Manteca City Council
April 7, 2026

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx

INTRODUCTION
The 4-C Ranch Subdivision project is located in the City of Manteca, California. The project includes the construction of 68 new single-family lots and a residential park area. The project will be bordered by other single-family homes to the west and south, residential land use to the north and east.

Figure 1 shows the project site plan. Figure 2 shows an aerial photo of the project site.

ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING

BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON NOISE
Fundamentals of Acoustics
Acoustics is the science of sound. Sound may be thought of as mechanical energy of a vibrating object transmitted by pressure waves through a medium to human (or animal) ears. If the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), then they can be heard and are called sound. The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of sound and is expressed as cycles per second or Hertz (Hz).

Noise is a subjective reaction to different types of sounds. Noise is typically defined as (airborne) sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected or undesired, and may therefore be classified as a more specific group of sounds.

Perceptions of sound and noise are highly subjective from person to person.

Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a very large and awkward range of numbers. To avoid this, the decibel scale was devised. The decibel scale uses the hearing threshold (20 micropascals), as a point of reference, defined as 0 dB. Other sound pressures are then compared to this reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range. The decibel scale allows a million-fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 dB, and changes in levels (dB) correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness.

The perceived loudness of sounds is dependent upon many factors, including sound pressure level and frequency content. However, within the usual range of environmental noise levels, perception of loudness is relatively predictable, and can be approximated by A-weighted sound levels. There is a strong correlation between A-weighted sound levels (expressed as dBA) and the way the human ear perceives sound. For this reason, the A-weighted sound level has become the standard tool of environmental noise assessment.

ATTACHMENT 9
4 -C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, Californi
a
Figure 1
Project S
ite Plan
Project Location
ATTACHMENT 9
Louise A
venue
Cherry Oak Lane
ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx The decibel scale is logarithmic, not linear. In other words, two sound levels 10-dB apart differ in acoustic energy by a factor of 10. When the standard logarithmic decibel is A-weighted, an increase of 10-dBA is generally perceived as a doubling in loudness. For example, a 70-dBA sound is half as loud as an 80-dBA sound, and twice as loud as a 60-dBA sound.

Community noise is commonly described in terms of the ambient noise level, which is defined as the allencompassing noise level associated with a given environment. A common statistical tool is the average, or equivalent, sound level (Leq), which corresponds to a steady-state A-weighted sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given time period (usually one hour). The Leq is the foundation of the composite noise descriptor, Ldn, and shows very good correlation with community response to noise.

The day/night average level (DNL or Ldn) is based upon the average noise level over a 24-hour day, with a +10- decibel weighing applied to noise occurring during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours. The nighttime penalty is based upon the assumption that people react to nighttime noise exposures as though they were twice as loud as daytime exposures. Because Ldn represents a 24-hour average, it tends to disguise short-term variations in the noise environment.

Table 1 lists several examples of the noise levels associated with common situations. Appendix A provides a summary of acoustical terms used in this report.

TABLE 1: TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS
Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dBA) Common Indoor Activities --110-- Rock Band
Jet Fly-over at 300 m (1,000 ft.) --100--
Gas Lawn Mower at 1 m (3 ft.) --90--
Diesel Truck at 15 m (50 ft.),
at 80 km/hr. (50 mph) --80--
Food Blender at 1 m (3 ft.)
Garbage Disposal at 1 m (3 ft.)
Noisy Urban Area, Daytime
Gas Lawn Mower, 30 m (100 ft.) --70-- Vacuum Cleaner at 3 m (10 ft.) Commercial Area
Heavy Traffic at 90 m (300 ft.) --60-- Normal Speech at 1 m (3 ft.) Quiet Urban Daytime --50--
Large Business Office
Dishwasher in Next Room
Quiet Urban Nighttime --40-- Theater, Large Conference Room (Background) Quiet Suburban Nighttime --30-- Library
Quiet Rural Nighttime --20-- Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall (Background) --10-- Broadcast/Recording Studio
Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing --0-- Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Source: Caltrans, Technical Noise Supplement, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September, 2013.

ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx Effects of Noise on People
The effects of noise on people can be placed in three categories:
• Subjective effects of annoyance, nuisance, and dissatisfaction • Interference with activities such as speech, sleep, and learning • Physiological effects such as hearing loss or sudden startling Environmental noise typically produces effects in the first two categories. Workers in industrial plants can experience noise in the last category. There is no completely satisfactory way to measure the subjective effects of noise or the corresponding reactions of annoyance and dissatisfaction. A wide variation in individual thresholds of annoyance exists and different tolerances to noise tend to develop based on an individual’s past experiences with noise.

Thus, an important way of predicting a human reaction to a new noise environment is the way it compares to the existing environment to which one has adapted: the so-called ambient noise level. In general, the more a new noise exceeds the previously existing ambient noise level, the less acceptable the new noise will be judged by those hearing it.

With regards to increases in A-weighted noise level, the following relationships occur:
• Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a change of 1-dBA cannot be perceived; • Outside of the laboratory, a 3-dBA change is considered a just-perceivable difference; • A change in level of at least 5-dBA is required before any noticeable change in human response would be expected; and
• A 10-dBA change is subjectively heard as approximately a doubling in loudness and can cause an adverse response.

Stationary point sources of noise – including stationary mobile sources such as idling vehicles – attenuate (lessen) at a rate of approximately 6-dB per doubling of distance from the source, depending on environmental conditions (i.e. atmospheric conditions and either vegetative or manufactured noise barriers, etc.). Widely distributed noises, such as a large industrial facility spread over many acres or a street with moving vehicles, would typically attenuate at a lower rate.

ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx

EXISTING NOISE AND VIBRATION ENVIRONMENTS

EXISTING NOISE RECEPTORS
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to noise than others. Land uses often associated with sensitive receptors generally include residences, schools, libraries, hospitals, and passive recreational areas. Sensitive noise receptors may also include threatened or endangered noise-sensitive biological species, although many jurisdictions have not adopted noise standards for wildlife areas. Noise sensitive land uses are typically given special attention in order to achieve protection from excessive noise.

Sensitivity is a function of noise exposure (in terms of both exposure duration and insulation from noise) and the types of activities involved. In the vicinity of the project site, sensitive land uses include existing singlefamily residential uses to the west and south of the project site.

EXISTING GENERAL AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
The existing noise environment in the project area is primarily defined by traffic on East Louise Avenue. To quantify the existing ambient noise environment in the project vicinity, Saxelby Acoustics conducted continuous (24-hr.) noise level measurements at two locations on the project site. Noise measurement locations are shown on Figure 2. A summary of the noise level measurement survey results is provided in Table

2. Appendix B contains the complete results of the noise monitoring.

The sound level meters were programmed to record the maximum, median, and average noise levels at each site during the survey. The maximum value, denoted Lmax, represents the highest noise level measured. The average value, denoted Leq, represents the energy average of all the noise received by the sound level meter microphone during the monitoring period. The median value, denoted L50, represents the sound level exceeded 50 percent of the time during the monitoring period.

Larson Davis Laboratories (LDL) model 820 precision integrating sound level meters were used for the ambient noise level measurement survey. The meters were calibrated before and after use with a CAL200 acoustical calibrator to ensure the accuracy of the measurements. The equipment used meets all pertinent specifications of the American National Standards Institute for Type 1 sound level meters (ANSI S1.4).

TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF EXISTING BACKGROUND NOISE MEASUREMENT DATA Location Date Ldn
Daytime
Leq
Daytime
L50
Daytime
Lmax
Nighttime
Leq
Nighttime
L50
Nighttime
Lmax
LT-1: 20 ft. to CL
of E. Louise Ave. 7/17/24 69 67 56 86 61 49 82
LT-2: 130 ft. to CL
of Cherry Oak Ln. 7/17/24 55 47 43 63 48 47 60
• All values shown in dBA
• Daytime hours: 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
• Nighttime Hours: 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
• Source: Saxelby Acoustics, 2024.

ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx

FUTURE TRAFFIC NOISE ENVIRONMENT AT OFF-SITE RECEPTORS

OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
To assess noise impacts due to project-related traffic increases on the local roadway network, traffic noise levels are predicted at sensitive receptors for existing no project and existing plus project conditions.

Existing and existing plus project noise levels due to traffic are calculated using the Federal Highway Administration Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108). The model is based upon the Calveno reference noise factors for automobiles, medium trucks and heavy trucks, with consideration given to vehicle volume, speed, roadway configuration, distance to the receiver, and the acoustical characteristics of the site.

The FHWA model was developed to predict hourly Leq values for free-flowing traffic conditions. To predict traffic noise levels in terms of Ldn, it is necessary to adjust the input volume to account for the day/night distribution of traffic.

Project trip generation volumes were provided by the project traffic engineer (Fehr & Peers 2024), truck usage and vehicle speeds on the local area roadways were estimated from field observations. Existing traffic volumes were obtained from the City of Manteca General Plan traffic analysis. The predicted increases in traffic noise levels on the local roadway network for existing conditions which would result from the project are provided in terms of Ldn.

Traffic noise levels are predicted at the sensitive receptors located at the closest typical setback distance along each project-area roadway segment. In some locations sensitive receptors may not receive full shielding from noise barriers or may be located at distances which vary from the assumed calculation distance.

Table 3 summarizes the modeled traffic noise levels at the nearest sensitive receptors along each roadway segment in the Project area. Appendix C provides the complete inputs and results of the FHWA traffic modeling.

TABLE 3: PREDICTED TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL AND PROJECT-RELATED TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASES Roadway Segment
Existing no
Project
Existing +
Project
Change
Louise Avenue East of Tulip Place 69.8 69.9 0.1
Based upon Table 3 data, the proposed project is predicted to result in an increase in a maximum traffic noise level increase of 0.1 dBA.

EVALUATION OF FUTURE TRANSPORTATION NOISE ON PROJECT SITE Saxelby Acoustics used the SoundPLAN noise model to calculate traffic noise levels at the proposed residential uses due to traffic on Louise Avenue. Inputs to the SoundPLAN noise model include topography, existing structures, roadway elevations, and the proposed building pad elevations. Louise Avenue was estimated to increase by +0.1 dBA based upon project traffic increases provided by the project traffic engineer (Fehr & Peers 2024). The results of this analysis are shown graphically on Figure 3.

ATTACHMENT 9
68 68 68 67
F1 65F2 65
F1 65F2 65
F1 65F2 66
68 F1 63F2 63
65 dBA
70 dBA
75 dBA 80 dBA
4‐C Ranch SubdivisionCity of Manteca, California
Figure 3Future Transportation Noise Contours
Ldn, dB(A)
Scale 1:300
0 50 100 200 300 400
feet
Legend
Project Site
Noise Level, dB(A)
65 < <= 70
70 < <= 7575 < <= 8080 <
4‐C Ranch Subdivision

ATTACHMENT
9 4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx

CONSTRUCTION NOISE ENVIRONMENT
During the construction of the proposed project, noise from construction activities would temporarily add to the noise environment in the project vicinity. As shown in Table 4, activities involved in construction would generate maximum noise levels ranging from 76 to 90 dB at a distance of 50 feet.

TABLE 4: CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE
Type of Equipment Maximum Level, dBA at 50 feet
Auger Drill Rig 84
Backhoe 78
Compactor 83
Compressor (air) 78
Concrete Saw 90
Dozer 82
Dump Truck 76
Excavator 81
Generator 81
Jackhammer 89
Pneumatic Tools 85
Source: Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide. Federal Highway Administration. FHWA-HEP-05-054. January 2006.

CONSTRUCTION VIBRATION ENVIRONMENT
The primary vibration-generating activities associated with the proposed project would occur during construction when activities such as grading, utilities placement, and parking lot construction occur. Table 5 shows the typical vibration levels produced by construction equipment.

TABLE 5: VIBRATION LEVELS FOR VARIOUS CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT Type of Equipment
Peak Particle Velocity at
25 feet
(inches/second)
Peak Particle Velocity at
50 feet
(inches/second)
Peak Particle Velocity at
100 feet
(inches/second)
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.031 0.011
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.027 0.010
Small Bulldozer 0.003 0.001 0.000
Auger/drill Rigs 0.089 0.031 0.011
Jackhammer 0.035 0.012 0.004
Vibratory Hammer 0.070 0.025 0.009
Vibratory Compactor/roller 0.210
(Less than 0.20 at 26 feet) 0.074 0.026
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines. Federal Transit Administration. May 2006.

ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx

REGULATORY CONTEXT

FEDERAL
There are no federal regulations related to noise that apply to the Proposed Project.

STATE
California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Appendix G, indicate that a significant noise impact may occur if a project exposes persons to noise or vibration levels in excess of local general plans or noise ordinance standards, or cause a substantial permanent or temporary increase in ambient noise levels.

CEQA standards are discussed in more detail under the Thresholds of Significance section.

LOCAL
City of Manteca General Plan Noise Element
S-6.4 Require residential and other noise-sensitive development projects to satisfy the noise level criteria in Tables S-1 (Table 6) and S-2 (Table 7).

S-6.6 Regulate construction-related noise to reduce impacts on adjacent uses to the criteria identified in Table S-2 (Table 7) or, if the criteria in Table S-2 (Table 7) cannot be met, to the maximum level feasible using best management practices and complying with the MMC Chapter 9.52.

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 (Table 6), 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 in 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.

S-6c Update the City’s Noise Ordinance (Chapter 9.52) to reflect the noise standards established in this 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, ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx 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 12 dBA 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
• 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.
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 are 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:

ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx 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 of 12 dB in noise will be considered substantial.

TABLE 6: MAXIMUM ALLOWABLENOISE EXPOSURE FROM MOBILENOISE SOURCES Land Use1
Outdoor
Activity
Areas2,
3 Interior Spaces
Ldn/CNEL, dBA Leq, dBA4
Residential 60 45 -
Motels/Hotels 65 45 -
Mixed-Use 65 45
Hospitals, Nursing Homes 60 45 -
Theaters, Auditoriums - - 35
Churches 60 - 40
Office Buildings 65 - 45
Schools, Libraries, Museums 70 - 45
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 70 - -
Industrial 75 - 45
Golf Courses, Water Recreation 70 - -
1Where a proposed use is not specifically listed, the use shall comply with the standards for the most similar use as determined by the City.
2Outdoor activity areas for residential development are considered to be the back yard patios or decks of single family units and the common areas where people generally congregate for multi-family developments. Where common outdoor activity areas for multi-family developments comply with the outdoor noise level standard, the standard will not be applied at patios or decks of individual units provided noise-reducing measures are incorporated (e.g., orientation of patio/deck, screening of patio with masonry or other noise-attenuating material). Outdoor activity areas for non-residential developments are the common areas where people generally congregate, including pedestrian plazas, seating areas, and outside lunch facilities; not all residential developments include outdoor activity areas.
3 In areas where it is not possible to reduce exterior noise levels to achieve the outdoor activity area standard using a practical application of the best noise-reduction technology, an increase of up to 5 Ldn over the standard will be allowed provided that available exterior noise reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table 4Determined for a typical worst-case hour during periods of use.

Source: City of Manteca General Plan Table S-1.

ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx TABLE 7: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR STATIONARY NOISE SOURCES, INCLUDING AFFECTED PROJECTS1,2,3,4 Noise Level Descriptor
Daytime Nighttime
7 am to 10 pm 10 pm to 7 am
Hourly Leq, dBA 55 45
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.
2No standards have been included for interior noise levels. Standard construction practices should, with the exterior noise levels identified, result in acceptable interior noise levels. 3Stationary noise sources which are typically of concern include, but are not limited to, the following:

HVAC System Cooling Towers/Evaporative Condensors
Pump Stations Lift Stations
Emergency Generators Boilers
Steam Valves Steam Turbines
Generators Fans
Air Compressors Heavy Equipment
Conveyor Systems Transformers
Pile Drivers Grinders
Drill Rigs Gas or Diesel Motors
Welders Cutting Equipment
Outdoor Speakers Blowers
4The types of uses which may typically produce the noise sources described above include but are not limited to: industrial facilities, pump stations, trucking operations, tire shops, auto maintenance shops, metal fabricating shops, shopping centers, drive-up windows, car washes, loading docks, public works projects, batch plants, bottling and canning plants, recycling centers, electric generating stations, race tracks, landfills, sand and gravel operations, and athletic fields.

CRITERIA FOR ACCEPTABLE VIBRATION
Vibration is like noise in that it involves a source, a transmission path, and a receiver. While vibration is related to noise, it differs in that noise is generally considered to be pressure waves transmitted through air, whereas vibration usually consists of the excitation of a structure or surface. As with noise, vibration consists of an amplitude and frequency. A person’s perception to the vibration will depend on their individual sensitivity to vibration, as well as the amplitude and frequency of the source and the response of the system which is vibrating.

Vibration can be measured in terms of acceleration, velocity, or displacement. A common practice is to monitor vibration measures in terms of peak particle velocities in inches per second. Standards pertaining to perception as well as damage to structures have been developed for vibration levels defined in terms of peak particle velocities.

Human and structural response to different vibration levels is influenced by a number of factors, including ground type, distance between source and receptor, duration, and the number of perceived vibration events.

Table 8, which was developed by Caltrans, shows the vibration levels which would normally be required to result in damage to structures. The vibration levels are presented in terms of peak particle velocity in inches per second.

Table 8 indicates that the threshold for architectural damage to structures is 0.20 in/sec p.p.v. A threshold of

0.20 in/sec p.p.v. is considered to be a reasonable threshold for short-term construction projects.

ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx TABLE 8: EFFECTS OF VIBRATION ON PEOPLE AND BUILDINGS
Peak Particle Velocity
Human Reaction Effect on Buildings
mm/second in/second

0.15-0.30 0.006-0.019 Threshold of perception; possibility of intrusion
Vibrations unlikely to cause damage of
any type

2.0 0.08 Vibrations readily perceptible
Recommended upper level of the
vibration to which ruins and ancient
monuments should be subjected

2.5 0.10 Level at which continuous vibrations
begin to annoy people
Virtually no risk of “architectural”
damage to normal buildings

5.0 0.20
Vibrations annoying to people in
buildings (this agrees with the levels
established for people standing on
bridges and subjected to relative
short periods of vibrations)
Threshold at which there is a risk of
“architectural” damage to normal
dwelling - houses with plastered walls
and ceilings. Special types of finish such
as lining of walls, flexible ceiling
treatment, etc., would minimize
“architectural” damage
10-15 0.4-0.6
Vibrations considered unpleasant by
people subjected to continuous
vibrations and unacceptable to some
people walking on bridges
Vibrations at a greater level than
normally expected from traffic, but
would cause “architectural” damage
and possibly minor structural damage
Source: Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations. Caltrans. TAV-02-01-R9601. February 20, 2002.

IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines states that a project would normally be considered to result in significant noise impacts if noise levels conflict with adopted environmental standards or plans or if noise generated by the project would substantially increase existing noise levels at sensitive receivers on a permanent or temporary basis. Significance criteria for noise impacts are drawn from CEQA Guidelines Appendix G (Items XI [a-c]).

Would the project:
a. Generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b. Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx The proposed project is not located within two miles of a public or private airport, therefore item “c” is not discussed any further in this study.

Noise Level Increase Criteria for Long-Term Project-Related Noise Level Increases The City of Manteca establishes noise level increase criteria for long-term project-related increases due to transportation noise in the General Plan. The relevant criteria are reproduced below:

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 Manteca General Plan April 2023 9-20 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.

Temporary Construction Noise Impacts
With temporary noise impacts (construction), identification of “substantial increases” depends upon the duration of the impact, the temporal daily nature of the impact, and the absolute change in decibel levels. Per the City of Manteca Municipal Code, construction activities operating between 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. are exempt from the ordinance. For short-term noise associated with Project construction, the City of Manteca establishes an increase criterion of 12 dBA in Policy S-6d. This level of increase is approximately equivalent to a doubling of sound energy.

PROJECT-SPECIFIC IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Impact 1: Would the project generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Traffic Noise Increases at Off-Site Receptors
The City of Manteca General Plan specifies criteria to determine the significance of traffic noise impacts. Where existing traffic noise levels are greater than 65 dB Ldn, a +1.5 dB Ldn increase in roadway noise levels will be considered significant. According to Table 3, the maximum increase in traffic noise at the nearest sensitive receptor is predicted to be 0.1 dBA. Therefore, impacts resulting from increased traffic noise would be considered less-than-significant, and no mitigation is required.

ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx Operational Noise at Existing Sensitive Receptors
The proposed project would include typical residential noise which would be compatible with the existing adjacent residential uses.

Therefore, this is a less-than-significant impact, and no mitigation is required.

Construction Noise
During the construction phases of the project, noise from construction activities would add to the noise environment in the immediate project vicinity. As indicated in Table 4, activities involved in construction would generate maximum noise levels ranging from 76 to 90 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet. Construction activities would also be temporary in nature and are anticipated to occur during normal daytime working hours. The City of Manteca General Plan exempts construction noise from the noise ordinance between the hours 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.

The City defines a significant increase due to construction noise as an increase of 12 dBA over existing ambient noise levels; Saxelby Acoustics used this criterion to evaluate increases due to construction noise associated with the project. As shown in Table 4, construction equipment is predicted to generate noise levels of up to 90 dBA Lmax at 50 feet. Construction noise is evaluated as occurring at the center of the site to represent average noise levels generated over the duration of construction across the project site. The nearest residential uses are located approximately 300 feet as measured from the center of the project site. At this distance, maximum construction noise levels would be up to 74 dBA. The average daytime maximum noise level in the vicinity of the sensitive receptors was measured to be 63 dBA, resulting in an increase of 11 dBA. Therefore, project construction would not cause an increase of greater than 12 dBA over existing ambient noise levels.

Noise would also be generated during the construction phase by increased truck traffic on area roadways. A project-generated noise source would be truck traffic associated with transport of heavy materials and equipment to and from the construction site. This noise increase would be of short duration and would occur during daytime hours.

Although construction activities are temporary in nature and would occur during normal daytime working hours, construction-related noise could result in sleep interference at existing noise-sensitive land uses in the vicinity of the construction if construction activities were to occur outside the normal daytime hours.

Therefore, impacts resulting from noise levels temporarily exceeding the threshold of significance due to construction would be considered potentially significant. Mitigation measure 1(a) would reduce construction noise impacts to less-than-significant.

Transportation Noise on Project Site (Non-CEQA Issue)
Exterior Transportation Noise
Compliance with City’s standards on new noise-sensitive receptors is not a CEQA consideration. However, this information is provided here so that a determination can be made regarding the ability of the proposed project to meet the requirements of the City of Manteca for exterior and interior noise levels at new sensitive uses proposed under the project.

ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx As shown on Figure 3, several of the proposed outdoor activity areas are predicted to be exposed to exterior transportation noise levels up to approximately 68 dBA Ldn. This would exceed the 60 dBA limit for outdoor areas established by the City of Manteca. Therefore, additional noise control measures would be required.

