less than 6 feet. f.Has the project site ever been used as a municipal,commercial or industrial solid waste management facility, ❑YesONo or does the project site adjoin property which is now,or was at one time,used as a solid waste management facility? If Yes: i. Has the facility been formally closed? ❑Yes❑ No • If yes,cite sources/documentation: ii. Describe the location of the project site relative to the boundaries of the solid waste management facility: iii. Describe any development constraints due to the prior solid waste activities: g. Have hazardous wastes been generated,treated and/or disposed of at the site,or does the project site adjoin ❑YcsONo property which is now or was at one time used to commercially treat, store and/or dispose of hazardous waste? If Yes: i. Describe waste(s)handled and waste management activities,including approximate time when activities occurred: h. Potential contamination history. Has there been a reported spill at the proposed project site,or have any OYes❑ No remedial actions been conducted at or adjacent to the proposed site? If Yes: i. Is any portion of the site listed on the NYSDEC Spills Incidents database or Environmental Site OYes❑No Remediation database? Check all that apply: ® Yes—Spills Incidents database Provide DEC ID number(s): see attached list, none on project parcel ❑ Yes—Environmental Site Remediation database Provide DEC ID number(s): ❑ Neither database ii. If site has been subject of RCRA corrective activities,describe control measures: iii. Is the project within 2000 feet of any site in the NYSDEC Environmental Site Remediation database? ❑YesONo If yes,provide DEC ID number(s): iv. If yes to(i), (ii)or(iii)above,describe current status of site(s): See attached list Page 10 of 13 v. Is the project site subject to an institutional control limiting property uses? ❑YesONo • If yes,DEC site ID number: • Describe the type of institutional control(e.g.,deed restriction or easement): • Describe any use limitations: • Describe any engineering controls: • Will the project affect the institutional or engineering controls in place? ❑Yes❑No • Explain: E.2. Natural Resources On or Near Project Site a. What is the average depth to bedrock on the project site? >5 feet b.Are there bedrock outcroppings on the project site? ❑YesONo If Yes,what proportion of the site is comprised of bedrock outcroppings? % c.Predominant soil type(s)present on project site: Woodbridge loam(WdB,WdC) 52 % Paxton fine sandy loam(PnC) 21 % Ridgebury loam(RdB) 17 % d. What is the average depth to the water table on the project site? Average: 0-5 feet e. Drainage status of project site soils:0 Well Drained: 17%of site 0 Moderately Well Drained: 75%of site 0 Poorly Drained 8%of site f.Approximate proportion of proposed action site with slopes: 0 0-10%: 70 %of site 0 10-15%: 8 %of site 0 15%or greater: 22 %of site g.Are there any unique geologic features on the project site? ❑YesONo If Yes,describe: h. Surface water features. i. Does any portion of the project site contain wetlands or other waterbodies(including streams,rivers, OYes❑No ponds or lakes)? ii. Do any wetlands or other waterbodies adjoin the project site? OYes❑No If Yes to either i or ii,continue. If No, skip to E.2.i. iii. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies within or adjoining the project site regulated by any federal, OYes❑No state or local agency? iv. For each identified regulated wetland and waterbody on the project site,provide the following information: • Streams: Name 935-95 Classification C 0 Lakes or Ponds: Name Classification • Wetlands: Name Federal Waters, Federal Waters, Federal Waters,... Approximate Size NYS Wetland 18.6 ac • Wetland No. (if regulated by DEC) G-3 v. Are any of the above water bodies listed in the most recent compilation of NYS water quality-impaired OYes❑No waterbodies? If yes,name of impaired water body/bodies and basis for listing as impaired: Name-Pollutants-Uses:Blind Brook, Upper,and tribs-Silt/Sediment-Aquatic Life i.is the project site in a designated Floodway? OYes❑No j. Is the project site in the 100 year Floodplain? Oyes❑No k.Is the project site in the 500 year Floodplain? Oyes❑No 1. Is the project site located over,or immediately adjoining,a primary,principal or sole source aquifer? [-]Yes ONo If Yes: i.Name of aquifer: Page 11 of 13 in. Identify the predominant wildlife species that occupy or use the project site: n. Does the project site contain a designated significant natural community? ❑Yes®No If Yes: i. Describe the habitat/community(composition,function,and basis for designation): ii. Source(s)of description or evaluation: iii. Extent of community/habitat: • Currently: acres • Following completion of project as proposed: acres • Gain or loss(indicate+or-): acres o. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by the federal government or NYS as Yes❑No endangered or threatened,or does it contain any areas identified as habitat for an endangered or threatened species? The EAF Mapper identified a species that may be endangered or threatened within the site's vicinity. A request has been made to NYSDEC to determine the species,however no habitat has been previously identified for endangered or threatened species during previous environmental review of this Site. p. Does the project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by NYS as rare,or as a species of ❑Yes®No special concern? q. Is the project site or adjoining area currently used for hunting,trapping,fishing or shell fishing? ❑YesRjNo If yes,give a brief description of how the proposed action may affect that use: E.3. Designated Public Resources On or Near Project Site a. is the project site,or any portion of it, located in a designated agricultural district certified pursuant to ❑YesRJNo Agriculture and Markets Law,Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? If Yes, provide county plus district name/number: b.Are agricultural lands consisting of highly productive soils present'? ❑YesR]No i. If Yes: acreage(s)on project site? ii. Source(s)of soil rating(s): c. Does the project site contain all or part of,or is it substantially contiguous to,a registered National ❑Yes®No Natural Landmark? If Yes: i. Nature of the natural landmark: ❑Biological Community ❑ Geological Feature ii. Provide brief description of landmark,including values behind designation and approximate size/extent: d.is the project site located in or does it adjoin a state listed Critical Environmental Area? ©Yes❑No If Yes: i. CEA name: Airport 60 Ldn Noise Contour ii. Basis for designation: Exceptional or unique character iii. Designating agency and date: Date:1-31-90,Ag ency:Westchester County Page 12 of 13 e. Does the project site contain,or is it substantially contiguous to,a building,archaeological site,or district ❑YesO No which is listed on,or has been nominated by the NYS Board of Historic Preservation for inclusion on,the State or National Register of Historic Places? If Yes: i.Nature of historic/archaeological resource: El Archaeological Site ❑Historic Building or District ii. Name: iii. Brief description of attributes on which listing is based: f.Is the project site,or any portion of it, located in or adjacent to an area designated as sensitive for ❑Yes ONo archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office(SHPO)archaeological site inventory? g. Have additional archaeological or historic site(s)or resources been identified on the project site? ❑Yes ONo If Yes: i. Describe possible resource(s): ii. Basis for identification: h.Is the project site within fives miles of any officially designated and publicly accessible federal, state,or local ❑Yes ONo scenic or aesthetic resource? If Yes: i. Identify resource: ii. Nature of,or basis for,designation(e.g.,established highway overlook,state or local park, state historic trail or scenic byway, etc.): iii. Distance between project and resource: miles. i. is the project site located within a designated river corridor under the Wild, Scenic and Recreational Rivers ❑YesONo Program 6 NYCRR 666? If Yes: i. Identify the name of the river and its designation: ii. is the activity consistent with development restrictions contained in 6NYCRR Part 666? ❑Yes❑No F.Additional Information Attach any additional information which may be needed to clarify your project. If you have identified any adverse impacts which could be associated with your proposal,please describe those impacts plus any measures which you propose to avoid or minimize them. G. Verification I certify that the information provided is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/Sponsor Name Sun Homes Date Partner,Divney Tung Schwalbe, LLP Signature Title Planning and Engineering Consultant PRINT FORM Page 13 of 13 EAF Mapper Summary Report Thursday, January 15, 2015 8:19 AM Disclaimer: The EAF Mapper is a screening tool intended to assist + project sponsors and reviewing agencies in preparing an environmental assessment form(EAF).Not all questions asked in the EAF are 1 r . g• answered by the EAF Mapper.Additional information on any EAF r question can be obtained by consulting the EAF Workbooks. Although 4 .'� the EAF Mapper provides the most up-to-date digital data available to + ' DEC,you may also need to contact local or other data sources in order to obtain data not provided by the Mapper.Digital data is not a ,,.y substitute for agency determinations. f' _ �t�,�ry ManiFeal Mon"IhEr Ab VA TaFwnlo L L � �,Cancortl i t D elFait BLIft.)I 5atrY :,{� �oston Roy idonre {Grevelana #la oFd a F 4 " LF iM-5 { PrFtGhLIFQEYLHarri:burgrli Inter map, mbU ir.�:m arp., IRGAN. YYavhington,Es a an,METI,Esri china B.i.i [Coastal or Waterfront Area] No B.i.ii [Local Waterfront Revitalization Area] No C.2.b. [Special Planning District] Digital mapping data are not available or are incomplete. Refer to EAF Workbook. E.1.h [DEC Spills or Remediation Site - Digital mapping data are not available or are incomplete. Refer to EAF Potential Contamination History] Workbook. E.1.h.i [DEC Spills or Remediation Site- Digital mapping data are not available or are incomplete. Refer to EAF Listed] Workbook. E.1.h.i [DEC Spills or Remediation Site- Digital mapping data are not available or are incomplete. Refer to EAF Environmental Site Remediation Database] Workbook. E.1.h.iii [Within 2,000' of DEC Remediation No Site] E.2.g [Unique Geologic Features] No E.2.h.i [Surface Water Features] Yes E.2.h.ii [Surface Water Features] Yes E.2.h.iii [Surface Water Features] Yes- Digital mapping information on local and federal wetlands and waterbodies is known to be incomplete. Refer to EAF Workbook. E.2.h.iv [Surface Water Features- Stream 935-95 Name] E.2.h.iv [Surface Water Features- Stream C Classification] E.2.h.iv [Surface Water Features-Wetlands Federal Waters, NYS Wetland Name] E.2.h.iv [Surface Water Features-Wetlands NYS Wetland (in acres):18.6 Size] E.2.h.iv [Surface Water Features- DEC G-3 Wetlands Number] E.2.h.v [Impaired Water Bodies] Yes Full Environmental Assessment Form - EAF Mapper Summary Report l E.2.h.v [Impaired Water Bodies- Name and Name- Pollutants- Uses:Blind Brook, Upper, and tribs—Silt/Sediment— Basis for Listing] Aquatic Life E.2.i. [Floodway] Yes E.2.j. [100 Year Floodplain] Yes E.2.k. [500 Year Floodplain] Yes E.2.1. [Aquifers] No E.2.n. [Natural Communities] No E.2.o. [Endangered or Threatened Species] Yes E.2.p. [Rare Plants or Animals] No E.3.a. [Agricultural District] No E.3.c. [National Natural Landmark] No E.3.d [Critical Environmental Area] Yes E.3.d [Critical Environmental Area - Name] Airport 60 Ldn Noise Contour E.3.d.ii [Critical Environmental Area- Exceptional or unique character Reason] E.3.d.iii [Critical Environmental Area— Date Date:1-31-90, Agency:Westchester County and Agency] E.3.e. [National Register of Historic Places] Digital mapping data are not available or are incomplete. Refer to EAF Workbook. E.3.f. [Archeological Sites] No E.3.i. [Designated River Corridor] No Full Environmental Assessment Form - EAF Mapper Summary Report 2 Sun Homes Full Environmental Assessment Form Question E.l.h.i. NYSDEC Spill Incidents Database Search Spill Number Date Spill Reported Spill Name County Ci /Town Address Status 1 610148 12/6/2006 RECKSON /COMMERICAL BUIL WESTCHESTER RYE BROOK 1100 KING ST Closed 12/12/07 2 807179 9/25/2008 RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK BLDG 4 WESTCHESTER RYE BROOK 1100 KING ST Closed 01/07/09 3 1012529 3/16/2011 RECKSON WESTCHESTER RYE BROOK 1100 KING ST Closed 10/25/11 41 1112661 2/2/2012 VERIZON/MCI BUILDING WESTCHESTER RYE BROOK 1100 KING ST Closed 08/21/12 5 1112975 2/13/2012 RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK BLDG 1 WESTCHESTER RYE BROOK 1100 KING ST Closed 07/24/12 6 1114239 3/22/2012 BUILDING 1 WESTCHESTER RYE BROOK 1100 KING ST Closed 04/06/12 7 1200040 4/3/2012 VERIZON FACILTY WESTCHESTER RYE BROOK 1100 KING ST Closed 04/03/12 8 1305320 8/16/2013 IRECKSON OFFICE PARK IWESTCHESTER IRYE BROOK 11100 KING ST IClosed 09/19/13 9 1407528 10/21/2014 BLD 6 WESTCHESTER RYE BROOK 1100 KUNG ST Pendin Divney Tung Schwalbe, LLP J.Michael Divney, P.E.,AICP, LEED AP D I V N EY • TUNG • SC H WA L B E One North Broadway Andrew V.Tung,ASLA, Esq., LEED AP Intelligent Land Use White Plains, NY 10601 Gerhard M. Schwalbe, P.E. P: 914.428.0010 William J.Carey,Jr. F: 914.428.0017 Mark S. Gratz, P.E. www.divneytungschwalbe.com Lisa L. Baker,AICP,ASLA Maria A. Coplit, P.E. Donna M. Maiello,ASLA SCHOOL-ACED CHILDREN SUN HOMES RYE BROOK The following analysis provides the potential number of public school-aged children that could be generated by the proposed Sun Homes Rye Brook residential community. Rutgers University's Center for Urban Policy Research released a publication entitled"Residential Demographic Multipliers: Estimates of Occupants of New Housing" (New Brunswick,New Jersey, June 2006) ("Rutgers Study")' which included a report for the State of New York. The report provides multipliers for the total ntunber of people per dwelling unit by age, the total number of school-aged children (SAC), and the total number of public school-aged children (PSAC) for new housing units. Each of these multipliers is provided based upon the type of housing twit (e.g. detached single-family, attached single-family, multifamily), the number of bedrooms, and the value of the housing unit arrayed in thirds (top-third, middle-third, and lower-third of value). Table 1 presents the multipliers for PSAC for each proposed housing twit type and bedroom count in the proposed project. For each housing type, the multiplier for the appropriate value (Rutgers Study, Table 3--2). Based on this analysis, it is anticipated that the proposed residential community would generate approximately 39 public school-aged children. Table 1 - New York School-Age Children (Public School Only)' Multiplier for Type of Unit Number of Units School-Aged Total School- Children per Aged Children Unit 2-4 Units, 2 Bedroom Value of More than $132,000 6 0.36 2.2 2-4 Units, 3 Bedroom Value of More than $213,500 4 0.62 2.5 Single-Family Attached, 3 Bedroom Value of More than $269,500 75 0.28 21.0 Single-Family Detached, 3 Bedroom Value of More than $194,500 25 0.50 12.5 Total 110 -- 38.1 Total public school-aged children (rounded) -- -- 39.0 ' A copy of the Rutgers Study's New York multipliers tables are attached to this analysis. 2 Residential Demographic Multipliers. Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University. Table 3--1 New York, School Age Children in Public School (PSAC). June 2006. DIVNEY • TUNG • SCHWALBE Intelligent Land Use The Rutgers Study indicates that 73% of all school-aged children would be anticipated to be public school-aged children, as opposed to children enrolled in private schools. Based on the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey' the Blind Brook School District had a public school enrollment of 92% of total school-aged children. Table 2 presents the multipliers for all school-aged children (SAC) and provides an estimate of the public school-aged children after adjusting for the Blind Brook School District's ratio of public to private enrolled students (92%). Based on this analysis, it is anticipated that the proposed residential community would generate approximately 46 public school- aged children. Table 2 - School-Age Children (Adjusted Public School Children based on Blind Brook School District)4 Multiplier for Type of Unit Number of Units School-Aged Total School- Children per Aged Children Unit 2-4 Units, 2 Bedroom Value of More than $132,000 6 0.45 2.7 2-4 Units, 3 Bedroom Value of More than $213,500 4 0.83 3.3 Single-Family Attached, 3 Bedroom Value of More than $269,500 75 0.39 29.3 Single-Family Detached, 3 Bedroom Value of More than $269,500 25 0.58 14.5 Total (Public&Private) 110 -- 49.8 Total public school-aged children (Adjusted based on Blind Brook School District ratio) -- -- 46.0 Based on U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS) 2008-2012 the Blind Brook School District had approximately 2,298 occupied housing units'with an estimated 1,497 students 'U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS) 2008-2012 Blind Brook School District contained 1,440 school-aged children with 1,330 public school children. This equates to a public school enrollment for the Blind Brook School District of 92% of the total enrolled children. Comparatively, the Rutgers Center for Urban Policy Research indicates that 73%public school children are projected when compared to total school aged children (Table 2--1,Public and Private). ACS data obtained from National Centers for Education Statistics' School District Demographic System. http:Hnces.ed.gov/survevs/sdds/index.aspx. a Residential Demographic Multipliers. Center for Urban Poficy Research, Rutgers University. Table 2--1 New York, School Age Children (SAC). June 2006. ' Based on U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS) 2008-2012 the Blind Brook School District contained 2,298 occupied housing units. 2 DIVNEY • TUNG • SCHWALBE Intelligent Land Use enrolled for the 2014-2015 school year',which equates to approximately 0.65 students per occupied housing unit. Based on this ratio, it is conservatively estimated that the number of public school-aged children generated by the proposed community could be approximately 72. 'Blind Brook-Rye USFSD 2014-2015 K-12 enrollment was estimated at 1,497,per Adopted Budget 2014-2015. 3 Rutgers University, Center for Urban Policy Research Residential Demographic Multipliers Estimates of the Occupants of New Housing (Residents, School-Age Children, Public School-Age Children) by State, Housing Type, Housing Size, and Housing Price Prepared by: Robert W. Burchell, Ph.D. David Listokin, Ph.D. William Dolphin, M.A. Center for Urban Policy Research Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey New Brunswick, New Jersey June 2006 DESCRIPTION,DEFINITION,AND ORGANIZATION OF RESIDENTIAL DEMOGRAPHIC MULTIPLIERS The national, state, and District of Columbia residential demographic multipliers are derived from the 2000 U.S. Census 5-Percent Public Use Microdata Sample(PDMS). The demographic multipliers include the following data fields and organization: 1. Household Size(HS): Total persons per housing unit. 2. Age distribution of the household members organized into the following age categories: 0-4,5-13, 14-17, 18-24,25-44,45-64, 65-74,75+. 3. Total school-age children(SAC) or number of persons in the household of school age,defined as those 5 to 17 years old. (The SAC is the same as the combined number of household members in the 5-13 and 14-17 age categories.) 4. Total public school-age children(PSAC),or the SAC who attend public schools. 5. The SAC and PSAC by grade group organized as follows: kindergarten (K)–grade 2, grades 3-6, grades 7-9, grades 10-12, and grade 9 by itself. The above data permit the analyst to tabulate the SAC and PSAC by differing school levels(e.g.,K-6,7-12, and 9-12). The demographic fields shown above are differentiated by housing type, housing size, housing price, and housing tenure—four variables that have been found by Rutgers University to be associated with statistically significant differences in the HS, SAC, and PSAC.The multipliers are calculated for new housing,here defined as units enumerated in the 2000 census and built from 1990-2000. The housing or structure types include the following: single-family detached; single-family attached, sometimes referred to as townhouses or townhomes; larger (5-or-more-unit) multifamily buildings, such as garden apartments or stacked flats; smaller multifamily structures (2 to 4 units), such as a starter two-family home; and mobile homes. As the 2000 census, the source for the residential multipliers, does not have information on the stories in a housing structure (this was last available in the 1980 census), multiplier presentations cannot disaggregate multifamily housing into garden,mid-rise,and high-rise categories. Housing-unit size is measured by the number of bedrooms, and data are presented for housing units ranging from I to S bedrooms. There is an association between housing type and number of bedrooms, and the demographic multiplier tables present the common configurations for each housing type. For instance, demographic data are shown for 1- through 3-bedroom multifamily units and not for 4- to 5-bedroom units of this type because multifamily housing tends to be built with fewer rather than more bedrooms. The opposite is the case for single-family detached homes; in this instance, data are presented for 2- to 5-bedroom units as opposed to 1-bedroom units because detached housing is typically built with more rather than fewer bedrooms. Housing is additionally classified by tenure: ownership or rental. According to the census, "A housing unit is owner-occupied if the owner or co-owner lives in the unit even if it is mortgaged or not fully paid for. . . . All occupied housing units that are not owner- occupied,whether they are rented for cash rent or occupied without payment of cash rent,are classified as renter-occupied." There is a further differentiation of the demographic profiles by housing value or rent. The census definitions for"value" and"rent" are shown on the Definitions page;with regard to the latter,the current study indicates the"gross rent"(rent with utilities)rather than the"contract rent." Values and gross rents reported in the 2000 census are updated to 2005 using a residential price inflation index available from the Federal Housing Finance Board. A separate price index is applied for the nation, for each of the 50 states, and for the District of Columbia. The demographic profiles by 2005 housing values and gross rents are organized following a four-tiered classification: all value or rent housing, and then housing arrayed by terciles (thirds) of value or rent(units at the 1st 33rd percentile of value or rent; units at the 33rd through 66th percentile of value or rent; and units at the 67th-100th percentile of value or rent.) DEFINITIONS OF DATA CONTAINED IN THE U.S. CENSUS OF POPULATION AND HOUSING PUBLIC USE MICRODATA SAMPLE (PDMS) 2000 AND OTHER MULTIPLIER TERMS TERMS DEFINITION/COMMENT Bedrooms(BR) The number of rooms that would be listed as bedrooms if the house,apartment,or mobile home were listed on the market for sale or rent even if these rooms are currently used for other purposes. Housing Categories Single-family, detached This is a 1-unit structure detached from any other house;that is,with open (Structure Type) space on all four sides. Such structures are considered detached if they have an adjoining shed or garage. Single-family attached This is a 1-unit structure that has one or more walls extending from ground to roof separating it from adjoining structures. In row houses(sometimes called townhouses),double houses,or houses attached to nonresidential structures,each house is a separate,attached structure if the dividing or common wall goes from ground to roof. 2-4 units. These are units in structures containing 2,3,or 4 housing units. 5+units. These are units in structures containing 5 or more housing units. Mobile home. Both occupied and vacant mobile homes to which no permanent rooms have been added are counted in this category. Mobile homes used only for business purposes or for extra sleeping space,and mobile homes for sale on a dealer's lot,at the factory,or in storage,are not counted in the housing inventory. In 1990,the category was"mobile home or trailer." Household Size The total number of persons in a housing unit. Housing Tenure A housing unit is owner-occupied if the owner or co-owner lives in the unit even if it is mortgaged or (Ownership or not fully paid for. All occupied housing units that are not owner-occupied,whether they are rented for Rental) cash rent or occupied without payment of cash rent, are classified as renter-occupied. Housing Unit A housing unit may be a house, an apartment, a mobile home, a group of rooms, or a single room that is occupied(or if vacant, is intended for occupancy as separate living quarters). Housing Value Housing value is the census respondent's estimate of how much the property would sell for if it were (Rent) for sale.In the current study,the value of a rented unit in a 1-to 4-unit structure is estimated to be 100 times the monthly gross rent,and all such units are included with owner-occupied units in calculating the multipliers.The housing value and rents indicated by the 2000 census were updated to 2005 using a residential price inflation index (available from the Federal Housing Finance Board)for the nation,for each state, and for the District of Columbia. Housing value or rent is categorized into a four-tier classification: all value(or rent)housing,and then housing units arrayed by terciles(thirds)of value(or rent). Housing Rent Contract rent is the monthly rent agreed to or contracted for, regardless of any furnishings, utilities, (Contract Rent) fees,meals, or services that may be included. Housing Rent Gross rent is the contract rent plus the estimated average monthly cost of utilities (electric, gas, water (Gross Rent) and sewer) and fuels(oil, coal,kerosene,wood, and the like)if these are paid by the renter(or paid for the renter by someone else). In the current study, the monthly gross rents are indicated in the demographic table. InsufftcientSample This notation in a table means that fewer than 600 weighted observations were counted for a housing type/bedroom/value combination or for an entire housing type/bedroom combination. Public School-Age The school-age children attending public school. Children(PSAC) Residential Multipliers show the population associated with different housing categories as well as housing Demographic differentiated by housing value,housing size(bedrooms),and housing tenure. Multipliers School-Age The household members of elementary and secondary school age,defined here as those 5 through 17 Children(SAC) years of age. NEW YORK(2--1)ALL SCHOOL CHILDREN: SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN(SAC) GRADE STRUCTURE TYPE BEDROOMS/ TOTAL Gr. 9 VALUE(2005)/TENURE SAC K-2 3-6 7-9 10-12 Only Single-Family Detached,2 BR All Values 0.30 0.09 0.10 0.07 0.04 0.02 Less than$106,000 0.36 0.08 0.11 0.10 0.06 0.03 $106,000 to$164,500 0.28 0.08 0.10 0.06 0.03 0.03 Single-Family Detached,3 BR All Values 0.71 0.21 0.24 0.15 0.11 0.05 Less than$135,000 0.85 0.23 0.29 0.19 0.14 0.06 $135,000 to$194,500 0.71 0.22 0.24 0.14 0.11 0.05 More than$194,500 0.58 0.18 0.20 mg e- ami y Defache , HR All Values 1.16 0.32 0.41 0.25 0.18 0.07 Less than$224,500 1.29 0.30 0.45 0.29 0.25 0.10 $224,500 to$329,500 1.15 0.34 0.39 0.24 0.17 0.07 More than$329,500 1.05 0.31 0.38 0.23 0.14 0.06 Single-Family Detached,5 BR All Values 1.58 0.39 0.53 0.36 0.30 0.12 Less than$329,500 1.75 0.37 0.54 0.46 0.38 0.19 $329,500 to$748,500 1.51 0.38 0.52 0.33 0.29 0.09 More than$748,500 1.47 0.45 0.54 0.27 0.21 0.08 Single-Family Attached,2 BR All Values 0.22 0.08 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.02 Less than$135,000 0.25 0.09 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.02 $135,000 to$194,500 0.25 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.04 0.02 More than$194 500 0.14 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.02 Single-Family Attached,3 BR All Values 0.62 0.14 0.22 0.13 0.14 0.04 Less than$164,500 0.81 0.19 0.33 0.14 0.15 0.06 $164,500 to$269,500 0.64 0.13 0.21 0.14 0.16 0.03 More 2 0.39 0.09..0,11 Single-Family Attached,4 BR All Values 1.19 0.19 0.48 0.29 0.24 0.07 Less than$224,500 1.54 0.26 0.62 0.39 0.27 0.12 $224,500 to$329,500 1.12 0.09 0.45 0.31 0.27 0.07 More than$329,500 Insufficient Sample 5+Units-Own,1 BR All Values 0.18 0.06 0.08 0.02 0.02 0.00 Less than$164,500 0.21 0.06 0.08 0.06 0.00 0.00 $164,500 to$269,500 0.19 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.00 More than$269,500 0.14 0.02 0.08 0.00 0.04 0.00 5+Units-Own,2 BR All Values 0.15 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.02 Less than$135,000 0.09 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.01 0.00 $135,000 to$329,500 0.19 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.03 0.03 More than$329,500 0.14 0.00 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.00 5+Units-Own,3 BR All Values 0.59 0.13 0.11 0.16 0.19 0.06 Less than$224,500 Insufficient Sample $224,500 to$748,500 Insufficient Sample More than$748,500 Insufficient Sample NEW YORK(2--2)ALL SCHOOL CHILDREN: SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN(SAC) GRADE STRUCTURE TYPE BEDROOMS/ TOTAL Gr. 9 VALUE 2005/TENURE SAC K-2 3-6 7-9 10-12 Only 5+Units-Rent,1 BR All Values 0.16 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.01 Less than$500 0.10 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 $500 to$1,000 0.30 0.11 0.10 0.05 0.04 0.01 More than$1,000 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 5+Units-Rent,2 BR All Values 0.49 0.15 0.17 0.10 0.09 0.03 Less than$750 0.74 0.20 0.29 0,12 0.13 0.04 $750 to$1,100 0.51 0.16 0.15 0.11 0.09 0.03 More than$1,100 0.23 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.01 5+Units-Rent,3 BR All Values 1.36 0.30 0.48 0.31 0.27 0.12 Less than$750 1.59 0.27 0.63 0.38 0.32 0.15 $750 to$1,250 1.50 0.37 0.51 0.34 0.28 0.11 More than$1,250 1.00 0.25 0.31 0.21 0.23 0.10 2-4 Units,1 BR All Values 0.30 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.02 Less than$74,500 0.25 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.05 0.02 $74,500 to$110,000 0.30 0.10 0.09 0.04 0.07 0.02 More than$110,000 036 0.11 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.04 All Values 0.49 0.12 0.17 0.10 0.10 0.03 Less than$86,000 0.47 0.12 0.16 0.10 0.09 0.03 $86,000 to$132,000 0.55 0.14 0.21 0.11 0.09 0.03 More than 132 000 0.45 0.10 0.1 0.12 0.04 2-4 Units,3 BR All Values 1.04 0.25 0.37 0.21 0.20 0.07 Less than$113,500 1.16 0.28 0.42 0.25 0.20 0.11 $113,500 to$213,500 1.11 0.27 0.42 0.20 0.22 0.06 More than$213 500 0.83 0.21 0.27 0.17 0.04 Mobile,2 BR All Values 0.25 0.07 0.09 0.04 0.05 0.01 Less than$33,000 0.19 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.01 $33,000 to$54,000 0.26 0.07 0.12 0.03 0.04 0.01 More than$54,000 0.27 0.08 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.02 Mobile,3 BR All Values 0.70 0.17 0.23 0.16 0.13 0.06 Less than$45,000 0.72 0.20 0.23 0.15 0.14 0.06 $45,000 to$66,000 0.69 0.16 0.26 0.16 0.11 0.07 More than$66,000 0.68 0.16 0.21 0.16 0.15 0.06 Mobile,4 BR All Values 1.70 0.31 0.52 0.40 0.46 0.17 Less than$54,000 Insufficient Sample $54,000 to$78,000 1.60 0.31 0.48 0.32 0.49 0.15 More than$78,000 Insufficient Sample NEW YORK(3--1)ALL PUBLIC SCHOOL CHILDREN: SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN IN PUBLIC SCHOOL(PSAC) PUBLIC SCHOOL GRADE STRUCTURE TYPE BEDROOMS/ TOTAL Gr.9 VALUE(2005)/TENURE PSAC K-2 3-6 7-9 10-12 Only Single-Family Detached,2 BR All Values 0.27 0.07 0.09 0.07 0.04 0.02 Less than$106,000 0.32 0.08 0.10 0.09 0.06 0.03 $106,000 to$164,500 0.26 0.07 0.10 0.06 0.03 0.03 More than$164,500 0.21 0.07 0.07 0.05 0.02 0.02 Single-Family Detached,3 BR All Values 0.64 0.18 0.22 0.14 0.10 0.05 Less than$135,000 0.79 0.21 0.27 0.18 0.13 0.05 $135,000 to$194,500 0.63 0.18 0.22 0.13 0.10 0.05 More than$194,500 0.50 RP 0.1 Single-Family Detacher,4 BR All Values 1.00 0.25 0.36 0.23 0.17 0.07 Less than$224,500 1.15 0.25 0.41 0.27 0.23 0.09 $224,500 to$329,500 0.98 0.27 0.34 0.22 0.16 0.06 More than$329,500 0.87 0.24 0.32 0.19 0.11 0.05 Single-Family Detached,5 BR All Values 1.23 0.29 0.41 0.28 0.24 0.10 Less than$329,500 1.48 0.30 0.45 0.41 0.32 0.17 $329,500 to$748,500 1.14 0.26 0.40 0.24 0.23 0.08 More than$748,500 1.03 0.34 0.38 0.17 0.14 0.06 Single-Family Attached,2 BR All Values 0.17 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.03 0.01 Less than$135,000 0.23 0.08 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.02 $135,000 to$194,500 0.18 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.01 More than$194,500 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 Single-Family.Attached,3 BR All Values 0.52 0.11 0.19 0.11 0.11 0.03 Less than$164,500 0.69 0.15 0.28 0.12 0.13 0.05 $164,500 to$269,500 0.54 0.11 0.18 0.12 0.13 0.03 More than$269,500 0.28 0.06 0.10 Single-Family Attached,4 BR All Values 0.86 0.11 0.31 0.23 0.21 0.06 Less than$224,500 0.98 0.17 0.35 0.25 0.20 0.08 $224,500 to$329,500 0.92 0.06 0.32 0.27 0.27 0.07 More than$329,500 Insufficient Sample 5+Units-Own,1 BR All Values 0.15 0.05 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.00 Less than$164,500 0.18 0.06 0.08 0.04 0.00 0.00 $164,500 to$269,500 0.16 0.06 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.00 More than$269,500 0.10 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.04 0.00 5+Units-Own,2 BR All Values 0.09 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.01 Less than$135,000 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $135,000 to$329,500 0.15 0.05 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.02 More than$329,500 0.05 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 5+Units-Own,3 BR All Values 0.49 0.10 0.07 0.14 0.19 0.06 Less than$224,500 Insufficient Sample $224,500 to$748,500 Insufficient Sample More than$748,500 Insufficient Sample NEW YORK(3--2)ALL PUBLIC SCHOOL CHILDREN: SCHOOL-AGE CHILDREN IN PUBLIC SCHOOL(PSAC) PUBLIC SCHOOL GRADE STRUCTURE TYPE BEDROOMS/ TOTAL Cr. 9 VALUE 2005/TENURE PSAC K-2 3-6 7-9 10-12 Only 5+Units-Rent,1 BR All Values 0.15 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.02 0.01 Less than$500 0.09 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.01 $500 to$1,000 0.27 0.09 0.09 0.05 0.04 0.01 More than$1,000 0.07 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 5+Units-Rent,2 BR All Values 0.43 0.13 0.14 0.08 0.08 0.03 Less than$750 0.67 0.19 0.26 0.11 0.12 0.04 $750 to$1,100 0.45 0.14 0.13 0.09 0.08 0.03 More than$1,100 0.16 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.01 5+Units-Rent,3 BR All Values 1.07 0.23 0.37 0.25 0.23 0.09 Less than$750 1.27 0.22 0.47 0.30 0.29 0.10 $750 to$1,250 1.30 0.31 0.44 0.31 0.23 0.11 More than$1,250 0.63 0.14 0.20 0.12 0.17 0.06 2-4 Units,1 BR All Values 0.27 0.08 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.02 Less than$74,500 0.23 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.02 $74,500 to$110,000 0.28 0.09 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.02 More than$110,000 0.30 0,09 0.05 0.07 0.09 0.03 FAII s,2 BR es 0.43 0.10 0.14 0.10 0.09 0.03 an$86,000 0.44 0.11 0.15 0.09 0.09 0.03 0 to$132,000 0.48 0.10 0.18 0.11 0.09 0.03 han J132,000 0.36 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.1 0.0 s,3 HR es 0.83 0.17 0.29 0.19 0.18 0.06 an$113,500 1.02 0.20 0.37 0.25 0.19 0.11 00 to$213,500 0.86 0.18 0.32 0.16 0.19 0.04 than$213,500 0.62 0.12 0.18 0.15 0.03. Mobile,2 BR All Values 0.24 0.07 0.08 0.04 0.05 0.01 Less than$33,000 0.19 0.07 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.01 $33,000 to$54,000 0.25 0.07 0.11 0.03 0.04 0.01 More than$54,000 0.27 0.08 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.02 Mobile,3 BR All Values 0.69 0.17 0.23 0.16 0.13 0.06 Less than$45,000 0.71 0.20 0.23 0.15 0.14 0.05 $45,000 to$66,000 0.68 0.15 0.26 0.16 0.11 0.07 More than$66,000 0.67 0.15 0.21 0.15 0.15 0.06 Mobile,4 BR All Values 1.61 0.28 0.50 0.38 0.45 0.16 Less than$54,000 Insufficient Sample $54,000 to$78,000 1.56 0.31 0.46 0.29 0.49 0.13 More than$78,000 Insufficient Sample / �� ,K�...... SUN HOMES RYE BROOK i ° „• RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK gyp\ RYE BROOK,NY 29K HMO [1 C ' - Jw.BnoKint nvenuE.wmJot / � envnirrc,Nr t3ssK / •� ` PLANNER&CIVIL ENGINEER: DIVNEY•TLXJG•SCHWALBE /. mW11SM rand Use LEGAL COUNSEL: Cuddy&Feder,LLP mei 445 Hamikon Avenue,14th Floor White Plains,NY 10601 SURVEYOR: Link Land Surveyors,P.C. 27 Clark Place =1Zn No. Mahopat,NY 10541 Z INT un nY ---------------- ---------------------- -- -- Ix I CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN _ 4EOF NNk•� JEB/SBK •�GMS 1 r M ­A— IN 1 _ N 0 JO 60 m SP-1 .0 BC,1LEl 1" BO' i I, � ��r ►� PLANNER&CIVIL ENGINEER: a Op A-01 LEGAL COUNSEL: ►/+► �� ♦' _.vim♦�a' �� 445 Ham!ton Avenue,14th Floor Link Land Surveyors,P.C. 21 Clark Pl� ahopac,NY 10541 ,IS% St 19 i ll'ri`�i�► Cuddy&Feder,LLP White Piain�,NY 10601 4/�� , qw— CONCEPTUAL GRADING&UTILITY PLAN ° � i WE NEMEC LMN MPOR ON Ln +- V) +- v VSER l/1 M CONSULTING P. A. 4- v E I � 0 w Traffic Impact Study Sun Homes s At Reckson Executive Park Rye Brook, Westchester County, New York i Q Q January 14, 2015 U Prepared For Mr. William Null Cuddy & Feder LLP 445 Hamilton Avenue - 14th Floor White Plains, NY 10601 o Prepared By Maser Consulting P.A. > 11 Bradhurst Avenue Hawthorne, NY 10532 Ln 914.347.7500 I I � 4J John T. Colli s P .D., P.E„ Principal Associate License No. 46029 142 v Ronald P. Rieman, Assistant Project Manager 6, MC Project No. 14001622A www.maserconsulting.com Traffic Impact Study .4 4V, Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A M , P.A. Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. A. INTRODUCTION........................................................ ... ................................................1 B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION.......................................................................1 C. YEAR 2014 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES..................................................................... 1 D. YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES....................................................................2 E. YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES W/APPROVED OFFICE.................................3 F. YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES W/PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL.....................3 G. DESCRIPTION OF ANALYSIS PROCEDURES..................................................................4 H. RESULTS OF ANALYSIS................. ........................................................................5 I. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION......:.................................................................................8 APPENDICES APPENDIXA............................................................................................................................FIGURES APPENDIX B................................................................................................. .-TABLES .......................... APPENDIX C..................................................................................... LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS APPENDIX D ......................................................................CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY SHEETS APPENDIXE....................................................................................................................COUNT DATA Traffic Impact Study r Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A C , N , U, , , ry , F I Pagel of8 A. INTRODUCTION This Study was prepared to evaluate the potential traffic impacts of the proposed Sun Homes residential development proposed at Reckson Executive Park on the surrounding roadway network. The following sections provide a description of the proposed Project and the tasks undertaken in completing our evaluation. