TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Project-related trips were geographically distributed over the study area roadway network. The geographical distribution of trips is based on the relative attractiveness or utility of possible destinations. Trip distribution percentages applied in this traffic impact study are presented in Table 16. The data presented in Table 16 are graphically shown in Figure 17 and Figure 18.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1390
Table 14. Trip Generation Rates
Trips per Unit
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Light Industrial Thousand 3.42 0.11 0.07 0.18 0.08 0.14 0.22 Square Feet
_____________________________
Source: McDowell pers. comm. and City of Stockton 2014.
Table 15. Trip Generation Estimate
Trips Generated
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Quantity Daily In Out Total In Out Total
3,616.87
Light Industrial Thousand 12,370 398 253 651 289 506 796 Square Feet
_____________________________
Source: McDowell pers. comm. and City of Stockton 2014.
Total may not equal the sum of components due to rounding.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1391
Table 16. Mariposa Industrial Park Project Trip Distribution Percentages Existing Plus
Approved Projects Cumulative
Direction of Travel Background Background
SR 99 North of Fremont Street 19.5 36.0
Fremont Street West of SR 99 0.2 0.3
Fremont Street East of SR 99 2.7 0.9
Crosstown Freeway West of SR 99 26.7 27.4
Golden Gate Avenue West of SR 99 1.9 1.1
Golden Gate Avenue East of SR 99 - - 0.4
8th Street West of Mariposa Road 6.5 2.1
Mariposa Rd Northwest of 8th St/Farmington Rd 7.0 6.2
Farmington Road East of Mariposa Road 0.6 0.3
SR 99 West Frontage Road South of Mariposa Road 0.8 0.8 Stagecoach Road North of Mariposa Road 7.5 0.2
Carpenter Road West of Mariposa Road 4.6 0.3
Carpenter Road East of Mariposa Road 0.2 2.8
Mariposa Road Southeast of Austin Road 2.9 3.7
Austin Road South of Mariposa Road 4.2 0.2
Arch Road West of Qantas Lane 6.0 10.1
Qantas Lane North of Arch Road 1.1 - -
Qantas Lane South of Arch Road 0.4 0.5
Arch Road East of SR 99 0.1 0.2
SR 99 South of Arch Road 7.1 6.5
TOTAL 100.0 100.0
__________________________
Source: City of Stockton General Plan Travel Demand Model Select Link Analysis.
Note: Dashes ( "- -" ) indicate value is less than one-tenth percent.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1392
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 17
EXISTING PLUS APPROVED PROJECTS
BACKGROUND TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
ARCH RD
AUSTIN RD
PROJECT
LOCATION
NOTE: THESE PERCENTAGES APPLY TO ALL PROJECT TRIPS,
NOT JUST TRUCKS.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1393
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 18
CUMULATIVE BACKGROUND
TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
ARCH RD
AUSTIN RD
PROJECT
LOCATION
NOTE: THESE PERCENTAGES APPLY TO ALL PROJECT TRIPS,
NOT JUST TRUCKS.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1394
The City of Stockton travel demand model (City of Stockton 2004 and City of Stockton 2018b) was used to estimate trip distribution percentages. The travel demand model is considered to be a valid source for the trip distribution percentages because it directly addresses:
the location of destinations of project-related trips, the magnitude of land uses that would attract project-related trips, and the quality of access to the destinations via the roadway network.
This traffic impact study includes analysis of scenarios based on two different background development conditions:
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP), and
2040 Cumulative Conditions.
The travel demand model for each of these two scenarios was used to estimate trip distribution percentages. Background (non-project) land uses are different in each of the two travel demand models. The different land uses result in different geographic distributions of travel. As a result, the trip distribution percentages are different for each of the two background development conditions. Table 16, Figure 17, and Figure 18 present the trip distribution percentages for each of the two background development scenarios.
A “select link” analysis was conducted using each of the two travel demand models to determine the geographic distribution of project-related travel. The select link analysis identifies vehicle trips associated with the proposed project site, and identifies the direction of travel to and from the project site.
Raw, pre-adjustment, traffic model results used in the development of trip distribution percentages are presented in the technical appendix.
TRIP ASSIGNMENT
Traffic that would be generated by the proposed project was geographically distributed over the study area roadway network using the trip distribution percentages shown in Table 16, Figure 17, and Figure 18. Figure 19 and Figure 20 display the project-related-only traffic volumes for each study intersection in the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour. Figure 21 and Figure 22 display the resulting EPAP Plus Project traffic volumes anticipated for each study intersection in the peak hours. The a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour freeway ramp junction traffic volumes are presented in Figure 23 and Figure 24.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1395
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Ave
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden Gate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden Gate Ave / SR 99 NB Ramps
5 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 SB Ramps
3 Mariposa Rd / 8th St / Farmington Rd
6 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 NB Ramps
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 19
PROJECTED-RELATED
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
0780-18 RA 7/9/20210 (0) 0 (0)
5 (10)
0 (0)
(8) 8
(0) 0
(0) 0(0) 0
223 (446)
0 (0)
(255) 351
(0) 0
(0) 0
(42) 59
129 (258)
75 (150)
(190) 262
(0) 0
0 (0)203 (147)
37 (74)
38 (75)
(0) 0
(43) 59 5 (10) 0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
(0) 0
(0) 0
N.T.S.
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1396
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwest Project Dwy
12 Arch Airport Rd/ Qantas Ln
15 Mariposa Rd / Southeast Project Dwy
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 20
PROJECTED-RELATED
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
0 (0)0 (0)4 (3)
(0) 0
(0) 0(1) 2
3 (6)
15 (30)
1 (2)
(0) 0
(17) 24
(0) 0
0 (0)11 (21)0 (0)
(0) 0
(12) 17
(0) 0
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
(0) 0
(0) 0
(0) 0
19 (38)0 (1)
(0) 0
(0) 0
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
(22) 30
(0) 0
(0) 0
N.T.S.
17 (12)0 (0)0 (0)
(0) 0(0) 0(0) 0
0 (0)
12 (8)
0 (0)
(21) 11
(15) 7
(0) 0
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1397
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Ave
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden Gate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden Gate Ave / SR 99 NB Ramps
5 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 SB Ramps
3 Mariposa Rd / 8th St / Farmington Rd
6 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 NB Ramps
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 21
EPAP PLUS PROJECT
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
29 (56)43 (63)156 (122)
(27) 12(88) 83
(295) 302
366 (197)298 (500)
61 (44)
173 (230)
(212) 131
(375) 118
(23) 13
(328) 243
(132) 26(114) 69
799 (1088)
103 (77)
(950) 916
(52) 92
138 (242)0 (0)75 (49)
(191) 218(139) 247
774 (1138)
285 (552)
(1000) 1124
(566) 489
752 (451)714 (595)
98 (212)
428 (537)
(910) 812
(310) 234 177 (204) 40 (121)
522 (546)
57 (80)
(306) 113
(589) 324
N.T.S.
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
CWLTL
“Free” Right Turn
Center Two-Way
Left Turn Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1398
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwest Project Dwy
12 Arch Airport Rd/ Qantas Ln
15 Mariposa Rd / Southeast Project Dwy
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 22
EPAP PLUS PROJECT
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
85 (92)1 (1)592 (770)
(2) 0
(1) 1
(14) 7
928 (357)
1484 (1141)
15 (18)
(50) 89
(1451) 1033
(2) 3
135 (165)248 (70)24 (12)
(221) 140(296) 114
(8) 10
7 (31)
43 (21)
2 (6)
(121) 161
(41) 22
(122) 320
1310 (521)1685 (593)
(319) 648
(322) 624
647 (1593)
504 (657)
363 (576)
(1026) 515
(559) 686
(683) 385206 (414) 2 (1)
36 (83)
(167) 27
(2) 1
(14) 2
124 (26)
491 (199)
17 (7)
(197) 372
(541) 167
(82) 210
N.T.S.
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
CWLTL
“Free” Right Turn
Center Two-Way
Left Turn Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1399
201
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
204
SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
207
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
202
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
205
SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
208
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Southbound On-Ramp (Slip) Merge
203
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Diverge
206
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
209
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Northbound Off-Ramp Diverge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 23
EPAP PLUS PROJECT FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,
AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
(4750) 3100 3890 (5783)
4913 (5577)
(3552) 5246
N.T.S.
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
(376) 289
(1892) 1565
4385 (6251) 3109 (4735)
4852 (4399)
340 (403)
913 (686)
(4396) 4823 (4113) 4250
4882 (5510) 4715 (5281)
(510) 355 (739) 522
(5218) 7012 (4002) 4723
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1400
210
SR 99 at Arch-Airport Rd
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
213
SR 99 at Arch-Airport Rd
Northbound Off-Ramp Diverge
211
SR 99 at Arch-Airport Rd
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
212
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Diverge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 24
EPAP PLUS PROJECT FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,
AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
3192 (3493)
(2749) 2485
3192 (3493)
(2749) 2485
N.T.S.
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1401
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
Implementation of the Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in roadway improvements needed to provide access to the project site. Improvements to project site access points are shown in the proposed project site plan presented in Figure 2 and project site frontage striping plan presented in Figure 3. These improvements have been previously described in more detail in the Project Description section of this traffic impact study.
Figure 21 and Figure 22 display the resulting EPAP Plus Project intersection lane geometrics for each study intersection. The resulting number of travel lanes assumed for study roadway segments and daily traffic volumes are shown in Table 17.
INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
Table 18 presents the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour LOS at each study intersection under EPAP Plus Project conditions. The worksheets presenting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, LOS at 11 of the 15 study intersections would be at acceptable LOS D or better during both the a.m. peak hour and the p.m. peak hour. No improvements would be needed at these 11 intersections to achieve acceptable LOS. The following describes the four study intersections that would operate at unacceptable LOS under EPAP Plus Project conditions.
3. Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this intersection would operate at LOS F with 109.3 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS F with 145.8 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS F is considered unacceptable. Compared to EPAP No Project Conditions, the projectrelated increase in delay would be greater than five seconds during either the a.m. peak hour or the p.m. peak hour. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered significant. The following improvement is recommended to improve operating conditions to acceptable LOS and reduce the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies to a less than significant level:
Split the northeastbound combined through/right-turn lane into an exclusive northeastbound through lane and a “free” northeastbound-to-southeastbound rightturn lane.
The above improvement would be consistent with the recommended improvement (described below) for Roadway Segment 105, Mariposa Road Between SR 99 and 8th Street/Farmington Road, to widen the portions of this roadway segment which are one lane in each direction to two lanes in each direction. The added southeastbound departure lane on Mariposa Road would serve vehicles departing the “free” northeastbound-to-southeastbound right-turn lane at this intersection.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1402
The existing northeastbound combined through/right-turn lane is approximately 23 to 24 feet wide and the single southwestbound departure lane is approximately 21 to 22 feet wide. As a result, the existing pavement width on the southwest leg of this intersection is considered wide enough to accommodate the above improvement.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1403
Table 17. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
101. SR 99 - North of 8 172,800 113,717 0.66 C
Crosstown Freeway (SR 4)
102. Crosstown Freeway - 8 172,800 120,429 0.70 C
West of SR 99
103. SR 99 - Between Crosstown Fwy 8 172,800 126,842 0.73 C and Golden Gate Avenue
104. SR 99 - Between 8 172,800 125,851 0.73 C
Golden Gate Ave and Mariposa Rd
105. Mariposa Road - Between 2 17,300 27,296 1.58 F
SR 99 and 8th St./Farmington Rd
106. Mariposa Road - Between 4 38,200 26,540 0.69 D
Carpenter Road and SR 99
107. Mariposa Road - Between the 4 38,200 26,777 0.70 D Project Site and Carpenter Road
108. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 16,163 0.42 A
Southeast of the Project Site
109. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 11,397 0.30 A
East of Austin Road
110. SR 99 - Between Mariposa Road 6 129,600 97,705 0.75 D and Arch-Airport Road
111. Arch-Airport Road - 6 59,300 51,815 0.87 E
Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
112. SR 99 - 6 129,600 85,955 0.66 C
South of Arch-Airport Road
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1404
Table 18. Intersection Level of Service -
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions Signal AM Peak PM Peak
Study Intersections Control Met? LOS Delay LOS Delay
1 Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Southbound Ramps Signal B 14.2 B 16.0 2 Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Northbound Ramps Signal B 15.8 C 23.9 3 Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road Signal F 109.3 F 145.8 4 Mariposa Road & SR 99 West Frontage Road Signal B 14.2 B 14.5 5 Mariposa Road & SR 99 Southbound Ramps Signal B 18.4 B 15.4 6 Mariposa Road & SR 99 Northbound Ramps Signal B 10.6 B 10.4 7 Mariposa Road & Stagecoach Road Signal B 18.5 B 18.2
8 Mariposa Road & Munford Avenue Signal B 11.5 C 23.9
9 Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road Unsig Yes A 3.7 F 63.9 10 Mariposa Road & Austin Road Signal C 35.0 D 40.2
11 Arch Road & Austin Road Signal D 45.2 D 40.2
12 Arch-Airport Road & Qantas Lane Signal E 61.7 C 28.4 13 Arch Road & SR 99 Signal F 194.4 E 73.6
14 Mariposa Road & Northwest Project Driveway Unsig No A 0.5 A 1.2 15 Mariposa Road & Southeast Project Driveway Signal B 13.8 C 23.1 ______________________________________________
Notes: LOS = Level of Service. "Inters. Control" = Type of intersection control. "Signal" = Signalized light control. "Unsig" = Unsignalized stop-sign control.
Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle.
Per City of Stockton guidelines, intersection average delay is reported for all intersections, including unsignalized intersections.
Inters. Warrant
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1405
As shown in Table 19, implementation of the above recommended improvement would improve traffic operations to LOS D with 40.4 seconds of delay in the a.m. peak hour and LOS E with 73.2 seconds of delay in the p.m. peak hour. As described in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, LOS D and E at this intersection are considered acceptable.
This recommended improvement is the same as the improvement recommended at this intersection for EPAP No Project conditions.
9. Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this intersection would operate at LOS A with 3.7 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS F with 63.9 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS F is considered unacceptable. Compared to EPAP No Project Conditions, the project-related increase in delay would be greater than five seconds during either the a.m. peak hour or the p.m. peak hour. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered significant. The following improvement is recommended to improve operating conditions to acceptable LOS and reduce the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies to a less than significant level:
Widen the northeastbound Carpenter Road approach. The approach is currently a single-lane approach. The approach should be widened to include an exclusive northeastbound-to northwestbound left-turn lane, and a combined through/right-turn lane.
As shown in Table 19, implementation of the above recommended improvement would improve traffic operations to LOS A with 2.9 seconds of delay in the a.m. peak hour and LOS D with 32.7 seconds of delay in the p.m. peak hour. LOS A and D are considered acceptable.
12. Arch-Airport Road & Qantas Lane
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this intersection would operate at LOS E with 61.7 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS C with 28.4 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS E is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under EPAP No Project conditions, and the project-related change in delay would not be greater than a five second increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1406
Table 19. Intersection Level of Service -
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements
AM Peak PM Peak
Signal
Warrant
Study Intersections Control Met? LOS Delay LOS Delay
3 Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road Signal D 40.4 E 73.2 9 Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road Unsig No A 2.9 D 32.7
______________________________________________
Notes: LOS = Level of Service. "Inters. Control" = Type of intersection control. "Signal" = Signalized light control. "Unsig" = Unsignalized stop-sign control.
Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle.
Per City of Stockton guidelines, intersection average delay is reported for all intersections, including unsignalized intersections.
Inters.
13. Arch Road & SR 99
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this intersection would operate at LOS F with 194.4 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS E with 73.6 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS E and F are considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under EPAP No Project conditions, and the project-related change in delay would not be greater than a five second increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE
Table 17 presents a summary of LOS on the 12 study roadway segments under EPAP Plus Project conditions. 10 of the roadway segments would operate at acceptable LOS D or better.
No improvements would be needed on these 10 roadway segments to achieve acceptable LOS.
The following two roadway segments would operate at unacceptable LOS. 105. Mariposa Road Between SR 99 and 8th Street/Farmington Road Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS F. LOS F is considered unacceptable. Compared to EPAP No Project Conditions, the project-related increase in volume would be greater than five percent. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1407
General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered significant. The following improvement is recommended to improve operating conditions to acceptable LOS and reduce the projectrelated inconsistency with General Plan policies to a less than significant level:
Widen the portions of this roadway segment which are one lane in each direction to two lanes in each direction.
As shown in Table 20, implementation of the above recommended improvement would improve traffic operations to LOS D. LOS D is considered acceptable.
This improvement is also recommended under Existing Conditions and the EPAP No Project scenario.
Table 20. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements
Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
105. Mariposa Road - Between 4 38,200 27,296 0.71 D
SR 99 and 8th St./Farmington Rd
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio. 111. Arch-Airport Road, Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS E. LOS E is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under EPAP No Project conditions, and the project-related change in traffic volume would not be greater than a five percent increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1408
RAMP JUNCTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
Figure 23 and Figure 24 present the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes at the ramp junctions under EPAP Plus Project conditions. Table 21 presents the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour LOS at each study ramp junction under EPAP Plus Project conditions. The worksheets presenting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, LOS at 10 of the 13 study ramp junctions would be at acceptable LOS D or better during both the a.m. peak hour and the p.m. peak hour. No improvements would be needed on these 10 ramp junctions to achieve acceptable LOS. The following are the three ramp junctions that would experience unacceptable LOS. 201. SR 99 Southbound Weave Area Between Fremont Street and Crosstown Freeway Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this ramp junction would operate at LOS F during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS C during the p.m. peak hour. LOS F is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under EPAP No Project conditions, and the project-related change in freeway and ramp volumes would not be greater than a five percent increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
205. SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue Northbound On-Ramp Merge Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this ramp junction would operate at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS F during the p.m. peak hour. LOS F is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under EPAP No Project conditions, and the project-related change in freeway and ramp volumes would not be greater than a five percent increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
211. SR 99 at Arch-Airport Road Northbound On-Ramp Merge Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this ramp junction would operate at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS E during the p.m. peak hour. LOS E is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under EPAP No Project conditions, and the project-related change in freeway and ramp volumes would not be greater than a five percent increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1409
Table 21. State Route 99 Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Level of Service - Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Freeway Ramp Freeway Ramp
Ramp Junction Volume Volume Density LOS Volume Volume Density LOS 201 SB Weave Between 7,012 515 > Capacity F 5,218 353 26.9 C Fremont St & Crosstown Fwy 4,723 2,804 4,002 1,569
202 NB Weave Between 4,385 289 22.2 C 6,251 376 32.7 D
Crosstown Fwy & Fremont St 3,109 1,565 4,735 1,892
203 NB at Crosstown Fwy Off-Ramp 3,100 2,832 < 10 A 4,750 2,246 < 10 A 204 Golden Gate Ave SB Off-Ramp 4,852 564 < 10 A 4,399 627 < 10 A 205 Golden Gate Ave NB On-Ramp 4,913 571 27.1 C 5,577 784 33.0 F 206 SB Weave Between 4,823 340 24.8 C 4,396 403 22.9 C
Golden Gate Ave & Mariposa Rd 4,250 913 4,113 686
207 NB Weave Between 4,882 355 25.2 C 5,510 510 29.4 D
Mariposa Rd & Golden Gate Ave 4,715 522 5,281 739
208 Mariposa Rd SB On-Ramp (Slip) 5,246 234 26.7 C 3,552 310 18.2 B 209 Mariposa Rd NB Off-Ramp 3,890 465 24.8 C 5,783 329 33.3 D 210 Arch-Airport Rd SB Off-Ramp 2,485 2,995 < 10 A 2,749 1,113 < 10 A 211 Arch-Airport Rd NB On-Ramp 3,192 1,162 22.2 C 3,493 2,619 38.0 E 212 Arch-Airport Rd SB On-Ramp 2,485 748 16.6 B 2,749 1,259 22.2 C 213 Arch-Airport Rd NB Off-Ramp 3,192 1,272 23.0 C 3,493 641 23.1 C _____________________________________________
Notes: "LOS" = Level of Service. "NB" = Northbound. "SB" = Southbound.
Density is expressed in passenger cars per mile per lane. "> Capacity" = volume-to-capacity ratio greater than 1.0.
For weave areas, north freeway and ramp volumes are listed first and south volumes are listed second.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1410
INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR TRANSIT
Implementation of the proposed Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in an increase in demand for public transit service. Currently, there is limited direct public transit service to the vicinity of the project site, and the development of urban uses would result in an increase in demand. The frequency and proximity of future transit service is not known at this time and, as a result, demand for transit cannot be quantified. However, it is expected that SJRTD can accommodate the additional passengers the project would generate. This is considered a less-thansignificant impact. No mitigation measures are required
INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Implementation of the Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in an increase in demand for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. As noted in the Project Description section of this traffic impact study, the proposed project includes sidewalks along the project site frontage of Mariposa Road.
Because sidewalks are not present along the Mariposa Road frontage of nearby properties, the sidewalks along the Mariposa Industrial Park project site frontage would be discontinuous in the near-term. In the longer-term, sidewalks along the project site frontage would incrementally improve the safety and convenience of bicycle and pedestrian travel along Mariposa Road. The City General Plan includes widening of Mariposa Road to four lanes in the future, and the Mariposa Industrial Park project site frontage improvements would contribute to a more continuous system of bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Mariposa Road. Therefore, the increase in demand for facilities is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation measures would be required.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1411
CUMULATIVE NO PROJECT CONDITIONS
The Cumulative No Project condition represents a long-term future background condition.
Development of approved and planned land uses and roadway improvements are assumed in this condition. The Cumulative No Project condition, therefore, serves as the baseline condition used to assess the significance of long-term project-related traffic effects.
The Cumulative No Project condition does not include development of the Mariposa Industrial Park project as proposed. Consistent with the approach described in the City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (City of Stockton 2003), this scenario serves as baseline condition for determining project-related impacts, and the traffic analysis of this condition assumes land uses on the project site consistent with the City of Stockton General Plan (City of Stockton 2018a).
TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
As previously described in the Travel Forecasting section of this traffic impact study, the City of Stockton Travel Demand Model (City of Stockton 2018b) was used to develop forecasts of background increases in traffic volumes under Cumulative No Project conditions. The increases in traffic volumes reflect development of land uses consistent with approved land use designations.
The model was modified in the vicinity of the project site to add detail to the model and more accurately represent how land uses are provided access to the roadway network. Minor changes were also made to land uses in the model to reflect existing and planned development.
Application of the methods described in the Travel Forecasting section results in the daily traffic volumes presented in Table 22.
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The analysis of Cumulative No Project conditions assumes roadway improvements consistent with the long-term future context. These include improvements from the City of Stockton General Plan (City of Stockton 2018b), and the Draft Environmental Impact Report - Mariposa Lakes Specific Plan - State Clearinghouse #2006022035 (City of Stockton 2007). The improvements include:
widening of Mariposa Road northwest of Carpenter Road to six lanes, widening of Mariposa Road southeast of Carpenter Road to four lanes, and widening of SR 99 from north of the Crosstown Freeway to south of Arch Road to eight lanes.
The resulting number of travel lanes assumed for study roadway segments are shown in Table
22. Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1412
Table 22. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Cumulative No Project Conditions
Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
101. SR 99 - North of 8 172,800 144,268 0.83 D
Crosstown Freeway (SR 4)
102. Crosstown Freeway - 8 172,800 131,917 0.76 D
West of SR 99
103. SR 99 - Between Crosstown Fwy 8 172,800 139,739 0.81 D and Golden Gate Avenue
104. SR 99 - Between 8 172,800 168,962 0.98 E
Golden Gate Ave and Mariposa Rd
105. Mariposa Road - Between 6 59,300 36,756 0.62 C
SR 99 and 8th St./Farmington Rd
106. Mariposa Road - Between 6 59,300 32,512 0.55 C
Carpenter Road and SR 99
107. Mariposa Road - Between the 4 38,200 23,483 0.61 C Project Site and Carpenter Road
108. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 23,483 0.61 C
Southeast of the Project Site
109. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 13,259 0.35 A
East of Austin Road
110. SR 99 - Between Mariposa Road 8 172,800 115,758 0.67 C and Arch-Airport Road
111. Arch-Airport Road - 6 59,300 67,860 1.14 F
Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
112. SR 99 - 8 172,800 106,202 0.61 C
South of Arch-Airport Road
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1413
ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE
Table 22 presents a summary of LOS on the 12 study roadway segments under Cumulative No Project conditions. Ten of the roadway segments would operate at acceptable LOS D or better.
No improvements are needed on these 10 roadway segments to achieve acceptable LOS. The following two roadway segments would operate at unacceptable LOS. 104. SR 99 Between Golden Gate Avenue and Mariposa Road Under Cumulative No Project condition, this roadway segment would operate at LOS E. LOS E is considered unacceptable. This roadway segment is already assumed to be eight lanes wide under Cumulative conditions. In the Transportation Concept Report State Route 99 (California Department of Transportation 2017), Caltrans describes the eight-lane width as the conceptual facility width, and this is considered to be the maximum feasible size in this traffic impact study.
Therefore, improvements are not recommended.
111. Arch-Airport Road, Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
Under Cumulative No Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS F. LOS F is considered unacceptable. The following improvement is recommended to improve LOS on this roadway segment:
Widen this roadway segment from six lanes to eight lanes.
Implementing this recommended improvement would result in this roadway segment operating at LOS E. This LOS is considered unacceptable. However, eight lanes is considered to be the maximum feasible width for this roadway segment. A summary of LOS with recommended improvements is presented in Table 23.
Table 23. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Cumulative No Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
111. Arch-Airport Road - 8 78,400 67,860 0.87 E
Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1414
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT IMPACTS
The analysis of Cumulative Plus Project conditions describes long-term traffic operations in the year 2040 assuming development of the proposed project. Comparing traffic operation under this condition to traffic operations under Cumulative No Project conditions allows an identification of the long-term project-related effects of the proposed project.
The development of the Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in vehicle traffic to and from the project site. Methods used to estimate project-related travel have been previously described in the Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project Impacts section of this traffic impact study. Table 24 displays the resulting Cumulative Plus Project roadway segment daily traffic volumes.
Development of forecasts of future year background traffic volumes has been previously described in the Cumulative No Project Conditions section of this traffic impact study.
Project-related roadway improvements and future year background roadway improvements assumed in this analysis have been previously described in the Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project Impacts and the Cumulative No Project Conditions sections of this traffic impact study.
ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE
Table 24 presents a summary of LOS on the 12 study roadway segments under Cumulative Plus Project conditions. Nine of the 12 roadway segments would operate at acceptable LOS D or better. No improvements are needed on these nine roadway segments to achieve acceptable LOS. The following three roadway segments would operate at unacceptable LOS. 104. SR 99 Between Golden Gate Avenue and Mariposa Road Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS F. LOS F is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under Cumulative No Project conditions, and the project-related change in traffic volume would not be greater than a five percent increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1415
Table 24. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Cumulative Plus Project Conditions
Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
101. SR 99 - North of 8 172,800 148,870 0.86 D
Crosstown Freeway (SR 4)
102. Crosstown Freeway - 8 172,800 135,307 0.78 D
West of SR 99
103. SR 99 - Between Crosstown Fwy 8 172,800 147,731 0.85 D and Golden Gate Avenue
104. SR 99 - Between 8 172,800 177,140 1.03 F
Golden Gate Ave and Mariposa Rd
105. Mariposa Road - Between 6 59,300 37,820 0.64 C
SR 99 and 8th St./Farmington Rd
106. Mariposa Road - Between 6 59,300 43,992 0.74 D
Carpenter Road and SR 99
107. Mariposa Road - Between the 4 38,200 35,371 0.93 E Project Site and Carpenter Road
108. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 23,965 0.63 C
Southeast of the Project Site
109. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 13,717 0.36 A
East of Austin Road
110. SR 99 - Between Mariposa Road 8 172,800 117,898 0.68 C and Arch-Airport Road
111. Arch-Airport Road - 6 59,300 69,172 1.17 F
Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
112. SR 99 - 8 172,800 107,006 0.62 C
South of Arch-Airport Road
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1416
107. Mariposa Road, Between the Project Site and Carpenter Road Under long-term future Cumulative Plus Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS E. LOS E is considered unacceptable. Compared to Cumulative No Project Conditions, the project-related increase in volume would be greater than five percent. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered significant. The following improvement is recommended to improve operating conditions to acceptable LOS and reduce the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies to a less than significant level:
Under long-term future cumulative conditions, widen this roadway segment from four lanes to six lanes.
As shown in Table 25, implementation of the above recommended improvement would improve traffic operations to LOS C. LOS C is considered acceptable.
