City of Manteca Planning Commission
AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE March 21, 2024
PROJECT NAME Crossroads Plaza – 2064 North Union Road
APPLICATION NUMBER GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and:
1. Adopt Resolution 1651 recommending approval of a General Plan Amendment, Site Plan & Design Review Application, and Minor Use Permit, and recommending the City Council introduce by title only and waive the first reading of an Ordinance approving a Rezone for the construction of a 6,816-square-foot Auto Zone auto parts store and a 5,200-square-foot Circle K convenience store with a 12-pump gas station on a 1.98-acre site located at 2064 North Union Road (File No. GPA22-04, REZ22- 05, SPC22-07, UPN22-08).
PROJECT INFORMATION
Applicant: Grey Peak Development, LLC, James Allen & Tenea Davis, 1925 Village Center Circle, Ste. # 150, Las Vegas NV 89134
Property Owner: Manteca 18, LLC, Jim Berookhim, 2355 Westwood Blvd., Ste. 410, Los Angeles, CA 90064
General Plan Designation: Currently High Density Residential (HDR), but will be redesignated to Commercial (C) Zoning: Currently Multiple-Family Dwelling (R-3), but will be rezoned to Neighborhood Commercial (CN)
Existing Use: Vacant
Proposed Use: Auto Zone auto parts store and a gas station with a Circle K convenience store
Parcel Size 1.98 acres
Adjacent Uses: North: Lathrop Road and a commercial development East: Single-family residential
South: Multi-family residential
West: Union Road and a commercial development
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project consists of a commercial development including a 6,816-square-foot Auto Zone auto parts store and a 5,200-square-foot Circle K convenience store with a 12-pump ATTACHMENT 6
gas station. See Figure 1 for Site Plan. The project will require approval of a General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Site Plan & Design Review, and a Minor Use Permit.
Figure 1: Site Plan – Crossroads Plaza
PROJECT LOCATION
The project site is located at the southeast corner of North Union Road and West Lathrop Road at 2064 North Union Road (APN: 216-020-01). The site is approximately one mile west of the Highway 99/Lathrop Road Interchange. The site is bound by West Lathrop Road and commercial uses to the north, single-family homes to the east, an apartment complex to the south, and North Union Road and commercial uses to the west. See Figures 2 and 3 for the Project Site Map and Vicinity Map.
ATTACHMENT 6
Figure 2: Project Site – Crossroads Plaza – 2064 N. Union Rd. Site outlined in yellow.
Figure 3: Vicinity Map – Crossroads Plaza. Site outlined in yellow.
ATTACHMENT 6
ANALYSIS
The proposed General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Site Plan & Design Review, and Minor Use Permit application were analyzed with respect to conformance with the:
1. Manteca General Plan Update
2. Manteca Municipal Code
3. Manteca Climate Action Plan
4. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
As shown on the current General Plan Land Use Map below (Figure 4), the project site currently has a General Plan land use designation of High Density Residential (HDR), but the designation will change to Commercial (C) as part of the upcoming General Plan Update (Figure 5). This project is requesting a General Plan Amendment because it is requesting approval prior to the General Plan Update being approved, and therefore the new designation of C is not yet memorialized. Per the General Plan Update, the C land use designation will provide for neighborhood, community, and regional-serving retail and service uses; offices; restaurants; service stations; highway-oriented and visitor commercial and lodging; auto-serving and heavy commercial uses; wholesale; warehousing; public and quasi-public uses; commercial recreation and public gathering facilities; and similar and compatible uses. The C Designation allows for a maximum site coverage of 50%, and the project has a proposed site coverage of approximately 20%.
Figure 4: Current General Plan Land Use Designation – HDR. Site outlined in red.
ATTACHMENT 6
Figure 5: General Plan Update Land Use Designation – ‘C.’ Site outlined in black.
The proposed uses include an Auto Zone auto parts store and a Circle K convenience store with a 12-pump gas station. Based on these uses, the project conforms to the uses anticipated in the new General Plan and the C land use designation.
In addition to conforming to the C land use designation requirements, the project supports the following General Plan goals and policies:
1. Land Use Policy LU-P-22: New commercial development serving citywide and regional shopping needs shall be located along major arterial streets.
Analysis: This development may serve both citywide and regional shopping needs as it is located close to the Highway 99 Interchange. Both Union Road and Lathrop Road are designated as arterial streets in Manteca.
2. Community Design Goal CD-8: Upgrade and enhance the visual quality of Manteca’s arterial and collector streets.
Analysis: The site development will include two buildings and one fuel canopy, all constructed in a coordinating contemporary architectural style. The two buildings have strong vertical and horizontal details and a mix of materials, creating an acceptable appearance. All public-facing sides of the facades include an acceptable ATTACHMENT 6
level of architectural interest. These buildings will enhance the City identity by developing a currently undeveloped corner at a prominent intersection in the City.
See Figures 6 through 8 for the facades.
ATTACHMENT 6
Figure 6: Facades of Circle K Convenience Store
Figure 7: Facades of Auto Zone building
ATTACHMENT 6
Figure 8: Gas station canopy
3. Land Use Policy LU-P-49: The City shall give priority to in-fill development and new development contiguous to existing developed areas, whenever practical.
Community Design Goal CD-1: Retain the compact and cohesive community form of the City.
Analysis: The project is within City limits, surrounded by existing development on all sides, making this an in-fill site. Infill development is a way to reinforce compact development and maintain a cohesive city form.
ZONING CODE CONFORMANCE
Zoning Ordinance Conformance
The project site is currently zoned Multiple-Family Dwelling (R-3), but the project is requesting a rezone to Neighborhood Commercial (CN) to ensure consistency with the new General Plan land use designation (See Figure 9). The project consists of a gas station, convenience store, and auto parts store, all of which are appropriate uses in the CN zone.
The convenience store and auto parts store are allowed uses in this zone, and the gas station is conditionally allowed with a Minor Use Permit.
ATTACHMENT 6
Figure 9: Current Zoning Map – 2064 N. Union Road
The project also meets the development standards of the CN zone, including setbacks and height. The maximum allowed height is 45 feet, and the structures on site will have the following heights:
Structure Height
Circle K Convenience Store 23 feet
Auto Zone Store 24 feet
Fuel Canopy 20 feet, 6 inches
The CN zone generally requires 0-foot setbacks on all sides, except for when a residential zoning district is adjacent to a commercial-zoned property, all structures shall be setback a minimum of 40 feet from the shared property line; however, the Planning Commission may reduce this setback if they can find compliance with the Performance Standards in Chapter
17.58. This project conducted a Noise Impact Study and an Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment, and was found to have less than significant impacts. This project is required to comply with all Performance Standards in Chapter 17.58 at all times. Therefore, the Planning Commission can approve the proposed setbacks of all structures on site:
Structures Closest to Adjacent Residential Distance to Residential Zone Circle K Convenience Store 25 feet
Auto Zone Store 30 feet
The site requires 42 parking stalls for the combined uses on the site, and the site plan proposes 46. The stalls include 18 stalls for the convenience store and 24 stalls for the auto parts store.
The Municipal Code outlines landscaping requirements for new projects. All areas of the site not paved or built will be landscaped in conformance with the Municipal Code.
Additionally, gas stations require a minimum of 20% of the site to be landscaped, and this ATTACHMENT 6
project meets that requirement. The proposed landscaping includes the required shade trees in the parking areas, as well as the required trees in the buffer areas along rights of way and between parcels in as many places as possible. The landscape planting areas include a mix of trees and shrubs, as required by Code. Three mature oak trees were removed for the development of this project. Therefore, this project is required to replace those trees with three new trees that are a minimum 36-inch box size. See Figure 10 for Landscape Plan.
This project will also meet all illumination standards set in the Code to ensure adequate illumination without light spillover or glare for the adjacent residential uses.
Figure 10: Landscape Plan – Crossroads Plaza
General Plan Amendment Findings
The purpose of a General Plan Amendment is to allow for modifications to the General Plan text or to change the General Plan land use designation on a parcel. The designated Approving Authority is the City Council, and the Development Services Director and Planning Commission make a recommendation of approval or denial to the City Council.
If a General Plan Amendment is requested, the applicant shall demonstrate to the City Council that there is a substantial benefit to be derived from such amendment. Additionally, the City Council must find that the proposed amendment meets the letter and intent of the General Plan goals and policies.
Analysis: This project is requesting a General Plan Amendment because it is requesting approval prior to the General Plan Update being approved, and therefore the new ATTACHMENT 6
designation of C is not yet memorialized. A commercial use was envisioned here as part of the General Plan Update in order to provide commercial uses for local and regional users.
As described above, the projects meets the intent of multiple General Plan goals and policies, and will provide a benefit to the City in that the site will provide commercial goods and services to both residents and visitors, and will upgrade the visual quality of a prominent intersection in the City.
Rezone Findings
The purpose of a Zoning Amendment is to allow a modification to any part of Title 17 or to rezone the zoning designation on the Zoning Map for any parcel. The Approving Authority for a rezone is the City Council. The Development Services Director and Planning Commission provide recommendations. The applicant is requesting a rezone approval prior to the City Zoning Map being approved, which will follow shortly after the General Plan Update is approved. The rezone will ensure consistency with the new General Plan land use designation.
The City Council may grant a Rezone when the following Findings are made:
1. The proposed Zoning Amendment (text or map) is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs.
Analysis: The Zoning Amendment to change the zone to CN will ensure the zone is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of C. The project is not part of a Master Plan or Specific Plan. As approved and conditioned, the project is also consistent with other noise, traffic, and air quality requirements established by the City. The project will comply with all other Improvement Standards and any other applicable standards adopted by the City.
2. The proposed amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.
Analysis: The proposed rezone has been reviewed and conditioned to ensure it will not be materially detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the public or to property and residents in the vicinity. This was done via a site plan and design review to ensure compliance with the development standards and requirements of the CN zone, as well as a noise impact study, traffic study, and a air quality and greenhouse gas assessment. The project complies with all applicable development standards of the CN zone, and will comply with all performance standards to ensure compatibility with the neighboring uses.
3. The amendment has been reviewed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
ATTACHMENT 6
Analysis: This project has been determined to not be subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15332, In-Fill Development Projects. It meets the In-Fill Development Projects exemption because the project will be consistent with the C General Plan land use designation and CN zoning. The project is on less than 5 acres (1.98 acres) and is completely surrounded by urban uses. The site does not have value as a habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species, but will follow all requirements from SJCOG- Multi-Species Conservation Plan. Lastly, approval of the project will not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality, as this project completed a traffic study, noise impact study, and air quality study and found less than significant impacts, and the project will follow all applicable standards and requirements.
4. The site is physically suitable (including absence of physical constraints, access, compatibility with adjoining land uses, and provisions of utilities) for the requested zoning designation and anticipated land uses/development.
Analysis: The site is relatively flat and therefore suitable for a commercial development. As described above, it has been thoughtfully reviewed to ensure compatibility with the neighboring residential uses.
Site Plan and Design Review Findings
The approving authority for a Site Plan & Design Review is the Planning Commission, but when a project requires more than one land use entitlement with more than one Approving Authority, all entitlements shall be processed concurrently and final action shall be taken by the highest-level designated Approving Authority for all requested land use entitlements. In order to approve a Site Plan and Design Review application, Section 17.10.060 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that the Approving Authority make the following findings:
1. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan, complies with applicable zoning regulations, Planned Development, Master Plan or Specific Plan provisions, Improvement Standards, and other applicable standards and regulations adopted by the City.
Analysis: The project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of C and the CN zone, as discussed above. The project is not part of a Master Plan or Specific Plan. As approved and conditioned, the project is also consistent with other noise, traffic, and air quality requirements established by the City. The project will comply with all other Improvement Standards and any other applicable standards adopted by the City.
2. The proposed project will not create conflicts with vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian transportation modes of circulation.
Analysis: The project was reviewed to ensure it will not create conflicts with vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian modes of transportation. A traffic analysis was conducted to ensure all movements on site are being performed safely.
ATTACHMENT 6
3. The site layout (orientation and placement of buildings and parking areas), as well as the landscaping, lighting, and other development features, is compatible with and complements the existing surrounding environment and ultimate character of the area under the General Plan.
Analysis: As reviewed and conditioned, this project will be compatible with and complement the existing surrounding environment as it develops. The project was reviewed with sound planning principles in mind and meets the standards and requirements of the General Plan and Municipal Code.
4. The proposed architecture, including the character, scale, and quality of the design, relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials, colors, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting and signing, and similar elements, establishes a clear design concept and is compatible with the character of buildings on adjoining and nearby properties.
Analysis: The architecture, as described above, has a clear design concept, and has been designed to be acceptable at this location.
Minor Use Permit Findings
The gas station requires a Minor Use Permit. The approving authority for a Minor Use Permit is the Development Services Director, but when a project requires more than one land use entitlement with more than one Approving Authority, all entitlements shall be processed concurrently and final action shall be taken by the highest-level designated Approving Authority for all requested land use entitlements. The findings for a Minor Use Permit are below:
1. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan, any applicable Specific Plan, and the provisions of this Title.
Analysis: As mentioned above, the project site will have a General Plan Land Use designation of C and will comply with all applicable standards and provisions of the General Plan and Municipal Code. The project is not part of a Specific Plan.
2. The proposed use is consistent with the purpose of the applicable district or districts.
Analysis: The proposed use of a gas station will be consistent with the standards of the CN zoning district, as described above in the Zoning Code Conformance section.
3. The proposed use will not be materially detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the public or to property and residents in the vicinity.
ATTACHMENT 6
Analysis: The proposed use has been reviewed and conditioned to ensure it will not be materially detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the public or to property and residents in the vicinity. This was done via a site plan and design review, as well as a noise impact study, traffic study, and an air quality and greenhouse gas assessment. The project complies with all applicable development standards, and will comply with all performance standards to ensure compatibility with the neighboring uses.
4. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan, complies with applicable zoning regulations, Planned Development, Master Plan or Specific Plan provisions, Improvement Standards, and other applicable standards and regulations adopted by the City.
Analysis: As described above, the use has been reviewed to be consistent with the General Plan and CN zoning district, and will comply with all applicable Improvement Standards, and other applicable standards and regulations adopted by the City. This project is not part of a Master Plan or Specific Plan.
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONFORMANCE
On October 15, 2013, the Manteca City Council approved and adopted the Air Quality Element Update and Climate Action Plan in response to the passing of Assembly Bill AB32.
The intent of this plan is to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions in both private and public sector development. The proposed project conforms to the following Climate Action Plan strategies:
1. CAP Strategies Water Conservation WC-1: The City shall continue to implement water conservation measures to comply with the Model Water Efficiency Landscape requirements that implement the Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 1881, Laird).
Analysis: This project is required to comply with the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, per Assembly Bill 1881.
2. Municipal Strategies - Urban Forestry (UF) UF-2: The City of Manteca will consider the following goals and actions when revising its urban forestry program:
• Increase public and private tree plantings citywide
• Use canopy trees along new major roadways and in new developments Analysis: This project will increase the City’s tree canopy by installing approximately 44 new trees throughout the site, including along Lathrop Road and Union Road.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project has been determined to not be subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15332, In-Fill Development Projects. It meets the In-Fill Development Projects exemption because the project will be consistent with the C General Plan land use designation and the CN zone. The project is on less than ATTACHMENT 6
5 acres (1.98 acres), and is completely surrounded by urban uses. The site does not have value as a habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species, but will follow all requirements from SJCOG-Multi-Species Conservation Plan. Lastly, approval of the project will not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality, as this project completed a traffic study, noise impact study, and air quality study, and found the project will have less than significant impacts, and the project will follow all applicable standards and requirements, and as approved and conditioned, approval of the project will not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. Therefore, no further environmental review is required.
Report prepared by: Mallorie Fenrich, Senior Planner
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 1651
2a. Exhibit A – Approved Plan Set
2b. Exhibit B - Conditions Of Approval
2. Traffic Impact Analysis from TJW Engineering, Inc.
3. Noise Impact Study from MD Acoustics
4. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment from Salem Engineering Group, Inc.
5. PowerPoint Presentation
Approved by:
___/s/_____________________________ __03/12/24______
Lea C. Simvoulakis, Deputy Director - Planning Date
ATTACHMENT 6
City of Manteca
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1651
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MANTECA,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MAKING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDING THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, SITE PLAN & DESIGN
REVIEW APPLICATION, AND MINOR USE PERMIT, AND RECOMMENDING THE CITY
COUNCIL INDRODUCE BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE THE FIRST READING OF AN
ORDINANCE APPROVING A REZONE FOR THE CROSSROADS PLAZA PROJECT AT 2064 NORTH UNION ROAD (APN: 216-020-01), WHICH IS FOUND TO BE EXEMPT FROM CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO 14 CAL. CODE REGS. § 15332, IN-FILL EXEMPTION
(FILE NOS. GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08) WHEREAS, the Manteca Planning Commission, at its duly noticed public hearing on March 21, 2024, considered a General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Commercial Site Plan & Design Review, and Minor Use Permit for the Crossroads Plaza Project at 2064 North Union Road (APN: 216-020-01), as filed by Grey Peak Development, LLC; James Allen & Tenea Davis; 1925 Village Center Circle, Suite # 150, Las Vegas, NV 89134; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 17.08.060 of the Manteca Municipal Code, the City Council is the final decision-making body for the actions and the Planning Commission is the recommending body; and
WHEREAS, the project is a commercial development consisting of a 6,816-squarefoot Auto Zone auto parts store and a 12-pump gas station with a 5,200-square-foot Circle K convenience store on 1.98 acres at 2064 North Union Road; and WHEREAS, the approved project plans are attached as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the project Conditions of Approval are attached as Exhibit B; and WHEREAS, the current General Plan land use designation for the project site is High Density Residential (HDR), but will be redesignated to Commercial (C) as part of the General Plan Update. This project is requesting a General Plan Amendment because it is requesting approval prior to the General Plan Update being approved, and therefore the new designation of C is not yet memorialized. The proposed project will be consistent with the uses allowed in the C designation; and
WHEREAS, the current zone for the project is Multiple-Family Dwelling (R-3), but the project is requesting a rezone to Neighborhood Commercial (CN) prior to the City Zoning Map Update, which will follow shortly after the General Plan Update is approved. This rezone will ATTACHMENT 6
ensure consistency with the new General Plan land use designation. The proposed project will be consistent with the uses allowed in the CN zone; and WHEREAS, the project is consistent with land use policies of the General Plan in that the project’s design reinforces acceptable urban design, acceptable quality development, and a compact City form, promotes infill development; and,
WHEREAS, the project is consistent with community design goals and policies of the General Plan in that this development includes quality contemporary architecture with an acceptable level of visual interest, and will also include a strong tree canopy and landscape plan to upgrade and enhance the visual quality of Lathrop Road and Union Road; and WHEREAS, the project is consistent with the City’s Climate Action Plan in that the proposed project will conform to all applicable Model Water Efficiency Landscape requirements (MWELO) and it will install many new trees; and WHEREAS, the project has been determined to not be subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15332, In-Fill Development Projects because the project will be consistent with the C General Plan land use designation and CN zone. The project is on less than 5 acres (1.98 acres) and completely surrounded by urban uses. The site does not have value as a habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species, but will follow all requirements from SJCOG-Multi-Species Conservation Plan.
Lastly, approval of the project will not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality, as this project completed a traffic study, noise impact study, and air quality study, and found the project will have less than significant impacts, and the project will follow all applicable standards and requirements and as approved and conditioned, approval of the project will not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. Therefore, no further environmental review is required; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered all information related to this matter, as presented at a public meeting, including any supporting reports by City Staff, and any information provided during public meetings.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Manteca Planning Commission, pursuant to the Manteca Municipal Code, upon evidence in the staff report and project file, makes the following findings to support the recommendation for approval of the General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Site Plan & Design Review, and Minor Use Permit, File Nos. GPA 22- 04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07 & UPN 22-08.
General Plan Amendment Findings
1. The General Plan Amendment to C produces a benefit to the City in that this designation on this parcel was envisioned as part of the General Plan Update, and the project supports multiple General Plan goals and policies, and the development will provide a benefit by providing commercial goods and services to both residents and visitors, as well as upgrade the visual quality of a prominent intersection in the City.
Rezone Findings
ATTACHMENT 6
1. The Zoning Amendment to change the zone to CN will ensure the zone is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of C. The project is not part of a Master Plan or Specific Plan. As approved and conditioned, the project is also consistent with other noise, traffic, and air quality requirements established by the City. The project will comply with all other Improvement Standards and any other applicable standards adopted by the City.
2. The proposed rezone has been reviewed and conditioned to ensure it will not be materially detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the public or to property and residents in the vicinity. This was done via a site plan and design review to ensure compliance with the development standards and requirements of the CN zone, as well as a noise impact study, traffic study, air quality and greenhouse gas assessment, and a Phase 1 environmental assessment. The project complies with all applicable development standards of the CN zone, and will comply with all performance standards to ensure compatibility with the neighboring uses.
3. This project has been determined to not be subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15332, In-Fill Development Projects. It meets the In-Fill Development Projects exemption because the project will be consistent with the C General Plan land use designation and CN zoning. The project is on less than 5 acres (1.98 acres) and is completely surrounded by urban uses. The site does not have value as a habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species, but will follow all requirements from SJCOG- Multi-Species Conservation Plan. Lastly, approval of the project will not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality, as this project completed a traffic study, noise impact study, and air quality study and found less than significant impacts, and the project will follow all applicable standards and requirements.
4. The site is relatively flat and therefore suitable for a commercial development. As described above, it has been thoughtfully reviewed to ensure compatibility with the neighboring residential uses.
Site Plan & Design Review Findings
1. The project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of C and the CN zone, as discussed above. The project is not part of a Master Plan or Specific Plan.
As approved and conditioned, the project is also consistent with other noise, traffic, and air quality requirements established by the City. The project will comply with all other Improvement Standards and any other applicable standards adopted by the City.
2. The project was reviewed to ensure it will not create conflicts with vehicular, bicycle, or pedestrian modes of transportation. A traffic analysis was conducted to ensure all movements on site are being performed safely.
3. As reviewed and conditioned, this project will be compatible with and complement the existing surrounding environment as it develops. The project was reviewed with sound ATTACHMENT 6
planning principles in mind and meets the standards and requirements of the General Plan and Municipal Code.
4. The architecture, as described above, has a clear design concept, and has been designed to be acceptable at this location.
Minor Use Permit Findings:
1. As described in the project staff report, the project site will have a General Plan Land Use designation of C and will comply with all applicable standards and provisions of the General Plan and Municipal Code. The project is not part of a Specific Plan.
2. The proposed use of a gas station will be consistent with the standards of the CN zoning district, as described above in the Zoning Code Conformance section.
3. The proposed use has been reviewed and conditioned to ensure it will not be materially detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the public or to property and residents in the vicinity. This was done via a site plan and design review, as well as a noise impact study, traffic study, air quality and greenhouse gas assessment, and a Phase 1 environmental assessment. The project complies with all applicable development standards, and will comply with all performance standards to ensure compatibility with the neighboring uses.
4. As described in the project staff report, the use has been reviewed to be consistent with the General Plan and CN zoning district, and will comply with all applicable Improvement Standards, and other applicable standards and regulations adopted by the City. This project is not part of a Master Plan or Specific Plan.
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 1651 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Manteca at a regularly scheduled public hearing held on March 21, 2024, by the following vote:
Roll Call:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
______________________________ ___________________
Chairman Date
Exhibits:
Exhibit A: Approved Plan Set
Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval
ATTACHMENT 6
W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 SD SD SD SD D > > > > > > > > > > > SD SD SD W2 W2 W2 FW6 FW6 FW6 W
NO
PARKING G
TS
TS
TS TS
TS
OH OH OH OH OH OH ET OH
OH
SS12 SS12
W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W W W W W W WW W W W ?E T C SS ET SD E T W W W W W W SD E E T SD12 SD12 W W SD10 W8 W12 W12 W12 SD12 SD12 ICVICV ICV
NO
PARKING NO PARKING
NO
PARKING NO PARKING
CLEAN AIR/VANPOOL/EV
CLEAN AIR/VANPOOL/EV CLEAN AIR/VANPOOL/EV 15K 8K 12K 20K D S NO PARKING > > > > > > > > > >> > SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > D D PROPOSED BUILDING "A" CIRCLE K 5,200 S.F. 2064 N. UNION ROAD PROPOSED BUILDING "B" AUTOZONE 6,816 S.F. 2080 N. UNION ROAD PROPOSED 6 MPD'S AND CANOPY 6 14 1 12 68 WEST LATHROP ROAD NORTH UNION ROAD EXISTING BUILDING (N.I.C.) ∆
P R O J E C T P LA N N IG - DES I GN - CO N S U LT I NG C u r r e n t R e le a s e D a te P la n n in g S u b m it a l P la n C h e c k S u b m it a l S T A T U S R E V I S I O N S S c a le P r o je c tC o o r d in a to r P r o je c tN o . S h e e t I D E N T I F I C A T I O N 2064 NORTH UNION ROAD
MANTECA, CALIFORNIA 95336
1 5 0 8 TO L L H O U S E R O A D , SU ITE ' C
C L O V IS,CA L I FO R N I A 93 6 1 1
5 5 9 -29 8 -30 6 0 (O F F IC E )
5 5 9 -29 8 -32 6 7 (FA X )
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR:
CROSSROADS PLAZA PROPOSED SITE PLAN A-0.0 N GENERAL NOTES N VICINITY MAP PROJECT DATA PARKING DATA PARCEL DATA BUILDING DATA ALLOWABLE BUILDING AREA KEYED NOTES
ATTACHMENT
6 4
5 6
1 2
3 REVISIONS
04-29-22
EXTERIOR COLOR ELEVATIONS AND KEYNOTES
CE
R COPYRIGHT 2007
AutoZone Store No. 6158
UNION @ LATHROP
MANTECA CA 95336
65W2-R
09-07-21
123456789
10 11
12 TWO PIECE COMPRESSION TRIM SEE DETAIL 4/A6
SMOOTH FACE CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS SEE PAINT
DETAIL SCHEME THIS SHEET
EXTERIOR INSULATED FINISH, PAINT: SW6091 RELIABLE WHITE
PAINT MAN DOOR RED & METAL FRAMES BLACK
DO NOT PAINT OVERHEAD DOOR PAINT ANGLES BLACK
EXPANSION JOINT
ALUMINUM STOREFRONT - RED KYNAR FINISH
FRONT WALL SIGN - 44" Channel Letters - LEFT STRIPES
13 14
15 TOILET WALL VENTS PAINT TO MATCH WALL
WALL MOUNTED LIGHT FIXTURE. MOUNT AT 11'-10 T.O.F.
PIPE GUARD WITH RED SLEEVE
STORE ADDRESS - 6" WHITE REFLECTIVE NUMBERS
GLASS AND ALUMINUM DOORS - CLEAR ANODIZED FINISH
16 BOND BEAM AT ROOF LINE
AWN01W
ELEVATION KEY NOTES
17 2
18 CLERESTORY WINDOW - EVERGREEN GLASS
19 FAUX WINDOW - OPAQUE BLACK GLASS 7'-4"
COLOR: RED
2'-6"
COLOR: DARK GREY
FINISHED FLOOR
COLOR: MED GREY
3'-4" 2'-8" 1'-4"
8"
COLOR: WHITE
COLOR: WHITE
PRE-FINISHED COPING: BLACK
COLOR: DARK GREY
NOTE: CENTER ALL WALL SIGNAGE VERTICALLY ON THE
PAINTED ORANGE STRIPE OR THE TOP TWO BRICK SOLDIER
COURSES. PAINT ORANGE STRIPE TO WITHIN 2' OF WALL
SIGN. DO NOT PAINT ORANGE STRIPE BEHIND SIGN.
CONTINUE ORANGE STRIPE ON E.I.F.S. ABOVE STOREFRONT.
1/4" = 1'-0" AWE01 3 EXTERIOR WALL COLOR SCHEME
COLOR: ORANGE
4"
21'-0"
COLOR: WHITE
SCUPPERS AND DOWNSPOUTS. PAINTED TO MATCH
BACKGROUND WALL COLOR. ADJACENT 4" H. X 6" W.
OVERFLOW SCUPPER. FLOWLINE 2" ABOVE ROOF.
HVAC UNITS SCREENED BY PARAPETS
LEFT WALL SIGN - 44" Channel Letters - AZ ONLY
21'- 0" 21'- 0"
21'- 0"
21'- 0"
FRONT WALL (HIGH SIDE)
LEFT SIDE WALL
REAR WALL (LOW SIDE)
RIGHT SIDE WALL
6 13
3 1
2 7
2 8
2 8
8 1
6 2
3 2
164
4 6
9 10
1 14
5 16
224 19
2 11 18 3 19
183
19 19
18 18
163
16 15
8 WEST
NORTH
EAST
SOUTH
17 17
17 17 17
17 3
3 12
3'-0"
20 4' METAL AWNING - COLOR BLACK
20 18 18 18
19 19 19
20 ATTACHMENT 6
ATTACHMENT 6
ATTACHMENT 6
NO
PARKING
NO
PARKING
NO
PARKING
CLEAN AIR/
VANPOOL/EV
CLEAN AIR/
VANPOOL/EV
CLEAN AIR/
VANPOOL/EV
NO
PARKING
NO
PARKING
FF 29.69
LATHROP ROAD
NORTH UNION ROAD
NEW CIRCLE-K BLDG
NEW GAS CANOPY
NEW GAS CANOPY
NEW
AUTOZONE
BLDG
DRAINAGE
DWG: D:\PROJECTS\2021\FMH.2101\Acad\Planset\Plans - On-site\C1.0_FMH.2101-Grd.dwg USER: TECH DATE: Nov 02, 2023 10:49am CIRCLE K AND AUTOZONE WEST LATHROP ROAD AND NORTH UNION ROAD MANTECA, CA 95336 DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: 11/02/23 HML GNX HML SHEET NO: SHEET OF 3 REV NO DATE DESCRIPTION JOB: FMH.2101 GRADING/UTILITY PERMIT: DEVELOPMENT PERMIT: CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSULTING PLANNING 620 DEWITT AVENUE, SUITE 101 (559) 297-5205 - FAX (559) 297-5200 TEL CLOVIS, CA 93612 EMAIL: [email protected] : WWW.LORE-ENGINEERING.COM C1.01 PRELIMINARY GRADING DRAINAGE PLAN 0 10 SCALE: 1" = 10' 10 SEE SHEET C1.1 FOR CONTINUATION
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
ATTACHMENT
6 NO
PARKING
NO
PARKING
NO
PARKING
NO
PARKING
CLEAN AIR/
VANPOOL/EV
CLEAN AIR/
VANPOOL/EV
CLEAN AIR/
VANPOOL/EV
NO
PARKING
EXISTING
HOME
EXISTING
HOME
EXISTING
HOME EXISTING
HOME
FF 29.83
LATHROP ROAD
NUNES CT
NEW GAS CANOPY
NEW CIRCLE-K
BLDG
NEW AUTOZONE BLDG
DRAINAGE
DWG: D:\PROJECTS\2021\FMH.2101\Acad\Planset\Plans - On-site\C1.1_FMH.2101-Grd.dwg USER: TECH DATE: Nov 02, 2023 10:49am CIRCLE K AND AUTOZONE WEST LATHROP ROAD AND NORTH UNION ROAD MANTECA, CA 95336 DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: 11/02/23 HML GNX HML SHEET NO: SHEET OF 3 REV NO DATE DESCRIPTION JOB: FMH.2101 GRADING/UTILITY PERMIT: DEVELOPMENT PERMIT: CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSULTING PLANNING 620 DEWITT AVENUE, SUITE 101 (559) 297-5205 - FAX (559) 297-5200 TEL CLOVIS, CA 93612 EMAIL: [email protected] : WWW.LORE-ENGINEERING.COM C1.12 PRELIMINARY GRADING DRAINAGE PLAN SEE SHEET C1.1 FOR CONTINUATION
0 10
SCALE: 1" = 10'
10 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
ATTACHMENT
6 S01°51'30"E 2639.00' (R1)
NEW CIRCLE-K BLDG
NORTH UNION ROAD
LATHROP ROAD
NEW GAS
CANOPY
NEW
AUTOZONE
BLDG
NUNES CT
NO
PARKING
NO
PARKING
NO
PARKING
NO
PARKING
CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/EV
CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/EV CLEAN AIR/ VANPOOL/EV NO PARKING
NO
PARKING
WATER
DWG: D:\PROJECTS\2021\FMH.2101\Acad\Planset\Plans - On-site\C2.0_FMH.2101-Util.dwg USER: TECH DATE: Nov 02, 2023 10:49am CIRCLE K AND AUTOZONE WEST LATHROP ROAD AND NORTH UNION ROAD MANTECA, CA 95336 DATE: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: 11/02/23 HML GNX HML SHEET NO: SHEET OF 3 REV NO DATE DESCRIPTION JOB: FMH.2101 GRADING/UTILITY PERMIT: DEVELOPMENT PERMIT: CIVIL ENGINEERING CONSULTING PLANNING 620 DEWITT AVENUE, SUITE 101 (559) 297-5205 - FAX (559) 297-5200 TEL CLOVIS, CA 93612 EMAIL: [email protected] : WWW.LORE-ENGINEERING.COM C2.03 PRELIMINARY WET UTILITY PLAN 0 10 SCALE: 1" = 10' 10 SEE SHEET C1.1 FOR CONTINUATION
FIRE SEWER
LEGEND - EXISTING
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
ATTACHMENT
6 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8
SD
SD
SD
SD
D > > > > > > >
>
>
> > SD SD SD
W2 W2 W2
FW6 FW6 FW6
W NO PARKING
G TS TS
TS TS
OH W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12
W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W
W
W
W
W
W
SD
E
T
W
W
W W
SD
E
E
T SD12
SD12 NO PARKING
NO
PARKING NO PARKING
NO
PARKING
CLEAN AIR/
VANPOOL/EV
CLEAN AIR/
VANPOOL/EV
CLEAN AIR/
VANPOOL/EV
15K
8K 12K
20K
D
NO
PARKING
> > > >
>
> > > > >
> >
SD SD SD SD SD
SD SD SD
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
>
>
> >
D
D
LATHROP ROAD
REFERENCE NOTES SCHEDULE
UNION ROAD
SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME CONT WATER USE MATURE WIDTH PLANT INFO QTY TREES
PLANT SCHEDULE
EXISTING TREES
SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME SIZE WATER USE MATURE WIDTH MATURE HEIGHT QTY SHRUBS
SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME CONT WATER USE MATURE WIDTH QTY
SHRUB AREAS
project no.
scale:
sheet title:
sheet no.
submittal: date:
drawn by: checked by:
project:
client:
No. 1
No. 2
No. 3
No. 4
21-11-006
1"=20'-0"
10/19/2022
09/20/2022
07/07/2022
12/08/2021
KJ PB
MANTECA, CA.
W. LATHROP RD.
NORTH UNION RD.
COMMERCIAL
DEVELOPMENT
No. 5 11/15/2023
LANDSCAPE
SITE PLAN
LSP-1
NORTH
0 SCALE:
20 40 60 feet
1" = 20'
ATTACHMENT 6
W
G
S 4B-16L(HS) MH: 20 4B-16L(HS) MH: 20 5L-16L MH: 20 5L-16L MH: 20 5L-16L MH: 20 5L-16L MH: 20 4B-16L MH: 20 3B-16L MH: 20 OSQW-4M-4L MH: 12 OSQW-4M-4L MH: 12 OSQW-4M-4L MH: 12 OSQW-4M-4L MH: 12 OSQW-4M-4L MH: 12 OSQW-4M-4L MH: 12 4M-16L MH: 20 OSQW-3M-4L MH: 12 OSQW-3M-4L MH: 12 AMH: 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.8 2.1 3.7 4.0 4.1 4.2 3.2 2.7 2.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 1.0 1.9 2.5 3.4 3.1 2.3 1.5 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.8 2.2 3.5 4.2 4.4 3.9 4.0 3.9 4.2 2.9 1.7 1.3 0.9 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.7 3.2 4.4 4.6 4.5 4.1 2.4 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.8 1.8 2.5 3.3 3.4 2.9 3.3 3.5 4.9 5.3 2.8 1.8 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.8 2.1 1.8 1.8 2.1 3.0 3.4 4.4 4.2 3.0 2.1 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.7 1.5 1.7 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.8 2.6 2.7 4.8 2.9 2.1 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.4 2.6 2.3 2.2 2.4 2.7 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.0 1.6 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.9 1.1 1.4 1.6 1.9 2.2 2.1 1.7 2.0 2.5 2.4 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.6 2.9 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.5 1.7 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.2 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.7 2.0 2.4 2.3 1.9 2.2 2.0 2.3 2.9 3.3 3.5 3.4 3.9 3.5 4.0 3.7 2.8 1.7 1.3 1.1 1.0 1.1 0.9 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 1.5 1.8 2.2 2.6 2.4 3.0 3.6 5.6 5.7 2.5 1.8 1.7 3.0 4.3 7.4 6.2 4.2 2.9 2.2 2.5 3.2 3.7 4.0 4.1 4.6 4.1 4.6 4.6 3.8 2.3 1.1 1.3 1.8 1.9 1.3 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.1 1.8 2.2 2.1 2.4 2.5 3.1 3.7 3.6 3.0 2.1 1.8 2.0 3.2 3.9 4.2 4.3 3.7 3.0 2.7 2.8 3.2 3.7 3.9 4.5 4.9 4.3 4.8 6.1 6.0 3.3 1.4 2.2 3.6 3.7 2.2 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.3 2.2 2.6 2.4 3.0 2.6 2.8 2.7 2.1 1.2 0.8 0.9 1.7 2.5 2.8 2.7 3.1 2.7 2.9 3.0 3.1 3.4 3.8 3.9 4.4 4.7 4.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.3 2.0 2.4 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.5 2.4 1.9 1.1 0.7 0.8 1.4 2.2 2.5 2.4 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.7 3.0 3.4 3.8 4.0 4.1 4.6 3.9 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.4 2.0 2.3 2.7 3.3 3.2 2.7 2.6 2.1 1.5 1.2 1.3 1.8 2.4 2.6 2.9 3.3 3.2 2.8 2.8 2.8 3.0 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.1 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.9 2.5 2.9 3.8 5.1 5.4 4.8 4.7 4.3 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.9 4.5 4.7 5.0 5.5 5.2 4.9 4.6 3.7 2.9 2.7 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.4 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 1.0 3.2 3.9 3.8 5.1 5.7 3.0 2.5 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.2 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 1.1 4.3 4.4 3.9 5.0 6.1 2.9 2.3 2.6 2.5 2.2 1.7 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 1.2 5.3 4.6 4.2 4.3 5.1 2.6 2.2 2.3 2.3 1.8 1.3 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 1.0 4.8 4.3 3.7 3.0 3.1 3.4 3.5 4.1 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.6 4.5 4.6 4.4 4.1 3.8 3.4 3.3 3.3 2.7 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.7 2.3 1.4 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.8 3.4 3.7 2.6 1.9 1.4 1.3 1.6 2.4 3.1 3.5 4.3 4.5 4.4 3.6 3.2 2.6 1.8 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.8 2.2 2.6 3.7 3.9 4.0 2.2 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.8 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.0 0.7 1.0 1.6 2.2 3.2 4.9 5.5 5.1 3.4 2.3 1.7 1.1 0.9 1.0 1.4 1.7 2.2 3.6 5.3 5.7 4.6 2.3 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.9 1.3 1.8 2.9 4.5 3.0 1.8 1.3 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.9 1.5 2.5 3.8 5.7 7.6 3.7 1.5 1.4 3.3 4.5 3.7 1.9 2.7 4.1 3.9 2.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.9 2.0 3.8 4.4 3.6 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.6 2.1 1.7 1.2 1.4 2.0 1.9 1.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.6 1.2 2.0 2.2 1.3 0.9 0.6 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8 9 9 9 9 8 9 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 8 9 10 10 9 9 9 9 9 8 7 8 9 10 10 9 9 10 10 10 9 9 9 9 10 10 9 9 9 10 10 10 9 9 10 10 10 10 9 9 10 10 9 7 8 9 10 10 9 9 10 10 10 10 9 9 9 10 10 9 9 9 10 10 10 9 9 10 10 10 10 9 9 10 10 9 7 7 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 9 9 9 9 10 10 9 9 9 9 9 9 7 6 7 8 8 7 7 8 8 8 8 7 7 8 8 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 8 7 8 8 8 8 7 7 8 8 7 6 SITE PHOTOMETRIC CALCULATIONS RC No. E17502 E S
E
TA S
TE
ECT
OF
L
GER I
ED
T RE
K
UPROFE
0 N I
C
L
I A
A
R I FO
L
A
E RE I N
L
C
S
S
H
H NA I O
NE G
GE
BB
M
S
L
C NBA CONTACT: MEG L. HOBBS, PE, LEED AP Electrical Spectral Engineering Consulting Engineers PHONE: 916-599-2439 EMAIL: [email protected] ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 1 of 16
City of Manteca
Development Services Department
Conditions of Approval
Crossroads Plaza
General Plan Amendment 22-04, Rezone 22-05,
Site Plan Review SPC 22-07 & Minor Use Permit UPN 22-08 April 16, 2024
Project File Numbers: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 Project Name: Crossroads Plaza
Project Address: 2064 North Union Road, Manteca, CA 95336 APN: 216-020-01
Project Applicant: Grey Peak Development, LLC; James Allen & Tenea Davis; 1925 Village Center Circle, Suite #150, Las Vegas, NV 89134 Property Owners: Manteca 18, LLC; Jim Berookhim; 2355 Westwood Boulevard, Suite 410, Los Angeles, CA 90064
NOTE: This list of conditions is not intended to be all-inclusive or a comprehensive list of City regulations. All conditions are referenced to the Crossroads Plaza Project Plan Set (dated 12/27/23) on file with the City of Manteca, Development Services Department, Planning Division.
City of Manteca Development Services Department: Planning Division
1. Acceptance of Conditions. Unless the applicant formally objects to these conditions prior to approval by the City Council, the applicant is bound by, must comply with, and must do all things required of or by the applicant pursuant to all of the terms, provisions, and conditions of these Conditions of Approval. All costs associated with compliance with the conditions shall be at the owner/developer’s expense.
2. Expiration of Approval. This approval for a General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Site Plan and Design Review, and Minor Use Permit shall automatically expire on April 16, 2026, or 24 months from and after the date of issuance. The date of issuance is the date these entitlements are approved by the City Council. Prior to the expiration date, the applicant may apply for an extension not to exceed one year.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 16
3. Vested Rights. This approval does not vest applicant’s rights regarding future development. All ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the project and public improvements to be constructed by the applicant shall be those in force and effect at the time the applicable plan or permit approval is granted.
4. Vesting Fees. This approval does not vest applicant’s rights regarding the payment of any development impact fees, exactions and dedications, processing fees, inspection fees, plan checking fees or charges, or any other fee or charge that could have been legally imposed by the City when the original application was deemed complete. All fees and charges shall be paid at the rate in effect at the time such fees are customarily due.
5. Fees. The applicant shall pay all applicable processing fees, permit fees, City development fees, fire fees, school fees, drainage fees, habitat conservation fees and other public entity fees in effect at the time of the issuance of the applicable permit.
6. Outside Agency Fees. It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to contact all outside agencies and pay applicable fees associated with this project.
7. Conformance to Plans. This approval is dependent upon and limited to the proposals and plans contained, supporting documents submitted, presentations made to staff, Planning Commission and/or City Council as affirmed to by the applicant. Any variation from these plans, proposals, supporting documents or presentations is subject to review and approval prior to implementation.