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION Sun Homes is proposing a 110 home (100 market rate homes and 10 affordable units) on property located at Reckson Executive Park in Rye Brook, New York. Access will be provided by the existing signalized driveway to the Reckson Executive Park (International Drive) as shown on Figure No. 1 in Appendix A of this Study. Phase I and II of Reckson Executive Park consists of 540,000 s.f. of existing office space of which 154,000 s.f. is currently vacant. (See Section D of this Study). The Proposed Residential development will replace the previously approved Reckson Executive Park Phase III office space (280,000 s.f.). This is further discussed in Section E of this Study. C. YEAR 2014 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES In order to identify current traffic conditions in the vicinity of the Site, turning movement traffic counts were conducted on Thursday, November 13, 2014 between the hours of 7:00 AM and 9:30 AM to determine the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and between the hours of 4:00 PM and 6:30 PM to determine the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour for the following intersections: • King Street (Route 120A) and Anderson Hill Road • King Street (Route 120A) and International Drive (Reckson Executive Park) Based upon a review of the traffic counts, the peak hours generally are: ■ Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour 7:30 AM—8:30 AM ■ Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour 5:00 PM—6:00 PM The resulting Year 2014 Existing Traffic Volumes are shown on Figures No. 2 and 3 for the Weekday Peak AM and Weekday Peak PM Highway Hours, respectively. Traffic Impact Study r Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A E I M t Y L T l X G R A. Page 2 of 8 D. YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES For the purpose of analysis, a Design Year of 2019 has been utilized in completing the traffic analysis. In order to account for normal background traffic growth in the area including traffic for the Brunswick School Expansion and Kingswood Residential Development, the Year 2014 Existing Traffic Volumes were increased by a total background growth rate of 10%. The resulting Year 2019 Projected Traffic Volumes are shown on Figures No. 4 and 5 for each of the Peak Hours, respectively. In addition, traffic for the unrented office space at Reckson Executive Park (154,000 s.f.) was included as part of the background traffic volume. The Hourly Trip Generation Rates (HTGR) and anticipated Site Generated Traffic Volumes are summarized below. ENTRY EXIT TOTAL UNRENTED HTGR Volume HTGR Volume HTGR Volume 154,000 s.f. Office Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour 1.37 211 0.19 29 1.56 240 Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour 0.25 39 1.24 191 1.49 230 Based on ITE Land Use 710-Office—ITE Trip Generation Manual,9 Edition,2012 In order to assign the unrented office space traffic volumes to the roadway network, it was necessary to establish an arrival/departure distribution. Based on a review of the existing traffic volumes on the surrounding roadway network and expected travel patterns, an arrival/departure distribution was established and is shown on Figure No. 6. The resulting unrented office space traffic volumes are shown on Figures No. 7 and 8 for each of the Peak Hours, respectively. These volumes were added the Year 2019 Projected Traffic Volumes to obtain the Year 2019 No-Build Traffic Volumes. The resulting Year 2019 No-Build Traffic Volumes are shown on Figures No. 9 and 10 for each of the Peak Hours, respectively. P, Traffic Impact Study r Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park IVIS E R MC Project No.: 14001622A CONSULTING P. A. Page 3 of 8 E. YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES W/APPROVED OFFICE As previously discussed, Reckson Executive Park has been approved for an additional 280,000 s.f. office building (R.E.P. Phase I11). The Hourly Trip Generation Rates and anticipated Site Generated Traffic Volumes are summarized below: ENTRY EXIT TOTAL APPROVED - OFFICE HTGR Volume HTGR Volume HTGR Volume 280,000 s.f. Office Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour 1.37 384 0.19 53 1.56 437 Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour 0.25 70 1.24 347 1.49 417 Based on ITE Land Use 710-Office—ITE Trip Generation Manual,9 Edition,2012 The Approved Site Generated Traffic Volumes for the 280,000 s.f. R.E.P. Phase III Office were assigned to the roadway network based on the arrival/departure distribution patterns shown on Figure No. 6. The resulting Approved Site Generated Traffic Volumes are shown on Figures No. 11 and 12 for each of the Peak Hours, respectively. These volumes were added to the Year 2019 No-Build Traffic Volumes to obtain the Year 2019 Build Traffic Volumes with the Approved 280,000 s.f. Office. The resulting Year 2019 Build Traffic Volumes with the Approved 280,000 s.f. Office are shown on Figures No. 13 and 14 for each of the Peak Hours, respectively. F. YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES W/PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL As previously discussed, the Proposed Residential development (110 homes) will replace the previously Approved Reckson Executive Park (R.E.P.) Phase III Office (280,000 s.f.). The Hourly Trip Generation Rates and anticipated Site Generated Traffic Volumes for the 110 homes are summarized below: ENTRY EXIT TOTAL PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL HTGR Volume HTGR Volume HTGR Volume 110 homes Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour 0.20 22 0.59 65 0.79 87 Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour 0.66 73 0.38 42 1.04 115 Based on ITE Land Use 210-Single Family Housing—ITE Trip Generation Manual,e Edition,2012 Traffic Impact Study AV, Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A i r i x c F. A. Page 4of8 The Proposed Site Generated Traffic Volumes for the 110 homes were assigned to the roadway network based on the arrival/departure distribution patterns shown on Figure No. 15. The resulting Proposed Site Generated Traffic Volumes are shown on Figures No. 16 and 17 for each of the Peak Hours, respectively. These volumes were added to the Year 2019 No-Build Traffic Volumes to obtain the Year 2019 Build Traffic Volumes with the Proposed Residential— 110 homes. The resulting Year 2019 Build Traffic Volumes with the Proposed Residential — 110 homes are shown on Figures No. 18 and 19 for each of the Peak Hours, respectively. The change from Office (280,000 s.f.) to Residential (110 homes) would result in 350 fewer vehicles during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and 302 fewer vehicles during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. G. DESCRIPTION OF ANALYSIS PROCEDURES In order to determine existing and future traffic operating conditions at the Study Area Intersections, it was necessary to perform capacity analyses. The following is a brief description of the analysis method utilized in this report: The capacity analysis for a signalized intersection was performed in accordance with the procedures described in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, published by the Transportation Research Board. The terminology used in identifying traffic flow conditions is Levels of Service. A Level of Service "A"represents the best condition and a Level of Service "F" represents the worst condition. A Level of Service "C" is generally used as a design standard while a Level of Service "D" is acceptable during peak periods. A Level of Service "E" represents an operation near capacity. In order to identify an intersection's Level of Service, the average amount of vehicle delay is computed for each approach to the intersection as well as for the overall intersection. Additional information concerning signalized Levels of Service can be found in Appendix C of this Study. Traffic Impact Study 4vt Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A gym. „ „ N Page 5of8 H. RESULTS OF ANALYSIS In order to evaluate current and future traffic operating conditions, SYNCHRO analyses were conducted at each of the study area intersections utilizing the procedures described above. Summarized below is a description of the existing geometrics, traffic control and a summary of the existing and future Levels of Service. Copies of the SYNCHRO analysis which also indicate the existing geometry for each of the intersections studied are contained in Appendix D of this Study. Table No. 1 summarizes the Levels of Service and delays for the Year 2014 Existing, Year 2019 No-Build, Year 2019 Build with Approved 280,000 s.f. Office and Year 2019 Build with Proposed Residential— 110 Homes Conditions. 1. King Street(Route 120A) and Anderson Hill Road Anderson Hill Road intersects King Street (Route 120A) at a "T” type, signalized intersection. The King Street (Route 120A) northbound approach consists of two lanes in the form of a separate left turn lane and a separate through lane and the King Street (Route 120A) southbound approach consists of two lanes in the form of a separate through lane and separate right turn lane. The Anderson Hill Road westbound approach consists of two lanes in the form of a separate left turn lane and a separate right turn lane. Year 2014 Existing Traffic Volumes Capacity analysis conducted utilizing the Year 2014 Existing Traffic Volumes indicates that the intersection is currently operating at an overall Level of Service "B" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is currently operating at an overall Level of Service "B" during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. Year 2019 No-Build Traffic Volumes Capacity analysis conducted utilizing the Year 2019 No-Build Traffic Volumes indicates that the intersection is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "B" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "C" during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. W/ Signal Optimization With signal timing changes (signal optimization) the intersection is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "B" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "B" during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. Traffic Impact Study KV Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A „ N, Page 6 of 8 Year 2019 Build Traffic Volumes—Approved 280,000 s.£ Office Capacity analysis conducted utilizing the Year 2019 Build Traffic Volumes with the Approved 280,000 Office indicates that the intersection is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "C" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "D" during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. W/ Signal Optimization With signal timing changes (signal optimization) the intersection is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "C" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "C" during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. Year 2019 Build Traffic Volumes—Proposed Residential— 110 Homes Capacity analysis conducted utilizing the Year 2019 Build Traffic Volumes with the Proposed Residential — 110 Homes indicates that the intersection is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "B" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "C" during the weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. W/ Signal Optimization With signal timing changes (signal optimization) the intersection is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "B" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "C" during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. 2. King Street(Route 120A) and Reckson Executive Park(International Drive) Reckson Executive Park (International Drive) intersects King Street (Route 120A) at a "T" type signalized intersection. The King Street (Route 120A) northbound approach consists of two lanes in the form of a separate left turn lane and a separate through lane and the King Street (Route 120A) southbound approach consists of two lanes in the form of a separate through lane and separate right turn lane. The Reckson Executive Park (International Drive) westbound approach consists of two lanes in the form of a separate left turn lane and a separate right turn lane. Year 2014 Existing Traffic Volumes Capacity analysis conducted utilizing the Year 2014 Existing Traffic Volumes indicates that the intersection is currently operating at an overall Level of Service "A" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is currently operating at an overall Level of Service "A" during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. Traffic Impact Study r Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A E I I A Y L f I M A P. A. Page 7 of 8 Year 2019 No-Build Traffic Volumes Capacity analysis conducted utilizing the Year 2019 No-Build Traffic Volumes indicates that the intersection is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "A" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "B" during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. W/ Signal Optimization With signal timing changes (signal optimization) the intersection is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "A" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "B" during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. Year 2019 Build Traffic Volumes—Approved 280,000 s.f. Office Capacity analysis conducted utilizing the Year 2019 Build Traffic Volumes with the Approved 280,000 Office indicates that the intersection is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "E" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "C" during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. W/ Signalptimization With signal timing changes (signal optimization) the intersection is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "C" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "C" during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. Year 2019 Build Traffic Volumes— Proposed Residential— 110 Homes Capacity analysis conducted utilizing the Year 2019 Build Traffic Volumes with the Proposed Residential — 110 Homes indicates that the intersection is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "B" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "B" during the weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. W/ Signalptimization With signal timing changes (signal optimization) the intersection is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "A" during the Weekday Peak AM Highway Hour and is projected to operate at an overall Level of Service "B" during the Weekday Peak PM Highway Hour. Traffic Impact Study ;CV Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A C I AeiriIa P. A. Page 8 of 8 I. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION As summarized in this Study,the proposed Residential development (110 homes) will not significantly affect the area roadways. Similar Levels of Service and delays are expected under Future No-Build and Future Build Conditions. It addition it should be noted that the Proposed Residential development would result in significantly fewer vehicles and better Levels of Service when compared to the traffic generated by the approved Reckson Executive Park(R.E.P.) Phase III office building. r:\projects\2014\14001622a-residential\reports\traffic\word\150114 tis.docx Traffic Impact Study ■ Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A 9 a N SN I I I Ni F. N. Appendix SUN HOMES A T RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK APPENDIX A FIGURES KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) SITE EXECUTIVEINTERNATIONAL DRIVE PARK ANDERSON HILL ROAD KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOTTO SCALE s SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK r e A „, r I F r r... 11 Bradhurst Avenue O Cmsul14 municod k EnwDismWel Engineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 Planes•Sw+�ee��aes•Lgedec aA,chitects Phone: 914.347.7500 JOB NUMBER: DATE: Stale of N.Y.Caiiltole of AW on! 0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 SITE LOCATION 14001622A 1 1/13/2015 New Jersey New York Pennsvlvania Virginia email: solutions @ maserconsulting.com FIGURE NUMBS Customer Loyalty through Client Satisfaction 1 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) CD O RECKSON SITE EXECUTIVE INTERNAl10NAL DRIVE PARK 2 N O 11�, Ln Q0 r- ANDERSON HILL ROAD 41 118 co 117 N co KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOTTO SCALE wSUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK O ■ r r r r r r I r r 11 Bradhurst Avenue CoaWt%U01cod&Efi*dMmld[r�*ears Hawthorne, NY 10532 ftncra'=*•londttttaappe Archleds Phone: 914.347.7500 YEAR 2014 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES ,TOB NUMBER: DATE: Slate al N.Y.Ce IiFcote of AulhafralWo =I7Z Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 14001622A 1 1/13/2015 New Jersey. NswYark Pon nsvlvsnia Viryin[ email: solutions @ moserconsulting.com FIGURE NLlM9fR: cusiomor L,nyamy MnNVA alien!507[3faUWn 2 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) M fu RECKSON4 1 SITE EXECUTIVE INTERNATIONAL DRIVE PARK 64- I 147--+ Ln mop Ln� ANDERSON HILL ROAD 41 1- 79--+79- �r KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOTTO SCALE ,, SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK r r e w r r i l r g g A 11 Bradhurst Avenue O Consulting,Munwipol&Emitor mlol Eagineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 Planners•Sarrcyvts•Lmdscope Wilects Phone: 914.347.7500 YEAR 2014 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES JOB NUMBER, DATE: State of N.Y.Catifi ale of Aultwruot'ian:0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR14001622A 1 1/13/2015 New JerseNew York Pennsylvania Virginia email: solutions @ maserconsulting.com FIGURE NUMBER; y Customer Loyalty through Client satisfaction 3 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) 0 uy RECKSON SITE EXECUTIVE INTERNATIONAL DRIVE .41 PARK 2� to n 0-1 CID ANDERSON HILL ROAD 41 1 130- 129 'N KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK lw&"Sm 11 radhurst Avenue eekilcrini r a O Omswifq,1Wni o&EnwsnnentO Cnggineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 INonners"Surrcyafs•Loodscepc hr[hitects Phone: 914.347.7500 YEAR 2019 PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES JOB NUMBER: DATE: Stole of N.Y.krGFeole of Futhurugl�ff 0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 14001622A 1 1/13/2015 email: solutions @ maserconsulting.com FIGURE NUMBER: New Jerse v New York Pennsylvania Virginia Customer Loyalty through Client Satisfaction 4 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) RECKSON SITE EXECUTIVE SITE DRIVE .41 � PARK 70 00 1 162- 00 �N 07(D ANDERSON HILL ROAD 87—+ Lo 00217 n KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK O 11 Bradhurst Avenue Consulting,kunko&Em*owffitol Engineem Hawthorne, NY 10532 Planners`Sur�q� Loodsc9&Frchilects Phone: 914.347.7500 YEAR 2019 PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES JOB NUMBER: DATE: State of N.Y.0ottifnote of wth«r than: 0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 14001622A 1 1/13/2015 New Jersey New York Pennsylvania Virginia email: solutions @ maserconsulting.com FIGURE NUMBER customer Loyally through Client Satisiactlon 5 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) 0 SITE EXECUTIVEINTERNATIONAL DRIVE PARK 130%1—# O [70%]—+ o 00 ANDERSON HILL ROAD 1 10%—# 0- o cD KING STREET % - ARRIVAL (ROUTE 120A) [%] - DEPARTURE NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOTTO SCALE SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK NEW YORK T r , 0 , r i I r 9 r r 11 Bradhurst Avenue O ca sw*,Yanicpd k Earionmental Engineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 Namtrs'Sur *Lmdscope Architects Phone: 914.347.7500 ARRIVAL/DEPARTURE DISTRIBUTION ,)0g NUMBER: DATE: Stall of"A'Ca' de of Aulhorization: 0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 (OFFICE) 14001622A 1 1/13/2015 w Naw YQrk PennDania V+ruinia email: solutions @ maserconsulting.com FIGURE NUM9ER: Cuslprnar Loynn llvorqh Clfenr Salislad0 6 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) SITE EXEC SON INTERNATIONAL DRIVE 4 PARK 9—+ 20—+ ANDERSON HILL ROAD 21� o 0—+ V KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK.NEW YORK 11 Bradhurst Avenue O Consulting,Municipal&EnAwnimtol Eagineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 OTHER DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES Planners'Surrayyvvrrss'Lgndxaye Frahitects Phone: 914.347.7500 ,10H NUMBER: DATE Stale of H.Y.CtrGGoale of Fvlhmrtaiion;0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR UNRENTED OFFICE SPACE-154,00 S.F. 140o1622A 1/13/ email: solutions 0 maserconsulting.com ( � FIGIJRE NUMBER- Customer Jersey New York Pennsylvania Virginia Customer Loyalty through Client satisfaction 17 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) N RECKSON SITE EXECUTIVE SITE DRIVE .41 PARK 57—+ 134 N 01 ANDERSON HILL ROAD .41 4—# 01 T KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE MW SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK.NEWYORK 11 Bradhurst Avenue O Consulting,Municipal k Environmental Engineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 OTHER DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES Planners•Surveyors•Landscape Architects Phone: 914.347.7500 JdEl NUA4EiER DnTE: Slate of N.Y.Certificate of Authorization:0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 140 UMUER1622A 1 1/13/2015 email: solutions ®moserconsulting.com (UNRENTED OFFICE SPACE-154,000 S.F.) FIGURE NUMBER: New Jerse v New York Pennsylvania Virginia Customer Loyalty through Client satisfaction 8 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) vC) r- SITE EXECUTIVE INTERNATIONAL DRIVE PARK 11 32—+ (U� 0 Coln 0,1110 ANDERSON HILL ROAD 41 151 ' Go 129 uo KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK 11 Bradhurst Avenue O ConsLitkg,Wam—d Ernimpmeatel En ineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 K mrs•Stow��oarss• Landscape Architects Phone: 914.347.7500 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES JOB NUMBER: DATE: Stale gf N,Y.Csrti�icalc of Fethon106m,.0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 14001622A 1 1/13/2015 email: solutions @ maserconsulting.com FIGURE NUMBER: New Jerse v New York Pennsylvania Virginia Customer Loyalty through Client Satisfaction 9 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) rnto SITE EXEC S INTERNATIONAL DRIVE 41 1 PARK 127 O 296 r'N ANDERSON HILL ROAD 91_+ 217- KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK WMASM r r r .,,.f h. ,.A. 11 Bradhurst Avenue O Conwlt4 Lkmlk 4 k Enftnmental Enyineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 ftmm•5urreynrs• landscape Architects Phone: 914.347.7500 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES JOB -hkUl�aBER: DATE- Stole of H.Y.Certificate of kulhanzation:0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 14001622A 1 1/13/2015 New Jerseemail: solutions @ maserconsulting.com FIGURE NUMBER: y New York Pennsylvania Virginia Loyalty through Client Satisfaction 110 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) In �o SITE EXECUTIVE INTERNATIONAL DRIVE PARK 16—_+ O 37—+ cNo N Ln n ANDERSON HILL ROAD 41 39—# 00 N KING STREET (ROUTE 12OA) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK MASM r r 9<<s T i N g r r 11 Bradhurst Avenue O CoasultWg,W ko k ErrAcmDltd fngineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 APPROVED PEmaem•Sureyors-Cmdscope Fahitects Phone: 914.347.7500 SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES JOB NUMBER: DATE: Slate o!N.Y.Cerliircntc nl Fu[hmualim:0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 14001622A 1 1/13/2015 email: solutions 0 maserconsulting.com (OFFICE-280,000 S.F.) FIGURE NUMBER: New ITT New York Pennsylvania Virginia Customer Loyalty through Cllen[Salisfac8on 11 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) �o SITE EXECUTIVE INTERNATIONAL DRIVE PARK 104 ♦l T M o 243 fb ifso M cd ANDERSON HILL ROAD 7---+ CD CUT 0--+ KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK JAIMASM IINI ULTINI r.e. 11 Bradhurst Avenue O [1aaaAl4 munkod 4 Enwonmentd Enyineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 APPROVED Pkmm• Landscape Archil ects Phone: 914.347.7500 SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES JOB NUMBER: DATE: Sluts of N.Y,Cr141 le at wlnon:u1kff 0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 14001622A 1/13/2015 email: solutions a moserconsulting.com (OFFICE-280,000 S.F.) FIGURE NUMBER: New Jersey New York Pennsylvania Virginia Customer Loyalty through Client Satlsfaclion 12 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) rno N f\ N CD RECKSON4 SITE EXECUTIVE INTERNATIONAL DRIVE PARK 27� I 69- Lr i-)N O 011 ANDERSON HILL ROAD 190 129- o0 � o KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE %4b SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK NEW YORK e o n r u L r l n r r.w. 11 Bradhurst Avenue O Co siAtn;l4*d&EnwoDmmtd Enggineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES Pl mars"Sums'Lmdseryr Architects Phone: 914.347.7500 JOB NUMBER: DATE: slots of H.Y.ce ur�al�of wthonmEge:0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR (W/APPROVED 280,000 S.F.OFFICE) URE 622A NUMBER; 1/13/2015 New Jersey New York Pennsylvania Virginia email: solutions @ maserconsulting.cam FIGURE Customer Loyalty through Client Satisfaction 13 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) o� RECKSON ♦11 SITE EXECUTIVE INTERNATIONAL DRIVE PARK 231 Q0 O 539—+ 00 N c0 L ANDERSON HILL ROAD 41 * 98� 1 217—+ "2 110 � LO KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE All, SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARKWESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK r . , . r , r I.A. 11 Bradhurst Avenue O Consulting,hlunicipd dr Emironmentol Enyineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES Planners•Surreyyaots• Londscoyelvthilects Phone: 914.347.7500 WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR JOB NUMBER. DATE: State of k.1 CerGGcole of kthortnallon: 0000172 Fox: 914.347.7266 14001622A 1 1/13/2015 New JerseNew York Pennsylvania Virginia email: solutions a maserconsulting.com (W/APPROVED 280,000 S.F.OFFICE) FIGURE NUMBER: y Customer Loyalty through Client Satisfaction 14 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) X 0 rq c SITE ExEc SON INTERNATIONAL DRIVE 1 PARK [30%]—, 170%] 1 00 ANDERSON HILL ROAD 10%-4 KING STREET % - ARRIVAL (ROUTE 120A) [/] - DEPARTURE NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK 44%r r, , t r 11 Bradhurst Avenue O C.OnWth;Murd d dr Wkwmental Engineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 PPmaas• lmdscope Architects Phone: 914.347.7500 ARRIVAL/DEPARTURE DISTRIBUTION JOB NUMBER: DATE: S14ta of H.Y.{krl�of AulEori:ation:0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 (RESIDENTIAL) 14001622n 1 1/132015 New Jersey New York Pennsylvania Virginia email: solutions @ moserconsulting.com FIGURE NUMBER: Customer Loyalty through Client Satisfaction 15 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) RECKSON SI TE EXECUTIVE INTERNATIONAL DRIVE .41 PARK 19—+ 46--+ ANDERSON HILL ROAD 1 2� T 0� KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK.NEW YORK r 4 9 1 1 1 L I k 4 1 11 Bradhurst Avenue O Ccnwttng,Yunidpd do Em wmcnld11 esrf Hawthorne, NY 10532 PROPOSED pll"s•serr�rs-Lmdscope kch8scts Phone: 914 347.7500 SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES JOB NUMBER: DATE: Sletr o!R.Y.Cali�ootral nuvmruotkc Wua172 Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 14001622A 1/13/2015 New JerseNew York Pennsylvania Virginia email: solutions @ maserconsulting.com (RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES) (FIGURE NUMBER: y Customer Loyalty through Client Satisfaction 16 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) N SITE EXECUTIVE INTERNATIONAL DRIVE r PARK 3—+ I 29—+ Ln ANDERSON HILL ROAD 7 T o� KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE ' SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK 11 Bradhurst Avenue O 4ftwllfng,IN 9*k Efl*ommental Engineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 PROPOSED Planners•Stxf�7�1aass Landscape Architects Phone: 914.347.7500 SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES .14B Nt1MBER pw7E: Stale of H.Y.Calf�Kate of AuNonmtion:0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 14001622A 1 1/13/2015 email: solutions @ maserconsulting.com (RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES) FIGURE NUMBER: NewJersev New York Pennsylvania Virginia Customer Loyalty through Client Sallsfac0on 17 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) �0 SITE ExEc SON INTERNATIONAL DRIVE 41 1 PARK 30 01 78 - N Ln M O 0 ANDERSON HILL ROAD 153 12900 ,2 - KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOTTO SCALE SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK,NEW YORK WMASM 7 r u A I r i i i, 4 1.A, 11 Bradhurst Avenue O Consulting,Municipal k EnvironmentalHawthorne, NY 10532 Environmental Engineers YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES Planners•Surveyors•Landscape Architects Phone: 914.347.7500 WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR JOB NUMBER: DATE: State of N.Y.Certificate of Authorization:01100172 FOX: 914.347.7266 14001622A 1 1/13/2015 email: solutions 0 moserconsulting.com (W/PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES) FIGURE NUA�BER: New Jersey New York Pennsylvania Virginia Customer Loyalty through Client Satisfaction 18 KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) RECKSON SITE EXECUTIVE SITE DRIVE 41 PARK 140 000 325 00 Q0 000 N� ANDERSON HILL ROAD * 98--+ 217—+ "' CO � Ln KING STREET (ROUTE 120A) NOTE:LINE DIAGRAM NOT TO SCALE mv , SUN HOMES @ RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK WESTCHESTER OFFICE RYE BROOK.NEW YORKO r w , 11 Bradhurst Avenue Consulthg IWnkipd do Enwumental Engineers Hawthorne, NY 10532 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES Plmnerz•Sufxyvrs•Lon6cope Archilecls Phone: 914.347.7500 WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR JOB NUMBER: GATE: Stale of H.Y.CcrliAceke of Whonzation:0000172 Fax: 914.347.7266 14001622A 1/13/2015 email: solutions @ maserconsulting.com (W/PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES) FIGURE NUMBER: New Jersey New York Pennsylvania Virginia Customer Loyalty through Client Satisfaction 119 Traffic Impact Study r Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A E I N f I l T I X i F. A Appendix S UN HOMES A T RECKSON EXE CUTI VE PARK APPENDIX B TABLES TABLE NO.1 LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY TABLE YEAR 2019 BUILD YEAR 2019 BUILD YEAR 2014 EXISTING YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD W/APPROVED 280.000 S.F.OFFICE W/PROPOSED RESIDENTAIL-110 HOMES WEEKDAY WEEKDAY WEEKDAY WEEKDAY WEEKDAY WEEKDAY WEEKDAY WEEKDAY LOCATION AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 1 KING STREET(ROUTE 120A)& ANDERSON HILL ROAD SIGNALIZED NORTHBOUND LEFT A[4,8] A[6.2] A[5.9] A[9.5] A[6.9] C[28.1] A(6,3] B[11.8] NORTHBOUND THROUGH A[7.0] A[6 81 B[10.6] A[7 81 C[24 11 A[8 21 B[10,9] A[8.3] NORTHBOUND APPROACH A(6.6] A[6.71 A[10-01 A[6.1] C[222] B[12.0] B[10.31 A[8,91 SOUTHBOUND THROUGH B[13-91 B[16.6] B[16.6] C[25.2] B[19.4] E[60.7] B[18,3] C[27.01 SOUTHBOUND RIGHT A[1 81 A[1,8] A[1.9] A[2 11 A[2 01 A[2 21 A[2 01 A[2.1] SOUTHBOUND APPROACH B[12.3] B[14.71 B[14.6] C[22 11 B[17.11 D[52,6] B[16,1] C[23.71 WESTBOUND LEFT D[42.6] D[35.4] D[46.0] D[35.8] D[48.5] D[36.2] D[46.2] D[36.2] WESTBOUND RIGHT D[46,9] D[54 61 D[47.6] E[58.1] D[43.8] E[58.1] D[47 51 E[58.1] WESTBOUND APPROACH D[44.7] D[49 11 D[46.71 D[51.5] D[46.6] D[51.3] D[46.8] D[51.3] OVERALL INTERSECTION B[14 21 B[17 81 B[16 8] C[21 91 C[23 91 D[38.8] B[17.5] C[22 71 W/SIGNAL OPTIMIZATION NORTHBOUND LEFT -- A 15 41 B[11.3] A[5.31 E[72.9] A[5.8] B[11.8] NORTHBOUND THROUGH ------ -------- A[9 41 A[8 11 B[17 31 A[7 31 A[9 71 A[8 31 NORTHBOUND APPROACH ---- A[8 91 A[8.6] B[16.0] B[19.6] A[9.2] A[8,9] SOUTHBOUND THROUGH B[12 41 C[20.5] B[12,4] C[30.7] B[14,11 C[20.8] SOUTHBOUND RIGHT All 21 A[1 21 A[1 2] A[1.2] A[1 4] A[1,21 SOUTHBOUND APPROACH -- -- B[10 91 B[17.91 B[10.9] C[26.61 B[12.4] B[18,21 WESTBOUND LEFT -- D[50.9] C[34 81 E[68.11 D[38.5] D[51.2] D[36.2] WESTBOUND RIGHT -- -- D[53 3] E[55 13 E[56.5] E[71 6] D[53 11 E[58 11 WESTBOUND APPROACH --- D 152 01 D[49.1] E[63.4] E[61.3] D[52 01 D[51 31 OVERALL INTERSECTION --- B[15.71 B[19.8] C[20.8] C[29.4] B[16.3] C[20.11 2 KING STREET(ROUTE 120A)& INTERNATIONAL DRIVE(RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK) SIGNALIZED NORTHBOUND LEFT A[2 7] A[2.9] B[10.6] A[4.5] F[206.0] A[7,31 B[17.0] A[5.6] NORTHBOUND THROUGH A[3 51 A[5,21 A[4 81 A[7.71 A[6 01 B[11 3] A[5 91 A[8.21 NORTHBOUND APPROACH A[3 4] A[52] A[6.4) A[7.5] E[92.1] B[10.8] A(9.1] A[7,9] SOUTHBOUND THROUGH B[10.1] A p.11 B(15.1] B[13.9] B[17.3] C[21.1] B[17.1] B[16.8] SOUTHBOUND RIGHT A[2.3] A[1.2] A[2 81 A[1 81 A[3 51 A[2.1] A[2 91 A[2,1] SOUTHBOUND APPROACH A[9.5] A(7.0] B[13.3] B 113 5] B[13.8] B[19.9] B[15.0] B[15 8] WESTBOUND LEFT C[29.0] C[33.1] C[29.6] C[34.91 C[30.5] D[35.6] C[31.0] C[34.9] WESTBOUND RIGHT B[16 91 B[10 9] B(13 51 A[9 61 B[11.9] D[49.9] B[12.1] B[12,1] WESTBOUND APPROACH B[16 61 B[17.6] B[17.5] B 11721 B[17.11 D[45.6] B[17.4] B 119 0] OVERALL INTERSECTION A[6 3) A[7,91 A[9.7] B[12.1] E[57.61 C[26.31 B 112 01 B[13 51 W/SIGNAL OPTIMIZATION NORTHBOUND LEFT ----- A[6-9] A[4-61 D[50.3] B[13.7] A[9.0] A[5,71 NORTHBOUND THROUGH --- A[3 91 A[7 81 A[3 51 B(18.4] A[4 31 A[8 21 NORTHBOUND APPROACH ------ A[4.7] A p,6] C[23,7] B[17.8] A(5.6] A[7 9] SOUTHBOUND THROUGH -------- B[13.3] B[12.3] D[37.8] C[28 51 B[14,6] B[14.8] SOUTHBOUND RIGHT A[32] A[1.3] B[10,6] A[1-4] A[3.41 A[1 61 SOUTHBOUND APPROACH ------- B[11 8] B[12.01 C[30.9] C[26 71 B[12 9] B[13.9] WESTBOUND LEFT -------- D[39.0] D[35.1] D[46.3] C[24.4] D[41.2] C[34.9] WESTBOUND RIGHT - ----- B[18 71 B[13 51 C[21 91 D[39.3] B[16.7] B[15 81 WESTBOUND APPROACH - C[23.6] C[20.0] C[28.71 C[34 91 C[23,5] C(21.5] OVERALL INTERSECTION A[62] B[12.3] C[26.8] C[26.7] A[9 71 B[13 51 THE ABOVE REPRESENTS THE LEVELS OF SERVICE AND VEHICLE DELAY IN SECONDS FOR THE ABOVE INTERSECTIONS MC 14001622A JANUARY 13,2015 Traffic Impact Study r Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A C O N f I l T I N 0 F. A. Appendix SUN HOMES A T RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK APPENDIX C LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS Traffic Impact Study r Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A C I M f Y l T I M C F. A Appendix LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Level of Service (LOS) can be characterized for the entire intersection, each intersection approach, and each lane group. Control delay alone is used to characterize LOS for the entire intersection or an approach. Control delay and volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio are used to characterize LOS for a lane group. Delay quantifies the increase in travel time due to traffic signal control. It is also a measure of driver discomfort and fuel consumption. The volume-to- capacity ratio quantifies the degree to which a phase's capacity is utilized by a lane group. LOS A describes operations with a control delay of 10 s/veh or less and a volume-to-capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is low and either progression is exceptionally favorable or the cycle length is very short. If it is due to favorable progression, most vehicles arrive during the green indication and travel through the intersection without stopping. LOS B describes operations with control delay between 10 and 20 s/veh and a volume-to- capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is low and either progression is highly favorable or the cycle length is short. More vehicles stop than with LOS A. LOS C describes operations with control delay between 20 and 35 s/veh and a volume-to- capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when progression is favorable or the cycle length is moderate. LOS D describes operations with control delay between 35 and 55 s/veh and a volume-to- capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is high and either progression is ineffective or the cycle length is long. Traffic Impact Study ■ Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park 1v1AS E R MC Project No.: 14001622A C O M f Y l T I N i P, A. Appendix LOS E describes operations with control delay between 55 and 80 s/veh and a volume-to- capacity ratio no greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is high,progression is unfavorable, and the cycle length is long. LOS F describes operations with control delay exceeding 80 s/veh or a volume-to-capacity ratio greater than 1.0. This level is typically assigned when the volume-to-capacity ratio is very high, progression is very poor, and the cycle length is long. A lane group can incur a delay less than 80 s/veh when the volume-to-capacity ratio exceeds 1.0. This condition typically occurs when the cycle length is short, the signal progression is favorable, or both. As a result, both the delay and volume-to-capacity ratio are considered when lane group LOS is established. A ratio of 1.0 or more indicates that cycle capacity is fully utilized and represents failure from a capacity perspective (just as delay in excess of 80 s/veh represents failure from a delay perspective). The Level of Service Criteria for signalized intersections are given in Exhibit 18-4 from the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual published by the Transportation Research Board. Exhibit 18-4 LOS by Volume-to-Capacity Ratio Control Delay (s/veh) v/c g.0 v/c>1.0 g0 A F >10-20 B F >20-35 C F >35-55 D F >55-80 E F >80 F F For approach-based and intersection wide assessments, LOS is defined solely by control delay. Traffic Impact Study r► Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A E I M I I L T I X C P. A. Appendix SUN HOMES A T RECKSON EXE CUTI VE PARK APPENDIX D CAPACITY ANALYSIS YEAR 2014 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A) 12/18/2014 Lane Configurations t t r Volume(vph) 121 660 575 86 118 117 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 75 200 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 100 0.98 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.287 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 518 1810 1810 1538 1676 1464 Right Tum on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 136 742 646 97 133 131 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 136 742 646 97 133 131 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right l? Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CH-Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A_AMEX Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2014 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 12/18/2014 *1 t ►� i Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 15.0 75.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 12.5% 62.5% 50.0% 20.8% 20.8% 17% Maximum Green(s) 10.0 70.0 55.0 20.0 20.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1,0 -1.0 -1,0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 I Recall Mode None Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) 5.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 Act Effct Green(s) 71.1 71.1 58.4 77.0 14.6 14.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.76 0.76 0,62 0.82 V6 0.16 v/c Ratio 0.27 0.54 0.57 0.08 0.50; 0.58 Control Delay 4.8 7.0 13.9 1,8 42.6 46.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 4.8 7.0 13.9 1.8 42.6 46.9 LOS A A B A D D Approach Delay 6.6 12.3 44.7 Approach LOS A B D Queue Length 50th (ft) 17 146 204 8 73 73 Queue Length 95th(ft) 40 278 368 17 128 129 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 534 1373 1128 1369 385 328 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.25 0.54 0.57 0.07 0.35 0 40 Obersecftar�` "Mono_11Area Type: Olhef Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:93.7 Natural Cycle:75 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.58 Intersection Signal Delay: 14.2 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET 120A 15S 6DS t06 Page 2 YEAR 2014 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A 12/1812014 -YrI - Lane Configurations + r t Volume(vph) 609 46 112 649 2 11 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.96 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.287 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1497 518 1810 1684 1477 Right Tum on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 12 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 684 52 126 729 2 12 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 684 52 126 729 2 12 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 18 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tum Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A AMEX Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2014 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A) 12/18/2014 Minimum Split(s) 11.0 9.0 10.0 11!0 9.0 9.0 Total Split(s) 46.0 25.0 14.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split(%) 54.1% 29.4% 16.5% 70,6% 29,4% 29,4% Maximum Green(s) 40.0 20.0 8.0 54.0 20.0 20.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.D 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 3.0 3.0 0.2 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 48.6 54.4 58.1 60.2 6.9 6.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.70 0.78 0.83 0.86 0.10 0.10 v/c Ratio 0.54 0,04 0,22 0,47 0.01 0.08 Control Delay 10.1 2.3 2.7 3.5 29.0 16.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 Total Delay 10.1 2.3 2.7 3.5 29.0 16.9 LOS B A A A C B +-' Approach Delay 9.5 3.4 18.6 Approach LOS A A B Queue Length 50th(ft) 170 4 9 82 1 0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 294 11 20 143 7 14 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2569 1440 Turn Bay Length(ft) 325 450 250 Base Capacity(vph) 1262 1380 587 1564 521 456 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.54 0.04 0.21 0.47 0.00 0.03 rn a Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length: 69.7 Natural Cycle:50 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:0.54 Intersection Signal Delay: 6.3 Intersection LOS:A Intersection Capacity Utilization 53.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET 120A x"01 02 03 145 6 14001622A AMEX Synchro 8 Report Page 4 YEAR 2014 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A) 12/18/2014 t Lane Configurations t t r Volume(vph) 123 471 571 88 79 197 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 75 200 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.98 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.267 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 482 1810 1810 1538 1676 1464 Right Tum on Red No No A Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj.Flow(vph) 138 529 642 99 89 221 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 138 529 642 99 89 221 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 l 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A PMEX Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2014 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 12/18/2014 t l �- -'mss 'E Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 15.0 75.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 12.5% 62.5% 50.0% 20.8% 20.8% 17% Maximum Green(s) 10.0 70.0 55.0 20.0 20.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1,0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) 5.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 Act Effct Green(s) 71.0 71.0 58.0 81.8 19.8 19.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.72 0.72 0.59 0.83 0.20 0,20 v/c Ratio 0.30 0.41 0.60 0.08 0.26 0.75 Control Delay 6.2 6.8 16.6 1.8 35.4 54.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 6.2 6.8 16.6 1.8 35.4 54.6 LOS A A B A D D Approach Delay 6.7 14.7 49.1 Approach LOS A B D Queue Length 50th(ft) 24 120 249 8 48 132 Queue Length 95th(ft) 42 171 371 17 91 #233 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 484 1301 1062 1292 365 311 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.29 0.41 0.60 0.08 0.24 0.71 Inde Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:98.8 Natural Cycle:90 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum A Ratio:0.75 Intersection Signal Delay: 17.8 Intersection LOS:B Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET(120A) A) 01 4 02 3 014 15S 20s 1, 1255 t06 YEAR 2014 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A 12/18/2014 Lane Configurations r '� t Volume(vph) 522 6 9 564 64 147 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.96 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.348 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1497 628 1810 1684 1477 Right Tum on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 165 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 587 7 10 634 72 165 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 587 7 10 634 72 165 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perin Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 u 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A PMEX Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2014 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A)_ 1211812014 Minonum Split(s) 11.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 9,0 9.0 Total Split(s) 46.0 25.0 14.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split(%) 54.1% 29.4% 16.5% 70.6% 29.4% 29.4% Maximum Green(s) 40.0 20.0 8.0 54.0 20.0 20.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1,0 -1,0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 0.2 3.0 3.0 0.2 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 52.8 63.2 55.1 55,1 9.4 9.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.72 0.86 0.75 0.75 0.13 0.13 v/c Ratio 0.45 0.01 0.02 0.47 0.33 0.50 Control Delay 7.1 1.2 2.9 5.2 33.1 10.