Saxelby Acoustics determined the effect of including a sound wall in the project design. A 6-foot-tall barrier was modeled along the southern project boundary. The barrier is predicted to lower noise levels at all outdoor activity areas on the project site to 64 dBA Ldn or lower. The City of Manteca General Plan allows for a 5 dB Ldn increase to the City’s exterior transportation noise standard to 65 dBA Ldn if practical application of noisereduction technology have been implemented. Figure 4 shows the recommended sound wall and resulting noise level contours.

ATTACHMENT 9
64 64 64
63 F1 61F2 65
F1 61F2 65
F1 61F2 65
F1 59F2 63
64 65 dBA
70 dBA
75 dBA 80 dBA
4‐C Ranch SubdivisionCity of Manteca, California
Figure 4Future Transportation Noise Contours withRecommended Sound WallLdn, dB(A) Scale 1:300
0 50 100 200 300 400
feet
Legend
Project SiteRecommendedSound Wall
Noise Level, dB(A)
65 < <= 70
70 < <= 7575 < <= 8080 <
4‐C Ranch Subdivision

ATTACHMENT
9 4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx Interior Transportation Noise
Modern building construction methods typically yield an exterior-to-interior noise level reduction of 25 dBA1.

Therefore, where exterior noise levels are 70 dBA Ldn, or less, no additional interior noise control measures are typically required. For this project, exterior noise levels are predicted to be up to 65 dBA Ldn at the second story of the buildings closest to Louise Avenue. This would result in interior noise levels of up to 40 dBA Ldn at the second story receivers based on typical building construction. This meets the City of Manteca which requires that interior noise levels do not exceed 45 dB Ldn. Therefore, no additional noise control measures are required to reduce interior noise to acceptable levels.

Mitigation Measures
1(a) The City shall establish the following as conditions of approval for any permit that results in the use of construction equipment:
• 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. • 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.
• Temporary power poles or zero-emission power sources shall be used instead of generators where feasible.
• 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. • 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.
• Delivery of materials shall observe the hours of operation described above. • Truck traffic shall avoid residential areas to the greatest extent feasible. • 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. 1 Assuming standard construction with a minimum STC rating of 29 for exterior window assemblies ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx • Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines is prohibited. • The construction contractor shall, to the maximum extent practical, locate on-site equipment staging areas to maximize the distance between construction-related noise sources and noise-sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction.

Timing/Implementation: Implemented prior to approval of grading and/or building permits Enforcement/Monitoring: City of Manteca Community Development Services Department Implementation of mitigation measures 1(a) would help to reduce construction-generated noise levels. With mitigation, this impact would be considered less-than-significant.

Recommended Condition of Approval
Prior to approval of project improvement plans, the plans for the proposed project shall show that the southern area of the project site shall be shielded from Louise Avenue through the use of minimum six-foot-tall sound walls per the approval of the City Engineer. Sound wall may include a combination of earthen berm and masonry wall to achieve the required wall height. Wall heights shall be measured relative to either pad or roadway centerline elevations, whichever is higher. The approximate locations of these barriers are shown on Figure 4.

Other types of barrier may be employed but shall be reviewed by an acoustical engineer prior to being constructed.

Impact 2: Would the project generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Construction vibration impacts include human annoyance and building structural damage. Human annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises significantly above the threshold of perception. Building damage can take the form of cosmetic or structural.

The Table 5 data indicate that construction vibration levels anticipated for the project are less than the 0.2 in/sec threshold at distances of 26 feet. Sensitive receptors which could be impacted by construction related vibrations, especially vibratory compactors/rollers, are located further than 26 feet from typical construction activities. At distances greater than 26 feet construction vibrations are not predicted to exceed acceptable levels. Additionally, construction activities would be temporary in nature and would likely occur during normal daytime working hours.

This is a less-than-significant impact and no mitigation is required.

Impact 3: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
There are no airports within two miles of the project vicinity. Therefore, this impact is not applicable to the proposed project.

ATTACHMENT 9
4-C Ranch Subdivision
City of Manteca, California
Job #240705
July 26, 2024 www.SaxNoise.com

S:\General\Job Folders\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision\Word\240705 4-C Ranch Subdivision.docx

REFERENCES
American National Standards Institute. (1998). [Standard] ANSI S1.43-1997 (R2007): Specifications for integrating-averaging sound level meters. New York: Acoustical Society of America.

American Standard Testing Methods, Standard Guide for Measurement of Outdoor A-Weighted Sound Levels, American Standard Testing Methods (ASTM) E1014-08, 2008.

ASTM E1014-12. Standard Guide for Measurement of Outdoor A-Weighted Sound Levels. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA. 2012.

ASTM E1780-12. Standard Guide for Measuring Outdoor Sound Received from a Nearby Fixed Source. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA. 2012.

Barry, T M. (1978). FHWA highway traffic noise prediction model (FHWA-RD-77-108). Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of transportation, Federal highway administration, Office of research, Office of environmental policy.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Technical Noise Supplement, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, September 2013.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, May 2011.

Egan, M. D. (1988). Architectural acoustics. United States of America: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Federal Highway Administration. FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide. FHWA-HEP-05- 054 DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-05-01. January 2006.

Hanson, Carl E. (Carl Elmer). (2006). Transit noise and vibration impact assessment. Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Office of Planning and Environment.

International Electrotechnical Commission. Technical committee 29: Electroacoustics. International Organization of Legal Metrology. (2013). Electroacoustics: Sound level meters.

International Organization for Standardization. (1996). Acoustic - ISO 9613-2: Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors. Part 2: General methods of calculation. Ginevra: I.S.O.

Miller, L. N., Bolt, Beranek, & and Newman, Inc. (1981). Noise control for buildings and manufacturing plants.

Cambridge, MA: Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Inc.

SoundPLAN. SoundPLAN GmbH. Backnang, Germany. http://www.soundplan.eu/english/ ATTACHMENT 9
Appendix A: Acoustical Terminology
Acoustics   The science of sound.

Ambient Noise  The distinctive acoustical characteristics of a given space consisting of all noise sources audible at that location. In many cases, the term ambient is used to describe an existing or pre‐project condition such as the setting in an environmental noise study.

ASTC  Apparent  Sound  Transmission  Class.    Similar  to  STC  but  includes  sound  from  flanking  paths  and  correct  for  room reverberation. A larger number means more attenuation. The scale, like the decibel scale for sound, is logarithmic.

Attenuation   The reduction of an acoustic signal.

A‐Weighting   A  frequency‐response  adjustment  of  a  sound  level meter  that  conditions  the  output  signal  to  approximate  human response.

Decibel or dB   Fundamental  unit  of  sound, A Bell is  defined as  the logarithm  of  the  ratio  of  the  sound  pressure  squared  over  the reference pressure squared. A Decibel is one‐tenth of a Bell.

CNEL   Community Noise Equivalent Level. Defined as  the 24‐hour average noise level with noise occurring during evening hours (7 ‐ 10 p.m.) weighted by +5 dBA and nighttime hours weighted by +10 dBA.

DNL  See definition of Ldn.

IIC  Impact  Insulation  Class.  An  integer‐number  rating  of  how  well  a  building  floor  attenuates  impact  sounds,  such  as footsteps. A larger number means more attenuation. The scale, like the decibel scale for sound, is logarithmic.

Frequency   The measure of the rapidity of alterations of a periodic signal, expressed in cycles per second or hertz (Hz).

Ldn     Day/Night Average Sound Level. Similar to CNEL but with no evening weighting.

Leq     Equivalent or energy‐averaged sound level.

Lmax     The highest root‐mean‐square (RMS) sound level measured over a given period of time.