8. Subsequent Development. All activities undertaken in accordance with this approval shall comply with the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code. In cases of conflict between the City’s Municipal Code or map-specific conditions of approval, the governing priority shall be, to the extent legally permitted, as follows:
1) Municipal Code regulations; 2) project-specific conditions; 3) standard conditions. The applicant shall comply with all regulations and code requirements of the Development Services Director, City Engineer, Building Official, Fire Chief, the Police Chief and any other agencies requiring review of the project. If required, these agencies shall be supplied copies of the final maps, site plans, public improvement plans, grading plans and building plans.
9. Structure Conformance. Applicant shall ensure all structures will be built in compliance with the City’s Zoning Ordinance.
10. Utility Companies. The applicant is responsible for contacting all appropriate utility companies to obtain agreements for extension and/or relocation of services necessary for the proposed development.
11. Other Requirements. The applicant shall secure and comply with all applicable federal, state and local licenses, permits, authorizations, conditions, agreements, and orders prior to or during construction and operation, as appropriate.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 3 of 16
12. Failure to Comply. Should the project be found, at any time, not to comply with any of the Conditions of Approval, or should the applicant construct or operate this development in any way other than specified in the Application or Supporting documents or presentations to staff, Planning Commission or City Council, as modified by the Conditions of this Approval, then the terms of this Approval shall be considered violated.
13. Indemnification. The applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its council members and commissioners, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from liability for any award, damages, costs and fees, including without limitation attorneys’ fees, incurred by the City and/or awarded to any plaintiff in any action related to or arising out of the City’s approval of this project or subdivision Map or any environmental or other documentation related to this project or subdivision Map. The applicant further agrees to provide a defense for the City in any such action.
14. Limits of Approval. Approval of this application does not constitute approval of any other entitlement or any other necessary permit, license, or approval.
15. Compliance with Local and State Laws. The subject use shall be conducted in full compliance with all local and state laws. No part of this approval shall be construed to permit a violation of any part of the Manteca Municipal Code. This Site Plan & Design Review and Minor Use Permit shall be subject to revocation if the subject use is conducted in such a manner as to cause a nuisance.
16. Erosion Prevention. The applicant shall take all necessary measures to ensure that his activities or those of his agents do not result in measurable erosion of soils on the site, either wind or water, during the construction and operation of the project covered by this approval.
17. Location of Conditions. All conditions of approval for this project shall be written by the project developer on all building permit plan check sets submitted for review and approval. These conditions of approval shall be on, at all times, all grading and construction plans kept on the project site. It is the responsibility of the building developer to ensure that the project contractor is aware of, and abides by, all conditions of approval. Prior approval from the Planning Manager must be received before any changes are constituted in site design, grading, building design, building colors or materials, etc.
18. Roof mounted screening. Applicant/developer shall ensure all roof-mounted equipment shall remain screened from public street view.
19. Signage. All signage shall be submitted as a separate building permit from the Building Division and shall comply with Chapter 17.54 of the Zoning Ordinance.
No signage has been approved with this entitlement approval.
20. On-site Lighting. All on-site lighting for parking areas, pedestrian areas and vehicular or pedestrian paths of travel shall be LED lighting. Any new lighting is required to submit a photometric plan for review showing it complies with the following standards (17.50.060.D.):
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 4 of 16
a. Parking lots, driveways, trash enclosures/areas, public phones, and group mailboxes shall be illuminated with a minimum maintained 1 foot-candle of light and an average not to exceed 4 foot-candles of light. The illumination shall not exceed 10 foot-candles in any one location.
b. Pedestrian walkways shall be illuminated with a minimum maintained 0.5 footcandle of light and an average not to exceed 2 foot-candles of light. c. Entryways and exterior doors of nonresidential structures shall be illuminated during the hours of darkness with a minimum maintained 1 foot-candle of light, measured within a 5-foot radius on each side of the door at ground level.
22.Site Conditions. The site shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner free of weeds, trash and debris.
23.Landscaping. Required planting areas shall be permanently maintained by water, clearing debris and litter, weeding, pruning, insect control, and replacement of plant materials and irrigation equipment as needed to preserve the health and appearance of plant materials. All landscaping shall be maintained in such a manner as to not restrict designated pedestrian access. All trees, shrubs, and plants which, due to accident, damage, disease, or other cause, fail to show a healthy growth shall be replaced, in kind, pursuant to the approved landscape plans within 30 days from the identified damage date. (MMC 17.48.060.A)
24.Noise. At all times, property owner shall ensure that operations do not negatively affect the quiet enjoyment of their property and quality of life for nearby residents.
Property owner shall ensure noise levels generated at the site do not exceed City performance standards. Refer to Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 17.58, Performance Standards. Failure to comply with these standards may result in a revocation hearing.
25.Design Requirements Prior to Building Permit Issuance:
a) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall ensure that the site is developed in accordance with the plans dated 12/27/23.
Development of the site shall not be modified by the applicant/developer or by any City Department or Division without prior express written approval by the designated approving authority as stipulated in Section 17.10.060 (C) of the City of Manteca Municipal Code. If any structure(s) landscaping, parking, signage or other features of the approved plans are installed, constructed or removed or site improvements otherwise deviate from what was shown or illustrated on these approved plans, that shall render this entitlement modified. All modifications shall be brought into conformance with the approved site plan at the sole expense of the applicant/developer. When modifications have taken place, a Certificate of Occupancy shall not be granted until either: a) the site has been brought into conformance with these approved plans; or, b) the applicant/developer files an application for the appropriate amendment and that application has been approved.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 5 of 16
b) All conditions of approval for this project shall be written by the project developer on all building permit plan check sets submitted for review and approval. These conditions of approval shall be on, at all times, all grading and construction plans kept on the project site. It is the responsibility of the building developer to ensure that the project contractor is aware of, and abides by, all conditions of approval. Prior approval from the Deputy Director - Planning must be received before any changes are constituted in site design, grading, building design, building colors or materials, etc.
26.Tree Replacement. Three mature oak trees were removed as part of the development of this project. Prior to certificate of occupancy, three new trees must be planted on site at a minimum 36-inch box size, per City Code, Table
17.48.060-1.
27.Site Lighting. Prior to building permit issuance, the final illumination photometric must show there is zero light spillover (level of 0.0) at the property lines to the east and south.
28.Fuel Canopy Design. Prior to building permit issuance and to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director, the fuel canopy shall incorporate architectural details to match the architectural style of the buildings on site.
29.Landscape. Prior to building permit issuance, the final landscape plan must show compliance with all standards and regulations of the landscape ordinance.
30.Masonry wall. A 7-foot tall masonry wall is required along the project’s south and east property line, as it is a commercial use adjacent to a residential use.
The masonry wall is required to remain in an orderly and good condition at all times.
a. Include a climbing vine planted at the base of the masonry wall to soften the appearance of the wall.
31.Clear Visibility Triangle. Trees or shrubs with a full-grown height equal to or greater than 30 inches shall not be planted in the clear visibility triangle at the intersection of Union Road and Lathrop Road.
32.Facades. Include windows and/or a trellis with a climbing plant on the east and west facades of the convenience store. Include windows on the north and south facades of the Auto Zone building.
33.Landscape. Final landscape plans shall show Cypress trees in the landscape planters along the east and south property lines.
City of Manteca Development Services Department: Building Safety Division ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 6 of 16
1. Accessible parking spaces complying with CBC § 11B-502 shall be provided in accordance with CBC Table 11B-208.2. CBC § 11B-208.2 and § 11B-208.2.4.
2. Accessible routes shall be provided per CBC § 11B-206. At least one accessible route shall be provided within the site from accessible parking spaces and accessible passenger loading zone; public streets and sidewalks; and public transportation stops to the accessible building or facility entrance they serve. Where more than one route is provided, all routes must be accessible. CBC § 11B-206.2.1.
3. At least one accessible route shall connect accessible buildings, accessible facilities, accessible elements, and accessible spaces that are on the same site, including trash enclosure(s). CBC § 11B-206.2.2.
4. All entrances and exterior ground-floor exits to buildings and facilities shall be accessible and shall comply with CBC § 11B-404. CBC § 11B-206.4.1.
5. Developer shall obtain separate building permits for each structure, signage, trash enclosure, etc. per CBC Admin 104 prior to construction of said structure.
6. Adequate sanitary facilities shall be provided per the requirements of Chapter 4 of the California Plumbing Code and CPC Table 422.1.
7. Developer shall provide bike parking spaces in accordance with California Green Building Standards Code 5.106 for number and distance to the entrance.
8. Construction to provide electric vehicle infrastructure and facilitate electric vehicle charging shall comply with CGBSC Section 5.106.5.3.:
• EV Capable spaces shall be provided in accordance with Table 5.106.5.3.1.
o With 48 proposed parking spaces, eight (8) EV capable spaces are required.
o With eight (8) EV Capable spaces, two (2) EVCS (EV
Capable spaces provided with EVSE) are required.
o The number of required EVCS count toward the total
number of required EV capable spaces.
o Show all the EV Capable and EV Capable with EVSE
spaces on the site plan.
9. The Developer shall submit a letter/certification prepared by a licensed land surveyor or registered civil engineer to the Chief Building Official, certifying that the building location (setbacks) are pursuant to the approved plans prior to receiving a foundation inspection.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 7 of 16
10.The project shall comply with the more restrictive of the outdoor potable water reduction requirements of the California Green Building Standards Code 4.304 and the Manteca Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Please note this on the plans.
11.The developer shall submit a “Construction and Demolition Waste Reduction and Recycling Plan” for review and approval with the appropriate permit application.
12. At time of building permit, submittal the developer shall incorporate all Conditions of Approvals from all departments and imprint into the submittal set of construction documents/plans.
City of Manteca Engineering Department
General
1. All improvements shall comply with the City of Manteca Standard Plans and Specifications. Improvement plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval. An encroachment permit is required for all work within the public rightof-way.
2. Developer shall provide easements, requested by the respective utility companies, within the project. Any existing facilities within or adjacent to the project that are affected by this project shall be relocated and placed underground at the Developer’s expense.
3. Developer shall dedicate ten-foot (10’) wide public utility easements on all street frontages for underground facilities and appurtenances.
4. Developer shall indicate on the improvement plans topographical information which shall include one-foot (1’) contour intervals and benchmark data based on City datum.
5. During all construction phases, Developer shall comply with City Laws regarding dust control. Developer shall also comply with San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Regulation VIII (Fugitive Dust Prohibitions) in an effort to reduce the amount of fine particulate matter (PM10) entrained into the ambient air from man-made sources.
6. Prior to the start of construction, all survey monuments that have the possibility of being damaged, destroyed or covered over during the course of construction for this project, shall be located and referenced by a licensed land surveyor and a corner record or record of survey shall be filed with the county surveyor. Survey monuments which are damaged, destroyed or covered over during the course of construction must be re-set at the original location with a new monument and monument box and another corner record or record of survey shall be filed with the county surveyor. All work in this condition shall be done by a licensed land surveyor.
7. Prior to or with the Building Permit plan set the following shall be submitted.
Review and approval of these items by the Engineering Department must occur ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 8 of 16
prior to or with the issuance of the first building permit associated with this project.
a. On-site grading and drainage plan,
b. On-site utility (sanitary sewer, water and storm drain) plan, c. Off-site improvement plan,
d. Erosion control plans,
e. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP),
f. Documentation, as required in the Post-Construction Stormwater Standards Manual, showing compliance with WQO NPDES 2013-0001- DWQ,
g. Joint Trench Intent plans, and
h. Dedication of required rights-of-way and easements to the City.
The plans specified in (a), (b) and (c) above shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer.
The items in (d), (e) and (f) above shall be prepared by a Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD).
8. Joint trench utility installation shall be in accordance with Manteca Municipal Code Chapter 13.34 and City Standards.
9. All address numbers shall be plainly visible from the street fronting the property.
Said numbers/letters shall contrast with background.
10.Developer shall enter into an Improvement Agreement for construction of the roadway and utility improvements which will be dedicated to the City. The agreement will require posting a Performance Bond in the amount of onehundred percent (100%), posting a Labor-Material Bond in the amount of fifty percent (50%), and payment of all required plan check, testing and inspection fees.
11.Developer shall install a benchmark on the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 vertical control system with this project. Final location shall be approved by the City Engineer and shown on the Improvement Plans. Developer shall obtain a benchmark from the City of Manteca and it shall be punched with the elevation, datum reference and benchmark number, which will be assigned by the City. A corner record shall be filed with the San Joaquin County Surveyor’s Office and shall include the language that the benchmark is being added to the City of Manteca Vertical Control Network.
12.Improvements which will be dedicated to the City must use a benchmark on the City of Manteca NVGD29 Vertical Control Network to establish the elevations of the improvements. The benchmark used shall be noted on the Improvement Plans.
13.The Engineering elements for this project shall be reviewed and finalized during the Building Permit review process. Designs/layouts of utilities and roadway ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 9 of 16
elements presented with the proposed Site Plan are preliminary to support its approval and are not being approved with this action.
Site
14.On-site parking area pavement surface drainage slope shall be as follows:
Minimum cross-slope on asphalt concrete is 2% or concrete is 1% with a maximum of 5%. Concrete valley or curb gutters shall have a minimum slope of
0.25%. The pavement slope in ADA areas shall be in accordance with the California Building Code, Chapter 11B.
15.Provide City Standard Refuse/Recycling Enclosures on-site at the locations shown on the site plan. Sizing shall be in accordance with City Standards.
16.The refuse enclosure shall be graded so there is no storm drain flows enter or exit the enclosure area. The enclosure area shall have a connection to the storm drain system, in compliance with the City’s Post-Construction Manual.
17.On-site curbing shall conform to City of Manteca Standard ST-35, "Parking Area Curbs”.
18.Developer shall ensure no buildings are constructed across property lines.
19.The fueling area design shall meets the Design Considerations section of Source Control Measure S-13: Fuel Dispensing Areas in Appendix E of the City’s PostConstruction Manual.
20.The area under the gas pump canopy shall drain to itself. Any storm drain inlet in this area must be equipped with a SafeDrain or similar storm drain system protection device, as approved by the City Engineer.
21.A sand-oil separator, in accordance with City Standard M-2 shall be installed as part of the project.
22.Landscape planting at driveway entrances/exits shall be maintained to a maximum height of three and one-half feet (3.5’).
23.Egress points from this project to public right-of-way shall be stop controlled.
Developer shall install signage and striping at egress points on the project’s property to meet this condition.
Streets
24.Existing driveways which are not to be used by this project shall be removed and replaced with sidewalk, vertical curb and gutter.
25.Street improvements and City easement dedications shall be completed as a condition of the first final inspection of a building permit for this development.
This shall be noted on the cover of the building permit submittal.
26.Developer shall reconstruct N. Union Road and W. Lathrop Road on the east half and south half of the centerline, respectively. The exact reconstruction method shall be as determined by the City Engineer at the time of Building Permit submittal. At the least, Developer shall grind off the top 2” of the roadway and overlay the roadway with 2” of asphalt concrete (AC).
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 10 of 16
27.Developer shall modify the signal timing and install upgraded controllers at the intersection of N. Union Road/W. Lathrop Road to optimize the traffic flow at the intersection.
28.Developer shall install street lights along the project’s frontage of N. Union Road and W. Lathrop Road. Street lights shall maintain an average foot candle coverage of 0.40, with a minimum allowable foot candle at any location of 0.07 within the public right-of-way. Electrolier photometric plan, showing the foot candle coverage, shall be submitted with the Improvement Plans showing this requirement is met with the existing street lights. If not, the project shall install street lights or modify the existing street lights so this requirement is met.
29.Developer shall install street lights along the project’s frontage of N. Union Road and W. Lathrop Road. The electrolier locations shall be finalized during the Improvement Plan or Building Permit review process. Electroliers shall maintain an average foot candle coverage of 0.40, with a minimum allowable foot candle at any location of 0.07, within the City’s right-of-way. Electrolier photometric plan, showing the foot candle coverage, shall be submitted with the plans.
30.The thickness of all sidewalks installed with the project shall be six inches (6”).
31.Developer shall remove and replace the existing sidewalk, curb, gutter and accessibility ramps along the N. Union Road and W. Lathrop Road frontage of this project which is dilapidated, cracked or creates a tripping hazard, as determined by the City Engineer at the time of Building Permit submittal.
Sidewalk installed with this project shall be six inches (6”) thick.
32.Driveway(s) and accessibility ramps installed with this project shall be in compliance with the latest revision of the California Building Code, Chapter 11B and Caltrans Standard Plans, detail A88A.
33.Extend the proposed Union Road “Finger” median from the intersection of W.
Lathrop Road southerly to limit access of the southerly most driveway to a rightin/right-out. Specific design requirements shall be as directed by the Engineering Department during the Improvement Plan Review.
Water
34.Improvements shall be designed and constructed in conformance with the latest version of the City Water Master Plan.
35.The City’s Water Master Plan and User Rate Charges are currently being analyzed and updated by HydroScience. The update of the Master Plan is anticipated to be completed in late 2023. The Water Master Plan will identify improvement projects that need to be engineered and constructed for both the distribution system and the treatment systems. As the needed projects, both distribution and treatment, are identified, and associated costs estimated, user rates, connection charges, and Public Facilities Implementation Plan (PFIP) fees will likely increase. New development projects will have to pay the following fees, as adopted by the City Council, that are in place at the time of development/permit issuance: (1) User Rate Charges, (2) Connection Charges, and (3) PFIP fees.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 11 of 16
36.Existing wells within the boundary of the proposed development which are not approved for use by the City, shall be abandoned in accordance with San Joaquin County Public Health Services requirements.
37.Fire hydrant locations shall be as approved by the Fire Department and finalized during the Building Permit review process. Developer shall provide and install fire hydrant “blue dot” reflective markers prior to issuance of the first building permit.
38.The onsite water line shall be maintained by the Property Owner.
39.The onsite fire system shall be maintained by the Property Owner in perpetuity, in accordance with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 25 Fire Code, as amended.
40.Developer shall install double check detector check valves (DCDCV) where the fire hydrant/fire service line enters the site from the public water system. The DCDCV shall be installed on private property immediately adjacent to the City right-of-way or a dedicated City access easement and shall be maintained by the property owner.
41.Developer shall install one meter for the domestic water system for this project.
The meter shall be installed at an accessible location within the public utility easement, adjacent to the City’s ROW. Piping and appurtenances downstream of the water meter are private and will be maintained by the property owner.
42.Developer shall install a backflow prevention device immediately downstream of the water meter. The backflow prevention device shall be maintained by the Property Owner.
43.Developer may install a separate water meter for the landscape irrigation system.
The meter shall be installed at an accessible location within the public utility easement, adjacent to the City’s ROW or waterline maintenance and access easement. Piping and appurtenances downstream of the water meter are private and will be maintained by the Property Owner. Irrigation water from the potable system shall be protected with a reduced pressure backflow device.
44.Developer is allowed a single connection to the City’s water main on N. Lathrop Road and a single connection on W. Lathrop Road. The domestic water system and the landscape water system will separate off of this single connection just before the water meters.
45.Developer shall pay fees associated with the Reclaimed Water Master Plan for all houses within this subdivision for which a building permit is issued after adoption of said Reclaimed Water Master Plan and fees by the City Council of Manteca.
46.Existing service connections to the City’s water mains which will not be used by this project shall be abandoned, as directed by the City of Manteca.
Storm Drainage
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 12 of 16
47.Improvements shall be designed and constructed in conformance with the latest edition of the Storm Drain Master Plan, the City’s Post-Construction Manual and City Standards.
48.A preliminary storm drainage plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval concurrently with the first improvement plan submittal. The plan shall be accompanied by calculations for peak flows, total runoff, pipe sizes, detention basin volume and evidence of historical groundwater depth.
49.No under sidewalk drainage is allowed within the City’s right-of-way. Developer shall extend the existing storm drain pipe in N. Union Road northerly and install an inlet, in accordance with City Standards. The detailed review and approval of the project’s storm drain solution shall be done with the Building Permit review.
50.All drain inlets shall be marked "No Dumping - Drains to River". Drain markers shall be purchased from the City of Manteca at cost plus 15% administrative charge, and installed by the Developer prior to acceptance of the improvements.
51.Developer shall incorporate appropriate site design measure(s) and submit the results of the Post-Construction Runoff Standards Manual. The City of Manteca approval of the proposed measures is precedent to issuance of any building, grading or construction permits.
52.Developer shall develop and submit a Project Stormwater Plan that identifies the methods to be employed to reduce or eliminate stormwater pollutant discharges through the construction, operation and maintenance of source control measures, low impact development design, site design measures, stormwater treatment control measures, and hydromodification control measures. Design and sizing requirements shall comply with the 2015 Post- Construction Stormwater Standards Manual. City of Manteca approval of the Project Stormwater Plan is precedent to issuance of any building, grading, or construction permits. An electronic copy of the Project Stormwater Plan shall be provided to the City of Manteca
53.Developer shall develop a hydromodification management plan to ensure the post-project stormwater runoff flow rate shall not exceed estimated pre-project flow rate for the 2-year, 24-hour storm. The hydromodification management plan shall be incorporated into the Project Stormwater Plan.
54.Developer shall develop and submit an Operations and Maintenance Plan that identifies the operations, maintenance, and inspection requirements of all stormwater treatment and baseline hydromodification control measures identified in the approved Project Stormwater Plan. City of Manteca approval of the preliminary Operations and Maintenance Plan is precedent to issuance of any building, grading, or construction permits. An electronic copy of the Maintenance Plan shall be provided to the City of Manteca.
55.City of Manteca approval of the final Operations and Maintenance Plan and recordation of the Maintenance Access Agreement is precedent to first building final inspection for this project. Two paper copies and an electronic copy of the final Operations and Maintenance Plan shall be provided to the City of Manteca.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 13 of 16
56. Post-Construction Management Practices shall conform to the City’s adopted Multi-Agency Post Construction Stormwater Standards Manual.
57.Where conflict between standards arises, the standard most-protective to water quality, to public health and safety, and against flooding shall be utilized.
58.Prior to any land disturbing construction activities occurring on a project, Developer shall meet the requirements of NPDES. For sites exceeding 1 acre of disturbance area that are deemed non-exempt, contractor shall prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and apply for a permit under the California General Construction NPDES permit. SWPPP shall be prepared and signed by a Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD) certified by the State Water Resources Control Board. All modifications to SWPPP shall be implemented by a QSD in responsible charge for the project. The SWPPP shall be implemented under the supervision of a Qualified SWPPP Practitioner (QSP).
For permit information, contact the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) at:
State Water Resources Control Board
PO Box 1977, Sacramento, CA 95812-1977
Attn: Storm Water Permitting Section
Telephone: (916) 341-5537
To log in to the SWRCB Storm Water Multiple Application and Report Tracking System (SMARTS) to enter site information and apply for permit, please contact the City of Manteca Engineering Department to establish a project and authorize data entry access.
All other sites shall conform to the City of Manteca Standards, the California Green Building Standards, and Section E.10 of the NPDES permit 2013-0001- DWQ. All construction involving land disturbing activities shall submit for approval an Erosion Control and Sedimentation Plan (ESCP) prepared and signed by a QSD. All ESCP treatment measures and BMPs must be maintained at all times until construction is completed and the site is stabilized as defined under the Construction General NPDES permit.
Prior to issuance of the first grading or building permit for a project, a copy of the SWPPP or ESCP shall be submitted by the developer and approved by Authorized Signatory or Legally Responsible Person (LRP) for the City’s NPDES program. Contact the City of Manteca Engineering Department to identify appropriate person for review and approval of plans and documents.
59.It is recognized that the design and calculations which have been submitted thus far to demonstrate this project’s compliance with the City’s Post-Construction Stormwater Standards Manual are approved for project entitlements but may require further refinement for final approval, which is precedent to issuance of any building, grading, or construction permits.
60.Bioretention areas which are adjacent to the City sidewalk shall include a onefoot (1’) wide flat area behind the sidewalk prior to the start of the bioretention area side slope.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 14 of 16
61.Developer shall pay fair-share costs for storm drainage improvements, including improvements downstream to improve capacity or water quality treatments needed to conform to current Storm Drain Master Plan, City standards and support the development.
62.Developer shall complete the CDD development memorandum, required by Storm Drainage Agreement Amendment No. 1, and submit it to SSJID for review.
Sanitary Sewer
63.Improvements shall be designed and constructed in conformance with the latest version of the City Wastewater Collection System Master Plan and City Standards.
64.The City’s Sewer Master Plan and User Rate Charges are currently being analyzed and updated by Stantec. The update of the Master Plan is anticipated to be completed in late 2023. The Sewer Master Plan will identify improvement projects that need to be engineered and constructed for both the collection system and the Wastewater Quality Control Facility (WQCF). As the needed projects, both collection and at the WQCF are identified, and associated costs estimated, user rates, connection charges, and Public Facilities Implementation Plan (PFIP) fees will likely increase. New development projects will have to pay the following fees, as adopted by the City Council, that are in place at the time of development/permit issuance: (1) User Rate Charges, (2) Connection Charges, and (3) PFIP fees.
65.A manhole shall be located at the back of the sidewalk, adjacent to City right-ofway, where the sanitary sewer main enters the development. This manhole shall be the end of the City’s maintenance responsibility for the sanitary sewer system.
66.Any existing septic tank(s) on the property that will not be approved by the City shall be abandoned in accordance with the permitting requirements of the San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department prior to issuance of the first building permit.
67.A preliminary sewer plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer for approval concurrently with the first improvement plan submittal. The plan shall be accompanied by calculations for peak wet weather flows showing pipe sizes and slopes for the entire development.
68.The detailed review and approval of the project’s sanitary sewer solution shall be done with the Building Permit review. No force mains will be allowed within the City’s right-of-way.
City of Manteca Fire Department
1. Building “B” - deferred submittals for Fire Sprinklers and Fire Alarm.
2. Building “A” - deferred submittal for Fire Alarm.
City of Manteca Municipal Code:
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 15 of 16
907.2. Where required-automatic fire detection system. A Fire Department approved automatic fire detection system installed in accordance with this code and NFPA 72 shall be provided in accordance with Sections 907.2.1 through 907.2.23 or:
1. Every building hereafter constructed in which the total floor area is between 3,000 and 6,000 square feet.
2. Every building hereafter remodeled when the cost of remodeling exceeds $100,000 and the total floor area is between 3,000 and 6,000 square feet. The $100,000 valuation shall be based on building valuation data published by the International Conference of Building Officials within a 12-month period. Not fewer than one manual fire alarm box shall be provided in an approved locations to initiate a fire alarm signal for fire alarm systems employing automatic fire detectors or waterflow detection devices. Where other sections of this code allow elimination of fire alarm boxes due to sprinklers, a single fire alarm box shall be installed.
Exceptions:
1. The manual fire alarm box is not required for fire alarm systems dedicated to elevator recall control and supervisory service.
2. The manual fire alarm box is not required for Group R-2 occupancies unless required by the fire code official to provide a means for fire watch personnel to initiate an alarm during a sprinkler system impairment event.
Where provided, the manual fire alarm box shall not be located in an area that is open to the public.
3. Private hydrant will be needed within the property for Fire Fighting Operations and within 100 feet of the Fire Department Connection.
City of Manteca Public Works – Park Planning & Projects
1. Trees along Union Road and Lathrop Road shall be outside of the Public Right-ofWay (ROW).
2. Existing street trees along Lathrop Road shall be protected in place unless removed for driveway entrance. Any irrigation revisions shall be coordinated with the Parks Department prior to construction.
3. New planter at back of curb shall receive 24” box tree to match existing tree species on Lathrop Road.
City of Manteca Information Technology Department, GIS Division
1. The proposed Circle K will use the existing address of 2064 NORTH UNION ROAD.
The proposed AutoZone will be assigned 2080 NORTH UNION ROAD.
San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza: GPA 22-04, REZ 22-05, SPC 22-07, & UPN 22-08 2064 North Union Road
Conditions of Approval Page 16 of 16
1. This project shall comply with all applicable requirements from the San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department.
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
1. This project shall comply with all applicable requirements from the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.
San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation (Laurel Boyd, Habitat Planner)
1. This project is subject to the SJMSCP. If you have any questions, please call (209) 235-0600.
ATTACHMENT 6
8711 Monroe Court, Suite A
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
(909) 980-6455 Office
(909) 980-6435 Fax
SAN JOSE, CA | STOCKTON, CA | FRESNO, CA | BAKERSFIELD, CA | RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA DALLAS, TX | DENVER, CO | CHARLESTON, SC
December 15, 2023 Job No. 4-423-0090
Ms. Tenea Davis
Manteca 18, LLC
1925 Village Center Circle, Suite 150
Las Vegas, NV 89314
Subject: TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Proposed Commercial Development
2064 North Union Road
Manteca, California
Dear Ms. Davis:
At your request and authorization, a Traffic Memorandum to include the Trip Generation and VMT Screening for the above-referenced project located at 2064 North Union Road in the City of Manteca, California (subject property) was conducted by SALEM’s Traffic subconsultant (see following report).
This traffic impact analysis (TIA) analyzes the projected traffic operations associated with the proposed project, Crossroads Plaza, to be located at 2064 North Union Road in the City of Manteca. The purpose of this TIA is to evaluate potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from the development of the proposed project, and to recommend improvements to achieve acceptable operations, if applicable.
This analysis has been prepared in coordination with the City of Manteca via a scoping agreement and is pursuant to applicable City of Manteca traffic impact analysis guidelines. The proposed project development includes a twelve-pump gas station with a 5,200 square feet convenience store, and a 6,816 square-foot automobile supply store. Site access is planned via two right-in/right-out (RI/RO) driveways, the first on North Union Road and the second on West Lathrop Road. The site is currently zoned as CN for Neighborhood Commercial per the City of Manteca General Plan. The project site is currently vacant.
The proposed project is anticipated to be built and generating trips in 2024.
Please refer to the following report for details resulting from this TIA. We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with this project. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (909) 980-6455.
Respectfully submitted,
SALEM Engineering Group, Inc.
Maria G. Ruvalcaba, EP
Project Manager
ATTACHMENT 6
December 15, 2023
Prepared by:
TJW ENGINEERING, INC.
9841 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92618
949.878.3509 | www.tjwengineering.com
Crossroads Plaza
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Manteca, California
ATTACHMENT 6
9841 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 200 | Irvine, California 92618 | 949.878.3509 |www.tjwengineering.com December 15, 2023
Ms. Maria Ruvalcaba
SALEM ENGINEERING, INC.
8711 Monroe Court, Suite A
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Subject: Traffic Impact Analysis – Crossroads Plaza, 2064 North Union Road, City of Manteca Dear Ms. Ruvalcaba:
TJW ENGINEERING, INC. (TJW) is pleased to present you with this traffic impact analysis for the proposed project, Crossroads Plaza, located at 2064 North Union Road in the City of Manteca. This traffic study has been prepared to meet the traffic study requirements for the City of Manteca and assess the forecast traffic operations associated with the proposed project and its impact on the local street network. This report is being submitted to you for review and forwarding to the City of Manteca.
Please contact us at (949) 878-3509 if you have any questions regarding this analysis.
Sincerely,
Gene Kim, PE, TE David Chew, PTP
Principal Engineer Transportation Planner
Registered Civil Engineer #83175
Registered Traffic Engineer #2684
Daniel Flores, EIT
Project Engineer
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Traffic Impact Analysis
City of Manteca, California
December 15, 2023
Prepared for:
Ms. Maria G Ruvalcaba
SALEM ENGINEERING, INC.
8711 Monroe Court, Suite A
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Prepared by:
Gene Kim, PE, TE
David Chew, PTP
Daniel Flores, EIT
TJW ENGINEERING, INC.
9841 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92618
949.878.3509 | www.tjwengineering.com
ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
1 Table of Contents
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................ 4
1.1 SUMMARY OF LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS RESULTS ........................................................................ 5
1.2 ON-SITE ROADWAY AND SITE ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS .................................................................... 6
2.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................ 7
2.2 STUDY AREA ........................................................................................................................................ 7
2.3 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 8
2.3.1 Intersection Analysis Methodology ............................................................................................. 8
2.3.2 Roadway Segment Analysis Methodology ................................................................................ 10
2.4 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA .................................................................................................................. 10
2.4.1 City of Manteca ........................................................................................................................ 10
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................................... 13
3.1 EXISTING CIRCULATION NETWORK/STUDY AREA CONDITIONS ....................................................... 13
3.2 CITY OF MANTECA GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT............................................................ 13
3.3 EXISTING BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES ............................................................................... 13
3.4 EXISTING PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICES ................................................................................................ 13
3.5 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES ............................................................................................................ 13
3.6 EXISTING CONDITIONS INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ............................................... 14
3.7 EXISTING CONDITIONS ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS .................................... 14
4.0 PROPOSED PROJECT ............................................................................................................................. 17
4.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................................... 17
4.2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION .............................................................................................................. 17
4.3 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION ............................................................................................................ 18
5.0 OPENING YEAR PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS (OYP) ................................................................ 20
5.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................................................. 20
5.2 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS .................................................................................................................... 20
5.3 OYP TRAFFIC VOLUMES .................................................................................................................... 20
5.4 OYP INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 20
5.5 OYP ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ................................................................................... 21
6.0 CUMULATIVE WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS (CNP) .......................................................... 25
6.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................................................. 25
6.2 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS .................................................................................................................... 25
6.3 CNP TRAFFIC VOLUMES .................................................................................................................... 25
6.4 CNP INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 25 ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
2 6.5 CNP ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ................................................................................... 26
7.0 CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS (CWP) ................................................................. 28
7.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................................................. 28
7.2 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS .................................................................................................................... 28
7.3 CWP TRAFFIC VOLUMES ................................................................................................................... 28
7.4 CWP INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS ............................................................................ 28
7.5 CWP ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS .................................................................................. 29 List of Tables
Table 1 HCM – LOS & Delay Thresholds – Signalized Intersections ................................................................... 9 Table 2 HCM – LOS & Delay Thresholds – Unsignalized Intersections............................................................... 9 Table 3 HCM – LOS & Capacity Thresholds – Roadway Segments ................................................................... 10 Table 4 Roadway Characteristics within Study Area ........................................................................................ 13 Table 5 Intersection Analysis – Existing Conditions ......................................................................................... 14 Table 6 Roadway Segment – Existing Conditions ............................................................................................. 14 Table 7 Proposed Project Trip Generation ....................................................................................................... 17 Table 8 Intersection Analysis – OYP Traffic Conditions .................................................................................... 21 Table 9 Roadway Segment – OYP Traffic Conditions ....................................................................................... 21 Table 10 Cumulative Project Trip Generation .................................................................................................. 22 Table 11 Intersection Analysis – CNP Traffic Conditions.................................................................................. 26 Table 12 Roadway Segment – CNP Traffic Conditions ..................................................................................... 26 Table 13 Intersection Analysis – CWP Conditions ............................................................................................ 29 Table 14 Roadway Segment – CWP Traffic Conditions .................................................................................... 29 List of Exhibits
Exhibit 1: Project Location ................................................................................................................................ 11 Exhibit 2: Proposed Project Site Plan ............................................................................................................... 12 Exhibit 4: Existing Lane Geometry and Intersection Controls .......................................................................... 15 Exhibit 5: Existing AM and PM Peak Hour Volumes ......................................................................................... 16 Exhibit 6: Project Trip Distribution and Trip Assignments at Study Intersections ........................................... 19 Exhibit 7: Cumulative Project Locations ........................................................................................................... 23 Exhibit 8: Opening Year Plus Project AM and PM Peak Hour Volumes ........................................................... 24 Exhibit 9: Cumulative Without Project AM and PM Peak Hour Volumes ........................................................ 27 Exhibit 10: Cumulative Plus Project AM and PM Peak Hour Volumes ............................................................. 30 ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
3 Appendices
Appendix A: Scoping Agreement and City Docs
Appendix B: Existing Traffic Counts
Appendix C: HCM Analysis Sheets
ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
4 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This traffic impact analysis (TIA) analyzes the projected traffic operations associated with the proposed project, Crossroads Plaza, located at 2064 North Union Road in the City of Manteca. The purpose of this TIA is to evaluate potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from the development of the proposed project, and to recommend improvements to achieve acceptable operations, if applicable. This analysis has been prepared in coordination with the City of Manteca via a scoping agreement (See Appendix A) and is pursuant to applicable City of Manteca traffic impact analysis guidelines.
The proposed project consists of a 12-pump gas station with a 5,200 square foot convenience store and a 6,816 square foot auto supply store. Site access is planned via two right-in/right-out (RI/RO) driveways, the first on North Union Road and the second on West Lathrop Road. The site is currently zoned as CN for Neighborhood Commercial per the City of Manteca General Plan. The project site is currently vacant. The proposed project is anticipated to be built and generating trips in 2024.
The proposed project is projected to generate 984 daily trips, 95 AM peak hour trips, and 87 PM peak hour trips.
The following four (4) intersections and two (2) roadway segments in the vicinity of the project site have been included in the level of service (LOS) analysis:
Intersections:
1. North Union Road/West Lathrop Road.
2. Arrowsmith Drive/West Lathrop Road.
3. Project Driveway #1/West Lathrop Road, and
4. North Union Road/Project Driveway #2.
Roadway Segments:
1. North Union Road south of West Lathrop Road; and
2. West Lathrop Road east of North Union Road.
The study intersections are analyzed for the following study scenarios:
Existing Traffic Conditions (Existing);
Opening Year Traffic Plus Projects Conditions (Opening Year with Cumulative Projects + Proposed Project).
Cumulative Traffic Conditions (Horizon Year 2040 with Cumulative Projects); and ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
5 Cumulative Traffic Plus Project Conditions (Horizon Year 2040 with Cumulative Projects + Proposed Project).
1.1 SUMMARY OF LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS RESULTS
Table ES-1 summarizes the results of the intersection level of service analysis based on the City of Manteca thresholds of significance for analyzing transportation deficiencies.
Table ES-1
Summary of Transportation Deficiencies at Study Intersections Intersection Existing Opening Year Cumulative
No Project
Cumulative
With Project
1 North Union Road West Lathrop Road No Deficiencies No Deficiencies No Deficiencies No Deficiencies 2 Arrowsmith Drive West Lathrop Road No Deficiencies No Deficiencies No Deficiencies No Deficiencies 3 West Lathrop Road Project Driveway #1 No Deficiencies No Deficiencies No Deficiencies No Deficiencies 4 North Union Road Project Driveway #2 No Deficiencies No Deficiencies No Deficiencies No Deficiencies Existing Conditions
The study intersections are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours for Existing conditions.
Opening Year Traffic Plus Project Conditions
The study intersections are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours for Opening Year Traffic Plus Project conditions.
Cumulative Traffic Conditions
The study intersections are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours for Cumulative Traffic conditions.
Cumulative Traffic Plus Project Conditions
The study intersections are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours for Cumulative Traffic Plus Project conditions.
ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
6 1.2 ON-SITE ROADWAY AND SITE ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS
Wherever necessary, roadways adjacent to the proposed project site and site access points will be constructed in compliance with recommended roadway classifications and respective cross-sections in the City of Manteca General Plan or as directed by the City Engineer.
Sight distance at each project access point should be reviewed with respect to standard Caltrans and City sight distance standards at the time of final grading, landscaping, and street improvement plans.
Signing/striping should be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the project site.
ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
7 2.0 INTRODUCTION
This traffic impact analysis (TIA) analyzes the projected traffic operations associated with the proposed project, Crossroads Plaza, located at 2064 North Union Road in the City of Manteca. The purpose of this TIA is to evaluate potential circulation system deficiencies that may result from the development of the proposed project, and to recommend improvements to achieve acceptable operations, if applicable. This analysis has been prepared in coordination with the City of Manteca via a scoping agreement (See Appendix A) and is pursuant to applicable City of Manteca traffic impact analysis guidelines.
2.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project consists of a 5,200 square foot convenience store and a 6,816 square foot auto supply store. Site access is planned via two right-in/right-out (RI/RO) driveways, the first on North Union Road and the second on West Lathrop Road. The site is currently zoned as CN for Neighborhood Commercial per the City of Manteca General Plan. The project site is currently vacant. The proposed project is anticipated to be built and generating trips in 2025.
Exhibit 1 shows the project site location. Exhibit 2 shows the proposed project site plan.
2.2 STUDY AREA
The following four (4) intersections and two (2) roadway segments in the vicinity of the project site have been included in the level of service (LOS) analysis:
Intersections:
1. North Union Road/West Lathrop Road
2. Arrowsmith Drive/West Lathrop Road
3. West Lathrop Road/Project Driveway #1
4. North Union Road/Project Driveway #2
Roadway Segments:
1. North Union Road south of West Lathrop Road
2. West Lathrop Road east of North Union Road
The study intersections and roadway segments are all located within the City of Manteca. This traffic analysis follows the City of Manteca Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines.
Exhibit 1 shows the location of the study intersections and roadway segments which are analyzed for the following study scenarios:
ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
8 Existing Traffic Conditions (Existing);
Opening Year Traffic Plus Projects Conditions (Opening Year with Cumulative Projects + Proposed Project);
Cumulative Traffic Conditions (Horizon Year 2040 with Cumulative Projects); and Cumulative Traffic Plus Project Conditions (Horizon Year 2040 with Cumulative Projects + Proposed Project).
Traffic operations are evaluated for the following time periods:
Weekday AM Peak Hour occurring between 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM; and Weekday PM Peak Hour occurring between 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM.
2.3 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
2.3.1 Intersection Analysis Methodology
The traffic analysis focuses on the project’s off-site traffic-related impacts at the traffic study area intersections and on the study area roadway segments. In accordance with the City of Manteca Transportation Impact Study Guidelines, intersection operation for both signalized and unsignalized intersections is evaluated using the methodology of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 7th Edition (Transportation Research Board, 2022).
The Highway Capacity Manual uses Level of Service (LOS) to describe the quality of flow on roadways and at intersections using a range from LOS A, or very favorable progression, to LOS F, or very poor progression.
The LOS definitions for interruption of traffic flow differ depending on the type of traffic control (traffic signal, unsignalized intersection with side street stops, unsignalized intersection with all-way stops).
The Highway Capacity Manual LOS ranges for signalized intersections is based on the intersection’s average control delay for all movements at the intersection during the peak hour. Control delays include initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay.
Table 1 identifies each Level of Service category with the corresponding general characteristics of traffic flow plus accompanying delay ranges at signalized intersections.
ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
9 Table 1
HCM – LOS & Delay Thresholds – Signalized Intersections Level of Service Description
Delay
(in seconds)
A
Very favorable progression: most vehicles arrive during green signal and do not stop.
Short cycle lengths.
0 – 10.00
B Good progression, short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS A. 10.01 – 20.00 C
Fair progression; longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear. The number of vehicles stopping is significant, though many vehicles still pass through without stopping.
20.01 – 35.00
D
Progression less favorable, longer cycle length and high flow/capacity ratio. The proportion of vehicles that pass through without stopping diminishes. Individual cycle failures are obvious.
35.01 – 55.00
E
Severe congestion with some long-standing queues on critical approaches. Poor progression, long cycle lengths and high flow/capacity ratio. Individual cycle failures are frequent.
55.01 – 80.00
F
Very poor progression, long cycle lengths and many individual cycle failures. Arrival flow rates exceed capacity of intersection.
> 80.01
Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, HCM 7th Edition (Washington D.C., 2022).
