Manteca City Council
November 15, 2022

ADDENDUM TO THE

NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER

PLAN EIR
SCH # 2010022024
OCTOBER 2022
Prepared for:

City of Manteca – City Hall
1001 West Center Street
Manteca, CA 95337
(209) 456-8000
Prepared by:

De Novo Planning Group
1020 Suncast Lane, Suite 106
El Dorado Hills, CA
(916) 580-9818
D e N o v o P l a n n i n g G r o u p
A L a n d U s e P l a n n i n g , D e s i g n , a n d E n v i r o n m e n t a l F i r m ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 3

ADDENDUM TO THE

NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
SCH # 2010022024
OCTOBER 2022
Prepared for:

City of Manteca – City Hall
1001 West Center Street
Manteca, CA 95337
(209) 456-8000
Prepared by:

De Novo Planning Group
1020 Suncast Lane, Suite 106
El Dorado Hills, CA
(916) 580-9818
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
1 Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 2

1.1 Background and Purpose of the EIR Addendum..................................................................................... 3

2.2 Project Description................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Original Project..................................................................................................................................................... 4 Project Location.............................................................................................................................................................. 4 Project Characteristics................................................................................................................................................. 4

2.2 Refined Project...................................................................................................................................................... 7 Project Location.............................................................................................................................................................. 7 Project Characteristics................................................................................................................................................. 7

2.3 Basis for Decision to Prepare an Addendum ............................................................................................ 9

3.0 Environmental Analysis .......................................................................................................................................18 SECTION 3.1 – AESTHETICS, LIGHT, AND GLARE..................................................................................................19 SECTION 3.2 – AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES...........................................................................................................20

3.3 AIR QUALITY ...................................................................................................................................................................21

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES..........................................................................................................................................26

3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES .............................................................................................................................................28

3.6 GEOLOGIY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY.....................................................................................................................30

3.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.........................................................................................................32

3.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY....................................................................................................................34

3.9 LAND USE..........................................................................................................................................................................37

3.10 NOISE ...............................................................................................................................................................................39

3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES .....................................................................................................................41

3.12 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION..........................................................................................................43 References ................................................................................................................................................................................61 Appendix ...................................................................................................................................................................................64 ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
2 This Page Intentionally Left Blank.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
3 1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Addendum was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines. This document has been prepared to serve as an Addendum to the previously certified EIR (State Clearinghouse [SCH] # 2010022024) for the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan Project (NWAWMP) (Original Project). The City of Manteca is the lead agency for the environmental review of the proposed Project refinements (Refined Project).

This Addendum addresses the proposed refinements that have occurred on individual sites developed within the NWAWMP relative to the conceptual plans that were available at the time the previous environmental review was prepared for the NWAWMP. CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 defines an Addendum as:

The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. ….A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record.

Information and technical analyses from the NWAWMP are utilized throughout this Addendum.

Relevant passages from this document are cited and available for review at:

City of Manteca – City Hall
1001 West Center Street
Manteca, CA 95337

1.1 BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF THE EIR ADDENDUM
The NWAWMP Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was certified by the Manteca City Council on November 16, 2010. The Original Project included certification of the EIR for the NWAWMP, adoption of the Master Plan document, General Plan Land Use map amendments, Zoning map and text amendments, and direction to file for annexation with the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (SJ LAFCo). On April 20, 2012, the SJ LAFCo approved the annexation request the original NWAWMP boundary, but not for annexation of non-master plan areas.

In determining whether an Addendum is the appropriate document to analyze the proposed refinements to the NWAWMP, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 states:
a) The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
4 d) The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project. e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency’s required findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.

2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 ORIGINAL PROJECT
Project Location
The Original Project site consists of the approximately 300-acre Master Plan area, which has been annexed to the City of Manteca as a result of the Original Project approvals. The rectangular Master Plan area consists of 300.3 acres bounded by the Union Pacific Railroad Lathrop Intermodal Terminal (west), Roth Road (north), Airport Way (east), and Lathrop Road (south). The Project site’s regional location is shown on Figure 1, the vicinity is shown on Figure 2, and an aerial photo is shown in Figure

3. Project Characteristics
The Original Project consisted of the NAWMP and Non-Master Plan Annexations. The NWAWMP was entitled and annexation of approximately 300 acres of light industrial and commercial land. The Master Plan required a General Plan Amendment and prezoning approval. Figure 4 and 5 illustrate the General Plan and Zoning Maps for the site. Table 1 provides a breakdown of the land uses in the Original Project.

TABLE 1: MASTER PLAN LAND USE SUMMARY – ORIGINAL PROJECT Land Use Acres
Light Industrial 248.3
Community Commercial 18.1
Open Space 33.9
Total 300.3
SOURCE: CITY OF MANTECA, 2010.

The Original Project also included Non-Master Plan Annexations, which consisted of two areas adjacent to the Master Plan area totaling approximately 221 acres. These annexations were intended to prevent the creation of “unincorporated islands” within the city limits as a result of Master Plan implementation. The non-master plan annexations required General Plan Amendment and prezoning approvals. It is noted that the City of Manteca approved the Non-Master Plan Annexations portion of the Original Project; however, after protest hearings, those annexations were not approved by LAFCO and remain outside the city limits to this day.

The NWAWMP was anticipated to result in approximately 4.7 million square feet of light industrial and commercial uses. Table 2 provides a breakdown of the anticipated buildout of the NWAWMP. As shown in Table 2, the CenterPoint Intermodal Facility (discussed below) would occupy most of the ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
5 square footage, with the non-CenterPoint components occupying the balance. The conceptual Master Plan development is shown in Figure 6 provides the conceptual site plan, and Figure 7 provides the conceptual Circulation Plan for the Original Project.

TABLE 2: MASTER PLAN BUILDOUT SUMMARY – ORIGINAL PROJECT Component Use Square Footage
CenterPoint Intermodal Facility Light Industrial and High Cube Warehouse 3,177,521 Non-CenterPoint Development
Light Industrial 1,275,620
Community Commercial 205,820
Total — 4,658,961
SOURCE: CITY OF MANTECA, 2010.

Light Industrial: Light Industrial land use accounts for most of the NWAWMP uses. The light industrial zone allows business and professional uses, and uses involving heavy trucks, automobile services, mini-storage, various agricultural industries, industrial manufacturing or assembly uses, industrial storage, and truck and motor freight uses.

The northern area is expected to develop primarily with warehouse/distribution facilities uses and limited light industrial uses (95 percent warehouse distribution, 5 percent light industrial). The southern area is expected to be developed with a majority of warehouse/distribution facilities, and some light industrial uses and limited retail development (80 percent warehouse/distribution, 15 percent light industrial, and 5 percent commercial). Including both the CenterPoint and nonCenterPoint components, a maximum of 4,453,141 square feet of light industrial uses was anticipated be developed under the NAWMP.

CenterPoint Intermodal Facility: The CenterPoint Intermodal Facility was expected to occupy 187.49 acres of the Light Industrial acreage. The intermodal facility was to be an integrated logistics center and would interface with the adjacent Union Pacific Railroad Lathrop Intermodal Terminal. The intermodal facility would sort, store and distribute goods for shippers and receivers. The facility would have a maximum square footage of 3,177,521. The facility would occupy two, non-contiguous sites (North and South):
a) North Site: The north site would be the larger of the two sites and contain three buildings totaling 2,693,483 square feet. All three of the north buildings would be rail-served with spur tracks connecting to the neighboring Lathrop Intermodal Terminal. This EIR will assume that each rail-served building receives two train movements a week (one inbound and one outbound). The buildings would also be accessible to trucks. b) South Site: The south site would be the smaller of the two sites and would contain as many as three buildings totaling 484,038 square feet. These buildings would be served exclusively by trucks.

The North and South sites would be linked by an internal roadway along the adjacent property line with the Lathrop Intermodal Terminal. The roadway would provide a single, controlled accessed point to the Lathrop Intermodal Terminal.

Non-CenterPoint Light Industrial Uses: The Non-CenterPoint light industrial uses would total 1,275,620 square feet. These uses would occupy the acreage between the CenterPoint North and ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
6 South sites. As many as 14 buildings were proposed ranging in size from 26,080 to 236,582 square feet. All buildings would be served exclusively by trucks. These uses would be accessible to the CenterPoint Intermodal Facility via internal roadways and would use the single, controlled accessed point to the Lathrop Intermodal Terminal.

Community Commercial: The Community Commercial land use would serve as a focal point for residents of the area and workers in the industrial portion of the development. An 18.1-acre, community-scale shopping center is envisioned for this area at the Lathrop Road/Airport Way intersection. The Community Commercial zone allows a wide variety of permitted or conditionally permitted commercial uses, such as commercial office and retail uses. A maximum of 205,820 square feet of commercial uses was anticipated to be developed within this area. The conceptual layout for the community commercial uses included a 125,435-square-foot anchor, with smaller buildings ranging in size from 4,500 to 47,206 square feet. The analysis was based on a generic shopping center use without defined tenants.

Circulation and Access: The circulation system proposed for the NWAWMP would be composed of the following elements:
• Improved major arterial roadways (Lathrop Road, Airport Way and Roth Road) • New onsite truck routes
• New onsite collector roads for trucks and autos
• Bikeways and pedestrian paths
The primary goal of the circulation system was to provide a network of roadways, pedestrian paths, and bikeways that allows for the safe and efficient movement of goods, people, and services within the Master Plan area, and to provide proper connections to the existing network of roadways and routes in the City of Manteca. Improvements within the Master Plan area include the provision of new rights- of-way and improvements to existing street sections with traffic signals added where necessary. Auto and truck parking, and truck loading and unloading areas also are part of the circulation system. The proposed circulation system will provide safe and convenient access to all locations within the Master Plan area. The Original Circulation Plan is provided in Figure 7.

The entrances to the NWAWMP were assumed to be Lovelace Road at Airport Way, private roadway “F” at Roth Road, private roadway “I” at Airport Way, and private roadway “A” at Lathrop Road. The Lovelace entrance was intended to serve as the major auto entry to the NWAWMP while roadways “F” and “A” entrances were intended to serve trucks entering and leaving the NWAWMP from the north and south. These would all be full access intersections with new traffic signals at the Lovelace/Airport and roadway “A”/Lathrop Road intersections. Private roadway “I” would serve commercial auto and industrial truck traffic entering and leaving the southern portion of the NWAWMP, as indicated in Figure 7. It was also anticipated that the existing signalized extension of Daisywood Drive at Airport Way would become the primary entrance to the southern portion of the NWAWMP, connecting to roadway “F”. Below is a summary of the circulation system.

Airport Way: Airport Way is an existing arterial road. The roadway would be widened to a 140- foot right-of-way with partial improvements where it abuts any existing or new residential development (south of Daisywood Drive), and a 130-foot right-of-way with partial improvements elsewhere (north of Daisywood Drive). Class II bicycle facilities (i.e., on-street lanes) would be installed along Airport Way.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
7 Roth Road: Roth Road is an existing arterial road with an at-grade crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad Oakland Subdivision. Roth Road would be widened to an 84-foot right-of-way with partial improvements.

As a separate project unrelated to the proposed Master Plan, Roth Road was proposed to be grade- separated from the Union Pacific Railroad Oakland Subdivision. This grade separation was being pursued in conjunction with the proposed Lathrop Intermodal Terminal expansion project.

Lathrop Road: Lathrop Road is an existing arterial road with a grade-separated crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad Oakland Subdivision. The roadway would be widened to a 106-foot rightof-way with partial improvements.

Internal Roadways: Internal roads were designed to provide for the efficient movement of commercial and industrial- oriented trucks within the Plan area. Curb-to-curb widths would range from 46 to 86 feet.

2.2 REFINED PROJECT
Project Location
The Refined Project site consists of the same approximately 300-acre Master Plan area that has already been annexed to the City of Manteca. There are no changes to the project location.

Project Characteristics
The Refined Project consists of the same approximately 300 acres of light industrial and commercial land. This land was designated and zoned with the original approvals. There are no changes to the General Plan land use or Zoning designations.

The Refined Project does not include the approximately 221 acres of Non-Master Plan Annexations that were included in the Original Project. LAFCO denied the annexations as a results of protest hearings and these areas remain outside the city limits to this day. This is a change in the scope of the Original Project; however, there is no net development change as a result of this change.

The NWAWMP was anticipated to result in approximately 4.7 million square feet of light industrial and commercial uses. There is currently approximately 2,008,000 square feet of existing development on 148.5 acres under the existing conditions for the Refined Project. There is an additional approximately 2,651,961 square feet of pending/undeveloped area on 151.8 acres under the Refined Project. Overall, there is no net change in the acreage or development square footage assumptions for the Master Plan area.

Circulation and Access: The circulation system for the Refined Project has several changes from the Original Project that affects trip distribution and travel patterns within the NWAWMP, as well as the roadway network through Manteca and Lathrop. The changes to the circulation system include:
• Eliminate truck trips from using Lathrop Road or Airport Road to reduce truck traffic in residential areas.
• Eliminate the connection of Intermodal Way to Lathrop Road. • Establish a STAA route from the southern terminus of Intermodal Way north to Roth Road.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
8 • Establish a STAA route on Roth Road to I-5.
• Concentrate all heavy truck trips on Intermodal Way and Roth Road These modifications to the circulation system were developed through coordination with the City of Lathrop and neighboring Manteca residents that pointed out their concerns for truck traffic driving through residential areas of Airport Way and Lathrop Road. These modifications are intended to improve safety on the roadway, and to eliminate truck emissions from these more sensitive residential areas. These modifications are anticipated to provide benefits related to Air Quality concerns, as well as traffic concerns.

The Refined Project will still have entrances to the NWAWMP on (private roadway “K”) at Lovelace Road and Airport Way, private roadway “F” at Roth Road, private roadway “I” at Airport Way, but will eliminate private roadway “A” at Lathrop Road. The Lovelace entrance (roadway “K”) is intended to serve as the major auto entry to the NWAWMP with a full signalization. The roadway “F” entrance is intended to serve trucks entering and leaving the NWAWMP from the north at Roth Road. Roadway “A” will no longer exist. Under the Refined Project, all roadway entrances off of Airport will serve passenger vehicle entrance/exits, but will not serve trucks. These entrances would still be full access intersections with new traffic signals at the Lovelace/Airport and Daisywood/Airport.

Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis: At the time of the Original Project, SB 743 did not exist and no VMT analysis was performed. The focus of the traffic analysis was on LOS operational analysis, which is no longer a standard for determined impacts under CEQA. The refinement to the circulation and access system within the NWAWMP warranted a VMT analysis, but also warrants an updated LOS analysis to determine consistency with City policy. It should be noted that the construction of the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area will improve the jobs to housing balance in the City of Manteca and provide an overall benefit to reducing VMT per employee with fewer residents expected to leave the City for employment. This will result in fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions reductions. The results of the VMT and LOS analysis is provided under the traffic section of this EIR Addendum.

It should be noted that the General Plan Update includes policies designed to reduce vehicle travel and VMT. The Circulation Element (Chapter 3.14) addresses providing adequate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities and opportunities, promoting non-vehicle travel modes, requiring development projects that accommodate or employ fifty (50) or more employees to implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs, and ensuring regional coordination on trip and VMT reduction efforts. General Plan policies and actions that contribute to VMT reductions are identified below. These policies and actions minimize VMT impacts to the greatest extent feasible.

Additionally, the Governors Executive Order N-79-20 requires that 100 percent of in-state sales of new passenger cars and trucks be zero-emission by 2035. It shall be a further goal of the State that 100 percent of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles in the State be zero-emission by 2045 for all operations, where feasible, and by 2035 for drayage trucks. It shall be further a goal of the State to transition to 100 percent zero-emission off-road vehicles and equipment by 2035, where feasible.

Accordingly, the City of Manteca aims to develop a Zero Emissions Vehicle Market Development Strategy that ensures expeditious implementation of the systems of policies, programs and regulations necessary to achieve the order. These facts are new considerations that are part of this EIR Addendum.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
9 Entitlements Requested: There are no new entitlements requested. The EIR Addendum is being prepared to reflect changes that have occurred as Master Plan Area has developed. This mainly includes changes to travel patterns, but also includes VMT analysis which was not a requirement of CEQA at the time the original analysis was performed.

2.3 BASIS FOR DECISION TO PREPARE AN ADDENDUM
When an environmental impact report has been certified for a project, Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 set forth the criteria for determining whether a subsequent EIR, subsequent negative declaration, addendum, or no further documentation be prepared in support of further agency action on the project. Under these Guidelines, a subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall be prepared if any of the following criteria are met:
(a) When an EIR has been certified or negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
(b) If changes to a project or its circumstances occur or new information becomes available after adoption of a negative declaration, the lead agency shall prepare a subsequent EIR if required under subdivision (a). Otherwise the lead agency shall determine whether to prepare a subsequent negative declaration, and addendum, or no further documentation.

In determining whether an Addendum is the appropriate document to analyze the proposed refinements to the project and its approval, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 (Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration) states:

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
10 a) The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.
d) The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project.
e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency’s required findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.

Based on a detailed review and analysis of the Refined Project by the City, it was determined that there was no evidence that there would be any new significant environmental effects, a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified environmental effects, or new information of substantial importance that would require major changes to the certified NWAWMP EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a). Therefore, a Subsequent EIR is not warranted for this project.

As part of this document, additional technical analysis was performed to determine if there were any new environmental impacts not known at the time of the original approval. No new significant impacts or an increase in the severity of environmental impacts have been identified as a result of the additional technical analysis. Instead, the Refined Project includes modifications to the site and circulation plans, which have beneficial effects to the NWAWMP and surrounding residential areas.

The beneficial impacts are related to shifts in heavy truck trips, including the emissions, away from residential areas along Airport Way and Lathrop Road, and concentrating them on a designated STAA truck route that is intended for heavy truck use.