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 7.1 1.2 2.9 5.2 33.1 10.9 LOS A A A A C B Approach Delay 7.0 5.2 176 Approach LOS A A B Queue Length 50th(ft) 75 0 1 84 30 0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 254 2 5 161 66 48 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2569 1440 Turn Bay Length(ft) 325 450 250 Base Capacity(vph) 1299 1397 604 1355 491 540 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.45 0.01 0.02 0.47 0.15 0.31 n Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length:73.5 Natural Cycle:50 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:0.50 Intersection Signal Delay:7.9 Intersection LOS:A Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET(120A) AC-01 I \1k 02 � 03 148 s 25 s _ \b' 14001622A PMEX Synchro 8 Report Page 4 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 1 t �► �i Lane Configurations t t Volume(vph) 133 853 650 98 151 129 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 75 200 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.98 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.232 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 419 1810 1810 1538 1677 1464 Right Tum on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 I Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj.Flow(vph) 149 958 730 110 170 145 i Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph,) 149 958 730 1:10 170 145 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A AMNB Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 111312015 t Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 15.0 75.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 12.5% 62,5% 50.0% 20.8% 20.8% 17% Maximum Green(s) 10.0 70.0 55.0 20.0 20.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1,0 -1,0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) &0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 Act Effct Green(s) 71.1 71.1 58.1 77.7 15.5 15.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.75 0.75 0.61 0.82 0.16 0.16 v/c Ratio 0.34 0.70 0.66 0.09 0.60 0.60 Control Delay 5.9 10.6 16.6 1.9 46.0 47.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.9 10.6 16.6 1.9 46.0 47.6 LOS A B B A D D Approach Delay 10.0 14.6 46.7 Approach LOS A B D Queue Length 50th(ft) 20 248 259 9 96 82 Queue Length 95th(ft) 44 475 459 20 160 142 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 466 1359 1111 1350 381 325 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 D 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.32 0.70 0.66 0.08 0.45 0.45 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:94.7 Natural Cycle:90 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum vlc Ratio:0.70 Intersection Signal Delay: 16.8 Intersection LOS:B Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET(120A) of � c32 � 3 ��-} dos ?5s t06 _ Page 2 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 Lane Configurations Volume(vph) 670 114 271 714 1 i 32 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.96 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.209 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1497 377 1810 1684 1477 Right Tum on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 36 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 753 128 304 802 12 36 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 753 128 304 802 12 36 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A AMNB Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 2-. INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A 1/1312015 Minimum Split(s) 11.0 9,0 10.0 11.0 9.0 9,0 Total Split(s) 46.0 25.0 14.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split r1o) 54.1% 29.4% 16.5% 70,6% 29.4% 29.4% Maximum Green(s) 40.0 20.0 8.0 54.0 20.0 20.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1,0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 LeadlLag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 3.0 3,0 0.2 3.0 3,0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 41.2 49.5 55.3 56.4 7.3 7.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.72 0.80 0.82 0.11 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.70 0.12 0.64 0.54 0.07 0.19 Control Delay 15.1 2.8 10.6 4.8 29.6 13.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 15.1 2.8 10.6 4.8 29.6 13.5 LOS B A B A C B Approach Delay 13.3 6.4 17.5 Approach LOS B A B _ Queue Length 50th(ft) 214 12 25 99 5 0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 361 23 82 187 19 24 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2569 1440 Turn Bay Length (ft) 325 450 250 Base Capacity(vph) 1077 1347 476 1476 524 475 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.70 0.10 0-64 0.54 0.02 0.08 Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length:69.2 Natural Cycle:60 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:0.70 A Intersection Signal Delay:9.7 Intersection LOS:A Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET(120A) mai oz 03 V6 14001622A AMNB Synchro 8 Report Page 4 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 Lane Configurations t t r Volume(vph) 135 541 743 116 91 217 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 75 200 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.98 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.138 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 249 1810 1810 1538 1678 1464 Right Tum on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adi.. Flow(vph) 152 608 835 130 102 244 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 152 608 835 130 102 244 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex C1+Ex Ci+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tum Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A PMNB Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 111312015 Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 15.0 75.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 12.5% 62.5% 50.0% 20.8% 20.8% 17% Maximum Green (s) 10.0 70.0 55.0 20.0 20.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3-0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode N011e Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) 5.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 Act Effct Green(s) 71.0 71.0 57.0 81.9 20.9 20.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.71 0.71 0.57 0.82 0.21 0.21 vlc Ratio 0.47 0.47 0.81 0.10 0.28 0.80 Control Delay 9.5 7.8 25.2 2.1 35.8 58.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 9.5 7.8 25.2 2.1 35.8 58.1 LOS A A C A D E Approach Delay 8.1 22.1 51,5 Approach LOS A C D Queue Length 50th (ft) 27 146 408 13 55 149 Queue Length 95th(ft) 45 208 586 23 102 #267 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 338 1286 1033 1262 361 307 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced vlc Ratio 0.45 0.47 0.81 0,10 X128 0.79 -� � -- IIS+ ■ ' 4kry� -:.ty-• .:��r..�Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:99.9 Natural Cycle:90 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum vlc Ratio:0.81 Intersection Signal Delay:21.9 Intersection LOS:C Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET(120A) A) vl 4 62 A013 7 04 JW I#T 60s - ?-0& 25s 1 06 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 Lane Configurations T Volume(vph) 574 19 37 620 127 296 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.96 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.279 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1497 504 1810 1684 1477 Right Turn on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 331 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj.Flow(vph) 645 21 42 697 143 333 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 645 21 42 697 143 333 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 !. Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane -_- Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel ,k. Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tum Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A PMNB Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 Minimum Split(s) 11.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 Total Split(s) 46.0 25.0 14.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split(%) 54.1% 29.4% 16.5% 70.6% 29.4% 29.4% Maximum Green(s) 40.0 20.0 8.0 54.0 20.0 20.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1,0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 3.0 3.0 0.2 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 47.8 61.8 55.1 55.1 13.0 13.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.62 0.80 0.71 0.71 0.17 0.17 v/c Ratio 0.57 0.02 0.09 0.54 0.49 0.64 Control Delay 13.9 1.8 4.5 7.7 34,9 9.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 13.9 1.8 4.5 7.7 34.9 9.6 LOS B A A A C A Approach Delay 13.5 7.5 17.2 Approach LOS B A B Queue Length 50th(ft) 192 2 5 123 63 1 Queue Length 95th(ft) 362 5 16 255 114 64 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2569 1440 Turn Bay Length (ft) 325 450 250 Base Capacity(vph) 1123 1306 502 1293 469 643 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.57 0.02 0.08 0.54 0.30 0.52 Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length:77.1 Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:0.64 Intersection Signal Delay: 12.1 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET 120A 0'41 02 0.3 X36 14001622A PMNB Synchro 8 Report Page 4 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED AM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 t Lane Configurations t t r Volume(vph) 133 1083 682 103 190 129 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 75 20.0 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.98 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.199 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 359 1810 1810 1538 1677 1464 Right Tum on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds.(#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj.Flow(vph) 149 1217 766 116 213 145 ! Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 149 3217 766 116 213 145 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A AMBD APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F. Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED AM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 t Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 15.0 75.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 20.0 _ Total Split(%) 12.5% 62.5% 50.0% 20.8% 20.8% 17% Maximum Green(s) 10.0 70.0 55.0 20.0 20.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) 5.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 Act Effct Green(s) 71.1 71.1 57.6 79.3 17.6 17.6 _ Actuated g/C Ratio 0.74 0.74 0:60 0.82 0.18 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.38 0.92 0.71 0.09 0.68 0.54 Control Delay 6.9 24.1 19,4 2.0 48.5 43.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 6.9 24.1 19.4 2.0 48.5 43.8 LOS A C B A D D Approach Delay 22.2 17.1 46.6 Approach LOS C B D Queue Length 50th(ft) 23 528 314 10 123 82 Queue Length 95th(ft) 44 #996 499 21 198 142 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 418 1330 1078 1314 373 318 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 3 0.36 0.92 0.71 0.09 0.57 0.46 ; CAIf6 _•r - Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:96.7 Natural Cycle: 130 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.92 Intersection Signal Delay:23.9 Intersection LOS:C Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min)15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET(120A) til 4 62 ��a3 #04 CO s 1205 1 125 5 t06 75 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED AM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A) 1113/2015 Lane Configurations + T Volume(vph) 670 229 540 714 27 69 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0D 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.96 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.194 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1497 350 1810 1684 1477 Right Tum on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 78 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj, Flow(vph) 753 257 607 802 30 78 AL Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 753 257 607 802 30 78 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane 1 Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 w. Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 1 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 00 0.0 0.0 0:0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A AMBD APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F. Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED AM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 Minimum Split(s) 11.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 Total Split(s) 46.0 25.0 14.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split(%) 54.1% 29.4% 16.5% 70.6% 29,4% 29.4% Maximum Green(s) 40.0 20.0 8.0 54.0 20.0 20.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 3.0 3,0 0.2 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 41.0 50.2 55.0 55.0 8.2 8.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.57 0.70 0.76 0.76 0.11 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.73 0.25 1.39 0.58 0.15 0.33 Control Delay 17.3 3.5 206.0 6.0 30.5 11.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 17.3 3.5 206.0 6.0 30.5 11.9 LOS B A F A C B Approach Delay 13.8 92.1 17.1 Approach LOS B F B Queue Length 50th(ft) 220 26 -152 107 12 0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 391 44 #396 221 35 35 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2569 1440 Turn Bay Length(ft) 325 450 250 Base Capacity(vph) 1028 1318 437 1379 500 484 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.73 0.19 1.39 0.58 0.06 0.16 Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length:72.2 Natural Cycle:90 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.39 Intersection Signal Delay:57.6 Intersection LOS: E Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min) 15 - Volume exceeds capacity,queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET(120A) JF-01 02 � 0.3 1415 46s X66 -T - 60 s YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED PM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 t ri Lane Configurations t t Volume(vph) 135 583 951 151 98 217 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 75 200 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.98 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.066 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 119 1810 1810 1538 1680 1464 Right Tum on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 152 655 1069 170 110 244 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 152 655 1069 170 110 244 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex C1+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel .",1, Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A_PMBD_APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F. Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED PM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET (120A) 111312015 Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9.0 9,0 9.0 9.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 15.0 75.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 12.5% 62.5% 50.0% 20.8% 20.8% 17% Maximum Green(s) 10.0 70.0 55.0 20.0 20.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) 5.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 Act Effct Green (s) 71.0 71.0 57.0 81.9 20.9 20.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.71 0.71 0.57 0.82 0.21 0.21 vlc Ratio 0.62 0.51 1.03 0.13 0.31 0.80 Control Delay 28.1 8.2 60.7 2.2 36.2 58.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 28.1 8.2 60.7 2.2 36.2 58.1 LOS C A E A D E Approach Delay 12,0 52.6 51.3 Approach LOS B D D Queue Length 50th(ft) 42 164 -749 17 60 149 Queue Length 95th(ft) 106 233 #977 29 108 #267 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 260 1286 1033 1262 361 307 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced vlc Ratio 0.58 0.51 1.03 0.13 0.30 0.79 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:99.9 Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum vlc Ratio: 1.03 Intersection Signal Delay:38.8 Intersection LOS:D Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 - Volume exceeds capacity,queue is theoretically infinite. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles, # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. 14001622A PMBD APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F. Synchro 8 Report Page 2 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED PM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 111312015 Splits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET(120A 15s■I-- Qs1 120S 1 125S 14001622A_PMBD_APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F. Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED PM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A) 1/13/2015 Lane Configurations t r t ' Volume(vph) 574 40 86 620 231 539 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.96 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.221 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1497 399 1810 1684 1477 Right Tum on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 331 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj.Flow(vph) 645 45 97 697 260 606 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 645 45 97 697 260 606 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex Ci+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A_PMBD_APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F. Synchro 8 Report Page 4 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED PM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 Minimum Split(s) 11.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 Total Split(s) 46.0 25.0 14.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split(%) 54.1% 29.4% 16.5% 70.6% 29.4% 29.4% Maximum Green(s) 40.0 20.0 8.0 54.0 20.0 20.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 , All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -110 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 3.0 3.0 0.2 3.0 3.0 1 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 44.3 66.3 55.0 55.0 21.0 21.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.52 0.78 0.65 0.65 0.25 0.25 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.04 0.25 0.60 0.61 0.99 Control Delay 21.1 2.1 7.3 11.3 35.6 49.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 21.1 2.1 7.3 11.3 35.6 49.9 LOS C A A B D D Approach Delay 19.9 10.8 45.6 Approach LOS B B D Queue Length 50th(ft) 259 4 17 189 123 165 Queue Length 95th(ft) 392 9 34 281 200 #383 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2569 1440 Turn Bay Length(ft) 325 450 250 Base Capacity(vph) 942 1177 397 1171 424 614 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 068 0.04 0.24 0.60 0.61 0.99 WE- Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length:85 Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:0.99 Intersection Signal Delay: 26.3 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET 120A 41 o2 0,3�A'-' is 46 25 s 6 14001622A_PMBD_APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F. Synchro 8 Report Page 5 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED AM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1113/2015 t 't /i Lane Configurations T t r Volume(vph) 133 866 689 105 153 129 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 75 200 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.98 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 At Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0:203 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 367 1810 1810 1538 1677 1464 Right Tum on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 149 973 774 118 172 145 ' Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 149 973 774 118 172 145 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Tuming Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9. . Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A_AMBD_PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED AM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 111312015 T Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 15.0 75.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 12.5% 62.5% 50.0% 20.8% 20.8% 17% Maximum Green(s) 10.0 70.0 55.0 20.0 20.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) 5.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 Act Effct Green (s) 71.1 71.1 57.6 77.2 15.6 15.6 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.75 0.75 0.61 0.82 0.16 C 16 vlc Ratio 0.36 0.72 0.70 0.09 0.61 0.60 Control Delay 6.3 10.9 18.3 2.0 46.2 47.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 6.3 10.9 18.3 2.0 46.2 47.5 LOS A B B A D D Approach Delay 10.3 16.1 46.8 Approach LOS B B D Queue Length 50th(ft) 20 257 295 10 97 82 Queue Length 95th (ft) 44 492 510 21 161 142 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 432 1358 1101 1342 381 324 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.34 372 0.70 009 0.45 0.45 Area Type. Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:94.7 Natural Cycle:90 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum vlc Ratio:0.72 Intersection Signal Delay: 17.5 Intersection LOS:B Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET(120A) A) 01 4 42 k 3 #04 15s 60 24s VSs t06 75 s Page 2 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED AM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 oil 1111 Lane Configurations t r Volume(vph) 670 121 286 714 30 78 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.96 _ Frt 0.850 0.850 Fit Protected 0.950 1950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.195 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1497 352 1810 1684 1477 Right Tum on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 88 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 753 136 321 802 34 88 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 753 136 321 802 34 88 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right J Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex C1+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tum Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A AMBD PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED AM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A) 111312015 Am �l jow Minimum Split(s) 11.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 Total Split(s) 46.0 25.0 14.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split(%) 54.1% 29.4% 16.5% 70.6% 29.4% 29.4% Maximum Green(s) 40.0 20.0 8.0 54.0 20.0 20.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 3,0 3.0 0.2 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 41.0 50.1 55.0 55.0 8.1 8,1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.57 0.69 0.76 0.76 0.11 0.11 v/c Ratio 0.73 0.13 0.73 0.58 0,18 0.36 Control Delay 17.1 2.9 17.0 5.9 31.0 12.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 17.1 2.9 17.0 5.9 31.0 12.1 LOS B A B A C B Approach Delay 15.0 9.1 17.4 Approach LOS B A B Queue Length 50th(ft) 223 12 30 108 14 0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 383 24 #82 211 38 37 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2569 1440 Turn Bay Length(ft) 325 450 250 Base Capacity(vph) 1029 1320 439 1381 500 492 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 1.11 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.73 0.10 0.73 0.58 0.07 0.18 Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length:72.1 Natural Cycle:60 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:0,73 Intersection Signal Delay: 12.0 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET(120A) JIL-01 *NL o� rJ 03 46s 2S N6 14001622A_AMBD_PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES Synchro 8 Report Page 4 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED PM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 Lane Configurations t t r Volume(vph) 135 585 768 120 98 217 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 75 200 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.98 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.121 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 219 1810 1810 1538 1678 1464 Right Tum on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 _ Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 152 657 863 135 110 244 - Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 152 657 863 135 110 244 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0:0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A PMBD__PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED PM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 15.0 75.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 12.5% 62,5% 50.0% 20,6% 20.8% 17% Maximum Green(s) 10.0 70.0 55.0 20.0 20.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) 5,0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 Act Effct Green(s) 71.0 71.0 57.0 81.9 20.9 20.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.71 0.71 0.57 0.82 0.21 0.21 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.51 0.84 0.11 0.31 0.80 Control Delay 11.8 8.3 27.0 2.1 36.2 58.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.8 8.3 27.0 2.1 36.2 58.1 LOS B A C A D E Approach Delay 8.9 23.7 51.3 Approach LOS A C D Queue Length 50th(ft) 27 165 435 13 60 149 Queue Length 95th (ft) 58 234 #644 24 108 #267 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 320 1286 1033 1262 361 307 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.47 0.51 0.84 0.11 0.30 0.79 1At9 rclr sic r:•'r+ i-7ll�Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:99,9 Natural Cycle:90 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.84 Intersection Signal Delay,22.7 Intersection LOS:C Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET(120A) al 4 02 A03 =J�04 I5s 120S ?55 t,06 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED PM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 Lane Configurations t r ` Volume(vph) 574 41 88 620 140 325 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.96 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0,950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.257 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1497 464 1810 1684 1477 Right Tum on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 331 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj.Flow(vph) 645 46 99 697 157 365 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 645 46 99 697 157 365 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) D 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A PMBD PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED PM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 Minimum Split(s) 11.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 Total Split(s) 46.0 25.0 14.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split(%) 54.1% 29.4% 16.5% 70.6% 29,4% 29.4% Maximum Green(s) 40.0 20.0 8.0 54.0 20.0 20.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 3.0 3.0 0.2 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 44.8 59.7 55.2 55.2 13.9 13.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.57 0.76 0.71 0.71 0.18 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.62 0.04 0.22 0.54 0.51 0.68 Control Delay 16.8 2.1 5.6 8.2 34.9 12.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 16.8 2.1 5.6 8.2 34.9 12.1 LOS B A A A C B Approach Delay 15.8 7.9 19.0 Approach LOS B A B Queue Length 50th(ft) 202 4 12 128 70 14 Queue Length 95th(ft) 392 10 34 281 123 87 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2569 1440 Turn Bay Length(ft) 325 450 250 ' Base Capacity(vph) 1039 1259 473 1279 463 640 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.62 0.04 0.21 0.54 0.34 0.57 Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length:78.1 Natural Cycle:60 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:0.68 Intersection Signal Delay: 13.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET(120A) X41 I -X " t 03 14s 146s 25 s *_06 14001622A_PMBD_PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES Synchro 8 Report Page 4 W/ SIGNAL OPTIMIZATION YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 t I Lane Configurations t t r Volume(vph) 133 853 650 98 151 129 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 75 200 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.261 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 471 1810 1810 1538 1667 1454 Right Tum on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 149 958 730 110 1:70 145 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 149 958 730 110 170 145 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tum Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A_AMNB-OPTIMIZATION Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 t 8 Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 10.0 79.0 69.0 21.0 21.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 8.3% 65.8% 57.5% 17.5% 17.5% 17% Maximum Green(s) 5.0 74.0 64.0 16.0 16.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None Max P.hax None None None Walk Time(s) 5.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#Ihr) 0 Act Effct Green(s) 75.0 75.0 65.0 84.1 15.1 15.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.76 0.76 0.66 0.86 0.15 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.34 0.69 0.61 0.08 0.64 0.65 Control Delay 5.4 9.4 12.4 1.2 50.9 53.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.4 9.4 12.4 1.2 50.9 53.3 LOS A A B A D D Approach Delay 8.9 10.9 52.0 Approach LOS A B D Queue Length 50th (ft) 21 263 243 7 101 86 Queue Length 95th(ft) 37 392 351 12 168 150 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 436 1384 1199 1348 298 252 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.34 0.69 0.61 0.08 057 0.58 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:98.1 Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.69 Intersection Signal Delay: 15.7 Intersection LOS:B Intersection Capacity Utilization 59.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min)15 Splits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET 020A) sal � 02 � 3 04 2�s 21s t06 Page 2 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A 1113/2015 Lane Configurations t r t Volume(vph) 670 114 271 714 11 32 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.93 0.91 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.240 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1496 434 1810 1597 1401 Right Tum on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 36 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 " Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj.Flow(vph) 753 128 304 802 12 36 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 753 123 304 802 12 36 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right i Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane 7 Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A_AMNB-OPTIMIZATION Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK AM HIGHWAY HOUR 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 Minimum Split(s) 11.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 Total Split(s) 55.0 10.0 20.0 75.0 10.0 10.0 Total Split(%) 64.7% 11.8% 23.5% 88.2% 11.8% 11.8% Maximum Green(s) 49.0 5.0 14.0 69.0 5.0 5.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5:0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 10 3.0 0.2 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 54.6 61.6 70.0 70.0 6.0 6.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.64 0.72 0.82 0.82 0.07 0.07 v/c Ratio 0.65 0.12 0.59 0.54 0.10 0.27 Control Delay 13.3 3.2 6.9 3.9 39.0 18.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Detay 13.3 3.2 6.9 3.9 39.0 18.7 LOS B A A A D B Approach Delay 11.8 4.7 23.8 Approach LOS B A C Queue Length 50th(ft) 213 12 23 91 6 0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 387 32 38 135 23 28 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2559 1440 Turn Bay Length(ft) 325 450 257 Base Capacity(vph) 1162 1086 584 1490 121 132 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.65 0.12 0.52 0.54 0.10 0.27 ,iigr,�,. Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length: 85 Natural Cycle:60 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:0.65 Intersection Signal Delay:8.2 Intersection LOS:A Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.3% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 S_puts and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET 120A) 61 0 z 0.3 2�7 s \6 75 s 14001622A_AMNB-OPTIMIZATION Synchro 8 Report Page 4 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 All) t Lane Configurations t t r Volume(vph) 135 541 743 116 91 217 i Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 75 200 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.98 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.165 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 298 1810 1810 1538 1680 1466 Right Turn on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 ? Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0:89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 152 608 835 130 102 244 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 152 608 835 130 102 244 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A PMNB Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9,0 9.0 9-0 9.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 10.0 74.0 64.0 263.0 26.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 8.3% 61.7% 533% 21.7°1% 21.7% 17% Maximum Green(s) 5.0 69.0 59.0 21.0 21.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2,0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.01 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) 5.0 ;� Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 Act Effct Green(s) 70.0 70.0 60.0 85.3 21.3 21.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.70 0.70 0.60 0.86 0.21 0.21 v/c Ratio 0.52 0.48 0.76 0.10 0.28 0.78 Control Delay 11.3 8.1 20.5 1.2 34.8 55.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.3 8.1 20.5 1.2 34.8 55.1 LOS B A C A C E Approach Delay 8.8 17.9 49.1 Approach LOS A B D Queue Length 50th(ft) 28 153 366 8 54 146 Queue Length 95th(ft) 47 217 524 14 101 #257 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 295 1276 1094 1332 381 324 } Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 u i Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.52 0.48 0.76 0.10 0.27 0.75 . ince- Area Type. Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:99.3 Natural Cycle:90 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.78 Intersection Signal Delay: 19.8 Intersection LOS:B Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET(120A) o1 2 A03 #04 Jos I 164s 263 s: 269' t06 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 Lane Configurations + Volume(vph) 574 19 37 620 127 296 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.96 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.290 0.950 ' Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1498 523 1810 1683 1475 Right Turn on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 290 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj.Flow(vph) 645 21 42 697 143 333 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 645 21 42 697 143 333 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0:0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tum Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A PMNB Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2019 NO-BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES WEEKDAY PEAK PM HIGHWAY HOUR 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A) 111312015 Minimum Split(s) 11.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 Total Split(s) 51.0 24.0 10.0 61.0 24.0 24.0 Total Split(%) 60.0% 28,2% 11.8% 71.8% 28.2% 28.2% Maximum Green(s) 45.0 19.0 4.0 55.0 19.0 19.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1,0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 3.0 3.0 0.2 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 50.4 64.7 56,2 56.2 13.3 13.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.64 0.82 0.72 0.72 0.17 0.17 vlc Ratio 0.56 u.;2 0.09 0.54 0.49 0.68 Control Delay 12.3 1.3 4.6 7.8 35.1 13.5 Queue Delay 0.0 O.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 12.3 1.3 4.6 7.8 35.1 13.5 LOS B A A A D B Approach Delay 12.0 7.6 20.0 Approach LOS B A C Queue Length 50th (ft) 179 1 5 124 64 18 Queue Length 95th(ft) 341 4 17 269 115 91 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2569 1440 Turn Bay Length(ft) 325 450 250 Base Capacity(vph) 1160 1320 450 '1295 439 592 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced vlc Ratio 01.56 0.02 0.09 0.54 0.33 0.56 Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length:78.5 Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum vlc Ratio:0.68 Intersection Signal Delay: 12.3 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET 120A Jr-01 *** d2 ! 03 141x51 s 24 5 ( '436 615 14001622A PMNB Synchro 8 Report Page 4 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED AM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 Lane Configurations t t r Volume(vph) 133 1083 682 103 190 129 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 75 200 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.97 0.94 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.246 0:950 Satd. Flow(perm) 444 1810 1810 1538 1661 1447 Right Tum on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 149 1217 766 116 213 145 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 149 1217 766 116 213 145 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel _ Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A AMBD APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F.-OPTIMIZATION Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED AM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET (120A) 111312015 i T Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 10.0 81.0 71.0 19.0 19.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 8.3% 67.5% 59,2% 15,8% 15.8% 17% Maximum Green (s) 5.0 76.0 66.0 14.0 14.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1,0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) 5.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 Act Effct Green(s) 77.0 77.0 67.0 86.0 15.0 15.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.77 0.77 0.67 0.86 0.15 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.87 0.63 0.09 0.83 0.67 Control Delay 5.3 17.3 12.4 1.2 68.1 56.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.3 17.3 12.4 1.2 68.1 56.5 LOS A B B A E E Approach Delay 16.0 10.9 63.4 Approach LOS B B E Queue Length 50th(ft) 19 439 249 7 134 88 Queue Length 95th(ft) 33 706 355 13 #252 #169 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 418 1393 1212 1322 257 217 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.36 x.87 0.63 0.(19 0.83 0.67 Area Type; Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Natural Cycle: 130 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.87 Intersection Signal Delay:20.8 Intersection LOS:C Intersection Capacity Utilization 74.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Spyks and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET(120A) ' 101 4 02 �f3 % s 4 Los 1 171s 20s 19s tp6 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED AM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A 1113/2015 Lane Configurations t r ` Volume(vph) 670 229 540 714 27 69 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util.Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.92 0.90 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.097 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1493 175 1810 1573 1379 Right Turn on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 78 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 753 257 607 802 30 78 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 753 257 607 802 30 78 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors D 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tum Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A AMBD.APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F.-OPTIMIZATION Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED AM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A)_ 1/13/2015 Minimum Split(s) 11.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 Total Split(s) 44.0 9.0 32.0 76.0 9.0 9.0 Total Split(%) 51.8% 10.6% 37.6% 89,4% 10.6% 10.6% Maximum Green(s) 38.0 4.0 26.0 70.0 4.0 4.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4,0 4.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 3.0 3.0 0.2 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 39.2 45.2 71.0 71.0 5.0 5.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.53 0.84 0.84 0.06 0.06 v/c Ratio 0.90 0.32 0.96 0.53 0.30 0.51 Control Delay 37.8 10.6 50.3 3.5 46.3 21.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 37.8 10.6 50.3 3.5 46.3 21.9 LOS D B D A D C Approach Delay 30.9 23.7 28.7 Approach LOS C C C Queue Length 50th(ft) 358 64 256 80 16 0 Queue Length 95th (ft) #582 106 #464 120 43 41 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2569 1440 Turn Bay Length(ft) 325 450 250 Base Capacity(vph) 834 796 636 1511 101 154 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.90 0.32 0.95 0.53 0.30 0.51 Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length:85 Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:0.96 Intersection Signal Delay: 26.8 Intersection LOS:C Intersection Capacity Utilization 80.2% ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period(min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer, Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET(120A) Jr-01 I \A 02 �J 03 32s 1 5445 9s *\O o 14001622A_AMBD_APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F.-OPTIMIZATION Synchro 8 Report Page 4 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED PM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 Lane Configurations t t r Volume(vph) 135 583 951 151 98 217 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 75 200 250 0 _ Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.98 0.95 -i Frt 0.850 0.850 At Protected 0:950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.064 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 116 1810 1810 1538 1676 1460 Right Tum on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 152 655 1069 170 110 244 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 152 655 1069 170 110 244 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right �q Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane E� Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A PMBD APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F.-OPTIMIZATION Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED PM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 t ►� i WNSM -1 MEMO 'Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 20.0 Total Split(s) 9.0 77.0 68.0 23.0 23.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 7,5% 64.2% 56.7% 19.2% 19.2% 17% Maximum Green(s) 4.0 72.0 63.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 4.0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4-0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) 5.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 Act Effct Green(s) 73.0 73.0 64.0 87.0 19.0 19.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.73 0.73 0.64 0;87 0.19 0.19 v/c Ratio 0.93 0.50 4.92 0.13 0.34 0.88 Control Delay 72.9 7.3 30.7 1,2 38.5 71.