The Highway Capacity Manual LOS range for unsignalized intersections is based on the weighted average control delay expressed in seconds per vehicle. At a two-way or side-street stop-controlled intersection, LOS is calculated for each stop-controlled minor street movement, for the left-turn movement(s) from the major street, and for the intersection as a whole. For approaches consisting of a single lane, the delay is calculated as the average of all movements in that lane. For all-way stop-controlled intersections, LOS is computed for the intersection as a whole. Table 2 describes the general characteristics of traffic flow and accompanying delay ranges at unsignalized intersections.
Table 2
HCM – LOS & Delay Thresholds – Unsignalized Intersections Level of
Service
Description
Delay
(in seconds)
A Little or no delays. 0 – 10.00
B Short traffic delays. 10.01 – 15.00
C Average traffic delays. 15.01 – 25.00
D Long traffic delays. Multiple vehicles in queue. 25.01 – 35.00 E Very long delays. Demand approaching capacity of intersection 35.01 – 50.00 F Very constrained flow with extreme delays and intersection capacity exceeded. > 50.01 Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, HCM 7th Edition (Washington D.C., 2022).
This study utilizes PTV Vistro 2022 analysis software for all signalized and unsignalized intersections. Vistro is a macroscopic traffic software program that is based on the signalized intersection capacity analysis specified in Chapter 16 of the HCM. The level of service and capacity analysis performed within Vistro takes into consideration the optimization and coordination of signalized and unsignalized intersections within a network.
ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
10 2.3.2 Roadway Segment Analysis Methodology
The City of Manteca Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines utilizes the Highway Capacity Manual to evaluate roadway segment daily capacity and corresponding LOS for each roadway classification. LOS is estimated by comparing the two-way 24-hour traffic volumes on the roadway segment to the daily roadway capacity, based on its functional classification. This comparison results in a volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio, which represents the percentage of the daily vehicular capacity that is required to accommodate the daily traffic volume. Table 3 presents the LOS range based on daily roadway segment capacity.
Table 3
HCM – LOS & Capacity Thresholds – Roadway Segments
Number of
Lanes
Maximum Daily Two-Way Traffic Volume (ADT1)
LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E
2 8,400 9,300 11,800 14,700 17,300
4 18,600 20,600 26,000 32,500 38,200
6 28,800 32,000 40,300 50,400 59,300
8 38,100 42,300 53,300 66,600 78,400
Source: City of Manteca Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines 1: ADT = Average Daily Traffic
2.4 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
2.4.1 City of Manteca
The City of Manteca General Plan has established the level of service “D” or better as acceptable LOS for all intersections and roadways within the designated street and highway system in the General Plan Circulation Element. For the purposes of analyzing the proposed project’s impact on traffic conditions, the City of Manteca Transportation Impact Study Guidelines identify significant impacts through a comparison of “no project” and “with project” traffic conditions.
For signalized and unsignalized intersections, impact is established if the project causes the LOS to change from an acceptable LOS under “no project” conditions to an unacceptable LOS under “with project” conditions. In addition, should the intersection under existing “no project” conditions operate at an unacceptable LOS, the project has an impact if the average vehicle delay increases by five (5) seconds or more.
For roadway segments, impact is established if the project causes the LOS to change from an acceptable LOS under “no project” conditions to an unacceptable LOS under “with project” conditions. Additionally, the project is determined to have an impact should it increase the daily volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c) by more than 0.1.
ATTACHMENT 6
Not to Scale
džŚŝďŝt ϭ͗ WƌoƉoƐeĚ Wƌoũect >ocatŝoŶ Crossroads Plaza Trip Gen SEG-23-002 Legend: Project Site # Study Intersection Location 1 Lathrop Road Union Road 2 Arrowsmith Drive
ATTACHMENT
6 Not to Scale
džŚŝďŝt Ϯ͗ WƌoƉoƐeĚ Wƌoũect Sŝte WlaŶ Crossroads Plaza Trip Gen SEG-23-002
ATTACHMENT
6 SEG-23-002
13 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 EXISTING CIRCULATION NETWORK/STUDY AREA CONDITIONS
The characteristics of the roadway system within the vicinity of the project site are described in Table 4.
Table 4
Roadway Characteristics within Study Area
Roadway Classification1Jurisdiction Direction
Existing
Travel Lanes
Median
Type2
Speed
Limit (mph)
On-Street
Parking
North Union Road Arterial Manteca North-South 4 NM 40 No West Lathrop Road Arterial Manteca East-West 4 RM 45 No 1: Source: City of Manteca General Plan (April 2023)
2: TWLTL = Two-Way Left-Turn Lane, RM= Raised Median, NM = No Median.
Exhibit 3 shows the existing conditions of the study area intersection controls and roadway geometry.
3.2 CITY OF MANTECA GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT
The proposed project site is located within the City of Manteca. Appendix A contains the current City of Manteca General Plan Circulation Element and an explanation of roadway cross sections.
3.3 EXISTING BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Within the study area, a Class II bike lane exists on North Union Road south of West Lathrop Road.
3.4 EXISTING PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICES
The City of Manteca is served by the Manteca Transit which provides bus service throughout the City of Manteca. Manteca Transit Route 3 has a stop on North Union Road 95 feet from the south border of the proposed project. Appendix A shows the routes in the vicinity of the project site.
3.5 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
To determine the existing operation of the study intersections, AM and PM peak period traffic volumes were estimated based on new traffic counts collected on November 14, 2023. Detailed traffic count data is provided in Appendix B. Exhibit 4 shows existing AM and PM peak hour volumes at the study intersections.
ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
14 3.6 EXISTING CONDITIONS INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS Existing conditions AM and PM peak hour intersection analysis is shown in Table 5. Calculations are based on the existing geometrics at the study area intersections as shown in Exhibit 3. HCM analysis sheets are provided in Appendix C.
Table 5
Intersection Analysis – Existing Conditions
Intersection Control Type Peak Hour
Existing Conditions
Delay (s/veh) LOS
1 North Union Road West Lathrop Road Signal
AM 32.00 C
PM 33.20 C
2 Arrowsmith Drive West Lathrop Road TWSC
AM 17.32 C
PM 14.48 B
Note: TWSC = Two-Way Stop-Control; Delay shown in seconds per vehicle. 1 = Per the Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition, for signalized intersection, the overall average delay and LOS are shown. For intersections with one or two-way stop-control, the delay and LOS for the worst individual movement is shown.
As shown, the study intersections are currently operating at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours.
3.7 EXISTING CONDITIONS ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS The roadway segment level of service analysis was conducted based on the roadway capacities presented previously in this report. The results of the roadway analysis for Existing Conditions are shown in Table 6.
Review of this table indicates that the study roadway segments are currently operating at an acceptable level of service on a daily basis.
Table 6
Roadway Segment – Existing Conditions
Roadway Segment Classification
Existing
Travel Lanes
LOS D
Capacity
Existing
ADT1 V/C LOS
North Union Road
West Lathrop Road to
Sprague Street
Arterial 4 32,500 11,530 0.302 A
West Lathrop Road
North Union Road to
Arrowsmith Drive
Arterial 4 32,500 17,180 0.450 A
1: ADT = Average Daily Traffic based on 10% of peak hour volumes.
ATTACHMENT 6
Not to Scale
džŚŝďŝt ϯ͗
džŝƐtŝŶŐ >aŶe 'eoŵetƌLJ aŶĚ /ŶteƌƐectŝoŶ oŶtƌolƐ Crossroads Plaza Trip Gen SEG-23-002 1 Lathrop Road Union Road Arrowsmith Drive 2 Union Road/ Lathrop Road Arrowsmith Drive/ Lathrop Road
ATTACHMENT
6 Not to Scale
džŚŝďŝt ϰ͗
džŝƐtŝŶŐ D aŶĚ WD WeaŬ ,oƵƌ solƵŵeƐ Crossroads Plaza Trip Gen SEG-23-002 Union Road/ Lathrop Road Arrowsmith Drive/ Lathrop Road 1 Lathrop Road Union Road Arrowsmith Drive 2 Union Road/ Lathrop Road Arrowsmith Drive/ Lathrop Road PM Peak Hour Volumes AM Peak Hour Volumes
ATTACHMENT
6 SEG-23-002
17 4.0 PROPOSED PROJECT
4.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project consists of a 5,200 square foot convenience store and a 6,816 square foot auto supply store. Site access is planned via two right-in/right-out (RI/RO) driveways, the first on North Union Road and the second on West Lathrop Road. The site is currently zoned as CN for Neighborhood Commercial per the City of Manteca General Plan. The project site is currently vacant. The proposed project is anticipated to be built and generating trips in 2025.
Exhibit 2 as previously shown displays the proposed project site plan.
4.2 PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Trip generation represents the amount of traffic, both inbound and outbound, produced by a development.
Determining trip generation for a proposed project is based on projecting the amount of traffic that the specific land uses being proposed will produce. Industry standard Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021) trip generation rates were used to determine trip generation of for most of the proposed project land uses.
Table 7 summarizes the projected AM peak hour, PM peak hour, and daily trip generation of the proposed project. The proposed project is projected to generate 984 net daily trips with 95 net AM and 87 net PM peak hour trips.
Table 7
Proposed Project Trip Generation
Proposed Land Use1
ITE
Code Qty Unit2
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Volume Rate In:Out
Split
Volume
Rate In:Out
Split
Volume
In Out Total In Out Total
Convenience Store/Gas
Station, GFA (4-5.5k), VFP (>8) 945 12.00 VFP 257.13 3,086 27.04 50:50 162 162 324 22.76 50:50 137 136 273 Pass-By Trips (0.75 Daily, 0.76
AM, 0.75 PM) -2,315 -123 -123 -246 -103 -102 -205
Automobile Parts Sales 843 6.82 TSF 54.57 372 2.51 55:45 9 8 17 4.9 48:52 16 17 33 Pass-By Trips (0.43 Daily, 0.43
PM) -160 0 0 0 -7 -7 -14
Results Daily Volume AM Peak Hour In Out Total PM Peak Hour In Out Total Subtotal 3,458 171 170 341 153 153 306
Pass-By Trips -2,474 -123 -123 -246 -110 -109 -219
Net Total 984 48 47 95 43 44 87
1: Trip generation and pass-by rates from ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition, 2021). 2: TSF = Thousand Square Feet; VFP = Vehicle Fueling Positions.
ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
18 4.3 PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Projecting trip distribution involves identifying probable destinations and traffic routes used by the proposed project’s traffic. Potential interaction between proposed land use and surrounding regional access routes are considered to identify probable routes onto which project traffic would distribute. The projected trip distribution for the proposed project is based on anticipated travel patterns to and from the project site.
Exhibit 5 shows the projected trip distribution of proposed project’s generated trips.
ATTACHMENT 6
(XX%) Percent Trip Distribution Legend: Project Site # Study Intersection LocationNot to Scale džŚŝďŝt ϲ͗ Wƌoũect dƌŝƉ ŝƐtƌŝďƵtŝoŶ aŶĚ dƌŝƉ ƐƐŝŐŶŵeŶt at StƵĚLJ /ŶteƌƐectŝoŶƐ Crossroads Plaza Trip Gen SEG-23-002 1 Lathrop Road Union Road 2 Arrowsmith Drive 30% 10%60%
ATTACHMENT
6 SEG-23-002
20 5.0 OPENING YEAR PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS (OYP) Opening Year Plus Project Traffic Conditions (OYP) analysis is intended to identify existing conditions with the proposed project.
5.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for the OYP scenario are consistent with those previously shown in Exhibit 3.
5.2 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS
This analysis also accounts for the projected impact of other reasonably foreseeable development projects in the study area. These cumulative projects may be in various stages of planning, entitlement, and construction. A list of cumulative projects was developed for this analysis through consultation with City of Rialto staff. A summary of cumulative project land uses is shown in Table 10. Cumulative project locations are shown in Exhibit 6.
5.3 OYP TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Opening Year Plus Project conditions volumes were estimated based on a yearly growth rate of 2.6% per year from base year (2023) to the proposed project’s estimated year of completion (2025).
OYP Traffic Volumes = (Existing (2023) Counts * 1.026^2) + Cumulative Projects + Proposed Project Exhibit 7 shows Opening Year Plus Project AM and PM peak hour volumes at the study intersections.
5.4 OYP INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
Opening Year Plus Project AM and PM peak hour intersection analysis is shown in Table 8. HCM analysis sheets are provided in Appendix C.
ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
21 Table 8
Intersection Analysis – OYP Traffic Conditions
Intersection Control Type Peak Hour OYP Conditions
ICU/Delay1 LOS
1 North Union Road West Lathrop Road Signal
AM 43.70 D
PM 50.30 D
2 Arrowsmith Drive West Lathrop Road TWSC
AM 21.15 C
PM 17.03 C
3 West Lathrop Road Project Driveway #1 TWSC
AM 13.19 B
PM 13.66 B
4 North Union Road Project Driveway #2 TWSC
AM 11.59 B
PM 11.64 B
Note: TWSC = Two-Way Stop-Control; Delay shown in seconds per vehicle. 1 = Per the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 7th Edition, for signalized intersection, the overall average delay and LOS are shown. For intersections with one or two-way stop-control, the delay and LOS for the worst individual movement is shown.
As shown, the study intersections are projected to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours for Opening Year Plus Project traffic conditions.
5.5 OYP ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
The roadway segment level of service analysis results for Opening Year Plus Project traffic conditions scenario are summarized in Table 9. Review of this table indicates that the study roadway segments are projected to continue to operate at an acceptable level of service on a daily basis.
Table 9
Roadway Segment – OYP Traffic Conditions
Roadway Segment Classification
Existing
Travel Lanes
LOS D
Capacity
OYP ADT1 V/C LOS
North Union Road
West Lathrop Road to
Sprague Street
Arterial 4 32,500 19,356 0.507 B
West Lathrop Road
North Union Road to
Arrowsmith Drive
Arterial 4 32,500 22,724 0.595 C
1: ADT = Average Daily Traffic based on 10% of peak hour volumes.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Traffic Impact Analysis
In Out Total In Out Total
1. GBX – 2261 Operation Place From reports provided 294.943 TSF 662 46 21 67 22 45 67
2. Airport Business Centre – 2803 N. Airport Way From reports provided 141.360 TSF 1,010 73 23 96 39 104 143
3. Airport Business Centre North – 3045, 3123, & 3157 N. Airport Way From reports provided 360 TSF 1,358 97 42 139 48 91 139
4. CenterPoint South – 2229 & 2273 N. Airport Way From reports provided 99.514 TSF 494 61 8 69 8 55 63
5. Airport Plaza – 2060 W. Lathrop Rd. From reports provided 6,150 78 70 148 81 70 151
6. Lathrop Road Commercial -2064 Crestwood Ave. Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) 822 8.402 TSF 54.45 457 2.36 60:40 12 8 20 6.59 50:50 28 27 55
7. North Manteca Annexation 1 (Just the Union Ranch Subdivision) 5,214 94 273 367 307 180 487
8. Luxury Apartments – 1279 W. Lathrop Rd. Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise), Not Close to Rail Transit 220(1) 136.000 DU 6.74 917 0.4 24:76 13 41 54 0.51 63:37 43 26 69
9. Woodbridge Retail West – 2155, 2127, & 2193 N. Union Rd. From reports provided 4,254 320 313 Daily Volume In Out Total In Out Total
20,516 474 486 1,280 576 598 1,487
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20,516 474 486 1,280 576 598 1,487
1: Trip generation and pass-by rates from ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition, 2021). 2: Parentheses reflect subcategory of land use code. For example, 945(2) is only convenience stores/gas stations with a general floor area (GFA) of 2-4k square feet and >8 VFPs. 3: RM = Rooms; TSF = Thousand Square Feet; VFP = Vehicle Fueling Positions; DU = Dwelling Units.
Table 10
Cumulative Project Trip Generation
Project Land Use1
ITE
Code2 Qty Unit3
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Volume Rate
In:Out
Split
Volume
Rate
In:Out
Split
Volume
Subtotal
Results AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Net Total
Pass-By Trips
SEG-23-002
ATTACHMENT 6
Not to Scale
džŚŝďŝt ϭϬ͗ ƵŵƵlatŝǀe Wƌoũect >ocatŝoŶ Crossroads Plaza Trip Gen SEG-23-002 Legend: Approximate Cumulative Project Locations Project Site X 1 5 4 23 7 9 8 6
ATTACHMENT
6 Not to Scale
džŚŝďŝt ϳ͗ KƉeŶŝŶŐ zeaƌ WlƵƐ Wƌoũect D aŶĚ WD WeaŬ ,oƵƌ solƵŵeƐ Crossroads Plaza Trip Gen SEG-23-002 PM Peak Hour Volumes Union Road/ Lathrop Road Arrowsmith Drive/ Lathrop Road Driveway #1/ Lathrop Road Union Road/ Driveway #2 1 Lathrop Road Union Road Arrowsmith Drive 2 Union Road/ Lathrop Road Arrowsmith Drive/ Lathrop Road Driveway #1/ Lathrop Road Union Road/ Driveway #2 AM Peak Hour Volumes 3 4
ATTACHMENT
6 SEG-23-002
25 6.0 CUMULATIVE WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS (CNP) Cumulative Without Project (CNP) traffic conditions analysis is intended identify baseline conditions with cumulative projects in the City of Manteca horizon year 2040 and without the proposed project.
6.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for the Cumulative Without Project traffic scenario are consistent with those previously shown in Exhibit 3.
6.2 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS
This analysis also accounts for the projected impact of other reasonably foreseeable development projects in the study area. These cumulative projects may be in various stages of planning, entitlement, and construction. Section 5.2 provides a summary of the cumulative projects.
6.3 CNP TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Cumulative Without Project conditions volumes were estimated based on yearly growth rates from current year (2023) to horizon year (2040) in the City of Manteca model. An annual growth rate of 2.6% was applied up to year 2028, followed by a 1% annual growth rate from 2029 to 2040.
Cumulative Without Project Traffic Volumes = (Existing (2023) Counts * 1.026^6 * 1.01^12 + Cumulative Projects
Exhibit 8 shows Cumulative Without Project AM and PM peak hour volumes at the study intersections.
6.4 CNP INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
Cumulative Without Project AM and PM peak hour intersection analysis is shown in Table 11. HCM analysis sheets are provided in Appendix C.
ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
26 Table 11
Intersection Analysis – CNP Traffic Conditions
Intersection Control Type Peak Hour
CNP Conditions
ICU/Delay1 LOS
1 North Union Road West Lathrop Road Signal AM 49.70 D
PM 49.80 D
2 Arrowsmith Drive West Lathrop Road OWSC
AM 22.86 C
PM 18.87 C
Note: AWSC = OWSC = One-Way Stop Control, Delay shown in seconds per vehicle. 1 = Per the Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition, for signalized intersection, the overall average delay and LOS are shown. For intersections with one or two-way stop-control, the delay and LOS for the worst individual movement is shown.
As shown in Table 11, the study intersections are projected to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours for Cumulative Without Project traffic conditions.
6.5 CNP ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
The roadway segment level of service analysis results for Cumulative Without Project traffic conditions scenario are summarized in Table 12. Review of this table indicates that the study roadway segments are projected to continue to operate at an acceptable level of service on a daily basis.
Table 12
Roadway Segment – CNP Traffic Conditions
Roadway Segment Classification
Existing
Travel Lanes
LOS D
Capacity
CNP ADT1 V/C LOS
North Union Road
West Lathrop Road to
Sprague Street
Arterial 4 32,500 21,496 0.563 C
West Lathrop Road
North Union Road to
Arrowsmith Drive
Arterial 4 32,500 26,155 0.685 D
1: ADT = Average Daily Traffic based on 10% of peak hour volumes.
ATTACHMENT 6
Not to Scale
džŚŝďŝt ϴ͗ ƵŵƵlatŝǀe tŝtŚoƵt Wƌoũect D aŶĚ WD WeaŬ ,oƵƌ solƵŵeƐ Crossroads Plaza Trip Gen SEG-23-002 1 Lathrop Road Union Road Arrowsmith Drive 2 Union Road/ Lathrop Road Arrowsmith Drive/ Lathrop Road Union Road/ Lathrop Road Arrowsmith Drive/ Lathrop Road PM Peak Hour Volumes AM Peak Hour Volumes
ATTACHMENT
6 SEG-23-002
28 7.0 CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS (CWP) Cumulative Plus Project Traffic (CWP) conditions analysis is intended to identify the project-related impacts on both the existing and planned City of Manteca horizon year (2040) circulation system.
7.1 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The lane configurations and traffic controls assumed to be in place for the Cumulative Plus Project traffic scenario are consistent with those previously shown in Exhibit 3.
7.2 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS
This analysis also accounts for the projected impact of other reasonably foreseeable development projects in the study area. These cumulative projects may be in various stages of planning, entitlement, and construction. Section 5.2 provides a summary of the cumulative projects.
7.3 CWP TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Cumulative Plus Project conditions volumes were estimated based on yearly growth rates from current year (2023) to horizon year (2040) in the City of Manteca model. An annual growth rate of 2.6% was applied up to year 2028, followed by a 1% annual growth rate from 2029 to 2040.
Cumulative Plus Project Traffic Volumes = (Existing (2023) Counts * 1.026^6 * 1.01^12) + Cumulative Projects + Proposed Project
Exhibit 9 shows Cumulative Plus Project traffic AM and PM peak hour volumes at the study intersections.
7.4 CWP INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
Cumulative Plus Project traffic conditions AM and PM peak hour intersection analysis is shown in Table 13.
HCM analysis sheets are provided in Appendix C.
ATTACHMENT 6
SEG-23-002
29 Table 13
Intersection Analysis – CWP Conditions
Intersection Control
Type
Peak
Hour
CNP
Conditions
CWP
Conditions Change Impact?
ICU/Delay1 LOS ICU/Delay1 LOS
1 North Union
Road West Lathrop Road Signal AM 49.70 D 53.60 D 3.9 No PM 49.80 D 51.20 D 1.4 No
2 Arrowsmith Drive West Lathrop Road TWSC
AM 22.86 C 23.50 C 0.6 No
PM 18.87 C 19.28 C 0.4 No
3 West Lathrop
Road Project Driveway #1 TWSC
AM 14.36 B
PM 14.30 B
4 North Union
Road Project Driveway #2 TWSC
AM 12.07 B
PM 11.73 B
Note: OWSC = One-Way Stop Control; Delay shown in seconds per vehicle. 1 = Per the Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition, overall average delay and LOS are shown for signalized intersections. For intersections with one-or-twoway stop-control, the delay and LOS for the worst individual movement is shown.
As shown in Table 13, the study intersections are projected to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS during the AM and PM peak hours for Cumulative Plus Project traffic conditions.
7.5 CWP ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
The roadway segment level of service analysis results for Cumulative Plus Project traffic conditions scenario are summarized in Table 14. Review of this table indicates that the study roadway segments are projected to continue to operate at an acceptable level of service on a daily basis.
Table 14
Roadway Segment – CWP Traffic Conditions
Roadway Segment Classification
Existing
Travel Lanes
LOS D
Capacity
CWP
ADT1 V/C LOS
North Union Road
West Lathrop Road to
Sprague Street
Arterial 4 32,500 21,988 0.576 C
West Lathrop Road
North Union Road to
Arrowsmith Drive
Arterial 4 32,500 26,647 0.698 D
1: ADT = Average Daily Traffic based on 10% of peak hour volumes.
ATTACHMENT 6
Not to Scale
džŚŝďŝt ϵ͗ ƵŵƵlatŝǀe tŝtŚ Wƌoũect D aŶĚ WD WeaŬ ,oƵƌ solƵŵe Crossroads Plaza Trip Gen SEG-23-002 Union Road/ Lathrop Road Arrowsmith Drive/ Lathrop Road Driveway #1/ Lathrop Road Union Road/ Driveway #2 1 Lathrop Road Union Road Arrowsmith Drive 2 Union Road/ Lathrop Road Arrowsmith Drive/ Lathrop Road Driveway #1/ Lathrop Road Union Road/ Driveway #2 PM Peak Hour Volumes AM Peak Hour Volumes
ATTACHMENT
6 SEG-23-002
31 APPENDIX
ATTACHMENT 6
APPENDIX A
SCOPING AGREEMENT AND CITY DOCS
ATTACHMENT 6
1 David Chew
From: Fenrich, Mallorie <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 7:56 AM
To: David Chew
Cc: Maria Ruvalcaba; Travis Yokota; Daniel Flores; Simvoulakis, Lea Subject: RE: Crossroads Plaza (2064 North Union Road)
Great, provided the items below are addressed in the traffic report, we are supporƟve.
I will see if we can get you a list of cumulaƟve projects in the area we would like you to include.
Thank you,
Mallorie Fenrich, Senior Planner, MUP, CPD
City of Manteca | Development Services Department
1215 W. Center St., Suite 201| Manteca, CA 95337
Office: 209.456.8514
manteca.gov
From: David Chew <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2023 5:27 PM
To: Fenrich, Mallorie <[email protected]>
Cc: Maria Ruvalcaba <[email protected]>; Travis Yokota <[email protected]>; Daniel Flores <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Crossroads Plaza (2064 North Union Road)
WARNING! This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi Mallorie,
Thank you for sending the review on the scoping. Please see below responses:
- Truck turn templates for the gas trucks showing movements entering, exiƟng, and throughout the site. o The project team will include truck turning templates with the applicaƟon/site plan. - Show that trucks will stay in their lane when entering and exiƟng the site. o Same as above, these turning exhibits will be provided by the project team. - Please note that a median will be required on Union Road so this may affect access. The whole site will be rightin/right-out. o Confirmed, we will assume right-in/right-out for all driveways. - This site will not have access to Nunes Court.
o Confirmed/noted, there will be no access to Nunes Court. - What will the impacts be for Arrowsmith Drive and Lathrop Road? ATTACHMENT 6
2 o We will include this intersecƟon in our analysis to determine any potenƟal impacts.
We will perform the traffic analysis per the emailed scope from October 3rd with the addiƟon of the above notes.
In addiƟon, can we get a list of cumulaƟve projects within the area that the City would like us to account for/include in our analysis?
Thanks,
From: Fenrich, Mallorie <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 4:29 PM
To: David Chew <[email protected]>
Cc: Maria Ruvalcaba <[email protected]>; Simvoulakis, Lea <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Crossroads Plaza (2064 North Union Road)
Hi David,
The scope will also need to include the following:
- Truck turn templates for the gas trucks showing movements entering, exiƟng, and throughout the site. - Show that trucks will stay in their lane when entering and exiƟng the site. - Please note that a median will be required on Union Road so this may affect access. The whole site will be rightin/right-out. - This site will not have access to Nunes Court.
- What will the impacts be for Arrowsmith Drive and Lathrop Road? Thank you,
Mallorie Fenrich, Senior Planner, MUP, CPD
City of Manteca | Development Services Department
1215 W. Center St., Suite 201| Manteca, CA 95337
Office: 209.456.8514
manteca.gov
From: David Chew <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 10:48 AM
To: Fenrich, Mallorie <[email protected]>
Cc: Maria Ruvalcaba <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Crossroads Plaza (2064 North Union Road)
WARNING! This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi Mallorie,
ATTACHMENT 6
3 Wanted to follow up on this and see if you’ve heard back from Engineering yet.
Thanks,
David Chew, PTP
Transportation Planning Manager
TJW Engineering
T. 949.878.3509
D. 949.536.8450
From: Fenrich, Mallorie <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 8:52 AM
To: David Chew <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Crossroads Plaza (2064 North Union Road)
Hi David,
I apologize for the delay. I am waiƟng to hear back from Engineering that they are okay with the scope.
Thank you,
Mallorie Fenrich, Senior Planner, MUP, CPD
City of Manteca | Development Services Department
1215 W. Center St., Suite 201| Manteca, CA 95337
Office: 209.456.8514
manteca.gov
From: David Chew <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 1:08 PM
To: Fenrich, Mallorie <[email protected]>
Cc: Bahr, David <[email protected]>; Maria Ruvalcaba <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Crossroads Plaza (2064 North Union Road)
WARNING! This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hello Mallore,
Wanted to follow up on the below email.
Thanks,
ATTACHMENT 6
4 David??Chew,??PTP
Transportation??Planning??Manager
TJW Engineering
T.??949.878.3509
D.??949.536.8450
From: David Chew
Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2023 4:47 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; Maria Ruvalcaba <[email protected]> Subject: Crossroads Plaza (2064 North Union Road)
Hello Mallore,
We are working with Maria Ruvalcaba (cc’d) on the Crossroads Plaza Traffic Analysis located at 2064 North Union Road.
The proposed project includes a 12-pump gas staƟon with a 5,200 square foot convenience store and a 6,816 square foot auto supply store. A site plan is aƩached for reference.
In response to the comments provided by the City, we will look at the following as part of the scope for our TIA.
Study Area IntersecƟon:
o Lathrop Road / Union Road
o Lathrop Road / Project Driveway
o Union Road / Project Driveway
Study Area Roadway Segments:
o Union Road south of Lathrop Road
o Lathrop Road east of Union Road
Study Scenarios:
o ExisƟng CondiƟons
o Opening Year Plus Proposed Project (Opening Year with CumulaƟve Projects and Proposed Project) o CumulaƟve CondiƟons (Horizon Year 2040 with CumulaƟve Projects o CumulaƟve CondiƟons with Project (Horizon Year 2040 with CumulaƟve Projects and Proposed Project)
AddiƟonal scoping related items:
o The study will review traffic impacts during the AM and PM peak hour periods of 7-9AM and 4-6PM. o Trip GeneraƟon will be based on latest ITE Trip GeneraƟon Manual and trip distribuƟon/assignment will be based on proposed projects and the general area.
o Annual growth rate of 2.6% will be applied up to year 2028, followed by a 1% growth rate applied from 2029 to year 2040.
o CumulaƟve projects will be determined as projects within 0.5 radius of our site City to provide list of cumulaƟve projects
o VMT analysis – Project will be screened via local serving project as outlined per OPR guidelines
If the above is sufficient, we will consider this proposed project to be scoped as such, and we will be moving forward with the data collecƟon efforts.
Please let us know if you have any quesƟons/concerns.
Thank you,
ATTACHMENT 6
5 Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast, a leader in email security and cyber resilience. Mimecast integrates email defenses with brand protection, security awareness training, web security, compliance and other essential capabilities. Mimecast helps protect large and small organizations from malicious activity, human error and technology failure; and to lead the movement toward building a more resilient world. To find out more, visit our website.
ATTACHMENT 6
4. Circulation
4-7 Adoption Draft
Table C-1: Street Classifications
Street Type Description
Parkway
High-capacity thoroughfare, typically four to six lanes, focused on vehicular traffic with limited property frontages. Aesthetically appealing with landscaped median islands. Provides regional access to adjacent land uses and safe crossings for all travel modes along a regional transportation corridor. Intersections typically require a ½ mile separation. Pedestrians and bicycles accommodated in a landscapeseparated path. Emphasizes regional vehicle trips through collaborations with other cities and agencies. On-street motor vehicle parking typically prohibited.
Arterial
Major thoroughfare, typically four lanes, focused on through traffic and public transit, with access for major local traffic generators, such as commercial, industrial, institutional, and large high-density housing complexes. Pedestrian sidewalks and Class II or IV bicycle facilities provided on both sides of the street. Curbside landscaping and landscaped medians encouraged. Restriping with narrower lanes allowed where necessary to close gaps in pedestrian and bicycle system. Provides access and safe crossings for all travel modes. On-street vehicle parking is typically prohibited.
Main Street
Arterial
Pedestrian-oriented street, typically two lanes, with primarily retail, mixeduse, or recreation uses. Provides access to all travel modes in support of typical “main street” land uses and includes on-street motor vehicle and bicycle parking. Service to pedestrian-oriented retail is of prime importance. Provides enhancements for walking and transit, including bulb-outs to reduce pedestrian crossing distances. On-street motor vehicle parking may be permitted where feasible to enhance access to adjacent uses.
Major
Collector
Major collector streets, typically two to four lanes, serve as smaller-scale parallel routes to arterial streets and provide access to neighborhoods.
Examples include Center Street, Powers Avenue, and Daniels Street west of Airport Way. Major collector streets will typically provide two travel lanes, a Class II bike lane or Class IV separated bikeway and a sidewalk on both sides. Median islands and turn lanes may be appropriate in certain conditions. For newly constructed major collector streets, on-street parking should be prohibited to reduce pavement width, pedestrian crossing distances, and maintenance costs. On-street parking for existing major collector streets should be restricted or limited by eliminating the parking lane or through the use of bulb-outs to minimize the cross section and discourage speeding.
ATTACHMENT 6
Manteca General Plan
April 2023 4-8
Street Type Description
Minor
Collector
Minor collector streets, typically two lanes, serve as the backbone circulation routes within larger neighborhoods and commercial/industrial areas, providing primary access to commercial and industrial uses and linking low volume residential streets to major collector and arterial streets. Minor collector streets should be small scale, two lane streets.
The streets should be wide enough to safely accommodate traffic flows, but not so wide as to encourage high-speed travel. Depending on the surrounding land uses (e.g., office, commercial, or residential areas), the minor collector may accommodate Class II bike lanes. Sidewalks should be provided on each side of the street.
Residential
Streets
While they carry relatively light traffic loads, residential streets, typically two lanes, constitute the majority of Manteca's street system. These streets are intended to serve residential driveways, providing access between homes and larger streets. These streets should include narrow travel and parking lanes to slow travel and discourage through trips and sidewalks on both sides of the street. Features like corner bulb-outs and traffic circles (a smaller version of a roundabout) should be incorporated to improve the aesthetic quality of the street, while calming traffic. Class III bike routes and special pavement markings for bicycles should be provided where appropriate to provide continuity for the bicycle system.
Where a residential street ends in a cul-de-sac, a shared bicycle/pedestrian path should be constructed to connect the cul-de-sac to other residential, collector, or arterial streets to shorten travel distances and encourage the use of these modes.
Intersections
of City Streets
Intersections are critical components of the street network since they tend to define how well the system operates. Drivers and transit users typically experience most of their traveling delay at intersections. Intersections are important for pedestrians and bicycles since they provide controlled points where these modes can cross major roadways. In general, intersections should have minimum lane widths to serve the type of vehicles expected on the roadway (e.g., lanes should be sufficiently wide to accommodate trucks in industrial areas). Narrower lanes pose less of a barrier for pedestrians to cross and reduce maintenance costs. Where there is demand, u-turn movements should be accommodated in the intersection design to the extent feasible to extend the length of landscaped medians. Bus bays should be included in intersection designs for expressways, arterials, and major collectors to maintain traffic flow while buses are loading and unloading.
ATTACHMENT 6
!k
!k
!k UV120
UV99
UV99
Lathrop
Stockton
YOSEMITE AVE
FRENCH CAMP RD
EL DORADO ST
WOODWARD AVE
AUST NI RD
LOUISE AVE
ROTH RD
MATHEWS RD
NORTHGATE DR
UNION RD
CENTER STMAIN ST
COTTAGE AVE
AIRPORT WAY
LATHROP RD
AUSTIN RD
Oakwood Lake
Circle
Lake
City Limits
Planning Area
Neighboring City
!k Future Interchange
Future Road (Dashed)
Roads to be Removed
Future Lanes
2-lane
4-lane
5-lane
6-lane
q 0 ½ 1
Miles
E120
Figure C-1: Major Streets Circulation Plan
Future alignments are conceptual and will be refined at the time the improvement is planned for funding.
ATTACHMENT 6
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
! !
!
!
!
! !
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
! !
! !! !
!
!
UV120
UV99
UV99
Lathrop
Stockton
YOSEMITE AVE
FRENCH CAMP RD
EL DORADO ST
WOODWARD AVE
AUST NI RD
LOUISE AVE
ROTH RD
MATHEWS RD
NORTHGATE DR
UNION RD
CENTER ST MAIN ST
COTTAGE AVE
AIRPORT WAY
LATHROP RD
AUSTIN RD
Oakwood Lake
Circle
Lake
City Limits
Planning Area
Neighboring
! Planned Crossing
Improvement
Planned Sidewalk
Planned Class I
Bike Path
Existing Class I
Bike Path
q 0 ½ 1
Miles
E120
Figure C-2: Active Transportation Plan - Pedestrian Network ATTACHMENT 6
UV120
UV99
UV99
Lathrop
Stockton
YOSEMITE AVE
FRENCH CAMP RD
EL DORADO ST
WOODWARD AVE
AUST NI RD
LOUISE AVE
ROTH RD
MATHEWS RD
NORTHGATE DR
UNION RD
CENTER ST MAIN ST
COTTAGE AVE
AIRPORT WAY
LATHROP RD
AUSTIN RD
Oakwood Lake
Circle
Lake
q 0 ½ 1
Miles
E120
Figure C-3: Active Transportation Plan - Bicycle Network City Limits
Planning Area
Neighboring City
Existing Bicycle Facilities
Class I - Multi-Use Path
Class II - Bicycle Lane
Class III - Bicycle Route
Planned Bicycle Facilities
Class I Bike Path
Class II Bike Lanes
Class II Buffered Bike Lanes
Class III Bike Route
Class IV Separated Bikeway
ATTACHMENT 6
APPENDIX B
EXISTING TRAFFIC COUNTS AND MODEL VOLUMES
ATTACHMENT 6
File Name : 01_MTC_Union_Lathrop AM
Site Code : 231098
Start Date : 11/14/2023
Page No : 1
City of Manteca
N/S: Union Road
E/W: Lathrop Road
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Union Road
Southbound
Lathrop Road
Westbound
Union Road
Northbound
Lathrop Road
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 26 23 6 55 22 71 27 120 17 46 26 89 5 81 9 95 359 07:15 AM 33 28 13 74 43 91 24 158 19 21 55 95 7 116 11 134 461 07:30 AM 43 39 22 104 59 136 37 232 24 37 51 112 6 118 18 142 590 07:45 AM 34 42 15 91 62 139 32 233 14 46 86 146 12 125 21 158 628 Total 136 132 56 324 186 437 120 743 74 150 218 442 30 440 59 529 2038 08:00 AM 43 65 7 115 66 69 32 167 24 71 66 161 19 143 46 208 651 08:15 AM 33 86 10 129 64 78 32 174 25 53 55 133 9 115 33 157 593 08:30 AM 25 45 11 81 53 78 24 155 25 60 85 170 12 91 23 126 532 08:45 AM 22 38 11 71 39 64 28 131 18 30 45 93 17 98 23 138 433 Total 123 234 39 396 222 289 116 627 92 214 251 557 57 447 125 629 2209 Grand Total 259 366 95 720 408 726 236 1370 166 364 469 999 87 887 184 1158 4247 Apprch % 36 50.8 13.2 29.8 53 17.2 16.6 36.4 46.9 7.5 76.6 15.9 Total % 6.1 8.6 2.2 17 9.6 17.1 5.6 32.3 3.9 8.6 11 23.5 2 20.9 4.3 27.3 Union Road
Southbound
Lathrop Road
Westbound
Union Road
Northbound
Lathrop Road
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM
07:30 AM 43 39 22 104 59 136 37 232 24 37 51 112 6 118 18 142 590 07:45 AM 34 42 15 91 62 139 32 233 14 46 86 146 12 125 21 158 628 08:00 AM 43 65 7 115 66 69 32 167 24 71 66 161 19 143 46 208 651 08:15 AM 33 86 10 129 64 78 32 174 25 53 55 133 9 115 33 157 593 Total Volume 153 232 54 439 251 422 133 806 87 207 258 552 46 501 118 665 2462 % App. Total 34.9 52.8 12.3 31.1 52.4 16.5 15.8 37.5 46.7 6.9 75.3 17.7 PHF .890 .674 .614 .851 .951 .759 .899 .865 .870 .729 .750 .857 .605 .876 .641 .799 .945 Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
ATTACHMENT 6
File Name : 01_MTC_Union_Lathrop AM
Site Code : 231098
Start Date : 11/14/2023
Page No : 2
City of Manteca
N/S: Union Road
E/W: Lathrop Road
Weather: Clear
Union Road
Lathrop Road
Lathrop Road
Union Road
Right
54 Thru
232
Left
153
Out In Total
386 439 825
Right
133
Thru
422
Left
251
Out Total In
912 806 1718
Left
87 Thru
207
Right
258
Out In Total
601 552 1153
Left
46 Thru
501
Right
118
Total Out In
563 665 1228
Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
07:30 AM 07:30 AM 07:45 AM 07:30 AM
+0 mins. 43 39 22 104 59 136 37 232 14 46 86 146 6 118 18 142 +15 mins. 34 42 15 91 62 139 32 233 24 71 66 161 12 125 21 158 +30 mins. 43 65 7 115 66 69 32 167 25 53 55 133 19 143 46 208 +45 mins. 33 86 10 129 64 78 32 174 25 60 85 170 9 115 33 157 Total Volume 153 232 54 439 251 422 133 806 88 230 292 610 46 501 118 665 % App. Total 34.9 52.8 12.3 31.1 52.4 16.5 14.4 37.7 47.9 6.9 75.3 17.7 PHF .890 .674 .614 .851 .951 .759 .899 .865 .880 .810 .849 .897 .605 .876 .641 .799 Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
ATTACHMENT 6
File Name : 01_MTC_Union_Lathrop PM
Site Code : 231098
Start Date : 11/14/2023
Page No : 1
City of Manteca
N/S: Union Road
E/W: Lathrop Road
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Union Road
Southbound
Lathrop Road
Westbound
Union Road
Northbound
Lathrop Road
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 04:00 PM 48 57 18 123 49 115 38 202 28 65 48 141 29 171 36 236 702 04:15 PM 36 62 11 109 50 104 30 184 27 59 41 127 32 131 27 190 610 04:30 PM 33 50 13 96 57 116 31 204 16 37 41 94 22 148 35 205 599 04:45 PM 23 50 7 80 55 98 34 187 22 53 52 127 26 128 32 186 580 Total 140 219 49 408 211 433 133 777 93 214 182 489 109 578 130 817 2491 05:00 PM 21 54 10 85 60 126 36 222 36 38 46 120 20 140 36 196 623 05:15 PM 28 50 7 85 62 114 24 200 22 43 44 109 21 104 27 152 546 05:30 PM 28 54 15 97 53 113 27 193 18 45 64 127 27 130 37 194 611 05:45 PM 37 55 9 101 51 123 24 198 24 45 36 105 17 154 20 191 595 Total 114 213 41 368 226 476 111 813 100 171 190 461 85 528 120 733 2375 Grand Total 254 432 90 776 437 909 244 1590 193 385 372 950 194 1106 250 1550 4866 Apprch % 32.7 55.7 11.6 27.5 57.2 15.3 20.3 40.5 39.2 12.5 71.4 16.1 Total % 5.2 8.9 1.8 15.9 9 18.7 5 32.7 4 7.9 7.6 19.5 4 22.7 5.1 31.9 Union Road
Southbound
Lathrop Road
Westbound
Union Road
Northbound
Lathrop Road
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Left Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:00 PM
04:00 PM 48 57 18 123 49 115 38 202 28 65 48 141 29 171 36 236 702 04:15 PM 36 62 11 109 50 104 30 184 27 59 41 127 32 131 27 190 610 04:30 PM 33 50 13 96 57 116 31 204 16 37 41 94 22 148 35 205 599 04:45 PM 23 50 7 80 55 98 34 187 22 53 52 127 26 128 32 186 580 Total Volume 140 219 49 408 211 433 133 777 93 214 182 489 109 578 130 817 2491 % App. Total 34.3 53.7 12 27.2 55.7 17.1 19 43.8 37.2 13.3 70.7 15.9 PHF .729 .883 .681 .829 .925 .933 .875 .952 .830 .823 .875 .867 .852 .845 .903 .865 .887 Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
ATTACHMENT 6
File Name : 01_MTC_Union_Lathrop PM
Site Code : 231098
Start Date : 11/14/2023
Page No : 2
City of Manteca
N/S: Union Road
E/W: Lathrop Road
Weather: Clear
Union Road
Lathrop Road
Lathrop Road
Union Road
Right
49 Thru
219
Left
140
Out In Total
456 408 864
Right
133
Thru
433
Left
211
Out Total In
900 777 1677
Left
93 Thru
214
Right
182
Out In Total
560 489 1049
Left
109
Thru
578
Right
130
Total Out In
575 817 1392
Peak Hour Begins at 04:00 PM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
04:00 PM 04:30 PM 04:00 PM 04:00 PM
+0 mins. 48 57 18 123 57 116 31 204 28 65 48 141 29 171 36 236 +15 mins. 36 62 11 109 55 98 34 187 27 59 41 127 32 131 27 190 +30 mins. 33 50 13 96 60 126 36 222 16 37 41 94 22 148 35 205 +45 mins. 23 50 7 80 62 114 24 200 22 53 52 127 26 128 32 186 Total Volume 140 219 49 408 234 454 125 813 93 214 182 489 109 578 130 817 % App. Total 34.3 53.7 12 28.8 55.8 15.4 19 43.8 37.2 13.3 70.7 15.9 PHF .729 .883 .681 .829 .944 .901 .868 .916 .830 .823 .875 .867 .852 .845 .903 .865 Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
ATTACHMENT 6
File Name : 02_MTC_Arr_Lathrop AM
Site Code : 231098
Start Date : 11/14/2023
Page No : 1
City of Manteca
N/S: Arrowsmith Drive
E/W: Lathrop Road
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Lathrop Road
Westbound
Arrowsmith Drive
Northbound
Lathrop Road
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru App. Total Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 07:00 AM 0 131 131 3 2 5 145 0 145 281
07:15 AM 1 163 164 2 6 8 192 2 194 366
07:30 AM 5 221 226 8 2 10 220 4 224 460
07:45 AM 0 230 230 3 2 5 247 8 255 490
Total 6 745 751 16 12 28 804 14 818 1597
08:00 AM 0 157 157 6 5 11 244 6 250 418
08:15 AM 0 170 170 5 3 8 186 5 191 369
08:30 AM 1 136 137 3 1 4 205 3 208 349
08:45 AM 1 126 127 3 1 4 165 2 167 298
Total 2 589 591 17 10 27 800 16 816 1434
Grand Total 8 1334 1342 33 22 55 1604 30 1634 3031
Apprch % 0.6 99.4 60 40 98.2 1.8
Total % 0.3 44 44.3 1.1 0.7 1.8 52.9 1 53.9
Lathrop Road
Westbound
Arrowsmith Drive
Northbound
Lathrop Road
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru App. Total Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM
07:30 AM 5 221 226 8 2 10 220 4 224 460
07:45 AM 0 230 230 3 2 5 247 8 255 490
08:00 AM 0 157 157 6 5 11 244 6 250 418
08:15 AM 0 170 170 5 3 8 186 5 191 369
Total Volume 5 778 783 22 12 34 897 23 920 1737
% App. Total 0.6 99.4 64.7 35.3 97.5 2.5
PHF .250 .846 .851 .688 .600 .773 .908 .719 .902 .886
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
ATTACHMENT 6
File Name : 02_MTC_Arr_Lathrop AM
Site Code : 231098
Start Date : 11/14/2023
Page No : 2
City of Manteca
N/S: Arrowsmith Drive
E/W: Lathrop Road
Weather: Clear
Lathrop Road
Lathrop Road
Arrowsmith Drive
Thru
778
Left
5 Out Total In
909 783 1692
Left
22 Right
12 Out In Total
28 34 62
Thru
897
Right
23 Total Out In
800 920 1720
Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
07:30 AM 07:15 AM 07:15 AM
+0 mins. 5 221 226 2 6 8 192 2 194
+15 mins. 0 230 230 8 2 10 220 4 224
+30 mins. 0 157 157 3 2 5 247 8 255
+45 mins. 0 170 170 6 5 11 244 6 250
Total Volume 5 778 783 19 15 34 903 20 923
% App. Total 0.6 99.4 55.9 44.1 97.8 2.2
PHF .250 .846 .851 .594 .625 .773 .914 .625 .905
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
ATTACHMENT 6
File Name : 02_MTC_Arr_Lathrop PM
Site Code : 231098
Start Date : 11/14/2023
Page No : 1
City of Manteca
N/S: Arrowsmith Drive
E/W: Lathrop Road
Weather: Clear
Groups Printed- Total Volume
Lathrop Road
Westbound
Arrowsmith Drive
Northbound
Lathrop Road
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru App. Total Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Int. Total 04:00 PM 3 197 200 1 1 2 237 7 244 446
04:15 PM 2 187 189 3 1 4 202 4 206 399
04:30 PM 0 183 183 1 8 9 217 8 225 417
04:45 PM 0 182 182 5 2 7 194 5 199 388
Total 5 749 754 10 12 22 850 24 874 1650
05:00 PM 3 214 217 2 0 2 205 3 208 427
05:15 PM 3 179 182 3 0 3 172 8 180 365
05:30 PM 3 218 221 5 2 7 229 8 237 465
05:45 PM 1 168 169 6 4 10 204 7 211 390
Total 10 779 789 16 6 22 810 26 836 1647
Grand Total 15 1528 1543 26 18 44 1660 50 1710 3297
Apprch % 1 99 59.1 40.9 97.1 2.9
Total % 0.5 46.3 46.8 0.8 0.5 1.3 50.3 1.5 51.9
Lathrop Road
Westbound
Arrowsmith Drive
Northbound
Lathrop Road
Eastbound
Start Time Left Thru App. Total Left Right App. Total Thru Right App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:00 PM
04:00 PM 3 197 200 1 1 2 237 7 244 446
04:15 PM 2 187 189 3 1 4 202 4 206 399
04:30 PM 0 183 183 1 8 9 217 8 225 417
04:45 PM 0 182 182 5 2 7 194 5 199 388
Total Volume 5 749 754 10 12 22 850 24 874 1650
% App. Total 0.7 99.3 45.5 54.5 97.3 2.7
PHF .417 .951 .943 .500 .375 .611 .897 .750 .895 .925
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
ATTACHMENT 6
File Name : 02_MTC_Arr_Lathrop PM
Site Code : 231098
Start Date : 11/14/2023
Page No : 2
City of Manteca
N/S: Arrowsmith Drive
E/W: Lathrop Road
Weather: Clear
Lathrop Road
Lathrop Road
Arrowsmith Drive
Thru
749
Left
5 Out Total In
862 754 1616
Left
10 Right
12 Out In Total
29 22 51
Thru
850
Right
24 Total Out In
759 874 1633
Peak Hour Begins at 04:00 PM
Total Volume
Peak Hour Data
North
Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Each Approach Begins at:
04:45 PM 04:00 PM 04:00 PM
+0 mins. 0 182 182 1 1 2 237 7 244
+15 mins. 3 214 217 3 1 4 202 4 206
+30 mins. 3 179 182 1 8 9 217 8 225
+45 mins. 3 218 221 5 2 7 194 5 199
Total Volume 9 793 802 10 12 22 850 24 874
% App. Total 1.1 98.9 45.5 54.5 97.3 2.7
PHF .750 .909 .907 .500 .375 .611 .897 .750 .895
Counts Unlimited, Inc.