Table 25. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Cumulative Plus Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
107. Mariposa Road - Between the 6 59,300 35,371 0.60 C Project Site and Carpenter Road
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio. 111. Arch-Airport Road, Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS F. LOS F is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under Cumulative No Project conditions, and the project-related change in traffic volume would not be greater than a five percent increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1417
PROJECT SITE ACCESS
To assess the adequacy of project site access under long-term future conditions, LOS at the two project site driveway intersections were analyzed under Cumulative Plus Project conditions.
These two intersections are:
14. Mariposa Road & Northwest Project Driveway
15. Mariposa Road & Southeast Project Driveway
Cumulative Plus Project a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes and intersection lane geometrics at these two intersections are shown in Figure 25.
Table 26 presents the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour LOS at the two study intersections under Cumulative Plus Project conditions. The worksheets presenting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.
Table 26. Intersection Level of Service -
Cumulative Plus Project Conditions
AM Peak PM Peak
Study Intersections Control LOS Delay LOS Delay
14 Mariposa Road & Northwest Project Driveway Signal A 3.2 A 5.1 15 Mariposa Road & Southeast Project Driveway Signal B 12.8 C 20.1 ______________________________________________
Notes: LOS = Level of Service. "Inters. Control" = Type of intersection control. "Signal" = Signalized light control.
Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle.
Per City of Stockton guidelines, intersection average delay is reported for all intersections.
Inters.
Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, LOS at both of the two project site access intersections would be at acceptable LOS C or better during both the a.m. peak hour and the p.m. peak hour. As a result, traffic operations at the project site access locations are considered to be adequate. No improvements would be needed at these two intersections to achieve acceptable LOS.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1418
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 25
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
N.T.S.
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwest Project Dwy
15 Mariposa Rd / Southeast Project Dwy
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1419
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
As noted earlier in the Significance Thresholds section of this traffic impact study, the effects of the proposed project on VMT are determined by comparing travel associated with the Mariposa Industrial Park project as proposed to travel associated with development of the project site with the current General Plan land use designations.
As noted earlier in the Project Description section of this traffic impact study, the Mariposa Industrial Park project proposes industrial land uses on the project site. As also noted in the Project Description section, the project site currently has an Industrial land use designation in the City of Stockton General Plan. Therefore, in this traffic impact study, vehicle travel associated with the Mariposa Industrial Park project would be the same as the Industrial land uses currently designated in the City of Stockton General Plan. That is, implementation of the Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in no net change from travel associated with the current General Plan-designated land uses.
VMT is calculated by multiplying the number of vehicle trips by the length of vehicle trips. As a result, a certain percent change in the number of vehicle trips would cause an equivalent change in VMT. Therefore, for the Mariposa Industrial Park project, a comparison of vehicle trips is considered equivalent to a comparison of VMT. Because the Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in no net change from travel associated with the current General Plan–designated land use, the project would result in no net change in VMT.
As described in the Vehicle Miles Traveled Significance Threshold section of this traffic impact study,
“Consistent with General Plan Action TR4.3A, if a project would result in a 15 percent or more reduction of vehicle travel, a project is considered to have a lessthan-significant impact. A project that would not result in a reduction of 15 percent or more is considered to have a significant impact.” Because the Mariposa Industrial Park project would not result in a 15 percent reduction in VMT, the project is considered to have a significant impact on VMT. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the impact of the project on VMT. The numbering of the following mitigation measures is from the document Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures - A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association 2010), which contains more detailed information on these measures. The numbering of the following mitigation measures is not sequential in this traffic impact study. The out-of-sequence numbering is provided below to allow direct reference to the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) document. The “TRT” acronym shown below is used in the numbering of the CAPCOA document and refers to Trip Reduction – Transportation.
Mitigation Measure TRT-1. Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program - Voluntary
The Mariposa Industrial Park project will implement a Commute Trip Reduction Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1420
(CTR) Program – Voluntary with employers to discourage single-occupancy vehicle trips and encourage alternative modes of transportation such as carpooling, taking transit, walking, and biking. This is a multi-strategy program that encompasses a combination of individual measures.
The CTR program will provide employees with assistance in using alternative modes of travel, and provide both “carrots” and “sticks” to encourage employees.
The CTR program should include all of the following:
Carpooling encouragement
Ride-matching assistance
Preferential carpool parking
Flexible work schedules for carpools
Half time transportation coordinator
Vanpool assistance
Bicycle end-trip facilities (parking, showers and lockers) Other strategies may also include:
new employee orientation of trip reduction and alternative mode options, event promotions and publications,
flexible work schedule for all employees,
transit subsidies,
parking cash-out or priced parking,
shuttles,
emergency ride home, and
improved on-site amenities.
Mitigation Measure TRT-5. Provide End of Trip Bicycle Facilities The Mariposa Industrial Park project will provide "end-of-trip" facilities for bicycle riders including showers, secure bicycle lockers, and changing spaces.
End-of-trip facilities encourage the use of bicycling as a viable form of travel to destinations, especially to work. End-of trip facilities provide the added convenience and security needed to encourage bicycle commuting.
Mitigation Measure TRT-11. Provide Employer-Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle The Mariposa Industrial Park project will implement an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle. A vanpool will usually service employees’ commute to work while a shuttle will service nearby transit stations and surrounding commercial centers. Employer-sponsored vanpool programs entail an employer purchasing or leasing vans for employee use, and often subsidizing the cost of at least program administration, if not more. The driver usually receives personal use of the van, often for a mileage fee. Scheduling is within the employer’s purview, and rider charges are normally set on the basis of vehicle and operating cost.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1421
Implementation of the measures listed above would reduce project-related VMT and reduce the significance of the impact on VMT. However, quantification of the reduction is not possible at this time. At the time this traffic impact study was prepared, potential occupants of the Mariposa Industrial Park project were not identified. While the type of land use is expected to be industrial, specific tenants were not known. As a result, the following factors which would affect the ability to implement VMT reduction measures are not known:
hours of operation, including times of the day when work shift would change; the portion of work positions which would be full-time versus part-time; feasibility of implementing flexible work schedules; and degree to which working remotely is feasible.
Because the potential occupants of the project are not known, it is not possible to establish an enforceable commitment to reduce VMT by more than 15 percent. As a result, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1422
REFERENCES
DOCUMENTS CITED
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. 2010. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures - A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. Sacramento, CA.
California Department of Transportation. 2014. California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 2014 Edition. Sacramento CA.
California Department of Transportation. 2017. Transportation Concept Report – State Route 99 - District 10. Stockton, CA.
California Department of Transportation. 2021. Caltrans Traffic Census Program Internet Website. http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/.
California, State of. 2018. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. Sacramento, CA.
Fehr & Peers. 2014. Traffic Impact Analysis – NorCal Logistics Center. Walnut Creek, CA.
Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2017. Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. Washington, D.C.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District. 2021. San Joaquin Regional Transit District Internet Webpage. http://www.sanjoaquinrtd.com/. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2003. City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2004. Travel Demand Model Development Report October 2004. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2007. Draft Environmental Impact Report - Mariposa Lakes Specific Plan - State Clearinghouse #2006022035. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2014. NorCal Logistics Center – Draft Environmental Impact Report (Project File No. P12-110). Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2018a. Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2018b. Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan Update and Utility Master Plan Supplements Draft EIR. Stockton, CA.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1423
Stockton, City of. 2009. Truck Routes Map. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2017. STAA Truck Routes Map. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2020. Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Report For The SanchezHoggan Annexation. Stockton, CA.
Trafficware. 2019. Trafficware Internet Website. http://www.trafficware.com/ Transportation Research Board. 1982. National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 255, Highway Traffic Data for Urbanized Area Project Planning and Design.
Washington, D.C.
Transportation Research Board. 2000. Highway Capacity Manual 2000. Washington, D.C.
Transportation Research Board. 2010. Highway Capacity Manual 2010. Washington, D.C.
Transportation Research Board. 2016. Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition. Washington, D.C.
PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS
Dumas, Tom. Chief, Office of Metropolitan Planning, Caltrans District 10. October 23, 2007 letter to David Stagnaro, City of Stockton Community Development Department.
McDowell, Mike. Acting Deputy Director. City of Stockton, Community Development Department, Planning and Engineering Services. February 15, 2012 E-mail message to Wayne Shijo, KD Anderson & Associates; Subject: Highway Capacity Manual Methods. November 15, 2012 E-mail message to Wayne Shijo, KD Anderson & Associates; Subject: Industrial Trip Generation Rates. May 8, 2019 E-mail message to Heba El-Guindy, City of Stockton; and Wayne Shijo, KD Anderson & Associates; Subject: EPAP Traffic Forecasts. September 19, 2019 telephone conversation with Wayne Shijo, KD Anderson & Associates. June 20, 2020 E-mail message to Charlie Simpson, BaseCamp Environmental; Subject: Industrial Trip Generation.
Moore, Nicole D. Senior Planner. City of Stockton Community Development Department.
December 15, 2020 E-mail message to Ken Anderson and Wayne Shijo, KD Anderson & Associates; Subject: Mariposa Industrial Park Traffic Study Scope of Work.
Tellez, Kathrin. Fehr & Peers. June 30, 2016 E-mail message to Mike McDowell, City of Stockton. Subject: Tidewater Crossing All-Industrial Project Traffic Impact Assessment Analysis Assumptions.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1424
TECHNICAL APPENDICES
IN SEPARATE ELECTRONIC FILES
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1425
%
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1426
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
FOR
THE MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT
Stockton, California
Prepared For:
BaseCamp Environmental
Prepared By:
KD Anderson & Associates
3853 Taylor Road, Suite G
Loomis, California 95650
(916) 660-1555
July 9, 2021
0780 -18
Mariposa Industrial Park TIS 7-9-21.doc
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1427
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR
THE MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................... i INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 STUDY PURPOSE ...................................................................................................................................................1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................................................1 OVERALL ANALYSIS APPROACH......................................................................................................................2 EXISTING SETTING ................................................................................................................................................. 7 STUDY AREA ROADWAYS ..................................................................................................................................7 TRUCK ROUTES ...................................................................................................................................................10 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ..............................................................................................................................12 PARK AND RIDE FACILITIES ............................................................................................................................13 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SYSTEMS ..........................................................................................................13 STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS ........................................................................................................................15 STUDY AREA ROADWAY SEGMENTS ............................................................................................................17 STUDY AREA FREEWAY RAMP JUNCTIONS.................................................................................................19 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................................................................21 LEVEL OF SERVICE AND SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS............................................................................28 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD ........................................................................32 EXISTING INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LEVELS OF SERVICE...........................................33 EXISTING ROADWAY SEGMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LEVELS OF SERVICE...............................35 EXISTING RAMP JUNCTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LEVELS OF SERVICE........................................42
EXISTING PLUS APPROVED PROJECTS NO MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................................................... 47 TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS .......................................................................................................................47 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS............................................................................................................................47 INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE .............................................................................................................53 ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE .................................................................................................56 RAMP JUNCTION LEVELS OF SERVICE ..........................................................................................................57
EXISTING PLUS APPROVED PROJECTS PLUS MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT IMPACTS ................................................................................................................................................................... 60 TRIP GENERATION..............................................................................................................................................60 TRIP DISTRIBUTION............................................................................................................................................60 TRIP ASSIGNMENT..............................................................................................................................................65 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS.............................................................................................................................72 INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE...............................................................................................................72 ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE .................................................................................................77 RAMP JUNCTION LEVELS OF SERVICE ..........................................................................................................79 INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR TRANSIT............................................................................................................81 INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES ..................................................81 CUMULATIVE NO PROJECT CONDITIONS .................................................................................................... 82 TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS .......................................................................................................................82 ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS............................................................................................................................82 ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE .................................................................................................84 Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1428
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT IMPACTS ....................................................................................................... 85 ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE .................................................................................................85 PROJECT SITE ACCESS.......................................................................................................................................88 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED .............................................................................................................................90 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................................... 93 TECHNICAL APPENDICES IN ELECTRONIC FILES ........................................................................................... 95 Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1429
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Number Number
1 Level of Service Definitions - Highway Capacity Manual 2010 ........................................................ 22 2 City of Stockton General Plan Roadway Segment Level of Service Thresholds................................ 24 3 Level of Service Criteria for Freeway Merge / Diverge and Weaving Areas..................................... 27 4 Heavy Truck Percentage ..................................................................................................................... 38 5 Intersection Level of Service - Existing Conditions ........................................................................... 39 6 Roadway Segment Level of Service - Existing Conditions ................................................................ 41 7 Roadway Segment Level of Service - Existing Conditions With Recommended Improvements ...... 42 8 State Route 99 Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Level of Service - Existing Conditions .............. 46 9 Roadway Segment Level of Service - Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) No Project Conditions............................................................................................................................... 50 10 Intersection Level of Service - Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) No Project Conditions ........................................................................................................................................... 54 11 Intersection Level of Service - Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) No Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements ................................................................................. 55 12 Roadway Segment Level of Service - Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) No Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements ................................................................................. 57 13 State Route 99 Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Level of Service -Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) No Project Conditions.............................................................................................. 58 14 Trip Generation Rates ......................................................................................................................... 61 15 Trip Generation Estimate .................................................................................................................... 61 16 Mariposa Industrial Park Project Trip Distribution Percentages......................................................... 62 17 Roadway Segment Level of Service - Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions............................................................................................................................... 74 18 Intersection Level of Service - Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions ........................................................................................................................................... 75 Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1430
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table Page
Number Number
19 Intersection Level of Service - Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements ................................................................................. 77 20 Roadway Segment Level of Service - Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements..................................................................... 78 21 State Route 99 Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Level of Service - Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions........................................................................... 80 22 Roadway Segment Level of Service – Cumulative No Project Conditions ........................................ 83 23 Roadway Segment Level of Service – Cumulative No Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements...................................................................................................................................... 84 24 Roadway Segment Level of Service – Cumulative Plus Project Conditions ...................................... 86 25 Roadway Segment Level of Service – Cumulative Plus Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements...................................................................................................................................... 87 26 Intersection Level of Service – Cumulative Plus Project Conditions ................................................. 88 Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1431
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
Number Number
1 Vicinity Map ......................................................................................................................................... 4 2 Site Plan ................................................................................................................................................ 5 3 Project Frontage Striping Plan .............................................................................................................. 6 4 Study Area............................................................................................................................................. 8 5 Existing and Planned Bicycle Network............................................................................................... 14 6 Study Intersections.............................................................................................................................. 16 7 Study Roadway Segments................................................................................................................... 18 8 Study Freeway Merge, Diverge, and Weave Areas ............................................................................ 20 9 Existing Intersection Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations ....................................................... 36 10 Existing Intersection Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations (Continued) ................................... 37 11 Existing Freeway Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Area Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations............................................................................................................................ 44 12 Existing Freeway Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Area Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations (Continued) ....................................................................................................... 45 13 EPAP No Project Intersection Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations......................................... 48 14 EPAP No Project Intersection Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations (Continued)..................... 49 15 EPAP No Project Freeway Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Area Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations............................................................................................................................ 51 16 EPAP No Project Freeway Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Area Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations (Continued) ....................................................................................................... 52 17 Existing Plus Approved Projects Background Trip Distribution Percentages .................................... 63 18 Cumulative Background Trip Distribution Percentages ..................................................................... 64 19 Project-Related Intersection Traffic Volumes..................................................................................... 66 20 Project-Related Intersection Traffic Volumes (Continued) ................................................................ 67 21 EPAP Plus Project Intersection Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations....................................... 68 22 EPAP Plus Project Intersection Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations (Continued)................... 69 23 EPAP Plus Project Freeway Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Area Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations............................................................................................................................ 70 24 EPAP Plus Project Freeway Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Area Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations (Continued) ....................................................................................................... 71 25 Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations.............................. 89 Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1432
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Executive Summary is a brief overview of the analysis presented in this traffic impact study. It is not intended to be a comprehensive description of the analysis. For more details, the reader is referred to the full description presented in the traffic impact study.
This traffic impact study presents an analysis of the traffic-related effects of the Mariposa Industrial Park project. The project is located in unincorporated San Joaquin County, southeast of the City of Stockton, east of State Route (SR) 99, north of Littlejohns Creek, southwest of Mariposa Road. The project site is approximately 203.48 acres in size and is proposed to include 3,616,870 building square feet (sf) of high-cube warehouse industrial land use.
Access to the Mariposa Industrial Park site would be provided via two driveway connections to Mariposa Road.
This traffic impact study includes analysis of:
15 intersections,
12 roadway segments, and
13 freeway ramp junction areas.
These study facilities are analyzed under the following five development scenarios:
Existing Conditions,
Near-Term Future Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) No Mariposa Industrial Park Project Conditions,
Near-Term Future EPAP Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project Conditions, Long-Term Future Cumulative No Mariposa Industrial Park Project Conditions, and Long-Term Future Cumulative Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project Conditions.
Under Existing Conditions, all study intersections operate at conditions which are considered acceptable. One study roadway segment and one freeway weave area operate at conditions which are considered unacceptable. This traffic impact study presents a recommended improvement for the study roadway segment.
Under EPAP No Mariposa Industrial Park Project conditions, three study intersections, two study roadway segments, and three study freeway ramp and weave facilities would experience operating conditions which are considered unacceptable. This traffic impact study presents recommended improvements for two of the study intersections, and one of the study roadway segments.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1433
Under EPAP Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project conditions, four study intersections, two study roadway segments, and three study freeway ramp and weave facilities would experience operating conditions which are considered unacceptable. The project-related change at two study intersections and one study roadway segment would be considered a significant inconsistency with General Plan policies and recommended improvements are identified to reduce the inconsistency to a less than significant level.
Under Cumulative No Mariposa Industrial Park Project conditions, two study roadway segments would experience operating conditions which are considered unacceptable. This traffic impact study presents recommended improvements for one of these two facilities.
Under Cumulative Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project conditions, three study roadway segments would experience operating conditions which are considered unacceptable. The project-related change at one study roadway segment would be considered a significant inconsistency with General Plan policies and a recommended improvement is identified to reduce the inconsistency to a less than significant level. The project-related change at two of these three facilities would be less than thresholds considered to be significant. Therefore, the project-related inconsistency at these facilities is considered less than significant.
In addition to presenting an analysis of traffic operating conditions, this traffic impact study also presents analysis of project-related impacts on
demand for public transit services,
demand for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and
vehicle miles traveled.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1434
INTRODUCTION
STUDY PURPOSE
This traffic impact study presents an analysis of the traffic-related effects of the proposed Mariposa Industrial Park project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The following is a description of the Mariposa Industrial Park project.
Project Location
The Mariposa Industrial Park project site is in the San Joaquin County unincorporated area, adjacent to the southeastern limits of the City of Stockton. Figure 1 presents an aerial photograph of the vicinity of the project site. The project site encompasses 203.48 acres.
Project Land Uses
The project proposes to develop the project site for light industrial land uses, primarily “highcube” warehouses. The details of the proposed development are discussed below.
The project proposes the annexation of the project site into the City of Stockton. The City would submit an annexation application to the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), which would be responsible for a decision on the annexation.
The project site is currently zoned by the County as AG-40 – General Agriculture with a 40-acre minimum parcel size. The project would include a request that the City pre-zone the entire project site Industrial, Limited (IL). This pre-zoning would be consistent with the current Industrial designation of the project site under the City of Stockton General Plan (City of Stockton 2018a) and with the proposed project.
Upon annexation, the project site is proposed to be developed with light industrial land uses, mainly high-cube warehouses. Figure 2 shows a conceptual site plan. A “high-cube warehouse” is a building that typically has at least 200,000 gross square feet of floor area, has a ceiling height of approximately 24 feet or more, and is used primarily for the storage and/or consolidation of manufactured goods (and, to a lesser extent, raw materials) prior to their distribution to retail locations or other warehouses. A typical high-cube warehouse has a high level of on-site automation and logistics management, which enable highly efficient processing of goods through the warehouse.
As shown in Figure 2, the Mariposa Industrial Park project would include 3,616,870 building square feet of proposed development.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1435
A total of approximately 2,900 parking stalls would be provided throughout the project site. Of that total, approximately 1,800 stalls would be for automobiles, 37 of which would be accessible to drivers with disabilities. The remaining approximately 1,100 stalls would be for trucks and trailers.
Circulation
Access would be from two driveways off Mariposa Road in the northeastern portion of the project site. In this traffic impact study, these two access locations are referred to as the “Southeast Project Driveway” and the “Northwest Project Driveway”. The Southeast Project Driveway would provide the main access to the project site, with an access road leading to most of the proposed development. The Northwest Project Driveway would provide access to the two northernmost buildings proposed on the site. Curb, gutter, and sidewalk would be installed along existing undeveloped street frontage in accordance with City standards. In addition, access to the project site would be made available from Marfargoa Road and Clark Road for emergency vehicles only. Figure 3 shows a striping plan for the project site frontage along Mariposa Road.
Desirable intersection spacing is often considered to be 1,000 feet between intersections. The distance between the driveway intersections for the Southeast Project Driveway and the Northwest Project Driveway is less than 1,000 feet. However, both of the driveway intersections would be “T” intersections. Neither would be a four-leg intersection. Because both driveways would connect at “T” intersections, neither intersection would have southeastbound-tonortheastbound left-turn movements. The absence of a need for vehicle storage for southeastbound-to-northeastbound left-turn movement at the Southeast Project Driveway intersection results in the distance between the two intersections being available for the northwestbound-to-southwestbound left-turn movement at the Northwest Project Driveway. As a result, the distance between the two project driveway intersections is considered to be adequate.
In the near-term future, this traffic impact study assumes the Southeast Project Driveway connection with Mariposa Road would include signalized intersection control. In the near-term future, the Northwest Project Driveway would include unsignalized stop-sign control, with the driveway being the controlled approach. In the long-term future, the Stockton General Plan includes widening of Mariposa Road from two lanes (one lane in each direction) to four lanes (two lanes in each direction). In the long-term future, this traffic impact study assumes both the Southeast Project Driveway connection and the Northwest Project Driveway connection would include signalized intersection control.
Project site frontage improvements will be geometrically designed to accommodate Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) design vehicle truck movements and heavy truck loads.
OVERALL ANALYSIS APPROACH
As noted above, this traffic impact study presents an analysis of the traffic-related effects of the Mariposa Industrial Park project. This analysis is conducted using near-term future background conditions and long-term future background conditions. Future background conditions are based Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1436
on the City of Stockton General Plan. Analysis of traffic operating conditions under the following five scenarios is presented in this traffic impact study:
Existing Conditions,
EPAP No Mariposa Industrial Park Project,
EPAP Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project,
Cumulative No Project, and
Cumulative Plus Project.
Existing Plus Approved Projects conditions are a near-term background condition which includes existing traffic levels, and traffic associated with approved but unconstructed land use development projects in vicinity of the project site.
Cumulative conditions with the City of Stockton General Plan are a long-term background condition which includes future year forecasts of traffic volumes, based on development of surrounding land uses. This set of scenarios assumes 2040 conditions with future development consistent with the General Plan.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1437
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 1
VICINITY MAP
0780-18 RA 3/11/2021
PROJECT
LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1438
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 2
SITE PLAN
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1439
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 3
STRIPING PLAN
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1440
EXISTING SETTING
This section of this traffic impact study presents a description of existing conditions in the study area. Information presented in this section of the study is based on on-site field observations, traffic count data collected for this study, and other data available from local and state agencies.
This section of the traffic impact study also describes analysis methods applied for this study, and thresholds used to determine the significance of project-related effects.
STUDY AREA ROADWAYS
This traffic impact study presents analyses of traffic operating conditions at intersections, on roadways, and at freeway ramp junctions, in the study area that may be affected by the proposed project. The limits of the study area were identified through discussions with City of Stockton staff (Moore pers. comm.).
The following is a description of roadways that provide access to the proposed project site. These roadways are shown in Figure 1 and Figure 4.
State Route 99 is a freeway that traverses the Central Valley, connecting Sacramento and points north with numerous Central Valley cities, including Modesto, Merced, Fresno and Bakersfield.
Three travel lanes are provided in each direction in the vicinity of the project site, with auxiliary lanes present at some locations. Twelve interchanges are provided along the 12-mile length of SR 99 within and adjacent to the Stockton City limits. Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes on SR 99 range between 80,000 and 95,000 in the vicinity of the project site based on data available at California Department of Transportation 2021. The speed limit on SR 99 is 65 miles per hour (mph) in the vicinity of the proposed project site.
Mariposa Road is a west-northwest-to-east-southeast roadway connecting Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard in south Stockton with Escalon Bellota Road north of Escalon. In the vicinity of the project site, Mariposa Road is a two-lane roadway. The portion of Mariposa Road southeast of Carpenter Road has a 55 mph posted speed limit. Between Carpenter Road and 8th Street/Farmington Road (northwest of SR 99), the posted speed limit is 50 mph. Mariposa Road crosses a railroad track with a grade-separated railroad crossing located just east of the intersection with Austin Road. Limited pedestrian and no bicycle facilities are provided along the roadway within the study area. Mariposa Road is classified in the City of Stockton General Plan (City of Stockton 2018a) as an arterial roadway. In the future, the General Plan indicates Mariposa Road would be six lanes wide from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard to Carpenter Road and four lanes wide from Carpenter Road to southeast of Austin Road.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1441
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 4
STUDY AREA
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
ARCH RD
AUSTIN RD
PROJECT
LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1442
Crosstown Freeway (SR 4) is an east-west freeway that traverses downtown Stockton. The eastern terminus of the Crosstown Freeway is at SR 99. The western terminus of the Crosstown Freeway is at Navy Drive, approximately 1.4 miles west of Interstate 5 (I-5). The Crosstown Freeway is designated SR 4, which continues west to Interstate 80 in the San Francisco Bay Area, and continues east into the Sierra Nevada foothills. The portion of the Crosstown Freeway immediately west of SR 99 is eight lanes wide. It is six to eight lanes wide through downtown Stockton. West of I-5, it is four lanes wide.
Carpenter Road is a west-southwest-to-east-northeast two-lane roadway that connects with Mariposa Road at an unsignalized intersection approximately one-third of a mile west-northwest of the project site. The east-northeastern terminus of Carpenter Road is approximately 0.9 mile eastnortheast of Mariposa Road. To the west-southwest, Carpenter Road terminates at SR 99 East Frontage Road, approximately 0.8 mile west-southwest of Mariposa Road. West of SR 99, a discontinuous portion of Carpenter Road extends west-southwest to Airport Way. Carpenter Road is classified in the City of Stockton General Plan (City of Stockton 2018a) as a collector roadway with a future east-northeast extension connecting to a future northern extension of Austin Road.
Munford Avenue is a west-southwest-to-east-northeast two-lane roadway that connects with Mariposa Road at a signalized intersection approximately 0.8 mile west-northwest of the project site. The east-northeastern terminus of Munford Avenue is at Mariposa Road. To the westsouthwest, Munford Avenue terminates at SR 99 East Frontage Road, approximately 0.4 mile westsouthwest of Mariposa Road. West of SR 99, a discontinuous portion of Munford Avenue extends approximately 0.4 mile west-southwest of SR 99.
Stagecoach Road is a north-south two-lane roadway with a southern terminus at a signalized intersection with Mariposa Road and a northern terminus at Farmington Road. The southwest leg of the intersection of Mariposa Road & Stagecoach Road is a gated driveway for Oldcastle Infrastructure.
Farmington Road is an east-west roadway with an overcrossing of SR 99. In the immediate vicinity of SR 99, it is two lanes wide. Approximately one-quarter mile east of SR 99, Farmington Road intersects with Golden Gate Avenue. East of this intersection, Farmington Road is two lanes to four lanes wide, with a center two-way left-turn lane (CTWLTL) along portions of the roadway.
Farmington Road continues east into the Sierra Nevada foothills as SR 4. Approximately one-half mile west-southwest of SR 99, Farmington Road intersects with Mariposa Road. To the westsouthwest of Mariposa Road, the roadway continues as 8th Street. Discontinuous portions of 8th Street extend to the southwest portion of Stockton.
Golden Gate Avenue is a northwest-to-southeast roadway with an interchange on SR 99. The roadway is four lanes wide southeast of SR 99 and two lanes wide northwest of SR 99. The southeastern terminus of Golden Gate Avenue is at Farmington Road, approximately one-quarter mile southeast of SR 99. Approximately one-third of a mile northwest of SR 99, Golden Gate Avenue transitions to a north-northwest – south-southeast alignment. This portion of Golden Gate Avenue has a north-northwest terminus at the Crosstown Freeway. Discontinuous portions of Golden Gate Avenue are present north of the Crosstown Freeway.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1443
Fremont Street is a west-southwest – to – east-northeast roadway with an interchange on SR 99.