As demonstrated in the environmental analysis provided in Section 3.0 (Environmental Analysis), the proposed changes do not meet the criteria for preparing a subsequent EIR or negative declaration. An addendum is appropriate here because, as explained in Section 3.0, none of the conditions calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
11 ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
12 ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
13 ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
14 ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
15 ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
16 ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
17 ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
18 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
This section of the Addendum provides analysis and cites substantial evidence that support’s the City’s determination that the proposed refinements to the NWAWMP do not meet the criteria for preparing a subsequent or supplemental EIR under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

The proposed changes do not cause a new significant impact or substantially increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact, and there have been no other changes in the circumstances that meet this criterion (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a][2]). There have been no changes in the environmental conditions on the property not contemplated and analyzed in the EIR that would result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts. There is no new information of substantial importance (which was not known or could not have been known at the time of the application, that identifies: a new significant impact (condition “A” under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a][3]); a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact (condition “B” CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a][3]); mitigation measures or alternatives previously found infeasible that would now be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects; or mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the EIR which would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment (conditions “C” and “D” CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a][3]). None of the “new information” conditions listed in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a][3] are present here to trigger the need for a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 states that “The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.” An addendum is appropriate here because, as explained above, none of the conditions calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.

The section below identifies the environmental topics addressed in the EIR, provides a summary of impacts associated with the Original Project, as described in the EIR, and includes a brief analysis of the potential impacts associated with the Refined Project when compared to the Original Project.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
19 SECTION 3.1 – AESTHETICS, LIGHT, AND GLARE
Impact AES-1: The
proposed project would
not have a substantial
adverse effect on a
scenic vista.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact AES-2: The
proposed project would
not degrade the visual
character of the project
site and its surroundings.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact AES-3:

Implementation of the
proposed project would
not result in the
introduction of
substantial new sources
of light and glare.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Discussion
The above impacts were identified and discussed in the Draft EIR. The Original Project anticipated industrial and commercial land uses to be developed on the project site. The Refined Project is consistent with the land uses that were anticipated by the Original Project and within the footprint of the Original Project. The Refined Project provides more specific details, including specific site plans and roadway patterns. These details were conceptualized at the time of the Original EIR for the purpose of establishing assumptions that could be analyzed in the EIR. The more specific details and refinements that are now known based on site specific site plans do not result in any new or increased impact that were not already anticipated for the Master Plan area.

The Refined Project would not result in any new potential aesthetic impacts and would not increase the significance of any aesthetic impacts identified in the Original Project or Refined Project. Much of the Master Plan area has built out under review of the City of Manteca’ design requirements, which has ensured that the exterior facades of the structures, landscaping, streetscape improvements, and exterior lighting improvements are compatible with the surrounding land uses. Additionally, there are no new impacts beyond what was addressed in the Final EIR, and there are no changed circumstances or new information that meets the standard for requiring further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
20 SECTION 3.2 – AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact AG-1: The
proposed project may
result in the conversion
of Important Farmland to
non-agricultural use.

MM AG-1: At the time building permits are sought for any Master Plan contemplated use, the project applicant shall pay the required City of Manteca agricultural mitigation fee to help offset the conversion of Important Farmland pursuant to Manteca Municipal Code Chapter 13.42.

Significant and
unavoidable
impact.

Impact AG-2: The
proposed project would
not conflict with existing
zoning for agricultural
use or conflict with a
Williamson Act contract.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact AG-3: The
proposed project would
not involve other
changes in the existing
environment, which,
because of their location
or nature, could result in
conversion of farmland
to non-agricultural use.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Discussion
The above agricultural impacts were identified and discussed in the Draft EIR. The Original Project anticipated industrial and commercial land uses to be developed on the project site. The Refined Project is within the footprint of the Original Project and has the same physical environmental impacts. The Refined Project provides more specific details, including specific site plans and roadway patterns, but that does not change the physical environmental impacts on this topic. The Refined Project would not result in any new potential agricultural impacts and would not increase the significance of any agricultural impacts identified in the Original Project. Additionally, there are no new agricultural impacts beyond what was addressed in the Final EIR, and there are no changed circumstances or new information that meets the standard for requiring further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
21 3.3 AIR QUALITY
Impact AIR-1: Project
construction and
operational emissions
may violate any air
quality standard or
contribute substantially
to an existing or
projected air quality
violation.

MM AIR-1a: Prior to issuance of grading permits for each Master Plan use, the project applicant shall provide information to the City of Manteca describing the methods by which the following measures will be complied with:
• Off-road equipment used onsite shall achieve a fleet average emissions equal to or less than the Tier II emissions standard of

4.8 grams of NOx per horsepower hour. This can be achieved through any combination of uncontrolled engines and engines complying with Tier II and above engine standards. Tier II emission standards are set forth in Section 2423 of Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, and Part 89 of Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations.
• Construction equipment shall be properly maintained at an offsite location; maintenance shall include proper tuning and timing of engines. Equipment maintenance records and data sheets of equipment design specifications shall be kept on-site during construction.
• Onsite construction equipment shall not idle for more than 5 minutes in any one hour.
• During the building phase, onsite electrical hook ups shall be provided for electric construction tools including saws, drills and compressors, to eliminate the need for diesel powered electric generators.
• Construction workers shall be encouraged to carpool to and from the construction site to the greatest extent practical.

Workers shall be informed in writing and a letter shall be placed on file in the City office documenting efforts to carpool.

MM AIR-1b: During the architectural coating phase for all Master Plan uses, paints with a volatile organic compound content less than 10 grams per liter shall be used.

MM AIR-1c: Prior to issuance of building permits for each Master Plan building, the project applicant shall demonstrate compliance with all applicable requirements of San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, Rule 9510 via the submittal of a Rule 9510 Implementation Plan to the City of Manteca for review and approval. The implementation plan shall achieve a 33-percent reduction in NOx and a 45-percent reduction in PM10 over the first 10 years of operations through the use of onsite emissions reduction measures or through the payment of offsite mitigation fees to the SJVAPCD for purchase of emission reductions. The requirements of the approved implementation plan shall be incorporated into the proposed project.

MM AIR-1d: Prior to approval of the final site plan for each Master Plan building that would receive 10 more truck deliveries per week, the project applicant shall demonstrate that the following anti-idling measures would be implemented:
• Provide available electricity hookups for trucks in the loading dock areas.
• Signs shall be posted in dock areas advising drivers that idling shall not occur for more than 3 minutes.

Significant
unavoidable
impact.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
22 • Telephone numbers of the building facilities manager and the California Air Resources Board shall be posted on signs at truck entrances to report idling violations.

Impact AIR-2: Project
operational emissions
would not violate any air
quality standard or
contribute substantially
to an existing or
projected air quality
violation associated with
carbon monoxide hot
spots.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact AIR-3: The
project may conflict with
or obstruct
implementation of the
applicable air quality
attainment plan.

Implement Mitigation Measures AIR-1a, AIR-1b, AIR-1c, AIR-1d, TRANS-6a, TRANS-6b, TRANS-6c, and TRANS-6d.

Significant
unavoidable
impact.

Impact AIR-4: The
project would result in a
cumulatively
considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant
for which the project
region is nonattainment
under an applicable
national or state ambient
air quality standard
(including releasing
emissions that exceed
quantitative thresholds
for ozone precursors).

Implement Mitigation Measures AIR-1a, AIR-1b, AIR-1c, AIR-1d, TRANS-6a, TRANS-6b, TRANS-6c, and TRANS-6d.

Significant
unavoidable
impact.

Impact AIR-5: The
project would not expose
sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact AIR-6: The
project may create
objectionable odors
affecting a substantial
number of people.

MM AIR-6: Prior to final site plan approval for any Master Plan use that includes food service (i.e., restaurants, cafeterias, etc.), the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with SJVAPCD Rules 4102 (Nuisance) and 4692 (Commercial Charbroiling) to the extent that these rules are applicable. Compliance may entail the installation of kitchen exhaust vents, exhaust filtration systems, or other odorreduction measures in accordance with accepted engineering practice. The approved plans shall be incorporated into the proposed project.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact AIR-7: The
project may generate
greenhouse gas
emissions that may have
a significant impact on
the environment and
conflict with any
Implement Mitigation Measures AIR-1a, AIR-1d, PSU-3a, PSU-3b, PSU- 6a, PSU-6b, TRANS-6a, TRANS-6b, TRANS-6c, and
TRANS-6d.

Less than
significant
impact.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
23 applicable plan, policy,
or regulation of an
agency adopted for the
purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse
gases.

Impact AIR-8: The
project may be affected
by climate change
through a reduction in
the quality and supply of
water available within
the State or increased
flooding.

Implement Mitigation Measures HYD-5a, HYD-5b, PSU-3a, and PSU-3b.

Less than
significant
impact.

Discussion
These impacts were identified and discussed in the Draft EIR.

Operational Emissions
The Refined Project does not designate any new sites for development and would not result in any substantial changes to the site uses or location of development. The Refined Project would not result in any significant changes that would change impacts associated with operational emissions. The traffic generated by the Refined Project is in alignment with the traffic that was anticipated in the Original Project; however, it is noteworthy that there have been significant emission and fuel efficiency improvements in mobile sources, and energy efficiency in area sources when compared to what was assumed under the Original Project. Overall, operational emissions would have a negligible change under the Refined Project, but quantitatively are reduced as a result of the fuel efficiency standards and air quality regulations that have come into effect since the original approval.

Construction Emissions
The Refined Project does not designate any new sites for development and would not result in any substantial changes to the construction methods or location of development. The Refined Project would not result in any significant changes that would change impacts associated with construction emissions. Therefore, the construction emissions would have a negligible change relative to the Refined Project.

SJVAPCD Rule VIII requires implementation of various fugitive PM10 measures. It is also noted that construction equipment fleet have had significant improvements since the Original Project was approved, therefore, the construction activities are anticipated to have impacts that are less then if the project were to be constructed under the assumptions of the Original Project.

Carbon Dioxide Hotspots
The Refined Project would not result in violations of the ambient air quality standards related to CO.

The region is currently in attainment for CO and the slight change in traffic volume does not create a hotspot.

Toxic Air Contaminants
A Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC) is defined as an air pollutant that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or in serious illness, or that may pose a hazard to human health. TACs are usually present in minute quantities in the ambient air. However, their high toxicity or health risk may pose a threat to public health even at very low concentrations. In general, for those TACs that ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
24 may cause cancer, there is no concentration that does not present some risk. This contrasts with the criteria pollutants for which acceptable levels of exposure can be determined and for which the state and federal governments have set ambient air quality standards.

Controlling air toxic emissions became a national priority with the passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990, whereby Congress mandated that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulate 188 air toxics, also known as hazardous air pollutants. The EPA has assessed this expansive list in their latest rule on the Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources (Federal Register, Vol. 72, No. 37, page 8430, February 26, 2007) and identified a group of 93 compounds emitted from mobile sources. In addition, EPA identified seven compounds with significant contributions from mobile sources that are among the national and regional-scale cancer risk drivers from their 1999 National Air Toxics Assessment. These are acrolein, benzene, 1,3- butidiene, diesel particulate matter plus diesel exhaust organic gases (diesel PM), formaldehyde, naphthalene, and polycyclic organic matter.

The 2007 EPA rule requires controls that will dramatically decrease Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT) emissions through cleaner fuels and cleaner engines. According to an FHWA analysis using EPA’s MOBILE6.2 model, even if vehicle activity (VMT) increases by 145 percent, a combined reduction of 72 percent in the total annual emission rate for the priority MSAT is projected from 1999 to 2050.

California maintains stricter standards for clean fuels and emissions compared to the national standards, therefore it is expected that MSAT trends in California will decrease consistent with or more than the U.S. EPA's national projections.

CARB published the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (2007) to provide information to local planners and decision-makers about land use compatibility issues associated with emissions from industrial, commercial and mobile sources of air pollution. The CARB Handbook indicates that mobile sources continue to be the largest overall contributors to the State’s air pollution problems, representing the greatest air pollution health risk to most Californians. The most serious pollutants on a statewide basis include diesel exhaust particulate matter (diesel PM), benzene, and 1,3-butadiene, all of which are emitted by motor vehicles. These mobile source air toxics are largely associated with freeways and high traffic roads. Non-mobile source air toxics are largely associated with industrial and commercial uses. Table 3 provides the CARB minimum separation recommendations on siting sensitive land uses. The Refined Project does not include any of the source categories identified in the CARB minimum separation standards.

TABLE 3: CARB MINIMUM SEPARATION RECOMMENDATIONS ON SITING SENSITIVE LAND USES Source Category Advisory Recommendations
Freeways and HighTraffic Roads • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day.

Distribution
Centers
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a distribution center (that accommodates more than 100 trucks per day, more than 40 trucks with operating transport refrigeration units (TRUs) per day, or where TRU unit operations exceed 300 hours per week). • Take into account the configuration of existing distribution centers and avoid locating residences and other new sensitive land uses near entry and exit points.

Rail Yards
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a major service and maintenance rail yard.
• Within one mile of a rail yard, consider possible siting limitations and mitigation approaches.

Ports
• Avoid siting of new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of ports in the most heavily impacted zones. Consult local air districts or the CARB on the status of pending analyses of health risks.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
25 Refineries • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses immediately downwind of petroleum refineries. Consult with local air districts and other local agencies to determine an appropriate separation.

Chrome Platers • Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a chrome plater.

Dry Cleaners Using
Perchloro-ethylene
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of any dry-cleaning operation. For operations with two or more machines, provide 500 feet. For operations with 3 or more machines, consult with the local air district.
• Do not site new sensitive land uses in the same building with perc dry cleaning operations.

Gasoline Dispensing
Facilities
• Avoid siting new sensitive land uses within 300 feet of a large gas station (defined as a facility with a throughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater). A 50-foot separation is recommended for typical gas dispensing facilities.

SOURCE: AIR QUALITY AND LAND USE HANDBOOK: A COMMUNITY HEALTH PERSPECTIVE (CARB 2005).

There are existing and proposed sensitive receptors adjacent to the Refined Project. The Refined Project includes shifted truck traffic, which is the main emitter of diesel particulates, onto Intermodal Way and Roth Road. This travel characteristic changes provides a greater distance for truck traffic from sensitive receptors along Airport Way and Lathrop Road, which is a beneficial impact.

Objectionable Odors
Implementation of the Refined Project would not directly create or generate objectionable odors to a significant degree.

Cumulative Air Quality Impacts
As shown above, the Refined Project would result in air emissions that are largely similar to what was anticipated by the Original Project, although the improvements to fuel efficiency standards and air quality regulations is anticipated to cause emissions to be lower than originally anticipated. The Refined Project does not conflict with the land use assumptions used to prepare the applicable air quality attainment plan (AQAP) and State Implementation Plan (SIP). The same mitigation measures included in the Draft EIR would be applicable to the Refined Project. The Refined Project would not have any cumulative air quality impacts beyond what was addressed in the EIR.

Conclusion
The Refined Project would not increase the severity of the impacts beyond what was addressed in the Final EIR. Mitigation Measures identified in the EIR for the Original Project would be sufficient in addressing the requirements for the Refined Project. There are no new impacts beyond what was addressed in the Final EIR. Lastly, there are no changed circumstances or new information that meets the standard for requiring further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
26 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact BIO-1:

Development activities
contemplated by the
Master Plan may have a
substantial adverse
effect, either directly or
through habitat
modifications, on
special-status wildlife
species.

MM BIO-1a: If ground clearing or vegetation removal activities occur during the nesting season (February 15 through August 31), then pre- construction surveys for nesting birds shall be conducted in all area suitable for nesting that are located within 250 feet of the Master Plan area. Surveys shall be conducted no more than 15 days prior to the beginning of ground disturbance. If an active nest is located, a 250-foot buffer shall be delineated and maintained around the nest until a qualified biologist has determined that fledging has occurred. Alternatively, CDFG may be consulted to determine if the protective buffer can be reduced based upon individual species responses to disturbance. This mitigation measure does not apply if ground clearing or vegetation removal activities occur outside of the nesting season (September 1 through February 14).

MM BIO-1b: No more than 30 day prior to the beginning of ground disturbance, a pre-construction survey for burrowing owls shall be conducted by a qualified biologist in general accordance with the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines by the California Burrowing Owl Consortium. Should the surveys be scheduled to occur during the period extending from February 1 through May 1, then surveys shall be conducted no more that 15 days prior to the start of ground disturbance. Surveys shall be conducted from 2 hours before sunset to 1 hour after sunset, or from 1 hour before sunrise to 2 hours after sunrise, and shall be conducted during weather conducive to observing owls outside of their burrows. No surveys shall occur during heavy rain, high winds, or dense fog. If occupied burrows are found, mitigation for potential impacts shall follow the guidelines outlined by the Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and Mitigation Guidelines, including passive relocation.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact BIO-2:

Development activities
contemplated by the
Master Plan may have a
substantial adverse effect
on riparian habitat.

MM BIO-2: Prior to issuance of grading permits within any impacted resource area, the project applicant shall obtain all required authorization from agencies with jurisdiction over the drainage canals within the Master Plan area. Such agencies may include but are not limited to the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the California Department of Fish and Game, and the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Impacted resources shall be offset through onsite restoration, offsite restoration, or purchase of credits at an agency-approved mitigation bank in the region at no less than a 1:1 ratio.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact BIO-3:

Development activities
contemplated by the
Master Plan may have a
substantial adverse effect
on federally protected
wetlands.

MM BIO-3: Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall obtain all required authorization from agencies with jurisdiction over the drainage canals within the Master Plan area.

This authorization may involve approvals from the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Impacted features shall be offset through onsite restoration, offsite restoration, or purchase of credits at an agency-approved mitigation bank in the region at no less than a 1:1 ratio.

Less than
significant
impact.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
27 Impact BIO-4:

Development activities
contemplated by the
Master Plan would not
interfere substantially
with the movement of
any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife
species.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact BIO-5:

Development activities
contemplated by the
Master Plan may conflict
with local biological
policies or ordinances.

MM BIO-5: Prior to issuance of grading permits for any activities that would remove one or more trees subject to City of Manteca Ordinance 17.19.060, the applicant shall prepare and submit a tree removal and replacement plan to the City of Manteca for review and approval. The plan shall identify all trees proposed for removal and proposed replacement tree species and locations. Replacement shall occur at no less than a 1:1 ratio. All replacement trees shall be no less than a 24-inch box size species.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact BIO-6:

Development activities
contemplated by the
Master Plan may conflict
with the provisions of
the San Joaquin County
Multi-Species Habitat
Conservation and Open
Space Plan.