PO Box 1178
Corona, CA 92878
(951) 268-6268
ATTACHMENT 6
APPENDIX C
HCM ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS
ATTACHMENT 6
EXISTING CONDITION
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection Analysis Summary
Report File: C:\...\E AM.pdf 12/14/2023
Vistro File: C:\...\SEG23002 Vistro.vistro Scenario 1 E AM Crossroads Plaza
V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.
NB Left 0.090 19.4 C
HCM 7th
Edition 2 Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd Two-way stop
EB Left 0.671 32.0 C
HCM 7th
Edition 1 N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd Signalized
ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS 1 12/14/2023
Scenario 1: 1 E AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.671
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 32.0
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
2 12/14/2023
Scenario 1: 1 E AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 92 219 273 162 246 57 49 530 125 266 447 141 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 23 55 68 40 61 14 12 133 31 66 112 35 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 87 207 258 153 232 54 46 501 118 251 422 133 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Proportion of CAVs [%] 0.00
Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 87 207 258 153 232 54 46 501 118 251 422 133 Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
3 12/14/2023
Scenario 1: 1 E AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 17 0 0 21 0 0 17 0 0 17 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 10 26 0 14 30 0 11 26 0 24 39 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 0 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 16.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
4 12/14/2023
Scenario 1: 1 E AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 104.00 155.03 206.21 175.57 96.20 92.19 57.06 241.07 111.40 257.27 229.85 215.55 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.16 6.20 8.25 7.02 3.85 3.69 2.28 9.64 4.46 10.29 9.19 8.62 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 57.78 86.13 117.37 97.54 53.45 51.22 31.70 143.01 61.89 155.14 134.68 124.18 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.31 3.45 4.69 3.90 2.14 2.05 1.27 5.72 2.48 6.21 5.39 4.97 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Lane Group LOS D C C D B B D D C D C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 51.14 21.79 24.54 47.42 17.83 17.91 52.63 38.20 33.95 43.71 26.43 26.51 X, volume / capacity 0.77 0.32 0.46 0.82 0.20 0.20 0.67 0.82 0.43 0.87 0.52 0.52 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 9.73 1.20 2.62 8.12 0.58 0.64 9.97 2.61 1.02 7.28 0.72 0.79 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 41.41 20.59 21.93 39.29 17.25 17.28 42.66 35.59 32.93 36.43 25.71 25.72 c, Capacity [veh/h] 120 692 588 198 774 724 73 648 289 307 586 538 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1810 1900 1615 1810 1900 1779 1810 3618 1615 1810 1900 1746 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.05 0.12 0.17 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.15 0.08 0.15 0.16 0.16 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.07 0.37 0.37 0.11 0.41 0.41 0.04 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.31 0.31 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 6 33 33 10 37 37 4 16 16 15 28 28 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Lane Group L C C L C C L C R L C C
Lane Group Calculations
5 12/14/2023
Scenario 1: 1 E AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 51.14 21.79 24.54 47.42 17.86 17.91 52.63 38.20 33.95 43.71 26.46 26.51 Movement LOS D C C D B B D D C D C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 27.70 28.17 38.45 31.84
Approach LOS C C D C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 32.04
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.671
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 36.49 36.49 36.49 36.49
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.540 2.472 2.666 2.656 Crosswalk LOS B B B B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 488 577 488 777 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 25.73 22.80 25.73 16.84
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.041 1.943 2.140 2.264 Bicycle LOS B A B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
6 12/14/2023
Scenario 1: 1 E AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.090
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 19.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 2: Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 25 14 1012 26 6 878
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 6 3 253 6 1 220
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.8860 0.8860 0.8860 0.8860 0.8860 0.8860 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 22 12 897 23 5 778
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 22 12 897 23 5 778
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
7 12/14/2023
Scenario 1: 1 E AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.38
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 17.32 0.00 0.07
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 9.91 9.91 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.13 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 Movement LOS C B A A B A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 19.44 13.55 0.00 0.00 10.32 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.09 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 2 0 2
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance Yes
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
8 12/14/2023
Scenario 1: 1 E AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection Analysis Summary
Report File: C:\...\E PM.pdf 12/14/2023
Vistro File: C:\...\SEG23002 Vistro.vistro Scenario 2 E PM Crossroads Plaza
V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.
NB Left 0.036 17.2 C
HCM 7th
Edition 2 Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd Two-way stop
NB Left 0.642 33.2 C
HCM 7th
Edition 1 N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd Signalized
ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS 1 12/14/2023
Scenario 2: 2 E PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.642
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 33.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
2 12/14/2023
Scenario 2: 2 E PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 105 241 205 158 247 55 123 652 147 238 488 150 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 26 60 51 39 62 14 31 163 37 59 122 37 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 93 214 182 140 219 49 109 578 130 211 433 133 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Proportion of CAVs [%] 0.00
Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 93 214 182 140 219 49 109 578 130 211 433 133 Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
3 12/14/2023
Scenario 2: 2 E PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 17 0 0 21 0 0 17 0 0 17 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 13 26 0 17 30 0 21 26 0 21 26 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 0 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 16.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 90
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD No
Intersection Settings
4 12/14/2023
Scenario 2: 2 E PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 116.82 176.02 156.96 170.43 101.10 97.06 134.17 283.15 126.18 236.94 260.22 244.18 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 4.67 7.04 6.28 6.82 4.04 3.88 5.37 11.33 5.05 9.48 10.41 9.77 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 64.90 97.79 87.20 94.68 56.16 53.92 74.54 174.75 70.10 139.94 157.36 145.33 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 2.60 3.91 3.49 3.79 2.25 2.16 2.98 6.99 2.80 5.60 6.29 5.81 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Lane Group LOS D C C D B B D D C D C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 49.83 23.35 23.78 47.04 19.43 19.52 48.15 36.90 31.65 44.70 29.72 29.84 X, volume / capacity 0.77 0.36 0.37 0.81 0.21 0.22 0.78 0.85 0.43 0.86 0.63 0.63 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 8.89 1.51 1.85 7.73 0.67 0.73 7.88 2.76 0.85 7.50 1.24 1.35 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 40.94 21.84 21.93 39.31 18.76 18.79 40.27 34.15 30.80 37.20 28.48 28.49 c, Capacity [veh/h] 136 663 565 195 725 681 159 767 342 278 528 486 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1810 1900 1619 1810 1900 1783 1810 3618 1615 1810 1900 1749 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.06 0.13 0.13 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.18 0.09 0.13 0.17 0.17 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.07 0.35 0.35 0.11 0.38 0.38 0.09 0.21 0.21 0.15 0.28 0.28 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 7 32 32 10 35 35 8 19 19 14 25 25 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 Lane Group L C C L C C L C R L C C
Lane Group Calculations
5 12/14/2023
Scenario 2: 2 E PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 49.83 23.35 23.78 47.04 19.46 19.52 48.15 36.90 31.65 44.70 29.76 29.84 Movement LOS D C C D B B D D C D C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 28.56 28.94 37.57 33.83
Approach LOS C C D C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 33.22
Intersection LOS C
Intersection V/C 0.642
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 36.49 36.49 36.49 36.49
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.532 2.491 2.710 2.670 Crosswalk LOS B B B B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 488 577 488 488 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 25.73 22.80 25.73 25.73
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.014 1.939 2.320 2.282 Bicycle LOS B A B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
6 12/14/2023
Scenario 2: 2 E PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.036
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 17.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 2: Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 11 13 919 26 5 810
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 3 3 230 6 1 202
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9250 0.9250 0.9250 0.9250 0.9250 0.9250 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 10 12 850 24 5 749
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 10 12 850 24 5 749
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
7 12/14/2023
Scenario 2: 2 E PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.22
Approach LOS B A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 14.48 0.00 0.06
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 4.72 4.72 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.10 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 Movement LOS C B A A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 17.20 12.19 0.00 0.00 9.91 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 2 0 2
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance Yes
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
8 12/14/2023
Scenario 2: 2 E PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
OPENING YEAR PLUS PROJECT
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection Analysis Summary
Report File: C:\...\OYP AM.pdf 12/14/2023
Vistro File: C:\...\SEG23002 Vistro.vistro Scenario 3 OYP AM Crossroads Plaza
V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.
WB Right 0.060 11.6 B
HCM 7th
Edition 4 N Union Rd/Driveway #2 Two-way stop
NB Right 0.031 13.2 B
HCM 7th
Edition 3 Driveway #1/E Lathrop Rd Two-way stop
NB Left 0.120 24.1 C
HCM 7th
Edition 2 Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd Two-way stop
WB Left 0.884 43.7 D
HCM 7th
Edition 1 N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd Signalized
ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS 1 12/14/2023
Scenario 3: 3 OYP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.884
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 43.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
2 12/14/2023
Scenario 3: 3 OYP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 267 304 321 252 383 120 110 634 235 280 566 185 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 67 76 80 63 96 30 28 158 59 70 142 46 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 0.9450 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 252 287 303 238 362 113 104 599 222 265 535 175 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 160 69 31 77 118 56 56 72 98 1 91 35 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 Proportion of CAVs [%] 0.00
Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 87 207 258 153 232 54 46 501 118 251 422 133 Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
3 12/14/2023
Scenario 3: 3 OYP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 17 0 0 21 0 0 17 0 0 17 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 22 31 0 21 30 0 12 26 0 22 36 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 0 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 16.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 100
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
4 12/14/2023
Scenario 3: 3 OYP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 292.88 290.91 341.01 279.08 252.29 238.65 141.56 315.60 239.29 323.71 344.81 322.89 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 11.72 11.64 13.64 11.16 10.09 9.55 5.66 12.62 9.57 12.95 13.79 12.92 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 182.19 180.69 219.52 171.65 151.39 141.21 78.64 199.71 141.68 206.02 222.49 205.38 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 7.29 7.23 8.78 6.87 6.06 5.65 3.15 7.99 5.67 8.24 8.90 8.22 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Lane Group LOS D D D D D D E D D E D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 51.66 38.36 48.65 51.80 36.89 37.40 58.25 43.89 41.04 59.15 35.18 35.58 X, volume / capacity 0.91 0.64 0.80 0.91 0.57 0.57 0.84 0.92 0.76 0.95 0.73 0.73 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 11.41 6.54 15.07 11.02 5.14 5.63 12.88 5.34 4.01 18.52 4.45 4.84 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.12 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.14 0.25 0.25 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 40.25 31.83 33.59 40.78 31.75 31.77 45.38 38.54 37.02 40.64 30.73 30.73 c, Capacity [veh/h] 293 474 403 277 457 420 132 692 309 293 534 489 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1629 1710 1454 1629 1710 1572 1629 3256 1454 1629 1710 1568 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.16 0.18 0.22 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.07 0.19 0.16 0.17 0.23 0.23 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.18 0.28 0.28 0.17 0.27 0.27 0.08 0.21 0.21 0.18 0.31 0.31 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 18 28 28 17 27 27 8 21 21 18 31 31 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Lane Group L C C L C C L C R L C C
Lane Group Calculations
5 12/14/2023
Scenario 3: 3 OYP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 51.66 38.36 48.65 51.80 37.05 37.40 58.25 43.89 41.04 59.15 35.30 35.58 Movement LOS D D D D D D E D D E D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 46.05 42.03 44.82 41.83
Approach LOS D D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 43.70
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.884
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 41.44 41.44 41.44 41.44
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.656 2.571 2.773 2.743 Crosswalk LOS B B C B
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 540 520 440 640 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 26.68 27.41 30.45 23.15
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.296 2.182 2.367 2.410 Bicycle LOS B B B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
6 12/14/2023
Scenario 3: 3 OYP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.120
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 24.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 2: Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 26 14 1219 27 6 1044
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 6 3 305 7 1 261
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.8860 0.8860 0.8860 0.8860 0.8860 0.8860 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 23 12 1080 24 5 925
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 160 0 0 127
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 22 12 897 23 5 778
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
7 12/14/2023
Scenario 3: 3 OYP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.39
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 21.15 0.00 0.06
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 13.22 13.22 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.13 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.53 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 Movement LOS C C A A B A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 24.06 15.74 0.00 0.00 11.37 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.12 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 2 0 2
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance Yes
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
8 12/14/2023
Scenario 3: 3 OYP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.031
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 13.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Driveway #1/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 1
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Driveway #1 East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 0 14 1153 34 0 1102
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 0 4 288 9 0 275
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 0.9450 1.0000 1.0000 0.8660 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 0 14 1090 34 0 954
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 14 146 34 0 127
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0000 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0000 1.0260 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 0 0 920 0 0 806
Name Driveway #1 East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road
Volumes
9 12/14/2023
Scenario 3: 3 OYP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.08
Approach LOS B A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 13.19 0.00 0.00
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 2.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS B A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.00 13.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
10 12/14/2023
Scenario 3: 3 OYP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.060
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 11.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 4: N Union Rd/Driveway #2
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.21 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 1 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound
Name North Union Road North Union Road Driveway #2
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 839 16 0 883 0 35
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 210 4 0 221 0 9
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9450 0.9450 1.0000 0.9450 1.0000 0.9450 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 793 15 0 834 0 33
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 227 15 0 217 0 33
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0260 1.0260 1.0000 1.0260 1.0000 1.0260 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 552 0 0 601 0 0
Name North Union Road North Union Road Driveway #2
Volumes
11 12/14/2023
Scenario 3: 3 OYP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.23
Approach LOS A A B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.00 0.00 11.59
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.79 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 Movement LOS A A A B
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.59 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.06
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Free Free Stop
Intersection Settings
12 12/14/2023
Scenario 3: 3 OYP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection Analysis Summary
Report File: C:\...\OYP PM.pdf 12/14/2023
Vistro File: C:\...\SEG23002 Vistro.vistro Scenario 4 OYP PM Crossroads Plaza
V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.
WB Right 0.061 11.6 B
HCM 7th
Edition 4 N Union Rd/Driveway #2 Two-way stop
NB Right 0.033 13.7 B
HCM 7th
Edition 3 Driveway #1/E Lathrop Rd Two-way stop
NB Left 0.046 21.0 C
HCM 7th
Edition 2 Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd Two-way stop
NB Left 0.878 50.3 D
HCM 7th
Edition 1 N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd Signalized
ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS 1 12/14/2023
Scenario 4: 4 OYP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.878
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 50.3
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
2 12/14/2023
Scenario 4: 4 OYP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 247 402 251 230 361 121 192 809 326 255 590 246 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 62 101 63 57 90 30 48 202 81 64 147 61 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 0.8870 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 219 357 223 204 320 107 170 718 289 226 523 218 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 121 132 31 57 89 55 55 110 152 4 67 78 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 1.0527 Proportion of CAVs [%] 0.00
Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 93 214 182 140 219 49 109 578 130 211 433 133 Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
3 12/14/2023
Scenario 4: 4 OYP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 17 0 0 21 0 0 17 0 0 17 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 24 32 0 22 30 0 24 28 0 28 32 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 0 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 16.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
4 12/14/2023
Scenario 4: 4 OYP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 298.99 384.69 349.76 280.09 269.01 254.06 241.98 423.87 375.25 307.18 463.32 430.31 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 11.96 15.39 13.99 11.20 10.76 10.16 9.68 16.95 15.01 12.29 18.53 17.21 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 186.89 254.00 226.38 172.42 164.00 152.73 143.69 285.35 246.51 193.20 317.27 290.54 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 7.48 10.16 9.06 6.90 6.56 6.11 5.75 11.41 9.86 7.73 12.69 11.62 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Lane Group LOS E D D E D D E D D E D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 56.89 50.02 51.67 56.34 41.78 42.42 56.81 46.94 53.83 56.79 48.63 49.92 X, volume / capacity 0.90 0.78 0.78 0.90 0.58 0.59 0.87 0.95 0.86 0.90 0.86 0.86 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 11.99 12.42 14.07 10.84 5.68 6.27 10.18 6.95 15.08 12.30 12.32 13.59 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.12 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.11 0.32 0.14 0.35 0.35 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 44.89 37.59 37.60 45.50 36.11 36.14 46.63 40.00 38.75 44.49 36.31 36.33 c, Capacity [veh/h] 274 449 392 256 430 394 220 849 379 284 512 462 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1629 1710 1493 1629 1710 1565 1629 3256 1454 1629 1710 1541 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.15 0.20 0.20 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.25 0.22 0.16 0.26 0.26 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.17 0.26 0.26 0.16 0.25 0.25 0.14 0.26 0.26 0.17 0.30 0.30 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 18 29 29 17 28 28 15 29 29 19 33 33 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C C L C C L C R L C C
Lane Group Calculations
5 12/14/2023
Scenario 4: 4 OYP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 56.89 50.24 51.67 56.34 41.98 42.42 56.81 46.94 53.83 56.79 48.96 49.92 Movement LOS E D D E D D E D D E D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 52.46 46.69 50.06 51.01
Approach LOS D D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 50.26
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.878
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.37 46.37 46.37 46.37
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.670 2.614 2.835 2.775 Crosswalk LOS B B C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 509 473 436 509 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 30.57 32.08 33.62 30.57
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.302 2.147 2.654 2.460 Bicycle LOS B B B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
6 12/14/2023
Scenario 4: 4 OYP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.046
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 21.0
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 2: Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 11 13 1137 27 5 990
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 3 3 284 7 1 248
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.9250 0.9250 0.9250 0.9250 0.9250 0.9250 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 10 12 1052 25 5 916
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 180 0 0 148
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 10 12 850 24 5 749
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
7 12/14/2023
Scenario 4: 4 OYP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.21
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 17.03 0.00 0.05
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 5.98 5.98 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.10 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 Movement LOS C B A A B A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 20.97 13.69 0.00 0.00 10.93 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 2 0 2
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance Yes
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
8 12/14/2023
Scenario 4: 4 OYP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.033
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 13.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Driveway #1/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 1
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Driveway #1 East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 0 14 1229 30 0 1022
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 0 4 307 8 0 255
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 0.8870 1.0000 1.0000 0.9250 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 0 14 1090 30 0 945
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 14 167 30 0 148
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 0 0 900 0 0 777
Name Driveway #1 East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road
Volumes
9 12/14/2023
Scenario 4: 4 OYP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.08
Approach LOS B A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 13.66 0.00 0.00
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 2.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS B A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.00 13.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
10 12/14/2023
Scenario 4: 4 OYP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.061
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 11.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 4: N Union Rd/Driveway #2
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.21 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 1 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound
Name North Union Road North Union Road Driveway #2
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 850 15 0 924 0 35
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 213 4 0 231 0 9
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 0.8870 0.8870 1.0000 0.8870 1.0000 0.8870 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 754 13 0 820 0 31
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 252 13 0 245 0 31
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 1.0260 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 489 0 0 560 0 0
Name North Union Road North Union Road Driveway #2
Volumes
11 12/14/2023
Scenario 4: 4 OYP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.22
Approach LOS A A B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.00 0.00 11.64
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.83 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 Movement LOS A A A B
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.64 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.06
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Free Free Stop
Intersection Settings
12 12/14/2023
Scenario 4: 4 OYP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
CUMULATIVE WITHOUT PROJECT
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection Analysis Summary
Report File: C:\...\EAC AM.pdf 12/14/2023
Vistro File: C:\...\SEG23002 Vistro.vistro Scenario 5 EAC AM Crossroads Plaza
V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.
NB Left 0.140 26.1 D
HCM 7th
Edition 2 Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd Two-way stop
WB Left 0.960 49.7 D
HCM 7th
Edition 1 N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd Signalized
ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS 1 12/14/2023
Scenario 5: 5 EAC AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.960
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 49.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
2 12/14/2023
Scenario 5: 5 EAC AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 257 329 332 268 415 125 115 700 249 323 632 205 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 64 82 83 67 104 31 29 175 62 81 158 51 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 257 329 332 268 415 125 115 700 249 323 632 205 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 146 64 2 72 118 56 56 58 98 1 91 35 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 Proportion of CAVs [%] 0.00
Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 87 207 258 153 232 54 46 501 118 251 422 133 Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
3 12/14/2023
Scenario 5: 5 EAC AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 17 0 0 21 0 0 17 0 0 17 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 20 29 0 21 30 0 12 26 0 24 38 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 0 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 16.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 100
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
4 12/14/2023
Scenario 5: 5 EAC AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 312.11 340.35 399.22 315.48 274.91 260.11 153.27 368.04 254.58 394.80 375.34 353.04 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 12.48 13.61 15.97 12.62 11.00 10.40 6.13 14.72 10.18 15.79 15.01 14.12 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 197.02 219.00 265.58 199.63 168.48 157.28 85.15 240.80 153.12 262.06 246.57 228.97 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 7.88 8.76 10.62 7.99 6.74 6.29 3.41 9.63 6.12 10.48 9.86 9.16 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Lane Group LOS E D E E D D E D D E C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 64.52 46.87 64.93 60.89 39.15 39.74 62.04 51.54 42.24 69.64 34.43 34.99 X, volume / capacity 0.99 0.76 0.91 0.97 0.63 0.63 0.88 0.99 0.78 0.99 0.75 0.76 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 22.62 12.18 28.62 19.65 6.52 7.09 16.51 12.58 5.34 29.70 5.00 5.52 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.12 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.11 0.14 0.20 0.27 0.27 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 41.90 34.69 36.31 41.25 32.63 32.65 45.53 38.95 36.90 39.94 29.44 29.47 c, Capacity [veh/h] 261 430 366 277 447 412 131 711 317 326 578 530 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1629 1710 1454 1629 1710 1576 1629 3256 1454 1629 1710 1569 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.16 0.19 0.23 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.07 0.21 0.17 0.20 0.25 0.26 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.16 0.25 0.25 0.17 0.26 0.26 0.08 0.22 0.22 0.20 0.34 0.34 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 16 25 25 17 26 26 8 22 22 20 34 34 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Lane Group L C C L C C L C R L C C
Lane Group Calculations
5 12/14/2023
Scenario 5: 5 EAC AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 64.52 46.87 64.93 60.89 39.34 39.74 62.04 51.54 42.24 69.64 34.61 34.99 Movement LOS E D E E D D E D D E C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 58.34 46.55 50.50 44.43
Approach LOS E D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 49.73
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.960
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 41.42 41.42 41.42 41.42
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.678 2.591 2.797 2.786 Crosswalk LOS B B C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 500 520 440 680 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 28.14 27.40 30.44 21.80
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.317 2.226 2.437 2.517 Bicycle LOS B B B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
6 12/14/2023
Scenario 5: 5 EAC AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.140
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 26.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 2: Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 28 15 1281 29 6 1124
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 7 4 320 7 2 281
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 28 15 1281 29 6 1124
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 132 0 0 127
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 22 12 897 23 5 778
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
7 12/14/2023
Scenario 5: 5 EAC AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.42
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 22.86 0.00 0.06
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 15.63 15.63 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.13 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 Movement LOS D C A A B A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 26.09 16.83 0.00 0.00 11.74 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.14 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 2 0 2
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance Yes
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
8 12/14/2023
Scenario 5: 5 EAC AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection Analysis Summary
Report File: C:\...\EAC PM.pdf 12/14/2023
Vistro File: C:\...\SEG23002 Vistro.vistro Scenario 6 EAC PM Crossroads Plaza
V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.
NB Left 0.062 23.5 C
HCM 7th
Edition 2 Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd Two-way stop
SB Left 0.897 49.8 D
HCM 7th
Edition 1 N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd Signalized
ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS 1 12/14/2023
Scenario 6: 6 EAC PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.897
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 49.8
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
2 12/14/2023
Scenario 6: 6 EAC PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 227 402 237 232 370 118 195 837 319 274 622 248 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 57 101 59 58 93 30 49 209 80 69 156 62 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 227 402 237 232 370 118 195 837 319 274 622 248 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 108 128 4 53 89 55 55 97 152 4 67 78 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 Proportion of CAVs [%] 0.00
Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 93 214 182 140 219 49 109 578 130 211 433 133 Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
3 12/14/2023
Scenario 6: 6 EAC PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 17 0 0 21 0 0 17 0 0 17 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 21 30 0 21 30 0 19 32 0 27 40 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 0 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 16.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
4 12/14/2023
Scenario 6: 6 EAC PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 278.06 396.08 362.37 287.47 277.17 262.34 246.23 430.70 348.57 331.63 457.42 426.26 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 11.12 15.84 14.49 11.50 11.09 10.49 9.85 17.23 13.94 13.27 18.30 17.05 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 170.87 263.08 236.32 178.05 170.19 158.96 146.86 290.86 225.45 212.18 312.47 287.28 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 6.83 10.52 9.45 7.12 6.81 6.36 5.87 11.63 9.02 8.49 12.50 11.49 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Lane Group LOS E E E E D D E D D E D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 56.82 56.02 58.09 58.86 43.74 44.44 57.41 45.27 47.50 58.60 43.76 44.86 X, volume / capacity 0.90 0.82 0.82 0.92 0.61 0.62 0.88 0.94 0.81 0.91 0.83 0.83 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 11.13 16.56 18.61 13.01 6.62 7.28 10.73 6.02 10.14 14.68 9.20 10.27 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.11 0.30 0.17 0.32 0.32 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 45.69 39.46 39.48 45.85 37.12 37.15 46.68 39.25 37.36 43.92 34.56 34.60 c, Capacity [veh/h] 252 414 363 252 414 380 222 886 396 302 550 497 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1629 1710 1500 1629 1710 1570 1629 3256 1454 1629 1710 1546 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.14 0.20 0.20 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.26 0.22 0.17 0.27 0.27 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.15 0.24 0.24 0.15 0.24 0.24 0.14 0.27 0.27 0.19 0.32 0.32 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 17 27 27 17 27 27 15 30 30 20 35 35 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C C L C C L C R L C C
Lane Group Calculations
5 12/14/2023
Scenario 6: 6 EAC PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 56.82 56.34 58.09 58.86 43.96 44.44 57.41 45.27 47.50 58.60 44.06 44.86 Movement LOS E E E E D D E D D E D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 56.94 48.84 47.55 47.71
Approach LOS E D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 49.82
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.897
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.39 46.39 46.39 46.39
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.668 2.616 2.841 2.789 Crosswalk LOS B B C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 473 473 509 654 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 32.10 32.10 30.59 24.91
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.274 2.154 2.674 2.503 Bicycle LOS B B B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
6 12/14/2023
Scenario 6: 6 EAC PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.062
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 23.5
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 2: Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 13 15 1242 31 6 1107
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 3 4 311 8 2 277
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 13 15 1242 31 6 1107
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 153 0 0 148
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 10 12 850 24 5 749
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
7 12/14/2023
Scenario 6: 6 EAC PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.25
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 18.87 0.00 0.06
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 8.01 8.01 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.13 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.32 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 Movement LOS C B A A B A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 23.54 14.81 0.00 0.00 11.52 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.06 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 2 0 2
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance Yes
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
8 12/14/2023
Scenario 6: 6 EAC PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection Analysis Summary
Report File: C:\...\EACP AM.pdf 12/14/2023
Vistro File: C:\...\SEG23002 Vistro.vistro Scenario 7 EACP AM Crossroads Plaza
V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.
WB Right 0.061 12.1 B
HCM 7th
Edition 4 N Union Rd/Driveway #2 Two-way stop
NB Right 0.035 14.4 B
HCM 7th
Edition 3 Driveway #1/E Lathrop Rd Two-way stop
NB Left 0.144 26.9 D
HCM 7th
Edition 2 Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd Two-way stop
NB Right 0.992 53.6 D
HCM 7th
Edition 1 N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd Signalized
ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS 1 12/14/2023
Scenario 7: 7 EACP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.992
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 53.6
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
2 12/14/2023
Scenario 7: 7 EACP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 271 334 361 273 415 125 115 714 249 323 632 205 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 68 84 90 68 104 31 29 179 62 81 158 51 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 271 334 361 273 415 125 115 714 249 323 632 205 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 160 69 31 77 118 56 56 72 98 1 91 35 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 Proportion of CAVs [%] 0.00
Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 87 207 258 153 232 54 46 501 118 251 422 133 Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
3 12/14/2023
Scenario 7: 7 EACP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 17 0 0 21 0 0 17 0 0 17 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 20 29 0 21 30 0 12 26 0 24 38 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 0 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 16.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 100
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
4 12/14/2023
Scenario 7: 7 EACP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 358.58 347.34 474.99 330.77 274.93 260.09 153.27 387.43 254.58 394.80 375.34 353.04 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 14.34 13.89 19.00 13.23 11.00 10.40 6.13 15.50 10.18 15.79 15.01 14.12 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 228.35 224.48 326.76 211.51 168.49 157.26 85.15 255.38 153.12 262.06 246.57 228.97 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 9.13 8.98 13.07 8.46 6.74 6.29 3.41 10.22 6.12 10.48 9.86 9.16 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Lane Group LOS F D F E D D E F D E C C
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 80.41 47.68 81.15 65.34 39.16 39.74 62.04 55.97 42.24 69.64 34.43 34.99 X, volume / capacity 1.04 0.78 0.99 0.99 0.63 0.63 0.88 1.00 0.78 0.99 0.75 0.76 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 38.39 12.86 43.88 23.94 6.52 7.09 16.51 16.85 5.34 29.70 5.00 5.52 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.12 0.50 0.50 0.13 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.11 0.14 0.20 0.27 0.27 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 42.02 34.82 37.28 41.40 32.63 32.65 45.53 39.12 36.90 39.94 29.44 29.47 c, Capacity [veh/h] 261 430 366 277 447 412 131 711 317 326 578 530 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1629 1710 1454 1629 1710 1576 1629 3256 1454 1629 1710 1569 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.17 0.20 0.25 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.07 0.22 0.17 0.20 0.25 0.26 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.16 0.25 0.25 0.17 0.26 0.26 0.08 0.22 0.22 0.20 0.34 0.34 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 16 25 25 17 26 26 8 22 22 20 34 34 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Lane Group L C C L C C L C R L C C
Lane Group Calculations
5 12/14/2023
Scenario 7: 7 EACP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 80.41 47.68 81.15 65.34 39.35 39.74 62.04 55.97 42.24 69.64 34.61 34.99 Movement LOS F D F E D D E F D E C C
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 69.37 48.13 53.45 44.43
Approach LOS E D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 53.60
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.992
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 41.42 41.42 41.42 41.42
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.687 2.593 2.802 2.796 Crosswalk LOS B B C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 500 520 440 680 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 28.14 27.40 30.44 21.80
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.357 2.230 2.449 2.517 Bicycle LOS B B B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
6 12/14/2023
Scenario 7: 7 EACP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.144
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 26.9
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 2: Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 28 15 1309 29 6 1124
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 7 4 327 7 2 281
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 28 15 1309 29 6 1124
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 160 0 0 127
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 22 12 897 23 5 778
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
7 12/14/2023
Scenario 7: 7 EACP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.43
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 23.50 0.00 0.06
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 16.17 16.17 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.13 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.65 0.65 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 Movement LOS D C A A B A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 26.86 17.22 0.00 0.00 11.90 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.14 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 2 0 2
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance Yes
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
8 12/14/2023
Scenario 7: 7 EACP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.035
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 14.4
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Driveway #1/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 1
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Driveway #1 East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 0 14 1325 34 0 1159
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 0 4 331 9 0 290
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 0 14 1325 34 0 1159
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 14 146 34 0 127
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 0 0 920 0 0 806
Name Driveway #1 East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road
Volumes
9 12/14/2023
Scenario 7: 7 EACP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.08
Approach LOS B A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 14.36 0.00 0.00
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 2.72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS B A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.00 14.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
10 12/14/2023
Scenario 7: 7 EACP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.061
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 12.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 4: N Union Rd/Driveway #2
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.21 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 1 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound
Name North Union Road North Union Road Driveway #2
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 934 15 0 987 0 33
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 234 4 0 247 0 8
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 934 15 0 987 0 33
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 227 15 0 217 0 33
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 552 0 0 601 0 0
Name North Union Road North Union Road Driveway #2
Volumes
11 12/14/2023
Scenario 7: 7 EACP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.20
Approach LOS A A B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.00 0.00 12.07
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.85 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 Movement LOS A A A B
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.07 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.06
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Free Free Stop
Intersection Settings
12 12/14/2023
Scenario 7: 7 EACP AM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection Analysis Summary
Report File: C:\...\EACP PM.pdf 12/14/2023
Vistro File: C:\...\SEG23002 Vistro.vistro Scenario 8 EACP PM Crossroads Plaza
V/C, Delay, LOS: For two-way stop, these values are taken from the movement with the worst (highest) delay value. For all other control types, they are taken for the whole intersection.