In the immediate vicinity of SR 99 and extending west-southwest to Wilson Way, Fremont Street is four lanes wide. West of Wilson Way, discontinuous portions of Fremont Street are two lanes wide, traverse downtown Stockton, and terminate west of I-5. East-northeast of SR 99, Fremont Street is two lanes wide and is designated SR 26. SR 26 extends to the northeast into the Sierra Nevada foothills.
Austin Road is a north-south roadway that extends south from Mariposa Road, and passes through Manteca before terminating at Caswell Memorial State Park. Within the project study area, Austin Road is a two-lane roadway with no pedestrian or bicycle facilities. Austin Road is classified in the City of Stockton General Plan (City of Stockton 2018a) as an arterial roadway with a future westnorthwest extension to Main Street.
Arch Road / Arch-Airport Road / Sperry Road / French Camp Road is an east-west roadway with several names. It is classified in the City of Stockton General Plan (City of Stockton 2018) as an arterial roadway. The roadway extends from Carolyn Weston Boulevard in the west to the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) facility east of Austin Road. In the study area, Arch Road is generally a two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. Additional lanes are provided at some portions, including the portion in the vicinity of the SR 99 interchange. Arch Road is currently undergoing improvements with some segments widened to provide additional travel capacity. In some cases, the widened portions are not yet striped to accommodate additional traffic.
Sidewalks are provided along some portions of Arch Road, including portions on the north side from Logistics Drive to approximately 100 feet east of Fite Court, and on the south side from Logistics Drive to Newcastle Road. There are no bicycle facilities on Arch-Airport Road/Arch Road in the project study area.
SR 99 East Frontage Road runs parallel to and east of SR 99. North of Arch Road, this roadway curves to the east, becoming Munford Avenue, and terminates at Mariposa Road. South of Arch Road, the roadway becomes Kingsley Road, terminating approximately 1.5 miles south of Arch Road. SR 99 East Frontage Road is a two-lane roadway with limited pedestrian facilities and no bicycle facilities in the project study area.
Qantas Lane is a north-south roadway that begins at Boeing Way to the north. South of ArchAirport Road, Qantas Lane becomes SR 99 West Frontage Road located on the west side of SR 99.
North of Arch-Airport Road, Qantas Lane is a two-lane roadway, while four travel lanes are provided south of Arch-Airport Road. South of the vicinity of Arch-Airport Road, Qantas Lane transitions to a two-lane roadway (one lane in each direction). Limited pedestrian facilities and no bicycle facilities are provided along Qantas Lane within the project study area.
TRUCK ROUTES
The City of Stockton Truck Routes map (City of Stockton 2009) and STAA Truck Routes map (City of Stockton 2017) describe truck routes in the Stockton area. Some of the truck routes are designated for use by STAA design vehicle trucks. These are large vehicles that have relatively Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1444
large turning radii, and require roadway design features that accommodate the large turning radii.
The following are designated truck routes in the vicinity of the project site:
Mariposa Road from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard to east-southeast of Austin Road is a route for vehicles transporting flammable liquids. Sperry Road/Arch Airport Road/Arch Road from McKinley Avenue to Austin Road is a City designated truck route.
Mariposa Road from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard to Munford Avenue is a designated STAA truck route. Portions are designated by the City and portions are designated by the County of San Joaquin.
Munford Avenue from Mariposa Road to 3730 Munford Avenue is designated by the County as an STAA truck route.
Golden Gate Avenue from SR 99 to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard is a County designated STAA truck route, and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard from Golden Gate Avenue to I-5 is a City designated STAA truck route. Fremont Street from Windsor Avenue (west of SR 99) to Cardinal Avenue (east of SR 99), and Cardinal Avenue from Fremont Street to 207 N. Cardinal Avenue are County designated STAA truck routes.
French Camp Road/Sperry Road/Arch Airport Road/Arch Road from I-5 to Austin Road is a designated STAA truck route. Portions are designated by the City and portions are designated by the County.
Qantas Lane from Arch-Airport Road to Boeing Way, and Boeing Way from Qantas Lane to Airport Way are City designated STAA truck routes. Newcastle Road north of Arch Road is a City designated STAA truck route.
Routes anticipated to be used by STAA trucks to access the project site include the following (Ebenal pers. comm.):
SR 99 north of Fremont Street,
SR 99 south of Arch Road,
Crosstown Freeway west of SR 99,
Golden Gate Avenue west of SR 99,
Golden Gate Avenue east of SR 99,
Mariposa Road west of SR 99,
Boeing Way west of Qantas Lane,
Arch-Airport Road west of Qantas Lane, and
Airport Way.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1445
A separate standalone assessment focusing on the potential effects of Mariposa Industrial Park project-related trucks is being prepared by the civil engineering firm Kier + Wright. The assessment will include effects associated with the potential use of STAA trucks. As appropriate, the truck assessment will be used as a source document for identifying truck-related impacts in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental impact report (EIR) for the Mariposa Industrial Park project and needed mitigation measures.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
The San Joaquin Regional Transit District (SJRTD) is the primary provider of public transportation service in San Joaquin County, providing services to the Stockton metropolitan area, as well as inter-city, inter-regional, and rural transit service. SJRTD provides fixed-route, flexible fixed-route, and dial-a-ride services in Stockton. Each service is described in more detail below. (San Joaquin Regional Transit District 2021)
Stockton Metropolitan Area Fixed Route Service operates 33 fixed routes within the Stockton metropolitan area.
Intercity Fixed Route Service is provided by a route between Stockton and the Lodi Station in downtown Lodi connecting with Lodi Grapeline, Calaveras Transit, Delta Breeze, Sacramento South County Transit (SCT)/LINK buses. Interregional Commuter Service is a subscription commuter bus service. A total of eight routes connect San Joaquin County to Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, and the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system.
SJRTD operates two Dial-a-Ride services. General Public Dial-A-Ride is a curb-tocurb service in areas not currently being served by RTD or other local transportation providers. Passengers are required to use other public transportation options currently available in their area. Stockton Metro Area Dial-A-Ride (SMA-ADA) is a curb-to-curb service operating within the Stockton Metropolitan Area for passengers with an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Certification. Hopper Service is a deviated fixed-route service connecting Stockton, Tracy, Lodi, Manteca, Ripon, and Lathrop. The Metro Hopper provides nine routes. The County Hopper provides six routes.
SJRTD service is provided in the area west of SR 99. In vicinity of the Mariposa Road and Arch Road interchanges, service is provided by:
Fixed routes 385 and 390,
Hopper routes 91 and 95, and
Express route 44.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1446
PARK AND RIDE FACILITIES
Park and Ride lots are free parking facilities for commuters to use as a convenient meeting place for carpools, transit, and vanpools. Park and Ride lots in the Stockton area are listed below. the Calvary First Church on Kelley Drive north of Hammer Lane; the Hammer Crossing Shopping Center at Hammer Lane and Sampson Road; the Lifesong Church, 3034 Michigan Avenue; and
Mariposa Road east of SR 99..
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SYSTEMS
The generally level terrain and mild weather make bicycling and walking viable forms of transportation in Stockton. The City of Stockton has an extensive network of bicycle facilities, including off-street trails and paths, as well as on-street bicycle lanes and routes. Many of these facilities also support pedestrian travel. According to Caltrans guidelines, bicycle facilities are generally divided into four categories:
Class I Bikeway (Bike Path). A completely separate facility designated for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with vehicle and pedestrian cross-flow minimized.
Class II Bikeway (Bike Lane). A striped lane designated for the use of bicycles on a street or highway. Vehicle parking and vehicle/pedestrian cross-flow are permitted at designated locations.
Class III Bikeway (Bike Route). A route designated by signs or pavement markings for bicyclists within the vehicular travel lane (i.e., shared use) of a roadway.
Class IV Bikeway (Separated Bikeway). A bikeway for the exclusive use of bicycles and includes a separation required between the separated bikeway and the through vehicular traffic. The separation may include, but is not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible posts, inflexible barriers, or on-street parking.
In the immediate vicinity of the project site, neither bicycle facilities nor sidewalks are present along either side of Mariposa Road between Munford Avenue and Austin Road.
The City of Stockton General Plan presents a map showing existing and planned bicycle facilities in the Stockton area, shown on Figure 5. Figure 5 shows a planned Class II bike lane on Arch Road between SR 99 and Austin Road, and a planned Class II bike lane on Mariposa Road between Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard and SR 99.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1447
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 5
EXISTING AND PLANNED BICYCLE NETWORK
0780-13 RA 7/9/2021
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1448
STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS
The traffic-related effects of the proposed project were assessed for this traffic impact study by analyzing traffic operations at intersections that would serve project-related travel. The following intersections were selected for analysis in consultation with City of Stockton staff (Moore pers. comm.).
1. Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Southbound Ramps
2. Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Northbound Ramps
3. Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road
4. Mariposa Road & SR 99 West Frontage Road
5. Mariposa Road & SR 99 Southbound Ramps
6. Mariposa Road & SR 99 Northbound Ramps
7. Mariposa Road & Stagecoach Road
8. Mariposa Road & Munford Avenue
9. Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road
10. Mariposa Road & Austin Road
11. Arch Road & Austin Road
12. Arch-Airport Road & Qantas Lane
13. Arch Road & SR 99
The following two intersections would only be present with construction of the Mariposa Industrial Park project. As a result, these intersections were only analyzed under development conditions that include the proposed project:
14. Mariposa Road & Northwest Project Driveway
15. Mariposa Road & Southeast Project Driveway
The locations of study intersections are presented in Figure 6. The numbers listed above correspond to the intersection numbers on this figure.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1449
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 6
STUDY INTERSECTIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
ARCH RD
AUSTIN RD
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 14
15 10
11 12 13
PROJECT
LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1450
STUDY AREA ROADWAY SEGMENTS
In addition to analyzing intersections, the traffic-related effects of the proposed project on roadway segments were assessed for this traffic impact study. Major roadways adjacent to the project site, and roadways that would serve as major access routes, were analyzed. The following roadway segments were selected for analysis in consultation with City of Stockton staff (Moore pers. comm.).
101. SR 99 North of Crosstown Freeway (SR 4)
102. Crosstown Freeway West of SR 99
103. SR 99 Between Crosstown Freeway and Golden Gate Avenue 104. SR 99 Between Golden Gate Avenue and Mariposa Road 105. Mariposa Road Between SR 99 and 8th Street/Farmington Road 106. Mariposa Road, Between Carpenter Road and SR 99
107. Mariposa Road, Between the Project Site and Carpenter Road 108. Mariposa Road, Southeast of the Project Site
109. Mariposa Road, East of Austin Road
110. SR 99 Between Mariposa Road and Arch-Airport Road
111. Arch-Airport Road, Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
112. SR 99 South of Arch-Airport Road
The locations of study roadway segment are presented in Figure 7. The numbers listed above correspond to the roadway segment numbers on this figure. The numbers used for roadway segments are sequential, beginning with 101 to distinguish study roadway segments from study intersections listed previously.
The study roadway segments are specific to certain locations on the roadway network. However, in some cases, a roadway segment represents larger portions of roadway segments. For example, analysis results for roadway segment Mariposa Road, east of Austin Road, applies to Mariposa Road from Austin Road to Jack Tone Road. The descriptions of locations listed above, and used in this traffic impact study, are as specific as possible to minimize ambiguity.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1451
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 7
STUDY ROADWAY SEGMENTS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
ARCH RD
AUSTIN RD
PROJECT
LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1452
STUDY AREA FREEWAY RAMP JUNCTIONS
In addition to analyzing intersections and roadway segments, the traffic-related effects of the proposed project on freeway ramp junctions were assessed for this traffic impact study. Ramp junctions that would serve as major access routes, and would be affected by project-related traffic, were analyzed. The following ramp junctions were selected for analysis in consultation with City of Stockton staff (Moore pers comm.):
201. SR 99 Southbound Weave Area Between Fremont Street and Crosstown Freeway 202. SR 99 Northbound Weave Area Between Crosstown Freeway and Fremont Street 203. SR 99 Northbound at Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Diverge 204. SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge 205. SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue Northbound On-Ramp Merge 206. SR 99 Southbound Weave Area Between Golden Gate Avenue and Mariposa Road 207. SR 99 Northbound Weave Area Between Mariposa Road and Golden Gate Avenue 208. SR 99 at Mariposa Road Southbound On-Ramp (Slip) Merge 209. SR 99 at Mariposa Road Northbound Off-Ramp Diverge 210. SR 99 at Arch-Airport Road Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge 211. SR 99 at Arch-Airport Road Northbound On-Ramp Merge 212. SR 99 at Arch-Airport Road Southbound On-Ramp Merge 213. SR 99 at Arch-Airport Road Northbound Off-Ramp Diverge The locations of freeway ramp junctions are presented in Figure 8. The numbers listed above correspond to the ramp junction numbers on this figure. The numbers used for ramp junctions are sequential, beginning with 201 to distinguish study ramp junctions from study intersections and study roadway segments listed previously.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1453
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 8
STUDY FREEWAY MERGE, DIVERGE, AND WEAVE AREAS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
ARCH RD
AUSTIN RD
PROJECT
LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1454
METHODOLOGY
The following is a description of the analysis methods used in this traffic impact study.
Intersection Level of Service Analysis Procedures
Level of service (LOS) analysis provides a basis for describing existing traffic conditions and for evaluating the significance of project-related inconsistency with General Plan transportation policies. Level of service measures the quality of traffic flow and is represented by letter designations from A to F, with a grade of A referring to the best conditions, and F representing the worst conditions. The characteristics associated with the various LOS for intersections are presented in Table 1.
Level of service at both signalized and unsignalized intersections was analyzed using methods presented in the Highway Capacity Manual. Methods described in the Highway Capacity Manual were used to provide a basis for describing traffic conditions and for evaluating the significance of inconsistency with General Plan policies. As specified by City of Stockton staff (McDowell pers. comm.), methods from the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (Transportation Research Board, 2000) were used to analyze local roadway intersections. As specified in the City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (City of Stockton, 2003), the Traffix software analysis package was used to analyze local roadway intersections.
Caltrans District 10 recommends use of the Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition (Transportation Research Board 2016) and the Synchro software package (Trafficware 2021). Therefore, as specified by City of Stockton staff, freeway ramp intersections were analyzed using Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition methods and the Synchro software package.
The lengths of vehicle queues were also analyzed for this traffic impact study. Methods presented in the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 and Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition were used to analyze queuing. 95th percentile queue length values are presented in this traffic impact study.
Worksheets and output reports for the calculation of LOS and vehicles queues for all scenarios analyzed for this traffic impact study are presented in the technical appendix.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1455
Table 1. Level of Service Definitions - Highway Capacity Manual 2010 Level of
Service Signalized Intersections Unsignalized Intersections A Vehicle progression is exceptionally
favorable or the cycle length is very short.
Little or no delay.
Delay < 10.0 seconds/vehicle Delay < 10 seconds/vehicle B Vehicle progression is highly favorable or the
cycle length is short.
Short traffic delays.
Delay > 10 seconds/vehicle and Delay > 10 seconds/vehicle and < 20 seconds/vehicle < 15 seconds/vehicle
C Vehicle progression is favorable or the cycle
length is moderate. Individual cycle failures
may begin to appear at this level.
Average traffic delays.
Delay > 20 seconds/vehicle and Delay > 15 seconds/vehicle and < 35 seconds/vehicle < 25 seconds/vehicle
D Vehicle progression is ineffective or the cycle
length is long. Many vehicles stop and the
individual cycle failures are noticeable.
Long traffic delays.
Delay > 35 seconds/vehicle and Delay > 25 seconds/vehicle and < 55 seconds/vehicle < 35 seconds/vehicle
E Vehicle progression is unfavorable and the
cycle length is long. Individual cycle failures
are frequent.
Very long traffic delays, failure, extreme
congestion.
Delay > 55 seconds/vehicle and Delay > 35 seconds/vehicle and < 80 seconds/vehicle < 50 seconds/vehicle
F Vehicle progression is very poor and the
cycle length is long. Most cycles fail to clear
the vehicle queue.
Intersection blocked by external causes.
Delay > 80 seconds/vehicle Delay > 50 seconds/vehicle
Source: Transportation Research Board 2010.
__________________________
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1456
Signal Warrants Procedures
Traffic signal warrants are a series of standards which provide guidelines for determining if a traffic signal is appropriate. Signal warrant analyses are typically conducted at intersections of uncontrolled major streets and stop sign-controlled minor streets. If one or more signal warrants are met, signalization of the intersection may be appropriate. However, a signal should not be installed if none of the warrants are met, because installation of signals would increase delays on the previously-uncontrolled major street, resulting in an undesirable increase in overall vehicle delay at the intersection. Signalization may also increase the occurrence of certain types of accidents.
Therefore, if signals are installed where signal warrants are not met, the detriment of increased accidents and overall delay may be greater than the benefit in traffic operating conditions on the single worst movement at the intersection. Signal warrants, then, provide an industry-standard basis for identifying when the adverse effect on the worst movement is substantial enough to warrant signalization.
For the analysis conducted for this traffic impact study, available data at unsignalized intersections are limited to a.m. and p.m. peak hour volumes. Thus, unsignalized intersections were evaluated using the Peak Hour Warrant (Warrant Number 3) from the California Department of Transportation document California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (California Department of Transportation 2014). This warrant was applied where the minor street experiences long delays in entering or crossing the major street for at least one hour of the day. The Peak Hour Warrant itself includes several components. Some of the components involve comparison of traffic volumes and vehicle delay to a series of standards. Another component involves comparison of traffic volumes to a nomograph.
Even if the peak hour warrant is met, a more detailed signal warrant study is recommended before a signal is installed. The more detailed study should consider volumes during the eight highest hours of the day, volumes during the four highest hours of the day, pedestrian traffic, and accident histories.
Signal warrant analysis worksheets for all stop sign-controlled intersections are presented in the technical appendix.
Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis Procedures
Roadway segment LOS was analyzed for this traffic impact study based on methods used in the Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan Update and Utility Master Plan Supplements Draft EIR analysis (City of Stockton 2018b). These methods set maximum daily traffic volume thresholds for each LOS designation. The thresholds are shown in Table 2.
As shown in Table 2, the roadway segment LOS analysis method sets separate thresholds for:
different types of facilities (i.e., freeways, arterials, and collectors); different number of lanes; and
different area types (i.e., new versus existing).
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1457
Table 2. City of Stockton General Plan Roadway Segment Level of Service Thresholds Level of Service
Number
Facility of Area
Class Lanes Type A B C D E
Freeway 4 All Areas 27,600 45,200 63,600 77,400 86,400
6 All Areas 41,400 67,800 95,400 116,100 129,600
8 All Areas 55,200 90,400 127,200 154,800 172,800
10 All Areas 69,000 113,000 159,000 193,500 216,000
Arterial 2 Existing 8,400 9,300 11,800 14,700 17,300
2 New 10,000 11,100 14,000 17,500 20,600
4 Existing 18,600 20,600 26,000 32,500 38,200
4 New 23,300 25,800 32,600 40,700 47,900
6 Existing 28,800 32,000 40,300 50,400 59,300
6 New 33,300 37,000 46,600 58,300 68,600
8 Existing 38,100 42,300 53,300 66,600 78,400
8 New 41,100 45,700 57,600 72,000 84,700
Collector 2 Existing 6,400 7,100 9,000 11,300 13,200
2 New 6,400 7,100 9,000 11,300 13,200
4 Existing 17,600 19,600 24,700 30,900 36,300
4 New 21,100 23,500 29,600 37,000 43,500
_________________________
Source: Stockton General Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (City of Stockton 2018b).
Note: The Stockton General Plan does not provide thresholds for local roads.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1458
As described in City of Stockton 2018b:
“Thresholds for arterials and collectors were based on Highway Capacity Manual calculations and were developed in conjunction with City staff at the time the current General Plan analysis was prepared. The arterial thresholds distinguish between roads in the existing urbanized area and those in new development areas; because arterials in new development areas can be designed to higher standards, with medians, exclusive turn lanes, and controlled access from adjacent uses, the capacities are higher than those in previously-developed areas. Thresholds for freeways were based on Highway Capacity Manual procedures relating levels of service to vehicle density ranges.”
As specified in City of Stockton 2018b, the “Existing” area is generally located between I-5 and SR 99, south of Eight Mile Road. Eight Mile Road itself is considered a “New” arterial due to the lack of existing development in the area.
Freeway Ramp Junction Level of Service Analysis Procedures Freeway ramp junctions are areas where freeway on-ramps merge into freeways, and where freeway off-ramps diverge from freeways. Weave areas are where an on-ramp and downstream off-ramp are connected by an auxiliary lane. Freeway ramp junctions which are considered to be potentially affected by project-related traffic were analyzed for this traffic impact study.
Freeway ramp junction areas were analyzed for this traffic impact study using methods described in Chapters 12 and 13 of the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 (Transportation Research Board 2010).
The Synchro software package does not analyze freeway ramp junction LOS. Therefore, the McTrans HCS+ Highway Capacity Software package was used to perform the ramp junction LOS calculations for this traffic impact study.
The Highway Capacity Manual 2010 methods were used to analyze three types of freeway facilities: on-ramp junctions (merge), off-ramp junctions (diverge), and weave areas. The analysis of all three types of facilities involves calculating the density of vehicles on a freeway facility, expressed as passenger cars per mile per lane (pcpmpl). The LOS designation is based on the vehicle density. Table 3 presents the relationship of vehicle density to LOS for ramp junctions and weave areas.
Freeway ramp operating conditions depend on traffic volumes and the ramp characteristics. These characteristics include the length and type of acceleration and deceleration lanes, the free-flow speed of ramps, the number of lanes, grade, and the types of facilities connected to the ramps.
The Highway Capacity Manual 2010 reports LOS A through E for ramps and weaving sections in terms of density. When the volume using the facility exceeds capacity, the V/C ratio is greater than 1, and the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 identifies the facility as overcapacity. While a density is not stated when the facility is over capacity, the freeway and ramp volumes for the facility are documented. For this traffic study, the freeway and ramp volumes are identified for all facilities where capacity has been exceeded.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1459
Some of the freeway on-ramp facilities analyzed for this traffic impact study are equipped with ramp metering. The Highway Capacity Manual 2010 methods used to analyze freeway on-ramp facilities does not take ramp metering into account (Transportation Research Board 2010). The objective and the effect of ramp metering is to smooth out traffic flows, reducing the magnitude of surges in traffic flow. As a result, the effect of ramp meters is to improve traffic operations, therefore improving ramp junction LOS. Because the ramp junction analysis presented in this traffic impact study does not take ramp metering into account, the LOS are considered to conservatively describe worse cast operating conditions.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1460
Table 3. Level of Service Criteria for Freeway Merge / Diverge and Weaving Areas Freeway Ramp Merge and Diverge
Freeway
Weave Area
Level of Vehicle Vehicle
Service Density Operating Characteristics Density
A Less than or
equal to 10.
LOS A represents unrestricted operations. Density
is low enough to permit smooth merging and
diverging, with very little turbulence in the traffic
stream.
Less than or equal
to 10.
B
Greater than
10. Less than
or equal to 20.
At LOS B, merging and diverging maneuvers
become noticeable to through drivers, and minimal
turbulence occurs.
Greater than 10.
Less than or equal
to 20.
C
Greater than
20. Less than
or equal to 28.
At LOS C, speed within the influence area begins
to decline as turbulence levels become much more
noticeable. Both ramp and freeway vehicles begin
to adjust their speeds to accomplish smooth
Greater than 20.
Less than or equal
to 28.
D
Greater than
28. Less than
or equal to 35.
At LOS D, turbulence levels in the influence area
become intrusive, and virtually all vehicles slow to
accommodate merging and diverging. Some ramp
queues may form at heavily used on-ramps, but
freeway operation remains stable.
Greater than 28.
Less than or equal
to 35.
E Greater than
35. LOS E represents conditions approaching or at
capacity. Small changes in demand or disruptions
within the traffic stream can cause both ramp and
freeway queues to form.
Greater than 35.
F †V/C >1
LOS F defines operating conditions within queues
that form on both the ramp and the freeway
mainline when capacity is exceeded by demand.
†V/C >1
____________________________________
Note: Vehicle density is expressed as passenger car equivalents per mile per lane.
Source: Transportation Research Board 2010.
† = Volume exceeds capacity. Therefore, the LOS is F. V/C ratio shown in lieu of density.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1461
Travel Forecasting
As part of the General Plan update process, the City of Stockton developed a series of travel demand forecasting simulation models. In consultation with City of Stockton staff (Moore, pers. comm.), travel forecasts for this traffic impact study are based on the City of Stockton General Plan travel demand forecasting simulation model (City of Stockton 2018b).
Travel models of the following two conditions were used to develop forecasts of future year traffic volumes for this traffic impact study:
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP), and
2040 Conditions with the General Plan.
The City’s travel model produces forecasts of daily traffic volumes. The forecasts of daily volumes generated by the City’s travel model are adequate for use in the analysis of roadway segment LOS, and are used for daily volume forecasts in this traffic impact study. However, the daily volumes generated by the traffic model are not, by themselves, adequate for use in the peak hour LOS analysis of study intersections.
Daily traffic volumes from the travel models were used to generate growth factors. These growth factors were applied to existing peak hour intersection turning movement traffic volumes.
The development of future year intersection turning movement traffic volumes requires that the turning movements at each intersection “balance”. To achieve the balance, inbound traffic volumes must equal the outbound traffic volumes, and the volumes must be distributed among the various left-turn, through, and right-turn movements at each intersection. The “balancing” of future year intersection turning movement traffic volumes was conducted using methods described in the Transportation Research Board’s (TRB’s) National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 255, Highway Traffic Data for Urbanized Area Project Planning and Design (Transportation Research Board 1982). The NCHRP 255 method applies the desired peak hour directional volumes to the intersection turning movement volumes, using an iterative process to balance and adjust the resulting forecasts to match the desired peak hour directional volumes.
LEVEL OF SERVICE AND SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS
Significance thresholds are used in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental documents to identify when the impacts of a project should be considered significant. Significance thresholds are the criteria used to determine the significance of impacts.
The City of Stockton Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (City of Stockton 2003) presents the methods, assumptions and significance thresholds specified by the City of Stockton for use in preparing traffic impact studies. In general, the methods, assumptions and significance threshold presented in the guidelines are applied in this traffic impact study. It is important to note the significance thresholds specified in the guidelines are based on policies presented in the City General Plan. More specifically, the General Plan policies define ranges of LOS considered to Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1462
be acceptable and unacceptable. The guidelines then use the General Plan policy ranges of LOS to identify whether a project impact is less than significant or significant.
Level of Service and Vehicle Miles Traveled
In the City of Stockton Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, the impacts of a project on LOS are an important factor in determining whether a project has a significant impact. However, recent changes to CEQA have changed how lead agencies use LOS in determining whether a project has a significant impact on transportation. As noted in the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) document Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research 2018), “Senate Bill 743 (Steinberg, 2013), which was codified in Public Resources Code section 21099, required changes to the guidelines implementing CEQA (CEQA Guidelines) (Cal. Code Regs., Title 14, Div. 6, Ch. 3, § 15000 et seq.) regarding the analysis of transportation impacts. . . OPR has proposed, and the California Natural Resources Agency (Agency) has certified and adopted, changes to the CEQA Guidelines that identify vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s transportation impacts. With the California Natural Resources Agency’s certification and adoption of the changes to the CEQA Guidelines, automobile delay, as measured by “level of service” and other similar metrics, generally no longer constitutes a significant environmental effect under CEQA. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subd. (b)(3).)” Notably, the City of Stockton Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines was prepared before the recent changes to CEQA due to Senate Bill 743 (Steinberg 2013). As a result, the City guidelines specify use of LOS in determining whether a project has a significant impact. Consistent with the approach described in the OPR Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, LOS will not be used in this traffic impact study as a basis for identifying significant impacts. Rather, the methods, assumptions and significance thresholds presented in the City guidelines are used to determine whether the project is consistent or inconsistent with General Plan policies on LOS, and whether the magnitude of inconsistency should be considered significant or less than significant.
General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria
As noted immediately above, in this traffic impact study the significance of the proposed project’s inconsistency with General Plan policies is based on a determination of whether resulting LOS is considered acceptable. A project’s inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered significant if implementation of the project would result in LOS changing from levels considered acceptable to levels considered unacceptable, or if the project would substantially worsen already unacceptable LOS.
The City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines notes that:
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1463
“The City of Stockton’s General Plan has a LOS ‘D’ standard for its roadway system. Intersections and roadway segments operating at LOS ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’, or ‘D’ conditions are considered acceptable, while those operating at LOS ‘E’ or ‘F’ conditions are considered unacceptable.