MM BIO-6: Prior to issuance of the first grading or building permit for the Master Plan, the project applicant shall obtain coverage under the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan. Coverage shall consist of approval of the Master Plan-specific “Section 8.2.1 (10) Checklist for Unmapped SJMSCP Projects” by the San Joaquin Council of Governments Technical Advisory Committee. The applicant shall pay all required fees to the San Joaquin Council of Governments prior to the commencement of construction activities.

Less than
significant
impact.

Discussion
The above biological impacts were identified and discussed in the Draft EIR. The Original Project anticipated industrial and commercial land uses to be developed on the project site. The Refined Project is within the footprint of the Original Project and has the same physical environmental impacts. The Refined Project provides more specific details, including specific site plans and roadway patterns, but that does not change the physical environmental impacts on this topic. The Refined Project would not result in any new potential biological impacts and would not increase the significance of any biological impacts identified in the Original Project. Additionally, there are no new biological impacts beyond what was addressed in the Final EIR, and there are no changed circumstances or new information that meets the standard for requiring further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
28 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact CUL-1: The
proposed project may
cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of a
historical resource.

MM CUL-1: If potentially significant historic resources are encountered during subsurface excavation activities for any Master Plan use, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the resource shall cease until a qualified archaeologist determines whether the resource requires further study. The City shall require that the applicant include a standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement.

Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California Environmental Quality Act criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites.

If the resource is determined to be significant under CEQA, the City and a qualified archaeologist shall determine whether preservation in place is feasible. Such preservation in place is the preferred mitigation. If such preservation is infeasible, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan for the resource. The archaeologist shall also conduct appropriate technical analyses, prepare a comprehensive written report and file it with the appropriate information center (California Historical Resources Information System), and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered materials.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact CUL-2:

Subsurface construction
activities associated with
the proposed project may
damage or destroy
previously undiscovered
archaeological resources.

MM CUL-2: If potentially significant archaeological resources are encountered during subsurface excavation activities, all construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the resource shall cease until a qualified archaeologist determines whether the resource requires further study. The City shall require that the applicant include a standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction shall be recorded on appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation forms and evaluated for significance in terms of California Environmental Quality Act criteria by a qualified archaeologist. Potentially significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is determined to be significant under CEQA, the City and a qualified archaeologist shall determine whether preservation in place is feasible. Such preservation in place is the preferred mitigation. If such preservation is infeasible, the qualified archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan for the resource. The archaeologist shall also conduct appropriate technical analyses, prepare a comprehensive written report and file it with the appropriate information center (California Historical Resources Information System), and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered materials.

Less than
significant
impact.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
29 Impact CUL-3:

Subsurface construction
activities associated with
the proposed project may
damage or destroy
previously undiscovered
paleontological
resources.

MM CUL-3: In the event that plant or animal fossils are discovered during subsurface excavation activities for the proposed project, all excavation within 50 feet of the fossil shall cease until a qualified paleontologist has determined the significance of the find and provides recommendations in accordance with Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. The paleontologist shall notify the City of Manteca to determine procedures to be followed before construction is allowed to resume at the location of the find. If the find is determined to be significant and the City determines that avoidance is not feasible, the paleontologist shall design and implement a data recovery plan consistent with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. The plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. Upon approval, the plan shall be incorporated into the project.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact CUL-4:

Subsurface construction
activities associated with
the proposed project may
damage or destroy
previously undiscovered
human remains.

MM CUL-4: If previously unknown human remains are encountered during construction activities, Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code applies, and the following procedures shall be followed: In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, Public Resource Code Section 5097.98 must be followed. Once project-related ground disturbance begins and if there is accidental discovery of human remains, the following steps shall be taken:
• There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the San Joaquin County Coroner’s Office is contacted to determine if the remains are Native American and if an investigation into cause of death is required. If the coroner determines the remains are Native American, the coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours, and the NAHC shall
identify the person or persons it believes to be the “most likely descendant” of the deceased Native American. The most likely descendant may make recommendations to the landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.

Less than
significant
impact.

Discussion
The above cultural impacts were identified and discussed in the Draft EIR. The Original Project anticipated industrial and commercial land uses to be developed on the project site. The Refined Project is within the footprint of the Original Project and has the same physical environmental impacts. The Refined Project provides more specific details, including specific site plans and roadway patterns, but that does not change the physical environmental impacts on this topic. The Refined Project would not result in any new potential cultural impacts and would not increase the significance of any cultural impacts identified in the Original Project. Additionally, there are no new cultural impacts beyond what was addressed in the Final EIR, and there are no changed circumstances or new information that meets the standard for requiring further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
30 3.6 GEOLOGIY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY
Impact GEO-1:

Development of the
proposed project may
expose persons or
structures to seismic
hazards.

MM GEO-1: Prior to issuance of building permits for each Master Plan use, the project applicant shall submit a design-level geotechnical study and building plans to the City of Manteca for review and approval. The building plans shall demonstrate that they incorporate all applicable recommendations of the design-level geotechnical study and comply with all applicable requirements of the most recent version of the California Building Standards Code.

A licensed professional engineer shall prepare the plans, including those that pertain to soil engineering, structural foundations, pipeline excavation, and installation. The approved plans shall be incorporated into the proposed project. All onsite soil engineering activities shall be conducted under the supervision of a licensed Geotechnical Engineer or Certified Engineering Geologist.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact GEO-2:

Construction activities
associated with the
proposed project have the
potential to create
erosion and
sedimentation.

Implement Mitigation Measure HYD-1. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact GEO-3: The
proposed project would
not expose persons or
structures to hazards
associated with unstable
geologic units or soils.

Implement Mitigation Measure GEO-1. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact GEO-4:

Development of the
proposed project would
not expose persons or
structures to hazards
associated with
expansive soils.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Discussion
The above geology, soils, and seismicity impacts were identified and discussed in the Draft EIR. The Original Project anticipated industrial and commercial land uses to be developed on the project site.

The Refined Project is within the footprint of the Original Project and has the same physical environmental impacts. The Refined Project provides more specific details, including specific site plans and roadway patterns, but that does not change the physical environmental impacts on this topic. The Refined Project would not result in any new potential geology, soils, and seismicity impacts and would not increase the significance of any geology, soils, and seismicity impacts identified in the Original Project. Additionally, there are no new geology, soils, and seismicity impacts beyond what was addressed in the Final EIR, and there are no changed circumstances or new information that meets the standard for requiring further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
31 ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
32 3.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact HAZ-1:

Development of the
proposed project does not
have the potential to
expose human health and
the environment to
hazardous materials
associated with past or
present usage of the
project site or
surrounding land uses.

MM HAZ-1a: Prior to grading activities for any Master Plan use in areas where THP-D has been detected, the applicant shall conduct soil sampling to delineate the horizontal and vertical extent of the TPH-D in order to implement a soil remediation program. Soil remediation shall be conducted in accordance with California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) guidelines.

Contaminated soil shall be excavated and disposed of at an approved disposal facility. Following excavation, confirmation sampling shall be conducted to confirm whether remaining soil meets acceptable applicable regulatory levels. The excavation shall be backfilled with clean soil.

MM HAZ-1b: Prior to grading activities for any Master Plan use, any onsite wells or septic systems intended to be removed shall be destroyed under permit and inspection with San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department.

MM HAZ-1c: Prior to demolition activities of any structures located within the Master Plan area, the project applicant shall retain a certified hazardous waste contractor to determine the presence or absence of building materials or equipment that contains hazardous waste, including asbestos, lead-based paint, mercury, and PCBs. If such substances are found to be present, the contractor shall properly remove and dispose of these hazardous materials in accordance with federal and state law. All removal activities shall be completed prior to commencement of demolition activities.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact HAZ-2: The
proposed project would
not create a significant
hazard to the public or
the environment through
the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous
materials or through
reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident
conditions.

Implement Mitigation Measure HAZ-1c. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact HAZ-3: The
proposed project would
not result in an aviation
safety hazard for people
residing or working
within the Stockton
Metropolitan Airport
Influence Area.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact HAZ-4: The
proposed project would
not impair
implementation of or
physically interfere with
No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
33 an adopted emergency
response plan or
emergency evacuation
plan.

Discussion
The hazards and hazardous materials impacts were identified and discussed in the Draft EIR. The Original Project anticipated industrial and commercial land uses to be developed on the project site.

The Refined Project is within the footprint of the Original Project and has the same physical environmental impacts. The Refined Project provides more specific details, including specific site plans and roadway patterns, but that does not change the physical environmental impacts on this topic. The Refined Project would not result in any new potential hazards and hazardous materials impacts and would not increase the significance of any hazards and hazardous materials impacts identified in the Original Project. Additionally, there are no new hazards and hazardous materials impacts beyond what was addressed in the Final EIR, and there are no changed circumstances or new information that meets the standard for requiring further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
34 3.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Impact HYD-1:

Construction activities
associated with the
proposed project have the
potential to degrade
water quality in
downstream water
bodies.

MM HYD-1: Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits for each proposed activities within the Master Plan area, the project applicant shall prepare and submit a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the City of Manteca that identifies specific actions and Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent stormwater pollution during construction activities. The SWPPP shall identify a practical sequence for BMP implementation, monitoring, and maintenance; site restoration; contingency measures; responsible parties; and agency contacts. The SWPPP shall include but not be limited to the following elements:
• Temporary erosion control measures shall be employed for disturbed areas.
• Specific measures shall be identified to protect the onsite open drainages during construction of the proposed resort.
• Specific measures shall be identified to protect the French Camp Outlet Canal and Drain 3 during any construction activities. • No disturbed surfaces shall be left without erosion control measures in place during the winter and spring months.
• Sediment shall be retained onsite by a system of sediment basins, traps, or other appropriate measures.
• The construction contractor shall prepare Standard Operating Procedures for the handling of hazardous materials on the construction site to eliminate or reduce discharge of materials to storm drains.
• BMP performance and effectiveness shall be determined either by visual means where applicable (e.g., observation of abovenormal sediment release), or by actual water sampling in cases where verification of contaminant reduction or elimination (such as inadvertent petroleum release) is required by the RWQCB to determine adequacy of the measure.
• In the event of significant construction delays or delays in final landscape installation, native grasses or other appropriate vegetative cover shall be established on the construction site as soon as possible after disturbance, as an interim erosion control measure throughout the wet season.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact HYD-2:

Operational activities
associated with the
proposed project have the
potential to degrade
water quality in
downstream water
bodies.

MM HYD-2: Prior to the issuance of building or grading permits for any development activities that occur pursuant to the Master Plan, the project applicant shall submit a stormwater quality control plan to the City of Manteca for review and approval. The plan shall include a detailed drainage plan and identify expected site-specific pollutants and required measures to treat those pollutants before they reach the regional detention basins and, ultimately, the French Camp Outlet Canal and San Joaquin River. The approved measures shall be incorporated into the proposed project. The plan will describe monitoring and performance measures and standards required in order to ensure water quality is adequately protected during operation of all proposed sites within the project area. Examples of stormwater pollution prevention measures and practices to be incorporated into the plan include but are not limited to:

Less than
significant
impact.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
35 • Strategically placed bioswales and landscaped areas that promote percolation of runoff
• Pervious pavement
• Roof drains that discharge to landscaped areas
• Trash enclosures with screen walls and roofs
• Stenciling on storm drains
• Curb cuts in parking areas to allow runoff to enter landscaped areas
• Rock-lined areas along landscaped areas in parking lots • Catch basins
• Oil/water separators
• Regular sweeping of parking areas and cleaning of storm drainage facilities
• Employee training to inform maintenance personnel of
stormwater pollution prevention measures
Impact HYD-3: The
proposed project would
not deplete groundwater
supplies or substantially
interfere with
groundwater recharge.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact HYD-4: The
proposed project would
increase impervious
surface coverage, which
may result in increased
stormwater runoff
volumes and peak flows.

MM HYD-4: Prior to the issuance of building or grading permits for the proposed project, the project applicant shall submit a stormwater quality control plan for the project as a whole to the City of Manteca for review and approval. The plan shall include a detailed drainage plan that demonstrates attainment of pre-project runoff requirements prior to release at the outlet canal and describes the volume reduction measures and treatment controls used to reach attainment. The drainage plan shall identify all expected flows from the project area and the location, size, and type of facilities used to retain and treat the runoff volumes and peak flows to meet pre-project conditions.

The approved drainage plan shall be incorporated into the proposed project.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact HYD-5: The
proposed project may
place structures within a
100-year flood hazard
area that may have the
potential to divert flood
flows or be subjected to
flood hazard.

MM HYD-5a: Prior to the issuance of grading or building permits, the project applicant must revisit the status of the provisionally accredited levees providing 100-year level of flood protection to the Master Plan area to determine it is still the case and the Master Plan remains outside of the 100-year flood hazard.

MM HYD-5b: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant shall either demonstrate that the developed portions of the Master Plan are outside of the anticipated 200-year flood hazard area or incorporate measures into the Master Plan to achieve a 200-year level of flood protection for any site installations that will occur in 2012 or later.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact HYD-6: The
proposed project may
expose people or
structures to a significant
No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
36 risk of loss, injury, or
death involving flooding
as a result of the failure of
a levee or dam.

Discussion
The hydrology and water quality impacts were identified and discussed in the Draft EIR. The Original Project anticipated industrial and commercial land uses to be developed on the project site. The Refined Project is within the footprint of the Original Project and has the same physical environmental impacts. The Refined Project provides more specific details, including specific site plans and roadway patterns, but that does not change the physical environmental impacts on this topic. The Refined Project would not result in any new potential hydrology and water quality impacts and would not increase the significance of any hydrology and water quality impacts identified in the Original Project. Additionally, there are no new hydrology and water quality impacts beyond what was addressed in the Final EIR, and there are no changed circumstances or new information that meets the standard for requiring further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
37 3.9 LAND USE
Impact LU-1: The
proposed project would
not physically divide an
established community.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact LU-2: The
proposed project would
be consistent with
applicable provisions of
the City of Manteca
General Plan.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact LU-3: The
proposed Master Plan
and non- master plan
annexations would be
consistent with the
applicable provisions of
the Manteca Municipal
Code.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact LU-4: The
proposed project would
be consistent with the
applicable
recommendations of the
adopted San Joaquin
County Airport Land Use
Plan.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact LU-5: The
proposed project would
not conflict with any of
the applicable policies
established by the San
Joaquin County Local
Agency Formation
Commission.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact LU-6: The
proposed project may not
be consistent with the
applicable policies of the
San Joaquin County
Multi-Species Habitat
Conservation and Open
Space Plan.

Implement Mitigation Measure BIO-6. Less than
significant
impact.

Discussion
The land use impacts were identified and discussed in the Draft EIR. The Original Project anticipated industrial and commercial land uses to be developed on the project site. The Refined Project is within ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
38 the footprint of the Original Project and has the same physical environmental impacts. The Refined Project provides more specific details, including specific site plans and roadway patterns, but that does not change the physical environmental impacts on this topic. The Refined Project would not result in any new potential land use impacts and would not increase the significance of any land use impacts identified in the Original Project. Additionally, there are no new land use impacts beyond what was addressed in the Final EIR, and there are no changed circumstances or new information that meets the standard for requiring further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
39 3.10 NOISE
Impact NOI-1:

Construction activities
associated with the
proposed project may
expose nearby land uses
to excessive noise levels.

MM NOI-1: During construction activities for all Master Plan uses, the applicant shall require its construction contractors to adhere to the following noise attenuation requirements:
• Construction activities shall be limited to the hours between 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. daily. The City of Manteca Director of Public Works shall have the discretion to permit construction activities to occur outside of allowable hours if compelling circumstances warrant such an exception (e.g., weather conditions necessary to pour concrete).
• All construction equipment shall use noise-reduction features (e.g., mufflers and engine shrouds) that are no less effective than those originally installed by the manufacturer. If no noisereduction features were installed by the manufacturer, then the contractor shall require that at least a muffler be installed on the equipment.
• Construction staging and heavy equipment maintenance
activities shall be performed a minimum distance of 300 feet from the nearest residence, unless safety or technical factors take precedence (e.g., an equipment breakdown).
• A 10-foot-high construction noise barrier shall be installed along the edge of the Master Plan area within 300 feet of any offsite residence prior to start of grading activities. The noise barrier shall either be constructed of a minimum 0.5-inch plywood or utilize acoustical blankets with a minimum Sound Transmission Class of 12. The barrier shall remain in place until noise intensive aspects of construction are completed.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact NOI-2:

Construction and
operational activities
associated with the
proposed project would
not generate substantial
groundborne vibration.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact NOI-3: The
proposed project’s
vehicular trips would not
cause a substantial
permanent increase in
ambient noise levels.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact NOI-4: The
proposed project would
not generate stationary
noise levels that cause
significant impacts at
nearby receptors.

MM NOI-4: During Master Plan operations, the use of street sweepers and mechanical landscape maintenance equipment (lawnmowers, leaf blowers, etc.) shall be prohibited between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.

Less than
significant
impact.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
40 Impact NOI-5: The
proposed project would
not generate combined
stationary and
transportation noise
levels that cause
significant impacts at
nearby receptors.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact NOI-6: The
proposed project would
not expose persons
residing or working in the
project vicinity to
excessive aviation noise
levels.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Discussion
The land use impacts were identified and discussed in the Draft EIR. The Original Project anticipated industrial and commercial land uses to be developed on the project site. The Refined Project is within the footprint of the Original Project and has the same development characteristics. The Refined Project provides more specific details, including specific site plans and roadway patterns. The Refined Project will remove trips distributed to the more noise sensitive residential areas along Airport Way and Lathrop Road, and divert them to Roth Road which is a planned STAA Route intended to accommodate heavy truck trips. The change is a beneficial noise impact. The Refined Project would not result in any new significant and adverse noise impacts and would not increase the significance of any land use impacts identified in the Original Project. Additionally, there are no new noise impacts beyond what was addressed in the Final EIR, and there are no changed circumstances or new information that meets the standard for requiring further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
41 3.11 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
Impact PSU-1: The
proposed project may
contribute to a need for
new or expanded fire
protection facilities.