WB Right 0.055 11.7 B
HCM 7th
Edition 4 N Union Rd/Driveway #2 Two-way stop
NB Right 0.035 14.3 B
HCM 7th
Edition 3 Driveway #1/E Lathrop Rd Two-way stop
NB Left 0.064 24.1 C
HCM 7th
Edition 2 Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd Two-way stop
NB Left 0.917 51.2 D
HCM 7th
Edition 1 N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd Signalized
ID Intersection Name Control Type Method Worst Mvmt V/C Delay (s/veh) LOS 1 12/14/2023
Scenario 8: 8 EACP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.917
Level Of Service: D
Delay (sec / veh): 51.2
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Signalized
Intersection 1: N Union Rd/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes Yes Yes Yes
Curb Present No No No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Turning Movement Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound
Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
2 12/14/2023
Scenario 8: 8 EACP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Bicycle Volume [bicycles/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ab, Corner Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0 0
v_ci, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing mi 0 0 0 0
v_co, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
v_di, Inbound Pedestrian Volume crossing m 0 0 0 0
v_do, Outbound Pedestrian Volume crossing 0 0 0 0
Local Bus Stopping Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
On-Street Parking Maneuver Rate [/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Presence of On-Street Parking No No No No No No No No
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 240 406 264 236 370 118 195 850 319 274 622 248 Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 60 102 66 59 93 30 49 213 80 69 156 62 Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 240 406 264 236 370 118 195 850 319 274 622 248 Right Turn on Red Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 121 132 31 57 89 55 55 110 152 4 67 78 In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 Proportion of CAVs [%] 0.00
Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 93 214 182 140 219 49 109 578 130 211 433 133 Name North Union Road North Union Road East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
3 12/14/2023
Scenario 8: 8 EACP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0
Pedestrian Walk [s] 0
Pedestrian Signal Group 0
Exclusive Pedestrian Phase
I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Detector Length [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Detector Location [ft] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Recall No No No No No No No No
Maximum Recall No No No No No No No No
Minimum Recall No No No No No No No No
l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 l1, Start-Up Lost Time [s] 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Rest In Walk No No No No
Delayed Vehicle Green [s] 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Pedestrian Clearance [s] 0 17 0 0 21 0 0 17 0 0 17 0
Walk [s] 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 5 0
Vehicle Extension [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Split [s] 21 30 0 21 30 0 19 35 0 24 40 0
All red [s] 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 Amber [s] 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 Maximum Green [s] 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0 30 30 0
Minimum Green [s] 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0 5 10 0
Lead / Lag Lead - - Lead - - Lead - - Lead - -
Auxiliary Signal Groups
Signal Group 1 6 0 5 2 0 3 8 0 7 4 0
Control Type Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Protecte Permiss Permiss Phasing & Timing
Lost time [s] 16.00
Permissive Mode SingleBand
Offset Reference Lead Green - Beginning of First Green
Offset [s] 0.0
Actuation Type Fully actuated
Coordination Type Time of Day Pattern Isolated
Cycle Length [s] 110
Signal Coordination Group -
Located in CBD Yes
Intersection Settings
4 12/14/2023
Scenario 8: 8 EACP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 306.14 430.40 391.22 295.73 277.60 262.71 246.23 435.78 344.11 337.70 456.52 425.39 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 12.25 17.22 15.65 11.83 11.10 10.51 9.85 17.43 13.76 13.51 18.26 17.02 50th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 192.40 290.62 259.20 184.38 170.52 159.24 146.86 294.95 221.94 216.92 311.74 286.58 50th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 7.70 11.62 10.37 7.38 6.82 6.37 5.87 11.80 8.88 8.68 12.47 11.46 Critical Lane Group No No Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes No No Lane Group LOS E E E E D D E D D E D D
d, Delay for Lane Group [s/veh] 63.73 61.15 63.66 60.82 43.88 44.59 57.41 44.97 46.11 61.15 43.56 44.65 X, volume / capacity 0.95 0.87 0.87 0.94 0.61 0.62 0.88 0.94 0.79 0.92 0.83 0.83 Lane Group Results
PF, progression factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Rp, platoon ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 d3, Initial Queue Delay [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d2, Incremental Delay [s] 17.62 21.09 23.58 14.84 6.69 7.36 10.73 5.96 9.17 16.87 9.08 10.13 I, Upstream Filtering Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 k, delay calibration 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.50 0.50 0.11 0.11 0.29 0.17 0.32 0.32 d1, Uniform Delay [s] 46.12 40.07 40.07 45.98 37.19 37.23 46.68 39.01 36.93 44.29 34.48 34.52 c, Capacity [veh/h] 252 413 359 252 413 379 222 900 402 296 551 498 s, saturation flow rate [veh/h] 1629 1710 1488 1629 1710 1570 1629 3256 1454 1629 1710 1546 (v / s)_i Volume / Saturation Flow Rate 0.15 0.21 0.21 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.26 0.22 0.17 0.27 0.27 g / C, Green / Cycle 0.15 0.24 0.24 0.15 0.24 0.24 0.14 0.28 0.28 0.18 0.32 0.32 g_i, Effective Green Time [s] 17 27 27 17 27 27 15 30 30 20 36 36 l2, Clearance Lost Time [s] 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 l1_p, Permitted Start-Up Lost Time [s] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 L, Total Lost Time per Cycle [s] 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 C, Cycle Length [s] 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 Lane Group L C C L C C L C R L C C
Lane Group Calculations
5 12/14/2023
Scenario 8: 8 EACP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 63.73 61.45 63.66 60.82 44.11 44.59 57.41 44.97 46.11 61.15 43.85 44.65 Movement LOS E E E E D D E D D E D D
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 62.69 49.63 47.02 48.17
Approach LOS E D D D
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 51.24
Intersection LOS D
Intersection V/C 0.917
Other Modes
g_Walk,mi, Effective Walk Time [s] 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0
M_corner, Corner Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 M_CW, Crosswalk Circulation Area [ft²/ped] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 d_p, Pedestrian Delay [s] 46.39 46.39 46.39 46.39
I_p,int, Pedestrian LOS Score for Intersection 2.676 2.618 2.845 2.797 Crosswalk LOS B B C C
s_b, Saturation Flow Rate of the bicycle lane 2000 2000 2000 2000 c_b, Capacity of the bicycle lane [bicycles/h] 473 473 563 654 d_b, Bicycle Delay [s] 32.10 32.10 28.39 24.91
I_b,int, Bicycle LOS Score for Intersection 2.310 2.157 2.685 2.503 Bicycle LOS B B B B
Ring 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 2 5 6 7 8 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ring 1 1 2 3 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sequence
6 12/14/2023
Scenario 8: 8 EACP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.064
Level Of Service: C
Delay (sec / veh): 24.1
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 2: Arrowsmith Dr/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 1 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 13 15 1269 31 6 1107
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 3 4 317 8 2 277
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 13 15 1269 31 6 1107
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 0 180 0 0 148
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 10 12 850 24 5 749
Name Arrowsmith Drive East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road Volumes
7 12/14/2023
Scenario 8: 8 EACP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS C
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.25
Approach LOS C A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 19.28 0.00 0.06
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 8.25 8.25 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.13 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 Movement LOS C C A A B A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 24.14 15.06 0.00 0.00 11.68 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.06 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 2 0 2
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance Yes
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane No
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
8 12/14/2023
Scenario 8: 8 EACP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.035
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 14.3
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 3: Driveway #1/E Lathrop Rd
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk Yes No No
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 1
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Left Right Thru Right Left Thru
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Eastbound Westbound
Name Driveway #1 East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 0 14 1320 30 0 1143
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 0 4 330 8 0 286
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 0 14 1320 30 0 1143
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 0 14 167 30 0 148
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 0 0 900 0 0 777
Name Driveway #1 East Lathrop Road East Lathrop Road
Volumes
9 12/14/2023
Scenario 8: 8 EACP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.08
Approach LOS B A A
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 14.30 0.00 0.00
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 2.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement LOS B A A A
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.00 14.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Stop Free Free
Intersection Settings
10 12/14/2023
Scenario 8: 8 EACP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Volume to Capacity (v/c): 0.055
Level Of Service: B
Delay (sec / veh): 11.7
Analysis Period: 15 minutes
Analysis Method: HCM 7th Edition
Control Type: Two-way stop
Intersection 4: N Union Rd/Driveway #2
Intersection Level Of Service Report
Crosswalk No No Yes
Grade [%] 0.00 0.00 0.00
Speed [mph] 30.00 30.00 30.00
Exit Pocket Length [ft] 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.21 0.00 0.00
No. of Lanes in Exit Pocket 0 0 0 1 0 0
Entry Pocket Length [ft] 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 No. of Lanes in Entry Pocket 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lane Width [ft] 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00
Turning Movement Thru Right Left Thru Left Right
Lane Configuration
Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound
Name North Union Road North Union Road Driveway #2
Intersection Setup
Pedestrian Volume [ped/h] 0 0 0
Total Analysis Volume [veh/h] 878 13 0 962 0 31
Total 15-Minute Volume [veh/h] 220 3 0 241 0 8
Other Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Peak Hour Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Total Hourly Volume [veh/h] 878 13 0 962 0 31
Other Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Existing Site Adjustment Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pass-by Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diverted Trips [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Site-Generated Trips [veh/h] 252 13 0 245 0 31
In-Process Volume [veh/h] 0 0 0 0 0 0
Growth Factor 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 1.2810 Heavy Vehicles Percentage [%] 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 Base Volume Adjustment Factor 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Base Volume Input [veh/h] 489 0 0 560 0 0
Name North Union Road North Union Road Driveway #2
Volumes
11 12/14/2023
Scenario 8: 8 EACP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
Intersection LOS B
d_I, Intersection Delay [s/veh] 0.19
Approach LOS A A B
d_A, Approach Delay [s/veh] 0.00 0.00 11.73
95th-Percentile Queue Length [ft/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.34 95th-Percentile Queue Length [veh/ln] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 Movement LOS A A A B
d_M, Delay for Movement [s/veh] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.73 V/C, Movement V/C Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.05
Movement, Approach, & Intersection Results
Number of Storage Spaces in Median 0 0 0
Two-Stage Gap Acceptance No
Storage Area [veh] 0 0 0
Flared Lane
Priority Scheme Free Free Stop
Intersection Settings
12 12/14/2023
Scenario 8: 8 EACP PM
Crossroads Plaza
Version 2022 (SP 0-11) TJW Engineering, Inc.
Generated with
ATTACHMENT 6
4729 W. Jacquelyn Avenue
Fresno, California 93722
(559) 271-9700 Office
(559) 275-0827 Fax
SAN JOSE, CA | STOCKTON, CA | FRESNO, CA | BAKERSFIELD, CA | RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA DALLAS, TX | DENVER, CO | CHARLESTON, SC
March 10, 2023 Job No. 4-423-0090
Ms. Tenea Davis
Manteca 18, LLC
1925 Village Center Circle, Suite 150
Las Vegas, NV 89314
SUBJECT: NOISE IMPACT STUDY
Proposed Crossroads Plaza
2064 North Union Road
Manteca, California
Dear Ms. Davis:
A Noise Impact Study for the above-referenced project located at 2064 North Union Road in the City of Manteca, California (subject property) was conducted. The proposed project involves the construction of an approximately 5,200 square-foot convenience store with a 6-pump fueling dispensers, a 6,816 squarefoot retail space and includes parking for 48 spaces.
The Noise Impact Study is an analysis of the proposed project’s potential noise and vibration impacts associated with the construction of the project, as well as long-term noise impacts associated with the operation of the proposed project. The Noise Study was prepared utilizing the City of Manteca General Plan Safety Element, and Noise Ordinance from the Municipal Code.
Please refer to Section 7.0 Future Noise Environmental Impacts and Mitigation, and Section 8.0 Construction Noise Impacts for detailed information pertaining to the proposed project temporary construction noise impacts, as well as long-term operational noise impacts. However, based on the noise impact analysis, impacts associated with off-site traffic noise, on-site traffic noise, off-site receptors from stationary noise sources, and construction noise and vibration are not significant, and mitigation is not required.
We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with this project. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (909) 980-6455.
Respectfully submitted,
SALEM Engineering Group, Inc.
Maria G. Ruvalcaba, EP
Project Manager
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA
Prepared for:
Ms. Maria Ruvalcaba
SALEM Engineering Group, Inc.
4729 W. Jacquelyn Avenue
Fresno, CA 93722
Prepared by:
MD Acoustics, LLC
Claire Pincock, INCE-USA
Rachel Edelman
1197 Los Angeles Ave, Ste C-256
Simi Valley, CA 93065
Date: 3/10/2023
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Table of Contents
MD Acoustics, LLC ii
JN: 10982202_Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives 1
1.2 Site Location and Study Area 1
1.3 Proposed Project Description 1
2.0 Fundamentals of Noise ................................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Sound, Noise and Acoustics 4
2.2 Frequency and Hertz 4
2.3 Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels 4
2.4 Addition of Decibels 4
2.5 Sensitive Receptors 5
2.6 Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels 5
2.7 Noise Descriptors 5
2.8 Traffic Noise Prediction 7
2.9 Sound Propagation 7
3.0 Ground-Bourne Vibration Fundamentals ....................................................................................... 8
3.1 Vibration Descriptors 8
3.2 Vibration Perception 8
4.0 Regulatory Setting ........................................................................................................................... 9
4.1 Federal Regulations 9
4.2 State Regulations 9
4.3 City of Manteca Noise Regulations 10
5.0 Study Method and Procedure ....................................................................................................... 17
5.1 Noise Measurement Procedure and Criteria 17
5.2 Noise Measurement Location 17
5.3 SoundPLAN Noise Model (Operational Noise) 17
5.4 Traffic Noise Prediction Modeling 18
5.5 Construction Noise Modeling 19
6.0 Existing Noise Environment .......................................................................................................... 20
7.0 Future Noise Environment Impacts and Mitigation ..................................................................... 22
7.1 Off-Site Traffic Noise Impact 22
7.2 On-Site Traffic Noise Impact 22
7.3 Noise Impacts to Off-Site Receptors Due to Stationary Noise Sources 23
8.0 Construction Noise and Vibration Impacts ................................................................................... 25
8.1 Construction Noise 25
8.2 Construction Vibration 26
9.0 References .................................................................................................................................... 29 ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Table of Contents
MD Acoustics, LLC iii
JN: 10982202_Report
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: Field Measurement Data
Appendix B: SoundPLAN Noise Modeling Data
Appendix C: FHWA Roadway Noise Modeling Worksheets
Appendix D: Construction Noise Modeling Output
Appendix E: Construction Vibration Modeling Output
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit A: Location Map ..................................................................................................................... 2 Exhibit B: Site Plan .............................................................................................................................. 3 Exhibit C: Typical A-Weighted Noise Levels ....................................................................................... 4 Exhibit D: Land Use Compatibility Guidelines ................................................................................... 10 Exhibit E: Measurement Locations .................................................................................................. 21 Exhibit F: Project Operational Noise Levels - CNEL ......................................................................... 24
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Decibel Changes and Loudness ..................................................................................................... 5 Table 2: Performance Standards for Stationary Noise Sources, Including Affected Projects .................. 11 Table 3: Maximum Permissible Sound Pressure Levels ............................................................................ 15 Table 4: Noise Level Corrections ............................................................................................................... 16 Table 5: SoundPLAN Modeling Assumptions ............................................................................................ 18 Table 6: Roadway Parameters and Vehicle Distribution .......................................................................... 19 Table 7: Short-Term Noise Measurement Data (dBA)1 ............................................................................ 20 Table 8: Change in Existing Noise Levels as a Result of Project Generated Traffic .................................. 22 Table 9: Operational Noise Levels (dBA Leq) ............................................................................................ 23 Table 10: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels1 ......................................................................... 25 Table 11: Construction Noise Level by Phase (dBA, Leq) ......................................................................... 26 Table 12: Guideline Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria ....................................................... 27 Table 13: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ............................................................... 27 ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Introduction
1 1.0 Introduction
1.1 Purpose of Analysis and Study Objectives
This noise assessment was prepared to evaluate the potential noise impacts for the project study area and to recommend noise mitigation measures, if necessary, to minimize the potential noise impacts. The assessment was conducted and compared to the noise standards set-forth by the Federal, State and Local agencies. Consistent with the City’s Noise Guidelines, the project must demonstrate compliance to the applicable noise criterion as outlined within the City of Manteca Noise Element and Municipal Code.
The following is provided in this report:
A description of the study area and the proposed project; Information regarding the fundamentals of noise;
A description of the local noise guidelines and standards; An analysis of traffic noise impacts to the sensitive receptors and the project site; and An analysis of construction noise impacts.
1.2 Site Location and Study Area
The Crossroads Plaza Commercial Development (Project) site is located at 2064 North Union Road in the City of Manteca, CA. See Exhibit A for the location. Land zoning directly surrounding the Project site include residential to the east, south, and southwest, commercial to the west, and Specific Plan to the north. W Lathrop Rd is to the north and North Union Rd is to the west.
1.3 Proposed Project Description
The proposed Project consists of the construction and operation of a commercial development. The Project proposes to construct a 5,200 square foot convenience store with 6-pump fueling dispensers, a 6,816 square foot retail space (AutoZone) and approximately 48 parking spaces on 1.98 acres. The site plan is shown in Exhibit B.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA
Exhibit A
Location Map
2 Site
ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit B
Site Plan
3 Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Fundamentals of Noise
4 2.0 Fundamentals of Noise
This section of the report provides basic information about noise and presents some of the terms used within the report.
2.1 Sound, Noise and Acoustics
Sound is a disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source and is capable of being detected by the hearing organs. Sound may be thought of as mechanical energy of a moving object transmitted by pressure waves through a medium to a human ear. For traffic, or stationary noise, the medium of concern is air. Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or unwanted.
2.2 Frequency and Hertz
A continuous sound is described by its frequency
(pitch) and its amplitude (loudness). Frequency
relates to the number of pressure oscillations per
second. Low-frequency sounds are low in pitch (bass
sounding) and high-frequency sounds are high in
pitch (squeak). These oscillations per second (cycles)
are commonly referred to as Hertz (Hz). The human
ear can hear from the bass pitch starting out at 20 Hz
all the way to the high pitch of 20,000 Hz.
2.3 Sound Pressure Levels and Decibels
The amplitude of a sound determines it loudness.
The loudness of sound increases or decreases as the
amplitude increases or decreases. Sound pressure
amplitude is measure in units of micro-Newton per
square inch meter (N/m2), also called micro-Pascal
(µPa). One µPa is approximately one hundred
billionths (0.00000000001) of normal atmospheric
pressure. Sound pressure level (SPL or Lp) is used to
describe in logarithmic units the ratio of actual
sound pressures to a reference pressure squared.
These units are called decibels abbreviated dB. Exhibit C illustrates references sound levels for different noise sources.
2.4 Addition of Decibels
Because decibels are on a logarithmic scale, sound pressure levels cannot be added or subtracted by simple plus or minus addition. When two sounds or equal SPL are combined, they will produce an SPL 3 dB greater than the original single SPL. In other words, sound energy must be doubled to produce a 3 dB increase. If two sounds differ by approximately 10 dB, the higher sound level is the predominant sound.
Exhibit C: Typical A-Weighted Noise Levels
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Fundamentals of Noise
5 2.5 Sensitive Receptors
Noise-sensitive land uses include residential (single and multi-family dwellings, mobile home parks, dormitories, and similar uses); transient lodging (including hotels, motels, and similar uses); hospitals, nursing homes, convalescent hospitals, and other facilities for long-term medical care; public or private educational facilities, libraries, churches, and places of public assembly.
2.6 Human Response to Changes in Noise Levels
In general, the healthy human ear is most sensitive to sounds between 1,000 Hz and 5,000 Hz, (Aweighted scale) and it perceives a sound within that range as being more intense than a sound with a higher or lower frequency with the same magnitude. For purposes of this report as well as with most environmental documents, the A-scale weighting is typically reported in terms of A-weighted decibel (dBA). Typically, the human ear can barely perceive the change in noise level of 3 dB. A change in 5 dB is readily perceptible, and a change in 10 dB is perceived as being twice or half as loud. As previously discussed, a doubling of sound energy results in a 3 dB increase in sound, which means that a doubling of sound energy (e.g. doubling the volume of traffic on a highway) would result in a barely perceptible change in sound level.
Table 1: Decibel Changes and Loudness
Changes in Intensity Level, dBA Changes in Apparent Loudness 1 Not perceptible
3 Just perceptible
5 Clearly noticeable
10 Twice (or half) as loud
Source: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/polguide02.cfm
2.7 Noise Descriptors
Noise in our daily environment fluctuates over time. Some noise levels occur in regular patterns, others are random. Some noise levels are constant while others are sporadic. Noise descriptors were created to describe the different time-varying noise levels.
A-Weighted Sound Level: The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighted filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the response of the human ear. A numerical method of rating human judgment of loudness.
Ambient Noise Level: The composite of noise from all sources, near and far. In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL): The average equivalent A-weighted sound level during a 24- hour day, obtained after addition of five (5) decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 to 10:00 ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Fundamentals of Noise
6 PM and after addition of ten (10) decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 AM and after 10:00 PM.
Decibel (dB): A unit for measuring the amplitude of a sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is 20 micropascals. dB(A): A-weighted sound level (see definition above).
Equivalent Sound Level (LEQ): The sound level corresponding to a steady noise level over a given sample period with the same amount of acoustic energy as the actual time varying noise level. The energy average noise level during the sample period.
Habitable Room: Any room meeting the requirements of the Uniform Building Code or other applicable regulations which is intended to be used for sleeping, living, cooking or dining purposes, excluding such enclosed spaces as closets, pantries, bath or toilet rooms, service rooms, connecting corridors, laundries, unfinished attics, foyers, storage spaces, cellars, utility rooms and similar spaces.
L(n): The A-weighted sound level exceeded during a certain percentage of the sample time. For example, L10 in the sound level exceeded 10 percent of the sample time. Similarly, L50, L90 and L99, etc.
Noise: Any unwanted sound or sound which is undesirable because it interferes with speech and hearing, or is intense enough to damage hearing, or is otherwise annoying. The State Noise Control Act defines noise as "...excessive undesirable sound...".
Outdoor Living Area: Outdoor spaces that are associated with residential land uses typically used for passive recreational activities or other noise-sensitive uses. Such spaces include patio areas, barbecue areas, jacuzzi areas, etc. associated with residential uses; outdoor patient recovery or resting areas associated with hospitals, convalescent hospitals, or rest homes; outdoor areas associated with places of worship which have a significant role in services or other noise-sensitive activities; and outdoor school facilities routinely used for educational purposes which may be adversely impacted by noise. Outdoor areas usually not included in this definition are: front yard areas, driveways, greenbelts, maintenance areas and storage areas associated with residential land uses; exterior areas at hospitals that are not used for patient activities; outdoor areas associated with places of worship and principally used for shortterm social gatherings; and, outdoor areas associated with school facilities that are not typically associated with educational uses prone to adverse noise impacts (for example, school play yard areas).
Percent Noise Levels: See L(n).
Sound Level (Noise Level): The weighted sound pressure level obtained by use of a sound level meter having a standard frequency-filter for attenuating part of the sound spectrum.
Sound Level Meter: An instrument, including a microphone, an amplifier, an output meter, and frequency weighting networks for the measurement and determination of noise and sound levels.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Fundamentals of Noise
7 Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL): The dB(A) level which, if it lasted for one second, would produce the same A-weighted sound energy as the actual event.
2.8 Traffic Noise Prediction
Noise levels associated with traffic depends on a variety of factors: (1) volume of traffic, (2) speed of traffic, (3) auto, medium truck (2 axle) and heavy truck percentage (3 axle and greater), and sound propagation. The greater the volume of traffic, higher speeds and truck percentages equate to a louder volume in noise. A doubling of the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) along a roadway will increase noise levels by approximately 3 dB; reasons for this are discussed in the sections above.
2.9 Sound Propagation
As sound propagates from a source it spreads geometrically. Sound from a small, localized source (i.e., a point source) radiates uniformly outward as it travels away from the source in a spherical pattern. The sound level attenuates at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance. The movement of vehicles down a roadway makes the source of the sound appear to propagate from a line (i.e., line source) rather than a point source. This line source results in the noise propagating from a roadway in a cylindrical spreading versus a spherical spreading that results from a point source. The sound level attenuates for a line source at a rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance.
As noise propagates from the source, it is affected by the ground and atmosphere. Noise models use hard site (reflective surfaces) and soft site (absorptive surfaces) to help calculate predicted noise levels.
Hard site conditions assume no excessive ground absorption between the noise source and the receiver.
Soft site conditions such as grass, soft dirt or landscaping attenuate noise at a rate of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance. When added to the geometric spreading, the excess ground attenuation results in an overall noise attenuation of 4.5 dB per doubling of distance for a line source and 7.5 dB per doubling of distance for a point source.
Research has demonstrated that atmospheric conditions can have a significant effect on noise levels when noise receivers are located 200 feet from a noise source. Wind, temperature, air humidity and turbulence can further impact have far sound can travel.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
8 3.0 Ground-Bourne Vibration Fundamentals
3.1 Vibration Descriptors
Ground-borne vibrations consist of rapidly fluctuating motions within the ground that have an average motion of zero. The effects of ground-borne vibrations typically only cause a nuisance to people, but at extreme vibration levels, damage to buildings may occur. Although ground-borne vibration can be felt outdoors, it is typically only an annoyance to people indoors where the associated effects of the shaking of a building can be notable. Ground-borne noise is an effect of ground-borne vibration and only exists indoors, since it is produced from noise radiated from the motion of the walls and floors of a room and may also consist of the rattling of windows or dishes on shelves.
Several different methods are used to quantify vibration amplitude.
PPV – Known as the peak particle velocity (PPV) which is the maximum instantaneous peak in vibration velocity, typically given in inches per second.
RMS – Known as root mean squared (RMS) can be used to denote vibration amplitude VdB – A commonly used abbreviation to describe the vibration level (VdB) for a vibration source.
3.2 Vibration Perception
Typically, developed areas are continuously affected by vibration velocities of 50 VdB or lower. These continuous vibrations are not noticeable to humans whose threshold of perception is around 65 VdB.
Outdoor sources that may produce perceptible vibrations are usually caused by construction equipment, steel-wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads, while smooth roads rarely produce perceptible groundborne noise or vibration. To counter the effects of ground-borne vibration, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published guidance relative to vibration impacts. According to the FTA, fragile buildings can be exposed to ground-borne vibration levels of 0.3 inches per second without experiencing structural damage.
There are three main types of vibration propagation: surface, compression, and shear waves. Surface waves, or Rayleigh waves, travel along the ground’s surface. These waves carry most of their energy along an expanding circular wave front, similar to ripples produced by throwing a rock into a pool of water. P-waves, or compression waves, are body waves that carry their energy along an expanding spherical wave front. The particle motion in these waves is longitudinal (i.e., in a “push-pull” fashion). Pwaves are analogous to airborne sound waves. S-waves, or shear waves, are also body waves that carry energy along an expanding spherical wave front. However, unlike P-waves, the particle motion is transverse, or side-to-side and perpendicular to the direction of propagation. As vibration waves propagate from a source, the vibration energy decreases in a logarithmic nature and the vibration levels typically decrease by 6 VdB per doubling of the distance from the vibration source. As stated above, this drop-off rate can vary greatly depending on the soil but has been shown to be effective enough for screening purposes, in order to identify potential vibration impacts that may need to be studied through actual field tests.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
9 4.0 Regulatory Setting
The proposed project is located in the City of Manteca and noise regulations are addressed through the efforts of various federal, state and local government agencies. The agencies responsible for regulating noise are discussed below.
4.1 Federal Regulations
The adverse impact of noise was officially recognized by the federal government in the Noise Control Act of 1972, which serves three purposes:
Publicize noise emission standards for interstate commerce Assist state and local abatement efforts
Promote noise education and research
The Federal Office of Noise Abatement and Control (ONAC) originally was tasked with implementing the Noise Control Act. However, it was eventually eliminated leaving other federal agencies and committees to develop noise policies and programs. Some examples of these agencies are as follows: The Department of Transportation (DOT) assumed a significant role in noise control through its various agencies. The Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) is responsible to regulate noise from aircraft and airports.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is responsible to regulate noise from the interstate highway system. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is responsible for the prohibition of excessive noise exposure to workers.
The federal government advocates that local jurisdiction use their land use regulatory authority to arrange new development in such a way that “noise sensitive” uses are either prohibited from being constructed adjacent to a highway or, or alternatively that the developments are planned and constructed in such a manner that potential noise impacts are minimized.
Since the federal government has preempted the setting of standards for noise levels that can be emitted by the transportation source, the City is restricted to regulating the noise generated by the transportation system through nuisance abatement Codes and land use planning.
4.2 State Regulations
Established in 1973, the California Department of Health Services Office of Noise Control (ONC) was instrumental in developing regularity tools to control and abate noise for use by local agencies. One significant model is the “Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments Matrix.” The matrix allows the local jurisdiction to clearly delineate compatibility of sensitive uses with various incremental levels of noise.
The State of California has established noise insulation standards as outlined in Title 24 and the Uniform Building Code (UBC) which in some cases requires acoustical analyses to outline exterior noise levels and to ensure interior noise levels do not exceed the interior threshold. The State mandates that the legislative body of each county and city adopt a noise element as part of its comprehensive general plan.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
10 The local noise element must recognize the land use compatibility guidelines published by the State Department of Health Services. The guidelines rank noise land use compatibility in terms of normally acceptable, conditionally acceptable, normally unacceptable, and clearly unacceptable.
4.3 City of Manteca Noise Regulations
The City of Manteca outlines their noise regulations and standards within the Safety Element from the General Plan and the Noise Ordinance from the Municipal Code.
City of Manteca General Plan
Applicable policies and standards governing environmental noise in the City of Manteca are set forth in the General Plan Safety Element. The land use compatibility guidelines are shown in Exhibit D.
Exhibit D: Land Use Compatibility Guidelines
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
11 In addition to the noise standards, the City has outlined goals, policies and implementation measures to reduce potential noise impacts and are presented below:
Goals, Policies, and Implementation Measures
The City utilizes the following General Plan Noise Element goal, policies and implementation measures to assess evaluate the project’s suitability in light of noise impacts.
Goal S-6 Protect the quality of life by protecting the community from harmful and excessive noise.
Policies
S-6.3 Areas within Manteca exposed to existing or projected exterior noise levels from mobile noise sources exceeding the performance standards in Table S-1 (Exhibit D in this report) shall be designated as noise-impacted areas.
S-6.4 Require residential and other noise-sensitive development projects to satisfy the noise level criteria in Tables S-1 and S-2 (Table 2 in this report).
Table 2: Performance Standards for Stationary Noise Sources, Including Affected Projects Noise Level Descriptor Daytime Nighttime
7 am to 10 pm 10 pm to 7 am
Hourly Leq, dBA 55 45
Notes:
1. Each of the noise levels specified above should be lowered by 5 dB for simple noise tones, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or recurring impulsive noises. Such noises are generally considered to be particularly annoying and are a primary source of noise complaints.
S-6.5 Require new stationary noise sources proposed adjacent to noise sensitive uses to incorporate noise-attenuating measures so as to not exceed the noise level performance standards in Table S-2, or a substantial increase in noise levels established through a detailed ambient noise survey.
S-6.6 Regulate construction-related noise to reduce impacts on adjacent uses to the criteria identified in Table S-2 or, if the criteria in Table S-2 cannot be met, to the maximum level feasible using best management practices and complying with the MMC Chapter 9.52.
S-6.7 Where the development of residential or other noise-sensitive land use is proposed for a noise-impacted area or where the development of a stationary noise source is proposed in the vicinity of noise sensitive uses, an acoustical analysis is required as part of the development review process so that noise mitigation may be considered in the project design. The acoustical analysis shall:
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
12 Include representative noise level measurements with sufficient sampling periods and locations to adequately describe local conditions and the predominant noise sources.
Estimate existing and projected (20 years) noise levels in terms of the standards of Table S-1 or Table S-2, and compare those levels to the adopted policies of the Noise Element.
Recommend appropriate mitigation measures to achieve compliance with the adopted policies and standards of the Noise Element. Estimate noise exposure after the prescribed mitigation measures have been implemented.
S-6.8 Apply noise level criteria applied to land uses other than residential or other noisesensitive uses consistent with noise performance levels of Table S-1 and Table S-2.
S-6.15 Recognizing that existing noise-sensitive uses may be exposed to increase noise levels due to circulation improvement projects associated with development under the General Plan and that it may not be feasible to reduce increased traffic noise levels to the criteria identified in Table S-1, the following criteria may be used to determine the significance of noise impacts associated with circulation improvement projects:
Where existing traffic noise levels are less than 60 dB Ldn at the outdoor activity areas of noise-sensitive uses, a +5 dB Ldn increase in noise levels due to roadway improvement projects will be considered significant; and Where existing traffic noise levels range between 60 and 65 dB Ldn at the outdoor activity areas of noise-sensitive uses, a +3 dB Ldn increase in noise levels due to roadway improvement projects will be considered significant; and
Where existing traffic noise levels are greater than 65 dB Ldn at the outdoor activity areas of noise-sensitive uses, a + 1.5 dB Ldn increase in noise levels due to roadway improvement projects will be considered significant.
Implementation
S-6a Require an acoustical analysis that complies with the requirements of S-6.7 where:
Noise sensitive land uses are proposed in areas exposed to existing or projected noise levels exceeding the levels specified in Table S-1 or S-2. Proposed transportation projects are likely to produce noise levels exceeding the levels specified in Table S-1 or S-2 at existing or planned noise sensitive uses.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
13 S-6c Update the City’s Noise Ordinance (Chapter 9.52) to reflect the noise standards established in this Noise Safety Element and proactively enforce the City’s Noise Ordinance, including requiring the following measures for construction:
Restrict construction activities to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction shall be permitted outside of these hours or on Sundays or federal holidays, without a specific exemption issued by the City. No exemption shall be issued for construction within 200 feet of residential uses.
A Construction Noise Management Plan shall be submitted by the applicant for construction projects that exceed ambient noise levels by more than 12dBA or produce perceptible vibrations at any off-site structures. The Construction Noise Management Plan shall include proper posting of construction schedules, appointment of a noise disturbance coordinator, methods for assisting in noise reduction measures, and shall establish allowed truck routes to access the site that minimize exposure of residential areas to heavy truck traffic.
Noise reduction measures shall include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. Equipment and trucks used for project construction shall utilize the best available noise control techniques (e.g., improved mufflers, equipment redesign, use of intake silencers, ducts, engine enclosures and acoustically attenuating shields or shrouds) wherever feasible.
b. Except as provided herein, impact tools (e.g., jack hammers, pavement breakers, and rock drills) used for project
construction shall be hydraulically or electrically powered to avoid noise associated with compressed air exhaust from pneumatically powered tools. However, where use of
pneumatic tools is unavoidable, an exhaust muffler on the compressed air exhaust shall be used. This muffler can lower noise levels from the exhaust by up to about 10 dBA. External jackets on the tools themselves shall be used, if such jackets are commercially available. This would achieve a reduction of up to 5 dBA. Quieter procedures shall be used, such as drills rather than impact equipment, whenever such procedures are
available and consistent with construction procedures.
c. Temporary power poles or zero-emission power sources shall be used instead of generators where feasible.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
14 d. Stationary noise sources shall be located as far from adjacent properties as possible, and they shall be muffled and enclosed within temporary sheds, incorporate insulation barriers, or use other measures as determined by the City to provide equivalent noise reduction.
e. The noisiest phases of construction shall be limited to less than 10 days at a time. Exceptions may be allowed if the City determines an extension is necessary and all available noise reduction controls are implemented.
f. Delivery of materials shall observe the hours of operation described above.
g. Truck traffic shall avoid residential areas to the greatest extent feasible.
S-6d In making a determination of impact under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a substantial increase will occur if ambient noise levels have a substantial increase. Generally, a 3 dB increase in noise levels is barely perceptible, and a 5 dB increase in noise levels is clearly perceptible. Therefore, increases in noise levels shall be considered to be substantial when the following occurs:
Transportation Noise
When existing noise levels are less than 60 dB, a 5 dB increase in noise will be considered substantial;
When existing noise levels are between 60 dB and 65 dB, a 3 dB increase in noise will be considered substantial;
When existing noise levels exceed 65 dB, a 1.5 dB increase in noise will be considered substantial.
Non-Transportation Noise
A 5 dB increase in noise will be considered substantial.
Construction Noise
An increase in 12 dB in noise in noise will be considered substantial.
S-6e Control noise at the source through use of insulation, berms, building design and orientation, buffer space, staggered operating hours, and similar techniques. Where such techniques would not meet acceptable levels, use noise barriers to attenuate noise associated with new noise sources to acceptable levels.
S-6f Require that all noise-attenuating features, including soundwalls and quieter pavements, are designed to be attractive and to minimize maintenance.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
15 City of Manteca Municipal Code
Section 17.58.050 and Chapter 9.52 of the City’s Municipal Code outlines the City’s exterior noise limits as it relates to stationary noise sources.
9.52.040. Specific prohibited noises.
J. Commercial Establishments Adjacent to Residential Property. Notwithstanding any provision of this code to the contrary, continuous, repeated or sustained noise from the premises of any commercial establishment which is adjacent to one or more residential dwelling units, including any outdoor area part of or under the control of the establishment, between the hours of ten p.m. and eight a.m. that is plainly audible from the residential dwelling unit’s property line.
K. Construction Equipment. The use or operation of any construction equipment between the hours of eight p.m. and seven a.m. and is sufficiently loud as to be plainly audible at the property line of the property from which the sound is emanating.
17.58.050. Noise Standards.
B. Noise Standards. The maximum sound level generated by any use or activity as measured at the point of measurement shall not exceed the levels established in Table 17.58.050-1 (Table 3 in this report) based on the use that is receiving the noise (e.g., residential use receiving noise generated by an industrial use).
Table 3: Maximum Permissible Sound Pressure Levels
Receiving Land Use Category
Maximum Allowable Noise
Levels (Ldn/CNEL, dB)
10 pm - 7 am 7 am - 10 pm
Single-Family and Limited Multiple-Family 50 60
Multiple-Family, Public Institution, and Neighborhood Commercial 55 60 Medium and Heavy Commercial 60 65
Light Industrial 70 70
Heavy Industrial 75 75
C. Calculation. Exterior noise levels shall be measured with a sound level meter and associated octave band analyzer meeting the American National Standards Institute’s standards S1.4-1971 for Type 1 or Type 2 sound level meters or an instrument and the associated recording and analyzing equipment that will provide equivalent data. When measuring the noise level, the corrections provided in Table
17.58.050-2 (Table 4 in this report) shall be applied.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
16 Table 4: Noise Level Corrections
Category Correction (dB)
Daytime operation only (7 a.m. - 7 p.m.) +5
Noise source operates less than: -
20% of any one-hour period +5
5% of any one-hour period +10
1% of any one-hour period +15
Noise of impulsive character (e.g., hammering) -5
Noise rising or falling in pitch or volume (e.g., hum, screech) -5 E. Prohibited Activities. The following acts shall be a violation of this Chapter.
1. Construction Noise. Operating or causing the operation of tools or equipment on private property used in alteration, construction, demolition, drilling, or repair work daily between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., so that the sound creates a noise disturbance across a residential property line, except for emergency work of public service utilities.
2. Loading and Unloading Activities. Loading, unloading, opening, closing, or other handling of boxes, crates, containers, building materials, garbage cans, or similar objects on private property between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. in a manner to cause a noise disturbance.
3. Sweepers and Associated Equipment. Operating or allowing the operation of sweepers or associated sweeping equipment (e.g., blowers) on private property between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following day in, or adjacent to, a Residential Zoning District.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
17 5.0 Study Method and Procedure
The following section describes the noise modeling procedures and assumptions used for this assessment.
5.1 Noise Measurement Procedure and Criteria
Noise measurements are taken to determine the existing noise levels. A noise receiver or receptor is any location in the noise analysis in which noise might produce an impact. The following criteria are used to select measurement locations and receptors:
Locations expected to receive the highest noise impacts, such as first row of houses Locations that are acoustically representative and equivalent of the area of concern Human land usage
Sites clear of major obstruction and contamination
MD conducted the sound level measurements in accordance to the Caltrans TeNS manual. All measurements equipment meets American National Standards Institute (ANSI) specifications for sound level meters (S1.4-1983 identified in Chapter 19.68.020.AA). MD noise measurement procedures are presented below:
Microphones for sound level meters were placed 5-feet above the ground for all measurements Sound level meters were calibrated (Larson Davis CAL 200) before and after each measurement Following the calibration of equipment, a wind screen was placed over the microphone Frequency weighting was set on “A” and slow response
Results of the noise measurements were recorded on field data sheets During any short-term noise measurements any noise contaminations such as barking dogs, local traffic, lawn mowers, or aircraft fly-overs were noted
Temperature and sky conditions were observed and documented
5.2 Noise Measurement Location
The noise monitoring location was selected to obtain a baseline of the existing noise environment. Two short-term noise measurement was conducted at the Project site. Appendix A includes photos, field sheet, and measured noise data. Exhibit E illustrates the location of the measurement.
5.3 SoundPLAN Noise Model (Operational Noise)
SoundPLAN acoustical modeling software was utilized to model project operational noise at nearby sensitive receptors. The SoundPLAN software utilizes algorithms (based on the inverse square law) to calculate noise level projections. It allows the user to input specific noise sources, spectral content, sound barriers, building placement, topography, and sensitive receptor locations. It also calculates noise level increases due to the reflection of noise from hard surfaces.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
18 Measured and referenced sound level data was utilized to model the various stationary on-site noise sources associated with project operation, (i.e. idling trucks and parking movements).
Noise associated with proposed truck and automobile parking areas was modeled using the SoundPLAN parking tool. The AutoZone parking lot was modeled with a lot-wide average of 1 movement per space per hour. The pump and service station parking lot was modeled with a lot-wide average of 6 movements per space per hour. The model assumes that each building has a 12.5 ton HVAC rooftop unit. Modeling assumptions are summarized in Table 5. SoundPLAN noise modeling input and results are provided in Appendix B.
Table 5: SoundPLAN Modeling Assumptions
Noise Source Source Type Reference Level Descriptor
Idling Truck Point Source 74 Lp @ 10’
Car Start Up Point Source 95 Lw
HVAC Point Source 83 Lw
Pump/Service Station Parking Area (Parking Tool) 6 Movements per hr Auto Zone Parking Area (Parking Tool) 1 Movements per hr Source: See Appendix B.
MD also calculated the impact of a backup beeper, assuming a beeper of 107 dBA Lw.
5.4 Traffic Noise Prediction Modeling
The FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108) was utilized to model future traffic noise levels on the project site and existing and existing plus project traffic noise volumes along roadways affected by project generated vehicle traffic. The FHWA model arrives at the predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to the Reference Energy Mean Emission Level (REMEL).
Project generated vehicle traffic will result in an incremental increase in ambient noise levels. To determine the project’s noise impact to the surrounding land uses, MD generated noise contours for existing ADT, and existing plus project conditions. Table 3 indicates the roadway parameters and vehicle distribution utilized for the modeling. Existing ADT data was taken from the Manteca General Plan November 2022 Environmental Impact Report from De Novo Planning Group. The existing traffic counts were provided by Fehr & Peers from 2020. Project ADT data was based on the CalEEMod prepared for this project. Noise contours are used to provide a characterization of sound levels experienced at a set distance from the centerline of a subject roadway. They are intended to represent a worst-case scenario and do not take into account structures, sound walls, topography, and/or other sound attenuating features which may further reduce the actual noise level. Noise contours are developed for comparative purposes and are used to demonstrate potential increases/decreases along subject roadways as a result of a project. The referenced traffic data and traffic noise calculation worksheets outputs are located in Appendix C.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
19 • Roadway classification – (e.g. freeway, major arterial, arterial, secondary, collector, etc.), • Roadway Active Width – (distance between the center of the outer most travel lanes on each side of the roadway)
• Average Daily Traffic Volumes (ADT), Speeds, Percentages of autos, medium and heavy trucks
• Roadway grade and angle of view
• Site Conditions (e.g. soft vs. hard)
• Percentage of total ADT which flows each hour through-out a 24-hour period Table 6: Roadway Parameters and Vehicle Distribution
Roadway Existing ADT1 Existing +
Project ADT2 Speed (MPH) Site Conditions
Lathrop Ave west of Sherwood Ave 19,300 21,426 45 Hard
Union Rd north of Crom St 17,500 19,626 45 Hard
Motor-Vehicle Type3
Daytime %
(7 AM to 7
PM)
Evening %
(7 PM to 10
PM)
Night %
(10 PM to 7
AM)
Total % of
Traffic Flow
Automobiles 77.5 12.9 9.6 89.4
Medium Trucks 84.8 4.9 10.3 2
Heavy Trucks 86.5 2.7 10.8 8.6
Notes:
1 2020 Fehr & Peers traffic counts.
2 Project trip generation from the CalEEMod prepared for the Project. 3 https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census
5.5 Construction Noise Modeling
Construction noise associated with the proposed project was calculated utilizing methodology presented in the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (2018) together with several key construction parameters including: distance to each sensitive receiver, equipment usage, percent usage factor, and baseline parameters for the project site. Construction activities are anticipated to include four phases site preparation, grading, building construction, and paving.
Construction noise levels were calculated for each phase based on CalEEMod Air Quality Model assumptions provided by the project proponent. All equipment was assumed to be situated at the edge of the Project site closest to the sensitive receptor. Construction equipment typically moves back and forth across the site, so this is a conservative assumption. Construction worksheets are provided in Appendix D.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Study Method and Procedure
20 6.0 Existing Noise Environment
Two (2) 15-minute noise measurements were conducted at the project site in order to document the existing noise environment. The measurements include the Leq, Lmin, Lmax and other statistical data (e.g. L2, L8). The results of the noise measurements are presented in Table 7. Noise measurement field sheets are provided in Appendix A.
Table 7: Short-Term Noise Measurement Data (dBA)1
Location Start Time Stop Time LEQ LMAX LMIN L2 L8 L25 L50 L90 ST1 5:34 PM 5:49 PM 58.1 69.1 48.0 65.5 61.9 58.4 55.8 52.1 ST2 5:52 PM 6:07 PM 60.5 76.8 51.7 68.3 64.1 59.5 57.1 54.5 Notes:
1. Short-term noise monitoring locations are illustrated in Exhibit E.
The data presented in Table 7 and the field notes provided in Appendix A indicate that ambient noise levels in the project vicinity range 58 to 61 dBA Leq. The field data indicates that traffic on N Union Road and W Lathrop Road is the dominant source of noise.
ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit D
Measurement Locations
21 X = Measurement location
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA
Site
2 1
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Existing Noise Environment
22 7.0 Future Noise Environment Impacts and Mitigation
This assessment analyzes future noise impacts to sensitive receptors and to the project and compares the results to the City’s Noise Standards. The analysis details the estimated exterior noise levels associated with traffic from adjacent roadway sources. The City has established different significance thresholds for different types of noise impacts.
7.1 Off-Site Traffic Noise Impact
The potential off-site noise impacts caused by the increase in vehicular traffic as a result of the project were calculated at a distance of 40 feet from affected road segments. Lathrop Avenue and Union Road are anticipated to have the largest increase in traffic due to the project. The total number of project trips was added to each road segment to calculate the worst-case change in noise level. The noise level at 40 feet both with and without project generated vehicle traffic was compared and the increase calculated.