L(n)   The sound level exceeded a described percentile over a measurement period. For instance, an hourly L50 is the sound level exceeded 50% of the time during the one‐hour period.

Loudness   A subjective term for the sensation of the magnitude of sound.

NIC  Noise Isolation Class.  A rating of the noise reduction between two spaces.  Similar to STC but includes sound  from flanking paths and no correction for room reverberation.

NNIC Normalized Noise Isolation Class.  Similar to NIC but includes a correction for room reverberation.

Noise     Unwanted sound.

NRC   Noise Reduction Coefficient. NRC is a single‐number rating of the sound‐absorption of a material equal to the arithmetic mean of the sound‐absorption coefficients in the 250, 500, 1000, and 2,000 Hz octave frequency bands rounded to the nearest multiple  of  0.05. It  is  a  representation  of  the  amount of  sound energy  absorbed  upon  striking  a  particular surface. An NRC of 0 indicates perfect reflection; an NRC of 1 indicates perfect absorption.

RT60     The time it takes reverberant sound to decay by 60 dB once the source has been removed.

Sabin   The unit of sound absorption. One square foot of material absorbing 100% of incident sound has an absorption of 1 Sabin.

SEL   Sound Exposure Level. SEL is a rating, in decibels, of a discrete event, such as an aircraft flyover or train pass by, that compresses the total sound energy into a one‐second event.

SPC  Speech Privacy Class. SPC is a method of rating speech privacy in buildings. It is designed  to measure the degree of speech  privacy  provided  by  a  closed  room,  indicating  the  degree  to  which  conversations  occurring  within  are  kept private from listeners outside the room.

STC   Sound Transmission Class. STC is an integer rating of how well a building partition attenuates airborne sound. It is widely used  to  rate  interior  partitions,  ceilings/floors,  doors,  windows  and  exterior  wall  configurations.    The  STC  rating  is typically used to rate the sound transmission of a specific building element when tested in laboratory conditions where flanking paths around the assembly don’t exist.   A larger number means more attenuation. The scale, like the decibel scale for sound, is logarithmic.

Threshold  The lowest sound that can be perceived by the human auditory system, generally considered of Hearing   to be 0 dB for persons with perfect hearing.

Threshold   Approximately 120 dB above the threshold of hearing. of Pain
Impulsive   Sound of short duration, usually less than one second, with an abrupt onset and rapid decay.

Simple Tone         Any sound which can be judged as audible as a single pitch or set of single pitches.

ATTACHMENT 9
Appendix B: Continuous Long-Term Ambient
Noise Measurement Results
ATTACHMENT 9
Site: LT-1
Project: Meter:

Leq Lmax L50 L90 Location: Calibrator:

Wednesday, July 17, 2024 11:00 66 81 55 44 Coordinates:

Wednesday, July 17, 2024 12:00 66 81 56 43
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 13:00 68 95 55 45
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 14:00 68 92 58 45
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 15:00 68 89 60 47
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 16:00 68 82 61 47
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 17:00 67 85 59 46
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 18:00 69 100 55 44
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 19:00 64 79 53 44
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 20:00 66 90 55 46
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 21:00 64 86 51 46
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 22:00 61 79 50 47
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 23:00 60 88 49 46
Thursday, July 18, 2024 0:00 59 89 46 44
Thursday, July 18, 2024 1:00 56 80 46 43
Thursday, July 18, 2024 2:00 56 78 45 42
Thursday, July 18, 2024 3:00 57 75 47 45
Thursday, July 18, 2024 4:00 60 80 50 46
Thursday, July 18, 2024 5:00 65 85 54 49
Thursday, July 18, 2024 6:00 65 84 54 51
Thursday, July 18, 2024 7:00 67 82 58 50
Thursday, July 18, 2024 8:00 65 79 56 47
Thursday, July 18, 2024 9:00 66 81 57 48
Thursday, July 18, 2024 10:00 66 86 55 44
Leq Lmax L50 L90
67 86 56 46
61 82 49 46
64 79 51 43
69 100 61 50
56 75 45 42
65 89 54 51
69 86
69 14
Appendix B1: Continuous Noise Monitoring Results
Date Time
Measured Level, dBA 4-C Ranch Subdivision
Southern Project Boundary
LDL 820-1
Night Average
CAL200
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 Thursday, July 18, 2024
Statistics
Day Average
(37.8121234, -121.1874007)
CNEL Night %
Day Low
Day High
Night Low
Night High
Ldn Day %
81 81
95 92
89 82
85 100
79 90
86 79
88 89
80 78
75 80
85 84
82 79 81
86 44 43 45 45
47 47 46 44 44 46 46 47 46
44 43 42
45 46
49 51 50 47 48
44 66 66
68 68 68 68 67 69
64 66 64
61 60 59
56 56 57
60 65 65 67 65 66 66
25 35
45 55
65 75
85 95
105
115
Measured Hourly Noise Levels, dBA
Time of Day
Measured Ambient Noise Levels vs. Time of Day
Lmax L90 Leq
Noise Measurement Site
LT-1
E. Louise Ave.

ATTACHMENT 9
Site: LT-2
Project: Meter:

Leq Lmax L50 L90 Location: Calibrator:

Wednesday, July 17, 2024 11:00 45 60 42 40 Coordinates:

Wednesday, July 17, 2024 12:00 43 59 42 39
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 13:00 43 55 42 40
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 14:00 44 58 43 40
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 15:00 44 59 43 41
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 16:00 45 60 42 40
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 17:00 43 61 42 40
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 18:00 45 68 42 41
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 19:00 48 65 42 40
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 20:00 52 77 44 43
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 21:00 47 64 46 44
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 22:00 48 54 48 46
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 23:00 49 62 48 47
Thursday, July 18, 2024 0:00 47 56 46 44
Thursday, July 18, 2024 1:00 46 60 45 43
Thursday, July 18, 2024 2:00 46 62 44 42
Thursday, July 18, 2024 3:00 46 57 46 44
Thursday, July 18, 2024 4:00 49 68 48 46
Thursday, July 18, 2024 5:00 50 62 50 48
Thursday, July 18, 2024 6:00 50 56 50 49
Thursday, July 18, 2024 7:00 49 65 48 46
Thursday, July 18, 2024 8:00 53 75 45 43
Thursday, July 18, 2024 9:00 44 57 43 41
Thursday, July 18, 2024 10:00 44 62 42 40
Leq Lmax L50 L90
47 63 43 41
48 60 47 45
43 55 42 39
53 77 48 46
46 54 44 42
50 68 50 49
55 57
CNEL 55 Night % 43
Day Low
Day High
Night Low
Night High
Ldn Day %
(37.8145973, -121.1875137)
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 Thursday, July 18, 2024
Statistics
Day Average
Night Average
CAL200
LDL 820-6
Appendix B2: Continuous Noise Monitoring Results
Date Time
Measured Level, dBA 4-C Ranch Subdivision
Northwestern Project Boundary
60 59
55 58 59 60 61
68 65
77 64
54 62
56 60
62 57
68 62
56 65
75 57
62 40 39 40 40 41 40 40 41 40 43 44 46 47 44 43 42 44 46 48 49 46 43 41 40
45 43 43 44 44 45 43
45 48
52 47 48 49 47 46 46 46
49 50 50 49
53 44 44
25 35
45 55
65 75
85 95
105
115
Measured Hourly Noise Levels, dBA
Time of Day
Measured Ambient Noise Levels vs. Time of Day
Lmax L90 Leq
Noise Measurement Site
LT-2
E. Louise Ave.