MM PSU-1: Prior to issuance of building permits for any Master Plan uses, the project applicant shall provide the City of Manteca will all applicable fire protection development fees in accordance with the latest adopted fee schedule.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact PSU-2: The
proposed project would
not contribute to a need
for new or expanded
police protection
facilities.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact PSU-3: The
proposed project may not
be served with sufficient
water supplies from
existing entitlements and
resources and may
require the construction
of new water treatment
facilities.

MM PSU-3a: Prior to issuance of building permits for each Master Plan use, the applicant shall prepare and submit documentation to the City of Manteca for review and approval identifying a non-potable irrigation system that is separate from the potable water systems. The non-potable irrigation system shall use non-potable well water until recycled water is available, at which point it shall be converted to use recycled water.

MM PSU-3b: Prior to issuance of building permits for each Master Plan use, the applicant shall prepare and submit documentation to the City of Manteca for review and approval identifying that all appropriate and feasible water conservation measures are incorporated into the proposed use(s). The approved measures shall be incorporated into the final development plans. Examples of water conservation measures include but are not limited to:
• Drought-tolerant landscaping or xeriscaping
• Water efficient irrigation systems (drip irrigation,
bubbler/soaker systems, hydrozones, evapotranspiration
controllers, etc.)
• Sensor-activated low-flow fixtures (e.g., faucets, urinals, and toilets)
Less than
significant
impact.

Impact PSU-4: The
proposed project’s
effluent would not
exceed wastewater
treatment requirements
of the applicable
Regional Water Quality
Control Board and would
not require the
construction of new
wastewater treatment
facilities.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
42 Impact PSU-5: The
proposed project would
not result require the
construction of new
downstream drainage
facilities.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact PSU-6: The
proposed project may not
be served by a landfill
with adequate capacity or
comply with federal,
state, and local statutes
and regulations related to
solid waste.

MM PSU-6a: Prior to issuance of building permits for any building developed pursuant to the Master Plan, the project applicant shall retain a qualified contractor to perform construction and demolition debris recycling. Following the completion of construction activities, the project applicant shall provide documentation to the satisfaction of the City of Manteca demonstrating that construction and demolition debris was recycled.

MM PSU-6b: Prior to issuance of building permits for each building developed pursuant to the Master Plan, the project applicant shall provide information to the City of Manteca describing the methods by which recycling and waste diversion activities shall be achieved.

This information shall include but is not limited to the type and location of facilities necessary to collect and store recyclable materials, contractors who would pick-up recyclable and reusable materials, and how recycling and waste diversion activities would be integrated into operational practices. To the extent feasible, centralized recycling facilities are encouraged to enhance the ease and efficiency of such practices. The approved facilities and practices shall be incorporated into the uses envisioned by the Master Plan.

Less than
significant
impact.

Impact PSU-7: The
proposed project would
not result in the
inefficient, wasteful, or
unnecessary use of
energy.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Discussion
The public service and utilities impacts were identified and discussed in the Draft EIR. The Original Project anticipated industrial and commercial land uses to be developed on the project site, which would require public services and utilities to support the land uses. The Refined Project is within the footprint of the Original Project and has the same land use characteristics, which would require the same public services and utilities as anticipated by the Original EIR. The Refined Project provides more specific details, including specific site plans and roadway patterns, but that does not change the physical environmental impacts on this topic. The Refined Project would not result in any new potential public service or utilities impacts and would not increase the significance of any public service or utilities impacts identified in the Original Project. Additionally, there are no new public service or utilities impacts beyond what was addressed in the Final EIR, and there are no changed circumstances or new information that meets the standard for requiring further environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
43 3.12 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION
Impact TRANS-1: The
CenterPoint Intermodal
Facility would generate
new trips that contribute
to unacceptable
intersection operations
under Existing Plus
Project Conditions.

MM TRANS-1: Prior to issuance of building permits for each Master Plan use, the applicant shall pay all transportation-related fees in accordance with the latest adopted fee schedule at the time permits are sought. Such fees shall include, but not be limited to, the City of Manteca Public Facilities Implementation Plan fee and the San Joaquin County Regional Transportation Impact Fee.

Significant
unavoidable
impact.

Impact TRANS-2: Both
the CenterPoint
Intermodal Facility and
the Master Plan uses
would generate new trips
that contribute to
unacceptable intersection
and freeway operations
under Cumulative
Conditions.

MM TRANS-2a: Prior to issuance of building permits for each Master Plan use, the applicant shall provide fees to the City of Manteca for the installation of signals at the I-5 Northbound Ramps/Roth Road and I-5 Southbound Ramps/Roth Road
intersections, provided that fee collection mechanism exists. Fee amounts shall be calculated in accordance with equitable share methodology. This mitigation measure shall be superseded by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 if no fee collection mechanism exists for this improvement at the time building permits are sought.

MM TRANS-2b: Prior to issuance of building permits for each Master Plan use, the applicant shall provide fees to the City of Manteca for improvements to the Roth Road/Harland Road
intersection, provided that fee collection mechanism exists. The improvements shall consist of the installation of a signal and widening the westbound approach to include left-turn lane, through lane, and shared through/right lane. Fee amounts shall be calculated in accordance with equitable share methodology. This mitigation measure shall be superseded by Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 if no fee collection mechanism exists for this improvement at the time building permits are sought.

Significant
unavoidable
impact.

Impact TRANS-3: The
proposed project would
not cause a change in air
traffic patterns that
results in substantial
safety risks.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact TRANS-4: The
proposed project may
substantially increase
hazards that are due to a
design feature or
incompatible uses.

MM TRANS-4a: Prior to site plan review for each Master Plan use, the applicant shall consult with the City of Manteca Community Development Department about appropriate frontage improvements.

All necessary frontage improvements shall be depicted on the final site plan and implemented as part of site development.

MM TRANS-4b: Prior to site plan review for each Master Plan use, the applicant shall consult with the City of Manteca Community Development Department about the following roadway access issues listed below. The access evaluations shall be performed in accordance with the City’s Transportation Impact Study Guidelines.

All necessary improvements shall be depicted on the final site plan Less than
significant
impact.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
44 and implemented as part of site development. Issues include but are not limited to:
• Need for traffic signals at driveways
• Traffic signal coordination and installation of associated signal conduits
• Truck traffic volumes at driveways and associated lane storage requirements, right-turn deceleration needs, and curb return radii
• Coordination and accommodation of driveways for future projects on the opposite side of the street
• Pavement thickness
Impact TRANS-5: The
proposed project would
provide adequate
emergency access.

No mitigation is necessary. Less than
significant
impact.

Impact TRANS-6: The
proposed project may
conflict with adopted
policies, plans, or
programs supporting
alternative
transportation.

MM TRANS-6a: Prior to site plan review for each Master Plan light industrial use, the applicant shall consult with the City of Manteca Community Development Department, Manteca Transit, and the San Joaquin Regional Transit District about the inclusion of appropriate transit facilities (turnouts, shelters, etc.) or services (e.g., an employee shuttle). If transit facilities are deemed to be necessary, they shall be provided on the final site plan. If transit services are deemed to be necessary, the applicant shall prepare a service plan and submit it to the City of Manteca for review and approval. The approved plan shall be incorporated into the project. To the extent feasible, transit facilities and services shall be coordinated among Master Plan uses to maximize efficiency and effectiveness.

MM TRANS-6b: Prior to site plan review for each Master Plan light industrial use, the applicant shall consult with the City of Manteca Community Development Department about the inclusion of appropriate bicycle facilities (racks, lockers, etc.). If bicycle facilities are deemed to be necessary, such facilities shall be provided on the final site plan.

MM TRANS-6c: Prior to site plan review for each Master Plan light industrial use, the applicant shall consult with the City of Manteca Community Development Department about the inclusion of appropriate pedestrian facilities. If pedestrian facilities are deemed to be necessary, such facilities shall be provided on the final site plan.

MM TRANS-6d: Prior to site plan review for the Master Plan community commercial use, the applicant shall prepare and submit plans to the City of Manteca demonstrating access and facilities for public transit, bicycles, and pedestrians. Public transit facilities shall consist of at least one bus turnout with shelter, lighting, trash receptacle, and direct pedestrian connection to the community commercial center. Bicycle facilities shall consist of racks near building entrances that provide storage equivalent to 2 percent of the minimum Municipal Code parking requirement. Pedestrian facilities Less than
significant
impact.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
45 shall consist of sidewalks along street frontages and direct connections between buildings. The approved facilities shall be incorporated in the community commercial center plans.

Impact TRANS-7:

Construction traffic and
parking may adversely
impact local circulation.

MM TRANS-7: Prior to issuance of grading permits for each Master Plan use, the applicant shall submit a Construction Traffic Control Plan to the City of Manteca for review and approval. The plan shall identify the timing and routing of all major construction equipment and trucking to avoid potential traffic congestion and delays on the local street network. The plan shall encourage the use of Interstate 5 (I-5), Roth Road, Airport Way, and Lathrop Road wherever practical. Anticipated temporary road closures should be identified, along with safety measures and detours. If necessary, construction equipment and materials deliveries shall be limited to off-peak hours to avoid conflicts with local traffic circulation. The plan shall also identify suitable locations for construction worker parking.

Less than
significant
impact.

Discussion
The Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) for the NWAWMP EIR Addendum analyzes the anticipated trip generation for the approved but not yet constructed, pending and undeveloped areas in the NWAWMP and determines if additional impacts on the surrounding transportation network would occur from changes to the circulation patterns and access.

Original Traffic Assumptions: The NWAWMP notes that the CenterPoint Intermodal Facility would capitalize on its location adjacent the Lathrop Intermodal Terminal to provide a transload center that would allow the contents of containers to be stored in on-site warehouses, assembled in on-site facilities, and distributed off-site by truck or rail. Given this relationship between the CenterPoint Intermodal Facility and the Lathrop Intermodal Terminal, the NWAWMP EIR forecasted that approximately 19 percent of daily trips and 13 percent of am and 12 percent pm peak hour trips generated by CenterPoint would travel to the Lathrop Intermodal Terminal under cumulative conditions. Under cumulative conditions, the NWAWMP EIR forecasted that the CenterPoint Intermodal Facility would generate 3,570 daily, 285 a.m. peak hour and 438 p.m. peak hour vehicle trips, as shown in Table 4.

TABLE 4: CENTERPOINT INTERMODAL FACILITY TRIP GENERATION FROM NWAWMP EIR Land Use
Quantity
(1,000 sq. ft.)
Trips
Daily
A.M.

Peak Hour
P.M.

Peak Hour
CenterPoint Intermodal Facility
(Distribution, High-Cube
Warehouse, Light Industrial) – Trip
Generation Rates
3,177 1.39 0.10 0.16
Gross Vehicle Trip Generation 4,420 327 495
CenterPoint-to-Lathrop Intermodal Terminal
Internalization (850) (42) (57)
New Vehicle Trips 3,570 285 438
SOURCE:NAWMP EIR, TABLE 3.12-8, 2010.

The NWAWMP EIR analysis reflected the internalized Lathrop Intermodal Terminal truck trips by reducing the number of trips entering/exiting onto Roth Road. The internalization was projected to ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
46 increase under cumulative conditions due to the assumed expansion of the Lathrop Intermodal Terminal.

The remaining properties in the NWAWMP (outside of the CenterPoint Intermodal Facility) consist of a mix of light industrial and community commercial uses. Table 5 presents the trip generation for these remaining master plan land uses. Under cumulative conditions, the remaining master plan land uses would generate 12,756 daily, 486 a.m. peak hour and 1,085 p.m. peak hour vehicle trips, as shown in Table 5.

TABLE 5: REMAINING NWAWMP LAND USES TRIP GENERATION FROM NWAWMP EIR Land Use
Quantity
(1,000 sq. ft.)
Trip Rate Trips
Daily
A.M.

Peak Hour
P.M.

Peak Hour Daily
A.M.

Peak Hour
P.M.

Peak Hour
High-Cube Warehouse 1,020.5 1.44 0.09 0.10 1,470 92 102 Light Industrial 191.3 6.94 0.71 0.61 1,327 136 116
Auto/Truck
Parts/Service 63.8 17.10 1.93 1.93 1,091 86 123
Retail 205.82 52.75 5.01 5.01 10,857 236 1,032
Gross Vehicle Trips 14,745 550 1,373
Internalization and Pass By Retail Trips (1,989) (64) (288) New Vehicle Trips 12,756 486 1,085
SOURCE: NAWMP EIR, TABLE 3.12-9, 2010.

Combining the trip generation in Table 4 and Table 5 the NWAWMP EIR estimated that buildout of the NWAWMP would generate 16,326 daily, 771 a.m. peak hour and 1,523 p.m. peak hour vehicle trips as shown in Table 6.

Based on a total of 300.3 acres and 4,658,961 square feet of development in the NWAWMP Area, the blended trip generation per 1,000 square feet was estimated to be 3.50 daily, 0.17 a.m. peak hour and

0.33 p.m. peak hour vehicle trips.

TABLE 6: TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY – NWAWMP EIR
Land Use
Trips
Daily
A.M.

Peak Hour
P.M.

Peak Hour
New Vehicle Trips from Table 2 3,570 285 438
New Vehicle Trips from Table 3 12,756 486 1,085
Cumulative Plus Master Plan Buildout 16,326 771 1,523
Trip Generation per 1,000 square feet 3.50 0.17 0.33
NOTES: REFER TO TABLE 2 AND TABLE 3 FOR DETAILED TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS.

EXISTING NWAWMP DEVELOPED AREA PROJECT TRIP GENERATION: Approximately 148.5 (49%) of the 300.3-acre Master Plan area has been developed. It should be noted that part of the 148.5 acres of existing NWAWMP developed area, have been constructed as truck parking lots. The northern parking lot is located on the south end of Intermodal Way and the southern parking lot is located behind 2365 Airport Way (behind Crothall Laundry Services).

Tables 7 through 8 present the trip generation rates and projected trips generated for existing NWAWMP developments for Weekday Daily, AM Peak Hour, and PM Peak Hour Conditions for All Vehicles (Table 6) based on the blended trip rates from the NWAWMP EIR, and the City of Manteca Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model being developed for the General Plan 2020/2040 Update.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
47 TABLE 7: EXISTING NWAWMP DEVELOPED AREA TRIP GENERATION RATES Land Use
(ITE Code)
Gross
Acres and
Floor Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Vehicle Trip Rate1
Daily AM PM
Total Total In Out Total In Out
Existing NWAWMP
Development
(Blended Trip Rate from
Table 4)
148.5 acres
(2,008,000
square feet)

3.50 0.17 0.12 0.05 0.33 0.11 0.22
NOTES:
1 TRIP RATES ARE BASED ON THE NAWMP AND THE CITY OF MANTECA TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING MODEL DEVELOPED FOR THE GENERAL PLAN 2020/2040 UPDATE.

SOURCE: FEHR & PEERS, 2022
TABLE 8: EXISTING NWAWMP DEVELOPED AREA TRIP GENERATION (ALL VEHICLES) Project
Gross Acres
and Floor Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Daily
(All Vehicles)
AM Peak Hour
(All Vehicles)
PM Peak Hour
(All Vehicles)
Total Total In Out Total In Out
Existing NAWMP
Development
148.5 acres
(2,008,000
square feet)
7,028 341 241 100 663 221 442
SOURCE: FEHR & PEERS, 2022
PENDING / UNDEVELOPED NWAWMP AREA PROJECT TRIP GENERATION: Tables 9 through 10 present the trip generation rates and projected trips generated by pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels for Weekday Daily, AM Peak Hour, and PM Peak Hour Conditions for All Vehicles based on the blended trip rates from the Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2021) and the City of Manteca Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model being developed for the General Plan 2020/2040 Update. Table 10 shows that the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels will generate a total of 9,960 daily vehicle trips, 783 AM peak hour and 964 PM peak hour vehicle trips.

TABLE 9: PENDING / UNDEVELOPED NWAWMP AREA TRIP GENERATION RATES Land Use
(ITE Code)
Gross
Acres and
Floor Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Vehicle Trip Rate1
Daily AM PM
Total Total In Out Total In Out
Pending / Undeveloped
NWAWMP Development
(Blended Trip Rate)
151.8 acres
(2,651,000
square feet)

4.96 0.39 0.28 0.11 0.48 0.15 0.33
NOTES:
1BLENDED TRIP RATES ARE BASED ON THE TRIP GENERATION MANUAL 11TH EDITION (INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, 2021) AND THE CITY OF MANTECA TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING MODEL DEVELOPED FOR THE GENERAL PLAN 2020/2040 UPDATE.

SOURCE: FEHR & PEERS, 2022
TABLE 10: PENDING / UNDEVELOPED NAWMP AREA TRIP GENERATION (ALL VEHICLES) Project
Gross Acres
and Floor Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Daily
(All Vehicles)
AM Peak Hour
(All Vehicles)
PM Peak Hour
(All Vehicles)
Total Total In Out Total In Out
Pending /
Undeveloped
NWAWMP
Development
(Blended Trip Rate)
151.8 acres
(2,651,000
square feet)
9,960 783 562 221 964 301 663
SOURCE: FEHR & PEERS, 2022
ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
48 Table 11 presents the results of NWAWMP trip generation analysis for the existing and developed areas. The EIR addendum transportation analysis will be based on a total of 16,988 daily vehicle trips, 1,124 AM peak hour and 1,626 PM peak hour vehicle trips. When compared to the NWAWMP Environmental Impact Report (2010), the NWAWMP will generate a total of 662 new daily vehicle trips, 353 new AM peak hour, and 103 new PM peak hour vehicle trips.