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 72.9 73 30.7 1.2 38.5 71.6 LOS E A C A D E Approach Delay 19.6 26.6 61.3 Approach LOS B C E Queue Length 50th(ft) 43 150 545 9 61 153 Queue Length 95th(ft) #163 213 #880 16 111 #287 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 164 1321 1158 1338 326 277 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced A Ratio 0.93 0.50 4.92 0.13 0.34 0.88 Area Type: 01her Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 100 Natural Cycle: 150 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.93 Intersection Signal Delay:29.4 Intersection LOS:C Intersection Capacity Utilization 73.0% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET 120A7 01 02 •403 % �a4 A) 20 J 123 e t06 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED PM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 Lane Configurations t r Volume(vph) 574 40 86 620 231 539 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.99 0.97 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.173 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1498 312 1810 1695 1486 Right Tum on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 235 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 645 45 97 697 260 606 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 645 45 97 697 260 606 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Lett Righl Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Tuming Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Tum Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A_PMBD_APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F.-OPTIMIZATION Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - APPROVED PM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 Minimum Split(s) 11.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 Total Split(s) 41.0 34.0 10.0 51.0 34.0 34.0 Total Split(%) 48.2% 40.0% 11.8% 60.0% 40.0% 40.0% Maximum Green(s) 35.0 29.0 4.0 45.0 29.0 29.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 3.0 3.0 0.2 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 38.3 66.9 46.1 46.1 27.5 27.5 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.81 0.56 0.56 0.33 0.33 v/c Ratio 0.77 0:04 0.37 0.69 0.45 0.93 Control Delay 28.5 1.4 13.7 18.4 24.4 39.3 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 28.5 1.4 13.7 18.4 24.4 39.3 LOS C A B B C D Approach Delay 26.7 17.8 34.9 Approach LOS C B C Queue Length 50th(ft) 299 3 24 260 104 197 Queue Length 95th(ft) #487 6 46 386 1.69 #403 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2569 1440 Turn Bay Length(ft) 325 450 250 Base Capacity(vph) 838 1244 259 1009 625 690 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.77 0.04 0.37 0.69 0.42 0.88 Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length:82.7 Natural Cycle:80 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:0.93 Intersection Signal Delay: 26.7 Intersection LOS:C Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. Splits and Phases:`, 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET 120A 0-41 �4 oZ 03 IDS 1 04is_ X36 14001622A_PMBD_APPROVED OFFICE-280,000 S.F.-OPTIMIZATION Synchro 8 Report Page 4 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED AM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 t Lane Configurations t t r Volume(vph) 133 866 689 105 153 129 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 75 200 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.97 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.231 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 417 1810 1810 1538 1668 1454 Right Tum on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 51G 5% 5% 5% Adj,Flow(vph) 149 973 774 118 172 145 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 149 973 774 118 172 145 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A AMBD PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED AM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 t J Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9,0 9.0 9.0 9.0 20.0 ., Total Split(s) 11.0 79.0 68.0 21.0 21.0 20.0 Total Spllt(%) 9.2% 65.8% 56.7% 17.5% 17.5% 17% Maximum Green(s) 6.0 74.0 63.0 16.0 16.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) 5.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 ' Act Effct Green(s) 75.1 75.1 64.0 83.2 15.1 15.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.76 0.76 0.65 0.85 0.15 0.15 v/c Ratio 0.36 0.70 0.66 0.09 0.65 0.65 Control Delay 5.8 9.7 14.1 1.4 51.2 53.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 5.8 9.7 14.1 1.4 51.2 53.1 LOS A A B A D D Approach Delay 9.2 12,4 52.0 Approach LOS A B D Queue Length 50th(ft) 21 271 278 8 102 86 Queue Length 95th(ft) 37 407 402 14 170 150 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 411 1383 1180 1332 297 252 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.36 0.70 0.66 0.09 0.58 0.58 me Area Type: Olher Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:98.2 Natural Cycle:90 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio:0.70 Intersection Signal Delay: 16,3 Intersection LOS:B Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period:(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET(120A) lis 68 s 2t}s. I 121s t06 Page 2 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED AM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET 120A) 1/13/2015 Lane Configurations t r '� t Volume(vph) 670 121 286 714 30 78 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.94 0.92 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.230 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1496 415 1810 1615 1416 Right Tum on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 88 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34.5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 753 136 321 802 34 88 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 753 136 321 802 34 88 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1-00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CIA-Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A_AMBD_PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL- 110 HOMES Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED AM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A) 111312015 Minimum Split(s) 11,0 9.0 10.0 11.0 9,0 9.0 Total Split(s) 54.0 11.0 20.0 74.0 11.0 11.0 Total Split(%) 63.5% 12,9% 23.5% 87,1% 12.9% 12.9% Maximum Green(s) 48.0 6.0 14.0 68.0 6.0 6.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5,0 4.0 4,0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 •1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 3.0 3.0 0.2 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 53.1 61.0 69.0 69.0 6.9 6.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.63 0.72 0.81 0.81 0.08 0.08 vlc Ratio 0.67 0.13 0.64 0.55 0.24 0.45 Control Delay 14.6 3.4 9.0 4.3 41.2 16.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 14.6 3.4 9.0 4.3 41.2 16.7 LOS B A A A D B Approach Delay 12.9 5.6 23.5 Approach LOS B A C Queue Length 50th (ft) 225 14 28 101 17 0 Queue Length 95th(ft) 401 34 65 150 45 42 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2563 1440 Turn Bay Length(ft) 325 450 250 Base Capacity(vph) 1130 1078 567 1470 141 197 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 r�Reduced vlc Ratio 0.67 0.13 0.57 0.55 0.24 0.45 MArea Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length:84.9 Natural Cycle:60 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum vlc Ratio:0.67 Intersection Signal Delay:9.7 Intersection LOS:A Intersection Capacity Utilization 66.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET(120A) I"'41 �l a2 �! 03 2 �;. I 054s as X56 14001622A AMBD PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES Synchro 8 Report Page 4 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED PM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 x) t Lane Configurations t t r Volume(vph) 135 585 768 120 98 217 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 75 200 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 1.00 0.98 0.95 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1719 1810 1810 1538 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.154 0.950 .I Satd. Flow(perm) 278 1810 1810 1538 1678 1464 Right Turn on Red No No Satd. Flow(RTOR) Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 - Link Distance(ft) 1256 2649 2715 Travel Time(s) 24.5 51.6 61.7 Confl. Peds.(#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 152 657 863 135 110 244 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 152 657 863 135 110 244 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Left Left Right Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 Number of Detectors 1 1 1 1 1 Detector Template Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CII-Ex Ci+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type pm+pt NA NA pt+ov Prot Perm Protected Phases 1 6 2 24 4 3 Permitted Phases 6 4 Detector Phase 1 6 2 24 4 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 14001622A_PMBD_PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL- 110 HOMES Synchro 8 Report Page 1 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED PM 1: ANDERSON HILL ROAD & KING STREET 120A 1/13/2015 t Minimum Split(s) 9.0 9.0 9,0 9.0 9.0 20,0 Total Split(s) 10.0 75.0 65.0 25.0 25.0 20.0 Total Split(%) 8.3% 62.5% 54.2% 20.8% 20.8% 17% Maximum Green(s) 5.0 70.0 60.0 20.0 20.0 18.0 Yellow Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode None Max Max None None None Walk Time(s) 5.0 Flash Dont Walk(s) 11.0 Pedestrian Calls(#/hr) 0 Act Effct Green(s) 71.0 71.0 61.0 85.9 20.9 20.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.71 0.71 0.61 0.86 0.21 0.21 v/c Ratio 0.54 0.51 0.78 0.10 0.31 0.80 Control Delay 11.8 8.3 20.8 1.2 36.2 58.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 11.8 8.3 20.8 1.2 36,2 58.1 LOS B A C A D E Approach Delay 8.9 18.2 51.3 Approach LOS A B D Queue Length 50th(ft) 27 165 378 8 60 149 Queue Length 95th(ft) 45 234 543 15 108 #267 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1176 2569 2635 Turn Bay Length(ft) 75 200 250 Base Capacity(vph) 283 1286 1105 1324 361 307 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.54 0.51 0.78 0.10 0.30 079 Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length:99.9 Natural Cycle:90 Control Type:Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.80 Intersection Signal Delay:20.1 Intersection LOS:C Intersection Capacity Utilization 63.3% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 `"W"M # 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity,queue may be longer. Queue shown is maximum after two cycles. S lits and Phases: 1:ANDERSON HILL ROAD&KING STREET(120A) of 02 � 3 ! 6� 20 125s _ .. t06 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED PM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 DPW- Lane Configurations t r t Volume(vph) 574 41 88 620 140 325 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length(ft) 325 450 250 0 Storage Lanes 1 1 1 1 Taper Length(ft) 25 25 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped Bike Factor 0.97 1.00 0.98 0.96 Frt 0.850 0.850 Flt Protected 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 1810 1538 1719 1810 1719 1538 Flt Permitted 0.271 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 1810 1497 489 1810 1684 1477 Right Tum on Red No Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 295 Link Speed(mph) 35 35 30 Link Distance(ft) 1949 2649 1520 Travel Time(s) 38.0 51.6 34,5 Confl. Peds. (#/hr) 10 10 10 10 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Heavy Vehicles(%) 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% Adj. Flow(vph) 645 46 99 697 157 365 -,1 Shared Lane Traffic(%) Lane Group Flow(vph) 645 46 99 697 157 365 Enter Blocked Intersection No No No No No No Lane Alignment Left Right Left Left Left Right Median Width(ft) 12 12 12 Link Offset(ft) 0 0 0 Crosswalk Width(ft) 16 16 16 Two way Left Turn Lane -� Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Turning Speed(mph) 9 15 15 9 Number of Detectors 0 0 1 0 1 1 Detector Template -' Leading Detector(ft) 0 0 50 0 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Position(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Detector 1 Size(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 Detector 1 Type CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex CI+Ex Detector 1 Channel Detector 1 Extend(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Queue(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector 1 Delay(s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Turn Type NA pm+ov pm+pt NA Prot Perm Protected Phases 2 3 1 6 3 Permitted Phases 2 6 3 Detector Phase 2 3 1 6 3 3 Switch Phase Minimum Initial(s) 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 14001622A_PMBD_PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL-110 HOMES Synchro 8 Report Page 3 YEAR 2019 BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES - PROPOSED PM 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE & KING STREET (120A) 1/13/2015 Minimum Split (s) 11.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 9.0 9.0 Total Split(s) 49.0 25.0 11.0 60.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split(%) 57.6% 29.4% 12.9% 70.6% 29.4% 29.4% Maximum Green(s) 43.0 20.0 5.0 54.0 20.0 20.0 Yellow Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4,0 4.0 All-Red Time(s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust(s) -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 Total Lost Time(s) 5.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 Lead/Lag Lag Lead Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Vehicle Extension(s) 0.2 3.0 3.0 0.2 3.0 3.0 Recall Mode Max None None Max None None Act Effct Green(s) 46.5 61,4 55.2 55,2 13.9 13,9 i Actuated g/C Ratio 0.60 0.79 0.71 0.71 0.18 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.60 0.04 0.23 0.54 0.51 0.72 Control Delay 14.8 1.6 5.7 8.2 34.9 15.8 _ Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - Total Delay 14.8 1.6 5.7 8.2 34.9 15.8 LOS B A A A C B Approach Delay 13.9 7.9 21.5 Approach LOS B A C +' Queue Length 50th(ft) 189 3 12 128 70 30 Queue Length 95th (ft) 361 7 34 281 123 111 Internal Link Dist(ft) 1869 2569 1440 Turn Bay Length(ft) 325 450 250 Base Capacity(vph) 1078 1291 440 1279 463 614 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.60 0.04 0.23 0.54 0.34 0.59 Area Type: Other Cycle Length:85 Actuated Cycle Length:78.1 Natural Cycle:60 Control Type: Semi Act-Uncoord Maximum v/c Ratio:0.72 Intersection Signal Delay: 13.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.9% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period(min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: INTERNATIONAL DRIVE&KING STREET 120A x`41 ".* 02 03 Ila 1 E49.s = 6 Fib 5 14001622A PMBD PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL- 110 HOMES Synchro 8 Report Page 4 i � Traffic Impact Study r Sun Homes at Reckson Executive Park MASER MC Project No.: 14001622A C I x I I l T 111 i P. A. Appendix SUN HOMES AT RECKSON EXECUTIVE PARK APPENDIX E COUNT DATA r R-It V 0 LO 0 0 0 r- M N M OD(A 00(O r-M (D O O O r- ((')V OD IT N NMM V V (3) It _ tl') M i M'gNM� V O �NMM4 'T 4 -qm M(O NNM MLDr�rM ''��, M V 7It(p a) Nr r r r- i— r r CMN r,LOM NM(DN OLOO t� LO Lr]0000 r-r n �[)rN M LLD Co r- (n(D L' "'N v v� M� � o M ^N( (O(D co co r rl- O O Q rl I I EOo00o 00000 00000000000 000ta000 �! o I 'o E 0 E� Od p r(D O(OM MM0000 st N M�v 04)M C)(ON �(KI O(OMO)OON_W m� 0--MMM NNN V N NNNtO^N Nco rO mSII) M(MNN ` W " Oa W r LO a0 C al eco r`MO OMtD(D'IN (OM WMU) uOM to � r`0)00Mh00O CRrNN0O NMNrl0 rNNv-"Mro ryNOj M NNNMr M00 r09. O U) @ror`(Dq- OOo�r,o o(nM(Orr-M(Dv @ rl-(D00C, r M U)r,-M M M 00 COQ r t('I M M V .M LO tD M N M 00 N N co r r r r11 r r O �.tD M M r N r.- r-- CL ` M Y `. h Q a ,r ¢ ¢ Cl) N Y a) c-4C I 00000 Ooocao 0OOo00oo000 OO000000 O 0 p a u) [n L w 4 > V w N � �;� N Q } .0 CYC mll o 0 =s°n C CO) Z 'rE mE _ /O ` r L OV-N Mr- MMO VO Mr tDM p-N �N Mr r- 12 00 r`MM LO.(1) �O �ZLL J.rrrNr� M VMNM NrCN N Ory �(L,j rNM V N�jO V O t w L w V/ (Q (Q Q Z `M(OMM(M LLD r- r-0 r` r-M'IM(O OO LO MMtO r-OrOM ` Z V N O' L�MrONN ��LLDMw N OD�(O OM N'O C,7 V m tOOV �(O� OD C +O1 � � �o F. r rrrr r r00q m Nrr(Oor-. C J LL (n U) 6- 01 O _ _ 'TN r- LO 00 co r--mlrO MND V r-Lo MM tN rl- LO 00'r LO O OOCO� V' MI�r NIiM OOM MN f`46qt Ml�li(D (O err. Y.-� r rr� (,)rte F rrrrcD w V a ¢ ¢ c00000 oo0o'Io OOOOr00'oo00 E o000000 o rn }"o O p 0 Z N O` MM MO M(O MtOwm00OM ,ttOv-M L.. E d¢ (OMO1,.Dr- OOW OOMMNI� (D(OOrM 000000 v)MONO N'iMOW OMN(D(OI 1'-00 LO rrr V rrrr(O �OOM�M � aco LO 00 O O M (6 li O fA 00(O M O M N 00(O v O O t`(O N(D N M fl O r �-' �O'S(O O N 001(D MI 00 4) NrNr` NNrx00 NrM�LO fO LO r Mr tri �� Or NN NI00r(D r co Q m O Q � N i O cn X222 m 222 2 m E a`) i °)mlri ¢¢¢¢ o ¢¢¢ ¢ o QQ pL_Lr v E o c¢¢¢Q,E ol2 I�otnotnH OtOC)Ln C)LO ` t0 MV)> > O HLL— OtOOLo��a �+O r(M V: O r(+) V: O r Q O J J Co[O CO H H .T N M O r O Nnn �� MMW OO MM O d~ oo c c0 �E5 r--�W cc a 0000 0000 000¢ � OWOoo01{�¢, C7 Q o` 0 c I 70 07 2 2 Y Y M v(D0(O(17I- MC) OvO p-corco r-va0Orn <0 0OO1�(ON OO(D CON ON(O f� M (D� .�. O(O(OON Y7 O (M M M(M(n M M(M M(n (M M M� Ca F MMM (n 0 CV M r ny00(nvMO CO OO It 00U)r- (D0 1- 00 @ 000 M(o R HMnM ( (ON Lo Lo LL)I�N 0 S 00 - U')O �W IN co 00 CLCL rL Q O Q Q r `00000 E 0000001c) F7 H c3 vm= vaNi� C� 0 � _ 0E mm V � (o co CON MM Lo I��CO (O'TN(r)'t N 0v' MOO COM 0(0O ` wµ, qC\l r- N04 00 NNNMLOO� N LMLL� N��N r-NDO C Q O(D M (M 0 L (JN ON N MN M_OM r.-0 V (n 0Ln� qO Q (MMM V Cl)r (MMa ) (0 (o(0N� e.- C; m M'T W)(DOn i(] yr �O00 r-LO f-N qr- O M0 NNH7q0Mm m N V rV to � 2 m (D OOV V 'q NNS m"t,- N� F C00�V Nom : Y Q � Q w ao LL NC/) Y = N CN C NI �= EOOOoO OoOoO 000O00c ac>O0 E 0000000: AW a C) H SNF- "1 \ m 7 0 7 0 ZOV C)V '�t O CO VNI- (D O00 M 0�M N C-4(D 00 co Off' TN (-O(M t� �- V L O Z OZLL�V MMv � vNMMM MMmNOM� O N J NMMMNpm Z O t (D O (D °r 4) m ]� +. c ) M o Q Z a 7Ofl- 'IT(O(0 Iq00NOLOCO-OO[D N2 - 2M `I 00NO C7 47 r _ ` Z V n 0MOO N «7 ((O 000N (D 0)0)fes. L', 0�V pi O �-+ �¢ F-- ��� � � �I-NC)O O j yp �O r-COO 00n OCO CDM - CD 000(Dh (O r- O 0 m � O1� I�I�n CO(n(O �� ��So v��.-pN� O SCO(n Qi ((n0 0[9O yF ���� V a a �t Qi EOOOOO OOOOO o0OOO!oc5OoOO c oO0OOOo 1-' -0 c a c 0 Y aZ oZ m aE aE ag «L. `O n00O MCO Co 0 ON OO ulmM 2 r-u)(D� '5 Oi 7 d CDN0 (D Ln O=ff L(D V(n V V MMMT 000M�0OO�oP O�� O LL,C� ((�M M M CO�(O`t N ��� r X00 co ��� co M �O M f6 O N C 0 CNm 000N0000 N- 001-[D IT 6]MM00 L�io'O�CONOON00 cr co �NNNMO �NN-00 N- NM Nm �* q -Id ONN-NOON V[U CS7 m O c O O N zm Z-222m 22iao a 42 . . (n (n w E 62222 w mLL Eaaaa o dada a as W-E-=.v0i ui (Yi 101 E o caaaa E o2 CD LO o `r'roiv~ o`r's Qom mmHH U)0)—CISva 0Ha m v v v v W) tii i)tri (o io c Q F oa RU.)Li)Lri(o > CR- c)000 0000 (Do (�Q o waoo076 U).= C7 Qc o010 3 7 O O 22 Y Y Ca (a (U 0) as r �N V 0072 O 0070 aDMr- MN NMf- 000 O LO NOI- 0Iq0N72 MN0 N0(O M +�+ Il-O)ItN 0 O �C\l m co N ('M m C'j m N N O N r N M M co M a W Nr r M c c r r r LO LO MM'co CD r Lo(6 co hc00) WOD0MNMr � MMCO� M N M N (.6r L7 ci C7 Q1 d. 'i r LI C- 0 0 0 O'O 000010 O O O O O,O o 0 0 0 0 0000000 �i 0 Wu F. F 0 c 6-7 'D (D c m 0 E a E O` C)C)M rr r MWNM V(OLOr(O("7�'OO N .,;, OOrrN�O N W rN0r W J L6n (D r-+ QI M�MMM 720'qMN 07n to Vr00 CM0 M CO � MM LL')Or(OO yam+ 0 r r M ANN cd O OR r4'n U) Of � 00 a a0 .N Zt7DMc00 CD--d-MhO NCOW �M'qNOM(D Cpl cM CO CD V' V ONcO OCO Il-rO �rM O IT 004 cD(O l7 Q F r r r N(O r r r r h r r(p 0 N r N r f W i� N d a r QI Cl) a) _ � `N p N x00000 OOOo',o 0a 000000000 0000000 0 co NI��~ (At� o �. Z Z n E -0 ee}t O N O . . . O LL a i N 0 M r M co co v L 00 O M Cl)00 C6�N�M r Cl)r O0li) 0 M COMN � c G /1 = L a) a) 2 J'I Z r r Z r � mv�, ZU � NSI' p)a'I _ 3.,V Itw M(O LDOM W OM 1--0m 000M ` V(OM(OOMcR E - � V7� r N 0 0 0 0 M N w'd- O 0 M � V (O 0 0 M V N C 2 O LL CO C/) a rrrrcD rrr �r7 r ����� rrrr(D�m C J o M�mO7 CI I-0N 0 0 O 7DOli M"ri r-r- R M0Il io to O 072Mr1D IR V �Oco �N6`I��;MN 6 MMNf- (UO') 61 y � rte- r r r r � rr V a n r. 00000 OOo oo 00000000000 c 0000000 � r O r U) r o 0 C q C 0Y 700 2 N t E. r E d M 0 L g-w a N(OM 0 0 7D O 7 r- 0 0"t V M I� �n M 0 7 4 ' Q N M 0 O 0x00 U)ll'�. rrr � rrrrL2 C14 o) N fnJF"Q(YOj r r r r(O f-. �O 0 (0 O N C � f-l�(000 f�c000 V*0) (2M0(V OOr ao '0(00- CO r-.(p Cn N rr MCO N �001 O -02 r—a (D 2 Q O C O -- - - O w'����m ,mmo o y m aa'7YY gE°:��� � m,LL E¢QQQ o QQQQIo QQ o r m rnrnN v, U v cQQQQ E ol= �07D 072H Ou70 W)7 0 L 2 (n 0 2 PLL c)L c)Lo oHl ai O r fM O r M O r CLF-O J J'm m .N.�M v O C9 h I� n r- 00 00 00 001 0 0 c Cl `�.' o c .�+ U) l--co c0> CL X0000 0000 OO 2Q wO0C)C) < Q 0 0 I2 Y Y (0 c] a) m (La rpI.N IT ON O NN4O MON OHO OO NM Q 00 NO 000 MMM f� MrMr ONO N (q M M N N M('M M N M N N c:) N 12: N CO CO Cl)M CV) r r r r r r Fla OO O N O!O o m r- N 00 0 0 O O 47 fD f� M 00 .^m-. O(O CO I-r O � F .--r N I O (D V LO lh N Cl)N L M I r O O �t(O V U)II N 0) CL d Q 0• r Q 0 0 0 c)O O O O 0I O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c O O O 0'0 O O O cC � � U) O -0m vvZ) c (u A E 0 ` y 2F' Lo Lo NOOOO O(n O N LO Mr OO NO (n D` MNOOIgMI� RS♦ZJ r07 Nrr (o r 0007 C)00 r co rN.-rl(ppN yr 1L N O W M nj <� l�O v0000NN 0047 V 00qI- N(o�r V I��OD OI,���O r r r NII CO M M N V N r N 0 00 N r- N OCD N V Cl)M MM r C 6vMOM O MOOM OM00 NMW Nm Imo' 00 47'q' 'O ��V N O OV �N N-I w O O N N Lo cp r 1 0. O r Fq Lo ,(IO Or r r It r •I r Q I w Q Q Qil I � N = N INC O N E00000 Ora Or 0n C) OoOoOo E, OOr0 "ryc di N oLB � Qz .0 Z r � � oN o'er OCO) ; O M N M N O r N M O w N O n O Qi r (o O'. I N r (V w(O M U L �,Z II r r NNON Mco O LLQ,JI r..4'I Z L � = m OC, Z awn � m� = ZU � C ([� (� a M�NOI-M 00(o M((7N LnOO I-N(C)r Nr CN ` h00(O M'qMM NO00 NN � OONn Nc6r r �i Or N(OO Lo LL CO O � o �rrr r rO rO HII rr(�r(n�,(q J 0 N (O O 4)N O M O 00 I- 47 I-pp M Df;l[7 r (n N 0,c0 M �O �'N MNMM(N vOM mMGDrQ.rr O vMNt7:� O CL Y ,-.- r r r QI rr.-- n CL V ¢ a I EOOOOO o00OO OOOOOOflOq'o0 EI OOOo'Oo''O 3 O r O C 0-r-0Ir O 0 Z ao _ -0E. log .L.. :3 C)0WO 2 (n 00(0 CO I-V(N(o 0)Cd co - t.. O >la a. (D W) ONOO 00 �1 M(7M(D MNMMu, �O 000 LoM Mr Or 071.LL OM MN MN�(o In �rrrr �rrr r rOvrrn �Ilarrrr(nOO Lo m o "n 0 4)I- O r O M q O O r M V 00(- N N r r t' 5)47 0 r Oi(O.--11 �# r 0 0 N 00 O Oj N 0 SII d m M. O c N E Elland o aaaa o as oma_=s w N (Yy'(3 E caddd, E o'12 O Lo 0 Lo O 47 O Lo o(n f-� o (c a al 0 3 E �- _� a �IOr f`7� Ce) q* Or -O `aOJJQa E17�F-' i'' .N� �O�MO~ 01'0000 0000 oo n~ e m T� v('ri(.)Lb> a wOooO1Q C7 a H S I 0 0 2 2 Y Y N (6 as y FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD,CONNECTICUT DAVID H.STOLMAN MEMORANDUM AICP,PP PRESIDENT MIEC CHAEL A.TIVE GALANTE To: Gary Zuckerman, Chairman, and the VICE PRESIDENT Planning Board of the Village of Rye Brook 35o THEO.FREMDAVE. RYE, NEW YORK 1058o Date: March 6, 2015 914 967-6540 FAX: 914 967-6615 CONNECTICUT Subject: Review of applications from 203 255-3100 New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a HUDSON VALLEY Verizon Wireless for a Special Permit and Site Plan 845 297-6056 Approval to install a wireless telecommunications facility LONG ISLAND on the roof of Doral Arrowwood, 965 Anderson Hill Road 5i6 364-4544 www.fpciark.com As requested, we reviewed applications from New York SMSA Limited email@fpciark.com Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless submitted to the Village of Rye Brook on behalf of the property owner, DCCA, LLC d/b/a Doral Arrowwood for a Special Permit and site plan approval to install a wireless telecommunications facility to include a stealth flagpole and related equipment on the roof, and a natural-gas powered back-up generator on grade in an existing outdoor equipment area that would allow collocation of additional telecommunications company facilities at the hotel building located at 965 Anderson Hill Road, Section 129.34, Block 1, Lot 45 on the Tax Assessor's Map. Property Description The hotel property is located in the PUD District, the Z-1 Instrument Approach Overlay Zone of Westchester County airport and the Anderson Hill Road Scenic Road Overlay District. The property is fully developed with a conference hotel and amenities, and it is adjacent to the Doral Green residential development to the east. The hotel property is also within 500 feet of the municipal lines of the Town/Village of Harrison and the Town of Greenwich in Connecticut, and it includes mature landscape plantings. The Blind Brook Club and the new Enclave (formerly Kingswood) development are located directly across Anderson Hill Road to the south, the Reckson Executive Park office complex is located to the north, and the Purchase campus of SUNY in Harrison is located immediately west of the property. FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT Project Description The Applicant proposes to locate a new wireless telecommunications facility on the roof of the north east portion of the hotel building and a natural-gas powered back-up generator on grade in an existing screened outdoor equipment area in the same general location. The facility antennas will be located in a 35-foot high stealth flag pole mounted on the hotel roof and new equipment cabinets installed on the roof will be screened by a new siding-covered wall matching existing screening already in place that will be utilized create a completely enclosed screened equipment area. The new facility will allow future collocation of the equipment and facilities of other telecommunications companies. Review We reviewed application materials and plans submitted by the Applicant that include the following items: 1. Short Environmental Assessment Form 2. Site Plan Application and Checklist 3. Exterior Building Permit 4. Application for Wireless/Attached Wireless Telecommunications Facility Special Permit 5. Existing Coverage Map, no date, no preparer 6. Letter to the Board of Trustees from Snyder and Snyder, LLP, Tarrytown, N.Y., dated December 3, 2014 7. Statement in Support of Application for Special Permit and Site Plan Approval for Public Utility Wireless Telecommunications Facility, from Snyder and Snyder, LLP, Tarrytown, N.Y., dated November 24, 2014 8. Statement in Support from Ali Aljibori, Verizon Wireless, West Nyack, N.Y., dated June 24, 2014 9. Noise Report for Proposed Back-Up Generator prepared by Tectonic, Mountainville, N.Y., dated November 5, 2014 10.Antenna Site FCC Compliance Assessment and Report, prepared by Pinnacle Telecom Group, Cedar Knolls, N.J. dated October 31, 2013 11.Visual Impact Assessment, prepared by Tectonic Mountainville, N.Y. dated November 7, 2013 12.Structural Capacity Verification, prepared by Tectonic Mountainville, N.Y. dated November 5, 2014 13.Collocation Acknowledgement Statement from Ryan Maybeck, Verizon Wireless, West Nyack, N.Y., dated November 5, 2014 2 FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT 14.Proposed Form of Removal Bond prepared for Verizon Wireless, no date, not executed 15.Technical Review Email to Michael Sheridan, from HDR, Mahwah, N.J., on February 25, 2015 16.Engineer's Plans, prepared by Tectonic, Mountainville, N.Y., dated November 5, 2014: Sheet Number Sheet Title Date T-1 Title Sheet 10/15/13 rev.11/08/14 C-1 Plot Plan, Setback Map and Notes 10/16/13 rev.1 1/08/14 A-1 Site Plan & Generator Detail Plan 10/16/13 rev.1 1/08/14 A-2 Site Detail Plan and Elevation 10/16/13 rev.1 1/08/14 A-3 Details 10/16/13 rev.11/06/14 Please note that our review is limited to planning, zoning and environmental issues. We offer the following comments regarding the application: 1. Zoning. The proposed stealth flagpole, equipment, antennas and generator would be installed on the property and the roof of a building in the Anderson Hill Road Scenic Road Overlay District. It will be necessary for the applicant to demonstrate if any element of the installation will be visible from the Scenic Road, especially in the winter when deciduous trees are leafless. The installation is also within the Z-1 Instrument Approach Zone that includes a maximum height for structures in the zone as measured from the elevation of the surface of the airport runway. 2. Visual impacts. A visual analysis was provided showing existing views of the hotel building from various locations and distances surrounding the proposed area where the facility equipment and flagpole would be located. However, the trees in the pictures are in full leaf, which does not provide a demonstration of the "worst case" when trees are leafless and views towards these areas are more open. In addition, all of the copies of the photos provided are of sufficiently poor quality that a conclusion regarding the visual impacts of the equipment cannot be reached. The Applicant should verify if the quality of the original montages is at fault or if the copies are. Better quality copies of the photo montages, or better quality montages should be provided for review. In addition, the same views should be re-photographed now while the trees are leafless and new montages made to illustrate the same views in winter after installation of the facility. 3 FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT The new and existing screen walls proposed should be tall enough to completely obscure views of the new equipment cabinets. The drawings should include a measurement of the full heights of the tops of the equipment cabinets on the mounting structure from the surface of the roof, and the exact heights of the tops of the screen walls from the roof surface to ensure full screening capability of the walls. The Applicant should provide the proposed color of the flagpole and the proposed color should be graphically indicated in the visual analysis. The Applicant should also clarify whether or not the flagpole will be used to fly a flag. If so, the size and color of the flag should be depicted in the visual analysis. When we receive the requested graphics and information we will continue our review. We look forward to discussion regarding the application and our comments. Marilyn Timpone Mohamed, ASLA, AICP Senior Associate/Planning/Environment cc: Honorable Mayor and the Village Board of Trustees Christopher Bradbury, Village Administrator Michal Nowak, Superintendent of Public Works/Village Engineer Philip A. Butler, Esq., Village Attorney Snyder and Snyder, LLP, for the Applicant J IDOCS215001Rye Brook1538.661.Doral Arco n,wood Verizon Colocation.Site Plan Modification.PB Inb-o memo.mtna.doc 4 V FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT DAVID H. STOLMAN MEMORANDUM AICP, PP PRESIDENT EXICHAEL A.ECUTIVE GALANTE To: Gary Zuckerman, Chairman, and the VICE PRESIDENT Planning Board of the Village of Rye Brook 35o THEO.FREMD AVE. RYE, NEW YORK 1058o Date: March 9, 2015 914 967-6540 FAX: 914 967-6615 CONNECTICUT Subject: Reckson Executive Parr, Phase 3 — 203 255-3100 Applications for Zoning Code and Zoning HUDSON VALLEY Map Amendments, and a PUD Concept Plan 845 297-6056 LONG ISLAND 5i6 364-4544 As requested, we reviewed applications for zoning code and zoning map www.fpciark.com amendments and approval of a PUD Concept Plan submitted by email@fpclark.com Buckingham Partners and Sun Homes on behalf of Reckson Operating Partnership LP, property owner, to amend Section 250-7 E., Planned Unit Development District (PUD), of the Village Code, change the Village Zoning Map to add Reckson Executive Park Phase 3 into the amended PUD District, and approve a Concept Plan for construction of 110 attached and detached single-family homes, a community building and swimming pool for the use of development residents, parking, roadways and other related infrastructure instead of the 280,000 square-foot office building and associated parking already approved, but not built, on property known as Reckson Executive Park Phase 3, International Drive, Section 129.25, Block 1, Lot 1 on the Town of Rye Tax Map. Property Description The 31.5-acre property, located at 1100 King Street in the Reckson Executive Park, is within the OB-1 Zoning District and the Z-1 Instrument Approach Zone of Westchester County Airport. The Phase 3 building lot is located west of the current terminus of International Drive and extends generally west to the Blind Brook. The western property line of the subject lot follows the course of the Blind Brook for the most part; however, a 0.5- acre portion of the lot is within the Town/Village of Harrison. The lot has an existing approved site plan and is partially developed with storm water management and water quality facilities that are under construction and mostly complete, which are part of the existing office building approval. is Generally, the rest of the lot is naturally vegetated. FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT The existing special permit and site plan approvals for office development have undergone a series of amendments and extensions of approval since the original approval in 1990. The current special permit, site plan and wetlands permit approvals for a 280,000 square-foot office building and 1,120 parking spaces were extended in December, 2010 by the Board of Trustees and are valid until December 14, 2015. Project Description The Applicant proposes to construct 100 market-rate, attached and detached, single- family homes and 10 attached, single-family, affordable homes that would qualify under the Rye Brook FAH regulations as AFFH homes, a community building, a swimming pool, and associated roads, parking areas, and other infrastructure on the Reckson Phase 3 lot. Construction also would include extension of the western end of International Drive, location of new streets within the development, an updated stormwater management plan, grading and removal of existing vegetation, extension of utilities, street lighting, driveways, pedestrian walkways, parking areas for visitors, landscape plantings, and signage. To make it possible to build the development and approve the proposed Concept Plan submitted, the Applicant submitted a petition to change the Rye Brook Zoning Map to put the Phase 3 lot into the Planned Unit Development District (PUD), and amend Section 250-7 E. of the Village Code regarding PUD development with respect to setbacks, density, street frontage, and the gross floor area of attached garages and walk- out basements. The zoning code and zoning map amendment petition and the Concept Plan were referred to the Planning Board by the Board of Trustees on February 24, 2015 for a report and recommendations. Review We reviewed a petition, applications, an EAF, and plans submitted by the Applicant that include the following items: 1. Full Environmental Assessment Form Part land EAF Mapper Summary 2. Letter and Petition to the Mayor and Board of Trustees prepared by Cuddy and Feder, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. dated February 10, 2015 3. School Aged Children, Sun Homes, Rye Brook prepared by Divney, Tung, Schwalbe , LLP, White Plains, N.Y. no date 2 FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT 4. Rendered Illustrative Plan, Home Plans and Elevations, illustrative plan prepared by Divney, Tung, Schwalbe , LLP, White Plains, N.Y., no date 5. Traffic Impact Study, prepared by Maser Consulting, P.A., Hawthorne, N.Y. dated January 14, 2015 6. Land Title Survey prepared by Joseph R. Link, Land Surveyor, Mahopac, N.Y. dated March 23, 2002, updated January 21, 2015 7. Memorandum to the Village Engineer and the Planning Board prepared by Dolph Rotfeld Engineering , P.C., Tarrytown, N.Y. dated March 3, 2015 8. Engineer's Plans, prepared by Divney, Tung, Schwalbe, LLP, White Plains, N.Y.: Sheet Number Sheet Title Date SP-1.0 Conceptual Site Plan 02/09/15 SP-2.0 Conceptual Grading and Utility Plan 02/09/15 Please note that our review is limited to planning, zoning and environmental issues. Comments We have the following comments regarding the application: 1. SEQRA Review. The Board of Trustees, as approval authority for the zoning petition and the PUD Concept Plan has determined the Proposed Action to be an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), and intends to be Lead Agency for the SEQRA review. Part 1 of the EAF provided by the Applicant indicates that there may be adverse environmental impacts created by the zoning changes and the PUD Concept Plan with respect to impacts to land use, zoning, topography, vegetation, wildlife and threatened or endangered species, a Critical Environmental Area (Westchester County Airport 60 Ldn Noise Contour), hazardous materials, floodplains, surface water resources, wetlands, transportation and parking, community services and construction. Based on the information provided and any additional information that the Applicant can supply, the Board of Trustees as Lead Agency will determine if the Proposed Action requires the preparation of an environmental impact statement. 3 FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT 2. Zoning. The zoning petition submitted requests a zoning map change to place the Phase 3 lot into the PUD district. In addition, the petition requests waivers and amendments of Section 250-7 E., the PUD regulations to build the proposed Concept Plan as follows: a. Waiver of the requirement for a 100-foot wide buffer along the common property line with Reckson Phases 1 and 2. b. Waiver of the 9,000 square foot maximum gross floor area per acre. c. Verification that the Phase 3 lot does not require 150 feet of frontage on a State or County Road. The Applicant also requests that the Village Board permit the gross floor areas of attached garages and the gross floor areas of walk-out basements beyond the total maximum allowable floor area of 9,000 square feet per acre. According to the information submitted, the Applicant proposes a total of 294,000 square feet of market rate and affordable housing on the site, which is approximately 9,333 square feet of gross floor area per acre. However, it is unclear if the petition asks for a density of 9,333 square feet per acre, or additional square footage per acre beyond the 9,333 square feet per acre. The Applicant should clarify if the gross floor area of each type of the market rate units of 3,300, 2,800, and 2,350 square feet includes the gross floor areas of walk-out basements and attached garages. If not, the additional square footage of gross floor area per-unit and the total gross floor area proposed above the 9,000 square-foot per acre maximum should be provided. 3. Affordable Housing. Pending review by the Building and Fire Inspector, the Applicant proposes 10 AFFH units and seeks incentives to provide these affordable units; however, affordable units are required by the Village Code in all new developments of 11 units or more, including PUDs. We recommend, if the Boards are inclined to consider incentives for the project, such as increased gross floor areas and decreased vegetated buffers then the magnitude of the incentives granted should be balanced by the benefits of the project to the Village, the environmental and other constraints of the particular site, and the ability of the site to accept the future changes and expansions of the owners of all the homes, affordable and market-rate. The guidelines for inevitable future modifications to the homes and the grounds surrounding the homes, such as decks, patios, enlarged driveways, etc., should be part of the considerations and the planning today. 4 FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT The Village Code includes requirements regarding the siting, size and design of AFFH units that are located in new or existing market-rate developments, such as the one proposed. These requirements include the integration of the affordable units throughout the development, the general design and exteriors of the units should be the same as the market-rate units, and that AFFH units may be no less than 80% of the floor area of the market-rate units. It appears, from the information provided and the site layout that the affordable units included in the Concept Plan do not comply with the requirements of the Village Code. We recommend that the AFFH unit plans and the Concept Plan layout be reconsidered to comply with the requirements of the Village Code. 4. PUD Concept Plan. Section 250-7 E(4)(a)[1] includes a list of all the items required on the Concept Plan and the written statement. The Concept Plan should be revised to provide all the requirements of the referenced section, including the dimensions of all required setbacks and requested setbacks, the limits of the regulated wetland buffer of the Blind Brook, the flood plains, the locations and limits of all easements, the dimensions of all roadway widths, and pedestrian circulation. We recommend that the written statement also be revised to include all the information required in the referenced section, including the type of ownership, etc. 5. Traffic and Parking. Our traffic engineers are reviewing the Traffic Impact Study submitted and will provide traffic and parking comments to the Village Boards in a separate memorandum. 6. Wetlands. The EAF states that the site plan submitted includes completion of the stormwater detention basins and the water quality basins that were approved for office development. The Applicant should clarify if the current basins will be modified and updated to become part of the new stormwater management plan. Any new work based on the PUD Concept Plan within the existing wetland basins or the wetland buffer of the Blind Brook would require Compliance with the Village Code regulations regarding wetlands and approval of a wetland permit. 7. Concept Grading Plan. The creation of new steep slopes on the site should be minimized by designing a site plan and street layout plan that works with the existing slopes of the site and utilization of retaining walls where appropriate. Dead end streets and cul-de-sacs should be avoided. As much as possible, natural vegetation should be preserved on the site and we do not recommend extensive grading to create sloped building areas for walk-out basements. Units with such basements should be located where the existing slopes that make such basements 5 FREDERICK P. CLARK ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION, ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT RYE, NEW YORK FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT possible are situated. The disturbance and creation of new steep slopes on the property would require compliance with the Village Code regulations regarding steep slopes, and the approval of a Steep Slopes Work Permit. 8. EAF. The EAF includes an error that should be corrected. The answer to Section D.3.b. should be "No." The Applicant should provide evidence that the potential environmental impacts related to construction, including the length of time of construction, public safety, noise, vibration, soil and erosion impacts, air quality impacts, and traffic would be reduced or eliminated by a construction logistics and management plan. 9. Visual Impacts. The removal of existing vegetation, grading of the lot and construction of the new homes may create visual impacts to views of the property from the surrounding residential neighborhoods of Bellefair and Doral Green. Evidence of the views from residential receptors surrounding the new development and any proposed mitigation measures or efforts to protect and preserve existing vegetation should be submitted. When the requested clarifications, additional information, and revisions are submitted, we will continue our review of the application. We look forward to discussion with the Planning Board regarding the application. Marilyn Timpone Mohamed, ASLA, AICP Senior Associate/Planning/Environment cc: Honorable Mayor and the Village Board of Trustees Christopher Bradbury, Village Administrator Michal Nowak, Superintendent of Public Works/Village Engineer Philip A. Butler, Esq., Village Attorney William S. Null, Esq., for the Applicant Gerhard M. Schwalbe, P.E. for the Applicant .L•IDOCS215001Rye Brook153R.hh2.Sun HomeC.ReClccon Pha.ce 3 A7nendnaentS.PB Intro memo.mtm.docx 6 .Dolph Rotfeld Engineering, P.C. CONSULTANTS & DESIGNERS 200 White Plains Road, Tarrytown, NY 10591 • (914)631-8600 M E M O TO: MICHAL NOWAK, Village Engineer GARY ZUCKERMAN, Chairman, Planning Board FROM: DOLPH ROTFELD, P.E., BCEE� SUBJECT: Sun Homes Reckson Executive Park Village of Rye Brook DATE: March 3, 2015 As per your request, we have reviewed the following submission materials with regard to the Sun Homes Conceptual Site Plan Amendment, Reckson Executive Park: • Plan entitled "Conceptual Site Plan" prepared by Divney-Tung-Schwalbe dated 219115; • Plan entitled "Conceptual Grading and Utility Plan" prepared by Divney- Tung-Schwalbe dated 219115; • ALTA/ACSM Land title survey, prepared by Joseph R. Link, dated 1126115; The following are our comments: 1. Detailed engineering site plans will be required for a full review of the proposed development. 