ATTACHMENT 9
Project #:

Description:

Ldn/CNEL: Ldn
Hard/Soft: Soft
60 dBA
65 dBA
70 dBA
Level,
dBA
1 Louise Ave East of Tulip Place (Existing) 23,510 83 0 17 1.0% 1.0% 40 50 -5 225 105 49 64.8 2 Louise Ave East of Tulip Place (Plus Project) 24,218 83 0 17 1.0% 1.0% 40 50 -5 230 107 50 64.9

0.1 Appendix C-1
240705
FHWA-RD-77-108 Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model
4-C Ranch Subdivision
Segment Roadway Segment
Difference
Contours (ft.) - No
Offset
Offset
Speed Distance (dB)
% Hvy.

Trucks
% Med.

Trucks
Night
%
Eve
%
Day
ADT %
ATTACHMENT 9
MANTECA 4-C RANCH SUBDIVISION PROJECT

ENVIRONMENTAL

CHECKLIST
City of Manteca PAGE 140
Appendix E: Traffic Report
ATTACHMENT 9
343 East Main Street | Suite 608 | Stockton, CA 95202 | (209) 645-4148 www.fehrandpeers.com
Memorandum
Date: July 11, 2024
To: Steve McMurtry – De Novo Planning Group
From: Jonathan Murillo, Francisco Martin – Fehr & Peers Subject: Trip Generation and Preliminary Transportation CEQA Analysis for the Proposed 4-C Ranch Project in Manteca, CA
RS24-4361

1. Introduction
This memorandum outlines the trip generation and preliminary transportation analysis required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the proposed 4-C Ranch single-family home development project in Manteca, CA. Although the project site is in unincorporated San Joaquin County, it falls within the City of Manteca Sphere of Influence. If approved, the project site would be annexed to the City of Manteca. Therefore, Fehr & Peers conducted this study based on our understanding of the project and our knowledge of the City of Manteca SB 743 Implementation Policy (City of Manteca, 2022).

The primary aim of this study is to inform the scope of work for the upcoming non-CEQA Local Transportation Assessment (LTA) required by the City of Manteca. Additionally, it aims to confirm whether the project can be exempted from a detailed vehicle miles traveled (VMT) CEQA analysis.

The study also includes an analysis of the proposed project's consistency with transportationrelated policies and plans outlined in the General Plan and other applicable transportation plans.

This memorandum is provided for review by City of Manteca staff to ensure that the proposed scope of work for the upcoming LTA report is sufficient and that the preliminary CEQA analysis meets the City’s LTA guidelines. Fehr & Peers will commence preparation of the LTA once the City of Manteca confirms the adequacy of the proposed scope of work presented in Appendix A.

ATTACHMENT 9
Steve McMurtry – De Novo Planning Group
July 11, 2024

1.1 Project Description
The project site includes approximately 20 acres located adjacent to the northeast area boundary of the City of Manteca, and within the City’s Sphere of Influence. The project site is identified as Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 208-080-10 by the San Joaquin County Assessor’s Office. The project site is located along Louise Avenue with planned connections at the Louise Avenue/Vasconcellos Avenue intersection, Cork Oak Lane and Black Pine Way. Figure 1 shows the project site location, the project site plan is provided in Appendix B.

The proposed project includes 68 single-family home residential parcels and one open space area designated as a park/open-space basin. The currently adopted City of Manteca General Plan (2023) land use map designates the project site as low density residential, which is consistent to the proposed project land use.

The project proposes construction of the following new streets within the site:
 Six New Residential Streets:
o Streets: Cork Oak Lane extension, Black Pine Way extension, Street 1, Street 2, Street 3, and Street 4.
o Right-of-Way (ROW): 50 feet.
o Features: Five-foot wide sidewalks on both sides and a 36-foot curb-to-curb width that includes a travel lane and a parking lane in both directions.  One New Collector Street:
o Street: Vasconcellos Avenue extension.
o ROW: 60 feet.
o Features: Five-foot wide sidewalks on both sides and a 44-foot curb-to-curb width that includes a travel lane and a parking lane in both directions.

2. Project Trip Generation
This section presents the forecasted project trip generation, including trip distribution and assignment. It also includes the recommended study intersections to be evaluated as part of the upcoming LTA based on the City’s TIA Guidelines.

2.1 Trip Generation
The project’s trip generation was estimated using trip rates published in the Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2021). Table 1 displays the estimated number of daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour vehicle trips for the proposed project. As ATTACHMENT 9
Steve McMurtry – De Novo Planning Group
July 11, 2024

shown in Table 1, the project is projected to generate 708 daily, 52 AM peak hour, and 69 PM
peak hour trips.

Table 1: Project Trip Generation
Land Use Quantity Daily Trips
AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips
In Out Total In Out Total
Single-Family Detached
Housing (ITE 210)1
68 Dwelling
Units 708 13 39 52 44 25 69
Notes:

1. ITE Trip Generation (11th Edition) land use category 310 (Single Family Detached Housing – Adj. Streets, 7-9 AM, 4-6 PM, General Urban/Suburban):
a. Daily: Ln(T) = 0.92 Ln(X) + 2.68
b. AM Peak Hour: Ln(T) = 0.91 Ln(X) + 0.12 (25% in, 75% out) c. PM Peak Hour: Ln(T) = 0.94 Ln(X) + 0.27 (63% in, 37% out) Source: Fehr & Peers, July 2024.

2.2 Trip Distribution
Project trips were distributed using the City of Manteca General Plan travel demand model, which accounts for location of complementary land uses and likely paths that will be used to travel to and from the site. Project trip distribution is presented below:
 68% of trips travel to/from Louise Avenue west of Pestana Avenue  10% of trips travel to/from Pestana Avenue south of Louise Avenue  19% of trips travel to/from Autin Road south of Louise Avenue  2% of trips travel to/from Autin Road north of Louise Avenue  1% of trips travel to/from Louise Avenue east of Austin Road

2.3 Trip Assignment
Trips generated by the project were assigned to the roadway network according to the trip distribution summarized above. Table 2 presents the estimated trip assignment for key intersections near the project site.

ATTACHMENT 9
Steve McMurtry – De Novo Planning Group
July 11, 2024

Table 2: Trip Assignment at Nearby Intersections
AM Peak Hour
Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound

L T R L T R L T R L T R

1. Louise Ave/Pestana Ave 1 1 7 3 6 3 19

2. Louise Ave/Vasconcellos
Ave / Project Driveway 9 22 7 3

3. Louise Ave/Austin Rd 2 1 1 1 7
PM Peak Hour
Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound

L T R L T R L T R L T R

1. Louise Ave/Pestana Ave 1 3 1 4 8 22 2 12

2. Louise Ave/ Vasconcellos
Ave / Project Driveway 6 14 25 10

3. Louise Ave/Austin Rd 8 1 1 5 1
Source: Fehr & Peers, July 2024.

2.4 Recommended Study Intersections
According to the City of Manteca SB 743 Implementation Policy (City of Manteca, 2022): A project that generates between 500-1,000 ADT will be required to analyze existing conditions, existing conditions plus project, existing conditions plus near-term cumulative projects, and existing conditions plus near-term cumulative projects plus project.

The LTA should analyze the project’s influence on the surrounding intersections and roadway network utilizing level of service (LOS) for all project scenarios. The purpose of a LTA is to ensure the goals, objectives, and policies adopted by the City are supported and implemented while monitoring the vehicular capacity for the roadway network.

Considering the existing intersection operating conditions and the number of project trips added to nearby intersections, we recommend evaluating the following three intersections as part of the upcoming LTA:

1. Louise Avenue / Pestana Avenue

2. Louise Avenue / Vasconcellos Avenue

3. Louise Avenue / Austin Road
ATTACHMENT 9
Steve McMurtry – De Novo Planning Group
July 11, 2024

The proposed LTA scope is presented in Appendix A and was informed by the trip generation analysis presented in this memorandum.