TABLE 11: NWAWMP AREA TRIP GENERATION – ADDENDUM COMPARED TO EIR Project
Gross Acres
and Floor Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Daily
(All Vehicles)
AM Peak Hour
(All Vehicles)
PM Peak Hour
(All Vehicles)
Total Total In Out Total In Out
Existing NAWMP
Development
148.5 acres
(2,008,000
square feet)
7,028 341 241 100 663 221 442
Pending /
Undeveloped
NAWMP
Development
(Blended Trip Rate)
151.8 acres
(2,651,000
square feet)
9,960 783 562 221 964 301 663
Cumulative Plus
Master Plan
Buildout
300.3 acres
(4,658,961
square feet)
(16,326) (771) (554) (227
)
(1,523) (508) (1,015)
New Vehicle Trips 662 353 259 95 103 14 89
SOURCE: FEHR & PEERS, 2022
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE – EXISTING CONDITIONS:The primary CEQA measure analyzed NWAWMP Environmental Impact Report (2010) was intersection level of service. The following sections present the results for Existing (Year 2022) and Existing With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area for Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Conditions.

Table 12 presents the existing AM and PM peak hour intersection level of service for the fourteen (14) study intersections in the project study area. The Project Trip Generation analysis showed that during the AM peak hour, the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels would add a total of 783 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 642 employee vehicles, and 141 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks. During the PM peak hour, the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels would add a total of 964 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 770 employee vehicles, and 194 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks.

The results of the intersection level of service analysis showed that the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels would not result in any intersections operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. All fourteen (14) study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service D or better under Existing With Project Conditions.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
49 TABLE 12: EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – NO PROJECT VERSUS WITH PENDING / UNDEVELOPED

NWAWMP PARCELS WEEKDAY AM AND PM PEAK HOURS
Intersection (Control)
Existing (No Project) Existing With Project
Delay AM(PM) LOS AM(PM) Delay AM(PM) LOS AM(PM)

1. Roth Road / Intermodal Way (Signal) 8.5 (9.2) A (A) 10.7 (11.2) B (B)

2. Roth Road / Airport Way (Signal) 12.0 (13.1) B (B) 16.8 (19.1) B (B)

3. Roth Road / I-5 SB Ramps (SSSC) 18.5 (22.1) C (C) 25.1 (27.8) D (D)

4. Roth Road / I-5 NB Ramps (SSSC) 13.1 (15.7) B (C) 16.8 (20.2) C (C)

5. Lathrop Road / Airport Way (Signal) 26.6 (27.0) C (C) 30.4 (31.6) C (C)

6. Lathrop Road / I-5 NB Ramps
(Signal) 13.1 (17.4) B (B) 15.5 (21.2) B (C)

7. Lathrop Road / I-5 SB Ramps (Signal) 14.4 (17.8) B (B) 18.7 (22.4) B (C)

8. Lathrop Road / Union Road (Signal) 31.7 (30.8) C (C) 33.4 (3.7) C (C)

9. Lathrop Road / SR 99 SB Ramps /
Main Street (Signal) 21.1 (24.0) C (C) 23.5 (27.8) C (C)

10. Lathrop Road / SR 99 NB Ramps
(Signal) 10.1 (9.9) B (A) 11.5 (12.4) B (B)

11. Airport Way / French Camp Road 21.2 (23.4) C (C) 23.6 (25.8) C (C)

12. Airport Way / Louise Avenue
(Signal) 28.5 (29.6) C (C) 31.2 (33.1) C (C)

13. Airport Way / WB SR 120 Ramps
(Signal) 11.8 (15.5) B (B) 12.5 (16.1) B (B)

14. Airport Way / EB SR 120 Ramps
(Signal) 18.5 (21.2) B (C) 20.2 (23.5) B (C)
NOTES: SSSC = SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL; LOS = LEVEL OF SERVICE 1 FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS AND ALL-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS, AVERAGE INTERSECTION DELAY IS REPORTED IN SECONDS PER VEHICLE FOR ALL APPROACHES. FOR SIDE STREET STOP-CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS, INTERSECTION DELAY IS REPORTED IN SECONDS PER VEHICLE FOR THE OVERALL INTERSECTION AND (WORST-CASE) MOVEMENT. INTERSECTION DELAY IS CALCULATED BASED ON THE PROCEDURES AND METHODOLOGY CONTAINED IN THE HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL 6TH EDITION (TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD, 2016).

SOURCE: FEHR & PEERS, 2022
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE – CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS: The following sections present the results for Cumulative No Project and Cumulative With Pending / Undeveloped NAWMP Area for Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Conditions. It should be noted that the Cumulative volumes were developed using the projected increase (delta method) in turning movement volumes from the City of Manteca Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model being developed for the General Plan 2020/2040 Update.

Table 13 presents the projected AM and PM peak hour intersection level of service for the fourteen (14) study intersections in the project study. Under Cumulative No Project Conditions, traffic associated with land use growth in the City of Manteca and City of Lathrop contributes to the increase in traffic volumes along Lathrop Road. As displayed, the Union Road / Lathrop Road intersection would operate unacceptably at LOS F during both AM and PM peak hours without the Pending / Undeveloped NAWMP Area:

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
50 Table 13 also shows that the proposed Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would not result in any additional intersections operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. Thirteen (13) of the fourteen (14) study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service D or better under Cumulative With Project Conditions. The Union Road/Lathrop Road intersection would continue to operate unacceptably at LOS F during both AM peak hour and PM peak hours under the Cumulative with Pending / Undeveloped NAWMP Area Project Conditions.

The City of Manteca has identified improvements to the intersection of Union Road / Lathrop Road beyond the current intersection geometrics, including a new traffic signal controller and improved signal timings. With these improvements, AM and PM peak hour operations at the Union Road / Lathrop Road intersection would marginally improve, reducing average vehicle delay and corresponding level of service (from LOS F to LOS E) for both Without and With the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area scenarios. Based on a discussion with the Engineering Department, the Union Road / Lathrop Road intersection will also be fully evaluated after the General Plan Update is completed as part of the 2023 PFIP Update. The goal will be to improve Union Road / Lathrop Road operations from LOS E to LOS D conditions, and each of the NWAWMP development projects will pay the current PFIP fee prior to issuance of building permits.

TABLE 13: CUMULATIVE LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS –NO PROJECT VERSUS WITH PENDING /UNDEVELOPED

NAWMP PARCELS WEEKDAY AM AND PM PEAK HOURS
Intersection (Control)
Cumulative (No Project) Cumulative With Project
Delay
AM(PM)
LOS
AM(PM)
Delay
AM(PM)
LOS
AM(PM)

1. Roth Road / Intermodal Way (Signal) 2 10.2 (10.8) B (B) 13.5 (14.7) B (B)

2. Roth Road / Airport Way (Signal) 2 22.5 (23.1) C (C) 25.7 (26.4) C (C)

3. Roth Road / I-5 NB Ramps (Signal) 2 3 13.2 (14.4) B (B) 15.5 (19.8) B (B)

4. Roth Road / I-5 SB Ramps (Signal) 2 3 13.9 (18.0) B (B) 18.0 (21.2) B (C)

5. Lathrop Road / Airport Way (Signal) 2 33.2 (32.6) C (C) 34.6 (33.9) C (C)

6. Lathrop Road / I-5 NB Ramps (Signal) 2 3 34.1 (25.4) C (C) 34.8 (27.1) C (C)

7. Lathrop Road / I-5 SB Ramps (Signal) 2 3 17.8 (21.3) B (C) 18.7 (24.5) B (C)

8. Lathrop Road / Union Road (Signal) 89.8 (80.2)

78.5 (75.5)
F (F)
E (E)

90.9 (81.6)

79.2 (76.7)
F (F)
E (E)

9. Lathrop Road / SR 99 SB Ramps / Main Street
(Signal) 47.4 (45.3) D (D) 49.5 (50.2) D (D)

10. Lathrop Road / SR 99 NB Ramps (Signal) 11.2 (10.8) B (B) 11.5 (11.2) B (B)

11. Airport Way / French Camp Road 39.5 (42.3) D (D) 41.1 (44.5) D (D)

12. Airport Way / Louise Avenue (Signal) 2 26.2 (28.5) C (C) 27.5 (29.1) C (C)

13. Airport Way / WB SR 120 Ramps (Signal) 2 3 28.3 (29.8) C (C) 29.3 (34.7) C (C)

14. Airport Way / EB SR 120 Ramps (Signal) 2 3 8.0 (47.1) A (D) 8.5 (50.6) A (D) NOTES: BOLD INDICATES UNACCEPTABLE OPERATIONS.

SSSC = SIDE-STREET STOP CONTROL; LOS = LEVEL OF SERVICE 1 FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS, ROUNDABOUTS, AND ALL-WAY STOP CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS, AVERAGE INTERSECTION DELAY IS REPORTED IN SECONDS PER VEHICLE FOR ALL APPROACHES. FOR SIDE STREET STOP-CONTROLLED INTERSECTIONS, INTERSECTION DELAY IS REPORTED IN SECONDS PER VEHICLE FOR THE OVERALL INTERSECTION AND (WORST-CASE) MOVEMENT. INTERSECTION DELAY IS CALCULATED BASED ON THE PROCEDURES AND METHODOLOGY CONTAINED IN ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
51 THE HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL 6TH EDITION (TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD, 2016). 2 INTERSECTION LANE CONFIGURATION AND/OR TRAFFIC CONTROL ARE DIFFERENT FOR CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS WHEN COMPARED TO EXISTING CONDITIONS DUE TO PLANNED INTERSECTION AND ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS.
3 THE FUTURE INTERCHANGE DESIGN HAS NOT BEEN FORMALIZED. DELAY AND LOS ARE ESTIMATED USING AN IMPROVED TIGHT-DIAMOND INTERCHANGE CONFIGURATION AND ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
4 THE FUTURE INTERSECTION OPERATIONS WAS ANALYZED BASED ON THE EXISTING INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS (BOLD) AND WITH A NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROLLER AND IMPROVED SIGNAL TIMINGS / OPERATIONS (BOLD/ITALICS).

SOURCE: FEHR & PEERS, 2022
ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
52 ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – EXISTING CONDITIONS: The secondary measure analyzed in the NWAWMP transportation analysis addendum is segment level of service for Existing (Year 2022) and Existing With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area Weekday Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Conditions. Table 14 presents the existing weekday ADT volumes for twenty-four (24) study roadway segments in the project study area. The Project Trip Generation analysis showed that on a daily basis, the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would add a total of 9,960 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 7,860 employee vehicles, and 2,100 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks.

The results of the roadway segment level of service analysis showed that the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would not result in any roadways operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. All twenty-four roadway segments would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service C or D under Existing With Project Conditions.

TABLE 14: EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – NO PROJECT VERSUS WITH PENDING / UNDEVELOPED

NAWMP PARCELS AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Roadway Segment - Location
Existing (No
Project)
Existing With
Project
With Project - No
Project
ADT
Volume LOS ADT Volume LOS ADT Volume
Percentage
Change

1. Roth Road – Between Intermodal Way
and Airport Way 9,700 D 11,800 D 2,100 21.6 %

2. Roth Road – Between Intermodal Way
and McKinley Avenue 9,600 D 11,700 D 2,100 21.9 %

3. Roth Road – Between McKinley
Avenue and Harlan Road 9,800 D 11,900 D 2,100 21.4 %

4. Roth Road – Between Harlan Road
and NB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 14,800 D 16,900 D 2,100 14.2 %

5. Roth Road – Between NB I-5 Off/ OnRamps and SB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 8,500 C 9,200 C 700 8.2 %

6. Airport Way – Between French Camp
Road and Roth Road 7,400 C 8,200 C 800 10.8 %

7. Airport Way – Between Roth Road
and Lovelace Road 6,700 C 13,900 D 7,200 107.5 %

8. Airport Way – Between Lovelace Road
and Tactical Way 7,100 C 14,300 D 7,200 101.4 %

9. Airport Way – Between Tactical Way
and Daisywood Drive 7,500 D 14,700 D 7,200 96.0 %

10. Airport Way – Between Daisywood
Drive and Lathrop Road 8,800 D 16,000 D 7,200 81.8 %

11. Airport Way – Between Lathrop Road
and Northgate Drive 9,800 D 14,200 D 4,400 44.9 %

12. Airport Way – Between Northgate
Drive and Louise Avenue 10,500 D 14,500 D 4,000 38.1 %

13. Airport Way – Between Louise
Avenue and Crom Avenue 14,800 D 18,400 D 3,600 24.3 %
ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
53 14. Airport Way – Between Crom Avenue
and Yosemite Avenue 15,600 D 18,800 D 3,200 20.5 %

15. Lathrop Road – Between Union Road
and Airport Way 16,700 D 18,700 D 2,000 12.0 %

16. Lathrop Road – Between Airport Way
and McKinley Avenue 21,400 D 22,200 D 800 3.7 %

17. Lathrop Road – Between McKinley
Avenue and 5th Street 21,000 D 21,600 D 600 2.9 %

18. Lathrop Road – Between 5th Street
and Harlan Road 20,600 D 21,200 D 600 2.9 %

19. Lathrop Road – Between Harlan Road
and NB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 24,500 D 25,100 D 600 2.4 %

20. Lathrop Road – Between NB I-5 Off
/On-Ramps and SB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 16,200 C 16,500 C 300 1.9 %

21. Spartan Way – Between SB I-5 Off/On
-Ramps and Golden Valley Parkway 9,200 C 9,290 C 90 1.0 %

22. Intermodal Way – Between Roth Road
and 5.11 Tactical Building 1,650 C 3,750 C 2,100 127 %

23. Intermodal Way – Between 5.11
Tactical Building and Tactical Way 950 C 2,945 C 1,995 210 %

24. Intermodal Way – Between Tactical
Way and A Street 400 C 2,290 C 1,890 472 %
NOTE: LOS = LEVEL OF SERVICE BASED ON SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLDS FROM MANTECA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND LATHROP GENERAL

PLAN UPDATE
SOURCE: FEHR & PEERS, 2022
ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS: The following sections present the results for Cumulative No Project and Cumulative With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area for Weekday Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Conditions. It should be noted that the Cumulative ADT volumes were developed using the projected increase (delta method) in daily traffic volumes from the City of Manteca Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model being developed for the General Plan 2020/2040 Update. Table 15 presents the projected ADT volumes for twenty-four (24) study roadway segments in the project study area using the City of Manteca / City of Lathrop Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model.

The Project Trip Generation analysis showed that on a daily basis, the Pending / Undeveloped NAWMP Area would add a total of 9,960 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 7,860 employee vehicles, and 2,100 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks.

The results of the roadway segment level of service analysis showed that the proposed Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would not result in any roadways operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. All twenty-four roadway segments would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service C or D under Existing With Project Conditions.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
54 TABLE 15: CUMULATIVE LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS –NO PROJECT VERSUS WITH PENDING /UNDEVELOPED

NWAWMP PARCELS AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Roadway Segment - Location
No Project With Project With Project - No Project
ADT
Volume LOS ADT Volume LOS ADT Volume
Percentage
Change

1. Roth Road – Between Intermodal Way
and Airport Way 17,000 D 19,100 D 2,100 12.4 %

2. Roth Road – Between Intermodal Way
and McKinley Avenue 16,600 D 18,700 D 2,100 12.7 %

3. Roth Road – Between McKinley Avenue
and Harlan Road 18,500 D 20,600 D 2,100 11.4 %

4. Roth Road – Between Harlan Road and
NB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 23,400 D 25,500 D 2,100 9.0 %

5. Roth Road – Between NB I-5 Off/OnRamps and SB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 25,300 D 26,000 D 700 2.8 %

6. Airport Way – Between French Camp
Road and Roth Road 16,800 D 17,600 D 800 4.8 %

7. Airport Way – Between Roth Road and
Lovelace Road 18,900 D 26,100 D 7,200 38.1 %

8. Airport Way – Between Lovelace Road
and Tactical Way 20,600 D 27,800 D 7,200 35.0%

9. Airport Way – Between Tactical Way
and Daisywood Drive 22,300 D 29,500 D 7,200 32.3 %

10. Airport Way – Between Daisywood
Drive and Lathrop Road 23,800 D 31,000 D 7,200 30.3%

11. Airport Way – Between Lathrop Road
and Northgate Drive 21,100 D 25,500 D 4,400 20.9 %

12. Airport Way – Between Northgate
Drive and Louise Avenue 19,800 D 23,800 D 4,000 20.2 %

13. Airport Way – Between Louise Avenue
and Crom Avenue 22,200 D 25,800 D 3,600 16.2 %

14. Airport Way – Between Crom Avenue
and Yosemite Avenue 22,100 D 25,300 D 3,200 14.5 %

15. Lathrop Road – Between Union Road
and Airport Way 20,600 D 22,600 D 2,000 9.7 %

16. Lathrop Road – Between Airport Way
and McKinley Avenue 23,300 D 24,100 D 800 3.4 %

17. Lathrop Road – Between McKinley
Avenue and 5th Street 24,800 D 25,400 D 600 2.4 %

18. Lathrop Road – Between 5th Street and
Harlan Road 24,200 D 24,800 D 600 2.5 %

19. Lathrop Road – Between Harlan Road
and NB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 33,600 D 34,200 D 600 1.8 %
ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
55 20. Lathrop Road – Between NB I-5 Off
/On-Ramps and SB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 34,600 D 34,900 D 300 0.9 %

21. Spartan Way – Between SB I-5 Off/On -
Ramps and Golden Valley Parkway 26,500 D 26,590 D 90 0.3 %

22. Intermodal Way – Between Roth Road
and 5.11 Tactical Building 1,900 C 4,000 C 2,100 110.5 %

23. Intermodal Way – Between 5.11
Tactical Building and Tactical Way 1,100 C 3,100 C 2,000 181.8 %

24. Tactical Way – Between Tactical Way
and A Street 600 C 2,500 C 1,900 316.7 %
NOTE: LOS = LEVEL OF SERVICE BASED ON SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLDS FROM MANTECA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND LATHROP GENERAL

PLAN UPDATE
SOURCE: FEHR & PEERS, 2022
SENATE BILL 743 AND VEHICLES MILES TRAVELED (VMT): SB 743 created several statewide changes to the evaluation of transportation and traffic impacts under CEQA. First, it directs OPR to amend the CEQA Guidelines to establish new metrics for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects within transit priority areas (TPAs) and allows OPR to extend use of the new metrics beyond TPAs. The California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted the amended CEQA Guidelines in December 2018. In the amended CEQA Guidelines, OPR selected Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as the primary transportation impact metric to be applied throughout the State of California.