2. The applicant will be required to demonstrate compliance with the current NYSDEC SPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activity - GP-0-15-002. since the stormwater detention basins have been previously approved and are exisitng, a determination will need to be made as to compliance with all of the current runoff reduction requirements of the General Permit. 3. The proposed water and sewer main extensions will need to be public thus requiring Westchester County Health Department approval. Easements would be required for municipal access. 4. Hydrant, fire flow testing should be conducted to verify existing capacity. Dolph Bot#eld Engineering, P.C. Mr. Michal Nowak Page 2 — March 3, 2015 5. An analysis of sewage flows and existing capacity should be submitted for review. 6. It is unclear if the roadways proposed will be public or private; at any rate these should be designed to Village standards, including adequate turning radius and turn-arounds for fire apparatus. 7. Please note that this office has not reviewed the conceptual site plan for zoning compliance. We will be happy to continue our review once additional information is provided. DR X�fl C: G. Schwalbe March 12, 2015 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON AN APPLICATION BY NEW YORK SMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D/B/A VERIZON WIRELESS FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND A SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AN ATTACHED PUBLIC UTILITY WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 965 ANDERSON HILL ROAD (AKA THE DORAL ARROWWOOD HOTEL) BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rye Brook Planning Board hereby adopts the attached Report and Recommendation to the Rye Brook Board of Trustees on an application by New York SMSA Limited Partnership dba Verizon Wireless for site plan approval and a special permit to construct an attached public utility wireless telecommunications facility on the roof of the Doral Arrow Hotel located at 965 Anderson Hill Road in the PUD Zoning District. On motion by , seconded by , Mr. Michael Nowak, Superintendent of Public Works, called the roll: APPROVING THE REFERRAL RESOLUTION: Ayes: Nays: Abstain: Excused: ACCURSO, GOODMAN, GRZAN, LAUFER, SCHOEN, TARTAGLIA, ZUCKERMAN REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FROM THE RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD TO THE RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON AN APPLICATION BY NEW YORK SMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D/B/A VERIZON WIRELESS FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND A SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AN ATTACHED PUBLIC UTILITY WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 965 ANDERSON HILL ROAD (AKA THE DORAL ARROWWOOD HOTEL) I. APPLICATION OVERVIEW The Rye Brook Board of Trustees (the "BOT") is currently considering an application by New York SMSA Limited Partnership dba Verizon Wireless ("Verizon") for site plan approval and a special permit to construct an attached public utility wireless telecommunications facility on the roof of the Doral Arrow Hotel located at 965 Anderson Hill Road in the PUD Zoning District. On February 24, 2015, the BOT referred Verizon's application to the Planning Board for consideration and for a report and recommendation thereon pursuant to Section 209-3 of the Village Code. II. DISCUSSION The Planning Board members reviewed and discussed Verizon's application at the Planning Board's meeting on March 12, 2015, at which time the Village staff and Village consultants also provided input. The Planning Board members also reviewed the Village Planner's memorandum, dated March 6, 2015, setting forth the following observations and comments concerning the application: 1. The applicant should provide information on whether any element of the installation will be visible from Anderson Hill Road, especially in the winter when deciduous trees are leafless. 2. Better quality copies of the photo montages, or better quality montages, should be provided for review. In addition, the same views should be re- photographed now while the trees are leafless and new montages made to illustrate the same views in winter after installation of the facility. 3. The Applicant should provide the proposed color of the flagpole, and the proposed color should be graphically indicated in the visual analysis. The Applicant also should clarify whether the flagpole will be used to fly a flag. If so, the size and color of the flag should be depicted in the visual analysis. 4. The project is within the Z-1 Airport Overlay Zone, which states that the maximum structure height in the zone is to be measured from the elevation of the surface of the Westchester Airport runway. The applicant should verify that the proposed height of the installation will not violate the maximum height allowed based on the Z-1 Airport Overlay Zone. At the Planning Board's meeting on March 12, 2015, the Board members made the following addition observations and comments concerning Verizon's application: 1. ; and 2. III. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on discussions at its March 12, 2015 meeting, the Planning Board hereby recommends to the BOT that -3- Dated: Rye Brook, New York March 12, 2015 On motion by , seconded by , Mr. Michael Nowak, Superintendent of Public Works, called the roll: APPROVED AT THE MARCH 12, 2015 MEETING OF THE RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD BY A VOTE OF - to - ACCEPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Ayes: Nays: Abstain: Excused: ACCURSO, GOODMAN, GRZAN, LAUFER, SCHOEN, TARTAGLIA, ZUCKERMAN -4- To: Members of the Planning Board March 12, 2015 From: Doral Greens Homeowners Association, Inc. Concerns of Doral Greens with cell tower proposal at Doral Arrowwood I am the President of the Doral Greens Homeowners Association and would like to make the Planning Board and the Village Board aware of the concerns we have with the cell tower proposed to be built on the Arrowwood Hotel building. Our first concern is regarding these cell towers and health issues. We appreciate that no definitive proof has been published linking these towers to a threat of cancer. However such threats have been frequently alleged to exist thus we urge the Village to take a very, very close look at the possible threat and decide if it is one they would like to ignore. We would also point out that the recent studies regarding the use of cell phones seem to continually suggest that there could be health risks beyond cancer, such as behavioral problems in children, and a team at the Cleveland Clinic found that men who used cell phones for more than four hours per day had markedly poorer sperm quality than the men in the control group. It is fair to say, "the data are not all in yet." However the precautionary advising of the use of simple measures to lower exposure should be adopted and taken seriously. Given the consistent results from these studies, public health bodies from around the world are asking that the current wireless safety standards be reviewed. The World Health Organization (WHO) recently classified radio frequency electromagnetic fields as a Group 2B possible carcinogen. Doctors groups are also sounding the alarm. The American Academy of Environmental Medicine, the International Society of Doctors for the Environment (ISDE) and the Irish Doctors Environmental Association (IDEA) are all calling for improved standards. This proposed cell tower is less than one mile from another tower that is in existence on the grounds of the Village Hall site. We were led to believe that this tower would alleviate reception problems in our area and we believe it did just that. Yet we are now confronted with the possibility of a new tower even closer to our homes. We strongly feel that just the public perception of the possible cancer link or that radiofrequency emissions pose a legitimate health risk to children would be enough to impact the home values at Doral Greens and thus would be detrimental to our homeowners. The second concern is the height of the proposed tower. It was originally designed to rise 25 feet from the hotel roof and this has now been increased to 35 feet. (A total of 81 feet without including the elevation of the topography, which would add more to the total.) We believe that both the Westchester Airport Authorities and the Federal Aviation Administration must be aware of and approve such a height. We ask you satisfy yourselves that the extra 10 feet are absolutely necessary. Notwithstanding that Verizon can meet any restrictions imposed we have a practical problem and that is because the flight paths of landing aircraft at Westchester Airport are determined by many factors, less when it is an instrument landing, which most commercial pilots use, and more when a visual landing is used when a pilot may use his own discretion during his approach. The placement of the tower being proposed may cause many pilots to avoid it by approaching from a more easterly route that places them DIRECTLY over the Doral Greens Homes. We have proposed that the airport tower direct these approaches so that they fly over the large hotel parking lot, which is located between the Hotel and Doral Greens and thus would affect less residents of either complex. We also would like a study or opinion of the authorities to the effect that the radio wave transmittals from the tower would in NO WAY interfere or jeopardize the communications to or instruments of the landing aircraft. We thank you for taking our concerns into consideration and for the diligence you will use in acting on the proposal presently before you. We do not begrudge the hotel trying to bolster its income and would hope they could find a much better way. March 12, 2015 File: 147 247441 Mayor Paul Rosenberg and Members of the Board of Trustees Chairman Gary Zuckerman and Members of the Planning Board Village of Rye Brook Village Hall 938 King Street Rye Brook, New York 10573 Re: Verizon Permit Application 965 Anderson Hill Road (Doral Arrowwood Hotel) Rye Brook, New York Technical Review Memorandum Dear Mayor Rosenberg, This memorandum was prepared to summarize HDR's technical review of an application prepared by Snyder & Snyder LLP, an agent of New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless (Verizon), to install a new wireless telecommunication facility on a rooftop at the above-referenced location (the site) in the Village of Rye Brook, New York. The site is located within a Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district. This review includes a general assessment of Verizon's application focusing on issues related to facility operation, aesthetics, conformance with electromagnetic radiation hazard criteria, and other aspects by HDR. The review consisted of an analysis of the application materials dated December 4, 2014 and supplemental information that was received in March 2015. This memorandum is written for the review and comment of the Village of Rye Brook Planning Board and Board of Trustees. The applicant is seeking a Special Use Permit, Site Plan approval and Building Permit. The applicant has not identified the need for variances or other approvals. A summary of recommendations is included at the end of this report. Verizon Site Overview Installation of a new Verizon wireless telecommunications facility is proposed on the rooftop at the existing Doral Arrowwood hotel and conference center. Panel antennas are proposed to be nested within a 35 ft tall monopole structure ("flagpole" type monopole). Equipment cabinets are proposed in proximity to the base of the monopole, on a new steel platform situated within a dedicated area on the roof. Installation of a ground-based back-up generator is also proposed, near the northwest corner of the building (in proximity to an existing generator and other utility feeds). New cabling / 1 conduits are proposed between the proposed rooftop monopole / equipment area, and the back-up generator and existing utility connections in the building. The elevation of the roof surface where the monopole and equipment platform are proposed is at a height of approximately 45 feet above surrounding ground level (agl), with the parapet at approximately 48 ft agl. The proposed monopole is 35 feet tall and 2.5 ft in diameter, and is noted to reaches to a maximum elevation of approximately 84.5 ft agl. A total of six Verizon panel antennas are proposed to be concealed within the monopole structure. The antenna centerlines will be located at heights of 79.5 ft (3 antennas; approximately at the 30 ft height in the monopole) and 72.5 ft (3 antennas; approximately at the 23 ft height in the monopole). No flag is proposed as part of this application. Co-location by other wireless carriers in the proposed monopole structure is not likely to be feasible, due to the relatively small height and diameter of the monopole. Verizon base station equipment is proposed on the rooftop steel platform. The platform will house 8 equipment cabinets, 12 remote radiohead (RRH) units, a transformer, fire extinguisher, and non-glare motion sensor activated lighting near the rooftop equipment. The above-identified equipment, platform, and monopole base will be located behind a stealth screening wall designed to match the building features and colors. The screening wall is proposed to consist of cream colored vinyl siding surrounding three sides of the proposed equipment platform (west, south, and north sides). The screening wall is approximately 13 ft in height, and will effectively shield the platform, monopole base, and cabinets/equipment from viewpoints located north, south, and west of the site. In addition to the equipment that will be behind the screening wall, new stairs to access the facility and electric conduits are proposed. Electric, telcom and ground conduits will be routed along the rooftop surface and up the exterior of building walls in some locations. GPS units (4 total) will be mounted to the new screening wall; they will extend one foot over the top of the screen wall. Installation of one 50kw natural gas back-up generator is proposed as part of Verizon's application. It will provide back-up power to the Verizon equipment in the event of a power outage. A new gas line and gas meter is also required. The proposed location is at the rear of the building (north side), and adjacent to an existing backup power generator. The proposed emergency generator will be at grade, on an existing concrete pad, and surrounded on two sides by a concrete wall and on one side by the building. The proposed generator includes a sound attenuating enclosure. Application Review HDR conducted a preliminary review of the application materials dated December 3, 2014. A visit to the site (including the rooftop where the Verizon equipment is proposed, 2 and the on-site generator area) was conducted with applicant and building representatives on February 5, 2015. Based on the preliminary review and site visit, additional application information and clarification needs were identified by HDR. A supplemental information request was submitted via email on February 25, 2015 and responses were received on March 5, 2015. Original and supplemental materials were reviewed to complete this technical memorandum. Attachment A provides a summary of the additional information requested by HDR, with comments in red text. Verizon Service/Capacity Verizon's 965 Anderson Hill Road facility is being proposed to provide more reliable and faster wireless voice and data services to the site area, by supplementing coverage and adding capacity to its existing cell sites in the area. Existing (on air) Verizon sites include: • 938 King Street (Village Hall, Rye Brook) 77 ft antenna height [approx. 1 mile SE of site] • 240 Airport Road, Harrison, NY, building co-location, 74 ft antenna height [approx. 3.27 miles NW of site] • 735 Anderson Hill Road, Purchase, NY, building co-location, 84 ft antenna height [approximately 0.91 miles SW of site] The proposed installation will accommodate Verizon's enhanced "4G" or long-term evolution (LTE) operations, including various voice and data services, to consumers. Verizon is licensed to operate at several frequency bands, including 700, 850, 1900, and 2100 MHz to provide different classes of wireless services (LTE, PCS, and cellular). The proposed antennas and radio equipment include the following: 1. Six new panel antennas nested within the monopole structure. 2. Four new GPS antennas on the south screening wall 3. Twelve new RRH units and two sectorization boxes, near the base of the monopole. RHH units are used increasingly by wireless carriers to boost antenna signals and process "call traffic". Two RRH models are proposed (to accommodate the various Verizon frequency bands), with the largest unit having a weight of 50 lbs. and maximum dimensions of approximately 25" tall, 15"wide, and 8"deep. Although supplemental information was requested in terms of the on air Verizon sites and trends in call / data traffic and need for capacity relief in the site area (see Attachment A), detailed data has not been provided as of the writing of this report. The applicant's RF engineer has provided an affidavit that attests to the need for capacity 3 relief (noting that existing Verizon cell sites in the area have become overburdened, resulting in dropped calls, denied access to the network, a reduction in data transmission speed, or an inability to successfully transmit data). Given the locations of existing Verizon sites and antenna heights in the area, the newer frequency bands and LTE services which Verizon is licensed to roll out, and based on HDR's experience with similar Verizon projects in the region in the past two years (both new cell site proposals and applications for facility upgrades), capacity relief for the local Verizon network is likely needed now or in the near future. The proposed Verizon facility is situated and designed to provide capacity relief and supplemental coverage to the existing cell site network. The recommendations at the end of this memorandum include a request for trend information/key performance indicator data for the existing Verizon cell sites in the area to be furnished to the Village so that trends in data can be further documented. Conformance with NIER and Other Radiation Hazard Criteria In order to comply with the Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Radiation (NIER) hazard criteria, Pinnacle Telecom Group (Pinnacle) (on behalf of the applicant) calculated RF levels for the proposed Verizon installation. It is understood based on application information and observations from the February 5, 2015 site visit conducted by HDR that there typically is no general public access to the Doral Arrowwood rooftop areas. Modeling was conducted by Pinnacle to simulate RF levels that can be expected in the site vicinity assuming the proposed Verizon site is constructed. The maximum RF level calculated was found to be approximately 1.1% of the general public Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limit, at a distance of approximately 100 ft from the monopole. Thus, RF emissions at all general public areas in the vicinity of the site are anticipated to be well within the applicable MPE. FCC-type signage is proposed on or near the proposed Verizon equipment on the rooftop platform, and at all rooftop entranceways. The plan for signage appears to be appropriate for the proposed facility. Aesthetic Impacts and Noise Tectonic Engineering & Surveying Consultants, P.C. conducted a visual resource evaluation to determine the potential visibility of Verizon's proposed installation. A field investigation, within an approximate 1/2 mile radius, was performed by Tectonic on November 3, 2014, and photosimulations were developed. Tectonic concluded that the proposed Verizon installation would in general be visible only from the immediate area (Doral Arrowwood site, views from Doral Greens, distance views from Bellefair). Under the proposed design, the Verizon panel antennas will be concealed within the 35 ft monopole structure (2.5 ft diameter). The monopole will thus have a smooth, uniform appearance (proposed to be painted white to match existing rooftop features; no flag or 4 lighting is proposed), with no antenna arrays visible. The proposed monopole would be the tallest rooftop feature. To ameliorate potential views of the equipment compound, a stealth screening wall is proposed around three sides of the rooftop equipment platform. The screening wall consists of cream-colored vinyl siding which will rise to approximately 13 ft above the rooftop. The monopole base and cabinets / other equipment will be effectively screened from viewpoints located north, west, and south of the site; however, screening on the east side of the compound is not proposed. Recommendations relating to visual aspects of the proposed facility are included at the end of this memorandum. A new natural gas-powered 50 kW back-up power generator is proposed to be located at grade, off the northern-most building in the complex. An existing generator and transformer currently exist in this area of the site. The existing on-site generator measures 5' 2" wide x 12' 5" long x 10' 2" high. The proposed Verizon generator measures 3' 4" wide x 9' 2" long x 6' 4" high (including vibration isolators). The proposed generator will be housed within a new sound attenuating enclosure on an existing concrete platform. The platform area is surrounded on three sides by the building and concrete walls / embankment (west of the upper parking lot). For periodic testing purposes, the generator will reportedly be run once per week (typically in the afternoon) for approximately a one hour period. A noise analysis prepared by the generator manufacturer reports a noise level of 57.8 dB(A) at a 7 meter (approximately 23 ft) distance, and an analysis prepared by the applicant's engineer notes a maximum noise level of approximately 32 dB(A) at a distance of 48 ft (nearest property line). No parking or accessway changes on the property are proposed. The drawings indicate that RF notice signs are to be placed at all roof access locations and emergency signs are to be placed on proposed equipment. Signage will not be visible to the general public. FAA and Airspace The Doral site lies within the Z-1 Instrument Approach Zone of the Westchester County Airport. The Village code includes height limits for new structures as follows: The topmost height above the elevation of the end of the graded landing strip to which such approach zone is appurtenant is greater than 1/40 of its horizontal distance from the end of such graded landing strip. The applicant provided a zoning map, indicating a horizontal distance of approximately 6200 ft between the proposed monopole and the edge of the runway. HDR used Terrain Navigator Pro Software to review the estimated horizontal distance, and the approximate elevation at the subject runway (380 ft amsl). Based on application Drawings, the top of the proposed monopole is at 84.5 ft above grade or, at an approximate elevation of 372 ft amsl. Based on the above code criterion, the maximum 5 height allowed above the landing strip elevation would be 155 ft (i.e., 6200 * 1/40). The monopole height appears to meet the requirement (8 ft difference as estimated by HDR). The applicant concludes that no FCC lighting, markings, or other special requirements will be required for the proposed rooftop monopole. However, it is requested that project information be furnished directly to Westchester County Airport for review and so that the Airport can confirm that there are no issues with the proposed Verizon facility. A request for a determination of "no hazard to air navigation" may be required to be filed with FAA (e.g., FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration). Structural A structural certification by Tectonic (NYS P.E.) was provided by the applicant, confirming that the building can accommodate the proposed installation. Structural summary calculations were not provided. The analysis utilized TIA 222-G guidelines, which appears appropriate as those guidelines include wind loads and ice conditions to be utilized in such structural assessments. It is understood that the Applicant maintains full responsibility for the accuracy and adequacy of all aspects of the proposed installation design and construction. It is also understood that the Village's Building Department may conduct a detailed review of the structural analysis (including all design assumptions and calculations). If requested, HDR can assist with the review of the final structural analysis. Conclusions and Recommendations The following recommendations were identified based on HDR's technical review of the Verizon application, and can be considered as conditions should the application be approved. • Aesthetics: It is recommended that the proposed screening wall that borders the south, west, and north sides of the Verizon facility compound also be installed along the east side of the equipment platform, for purposes of shielding equipment and monopole base from potential views from the east. Since existing rooftop mechanical equipment will screen some of the proposed compound, it is suggested that the northern 30 ft of the eastern equipment platform should also include the screening wall. Verizon cabinets, RRH units, and GPS units should be color-matched to the screening wall (it is understood that the interior and exterior of the screening wall will have the same color). Other structures including conduits and cables shall be color-matched to the existing building colors/textures as feasible. A 6 matte finish is recommended for all components. The following colors are recommended for the Planning Board's consideration: o Monopole:white appears to be reasonable based on photosimulations o Screening Wall: cream color vinyl appears to be reasonable based on photos imulations. Samples of the screening wall material / color should be provided by the applicant. o Conduit/Utility runs that are visible from general public areas (e.g., vertical pipe runs): match existing building background color for length of runs that are visible. Other equipment including conduit / utility runs that are installed on the roof surface, new stairs to access the Verizon equipment platform, and the back-up generator, should match in style and color with existing similar site/rooftop features. • Capacity Data: Capacity trend information for nearby existing Verizon cell sites is requested to further document the need for capacity relief in the area. This information can be displayed graphically (e.g., documenting an increase in capacity needs over time). Key performance indicators (KPIs) such as Average Scheduled Eligibility Users (ASEU) and Forward Data Volume (FDV) can be presented. [Refer to Attachment A] • RF/Safety: o The proposed FCC-type signage should be installed and routinely inspected and maintained in accordance with all FCC rules, regulations, and guidance. It is understood that the proposed Verizon equipment area qualifies as an FCC "controlled" area, and that there will be no "nearfield" antenna exposure potential for individuals accessing to the roof and who are not trained in RF emissions. [It is the applicant's responsibility to comply with all FCC rules and regulations that are applicable to the site and operations.] o Protocols should be established for rooftop access for persons not trained in RF emissions (such as maintenance workers that may need to work in proximity of the Verizon equipment / antennas in the future). It is understood that work of such nature will be coordinated between Verizon and Doral Arrowwood. • FAA / Airspace: The applicant concludes that the proposed 35 ft monopole will be compliant with FAA rules and regulations and will not require special FAA marking, lighting, or monitoring. It is requested that project information be furnished directly to Westchester County Airport for review and so that the Airport can confirm that there are no issues with the proposed Verizon facility. A request for a determination of "no hazard to air navigation" may be required to be filed with FAA (e.g., FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration). • Structural Analysis: It is recommended that a final structural analysis (with design assumptions and calculations for the monopole, screening wall, equipment platform, and all equipment, and confirmation that the building has adequate structural capacity to accommodate the Verizon facility) be provided to the Village Building Department as part of the Building Permit review process. Although a structural certification letter has been furnished with the application materials (Tectonic; November 5, 2014), it is understood that the details for the facility (e.g., selected vender to provide monopole structure; type of supports for screening wall; anchor system for monopole base) may not be finalized at the current time. • Other: o Appropriate grounding and local code compliance should be established during the installation of the Verizon equipment and connections with existing electric and telephone utilities. It is understood that on-site connections will be utilized. Documentation of final construction (including but not limited to utility connections, "as-built"locations/heights of the monopole, antennas, equipment cabinets, and signage) shall be provided to the Village Building Department. o Operations should be maintained in accordance with the Village's Wireless Ordinance and all other relevant Village codes and state/federal regulations. Any proposed increases in Verizon's number of antennas, antenna sizes, or number/sizes of other equipment from the "final" approved configurations shall be approved by the Village prior to any modifications. o All applicable Village code and other state/federal requirements relating to operations, periodic compliance reporting, certifications, permit renewals, and other items shall be adhered to by the applicant for the life of the facility. Please feel free to contact us should you have any questions on this report. Sincerely, Henningson, Durham & Richardson Architecture& Engineering, P.C. In Association with HDR Engineering, Inc. I,JJ 1 p, 9t , P-( . Michael P. Musso, P.E. Senior Project Engineer cc: M. Nowak,C. Bradbury M. Sheridan (Snyder&Snyder) 8 ATTACHMENT A s February 25, 2015 HDR Supplemental Information Request Technical Information: • Details should be provided for all proposed remote radiohead (RRH) units, along with clarification on the number of RRHs per each frequency band. Typical details/ dimensions of the RRHs along with the attachments/mounts for this equipment can be provided on Dwg A-3. In addition, spec sheets for the RRH models proposed and a brief narrative on why the RRHs are required for the proposed facility are requested. (Specs can be integrated on the Dwgs or submitted with the narrative.) INFORMATION PROVIDED • A specification sheet for the proposed 35 ft (+/-) monopole should be provided. It is understood that a vender or specific product may not have been selected at this time; if that is the case a"typical"spec can be referred to. INFORMATION PROVIDED • RF—Necessity of Service o To supplement the RF affidavit in Exhibit 1, trend information for nearby existing Verizon cell sites is requested to confirm the need for additional capacity in the area. This information can be displayed graphically(e.g., documenting an increase in capacity needs over time). Key performance indicators (KPIs) such as Average Scheduled Eligibility Users (ASEU) and Forward Data Volume (FDV) can be presented. DETAILED DATA ON EXISTING CAPACITY NOT PROVIDED. o Coverage maps should also be provided for at least two of Verizon's frequencies, showing In-Vehicle coverage from existing/operational Verizon cell sites in the area("before and after", i.e., with and w/o the proposed facility). The existing Verizon sites should include all that are located within the Village of Rye Brook boundaries, and the closest adjacent sites to the north, east, and west. The coverage map information is useful not only for the review of this application, but also so that the Village is aware of the status of existing cell sites. LOCATION INFORMATION ON NEARBY EXISTING (ON AIR) VERIZON SITES PROVIDED. COVERAGE MAPS WERE NOT FURNISHED. • RF—Alternate Sites o Were any alternate sites contemplated and reviewed in detail from an RF perspective for this application ? A DETAILED ALTERNATE SITE ANALYSIS WAS NOT CONDUCTED. APPLICANT NOTES IN RF AFFIDAVIT AND OTHER APPLICATION MATERIALS THAT BASED ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY'S CONFIGURATION, SETBACKS, AND CURRENT ZONING—AND THE CONCEALMENT MONOPOLE DESIGN - THAT THE PROPOSED SITE IS THE BEST ALTERNATE FOR THE SITE AREA. • Structural—A certification letter was prepared by a NYS P.E., attesting that the existing building can accommodate the proposed Verizon facility. Based on the Planning Board review process, additional information may be requested in the future (e.g., structural analysis and design calculations). 10 STATEMENT. IF APPLICATION IS APPROVED, FULL ANALYSIS REQUESTED FOR BUILDING DEPARTMENT REVIEW. Aesthetics: • Better color images of the Visual Analysis/photosimulations are requested (such as digital color images/files). The copy of the Visual Analysis (Exhibit 4) in the application package received by HDR was not clear. COLOR IMAGES FURNISHED. • Is a specific color proposed for the monopole at this time ? YES, WHITE. • It is our understanding that a flag is not being proposed, please confirm. CONFIRMED. NO FLAG IS PROPOSED. • Screening Wall (max height of 13 ft+/- above existing roof surface; to conceal proposed Verizon equip platform/cabinets). DWG A-2 notes the screening wall is proposed on 3 sides of the Verizon platform. o It is requested that Detail 3/A-1 be revised to clearly depict the extent and locations of the proposed screening wall (perhaps with a bold line type and additional labels for the plan view). DWG A-2 UPDATED. o A specification sheet is requested for the screening wall (manufacturer, color options, material, thickness,weight, durability), along with details for how it will be anchored/mounted to the existing roof(typ.). Specs and details can be added to the Dwg set. NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE SCREENING WALL WAS PROVIDED IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS RECEIVED IN MARCH 2015. o It is understood that a cream color is proposed for the screening wall in the application materials, but that the Planning Board may provide feedback on preferences. If possible, a sample of the proposed vinyl wall should be brought to a future Planning Board meeting. STATEMENT. • Coaxial Cable runs. o Based on the Dwgs the majority of the coaxial cable runs (and grounding, electric and telco runs)will be mounted along the rooftop surface and will thus not be visible from general public areas. For cable/conduit sections that are proposed to be situated along building walls (and that may be visible), please provide information for mounting and color matching. This information can be described in narrative form and with a detail on Dwg A-3. A flush mount"box type" cable cover that can be color-matched to the building walls is recommended, if feasible. NOTE ADDED TO DWG SET CONFIRMING ALL VISIBLE UTILITY CONDUITS/CABLES WILL BE PAINTED TO MATCH ADJACENT SURFACES. 11 • Future Colocation. Please clarify that the current Verizon proposal (35 ft+/-flagpole monopole) is designed to ONLY accommodate Verizon antennas, and that the structural certification letter does not consider hypothetical future co-location. Confirm that no additional space is available for other wireless carriers to co-locate within the proposed monopole as designed and shown on the Dwgs. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION NOTES THAT CO-LOCATION WILL BE PERMITTED TO THE EXTENT FEASIBLE (AS PER CODE). HOWEVER, CO- LOCATION WITHIN THE PROPOSED 35 FT TALL MONOPOLE STRUCTURE IS UNLIKELY. FCC/ Height: • The proposed monopole on the roof appears to be the tallest structure that will exist if approved. A note on DWG C-1 states that the facility will comply with Code Section 250- 7D, specifically the Z-1 Instrument Zone. It appears an analysis has been completed for the Verizon rooftop facility to confirm it meets the height criteria of the Airport Zone. Additional information is required for the application file (narrative and sketch) that demonstrate compliance with the Village Code: o Plan View location of the subject Doral Building and proposed Verizon facility in relation to airport/landing strip, with "overlays"Z-1 and Z-2 as defined in 250- 7D (1) shown. PLAN VIEW MAP FURNISHED. INCLUDES REFERENCES TO VILLAGE CODE AND ZONING MAP (confirming that the site is located on an Instrument Approach Zone[Z-1]). o Documentation x-section that shows the proposed Verizon facility is situated at appropriate distance from the airport and at a maximum height that is below the height limit criterion. X-SECTION NOT PROVIDED, BUT COMPARABLE INFORMATION FURNISHED ON PLAN VIEW MAP. • Based on the above, HDR or the Village may request that notification to the Westchester County Airport be made, to provide the Airport with an opportunity to comment on the Verizon application. STATEMENT. This information will confirm that no special FCC striping or lighting -and no zoning variance- is required for the proposed Verizon facility. STATEMENT. CONFIRMATION NEEDED Generator: • A specification sheet for the proposed generator/generator enclosure should be provided. Information on noise attenuation and exhaust should be provided. INFORMATION PROVIDED. • Confirm the height of the proposed generator in relation to the existing concrete wall to the north and east. INFORMATION PROVIDED. 12 • How do the specifications of the proposed generator compare with the existing on-site generator in the same area of the site, in terms of dimensions ? INFORMATION PROVIDED. • Natural Gas and Electric conduit. It is understood based on the Dwgs that the majority of the gas lines will be installed behind existing concrete walls at the north end of the Doral campus' buildings, and the majority of the electric lines that connect the generator to the propose Verizon facility will be routed along the rooftop surface (and will thus not be visible from general public areas). For sections of these utility lines that are proposed to be situated along building walls (e.g.,vertical runs that may be visible) and at grade, please provide information for installation and color matching. This information can be described in narrative form and with a detail on the Dwgs. NOTE ADDED TO DWG SET CONFIRMING ALL VISIBLE UTILITY CONDUITS/ CABLES WILL BE PAINTED TO MATCH ADJACENT SURFACES. 13 March 12, 2015 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON AN APPLICATION BY NEW YORK SMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D/B/A VERIZON WIRELESS FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND A SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AN ATTACHED PUBLIC UTILITY WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 965 ANDERSON HILL ROAD (AKA THE DORAL ARROWWOOD HOTEL) BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rye Brook Planning Board hereby adopts the attached Report and Recommendation to the Rye Brook Board of Trustees on an application by New York SMSA Limited Partnership dba Verizon Wireless for site plan approval and a special permit to construct an attached public utility wireless telecommunications facility on the roof of the Doral Arrow Hotel located at 965 Anderson Hill Road in the PUD Zoning District. On motion by , seconded by , Mr. Michael Nowak, Superintendent of Public Works, called the roll: APPROVING THE REFERRAL RESOLUTION: Ayes: Nays: Abstain: Excused: ACCURSO, GOODMAN, GRZAN, LAUFER, SCHOEN, TARTAGLIA, ZUCKERMAN REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION FROM THE RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD TO THE RYE BROOK BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON AN APPLICATION BY NEW YORK SMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D/B/A VERIZON WIRELESS FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND A SPECIAL PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT AN ATTACHED PUBLIC UTILITY WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 965 ANDERSON HILL ROAD (AKA THE DORAL ARROWWOOD HOTEL) I. APPLICATION OVERVIEW The Rye Brook Board of Trustees (the "BOT") is currently considering an application by New York SMSA Limited Partnership dba Verizon Wireless ("Verizon") for site plan approval and a special permit to construct an attached public utility wireless telecommunications facility on the roof of the Doral Arrow Hotel located at 965 Anderson Hill Road in the PUD Zoning District. On February 24, 2015, the BOT referred Verizon's application to the Planning Board for consideration and for a report and recommendation thereon pursuant to Section 209-3 of the Village Code. II. DISCUSSION The Planning Board members reviewed and discussed Verizon's application at the Planning Board's meeting on March 12, 2015, at which time the Village staff and consultants also provided input. The Planning Board members reviewed the Village Planner's memorandum, dated March 6, 2015, setting forth the following observations and comments: 1. The applicant should provide information on whether any element of the installation will be visible from Anderson Hill Road, especially in the winter when deciduous trees are leafless. 2. Better quality copies of the photo montages, or better quality montages, should be provided for review. In addition, the same views should be re- photographed now while the trees are leafless and new montages made to illustrate the same views in winter after installation of the facility. 3. The Applicant should provide the proposed color of the flagpole, and the proposed color should be graphically indicated in the visual analysis. The Applicant also should clarify whether the flagpole will be used to fly a flag. If so, the size and color of the flag should be depicted in the visual analysis. 