3. CEQA Analysis
This section summarizes the transportation CEQA analysis required per the City of Manteca SB 743 Implementation Policy (City of Manteca, 2022). We addressed the following four questions for the project:
a. Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b) (requirement to use VMT)?
c. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? d. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? The CEQA analysis results are presented below.

3.1 Policy Consistency
Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? We reviewed the City of Manteca 2040 General Plan (2023), City of Manteca Public Facilities Improvement Plan (PFIP, 2013), City of Manteca Active Transportation Plan (2020), and existing transit service to determine if the proposed project results in any inconsistencies with adopted transportation related policies or design standards.

Manteca General Plan
Land Use & Zoning
The currently adopted City of Manteca General Plan designates the project site as low density residential allowing 2.1 to 8.0 dwelling units per acre. The project is consistent with the adopted General Plan land use designation and density as the project proposes an average density of 3.4 single family dwelling units per acre.

Transportation
Relevant policies include:

ATTACHMENT 9
Steve McMurtry – De Novo Planning Group
July 11, 2024

 C-2.6: Align residential and collector street intersections with collector and arterial streets with other residential and collector streets, where feasible, to maintain a high degree of connectivity between neighborhoods, minimize circuitous travel, and to allow bicyclists and pedestrians to travel more conveniently and more safely from one neighborhood to another without using major streets.
 C-2.1: Promote development of a future roadway system as shown in the Major Streets Master Plan, Figure C-1, with streets designed in accordance with the City’s standard plans to provide multiple, direct and convenient routes for all modes and to provide highvolume, multi-lane facilities with access controls, as needed, to preserve the through traffic carrying capacity of the facility.
 C-2.12: Require new development to establish joint-use driveways and/or cross access easements to provide access when feasible and/or if: 1) located on street segments identified in C-1.2, 2) located on streets with intersections approaching not meeting LOS D, or 3) the shared access will reduce vehicle miles traveled as determined by the City’s Development Services Department. The requirement is intended to preserve the movement function of the major thoroughfare system by requiring development of parallel roads or cross access easements to connect developments as they are permitted along major roads, providing more efficient connections to destinations, and reducing air emissions.

The proposed roadway layout maintains a high degree of connectivity between the neighborhoods by connecting with the neighborhood at Cork Oak Lane and Black Pine Way. This will reduce circuity and allow for more direct access to the existing neighborhood to the west. The proposed project driveway at the Louise Avenue / Vasconcellos Avenue intersection provides joint access between the neighborhood to the south and the proposed project.

The City’s design standards shown on Drawing No. ST-2 in the Standard Street Cross Sections (City of Manteca, 2004) require a minimum 50-foot ROW, 36-foot curb-to-curb width, and five-foot wide sidewalks on both sides of the street for new residential streets. The proposed cross-section for new residential streets (Cork Oak Lane extension, Black Pine Way extension, Street 1, Street 2, Street 3, and Street 4) meets the minimum City of Manteca design standards for residential streets.

Drawing No. ST-2 in the Standard Street Cross Sections (City of Manteca, 2004) also shows design standards for new small collector streets, which require a minimum 60-foot ROW, 44-foot curbto-curb width, and five-foot wide sidewalks on both sides of the street. The proposed crosssection for the Vasconcellos Avenue extension meets the minimum City of Manteca design standards for small collector streets.

ATTACHMENT 9
Steve McMurtry – De Novo Planning Group
July 11, 2024

Public Facilities Improvement Plan (PFIP)
The City of Manteca PFIP identifies planned roadway improvements and design standards for the City’s transportation system. The four-lane street section shown on Plate E-2.03 of the PFIP provides the minimum design standards for Louise Avenue along the project site frontage. The design standards require the following minimum dimensions:
 ROW: 60 feet.
 Features: Five-foot wide sidewalks on both sides with six-foot landscape buffers on both sides of each sidewalk, five-foot Class II bike lanes along both directions, 11-foot travel lanes (two travel lanes per direction), and 14-foot median.

The project’s proposed frontage improvements along Louise Avenue meet the minimum design standards specified on Plate E-2.03 of the PFIP. It is assumed that the project will improve Louise Avenue along the project frontage between the roadway centerline and the ROW/project site boundary. Improvements to the roadway area south of the centerline are assumed to be implemented by others.

Manteca Active Transportation Plan
Bicycle Facilities
The City of Manteca Active Transportation Plan identifies the following planned improvements near the project site:
 Planned Class II bike lanes along both directions of Louise Avenue between Pestana Avenue to Austin Road
The project proposes frontage improvements along Louise Avenue. These improvements are assumed to include median adjustments to provide adequate left-turn access to the site, as well as enhancements to travel lanes, a Class II bike lane, and a new sidewalk with landscape buffers on each side. These improvements will extend from the Louise Avenue centerline to the ROW limit along the southern boundary of the project site, with a minimum cross-section distance of 54 feet from the centerline to the ROW line.

As part of the project, a westbound Class II bike lane will be implemented along the Louise Avenue frontage. This will not preclude the future implementation of an eastbound Class II bike lane, which is expected to be constructed by others. In general, improvements south of the Louise Avenue centerline are expected to be implemented by others as the project is only proposing frontage improvements for the segment north of the centerline. The proposed improvements along westbound Louise Avenue align with the City of Manteca Active Transportation Plan and are not expected to conflict with planned bicycle network improvements or the City of Manteca design standards.

ATTACHMENT 9
Steve McMurtry – De Novo Planning Group
July 11, 2024

Pedestrian Facilities
Primary access between the project site and surrounding neighborhood will be provided via new connections to the existing Cork Oak Lane and Black Pine Way. All existing streets connecting to the west side of the project site provide four-foot-wide sidewalks with a five-foot wide landscaped buffer between the sidewalk and the gutter. The project proposes five-foot-wide sidewalks on both sides of all new residential and collector streets with rolled curbs. The fourfoot-wide sidewalks meet the minimum City of Manteca design standards for local residential streets.

The project proposes eight-foot-wide sidewalks with six-foot-wide landscape buffers on both sides of the sidewalk along the Louise Avenue site frontage. This design meets the minimum cross-sectional requirements specified on the Plate E-2.03 drawings of the the PFIP design standards for Louise Avenue. The project proposes continuous and connected sidewalks throughout the site and will connect to the existing sidewalk network along Louise Avenue, Cork Oak Lane and Black Pine Way.

Transit Network
Two existing bus stops for Route 3 are provided within a half-mile walk of the project site. Transit service is provided by Manteca Transit, Route 3 serves north Manteca with connections to the Manteca Transit Center and Downtown Manteca; route information is summarized in Table 3.

Based on our review of readily available local information, we are not aware of major planned transit service improvements within the study area.

The project can lead to increased transit ridership along existing routes given that the project site is within a half-mile of the nearest transit stop. The project is not expected to conflict with existing or planned transit services.

Table 3: Transit Services Near Project Site
Route Route Limits
Nearest Stop
(Distance from
Project Site
Weekdays Weekends
(Saturday Only)
Hours Headway1 Hours Headway1
3 Diamond Oak Park to
Manteca Transit Center
to East Union High
School
Louise Avenue /
Empire Lane
(0.50 miles)
6:00 AM –
6:48 PM 60 minutes 9:00 AM – 3:48 PM 60 minutes
Notes:

1. The frequency, or interval of time between buses traveling in any given direction along a designated route.

Source: City of Manteca website visited in July 2024; Fehr & Peers, July 2024.