“For a City intersection, a transportation impact for a project is considered significant if the addition of project traffic would cause an intersection that would function at LOS ‘D’ or better without the Project to function at LOS ‘E’ or ‘F’. “For City intersections with a LOS ‘E’ or ‘F’ conditions without the project, a transportation impact for a project is considered significant if the addition of project traffic causes an increase of greater than 5 seconds in the average delay for the intersection.”
Portions of the City’s guidelines do not specifically address criteria used to quantify changes in operating conditions on roadway segments or freeway ramp junctions. For this traffic impact study, the City’s significance thresholds described above are also applied to roadway segments and freeway ramp junctions. As shown in Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3, LOS at intersections is measured in seconds of delay, LOS on roadway segments is measured in traffic volume, and LOS at ramp junctions is measured in vehicle density. Therefore, for roadway segments and ramp junctions already at LOS E or F, an increase of greater than five seconds of delay cannot be identified. Because roadway segment LOS is measured in traffic volumes, rather than seconds of delay, an increase in traffic volumes is used in this traffic impact study, in lieu of the threshold of five seconds of delay. At ramp junctions when the demand exceeds capacity, an increase in density is not identified; however, the densities of each area are based upon the volume.
Therefore, for this traffic impact study, if a roadway segment or ramp junction operates at LOS E or F without the project, the inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered significant if the addition of project traffic causes an increase of greater than five percent in traffic volumes.
The Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan (City of Stockton 2018a) notes:
“The City of Stockton strives to maintain LOS D or better for peak hour intersection and daily roadway segment operations. However, in the Downtown and other areas, exceptions to this standard are permissible to support other goals, such as encouraging safe travel by other modes of transportation than the car. The City can use VMT and LOS to support non-auto transportation modes, with the ultimate goal of maintaining and enhancing a complete roadway network that serves all travel modes in a balanced and equitable way.” This section of the City General Plan lists more than 14 facilities as exceptions to the LOS D policy standard, and lists the applicable standard. Among the facilities listed as exceptions is “Eighth Street, Airport Way to Mariposa Road – LOS E”. Consistent with the City General Plan, a LOS E standard is applied in this traffic impact study to the intersection of Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1464
SR 99 is a facility under the jurisdiction of Caltrans. While the City General Plan identifies LOS E and LOS F as standards for portions of the SR 99 corridor, Caltrans has set a LOS D standard (Dumas, pers. comm.). At the direction of City staff, because SR 99 is under the jurisdiction of Caltrans, LOS D is used as the LOS standard for the SR 99 corridor in this traffic impact study; LOS E and F are considered unacceptable. In this traffic impact study, the Caltrans LOS D standard is applied to mainline freeway LOS, ramp junction LOS, and to LOS at freeway interchange intersections.
In this traffic impact study, a project’s inconsistency with General Plan policies will be considered significant if:
the project would result in traffic operating conditions changing from an acceptable LOS to an unacceptable LOS, or
when LOS without the project is already unacceptable, the project would result in a substantial degradation of traffic operating conditions (e.g., an increase of more than five seconds of delay at an intersection, an increase of more than five percent in traffic volume on a roadway segment, or an increase of more than five percent in the freeway and ramp volumes for ramps).
Maximum Feasible Roadway Improvements
This traffic impact study identifies traffic operating conditions that would result from background development of land use not related to the proposed project, and would result from development of the proposed project. In some cases, this development would result in unacceptable LOS. If unacceptable LOS is forecasted, feasible roadway improvements needed to achieve acceptable LOS are identified.
For this traffic impact study, maximum feasible sizes of roadway facilities have been established.
For intersections, the maximum feasible size is considered to be seven approach lanes on each leg of an intersection. For example, two left-turn lanes, four through lanes, and a right-turn lane (a total of seven lanes) is considered to be the maximum feasible size on an intersection approach. Existing land use development, physical or right-of-way constraints, and the relative benefits of additional roadway improvements in some cases result in a smaller approach being considered the maximum feasible size.
For SR 99 in the study area for this traffic impact study, the Caltrans Transportation Concept Report State Route 99 (California Department of Transportation 2017) identifies a “conceptual facility” width of eight lanes (four in each direction) by the year 2040. Therefore, an eight-lane width is considered to be the maximum feasible size for SR 99.
It is technically possible to construct roadway facilities larger than the maximum feasible sizes applied in this traffic impact study. However, for the following reasons, this traffic impact study considers these sizes to be not feasible.
Pedestrian Safety – The amount of time required by pedestrians to walk across an intersection leg with more than seven approach lanes is considered excessive.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1465
The possibility of signal lights changing before pedestrians are able to exit the intersection is considered unacceptably high.
Vehicle Safety – When a vehicle enters an intersection on the yellow light, the amount of time required for this subject vehicle to depart overly-large intersections is considered excessive. The possibility of other vehicles on conflicting movements entering the intersection before the subject vehicle has departed is considered unacceptably high.
Intersection Efficiency – The timing of signal lights may be modified to provide protection for pedestrians and vehicles at overly-large intersections. However, the amount of time needed for pedestrians and vehicles to exit an overly-large intersection becomes excessive. This results in the intersection operating with an unacceptable degree of inefficiency.
Engineering Constraints – Overhead structures and equipment are required to traverse both intersection approaches and freeway lanes. Overhead structures involve primarily overcrossing roadways. Equipment includes signal light support structures, power lines, and signs. With larger facilities, the size and resulting cost of these structures and equipment becomes unacceptable.
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD
The City of Stockton General Plan (City of Stockton 2018a) Policy TR-4.3 addresses the topic of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as an impact in CEQA documents. The policy states, “Use the threshold recommended by the California Office of Planning and Research for determining whether VMT impacts associated with land uses are considered significant under State environmental analysis requirements.” The OPR Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (State of California 2018) provides recommended thresholds for determining the significance of VMT impacts associated with land use development projects. Specific thresholds are provided for residential, office, and retail commercial types of development. A specific threshold is not provided for industrial land use, like the Mariposa Industrial Park project and is, therefore, considered not applicable for this traffic impact study.
The City of Stockton General Plan Policy Action TR-4.3A states, “Establish a threshold of 15 percent below baseline VMT per capita to determine a significant transportation impact under the California Environmental Quality Act.” The 15 percent threshold in General Plan Action TR-4.3A is similar to thresholds for residential and office land use types recommended by OPR in the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, and is used in this traffic impact study to determine the significance of VMT impacts associated with the Mariposa Industrial Park project.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1466
Consistent with General Plan Action TR4.3A, if a project would result in a 15 percent or more reduction of vehicle travel, a project is considered to have a less-than-significant impact. A project that would not result in a reduction of 15 percent or more is considered to have a significant impact. The percent change in vehicle travel is determined by comparing projectrelated travel to the amount of travel that would occur without approval of the proposed project.
In this traffic impact study, vehicle travel associated with the Mariposa Industrial Park project will be compared to vehicle travel associated with the land uses currently designated in the City of Stockton General Plan.
At the time the analysis presented in this traffic impact study commenced, the City of Stockton had not adopted guidelines for analyzing VMT or determining the significance of a project’s impact on VMT. The City was in the process of developing and adopting guidelines, but the process was not completed. The VMT analysis presented in this traffic impact study is not intended to pre-empt the City process of developing and adopting VMT guidelines. Rather, the analysis presented in this traffic impact study is intended to be a good-faith effort at disclosing and identifying the VMT impacts of the Mariposa Industrial Park project based on currently available data and guidance.
EXISTING INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LEVELS OF SERVICE The following is a description of existing traffic operating conditions at the study intersections.
Traffic Volumes
Since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, traffic volumes have at times been lower than normal. With the pandemic, places of employment, schools, social and recreational gatherings, sports events, restaurants, and many other types of activities have been substantially reduced or prohibited. As a result, the use of new traffic volume count data collected during the pandemic could result in volumes that are unrepresentatively low. To ensure data used in this traffic study are representative, the traffic analysis of the Mariposa Industrial Park project is based on both existing traffic volume data collected before the outbreak of Covid-19, and current new traffic volume count data collected since the outbreak. Data collected before the outbreak of Covid-19 are from previously-prepared traffic analyses and from StreetLight Data (https://www.streetlightdata.com/). Data from new traffic volume count data collected since the outbreak were used to validate data collected before the outbreak of Covid-19. This approach was applied to intersection traffic volumes, described immediately below. This approach was also applied to roadway segment and ramp junction traffic volumes, described later in this traffic impact study.
At the following study intersections, turning movement count data collected for the Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Sanchez-Hoggan Annexation (City of Stockton 2020) were used in this traffic impact study.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1467
4. Mariposa Road & SR 99 West Frontage Road
5. Mariposa Road & SR 99 Southbound Ramps
6. Mariposa Road & SR 99 Northbound Ramps
10. Mariposa Road & Austin Road
11. Arch Road & Austin Road
12. Arch-Airport Road & Qantas Lane
13. Arch Road & SR 99
Traffic count data collected for the intersections listed above are presented in the technical appendix. The peak period intersection turning movement count data were collected on Thursday March 7, 2019. The data were collected during the 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. period, and the 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. period. Volumes during the highest one-hour period were used for this traffic impact study. It should be noted that a since the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, a south leg has been constructed at intersection 10, Mariposa Road & Austin Road. However, as noted previously, traffic volumes during the pandemic could be unrepresentatively low. To ensure representative data are presented in this traffic impact study, conditions before the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic are used.
At the following study intersections, pre-Covid-19 intersection turning movement count data were collected for weekday periods between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., and between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. from StreetLight Data. These data represent Tuesday through Thursday volumes collected during six non-holiday months between March 2019 and February 2020. Traffic volume count data collected from StreetLight Data are presented in the technical appendix.
1. Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Southbound Ramps
2. Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Northbound Ramps
3. Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road
7. Mariposa Road & Stagecoach Road
8. Mariposa Road & Munford Avenue
9. Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road
To validate the traffic volumes collected from StreetLight Data, new count data were also collected on Tuesday January 12, 2021 at the intersections listed above during the 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. morning peak period and the 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. evening peak. The new count data were used to adjust volumes from StreetLight Data at the following intersection legs:
the southwest leg of the intersection of Mariposa Road & Stagecoach Road, the southwest leg of the intersection of Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road, and the northeast leg of the intersection of Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road.
Traffic volumes on the intersection legs listed above are relatively low and the intersection turning movement volumes from StreetLight Data were considered to be unrepresentative. The new count data collected on Tuesday January 12, 2021 were used to adjust the turning movement volumes on the intersection legs listed above.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1468
Using the approach described above results in volumes applied in this traffic study which compensate for decreases caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.
Figure 9 and Figure 10 present the existing lane configurations and existing a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes at the existing study intersections.
Intersection turning movement count data collected for this traffic impact study were disaggregated to light-duty vehicles (e.g., automobiles) and heavy vehicles (e.g., heavy-duty trucks). These data were used to estimate heavy vehicle percentage at each study intersection.
The percentages are shown in Table 4, and were used in the intersection LOS analysis presented in this traffic impact study.
Intersection Levels of Service
Table 5 presents a summary of existing a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour LOS at the 13 existing study intersections. The worksheets presenting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.
All of the 13 existing study intersections operate at acceptable LOS C or better during both the a.m. peak hour and the p.m. peak hour. No improvements are needed at these intersections to achieve acceptable LOS.
EXISTING ROADWAY SEGMENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LEVELS OF SERVICE The following is a description of existing traffic operating conditions on study roadway segments.
Roadway Segment Traffic Volumes
As described in more detail previously in this traffic impact study, to ensure data used in this study are representative, the traffic analysis of the Mariposa Industrial Park project is based on both existing traffic volume data collected before the outbreak of Covid-19, and current new traffic volume count data collected since the outbreak.
Roadway segment traffic volume count data were collected for 24-hour periods for the Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Sanchez-Hoggan Annexation (City of Stockton 2020). For the following roadway segments, the data were collected on Wednesday March 13, 2019; and Thursday March 21, 2019. Traffic count data collected for the following roadway segments were used in this traffic impact study, and are presented in the technical appendix:
106. Mariposa Road, Between Carpenter Road and SR 99
107. Mariposa Road, Between the Project Site and Carpenter Road 108. Mariposa Road, Southeast of the Project Site
109. Mariposa Road, East of Austin Road
111. Arch-Airport Road, Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1469
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Ave
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden Gate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden Gate Ave / SR 99 NB Ramps
5 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 SB Ramps
3 Mariposa Rd / 8th St / Farmington Rd
6 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 NB Ramps
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 9
EXISTING INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
78 (101)96 (94)91 (70)
(37) 24
(122) 134(120) 122
242 (110)276 (473)
65 (57)
124 (176)
(144) 83
(270) 77
(92) 90
(346) 255
(200) 65
(49) 37
429 (434)
42 (38)
(498) 392
(97) 161
95 (182)0 (0)66 (50)
(122) 150
(49) 95
454 (532)
160 (256)
(582) 471
(380) 328
470 (255)370 (435)
50 (95)
260 (278)
(525) 408
(161) 118 128 (146) 29 (89)
418 (443)
67 (86)
(211) 70
(528) 287
N.T.S.
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Future Roadway
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1470
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwest Project Dwy
12 Arch Airport Rd/ Qantas Ln
15 Mariposa Rd / Southeast Project Dwy
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 10
EXISTING INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
85 (98)1 (1)306 (386)
(3) 0
(2) 1
(11) 5
490 (174)
820 (536)
12 (14)
(54) 89
(785) 482
(3) 5
71 (19)119 (61)26 (12)
(137) 62(162) 42
(4) 5
7 (36)
42 (26)
1 (3)
(48) 26
(45) 28
(59) 192
43 (176)27 (73)
(0) 123
(0) 136643 (226) 540 (173)
(209) 429
(130) 265
205 (502)
246 (290)
154 (238)
(498) 231
(253) 304
(436) 253
N.T.S.
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Future Roadway
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1471
Table 4. Heavy Truck Percentage
AM Peak PM Peak
Intersection Hour Hour
1 Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Southbound Ramps 6% 4%
2 Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Northbound Ramps 7% 3%
3 Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road 9% 3%
4 Mariposa Road & SR 99 West Frontage Road 5% 5%
5 Mariposa Road & SR 99 Southbound Ramps 7% 6%
6 Mariposa Road & SR 99 Northbound Ramps 9% 7%
7 Mariposa Road & Stagecoach Road 21% 10%
8 Mariposa Road & Munford Avenue 20% 9%
9 Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road 20% 8%
10 Mariposa Road & Austin Road 10% 6%
11 Arch Road & Austin Road 20% 20%
12 Arch-Airport Road & Qantas Lane 8% 9%
13 Arch Road & SR 99 9% 9%
14 Mariposa Road & Northwest Project Driveway 20% 8%
15 Mariposa Road & Southeast Project Driveway 20% 8%
____________________________
Source: Peak hour intersection traffic volume count data.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1472
Table 5. Intersection Level of Service -
Existing Conditions
Signal AM Peak PM Peak
Study Intersections Control Met? LOS Delay LOS Delay
1 Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Southbound Ramps Signal B 13.3 B 15.2 2 Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Northbound Ramps Signal B 13.6 B 13.9 3 Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road Signal C 34.0 C 32.4 4 Mariposa Road & SR 99 West Frontage Road Signal B 17.8 B 17.1 5 Mariposa Road & SR 99 Southbound Ramps Signal A 9.5 B 10.1 6 Mariposa Road & SR 99 Northbound Ramps Signal A 9.1 A 9.0 7 Mariposa Road & Stagecoach Road Signal B 18.4 B 17.3
8 Mariposa Road & Munford Avenue Signal B 11.7 B 17.7
9 Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road Unsig No A 1.8 A 2.4
10 Mariposa Road & Austin Road Signal B 15.1 B 16.6
11 Arch Road & Austin Road Signal C 28.8 C 27.2
12 Arch-Airport Road & Qantas Lane Signal B 16.9 B 17.2 13 Arch Road & SR 99 Signal B 18.4 B 17.0
14 Mariposa Road & Northwest Project Driveway - - - - - - - - - - 15 Mariposa Road & Southeast Project Driveway - - - - - - - - - - ______________________________________________
Notes: LOS = Level of Service. "Inters. Control" = Type of intersection control. "Signal" = Signalized light control. "Unsig" = Unsignalized stop-sign control.
Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle.
Per City of Stockton guidelines, intersection average delay is reported for all intersections, including unsignalized intersections.
Dashes ( "- -" ) indicate intersection not present under this scenario.
Inters. Warrant
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1473
At study roadway segment 105, Mariposa Road between SR 99 and 8th Street/Farmington Road, pre-Covid-19 traffic volume count data for weekday 24-hour periods were collected from StreetLight Data. These data represent Tuesday through Thursday volumes collected during six non-holiday months between March 2019 and February 2020. Traffic volume count data collected from StreetLight Data are presented in the technical appendix.
To validate the 24-hour roadway segment traffic volume data collected from StreetLight Data, new count data were also collected on Tuesday January 12, 2021 on Mariposa Road between SR 99 and 8th Street/Farmington Road.
For the following freeway mainline roadway segments, 24-hour traffic volume data were collected from the Caltrans Traffic Census Program Internet Website (California Department of Transportation 2021) and applied in this traffic impact study. 101. SR 99 North of Crosstown Freeway (SR 4)
102. Crosstown Freeway (SR 4) West of SR 99
103. SR 99 Between Crosstown Freeway (SR 4) and Golden Gate Avenue 104. SR 99 Between Golden Gate Avenue and Mariposa Road 110. SR 99 Between Mariposa Road and Arch-Airport Road
112. SR 99 South of Arch-Airport Road
Table 6 presents the existing daily traffic volumes for study roadway segments.
Roadway Segment Levels of Service
Table 6 presents a summary of existing LOS on the 12 study roadway segments. 11 of the study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS C or better. No improvements are needed on these 11 roadway segments to achieve acceptable LOS.
105. Mariposa Road Between SR 99 and 8th Street/Farmington Road Under Existing Conditions, this roadway segment operates at LOS E. This LOS is considered unacceptable. The following improvement is recommended:
Widen the portions of this roadway segment which are one lane in each direction to two lanes in each direction.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1474
Table 6. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Existing Conditions
Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
101. SR 99 - North of 8 172,800 95,000 0.55 C
Crosstown Freeway (SR 4)
102. Crosstown Freeway - 8 172,800 104,900 0.61 C
West of SR 99
103. SR 99 - Between Crosstown Fwy 8 172,800 94,000 0.54 C and Golden Gate Avenue
104. SR 99 - Between 8 172,800 92,300 0.53 C
Golden Gate Ave and Mariposa Rd
105. Mariposa Road - Between 2 17,300 16,295 0.94 E
SR 99 and 8th St./Farmington Rd
106. Mariposa Road - Between 2 17,300 10,034 0.58 C
Carpenter Road and SR 99
107. Mariposa Road - Between the 2 17,300 9,042 0.52 B
Project Site and Carpenter Road
108. Mariposa Road - 2 17,300 9,042 0.52 B
Southeast of the Project Site
109. Mariposa Road - 2 17,300 8,149 0.47 A
East of Austin Road
110. SR 99 - Between Mariposa Road 6 129,600 80,600 0.62 C and Arch-Airport Road
111. Arch-Airport Road - 6 59,300 26,889 0.45 A
Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
112. SR 99 - 6 129,600 85,000 0.66 C
South of Arch-Airport Road
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1475
A summary of LOS with recommended improvements is presented in Table 7. With this recommended improvement, this roadway segment would operate at LOS A. This LOS is considered acceptable.
Table 7. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Existing Conditions With Recommended Improvements
Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
105. Mariposa Road - Between 4 38,200 16,295 0.43 A
SR 99 and 8th St./Farmington Rd
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio.
EXISTING RAMP JUNCTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LEVELS OF SERVICE The following is a description of existing traffic operating conditions at the study ramp junctions.
Ramp Junction Traffic Volumes
As described in more detail previously in this traffic impact study, to ensure data used in this study are representative, the traffic analysis of the Mariposa Industrial Park project is based on both existing traffic volume data collected before the outbreak of Covid-19, and current new traffic volume count data collected since the outbreak.
Traffic volume count data were collected for the following freeway ramp junctions for the Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Sanchez-Hoggan Annexation (City of Stockton 2020). These data are applied in this traffic impact study. 208. SR 99 at Mariposa Road Southbound On-Ramp (Slip) Merge 209. SR 99 at Mariposa Road Northbound Off-Ramp Diverge 210. SR 99 at Arch-Airport Road Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge 211. SR 99 at Arch-Airport Road Northbound On-Ramp Merge 212. SR 99 at Arch-Airport Road Southbound On-Ramp Merge 213. SR 99 at Arch-Airport Road Northbound Off-Ramp Diverge Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1476
At the following study ramp junctions, pre-Covid-19 count data were collected for weekday periods between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., and between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. from StreetLight Data. These data represent Tuesday through Thursday volumes collected during six non-holiday months between March 2019 and February 2020. Traffic volume count data collected from StreetLight Data are presented in the technical appendix. 201. SR 99 Southbound Weave Area Between Fremont Street and Crosstown Freeway 202. SR 99 Northbound Weave Area Between Crosstown Freeway and Fremont Street 203. SR 99 Northbound at Crosstown Freeway (SR 4) Off-Ramp Diverge 204. SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge 205. SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue Northbound On-Ramp Merge 206. SR 99 Southbound Weave Area Between Golden Gate Avenue and Mariposa Road 207. SR 99 Northbound Weave Area Between Mariposa Road and Golden Gate Avenue To validate the ramp junction traffic volume data collected from StreetLight Data, peak hour traffic volume data for freeway facilities were collected from the Caltrans PeMS database (http://pems.dot.ca.gov/). Data for Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays between February 4, 2020 and Thursday February 13, 2020 were used to validate the traffic volume data collected from StreetLight Data.
Figure 11 and Figure 12 present the existing a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes at the existing ramp junctions.
Ramp Junction Levels of Service
Table 8 presents a summary of existing a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour LOS at the 13 study ramp junctions. The worksheets presenting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.
12 of the 13 ramp junctions operate at acceptable LOS C or better during both the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour. No improvements are needed at these 12 ramp junctions to achieve acceptable LOS.
201. SR 99 Southbound Weave Area Between Fremont Street and Crosstown Freeway Under Existing Conditions, the SR 99 southbound weave area between the Fremont Street interchange and the Crosstown Freeway interchange operates at LOS E during the a.m. peak hour.
This LOS is considered unacceptable. Existing land use adjacent to SR 99 and the location of the two interchanges results in improvements to the weave area being considered not feasible. As a result, no improvements are recommended to improve LOS at this location.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1477
201
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
204
SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
207
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
202
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
205
SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
208
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Southbound On-Ramp (Slip) Merge
203
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Diverge
206
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
209
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Northbound Off-Ramp Diverge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 11
EXISTING FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,
AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
(3488) 2289 3472 (4203)
3584 (3976)
(3158) 3590
N.T.S.
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane (4181) 5683 (2981) 3466
(352) 275
(1863) 1524
3598 (5105) 2349 (3594)
3613 (3302)
158 (191)
546 (415)
(3337) 3604 (3113) 3216
3556 (3944) 3466 (3871)
(246) 172 (319) 262
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1478
210
SR 99 at Arch-Airport Rd
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
213
SR 99 at Arch-Airport Rd
Northbound Off-Ramp Diverge
211
SR 99 at Arch-Airport Rd
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
212
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Diverge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 12
EXISTING FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,
AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
3281 (3378)
(2920) 2525
3281 (3378)
(2920) 2525
N.T.S.
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1479
Table 8. State Route 99 Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Level of Service - Existing Conditions
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Freeway Ramp Freeway Ramp
Ramp Junction Volume Volume Density LOS Volume Volume Density LOS 201 SB Weave Between 5,688 492 > Capacity F 4,181 334 21.4 C Fremont St & Crosstown Fwy 3,466 2,709 2,981 1,534
202 NB Weave Between 3,598 275 18.1 B 5,105 352 26.3 C
Crosstown Fwy & Fremont St 2,349 1,524 3,594 1,863
203 NB at Crosstown Fwy Off-Ramp 2,289 2,126 < 10 A 3,488 1,624 < 10 A 204 Golden Gate Ave SB Off-Ramp 3,613 529 < 10 A 3,302 589 < 10 A 205 Golden Gate Ave NB On-Ramp 3,584 491 19.3 B 3,976 672 22.9 C 206 SB Weave Between 3,604 158 17.5 B 3,337 191 16.4 B
Golden Gate Ave & Mariposa Rd 3,216 546 3,113 415
207 NB Weave Between 3,556 172 17.3 B 3,944 246 19.7 B
Mariposa Rd & Golden Gate Ave 3,466 262 3,871 319
208 Mariposa Rd SB On-Ramp (Slip) 3,590 118 16.9 B 3,158 161 14.9 B 209 Mariposa Rd NB Off-Ramp 3,472 245 22.2 C 4,203 171 25.8 C 210 Arch-Airport Rd SB Off-Ramp 2,525 1,183 < 10 A 2,920 399 < 10 A 211 Arch-Airport Rd NB On-Ramp 3,281 436 17.3 B 3,378 996 22.3 C 212 Arch-Airport Rd SB On-Ramp 2,525 407 14.0 B 2,920 672 18.3 B 213 Arch-Airport Rd NB Off-Ramp 3,281 694 22.1 C 3,378 339 21.8 C _____________________________________________
Notes: "LOS" = Level of Service. "NB" = Northbound. "SB" = Southbound.
Density is expressed in passenger cars per mile per lane. "> Capacity" = volume-to-capacity ratio greater than 1.0.
For weave areas, north freeway and ramp volumes are listed first and south volumes are listed second.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1480
EXISTING PLUS APPROVED PROJECTS
NO MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT CONDITIONS
The EPAP No Mariposa Industrial Park Project condition is a near-term future background condition. This condition is also referred to in this traffic impact study as EPAP No Project conditions. Development of land uses and roadway improvements associated with previouslyapproved but as yet unconstructed projects are assumed in this condition. This scenario does not include development of the proposed Mariposa Industrial Park project. The EPAP No Project condition, therefore, serves as the baseline condition used to assess the significance of near-term project-related traffic effects.
TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
In consultation with City of Stockton staff (Moore pers. comm.), the City of Stockton Travel Demand Model (City of Stockton 2004) was used to develop forecasts of background increases in traffic volumes under near-term EPAP conditions. The increases in traffic volumes reflect development of near-term previously-approved projects in Stockton. The model was modified in the vicinity of the project site to add detail to the model and more accurately represent how land uses are provided access to the roadway network. Minor changes were also made to land uses in the model to accurately represent land uses.
Application of these methods results in the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour intersection traffic volumes presented in Figure 13 and Figure 14, the daily traffic volumes presented in Table 9, and the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour ramp junction traffic volumes presented in Figure 15 and Figure 16.
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The EPAP No Project condition assumes roadway improvements associated with previouslyapproved land use development projects, and approved roadway improvement projects. These near-term roadway improvements were identified in the NorCal Logistics Center – Draft Environmental Impact Report (Project File No. P12-110) (City of Stockton 2014), and the Draft Environmental Impact Report - Mariposa Lakes Specific Plan - State Clearinghouse #2006022035 (City of Stockton 2007) and the Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Sanchez-Hoggan Annexation (City of Stockton 2020). The improvements include, for example, construction of a fourth leg at the intersection of Mariposa Road & Austin Road, which is associated with the Sanchez-Hoggan development project.
The resulting lane geometrics assumed for EPAP No Project conditions are shown in Figure 13 and Figure 14 and in Table 9.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1481
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Ave
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden Gate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden Gate Ave / SR 99 NB Ramps
5 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 SB Ramps
3 Mariposa Rd / 8th St / Farmington Rd
6 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 NB Ramps
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 13
EPAP NO PROJECT
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
29 (56)43 (63)154 (120)
(27) 12(88) 83
(276) 276
366 (197)298 (500)
61 (44)
168 (220)
(207) 123
(375) 118
(23) 13
(326) 240
(132) 26(114) 69
576 (642)
103 (77)
(695) 565
(52) 92
138 (242)0 (0)45 (27)
(191) 218
(97) 188
645 (880)
210 (402)
(810) 862
(566) 489
752 (451)511 (448)
61 (138)
390 (462)
(867) 753
(310) 234 172 (194) 40 (121)
522 (546)
57 (80)
(306) 113
(589) 324
N.T.S.