4. The project is within the Z-1 Airport Overlay Zone, which states that the maximum structure height in the zone is to be measured from the elevation of the surface of the Westchester Airport runway. The applicant should verify that the proposed height of the installation will not violate the maximum height allowed based on the Z-1 Airport Overlay Zone. The Planning Board members also reviewed and considered a memorandum, dated March 12, 2015, to the Planning Board and the Board of Trustees from the Village's engineering consultant, HDR. The HDR memorandum made the following conclusions and recommendations: 1. The applicant should submit more detailed information concerning existing Verizon sites, trends in call and data traffic and the need for capacity relief around the site area to supplement information in the affidavit submitted by the applicant's RF engineer. Specific information requests were provided -3- in HDR's February 25, 2015 Supplemental Information Request to the applicant. 2. Radio emissions from the project site are anticipated to be well within the maximum permissible exposure levels prescribed under the FCC regulations. 3. Based on the proposed project dimensions, the project will not violate FAA rules and regulations, or require special FAA markings or lighting, nor will it violate the height restrictions under the applicable provisions of the Village Code. 4. Proposed screening on the south, west and north sides of the equipment platform should be extended onto the east side as well. 5. All equipment (including the emergency generator), cables and conduits on the roof should be color-matched to the screening walls. 6. FCC compliant signage should be installed, inspected and maintained. 7. The hotel should implement access protocols for the roof area. 8. The project information should be forwarded directly to the Westchester County Airport for review and comment. 9. A final structural analysis should be provided to the Village Building Department as part of the building permit application. The Planning Board also reviewed a letter from the Doral Greens Homeowners Association ("DGHOA") to the Planning Board, dated March 12, 2015, wherein the DGHOA raised questions relating to: -4- 1. Possible health impacts associated with radio emissions. 2. The actual need for siting the project at the proposed location. 3. Potential impacts on property values. 4. The height of the project and potential impacts on planes and flight patterns at the Westchester Airport. The Planning Board considered each of these issues, with input from the Village staff and consultants. Based on the foregoing, the Board members made the following observations and comments concerning Verizon's application: 1. With respect to the potential health concerns, the Planning Board has been advised by counsel that the Village and its constituent boards do not have authority to investigate this issue. Under the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B), specifically, the Village cannot regulate "the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions." Accordingly, the Village's inquiry into this subject is limited to confirming that the radio frequency emissions from the operation of the project will comply with FCC regulations. The applicant has submitted documentation indicating that the project will comply with FCC radio emission standards. This -5- information has been confirmed by HDR in its memorandum to the Planning Board. 2. With respect to the proposed site of the project, Verizon should provide the information requested in HDR's Supplemental Information Request, dated February 25, 2015, which includes requests for information supporting the need for the project at the proposed site. 3. With respect to impacts on property values, there is no evidence before this Board suggesting that the proposed siting of the project will have an impact on residential property values in the area. 4. With respect to impacts on air traffic and the Westchester Airport, HDR has provided information indicating that the project will not violate FAA or Village height restrictions and that special markings or lighting should be required. However, this application should be provided to the Westchester County Airport for review and comment. III. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on discussions at its March 12, 2015 meeting, the Planning Board hereby recommends to the BOT that Dated: Rye Brook, New York March 12, 2015 On motion by , seconded by , Mr. Michael Nowak, Superintendent of Public Works, called the roll: -6- APPROVED AT THE MARCH 12, 2015 MEETING OF THE RYE BROOK PLANNING BOARD BY A VOTE OF - to - ACCEPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Ayes: Nays: Abstain: Excused: ACCURSO, GOODMAN, GRZAN, LAUFER, SCHOEN, TARTAGLIA, ZUCKERMAN -7- LAW OFFICES OF SNYDER & SNYDER, LLP 94 WHITE PLAINS ROAD NEW YORK OFFICE TARRYTowN, NEW YORK 10591 NEW JERSEY OFFICE 445 PARK AVENUE,9TH FLOOR (914)333-0700 ONE GATEWAY CENTER,SUITE 2600 NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10022 NEWARK,NEW JERSEY 07102 (212)749.1448 FAX(914) 333-0743 (973)824.9772 FAX(212)932-2693 FAX(973)824-9774 WRITER'S E-MAIL ADDRESS REPLY TO: LESLIE J.SNYDER ROBERT D.GAUDIOSO DAVID L.SNYDER (1956-2012) Unyder@Snyderlaw.net Westchester Office December 3,2014 EB ::]Honorable Mayor Paul S.Rosenbergand Members of the Village Board of Trustees Rye Brook Village Hall 938 King Street OKRye Brook,New York 10573 NT RE: New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless Proposed Public Utility Wireless Telecommunications Facility On the Doral Arrowwood Hotel located at 965 Anderson Hill Road,Rye Brook,NY Honorable Mayor Rosenberg and Members of the Board of Trustees: I am the attorney for New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless ("Verizon Wireless") in connection with its request for special permit and site plan approval to install an attached public utility wireless telecommunications facility ("Facility") at the captioned property. The Facility is proposed on the roof of the existing hotel/conference center building known as the Doral Arrowwood (`Building"). The Facility has been strategically designed to shield it from view by having the antennas concealed within a flagpole affixed to the roof, together with related equipment behind a screen wall designed to match the Building. The Property is located in the PUD (Planned Unit Development) zoning district, wherein pursuant to Section 250-39 of the Village Zoning Ordinance, wireless telecommunications facilities, such as the Facility, are permitted by special permit from the Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees. In connection with the foregoing, enclosed please find the required application and escrow fees,together with eight(8)paper copies and one electronic copy of the following materials: 1. Special Use Permit Application, Site Plan Application and Exterior Building Permit Application,together with a letter of authorization from the owner of the Property attached thereto; 2. Statement in Support of the Application,with the documentation required by Section 250-39 of the Zoning Ordinance; 3. Full Environmental Assessment Form and Visual EAF Addendum; and 4. Signed and sealed Site Plan prepared by Tectonic Engineering and Surveying Consultants,P.C. We look forward to discussing this matter at the next available Board of Trustees meeting. If you have any questions or require further documentation,please feel free to contact me or Michael Sheridan of my office at(914) 333-0700. Respectfully submitted, Leslie J. Snyder LJS:ms Enclosures cc: Verizon Wireless Tectonic Engineering Z:\SSDATA WPDATA\SS4 WP\NEWBANM\MiIc Bonhomme\Purchase 2\Zoning\villageboardletter,Ijsnov2014.ms.doe 2 LAW OFFICES OF SNYDER & SNYDER, LLP 94 WHITE PLAINS ROAD NEW YORK OFFICE TARRYTOWN, NEW YORK 10591 NEW JERSEY OFFICE 445 PARK AVENUE,9TH FLOOR (914) 333-0700 ONE GATEWAY CENTER, SUITE 2600 NEW YORK,NEW YORK 10022 NEWARK,NEW JERSEY 07102 (212)749-1448 FAX(914) 333-0743 (973)824-9772 FAX(212)932-2693 FAX(973)824-9774 WRITER'S E-MAIL ADDRESS LESLIE J.SNYDER Msheridan@snyderlaw.net REPLY TO: ROBERT D. SAUDIOSO DAVID L.SNYDER Tarrytown Office (1956-2012) December 9,2014 ES � MHonorable Mayor Paul S.Rosenberg �� " ED and Members of the Village Board of Trustees D'EW 1 a�14Rye Brook Village Hall938 King Street GE OF RYE BROOKRye Brook,New York 10573 ING �EpARTMENT RE: New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless Proposed Public Utility Wireless Telecommunications Facility On the Doral Arrowwood Hotel located at 965 Anderson Hill Road,Rye Brook,NY("Property") Honorable Mayor Rosenberg and Members of the Board of Trustees: Pursuant to your request, enclosed please find the following documents: 1. One (1) Site Plan Application and one (1) Special Permit Application, together with a letter of authorization from the owner of the Property attached thereto; 2. One(1)Architectural Review Board Check List for Applicants; 3. One(1)Exterior Building Permit Application. We look forward to discussing this matter at the next available Board of Trustees meeting. If you have any questions or require further documentation,please feel free to contact me or Leslie Snyder at(914)333-0700. r Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. �D IEC 1- h1 V Fri r Respectfully submitted, L1 l f f+! Snyder&Snyder,LLP VILLAGE Y� Michael P. Sheridan MS/jw Enclosures cc:Verizon Wireless Z:\SSDATA\WPDATA`•SS4'WP\NEWBANM\MIKE BONHOMME\PURCHASE 2\ZONENG\ADDMONAL DOCS.LTRATF SNYDER & SNYDER, LLP ED �E'94 White Plains RoadTarrytown.New York 10591 DEC 112014 (914)333-0700 _____Fax:(914)333-0743 AGEO� RYEE SROOK �1Uthorizatlon LD!AIG vEPARTMENT To: Michael Parisi Date: May 9,2014 Email: Pages: /D,including this cover sheet. From: Leslie J.Snyder,Esq. Subject: NY-Purchase 2.1375 Anderson Hill Road,Purchase.NY) Dear Mr.Parisi: In connection with that certain Building and Rooftop Lease("Lease"),dated September 27, 2013,between DCCA,LLC d/b/a Doral Arrowwood and New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless("Verizon Wireless"),attached please find updated exhibits whichdepictthe revised location of Verizon Wireless'generator and associated improvements. Please sign below to acknowledge that the revised exhibits are acceptable. Upon such approval,we will forward to you an Amendment of Lease. I appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.Please call me at(914)333.0700 with any questions. Sincerely yours, Leslie J.Snyder Authorized and Approved DCCA,LL Doral a By: Authorized Signatory Name: Title: %404 des► ,� Dated: ,,ZS CONFIDEIMAUff NOTIC&THIS COMMUNICATION CONTAWS PRIVEMED AND CONFIDENTIAL WORMAMON OMMED ONLY FOR nM USBOP nM ADDRESSEE. IFYOUARBNOrrM INJ MM)RWDMr.BBADVISED THATnM UNAUTHORMED DISSEMINATION OPTHIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHmnBD.IF YOU HAVB RWBIVBD THIS CaMMUMCATION IN ERROR MDLY NOMY SENDER BY COU.Wr.CML FOR FURTHBR INSTRUCTIONS. &l�48DATAIWPDKGIS94%WPWflWBA1* Mlke Boa6o=Tumbw l LsudwImfl=vrpd ECEOVE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK DEC 1 1 2014 938 KING STREET RYE BROOK,NEW YORK 10573 VILLf1GE OF RYE BROOK PHONE(914)939-0668 FAX(914)939-5801 BUILDING DEPARTMENT WEB SITE: www.ryebrook.org ********************************************************************************** APPLICA TION FOR WIRELESS/ATTACHED WIRELESS TELECOADIUMCA TIONS FACILITY SPECIAL PERMIT Section 250-39 Code of the Village of Rye Brook NOTE: 30 COPIES OFALL DOCUMENTATION.INCLUDING SITE PLANAPPLICAT70N AND FULL 4MVLRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ISA REQUIREMENT. Part A. Category of Facility(check one) ( ) Wireless Telecommunications Facility (X) Attached Wireless Telecommunications Facility Part B. Proiect Location Section: 129.34 Block: 1 Lot: 45 Zoning District: PUD Property Owner: 'SAL A-a(--,)wWoolh, Name: DCCA, LLC d/b/a Doral Arrowwood Address: 975 Anderson Hill Road, Rye Brook, New York Telephone: 914-939-5500 Fax: i Part C. Applicant Applicant: New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless Address: c/o Snyder&Snyder LLP,94 White Plains Road,Tarrytown, NY Telephone: 914-333-0700 Fax: 914-333-0743 Managing Agent: Ryan Maybeck Address: 4 Centerock Road,West Nyack Telephone: 914-714-7371 Fax: Service of Process Agent: Ryan Maybeck Address: c/o Snyder& Snyder,LLP,94 White Plains Road, Tarrytown, New York 10591 Telephone: 914-333-0700 Fax: 914-333-0743 Part D. Consultants Radio Frequency Engineer: All Aljibori-Verizon Wireless Address: 4 Centerock Road,West Nyack, NY Telephone: 914-714-7224 Fes; Structural Engineer; Tectonic Engineering&Surveying Consultants,P.C. Address: 1279 Route 300,Newburgh, New York 12550 Telephone: 845-567-6656 Fax: 845-567-8703 Health Physicist: Pinnacle Telecom Group-Daniel J.Collins Address: 14 Ridgedale Avenue,Cedar Knolls,New Jersey 07927 Telephone: 973-451-1630 Fax: Part E: Facility Type: X Attached Lattice Monopole NIER Level: 1.0929% Height: 35' Above Ground: 84'-6' feet Above Attachment Structure: 35' feet Distance to Nearest Dwelling: 565' feet Manner of Erection: steel platform Value of Improvement:$ Part F: Anulication Fee (make check payable to the:Village of Rye Brook) Wireless an attached Fee paid of Date paid: I Z 3 I Part G: ChRcklist Items to be submitted with application(please check oil: (X) Site Plan Application (X) Fall Environmental Assessment Form Application � (X) Visual Environmental Assessment Form (X) Antenna Report(Engineer) (X) Radio Frequency Report(Health Physicist) (X) Structural Report by NYS Licensed Professional Engineer (X) Co-location Certification and Affidavit (X) Interference Certification and Supporting Documentation (X) Statement of On-Site Service Needs N/A( ) Landscape Plan (X) Abandonment Bond ( ) Site Access Agreement-Pursuant to Section§250-39(F)(14)it is requested that this Honorable Board waive this requirement at this time. New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless See attached Letter of Authorization By:: Signature of Owner Signature of Applicant Ryan Maybeck Print Name Print Name New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless By: WAIK&Z Authn AllovAhg Service of Process on Agent Ryan Maybeck Print Name STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER as: New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless being duly sworn,deposes and says: that (Pr t Name:of app$cod.agent,—.cmpaaate officer) DCCA,LLC d/b/a Doral Arrowwood is the(circle one)owner, gent,corporate officer of the promises to which this application applies;that the applicant is duly authorized to make this application; and that the statements obtained here are true and made to the best of the applicant's knowledge and belief. Sworn to before me this OL Sworn to before me this day of 20 14 day of -.020 Kw� Notary blit�� Notary Public New York SMSA Limited Partne hip d/b/a Ilk Ire ss See attached Letter of Authorization Signa re f A plian Signature of Owner Michael R.Bonhomme Notary Public,State of New York No.01B06144229 Qualified in Orange County Commission Expires 04/24/2011 t D C�C�OMC� By OR T DEC 11 2014 938 KING NY 10573 {914)9 may} 39-5801 VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK Q BUILDING DEPARTMENT ##i#i#t#4i4ii44tiiiit#itiit#t#i##i##ttiiiiiiai4iiiii4iiiii4iiiii#Mt#i########iii#iii#iiiitit4t4#i4####ti#it FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: BOT Approval Date: PB Approval Date: BOT Disapproval Date: PS Disapproval Date: Chairman: Attach Resolution: BOT L 3 PBA 13 ZBA 13 , i#i#iiiiitit#it#44##i#it#i#ti#iiiii4iti#iitt4t#t#4t#it#iiiti#ii#•i4it#tiiii4#iitiiiiiiii#iMtit#i4iii#i4tti SITE PLANAPPLICATION SUBMISSSION OF APPLICATION DOES NOT ASSURE PLACEMENT ON ANY PLANNING BOARD AGENDA. APPLICANT WILL BE NOTMED OF SUCH PLACEMENT. #t##t#ii####i#4titt4iMi##ittiiit#Mti#iiiiii#i4i#4iii4i4#i4itti4iiii#4i#ii#tiit4t######4#iiliii4titi4#iiiiii APPENDI%: THIS SITE PLAN APPLICATION REFERENCES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING CODE SECTIONS OF THE VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK; SECTIONS: 250 ZONING, 209 SITE PLAN REVIEW, 235 TREES, 107 DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS,224 SWR vDMNG POOLS,121 EXCAVATION&TOPSOELREMOVA14 118 EROSION&SEDIMENT CONTROL,213 STEEP SLOPES PROTECTION, 219 SUBDIVISION OF LAND, 250110 NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. DESIGN PROFESSIONALS&APPLICANTS ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO REVIEW THE ABOVE MENTIONED CODE SECTIONS, AVAILABLE ONLINE AT www.M brook.org PRIOR TO COMPLETING THIS APPLICATION. SITE PLAN: IdentificationofApplicant: New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless("Verizon Wireless") Owner: DCCA, LLC d/b/a Doral Arrowwood Address: 975 Anderson Hill Road, Rye Brook. NY &Mail: TOL#: 914-939-5500 Fes; Applicant: New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless do Snyder&Snyder LLP 94 White Plains Rd. Address:Tamrtown. NY M591 &Mail:lsnyderna snyderlaw.net Tel.#: 914-333-0700 Fax: 914-333-0743 DesignProfessionaL• Tectonic Engineering&Surveying Consultants, P.C. Address: 1279 Route 300, Newburgh, New York 12550 E-Mail: Tel.#: 845-567-6656 Fax: Designate to whom correspondence is to be sent: Note: If applicant is a"Contract Vendee",please attach a copy of the contract summary with financial and confidential terms deleted. IDENTIFICATION OF PR PE A. Identifying Title: 965 Anderson Hill Road B. Tax Designation: Section: 129.34 Block: 1 Lot: 45 C. Zoning District: PUD D. Street which property abuts: Anderson Hill Road E. Does property connect directly into State or County highway? No LAST REVISED 7.13 F. Is site within 500 feet of Village Boundary? No If yes note all bordering municipalities: G. Total area of site: 1.59 acres Area of site activity: 0.03 acres H. Site coverage: 1.88 %; Building coverage: 78.62 % I. Existing building size: 38,646 sq ft New/additional building size no change J. Existing parking spaces N/A New parking spaces N/A K Nature of proposed activity. Installation of wireless telecommunications facility including a stealth flagpole and related l3Wj3mflltt«q.%J�%jgR1V14gI«e&l' ::i d1:�«`"1' .q2. ng.Ito gggad�1 ��'+:i :n «»3:ig::.t area APPLICATION FEES: Application fees are non-refundable. Environmental Fees and Site Plan Fees must be paid on separate checks. Make checks payable to the:Village of Rye Brook. Residential Dwellings $300 phis-$200 per additional unit Non-Residential $450 phis-$30 per parking space Planned Unit Development $500 per acre PUD Amendment $250 Site Plan Amendment $550 Wetlands&Watercourse $1,100 Consultant Review(Environmentao Fee: Minimum fee$250-maximum fee$2,500 estimated. Applicant's Environmental Account must have a positive balance at all times prior to any Consultant,Attorney,Village, and Board review. SITE PLAN FEE: * 3OO-�`� DATE PAID: tZ I -?. l ENVIRONMENTAL FEE: 45%01-- DATE PAID: tz L -Z I I`'f Please note that this application must Include the notarized signature(s)of the legal owners)of the above-mentioned property, In the space provided below. Any application not bearing the legal property owner's notarized signature(s)shall be deemed null and void,and will be rletumed to the applicant rttxrrrrrxr►rxrrxrrxrxrxrttrtxttxrtrttxrxxxxrxxtxttxrrxxxtrrxrrttrrtrtrrxrtttttttttttttxxrtxxxxxxxttxrxtxtx STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) as: aRi�ia va ywlnfirnrdese York SMSA tJmfted Partnership ,being duly sworn,deposes and states that he/she is the applicant above named, (print same ofiivishral signing as the applicant). and further states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the lessee for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indiaro Wddtwk wnha w.agm;attorney,eta) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his/her knowledge and belies and that any work performed,or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as act forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as in accordance with the New York StateUnifb m Fire Prevention &Building Code,the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws,ordinances and regulations. Sworn to before me this Swam to before me this ,g q tf r day of_ ,20 day of 201y wN ' NotaryPublic NeT to Pa ip d/b/a Vw mn Wireless SEE ATTACHED LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION by; Signatim of Property Owner Signature pli Ryan Maybeck Print Name of Property Owner Print Name of Applicant Michael R.Bonhomme Notary Public,State of New York LAST RE1/Isen 7.13 i No.01 806144229 1 Qualified in Orange County Commission Expires 04/24/20,19 - D VILLA 938 iV g S T 00 0573 (914)939 39-6801 SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL REVIEW CRECSLIST This form shall serve as a checklist for site plan submittal and review by the Village of Rye Brook.The use of this plan review checklist by the applicant is to ensure compliance with the technical provisions of The Village of Rye Brook Site Plan Code,Section 209,pertaining to preliminary and final plan preparation.The Village of Rye Brook Site Plan Code is available at The Village of Rye Brook Building Department or to download at:www.rvebrook grg SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL§MALL INCLUDE: 1. APPLICATIONS. Completed and signed including correspondences. 2. CHECKLIST. Completed and signed. 3. PLANS. Signed, Sealed&Dated. Fifteen paper (15) copies or twenty (20) copies when Board of Trustees approval is required and one(1)electronic version. One(1)record set with original signatures,dates and seals may be provided and submitted with fourteen(14)copies or nineteen(19)copies that clearly indicate the signatures, dates,and seals shown on the record set. 4. FEES: All application fees and Environmental he. A separate check for riling fee and Environmental fee. 5. Environmental Form. Short or Long Form(contact office)completed. 6. Electronic Copy. Complete copy of all plans and shad be submitted electronically at time of submission. 7. Prior to the appearance before ANY meeting or hearing of the Planning Board, the applicant must comply with all Notification Re uirements of Code Section 250-40. I New York S i d r ers yip dPo/a erizon Wireless It' (APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE)have read the Notificatio equireme of Code Section 25040 and will provide notification as required. IDEN�ATIONr OF APPLICA)�S): Identification of Applicant:New York SMSA Limited Partnership Verizon Wireless d/b/a Verizon Wireless Applicant:New York SMSA Limited Partnership Verizon Wireless d/b/a Verizon Wireless Address: c/o Snyder and Snyder LLP,94 White Plains Road,Tarrytown,NY 10591 Tel.#: 914-333-0700 Fax:914-333-743 —E-Mail: Isnyder@snyderlaw.net Project Name: Verizon Wireless Attached Wireless Telecommunications Facility Project Address: 965 Anderson Hill Road Current Property owner: DCCA,LLC,d/b/s Doral Amowwood Address:975 Anderson Hill Road,Rye Brook,NY Tel.M 645-567-6656 Fax: $_Mail; IDENTIFIPAMN OF PROPERTY: Identifying Title: 965 Anderson Hill Road Tax Designation:Section: 129.34 Block: 1 Lot: 45 Zoning District: PUD Street which property abuts:Anderson Hill Road Plan Submission Date: Site Plan Checklist Page 1 of 7 i Project Address g�� �PL�vREOUlREMENTS • 00 15-20 copies of plans prepared and signed by a registered Land Surveyor,Engineer or Architect. • 00 One(1)electronic copy of all submitted plans. O 00 Topographic Survey stamped by New York State Land Surveyor with license number and seal. O O • Topographic survey scale of one(1)inch per twenty(20)feet or larger. • 00 Section, block and lot numbers of the property taken from the latest tax records along with a copy of the most recent property card on file with the Town of Rye Tax Assessor's office. O O• Name ofthe proposed subdivision plan. P O O Name and address of the owner of record. 0 O O Name and address of the applicant O O • Deed reference(s). • O O Names, addresses and signature of every Engineer,Architect, Land Surveyor or Soil Scientist whose professional seal appears on any site plan submitted to tate Board. • O O Nath arrow and scale. • O O Location map at the minimum scale of 1"equals 1,000 feet. • O O Area of all lots,in square feet. • O O Engineering notes on plans as stated in application packages. O O • Copies of all existing and proposed deed restrictions or covenants applying to the property,including,but not limited to, covenants and agreements restricting the use and establishing fature ownership and maintenance responsibilities for all private roads,recreation,and open space areas. 000 Any prior land use approvals with respect to the subject property. 000 Date the plans were first drafted. Any revision(s)made to any ofthe sheets first submitted are to be so noted in the revision block. The revision block is to be placed on the originals of the revised sheets. Additional paper copies arc to be made& submitted for the Planning Board&Building Dept to replace those sheets previously submitted. 000 Other existing site improvements,including,but not limited to,fences,landscape or retaining walls,landscaping & screening. 000 Location of all buildings and structures an die premises and approximate location of all neighboring buildings or structures within 100 foot of the lot lino. 000 Fees paid to The Village ofRye Brook Building Department 000 Any revisions to plans shall be identified with a revision cloud and numbered revision triangle Y IN 1VA ABUTTUPROPi3RU4W0RMATION i O O The names and addresses of all abutting property owners within 250 8 as indicated in the Municipal records. • O O Zoning and use of abutting properties noted on plans. O O • Shape,size,height and location of existing buildings and driveways within me hundred(100)feet ofthe site. O O • Location and description of existing easements within one hundred(100)feet of the site. • O O Location of existing private or public trails within one hundred(100)feet ofthe site. O O 0 Location of existing roads,scenic roads and/or driveways within two hundred(200)feet of the site. • O O Location of proposed parkland.If none state nearest recreation facility O O • Location of existing septic system leach fields within two hundred(200)feet ofthe site. O O • Locations,dimensions,grades and flow direction of existing sewerg,culverts,watoriines as well as other underground utilities within and adjacent to the property. Site Plan Checklist Page 2 of 7 Project Address 000 The location of all existing watercourses,intermittent streams,wetland areas and springs,consistent with the definitions set forth in Chapter 245,Wetlands and Watercourses,of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook Y N NA PROPOSED SITE PLANM ORMATION 0 O O Sufficient,acceptable information to readily determine the location,bearing,and length of every street line,lot line,and property boundary line. 600 Location of all building setback lines. 000 Topographic data at a minimum contour interval of T-0"increments,showing existing and proposed contours on the property and extending a minimum of 25 feet into all adjacent properties. 000 The location and characteristics of the different areas of vegetation,including the identification of all individual trees 12 or more inches in diameter at breast height("Mr),protected trees of any size,as well ea stands of trees and wooded areas, within areas of proposed disturbance,consistent with the provisions of Chapter 235,Trees, of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook 000 Location and proposed development of all buffer areas,including existing vegetative cover. • O O Location and description of any zoning district and municipal boundaries including a zoning compliance chart for the existing and proposed lots. • O O Shape,size,height and location of all existing and proposed buildings. O 00 Location and description of any existing and proposed easements. • O O Location and dimensions of all existing andproposed streets,driveways,sidewalks,parking spaces,bicycle parking, loading arras and other facilities associated with the proposed use. O O • Identification of the location and amount of building area proposed for retail sales or similar commercial activity. O O • Location of existing and proposed utilities(water,sewer,gas,electrical,telephone,oil tank eta). O O • Design and location of all existing and proposed wells,septic tanks and leach field systems,or methods of waste water disposal. • O O Location,type and size of all existing and proposed landscaping and screening including fences and walls. O O 6 Location,size and proposed screening of outdoor storage areas,if any. O O • Location, design and construction material of all existing or proposed site improvements, including drains, culverts, retaining walls,landscape walls and fences. 0 O O Exterior lighting plan and proposed signs to be located on site,including sign orientation,size,heigb%and elevation view. O O a Storm drainage plan and plans for snow removal and storage. O O 0 Pedestrian and automobile circulation plan. O O • Construction drawings for pavements,walks,steeps,curbing,drainage fit other structures associated with the proposed use. O O i Erosion and sedimentation control plan,including installation details of proposed control measures,directive construction notations and a schedule for the installation and maintenance of proposed control measure. O O • Description of measures planned to assure proper erosion and sedimentation control in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 118 entitled"Erosion and Sediment Control,"of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook O O • Drawing and computation for storm water detention design for a 25-year storm in accordance with the Westchester County Best Management Practices O O • Rock outcroppings and areas of steep slope consistent with the definitions set forth in Chapter 213,Steep Slope Protection, of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook. O O • Location of any common lands and/or public lands. 0 00 Phasing or an estimated project construction schedule. O O • Supporting documents,including deeds,maintenance,condominium agreements,do. Site Plan Checklist Page 3 of 7 Project Address 000 Location of proposed construction or area of disturbance and its relationship to any property line, easement, building, structure, road, wall, fence, sewage disposal system, well, wetland feature or tree exceeding six inches in diameter measured at a height of four feet from the ground 006 Estimate of earthwork showing the quantity of any material to be imported to and/or removed from the site including a chart with the number/species and size of any trees to be removed. 000 Location and size of areas of soils by soil types in the area ofproposed disturbance and to a distance of 100 feet surrounding the area of disturbance. O O • Cross sections of steep slope areas. O 00 Retaining walls or like constructions,with details of construction. O O i Approximate boundaries of any areas subject to flooding or stormwater overflows,including areas of special flood hazard and coastal high-hazard areas,c mistent with the definitions act forth in Chapter 130,Flood Damage Prevention,of the Code of the Village of Rye Brook.Approximate Wetlands and wetland buffy boundaries aball be clearly delineated. O O • Location of fire and other emergency zones,including the location of fire hydrants. • O O Studies to include,but not necessarily limited to: environmental impact analysis,wildlife,traffic,stormwater management,recreation,public service,fiscal impact,visual impact and historic sign ficanee documentation,or a written request to waive the submission requirements for these studies. O O • Amount of any bonds required, O O r Amount of excavated material to be removed from site,if any. Y IN NA OTHER(as annlicable) 000 Record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from state and county officials and local utility companies. 000 Identification of any federal,state or county permits required for the projects execution,including project referrals, if any,&environmental reviewprocedures mandated by Article 8,Environmental QualityReview,of the Environmental Conservation Law(SEQRA). 000 Any other information felt necessary bythe Planning Board to allow the Board to proceed with consideration&to make an informed decision. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CHECSLIST "AN-�sTER C0UIV77P4AM2 RBOAM Notice to Applicants/Developera: At some point during the development review process your project may be referred to the Westchester County Planning Board for review and comment in accordance with elate and county laws that require local planning boards, zoning boards of appeals and governing bodies to refer certain development applications to the County Planning Board. Referral to the County Planning Board may not occur until your project has progressed well along through the design process.Since the Planning Board's comments may impact project design,this checklist is provided to encourage early ocnaideration of these areas of concern by applicants to avoid project changes later. For information on the County Planning Board review process and to access an electronic copy of this checklist, go online to www.viestchestargov.00m/planningre*nsb or contact Lukus Herbert at lsh5@wcstchestergov.com. L COUNTY PLANNING BOARD POLICIES: Written policies underlie all recommendations of the County Planning Board. Westchester 2025-Contort fur County and Municipal Planning and PoUcks to Gidde Count/Planning,adopted by the County Planning Board on 5/6/08,amended 1/5/10,can be found at ww.westchestergov.com/2025. 17 Westchester 2025:Policies should be reviewed to determine how they relate to the development proposal. lI.EAPACTS TO COUNTY FACE ITMS AND SERVICES: The County Planning Board coordinates the review of development projects with Westchester County departments to identify and address potential impacts on County services and infrastructure.In some situations,permits and approvals may be required that could change project design. Site Plan Checklist Page 4 of 7 Project Address ❑ Map of County Facilities: Review the State&County Roads and Packs map(which also includes county channel lines)to identify proximity to County facilities at: www.wemcbestergov.com/pbmmdugdocsipdfmaps/counbmtateroadsparkB.pdt Other useful map links for information about environmental features, septictsewer map, county sewer districts map, etc can be found at: www.westchestargw.com/maps ❑ COUNTY ROAD:Applications for development oa sites that abut a County road must be submitted for review by the County Department of Public Works.Information and forms can be found at:www.westchestmgm.can/dpw/bldgpmmLbtm.Former County Roads do not need review by the Department of Public Worha,but will still likely trigger a review by the County Planning Board ❑ COUNTY CHANNEL LINES:Applications for development on sites within 100 feet of a designated County Channel Line require a stream control permit from the County Department of Public Works. Information and forms can be found at www.wegtchcatergov.c=Vdpw/bldgperm.btin ❑ COUNTY PARK:New construction&land alteration projects adjacent to County parks are expected to address screening& buffer of new uses from the park,as appropriate. Stacmwater should not drain from a developed site onto a County park without acceptable quantity and quality controls.County parks are designated as Critical Environmental Area. ❑ SEWAGE TREATMENT AT COUNTY TREATMENT PLANT: Local municipalities are required to reduce and eliminate inflow and infiltration(I&I)into the sanitary sewage systems tributary to County treatment plants.New development will be expected to reduce I&I in relation to generation of new flow at a ratio of three to one.This requirement must be discussed with local ofcials. ❑BEE-LINE BUS SERVICE: Bee-Line bus stags serving a development site should be identified on plans or noted if located off-site. If a bus stop is located along the site's frontage, the applicant should contact the County Department of Transportation to discuss impacts and the need for Improvement's.Safe and separate pedestrian access should be provided to link a bus stop and sidewa& with building a»I oes. Information on County bus service and design guidelines can be found at wwtchesteagov com/ttansportadon/imagewBm%20Service'/o2oowdelines.pdf ❑FAIR AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Many municipalities require inclusion of fair & affordable units in new developments. Financial assistance to achieve fitir&affordable housing development is available through Westchester County& other sources.Applications that include new residential units to be affirmatively marketed&sod or rented subject to fair& affordable housing provisions should be tied to Westchester Comity guidelines on affordability including income guidelines of eligible households that can be found at, ht1p:1/homcs.wes!chwftVv.com/. If County finding is sought to develop fair & affordable housing,the County Board of Legislators must be included as an involved agency under SBQR ❑RECYCLING: New buildings must contain a designated area of sufficient size for separation and storage of recyclables and trash.Building expansions should also include sufficient space for separation and storage of recyclables.For more information about County recycling requirements go to:www.westcbedagov.comtenvn mment recycling htm ❑STORM SEWER SYSTEM: Any connections to a County storm sewer line will require a permit from the Department of Public Works in accordance with the County Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination(IDDE)law.Information&forms can be found at:www.wmtcbestergov.com/dpw/bldgperm.btm Nam-stormwater discharges to the County storm sower system aro prohibited. UL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The County Planning Board's land use policies focus attention on several aspects of development that may have intermunicipal and quality of liSc impacts.The list below includes areas most frequently commented on by the County Planning Board ❑WATER All development plans should include sufficient provisions for stormwater menagemea%water quality measures and mitigation of flooding. ❑Plans should identify the major drainage basin or watershed the site is looted in (Croton River, Upper Hudson River, Lower Hudson,Upper Long Island Sound,Bronx River and Lower Long Island Sound).An interactive map with watershed boundaries can be found at www.vmstchestargmean/planning/maps&Hstddminbasinzllx]7.htnrl ❑Watershed plans have been developed for several of the County's watersheds-the Croton,Indian Brook-Crotam Gorge, Bronx River & Long Island Sound watersheds - that include specific recommendations that apply to development projects. See recommendations in watershed plane at:plann ng.westchestergov.corn/mdex.php7opticn=con cmtent&taslr—view&id=1231& Itemid=2204 Site Plan Checklist Page 5 of 7 Project Address ❑Development that involves filling, creation of impervious surfaces or buildings and substantive loss of natural vegetation in a floodplain or flood prone area should be avoided. El Above ground,vegetated retention/detention basins or devices are preferred because they perform better,are easier to inspect and maintain and provide additional environmental benefits over subsurface structural devices. Any such treatments should not be constructed within wetlands or buffer areas around wetlands. ❑The development should treat and retain as much atormwater on-site as possible,particularly when the site is located in a drainage basin with known flooding problems.A Construction Stormwater Toolbox with tools and sources of technical information related to the construction activities and stermwater management best practices is available from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation at:www.dccmy.gov/chemimU8694.html ❑New development should include protection of aquatic resources.For more information about protection of aquatic resources& buffer areas,go to:planning.westchestergev com/index.php7opdon=con content&task=v1ew&id--1491&Itemid=2458 [Impervious cover should be minimized Permeable paving surfaces should be used where feasible.Vegetative rain gardens should be used,particularly in areas of overland or channelized statmwater flow,to improve stormwater quality and reduce runoff volume. For more information,go to: www.westchestergov.com/swrmwaux ❑Buildings along coastlines and Iow lying area should consider the impacts of sea level rise. Specific ocr sideration is required of potential impacts to surface and subsurface drinking water supplies ❑SITE LAYOUT.Aesthetic design,building orientation and community character should be considered in the site layout and building appearance. ❑In most locations,buildings should face the street and have pedestrian access from the street. ❑Commercial buildings should be located near the front street line with the majority ofparkdng located in the rear of the building. Even gas stations and convenience stores should be upfront in a landscaped setting with parking,pumps and canopy toward the rear. ❑Buildings should be of pedestrian-scale when seen from the sidewalk ❑Building facades should contribute to and enhance the character of the community. ❑Driveway and pathway connections should be provided to adjacent sites when possible and crossessements provided. Q STREETS.Street design should reduce unwarranted paving and promote connectivity. ❑New streets should connect with adjacent streets wherever feaskble to prevent the proliferation of dead-end streets and promote neighborhood integration. ❑Connections could be vehicular or pedestriauNcyclo only.where appropriate. ❑Street widths should be minimized for streets with low traffic volume to reduce speeds and impervious surfh=.Lane widths of 12 feet are only appropriate for major roadways. ❑Driveway widths should be no more than 9 feet to reduce impervious surfaces. ❑Permeable paving surfaces should be used where feasible. ❑GREEN TECHNOLOGY.New development should include as many green building elements as possible,such as:renewable building materials,energy efficient heating/cooling systems and fixwres,water saving devices,green roofs and permeable paving surfaces.Information can be obtained from the U.S.Green Building Council at:www.usgbe.org. ❑LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTINNG.The site improvements should enhance community character. Site Plan Checklist Page 6 of 7 ❑Landscaping should consist of native pleat species epluProject Addeess 01" to for the location Invasive plant species should be www Invasive plant information available at: .westchestw ov.coMM=nWenvir �0g� anmmtalltteporte/iavasIvel'lants&och08.pdf ❑Pollutant tolerant plantings should Offw ively abield pari ft loading areas and ref m c Whwaan sites. ❑Site lighting should be provided at the lowest gem levels and lowatt haighta,avoiding all spillage off cite. ❑ PBDESTHIANSf.Saft convenient and ADA ac ceasible pedesbdaa acs m pr ov dad. ❑A sidewalk should be provided along the aibe flrontage aloft each s freet, ❑Daw PedeatrLft GOOD-tans should be made flnm the front of the building to the sddewRIL Pedestrian anesiop ofdrive-wa & Parking lob aboald be minimized or avoided.If they must be provided,Painted ted crosawallm shcold bapravided through Farling Iota 13 ADA eeeeesibilitymust beprovidad ❑BICYCLS71.Provisions for bicyclists should be incorporated into prciect design. ❑Bicycle patldng should be provided in commrocial and residential dovelcipmem%flaidelines can be found at: www apbp-OfShm u= /rc=MX(pnblicsti-'Ncyrle.Parki-LAWdelinea pdf ❑Ifnear a ttailway or bicycle evnte,a=conaidt;<ation dWWd be gives to bicycle accaulbility,such ae