The amended CEQA Guidelines state that “generally, VMT is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts” and the provisions requiring the use of VMT shall apply statewide as of July 1, 2020. The amended CEQA Guidelines further state that land use “projects within one-half mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high-quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less-than-significant transportation impact.” Second, SB 743 establishes that aesthetic and parking impacts of a residential, mixed-use residential, or employment center projects on an infill site within a TPA shall not be considered significant impacts on the environment.

Third, SB 743 added section 21099 to the Public Resources Code, which states that automobile delay, as described by level of service (LOS) or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment upon certification of the CEQA Guidelines by the Natural Resources Agency. Since the amended CEQA Guidelines were certified in December 2018, LOS or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion are not considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA.

Lastly, SB 743 establishes a new CEQA exemption for a residential, mixed-use, and employment center project a) within a TPA, b) consistent with a specific plan for which an EIR has been certified, and c) consistent with an SCS. This exemption requires further review if the project or circumstances changes significantly.

Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts: To aid in SB 743 implementation, in December 2018 OPR released a Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory). The Technical Advisory provides advice and recommendations to CEQA lead agencies on how to implement the SB 743 changes. This includes technical recommendations ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
56 regarding the assessment of VMT, thresholds of significance, VMT mitigation measures, and screening thresholds for certain land use projects. Lead agencies may consider and use these recommendations at their discretion and with the provision of substantial evidence to support alternative approaches.

The Technical Advisory identifies “screening thresholds” to quickly identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. The Technical Advisory suggests that projects meeting one or more of the following criteria should be expected to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT.

Small projects – projects consistent with a SCS and local general plan that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day.

Projects near major transit stops – certain projects (residential, retail, office, or a mix of these uses) proposed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor.

Affordable residential development – a project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis to find a less-than-significant impact on VMT.

Local-serving retail – local-serving retail development tends to shorten trips and reduce VMT. The Technical Advisory encourages lead agencies to decide when a project will likely be local-serving, but generally acknowledges that retail development including stores larger than 50,000 square feet might be considered regional-serving. The Technical Advisory suggests lead agencies analyze whether regional-serving retail would increase or decrease VMT (i.e., not presume a less-thansignificant).

Projects in low VMT areas – residential and office projects that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility) as existing development in areas with low VMT will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT.

The Technical Advisory also identifies recommended numeric VMT thresholds for residential, office, and retail projects, as described below.

Residential development that would generate vehicle travel exceeding 15 percent below existing (baseline) residential VMT per capita may indicate a significant transportation impact. Existing VMT per capita may be measured as a regional VMT per capita or as city VMT per capita.

Office projects that would generate vehicle travel exceeding 15 percent below existing regional VMT per employee may indicate a significant transportation impact.

Retail projects (and other non-residential/non-office projects) that results in a net increase in total VMT may indicate a significant transportation impact.

For mixed-use projects, the Technical Advisory suggests evaluating each component independently and applying the significance threshold for each project type included. Alternatively, the lead agency may consider only the project’s dominant use.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
57 The Technical Advisory also provides guidance on impacts to transit. Specifically, the Technical Advisory suggests that lead agencies generally should not treat the addition of new transit users as an adverse impact. As an example, the Technical Advisory suggests that “an infill development may add riders to transit systems and the additional boarding and alighting may slow transit vehicles, but it also adds destinations, improving proximity and accessibility. Such development also improves regional vehicle flow by adding less vehicle travel onto the regional network.” VMT-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide: On May 20, 2020, the VMT-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide (TISG) was adopted. The TISG provides guidance on how Caltrans will review land use projects, with focus on VMT analysis and supporting state land use goals, state planning priorities, and GHG emission reduction goals; as well as identifying land use projects’ possible transportation impacts to the State Highway System and potential non-capacity increasing mitigation measures.

The TISG emphasizes that VMT analysis is Caltrans’ primary review focus, and references OPR’s Technical Advisory as a basis for the guidance in the TISG. Notably, the TISG recommends the use of the recommended thresholds in the Technical Advisory for land use projects. The TISG also references the Technical Advisory for screening thresholds that would identify projects and areas presumed to have a less-than-significant transportation impact. Caltrans supports streamlining for projects that meet these screening thresholds because they help achieve VMT reduction and mode shift goals.

NWAWMP VEHICLES MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS: The proposed NAWMP Project does not qualify as a small project for screening purposes, and it is not located in a low VMT area. Therefore, consistent with the discussion of SB 743 provided above vehicle travel was evaluated using VMT as the primary metric. The following describes the baseline VMT levels for industrial land uses in the City of Manteca.

The Baseline VMT and Cumulative Project VMT was developed using the City of Manteca travel demand model that was derived from the San Joaquin Council of Government’s (SJCOG) Regional Travel Demand Model. The model was developed in 2020 and calibrated to adjusted pre COVID-19 traffic counts.

Roadway improvements and land use projections consistent with the SJCOG Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), City of Manteca General Plan, and City of Lathrop General Plan were added to the Cumulative Conditions Model.

A model-wide analysis was performed to obtain daily trips and travel distance for all Industrial Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs), and the product of daily trips and travel distance was summed up to obtain VMT estimates. It should be noted that the VMT analysis was based on Intermodal Way being designated to provide access to and from Roth Road and the I-5 / Roth Road interchange for project-generated California Legal and STAA Truck traffic.

Table 16 presents modeled Baseline Citywide from the Manteca General Plan EIR and Cumulative With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area VMT per industrial employee. According to the Manteca General Plan EIR, the 2019 Baseline VMT per industrial employee is 75.3. The results of the VMT analysis showed that the proposed Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area will result in a relatively flat / minor decrease in VMT when compared to baseline citywide, from 75.3 to 75.1 vehicle miles per employee.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
58 This represents a relatively flat 0.26% decrease when compared to baseline city-wide average. This result is consistent with the Manteca General Plan EIR, which showed a reduction from 75.3 to 75.0 (Table 3.14-8). It should be noted that the construction of the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area will improve the jobs to housing balance in the City of Manteca and provide an overall benefit to reducing VMT per employee with fewer residents expected to leave the City for employment. This will result in fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions reductions.

TABLE 16: PENDING / UNDEVELOPED NAWMP PARCELS VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) ANALYSIS Scenario
VMT Per
Industrial
Employee
VMT Reduction Per
Industrial Employee
Percentage Reduction Per
Industrial Employee
Baseline Citywide 75.3
Cumulative With Pending /
Undeveloped NWAWMP Area 75.1 - 0.2 -0.26 %
NOTE: CITYWIDE VMT INCLUDES ALL INDUSTRIAL LAND USES IN THE CITY OF MANTECA SOURCE: CITY OF MANTECA TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL - FEHR & PEERS, 2022 Summary Conclusions
The following sections presents the conclusions of the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) conducted for the NWAWMP EIR Addendum
INTERSECTION OPERATIONS ANALYSIS: The Project Trip Generation analysis showed that during the AM peak hour, the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels would add a total of 783 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 642 employee vehicles, and 141 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks. During the PM peak hour, the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels would add a total of 803 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 642 employee vehicles, and 161 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks.

The results of the intersection level of service analysis showed that the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels would not result in any intersections operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. All fourteen (14) study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service D or better under Existing With Project Conditions.

Under Cumulative No Project Conditions, traffic associated with land use growth in the City of Manteca and City of Lathrop contributes to the increase in traffic volumes along Lathrop Road. The Union Road/Lathrop Road would operate unacceptably at LOS F during both AM peak hour and PM peak hours without the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area. The results of the intersection level of service analysis showed that the proposed Pending / Undeveloped NAWMP Area would not result in any additional intersections operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. Thirteen (13) of the fourteen (14) study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service D or better under Cumulative With Project Conditions. The Union Road/Lathrop Road intersection would continue to operate unacceptably at LOS F during both AM peak hour and PM peak hours under the Cumulative with Pending / Undeveloped NAWMP Area Project Conditions.

The City of Manteca has identified improvements to the intersection of Union Road / Lathrop Road beyond the current intersection geometrics, including a new traffic signal controller and improved signal timings. With these improvements, AM and PM peak hour operations at the Union Road / Lathrop Road intersection would marginally improve, reducing average vehicle delay and corresponding level of service (from LOS F to LOS E) for both Without and With the Pending / ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
59 Undeveloped NWAWMP Area scenarios. Based on a discussion with the Engineering Department, the Union Road / Lathrop Road intersection will also be fully evaluated after the General Plan Update is completed as part of the 2023 PFIP Update. The goal will be to improve Union Road / Lathrop Road operations from LOS E to LOS D conditions, and each of the NWAWMP development projects will pay the current PFIP fee prior to issuance of building permits.

ROADWAY OPERATIONS ANALYSIS:The Project Trip Generation analysis showed that on a daily basis, the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would add a total of 10,085 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 8,080 employee vehicles, and 2,005 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks.

The results of the roadway segment level of service analysis showed that the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would not result in any roadways operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. All twenty-four roadway segments would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service C or D under Existing With Project Conditions.

The results of the roadway segment level of service analysis showed that the proposed Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would not result in any roadways operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. All twenty-four roadway segments would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service C or D under Existing With Project Conditions.

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS: The results of the VMT analysis showed that the proposed Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area will result in a relatively flat 0.26% decrease when compared to baseline city-wide average. This result is consistent with the Manteca General Plan EIR, which showed a reduction from 75.3 to 75.0 (Table 3.14-8). It should be noted that the construction of the Pending / Undeveloped NAWMP Area will improve the jobs to housing balance in the City of Manteca and provide an overall benefit to reducing VMT per employee with fewer residents expected to leave the City for employment. This will result in fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions reductions.

It should be noted that the updated General Plan includes policies designed to reduce vehicle travel and vehicle miles traveled. The Circulation Element (Chapter 3.14) addresses providing adequate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities and opportunities, promoting non-vehicle travel modes, requiring development projects that accommodate or employ fifty (50) or more employees to implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs, and ensuring regional coordination on trip and VMT reduction efforts. General Plan policies and actions that contribute to VMT reductions are identified below. These policies and actions minimize VMT impacts to the greatest extent feasible.

Additionally, the Governors Executive Order N-79-20 requires that 100 percent of in-state sales of new passenger cars and trucks be zero-emission by 2035. It shall be a further goal of the State that 100 percent of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles in the State be zero-emission by 2045 for all operations, where feasible, and by 2035 for drayage trucks. It shall be further a goal of the State to transition to 100 percent zero-emission off-road vehicles and equipment by 2035, where feasible.

Accordingly, the City of Manteca aims to develop a Zero Emissions Vehicle Market Development Strategy that ensures expeditious implementation of the systems of policies, programs and regulations necessary to achieve the order.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
60 ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
61 REFERENCES
C. Donald Ahrens. 2006. Meteorology Today: An Introduction to Weather, Climate, & the Environment.

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2010. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. Available: http://www.capcoa.org/wpcontent/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-Final.pdf California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2016. Air Toxics Hotspot Program.

Available: http://www.capcoa.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/08/CAPCOA%20Prioritization%20Guidelines%20- %20August%202016%20FINAL.pdf
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2017. Appendix A, Calculation Details for CalEEMod. November 8, 2017.

California Air Resources Board. 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. Available: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf California Air Resources Board. 2014. Background Material: Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality 2013 Edition - Chapter 4 Regional Trends and Forecasts. Page last reviewed on February 7, 2014. Available: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanac13/chap413.htm California Air Resources Board. 2021. Emission Inventory. Available:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/aa784749921657a3127202959a402bfceebb4665 California Air Resources Board. 2018 (November). Progress Report, California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act. Available:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2018-
11/Final2018Report_SB150_112618_02_Report.pdf. Accessed December 2, 2020.

California Air Resources Board. 2018b. Area Designations Maps/State and National. This page last reviewed December 28, 2018. Available: https://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm California Air Resources Board. 2019. 2017 Scoping Plan-Identified VMT Reductions and Relationship to State Climate Goals. Available:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/carb-2017-scoping-plan-identified-vmtreductions-and-relationship-state-climate. Accessed February 4, 2020.

California Air Resources Board. 2019a. California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). Available:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/caaqs.htm
California Air Resources Board. 2019b. ARB Databases: Aerometric Data Analysis and Management System (ADAM). Available at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/trends/trends1.php California Air Resources Board. 2019c. Carbon Monoxide and Health. Available:
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/co/co.htm
ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
62 California Air Resources Board. 2019d. What is Carbon Monoxide? Available:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/carbon-monoxide-and-health.

California Air Resources Board. 2019e. California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). Available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/caaqs/caaqs.htm California Air Resources Board. 2020a. ARB Databases: Aerometric Data Analysis and Management System (ADAM). Available: http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/databases.htm.

California Air Resources Board. 2020b. Maps of State and Federal Area Designations. Available:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/maps-state-and-federal-area-designations California Air Resources Board. 2020c. GHG Current California Emission Inventory Data. Available:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ghg-inventory-data
California Energy Commission. 2006. Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990 to 2004. (CEC-600-2006-013-SF.) Available at:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2006publications/CEC-600-2006-013/CEC-600-2006-013- SF.PDF.

California Energy Commission. 2021. California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory – 2020Edition.

Available at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm City of Manteca. 2013. City of Manteca Climate Action Plan. Adopted October 15, 2013. http://www.ci.manteca.ca.us/communitydevelopment/Documents/Final%20Climate%20A ction%20Plan.pdf .

City of Manteca. 2016. Final Draft City of Manteca 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. July 2016.

Available: https://www.ci.manteca.ca.us/Engineering/Documents/Manteca_2015_UWMPFinalDraft.pdf#search=uwmp City of Manteca, 2003. Manteca General Plan 2023 Draft Environmental Impact Report. Certified October 6, 2003.

City of Manteca, 2013. 2012 Wastewater Collection System Master Plan Update. January 2013.

Available:
https://www.ci.manteca.ca.us/pwt/Documents/Wastewater%20Collection%20System%2 0Master%20Plan%20-%20Complete.pdf
City of Manteca. 2022. Municipal Service Review and Sphere of Influence Plan.

City of Manteca. City of Manteca 2012 Wastewater Collection System Master Plan Update. January 2013.

City of Manteca. 2020. Manteca Municipal Code.

City of Manteca. Northwest Airport Way Master Plan (Adopted by City Council Ordinance No. 1484).

November 16, 2010.

ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
63 City of Manteca. Northwest Airport Way Master Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2010022024). October 7, 2010.

City of Manteca. Northwest Airport Way Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2010022024). August 2, 2010.

City of Manteca. Northwest Airport Way Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Addendum (SCH # 2010022024). April 2019.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2013. “Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Summary for Policymakers.” Available at:
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. Guide for Assessing and Mitigation Air Quality Impacts. March 19, 2015.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2014. Climate Change Indicators in the United States: Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Updated May 2014. Available at:
www.epa.gov/climatechange/indicators
ATTACHMENT 3
EIR ADDENDUM – NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN EIR
City of Manteca September 2022
64 APPENDIX
ATTACHMENT 3

TRANSPORTATION

IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT

FOR THE

NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN

EIR ADDENDUM

IN MANTECA, CA
Prepared for
De Novo Planning Group
City of Manteca
Prepared by
Fehr & Peers
Transportation Consultants
October 3, 2022
The Fountains in Roseville 1013 Galleria Blvd. Suite 255 | Roseville, CA 95678 (916) 773-1900 Fax (916) 773-2015 www.fehrandpeers.com
ATTACHMENT 3
Table of Contents

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1

2. Northwest Airport Way Master Plan (NWAWMP) Project Background ............................. 1

3. Existing NWAWMP Developed Area Project Trip Generation ............................................. 3

4. Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area Project Trip Generation ...................................... 4

5. Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Existing Conditions ................................................ 6

6. Intersection Level of Service Analysis – Cumulative Conditions .......................................... 7

7. Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis – Existing Conditions .................................... 9

8. Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis – Cumulative Conditions ............................ 11

9. Senate Bill 743 and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) .............................................................. 13

10. Northwest Airport Way Master Plan (NWAWMP) Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis ...... 15

11. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................ 16 ATTACHMENT 3
1 | Page

INTRODUCTION
This report documents the results of the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) conducted for the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR Addendum. This report was prepared under contract to the City of Manteca Community Development Department and in coordination with the land use and environmental DeNovo Planning Group. The purpose of this study is to analyze the anticipated trip generation for the approved but not yet constructed, pending and undeveloped areas in the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan (NWAWMP) area in Manteca, CA and determine if additional impacts on the surrounding transportation network would occur.

NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN (NWAWMP) PROJECT BACKGROUND Table 1 shows the buildout potential that was analyzed in the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR1. As shown in Table 1 the CenterPoint Intermodal Facility comprises most of the square footage.

The CenterPoint Intermodal Facility was envisioned as an integrated logistics center that would interface with the adjacent Union Pacific Railroad Lathrop Intermodal Terminal. The facility would occupy two, noncontiguous sites (North and South). The North site would contain buildings totaling 2,693,483 square feet (SF) while the South site would contain buildings totaling 484,038 SF. Combined, the CenterPoint Intermodal Facility would occupy 187.49 acres of the light industrial acreage in the 300.3 acre-Northwest Airport Way Master Plan.

Table 1: Northwest Airport Way Master Plan Buildout Potential Project Component Land Use Square Footage
CenterPoint Intermodal Facility Light Industrial and High Cube Warehouse 3,177,521 Non-CenterPoint Development
Light Industrial 1,275,620
Community Commercial 205,820
Subtotal 1,483,620
Total 300.3 Acres 4,658,961 Square Feet
Source: Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR, Table 2-3, 2010.

The Northwest Airport Way Master Plan notes that the CenterPoint Intermodal Facility would capitalize on its location adjacent the Lathrop Intermodal Terminal to provide a transload center that would allow the contents of containers to be stored in on-site warehouses, assembled in on-site facilities, and distributed off-site by truck or rail. Given this relationship between the CenterPoint Intermodal Facility and the Lathrop Intermodal Terminal, the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR forecasted that approximately 19 percent of daily trips and 13 percent of am and 12 percent pm peak hour trips generated by CenterPoint would travel to the Lathrop Intermodal Terminal under cumulative conditions. Under cumulative conditions, the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR forecasted that the CenterPoint Intermodal Facility would generate 3,570 daily, 285 a.m. peak hour and 438 p.m. peak hour vehicle trips, as shown in Table 2. 1 City of Manteca. Northwest Airport Way Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (2010). Table 2-3.