The distance to the 55, 60, 65, and 70 dBA CNEL noise contours are also provided for reference (Appendix C). Noise contours were calculated for the following scenarios and conditions:
Existing Condition: This scenario refers to the existing traffic noise condition and is demonstrated in Table 8.
Existing + Project Condition: This scenario refers to the existing plus project traffic noise condition and is demonstrated in Table 8.
As shown in Table 8, the addition of project generated vehicle traffic to Lathrop Avenue and Union Road would result in negligible increases in ambient noise levels and would not be significant.
Table 8: Change in Existing Noise Levels as a Result of Project Generated Traffic Roadway Segment
Modeled Noise Levels (dBA CNEL) at 40 feet from the
Centerline
Existing
without
Project
Existing
with Project
Change in
Noise Level
Increase of
1.5 dB or
more2
Lathrop Ave West of Sherwood Ave 75.8 76.3 0.5 No
Union Rd North of Crom St 75.2 75.7 0.5 No
Notes:
1 FHWA roadway noise modeling worksheets provided in Appendix C. 2 SP EIR significance threshold for existing levels greater than 65 dBA.
7.2 On-Site Traffic Noise Impact
Future noise levels associated with traffic were measured as shown in Table 8 in order to evaluate the project in light of the City’s land use compatibility guidelines presented in Exhibit D of this report as they apply to future traffic noise impacts to the proposed project. The Project is currently within normally unacceptable for commercial uses. It will not change due to the increase in traffic levels due to the project. The proposed use is not noise sensitive as there are no proposed outdoor uses for employees or patrons. The impact is less than significant.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Existing Noise Environment
23 7.3 Noise Impacts to Off-Site Receptors Due to Stationary Noise Sources Worst-case operational noise was modeled using SoundPLAN acoustical modeling software. Four (4) receptors representing adjacent residential uses and one (1) receptor representing commercial uses were modeled using the SoundPLAN noise model to evaluate the proposed project’s operational impact.
The model assumes that every fueling position is occupied with an idling truck. A receptor is denoted by a yellow dot. All yellow dots represent either an existing building, a property line, or a sensitive receptor.
The results are in Table 9.
Project Operational Noise Levels
Worst-case “project only” exterior operational noise is presented on Exhibit F. Operational noise levels are expected to be 47 to 48 dBA at single-family residential receptors and will meet the City’s 50 dBA nighttime noise limit (see Table 2). Operational noise levels at multiple-family residential receptors are expected to be 52 to 53 dBA and meets the City’s 55 dBA nighttime noise limit. Noise levels are expected to be 60 dBA at the commercial receptor and will meet the City’s nighttime noise standard of 60 dBA.
Project Plus Ambient Operational Noise Levels
Existing plus project noise level projections are anticipated to be 59 dBA Leq at multi-family residential receptors, 61 dBA at single-family residential receptors, and 62 dBA at the commercial receptor. Project generated operational noise is expected to result in a 1 dB increase in ambient noise levels at the south residential uses, a 0 dB increase at the east residential uses, and a 3 dB increase at the north commercial uses. A change in 1 dB is not perceptible, and a change of 3 dB is just perceptible (see Table 2). Thus, this impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Table 9: Operational Noise Levels (dBA Leq)
Receptor1
Existing
Ambient
Noise Level
(dBA)2
Project
Noise Level
(dBA)3
Nighttime
(10 p.m. - 7 a.m.)
Non Transp. Noise Limit
(dBA, Leq)
Total
Combined
Noise Level
(dBA)
Change in
Noise Level as
Result of
Project
R1 58 52 55 59 1
R2 61 60 60 64 3
R3 58 53 55 59 1
R4 61 47 50 61 0
R5 61 48 50 61 0
Notes:
1. Receptors 1 and 3 are single-family residential, Receptor 2 is commercial, and Receptors 4 and 5 are multiple-family residential.
2. See Appendix A for noise measurement field sheet.
3. See Exhibit F for the operational noise level projections at said receptors.
Loading and unloading activities can only take place during the day according to 17.58.050(E)(2) of the municipal code. Backup beepers will be less than 1% of an hour period. A backup beeper will have an Lmax level of 64 dBA, which is below the 75 dBA L1 limit for daytime residential uses.
ATTACHMENT 6
Exhibit E
Project Operational Noise Levels (CNEL)
24 Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Construction Noise and Vibration Impacts 25 8.0 Construction Noise and Vibration Impacts
The degree of construction noise may vary for different areas of the project site and also vary depending on the construction activities. Project construction will occur in five phases, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. This section summarizes discusses noise and ground-borne vibration modeling efforts, impact analysis, and mitigation, if necessary.
8.1 Construction Noise
Typical construction equipment noise levels are presented in Table 10.
Table 10: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels1
EQUIPMENT POWERED BY INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES
Type Noise Levels (dBA) at 50 Feet
Earth Moving
Compactors (Rollers) 73 - 76
Front Loaders 73 - 84
Backhoes 73 - 92
Tractors 75 - 95
Scrapers, Graders 78 - 92
Pavers 85 - 87
Trucks 81 - 94
Materials Handling
Concrete Mixers 72 - 87
Concrete Pumps 81 - 83
Cranes (Movable) 72 - 86
Cranes (Derrick) 85 - 87
Stationary
Pumps 68 - 71
Generators 71 - 83
Compressors 75 – 86
IMPACT EQUIPMENT
Type Noise Levels (dBA) at 50 Feet
Saws 71 - 82
Vibrators 68 - 82
Notes:
1 Referenced Noise Levels from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Construction noise associated with each phase of the project was calculated at the residences to the south utilizing methodology presented in the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (2018) together with several key construction parameters ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Construction Noise and Vibration Impacts 26 including: distance to each sensitive receiver, equipment usage, percent usage factor, and baseline parameters for the project site. Construction equipment typically moves back and forth across the site; and it is an industry standard to use the acoustical center of the site to model average construction noise levels.
Construction activities are anticipated to include five phases site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. Noise levels associated with each phase are shown in Table 11. The construction noise calculation output worksheet is located in Appendix D.
Table 11: Construction Noise Level by Phase (dBA, Leq)
Activity Noise Levels at Nearest Sensitive Receptor
Leq Lmax
Site Preparation 77 93
Grading 78 93
Building Construction 75 92
Paving 76 98
Architectural Coating 66 86
Notes:
Construction Modeling Worksheets are provided in Appendix D.
As shown in Table 11, project construction noise will range between 66 to 78 dBA Leq and 86 to 98 dBA Lmax at the nearest sensitive receptor.
The Project will be required to adhere to the allowed times for construction outlined in the Municipal Code in Section 17.58.050(E)(1). This impact is less than significant. No mitigation is required.
8.2 Construction Vibration
Construction activities can produce vibration that may be felt by adjacent land uses. The construction of the proposed project would not require the use of equipment such as pile drivers, which are known to generate substantial construction vibration levels. The primary vibration source during construction may be from a bull dozer. A large bull dozer has a vibration impact of 0.089 inches per second peak particle velocity (PPV) at 25 feet which is perceptible but below any risk to architectural damage.
The fundamental equation used to calculate vibration propagation through average soil conditions and distance is as follows:
PPVequipment = PPVref (100/Drec)
n
Where: PPVref = reference PPV at 100ft.
Drec = distance from equipment to receiver in ft.
n = 1.1 (the value related to the attenuation rate through ground) ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Construction Noise and Vibration Impacts 27 The thresholds from the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Induced Vibration Guidance Manual in Table 12 (below) provides general thresholds and guidelines as to the vibration damage potential from vibratory impacts.
Table 12: Guideline Vibration Damage Potential Threshold Criteria Structure and Condition
Maximum PPV (in/sec)
Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments 0.12 0.08 Fragile buildings 0.2 0.1
Historic and some old buildings 0.5 0.25
Older residential structures 0.5 0.3
New residential structures 1.0 0.5
Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.0 0.5
Source: Table 19, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, Caltrans, Sept. 2013.
Note: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.
Table 13 gives approximate vibration levels for particular construction activities. This data provides a reasonable estimate for a wide range of soil conditions.
Table 13: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment
Peak Particle Velocity Approximate Vibration Level
(inches/second) at 25 feet LV (dVB) at 25 feet
Pile driver (impact) 1.518 (upper range) 112
0.644 (typical) 104
Pile driver (sonic) 0.734 upper range 105
0.170 typical 93
Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94
Hydromill 0.008 in soil 66
(slurry wall) 0.017 in rock 75
Vibratory Roller 0.21 94
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large bulldozer 0.089 87
Caisson drill 0.089 87
Loaded trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small bulldozer 0.003 58
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, Federal Transit Administration, May 2018.
The nearest existing building is 20 feet east of the project site. At this distance, a large bulldozer would yield a worst-case 0.114 PPV (in/sec) which may be perceptible but will not result in architectural ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Construction Noise and Vibration Impacts 28 damage. The impact is not significant and no mitigation is required. The ground-borne vibration worksheet is provided in Appendix E.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA Construction Noise and Vibration Impacts 29 9.0 References
City of Manteca
2022 General Plan
2022 Municipal Code
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
2013 Transportation and Construction Induced Vibration Guidance Manual. 2018 Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Sept.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
2010 Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/polguide02.cfm Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
2018 Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
State of California General Plan Guidelines, 1998
De Novo Planning Group
Environmental Impact Report – Volume IV
SoundPLAN International, LLC
2016 SoundPLAN Essential 4.0 Manual. May.
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA References
1 Appendix A:
Field Measurement Data
ATTACHMENT 6
ATTACHMENT 6
ATTACHMENT 6
ATTACHMENT 6
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA References
2 Appendix B:
SoundPLAN Noise Modeling Data
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Assessed receiver spectra in dB(A) - 001 - Crossroads Plaza:
Outdoor SP
Time
slice
63Hz
dB(A)
125Hz
dB(A)
250Hz
dB(A)
500Hz
dB(A)
1kHz
dB(A)
2kHz
dB(A)
4kHz
dB(A)
8kHz
dB(A)
16kHz
dB(A)
Receiver 10655287,4187945 Fl GF Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 52.0 dB(A) Leq,d 40.5 48.3 39.9 43.3 43.3 43.2 38.7 26.4 -0.2
Receiver 10655327,4188059 Fl GF Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 60.2 dB(A) Leq,d 47.0 56.0 42.1 46.4 52.2 54.4 49.9 37.3 7.0
Receiver 10655342,4187924 Fl GF Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 52.3 dB(A) Leq,d 40.0 47.9 38.4 41.9 44.7 45.6 39.8 26.0 -3.1
Receiver 10655389,4187999 Fl GF Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 47.3 dB(A) Leq,d 37.4 44.3 33.7 36.6 38.6 37.9 30.9 17.7 -5.5
Receiver 10655392,4187964 Fl GF Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 48.4 dB(A) Leq,d 37.4 45.2 35.5 38.1 39.1 39.3 35.9 19.7 -9.7
SoundPLAN 9.0
MD Acoustics 1197 E Los Angeles Ave,Unit C 256 Simi Valley, CA 93065 USA
1 ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Contribution level - 001 - Crossroads Plaza: Outdoor SP 9 Source Source typeTr. lane Leq,d
dB(A)
A
dB
Receiver 10655287,4187945 Fl GF Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 52.0 dB(A) Auto Fuel Pump Point 46.9 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 46.8 0.0
Auto Parking PLot 41.4 0.0
HVAC Point 38.6 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 37.4 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 37.1 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 36.5 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 36.4 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 36.1 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 35.9 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 35.7 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 35.5 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 34.8 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 34.5 0.0
Auto Parking PLot 26.0 0.0
HVAC Point 24.4 0.0
Receiver 10655327,4188059 Fl GF Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 60.2 dB(A) Auto Fuel Pump Point 49.6 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 49.6 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 49.5 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 49.4 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 49.3 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 49.2 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 49.2 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 49.2 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 49.0 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 48.9 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 48.6 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 48.4 0.0
Auto Parking PLot 47.3 0.0
Auto Parking PLot 37.3 0.0
HVAC Point 33.0 0.0
HVAC Point 32.6 0.0
Receiver 10655342,4187924 Fl GF Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 52.3 dB(A) Auto Fuel Pump Point 44.7 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 43.7 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 43.6 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 43.3 0.0
Auto Parking PLot 40.1 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 39.3 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 38.7 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 38.2 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 37.8 0.0
SoundPLAN 9.0
MD Acoustics 1197 E Los Angeles Ave,Unit C 256 Simi Valley, CA 93065 USA 1 ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Contribution level - 001 - Crossroads Plaza: Outdoor SP 9 Source Source typeTr. lane Leq,d
dB(A)
A
dB
Auto Fuel Pump Point 37.7 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 37.6 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 37.5 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 37.2 0.0
HVAC Point 36.7 0.0
Auto Parking PLot 36.3 0.0
HVAC Point 32.8 0.0
Receiver 10655389,4187999 Fl GF Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 47.3 dB(A) HVAC Point 37.1 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 36.9 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 36.7 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 36.7 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 36.2 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 35.7 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 35.6 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 35.4 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 35.1 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 35.0 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 34.8 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 34.7 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 34.7 0.0
Auto Parking PLot 34.2 0.0
Auto Parking PLot 31.8 0.0
HVAC Point 24.8 0.0
Receiver 10655392,4187964 Fl GF Lr,lim dB(A) Leq,d 48.4 dB(A) Auto Fuel Pump Point 38.6 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 38.5 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 38.4 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 38.2 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 37.5 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 37.1 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 36.4 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 36.3 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 35.6 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 35.4 0.0
Auto Parking PLot 35.3 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 35.1 0.0
Auto Parking PLot 35.0 0.0
Auto Fuel Pump Point 34.8 0.0
HVAC Point 31.3 0.0
HVAC Point 25.8 0.0
SoundPLAN 9.0
MD Acoustics 1197 E Los Angeles Ave,Unit C 256 Simi Valley, CA 93065 USA 2 ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Octave spectra of the sources in dB(A) - 001 - Crossroads Plaza: Outdoor SP 3 Name Source type l or A
m,m²
Li
dB(A)
R'w
dB
L'w
dB(A)
Lw
dB(A)
KI
dB
KT
dB
LwMax
dB(A)
DO-Wall
dB
Time histogram Emission spectrum 63Hz
dB(A)
125Hz
dB(A)
250Hz
dB(A)
500Hz
dB(A)
1kHz
dB(A)
2kHz
dB(A)
4kHz
dB(A)
8kHz
dB(A)
16kHz
dB(A)
Auto Parking PLot 989.37 54.3 84.2 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Typical spectrum 67.6 79.2 71.7 76.2 76.3 76.7 74.0 67.8 55.0 Auto Parking PLot 2385.62 51.5 85.3 0.0 0.0 0 6 events per hour Typical spectrum 68.6 80.2 72.7 77.2 77.3 77.7 75.0 68.8 56.0 Auto Fuel Pump Point 94.7 94.7 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Car start up 78.0 89.6 82.1 86.6 86.7 87.1 84.4 78.2 65.4 Auto Fuel Pump Point 94.7 94.7 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Car start up 78.0 89.6 82.1 86.6 86.7 87.1 84.4 78.2 65.4 Auto Fuel Pump Point 94.7 94.7 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Car start up 78.0 89.6 82.1 86.6 86.7 87.1 84.4 78.2 65.4 Auto Fuel Pump Point 94.7 94.7 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Car start up 78.0 89.6 82.1 86.6 86.7 87.1 84.4 78.2 65.4 Auto Fuel Pump Point 94.7 94.7 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Car start up 78.0 89.6 82.1 86.6 86.7 87.1 84.4 78.2 65.4 Auto Fuel Pump Point 94.7 94.7 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Car start up 78.0 89.6 82.1 86.6 86.7 87.1 84.4 78.2 65.4 Auto Fuel Pump Point 94.7 94.7 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Car start up 78.0 89.6 82.1 86.6 86.7 87.1 84.4 78.2 65.4 Auto Fuel Pump Point 94.7 94.7 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Car start up 78.0 89.6 82.1 86.6 86.7 87.1 84.4 78.2 65.4 Auto Fuel Pump Point 94.7 94.7 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Car start up 78.0 89.6 82.1 86.6 86.7 87.1 84.4 78.2 65.4 Auto Fuel Pump Point 94.7 94.7 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Car start up 78.0 89.6 82.1 86.6 86.7 87.1 84.4 78.2 65.4 Auto Fuel Pump Point 94.7 94.7 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Car start up 78.0 89.6 82.1 86.6 86.7 87.1 84.4 78.2 65.4 Auto Fuel Pump Point 94.7 94.7 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h Car start up 78.0 89.6 82.1 86.6 86.7 87.1 84.4 78.2 65.4 HVAC Point 83.0 83.0 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h HVAC: 67.7dB @ 3ft - Carrier 50TFQ0006 - 60.1 68.6 71.0 75.3 77.6 77.2 74.2 69.3 57.0 HVAC Point 83.0 83.0 0.0 0.0 0 100%/24h HVAC: 67.7dB @ 3ft - Carrier 50TFQ0006 - 60.1 68.6 71.0 75.3 77.6 77.2 74.2 69.3 57.0 SoundPLAN 9.0
MD Acoustics 1197 E Los Angeles Ave,Unit C 256 Simi Valley, CA 93065 USA 1 ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA References
3 Appendix C:
FHWA Roadway Noise Modeling Worksheets
ATTACHMENT 6
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL
PROJECT: CROSSROADS PLAZA JOB #: 1098-2022-002
ROADWAY: LATHROP AVENUE - EXISTING DATE: ########
LOCATION: WEST OF SHERWOOD AVE ENGINEER:R.Edelman
ADT = 19,300 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 40
SPEED = 45 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5.0
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 48 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 40 ROAD ELEVATION = 0.0 PAD ELEVATION = 0.5
GRADE = 1.0 % ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE= -90
PK HR VOL = 1,930 RT ANGLE= 90
DF ANGLE= 180
AUTOMOBILES = 10 HTH WALL= 0.0
MEDIUM TRUCKS = 10 (10 = HARD SITE, 15 = SOFT SITE) AMBIENT= 0.0 HEAVY TRUCKS = 10 BARRIER = 0 (0 = WALL, 1 = BERM)
VEHICLE TYPE EVENING NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE AUTOMOBILES 0.129 0.096 0.8940 AUTOMOBILES 2.0 32.19
MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.049 0.103 0.0200 MEDIUM TRUCKS 4.0 32.04 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.027 0.108 0.0860 HEAVY TRUCKS 8.0 32.10
VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.7 69.8 68.1 62.0 70.6 71.2
MEDIUM TRUCKS 63.5 62.0 55.6 54.1 62.6 62.8
HEAVY TRUCKS 74.4 72.9 63.9 65.2 73.5 73.6
NOISE LEVELS (dBA) 76.5 74.9 69.6 67.1 75.5 75.8
VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.7 69.8 68.1 62.0 70.6 71.2
MEDIUM TRUCKS 63.5 62.0 55.6 54.1 62.6 62.8
HEAVY TRUCKS 74.4 72.9 63.9 65.2 73.5 73.6
NOISE LEVELS (dBA) 76.5 74.9 69.6 67.1 75.5 75.8
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 153 484 1530 4840
LDN 143 452 1431 4525
NOISE INPUT DATA - EXISTING
ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
VEHICLE MIX DATA MISC. VEHICLE INFO
0.775 - -
DAY GRADE ADJUSTMENT
NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
- -
0.00 0.848
0.865
NOISE OUTPUT DATA
NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)
NOISE IMPACTS (WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING)
ATTACHMENT 6
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL
PROJECT: CROSSROADS PLAZA JOB #: 1098-2022-002
ROADWAY: LATHROP AVENUE - EXISTING + PROJECT DATE: ######## LOCATION: WEST OF SHERWOOD AVE ENGINEER:R.Edelman
ADT = 21,426 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 40
SPEED = 45 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5.0
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 48 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 40 ROAD ELEVATION = 0.0 PAD ELEVATION = 0.5
GRADE = 1.0 % ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE= -90
PK HR VOL = 2,143 RT ANGLE= 90
DF ANGLE= 180
AUTOMOBILES = 10 HTH WALL= 0.0
MEDIUM TRUCKS = 10 (10 = HARD SITE, 15 = SOFT SITE) AMBIENT= 0.0 HEAVY TRUCKS = 10 BARRIER = 0 (0 = WALL, 1 = BERM)
VEHICLE TYPE EVENING NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE AUTOMOBILES 0.129 0.096 0.8940 AUTOMOBILES 2.0 32.19
MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.049 0.103 0.0200 MEDIUM TRUCKS 4.0 32.04 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.027 0.108 0.0860 HEAVY TRUCKS 8.0 32.10
VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 72.2 70.3 68.5 62.5 71.1 71.7
MEDIUM TRUCKS 64.0 62.5 56.1 54.6 63.0 63.2
HEAVY TRUCKS 74.8 73.4 64.4 65.6 74.0 74.1
NOISE LEVELS (dBA) 76.9 75.3 70.1 67.5 76.0 76.3
VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 72.2 70.3 68.5 62.5 71.1 71.7
MEDIUM TRUCKS 64.0 62.5 56.1 54.6 63.0 63.2
HEAVY TRUCKS 74.8 73.4 64.4 65.6 74.0 74.1
NOISE LEVELS (dBA) 76.9 75.3 70.1 67.5 76.0 76.3
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 170 537 1699 5373
LDN 159 502 1588 5023
VEHICLE MIX DATA MISC. VEHICLE INFO
NOISE INPUT DATA - EXISTING + PROJECT
ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
DAY GRADE ADJUSTMENT
0.775 - -
0.848 - -
0.865 0.00
NOISE OUTPUT DATA
NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)
NOISE IMPACTS (WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING)
ATTACHMENT 6
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL
PROJECT: CROSSROADS PLAZA JOB #: 1098-2022-002
ROADWAY: UNION RD - EXISTING DATE: ########
LOCATION: NORTH OF CROM STREET ENGINEER:R.Edelman
ADT = 17,500 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 40
SPEED = 45 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5.0
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 44 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 40 ROAD ELEVATION = 0.0 PAD ELEVATION = 0.5
GRADE = 1.0 % ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE= -90
PK HR VOL = 1,750 RT ANGLE= 90
DF ANGLE= 180
AUTOMOBILES = 10 HTH WALL= 0.0
MEDIUM TRUCKS = 10 (10 = HARD SITE, 15 = SOFT SITE) AMBIENT= 0.0 HEAVY TRUCKS = 10 BARRIER = 0 (0 = WALL, 1 = BERM)
VEHICLE TYPE EVENING NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE AUTOMOBILES 0.129 0.096 0.8940 AUTOMOBILES 2.0 33.59
MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.049 0.103 0.0200 MEDIUM TRUCKS 4.0 33.44 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.027 0.108 0.0860 HEAVY TRUCKS 8.0 33.50
VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.1 69.2 67.4 61.4 70.0 70.6
MEDIUM TRUCKS 62.9 61.4 55.0 53.5 62.0 62.2
HEAVY TRUCKS 73.7 72.3 63.3 64.5 72.9 73.0
NOISE LEVELS (dBA) 75.9 74.3 69.0 66.5 74.9 75.2
VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.1 69.2 67.4 61.4 70.0 70.6
MEDIUM TRUCKS 62.9 61.4 55.0 53.5 62.0 62.2
HEAVY TRUCKS 73.7 72.3 63.3 64.5 72.9 73.0
NOISE LEVELS (dBA) 75.9 74.3 69.0 66.5 74.9 75.2
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 133 420 1330 4205
LDN 124 393 1243 3931
NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
DAY GRADE ADJUSTMENT
0.775 - -
0.848 - -
0.865 0.00
NOISE OUTPUT DATA
NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)
NOISE IMPACTS (WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING)
VEHICLE MIX DATA MISC. VEHICLE INFO
NOISE INPUT DATA - EXISTING
ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
ATTACHMENT 6
FHWA-RD-77-108 HIGHWAY NOISE PREDICTION MODEL
PROJECT: CROSSROADS PLAZA JOB #: 1098-2022-002
ROADWAY: UNION RD - EXISTING + PROJECT DATE: ########
LOCATION: NORTH OF CROM STREET ENGINEER:R.Edelman
ADT = 19,626 RECEIVER DISTANCE = 40
SPEED = 45 DIST C/L TO WALL = 0
PK HR % = 10 RECEIVER HEIGHT = 5.0
NEAR LANE/FAR LANE DIST = 44 WALL DISTANCE FROM RECEIVER = 40 ROAD ELEVATION = 0.0 PAD ELEVATION = 0.5
GRADE = 1.0 % ROADWAY VIEW: LF ANGLE= -90
PK HR VOL = 1,963 RT ANGLE= 90
DF ANGLE= 180
AUTOMOBILES = 10 HTH WALL= 0.0
MEDIUM TRUCKS = 10 (10 = HARD SITE, 15 = SOFT SITE) AMBIENT= 0.0 HEAVY TRUCKS = 10 BARRIER = 0 (0 = WALL, 1 = BERM)
VEHICLE TYPE EVENING NIGHT DAILY VEHICLE TYPE HEIGHT SLE DISTANCE AUTOMOBILES 0.129 0.096 0.8940 AUTOMOBILES 2.0 33.59
MEDIUM TRUCKS 0.049 0.103 0.0200 MEDIUM TRUCKS 4.0 33.44 HEAVY TRUCKS 0.027 0.108 0.0860 HEAVY TRUCKS 8.0 33.50
VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.6 69.7 67.9 61.9 70.5 71.1
MEDIUM TRUCKS 63.4 61.9 55.5 54.0 62.4 62.7
HEAVY TRUCKS 74.2 72.8 63.8 65.0 73.4 73.5
NOISE LEVELS (dBA) 76.4 74.8 69.5 67.0 75.4 75.7
VEHICLE TYPE PK HR LEQ DAY LEQ EVEN LEQ NIGHT LEQ LDN CNEL AUTOMOBILES 71.6 69.7 67.9 61.9 70.5 71.1
MEDIUM TRUCKS 63.4 61.9 55.5 54.0 62.4 62.7
HEAVY TRUCKS 74.2 72.8 63.8 65.0 73.4 73.5
NOISE LEVELS (dBA) 76.4 74.8 69.5 67.0 75.4 75.7
NOISE LEVELS 70 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA 55 dBA
CNEL 149 472 1491 4716
LDN 139 441 1394 4409
NOISE CONTOUR (FT)
DAY GRADE ADJUSTMENT
0.775 - -
0.848 - -
0.865 0.00
NOISE OUTPUT DATA
NOISE IMPACTS (WITHOUT TOPO OR BARRIER SHIELDING)
NOISE IMPACTS (WITH TOPO AND BARRIER SHIELDING)
VEHICLE MIX DATA MISC. VEHICLE INFO
NOISE INPUT DATA - EXISTING + PROJECT
ROADWAY CONDITIONS RECEIVER INPUT DATA
SITE CONDITIONS WALL INFORMATION
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA References
4 Appendix D:
Construction Noise Modeling Output
ATTACHMENT 6
Construction Phase Equipment
Item
# of Items
Item Lmax at 50
feet, dBA1
Edge of Site to
Receptor, feet
Center of Site to
Receptor, feet
Item Usage
Percent1 Ground Factor2 Usage Factor
Receptor Item
Lmax, dBA
Recptor. Item
Leq, dBA
SITE PREP
Tractor 1 84 25 100 40 0.66 0.40 92.0 72.0
Dozer 1 82 25 100 40 0.66 0.40 90.0 70.0
Grader 1 85 25 100 40 0.66 0.40 93.0 73.0
Log Sum 93.0 76.6
GRADE
Dozer 1 82 25 100 40 0.66 0.40 90.0 70.0
Grader 1 85 25 100 40 0.66 0.40 93.0 73.0
Tractor 2 84 25 100 40 0.66 0.40 92.0 72.0
93.0 77.9
BUILD
Crane 1 81 25 100 16 0.66 0.16 89.0 65.0
Man lift 1 75 25 100 20 0.66 0.20 83.0 60.0
Generator 1 81 25 100 50 0.66 0.50 89.0 70.0
Tractor 1 84 25 100 40 0.66 0.40 92.0 72.0
Welder/Torch 3 74 25 100 40 0.66 0.40 82.0 62.0
92.0 75.4
PAVE
Paver 1 77 25 100 50 0.66 0.50 85.0 66.0
Pavement Scarifier 1 90 25 100 20 0.66 0.20 98.0 75.0
Roller 1 80 25 100 20 0.66 0.20 88.0 65.0
Tractor 1 84 25 100 40 0.66 0.40 92.0 72.0
Concrete Mixer Truck 1 79 25 100 40 0.66 0.40 87.0 67.0
98.0 76.4
ARCH COAT
Compressor (air) 1 78 25 100 40 0.66 0.40 86.0 66.0
86.0 66.0
1 FHWA Construction Noise Handbook: Table 9.1 RCNM Default Noise Emission Reference Levels and Usage Factors Receptor - Residences to the South
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
Noise Impact Study
City of Manteca, CA References
5 Appendix E:
Construction Vibration Modeling Output
ATTACHMENT 6
Project: Crossroads Plaxa Date: 3/10/23
Source: Large Bulldozer
Scenario: Unmitigated
Location:
Address: 2064 North Union Road
PPV = PPVref(25/D)^n (in/sec)
Equipment = INPUT SECTION IN BLUE
Type
PPVref = 0.089 Reference PPV (in/sec) at 25 ft.
D = 20.00 Distance from Equipment to Receiver (ft)
n = 1.10 Vibration attenuation rate through the ground
PPV = 0.114 IN/SEC OUTPUT IN RED
DATA OUT RESULTS
2 Large Bulldozer
Note: Based on reference equations from Vibration Guidance Manual, California Department of Transportation, 2006, pgs 38-43.
VIBRATION LEVEL IMPACT
Adjacent residences
DATA INPUT
ATTACHMENT 6
LOS ANGELES • SAN JOSE • FRESNO • STOCKTON • BAKERSFIELD DALLAS • SEATTLE • DENVER
AIR QUALITY AND
GREENHOUSE GAS
ASSESSMENT
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
2064 NORTH UNION ROAD
MANTECA, CALIFORNIA
SALEM PROJECT NO. 4-423-0090
APRIL 6, 2023
PREPARED FOR:
MS. TENEA DAVIS
MANTECA 18, LLC
1925 VILLAGE CENTER CIRCLE, SUITE 150
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89314
PREPARED BY:
SALEM ENGINEERING GROUP, INC.
4729 W. JAQUELYN AVENUE
FRESNO, CA 93722
P: (559) 271-9700
F: (559) 275-0827
www.salem.net
GEOTECHNICAL ● ENVIRONMENTAL ● GEOLOGY ● MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION ● FORENSIC ● LABORATORY ATTACHMENT 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Job No. 4-423-0090
1.0 INTRODUCTON ........................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................... 1
2.1 Current Development ....................................................................................................................... 1
2.2 Regulatory Setting ........................................................................................................................... 1
3.0 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE ......................................................................................... 3
4.0 IMPACTS ....................................................................................................................................... 4
4.1 Construction ..................................................................................................................................... 4
4.2 Operational Impacts ......................................................................................................................... 4
4.3 Odors ................................................................................................................................................ 5
4.4 Project’s Contribution to Criteria Pollutants .................................................................................... 6
5.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EVALUATION ........................................................................................ 6
6.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................ 7
7.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 11
APPENDICES
Site Plan ...................................................................................................................................................... .A CalEEMod Model Outputs ...........................................................................................................................B ATTACHMENT 6
4729 West Jacquelyn Avenue
Fresno, California 93722
(559) 271-9700 Office
(559) 275-0827 Fax
SAN JOSE ▪ STOCKTON ▪ FRESNO ▪ BAKERSFIELD ▪ RANCHO CUCAMONGA
DALLAS, TEXAS
April 6, 2023 Job No. 4-423-0090
AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS ASSESSMENT
PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
2064 NORTH UNION ROAD
MANTECA, CALIFORNIA
1.0 INTRODUCTON
This report presents an assessment of potential air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts associated with the proposed commercial development to be constructed at 2064 North Union Road in Manteca, California (subject property). The subject property consists of one rectangular-shaped parcel of vacant land (identified as San Joaquin County Assessor Parcel Number [APN] 216-020-01) totaling approximately 1.98 acres gross land area. According to SALEM’s review of the Proposed Site Plan (Sheet A-0.0) prepared by Centerline Design, LLC., (Centerline), the following improvements are planned on the above-referenced parcel:
• One 5,200 square-foot convenience store with six (6) fuel dispensers, • One 6,816 square-foot retail building,
• 48 parking stalls
Air quality and GHG impacts will be attributed to emissions associated with construction and operational emissions including traffic and energy use. This report presents an evaluation of existing conditions at the subject property, thresholds of significance, and potential air quality and GHG impacts associated with construction and operation of the project.
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.1 Current Development
The subject property is currently undeveloped. Offsite and onsite improvements will be constructed to allow for vehicle and pedestrian access to the site.
2.2 Regulatory Setting
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines air quality by ambient air concentrations of specific pollutants that have been shown to be of concern with respect to health and welfare of the general public. The EPA is responsible for enforcing the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970 and its 1977 and 1990 Amendments. The CAA required the EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), which identify concentrations of pollutants in the ambient air below which no adverse effects on the public health and welfare are anticipated.
In response, the EPA established both primary and secondary standards for several pollutants (called “criteria” pollutants). Primary standards are designed to protect human health with an adequate margin of safety. Secondary standards are designed to protect property and the public welfare from air pollutants in the atmosphere.
The Federal CAA allows states to adopt ambient air quality standards and other regulations provided they are at least as stringent as federal standards. More stringent California Ambient Air Quality Standards ATTACHMENT 6
Project No. 4-423-0090
April 6, 2023
Page No. 2
(CAAQS) have been adapted by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) for the six criteria pollutants through the California Clean Air Act of 1988 (CCAA). The CCAA also established California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for additional pollutants, including sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, vinyl chloride and visibility-reducing particles (see Table 1 for NAAQS and CAAQS.) Areas that do not meet the NAAQS or the CAAQS for a particular pollutant are considered to be “Nonattainment Areas” for that pollutant. In September 1997, the EPA promulgated 8-hour O3 and 24-hour and annual PM2.5 national standards. As a result, this action has initiated a new planning process to monitor and evaluate emission control measures for these pollutants.
The California ARB is the state regulatory agency with authority to enforce regulations to both achieve and maintain the NAAQS and CAAQS. The ARB is responsible for the development, adoption, and enforcement of the state’s motor vehicle emissions program, as well as the adoption of the CAAQS. The ARB also reviews operations and programs of the local air districts and requires each air district with jurisdiction over a nonattainment area to develop its own strategy for achieving the NAAQS and CAAQS.
The local air district has the primary responsibility for the development and implementation of rules and regulations designed to attain the NAAQS and CAAQS, as well as the permitting of new or modified sources, development of air quality management plans, and adoption and enforcement of air pollution regulations. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) is the local agency responsible for the administration and enforcement of air quality regulations.
Table 1 presents a summary of the ambient air quality standards adopted by the federal and California Clean Air Acts.
TABLE 1
Ambient Air Quality Standards
POLLUTANT
AVERAGE
TIME
CALIFORNIA
STANDARDS
CONCENTRATION
CALIFORNIA
STANDARDS
METHODS
NATIONAL
STANDARDS
PRIMARY
NATIONAL
STANDARDS
SECONDARY
NATIONAL
STANDARDS
METHOD
Ozone (O3)
1 hour 0.09 ppm
(180 µg/m3) Ultraviolet
Photometry
Ultraviolet
Photometry 8 hour 0.070 ppm
(137 µg/m3)
0.075 ppm
(147 µg/m3)
0.075 ppm
(147 µg/m3)
Carbon
Monoxide (CO)
1 Hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3) Non-Dispersive
Infrared Photometry
(NDIR)
35 ppm (40
µg/m3)
— Non-Dispersive
Infrared
Spectroscopy
(NDIR)
8 Hour 9.0 ppm (10
mg/m3)
9 ppm (10
µg/m3)
—
Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2)
Annual 0.030 ppm
(56 µg/m3) Gas Phase
Chemiluminescence
0.053 ppm
(100 µg/m3) Gas Phase
Chemiluminescence
1 hour 0.18 ppm
(338 µg/m3)
0.100 ppm
(188 µg/m3)
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2)
24 hours 0.04 ppm
(105 µg/m3)
Ultraviolet
Fluorescence Pararosaniline 3 hours -- 0.5 ppm (1300
µg/m3)
1 hour 0.25 ppm
(655 µg/m3)
0.075 ppm
(196 µg/m3)
24 hours 50 µg/m3 Gravimetric or Beta
Attenuation 150 µg/m3 150 µg/m3
ATTACHMENT 6
Project No. 4-423-0090
April 6, 2023
Page No. 3
POLLUTANT
AVERAGE
TIME
CALIFORNIA
STANDARDS
CONCENTRATION
CALIFORNIA
STANDARDS
METHODS
NATIONAL
STANDARDS
PRIMARY
NATIONAL
STANDARDS
SECONDARY
NATIONAL
STANDARDS
METHOD
Respirable
Particulate
Matter (PM10)
Annual
Arithmetic
Mean
20 µg/m3
Inertial Separation
and Gravimetric
Analysis
Fine
Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
Annual
Arithmetic
Mean
12 µg/m3
Gravimetric or Beta
Attenuation
12.0 µg/m3 15 µg/m3 Inertial Separation
and Gravimetric
Analysis 24 hours 35 µg/m3
Sulfates 24 hours 25 µg/m3 Ion
Chromatography No National Standards
Lead
30-day
Average 1.5 µg/m3
Atomic Absorption Atomic Absorption Calendar
Quarter 1.5 µg/m3 1.5 µg/m3
3-Month
Rolling 0.15 µg/m3 0.15 µg/m3
Hydrogen
Sulfide 1 hour 0.03 ppm
(42 µg/m3)
Ultraviolet
Fluorescence No National Standards
Vinyl Chloride 24 hours 0.010 ppm
(26 µg/m3)
Gas
Chromatography No National Standards
ppm= parts per million; µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; mg/m3= milligrams per cubic meter Source: California Air Resources Board, www.arb.ca.gov, 2014
3.0 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The SJVAPCD has identified numerical emission thresholds for significance for construction and operation for a project. The project-level numerical thresholds are summarized in Table 2.
TABLE 2
SJVAPCD Significance Thresholds
POLLUTANT CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION
Annual Threshold (tons) Daily Threshold (pounds)
NOx 10 -
ROG (VOC) 10 -
PM10 15 -
PM2.5 15 -
SOx 27 -
CO 100 -
TABLE 3
Construction Summary for Subject Property
AREA DISTURBED CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY PARKING SPACES APPROXIMATE DURATION 5,200 square feet Convenience Store with 16 pumps 8 Months 6,816 square feet Retail Building - 8 Months
0.43 ac Parking Lot 48 1 Month
ATTACHMENT 6
Project No. 4-423-0090
April 6, 2023
Page No. 4
4.0 IMPACTS
The proposed commercial development to be constructed include both construction and operational impacts. Construction impacts include emissions associated with site grading/preparation, utilities installation, construction of a building, and paving. Operational impacts include emissions associated with the project, including traffic, at full build-out.
4.1 Construction
Emissions of pollutants such as fugitive dust that are generated during construction are generally highest near the construction site. Emissions from the construction phase of the project were estimated through the use of the CalEEMod Model (ENVIRON). It was assumed that the construction would be vary in timeline as stated in the above table and that heavy construction equipment would be operating at the site for eight hours per day, five days per week during project construction.
Tables 4 and 5 provide summaries of the emission estimates for construction and operation of all proposed site improvements. These projected emissions assume standard measures are implemented to reduce emissions, as calculated with the CalEEMod Model, and are compared to the regional and localized significance thresholds. The localized significance thresholds are applicable only to on-site emissions and do not consider emissions occurring on roadways during travel to and from the site. Refer to Appendix A for detailed model output files.
Table 5 includes projected emissions for all steps of construction, averaged over the project’s projected construction duration. These steps include: Grading Site, Site Preparation, Building Construction, Paving, and Architectural Coatings. Note that projected emissions for all pollutants during construction are below both the MDAQMD’s Air Quality Significance Thresholds.
Construction of the project would be short-term and temporary. Thus, the emissions associated with construction would not result in a significant impact on the ambient air quality. Because emissions are less than the significance levels, they would not conflict or obstruct the implementation of the AQMP or applicable portions of the SIP. Project construction would also not result in emission of any odor compounds that would cause a nuisance or significant impact to nearby receptors. The impacts associated with Project construction are therefore not considered significant.
TABLE 4
Estimated Construction Emissions
Tons/Year (unless otherwise shown)
EMISSION SOURCE ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Significance Criteria 10 10 100 27 15 15
Project Construction Emissions 0.06 0.28 0.31 0.0005 .02 .01 Significant? No No No No No No
4.2 Operational Impacts
The main operational impacts associated with the Project would be impacts associated with traffic. Minor impacts would be associated with energy use and area sources.
The CalEEMod Model contains emission factors from the EMFAC model, which is the latest version of the Caltrans emission factor model for on-road traffic. Project-related traffic was assumed to be comprised of a mixture of vehicles in accordance with the CalEEMod Model default outputs for traffic. This assumption includes light duty autos and light duty trucks (i.e., small trucks, SUVs, and vans) as well as medium- and heavy-duty vehicles that may be traveling to the facility to make deliveries. For conservative ATTACHMENT 6
Project No. 4-423-0090
April 6, 2023
Page No. 5
purposes, emission factors representing the vehicle mix for 2023 were used to estimate emissions as 2023 was assumed to be the first year of full operation; based on the results of the EMFAC model for subsequent years, emissions would decrease on an annual basis from 2023 onward due to phase-out of higher polluting vehicles and implementation of more stringent emission standards that are taken into account in the EMFAC model. Emissions associated with area sources (energy use and landscaping activities) were also estimated using the default assumptions in the CalEEMod Model.
Table 5 below presents the results of the CalEEMod emission calculations in lbs./day for operations, as an annual average considering the project’s design features. The calculation assumed that the project would be constructed to current Title 24 buildings standards and would use low flow plumbing fixtures.
TABLE 5
Estimated Operational Emissions, Tons/Year (unless otherwise shown) EMISSION SOURCE ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Significance Criteria 10 10 100 27 15 15
Project Construction Emissions 0.64 0.64 3.39 .004 0.43 0.12 Significant? No No No No No No
Based on the estimates of the emissions associated with project operations, the emissions are below the significance criteria. In addition, because the emissions are less than the significance levels, they would not conflict or obstruct the implementation of the AQMP or applicable portions of the SIP. It should be noted that the emissions from vehicles are projected to decrease with time due to phase-out of older, more polluting vehicles and increasingly stringent emissions standards.
Projects involving traffic impacts may result in the formation of locally high concentrations of CO, known as CO “hot spots.” Based on the traffic recommendation to be implemented, it is not anticipated that the project would have a significant impact on traffic in the area, and no intersections would degrade to unacceptable levels. The intersections in the project area would therefore operate at an acceptable LOS and would not experience CO “hot spots” because traffic congestion would not result.
In reviewing the project data, location and area, a cumulatively increase in the surrounding emissions associated with the area would not result in a significant impact on the ambient air quality. In addition, because emissions are less than the significance levels, they do not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Based on the above project analyst of the operational phase, the project will not conflict or obstruct the implementation of the AQMP or applicable portions of the SIP.
4.3 Odors
During construction, diesel equipment operating at the site may generate some nuisance odors; however, due to the fact that there are no sensitive receptors near the project site and the temporary nature of construction, odors associated with project construction would not be significant.