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Future Roadway
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1482
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwest Project Dwy
12 Arch Airport Rd/ Qantas Ln
15 Mariposa Rd / Southeast Project Dwy
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 14
EPAP NO PROJECT
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
85 (92)1 (1)588 (767)
(2) 0
(1) 1
(13) 5
925 (351)
1469 (1111)
14 (16)
(50) 89
(1434) 1009
(2) 3
135 (165)237 (49)24 (12)
(221) 140
(284) 97
(8) 10
7 (31)
43 (21)
2 (6)
(121) 161
(41) 22
(122) 320
1291 (483)1685 (592)
(319) 648
(322) 624
647 (1593)
504 (657)
363 (576)
(1004) 485
(559) 686
(683) 385
N.T.S.
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Future Roadway
189 (402)2 (1)36 (83)
(167) 27
(2) 1
(14) 2
124 (26)
479 (191)
17 (7)
(176) 361
(526) 160
(82) 210
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1483
Table 9. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) No Project Conditions Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
101. SR 99 - North of 8 172,800 110,947 0.64 C
Crosstown Freeway (SR 4)
102. Crosstown Freeway - 8 172,800 117,127 0.68 C
West of SR 99
103. SR 99 - Between Crosstown Fwy 8 172,800 120,768 0.70 C and Golden Gate Avenue
104. SR 99 - Between 8 172,800 119,541 0.69 C
Golden Gate Ave and Mariposa Rd
105. Mariposa Road - Between 2 17,300 25,552 1.48 F
SR 99 and 8th St./Farmington Rd
106. Mariposa Road - Between 4 38,200 16,570 0.43 A
Carpenter Road and SR 99
107. Mariposa Road - Between the 4 38,200 15,285 0.40 A Project Site and Carpenter Road
108. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 15,285 0.40 A
Southeast of the Project Site
109. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 11,039 0.29 A
East of Austin Road
110. SR 99 - Between Mariposa Road 6 129,600 95,887 0.74 D and Arch-Airport Road
111. Arch-Airport Road - 6 59,300 50,887 0.86 E
Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
112. SR 99 - 6 129,600 85,077 0.66 C
South of Arch-Airport Road
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1484
201
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
204
SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
207
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
202
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
205
SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
208
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Southbound On-Ramp (Slip) Merge
203
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Diverge
206
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
209
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Northbound Off-Ramp Diverge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 15
EPAP NO PROJECT FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,
AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
(4637) 3043 3890 (5783)
4789 (5329)
(3478) 5209
N.T.S.
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
(361) 282
(1892) 1565
4336 (6152) 3053 (4621)
4657 (4257)
332 (398)
710 (539)
(4254) 4628 (4113) 4250
4758 (5262) 4715 (5281)
(500) 350 (481) 393
(5162) 6934 (3938) 4633
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1485
210
SR 99 at Arch-Airport Rd
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
213
SR 99 at Arch-Airport Rd
Northbound Off-Ramp Diverge
211
SR 99 at Arch-Airport Rd
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
212
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Diverge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 16
EPAP NO PROJECT FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,
AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
3164 (3472)
(2713) 2467
3164 (3472)
(2713) 2467
N.T.S.
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1486
INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
Table 10 presents the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour LOS at each study intersection under EPAP No Project conditions. The worksheets presenting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.
Traffic volumes under EPAP No Project conditions would be generally higher than under Existing Conditions and, as a result, vehicle delay at study intersections under EPAP No Project conditions would be higher than under Existing Conditions.
Under EPAP No Project conditions, LOS at 10 of the 13 study intersections would be at acceptable LOS D or better during both the a.m. peak hour and the p.m. peak hour. No improvements are needed at these 10 intersections to achieve acceptable LOS. The following describes the three study intersections that would operate at unacceptable LOS under EPAP No Project conditions.
3. Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road
Under EPAP No Project conditions, the intersection of Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road would operate at LOS F with 94.9 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS F with 130.0 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS F is considered unacceptable. The following improvement is recommended:
Split the northeastbound combined through/right-turn lane into an exclusive northeastbound through lane and a “free” northeastbound-to-southeastbound rightturn lane.
The above improvement would be consistent with the recommended improvement (described below) for Roadway Segment 105, Mariposa Road Between SR 99 and 8th Street/Farmington Road, to widen the portions of this roadway segment which are one lane in each direction to two lanes in each direction. The added southeastbound departure lane on Mariposa Road would serve vehicles departing the “free” northeastbound-to-southeastbound right-turn lane at this intersection.
The existing northeastbound combined through/right-turn lane is approximately 23 to 24 feet wide and the single southwestbound departure lane is approximately 21 to 22 feet wide. As a result, the existing pavement width on the southwest leg of this intersection is considered wide enough to accommodate the above improvement.
As shown in Table 11, implementation of the above recommended improvement would improve traffic operations to LOS D with 38.2 seconds of delay in the a.m. peak hour and LOS E with 64.3 seconds of delay in the p.m. peak hour. As described in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, LOS D and E at this intersection are considered acceptable.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1487
Table 10. Intersection Level of Service -
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) No Project Conditions Signal AM Peak PM Peak
Study Intersections Control Met? LOS Delay LOS Delay
1 Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Southbound Ramps Signal B 14.1 B 15.9 2 Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Northbound Ramps Signal B 15.6 C 23.2 3 Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road Signal F 94.9 F 130.0 4 Mariposa Road & SR 99 West Frontage Road Signal B 13.7 B 14.2 5 Mariposa Road & SR 99 Southbound Ramps Signal B 12.7 B 12.1 6 Mariposa Road & SR 99 Northbound Ramps Signal B 10.1 A 9.9 7 Mariposa Road & Stagecoach Road Signal B 19.8 B 19.3
8 Mariposa Road & Munford Avenue Signal B 12.7 B 17.8
9 Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road Unsig Yes A 1.8 A 6.3
10 Mariposa Road & Austin Road Signal C 32.7 D 38.7
11 Arch Road & Austin Road Signal D 43.1 D 38.4
12 Arch-Airport Road & Qantas Lane Signal E 60.0 C 27.8 13 Arch Road & SR 99 Signal F 195.4 E 69.5
14 Mariposa Road & Northwest Project Driveway - - - - - - - - - - 15 Mariposa Road & Southeast Project Driveway - - - - - - - - - - ______________________________________________
Notes: LOS = Level of Service. "Inters. Control" = Type of intersection control. "Signal" = Signalized light control. "Unsig" = Unsignalized stop-sign control.
Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle.
Per City of Stockton guidelines, intersection average delay is reported for all intersections, including unsignalized intersections.
Dashes ( "- -" ) indicate intersection not present under this scenario.
Inters. Warrant
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1488
Table 11. Intersection Level of Service -
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) No Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements
AM Peak PM Peak
Study Intersections Control LOS Delay LOS Delay
3 Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road Signal D 38.2 E 64.3 12 Arch-Airport Road & Qantas Lane Signal C 31.6 C 26.8 ______________________________________________
Notes: LOS = Level of Service. "Inters. Control" = Type of intersection control. "Signal" = Signalized light control.
Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle.
Per City of Stockton guidelines, intersection average delay is reported for all intersections.
Inters.
12. Arch-Airport Road & Qantas Lane
Under EPAP No Project conditions, the intersection of Arch-Airport Road & Qantas Lane would operate at LOS E with 60.0 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS C with 27.8 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS E is considered unacceptable. The following improvement is recommended:
Change the signal timing to include overlap phasing on the northwestbound-tonortheastbound right-turn movement.
As shown in Table 11, implementation of the above recommended improvement would improve traffic operations to LOS C with 31.6 seconds of delay in the a.m. peak hour and LOS C with 26.8 seconds of delay in the p.m. peak hour. LOS C is considered acceptable.
13. Arch Road & SR 99
Under EPAP No Project conditions, the intersection of Arch Road & SR 99 would operate at LOS F with 195.4 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS E with 69.5 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS E and F are considered unacceptable.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1489
The unacceptable LOS at this intersection under EPAP No Project conditions would be due to increases in traffic volume along Arch Road, and on the SR 99 interchange ramps. Improvement of LOS at this intersection to acceptable LOS would require re-structuring of the interchange facility.
Reconstruction of the Arch–Airport Road interchange on SR 99, including additional eastbound and westbound through lanes would be required to achieve acceptable LOS. The EPAP No Project scenario is considered a near-term condition, and reconstruction of the interchange in the near-term future is not considered feasible. Therefore, improvements at this intersection are not recommended.
ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE
Table 9 presents a summary of LOS on the 12 study roadway segments under EPAP No Project conditions. 10 of the 12 roadway segments would operate at acceptable LOS D or better. No improvements are needed on these 10 roadway segments to achieve acceptable LOS. The following describes the two study roadway segments that would operate at unacceptable LOS under EPAP No Project conditions.
105. Mariposa Road Between SR 99 and 8th Street/Farmington Road Under EPAP No Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS F. This LOS is considered unacceptable. The following improvement is recommended:
Widen the portions of this roadway segment which are one lane in each direction to two lanes in each direction.
A summary of LOS with recommended improvements is presented in Table 12. With this recommended improvement, this roadway segment would operate at LOS C. This LOS is considered acceptable.
This improvement is also recommended under Existing Conditions. 111. Arch-Airport Road Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
Under EPAP No Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS E. This LOS is considered unacceptable. Widening of this roadway segment to add through lanes to improve LOS would require reconstruction of the Arch-Airport Road interchange on SR 99. The EPAP No Project scenario is considered a near-term condition, and reconstruction of the interchange in the near-term future is not considered feasible. Therefore, improvement to this roadway segment is not recommended.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1490
Table 12. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) No Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements
Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
105. Mariposa Road - Between 4 38,200 25,552 0.67 C
SR 99 and 8th St./Farmington Rd
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio.
RAMP JUNCTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
Figure 15 and Figure 16 presents a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes at the study ramp junctions under EPAP No Project conditions. Table 13 presents the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour LOS at each study ramp junction under EPAP No Project conditions. The worksheets presenting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.
Traffic volumes under EPAP No Project conditions would be generally higher than under Existing Conditions and, as a result, vehicle density at study ramp junctions under EPAP No Project conditions would be higher than under Existing Conditions.
Under EPAP No Project conditions, LOS at 10 of the 13 study ramp junctions would be at acceptable LOS D or better during both the a.m. peak hour and the p.m. peak hour. No improvements are needed at these 10 ramp junctions to achieve acceptable LOS.
The following three ramp junction areas would operate at unacceptable LOS under EPAP No Project conditions:
201. SR 99 Southbound Weave Area Between Fremont Street and Crosstown Freeway would operate at LOS F during the a.m. peak hour, 205. SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue Northbound On-Ramp Merge would operate at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour, and
211. SR 99 at Arch-Airport Road Northbound On-Ramp Merge would operate at LOS E in the p.m. peak hour.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1491
Table 13. State Route 99 Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Level of Service - Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) No Project Conditions AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Freeway Ramp Freeway Ramp
Ramp Junction Volume Volume Density LOS Volume Volume Density LOS 201 SB Weave Between 6,934 503 > Capacity F 5,162 345 26.6 C Fremont St & Crosstown Fwy 4,633 2,804 3,938 1,569
202 NB Weave Between 4,336 282 21.9 C 6,152 361 32.1 D
Crosstown Fwy & Fremont St 3,053 1,565 4,621 1,892
203 NB at Crosstown Fwy Off-Ramp 3,043 2,764 < 10 A 4,637 2,111 < 10 A 204 Golden Gate Ave SB Off-Ramp 4,657 564 < 10 A 4,257 627 < 10 A 205 Golden Gate Ave NB On-Ramp 4,789 571 26.5 C 5,329 784 31.6 F 206 SB Weave Between 4,628 332 23.7 C 4,254 398 22.1 C
Golden Gate Ave & Mariposa Rd 4,250 710 4,113 539
207 NB Weave Between 4,758 350 24.5 C 5,262 500 28.0 D
Mariposa Rd & Golden Gate Ave 4,715 393 5,281 481
208 Mariposa Rd SB On-Ramp (Slip) 5,209 234 26.5 C 3,478 310 17.8 B 209 Mariposa Rd NB Off-Ramp 3,890 406 24.7 C 5,783 287 33.2 D 210 Arch-Airport Rd SB Off-Ramp 2,467 2,976 < 10 A 2,713 1,075 < 10 A 211 Arch-Airport Rd NB On-Ramp 3,164 1,132 22.3 C 3,472 2,597 35.9 E 212 Arch-Airport Rd SB On-Ramp 2,467 748 16.5 B 2,713 1,259 22.0 C 213 Arch-Airport Rd NB Off-Ramp 3,164 1,272 22.9 C 3,472 641 23.0 C _____________________________________________
Notes: "LOS" = Level of Service. "NB" = Northbound. "SB" = Southbound.
Density is expressed in passenger cars per mile per lane. "> Capacity" = volume-to-capacity ratio greater than 1.0.
For weave areas, north freeway and ramp volumes are listed first and south volumes are listed second.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1492
201. SR 99 Southbound Weave Area Between Fremont Street and Crosstown Freeway LOS F at the SR 99 Southbound Weave Area Between Fremont Street and Crosstown Freeway is considered unacceptable. Reconstruction of the Fremont Street and Crosstown Freeway interchanges on SR 99, including the addition of lanes on mainline SR 99, would be required to achieve acceptable LOS at this weave area. The EPAP No Project scenario is considered a nearterm condition, and reconstruction of this weave area in the near-term future is not considered feasible. In addition, existing land use adjacent to SR 99 and the location of the two interchanges results in improvements to the weave area being considered not feasible.
Therefore, improvements to this weave area are not recommended. 205. SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue Northbound On-Ramp Merge LOS F at the Golden Gate Avenue Northbound On-Ramp Merge is considered unacceptable.
Reconstruction of the Golden Gate Avenue interchange on SR 99, including the addition of lanes on mainline SR 99, would be required to achieve acceptable LOS at this ramp junction. The EPAP No Project scenario is considered a near-term condition, and reconstruction of the interchange in the near-term future is not considered feasible. Therefore, improvements to this ramp junction area are not recommended.
211. SR 99 at Arch-Airport Road Northbound On-Ramp Merge LOS E at the Arch-Airport Road Northbound On-Ramp Merge is considered unacceptable.
Reconstruction of the Arch–Airport Road interchange on SR 99, including the addition of lanes on mainline SR 99, would be required to achieve acceptable LOS at this ramp junction. The EPAP No Project scenario is considered a near-term condition, and reconstruction of the interchange in the near-term future is not considered feasible. Therefore, improvements to this ramp junction area are not recommended.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1493
EXISTING PLUS APPROVED PROJECTS
PLUS MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT IMPACTS
The EPAP Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project scenario is a near-term future condition with the proposed project. This condition is also referred to in this traffic impact study as EPAP Plus Project conditions.
The development of the Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in vehicle traffic to and from the project site. The amount of additional traffic on a particular section of the street network depends on three factors:
Trip Generation, the number of new trips generated by the project, Trip Distribution, the direction of travel for the new traffic, and Trip Assignment, the specific routes used by the new traffic.
Each of these three factors is described below.
TRIP GENERATION
Development of the Mariposa Industrial Park project would generate new vehicle trips and potentially affect traffic operations on study facilities. The number of vehicle trips expected to be generated by the proposed project has been estimated using typical trip generation rates that have been developed based on the nature and size of project land uses. Trip generation rates developed for the City of Stockton (McDowell pers. comm.) were applied for this traffic impact study. These rates have been applied by the City for other projects in the southeast Stockton area (City of Stockton 2014, and Tellez pers. comm.) with land uses similar to the Mariposa Industrial Park project.
The trip generation rates used in this traffic impact study are presented in Table 14. The trip generation rates are applied to the amount of project-related land uses. The resulting trip generation estimates are presented in Table 15. As shown in Table 15, the Mariposa Industrial Park project would generate an estimated 12,370 vehicle trips per day, with 651 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 796 trips during the p.m. peak hour.
TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Project-related trips were geographically distributed over the study area roadway network. The geographical distribution of trips is based on the relative attractiveness or utility of possible destinations. Trip distribution percentages applied in this traffic impact study are presented in Table 16. The data presented in Table 16 are graphically shown in Figure 17 and Figure 18.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1494
Table 14. Trip Generation Rates
Trips per Unit
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Light Industrial Thousand 3.42 0.11 0.07 0.18 0.08 0.14 0.22 Square Feet
_____________________________
Source: McDowell pers. comm. and City of Stockton 2014.
Table 15. Trip Generation Estimate
Trips Generated
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Quantity Daily In Out Total In Out Total
3,616.87
Light Industrial Thousand 12,370 398 253 651 289 506 796 Square Feet
_____________________________
Source: McDowell pers. comm. and City of Stockton 2014.
Total may not equal the sum of components due to rounding.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1495
Table 16. Mariposa Industrial Park Project Trip Distribution Percentages Existing Plus
Approved Projects Cumulative
Direction of Travel Background Background
SR 99 North of Fremont Street 19.5 36.0
Fremont Street West of SR 99 0.2 0.3
Fremont Street East of SR 99 2.7 0.9
Crosstown Freeway West of SR 99 26.7 27.4
Golden Gate Avenue West of SR 99 1.9 1.1
Golden Gate Avenue East of SR 99 - - 0.4
8th Street West of Mariposa Road 6.5 2.1
Mariposa Rd Northwest of 8th St/Farmington Rd 7.0 6.2
Farmington Road East of Mariposa Road 0.6 0.3
SR 99 West Frontage Road South of Mariposa Road 0.8 0.8 Stagecoach Road North of Mariposa Road 7.5 0.2
Carpenter Road West of Mariposa Road 4.6 0.3
Carpenter Road East of Mariposa Road 0.2 2.8
Mariposa Road Southeast of Austin Road 2.9 3.7
Austin Road South of Mariposa Road 4.2 0.2
Arch Road West of Qantas Lane 6.0 10.1
Qantas Lane North of Arch Road 1.1 - -
Qantas Lane South of Arch Road 0.4 0.5
Arch Road East of SR 99 0.1 0.2
SR 99 South of Arch Road 7.1 6.5
TOTAL 100.0 100.0
__________________________
Source: City of Stockton General Plan Travel Demand Model Select Link Analysis.
Note: Dashes ( "- -" ) indicate value is less than one-tenth percent.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1496
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 17
EXISTING PLUS APPROVED PROJECTS
BACKGROUND TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
ARCH RD
AUSTIN RD
PROJECT
LOCATION
NOTE: THESE PERCENTAGES APPLY TO ALL PROJECT TRIPS,
NOT JUST TRUCKS.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1497
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 18
CUMULATIVE BACKGROUND
TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
ARCH RD
AUSTIN RD
PROJECT
LOCATION
NOTE: THESE PERCENTAGES APPLY TO ALL PROJECT TRIPS,
NOT JUST TRUCKS.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1498
The City of Stockton travel demand model (City of Stockton 2004 and City of Stockton 2018b) was used to estimate trip distribution percentages. The travel demand model is considered to be a valid source for the trip distribution percentages because it directly addresses:
the location of destinations of project-related trips, the magnitude of land uses that would attract project-related trips, and the quality of access to the destinations via the roadway network.
This traffic impact study includes analysis of scenarios based on two different background development conditions:
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP), and
2040 Cumulative Conditions.
The travel demand model for each of these two scenarios was used to estimate trip distribution percentages. Background (non-project) land uses are different in each of the two travel demand models. The different land uses result in different geographic distributions of travel. As a result, the trip distribution percentages are different for each of the two background development conditions. Table 16, Figure 17, and Figure 18 present the trip distribution percentages for each of the two background development scenarios.
A “select link” analysis was conducted using each of the two travel demand models to determine the geographic distribution of project-related travel. The select link analysis identifies vehicle trips associated with the proposed project site, and identifies the direction of travel to and from the project site.
Raw, pre-adjustment, traffic model results used in the development of trip distribution percentages are presented in the technical appendix.
TRIP ASSIGNMENT
Traffic that would be generated by the proposed project was geographically distributed over the study area roadway network using the trip distribution percentages shown in Table 16, Figure 17, and Figure 18. Figure 19 and Figure 20 display the project-related-only traffic volumes for each study intersection in the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour. Figure 21 and Figure 22 display the resulting EPAP Plus Project traffic volumes anticipated for each study intersection in the peak hours. The a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour freeway ramp junction traffic volumes are presented in Figure 23 and Figure 24.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1499
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Ave
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden Gate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden Gate Ave / SR 99 NB Ramps
5 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 SB Ramps
3 Mariposa Rd / 8th St / Farmington Rd
6 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 NB Ramps
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 19
PROJECTED-RELATED
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
0780-18 RA 7/9/20210 (0) 0 (0)
5 (10)
0 (0)
(8) 8
(0) 0
(0) 0(0) 0
223 (446)
0 (0)
(255) 351
(0) 0
(0) 0
(42) 59
129 (258)
75 (150)
(190) 262
(0) 0
0 (0)203 (147)
37 (74)
38 (75)
(0) 0
(43) 59 5 (10) 0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
(0) 0
(0) 0
N.T.S.
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1500
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwest Project Dwy
12 Arch Airport Rd/ Qantas Ln
15 Mariposa Rd / Southeast Project Dwy
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 20
PROJECTED-RELATED
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
0 (0)0 (0)4 (3)
(0) 0
(0) 0(1) 2
3 (6)
15 (30)
1 (2)
(0) 0
(17) 24
(0) 0
0 (0)11 (21)0 (0)
(0) 0
(12) 17
(0) 0
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
(0) 0
(0) 0
(0) 0
19 (38)0 (1)
(0) 0
(0) 0
0 (0)
0 (0)
0 (0)
(22) 30
(0) 0
(0) 0
N.T.S.
17 (12)0 (0)0 (0)
(0) 0(0) 0(0) 0
0 (0)
12 (8)
0 (0)
(21) 11
(15) 7
(0) 0
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1501
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Ave
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden Gate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden Gate Ave / SR 99 NB Ramps
5 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 SB Ramps
3 Mariposa Rd / 8th St / Farmington Rd
6 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 NB Ramps
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 21
EPAP PLUS PROJECT
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
29 (56)43 (63)156 (122)
(27) 12(88) 83
(295) 302
366 (197)298 (500)
61 (44)
173 (230)
(212) 131
(375) 118
(23) 13
(328) 243
(132) 26(114) 69
799 (1088)
103 (77)
(950) 916
(52) 92
138 (242)0 (0)75 (49)
(191) 218(139) 247
774 (1138)
285 (552)
(1000) 1124
(566) 489
752 (451)714 (595)
98 (212)
428 (537)
(910) 812
(310) 234 177 (204) 40 (121)
522 (546)
57 (80)
(306) 113
(589) 324
N.T.S.
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
CWLTL
“Free” Right Turn
Center Two-Way
Left Turn Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1502
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwest Project Dwy
12 Arch Airport Rd/ Qantas Ln
15 Mariposa Rd / Southeast Project Dwy
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 22
EPAP PLUS PROJECT
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
85 (92)1 (1)592 (770)
(2) 0
(1) 1
(14) 7
928 (357)
1484 (1141)
15 (18)
(50) 89
(1451) 1033
(2) 3
135 (165)248 (70)24 (12)
(221) 140(296) 114
(8) 10
7 (31)
43 (21)
2 (6)
(121) 161
(41) 22
(122) 320
1310 (521)1685 (593)
(319) 648
(322) 624
647 (1593)
504 (657)
363 (576)
(1026) 515
(559) 686
(683) 385206 (414) 2 (1)
36 (83)
(167) 27
(2) 1
(14) 2
124 (26)
491 (199)
17 (7)
(197) 372
(541) 167
(82) 210
N.T.S.
Stop Sign
Legend
AM Peak Hour Volume
R1-1
XX
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
CWLTL
“Free” Right Turn
Center Two-Way
Left Turn Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1503
201
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
204
SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
207
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
202
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
205
SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
208
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Southbound On-Ramp (Slip) Merge
203
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Diverge
206
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
209
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Northbound Off-Ramp Diverge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 23
EPAP PLUS PROJECT FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,
AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
(4750) 3100 3890 (5783)
4913 (5577)
(3552) 5246
N.T.S.
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
(376) 289
(1892) 1565
4385 (6251) 3109 (4735)
4852 (4399)
340 (403)
913 (686)
(4396) 4823 (4113) 4250
4882 (5510) 4715 (5281)
(510) 355 (739) 522
(5218) 7012 (4002) 4723
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1504
210
SR 99 at Arch-Airport Rd
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
213
SR 99 at Arch-Airport Rd
Northbound Off-Ramp Diverge
211
SR 99 at Arch-Airport Rd
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
212
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Diverge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 24
EPAP PLUS PROJECT FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,
AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
3192 (3493)
(2749) 2485
3192 (3493)
(2749) 2485
N.T.S.
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1505
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
Implementation of the Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in roadway improvements needed to provide access to the project site. Improvements to project site access points are shown in the proposed project site plan presented in Figure 2 and project site frontage striping plan presented in Figure 3. These improvements have been previously described in more detail in the Project Description section of this traffic impact study.
Figure 21 and Figure 22 display the resulting EPAP Plus Project intersection lane geometrics for each study intersection. The resulting number of travel lanes assumed for study roadway segments and daily traffic volumes are shown in Table 17.
INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
Table 18 presents the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour LOS at each study intersection under EPAP Plus Project conditions. The worksheets presenting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, LOS at 11 of the 15 study intersections would be at acceptable LOS D or better during both the a.m. peak hour and the p.m. peak hour. No improvements would be needed at these 11 intersections to achieve acceptable LOS. The following describes the four study intersections that would operate at unacceptable LOS under EPAP Plus Project conditions.
3. Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this intersection would operate at LOS F with 109.3 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS F with 145.8 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS F is considered unacceptable. Compared to EPAP No Project Conditions, the projectrelated increase in delay would be greater than five seconds during either the a.m. peak hour or the p.m. peak hour. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered significant. The following improvement is recommended to improve operating conditions to acceptable LOS and reduce the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies to a less than significant level:
Split the northeastbound combined through/right-turn lane into an exclusive northeastbound through lane and a “free” northeastbound-to-southeastbound rightturn lane.
The above improvement would be consistent with the recommended improvement (described below) for Roadway Segment 105, Mariposa Road Between SR 99 and 8th Street/Farmington Road, to widen the portions of this roadway segment which are one lane in each direction to two lanes in each direction. The added southeastbound departure lane on Mariposa Road would serve vehicles departing the “free” northeastbound-to-southeastbound right-turn lane at this intersection.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1506
The existing northeastbound combined through/right-turn lane is approximately 23 to 24 feet wide and the single southwestbound departure lane is approximately 21 to 22 feet wide. As a result, the existing pavement width on the southwest leg of this intersection is considered wide enough to accommodate the above improvement.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1507
Table 17. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
101. SR 99 - North of 8 172,800 113,717 0.66 C
Crosstown Freeway (SR 4)
102. Crosstown Freeway - 8 172,800 120,429 0.70 C
West of SR 99
103. SR 99 - Between Crosstown Fwy 8 172,800 126,842 0.73 C and Golden Gate Avenue
104. SR 99 - Between 8 172,800 125,851 0.73 C
Golden Gate Ave and Mariposa Rd
105. Mariposa Road - Between 2 17,300 27,296 1.58 F
SR 99 and 8th St./Farmington Rd
106. Mariposa Road - Between 4 38,200 26,540 0.69 D
Carpenter Road and SR 99
107. Mariposa Road - Between the 4 38,200 26,777 0.70 D Project Site and Carpenter Road
108. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 16,163 0.42 A
Southeast of the Project Site
109. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 11,397 0.30 A
East of Austin Road
110. SR 99 - Between Mariposa Road 6 129,600 97,705 0.75 D and Arch-Airport Road
111. Arch-Airport Road - 6 59,300 51,815 0.87 E
Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
112. SR 99 - 6 129,600 85,955 0.66 C
South of Arch-Airport Road
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1508
Table 18. Intersection Level of Service -
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions Signal AM Peak PM Peak
Study Intersections Control Met? LOS Delay LOS Delay
1 Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Southbound Ramps Signal B 14.2 B 16.0 2 Golden Gate Avenue & SR 99 Northbound Ramps Signal B 15.8 C 23.9 3 Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road Signal F 109.3 F 145.8 4 Mariposa Road & SR 99 West Frontage Road Signal B 14.2 B 14.5 5 Mariposa Road & SR 99 Southbound Ramps Signal B 18.4 B 15.4 6 Mariposa Road & SR 99 Northbound Ramps Signal B 10.6 B 10.4 7 Mariposa Road & Stagecoach Road Signal B 18.5 B 18.2
8 Mariposa Road & Munford Avenue Signal B 11.5 C 23.9
9 Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road Unsig Yes A 3.7 F 63.9 10 Mariposa Road & Austin Road Signal C 35.0 D 40.2
11 Arch Road & Austin Road Signal D 45.2 D 40.2
12 Arch-Airport Road & Qantas Lane Signal E 61.7 C 28.4 13 Arch Road & SR 99 Signal F 194.4 E 73.6
14 Mariposa Road & Northwest Project Driveway Unsig No A 0.5 A 1.2 15 Mariposa Road & Southeast Project Driveway Signal B 13.8 C 23.1 ______________________________________________
Notes: LOS = Level of Service. "Inters. Control" = Type of intersection control. "Signal" = Signalized light control. "Unsig" = Unsignalized stop-sign control.
Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle.
Per City of Stockton guidelines, intersection average delay is reported for all intersections, including unsignalized intersections.
Inters. Warrant
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1509
As shown in Table 19, implementation of the above recommended improvement would improve traffic operations to LOS D with 40.4 seconds of delay in the a.m. peak hour and LOS E with 73.2 seconds of delay in the p.m. peak hour. As described in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, LOS D and E at this intersection are considered acceptable.
This recommended improvement is the same as the improvement recommended at this intersection for EPAP No Project conditions.
9. Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this intersection would operate at LOS A with 3.7 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS F with 63.9 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS F is considered unacceptable. Compared to EPAP No Project Conditions, the project-related increase in delay would be greater than five seconds during either the a.m. peak hour or the p.m. peak hour. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered significant. The following improvement is recommended to improve operating conditions to acceptable LOS and reduce the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies to a less than significant level:
Widen the northeastbound Carpenter Road approach. The approach is currently a single-lane approach. The approach should be widened to include an exclusive northeastbound-to northwestbound left-turn lane, and a combined through/right-turn lane.
As shown in Table 19, implementation of the above recommended improvement would improve traffic operations to LOS A with 2.9 seconds of delay in the a.m. peak hour and LOS D with 32.7 seconds of delay in the p.m. peak hour. LOS A and D are considered acceptable.
12. Arch-Airport Road & Qantas Lane
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this intersection would operate at LOS E with 61.7 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS C with 28.4 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS E is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under EPAP No Project conditions, and the project-related change in delay would not be greater than a five second increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1510
Table 19. Intersection Level of Service -
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements
AM Peak PM Peak
Signal
Warrant
Study Intersections Control Met? LOS Delay LOS Delay
3 Mariposa Road & 8th Street/Farmington Road Signal D 40.4 E 73.2 9 Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road Unsig No A 2.9 D 32.7
______________________________________________
Notes: LOS = Level of Service. "Inters. Control" = Type of intersection control. "Signal" = Signalized light control. "Unsig" = Unsignalized stop-sign control.
Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle.
Per City of Stockton guidelines, intersection average delay is reported for all intersections, including unsignalized intersections.
Inters.
13. Arch Road & SR 99
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this intersection would operate at LOS F with 194.4 seconds of delay during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS E with 73.6 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS E and F are considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under EPAP No Project conditions, and the project-related change in delay would not be greater than a five second increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE
Table 17 presents a summary of LOS on the 12 study roadway segments under EPAP Plus Project conditions. 10 of the roadway segments would operate at acceptable LOS D or better.
No improvements would be needed on these 10 roadway segments to achieve acceptable LOS.
The following two roadway segments would operate at unacceptable LOS. 105. Mariposa Road Between SR 99 and 8th Street/Farmington Road Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS F. LOS F is considered unacceptable. Compared to EPAP No Project Conditions, the project-related increase in volume would be greater than five percent. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1511
General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered significant. The following improvement is recommended to improve operating conditions to acceptable LOS and reduce the projectrelated inconsistency with General Plan policies to a less than significant level:
Widen the portions of this roadway segment which are one lane in each direction to two lanes in each direction.
As shown in Table 20, implementation of the above recommended improvement would improve traffic operations to LOS D. LOS D is considered acceptable.
This improvement is also recommended under Existing Conditions and the EPAP No Project scenario.
Table 20. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements
Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
105. Mariposa Road - Between 4 38,200 27,296 0.71 D
SR 99 and 8th St./Farmington Rd
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio. 111. Arch-Airport Road, Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS E. LOS E is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under EPAP No Project conditions, and the project-related change in traffic volume would not be greater than a five percent increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1512
RAMP JUNCTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
Figure 23 and Figure 24 present the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes at the ramp junctions under EPAP Plus Project conditions. Table 21 presents the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour LOS at each study ramp junction under EPAP Plus Project conditions. The worksheets presenting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.
Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, LOS at 10 of the 13 study ramp junctions would be at acceptable LOS D or better during both the a.m. peak hour and the p.m. peak hour. No improvements would be needed on these 10 ramp junctions to achieve acceptable LOS. The following are the three ramp junctions that would experience unacceptable LOS. 201. SR 99 Southbound Weave Area Between Fremont Street and Crosstown Freeway Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this ramp junction would operate at LOS F during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS C during the p.m. peak hour. LOS F is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under EPAP No Project conditions, and the project-related change in freeway and ramp volumes would not be greater than a five percent increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
205. SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue Northbound On-Ramp Merge Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this ramp junction would operate at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS F during the p.m. peak hour. LOS F is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under EPAP No Project conditions, and the project-related change in freeway and ramp volumes would not be greater than a five percent increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
211. SR 99 at Arch-Airport Road Northbound On-Ramp Merge Under EPAP Plus Project conditions, this ramp junction would operate at LOS C during the a.m. peak hour, and LOS E during the p.m. peak hour. LOS E is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under EPAP No Project conditions, and the project-related change in freeway and ramp volumes would not be greater than a five percent increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1513
Table 21. State Route 99 Ramp Merge, Diverge, and Weave Level of Service - Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) Plus Project Conditions AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Freeway Ramp Freeway Ramp
Ramp Junction Volume Volume Density LOS Volume Volume Density LOS 201 SB Weave Between 7,012 515 > Capacity F 5,218 353 26.9 C Fremont St & Crosstown Fwy 4,723 2,804 4,002 1,569
202 NB Weave Between 4,385 289 22.2 C 6,251 376 32.7 D
Crosstown Fwy & Fremont St 3,109 1,565 4,735 1,892
203 NB at Crosstown Fwy Off-Ramp 3,100 2,832 < 10 A 4,750 2,246 < 10 A 204 Golden Gate Ave SB Off-Ramp 4,852 564 < 10 A 4,399 627 < 10 A 205 Golden Gate Ave NB On-Ramp 4,913 571 27.1 C 5,577 784 33.0 F 206 SB Weave Between 4,823 340 24.8 C 4,396 403 22.9 C
Golden Gate Ave & Mariposa Rd 4,250 913 4,113 686
207 NB Weave Between 4,882 355 25.2 C 5,510 510 29.4 D
Mariposa Rd & Golden Gate Ave 4,715 522 5,281 739
208 Mariposa Rd SB On-Ramp (Slip) 5,246 234 26.7 C 3,552 310 18.2 B 209 Mariposa Rd NB Off-Ramp 3,890 465 24.8 C 5,783 329 33.3 D 210 Arch-Airport Rd SB Off-Ramp 2,485 2,995 < 10 A 2,749 1,113 < 10 A 211 Arch-Airport Rd NB On-Ramp 3,192 1,162 22.2 C 3,493 2,619 38.0 E 212 Arch-Airport Rd SB On-Ramp 2,485 748 16.6 B 2,749 1,259 22.2 C 213 Arch-Airport Rd NB Off-Ramp 3,192 1,272 23.0 C 3,493 641 23.1 C _____________________________________________
Notes: "LOS" = Level of Service. "NB" = Northbound. "SB" = Southbound.
Density is expressed in passenger cars per mile per lane. "> Capacity" = volume-to-capacity ratio greater than 1.0.
For weave areas, north freeway and ramp volumes are listed first and south volumes are listed second.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1514
INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR TRANSIT
Implementation of the proposed Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in an increase in demand for public transit service. Currently, there is limited direct public transit service to the vicinity of the project site, and the development of urban uses would result in an increase in demand. The frequency and proximity of future transit service is not known at this time and, as a result, demand for transit cannot be quantified. However, it is expected that SJRTD can accommodate the additional passengers the project would generate. This is considered a less-thansignificant impact. No mitigation measures are required
INCREASE IN DEMAND FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Implementation of the Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in an increase in demand for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. As noted in the Project Description section of this traffic impact study, the proposed project includes sidewalks along the project site frontage of Mariposa Road.
Because sidewalks are not present along the Mariposa Road frontage of nearby properties, the sidewalks along the Mariposa Industrial Park project site frontage would be discontinuous in the near-term. In the longer-term, sidewalks along the project site frontage would incrementally improve the safety and convenience of bicycle and pedestrian travel along Mariposa Road. The City General Plan includes widening of Mariposa Road to four lanes in the future, and the Mariposa Industrial Park project site frontage improvements would contribute to a more continuous system of bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Mariposa Road. Therefore, the increase in demand for facilities is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation measures would be required.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1515
CUMULATIVE NO PROJECT CONDITIONS
The Cumulative No Project condition represents a long-term future background condition.
Development of approved and planned land uses and roadway improvements are assumed in this condition. The Cumulative No Project condition, therefore, serves as the baseline condition used to assess the significance of long-term project-related traffic effects.
The Cumulative No Project condition does not include development of the Mariposa Industrial Park project as proposed. Consistent with the approach described in the City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (City of Stockton 2003), this scenario serves as baseline condition for determining project-related impacts, and the traffic analysis of this condition assumes land uses on the project site consistent with the City of Stockton General Plan (City of Stockton 2018a).
TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
As previously described in the Travel Forecasting section of this traffic impact study, the City of Stockton Travel Demand Model (City of Stockton 2018b) was used to develop forecasts of background increases in traffic volumes under Cumulative No Project conditions. The increases in traffic volumes reflect development of land uses consistent with approved land use designations.
The model was modified in the vicinity of the project site to add detail to the model and more accurately represent how land uses are provided access to the roadway network. Minor changes were also made to land uses in the model to reflect existing and planned development.
Application of the methods described in the Travel Forecasting section results in the daily traffic volumes presented in Table 22.
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The analysis of Cumulative No Project conditions assumes roadway improvements consistent with the long-term future context. These include improvements from the City of Stockton General Plan (City of Stockton 2018b), and the Draft Environmental Impact Report - Mariposa Lakes Specific Plan - State Clearinghouse #2006022035 (City of Stockton 2007). The improvements include:
widening of Mariposa Road northwest of Carpenter Road to six lanes, widening of Mariposa Road southeast of Carpenter Road to four lanes, and widening of SR 99 from north of the Crosstown Freeway to south of Arch Road to eight lanes.
The resulting number of travel lanes assumed for study roadway segments are shown in Table
22. Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1516
Table 22. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Cumulative No Project Conditions
Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
101. SR 99 - North of 8 172,800 144,268 0.83 D
Crosstown Freeway (SR 4)
102. Crosstown Freeway - 8 172,800 131,917 0.76 D
West of SR 99
103. SR 99 - Between Crosstown Fwy 8 172,800 139,739 0.81 D and Golden Gate Avenue
104. SR 99 - Between 8 172,800 168,962 0.98 E
Golden Gate Ave and Mariposa Rd
105. Mariposa Road - Between 6 59,300 36,756 0.62 C
SR 99 and 8th St./Farmington Rd
106. Mariposa Road - Between 6 59,300 32,512 0.55 C
Carpenter Road and SR 99
107. Mariposa Road - Between the 4 38,200 23,483 0.61 C Project Site and Carpenter Road
108. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 23,483 0.61 C
Southeast of the Project Site
109. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 13,259 0.35 A
East of Austin Road
110. SR 99 - Between Mariposa Road 8 172,800 115,758 0.67 C and Arch-Airport Road
111. Arch-Airport Road - 6 59,300 67,860 1.14 F
Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
112. SR 99 - 8 172,800 106,202 0.61 C
South of Arch-Airport Road
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1517
ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE
Table 22 presents a summary of LOS on the 12 study roadway segments under Cumulative No Project conditions. Ten of the roadway segments would operate at acceptable LOS D or better.
No improvements are needed on these 10 roadway segments to achieve acceptable LOS. The following two roadway segments would operate at unacceptable LOS. 104. SR 99 Between Golden Gate Avenue and Mariposa Road Under Cumulative No Project condition, this roadway segment would operate at LOS E. LOS E is considered unacceptable. This roadway segment is already assumed to be eight lanes wide under Cumulative conditions. In the Transportation Concept Report State Route 99 (California Department of Transportation 2017), Caltrans describes the eight-lane width as the conceptual facility width, and this is considered to be the maximum feasible size in this traffic impact study.
Therefore, improvements are not recommended.
111. Arch-Airport Road, Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
Under Cumulative No Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS F. LOS F is considered unacceptable. The following improvement is recommended to improve LOS on this roadway segment:
Widen this roadway segment from six lanes to eight lanes.
Implementing this recommended improvement would result in this roadway segment operating at LOS E. This LOS is considered unacceptable. However, eight lanes is considered to be the maximum feasible width for this roadway segment. A summary of LOS with recommended improvements is presented in Table 23.
Table 23. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Cumulative No Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
111. Arch-Airport Road - 8 78,400 67,860 0.87 E
Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1518
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT IMPACTS
The analysis of Cumulative Plus Project conditions describes long-term traffic operations in the year 2040 assuming development of the proposed project. Comparing traffic operation under this condition to traffic operations under Cumulative No Project conditions allows an identification of the long-term project-related effects of the proposed project.
The development of the Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in vehicle traffic to and from the project site. Methods used to estimate project-related travel have been previously described in the Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project Impacts section of this traffic impact study. Table 24 displays the resulting Cumulative Plus Project roadway segment daily traffic volumes.
Development of forecasts of future year background traffic volumes has been previously described in the Cumulative No Project Conditions section of this traffic impact study.
Project-related roadway improvements and future year background roadway improvements assumed in this analysis have been previously described in the Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project Impacts and the Cumulative No Project Conditions sections of this traffic impact study.
ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVELS OF SERVICE
Table 24 presents a summary of LOS on the 12 study roadway segments under Cumulative Plus Project conditions. Nine of the 12 roadway segments would operate at acceptable LOS D or better. No improvements are needed on these nine roadway segments to achieve acceptable LOS. The following three roadway segments would operate at unacceptable LOS. 104. SR 99 Between Golden Gate Avenue and Mariposa Road Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS F. LOS F is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under Cumulative No Project conditions, and the project-related change in traffic volume would not be greater than a five percent increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1519
Table 24. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Cumulative Plus Project Conditions
Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
101. SR 99 - North of 8 172,800 148,870 0.86 D
Crosstown Freeway (SR 4)
102. Crosstown Freeway - 8 172,800 135,307 0.78 D
West of SR 99
103. SR 99 - Between Crosstown Fwy 8 172,800 147,731 0.85 D and Golden Gate Avenue
104. SR 99 - Between 8 172,800 177,140 1.03 F
Golden Gate Ave and Mariposa Rd
105. Mariposa Road - Between 6 59,300 37,820 0.64 C
SR 99 and 8th St./Farmington Rd
106. Mariposa Road - Between 6 59,300 43,992 0.74 D
Carpenter Road and SR 99
107. Mariposa Road - Between the 4 38,200 35,371 0.93 E Project Site and Carpenter Road
108. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 23,965 0.63 C
Southeast of the Project Site
109. Mariposa Road - 4 38,200 13,717 0.36 A
East of Austin Road
110. SR 99 - Between Mariposa Road 8 172,800 117,898 0.68 C and Arch-Airport Road
111. Arch-Airport Road - 6 59,300 69,172 1.17 F
Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
112. SR 99 - 8 172,800 107,006 0.62 C
South of Arch-Airport Road
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1520
107. Mariposa Road, Between the Project Site and Carpenter Road Under long-term future Cumulative Plus Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS E. LOS E is considered unacceptable. Compared to Cumulative No Project Conditions, the project-related increase in volume would be greater than five percent. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered significant. The following improvement is recommended to improve operating conditions to acceptable LOS and reduce the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies to a less than significant level:
Under long-term future cumulative conditions, widen this roadway segment from four lanes to six lanes.
As shown in Table 25, implementation of the above recommended improvement would improve traffic operations to LOS C. LOS C is considered acceptable.
Table 25. Roadway Segment Level of Service -
Cumulative Plus Project Conditions With Recommended Improvements Number Daily Daily V/C Level of
Roadway Segment of Lanes Capacity Volume Ratio Service
107. Mariposa Road - Between the 6 59,300 35,371 0.60 C Project Site and Carpenter Road
__________________________
Notes: "SR" = State Route. "V/C Ratio" = volume-to-capacity ratio. 111. Arch-Airport Road, Between Qantas Lane and SR 99
Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, this roadway segment would operate at LOS F. LOS F is considered unacceptable. However, LOS would also be unacceptable under Cumulative No Project conditions, and the project-related change in traffic volume would not be greater than a five percent increase. Therefore, based on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1521
PROJECT SITE ACCESS
To assess the adequacy of project site access under long-term future conditions, LOS at the two project site driveway intersections were analyzed under Cumulative Plus Project conditions.
These two intersections are:
14. Mariposa Road & Northwest Project Driveway
15. Mariposa Road & Southeast Project Driveway
Cumulative Plus Project a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes and intersection lane geometrics at these two intersections are shown in Figure 25.
Table 26 presents the a.m. peak hour and p.m. peak hour LOS at the two study intersections under Cumulative Plus Project conditions. The worksheets presenting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.
Table 26. Intersection Level of Service -
Cumulative Plus Project Conditions
AM Peak PM Peak
Study Intersections Control LOS Delay LOS Delay
14 Mariposa Road & Northwest Project Driveway Signal A 3.2 A 5.1 15 Mariposa Road & Southeast Project Driveway Signal B 12.8 C 20.1 ______________________________________________
Notes: LOS = Level of Service. "Inters. Control" = Type of intersection control. "Signal" = Signalized light control.
Delay is measured in seconds per vehicle.
Per City of Stockton guidelines, intersection average delay is reported for all intersections.
Inters.
Under Cumulative Plus Project conditions, LOS at both of the two project site access intersections would be at acceptable LOS C or better during both the a.m. peak hour and the p.m. peak hour. As a result, traffic operations at the project site access locations are considered to be adequate. No improvements would be needed at these two intersections to achieve acceptable LOS.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1522
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.
Transportation Engineers
figure 25
CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT
INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
N.T.S.
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwest Project Dwy
15 Mariposa Rd / Southeast Project Dwy
Legend
XX AM Peak Hour Volume
(XX) PM Peak Hour Volume
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1523
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
As noted earlier in the Significance Thresholds section of this traffic impact study, the effects of the proposed project on VMT are determined by comparing travel associated with the Mariposa Industrial Park project as proposed to travel associated with development of the project site with the current General Plan land use designations.
As noted earlier in the Project Description section of this traffic impact study, the Mariposa Industrial Park project proposes industrial land uses on the project site. As also noted in the Project Description section, the project site currently has an Industrial land use designation in the City of Stockton General Plan. Therefore, in this traffic impact study, vehicle travel associated with the Mariposa Industrial Park project would be the same as the Industrial land uses currently designated in the City of Stockton General Plan. That is, implementation of the Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in no net change from travel associated with the current General Plan-designated land uses.
VMT is calculated by multiplying the number of vehicle trips by the length of vehicle trips. As a result, a certain percent change in the number of vehicle trips would cause an equivalent change in VMT. Therefore, for the Mariposa Industrial Park project, a comparison of vehicle trips is considered equivalent to a comparison of VMT. Because the Mariposa Industrial Park project would result in no net change from travel associated with the current General Plan–designated land use, the project would result in no net change in VMT.
As described in the Vehicle Miles Traveled Significance Threshold section of this traffic impact study,
“Consistent with General Plan Action TR4.3A, if a project would result in a 15 percent or more reduction of vehicle travel, a project is considered to have a lessthan-significant impact. A project that would not result in a reduction of 15 percent or more is considered to have a significant impact.” Because the Mariposa Industrial Park project would not result in a 15 percent reduction in VMT, the project is considered to have a significant impact on VMT. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the impact of the project on VMT. The numbering of the following mitigation measures is from the document Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures - A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association 2010), which contains more detailed information on these measures. The numbering of the following mitigation measures is not sequential in this traffic impact study. The out-of-sequence numbering is provided below to allow direct reference to the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) document. The “TRT” acronym shown below is used in the numbering of the CAPCOA document and refers to Trip Reduction – Transportation.
Mitigation Measure TRT-1. Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program - Voluntary
The Mariposa Industrial Park project will implement a Commute Trip Reduction Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1524
(CTR) Program – Voluntary with employers to discourage single-occupancy vehicle trips and encourage alternative modes of transportation such as carpooling, taking transit, walking, and biking. This is a multi-strategy program that encompasses a combination of individual measures.
The CTR program will provide employees with assistance in using alternative modes of travel, and provide both “carrots” and “sticks” to encourage employees.
The CTR program should include all of the following:
Carpooling encouragement
Ride-matching assistance
Preferential carpool parking
Flexible work schedules for carpools
Half time transportation coordinator
Vanpool assistance
Bicycle end-trip facilities (parking, showers and lockers) Other strategies may also include:
new employee orientation of trip reduction and alternative mode options, event promotions and publications,
flexible work schedule for all employees,
transit subsidies,
parking cash-out or priced parking,
shuttles,
emergency ride home, and
improved on-site amenities.
Mitigation Measure TRT-5. Provide End of Trip Bicycle Facilities The Mariposa Industrial Park project will provide "end-of-trip" facilities for bicycle riders including showers, secure bicycle lockers, and changing spaces.
End-of-trip facilities encourage the use of bicycling as a viable form of travel to destinations, especially to work. End-of trip facilities provide the added convenience and security needed to encourage bicycle commuting.
Mitigation Measure TRT-11. Provide Employer-Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle The Mariposa Industrial Park project will implement an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle. A vanpool will usually service employees’ commute to work while a shuttle will service nearby transit stations and surrounding commercial centers. Employer-sponsored vanpool programs entail an employer purchasing or leasing vans for employee use, and often subsidizing the cost of at least program administration, if not more. The driver usually receives personal use of the van, often for a mileage fee. Scheduling is within the employer’s purview, and rider charges are normally set on the basis of vehicle and operating cost.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1525
Implementation of the measures listed above would reduce project-related VMT and reduce the significance of the impact on VMT. However, quantification of the reduction is not possible at this time. At the time this traffic impact study was prepared, potential occupants of the Mariposa Industrial Park project were not identified. While the type of land use is expected to be industrial, specific tenants were not known. As a result, the following factors which would affect the ability to implement VMT reduction measures are not known:
hours of operation, including times of the day when work shift would change; the portion of work positions which would be full-time versus part-time; feasibility of implementing flexible work schedules; and degree to which working remotely is feasible.
Because the potential occupants of the project are not known, it is not possible to establish an enforceable commitment to reduce VMT by more than 15 percent. As a result, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1526
REFERENCES
DOCUMENTS CITED
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. 2010. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures - A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. Sacramento, CA.
California Department of Transportation. 2014. California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices 2014 Edition. Sacramento CA.
California Department of Transportation. 2017. Transportation Concept Report – State Route 99 - District 10. Stockton, CA.
California Department of Transportation. 2021. Caltrans Traffic Census Program Internet Website. http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/census/.
California, State of. 2018. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. Sacramento, CA.
Fehr & Peers. 2014. Traffic Impact Analysis – NorCal Logistics Center. Walnut Creek, CA.
Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2017. Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. Washington, D.C.
San Joaquin Regional Transit District. 2021. San Joaquin Regional Transit District Internet Webpage. http://www.sanjoaquinrtd.com/. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2003. City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2004. Travel Demand Model Development Report October 2004. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2007. Draft Environmental Impact Report - Mariposa Lakes Specific Plan - State Clearinghouse #2006022035. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2014. NorCal Logistics Center – Draft Environmental Impact Report (Project File No. P12-110). Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2018a. Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2018b. Envision Stockton 2040 General Plan Update and Utility Master Plan Supplements Draft EIR. Stockton, CA.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1527
Stockton, City of. 2009. Truck Routes Map. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2017. STAA Truck Routes Map. Stockton, CA.
Stockton, City of. 2020. Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Report For The SanchezHoggan Annexation. Stockton, CA.
Trafficware. 2019. Trafficware Internet Website. http://www.trafficware.com/ Transportation Research Board. 1982. National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 255, Highway Traffic Data for Urbanized Area Project Planning and Design.
Washington, D.C.
Transportation Research Board. 2000. Highway Capacity Manual 2000. Washington, D.C.
Transportation Research Board. 2010. Highway Capacity Manual 2010. Washington, D.C.
Transportation Research Board. 2016. Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition. Washington, D.C.
PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS
Dumas, Tom. Chief, Office of Metropolitan Planning, Caltrans District 10. October 23, 2007 letter to David Stagnaro, City of Stockton Community Development Department.
McDowell, Mike. Acting Deputy Director. City of Stockton, Community Development Department, Planning and Engineering Services. February 15, 2012 E-mail message to Wayne Shijo, KD Anderson & Associates; Subject: Highway Capacity Manual Methods. November 15, 2012 E-mail message to Wayne Shijo, KD Anderson & Associates; Subject: Industrial Trip Generation Rates. May 8, 2019 E-mail message to Heba El-Guindy, City of Stockton; and Wayne Shijo, KD Anderson & Associates; Subject: EPAP Traffic Forecasts. September 19, 2019 telephone conversation with Wayne Shijo, KD Anderson & Associates. June 20, 2020 E-mail message to Charlie Simpson, BaseCamp Environmental; Subject: Industrial Trip Generation.
Moore, Nicole D. Senior Planner. City of Stockton Community Development Department.
December 15, 2020 E-mail message to Ken Anderson and Wayne Shijo, KD Anderson & Associates; Subject: Mariposa Industrial Park Traffic Study Scope of Work.
Tellez, Kathrin. Fehr & Peers. June 30, 2016 E-mail message to Mike McDowell, City of Stockton. Subject: Tidewater Crossing All-Industrial Project Traffic Impact Assessment Analysis Assumptions.
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1528
TECHNICAL APPENDICES
IN SEPARATE ELECTRONIC FILES
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
1529
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR THE
MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK
City of Stockton, CA
State Clearinghouse No: 2020120283
February 28, 2022
Prepared for:
CITY OF STOCKTON
345 N. El Dorado Street
Stockton, CA 95202
(209) 937-7564
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1530
Mariposa Industrial Park, Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 1-1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This document sets forth the Statement of Overriding Considerations of the City of Stockton (the "City") as to six of the environmental impacts of the Mariposa Industrial Park project identified in the EIR for the project, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. The six environmental impacts, together with the other environmental effects of the proposed project, are described in the certified Final EIR for the project. These six impacts, listed below, are considered “significant and unavoidable.” This is based on the City of Stockton’s determination in this adopted document that no feasible mitigation measures exist that would reduce the impacts to a less than significant level.
This Statement of Overriding Considerations is closely related to the CEQA Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program for the Mariposa Industrial Park project, which addresses the effectiveness of mitigation measures with respect to all of the other environmental effects of the project, as required by CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091- 15093 and 15097. The CEQA Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program is a separate standalone document.
1.1 APPLICABLE CEQA REQUIREMENTS
CEQA requires that a Lead Agency prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) when a proposed project may involve significant environmental effects. Prior to approval of the project, the Lead Agency must certify that the EIR was completed in compliance with CEQA and that the Lead Agency reviewed and considered the EIR before approving the project.
The Mariposa Industrial project involves annexation of approximately 203 acres into the City of Stockton for the purposes of industrial development. The annexation area consists of several adjoining properties that together comprise the overall project site. The project location and proposed development of the site are described in more detail in the referenced EIR and the CEQA Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program for the project, both of which are referenced below.
During 2021, the City of Stockton prepared an EIR documenting the potential environmental effects of the project, feasible mitigation measures that would avoid or reduce address these effects, and a range of reasonable alternatives to the project. The City conducted agency and public review of the EIR and the remainder of the EIR process in accordance with CEQA requirements. These activities are described in more detail in Final EIR and the CEQA Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program for the project.
When an EIR identifies significant or potentially significant environmental effects, CEQA requires that the Lead Agency make specified written findings regarding each of the significant effects prior to project approval. For the Mariposa Industrial Park project, Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1531
Mariposa Industrial Park, Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 1-2 these written findings are contained in the CEQA Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program, which will require adoption by the City of Stockton prior to its action on the project.
When an EIR finds that there are no mitigation measures or no feasible mitigation measures for any of the significant environmental effects of the project, and the Lead Agency - the City of Stockton – wishes to approve the project in spite of its unmitigated significant effects, CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 provides that the Lead Agency must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) before approving the project. As described in the Section 15093 excerpt below, the SOC presents the Lead Agency’s rationale for balancing the benefits of the project vs. its unavoidable environmental risks. 15093. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
(a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including regionwide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable.”