ATTACHMENT 3
2 | Page
Table 2: CenterPoint Intermodal Facility Trip Generation from Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR
Land Use
Quantity
(1,000 sq. ft.)
Trips
Daily
A.M.

Peak Hour
P.M.

Peak Hour
CenterPoint Intermodal Facility
(Distribution, High-Cube
Warehouse, Light Industrial) – Trip
Generation Rates
3,177 1.39 0.10 0.16
Gross Vehicle Trip Generation 4,420 327 495
CenterPoint-to-Lathrop Intermodal Terminal
Internalization (850) (42) (57)
New Vehicle Trips 3,570 285 438
Source: Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR, Table 3.12-8, 2010.

The Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR analysis reflected the internalized Lathrop Intermodal Terminal truck trips by reducing the number of trips entering/exiting onto Roth Road. The internalization was projected to increase under cumulative conditions due to the assumed expansion of the Lathrop Intermodal Terminal.

The remaining properties in the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan (outside of the CenterPoint Intermodal Facility) consist of a mix of light industrial and community commercial uses. Table 3 presents the trip generation for these remaining master plan land uses, as presented in Table 3.12-9 of the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR2. Under cumulative conditions, the remaining master plan land uses would generate 12,756 daily, 486 a.m. peak hour and 1,085 p.m. peak hour vehicle trips, as shown in Table 3.

Combining the trip generation in Table 2Error! Reference source not found. and Error! Reference source not found.Table 3 the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR estimated that buildout of the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan would generate 16,326 daily, 771 a.m. peak hour and 1,523 p.m. peak hour vehicle trips as shown in Table 4.

Based on a total of 300.3 acres and 4,658,961 square feet of development in the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan Area (as shown in Table 2), the blended trip generation per 1,000 square feet was estimated to be 3.50 daily, 0.17 a.m. peak hour and 0.33 p.m. peak hour vehicle trips. 2 City of Manteca. Northwest Airport Way Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (2010). Table 3.12-9.

ATTACHMENT 3
3 | Page
Table 3: Remaining Northwest Airport Way Master Plan Land Uses Trip Generation from Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR
Land Use
Quantity
(1,000 sq. ft.)
Trip Rate Trips
Daily
A.M.

Peak Hour
P.M.

Peak Hour Daily
A.M.

Peak Hour
P.M.

Peak Hour
High-Cube Warehouse 1,020.5 1.44 0.09 0.10 1,470 92 102 Light Industrial 191.3 6.94 0.71 0.61 1,327 136 116
Auto/Truck
Parts/Service 63.8 17.10 1.93 1.93 1,091 86 123
Retail 205.82 52.75 5.01 5.01 10,857 236 1,032
Gross Vehicle Trips 14,745 550 1,373
Internalization and Pass By Retail Trips (1,989) (64) (288) New Vehicle Trips 12,756 486 1,085
Source: Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR, Table 3.12-9, 2010.

Table 4: Trip Generation Summary – Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR Land Use
Trips
Daily
A.M.

Peak Hour
P.M.

Peak Hour
New Vehicle Trips from Table 2 3,570 285 438
New Vehicle Trips from Table 3 12,756 486 1,085
Cumulative Plus Master Plan Buildout 16,326 771 1,523
Trip Generation per 1,000 square feet 3.50 0.17 0.33
Notes: Refer to Table 2 and Table 3 for detailed trip generation calculations.

EXISTING NWAWMP DEVELOPED AREA PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Using a combination of Geographic Information System (GIS) data from the City of Manteca General Plan and aerial Good Earth photography, it was determined that approximately 148.5 (49%) of the 300.3 acre Master Plan area has been developed. It should be noted that part of the 148.5 acres of existing NWAWMP developed area, have been constructed as truck parking lots. The northern parking lot is located on the south end of Intermodal Way and the southern parking lot is located behind 2365 Airport Way (behind Crothall Laundry Services).

ATTACHMENT 3
4 | Page
Tables 5 through 6 presents the trip generation rates (Table 5) and projected trips generated by existing NWAWMP developments for Weekday Daily, AM Peak Hour, and PM Peak Hour Conditions for All Vehicles (Table 6) based on the blended trip rates from the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR, and the City of Manteca Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model being developed for the General Plan 2020/2040 Update.

Table 5: Existing NWAWMP Developed Area Trip Generation Rates Land Use
(ITE Code)
Gross
Acres and
Floor Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Vehicle Trip Rate1
Daily AM PM
Total Total In Out Total In Out
Existing NWAWMP
Development
(Blended Trip Rate from
Table 4)
148.5 acres
(2,008,000
square feet)

3.50 0.17 0.12 0.05 0.33 0.11 0.22
Notes:
1 Trip rates are based on the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan and the City of Manteca Travel Demand Forecasting Model developed for the General Plan 2020/2040 Update.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022
Table 6: Existing NWAWMP Developed Area Trip Generation (All Vehicles) Project
Gross Acres
and Floor Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Daily
(All Vehicles)
AM Peak Hour
(All Vehicles)
PM Peak Hour
(All Vehicles)
Total Total In Out Total In Out
Existing NWAWMP
Development
148.5 acres
(2,008,000
square feet)
7,028 341 241 100 663 221 442
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022

PENDING / UNDEVELOPED NWAWMP AREA PROJECT TRIP GENERATION Tables 7 through 8 presents the trip generation rates (Table 7) and projected trips generated by pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels for Weekday Daily, AM Peak Hour, and PM Peak Hour Conditions for All Vehicles (Table 8) based on the blended trip rates from the Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2021) and the City of Manteca Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model being developed for the General Plan 2020/2040 Update. Table 8 shows that the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels will generate a total of 9,960 daily vehicle trips , 783 AM peak hour and 964 PM peak hour vehicle trips
Table 9 presents the results of NWAWMP trip generation analysis for the existing and developed areas.

The EIR addendum transportation analysis will be based on a total of 16,988 daily vehicle trips, 1,124 AM peak hour and 1,626 PM peak hour vehicle trips. When compared to the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (2010), the NWAWMP will generate a total of 662 new daily vehicle trips, 353 new AM peak hour, and 103 new PM peak hour vehicle trips.

ATTACHMENT 3
5 | Page
Table 7: Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area Trip Generation Rates Land Use
(ITE Code)
Gross
Acres and
Floor Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Vehicle Trip Rate1
Daily AM PM
Total Total In Out Total In Out
Pending / Undeveloped
NWAWMP Development
(Blended Trip Rate)
151.8 acres
(2,651,000
square feet)

4.96 0.39 0.28 0.11 0.48 0.15 0.33
Notes:
1 Blended trip rates are based on the Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition (institute of Transportation Engineers, 2021) and the City of Manteca Travel Demand Forecasting Model developed for the General Plan 2020/2040 Update.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022
Table 8: Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area Trip Generation (All Vehicles) Project
Gross Acres
and Floor Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Daily
(All Vehicles)
AM Peak Hour
(All Vehicles)
PM Peak Hour
(All Vehicles)
Total Total In Out Total In Out
Pending /
Undeveloped
NWAWMP
Development
(Blended Trip Rate)
151.8 acres
(2,651,000
square feet)
9,960 783 562 221 964 301 663
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022
Table 9: NWAWMP Area Trip Generation – Addendum compared to EIR Project
Gross Acres
and Floor Area
(Sq. Ft.)
Daily
(All Vehicles)
AM Peak Hour
(All Vehicles)
PM Peak Hour
(All Vehicles)
Total Total In Out Total In Out
Existing NWAWMP
Development
148.5 acres
(2,008,000
square feet)
7,028 341 241 100 663 221 442
Pending /
Undeveloped
NWAWMP
Development
(Blended Trip Rate)
151.8 acres
(2,651,000
square feet)
9,960 783 562 221 964 301 663
Cumulative Plus
Master Plan
Buildout
300.3 acres
(4,658,961
square feet)
(16,326) (771) (554) (227) (1,523) (508) (1,015)
New Vehicle Trips 662 353 259 95 103 14 89
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022
ATTACHMENT 3
6 | Page
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – EXISTING CONDITIONS The primary CEQA measure analyzed Northwest Airport Way Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (2010) was intersection level of service. The following sections present the results for Existing (Year 2022) and Existing With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area for Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Conditions.

Table 10 presents the existing AM and PM peak hour intersection level of service for the fourteen (14) study intersections in the project study area. The Project Trip Generation analysis showed that during the AM peak hour, the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels would add a total of 783 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 642 employee vehicles, and 141 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks. During the PM peak hour, the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels would add a total of 964 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 770 employee vehicles, and 194 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks.

The results of the intersection level of service analysis showed that the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels would not result in any intersections operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. All fourteen (14) study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service D or better under Existing With Project Conditions.

Table 10: Existing Level of Service Analysis – No Project versus With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Parcels Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours
Intersection (Control)
Existing (No Project) Existing With Project
Delay AM(PM) LOS AM(PM) Delay AM(PM) LOS AM(PM)

1. Roth Road / Intermodal Way
(Signal) 8.5 (9.2) A (A) 10.7 (11.2) B (B)

2. Roth Road / Airport Way (Signal) 12.0 (13.1) B (B) 16.8 (19.1) B (B)

3. Roth Road / I-5 SB Ramps (SSSC) 18.5 (22.1) C (C) 25.1 (27.8) D (D)

4. Roth Road / I-5 NB Ramps (SSSC) 13.1 (15.7) B (C) 16.8 (20.2) C (C)

5. Lathrop Road / Airport Way (Signal) 26.6 (27.0) C (C) 30.4 (31.6) C (C)

6. Lathrop Road / I-5 NB Ramps
(Signal) 13.1 (17.4) B (B) 15.5 (21.2) B (C)

7. Lathrop Road / I-5 SB Ramps
(Signal) 14.4 (17.8) B (B) 18.7 (22.4) B (C)

8. Lathrop Road / Union Road (Signal) 31.7 (30.8) C (C) 33.4 (3.7) C (C)

9. Lathrop Road / SR 99 SB Ramps /
Main Street (Signal) 21.1 (24.0) C (C) 23.5 (27.8) C (C) Notes:

SSSC = Side-Street Stop Control; LOS = Level of Service 1 For signalized intersections and all-way stop controlled intersections, average intersection delay is reported in seconds per vehicle for all approaches. For side street stop-controlled intersections, intersection delay is reported in seconds per vehicle for the overall intersection and (worst-case) movement. Intersection delay is calculated based on the procedures and methodology contained in the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (Transportation Research Board, 2016).

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022
ATTACHMENT 3
7 | Page
Table 10 (Continued): Existing Level of Service Analysis – No Project versus With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Parcels
Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours
Intersection (Control)
Existing (No Project) Existing With Project
Delay AM(PM) LOS AM(PM) Delay AM(PM) LOS AM(PM)

10. Lathrop Road / SR 99 NB Ramps
(Signal) 10.1 (9.9) B (A) 11.5 (12.4) B (B)

11. Airport Way / French Camp Road 21.2 (23.4) C (C) 23.6 (25.8) C (C)

12. Airport Way / Louise Avenue
(Signal) 28.5 (29.6) C (C) 31.2 (33.1) C (C)

13. Airport Way / WB SR 120 Ramps
(Signal) 11.8 (15.5) B (B) 12.5 (16.1) B (B)

14. Airport Way / EB SR 120 Ramps
(Signal) 18.5 (21.2) B (C) 20.2 (23.5) B (C)
Notes:

SSSC = Side-Street Stop Control; LOS = Level of Service 1 For signalized intersections and all-way stop controlled intersections, average intersection delay is reported in seconds per vehicle for all approaches. For side street stop-controlled intersections, intersection delay is reported in seconds per vehicle for the overall intersection and (worst-case) movement. Intersection delay is calculated based on the procedures and methodology contained in the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (Transportation Research Board, 2016).

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS The following sections present the results for Cumulative No Project and Cumulative With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area for Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Conditions. It should be noted that the Cumulative volumes were developed using the projected increase (delta method) in turning movement volumes from the City of Manteca Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model being developed for the General Plan 2020/2040 Update.

Table 11 presents the projected AM and PM peak hour intersection level of service for the fourteen (14) study intersections in the project study. Under Cumulative No Project Conditions, traffic associated with land use growth in the City of Manteca and City of Lathrop contributes to the increase in traffic volumes along Lathrop Road. As displayed, the Union Road / Lathrop Road intersection would operate unacceptably at LOS F during both AM and PM peak hours without the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area:

Table 11 also shows that the addition of the proposed Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would not result in any additional intersections operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. Thirteen (13) of the fourteen (14) study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service D or better under Cumulative With Project Conditions. The Union Road/Lathrop Road intersection would continue to operate unacceptably at LOS F during both AM peak hour and PM peak hours under the Cumulative With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area Project Conditions.

The City of Manteca has identified improvements to the intersection of Union Road / Lathrop Road beyond the current intersection geometrics, including a new traffic signal controller and improved signal timings.

With these improvements, AM and PM peak hour operations at the Union Road / Lathrop Road intersection would marginally improve, reducing average vehicle delay and corresponding level of service (from LOS F ATTACHMENT 3
8 | Page
to LOS E) for both Without and With the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area scenarios. Based on a discussion with the Engineering Department, the Union Road / Lathrop Road intersection will also be fully evaluated after the General Plan Update is completed as part of the 2023 PFIP Update. The goal will be to improve Union Road / Lathrop Road operations from LOS E to LOS D conditions, and each of the NWAWMP development projects will pay the current PFIP fee prior to issuance of building permits.

Table 11: Cumulative Level of Service Analysis – No Project versus With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Parcels Weekday AM and PM Peak Hours
Intersection (Control)
Cumulative (No Project) Cumulative With Project
Delay
AM(PM) LOS AM(PM) Delay AM(PM) LOS AM(PM)

1. Roth Road / Intermodal Way (Signal) 2 10.2 (10.8) B (B) 13.5 (14.7) B (B)

2. Roth Road / Airport Way (Signal) 2 22.5 (23.1) C (C) 25.7 (26.4) C (C)

3. Roth Road / I-5 NB Ramps (Signal) 2 3 13.2 (14.4) B (B) 15.5 (19.8) B (B)

4. Roth Road / I-5 SB Ramps (Signal) 2 3 13.9 (18.0) B (B) 18.0 (21.2) B (C)

5. Lathrop Road / Airport Way (Signal) 2 33.2 (32.6) C (C) 34.6 (33.9) C (C)

6. Lathrop Road / I-5 NB Ramps (Signal) 2 3 34.1 (25.4) C (C) 34.8 (27.1) C (C)

7. Lathrop Road / I-5 SB Ramps (Signal) 2 3 17.8 (21.3) B (C) 18.7 (24.5) B (C)

8. Lathrop Road / Union Road (Signal) 4 89.8 (80.2)

78.5 (75.5)
F (F)
E (E)

90.9 (81.6)

79.2 (76.7)
F (F)
E (E)

9. Lathrop Road / SR 99 SB Ramps /
Main Street (Signal) 47.4 (45.3) D (D) 49.5 (50.2) D (D)

10. Lathrop Road / SR 99 NB Ramps (Signal) 11.2 (10.8) B (B) 11.5 (11.2) B (B)

11. Airport Way / French Camp Road 39.5 (42.3) D (D) 41.1 (44.5) D (D)

12. Airport Way / Louise Avenue (Signal) 2 26.2 (28.5) C (C) 27.5 (29.1) C (C)

13. Airport Way / WB SR 120 Ramps
(Signal) 2 3 28.3 (29.8) C (C) 29.3 (34.7) C (C)

14. Airport Way / EB SR 120 Ramps
(Signal) 2 3 8.0 (47.1) A (D) 8.5 (50.6) A (D)
Notes:

Bold indicates unacceptable operations.

SSSC = Side-Street Stop Control; LOS = Level of Service 1 For signalized intersections, roundabouts, and all-way stop controlled intersections, average intersection delay is reported in seconds per vehicle for all approaches. For side street stop-controlled intersections, intersection delay is reported in seconds per vehicle for the overall intersection and (worst-case) movement. Intersection delay is calculated based on the procedures and methodology contained in the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (Transportation Research Board, 2016). 2 Intersection lane configuration and/or traffic control are different for Cumulative Conditions when compared to Existing Conditions due to planned intersection and roadway improvements. 3 The future interchange design has not been formalized. Delay and LOS are estimated using an improved tight-diamond interchange configuration and are subject to change.
4 The future intersection operations was analyzed based on the existing intersection geometrics (Bold) and with a new traffic signal controller and improved signal timings / operations (Bold/Italics).

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022
ATTACHMENT 3
9 | Page
ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – EXISTING CONDITIONS The secondary measure analyzed in the NWAWP transportation analysis addendum is segment level of service for Existing (Year 2022) and Existing With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area Weekday Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Conditions. Table 12 presents the existing weekday ADT volumes for twenty-four (24) study roadway segments in the project study area. The Project Trip Generation analysis showed that on a daily basis, the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would add a total of 9,960 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 7,860 employee vehicles, and 2,100 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks.

The results of the roadway segment level of service analysis showed that the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would not result in any roadways operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. All twenty-four roadway segments would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service C or D under Existing With Project Conditions.