Land uses associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting activities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding operations. These land uses are not proposed for the commercial development on the subject property. As such, odor impacts would not be significant.
Provide
traffic study
to confirm
this.
Residential
communities
are sensitive
receptors
and they are
adjacent to
this site.
ATTACHMENT 6
Project No. 4-423-0090
April 6, 2023
Page No. 6
4.4 Project’s Contribution to Criteria Pollutants
Pursuant to the Sierra Club v. Friant Ranch Supreme Court Ruling (Case No. S219783, December 24, 2018), which found on page 6 of the ruling that EIRs need to “makes a reasonable effort to substantively connect a project’s air quality impacts to likely health consequences.” Also, on page 24 of the ruling it states “The Court of Appeal identified several ways in which the EIR could have framed the analysis so as to adequately inform the public and decision makers of possible adverse health effects. The County could have, for example, identified the Project’s impact on the days of nonattainment per year.” TABLE 6
Project’s Contribution to Criteria Pollutants in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin
EMISSIONS SOURCE
MAXIMUM DAILY EMISSIONS
ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Project Emissions (tons/year)1 0.64 0.64 3.39 .004 0.43 0.12 Total Emissions in Air Basin
(lbs./day) 1,000,000 1,044,000 4,246,000 36,000 132,000 132,000 Project’s Percent of Air
Emissions insignificant insignificant insignificant insignificant insignificant insignificant Notes:
1 From the project’s total operational emissions.
5.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EVALUATION
According to the California Natural Resources Agency, “due to the global nature of GHG emissions and their potential effects, GHG emissions will typically be addressed in a cumulative impacts analysis.” According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the following criteria may be considered to establish the significance of GHG emissions:
Would the project:
Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
As discussed in Section 15064.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, the determination of the significance of greenhouse gas emissions calls for a careful judgment by the lead agency, consistent with the provisions in Section 15064. Section 15064.4 further provides that a lead agency should make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of GHG emissions resulting from a project. A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to:
• Use a model or methodology to quantify greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project, and which model or methodology to use. The lead agency has discretion to select the model or methodology it considers most appropriate provided it supports its decision with substantial evidence. The lead agency should explain the limitations of the particular model or methodology selected for use; and/or
• Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance-based standards.
Section 15064.4 also advises a lead agency to consider the following factors, among others, when assessing the significance of impacts from greenhouse gas emissions on the environment:
ATTACHMENT 6
Project No. 4-423-0090
April 6, 2023
Page No. 7
1. The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting;
2. Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project; and
3. The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.
Based on the results of the CalEEMod Model, the project would generate a total of 49.71 tons of CO2e from construction and 487.46 tons of CO2e emissions annually from operations.
6.0 CONCLUSIONS
The air quality and GHG analysis for the Proposed Commercial Development project in Manteca, CA evaluated emissions associated with both the construction and operation of the proposed project. Emissions associated with construction and operation were compared with significance thresholds developed by the SJVAPCD, which provide a conservative means of evaluating whether project emissions would cause a significant impact on the ambient air quality or whether further evaluation is warranted. Emissions associated with construction and operation are below the significance thresholds for all phases and pollutants. Thus, the emissions associated with construction and operation of the project would not result in a significant impact.
6.1 Impact Determinations and Recommended Mitigation
In accordance with CEQA, when a proposed project is consistent with a General Plan for which an EIR has been certified, the effects of that project are evaluated to determine if they will result in project-specific significant adverse impacts on the environment. The criteria used to determine the significance of an air quality or greenhouse gas impact are based on the following thresholds of significance, which come from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and the General Plan EIR. Accordingly, air quality or greenhouse gas impacts resulting from the Proposed Project are considered significant if the Proposed Project would:
Air Quality
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
6.2 Air Quality
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan The primary way of determining consistency with the air quality plan’s (AQP’s) assumptions is determining consistency with the applicable General Plan to ensure that the Project’s population density and land use are consistent with the growth assumptions used in the AQPs for the air basin.
ATTACHMENT 6
Project No. 4-423-0090
April 6, 2023
Page No. 8
As required by California law, city and county General Plans contain a Land Use Element that details the types and quantities of land uses that the city or county estimates will be needed for future growth, and that designate locations for land uses to regulate growth. SJCOG uses the growth projections and land use information in adopted general plans to estimate future average daily trips and then VMT, which are then provided to SJVAPCD to estimate future emissions in the AQPs. Existing and future pollutant emissions computed in the AQP are based on land uses from area general plans. AQPs detail the control measures and emission reductions required for reaching attainment of the air standards.
The applicable General Plan for the project is the City of Madera General Plan. The Project is consistent with the currently adopted General Plan for the City and is therefore consistent with the population growth and VMT applied in the plan. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the growth assumptions used in the applicable AQPs. As a result, the Project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any air quality plans. Therefore, no mitigation is needed. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard The San Joaquin County area is nonattainment for Federal and State air quality standards for ozone, in attainment of Federal standards and nonattainment for State standards for PM10, and nonattainment for Federal and State standards for PM2.5. The SJVAPCD has prepared the 2016 and 2013 Ozone Plans, 2007 PM10 Maintenance Plan, and 2012 PM2.5 Plan to achieve Federal and State standards for improved air quality in the SJVAB regarding ozone and PM. Inconsistency with any of the plans would be considered a cumulatively adverse air quality impact. As discussed above, the Project is consistent with the currently adopted General Plan for the City of Manteca and is therefore consistent with the population growth and VMT applied in the plan. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the growth assumptions used in the 2016 and 2013 Ozone Plan, 2007 PM10 Maintenance Plan, and 2012 PM2.5 Plan.
Project specific emissions that exceed the thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants would be expected to result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the County is in non-attainment under applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards. It should be noted that a project is not characterized as cumulatively insignificant when project emissions fall below thresholds of significance. As discussed in Section 3.1, the SJVAPCD has established thresholds of significance for determining environmental significance which are provided in Table 6.
As discussed above, results of the analysis show that emissions generated from construction and operation of the Project will be less than the applicable SJVAPCD emission thresholds for criteria pollutants. Therefore, no mitigation is needed.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations Sensitive receptors refer to those segments of the population most susceptible to poor air quality (i.e., children, the elderly, and those with pre-existing serious health problems affected by air quality). Land uses that have the greatest potential to attract these types of sensitive receptors include schools, parks, playgrounds, daycare centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential communities. From a health risk perspective, this Project may be required to provide a Health Risk Assessment per SJVAPCD requirements; that is beyond the scope of this analysis.
Short-Term Impacts: The annual emissions from the construction phase of the Project will be less than the applicable SJVAPCD emission thresholds for criteria pollutants as shown above. Therefore, construction emissions associated with the Project are considered less than significant.
There is a
residential
community
adjacent to this
site.
Provide Health
Risk
Assessment.
ATTACHMENT 6
Project No. 4-423-0090
April 6, 2023
Page No. 9
Long-Term Impacts: Long-Term emissions from the Project are generated primarily by mobile source (vehicle) emissions from the Project site and area sources such as maintenance equipment. Emissions from long-term operations generally represent a project’s most substantial air quality impact. Table 8 summarizes the Project’s operational impacts by pollutant. Results indicate that the annual operational emissions from the Project will be less than the SJVAPCD emission thresholds for criteria pollutants.
Therefore, operational emissions associated with the Project are considered less than significant. d) Result in other emissions such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people
The SJVAPCD requires that an analysis of potential odor impacts be conducted for the following two situations:
Generators – projects that would potentially generate odorous emissions proposed to be located near existing sensitive receptors or other land uses where people may congregate, and Receivers – residential or other sensitive receptor projects or other projects built for the intent of attracting people located near existing odor sources.
The intensity of an odor source’s operations and its proximity to sensitive receptors influences the potential significance of odor emissions. The SJVAPCD has identified some common types of facilities that have been known to produce odors in the SJV Air Basin. The types of facilities that are known to produce odors are shown above along with a reasonable distance from the source within which, the degree of odors could possibly be significant. The Project will not generate odorous emissions given the nature or characteristics of the Project. Therefore, no mitigation is needed.
6.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment
The SJVAPCD acknowledges the current absence of numerical thresholds and recommends a tiered approach to establish the significance of the GHG impacts on the environment:
i. If a project complies with an approved GHG emission reduction plan or GHG mitigation program which avoids or substantially reduces GHG emissions within the geographic area in which the project is located, then the project would be determined to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impact for GHG emissions; ii. If a project does not comply with an approved GHG emission reduction plan or mitigation program, then it would be required to implement Best Performance Standards (BPS); and iii. If a project is not implementing BPS, then it should demonstrate that its GHG emissions would be reduced or mitigated by at least 29 percent compared to Business as Usual (BAU).
In the event that a local air district’s guidance for addressing GHG impacts does not use numerical GHG emissions thresholds, at the lead agency’s discretion, a neighboring air district’s GHG threshold may be used to determine impacts. In December 2008, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Governing Board adopted the staff proposal for an interim GHG significance threshold for projects where the SCAQMD is lead agency. The SCAQMD guidance identifies a threshold of 3,500 MTCO2eq./year for GHG for construction emissions amortized over a 30-year project lifetime, plus annual operation emissions. Though the Project is under SJVAPCD jurisdiction, the SCAQMD GHG threshold provides some perspective on the GHG emissions generated by the Project. The yearly GHG emissions generated by the Project as determined by the CalEEMod model are shown above, which is less than the threshold identified by the SCAQMD.
The resulting permanent greenhouse gas increases related to Project operations would be within the greenhouse gas increases analyzed in the City of Manteca General Plan EIR since the Project meets the ATTACHMENT 6
Project No. 4-423-0090
April 6, 2023
Page No. 10
applicable zoning requirements. There would be no increase in severity to the greenhouse gas impacts, and implementation of the Project will not result in Project-specific or site-specific significant adverse impacts from greenhouse gas emissions within the Project study area. Therefore, no mitigation measures are needed.
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases
California passed the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. Under AB 32, CARB must adopt regulations by January 1, 2011, to achieve reductions in GHGs to meet the 1990 emission cap by 2020. On December 11, 2008, CARB adopted its initial Scoping Plan, which functions as a roadmap of CARB’s plans to achieve GHG reductions in California required by AB 32 through subsequently enacted regulations.
CARB’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan builds on the efforts and plans encompassed in the initial Scoping Plan.
SB 375 requires MPOs to adopt a SCS or APS that will prescribe land use allocation in that MPO's regional transportation plan. CARB, in consultation with MPOs, has provided each affected region with reduction targets for GHGs emitted by passenger cars and light trucks in the region for the years 2020 and 2035. For the SJCOG region, CARB set targets at five (5) percent per capita decrease in 2020 and a ten (10) percent per capita decrease in 2035 from a base year of 2005.
Executive Order B-30-15 establishes a California greenhouse gas reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 to ensure California meets its target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Executive Order B-30-15 requires MPO’s to implement measures that will achieve reductions of greenhouse gas emissions to meet the 2030 and 2050 greenhouse gas emissions reductions targets.
As required by California law, city and county General Plans contain a Land Use Element that details the types and quantities of land uses that the city or county estimates will be needed for future growth, and that designate locations for land uses to regulate growth. SJCOG uses the growth projections and land use information in adopted general plans to estimate future average daily trips and then VMT, which are then provided to SJVAPCD to estimate future emissions in the AQPs. The applicable General Plan for the project is City of Manteca General Plan.
The Project is consistent with the currently adopted General Plan for the City and the adopted SJCOG RTP/SCS and is therefore consistent with the population growth and VMT applied in those plan documents. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the growth assumptions used in the applicable AQP. It should also be noted that yearly GHG emissions generated by the Project are less than the threshold identified by the SCAQMD (see the discussion for Impact 4.2.1 above).
CARB’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan builds on the efforts and plans encompassed in the initial Scoping Plan. The current plan has identified new policies and actions to accomplish the State’s 2030 GHG limit. Below is a list of applicable strategies in the Scoping Plan and the Project’s consistency with those strategies.
California Light-Duty Vehicle GHG Standards – Implement adopted standards and planned second phase of the program. Align zero-emission vehicle, alternative and renewable fuel and vehicle technology programs for long-term climate change goals.
The Project is consistent with this reduction measure. This measure cannot be implemented by a particular project or lead agency since it is a statewide measure. When this measure is ATTACHMENT 6
Project No. 4-423-0090
April 6, 2023
Page No. 11
implemented, standards would be applicable to light-duty vehicles that would access the Project.
The Project would not conflict or obstruct this reduction measure.
Energy Efficiency – Pursuit of comparable investment in energy efficiency from all retail providers of electricity in California. Maximize energy efficiency building and appliance standards.
The Project is consistent with this reduction measure. Though this measure applies to the State to increase its energy standards, the Project would comply with this measure through existing regulation. The Project would not conflict or obstruct this reduction measure. Low Carbon Fuel – Development and adoption of the low carbon fuel standard.
The Project is consistent with this reduction measure. This measure cannot be implemented by a particular project or lead agency since it is a statewide measure. When this measure is implemented, standards would be applicable to the fuel used by vehicles that would access the Project. The Project would not conflict or obstruct this reduction measure.
Based on the assessment above, the Project will not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Therefore, any impacts would be less than significant.
7.0 REFERENCES
Association of Environmental Professionals. 2007. Recommendations by the Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP) on How to Analyze Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Global Climate Change in CEQA Documents. June.
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. 2008. CEQA and Climate Change – Evaluating and Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Projects Subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. January.
California Air Resources Board. EMFAC Emissions Model. California Air Resources Board. 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan. November. City of Manteca General Plan.
ENVIRON. CalEEMod Model.
San Joaquin Council of Governments RTP/SCS.
U.S. EPA. 2006. The U.S. Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: Fast Facts. www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads06/06FastFacts.pdf.
We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with this project. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (559) 271-9700.
Respectfully submitted,
SALEM Engineering Group, Inc.
John Thomason, QSP/D/QISP, LEED AP
Air Quality/CEQA Associate
ATTACHMENT 6
APPENDIX
A
ATTACHMENT 6
SD SD SD SD SD SD
SD SD SD SD > > > > > > > > > > > > W2 W2 W2 FW6 FW6 FW6 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W8 W NO
PARKING G
TS
TS
TS TS
TS
OH OH OH OH OH OH ET OH
OH
SS12 SS12
W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W12 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W18 W W W W W W WW W W W ?E T C SS ET E SD E T W W W W W W SD E E T SD12 SD12 W W SD10 W8 W12 W12 W12 SD12 SD12 ICVICV ICV
NO
PARKING NO PARKING
NO
PARKING NO PARKING
CLEAN AIR/VANPOOL/EV
CLEAN AIR/VANPOOL/EV CLEAN AIR/VANPOOL/EV 15K 8K 12K 20K > > > > > > > > > > > > D D > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 15K 8K 12K 20K > > > > > S NO PARKING PROPOSED BUILDING "A" CIRCLE K 5,200 S.F. 2064 N. UNION ROAD PROPOSED BUILDING "B" AUTOZONE 6,816 S.F. 2080 N. UNION ROAD PROPOSED 6 MPD'S AND CANOPY 5 14 1 12 68 WEST LATHROP ROAD NORTH UNION ROAD EXISTING BUILDING (N.I.C.) Δ
P R O J E C T P LA N N IG - DES I GN - CO N S U LT I NG C u r r e n t R e le a s e D a te P la n n in g S u b m it a l P la n C h e c k S u b m it a l S T A T U S R E V I S I O N S S c a le P r o je c tC o o r d in a to r P r o je c tN o . S h e e t I D E N T I F I C A T I O N 2064 NORTH UNION ROAD
MANTECA, CALIFORNIA 95336
1 5 0 8 TO L L H O U S E R O A D , SU ITE ' C
C L O V IS,CA L I FO R N I A 93 6 1 1
5 5 9 -29 8 -30 6 0 (O F F IC E )
5 5 9 -29 8 -32 6 7 (FA X )
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR:
CROSSROADS PLAZA PROPOSED SITE PLAN A-0.0 N GENERAL NOTES N VICINITY MAP PROJECT DATA PARKING DATA PARCEL DATA BUILDING DATA ALLOWABLE BUILDING AREA KEYED NOTES
ATTACHMENT
6 APPENDIX
B
ATTACHMENT 6
Manteca Commercial Development
San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation -
Area Mitigation - Low VOC paints.
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 6.00 Pump 0.02 847.05 0 General Office Building 6.82 1000sqft 0.16 6,816.00 0
Parking Lot 48.00 Space 0.43 19,200.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
3 Wind Speed (m/s) 2.7 Precipitation Freq (Days) 45
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Operational Year 2025
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExteriorV alue
150 50
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInteriorV alue
150 50
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingCheck False True tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingValue 150 50
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
2.0 Emissions Summary
2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.0291 0.2839 0.3170 5.6000e0040.0102 0.0137 0.0239 3.8600e0030.0127 0.0165 0.0000 49.2271 49.2271 0.0134 5.1000e00449.7144 2024 0.0684 0.0995 0.1228 2.1000e0041.9500e0034.5900e0036.5400e0035.3000e0044.2500e0034.7700e0030.0000 18.7760 18.7760 5.1400e0031.9000e00418.9605 Maximum 0.0684 0.2839 0.3170 5.6000e0040.0102 0.0137 0.0239 3.8600e0030.0127 0.0165 0.0000 49.2271 49.2271 0.0134 5.1000e00449.7144 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.0291 0.2839 0.3170 5.6000e0046.9200e0030.0137 0.0206 2.3100e0030.0127 0.0150 0.0000 49.2271 49.2271 0.0134 5.1000e00449.7144 2024 0.0684 0.0995 0.1228 2.1000e0041.9500e0034.5900e0036.5400e0035.3000e0044.2500e0034.7700e0030.0000 18.7760 18.7760 5.1400e0031.9000e00418.9605 Maximum 0.0684 0.2839 0.3170 5.6000e0046.9200e0030.0137 0.0206 2.3100e0030.0127 0.0150 0.0000 49.2271 49.2271 0.0134 5.1000e00449.7144 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.24 0.00 10.90 35.31 0.00 7.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 9-1-2023 11-30-2023 0.2384 0.2384
2 12-1-2023 2-29-2024 0.2469 0.2469
Highest 0.2469 0.2469
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.0370 1.0000e0055.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0900e0031.0900e0030.0000 0.0000 1.1600e003 Energy 5.2000e0044.7600e0034.0000e0033.0000e0053.6000e0043.6000e0043.6000e0043.6000e0040.0000 11.9963 11.9963 1.2000e0032.3000e00412.0945 Mobile 0.6082 0.6354 3.3929 4.9300e0030.4345 5.0200e0030.4395 0.1163 4.6900e0030.1210 0.0000 456.3314 456.3314 0.0524 0.0400 469.5466 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.2870 0.0000 1.2870 0.0761 0.0000 3.1884 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.4045 0.8913 1.2958 0.0417 1.0000e0032.6355 Total 0.6457 0.6401 3.3975 4.9600e0030.4345 5.3800e0030.4399 0.1163 5.0500e0030.1213 1.6914 469.2201 470.9115 0.1713 0.0412 487.4661 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 0.0331 1.0000e0055.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0900e0031.0900e0030.0000 0.0000 1.1600e003 Energy 5.2000e0044.7600e0034.0000e0033.0000e0053.6000e0043.6000e0043.6000e0043.6000e0040.0000 11.9963 11.9963 1.2000e0032.3000e00412.0945 Mobile 0.6082 0.6354 3.3929 4.9300e0030.4345 5.0200e0030.4395 0.1163 4.6900e0030.1210 0.0000 456.3314 456.3314 0.0524 0.0400 469.5466 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.2870 0.0000 1.2870 0.0761 0.0000 3.1884 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.4045 0.8913 1.2958 0.0417 1.0000e0032.6355 Total 0.6419 0.6401 3.3975 4.9600e0030.4345 5.3800e0030.4399 0.1163 5.0500e0030.1213 1.6914 469.2201 470.9115 0.1713 0.0412 487.4661 Mitigated Operational
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2023 9/14/2023 5 10
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 9/15/2023 9/15/2023 5 1 3 Grading Grading 9/16/2023 9/19/2023 5 2
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
4 Building Construction Building Construction 9/20/2023 2/6/2024 5 100 5 Paving Paving 2/7/2024 2/13/2024 5 5
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 2/14/2024 2/20/2024 5 5 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6.00 9 0.56
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Building Construction Cranes 1 4.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6.00 89 0.20
Grading Graders 1 6.00 187 0.41
Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Paving Pavers 1 7.00 130 0.42
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1.00 247 0.40
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 6.00 247 0.40
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 11,495; Non-Residential Outdoor: 3,832; Striped Parking Area: 1,152 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 1.5
Acres of Paving: 0.43
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 3.2300e0030.0289 0.0370 6.0000e0051.4100e0031.4100e0031.3500e0031.3500e0030.0000 5.2091 5.2091 9.5000e0040.0000 5.2328 Total 3.2300e0030.0289 0.0370 6.0000e0051.4100e0031.4100e0031.3500e0031.3500e0030.0000 5.2091 5.2091 9.5000e0040.0000 5.2328 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Use Soil Stabilizer
Replace Ground Cover
Water Exposed Area
Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 2 5.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 5 11.00 4.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 2.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.6000e0041.1000e0041.2400e0030.0000 4.0000e0040.0000 4.0000e0041.1000e0040.0000 1.1000e0040.0000 0.3197 0.3197 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.3228 Total 1.6000e0041.1000e0041.2400e0030.0000 4.0000e0040.0000 4.0000e0041.1000e0040.0000 1.1000e0040.0000 0.3197 0.3197 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.3228 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 3.2300e0030.0289 0.0370 6.0000e0051.4100e0031.4100e0031.3500e0031.3500e0030.0000 5.2091 5.2091 9.5000e0040.0000 5.2328 Total 3.2300e0030.0289 0.0370 6.0000e0051.4100e0031.4100e0031.3500e0031.3500e0030.0000 5.2091 5.2091 9.5000e0040.0000 5.2328 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.6000e0041.1000e0041.2400e0030.0000 4.0000e0040.0000 4.0000e0041.1000e0040.0000 1.1000e0040.0000 0.3197 0.3197 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.3228 Total 1.6000e0041.1000e0041.2400e0030.0000 4.0000e0040.0000 4.0000e0041.1000e0040.0000 1.1000e0040.0000 0.3197 0.3197 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.3228 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 2.7000e0040.0000 2.7000e0043.0000e0050.0000 3.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7000e0043.0900e0031.9600e0030.0000 1.1000e0041.1000e0041.0000e0041.0000e0040.0000 0.4275 0.4275 1.4000e0040.0000 0.4309 Total 2.7000e0043.0900e0031.9600e0030.0000 2.7000e0041.1000e0043.8000e0043.0000e0051.0000e0041.3000e0040.0000 0.4275 0.4275 1.4000e0040.0000 0.4309 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.3 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.0000e0051.0000e0056.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0160 0.0160 0.0000 0.0000 0.0161 Total 1.0000e0051.0000e0056.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0160 0.0160 0.0000 0.0000 0.0161 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 1.1000e0040.0000 1.1000e0041.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 2.7000e0043.0900e0031.9600e0030.0000 1.1000e0041.1000e0041.0000e0041.0000e0040.0000 0.4275 0.4275 1.4000e0040.0000 0.4309 Total 2.7000e0043.0900e0031.9600e0030.0000 1.1000e0041.1000e0042.2000e0041.0000e0051.0000e0041.1000e0040.0000 0.4275 0.4275 1.4000e0040.0000 0.4309 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.3 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.0000e0051.0000e0056.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0160 0.0160 0.0000 0.0000 0.0161 Total 1.0000e0051.0000e0056.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0160 0.0160 0.0000 0.0000 0.0161 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 5.3100e0030.0000 5.3100e0032.5700e0030.0000 2.5700e0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 9.3000e0040.0102 5.5500e0031.0000e0054.2000e0044.2000e0043.9000e0043.9000e0040.0000 1.2381 1.2381 4.0000e0040.0000 1.2481 Total 9.3000e0040.0102 5.5500e0031.0000e0055.3100e0034.2000e0045.7300e0032.5700e0033.9000e0042.9600e0030.0000 1.2381 1.2381 4.0000e0040.0000 1.2481 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.4 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0040.0000 6.0000e0050.0000 6.0000e0052.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 0.0512 0.0512 0.0000 0.0000 0.0516 Total 3.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0040.0000 6.0000e0050.0000 6.0000e0052.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 0.0512 0.0512 0.0000 0.0000 0.0516 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 2.1500e0030.0000 2.1500e0031.0400e0030.0000 1.0400e0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 9.3000e0040.0102 5.5500e0031.0000e0054.2000e0044.2000e0043.9000e0043.9000e0040.0000 1.2381 1.2381 4.0000e0040.0000 1.2481 Total 9.3000e0040.0102 5.5500e0031.0000e0052.1500e0034.2000e0042.5700e0031.0400e0033.9000e0041.4300e0030.0000 1.2381 1.2381 4.0000e0040.0000 1.2481 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.4 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 3.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0040.0000 6.0000e0050.0000 6.0000e0052.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 0.0512 0.0512 0.0000 0.0000 0.0516 Total 3.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0040.0000 6.0000e0050.0000 6.0000e0052.0000e0050.0000 2.0000e0050.0000 0.0512 0.0512 0.0000 0.0000 0.0516 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0231 0.2343 0.2590 4.2000e0040.0117 0.0117 0.0108 0.0108 0.0000 36.5761 36.5761 0.0118 0.0000 36.8718 Total 0.0231 0.2343 0.2590 4.2000e0040.0117 0.0117 0.0108 0.0108 0.0000 36.5761 36.5761 0.0118 0.0000 36.8718 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.6000e0046.4500e0031.9800e0033.0000e0059.7000e0044.0000e0051.0100e0032.8000e0044.0000e0053.2000e0040.0000 2.8224 2.8224 1.0000e0054.2000e0042.9486 Worker 1.2600e0038.5000e0049.9700e0033.0000e0053.2100e0032.0000e0053.2300e0038.5000e0042.0000e0058.7000e0040.0000 2.5671 2.5671 8.0000e0058.0000e0052.5917 Total 1.4200e0037.3000e0030.0120 6.0000e0054.1800e0036.0000e0054.2400e0031.1300e0036.0000e0051.1900e0030.0000 5.3896 5.3896 9.0000e0055.0000e0045.5403 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0231 0.2343 0.2590 4.2000e0040.0117 0.0117 0.0108 0.0108 0.0000 36.5760 36.5760 0.0118 0.0000 36.8718 Total 0.0231 0.2343 0.2590 4.2000e0040.0117 0.0117 0.0108 0.0108 0.0000 36.5760 36.5760 0.0118 0.0000 36.8718 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 1.6000e0046.4500e0031.9800e0033.0000e0059.7000e0044.0000e0051.0100e0032.8000e0044.0000e0053.2000e0040.0000 2.8224 2.8224 1.0000e0054.2000e0042.9486 Worker 1.2600e0038.5000e0049.9700e0033.0000e0053.2100e0032.0000e0053.2300e0038.5000e0042.0000e0058.7000e0040.0000 2.5671 2.5671 8.0000e0058.0000e0052.5917 Total 1.4200e0037.3000e0030.0120 6.0000e0054.1800e0036.0000e0054.2400e0031.1300e0036.0000e0051.1900e0030.0000 5.3896 5.3896 9.0000e0055.0000e0045.5403 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 8.0300e0030.0807 0.0954 1.5000e0043.8100e0033.8100e0033.5100e0033.5100e0030.0000 13.5327 13.5327 4.3800e0030.0000 13.6421 Total 8.0300e0030.0807 0.0954 1.5000e0043.8100e0033.8100e0033.5100e0033.5100e0030.0000 13.5327 13.5327 4.3800e0030.0000 13.6421 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.5 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 6.0000e0052.3900e0037.1000e0041.0000e0053.6000e0042.0000e0053.7000e0041.0000e0041.0000e0051.2000e0040.0000 1.0272 1.0272 0.0000 1.5000e0041.0731 Worker 4.3000e0042.8000e0043.4000e0031.0000e0051.1900e0031.0000e0051.1900e0033.2000e0041.0000e0053.2000e0040.0000 0.9184 0.9184 3.0000e0053.0000e0050.9268 Total 4.9000e0042.6700e0034.1100e0032.0000e0051.5500e0033.0000e0051.5600e0034.2000e0042.0000e0054.4000e0040.0000 1.9456 1.9456 3.0000e0051.8000e0041.9999 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 8.0300e0030.0807 0.0954 1.5000e0043.8100e0033.8100e0033.5100e0033.5100e0030.0000 13.5327 13.5327 4.3800e0030.0000 13.6421 Total 8.0300e0030.0807 0.0954 1.5000e0043.8100e0033.8100e0033.5100e0033.5100e0030.0000 13.5327 13.5327 4.3800e0030.0000 13.6421 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.5 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 6.0000e0052.3900e0037.1000e0041.0000e0053.6000e0042.0000e0053.7000e0041.0000e0041.0000e0051.2000e0040.0000 1.0272 1.0272 0.0000 1.5000e0041.0731 Worker 4.3000e0042.8000e0043.4000e0031.0000e0051.1900e0031.0000e0051.1900e0033.2000e0041.0000e0053.2000e0040.0000 0.9184 0.9184 3.0000e0053.0000e0050.9268 Total 4.9000e0042.6700e0034.1100e0032.0000e0051.5500e0033.0000e0051.5600e0034.2000e0042.0000e0054.4000e0040.0000 1.9456 1.9456 3.0000e0051.8000e0041.9999 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 1.4800e0030.0131 0.0176 3.0000e0056.1000e0046.1000e0045.7000e0045.7000e0040.0000 2.3502 2.3502 6.8000e0040.0000 2.3673 Paving 5.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.0400e0030.0131 0.0176 3.0000e0056.1000e0046.1000e0045.7000e0045.7000e0040.0000 2.3502 2.3502 6.8000e0040.0000 2.3673 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.3000e0048.0000e0051.0300e0030.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 3.6000e0041.0000e0040.0000 1.0000e0040.0000 0.2783 0.2783 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.2808 Total 1.3000e0048.0000e0051.0300e0030.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 3.6000e0041.0000e0040.0000 1.0000e0040.0000 0.2783 0.2783 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.2808 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 1.4800e0030.0131 0.0176 3.0000e0056.1000e0046.1000e0045.7000e0045.7000e0040.0000 2.3502 2.3502 6.8000e0040.0000 2.3673 Paving 5.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.0400e0030.0131 0.0176 3.0000e0056.1000e0046.1000e0045.7000e0045.7000e0040.0000 2.3502 2.3502 6.8000e0040.0000 2.3673 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.3000e0048.0000e0051.0300e0030.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 3.6000e0041.0000e0040.0000 1.0000e0040.0000 0.2783 0.2783 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.2808 Total 1.3000e0048.0000e0051.0300e0030.0000 3.6000e0040.0000 3.6000e0041.0000e0040.0000 1.0000e0040.0000 0.2783 0.2783 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.2808 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0573 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.5000e0043.0500e0034.5300e0031.0000e0051.5000e0041.5000e0041.5000e0041.5000e0040.0000 0.6383 0.6383 4.0000e0050.0000 0.6392 Total 0.0577 3.0500e0034.5300e0031.0000e0051.5000e0041.5000e0041.5000e0041.5000e0040.0000 0.6383 0.6383 4.0000e0050.0000 0.6392 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.0000e0051.0000e0051.1000e0040.0000 4.0000e0050.0000 4.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0309 0.0309 0.0000 0.0000 0.0312 Total 1.0000e0051.0000e0051.1000e0040.0000 4.0000e0050.0000 4.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0309 0.0309 0.0000 0.0000 0.0312 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Archit. Coating 0.0573 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 4.5000e0043.0500e0034.5300e0031.0000e0051.5000e0041.5000e0041.5000e0041.5000e0040.0000 0.6383 0.6383 4.0000e0050.0000 0.6392 Total 0.0577 3.0500e0034.5300e0031.0000e0051.5000e0041.5000e0041.5000e0041.5000e0040.0000 0.6383 0.6383 4.0000e0050.0000 0.6392 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.0000e0051.0000e0051.1000e0040.0000 4.0000e0050.0000 4.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0309 0.0309 0.0000 0.0000 0.0312 Total 1.0000e0051.0000e0051.1000e0040.0000 4.0000e0050.0000 4.0000e0051.0000e0050.0000 1.0000e0050.0000 0.0309 0.0309 0.0000 0.0000 0.0312 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.6082 0.6354 3.3929 4.9300e0030.4345 5.0200e0030.4395 0.1163 4.6900e0030.1210 0.0000 456.3314 456.3314 0.0524 0.0400 469.5466 Unmitigated 0.6082 0.6354 3.3929 4.9300e0030.4345 5.0200e0030.4395 0.1163 4.6900e0030.1210 0.0000 456.3314 456.3314 0.0524 0.0400 469.5466
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 1,935.00 1,935.00 1935.00 1,037,942 1,037,942 General Office Building 66.39 15.06 4.77 120,093 120,093 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 2,001.39 1,950.06 1,939.77 1,158,035 1,158,035
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps
9.50 7.30 7.30 0.80 80.20 19.00 14 21 65
General Office Building 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4 Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps
0.517111 0.052324 0.170980 0.155671 0.027786 0.007423 0.013424 0.026160 0.000649 0.000313 0.023324 0.001439 0.003395 General Office Building 0.517111 0.052324 0.170980 0.155671 0.027786 0.007423 0.013424 0.026160 0.000649 0.000313 0.023324 0.001439 0.003395 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
Parking Lot 0.517111 0.052324 0.170980 0.155671 0.027786 0.007423 0.013424 0.026160 0.000649 0.000313 0.023324 0.001439 0.003395
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Electricity
Mitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.8173 6.8173 1.1000e0031.3000e0046.8848 Electricity
Unmitigated
0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.8173 6.8173 1.1000e0031.3000e0046.8848 NaturalGas
Mitigated
5.2000e0044.7600e0034.0000e0033.0000e0053.6000e0043.6000e0043.6000e0043.6000e0040.0000 5.1790 5.1790 1.0000e0049.0000e0055.2097 NaturalGas
Unmitigated
5.2000e0044.7600e0034.0000e0033.0000e0053.6000e0043.6000e0043.6000e0043.6000e0040.0000 5.1790 5.1790 1.0000e0049.0000e0055.2097
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
8987.2 5.0000e0054.4000e0043.7000e0040.0000 3.0000e0053.0000e0053.0000e0053.0000e0050.0000 0.4796 0.4796 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.4824 General Office
Building
88062.7 4.7000e0044.3200e0033.6300e0033.0000e0053.3000e0043.3000e0043.3000e0043.3000e0040.0000 4.6994 4.6994 9.0000e0059.0000e0054.7273 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 5.2000e0044.7600e0034.0000e0033.0000e0053.6000e0043.6000e0043.6000e0043.6000e0040.0000 5.1790 5.1790 1.0000e0041.0000e0045.2097 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
8987.2 5.0000e0054.4000e0043.7000e0040.0000 3.0000e0053.0000e0053.0000e0053.0000e0050.0000 0.4796 0.4796 1.0000e0051.0000e0050.4824 General Office
Building
88062.7 4.7000e0044.3200e0033.6300e0033.0000e0053.3000e0043.3000e0043.3000e0043.3000e0040.0000 4.6994 4.6994 9.0000e0059.0000e0054.7273 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 5.2000e0044.7600e0034.0000e0033.0000e0053.6000e0043.6000e0043.6000e0043.6000e0040.0000 5.1790 5.1790 1.0000e0041.0000e0045.2097 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
6708.64 0.6207 1.0000e0041.0000e0050.6269
General Office
Building
60253.4 5.5749 9.0000e0041.1000e0045.6300
Parking Lot 6720 0.6218 1.0000e0041.0000e0050.6279
Total 6.8174 1.1000e0031.3000e0046.8848
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity
Electricity
Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kWh/yr MT/yr
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
6708.64 0.6207 1.0000e0041.0000e0050.6269
General Office
Building
60253.4 5.5749 9.0000e0041.1000e0045.6300
Parking Lot 6720 0.6218 1.0000e0041.0000e0050.6279
Total 6.8174 1.1000e0031.3000e0046.8848
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Mitigated 0.0331 1.0000e0055.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0900e0031.0900e0030.0000 0.0000 1.1600e003 Unmitigated 0.0370 1.0000e0055.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0900e0031.0900e0030.0000 0.0000 1.1600e003
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating
5.7300e0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products
0.0312 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 5.0000e0051.0000e0055.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0900e0031.0900e0030.0000 0.0000 1.1600e003 Total 0.0370 1.0000e0055.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0900e0031.0900e0030.0000 0.0000 1.1600e003 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr
Architectural
Coating
1.9100e0030.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer
Products
0.0312 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 5.0000e0051.0000e0055.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0900e0031.0900e0030.0000 0.0000 1.1600e003 Total 0.0331 1.0000e0055.6000e0040.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1.0900e0031.0900e0030.0000 0.0000 1.1600e003 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 28 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category MT/yr
Mitigated 1.2958 0.0417 1.0000e0032.6355
Unmitigated 1.2958 0.0417 1.0000e0032.6355
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
0.0627431
/
0.0384554
0.0638 2.0500e0035.0000e0050.1297
General Office
Building
1.21214 /
0.742927
1.2320 0.0396 9.5000e0042.5057
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.2958 0.0417 1.0000e0032.6354
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 29 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
7.2 Water by Land Use
Indoor/Out
door Use
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use Mgal MT/yr
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
0.0627431
/
0.0384554
0.0638 2.0500e0035.0000e0050.1297
General Office
Building
1.21214 /
0.742927
1.2320 0.0396 9.5000e0042.5057
Parking Lot 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.2958 0.0417 1.0000e0032.6354
Mitigated
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
8.0 Waste Detail
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 30 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
MT/yr
Mitigated 1.2870 0.0761 0.0000 3.1884
Unmitigated 1.2870 0.0761 0.0000 3.1884
Category/Year
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
General Office
Building
6.34 1.2870 0.0761 0.0000 3.1884
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.2870 0.0761 0.0000 3.1884
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 31 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
11.0 Vegetation
8.2 Waste by Land Use
Waste
Disposed
Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use tons MT/yr
General Office
Building
6.34 1.2870 0.0761 0.0000 3.1884
Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Total 1.2870 0.0761 0.0000 3.1884
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 32 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 33 of 33 Date: 3/24/2023 9:59 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
Manteca Commercial Development
San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer
Project Characteristics -
Land Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation -
Area Mitigation - Low VOC paints.