(b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record.
The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record.
(c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091.
The EIR for the project concludes that project impacts on agricultural land conversion, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise and transportation impacts are significant and that feasible mitigation measures are not available that would conclusively reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. This document constitutes the Statement of Overriding Considerations addressing these significant and unavoidable impacst of the project, as described in more detail below.
The Draft EIR, the Final EIR and the CEQA Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program for the project are hereby incorporated by reference.
Copies of these documents, specifically cited below, are available for review at the offices of City of Stockton Community Development Department, Planning Division, 345 N. El Dorado Street, Stockton, California 95202.
BaseCamp Environmental, 2021a. Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Mariposa Industrial Park. SCH #2020120283. August 24, 2021.
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1532
Mariposa Industrial Park, Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 1-3 BaseCamp Environmental, 2021b. Final Environmental Impact Report, Mariposa Industrial Park. SCH #2020120283. February 28, 2022.
BaseCamp Environmental, 2021c. CEQA Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program, Mariposa Industrial Park. SCH #2021120283.
February 28, 2022.
1.2 SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
The project would involve six potentially significant and unavoidable environmental effects related to the Mariposa Industrial Park. These effects, available mitigation measures and, where appropriate, any other agencies associated with implementation of the mitigation measures are described below.
Agricultural Land Conversion. The project would convert up to 203 acres of agricultural lands to urban industrial use. The project would participate in the City’s Agricultural Lands Mitigation Program and the San Joaquin County MultiSpecies Habitat Conservation Plan, but these actions would only partially mitigate the agricultural land conversion impact, leaving it significant and unavoidable. No other feasible mitigation measures are available. This impact was accepted by the City for the site and other lands in its Statement of Overriding Considerations for adoption of the Stockton General Plan 2040 in 2018.
Air Quality Plans and Standards- Operational Emissions. The project would involve predicted emissions of oxides of nitrogen that would exceed San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District significance thresholds even with project conformance with SJVAPCD’s mitigating Rule 9510. The FEIR, in Appendix C, assigns responsibility for several air quality improvement measures to the project.
These measures are those that have been assigned to previous similar projects in the City of Stockton combined with those recommended by the California Air Resources Board, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District and the California Department of Justice in their comments on the DEIR for the Mariposa Industrial Park project. These together constitute a set of the best available mitigation measures for the referenced air quality impact and may be sufficient to reduce air quality impacts to a less than significant level. The effectiveness of these measures is not, however, quantified leaving uncertainty as to whether impacts will or will not be reduced to a less than significant level. For the purposes of the FEIR and the project CEQA findings, this impact is considered potentially significant and unavoidable.
Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Criteria Pollutants. The project’s NOx emissions could result in unquantified but potentially significant air quality impacts on the adjoining disadvantaged unincorporated community. The potential effectiveness of mitigation measures described in the EIR is also unquantified.
There is resulting uncertainty whether the project would result in a significant air quality on this community, which for the purposes of making the required CEQA Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1533
Mariposa Industrial Park, Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 1-4 findings are considered potentially significant and unavoidable. Additional discussion on this issue is provided below.
Project GHG Construction Emissions and Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies. Unmitigated construction GHG emissions would be reduced by Additional Air Quality Improvement Measures identified in the EIR and to be included in the project as conditions of approval. Compliance with applicable State and SJVAPCD rules and regulations would provide additional mitigation.
However, since these measures cannot be precisely quantified, and no quantified thresholds applicable to GHG construction emissions are available, it cannot be stated with certainty that GHG emissions would be reduced to a level that is considered less than significant.
Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards-Traffic. Predicted increases in vehicle traffic on Mariposa Road will result in significant increases in existing traffic noise for rural residences located along this regional roadway. Any substantial mitigation of these noise increases would require construction of continuous barrier walls along the frontage of residential parcels along Mariposa Road. To maintain existing access to each parcel, however, sound walls would need to be discontinuous, which would virtually eliminate their noise mitigation properties. There is no other known method of traffic noise mitigation that would be applicable in this area.
Consistency with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b). Chapter 16.0 of the Draft EIR, pages 16-24 through 16-26, concludes that the project would likely have a significant impact on Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Mitigation is available but its effectiveness is not clearly quantifiable, leaving the potential that VMT impacts could remain significant and unavoidable.
In that the above environmental impacts may result from the Mariposa Industrial Park project, if the City chooses to approve the project, it must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations balancing its reasons for approving the project with the fact that it would involve significant or potentially significant environmental effects that cannot be substantially reduced or mitigated. The City’s Statement of Overriding Considerations and related information is presented in Section 2.0 below.
When a City proposes to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, it is also required to make findings with respect to the alternatives to the proposed project. These findings are set forth in Section 3.0 of this document.
The Statement of Overriding Considerations for the proposed project is based upon substantial evidence, including information, analysis and mitigation measures described in the Draft and Final EIRs, information incorporated into these documents by reference and other information detailed or specifically referenced in the SOC itself.
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1534
Mariposa Industrial Park, Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 2-1
2.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City Council of the City of Stockton finds that the six potential environmental effects of the Mariposa Industrial Park project, as described above and in the referenced sections of the Draft and Final EIRs for the project, are potentially significant and may not be avoided, mitigated to Less Than Significant or substantially reduced by the available mitigation measures documented in the EIR.
The City also finds in Section 3.0 of this document that none of the project alternatives have the potential to avoid or substantially reduce the significant environmental effects of the project except the No Project Alternative, which is entirely inconsistent with the project objectives.
The City Council hereby adopts and makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) with respect to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, which is shown in its entirety in Section 1.0. The SOC describes the anticipated economic, legal, social, technological and/or other benefits or considerations that warrant the City Council’s decision to approve the project even though all of the environmental effects of the project are not fully mitigated.
The City Council specifically finds that the potentially significant and unavoidable environmental impacts of the Mariposa Industrial Park project are considered acceptable in light of overriding social, economic and other benefits or considerations related to the project, as described below. That is, the social, economic and other benefits or considerations of the project outweigh the significant and unavoidable effects of the project.
The City Council considers the following items to be the overriding social, economic and other benefits or considerations of the project.
• The project site and surroundings are designated for urban industrial development by the Stockton General Plan 2040. The site area is within Stockton’s designated Urban Services Boundary, which is intended to be annexed and pre-zoned for urban development in the near future. In anticipation of eventual annexation and development, the project site is designated “Urban Reserve” by San Joaquin County.
• Economic development and job creation, including the designation of sufficient land for ongoing development of job-generating land uses, are among the core objectives of the Stockton General Plan 2040.
• The project is in compliance with Stockton General Plan 2040 policies supporting urban growth on lands with existing transportation and utility services, thereby preventing unnecessary urban expansion into greenfield areas on the periphery of Stockton. The project site is surrounded by other areas designated for urban industrial and residential development.
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1535
Mariposa Industrial Park, Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 2-2 • The General Plan 2040 EIR, considered and certified by the Stockton City Council before adopting the General Plan in 2018, disclosed a range of potential environmental impacts associated with planned development in accordance with the existing general plan designations. The project would make contributions to these previously identified impacts consistent with the analysis provided in the certified Stockton General Plan 2040 Environmental Impact Report (GPEIR). The significant impacts analyzed in the GPEIR include conversion of agricultural lands, emissions of criteria pollutants including oxides of nitrogen, greenhouse gas emissions and traffic and noise increases along Mariposa Road that would result from planned urban growth as a whole.
• Proposed industrial development is within the allowable land use intensity for the City’s Industrial General Plan designation. Approval of the project would not confer any increase in the planned future industrial development intensity on the project site that is not already accounted for in the Stockton General Plan 2040 and the GPEIR.
• The City is in the planning development of a new fire station to serve ongoing industrial development in the southern portion of the City. As provided in the proposed, the project applicant will provide $100,000 to fund formation of a Community Facilities District (CFD). The CFD will be responsible for construction and long-term operation of the fire station. The Development Agreement also commits the applicant to provide up to $3 million in funding for fire station construction and to pay the project’s fair share of operating costs in perpetuity.
• The February 4, 2022 Economic Benefit Report on the project, prepared by Development Planning and Financing Group (DPFG), indicates that the project will produce significant economic benefits to the local economy, including impact fee benefits, construction benefits, employment benefits, earnings increases, and tax revenue generation.
• DPFG estimates that construction of the project will generate approximately $580 million in construction economic activity, an estimated 7,422 construction jobs and $517.8 million in worker earnings over the project construction period. • Once constructed and in operation, DPFG estimates the project will generate an estimated $4.1 million annually in property tax revenues; $828,000 of this revenue will directly benefit the City of Stockton; an increase of $686,000 in revenues will be paid to the County of San Joaquin, and an additional $2.6 million in property tax revenues will accrue to other local agencies including the Stockton USD, SJ Delta Community College and San Joaquin County flood control agencies, among others.
• The project will employ an estimated 3,062 full-time employees. New employee spending will generate an estimated $8 million in taxable sales, including $5.6 million within the City limits generating approximately $55,736 annually in sales tax revenue to the City.
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1536
Mariposa Industrial Park, Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 2-3 • The project is estimated to fund more than $6 million in development fees to the City and $1.3 million to the Stockton Unified School District. Of these, City development impact fees contribute to capital costs of new facilities or upgrades to existing streets, utilities, fire, police, medical, libraries and parks facilities required by new development.
• The project is subject to the requirements of the Stockton Agricultural Lands Mitigation Program. The project will involve a substantial contribution of conservation easement-protected land or payment of in-lieu fees of approximately $1 million to the Mitigation Program as compensation for the agricultural land conversion impacts of the project.
• The project will involve a contribution of more than $4.6 million in habitat conservation fees to the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Program.
• The project will widen approximately 900 feet of Mariposa Road, including turning lanes, pedestrian sidewalks and bike lanes, at an estimated cost of approximately $6 million.
• Except for the six significant and unavoidable impacts addressed in this document, all of the other potential environmental impacts of the project described in the project EIR were determined to be less than significant or would be reduced to less than significant level with mitigation measures that will be incorporated into the project.
In addition to the above-listed social, economic and other benefits of the project, the City Council has also taken the following points into consideration:
• The DEIR considered a range of feasible alternatives to the proposed project.
None of the alternatives would result in avoidance or a substantial reduction in the significant and unavoidable effects of the project.
• The agricultural land conversion impacts of the project were included in the analysis of this environmental concern in the EIR prepared and certified prior to adoption of the Stockton General Plan 2040 in 2018. Agricultural land conversion impacts were accepted by the City as significant and unavoidable in its Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted in conjunction with adoption of the General Plan.
• While the Mariposa Industrial EIR considers Air Quality Plans and StandardsOperational Emissions impacts to be significant and unavoidable, these impacts were also addressed in the Stockton General Plan 2040 EIR and accepted in the Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted in conjunction with adoption of the General Plan.
• The agencies commenting on the Mariposa Industrial Draft EIR have identified a range of potential air quality mitigation measures, which have been incorporated into the Final EIR to the degree feasible. The means to reliably quantify the Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1537
Mariposa Industrial Park, Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 2-4 efficacy of these mitigation measures, considered “best available,” are not available at this time.
• While the Mariposa Industrial EIR acknowledges that air quality impacts on Disadvantaged Communities, specifically the effects of the project on NO2 pollution levels may be significant, there is no known evidence that these areas are subject to existing NO2 levels that the project could result in an exceedance of criteria pollutant (NO2) standards in this area.
• The Mariposa Industrial EIR indicates that new traffic along Mariposa Road would result in an increase in existing traffic noise levels, residential land uses along Mariposa Road will nonetheless, due to predicted long-term traffic growth, be subject to significant traffic noise increases over time. The City also recognizes that the subject residences are legal non-conforming uses in an area designated for and committed to industrial development in the foreseeable future as described in the Stockton General Plan.
The previously-described economic, legal, social, technological and other benefits or considerations of the project outweigh the environmental effects of the project that may remain unmitigated or are considered to be unavoidable. These environmental effects of project implementation are, therefore, considered to be acceptable.
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1538
Mariposa Industrial Park, Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 3-1
3.0 FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES
The State CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR include a discussion of a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project or to the location of the project. Alternatives to the proposed project were addressed in Chapter 19.0 of the DEIR. When a Lead Agency finds that mitigation measures needed to reduce a significant effect to less than significant, or to substantially reduce it, are infeasible (Finding 3), the Lead Agency must also describe the specific reasons for rejecting alternatives that could meet the same need.
The City is making Finding 3 with regard to six environmental effects that could result from the project; these effects will not be sufficiently reduced by mitigation measures.
Consequently, the City Council makes the following findings with regard to project alternatives.
Chapter 19.0 of the EIR evaluated several alternatives to the proposed project. These alternatives, described below, are generally feasible but are unlikely to avoid or substantially lessen environmental effects of the project. Therefore, these alternatives are not specifically rejected by the City, but their environmental effects are not such that any of the alternatives should be considered “environmentally superior” to the project and therefore selected in lieu of the proposed project. The alternatives are discussed below.
3.1 ALTERNATIVES NOT ADDRESSED IN DETAIL
The DEIR considered several alternatives but did not address them in detail as they were not considered “feasible” alternatives under CEQA. These “Alternatives Not Addressed In Detail: 1) were clearly infeasible, or 2) did not have the ability to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of the project as discussed below. The Alternative Sites, while possibly reducing a few of the project’s environmental effects, may exacerbate other impacts, and mainly would shift potential environmental impacts from one location to another. The Alternative Site Design alternative is infeasible and would not reduce significant environmental effects of the proposed project.
3.2 NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
The DEIR defined the “No Project” Alternative as no annexation to the City of Stockton, no industrial pre-zoning, and no industrial development as proposed by the project. The project site would continue to be used for agricultural activities consistent with the existing San Joaquin County zoning.
Since industrial development would not occur under this alternative, there would be no impacts associated with such development on the project site. Most environmental impacts associated with the proposed project would be avoided, particularly air pollutant and GHG emissions, noise, and traffic. However, this alternative would meet none of the objectives of the proposed project. It also would be inconsistent with both the City of Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1539
Mariposa Industrial Park, Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 3-2 Stockton and San Joaquin County General Plans, which anticipate industrial development of the project site. No annexation and development of the site also would mean that the City would realize no additional increase in revenue from property taxes, utility user taxes, license fees, and other taxes and fees. With no development, only limited employment opportunities associated with agricultural work would be created.
It is uncertain if agricultural operations on the project site, even those involving highervalue crops, would be viable in the long term, given its location in an area designated for industrial development under the Stockton General Plan and already developed with some residential and commercial uses. There also may be potential conflict between farm equipment and other vehicle traffic in the area, along with the disposal of agricultural waste, particularly if burning is involved. Continued agricultural use may require agricultural chemicals such as pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers, that have potential to affect nearby residential areas, contaminate project site soils and adjacent North Littlejohns Creek if not properly applied. Agricultural activities also could generate dust emissions to which nearby land uses, including residences, may be exposed.
The City Council hereby rejects the No Project Alternative because it would not meet the objectives of the project and could cause some environmental impacts that would not occur with the proposed project. The evidence in support of this finding is provided in DEIR Chapter 19.0.
3.3 ALTERNATIVE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
This alternative proposes development of the project site other than the high-cube warehouses proposed by the project. For this alternative, it is assumed that the City would annex the project site and pre-zone the property as Limited Industrial (IL), the same as for the proposed project. The IL zone would be consistent with the existing Stockton General Plan designation for the site (Industrial). The IL zone is applied to areas appropriate for light manufacturing uses that may generate more nuisance impacts than are acceptable in commercial zoning districts and whose operations are conducted indoors.
Alternative industrial development would require extension of public services and utilities from the City to the project site. Road improvements, including curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements, would need to be made. Because of this, development under this alternative would have similar impacts to the proposed project, particularly related to traffic and noise. Ground disturbance impacts related to soil erosion, surface water quality, and drainage would be similar. Depending on the type of industrial activity located on the project site, this alternative may have new or more severe impacts than the proposed project. For instance, manufacturing activities may use or store a greater quantity of hazardous materials, or generate quantities of hazardous waste, releases of which could have a more adverse impact in the vicinity than would occur under the proposed project. In addition, this alternative would not meet the objectives of the proposed project related to warehouse development.
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1540
Mariposa Industrial Park, Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 3-3 The City Council hereby rejects the Alternative Industrial Development because it would not meet the objectives of the project and would cause similar effects as the project and could cause new and/or more severe environmental impacts than the proposed project.
The evidence in support of this finding is provided in DEIR Chapter 19.0.
3.4 REDUCED PROJECT SITE DEVELOPMENT
Under this alternative, the project site would be annexed to the City of Stockton and prezoned as under the proposed project. Also, proposed development of the project site would be like the proposed project. However, the proposed warehouse development on the project site would be reduced in floor area. For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that only two buildings that total approximately 2,042,880 square feet in floor area would be constructed.
This alternative would be consistent with the objectives of the proposed project. As with the proposed project, it would contribute to increased City revenue potential, though at a lower level. Employment opportunities also would be created, again at a lower level than under the proposed project. The environmental impacts of the proposed project would be lessened by this alternative. Air pollutant and GHG emissions from both mobile and area emissions would be reduced, although a CalEEMod run indicates that ROG emissions would remain above their SJVAPCD significance threshold. The alternative would also reduce the amount of traffic that would be generated, along with attendant air quality and noise impacts. With the reduced development, a lower quantity of hazardous materials associated with industrial development would be used.
However, effects on other environmental issues would be the same as the proposed project, and mitigation would likely be required to reduce some of these impacts.
Potentially more land would be left available for existing uses such as agriculture, although the existing walnut orchard would likely be removed as this area is favored for near-term development. Agricultural activities, as discussed under the No Project Alternative, could involve the use of agricultural chemicals that could contaminate the project site and nearby North Littlejohns Creek if not properly used. Also, agricultural activities could generate dust emissions to which nearby sensitive receptors could be exposed, and potential conflicts could occur between farm equipment and vehicle traffic.
The City Council hereby rejects the Reduced Project Site Development Alternative because it could have more adverse impacts on specific environmental issues, mainly related to potential agricultural use, plus it would not meet project objectives to the extent the proposed project would. This alternative is considered to have environmental effects that are generally equivalent to the proposed project, but the alternative is not considered “environmentally superior” to the project and need not be selected in lieu of the proposed project. The evidence in support of this finding is provided in DEIR Chapter 19.0.
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1541
Economic Benefit Report
Mariposa Industrial Park
City of Stockton, CA
Date: February 4, 2022
Prepared By:
DPFG, LLC
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1542
2281 Lava Ridge Ct. Ste 340, Roseville CA, 9566 916.480.0305 DPFG.com February 4, 2022
RE: Greenlaw Partners Proposed Mariposa Industrial Park Project: Economic Benefit Report
Greenlaw Partners has requested the services of DPFG, LLC (“DPFG”) to review and quantify the economic benefits of the Proposed Mariposa Industrial Park Project (“Project”), located within the boundaries of the City of Stockton (“City”).
The results of our review indicate that the Project will produce significant economic benefits to the local economy, including impact fee benefits, construction benefits, employment benefits, earnings increase, and tax revenue generation. The attached report outlines our conclusions and findings regarding the economic benefits that will accrue to the local economy as a result of the Project.
Sincerely,
Chris Austin
Managing Principal
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1543
2281 Lava Ridge Ct. Ste 340, Roseville CA, 9566 916.480.0305 DPFG.com Economic Benefit Report
Mariposa Industrial Park Project
Purpose of Report
The purpose of this report is to review and quantify the economic benefits produced by the Proposed Mariposa Industrial Park Project in the City of Stockton (“Project”) that will accrue to the local economy.
Scope of Work
The scope of our work includes a review of various direct and indirect economic benefits produced by the Project, these include the following: (i) sales tax benefits, (ii) tax revenue generation, (iii) development impact fees, (iv) construction benefits, and (v) earnings increases.
Project Description
The Project is planned for an Industrial Park of 203.5 acres. The non-residential square footage is broken up between two buildings at 900,000 square feet and 1,224,880 square feet. The Project is located along Mariposa Road north of North Littlejohn’s Creek, within San Joaquin County (County), and will be annexed into the City of Stockton (“City”).
Project improvements include $92.5 million in on-site improvements, over $401.8 million in vertical construction (including soft costs, contingency, and impact fees), and $110 million in furniture, fixtures, and equipment.
Executive Summary
The economic benefits of the Project are as follows:
General Fund Revenues (Annual/Ongoing)
$1,624,300 increase in revenues
Property Tax Revenue Generation (Annual/Ongoing)
$4.1 million in property tax revenues
o $828,000 in property tax revenues ($821,000 increase over existing land use) to the City of Stockton annually.
o $686,000 in property tax revenues ($681,000 increase over existing land use) to San Joaquin County annually.
o $2.6 million in property tax revenues ($2.6 million increase over existing land use) to Other Agencies (Stockton USD, SJ Delta Community College, Flood Control, Water, Transit, etc.) annually.
Sales Tax Benefits (Annual/Ongoing)
$8 million increase in taxable sales from new employee spending Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1544
2281 Lava Ridge Ct. Ste 340, Roseville CA, 9566 916.480.0305 DPFG.com Executive Summary (continued)
o $5.6 million within the City
o $2.4 million leakage to Other Jurisdictions
o $55,736 in Sales Tax Revenue to the City of Stockton
Development Fees (One-time)
$6 million in City of Stockton Fees
$1.3 million in Stockton Unified School District Fees Voter Approved Revenues/Other Economic Benefits (Annual) $97,539 in voter approved and other economic benefits o $27,868 in revenues from Measure K San Joaquin County Sales Tax o $13,934 in revenues from Measure W for Stockton Safe Neighborhood Gang and Drug Prevention
o $41,802 in revenues from Measure A for Law Enforcement, Crime Prevention, and Essential City Services
o $13,934 in revenues from Measure M for Library and Recreation (Strong Communities Special Tax)
Construction Benefits (One-time)
$580 million in economic activity will be created by the Project. 7,422 total jobs will be created over the construction of the Project Earnings Increases (One-time)
$517.8 million increase in workers’ earnings in all industries will occur as a result of the Project’s impacts within the local economy.
Annual Employees and Salaries of Project
3,062 average annual full-time employees
135 salaries manager positions (avg $100,000)
2,927 full-time hourly employees (starting $19/hr)
Housing affordability ranging from $360,000 to $900,000 Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1545
2281 Lava Ridge Ct. Ste 340, Roseville CA, 9566 916.480.0305 DPFG.com Economic Benefit Report
Mariposa Industrial Park Project
General Fund Revenues
Using a fiscal revenue model, DPFG projected the increase in General Fund revenues anticipated at the buildout of the project. An average per capita approach is used for all revenue categories except property tax and sales tax which are done as separate case studies. Using a prospective user’s data and industry acceptable assumptions on employees per square foot for City of Stockton, it is assumed that the persons served base will increase 1,531 (new employees of 3,062) because of the Project.
Annually the average revenue model illustrates a $1,624,300 increase in the City’s General Fund revenues (see Table 1).
Property Tax Revenue Generation
The Project is anticipated to create additional property tax revenue for the local governments. This positive impact is a result of under-utilized existing uses and vacant land, when compared with a newly developed residential site (See Table 3). The Project generates an increase in property tax revenues by $4.1 million annually after development of the Project. The City and County receive a significant portion of property tax revenues from the Project. The City will receive 20.16% of the 1% ad valorem taxes or $828,000, a $821,000 increase. Additionally, the County will receive 16.71% or $686,000 of property tax revenues, a $681,000 increase annually after development buildout. Other local agencies such as the Stockton USD, SJ Delta Community College, Flood Control, Water, and Transit will also benefit from property tax revenues.
Property Tax In-Lieu of Vehicle License Fees
The Project is anticipated to create additional Property Tax In-Lieu of Vehicle License Fee revenue of $420,900. The calculation of property tax in-lieu of vehicle license fees was a consequence of the passage of Proposition 1A in November of 2004. Revenue was calculated by taking the estimated percent change in assessed value that the Project would have on the City and applying that percent change on the revenue adopted in the FY 2021-22 Budget. Property Tax In-Lieu of Vehicle License Fees revenues are shown in Table 4.
Property Transfer Tax
The Project is anticipated to create additional Property Transfer Tax revenues of $11,300. The City receives this tax at the time in which a new or existing property is sold and ownership is transferred.
Property transfer tax is collected upon the sale of property at a rate of $0.55 per $1,000 of assessed valuation. The transfer tax is calculated by using an annual turnover rate of 5.0% for non-residential property. Annual document transfer tax revenues are shown in Table 5.
Sales Tax Revenue Generation
The Project is anticipated to generate taxable sales through purchases within the local economy by its employees. In DPFG experience it is typically assumed that leakage or purchases by new employees outside the City limits. The Project is anticipated to generate total taxable spending of $8 million annually after development of the Project ($5.6 million within the City and $2.4 million leaking to the County or other Jurisdictions) and generates $55,700 in sales tax revenues to the General Fund (see Table 6).
Utility Consumption Tax
Using a fiscal revenue model, DPFG projected the increase in Utility Users Tax revenues anticipated at the buildout of the project. An average per person served approach is used for all revenue Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1546
2281 Lava Ridge Ct. Ste 340, Roseville CA, 9566 916.480.0305 DPFG.com categories such as phone, cable, gas, and electricity. It is assumed that the persons served base will increase 1,531 (new employees of 3,062) because of the Project. Annually the average revenue model illustrates a $137,000 increase in the City’s Utility Users Tax (see Table 7).
Development Fees
The Project is estimated to fund more than $10.8 million in development fees to the City, School District, and other public agencies. The development impact fees contribute to pay for capital costs of new facilities or upgrades to existing facilities. $6 million would fund City fees that fund capital improvements that support fire protections and medical services, police protection, libraries, parks and recreation, storm drain infrastructure, and transportation improvements (See Table 8).
Voter Approved Revenues/Other Economic Benefits
The Project is estimated to fund approximately $97,500 in Stockton City Council and voter approved ad valorem, parcel tax, and sales tax measures that fund the following (See Table 9). San Joaquin County Measure K Sales Tax - $27,900 in revenues City of Stockton Measure W - $13,900 in revenues for safe neighborhood, gang, and drug prevention
City of Stockton Measure A - $41,800 in revenues for law enforcement, crime prevention, and essential City services
City of Stockton Measure M - $13,900 in revenues for library and recreation (strong communities special tax)
Construction Benefits
Construction benefits created by the Project include direct investment into the economy, the indirect and induced effects from that investment, and job creation. Direct investment into the economy occurs through costs associated with construction of the Project, including such things as materials costs and labor costs. The injection of construction dollars into the economy creates indirect and induced benefits through multiplier effects or the recycling of these additional dollars in the economy.
The Project creates economic activity of $580 million for the economy through direct investment and its indirect or multiplier effects. Additionally, the Project creates jobs for workers within the economy. The expected job creation because of the construction of the Project is estimated at 7,422 jobs. The Projects investment in construction costs and labor benefits the citizens of the City, County, and surrounding areas.
Earnings Increases
Development of the Project is anticipated to increase workers’ earnings in all industries through the creation of on-site jobs by the Project, as well as indirect jobs and induced jobs created by the Project.
The recycling of dollars spent by the Project within the local economy causes increased demand for goods and services which increases the number of local jobs. The increased number of jobs in the local economy increases earnings for existing workers. It is estimated that the Project will create a total increase in workers’ earnings of $518 million within the local economy. By increasing workers’ earnings, the Project benefits the citizens of the City, County, and surrounding areas.
Annual Economic Earnings of Project Employees
Using information provided by a prospective user and extrapolating it across the entire Project, of the 3,062 employees roughly 135 would be manager level positions with a starting annual pay of $75,000 (assuming an average of $100,000 to account for head positions) and the remaining 2,927 would be hourly workers with a starting wage of $19/hour. Salaries of employees of the Project would earn just over $100 million annually.
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1547
2281 Lava Ridge Ct. Ste 340, Roseville CA, 9566 916.480.0305 DPFG.com Housing affordability is an important issue when discussing salaries of employees and being able to house them locally. With the above-mentioned salaries, DPFG calculated the estimated home purchase price affordable to the different income ranges from the Project. Assuming a 20% down payment, 30-year fixed payment at 4% interest and a household with two income earners (both earning the minimum $19/hour from above), they could purchase a home at $360,000. At the other end of the spectrum, a two-income earning household (both at the $100,000 manager level) could afford to purchase a $900,000 home.