ATTACHMENT 9
Steve McMurtry – De Novo Planning Group
July 11, 2024

Policy Consistency Determination
The proposed project aligns with adopted transportation-related programs, plans, ordinances, and policies. The project's street improvements are consistent with adopted plans and design standards. Therefore, the project is not expected to impact the proposed and surrounding circulation system, including planned transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

3.2 VMT Screening
b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
As of July 1, 2020, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) states that the recommended metric for the evaluation of transportation impacts is VMT. It outlines the criteria for analyzing a project’s transportation impacts. For land use projects, this section states that “vehicle miles traveled exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact.” According to City of Manteca SB 743 Implementation Policy (City of Manteca, 2022), a project would result in a significant transportation VMT impact if it would:
 Not qualify for screening per the screening criteria outlined in the City’s VMT screening guidelines, which states that a project may be screened from additional VMT analysis if it complies with one or more of the following conditions: (1) is a small project generating fewer than 1,000 trips a day and consistent with City’s General Plan; or (2) 100% affordable housing; or (3) is local-serving retail less than 125,000 square feet in building floor area; or (4) located in a High-Quality Transit Area; or (5) located in a low VMT area.  Exceed the applicable VMT threshold, which for a residential project is set to 15% below Citywide baseline for VMT per single-family dwelling unit The proposed project does qualify for screening criteria (1) listed above given that the project would generate fewer than 1,000 daily trips and is consistent with the City’s General Plan land use designation and density limits established by the City of Manteca for the project site.

VMT Screening Determination
The project meets the small project screening criteria specified in the City of Manteca SB 743 Implementation Policy (City of Manteca, 2022) since the project is consistent with the General Plan land use plan and zoning standards. As a result, the project is presumed to not require a detailed VMT analysis for CEQA purposes.

Furthermore, CEQA Guidelines Section 15183(a) states that: “CEQA mandates that projects which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant ATTACHMENT 9
Steve McMurtry – De Novo Planning Group
July 11, 2024

effects which are peculiar to the project or its site.” The General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) , which was certified in 2023, identified a significant and unavoidable VMT impact on the transportation system. The project proposes detached single-family homes with an average density of 3.8 dwelling units per acre, which is consistent with the low-density residential land use designation of the General Plan.

3.3 Hazards Due to Geometric Design Features
c. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Proposed street sections (provided in Appendix B) for new streets to be constructed by the project meet the minimum City of Manteca design standards (City of Manteca Standard Street Cross Sections, ST-2) for residential streets. The project also meets the City’s PFIP improvement design standards for proposed Louise Avenue improvements along the site frontage. Furthermore, proposed street improvements would provide continuous and connected sidewalks. Although the project does not propose on-site dedicated bike lanes, the proposed on-site streets are expected to be low volume and low speed, which would facilitate a low stress bicycling environment.

The proposed improvements and corresponding design features are compatible with the proposed and neighborhood uses; therefore, no impact would occur.

3.4 Emergency Vehicle Access
d. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? The project includes three access points (on Louise Avenue, Cork Oak Lane, and Black Pine Way) connecting the project site with the surrounding neighborhood. All proposed on-site streets would provide a minimum clear width of 20 feet, meeting the City of Manteca Fire Code minimum 20- foot clear-width requirement for streets that provide access to buildings under 30 feet in height.

Thus, there would be no impact on emergency vehicle access.

4. Conclusions
The proposed project is projected to generate 708 daily, 52 AM peak hour, and 69 PM peak hour trips during typical weekday conditions. The City of Manteca requires preparation of a LTA. Fehr & Peers will commence preparation of the LTA once City of Manteca staff confirm the adequacy of the proposed scope of work presented in Appendix A.

ATTACHMENT 9
Steve McMurtry – De Novo Planning Group
July 11, 2024

The project aligns with the City of Manteca General Plan, zoning standards, and other local plans and policies related to the land use designations, including density limits, and the circulation system. It is not anticipated to increase hazards and will provide adequate emergency vehicle access. Given its consistency with the General Plan and the project size, the project is presumed to not require additional VMT analysis for CEQA purposes.

Please contact Francisco Martin (209-210-5609) or Jonathan Murillo (916-379-7015) if you have any questions or comments on the information presented in this memorandum.

Attachments
Figure 1 – Project Site and Proposed Study Intersections Appendix A – Proposed Non-CEQA Local Transportation Assessment Scope of Work Appendix B – Project Site Plan
ATTACHMENT 9
·99
Pestana Ave
Vasconcellos Ave
Cottage Ave
Louise Ave
Austin Rd
1 2 3
\\fpgisdevApp01\DevGISLibrary\ServiceMXDs\RS\RS244361_4C_Ranch_TIS\RS244361_4C_Ranch_TIS.aprx Project Site and Proposed Study Intersections
Study Intersections
Project Site
Parks
City of Manteca City Limits
Figure 1
ATTACHMENT 9
343 East Main Street | Suite 608 | Stockton, CA 95202 | (209) 645-4148 www.fehrandpeers.com
Appendix A
Proposed Non-CEQA Local Transportation
Assessment Scope of Work
Fehr & Peers
July 2024
ATTACHMENT 9
Scope of Work
Fehr & Peers will prepare the following non-CEQA local transportation analysis (LTA) for the project. The project is estimated to generate between 500 – 1,000 weekday trips, which triggers the need to complete a Local Transportation Assessment (LTA) per the City of Manteca SB 743 Implementation Policy (City of Manteca, 2022). Fehr & Peers will commence preparation of the LTA once City of Stockton staff confirm the adequacy of the proposed scope of work.

Task 1. Non-CEQA Local Transportation Assessment
The following intersections are the recommended study locations based on the project trip assignment analysis results.

1. Louise Avenue/Vasconcellos Avenue/Project Driveway

2. Louise Avenue/Pestana Avenue

3. Louise Avenue/Austin Road
New traffic counts (including heavy vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles) will be collected at up to three study intersections during the AM peak period (7 – 9 AM) and PM peak period (4 – 6 PM) on a typical weekday.

Study intersections will be analyzed for weekday AM and PM peak hours using procedures described in the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (Transportation Research Board, 2016). HCM procedures will be applied using the Synchro version 11 software application. Intersection operations including delay and level of service (LOS) will be evaluated at each intersection. Additionally, the peak hour traffic volumes will be used to evaluate whether any of the unsignalized intersections meet the peak hour signal warrant based on the methodology provided in the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (2014).

The analysis will be completed for the following scenarios:
• Existing Conditions
• Existing Plus Project Conditions
• Near-Term (Existing Plus Approved Projects) No Project Conditions • Near-Term Plus Project Conditions
Travel characteristics of the proposed project identified during Phase 1 of the study will be applied to Existing traffic counts to develop the Existing Plus Project traffic volume forecast. Near-Term forecasts will be developed by manually assigning trips from approved projects using the trip generation and distribution assumptions from the transportation impact studies completed for each project. These assumptions will be verified with the City prior to starting work on Phase 2.

Task 2. Multi-Modal Site Access Evaluation
Fehr & Peers will conduct a multimodal site access and circulation plan review, including review of:
• Site access and interface with public roadway network including adequacy of turn-pocket lengths, driveway throat lengths, sight distance, and intersection operations •
Emergency vehicle access and circulation
ATTACHMENT 9
• Vehicular circulation within the site
• Pedestrian and bicycle access and circulation within and adjacent to the site • Proximity to and access to/from public transit
• Adequacy of vehicle and bicycle parking per City Code Fehr & Peers will identify recommendations to improve site access and circulation, as necessary. Fehr & Peers will prepare a graphic illustrating our recommendations to improve site access and internal circulation.

Task 4. Documentation
Fehr & Peers will document the assumptions, methodologies, and findings in a draft transportation impact study report. The report will include pertinent technical calculations and appropriate tables and figures to support the documentation.

ATTACHMENT 9
343 East Main Street | Suite 608 | Stockton, CA 95202 | (209) 645-4148 www.fehrandpeers.com
Appendix B
Project Site Plan
Fehr & Peers
July 2024
ATTACHMENT 9
ATTACHMENT 9