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 6.00 Pump 0.02 847.05 0 General Office Building 6.82 1000sqft 0.16 6,816.00 0
Parking Lot 48.00 Space 0.43 19,200.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
3 Wind Speed (m/s) 2.7 Precipitation Freq (Days) 45
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Operational Year 2025
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExteriorV alue
150 50
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInteriorV alue
150 50
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingCheck False True tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingValue 150 50
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
2.0 Emissions Summary
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 0.9626 10.1945 7.6794 0.0147 5.3777 0.4204 5.7981 2.5860 0.3868 2.9728 0.0000 1,426.079 0 1,426.079
0 0.4431 0.0149 1,437.628
5 2024 23.1015 6.1621 7.5066 0.0130 0.1479 0.2840 0.4014 0.0392 0.2613 0.2931 0.0000 1,270.305 9 1,270.305
9 0.3598 0.0145 1,283.633
9 Maximum 23.1015 10.1945 7.6794 0.0147 5.3777 0.4204 5.7981 2.5860 0.3868 2.9728 0.0000 1,426.079 0 1,426.079
0 0.4431 0.0149 1,437.628
5 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 0.9626 10.1945 7.6794 0.0147 2.2171 0.4204 2.6375 1.0577 0.3868 1.4445 0.0000 1,426.079 0 1,426.079
0 0.4431 0.0149 1,437.628
5 2024 23.1015 6.1621 7.5066 0.0130 0.1479 0.2840 0.4014 0.0392 0.2613 0.2931 0.0000 1,270.305 9 1,270.305
9 0.3598 0.0145 1,283.633
9 Maximum 23.1015 10.1945 7.6794 0.0147 2.2171 0.4204 2.6375 1.0577 0.3868 1.4445 0.0000 1,426.079 0 1,426.079
0 0.4431 0.0149 1,437.628
5 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.20 0.00 50.98 58.22 0.00 46.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 0.2028 6.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Energy 2.8700e0030.0261 0.0219 1.6000e0041.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e00331.2812 31.2812 6.0000e0045.7000e00431.4671 Mobile 4.4330 3.3690 18.4403 0.0294 2.5339 0.0283 2.5621 0.6766 0.0265 0.7031 3,000.355 0 3,000.355
0 0.2875 0.2392 3,078.829
7 Total 4.6386 3.3951 18.4683 0.0296 2.5339 0.0303 2.5641 0.6766 0.0285 0.7051 3,031.649 5 3,031.649
5 0.2881 0.2398 3,110.311
0 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 0.1818 6.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Energy 2.8700e0030.0261 0.0219 1.6000e0041.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e00331.2812 31.2812 6.0000e0045.7000e00431.4671 Mobile 4.4330 3.3690 18.4403 0.0294 2.5339 0.0283 2.5621 0.6766 0.0265 0.7031 3,000.355 0 3,000.355
0 0.2875 0.2392 3,078.829
7 Total 4.6177 3.3951 18.4683 0.0296 2.5339 0.0303 2.5641 0.6766 0.0285 0.7051 3,031.649 5 3,031.649
5 0.2881 0.2398 3,110.311
0 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2023 9/14/2023 5 10
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 9/15/2023 9/15/2023 5 1 3 Grading Grading 9/16/2023 9/19/2023 5 2
4 Building Construction Building Construction 9/20/2023 2/6/2024 5 100 5 Paving Paving 2/7/2024 2/13/2024 5 5
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 2/14/2024 2/20/2024 5 5 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6.00 9 0.56
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Building Construction Cranes 1 4.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6.00 89 0.20
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 11,495; Non-Residential Outdoor: 3,832; Striped Parking Area: 1,152 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 1.5
Acres of Paving: 0.43
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Use Soil Stabilizer
Replace Ground Cover
Water Exposed Area
Grading Graders 1 6.00 187 0.41
Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Paving Pavers 1 7.00 130 0.42
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1.00 247 0.40
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 6.00 247 0.40
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 2 5.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 5 11.00 4.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 2.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6463 5.7787 7.3926 0.0120 0.2821 0.2821 0.2698 0.2698 1,148.405 5 1,148.405
5 0.2089 1,153.629
0 Total 0.6463 5.7787 7.3926 0.0120 0.2821 0.2821 0.2698 0.2698 1,148.405 5 1,148.405
5 0.2089 1,153.629
0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0363 0.0196 0.2867 7.6000e0040.0822 4.2000e0040.0826 0.0218 3.9000e0040.0222 76.6346 76.6346 2.1400e0031.9800e00377.2779 Total 0.0363 0.0196 0.2867 7.6000e0040.0822 4.2000e0040.0826 0.0218 3.9000e0040.0222 76.6346 76.6346 2.1400e0031.9800e00377.2779 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6463 5.7787 7.3926 0.0120 0.2821 0.2821 0.2698 0.2698 0.0000 1,148.405 5 1,148.405
5 0.2089 1,153.629
0 Total 0.6463 5.7787 7.3926 0.0120 0.2821 0.2821 0.2698 0.2698 0.0000 1,148.405 5 1,148.405
5 0.2089 1,153.629
0 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0363 0.0196 0.2867 7.6000e0040.0822 4.2000e0040.0826 0.0218 3.9000e0040.0222 76.6346 76.6346 2.1400e0031.9800e00377.2779 Total 0.0363 0.0196 0.2867 7.6000e0040.0822 4.2000e0040.0826 0.0218 3.9000e0040.0222 76.6346 76.6346 2.1400e0031.9800e00377.2779 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.3 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.5303 0.0000 0.5303 0.0573 0.0000 0.0573 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.2266 0.2266 0.2084 0.2084 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 Total 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.5303 0.2266 0.7568 0.0573 0.2084 0.2657 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0181 9.7800e0030.1434 3.8000e0040.0411 2.1000e0040.0413 0.0109 1.9000e0040.0111 38.3173 38.3173 1.0700e0039.9000e00438.6389 Total 0.0181 9.7800e0030.1434 3.8000e0040.0411 2.1000e0040.0413 0.0109 1.9000e0040.0111 38.3173 38.3173 1.0700e0039.9000e00438.6389 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.3 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.2148 0.0000 0.2148 0.0232 0.0000 0.0232 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.2266 0.2266 0.2084 0.2084 0.0000 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 Total 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.2148 0.2266 0.4413 0.0232 0.2084 0.2316 0.0000 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0181 9.7800e0030.1434 3.8000e0040.0411 2.1000e0040.0413 0.0109 1.9000e0040.0111 38.3173 38.3173 1.0700e0039.9000e00438.6389 Total 0.0181 9.7800e0030.1434 3.8000e0040.0411 2.1000e0040.0413 0.0109 1.9000e0040.0111 38.3173 38.3173 1.0700e0039.9000e00438.6389 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.4 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 5.3119 0.0000 5.3119 2.5686 0.0000 2.5686 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 0.4201 0.4201 0.3865 0.3865 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
2 Total 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 5.3119 0.4201 5.7320 2.5686 0.3865 2.9550 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0290 0.0157 0.2294 6.1000e0040.0657 3.4000e0040.0661 0.0174 3.1000e0040.0177 61.3077 61.3077 1.7100e0031.5800e00361.8223 Total 0.0290 0.0157 0.2294 6.1000e0040.0657 3.4000e0040.0661 0.0174 3.1000e0040.0177 61.3077 61.3077 1.7100e0031.5800e00361.8223 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.4 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 2.1513 0.0000 2.1513 1.0403 0.0000 1.0403 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 0.4201 0.4201 0.3865 0.3865 0.0000 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
2 Total 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 2.1513 0.4201 2.5714 1.0403 0.3865 1.4268 0.0000 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0290 0.0157 0.2294 6.1000e0040.0657 3.4000e0040.0661 0.0174 3.1000e0040.0177 61.3077 61.3077 1.7100e0031.5800e00361.8223 Total 0.0290 0.0157 0.2294 6.1000e0040.0657 3.4000e0040.0661 0.0174 3.1000e0040.0177 61.3077 61.3077 1.7100e0031.5800e00361.8223 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
2 Total 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 4.5700e0030.1691 0.0534 8.1000e0040.0271 1.1400e0030.0283 7.8100e0031.0900e0038.9000e00385.1683 85.1683 3.7000e0040.0127 88.9728 Worker 0.0399 0.0215 0.3154 8.3000e0040.0904 4.6000e0040.0908 0.0240 4.3000e0040.0244 84.2981 84.2981 2.3500e0032.1800e00385.0057 Total 0.0445 0.1906 0.3688 1.6400e0030.1175 1.6000e0030.1191 0.0318 1.5200e0030.0333 169.4664 169.4664 2.7200e0030.0149 173.9784 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 0.0000 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
2 Total 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 0.0000 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 4.5700e0030.1691 0.0534 8.1000e0040.0271 1.1400e0030.0283 7.8100e0031.0900e0038.9000e00385.1683 85.1683 3.7000e0040.0127 88.9728 Worker 0.0399 0.0215 0.3154 8.3000e0040.0904 4.6000e0040.0908 0.0240 4.3000e0040.0244 84.2981 84.2981 2.3500e0032.1800e00385.0057 Total 0.0445 0.1906 0.3688 1.6400e0030.1175 1.6000e0030.1191 0.0318 1.5200e0030.0333 169.4664 169.4664 2.7200e0030.0149 173.9784 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.5 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.5950 5.9739 7.0675 0.0114 0.2824 0.2824 0.2598 0.2598 1,104.983 4 1,104.983
4 0.3574 1,113.917
7 Total 0.5950 5.9739 7.0675 0.0114 0.2824 0.2824 0.2598 0.2598 1,104.983 4 1,104.983
4 0.3574 1,113.917
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 4.4400e0030.1692 0.0521 7.9000e0040.0271 1.1500e0030.0283 7.8100e0031.1000e0038.9100e00383.8071 83.8071 3.5000e0040.0125 87.5488 Worker 0.0367 0.0190 0.2904 8.1000e0040.0904 4.4000e0040.0908 0.0240 4.0000e0040.0244 81.5155 81.5155 2.1100e0032.0100e00382.1674 Total 0.0412 0.1882 0.3425 1.6000e0030.1175 1.5900e0030.1191 0.0318 1.5000e0030.0333 165.3226 165.3226 2.4600e0030.0145 169.7162 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.5 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.5950 5.9739 7.0675 0.0114 0.2824 0.2824 0.2598 0.2598 0.0000 1,104.983 4 1,104.983
4 0.3574 1,113.917
7 Total 0.5950 5.9739 7.0675 0.0114 0.2824 0.2824 0.2598 0.2598 0.0000 1,104.983 4 1,104.983
4 0.3574 1,113.917
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 4.4400e0030.1692 0.0521 7.9000e0040.0271 1.1500e0030.0283 7.8100e0031.1000e0038.9100e00383.8071 83.8071 3.5000e0040.0125 87.5488 Worker 0.0367 0.0190 0.2904 8.1000e0040.0904 4.4000e0040.0908 0.0240 4.0000e0040.0244 81.5155 81.5155 2.1100e0032.0100e00382.1674 Total 0.0412 0.1882 0.3425 1.6000e0030.1175 1.5900e0030.1191 0.0318 1.5000e0030.0333 165.3226 165.3226 2.4600e0030.0145 169.7162 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.5904 5.2297 7.0314 0.0113 0.2429 0.2429 0.2269 0.2269 1,036.239 3 1,036.239
3 0.3019 1,043.785
8 Paving 0.2253 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.8157 5.2297 7.0314 0.0113 0.2429 0.2429 0.2269 0.2269 1,036.239 3 1,036.239
3 0.3019 1,043.785
8 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0601 0.0310 0.4752 1.3200e0030.1479 7.2000e0040.1486 0.0392 6.6000e0040.0399 133.3890 133.3890 3.4500e0033.2900e003134.4557 Total 0.0601 0.0310 0.4752 1.3200e0030.1479 7.2000e0040.1486 0.0392 6.6000e0040.0399 133.3890 133.3890 3.4500e0033.2900e003134.4557 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.5904 5.2297 7.0314 0.0113 0.2429 0.2429 0.2269 0.2269 0.0000 1,036.239 3 1,036.239
3 0.3019 1,043.785
8 Paving 0.2253 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.8157 5.2297 7.0314 0.0113 0.2429 0.2429 0.2269 0.2269 0.0000 1,036.239 3 1,036.239
3 0.3019 1,043.785
8 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0601 0.0310 0.4752 1.3200e0030.1479 7.2000e0040.1486 0.0392 6.6000e0040.0399 133.3890 133.3890 3.4500e0033.2900e003134.4557 Total 0.0601 0.0310 0.4752 1.3200e0030.1479 7.2000e0040.1486 0.0392 6.6000e0040.0399 133.3890 133.3890 3.4500e0033.2900e003134.4557 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 22.9141 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Total 23.0948 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.6800e0033.4500e0030.0528 1.5000e0040.0164 8.0000e0050.0165 4.3600e0037.0000e0054.4300e00314.8210 14.8210 3.8000e0043.7000e00414.9395 Total 6.6800e0033.4500e0030.0528 1.5000e0040.0164 8.0000e0050.0165 4.3600e0037.0000e0054.4300e00314.8210 14.8210 3.8000e0043.7000e00414.9395 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 22.9141 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Total 23.0948 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 6.6800e0033.4500e0030.0528 1.5000e0040.0164 8.0000e0050.0165 4.3600e0037.0000e0054.4300e00314.8210 14.8210 3.8000e0043.7000e00414.9395 Total 6.6800e0033.4500e0030.0528 1.5000e0040.0164 8.0000e0050.0165 4.3600e0037.0000e0054.4300e00314.8210 14.8210 3.8000e0043.7000e00414.9395 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 4.4330 3.3690 18.4403 0.0294 2.5339 0.0283 2.5621 0.6766 0.0265 0.7031 3,000.355 0 3,000.355
0 0.2875 0.2392 3,078.829
7 Unmitigated 4.4330 3.3690 18.4403 0.0294 2.5339 0.0283 2.5621 0.6766 0.0265 0.7031 3,000.355 0 3,000.355
0 0.2875 0.2392 3,078.829
7 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 1,935.00 1,935.00 1935.00 1,037,942 1,037,942 General Office Building 66.39 15.06 4.77 120,093 120,093 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 2,001.39 1,950.06 1,939.77 1,158,035 1,158,035
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps
9.50 7.30 7.30 0.80 80.20 19.00 14 21 65
General Office Building 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4 Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps
0.517111 0.052324 0.170980 0.155671 0.027786 0.007423 0.013424 0.026160 0.000649 0.000313 0.023324 0.001439 0.003395 General Office Building 0.517111 0.052324 0.170980 0.155671 0.027786 0.007423 0.013424 0.026160 0.000649 0.000313 0.023324 0.001439 0.003395 Parking Lot 0.517111 0.052324 0.170980 0.155671 0.027786 0.007423 0.013424 0.026160 0.000649 0.000313 0.023324 0.001439 0.003395
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated
2.8700e0030.0261 0.0219 1.6000e0041.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e00331.2812 31.2812 6.0000e0045.7000e00431.4671 NaturalGas
Unmitigated
2.8700e0030.0261 0.0219 1.6000e0041.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e00331.2812 31.2812 6.0000e0045.7000e00431.4671
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
24.6225 2.7000e0042.4100e0032.0300e0031.0000e0051.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0042.8968 2.8968 6.0000e0055.0000e0052.9140 General Office
Building
241.268 2.6000e0030.0237 0.0199 1.4000e0041.8000e0031.8000e0031.8000e0031.8000e00328.3844 28.3844 5.4000e0045.2000e00428.5531 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.8700e0030.0261 0.0219 1.5000e0041.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e00331.2812 31.2812 6.0000e0045.7000e00431.4671 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
0.0246225 2.7000e0042.4100e0032.0300e0031.0000e0051.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0042.8968 2.8968 6.0000e0055.0000e0052.9140 General Office
Building
0.241268 2.6000e0030.0237 0.0199 1.4000e0041.8000e0031.8000e0031.8000e0031.8000e00328.3844 28.3844 5.4000e0045.2000e00428.5531 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.8700e0030.0261 0.0219 1.5000e0041.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e00331.2812 31.2812 6.0000e0045.7000e00431.4671 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 0.1818 6.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Unmitigated 0.2028 6.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.0314 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
0.1708 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 5.7000e0046.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Total 0.2028 6.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.0105 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
0.1708 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 5.7000e0046.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Total 0.1818 6.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
11.0 Vegetation
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
8.0 Waste Detail
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:08 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Summer EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
Manteca Commercial Development
San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter
Project Characteristics -
Land Use -
Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation -
Area Mitigation - Low VOC paints.
1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 6.00 Pump 0.02 847.05 0 General Office Building 6.82 1000sqft 0.16 6,816.00 0
Parking Lot 48.00 Space 0.43 19,200.00 0
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
3 Wind Speed (m/s) 2.7 Precipitation Freq (Days) 45
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Operational Year 2025
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialExteriorV alue
150 50
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintNonresidentialInteriorV alue
150 50
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingCheck False True tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingValue 150 50
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
2.0 Emissions Summary
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 0.9594 10.1973 7.6381 0.0146 5.3777 0.4204 5.7981 2.5860 0.3868 2.9728 0.0000 1,419.323 6 1,419.323
6 0.4433 0.0152 1,430.933
1 2024 23.1008 6.1775 7.4400 0.0129 0.1479 0.2840 0.4014 0.0392 0.2613 0.2931 0.0000 1,261.513 7 1,261.513
7 0.3601 0.0148 1,274.928
0 Maximum 23.1008 10.1973 7.6381 0.0146 5.3777 0.4204 5.7981 2.5860 0.3868 2.9728 0.0000 1,419.323 6 1,419.323
6 0.4433 0.0152 1,430.933
1 Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year lb/day lb/day
2023 0.9594 10.1973 7.6381 0.0146 2.2171 0.4204 2.6375 1.0577 0.3868 1.4445 0.0000 1,419.323 6 1,419.323
6 0.4433 0.0152 1,430.933
1 2024 23.1008 6.1775 7.4400 0.0129 0.1479 0.2840 0.4014 0.0392 0.2613 0.2931 0.0000 1,261.513 7 1,261.513
7 0.3601 0.0148 1,274.928
0 Maximum 23.1008 10.1973 7.6381 0.0146 2.2171 0.4204 2.6375 1.0577 0.3868 1.4445 0.0000 1,419.323 6 1,419.323
6 0.4433 0.0152 1,430.933
1 Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57.20 0.00 50.98 58.22 0.00 46.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 0.2028 6.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Energy 2.8700e0030.0261 0.0219 1.6000e0041.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e00331.2812 31.2812 6.0000e0045.7000e00431.4671 Mobile 3.0792 3.7660 21.1282 0.0274 2.5339 0.0284 2.5622 0.6766 0.0266 0.7032 2,798.273 2 2,798.273
2 0.3598 0.2581 2,884.166
0 Total 3.2848 3.7921 21.1563 0.0276 2.5339 0.0304 2.5642 0.6766 0.0286 0.7052 2,829.567 7 2,829.567
7 0.3604 0.2586 2,915.647
3 Unmitigated Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Area 0.1818 6.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Energy 2.8700e0030.0261 0.0219 1.6000e0041.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e00331.2812 31.2812 6.0000e0045.7000e00431.4671 Mobile 3.0792 3.7660 21.1282 0.0274 2.5339 0.0284 2.5622 0.6766 0.0266 0.7032 2,798.273 2 2,798.273
2 0.3598 0.2581 2,884.166
0 Total 3.2638 3.7921 21.1563 0.0276 2.5339 0.0304 2.5642 0.6766 0.0286 0.7052 2,829.567 7 2,829.567
7 0.3604 0.2586 2,915.647
3 Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 9/1/2023 9/14/2023 5 10
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 9/15/2023 9/15/2023 5 1 3 Grading Grading 9/16/2023 9/19/2023 5 2
4 Building Construction Building Construction 9/20/2023 2/6/2024 5 100 5 Paving Paving 2/7/2024 2/13/2024 5 5
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 2/14/2024 2/20/2024 5 5 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Paving Cement and Mortar Mixers 4 6.00 9 0.56
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Building Construction Cranes 1 4.00 231 0.29
Building Construction Forklifts 2 6.00 89 0.20
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 11,495; Non-Residential Outdoor: 3,832; Striped Parking Area: 1,152 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0.5
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 1.5
Acres of Paving: 0.43
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Use Soil Stabilizer
Replace Ground Cover
Water Exposed Area
Grading Graders 1 6.00 187 0.41
Site Preparation Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Paving Pavers 1 7.00 130 0.42
Paving Rollers 1 7.00 80 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 1 1.00 247 0.40
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 6.00 247 0.40
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 6.00 97 0.37
Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Paving Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 7.00 97 0.37
Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT
Phase Name Offroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition 4 10.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Site Preparation 2 5.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Grading 3 8.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Building Construction 5 11.00 4.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Paving 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT Architectural Coating 1 2.00 0.00 0.00 10.80 7.30 20.00 LD_Mix HDT_Mix HHDT CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6463 5.7787 7.3926 0.0120 0.2821 0.2821 0.2698 0.2698 1,148.405 5 1,148.405
5 0.2089 1,153.629
0 Total 0.6463 5.7787 7.3926 0.0120 0.2821 0.2821 0.2698 0.2698 1,148.405 5 1,148.405
5 0.2089 1,153.629
0 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0324 0.0231 0.2454 6.7000e0040.0822 4.2000e0040.0826 0.0218 3.9000e0040.0222 68.1903 68.1903 2.3800e0032.2100e00368.9086 Total 0.0324 0.0231 0.2454 6.7000e0040.0822 4.2000e0040.0826 0.0218 3.9000e0040.0222 68.1903 68.1903 2.3800e0032.2100e00368.9086 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6463 5.7787 7.3926 0.0120 0.2821 0.2821 0.2698 0.2698 0.0000 1,148.405 5 1,148.405
5 0.2089 1,153.629
0 Total 0.6463 5.7787 7.3926 0.0120 0.2821 0.2821 0.2698 0.2698 0.0000 1,148.405 5 1,148.405
5 0.2089 1,153.629
0 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0324 0.0231 0.2454 6.7000e0040.0822 4.2000e0040.0826 0.0218 3.9000e0040.0222 68.1903 68.1903 2.3800e0032.2100e00368.9086 Total 0.0324 0.0231 0.2454 6.7000e0040.0822 4.2000e0040.0826 0.0218 3.9000e0040.0222 68.1903 68.1903 2.3800e0032.2100e00368.9086 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.3 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.5303 0.0000 0.5303 0.0573 0.0000 0.0573 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.2266 0.2266 0.2084 0.2084 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 Total 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.5303 0.2266 0.7568 0.0573 0.2084 0.2657 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0162 0.0116 0.1227 3.4000e0040.0411 2.1000e0040.0413 0.0109 1.9000e0040.0111 34.0952 34.0952 1.1900e0031.1100e00334.4543 Total 0.0162 0.0116 0.1227 3.4000e0040.0411 2.1000e0040.0413 0.0109 1.9000e0040.0111 34.0952 34.0952 1.1900e0031.1100e00334.4543 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.3 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 0.2148 0.0000 0.2148 0.0232 0.0000 0.0232 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.2266 0.2266 0.2084 0.2084 0.0000 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 Total 0.5348 6.1887 3.9239 9.7300e0030.2148 0.2266 0.4413 0.0232 0.2084 0.2316 0.0000 942.4317 942.4317 0.3048 950.0517 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0162 0.0116 0.1227 3.4000e0040.0411 2.1000e0040.0413 0.0109 1.9000e0040.0111 34.0952 34.0952 1.1900e0031.1100e00334.4543 Total 0.0162 0.0116 0.1227 3.4000e0040.0411 2.1000e0040.0413 0.0109 1.9000e0040.0111 34.0952 34.0952 1.1900e0031.1100e00334.4543 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.4 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 5.3119 0.0000 5.3119 2.5686 0.0000 2.5686 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 0.4201 0.4201 0.3865 0.3865 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
2 Total 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 5.3119 0.4201 5.7320 2.5686 0.3865 2.9550 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0259 0.0185 0.1964 5.4000e0040.0657 3.4000e0040.0661 0.0174 3.1000e0040.0177 54.5522 54.5522 1.9000e0031.7700e00355.1269 Total 0.0259 0.0185 0.1964 5.4000e0040.0657 3.4000e0040.0661 0.0174 3.1000e0040.0177 54.5522 54.5522 1.9000e0031.7700e00355.1269 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.4 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Fugitive Dust 2.1513 0.0000 2.1513 1.0403 0.0000 1.0403 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 0.4201 0.4201 0.3865 0.3865 0.0000 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
2 Total 0.9335 10.1789 5.5516 0.0141 2.1513 0.4201 2.5714 1.0403 0.3865 1.4268 0.0000 1,364.771 3 1,364.771
3 0.4414 1,375.806
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0259 0.0185 0.1964 5.4000e0040.0657 3.4000e0040.0661 0.0174 3.1000e0040.0177 54.5522 54.5522 1.9000e0031.7700e00355.1269 Total 0.0259 0.0185 0.1964 5.4000e0040.0657 3.4000e0040.0661 0.0174 3.1000e0040.0177 54.5522 54.5522 1.9000e0031.7700e00355.1269 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
2 Total 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 4.2900e0030.1811 0.0552 8.1000e0040.0271 1.1500e0030.0283 7.8100e0031.1000e0038.9000e00385.3349 85.3349 3.6000e0040.0128 89.1502 Worker 0.0356 0.0254 0.2700 7.4000e0040.0904 4.6000e0040.0908 0.0240 4.3000e0040.0244 75.0093 75.0093 2.6100e0032.4300e00375.7995 Total 0.0399 0.2065 0.3252 1.5500e0030.1175 1.6100e0030.1191 0.0318 1.5300e0030.0333 160.3442 160.3442 2.9700e0030.0152 164.9496 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 13 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.5 Building Construction - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 0.0000 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
2 Total 0.6322 6.4186 7.0970 0.0114 0.3203 0.3203 0.2946 0.2946 0.0000 1,104.608 9 1,104.608
9 0.3573 1,113.540
2 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 4.2900e0030.1811 0.0552 8.1000e0040.0271 1.1500e0030.0283 7.8100e0031.1000e0038.9000e00385.3349 85.3349 3.6000e0040.0128 89.1502 Worker 0.0356 0.0254 0.2700 7.4000e0040.0904 4.6000e0040.0908 0.0240 4.3000e0040.0244 75.0093 75.0093 2.6100e0032.4300e00375.7995 Total 0.0399 0.2065 0.3252 1.5500e0030.1175 1.6100e0030.1191 0.0318 1.5300e0030.0333 160.3442 160.3442 2.9700e0030.0152 164.9496 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 14 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.5 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.5950 5.9739 7.0675 0.0114 0.2824 0.2824 0.2598 0.2598 1,104.983 4 1,104.983
4 0.3574 1,113.917
7 Total 0.5950 5.9739 7.0675 0.0114 0.2824 0.2824 0.2598 0.2598 1,104.983 4 1,104.983
4 0.3574 1,113.917
7 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 4.1700e0030.1812 0.0539 7.9000e0040.0271 1.1500e0030.0283 7.8100e0031.1000e0038.9100e00383.9719 83.9719 3.4000e0040.0126 87.7239 Worker 0.0329 0.0224 0.2497 7.2000e0040.0904 4.4000e0040.0908 0.0240 4.0000e0040.0244 72.5584 72.5584 2.3600e0032.2500e00373.2863 Total 0.0370 0.2036 0.3035 1.5100e0030.1175 1.5900e0030.1191 0.0318 1.5000e0030.0333 156.5303 156.5303 2.7000e0030.0148 161.0102 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 15 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.5 Building Construction - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.5950 5.9739 7.0675 0.0114 0.2824 0.2824 0.2598 0.2598 0.0000 1,104.983 4 1,104.983
4 0.3574 1,113.917
7 Total 0.5950 5.9739 7.0675 0.0114 0.2824 0.2824 0.2598 0.2598 0.0000 1,104.983 4 1,104.983
4 0.3574 1,113.917
7 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 4.1700e0030.1812 0.0539 7.9000e0040.0271 1.1500e0030.0283 7.8100e0031.1000e0038.9100e00383.9719 83.9719 3.4000e0040.0126 87.7239 Worker 0.0329 0.0224 0.2497 7.2000e0040.0904 4.4000e0040.0908 0.0240 4.0000e0040.0244 72.5584 72.5584 2.3600e0032.2500e00373.2863 Total 0.0370 0.2036 0.3035 1.5100e0030.1175 1.5900e0030.1191 0.0318 1.5000e0030.0333 156.5303 156.5303 2.7000e0030.0148 161.0102 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 16 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.5904 5.2297 7.0314 0.0113 0.2429 0.2429 0.2269 0.2269 1,036.239 3 1,036.239
3 0.3019 1,043.785
8 Paving 0.2253 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.8157 5.2297 7.0314 0.0113 0.2429 0.2429 0.2269 0.2269 1,036.239 3 1,036.239
3 0.3019 1,043.785
8 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0538 0.0366 0.4086 1.1700e0030.1479 7.2000e0040.1486 0.0392 6.6000e0040.0399 118.7319 118.7319 3.8500e0033.6700e003119.9230 Total 0.0538 0.0366 0.4086 1.1700e0030.1479 7.2000e0040.1486 0.0392 6.6000e0040.0399 118.7319 118.7319 3.8500e0033.6700e003119.9230 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 17 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.6 Paving - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Off-Road 0.5904 5.2297 7.0314 0.0113 0.2429 0.2429 0.2269 0.2269 0.0000 1,036.239 3 1,036.239
3 0.3019 1,043.785
8 Paving 0.2253 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.8157 5.2297 7.0314 0.0113 0.2429 0.2429 0.2269 0.2269 0.0000 1,036.239 3 1,036.239
3 0.3019 1,043.785
8 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0538 0.0366 0.4086 1.1700e0030.1479 7.2000e0040.1486 0.0392 6.6000e0040.0399 118.7319 118.7319 3.8500e0033.6700e003119.9230 Total 0.0538 0.0366 0.4086 1.1700e0030.1479 7.2000e0040.1486 0.0392 6.6000e0040.0399 118.7319 118.7319 3.8500e0033.6700e003119.9230 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 18 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 22.9141 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Total 23.0948 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.9700e0034.0700e0030.0454 1.3000e0040.0164 8.0000e0050.0165 4.3600e0037.0000e0054.4300e00313.1924 13.1924 4.3000e0044.1000e00413.3248 Total 5.9700e0034.0700e0030.0454 1.3000e0040.0164 8.0000e0050.0165 4.3600e0037.0000e0054.4300e00313.1924 13.1924 4.3000e0044.1000e00413.3248 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 19 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2024
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Archit. Coating 22.9141 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1808 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Total 23.0948 1.2188 1.8101 2.9700e0030.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0609 0.0000 281.4481 281.4481 0.0159 281.8443 Mitigated Construction On-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 5.9700e0034.0700e0030.0454 1.3000e0040.0164 8.0000e0050.0165 4.3600e0037.0000e0054.4300e00313.1924 13.1924 4.3000e0044.1000e00413.3248 Total 5.9700e0034.0700e0030.0454 1.3000e0040.0164 8.0000e0050.0165 4.3600e0037.0000e0054.4300e00313.1924 13.1924 4.3000e0044.1000e00413.3248 Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 20 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 3.0792 3.7660 21.1282 0.0274 2.5339 0.0284 2.5622 0.6766 0.0266 0.7032 2,798.273 2 2,798.273
2 0.3598 0.2581 2,884.166
0 Unmitigated 3.0792 3.7660 21.1282 0.0274 2.5339 0.0284 2.5622 0.6766 0.0266 0.7032 2,798.273 2 2,798.273
2 0.3598 0.2581 2,884.166
0 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated
Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT
Convenience Market with Gas Pumps 1,935.00 1,935.00 1935.00 1,037,942 1,037,942 General Office Building 66.39 15.06 4.77 120,093 120,093 Parking Lot 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 2,001.39 1,950.06 1,939.77 1,158,035 1,158,035
Miles Trip % Trip Purpose %
Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps
9.50 7.30 7.30 0.80 80.20 19.00 14 21 65
General Office Building 9.50 7.30 7.30 33.00 48.00 19.00 77 19 4 Parking Lot 9.50 7.30 7.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 21 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
4.4 Fleet Mix
Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Convenience Market with Gas
Pumps
0.517111 0.052324 0.170980 0.155671 0.027786 0.007423 0.013424 0.026160 0.000649 0.000313 0.023324 0.001439 0.003395 General Office Building 0.517111 0.052324 0.170980 0.155671 0.027786 0.007423 0.013424 0.026160 0.000649 0.000313 0.023324 0.001439 0.003395 Parking Lot 0.517111 0.052324 0.170980 0.155671 0.027786 0.007423 0.013424 0.026160 0.000649 0.000313 0.023324 0.001439 0.003395
5.0 Energy Detail
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated
2.8700e0030.0261 0.0219 1.6000e0041.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e00331.2812 31.2812 6.0000e0045.7000e00431.4671 NaturalGas
Unmitigated
2.8700e0030.0261 0.0219 1.6000e0041.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e00331.2812 31.2812 6.0000e0045.7000e00431.4671
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 22 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
24.6225 2.7000e0042.4100e0032.0300e0031.0000e0051.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0042.8968 2.8968 6.0000e0055.0000e0052.9140 General Office
Building
241.268 2.6000e0030.0237 0.0199 1.4000e0041.8000e0031.8000e0031.8000e0031.8000e00328.3844 28.3844 5.4000e0045.2000e00428.5531 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.8700e0030.0261 0.0219 1.5000e0041.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e00331.2812 31.2812 6.0000e0045.7000e00431.4671 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 23 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Interior
Use Low VOC Paint - Non-Residential Exterior
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day
Convenience
Market with Gas
Pumps
0.0246225 2.7000e0042.4100e0032.0300e0031.0000e0051.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0041.8000e0042.8968 2.8968 6.0000e0055.0000e0052.9140 General Office
Building
0.241268 2.6000e0030.0237 0.0199 1.4000e0041.8000e0031.8000e0031.8000e0031.8000e00328.3844 28.3844 5.4000e0045.2000e00428.5531 Parking Lot 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 2.8700e0030.0261 0.0219 1.5000e0041.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e0031.9800e00331.2812 31.2812 6.0000e0045.7000e00431.4671 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 24 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category lb/day lb/day
Mitigated 0.1818 6.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Unmitigated 0.2028 6.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.0314 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
0.1708 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 5.7000e0046.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Total 0.2028 6.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 25 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
SubCategory lb/day lb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.0105 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Consumer
Products
0.1708 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Landscaping 5.7000e0046.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Total 0.1818 6.0000e0056.1900e0030.0000 2.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0052.0000e0050.0133 0.0133 3.0000e0050.0142 Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 26 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
11.0 Vegetation
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
8.0 Waste Detail
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type
10.0 Stationary Equipment
Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators
Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers
Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type User Defined Equipment
Equipment Type Number
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 27 of 27 Date: 3/24/2023 10:09 AM Manteca Commercial Development - San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Winter EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied ATTACHMENT 6
APPENDIX
C
ATTACHMENT 6
San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD Air District, Mitigation Report Construction Mitigation Summary
Phase ROG NOx CO SO2
Exhaust
PM10
Exhaust
PM2.5 Bio- CO2
NBioCO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Percent Reduction
Architectural Coating 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Building Construction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Grading 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Paving 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Site Preparation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 OFFROAD Equipment Mitigation
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 11 Date: 3/24/2023 10:10 AM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Manteca Commercial Development
ATTACHMENT 6
Equipment Type Fuel Type Tier Number Mitigated Total Number of Equipment DPF Oxidation Catalyst Air Compressors Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Cement and Mortar Mixers Diesel No Change 0 4 No Change 0.00 Concrete/Industrial Saws Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00 Cranes Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Forklifts Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00
Graders Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00
Pavers Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Rollers Diesel No Change 0 1 No Change 0.00
Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel No Change 0 2 No Change 0.00 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Diesel No Change 0 7 No Change 0.00 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 11 Date: 3/24/2023 10:10 AM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Manteca Commercial Development
ATTACHMENT 6
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Unmitigated tons/yr Unmitigated mt/yr
Air Compressors 4.50000E-004 3.05000E-003 4.53000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.50000E-004 1.50000E-004 0.00000E+000 6.38310E-001 6.38310E-001 4.00000E-005 0.00000E+000 6.39210E-001 Cement and
Mortar Mixers
4.40000E-004 2.76000E-003 2.31000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.10000E-004 1.10000E-004 0.00000E+000 3.43710E-001 3.43710E-001 4.00000E-005 0.00000E+000 3.44600E-001 Concrete/Industria
l Saws
1.67000E-003 1.29200E-002 1.82900E-002 3.00000E-005 6.40000E-004 6.40000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.68829E+000 2.68829E+000 1.30000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.69160E+000 Cranes 8.65000E-003 9.32900E-002 4.54600E-002 1.40000E-004 3.89000E-003 3.58000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.26737E+001 1.26737E+001 4.10000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.27762E+001 Forklifts 7.52000E-003 7.04300E-002 8.57500E-002 1.10000E-004 4.28000E-003 3.94000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.00719E+001 1.00719E+001 3.26000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.01533E+001 Graders 4.80000E-004 5.82000E-003 2.12000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.90000E-004 1.70000E-004 0.00000E+000 7.26720E-001 7.26720E-001 2.40000E-004 0.00000E+000 7.32590E-001 Pavers 4.00000E-004 3.81000E-003 6.33000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.80000E-004 1.60000E-004 0.00000E+000 9.03250E-001 9.03250E-001 2.90000E-004 0.00000E+000 9.10560E-001 Rollers 3.20000E-004 3.33000E-003 4.05000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.80000E-004 1.60000E-004 0.00000E+000 5.04340E-001 5.04340E-001 1.60000E-004 0.00000E+000 5.08420E-001 Rubber Tired
Dozers
9.40000E-004 9.80000E-003 4.27000E-003 1.00000E-005 4.40000E-004 4.10000E-004 0.00000E+000 1.03158E+000 1.03158E+000 3.30000E-004 0.00000E+000 1.03992E+000 Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
1.65900E-002 1.68000E-001 2.47940E-001 3.50000E-004 8.15000E-003 7.50000E-003 0.00000E+000 3.03901E+001 3.03901E+001 9.83000E-003 0.00000E+000 3.06359E+001 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 11 Date: 3/24/2023 10:10 AM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Manteca Commercial Development
ATTACHMENT 6
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Mitigated tons/yr Mitigated mt/yr
Air Compressors 4.50000E-004 3.05000E-003 4.53000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.50000E-004 1.50000E-004 0.00000E+000 6.38310E-001 6.38310E-001 4.00000E-005 0.00000E+000 6.39210E-001 Cement and Mortar
Mixers
4.40000E-004 2.76000E-003 2.31000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.10000E-004 1.10000E-004 0.00000E+000 3.43710E-001 3.43710E-001 4.00000E-005 0.00000E+000 3.44600E-001 Concrete/Industrial
Saws
1.67000E-003 1.29200E-002 1.82900E-002 3.00000E-005 6.40000E-004 6.40000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.68828E+000 2.68828E+000 1.30000E-004 0.00000E+000 2.69159E+000 Cranes 8.65000E-003 9.32900E-002 4.54600E-002 1.40000E-004 3.89000E-003 3.58000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.26737E+001 1.26737E+001 4.10000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.27762E+001 Forklifts 7.52000E-003 7.04300E-002 8.57500E-002 1.10000E-004 4.28000E-003 3.94000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.00718E+001 1.00718E+001 3.26000E-003 0.00000E+000 1.01533E+001 Graders 4.80000E-004 5.82000E-003 2.12000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.90000E-004 1.70000E-004 0.00000E+000 7.26720E-001 7.26720E-001 2.40000E-004 0.00000E+000 7.32590E-001 Pavers 4.00000E-004 3.81000E-003 6.33000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.80000E-004 1.60000E-004 0.00000E+000 9.03250E-001 9.03250E-001 2.90000E-004 0.00000E+000 9.10560E-001 Rollers 3.20000E-004 3.33000E-003 4.05000E-003 1.00000E-005 1.80000E-004 1.60000E-004 0.00000E+000 5.04340E-001 5.04340E-001 1.60000E-004 0.00000E+000 5.08420E-001 Rubber Tired Dozers 9.40000E-004 9.80000E-003 4.27000E-003 1.00000E-005 4.40000E-004 4.10000E-004 0.00000E+000 1.03158E+000 1.03158E+000 3.30000E-004 0.00000E+000 1.03992E+000 Tractors/Loaders/Ba
ckhoes
1.65900E-002 1.68000E-001 2.47940E-001 3.50000E-004 8.15000E-003 7.50000E-003 0.00000E+000 3.03901E+001 3.03901E+001 9.83000E-003 0.00000E+000 3.06358E+001 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 11 Date: 3/24/2023 10:10 AM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Manteca Commercial Development
ATTACHMENT 6
Equipment Type ROG NOx CO SO2 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Percent Reduction
Air Compressors 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Cement and Mortar
Mixers
0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Concrete/Industrial
Saws
0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 3.71984E-006 3.71984E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 3.71526E-006 Cranes 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 7.89034E-007 7.89034E-007 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.56541E-006 Forklifts 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 9.92866E-007 9.92866E-007 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 9.84903E-007 Graders 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Pavers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Rollers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Rubber Tired Dozers 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 Tractors/Loaders/Ba
ckhoes
0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.31622E-006 1.31622E-006 0.00000E+000 0.00000E+000 1.30566E-006 Fugitive Dust Mitigation
Yes Soil Stabilizer for unpaved
Roads
PM10 Reduction 15.00 PM2.5 Reduction 15.00
Yes Replace Ground Cover of Area
Disturbed
PM10 Reduction 10.00 PM2.5 Reduction 10.00
Yes Water Exposed Area PM10 Reduction 55.00 PM2.5 Reduction 55.00 Frequency (per day)
2.00 Yes/No Mitigation Measure Mitigation Input Mitigation Input Mitigation Input CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 11 Date: 3/24/2023 10:10 AM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Manteca Commercial Development
ATTACHMENT 6
No Unpaved Road Mitigation Moisture Content
%
0.00 Vehicle Speed
(mph)
0.00 No Clean Paved Road % PM Reduction 0.00
Operational Percent Reduction Summary
Unmitigated Mitigated Percent Reduction
Phase Source PM10 PM2.5 PM10 PM2.5 PM10 PM2.5
Architectural Coating Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Architectural Coating Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Building Construction Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Building Construction Roads 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Demolition Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Demolition Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Grading Fugitive Dust 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.60
Grading Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Paving Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Paving Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Site Preparation Fugitive Dust 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.59 0.67 Site Preparation Roads 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 11 Date: 3/24/2023 10:10 AM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Manteca Commercial Development
ATTACHMENT 6
Category ROG NOx CO SO2
Exhaust
PM10
Exhaust
PM2.5 Bio- CO2
NBioCO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Percent Reduction
Architectural Coating 66.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Consumer Products 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hearth 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Landscaping 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mobile 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Natural Gas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Water Indoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Water Outdoor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Operational Mobile Mitigation
Mitigation
Selected
No
No
No
No
No
No
Category
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
Land Use
% Reduction
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.25
0.00 0.00
0.11 Input Value 1
0.33 Measure Input Value 2 Input Value 3
Increase Diversity
Land Use SubTotal
Integrate Below Market Rate Housing
Increase Transit Accessibility
Improve Destination Accessibility
Improve Walkability Design
Increase Density
Project Setting:
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 11 Date: 3/24/2023 10:10 AM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Manteca Commercial Development
ATTACHMENT 6
No
No
No Neighborhood Enhancements
Neighborhood Enhancements
Neighborhood Enhancements
Implement NEV Network 0.00
Provide Traffic Calming Measures
Improve Pedestrian Network
No
No
No
No
No
No
Parking Policy Pricing
Transit Improvements
Transit Improvements
Transit Improvements
Transit Improvements
Parking Policy Pricing
Parking Policy Pricing
Parking Policy Pricing
Neighborhood Enhancements 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Limit Parking Supply 0.00
Land Use and Site Enhancement Subtotal
Transit Improvements Subtotal
Increase Transit Frequency
Expand Transit Network
Provide BRT System
Parking Policy Pricing Subtotal
On-street Market Pricing
Unbundle Parking Costs
Neighborhood Enhancements Subtotal
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
Commute
0.00 0.00
0.00 2.00
Transit Subsidy
Employee Vanpool/Shuttle
Market Commute Trip Reduction Option
Encourage Telecommuting and Alternative
Work Schedules
Workplace Parking Charge
Implement Employee Parking "Cash Out"
Implement Trip Reduction Program
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 8 of 11 Date: 3/24/2023 10:10 AM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Manteca Commercial Development
ATTACHMENT 6
No
No School Trip
Commute
Commute
0.00 0.00
Implement School Bus Program
Commute Subtotal
Provide Ride Sharing Program
Total VMT Reduction 0.00
Area Mitigation
Measure Implemented
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Mitigation Measure
No Hearth
% Electric Chainsaw
% Electric Leafblower
% Electric Lawnmower
Use Low VOC Paint (Non-residential Exterior)
Use Low VOC Paint (Non-residential Interior)
Use Low VOC Paint (Residential Exterior)
Use Low VOC Paint (Residential Interior)
Use Low VOC Cleaning Supplies
Only Natural Gas Hearth
Input Value
0.00 0.00
0.00 50.00
50.00 150.00
150.00
Energy Mitigation Measures
Measure Implemented
No
Mitigation Measure
Exceed Title 24
Input Value 1 Input Value 2
Yes Use Low VOC Paint (Parking) 50.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 11 Date: 3/24/2023 10:10 AM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Manteca Commercial Development
ATTACHMENT 6
Solid Waste Mitigation
No
No Install High Efficiency Lighting
On-site Renewable
Appliance Type Land Use Subtype % Improvement
ClothWasher 30.00
DishWasher 15.00
Fan 50.00
Refrigerator 15.00
Water Mitigation Measures
Measure Implemented
No
No
No
Mitigation Measure
Use Reclaimed Water
Use Grey Water
Apply Water Conservation on Strategy
Input Value 1 Input Value 2
No
No
No
No
Install low-flow bathroom faucet
Install low-flow Toilet
Install low-flow Shower
Install low-flow Kitchen faucet
32.00 18.00
20.00 20.00
No
No
No
Turf Reduction
Water Efficient Landscape
Use Water Efficient Irrigation Systems 6.10
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 10 of 11 Date: 3/24/2023 10:10 AM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Manteca Commercial Development
ATTACHMENT 6
Mitigation Measures
Institute Recycling and Composting Services
Percent Reduction in Waste Disposed
Input Value
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 11 Date: 3/24/2023 10:10 AM EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Not Applied Manteca Commercial Development
ATTACHMENT 6
Crossroads Plaza
2064 North Union Road
General Plan Amendment, Rezone,
Site Plan & Design Review, and Minor Use Permit
March 21, 2024
City of Manteca Planning Commission Public Hearing
ATTACHMENT 6
SITE VICINITY AND ADJACENT USES
ATTACHMENT 6
Site Location – 2064 N. Union Road
ATTACHMENT 6
CURRENT GENERAL PLAN LAND USE & ZONING
Current General Plan Land Use Designation:
High Density Residential (HDR)
Current Zone:
Multiple-Family Dwelling (R-3)
ATTACHMENT 6
New General Plan Land Use
General Plan Update Map
ATTACHMENT 6
SITE PLAN
ATTACHMENT 6
ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS
AUTO ZONE AUTO PARTS STORE
ATTACHMENT 6
ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS
CIRCLE K CONVENIENCE STORE
ATTACHMENT 6
ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS
CIRCLE K FUEL CANOPY
ATTACHMENT 6
LANDSCAPING
ATTACHMENT 6
SUMMARY
• Consistent with General Plan and Zoning
• Meets required Findings for:
• General Plan Amendment
• Rezone
• Site Plan & Design Review
• Minor Use Permit
• Consistent with the Climate Action Plan
• CEQA Exempt: Section 15332 – In-Fill Development Projects ATTACHMENT 6
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the following for Crossroads Plaza:
• Resolution No. 1651 recommending approval to the
City Council for:
• A General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Site Plan & Design
Review, and Minor Use Permit for a 6,816-square-foot Auto Zone auto parts store and a 5,200-square-foot Circle K
convenience store with a 12-pump gas station with on a
1.98-acre site at 2064 North Union Road
ATTACHMENT 6
Thank you
March 21, 2024
City of Manteca Planning Commission Public Hearing
ATTACHMENT 6