bike lanes on internal roadways,bicycle Parking and other amenities. ❑Drivo.thrn leans at urea such as banlm and feat food restaurants should also be accma'blo for bicycles. of dr"dapnMW orby Me BWft -VAIW 11URInau.Pleating Bond or Home of lrusoees that due to the p abode ahan dor a =h"IkiWman notme1149 recioired as pof the s�chup in use W m°peNd amdldoae pesatNsr to a eMn.to eobodeiaa of a tmal site Flag or oorodn p1m.L or Prom at ophaion of such official or 806 wai an wlbe coosfatmt with the or Hand each sobnd aim r eats whtaevr vM add �The conannaitY 11te 8ndlap 1br gn3ating aue6 waiyas IhaU beoe®e a Pat of thathe pablie d of pwoft d10Amy �h0°1�'safety sad general;;d of the halide InMelmrt detaBed tofmMtion for tiro appropda to sue=*to make an informed dation, MW wast be made to Willa f,sod ��ttEn Pmiiessienal+s CertLsaHon at Conml �n e!Cber`kilat I have SAY reviewed rho Village of Rye Brook's regt>ierneab and cw*tWs application tv be a complete submission. I understltnd that as incomplete plat Cc incampleto chez lcliet shall be deemed an incomplato submission and shall be nohaned to rho applicant upon ddMminatioa of each by the appropriate authority. Name(?haat) Edward N. lamiceli S 0. igtij�O igaataae y �/ �c W LU Z Data / r -6 aQy pROFESs� CW*Lib 7.1213 Site Plan(hacklist Page 7 of 7 FuU Environmental Assessment Form Part I-Project and SettingEEI 2014 Instructions for Completing Part 1 sv F200K Al�tTMIENTPart 1 Is to be completed by the applicant or project sponsor. Responses become part of tal or n mg, are subject to public review,and may be subject to further verification. Complete Part 1 based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item,please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information;indicate whether missing information does not exist, or is not reasonably available to the sponsor;and,when possible,generally describe work or studies which would be necessary to update or fully develop that information. Applicants/sponsom must complete all items in Sections A&B. In Sections C,D&E,most items contain an initial question that must be answered either"Yes"or"No". If the answer to the initial question is"Yes",complete the sub-questions that follow. If the answer to the initial question is"No",proceed to the next question. Section F allows the project sponsor to identify and attach any additional information. Section G requires the name and signature of the project sponsor to verify that the information contained in Part lis accurate and complete. A.Project and Sponsor Information. Name of Action or Project: Proposed Verizon Wireless Attached Public Utility Wireless Telecommunications Facility Project Location(describe,and attach a general location map): 965 Anderson HIII Road,Rye Brook,NY Westchester County Brief Description of Proposed Action(include purpose or need): An attached wireless telecommmIcatlons facility on the Doral Arrowwood hotel.The facility Includes a rooftop flagpole with concealed antennas and related equipment- Name of Applicant/Sponsor: Telephone:914-714-7371 New York SMSA Unilted Partnership dlWa Verizon Wireless("Verizon Wireless') E-Mail: Address:4 Centerodk Road City/PO:West Nyack She:New York Zip Code:10994 Project Contact(if not same as sponsor,give name and title/role): Telephone: E-Mail: Address: City/PO: State: Zip Code: Property Owner (if not same as sponsor): Telephone:914-935-6028 DCCA,LLC d/b/a Doral Arowwood E-Mail: Address: 975 Anderson HIII Road City/PO: Rye Brook She:New York Zip Code:105M Page 1 of 13 B.Government Approvals B.Government Approvals,Funding,or Sponsorship. ("Funding"includes grants,loans,tax relief,and any other farms of financial assistance.) Government Entity If Yes:Identify Agency and Approval(s) Application Date Required (Actual or projected) a.City Council,Town Board, ®Yes❑No Village Board:Special Pam*and Site Plan 1112014 or Village Board of Trustees Approval b.City,Town or Village ❑YesONo Planning Board or Commission c.City Council,Town or ❑Yes®No Village Zoning Board of Appeals d.Other local agencies ®Yes❑NO Building Department-Building Permit e.County agencies ❑Yes0No f.Regional agencies ❑Yes®No g.State agencies ❑YesONo h.Federal agencies ❑Yes®No i. Coastal Resources. L Is the project site within a Coastal Area,or the waterfront area of aDesignated Inland Waterway? ❑Yes®No U. Is the project site located in a community with an approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program? ❑Yes®No fli. Is the project site within a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area? ❑Yes®No C.Planning and Zoning M.Planning and zoning actions. Will administrative or legislative adoption,or amendment of a plan,local law,ordinance,rule or regulation be the ❑Yes®No only approval(s)which must be granted to enable the proposed action to proceed? • If Yes,complete sections C,F and G. • If No,proceed to question C.2 and complete all remaining sections and questions in Part I C.2.Adopted land use plans. a.Do any municipally-adopted (city,town,village or county)comprehensive land use plan(s)include the site ❑YesONo where the proposed action would be located? If Yes,does the comprehensive plan include specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action ❑Yes❑No would be located? b.Is the site of the proposed action within any local or regional special planning district(for example: Greenway ❑Yes®No Brownfield Opportunity Area(BOA);designated State or Federal heritage area;watershed management plan; or other?) If Yes,identify the plan(s): e. Is the proposed action located wholly or partially within an area fisted in an adopted municipal open space plan, ❑Yes®No or an adopted municipal farmland protection plan? If Yes,identify the plau(s): NIA'Installation is on existing rog ton and existing_equlprmnt pad. Page 2 of 13 C.3. Zoning a. Is the site of the proposed action located in a municipality with an adopted zoning law or ordinance. ®Yes❑No If Yes,what is the zoning classificatioa(s)including any applicable overlay district? The pmposed Activity to kxated within the PUD district with Airoort(Z-11 and Scenig,Road overlay district. b. Is the use permitted or allowed by a special or conditional use permit? ®YesONo c.Is a zoning change requested as part of the proposed action? ❑Yes®No If Yes, L What is the proposed new zoning for the site? CA.Existing community services. a.In what school district is the project site located?Blind Brook-Rve Union Free School District b.What police or other public protection forces serve the project site? Rye Rnmk Pollee Department c.Which fire protection and emergency medical services serve the project sits? Rye Brook Fire Department d.What parks serve the project site? N/A D.Project Details D.I.Proposed and Potential Development a.What is the general nature of the proposed action(e.g.,residential,industrial,commercial,recreational;if mixed,include all components)?Public Utility b.a.Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? o.o3 t acres b.Total acreage to be physically disturbed? NIA acres c.Total acreage(project site and any contiguous properties)owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? 0,03i acres c.Is the proposed action an expansion of an existing project or use? ❑Yes®No 1 If Yes,what is the approximate percentage of the proposed expansion and identify the units(e.g.,acres,miles,housing units, square feet)? % Units: d.Is the proposed action a subdivision,or does it include a subdivision? ❑Yes oto If Yes, i.Purpose or type of subdivision?(e.g.,residential,industrial,commercial;ifmixed,specify types) ii.Is a cluster/conservation layout proposed? ❑Yes ONo N.Number of lots proposed? iv.Minimum and maximum proposed lot sizes? Mmimum Maximum e.Will proposed action be constructed in multiple phases? ❑Yes®No i. If No,anticipated period of construction; months U. if Yes: • Total number of phases anticipated • Anticipated commencement date of phase I(mcluding demolition) month year • Anticipated completion date of final phase month year • Generally describe connections or relationships among phases,including any contingencies where progress of one phase may determine timing or duration of future phases: Page 3 of 13 f.Does the project include new residential uses? ❑Yes®No If Yes,show numbers of units proposed. One Family Two Family Three Family Multiple Familyfour_p 1 more) Initial Phase At completion of all phases g.Does the proposed action include new non-residential construction(including expansions)? ®Yes❑No IfYes, ...... t.Total number of structures 2 ii.Dimensions(in feet)of largest proposed structure: 35'•height; 2'-6" width; and N/A length W.Approximate extent of building space to be heated or cooled: square feet h.Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that will result in the impoundment of any ❑Yes®No liquids,such as creation of a water supply,reservoir,pond,lake,waste lagoon or other storage? If Yes, i.Purpose of the impoundment: U.If a water impoundment,the principal source of the water: ❑Ground water❑Surface water streams❑Other specify: M.If other than water,identify the type of impounded/contained liquids and their source. iv.Approximate size of the proposed impoundment. Volume: million gallons;surface area: acres v.Dimensions of the proposed dam or impounding structure: height; length W.Construction method/materials for the proposed dam or impounding structure(e,g.,earth fill,rock,wood,concrete): D.2. Project Operations a.Does the proposed action include any excavation,mining,or dredging,during construction,operations,or both? Yes No (Not including general site preparation,grading or installation of utilities or foundations where all excavated materials will remain onsite) If Yes: i.What is the purpose of the excavation or dredging? A How much material(including rock,earth,sediments,etc.)is proposed to be removed from the site? • Volume(specify tons or cubic yards): • Over what duration of time? M.Describe nature and characteristics of materials to be excavated or dredged,and plans to use,manage or dispose of them. iv.Will there be onsite dewatering or processing of excavated materials? Yes No If yes,describe, v.What is the total area to be dredged or excavated? acres A What is the maximum area to be worked at any one time? acres vii,What would be the maximum depth of excavation or dredging? feet viii.Will the excavation require blasting? ❑Yes❑No ix.Summarize site reclamation goals and plan: b.Would the proposed action cause or result in alteration of increase or decrease in size of or encroachment Yes No into any existing wetland,waterbody,shoreline,beach or adjacent area? If Yes: L Identify the wetland or waterbody which would be affected(by name,water index number,wetland map number or geographic description): Page 4 of 13 ii,Describe how the proposed action would affect that waterbody or wetland,e.g.excavation,fill,placement of structures,or alteration of channels,banks and shorelines. Indicate extent of activities,alterations and additions in square feet or acres: M.Will proposed action cause or result in disturbance to bottom sediments? ❑Yes❑No If Yes,describe: iv.Will proposed action cause or result in the destruction or removal of aquatic vegetation? ❑Yes❑No If Yes: • acres of aquatic vegetation proposed to be romoved: • expected acreage of aquatic vegetation remaining after project completion: • purpose of proposed removal(e.g.beach clearing,invasive species control,boat access): • proposed method of plant removal: • if chemical/herbicide treatment will be used,specify product(s): v.Describe any proposed reclamation/mitigation following disturbance: c.Will the proposed action use,or create anew demand for water? ❑Yes Flo If Yes: I Total anticipated water usage/demand per day: gallonstday ii.Will the proposed action obtain water from an existing public water supply? ❑Yes❑No If Yes: • Name of district or service area: • Does the existing public water supply have capacity to serve the proposal? ❑Yes❑No • is the project site in the existing district? ❑Yes❑No • Is expansion of the district needed? ❑Yes❑No • Do existing lines serve the project site? ❑Yes❑No iii.Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to supply the project? ❑Yes Clo If Yes: • Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: • Source(s)of supply for the district: tv.Is a new water supply district or service area proposed to be formed to serve the project site? ❑Yea❑No If,Yes: • AppHeant/sponsor for new district: • Date application submitted or anticipated: • Proposed source(s)of supply for new district: v.If a public water supply will not be used,describe plans to provide water supply for the project: vi.If water supply will be from wells(public or private),maximum pumping capacity: gallons/minute. d.Will the proposed action generate liquid wastes? ❑Yes®No If Yes: I Total anticipated liquid waste generation per day: gallons/day H.Nature of liquid wastes to be generated(e.g.,sanitary wastewater,industrial;if combination,describe all components and approximate volumes or proportions of each): M.Will the proposed action use any existing public wastewater treatment facilities? ❑Yes❑No If Yes: • Name of wastewater treatment plant to be used: • Name of district~ • Does the existing wastewater treatment plant have capacity to serve the project? ❑Yes❑No • Is the project site in the existing district? DYes❑No • Is expansion of the district needed? ❑Yes❑No Page 5 of 13 • Do existing sewer lines serve the project site? ❑Yes❑No • Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to serve the project? ❑Yes❑No If Yes: • Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: N. Will a new wastewater(sewage)treatment district be formed to serve the project site? ❑Ycs❑No If Yes: • Applicant/sponsor for new district: • Date application submitted or anticipated: • What is the receiving water for the wastewater discharge? v. If public facilities will not be used,describe plans to provide wastewater treatment for the project,including specifying proposed receiving water(name and classification if surface discharge,or describe subsurface disposal plans): vi.Describe any plans or designs to capture,recycle or reuse liquid waste: e.Will the proposed action disturb more than one acre and create stormwater runoff,either from new point ❑Yes®No sources(i.e.ditches,pipes,swales,curbs,gutters or other concentrated flows of stormwater)or non-point source(i.e.sheet flow)during construction or post construction? If Yes: 4 How much impervious surface will the project create in relation to total size of project parcel? Square feet or acres(impervious surface) Square feet or acres(parcel size) R.Describe types of new point sources. iii.Where will the stormwater runoff be directed(i.e.on-site stormwater management facility/structures,adjacent properties, groundwater,on-site surface water or off-site surface waters)? • if to surface waters,identify receiving water bodies or wetlands: • Will stormwater runoff flow to adjacent properties? ❑Yes❑No iv.Does proposed plan minimize impervious surfaces,use pervious materials or collect and re-use stormwater? ❑Yas❑No C Does the proposed action include,or will it use on-site,one or more sources of air emissions,including fuel ®Yea❑No combustion,waste incineration,or other processes or operations? If Yes,identify: i.Mobile sources during project operations(e.g.,heavy equipment,fleet or delivery vehicles) NIA ii.Stationary sources during construction(e.g.,power generation,structural heating,batch plant,crushers) WA iii Stationary sources during operations(e.g.,process emissions,large boilers,electric generation) Emergency generator for back-up power in the event of an extended power outage. g.Will any air emission sources named in D.2£(above),require a NY State Air Registration,Air Facility Permit, ❑Yes®No or Federal Clean Air Act Title IV or Title V Permit? If Yes: i. Is the project site located in an Air quality non-attainment area? (Area routinely or periodically fails to meet ❑Yes❑No ambient air quality standards for all or some parts of the year) ii.In addition to emissions as calculated in the application,the project will generate: • Tons/year(short tons)of Carbon Dioxide(CO2) Tons/year(short tons)of Nitrous Oxide(N20) Tonslyear(short tons)of Perfluorocarbon(PFCs) • Tons/year(short tons)of Sulfur Hexafluoride(SF6) Tons/year(short tons)of Carbon Dioxide equivalent of Hydroflourocarbons(IFCs) Tons/year(short tons)of Hazardous Air Pollutants(HAPS) Page 6 of 13 h.Will the proposed action generate or emit methane(including,but not limited to,sewage treatment plants, Yes No landfills,composting facilities)? If Yes: L Estimate methane generation in tons/year(metric): it.Describe any methane capture,control or elimination measures included in project design(e.g.,combustion to generate heat or electricity,flaring): i.Will the proposed action result in the release of air pollutants from open-air operations or processes,such as ❑Yes®No quarry or landfill operations? If Yes:Describe operations and nature of emissions(e.g.,diesel exhaust,rock particulates/dust): j.Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels or generate substantial ❑Yes®No new demand for transportation facilities or services? If Yes: i.When is the peak traffic expected(Check all that apply); ❑Morning ❑Evening []Weekend ❑Randomly between hours of to ii.For commercial activities only,projected number of semi-trailer truck tripslday: iii.Parking spaces: Existing Proposed Net increase/decrease iv.Does the proposed action include any shared use parking? ❑Yes❑No v. If the proposed action includes any modification of existing roads,creation of new roads or change in existing access,describe: vi. Are public/private transportation service(s)or facilities available within'%mile of the proposed site? []YesEjNo vii Will the proposed action include access to public transportation or accommodations for use of hybrid,electric ❑Yes No or other alternative fueled vehicles? viii.Will the proposed action include plans for pedestrian or bicycle accommodations for connections to existing DYes❑No pedestrian or bicycle routes? k.Will the proposed action(for commercial or industrial projects only)generate new or additional demand ®Yes❑No for energy? If Yes: L Estimate annual electricity demand during operation of the proposed action: Minimal Increase In electrical power(New sub-meter within existlna building) U.Anticipated sources/suppliers of electricity for the project(e.g,on-site combustion,on-site renewable,via grid/local utility,or other): Gon-Fdlson iff.Will the proposed action require a new,or an upgrade to,an existing substation? ❑Yes®No 1.Hours of operation. Answer all items which apply. i.During Construction: U. During Operations: • Monday-Friday: BAM-GPM(Per town code) • Monday-Friday: • Saturday: 9AM-4PM(Per town code) • Saturday: • Sunday: NIA • Sunday: Holidays: NIA • Holidays: Page 7 of 13 m.Will the proposed action produce noise that will exceed existing ambient noise levels during construction, ❑YesONo operation,or both? If yes: 1. Provide details including sources,time of day and duration: if. Will proposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a noise barrier or screen? ❑Yes[]No Describe: n.,Will the proposed action have outdoor lighting? ®Yes❑No If yes: 1.Describe source(s),location(s),height of fixture(s),direction/aim,and proximity to nearest occupied structures: The proposed facility yAA have a non-dare motion sensor activated lighting by rooftop equipment if. Will proposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a light barrier or screen? ❑Yes®No Describe: o.Does the proposed action have the potential to produce odors for more than one hour per day? ❑Yes®No If Yes,describe possible sources,potential frequency and duration of odor emissions,and proximity to nearest occupied structures: p.Will the proposed action include any bulk storage of petroleum(combined capacity of over 1,100 gallons) ❑Yes®No or chemical products 185 gallons in above ground storage or any amount in underground storage? If Yes: L Product(s)to be stored ii.Volumes) per unit time (e.g.,month,year) iii. Generally describe proposed storage facilities: q.Will the proposed action(commercial,industrial and recreational projects only)use pesticides(i.e.,herbicides, Yes ONo insecticides)during construction or operation? If Yes: I.Describe proposed treatment(s); ii.Will the proposed action use Integrated Pest Management Practices? ❑Yes ❑No r.Will the proposed action(commercial or industrial projects only)involve or require the management or disposal ❑ Yes mNo of solid waste(excluding hazardous materials)? If Yes: I.Describe any solid waste(s)to be generated during construction or operation of the facility: • Construction: tons per (unit of time) • Operation: tons per (unit of time) ii.Describe any proposals for on-site minimization,recycling or reuse of materials to avoid disposal as solid waste: • Construction: • Operation; Ili. Proposed disposal methods/facilities for solid waste generated on-site: • Construction: • Operation: Page 8 of 13 s.Does the proposed action include construction or modification of a solid waste management facility? ❑Yes® No If Yes: i. Type of management or handling of waste proposed for the site(e.g.,recycling or transfer station,composting,landfill,or other disposal activities): H. Anticipated rate of disposal/processing: • Tons/month,if transfer or other non-combustion/thermal treatment,or • Tons/hour,if combustion or thermal treatment iii.Tf landfill,anticipated site life: years t.Will proposed action at the site involve the commercial generation,treatment,storage,or disposal of hazardous ❑Yes®No waste? If Yes: i.Name(s)of all hazardous wastes or constituents to be generated,handled or managed at facility: H.Generally describe processes or activities involving hazardous wastes or constituents: X.Specify amount to be handled or generated tons/month ix Describe any proposals for on-site minimization,recycling or reuse of hazardous constituents: v.Will any hazardous wastes be disposed at an existing offsite hazardous waste facility? Yes No If Yes:provide name and location of facility: If No:describe proposed management of any hazardous wastes which will not be sent to a hazardous waste facility: E.Site and Setting of Proposed Action E.1.Land uses on And surrounding the project site a.Existing land uses. L Check all uses that occur on,adjoining and near the project site. ❑Urban ❑ Industrial ® Commercial ®Residential(suburban) ❑Rural(non-farm) ❑Forest ❑ Agriculture ❑ Aquatic ® Other(specify):Hotellconference Center fl. If mix of uses,generally describe: b.Land uses and covertypes on the project site. . Land use or Current Acreage After Change Covertype Acreage Project Completion (Acres+/- • Roads,buildings,and other paved or impervious surfaces N/A NIA NIA • Forested NIA NIA NIA • Meadows,grasslands or brushlands(non- NIA NIA N/A agricultural,including abandonedagricultural) • Agricultural N/A NIA N/A (includes active orchards,field,greenhouse etc.) • Surface water features (lakes,ponds,streams,rivers,etc.) N/A NIA N/A • Wetlands(freshwater or tidal) N/A NIA N/A • Non-vegetated(bare rock,earth or fill) NIA NIA N/A • Other Describe: Page 9 of 13 c.is the project site presently used by members of the community for public recreation? ❑Yes❑✓No i.If Yes:explain: d.Are there any facilities serving children,the elderly,people with disabilides(e.g.,schools,hospitals,licensed ❑Yes®No day care centers,or group homes)within 1500 feet of the project site? If Yes, 1.Identify Facilities: e.Does the project site contain an existing dam? ❑Yes®No If Yes: i.Dimensions of the dam and impoundment: • Dam height: feet • Dam length: feet • Surface area: acres • Volume impounded: gallons OR acre-feet U.Dam's existing hazard classification: W.Provide date and summarize results of last inspection: f.Has the project site ever been used as a municipal,commercial or industrial solid waste management facility, ❑Yes®No or does the project site adjoin property which is now,or was at one time,used as a solid waste management facility? If Yes: i.Has the facility been formally closed? ❑YesO No • Ifyes,cite sources/documentation: U.Describe the location of the project site relative to the boundaries of the solid waste management facility: Iii.Describe any development constraints due to the prior solid waste activities: g.Have hazardous wastes been generated,treated and/or disposed of at the site,or does the project site adjoin ❑Yes®No property which is now or was at one time used to commercially treat,store and/or dispose of hazardous waste? If Yes: I Describe waste(s)handled and waste management activities,including approximate time when activities occurred: h. Potential contamination history, Has there been a reported spill at the proposed project site,or have any ❑Yes®No remedial actions been conducted at or adjacent to the proposed site? If Yes: 1.Is any portion of the site listed on the NYSDEC Spills incidents database or Environmental Site ❑Yes®No Remediation database? Check all that apply: ❑Yes—Spills Incidents database Provide DEC ID number(s): ❑Yes—Environmental Site Remediation database Provide DEC ID number(s): ❑Neither database U.If site has been subject of RCRA corrective activities,describe control measures: M.is the project within 2000 feet of any site in the NYSDEC Environmental Site Remediation database? ❑Yes®No If yes,provide DEC 1D number(s): iv.if yes to(i),(ii)or(iii)above,describe current status of site(s): Page 10 of 13 v.Is the project site subject to an institutional control limiting property uses? ❑Yes®No • If yes,DEC site ID number: • Describe the type of institutional control(e.g.,deed restriction or easement): • Describe any use limitations: • Describe any engineering controls: • Will the project affect the institutional or engineering controls in place? ❑Yes❑No • Explain: E.2. Natural Resources On or Near Project Site a.What is the average depth to bedrock on the project site? NIA feet b.Are there bedrock outcroppings on the project site? ❑Yes®No If Yes,what proportion of the site is comprised of bedrock outcroppings? % c.Predominant soil type(s)present on project site: WA °� WA % ............«. N/A % d.What is the average depth to the water table on the project site? Average: _ Nip feet e.Drainage status of project site soils.[]Well Drained: NIA%of site ❑Moderately Well Drained: �I %of site ❑Poorly Drained NIA%of site f.Approximate proportion of proposed action site with slopes:❑ 0-10%: —111&210 of site ❑ 10-15%: _HIA216 of site ❑ 15%or greater: —N(g.%of site g.Are there any unique geologic features on the project site? Yes®No If Yes,describe: h.Surface water features. i.Does any portion of the project site contain wetlands or other waterbodies(including streams,rivers, ❑Yes®No ponds or lakes)? ii.Do any wetlands or other waterbodies adjoin the project site? ❑Yes®No If Yes to either i or ii,continue. If No,skip to E.21 W. Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies within or adjoining the project site regulated by any federal, ❑Yes[ZNo state or local agency? iv.For each identified regulated wetland and waterbody on the project site,provide the following information: • Streams: Name Classification • Lakes or Ponds: Name Classification • Wetlands: Name Approximate Size • Wetland No.(if regulated by DEC) v. Are any of the above water bodies listed in the most recent compilation of NYS water quality-impaired ❑Yes ONo waterbodies? If yes,name of impaired water body/bodies and basis for listing as impaired: i.Is the project site in a designated Floodway? ❑Yes®No j.Is the project site in the 100 year Floodplain? ❑Yes®No k.Is the project site in the 500 year Floodplain? ❑Yes®No 1.Is the project site located over,or immediately adjoining,a primary,principal or sole source aquifer? ❑Yes®No If Yes: i.Name of aquifer: Page 11 of 13 m. Identify the predominant wildlife species that occupy or use the project site: WA:Installation is on existing rooftop and equipment pad. n.Does the project site contain a designated significant natural community? ❑YesoNo If Yes: i.Describe the habitat/community(composition,function,and basis for designation): A Source(s)of description or evaluation: W.Extent of community/habitat: • Currently: acres • Following completion of project as proposed: acres • Gain or loss(indicate+or-): acres o.Does project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by the federal government or NYS as ❑Yes®No endangered or threatened,or does it contain any areas identified as habitat for an endangered or threatened species? p. Does the project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by NYS as rare,or as a species of Yes®No special concem? q.Is the project site or adjoining area currently used for hunting,trapping,fishing or shell fishing? ❑Yes®No If yes,give a brief description of how the proposed action may affect that use: E.3. Designated Public Resources On or Near Project Site a.Is the project site,or any portion of it,located in a designated agricultural district certified pursuant to ❑Yes®No Agriculture and Markets Law,Article 25-AA,Section 303 and 3047 If Yes, provide county plus district name/number. b.Are agricultural lands consisting of highly productive soils present? ❑YesONo L If Yes:acreage(s)on project site7 ii.Source(s)of soil rating(s): c. Does the project site contain all or part of,or is it substantially contiguous to,a registered National ❑YOSONo Natural Landmark? If Yes: i. Nature of the natural landmark: ❑Biological Community ❑ Geological Feature ii.Provide brief description of landmark,including values behind designation and approximate sizatextent: d.Is the project site located in or does it adjoin a state listed Critical Environmental Area? ®Yes❑No If Yes: J CEA name:Airport 60 Ldn Noise Contour h.Basis for designation: Exceptional or unique character W.Designating agency and date: Date:1-31-90,Agency:Westchester County Page 12 of 13 e.Does the project site contain,or is it substantially contiguous to,a building,archaeological site,or district ❑Yes®No which is listed on,or has been nominated by the NYS Board of Historic Preservation for inclusion on,the State or National Register of Historic Places? If Yes: 1.Nature of historic/archaeological resource: []Archaeological Site ElHistoric Building or District U.Name-, iii.Brief description of attributes on which listing is based: f.Is the project site,or any portion of it,located in or adjacent to an area designated as sensitive for ❑Yes®No archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office(SHPO)archaeological site inventory? g.Have additional archaeological or historic site(s)or resources been identified on the project site? El Yes®No If Yes: L Describe possible resource(s): ii.Basis for identification: h.Is the project site within fives miles of any officially designated and publicly accessible federal,state,or local ®Yes❑No scenic or aesthetic resource? If Yes: i.Identify resource:Crawford Town Perk U.Nature of,or basis for,designation(e.g.,established highway overlook,state or local park,state historic trail or scenic byway, etc.):Local Park iii.Distance between project and resource: 2.0 miles. L Is the project site located within a designated river corridor under the Wild,Scenic and Recreational Rivers ❑Yes®No Program 6 NYCRR 6667 If Yes: L Identify the name of the river and its designation: U. Is the activity consistent with development restrictions contained in 6NYCRR Part 666? []Yes[]No F.Additional Information Attach any additional information which may be needed to clarify your project. If you have identified any adverse impacts which could be associated with your proposal,please describe those impacts plus any measures which you propose to avoid or minimize them. G. Verification I certify that the information provided is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/Sponsor Name Anthony Boma Date 12102/14 Signature AATitle Project Engineer PRINT FORM Page 13 of 13 W.O:6666.PURC2 VZW SITE NAME:PURCHASE 2 965 ANDERSON HILL ROAD,RYE BROOK NY II a �) es49 1 C1 1 U E :wa+:• waumaayfila. � - 3 � dpp r.a��+.rn•herr � � � ,� @ ) � ?� t I P � p Ad" 6 i oam.0 i7' >\ wofwmlmi;• 2C \ 6 *'kU per, e p � w ft.AWI a � c o Noe �� F sw ladnw.�""a 4 ' (mina yea i n,d,Run NN IM g c.nrr ue � niu f� �y� *�qm IJ� td � ��p e Jr Full Environmental Assessment Form Project: Ag-cy Use Only[If applicable) Part 2-Identification of Potential Project Impacts Date: Part 2 is to be completed by the lead agency. Part 2 is designed to help the lead agency inventory all potential resources that could be affected by a proposed project or action. We recognize that the lead agency's reviewer(s)will not necessarily be environmental professionals. So,the questions are designed to walk a reviewer througb the assessment process by providing a series of questions that can be answered using the information found in Part 1. To further assist the lead agency in completing Part 2,the form identifies the most relevant questions in Part 1 that will provide the information needed to answer the Part 2 question. When Part 2 is completed,the lead agency will have identified the relevant environmental areas that may be impacted by the proposed activity. If the lead agency is a state agency and the action is in any Coastal Area,complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment. TYps for completing Part 2: • Review all of the information provided in Part 1. • Review any application,maps,supporting materials and the Full EAF Workbook. • Answer each of the 18 questions in Part 2. • If you answer"Yes"to a numbered question,please complete all the questions that follow in that section. • If you answer"No"to a numbered question,move on to the next numbered question. • Check appropriate column to indicate the anticipated size of the impact. • Proposed projects that would exceed a numeric threshold contained in a question should result in the reviewing agency checking the box"Moderate to large impact may occur." • The reviewer is not expected to be an expert in environmental analysis. • If you are not sure or undecided about the size of an impact,it may help to review the sub-questions for the general question and consult the workbook. • When answering a question consider all components of the proposed activity,that is,the"whole action". • Consider the possibility for long-term and cumulative impacts as well as direct impacts. • Answer the question in a reasonable manner considering the scale and context of the project. 1. Impact on Land Proposed action may involve construction on,or physical alteration of, JZNO []YES the land surface of the proposed site. (See Part 1.D.1) I "Yes", answer questions a J. I "No",move on to Section 2. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may involve construction on land where depth to water table is E2d ❑ ❑ less then 3 feet. b.The proposed action may involve construction on slopes of 15%or greater. Elf ❑ ❑ c.The proposed action may involve construction on land where bedrock is exposed,or Eta ❑ ❑ generally within 5 feet of existing ground surface. d.The proposed action may involve the excavation and removal of more than 1,000 tons D2a ❑ ❑ of natural material. e.The proposed action may involve construction that continues for more than one year Dle ❑ ❑ or in multiple phases. f.The proposed action may result in increased erosion,whether from physical D2e,D2q ❑ ❑ disturbance or vegetation removal(including from treatment by herbicides). g.The proposed action is,or may be,located within a Coastal Erosion hazard area. B 1 i ❑ ❑ h.Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Page 1 of 10 2. Impact on Geological Features The proposed action may result in the modification or destruction of,or inhibit access to,any unique or unusual land forms on the site(e.g.,cliffs,dunes, EZNO ❑YES minerals,fossils,caves). (See Part 1.E.2.g) I "Yes", answer questions a-c. I "No", move on to Section 3. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.Identify the specific land form(s)attached: E29 ❑ ❑ b.The proposed action may affect or is adjacent to a geological feature listed as a E3c ❑ ❑ registered National Natural Landmark. Specific feature: e. Other impacts: ❑ ❑ 3. Impacts on Surface Water The proposed action may affect one or more wetlands or other surface water ®NO ❑YES bodies(e.g.,streams,rivers,ponds or lakes). (See Part 1.D.2,E.21) I "Yes", answer questions a-1. I "No",move on to Section 4. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Questlon(s) impact impact may inay occur occur a.The proposed action may create anew water body. D2b,Dlh ❑ p b.The proposed action may result in an increase or decrease of over 10%or more than a D2b ❑ ❑ 10 acre increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water. c.The proposed action may involve dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material 132a ❑ ❑ from a wetland or water body. d.The proposed action may involve construction within or adjoining a freshwater or E2h ❑ ❑ tidal wetland,or in the bed or banks of any other water body. e.The proposed action may create turbidity in a waterbody,either from upland erosion, D2a,D2h ❑ ❑ runoff or by disturbing bottom sediments. f.The proposed action may include construction of one or more intake(s)for withdrawal D2c ❑ ❑ of water from surface water. g.The proposed action may include construction of one or more outfall(s)for discharge D2d ❑ ❑ of wastewater to surface water(s). h.The proposed action may cause soil erosion,or otherwise create a source of D2e [] ❑ stormwater discharge that may lead to siltation or other degradation of receiving water bodies. 1.The proposed action may affect the water quality of any water bodies within or E21i ❑ ❑ downstream of the site of the proposed action. j.The proposed action may involve the application of pesticides or herbicides in or D2q,E2h ❑ ❑ around any water body. k.The proposed action may require the construction of new,or expansion of existing, D 1 a,D2d ❑ ❑ wastewater treatment facilities. Page 2 of 10 1.Other impacts: O 4. Impact on groundwater The proposed action may result in new or additional use of ground water,or ®NO ❑YES may have the potential to introduce contaminants to ground water or an aquifer. (See Part 1.D.2.a,D.2.c,D.2.d,D.2.p,D.2.q,D.2.t) if"Yes", answer questions a-h. If"No",move on to Section 5. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may ma occur occur a.The proposed action may require new water supply wells,or create additional demand D2c ❑ ❑ on supplies from existing water supply wells. b.Water supply demand from the proposed action may exceed safe and sustainable D2c ❑ ❑ withdrawal capacity rate of the local supply or aquifer, Cite Source: c.The proposed action may allow or result in residential uses in areas without water and D 1 a,D2c ❑ ❑ sewer services. d.The proposed action may include or require wastewater discharged to groundwater. D2d,E21 ❑ ❑ e.The proposed action may result in the construction of water supply wells in locations D2c,Elly ❑ o where groundwater is,or is suspected to be,contaminated. Elg,Elh f.The proposed action may require the bulk storage of petroleum or chemical products D2p,E21 ❑ ❑ over ground water or an aquifer. g.The proposed action may involve the commercial application of pesticides within 100 E2h,D2q, ❑ ❑ feet of potable drinking water or irrigation sources. E21,D2c h. Other impacts: ❑ ❑ 5. Impact on Flooding The proposed action may result in development on lands subject to flooding. ©NO ❑YES (See Part 1.E.2) I "Yes', answer questions a-g, I "No",move on to Section 6 Relevant No,or Moderate Part l small to large Questions) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may result in development in a designated floodway. Eli ❑ ❑ b.The proposed action may result in development within a 100 year floodplain. E2j ❑ ❑ c.The proposed action may result in development within a 500 year floodplain. Elk o ❑ d.The proposed action may result in,or require,modification of existing drainage D2b,D2e o ❑ patterns. e.The proposed action may change flood water flows that contribute to flooding. D2b,Eli, ❑ ❑ E2',E2k f.If there is a dam located on the site of the proposed action,is the dam in need of repair, Ele ❑ ❑ or upgrade? Page 3 of 10 g.Other impacts: ❑ ❑ 6. Impacts on Air The proposed action may include a state regulated air emission source. ©NO nYES (See Part 1.13.2.f.,D,2,h,D.2.g) I "Yes", answer questions a-f If"No", move on to Section 7. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.If the proposed action requires federal or state air emission permits,the action may also emit one or more greenhouse gases at or above the following levels: i. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon dioxide(CO2) D2g ❑ ❑ ii. More than 3.5 tons/year of nitrous oxide(N20) D2g ❑ ❑ iii.More than 1000 tons/year of carbon equivalent of perfluorocarbon(PFCs) D2g ❑ ❑ iv.More than.045 tons/year of sulfur hexafluoride(SF6) D2g 0 ❑ ❑ v. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon dioxide equivalent of D2g hydroehloroflourocarbons(BFCs)emissions vi.43 tons/year or more of methane D2h ❑ ❑ b.The proposed action may generate 10 tons/year or more of any one designated D2g ❑ ❑ hazardous air pollutant,or 25 tons/year or more of any combination of such hazardous air pollutants. c.The proposed action may require a state air registration,or may produce an emissions D2f,D2g ❑ ❑ rate of total contaminants that may exceed 5 tbs.per hour,or may include a heat source capable of producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. d.The proposed action may reach 500/a of any of the thresholds in"a"through"c", D2g ❑ ❑ above. e.The proposed action may result in the combustion or thermal treatment of more than I D2s ❑ ❑ ton of refuse per hour. £Other impacts: ❑ ❑ 7. Impact on Plants and Animals The proposed action may result in a loss of flora or fauna. (See Part 1.E.2,m.-q.) ©NO DYES I "Yes",answer questions a J. I "No';move on to Section 8. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may cause reduction in population or loss of individuals of any Ego ❑ ❑ threatened or endangered species,as listed by New York State or the Federal government,that use the site,or are found on,over,or near the site. b.The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by E2o ❑ ❑ any rare,threatened or endangered species,as listed by New York State or the federal government c.The proposed action may cause reduction in population,or loss of individuals,of any E2p ❑ ❑ species of special concern or conservation need,as listed by New York State or the Federal government,that use the site,or are found on,over,or near the site. d.The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by E2p ❑ ❑ any species of special concern and conservation need,as listed by New York State or the Federal government Page 4 of 10 e.The proposed action may diminish the capacity of a registered National Natural E3c ❑ ❑ Landmark to support the biological community it was established to protect. f.The proposed action may result in the removal of,or ground disturbance in,any E2n ❑ ❑ portion of a designated significant natural community. Source: g.The proposed action may substantially interfere with nesting(breeding,foraging,or Elm ❑ ❑ over-wintering habitat for the predominant species that occupy or use the project site. In.The proposed action requires the conversion of more than 10 acres of forest, Elb ❑ ❑ grassland or any other regionally or locally important habitat. Habitat type&information source: L Proposed action(commercial,industrial or recreational projects,only)involves use of D2q ❑ ❑ herbicides or pesticides. j.Other impacts: ❑ ❑ S. Impact on Agricultural Resources The proposed action may impact agricultural resources. (See Part 1.E.3.a.and b.) ©NO El YES I "Yes", answer questions o-h. 1 "No",move on to Section 9. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may impact soil classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the Etc,E3b ❑ ❑ NYS Land Classification System. b.The proposed action may sever,cross or otherwise limit access to agricultural land Ela,Elb ❑ ❑ (includes cropland,bayfields,pasture,vineyard,orchard,etc). c.The proposed action may result in the excavation or compaction of the soil profile of E3b ❑ ❑ active agriculftuml land. d.The proposed action may irreversibly convert agricultural land to non-agricultural Elb,E3a ❑ ❑ uses,either more than 2.5,1c a if located in an Agricultural District,or more than 10 acres if not within an Agricultural District. e.The proposed action may disrupt or prevent installation of an agricultural land El a,Elb ❑ ❑ management system. f.The proposed action may result,directly or indirectly,in increased development C2e,C3, ❑ ❑ potential or pressure on farmland. D2c,D2d g.The proposed project is not consistent with the adopted municipal Farmland C2c ❑ ❑ Protection Plan. h.Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Page 5 of 10 9. Impact on Aesthetic Resources The land use of the proposed action are obviously different from,or are in ©NO ❑YES sharp contrast to,current land use patterns between the proposed project and a scenic or aesthetic resource. (Part 1.E.La,E.Lb,E.31.) I "Yes", answer questions a-g. I "No",go to Section 10. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact Impact may may occur occur a.Proposed action may be visible from any officially designated federal,state,or local E3h ❑ ❑ scenic or aesthetic resource. b.The proposed action may result in the obstruction,elimination or significant E3h,C2b ❑ ❑ screening of one or more officially designated scenic views. c.The proposed action may be visible from publicly accessible vantage points: E3h I.Seasonally(e.g.,screened by summer foliage,but visible during other seasons) ❑ ❑ ii.Year round ❑ ❑ d.The situation or activity in which viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed E3h action is: I. Routine travel by residents,including travel to and from work E2q, 11 ii.Recreational or tourism based activities Elc 13❑ O e.The proposed action may cause a diminishment of the public enjoyment and E3h ❑ ❑ appreciation of the designated aesthetic resource. £ There are similar projects visible within the following distance of the proposed DI a,EI a, ❑ ❑ project: Dlf,DI g D-1/2 mile %s-3 mile 3-5 mile 5+ mile g.Other impacts: ❑ ❑ 10. Impact on Historic and Archeological Resources The proposed action may occur in or adjacent to a historic or archaeological ©NO ❑YES resource. (Part 1.E.3.e,f.and g.) 1 "Yes", answer questions a-e. I "No",&o to Section 11. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may occur wholly or partially within,or substantially contiguous E3e ❑ ❑ to,any buildings,archaeological site or district which is listed on or has been nominated by the NYS Board of Historic Preservation for inclusion on the State or National Register of historic Places. b.The proposed action may occur wholly or partially within,or substantially contiguous E3f ❑ ❑ to,an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office(SHPO)archaeological site inventory. c.The proposed action may occur wholly or partially within,or substantially contiguous B39 ❑ ❑ to,an archaeological site not included on the NY SHPO inventory. Source: Page 6 of 10 d.Other impacts: ❑ ❑ e.If any of the above(a-d)are answered"Yes",continue with the following questions to help support conclusions in Part 3: i. The proposed action may result in the destruction or alteration of all or part E3e,E3g, ❑ ❑ of the site or property. E3f ii. The proposed action may result in the alteration of the property's setting or E3e,E3f, integrity. E3g,Ela, Rib iii. The proposed action may result in the introduction of visual elements which E3e,E3 f, ❑ ❑ are out of character with the site or property,or may alter its setting. E3g,E3h, C2 C3 IL Impact on Open Space and Recreation The proposed action may result in a loss of recreational opportunities or a ©NO 7YES reduction of an open space resource as designated in any adopted municipal open space plan. (See Part 1.C.2.c,E.l.c.,E.2.q.) 9"Yes",answer questions a-e. 1 "No",go to Section 12. Relevant No,or Moderate Part i small to large Questions) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may result in an impairment of natural functions,or"ecosystem D2e,Elb ❑ ❑ services",provided by an undeveloped area,including but not limited to stormwater E2h, storage,nutrient cycling,wildlife habitat. E2m,Ego, E2n E2 b.The proposed action may result in the loss of a current or future recreational resource, C2a,Elc, ❑ ❑ C2c,E2 c.The proposed action may eliminate open space or recreational resource in an area C2a,C2c ❑ ❑ with few such resources. Etc,E2q d.The proposed action may result in loss of an area now used informally by the C2c,El c ❑ ❑ community as an open space resource. F. Other impacts: ❑ [] 12. Impact on Critical Environmental Areas The proposed action may be located within or adjacent to a critical NO ©YES environmental area(CEA). (See Part 1.E.3.d) If"Yes", answer questions a-c. 1 "No",go to Section 13. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may result in a reduction in the quantity of the resource or E3d ® ❑ characteristic which was the basis for designation of the CEA. b.The proposed action may result in a reduction in the quality of the resource or E3d ❑ characteristic which was the basis for designation of the CEA. c.Other impacts: ® ❑ Page 7 of 10 13. Impact on Transportation The proposed action may result in a change to existing transportation systems. ©NO F�YES (See Part 1.D.2 j) I "Yes", answer questions a-g, I "No",go to Section 14. Relevant No,or Moderate Partl small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.Projected traffic increase may exceed capacity of existing road network. D2j ❑ ❑ b.The proposed action may result in the construction of paved parking area for 500 or D2j ❑ ❑ more vehicles. c.The proposed action will degrade existing transit access. D2j ❑ ❑ d.The proposed action will degrade existing pedestrian or bicycle accommodations. D2j ❑ ❑ e.The proposed action may alter the present pattern of movement of people or goods. D2j ❑ ❑ f. Other impacts: ❑ ❑ 14. Impact on Energy The proposed action may cause an increase in the use of any form of energy. [:]NO ©YES (See Part 1.D.21) I "Yes", answer questions a-e. ff"No",go to Section 15. Relevant No,or Moderate Part 1 small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action will require anew,or an upgrade to an existing,substation. D2k ® ❑ b.The proposed action will require the creation or extension of an energy transmission Dlfy ® ❑ or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two-family residences or to serve a D1 q,D2k commercial or industrial use. c.The proposed action may utilize more than 2,500 MWhrs per year of electricity. D2k ® ❑ d.The proposed action may involve heating and cooling of more than 100,000 square Dig ® ❑ feet of building area when completed. e.Other Impacts: 15. Impact on Noise,Odor,and Light The proposed action may result in an increase in noise,odors,or outdoor lighting. ©NO ❑YES (See Part 1.D.2.m.,n.,and o.) I "Yes", answer questions a-f I "No",go to Section 16. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may produce sound above noise levels established by local 132m ❑ ❑ regulation. b.The proposed action may result in blasting within 1,500 feet of any residence, 132m,Eld ❑ ❑ hospital,school,licensed day care center,or nursing home. c.The proposed action may result in routine odors for more than one hour per day. D2o ❑ ❑ Page 8 of 10 d.The proposed action may result in light shining onto adjoining properties. D2n ❑ ❑ e.The proposed action may result in lighting creating sky-glow brighter than existing D2n,Ela ❑ ❑ area conditions. f.Other impacts: ❑ ❑ 16. Impact on Human Health The proposed action may have an impact on human health from exposure ©NO ❑YES to new or existing sources of contaminants. (See Part 1.D.2.q.,E.I.d,f.g.and h.) I "Yes", answer questions a-m. I "No",go to Section 17. Relevant No,or Moderate Part 1 small to large Question(s) impact Impact may may cccur occur a.The proposed action is located within 1500 feet of a school,hospital,licensed day Eld ❑ ❑ care center.group home nursing home or retirement community. b.The site of the proposed action is currently undergoing remediation. Elg,E 1 h ❑ ❑ c.There is a completed emergency spill remediation,or a completed environmental site Elg,Elh ❑ ❑ remediation on,or adjacent to,the site of the proposed action. d.The site of the action is subject to an institutional control limiting the use of the Elg,Elh ❑ ❑ property(e. .,easement or deed restriction). e.The proposed action may affect institutional control measures that were put in place EI g,E 1 h ❑ ❑ to ensure that the site remains protective of the environment and human health. f.The proposed action has adequate control measures in place to ensure that future D2t ❑ ❑ generation,treatment and/or disposal of hazardous wastes will be protective of the environment and human health. g.The proposed action involves construction or modification of a solid waste D2q,Elf ❑ ❑ management facility. h.The proposed action may result in the unearthing of solid or hazardous waste. D2q,Elf ❑ ❑ L The proposed action may result in an increase in the rate of disposal,or processing,of D2r,D29 ❑ ❑ solid waste. j.The proposed action may result in excavation or other disturbance within 2000 feet of Eli;Elg ❑ ❑ a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous waste. Elh k.The proposed action may result in the migration of explosive gases from a landfil I Elf,EI g ❑ ❑ site to adjacent off site structures. 1.The proposed action may result in the release of contaminated leachate from the D29,E If, ❑ ❑ project site. D2r m.Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Page 9 of 10 17. Consistency with Community Plans The proposed action is not consistent with adopted land use plans. ©NO DYES (See Part 1.C.1,C.2.and C.3.) If"Yes", answer questions a-h. I "No",go to Section 18. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur e.The proposed action's land use components may be different from,or in sharp C2,C3,Dla ❑ ❑ contrast to,current surrounding land use pattern(s). Ela,Elb b.The proposed action will cause the permanent population of the city,town or village C2 ❑ ❑ in which the project is located to grow by more than 5%. c.The proposed action is inconsistent with local land use plans or zoning regulations, C2,C2,C3 ❑ ❑ d.The proposed action is inconsistent with any County plans,or other regional land use C2,C2 ❑ ❑ Tans. e.The proposed action may cause a change in the density of development that is not C3,Dlc, ❑ ❑ supported by existing infrastructure or is distant from existing infrastructure. Dld,Dlf, Dl d,Elb f.The proposed action is located in an area characterized by low density development C4,D2c,D2d ❑ ❑ that will require new or expanded public infrastructure. D2j g.The proposed action may induce secondary development impacts(e.g.,residential or C2a ❑ ❑ commercial development not included in the proposed action) h.Other: ❑ ❑ 18. Consistency with Community Character The proposed project is inconsistent with the existing community character. ©NO FJYES (See Part 1.C.2,C.3,D.2,E.3) I "Yes", answer questions a-g. I "No",proceed to Part 3. Relevant No,or Moderate Part I small to large Question(s) impact impact may may occur occur a.The proposed action may replace or eliminate existing facilities,structures,or areas EU,EH,E3g ❑ ❑ of historic importance to the community. b.The proposed action may create a demand for additional community services(e.g. C4 ❑ ❑ schools,police and fire c.The proposed action may displace affordable or low-income housing in an area where C2,C3,Dl f ❑ ❑ there is a shortage of such housing, Dlg,Ela d.The proposed action may interfere with the use or enjoyment of officially recognized C2,E3 ❑ ❑ or designated public resources. e.The proposed action is inconsistent with the predominant architectural scale and C2,C3 ❑ ❑ character. L Proposed action is inconsistent with the character of the existing natural landscape. C2,C3 ❑ ❑ Ela,Elb E2g.E2h g.Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Page 10 of 10 617.20 Appendix B State Environmental Quality Review VISUAL EAF ADDENDUM This form may be used to provide additional information relating to Question 11 of Part 2 of the Full EAF. (To be completed by Lead Agency) Distance Between Visibility Project and Resource(in Miles) 1. Would the project be visible from: a a.a 5+ 1 A parcel of land which is dedicated to and available 0' ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ to the public for the use, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made scenic qualities? Yes-Doral Arrowwood Golf Club I Blind Brook Country Club ❑ El ❑ E] 1:1I An overlook or parcel of land dedicated to public observation,enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made scenic qualities? No I A site or structure listed on the National or State ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Registers of Historic Places? No I State Parks? No ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ I The State Forest Preserve? No ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ I National Wildlife Refuges and State Game Refuges? No ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ I National Natural Landmarks and other outstanding ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ natural features? No 1 National Park Service lands? No ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ I Rivers designated as National or State Wild,Scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ or Recreational? No I Any transportation corridor of high exposure,such ❑ ❑ ❑✓ • ❑ ❑ as part of the Interstate System, or Amtrak? 184/Hutchinson River Parkway/Meritt Parkway I A governmentally established or designated interstate ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ or inter-county foot trail, or one formally proposed for establishment or designation? No 1 A site, area,lake,reservoir or highway designated as ❑ ❑ ❑✓ ❑ ❑ scenic? Meritt Parkway I Municipal park,or designated open space? ❑ ❑ 21' ❑ ❑ Western Greenwich Civic Center Park/Crawford Town Park I County road? No ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 1 State road? Route 12DA/Route 15/Route 120 ❑ ❑ ❑ I Local road? Anderson Hill Road Ry ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Is the visibility of the project seasonal?(i.e.,screened by summer foliage,but visible during other seasons) ❑✓Yes []No 3. Are any of the resources checked in question 1 used by the public during the time of year during which the project will be visible? R]Yes ❑No Due to the density and height of buildings and surrounding topography,visibility will be limited;installation will be barely discernible, since antennas will be concealed within flagpole and screen walls for equipment. DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING VISUAL ENVIRONMENT 4. From each item checked in question 1,check those which generally describe the sun-ounding environment. Within *Y4 mile *1 mile Essentially undeveloped No ❑ ❑ Forested No ❑ ❑ Agricultural No ❑ ❑ Suburban Residential Yes ❑ ❑ Industrial No ❑ ❑ Commerical Yes ❑ Urban No ❑ ❑ River,Lake,Pond Yes ❑ Cliffs, Overlooks No ❑ ❑ Designated Open Space No ❑ ❑ Flat ❑✓ ❑ Hilly No ❑ ❑ Mountainous No ❑ ❑ Other No ❑ ❑ NOTE:add attachments as needed 5. Are there visually similar projects within: *Y2 mile QYes ❑No 1 mile ✓❑Yes ❑No 2 miles ©Yes ❑No 3 miles ✓❑Yes ❑ No *Distance from project site is provided for assistance. Substitute other distances as appropriate. EXPOSURE 6. The annual number of viewers likely to observe the proposed project is 2,000,000.00 p NOTE:When user data is unavailable or unknown,use best estimate. CONTEXT 7. The situation or activity in which the viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed action is: FREQUENCY Holidays/ Activity Daily Weekly Weekends Seasonally Travel to and from work O O O O Involved in recreational activities O O O O Routine travel by residents O O O O At a residence O O O O At worksite O O O O Other O O O O Reset I BUIL MENT IBUILDING V1 OK 938 KING itNY 10573DEC:DEPARTME­ FOR 014(914)9 39-5801 LAGE BROOKTOFFICE USE ONLY: Approval Date: Permit# Application # Approval Signature: ;ARCMRAL REVIEW BOARD: Disapproved: Mate: BOT Approval Date: Case# :Chairman: PB Approval Date: Case# ;Secretary: ZBA Approval Date: Case# Other: Application Fee: I T.0,*�_Permit Fees: Exterior Building Permit Anulication Application dated: is hereby made to the Badding Inspector of the Village of Rye Brook NY,for the issoanceofa Perast for the construction of buildings,structures,additions,alterations or for a change in use,as per detailed statement described below. 1. JobAddress: 96q Andersnn Hill Rnael 2. ParcelID#: 129.34.1.45 Zone: PUD 3. Proposed Improvement(Describe in detail):Installation of wireless telecomm inirations facility i-, neluding,a_ stealth flagpole and related equipment on the roof of the existing building with a generator at grade in an existing equipment area 4. Property Owner: DCCA.LLC d/b/a Doral Arrowwood Address: 975 Anderson Hill Road,Rye Brook,NY Phone# g1Q_gAQ_g9np Cell# a-mall List All Other Properties Owned in Rye Brook: Applicant: NPmN York gMCA Limited p nPrahin dffila Merimn Wirelegg Address: c/o Snyder&Snyder LLP.94 White Plains Road Tarrytown,NY Phone# 914-333-0700 Cell# e-maills�der0snydPrlaw net Architect: N/A Address: Phone# Cell# e-mail Engineer. Tectonic Engineering&Surveying Consultants.P.C. Address: 1279 Route 300.Newburgh.NY 12550 Phone#R41;_567-6656 Cell# e-mall General Contractor:_ TRIS Address: Phone# Cell# e-mail 6.12014 5. Occupancy;(1-Fam.,2 Fam.,Comm.,etc...)Prior to construction: Comm.' After construction:Cnmm_/Puhlic I Itility 6. Will the proposed project require the installation of a new,or an extension/modification to an existing automatic fire suppression system?(Fire Sprinkler,ANSL System,FM-200 System,Type I Hood,etc...)Yes:_No:_,(if yes,you must submit a separate Automatic Fire Suppression System Permit application&2 sets of detailed engineered plans) 7. Will the proposed project disturb 400 sq.ft.or more of laud,or create 400 sq.ft.or more of impervious coverage requiringa Stormwater Management Control Permit as per§217 of Village Code? Yes:_No: X Area: 8. Will the proposed project require a Site Plan Review by the Village Planning Board as per§209 of Village Code? Yes: X No:_(ifyes,you must submit a Site Plan Application,&provide detailed drawings) 9. Will the proposed project require a Steep Slopes Permit as per§213 of Village Code Yes: No:—(if yes,you must submit a Site Plan Application,&provide a detailed topographical survey) 10. Is the lot located within 100 ft of a Wetland as per§245 of Village Code? Yes:_No: X (ifyes,the area ofwedaud and the wetland buffer zone must be properly depicted on the survey&site plan) 11. Is the lot or any portion thereof located in a Flood Plane as per the FIRM Map dated 9/28/07? Yes:_No: X (if yes,the area and elevations of the flood plane must be properly depicted on the survey&site plan) 12. Will the proposed project require a Tree Removal Permit as per§235 of Village Code?Yes:_No: X (ifyes,you must submit a Tree Removal Permit Application) 13. Does the proposed project Involve a Home-Occupation as per§250-38 of Vi➢age Code? Yes:_No:.X,If yea,indicate: TIER I: TIER II:_TIER III:_(if yes,a Home Occupation Permit Application is required) 14. Area of proposed building in square feet: Basement:_ NIA 1"d: N/A 2'"8.: N/A 3ee i7.:N/A 15. What Is the total Grose Floor Area of the proposed new construction: N/A 16. What is the total Square Footage of the proposed renovation to the existing structure: N/A 17. What is the total estimated cost of construction: $ 160,00.00 (The estimated cost spall include all site improvements,labor,material,scaffolding,fixed equipment,professional fees,including any material and labor which maybe donated gratis.) 18. Area of lot: Square feet: 74.051+/- Acres: 1.59+/- 19. Dimensions from proposed building or structure to lot lines: front yard: 1 +/_ rear yard:__aL_ +/- right side yard: 48+/- left side yard: 59+/- other: 20. if building in Inented on a corner int,which mtrept does ft f3rout on: N/A 21. N.Y.State Construction Classification: IB N.Y.State Use Classification: B 22. Number of stories: N/A Overall Height: R4'-6"+LqL Median Height: N/A 23. Will the basement be Hull,or partial: NIA . finished or unfinished: N/A 24. What material is the exterior finish: N/A 25. Will roof be peaked,hip,mansard,flat,etc: N/g Roofing material: N/A 26. What system of heating:_ N/A 27. If private sewage disposal Is necessary,approval by the Westchester County Health Department most be submitted with this application. 28. Estimated date of completion: 29. The State Workman's Compensation Law provides that before a Building Permit is issued,the Contractor,Owner, Architect,etc.,shall produce the following information: Name of Compensation Insurance Carrier: Contractor TBD Policy Number. Date of Expiration: 6.12014 This application must be properly completed in its entirety by a N.Y. State Registered Architect or N.Y. State Licensed Professional Engineer&signed by those professionals where indicated. It must also include the notarized signature(s) of the legal owner(s)of the subject property, and the applicant of record in the spaces provided.Any application not properly completed in its entirety and/or not properly signed shall be deemed null and void, and will be returned to the applicant Please note that application fees are non-refundable. 11A;401a,N gAY TY F WESTCHESTER ) as: Xavle.. w ,being duly sworn,deposes and states that helshe is the applicant above named, (print oame of individual signing as the applicant) and fiuther states that (s)he is the legal owner of the property to which this application pertains, or that (s)he is the agent for the legal owner and is duly authorized to make and file this application. (indicate architect,contractor,agent,attorney,eta) That all statements contained herein are true to the best of his/her knowledge and beliet and that any work performed,or use conducted at the above captioned property will be in conformance with the details as set forth and contained in this application and in any accompanying approved plans and specifications,as well as in accordance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention&Building Code,the Code of the Village of Rye Brook and all other applicable laws,ordinances and regulations. Sworn to before me this Sworn to before me this 3 day of , 20 day of Nei r"e' ,20_)J_ New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless 8',�__ cant Signature of Properly Owner Stgnahue of Appliicant I SEE ATTACHED LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION lipgMgybeck Print Name of Property Owner Print Name of Applicant Notary Public NotaitVublic Michael R.Bonhomme Notary Public,State of New York No.01 B06144229 Qualified in Orange County Commission Expires 04/24/20 6.1.2014 NEW YORK SMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP db/ Verizo6 ■ wireless WEST NYACK, NEW YORK PUBLIC UTILITY ATTACHED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 965 ANDERSON HILL ROAD RYE BROOK, NY 10573 SITE INFORMATION VW SITE TYPE NEW BUILD VW PRO,ECT CODE: 2011615945 - STE DESCRIPTION: ATTACHED WRELESS TEITECOMMUNICAONS FACILITY;INSTALL NEW UNMANNED EQUIPMENT CABINETS k POLE WTH INTERIOR - SIX(6)ANTENNAS ON THE EXISTING ROOFTOP AND A BACKUP GENERATOR AT MADE PRO,ECT LOCATION: 965 ANDERSON HILL ROAD RYE BROOK,NY 113573 S17B `moo .f BUILDING OWNER: DORAL ARROWWOOD ' ® '+r _ M 4• u 975 ANDERSON HILL ROAD, RYE BROOK,NY 10573 rfinn �'" a f] ,•'� z. SITE CONTACT: MICHAEL PARISI (914)935-6628 ® VW LEASING CONTACT: DANABROCKLEBANK(TECTONIC) o..ue +�+ ,• „,°,"„ Av (845)567-8856 VW CON5O2UCTION CONTACT: (546) CE JONES J �J } .-.rzAy,��, (64fi423-3072 pf` f A/E(ENGINEER)CONTACT-. EDWARD WMCEJ J (845)567-6656 EXF.2611 MINITY MAP AREA MAP ELECTRICAL DOMPANY CONSOLIDATED EOOON CONTACT:CUSTOMER SERYIGE PHONE:(600)752-6633 TELEPHONE COMPANY 4ERUEN1 NEW YORK,INC. (645)690-71DO LATITUDE 41'02'44.73"N(NAD 63) LONGITUDE: 73'41'20.13 W(NAD 63) ELEVATION: 257'-1't AMSL JURISDICTION: VILLAGE OF RYE BROOK SECTION: 129.34 BLOCK: 7 LOT(S): 45 Y® ZONING DISTRICT: P.U.D.—PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (A R/)— • ""'"""'^� °sn zor oI.P.P. Pipe/v A TTTL6 31B3ET Ia/+4 Be ANOI3BSON HIM ROAD m BROOK,NY 10573 Shy- —��sri�— a�R,/,a xesm caW im o� , �wia yen,waP oma. w +,NVu es.umwa cmPwxis OFm°' ®�3F1�°g• 6666.PURCB T-1xa p8 • AR®F�`' LEGEND LIST OF TY OWNERS WHIN 250' RADIUS El GENERAL NOTES MD Ull —" ---------------- V UO OM r REMENTS /A ."ll I.R. �E OF RTF @jOOK 0 r SETBACK %o _ MAP W PLS _OT PIAN Lu _L---�XDT PLAN,SEMCK MAP&NOTES 3b R85 ANDERSON Enl ROAD /W4 RU 13RGGX,NY 10573 3 R F ilAvi4 pr— -H N 1 ❑ I' ❑ I i II I /' — — ' I vsr mxvarz asem w.m l,mJ mur Fmvr�+uxF e w��� I I m(e mxmq I Fa uro,v I � � I I i up ��x cmass as us awnn rouom e�2] I ,�. ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � ua°�'imxc Fvu: ___________'__ i omen coeue ______________ ra memr�®a��w�uavwv e easr cxw uix rwve av FiJea*one __ uro vF I I 1 II II I I v.Fmiwe 4rorA I I _mwa�,vrt II i era ear eevc cwe¢x rxm wwva l� rea aeomx wmfg oe,ve eeme w Fwes 1 _______ eeeaaoe aewsr °°"rxore II me>;mxsr mnn�.J ame F/WrL�iE I___ __ vmr rorF•.ox ��� ,tl 19md ________ 11 sr� ear urxm xva• ver v ��� I ___ _ vi ��evim,v�oxa�mn /!I neFz vamx ox coot on srvm C aemae J I o�ypym,�®ops, / _ w auras ❑ I car rxr wo � ro�or(� M IEelle^x MpYN°YAO� 4 mG�[w. n� tee veeme,mrs___ �w�u°vlu�sain®r°�nxv I ooRmc�e°iF ea°ire _ roof a zzass� curt arsime vru _ Iww iv ray 1 !� s xw r�wev Wmp p+c1 � omx e�m rmr varraa I cm ar uew pm) I I �seua I ref va®n romm cas mm i __J .� ° I 1 I �n ��as @ GENERATOR DETAIL PLAN eeo,ee.,aro, Jib9!�ffia N. IAflg/C m=F=¢= 'cv fir® ,N,ana � t� m PIAN&GSNERATDR DETAM PLANv� Lu u:v+• ersm� o mF`,,,,,w I 865 ANDERSON E 11 ROAD R0� OFN "°" �'®,a�,e�9R�° ��/„ e e FW NRYE ExooE NY o573 nrrb-,•�• - -v WA,na n—", 0 362 ,ans — „roan• �., o p SSS® sa66.PDeca A-1 6 N I Icr ve®x rmm s� ao �aa:sn Y ac:er1°m d — �iomaw ,\ \ -------- ------------ SITE DETAIL PLAN —\ a n�EE1TgIp awl�.VINM 5Y-eYR�101K IP al ����pp 60ee1 ------n e ------------- - ------------------ �r ami ii --- LAPARTIAL ELEVATION Nr-,b eert roes�. aei N. IA/y ' axi ® ,o/,wna (9p,• o DETAII.PLAN&EUTMONa ow a a� „Nana Z— vnn+ O � - .s 865 ANDERSON HILL ROAD m/Dann r m (4 RYE BR00$NY 10575 :N,nn ' - - ,�Ne/,+Jillpa�y�u O U 8888.PURCwR A—P 6 N „• �wfr®f�ss Ra� �wags NOTICE 1-800-852-2671� sm m as auan n.0.uw,ma,mmxs xw m a n.wm ox xmvca.wmw xxaExm Eaiv.wr. s¢i.•-et.N:� s f r.-v�i x. RF NGTCE SIGN EA£%GExGY SGN SIGH__N DETAILS ANTENNA PLANS � ecvE,a-r-.• �7 mp— ,n.•TM max, wa.•No-oN.m e� tffi¢ � I`7 canr � GM l GP m @S MOUNTING� DETAIL .Nnv,un3 N.r xcwz TeX,unS�um/m�m.,�Nm+s m ' @ANTENNA DETAIL EW N9f Y08K S1L9A SuffT® a/W. 9 N, IAS ,ony+a m tQ DETATTS �, �[ Z a/ana xsrx®se-N�,¢xw O f9i () - .;e Z 5 ANDERSON HIi.L ROAD RYE BRODY.NY 10578 o cS 09362 ab. 1,/Yan1 o mn..e f.? S 8888.P9RC2 A-S 8 NEW YORK SMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP d/b/a Verizob wireless WEST NYACK, NEW YORK PUBLIC UTILITY ATTACHED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 965 ANDERSON HILL ROAD RYE BROOK, NY 10573 SITE INFORMATION N - VW SITE TYPE NEW BUILD .;0 1 - _ ` W. @' VW PROJECT CODE: 2D11613945 SITE DESCRIPTION: ATTACHED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FAgLITY,INSTALL NEW UNMANNED - EQUIPMENT CABINETS&POLE WITH INTERIOR 1, ,•,„;( 1 ml1 _ SIX(6)ANTENNAS ON THE EXISTING ROOFTOP AND A BACKUP GENERATOR AT GRADE. S!/'F PROJECT LOCATION: 965 ANDERSON HILL ROAD RYE BROOK,NY 10573 -92 �p O� S�E BUILDING OWNER: DORAL ARROWWOOD LEGEND LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 250' RADIUS cN F-1 7D // /,✓'l `/ ���� �,\` GENERAL NOTES ,\ \,\�)�!tom•'� ,'a' ���� �� �\ ce w,wwsnµo,x�w,s o06 xu�e..a,E�,�.Rx o. BULK-REQUIREMENTS W. O e � xra xwo sw�. e IVA a- v � R�.xaxo 1 �N _O��r•R� SETy BACK MAP �/ F PLAN ypy S�pTE 0F� PLS �.�p/ m YORK SMSA Ll P P 2� 11(B I PLAN,SETBACK NAP&NOTES .M 5 ANDERSON a /u wssm • 9•� �(��' OBRYE BROOK,NY L 1067 „nan .0�...a 6 0 A LEN a..,.x.. - aa/u/�e ,ve O new. 6666.PURC2 C-1 x7 Naha — a p ---; sc 000uron art eou riw,A�+ r—— �I � II • I� I, am�ax�x-ax�..) /;� ° I I I � ❑ a�n�� I I I, /, �ivwn aoor, :- m m eaerser u[ xew weax axmm vM � o �asap ro (sa nes�MA. I I •� O vm y rroi.A,rofty) sns,wxcasis sue ( mxos+o Baas ®ossa. xvmm mr-o,w- "ZVI crauuma wrt a ^- - __ru ive vaa�) mmm ® Ka wex.a��uE aa„m ® o ❑ o l ------.• I lwr�arc iwW Y I I � a I pmx aoa I aa.a.vaso I I spsr torpor Oxal .ccax pw.p I ooa wm.E aaoerp� �� �� rrou vm w"n'i�w w�awpi/mxwexe '--- � _ pax�wR -____—_ 1 r _ m„amara aoa. »d Maom aaw a m. ox arox a ewe O .�ro am(af pa'�r�p+. ' eapapx '-- ow axxrpp ❑� } a"axo�°'��) max"ter) ia,vca.emm___ 'am rs•�caavm rap i - k ams`r")m�mc°s.e u,<aa �� �I - osr carcarre wu. moa e ,e•*wx) .ievpaa ppm.aa�ro xnxw. �, I -- ..u® aw"'�masa C; � q rop+am pax wa ww rEw wpuv www cs I I mom)� � I I 1 m0e AARs rooa GENERATOR DETAIL PLAN nao�OXv oaf puapupin �pTE Op MYOPK SMSA UNI OWARD - i/am(sp6a°`ak n/A-a>�adJ1°ov.w +W/,o as n antiaxrao� ,q LAN&GENERATOR DETAIL PLAN MES A a n/a/+. tin•a er+b '1'�� r. 985 ANDERSON HILL ROAD O_LDN TAN— n ++/ x 9 2 ��Q' R oma.HROOX.NY 10573 SIZE!N)NCHES 0 N II cvovr asr y I I `.art°" I �" mm m•.v.ow.x ) r-- ------ -- om ,E,vwxwo wK� _ I I xn wives � ��G�� I wsr wrtt ,vv waw rsa� � I 1 ` res�usaysuss � I T I (�ariz)tK ij� L t I' � I • I � msr mxamc aw t \xsw wavx I `• ed��¢a � ` I �----- ----�--------------'Lj---____-_- ' (m ae c,vW T- fsm mu,/iw) I ❑ I I I _. L_1---------------------------------------------J m. m SITE DETAIL PLAN av9 a-eA An�— _�/Aa.�i1m«rm�»Krc� muc y,o•-,'-v �[ . ,(nae•:Aa � � •o:,a� r�wemv rmnm e�im'rvs uq M mw » +) _o f ui r w'�se eavwov v- ux A— aAmni .an+— mor wn IZIMI oTF1: sruss �x piwxoj wmm sous !'. ¢/zaz ai�wa *51,,TE opo, n O,p�ARD ti $;�' n PARTIAL rc ELEVATION NKR YORK 8N8Aa T AAfR BRe . a/.,z•_ _ m tea„ a XEea3 w. IL, TE DETAIL PIAN&ELEVATION 0,",,,r, \\ 986 ANDERSON HDI ROAD 0 xr'n..+ ON EN RYE BROOK,NY 10679 0 rrwu., 8888.PURC2 zl-2 7 ® NOTICE ® �.ow.x.wM e.*) 1-800-852-2671 _ V— RF NORGE SIGN sxw ro eE eucm ox aawttm xemaas ee,.sumr. •(W-N/6 s(R-eY ru As un"ix¢o wWa i u'S/�ixmx/oq�gp�aEgsu smucnex. ro .—G.. SIGN�DETAILSnANTENNA PLANS ANTENr-cNA DETAIL �J au,c,n•-,•-a• mxmxn„a, ti 1 au,roxx x,,,wa v ons'aN x , ,svxono ea Aral vM.T. ,Kx[)ro (cw io acc'o miw�x)Ora; Fwmu � � wiu 1 1�1 �1 i (' V ,oxo wa eeels i 1 we.,s cwoar rwus ___J �s.aw GG.,s.a-(rG.as-lo) 1.11�(x).,eas•GG.,aw'(o) l/zY)u-eoca was mns waaor.n..,aa ,waamx,sou us Par oa A ear �� ram".wa raamnex wsxws j �Wu�csav roa s>scmwnsxs.� ,nY eon RM � GPS MOUNTING DETAIL @)LR�..DETAIL wnm n> Awa T� .,ix� eme(na) u,mc.tnal va mx.a wx ea,xw.an mm mem m a. MirZ-1 E,��xm�.. /1RRH & JUNCTION BOX MOUNTING DETAIL HYBRIFLEX MOUNTING SIDE ELEVATION m,cx emxccxr svxrxce� ,,n•-r-o• ,,n•-rb Nm You 9RSA P r.yp CONDUIT DETAIL 0 N w. refbss au rm E.5 «Nam arR �m --14fW _ -.+1 DETAILS oa „/una P aejtl n ' /t4j 866 ANDERSON HUI ROAD c �1e ani o r<«enWx T RYE BROOK,NY 10573 11 �« 1 i oe/w/,e au o emwuww. ON E 6666.PURCR A-3 7 VISUAL RESOURCE EVALUATION PROPOSED ATTACHED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS INSTALLATION 965 ANDERSON HILL ROAD RYE BROOK WESTCHESTER COUNTY NEW YORK Submitted by: Vert, ►OAwtreless 175 Calkins Road Rochester, NY 14623 Prepared by: TECTONIC ENGINEERING & SURVEYING CONSULTANTS, P.C. 70 Pleasant Hill Road Mountainville, New York 10953 845-534-5959 845-534-5999 FAX W.O. # 6666.PURC2 6/25/2014 G= CORPORATE OFFICE Mountainville, NY (800)829-6531 PrKticaI 5*6m.6xepfionaI5ervi€e PO Box 37,70 Pleasant Hill Road (845)534-5959 FAX:(845)534-5999 Mountainville, NY 10953 www.tectonicengineering.com Verizon Wireless 175 Calkins Road, Rochester, NY 14623 November 7, 2013 Revised June 25, 2013 RE: W.O.: # 6666.PURC2 VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, 965 ANDERSON HILL ROAD, RYE BROOK WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK Tectonic Engineering & Surveying Consultants, P.C., was retained by Verizon Wireless to conduct a "Visual Resource Evaluation" to determine the potential visibility of a proposed attached rooftop installation on an existing building located at 965 Anderson Hill Road in the Village of Rye Brook, Westchester County, NY. 1.0 SETTING The proposed installation is located at 965 Anderson Hill Road in the Village of Rye Brook. The surrounding land use along Anderson Hill Road is primarily residential, recreational, and commercial use. 2.0 METHODOLOGY On November 3, 2013, Tectonic Engineering & Surveying Consultants, P.C., conducted a field investigation for the purpose of evaluating the views associated with the proposed rooftop installation from various locations in the neighborhood. Weather conditions were partly cloudy and cool with temperatures around 55 degrees. The study area consisted of an approximate '/2 mile radius from the project site. Photographs were taken from various vantage points within the study area to document the actual view toward the existing building. Photographs were taken using a Canon EOS Rebel XT Digital SLR digital camera with an 18 to 55 millimeter zoom lens. Unless otherwise noted, the zoom lens was set to approximately 31 mm to achieve a field-of-view comparable to a 50mm lens on a full frame 35mm camera, thereby approximating the normal human eyesight relative to scale. Using a handheld GPS unit, the coordinates and orientation of each photograph location were taken. Each photograph attached includes a brief description of the location and orientation from which it was taken. These photograph descriptions are summarized below: G= Practical Wi;t;yrs.E}xeplionalServ;re 965 Anderson Hill Road 2 November 7, 2013 Revised June 25, 2013 1. View from Anderson Hill Road, looking north towards the proposed installation, from a distance of approximately 2100 feet. 2. View from intersection of Anderson Hill Road and entrance to Doral Arrowwood, looking northwest towards the proposed installation, from a distance of approximately 1500 feet. 3. View from the entrance to Blind Brook Club, looking northwest towards the proposed installation, from a distance of approximately 1400 feet. 4. View from entrance to Doral Greens Drive, looking west northwest towards the proposed installation, from a distance of approximately 1300 feet. 5. View from end of Doral Greens Drive E, looking west towards the proposed installation, from a distance of approximately 1200 feet. 6. View from Doral Greens Drive W, looking north towards the proposed installation, from a distance of approximately 500 feet. 7. View from Doral Greens Drive W, looking north towards the proposed installation, from a distance of approximately 300 feet. 8. View from intersection of King Street and Hettiefred Road, looking southwest towards the proposed installation, from a distance of approximately 1900 feet. 9. View from intersection of King Street and International Drive, looking south towards the proposed installation, from a distance of approximately 2000 feet. 10. View from intersection of High Point Circle and Bellefair Road looking south towards the proposed installation, from a distance of approximately 2400 feet. 11. View from Bellefair Road, looking southeast towards the proposed installation, from a distance of approximately 2200 feet. 12. View from intersection of Bellefair Road and Fellowship Lane looking southeast towards the proposed installation, from a distance of approximately 2600 feet. These photograph locations are presented on the attached "PhotoLog Map." 3.0 PROCESS The digital images were merged and manipulated through the use of the image editing software "Adobe PhotoShop CS5." With this process, the proposed antenna and associated equipment were scaled to the correct location and height, relative to the G= Practical Wi;t;yrS,E,xeplionalServ;re 965 Anderson Hill Road 3 November 7, 2013 Revised June 25, 2013 existing building. Copies of the existing conditions and the photographic simulations are attached. 4.0 CONCLUSION The potential visibility of the proposed installation is primarily limited to the immediate area. As the proposed installation includes a stealth flagpole and a stealth enclosure, the proposed addition of Verizon Wireless equipment on the Building at 965 Anderson Hill Road will have little to no adverse impacts on existing views of the Building. Beyond the immediate area, the building and proposed installation are obstructed by mature vegetation, the sloping landscape, and/or intervening buildings. If you have any questions or comments, please call the undersigned. Sincerely, TECTONIC ENGINEERING & SURVEYING CONSULTANTS P.C. rl Peter T. Sutherland P.E., L.E.P., C.P.G. Vice President, Manager of Environmental Services ��a- m �?, Approximate Typical PHOTOLOG MAP N � o- �r Photo Location PROPOSED ATTACHED ANTENNA INSTALLA- TION ON AN EXISTING t 1 urserleu 5 BeIle Vai� STRUCTURE Whitiem � Hca ;hu 6e *! ft 965 ANDERSON HILL RD rr ry the Great ❑ � RYE BROOK Lawns I1 '4 WESTCHESTER COUNTY NEW YORK Oared mti 75: 4 S arb4.lck5 `�� State University � " of New York- ?a Purchase College � �a�' Doral Arfawwood y Hotel Conference Genter VeffLMwireless Water Baptist Gemetery fire KSL Capital PREPARED FOR: � b- Partners n t -0 nr ¢�` G PREPARED BY: m 4 Pepsico A 120A Trattoria Brigit E g,Employees FetleYei 532 Huwyler CreditUrtion vs a' I'Twital5olurion�rftceptionalService ^ { Merrill � a� p ? Oemetery IfaiB pUa 5N0005 `❑�Lti LES 11410 U,f4 yyfFk Rye Brook 70 PLEASANT HILL ROAD '. a +tiy Firehouse 14 MOUNTAINVILLE,NY 10953 to 0 _ 845-534-5959 4r s ar Group ' (FAX)845-534-5999 r Blind erool w c �tiG High School GE) � "'V'r.�Y' Bruns M ?. Rye Brook I I'onterio Ridge c Akhleilc Fields stvnel}4h Hidge,Street.. Street School Blind Brook'`, $b W.O.#6666.PURC2 N0V.7,2013 o Baseball Fleld Baseball Field Revised N0V.8,2013 a Goals jr 14 , rte'�_ *'�`._ �� ' x, } •' ' _ _ - '4 [ •_ � r C. ! • ','S:'I -� 'v 41 � %AP L A 4_ii G } '�. } _ +T�� � 4 .• F �4 �,�'� ; � y� � 'sem �T -+� .4 "a h %6 PAP 4-1 AL ve ! 1 #_ • ,a - L. �. .+ ' TECTONIC • • • ANDERSONROPOSED FACILITY WILL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION . DISTANCE FROM PHOTOGRAPH L• • • THE PROPOSED SITE IS 2100'± ■ ■ 7%,.s ;y�PP.' ' v AA ��' - a-- Y- • Y r � {*`�r� -•�� Y r f.��"F ,.rte - Pl MW' ' � r LOOKING NW FROM INTERSECTION OF ANDERSON HILL RD. AND ENTRANCE TO DORAL TECTONIC ARROWWOOD P-2 PROPOSED FACILITY WILL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION DISTANCE FROM • • 'A'H LOCATION TO THE PROPOSED SITE IS 1500'± �= !r r � •, yT#••,. - - �f +'rte �. ■ -' }- 4��f .fry' m f 406 _� ►* ��+�'r�T���,r `5 � 3f�`..� ,.,- kyr � ..5 `�� _ F'+'+. � F� •' •+..� ' I �. !j i '4 4+ j�fir= "+r •� -o - +ur'-.{ "x"I �' 'r #• fIry y� }-.art +. 9 '_{ l'• i � . ,t"t - r ':+ .. dw - { # G +fix '� = LCL- } T" _ -t.+ .'�.*� � �'r -- '•. ��`+ 7k '� 54 'Yrr.SS�' ' 16' qr • i *. LOOKING NW FROM ENTRANCE TO BLIND BROOK CLUB TECTONIC PROPOSED FACILITY WILL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION P-3 DISTANCE FROM PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION TO THE PROPOSED SITE IS SII 1 f ■ ■ W 0+t:,+ '. ' � *��,_ X •ate- _ .- - TECTONIC . . FROM . DORAL - DRIVE ROPOSED FACILITY WILL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION P-4 DISTANCE FROM THE PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION . THE R.P. 1300'± 1 f ■ ■ ♦i � f ... # ' - � a� { �may`:' ��Y 14 rp op 10 .. TECTONIC • • . • DORAL ROPOSED FACILITY WILL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION P-5 DISTANCE '• PHOTOGRAPH L• • • THE PROPOSED SITE IS 1200'± + ■ ■ gr ory # .1 �,� y1F �•l � �� '♦ � �. ' ��.' - ,y ,aiv 1 x 1 er X5 t tj - 1 +�� _y �•ri `�.. '_ ay -. .. ON a .+I fir.+-' ►.,,. 11L- • -rte-. — �.40 T 1 +_ ,' t5 -r rf t. LOOKING W FROM DORAL GREENS DR. W TECTONIC PROPOSED FACILITY WILL BE VISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION P-6 DISTANCE FROM THE PHOTOGRAPH L/ / • THE PROPOSED SITE IS 500'± ■ ■ 40 .fir• qp _ � , * ,� �{� �'� �:.i � • ; jay i SK � 1 #! 'WF ..•rT ���,.j�i:f� � }�ISS•s����* . r t 14 Ij -���� ? � . yam; `�'. ��.- ry ,�� �•� L LOOKING W FROM DORAL GREENS DR. W TECTONIC PROPOSED FACILITY IS VISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION S-6 DISTANCE FROM THE PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION TO THE PROPOSED SITE IS 500'± _ r r ■ ■ • �� '` fir� w� ,,. PIP 46 41 "ti J .4{ - *' 4- F •'F _ i"'J�,'v�yT- TM "i i `' Ti h` _ }� • � i�±, } moi_ - r ,} 41 LOOKING W FROM DORAL GREENS DR. W TECTONIC PROPOSED FACILITY WILL BE VISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION P-7 DISTANCE FROMPHOTOGRAPH L• / • THE PROPOSED SITE IS 300'± ■ ■ _AMP, Ilk 'k 4 Otre � ti. �!� •• p � - Y ■ '� � �t•- "�+ �*rte'' ��•� .1+^4f �-' �.`�}, .F.� '• -�- � •'�'=-��Y..:'�Lb� , S��?� *'�4 4 140 W " t '+x- y *t "� : .Yf it"Y� � * •�' r?. F ', F''S =1f. - _ i-, - '� LOOKING W FROM DORAL GREENS DR. W TECTONIC PROPOSED FACILITY IS VISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION S-7 DISTANCE FROMPHOTOGRAPH L• • • THE PROPOSED SITE IS 300'± ■ ■ t a Y Sx r IF � =F"_�- �_ }�-� ��y �� .� i. 'N`* �►F •'�'r .', f 'fir _— _ s t ter• � ISI � � }�' •� �.��� IFIIi if tli�. I t.k• � 'I�]I I I�I'� I i 'i r 1 i Y I '11 ` r :a FROM PHOTOGRAPH L• • • THE PROPOSED SITE IS 1900'± r LOOKING S FROM INTERSECTION OF KING ST.AND INTERNATIONAL DR. PROPOSED FACILITY WILL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION P'9 DISTANCE FROM THE PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION TO THE PROPOSED SITE IS 2000'± Practical Solutions,ftceptiona I Service 6666.PURC2 I � - Z ��`� - , - LOOKING SFROM INTERSECTION OF HIGH POINT C|R. AND BELLEFA|R RD. Sa PROPOSEDFACII Y WILL NOT BEVISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION P-1 0 DISTANCE FROM T E PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION T THE PROPOSED SITE 32 0' Practical SoluIton%ftct 2|Sem mmpuRC 2 +' �N41o. r s . Aoft 44 do e qp wit r � M i* �• !It � 1p ;. .; . _ ,rt � •� .fir _ '~*4 `�� �'�u ti - , '!' _ ._.��. � . .H P fib ' IM VF +� #:S' _#- f •� i ! �.s! � � R •iii.. � �S� � ty, DISTANCE '• PHOTOGRAPH L1 1 • THE PROPOSED SITE IS 2200'± •1 y �' �' � �.•{ � � '1'�x� r� .. �Hyl 1 tip+ R ��r. �f�{". ". #`� ■J .. ; �y ," ,.�'. t,,,_ � r f �r � � '' '�'• � �". 1� '"�• ��4' i - fir. *41 Aft do 444 IL 46 76 ' .. r.3+ � r �'�. �1� ter'- * a � � "�.����`. �`�! � Y * ��,.� .' ' 1• _ - "�� LOOKING SE FROM BELLEFAIR RD. TECTONIC PROPOSED FACILITY IS VISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION S-11 DISTANCE FROM PHOTOGRAPH L• • • THE PROPOSED SITE IS 2200'± ■ ■ rt LOOKING SE FROM INTERSECTION OF BELLEFAIR RD. AND FELLOWSHIP LN. PROPOSED FACILITY WILL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THIS LOCATION P'1 2 DISTANCE FROM THE PHOTOGRAPH LOCATION TO THE PROPOSED SITE IS 2600'± Practical SoN lons,ftceptional Service 6666.PURC2