Table 12: Existing Level of Service Analysis – No Project versus With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Parcels Average Daily Traffic Volumes
Roadway Segment - Location
Existing (No Project) Existing With Project With Project - No Project ADT
Volume LOS
ADT
Volume LOS
ADT
Volume
Percentage
Change

1. Roth Road – Between Intermodal
Way and Airport Way 9,700 D 11,800 D 2,100 21.6 %

2. Roth Road – Between Intermodal
Way and McKinley Avenue 9,600 D 11,700 D 2,100 21.9 %

3. Roth Road – Between McKinley
Avenue and Harlan Road 9,800 D 11,900 D 2,100 21.4 %

4. Roth Road – Between Harlan Road
and NB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 14,800 D 16,900 D 2,100 14.2 %

5. Roth Road – Between NB I-5 Off/
On-Ramps and SB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 8,500 C 9,200 C 700 8.2 %

6. Airport Way – Between French Camp
Road and Roth Road 7,400 C 8,200 C 800 10.8 %

7. Airport Way – Between Roth Road
and Lovelace Road 6,700 C 13,900 D 7,200 107.5 %

8. Airport Way – Between Lovelace
Road and Tactical Way 7,100 C 14,300 D 7,200 101.4 %

9. Airport Way – Between Tactical Way
and Daisywood Drive 7,500 D 14,700 D 7,200 96.0 %

10. Airport Way – Between Daisywood
Drive and Lathrop Road 8,800 D 16,000 D 7,200 81.8 %
Note: LOS = Level of Service based on Segment Level of Service Thresholds from Manteca General Plan Update and Lathrop General Plan Update
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022
ATTACHMENT 3
10 | Page
Table 12 (Continued): Existing Level of Service Analysis – No Project versus With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Parcels - Average Daily Traffic Volumes Roadway Segment - Location
Existing (No
Project) Existing With Project With Project - No Project ADT
Volume LOS
ADT
Volume LOS
ADT
Volume
Percentage
Change

11. Airport Way – Between Lathrop Road
and Northgate Drive 9,800 D 14,200 D 4,400 44.9 %

12. Airport Way – Between Northgate
Drive and Louise Avenue 10,500 D 14,500 D 4,000 38.1 %

13. Airport Way – Between Louise Avenue
and Crom Avenue 14,800 D 18,400 D 3,600 24.3 %

14. Airport Way – Between Crom Avenue
and Yosemite Avenue 15,600 D 18,800 D 3,200 20.5 %

15. Lathrop Road – Between Union Road
and Airport Way 16,700 D 18,700 D 2,000 12.0 %

16. Lathrop Road – Between Airport Way
and McKinley Avenue 21,400 D 22,200 D 800 3.7 %

17. Lathrop Road – Between McKinley
Avenue and 5th Street 21,000 D 21,600 D 600 2.9 %

18. Lathrop Road – Between 5th Street
and Harlan Road 20,600 D 21,200 D 600 2.9 %

19. Lathrop Road – Between Harlan Road
and NB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 24,500 D 25,100 D 600 2.4 %

20. Lathrop Road – Between NB I-5 Off
/On-Ramps and SB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 16,200 C 16,500 C 300 1.9 %

21. Spartan Way – Between SB I-5 Off/On
-Ramps and Golden Valley Parkway 9,200 C 9,290 C 90 1.0 %

22. Intermodal Way – Between Roth Road
and 5.11 Tactical Building 1,650 C 3,750 C 2,100 127 %

23. Intermodal Way – Between 5.11
Tactical Building and Tactical Way 950 C 2,945 C 1,995 210 %

24. Intermodal Way – Between Tactical
Way and A Street 400 C 2,290 C 1,890 472 %
Note: LOS = Level of Service based on Segment Level of Service Thresholds from Manteca General Plan Update and Lathrop General Plan Update
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022

ATTACHMENT 3
11 | Page
ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS – CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS The following sections present the results for Cumulative No Project and Cumulative With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area for Weekday Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Conditions. It should be noted that the Cumulative ADT volumes were developed using the projected increase (delta method) in daily traffic volumes from the City of Manteca Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model being developed for the General Plan 2020/2040 Update. Table 13 presents the projected ADT volumes for twenty-four (24) study roadway segments in the project study area using the City of Manteca / City of Lathrop Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) Model.

The Project Trip Generation analysis showed that on a daily basis, the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would add a total of 9,960 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 7,860 employee vehicles, and 2,100 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks.

The results of the roadway segment level of service analysis showed that the proposed Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would not result in any roadways operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. All twenty-four roadway segments would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service C or D under Existing With Project Conditions.

Table 13: Cumulative Level of Service Analysis – No Project versus With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Parcels Average Daily Traffic Volumes
Roadway Segment - Location
No Project With Project With Project - No Project
ADT
Volume LOS
ADT
Volume LOS
ADT
Volume
Percentage
Change

1. Roth Road – Between Intermodal Way
and Airport Way 17,000 D 19,100 D 2,100 12.4 %

2. Roth Road – Between Intermodal Way
and McKinley Avenue 16,600 D 18,700 D 2,100 12.7 %

3. Roth Road – Between McKinley
Avenue and Harlan Road 18,500 D 20,600 D 2,100 11.4 %

4. Roth Road – Between Harlan Road
and NB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 23,400 D 25,500 D 2,100 9.0 %

5. Roth Road – Between NB I-5 Off/OnRamps and SB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 25,300 D 26,000 D 700 2.8 %

6. Airport Way – Between French Camp
Road and Roth Road 16,800 D 17,600 D 800 4.8 %

7. Airport Way – Between Roth Road
and Lovelace Road 18,900 D 26,100 D 7,200 38.1 %

8. Airport Way – Between Lovelace Road
and Tactical Way 20,600 D 27,800 D 7,200 35.0%

9. Airport Way – Between Tactical Way
and Daisywood Drive 22,300 D 29,500 D 7,200 32.3 %
Note: LOS = Level of Service based on Segment Level of Service Thresholds from Manteca General Plan Update and Lathrop General Plan Update
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022
ATTACHMENT 3
12 | Page
Table 13 (Continued): Cumulative Level of Service Analysis – No Project versus With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Parcels
Average Daily Traffic Volumes
Roadway Segment - Location
No Project With Project With Project - No Project
ADT
Volume LOS
ADT
Volume LOS
ADT
Volume
Percentage
Change

10. Airport Way – Between Daisywood
Drive and Lathrop Road 23,800 D 31,000 D 7,200 30.3%

11. Airport Way – Between Lathrop Road
and Northgate Drive 21,100 D 25,500 D 4,400 20.9 %

12. Airport Way – Between Northgate
Drive and Louise Avenue 19,800 D 23,800 D 4,000 20.2 %

13. Airport Way – Between Louise Avenue
and Crom Avenue 22,200 D 25,800 D 3,600 16.2 %

14. Airport Way – Between Crom Avenue
and Yosemite Avenue 22,100 D 25,300 D 3,200 14.5 %

15. Lathrop Road – Between Union Road
and Airport Way 20,600 D 22,600 D 2,000 9.7 %

16. Lathrop Road – Between Airport Way
and McKinley Avenue 23,300 D 24,100 D 800 3.4 %

17. Lathrop Road – Between McKinley
Avenue and 5th Street 24,800 D 25,400 D 600 2.4 %

18. Lathrop Road – Between 5th Street
and Harlan Road 24,200 D 24,800 D 600 2.5 %

19. Lathrop Road – Between Harlan Road
and NB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 33,600 D 34,200 D 600 1.8 %

20. Lathrop Road – Between NB I-5 Off
/On-Ramps and SB I-5 Off/On-Ramps 34,600 D 34,900 D 300 0.9 %

21. Spartan Way – Between SB I-5 Off/On
-Ramps and Golden Valley Parkway 26,500 D 26,590 D 90 0.3 %

22. Intermodal Way – Between Roth Road
and 5.11 Tactical Building 1,900 C 4,000 C 2,100 110.5 %

23. Intermodal Way – Between 5.11
Tactical Building and Tactical Way 1,100 C 3,100 C 2,000 181.8 %

24. Tactical Way – Between Tactical Way
and A Street 600 C 2,500 C 1,900 316.7 %
Note: LOS = Level of Service based on Segment Level of Service Thresholds from Manteca General Plan Update and Lathrop General Plan Update
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022
ATTACHMENT 3
13 | Page
SENATE BILL 743 AND VEHICLES MILES TRAVELED (VMT)
SB 743 created several statewide changes to the evaluation of transportation and traffic impacts under CEQA. First, it directs OPR to amend the CEQA Guidelines to establish new metrics for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects within transit priority areas (TPAs) and allows OPR to extend use of the new metrics beyond TPAs. The California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted the amended CEQA Guidelines in December 2018. In the amended CEQA Guidelines, OPR selected Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as the primary transportation impact metric to be applied throughout the State of California.

The amended CEQA Guidelines state that “generally, VMT is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts” and the provisions requiring the use of VMT shall apply statewide as of July 1, 2020. The amended CEQA Guidelines further state that land use “projects within one-half mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high-quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less-thansignificant transportation impact.” Second, SB 743 establishes that aesthetic and parking impacts of a residential, mixed-use residential, or employment center projects on an infill site within a TPA shall not be considered significant impacts on the environment.

Third, SB 743 added section 21099 to the Public Resources Code, which states that automobile delay, as described by level of service (LOS) or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment upon certification of the CEQA Guidelines by the Natural Resources Agency. Since the amended CEQA Guidelines were certified in December 2018, LOS or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion are not considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA.

Lastly, SB 743 establishes a new CEQA exemption for a residential, mixed-use, and employment center project a) within a TPA, b) consistent with a specific plan for which an EIR has been certified, and c) consistent with an SCS. This exemption requires further review if the project or circumstances changes significantly.

Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts To aid in SB 743 implementation, in December 2018 OPR released a Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory). The Technical Advisory provides advice and recommendations to CEQA lead agencies on how to implement the SB 743 changes. This includes technical recommendations regarding the assessment of VMT, thresholds of significance, VMT mitigation measures, and screening thresholds for certain land use projects. Lead agencies may consider and use these recommendations at their discretion and with the provision of substantial evidence to support alternative approaches.

The Technical Advisory identifies “screening thresholds” to quickly identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. The Technical Advisory suggests that projects meeting one or more of the following criteria should be expected to have a less-than-significant impact on VMT.

Small projects – projects consistent with a SCS and local general plan that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day.

Projects near major transit stops – certain projects (residential, retail, office, or a mix of these uses) proposed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor.

ATTACHMENT 3
14 | Page
Affordable residential development – a project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis to find a less-than-significant impact on VMT.

Local-serving retail – local-serving retail development tends to shorten trips and reduce VMT. The Technical Advisory encourages lead agencies to decide when a project will likely be local-serving, but generally acknowledges that retail development including stores larger than 50,000 square feet might be considered regional-serving. The Technical Advisory suggests lead agencies analyze whether regional-serving retail would increase or decrease VMT (i.e., not presume a less-than-significant).

Projects in low VMT areas – residential and office projects that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility) as existing development in areas with low VMT will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT.

The Technical Advisory also identifies recommended numeric VMT thresholds for residential, office, and retail projects, as described below.

Residential development that would generate vehicle travel exceeding 15 percent below existing (baseline) residential VMT per capita may indicate a significant transportation impact. Existing VMT per capita may be measured as a regional VMT per capita or as city VMT per capita.

Office projects that would generate vehicle travel exceeding 15 percent below existing regional VMT per employee may indicate a significant transportation impact.

Retail projects (and other non-residential/non-office projects) that results in a net increase in total VMT may indicate a significant transportation impact.

For mixed-use projects, the Technical Advisory suggests evaluating each component independently and applying the significance threshold for each project type included. Alternatively, the lead agency may consider only the project’s dominant use.

The Technical Advisory also provides guidance on impacts to transit. Specifically, the Technical Advisory suggests that lead agencies generally should not treat the addition of new transit users as an adverse impact. As an example, the Technical Advisory suggests that “an infill development may add riders to transit systems and the additional boarding and alighting may slow transit vehicles, but it also adds destinations, improving proximity and accessibility. Such development also improves regional vehicle flow by adding less vehicle travel onto the regional network.”
VMT-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide
On May 20, 2020, the VMT-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide (TISG) was adopted. The TISG provides guidance on how Caltrans will review land use projects, with focus on VMT analysis and supporting state land use goals, state planning priorities, and GHG emission reduction goals; as well as identifying land use projects’ possible transportation impacts to the State Highway System and potential non-capacity increasing mitigation measures.

The TISG emphasizes that VMT analysis is Caltrans’ primary review focus, and references OPR’s Technical Advisory as a basis for the guidance in the TISG. Notably, the TISG recommends the use of the recommended thresholds in the Technical Advisory for land use projects. The TISG also references the Technical Advisory for screening thresholds that would identify projects and areas presumed to have a lessthan-significant transportation impact. Caltrans supports streamlining for projects that meet these screening thresholds because they help achieve VMT reduction and mode shift goals.

ATTACHMENT 3
15 | Page

NORTHWEST AIRPORT WAY MASTER PLAN (NWAWMP) VEHICLES MILES TRAVELED

ANALYSIS
The proposed NWAWMP Project does not qualify as a small project for screening purposes, and it is not located in a low VMT area. Therefore, consistent with the discussion of SB 743 provided above vehicle travel was evaluated using VMT as the primary metric. The following describes the baseline VMT levels for industrial land uses in the City of Manteca. The Baseline VMT and Cumulative Project VMT was developed using the City of Manteca travel demand model that was derived from the San Joaquin Council of Government’s (SJCOG) Regional Travel Demand Model. The model was developed in 2020 and calibrated to adjusted pre COVID-19 traffic counts.

Roadway improvements and land use projections consistent with the SJCOG Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), City of Manteca General Plan, and City of Lathrop General Plan were added to the Cumulative Conditions Model.

A model-wide analysis was preformed to obtain daily trips and travel distance for all Industrial Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs), and the product of daily trips and travel distance was summed up to obtain VMT estimates. It should be noted that the VMT analysis was based on Intermodal Way being designated to provide access to and from Roth Road and the I-5 / Roth Road interchange for projectgenerated California Legal and STAA Truck traffic.

Table 14 presents modeled Baseline Citywide from the Manteca General Plan EIR and Cumulative With Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area VMT per industrial employee. According to the Manteca General Plan EIR, the 2019 Baseline VMT per industrial employee is 75.3. The results of the VMT analysis showed that the proposed Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area will result in a relatively flat / minor decrease in VMT when compared to baseline citywide, from 75.3 to 75.1 vehicle miles per employee.

This represents a relatively flat 0.26% decrease when compared to baseline city-wide average. This result is consistent with the Manteca General Plan EIR, which showed a reduction from 75.3 to 75.0 (Table 3.14-8).

It should be noted that the construction of the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area will improve the jobs to housing balance in the City of Manteca and provide an overall benefit to reducing VMT per employee with fewer residents expected to leave the City for employment. This will result in fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions reductions.

Table 14: Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Parcels Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Scenario VMT Per Industrial
Employee
VMT Reduction Per
Industrial Employee
Percentage Reduction Per
Industrial Employee
Baseline Citywide 75.3
Cumulative With Pending /
Undeveloped NWAWMP Area 75.1 - 0.2 -0.26 %
Note: Citywide VMT includes All industrial land Uses in the City of Manteca Source: City of Manteca Travel Demand Model - Fehr & Peers, 2022 ATTACHMENT 3
16 | Page

CONCLUSIONS
The following sections presents the conclusions of the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) conducted for the Northwest Airport Way Master Plan EIR Addendum
Intersection Operations Analysis
The Project Trip Generation analysis showed that during the AM peak hour, the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels would add a total of 783 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 642 employee vehicles, and 141 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks. During the PM peak hour, the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels would add a total of 803 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 642 employee vehicles, and 161 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks.

The results of the intersection level of service analysis showed that the pending / undeveloped NWAWMP parcels would not result in any intersections operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. All fourteen (14) study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service D or better under Existing With Project Conditions.

Under Cumulative No Project Conditions, traffic associated with land use growth in the City of Manteca and City of Lathrop contributes to the increase in traffic volumes along Lathrop Road. The Union Road/Lathrop Road would operate unacceptably at LOS F during both AM peak hour and PM peak hours without the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area.

The results of the intersection level of service analysis showed that the proposed Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would not result in any additional intersections operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. Thirteen (13) of the fourteen (14) study intersections would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service D or better under Cumulative With Project Conditions. The Union Road/Lathrop Road intersection would continue to operate unacceptably at LOS F during both AM peak hour and PM peak hours under the Cumulative with Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area Project Conditions.

Roadway Operations Analysis
The Project Trip Generation analysis showed that on a daily basis, the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would add a total of 10,085 vehicles to the surrounding transportation network, consisting of 8,080 employee vehicles, and 2,005 delivery, California Legal or STAA Trucks.

The results of the roadway segment level of service analysis showed that the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would not result in any roadways operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. All twenty-four roadway segments would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service C or D under Existing With Project Conditions.

The results of the roadway segment level of service analysis showed that the proposed Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area would not result in any roadways operating below acceptable level of service thresholds on the surrounding transportation network. All twenty-four roadway segments would continue to operate at acceptable Level of Service C or D under Existing With Project Conditions.

ATTACHMENT 3
17 | Page
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
The results of the VMT analysis showed that the proposed Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area will result in a relatively flat 0.26% decrease when compared to baseline city-wide average. This result is consistent with the Manteca General Plan EIR, which showed a reduction from 75.3 to 75.0 (Table 3.14-8).

It should be noted that the construction of the Pending / Undeveloped NWAWMP Area will improve the jobs to housing balance in the City of Manteca and provide an overall benefit to reducing VMT per employee with fewer residents expected to leave the City for employment. This will result in fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions reductions.

It should be noted that the updated General Plan includes policies designed to reduce vehicle travel and vehicle miles traveled. The Circulation Element (Chapter 3.14) addresses providing adequate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities and opportunities, promoting non-vehicle travel modes, requiring development projects that accommodate or employ fifty (50) or more employees to implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs, and ensuring regional coordination on trip and VMT reduction efforts.

General Plan policies and actions that contribute to VMT reductions are identified below. These policies and actions minimize VMT impacts to the greatest extent feasible.

Additionally, the Governors Executive Order N-79-20 requires that 100 percent of in-state sales of new passenger cars and trucks be zero-emission by 2035. It shall be a further goal of the State that 100 percent of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles in the State be zero-emission by 2045 for all operations, where feasible, and by 2035 for drayage trucks. It shall be further a goal of the State to transition to 100 percent zeroemission off-road vehicles and equipment by 2035, where feasible. Accordingly, the City of Manteca aims to develop a Zero Emissions Vehicle Market Development Strategy that ensures expeditious implementation of the systems of policies, programs and regulations necessary to achieve the order.

ATTACHMENT 3