In terms of rent affordability, a household typically spends about 30% of their gross income on rent, this would mean that a household with two income earners (both earning minimum $19/hour from above) could afford a monthly rent of $1,976. At the upper income range, a two-income earning household (both at the $100,000 manager level) could afford a monthly rent of about $5,000.
Economic Benefit Calculations
For calculation of the Project’s economic benefits please see Exhibit A: City of Stockton Economic Benefit Calculation.
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1548
2281 Lava Ridge Ct. Ste 340, Roseville CA, 9566 916.480.0305 DPFG.com Professional Qualifications
DPFG formed in 1991, is a national real estate consulting firm that has been involved in thousands of real estate transactions in California and throughout the nation. DPFG provides consulting services to the land development and homebuilding industry. The Senior Management Team at DPFG has 215 years of combined real estate experience and has been involved in public finance transactions, fiscal impact analyses, pro-forma analyses, development impact fee reviews, and infrastructure finance transactions. DPFG has office locations in six states and is currently working on transactions in fifteen different states.
Report Source Documents
City of Stockton, 2021-22 Operating Budget
IMPLAN 2021 Economic Data
BLS Consumer Expenditure Survey Data
US Census Data
San Joaquin County Assessor
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1549
2281 Lava Ridge Ct. Ste 340, Roseville CA, 9566 916.480.0305 DPFG.com Exhibits & Tables:
City of Stockton
Economic Benefit Calculations
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1550
2021‐22 Estimating Citywide Rev. Per Service Total
General Fund Revenue Category Budget Method Population1 Person Population Project Property Tax $38,416,000 Case Study2 ‐ ‐ ‐ $827,985
Property Tax: Vehicle License Fee (VLF) ‐ Property Tax Swap $26,791,495 Case Study3 ‐ ‐ ‐ $420,871 Measure A Transaction Tax $36,132,000 Case Study8 ‐ ‐ ‐ $41,802 Sales Tax $56,076,000 Case Study9 ‐ ‐ ‐ $55,736
Prop. 172 Sales Tax $2,379,000 Case Study9 ‐ ‐ ‐ $13,934 Document Transfer Tax $852,000 Case Study7 N/A ‐ ‐ $11,295 Franchise Tax $16,595,630 Persons Served 383,500 $43.27 1,531 $66,262 Hotel/Motel Tax $2,648,000 Persons Served 383,500 $6.90 1,531 $10,573 Business License $9,695,000 Persons Served 383,500 $25.28 1,531 $38,710 Utility Users Tax $34,342,000 Persons Served 383,500 $89.55 1,531 $137,119 Licenses & Permits $0 N/A4 N/A ‐ ‐ ‐
Revenues from Other Agencies $3,253,496 Persons Served3,4 383,500 $8.48 1,531 ‐ Motor Vehicle In‐Lieu $200,000 Persons Served5 383,500 $0.52 1,531 ‐ Charges for Services $3,150,079 Persons Served3 383,500 $8.21 1,531 ‐ Fire Contracts $4,691,240 N/A4 N/A ‐ ‐ ‐
Code Enforcement $3,498,413 N/A4 N/A ‐ ‐ ‐
Fines & Forfeitures $501,694 N/A4 N/A ‐ ‐ ‐
Other Revenues $11,026,889 N/A5 N/A ‐ ‐ ‐
Transfers In $0 N/A5 N/A ‐ ‐ ‐
Total Revenues $250,248,936 $1,624,287
Source: City of Stockton FY 2021‐22 Annual Budget.
Footnotes:
1 See Table 2
2 See Table 3
3 See Table 4
4 This analysis assumes that all or part of these revenues are fully dedicated to specific General Fund departmental costs (Offsetting Revenues). Since these revenues are budget neutral and are not discretionary, they are not included in estimating discretionary Project revenues. 5 Not expected to be affected by the Project and therefore no revenue multipliers are estimated in this analysis. 6 The city allocation of Motor Vehicle in Lieu was eliminated in FY 20‐21 by SB89. As a result, it is excluded from the analysis. 7 See Table 5.
8 Table 9.
9 Table 6.
Table 1
Mariposa Industrial Park
General Fund Revenues
Prepared by DPFG 2/10/2022
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1551
Square Avg.
Land Use Feet Value
Nonresidential
Industrial (Building 1) 900,000 $164
Industrial (Building 2) 1,224,880 $125
Total Nonresidential 2,124,880 $142
Assesed Value
Nonresidential Weighted Average Value $ 142
Square Feet 2,124,880
Total Nonresidential Assessed Value 300,710,00 $ 0 Unsecured Property (FF&E)
Industrial (Building 1) $ 100,000,000
Industrial (Building 2) 10,000,00 0
Total Nonresidential Unsecured Property 110,000,00 $ 0 Assesed Value $410,710,000
Employees
Employees (Building 1) 2,450
Employees (Building 2) 612
Nonresidential Employees 3,062
Total Nonresidential Persons Served (50% of employees) 1,531 Total City of Stockton
City of Stockton Population1 320,876
City of Stockton Employees2 125,248
City of Stockton Persons Served (Population plus 50% of Employees) 383,500 Footnotes:
1 California Department of Finance, E‐5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates, 1/1/2021 2 Per City of Stockton 2021‐22 Budget.
Table 2
Mariposa Industrial Park
Land Use and Assumptions
Prepared by DPFG 2/10/2022
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1552
Existing Buildout of Net
Assumptions Property1 Project1 Increase
Estimated Valuation $3,317,019 $410,710,000 $407,392,981 1% General Property Tax 1% $33,170 $4,107,100 $4,073,930 Breakdown of 1%
City of Stockton 20.160% $6,687 $827,985 $821,298
San Joaquin County 16.711% $5,543 $686,339 $680,796
Other Agencies/ERAF 63.13% $20,940 $2,592,775 $2,571,835 Total to City $6,687 $827,985 $821,298
Source: San Joaquin County Assessor.
Footnotes:
1 Per the 2020‐21 valuation on property tax bill.
2 Assumes property tax share agreement of 80% County and 20% City.
Table 3
Mariposa Industrial Park
Property Tax Increase
Prepared by DPFG 2/10/2022
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1553
FY 2021‐22 City of Stockton Assessed Valuation $ 26,144,690,583 Assessed Value of Project $ 410,710,000
Total Assessed Value $ 26,555,400,583
Percent Change in Assessed Value 1.57%
Total FY 2021‐22 Property Tax in Lieu of VLF Adopted Revenue 26,791,49 $ 5 Estimated Increase in Property Tax in Lieu of VLF 420,871 $ Source: San Joaquin County Assessor.
Table 4
Mariposa Industrial Park
Property Tax Vehicle License Fee Increase
Prepared by DPFG 2/10/2022
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1554
Turnover Rate
Industrail Property 5.00%
Industrial Property Assessed Value 410,710,00 $ 0 Estimated Assessed Valuation Turnover Amount 20,535,50 $ 0 Rate per $1,000 of Assessed Value $ 0.55
Total Estimated Document Transfer Tax $ 11,295 Table 5
Mariposa Industrial Park
Property Transfer Tax
Prepared by DPFG 2/10/2022
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1555
Taxable Total
Spending Taxable
Land Use per Employee Employees Spending
per day
Nonresidential
Industrial (Building 1) $10 2,450 $6,370,000
Industrial (Building 2) $10 612 $1,592,344
3,062 $7,962,344
Leakage (30%) $2,388,703
City of Stockton Capture (70%) $5,573,641
City of Stockton General Fund Sales & Use Tax Revenues:
City of Stockton Taxable Spending Capture $5,573,641
City Share of Sales Tax 1.00% $55,736
Project Derived Sales Tax Revenue to City $55,736
Prop. 172 Sales Tax 0.25% $13,934
Table 6
Mariposa Industrial Park
Sales Tax
Prepared by DPFG 2/10/2022
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1556
2021‐22 Estimating Citywide Rev. Per Service Total
Budget Method Population1 Person Population Project
Utility Users Tax $34,342,000 Persons Served 383,500 $89.55 1,531 $137,119 Table 7
Mariposa Industrial Park
Utility Users Tax
Prepared by DPFG 2/10/2022
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1557
Description Total
Impact Fees $5,997,979
Habitat/Open Space (SJCOG) $3,533,371
School District Fees (SUSD) $1,296,177
Total Project Development Fees $10,827,527
Source: Administrative Review Draft Annexation Report, updated with new square footage assumptions.
Table 8
Mariposa Industrial Park
Fees
Prepared by DPFG 2/10/2022
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1558
Project Taxable
Spending
San Joaquin County (Measure K) Sales Tax $5,573,641 0.500% $27,868 Stockton Safe Neighborhood Gang and Drug Prevention Police & Fire (Measure W) $5,573,641 0.250% $13,934 Law Enforcement, Crime Prevention, Essential City Services (Measure A) $5,573,641 0.750% $41,802 Library and Recreation ‐ Strong Communities Special Tax (Measure M) $5,573,641 0.250% $13,934 Total Voter Approved/Other Economic Benefits (At Buildout) $97,539 Table 9
Mariposa Industrial Park
Voter Approved Revenues/Other Economic Benefits
Prepared by DPFG 2/10/2022
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1559
I: Construction Benefits ‐ Industrial
Construction Spending
Total Construction Cost (a) (1) $ 437,905,354
Total Indirect Construction Cost (a) (2) 142,199,13 $ 3 Construction Spending Total (3)=(1)+(2) 580,104,48 $ 7 Investment into Local Economy
Direct Effect (b) (3) $ 580,104,487
Indirect Effect (b) (4) 106,413,26 9
Induced Effect (b) (5) 126,731,01 8
Total Economic Output (6) = (3)+(4)+(5) 813,248,77 $ 4 Employment
Direct Effect (b) (7) 6,013
Indirect Effect (b) (8) 590
Induced Effect (b) (9) 818
Jobs Created through Buildout (10)=(7)+(8)+(9) 7,422
II: Earnings Increases
Labor Income
Direct Effect (b) (13) 441,252,38 $ 5
Indirect Effect (b) (14) 36,607,80 6
Induced Effect (b) (15) 39,896,95 5
Total Earnings Increase for Workers within the Local Economy (16)=(13)+(14)+(15) $ 517,757,146 Notes:
construction of new highways and streets at $92.6M.
Table 10
Mariposa Industrial Park
Construction Benefits
(a) Construction spending amounts are based on estimates per Table 11. (b) Based on the IMPLAN model for new industrial construction assuming construciton costs of $401.8M and Prepared by DPFG 2/10/2022
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1560
TOTAL
Cost Category
Industrial Square Footage
Building 1 900,00 0
Building 2 1,224,88 0
Construction Cost
Building 1 ($164/sf) $147,600,000
Building 2 ($125/sf) $153,110,000
Building 1 FF&E (60% installed/built equipment) $60,000,000 Building 2 FF&E (60% installed/built equipment) $6,000,000 Site Improvement $71,195,354
Total Construction Costs $437,905,354
Indirect Costs
Impact Fees (Table 8) $10,827,527
Soft Costs (15%) $65,685,803
Contingency (15%) $65,685,803
Total Indirect Costs $142,199,133
Grand Total Project Cost $580,104,487
Table 11
Mariposa Industrial Park
Construction Costs
Source: Developer & Builder.
Prepared by DPFG 2/10/2022
Exhibit 2 - Statement of OC Revised 1561
CEQA FINDINGS AND
MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM
FOR THE
MARIPOSA INDUSTRIAL PARK
City of Stockton, CA
State Clearinghouse No: 2020120283
February 28, 2022
Prepared for:
CITY OF STOCKTON
345 N. El Dorado Street
Stockton, CA 95202
(209) 937-8266
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1562
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
2.0 FINDINGS OF THE LEAD AGENCY WITH REGARD TO SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT 2-1
3.0 MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM 3-1
APPENDIX
MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM TABLE
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1563
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Page 1-1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This document sets forth the findings of the City of Stockton (the "City") relating to the Mariposa Industrial Park Project as required by CEQA Guidelines sections 15091-15093.
This document also describes the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project as required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15097. The primary source document for the findings and MMRP is the Environmental Impact Report for the Mariposa Industrial Park Project (SCH# 2020120283) (the "EIR"). When referenced as such, the EIR includes the Public Review Draft EIR (the DEIR) dated August 24, 2021 and the Final EIR (the FEIR) dated December 10, 2021 for the project, as well as any documents that have been incorporated into the DEIR and FEIR by reference.
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THIS DOCUMENT
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that a Lead Agency prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) when a proposed project may involve significant environmental effects, as defined by CEQA. Prior to approval of the project, the Lead Agency is required to certify that the EIR was completed in compliance with CEQA and that the Lead Agency reviewed and considered the information in the EIR before approving the project. If the EIR identifies significant or potentially significant environmental effects, CEQA requires that the Lead Agency make specified written findings prior to project approval. If the Lead Agency finds that mitigation measures are not feasible for one or more of the significant environmental effects of the project, it must also adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations; this is the case for the proposed project, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations is contained in a separate document. The Lead Agency must also adopt a MMRP that lists all mitigation measures identified in the EIR and describes their implementation and/or monitoring.
The proposed project that is the subject of these findings, the environmental review process, the environmental documentation prepared for the project, and the findings that the City must make to fulfill the requirements of CEQA, are discussed below. The findings and MMRP for the project are described in subsequent sections of this document, as follows:
2.0 Findings of the Lead Agency with Regard to the Significant Environmental Effects of the Project
3.0 Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program
A table detailing the Lead Agency’s findings with respect to each of the significant or potentially significant effects of the project, the applicable CEQA findings and the various provisions of the MMRP are shown in the Appendix.
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1564
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Page 1-2
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site, consisting of nine parcels, is in the San Joaquin County unincorporated area, adjacent to the southeastern limits of the City of Stockton (Chapter 1.0, Figures 1-1 through 1-5). Table 3-1 identifies each of these parcels by its Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN), street address, and acreage (Figure 1-5, Assessor’s Parcel Map). The project site encompasses 203.48 acres.
TABLE 3-1
PROJECT SITE PARCELS AND ACREAGES
APN Address Acres
179-220-10 5290 E. Mariposa Road 12.46
179-220-11 4600 E. Marfargoa Drive 7.46
179-220-12 5280 E. Mariposa Road 24.55
179-220-13 4522 E. Marfargoa Drive 14.97
179-220-16 5100 E. Clark Drive 19.52
179-220-17 4500 E. Clark Drive 14.97
179-220-18 5150 E. Mariposa Road 65.73
179-220-19 5110 E. Mariposa Road 43.31
179-220-24 4490 E. Clark Drive 0.51
TOTAL ACRES 203.48
The project site is shown on the Stockton East 7.5-minute quadrangle map within the C.M. Weber grant of Rancho Campo de los Franceses, Sections 59 and 69, Township 1 North, and Range 7 East, Mt. Diablo Baseline and Meridian. The approximate latitude of the project site is 37° 55ʹ 13ʺ North, and the approximate longitude is 121° 12ʹ 39ʺ West.
1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE PROJECT UNDER
CEQA
The potential environmental effects of the project, mitigation measures necessary to address these effects and alternatives to the project are discussed in detail an EIR prepared by the City of Stockton in accordance with the requirements of CEQA. In addition to preparing the EIR document, the City has conducted the EIR process in conformance with CEQA requirements. EIR process steps have included preparation and distribution of a Notice of Preparation, holding a scoping meeting, publication and distribution of a Draft EIR for public review, preparation of a Final EIR addressing comments received during the public review period and preparation of this CEQA Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1565
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Page 1-3 Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Plan for adoption by the Stockton City Council.
The City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the EIR on December 10, 2020; the NOP was circulated for agency review as required by CEQA. Detailed information on the content, circulation and comments received by the City on the Notice of Preparation is contained in Appendix A of the DEIR; the DEIR is incorporated herein by reference.
The Public Review Draft EIR (DEIR) was prepared by the City and distributed for agency and public comment during the period from August 24, 2021 to October 7, 2021.
Documentation of the distribution process is detailed in the FEIR, which, is also incorporated into this document by reference, below.
The City received written comments on the DEIR. In response to this input, the City has prepared the FEIR, which incorporates the DEIR by reference, displays a summary the EIR includes all comments received on the DEIR, provides the City’s responses to those comments, and makes any required revisions to the DEIR.
The DEIR and the FEIR for the Mariposa Industrial Park project are hereby incorporated by reference. Copies of these documents, specifically cited below, are available for review at the offices of City of Stockton Community Development Department, Planning Division, 345 N. El Dorado Street, Stockton, California 95202.
BaseCamp Environmental, 2021a. Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Mariposa Industrial Park Project. SCH #2020120283. August 24, 2021 BaseCamp Environmental, 2021b. Final Environmental Impact Report, Mariposa Industrial Park Project. SCH #2020120283. February 28, 2022.
1.4 REQUIRED FINDINGS
CEQA requires that, prior to approval of a project, the Lead Agency make specified findings related to each of the significant or potentially significant environmental effects considered in the EIR. The EIR considered the range of potential environmental effects, including those listed in the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environmental Checklist.
Most of these potential environmental effects were found, on analysis, to have no effect or less than significant environmental effects. These potential effects do not require City findings under CEQA. All of these potential, but less than significant, effects are listed in the following Section 2.1.
The Mariposa Industrial Park EIR identifies several significant or potentially significant effects on the environment and the mitigation measures needed to reduce those effects to a less than significant level. The City’s findings with respect to each of these environmental effects are set forth in Section 2.2 and the Appendix of this document.
It is anticipated that the City will certify the EIR, adopt the EIR mitigation measures and approve the project in conjunction with its adoption of this document. With these approvals in place, all but six of the project’s significant or potentially significant environmental effects will be reduced to a Less Than Significant level.
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1566
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Page 1-4 The project would involve six potentially significant and unavoidable environmental effects as described in the EIR: Conversion of Farmland, Air Quality Plans and Standards, Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Criteria Pollutants, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Transportation VMT Effects. These potential effects are partially mitigated, but there is uncertainty as to quantification of the mitigation and therefore, whether the available mitigation measures will reduce impacts to a Less than Significant level. As a result, a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required. The Statement of Overriding Considerations is described in a separate document cited below.
BaseCamp Environmental, 2021c. Statement of Overriding Considerations, Mariposa Industrial Park SCH #2020120283. February 28, 2022.
The findings for the Mariposa Industrial Park project described below are based upon substantial evidence, comprised primarily of the information, analysis and mitigation measures described in the DEIR and FEIR and any other information incorporated into these documents by reference. Specific references to supporting information are provided in conjunction with the City’s finding for each potentially significant effect of the project, as shown in the MMRP table in the Appendix.
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1567
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Page 2-1
2.0 FINDINGS OF THE LEAD AGENCY WITH REGARD TO
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT THAT ARE
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT AND REQUIRE NO FINDINGS
The following items were evaluated in the EIR and were determined to have no effect or a less than significant effect on the environment and do not require findings under CEQA.
It should be noted that some of these potential environmental effects, including air quality, agricultural land conversion, noise and traffic, were identified in the Mariposa Industrial Park Draft EIR as subjects not requiring further analysis under CEQA. These and other environmental subjects were addressed on a city-wide level in the City’s General Plan and General Plan EIR adopted in December 2018. Where any of these subjects were, after consideration of all feasible mitigation measures, considered significant and unavoidable, they were addressed in the CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted by the City in conjunction with the General Plan. The General Plan EIR and findings document were incorporated by reference into the Mariposa Industrial Park on page 1-4 of the Draft EIR.
4.0 AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES
Impact AES-1: Scenic Vistas
Impact AES-2: Scenic Resources
Impact AES-3: Visual Character and Quality
Impact AES-4: Light and Glare
5.0 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact AG-2: Agricultural Zoning and Williamson Act
Impact AG-3: Indirect Conversion of Agricultural Lands
6.0 AIR QUALITY
Impact AIR-1: Air Quality Plans and Standards, Construction Emissions Impact AIR-4: Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants Impact AIR-5: Odors and Other Emissions
7.0 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact BIO-2: Riparian and Other Sensitive Habitats
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1568
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Page 2-2
8.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impact CULT-1 Historical Resources
9.0 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Impact GEO-1: Faulting and Seismicity
Impact GEO-2: Other Geologic Hazards
Impact GEO-3: Soil Erosion
Impact GEO-4: Expansive Soils
Impact GEO-6: Access to Mineral Resources
10.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Impact GHG-2: Project GHG Operational Emissions and Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies.
11.0 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact HAZ-1: Hazardous Material Transportation and Storage Impact HAZ-2: Hazardous Material Releases
Impact HAZ-3: Hazardous Material Sites
Impact HAZ-4: Airport Hazards
Impact HAZ-5: Interference with Emergency Vehicle Access and Evacuations Impact HAZ-6: Wildfire Hazards
12.0 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Impact HYDRO-1: Surface Water Resources and Quality
Impact HYDRO-2: Groundwater Resources and Quality
Impact HYDRO-3: Drainage Patterns and Runoff
Impact HYDRO-4: Release of Pollutants in Flood, Tsunami, and Seiche Zones Impact HYDRO-5: Consistency with Water Quality and Groundwater Management Plans
13.0 LAND USE, POPULATION, AND HOUSING
Impact LUP-1: Division of Communities
Impact LUP-2: Conflict with Applicable Plans, Policies, and Regulations Impact LUP-3: Inducement of Population Growth
Impact LUP-4: Displacement of Housing and People
14.0 NOISE
Impact NOISE-4: Groundborne Vibrations
Impact NOISE-5: Airport and Airstrip Noise
15.0 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Impact PSR-1: Fire Protection Services
Impact PSR-2: Police Protection Services
Impact PSR-3: Schools
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1569
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Page 2-3 Impact PSR-4: Parks and Recreational Services
Impact PSR-5: Other Public Facilities
16.0 TRANSPORTATION
*Impact TRANS-1: Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans-Intersections *Impact TRANS-2: Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans-Road Way Segments Impact TRANS-3: Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans-Ramp Junctions Impact TRANS-4: Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans-Truck Routes Impact TRANS-5: Conflicts with Non-Motor Vehicle Transportation Plans Impact TRANS-7: Safety Hazards
Impact TRANS-8: Emergency Access
*Note: Impacts are the subject to transportation improvement recommendations, but do not require mitigation
UTILTIES AND ENERGY
Impact UTIL-1: Wastewater Services and Facilities
Impact UTIL-2: Water Services and Facilities
Impact UTIL-3: Stormwater Services and Facilities
Impact UTIL-4: Solid Waste
Impact UTIL-5: Energy and Telecommunications Systems
Impact UTIL-6: Project Energy Consumption
2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT THAT
REQUIRE FINDINGS
The environmental effects that were found by the EIR to be significant and/or potentially significant prior to the application of mitigation measures include the effects listed below.
As required by CEQA, the City must make findings with respect to each of these significant effects. The City’s findings, and the evidence in support of those findings, are detailed in the Mitigation Monitoring/Findings table shown in the Appendix. All of the following environmental effects would be reduced to a less than significant level with mitigation measures.
Impact BIO-1: Special-Status Species and Habitats
Impact BIO-3: State and Federally Protected Wetlands
Impact BIO-4: Migratory Fish and Wildlife Habitats
Impact BIO-5: Local Biological Requirements
Impact BIO-6: Habitat Conservation Plans
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1570
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Page 2-4 Impact CULT-2: Archaeological and Tribal Cultural Resources Impact CULT-3: Human Burials
Impact GEO-5: Paleontological Resources and Unique Geological Features Impact NOISE-2: Increase in Noise Levels in excess of Standards-Other Project Noise
Impact NOISE-3: Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards-Construction The EIR indicates that the proposed project would involve six potentially significant and unavoidable effects:
Impact AG-1: Conversion of Farmland
Impact AIR-2: Air Quality plans and Standards-Operational Emissions Impact AIR-3: Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Criteria Pollutants Impact GHG-1: Project GHG Construction Emissions and Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies
Impact NOISE-1: Increase in Noise Levels in Excess of Standards-Traffic Impact TRANS-6: Consistency with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) In order to address these significant and unavoidable effects, findings related to alternatives and a Statement of Overriding Consideration for the project are provided in a separate document as noted above.
2.3 FINDINGS TABLE
The City’s findings with respect to each of the significant or potentially significant environmental effects of the project are detailed in the Mitigation Monitoring/Findings table shown in the Appendix. The findings consider each of the significant or potentially significant environmental effects of the project on an individual basis. Each environmental effect is briefly identified, all of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR are listed, and the significance of each environmental effect after application of the mitigation measures is identified. Following this, the City’s finding with respect to the environmental effect, and the location of source information for the City’s finding, are identified.
The findings are based upon the whole of the information and analysis included in the EIR and, in particular, on the implementation of the project mitigation measures identified in the EIR as described in the following Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Plan.
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1571
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Page 2-5 As described in the MMRP, implementation of the mitigation measures will be accomplished through incorporation in permits and approvals as well as project improvement plans and specifications. Implementation of mitigation measures will be ensured through monitoring of project activities by the Stockton Community Development Department. Section 5.0 of this document adopts the MMRP.
Potential findings for the significant and potentially significant effects of the project are prescribed in Sections 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines. The three potential findings as they apply to the significant effects of the project are listed below. The findings are listed by number reference only in the appended table describing findings for the individual significant effects.
Finding 1 Changes or alterations to the project have been required of, or incorporated into, the project that will avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect, as identified in the Final EIR. (This is the finding made by the City for all but six of the significant or potentially significant environmental effects identified in the EIR.) Finding 2 Changes or alterations to the project that would avoid or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the City. Such changes or alterations have been adopted by such other agency, or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (This finding is not applied to any of the environmental effects identified in the EIR.) Finding 3 Mitigation measures or alternatives that would avoid or substantially lessen the subject environmental effect are infeasible as a result of specific economic, legal, social, technological or other considerations. (This finding is applied to six of the environmental effects identified in the EIR, which were determine to be unavoidable and are the subject of the City’s Statement of Overriding Considerations.)
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1572
Mariposa Industrial Park, CEQA Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Page 3-1
3.0 MITIGATION MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM
CEQA requires more than just preparing environmental documents; it also requires the governmental agency to change or place conditions on a project, or to adopt plans or ordinances for a broader class of projects, which would address potential environmental impacts. To ensure that mitigation measures within the Lead Agency’s purview are actually implemented, CEQA requires the adoption of a mitigation monitoring and/or reporting program (MMRP). Specifically, CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(d) requires that a public agency, when making findings for the significant impacts of a project, “shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures." Mitigation measures that are not feasible, or are within the jurisdiction of other agencies, are addressed through the findings required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15091. The Mariposa Industrial Park involves one such mitigation measure. The Council’s certification of the EIR, and the approval of the project together with adoption of this document, will initiate implementation of the Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program for the project.
The EIR sets forth several mitigation measures that will be applicable to the project. The table shown in the Appendix summarizes the environmental effects that could result from approval of the proposed project as described in the EIR. The table identifies 1) each effect, 2) how each significant effect would be mitigated, 3) the responsibility for implementation of each mitigation measure, 4) the responsibility for monitoring of the mitigation measures, and 5) the City’s CEQA finding, the significance of the effect with mitigation and the source material for the finding. The table follows the same sequence as the impact analysis in the EIR. Reporting actions required to ensure that the mitigation measures are implemented are also described in the table.
The significance determination for each environmental effect evaluated in the EIR was based on one or more criteria for significance developed from guidance contained in the CEQA Guidelines, or other “significance thresholds” established by federal, state, regional, or local agencies:
• A “Significant” effect is a substantial adverse change in the environment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15382).
• A “Cumulatively Significant” effect is a substantial adverse change in the environment, which results from cumulative development in the City of Stockton.
• A “Potentially Significant” effect is one that is likely to cause future substantial adverse changes to the environment.
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1573
Mariposa Industrial Park, CEQA Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Plan Page 3-2 • A “Significant and Unavoidable” effect is one for which there is no known or feasible mitigation.
• A “Not Significant” effect is one that may be adverse but does not exceed the defined significance threshold.
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1574
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation Responsibility Monitoring/Reporting Responsibility
CEQA Finding,
Significance with
Mitigation,
Sources
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Appendix, Page 1
4.0 AESTHETICS
There are no significant or potentially significant impacts in this issue area.
5.0 AGRICULTURE
Conversion of Farmland. This is a significant impact.
None feasible . 3 SU
Rationale:
DEIR, Pages 5-5
to 5-6
6.0 AIR QUALITY
Air Quality Plans and Standards- Operational Emissions. This is a significant issue.
All available mitigation measures are assigned to the project in the FEIR. There is uncertainty in terms of quantification as to the degree of impact reduction that will be achieved and whether impacts will be reduced to a Less than Significant level.
. 3 SU
Rationale:
DEIR, Pages 6-
14 to 6-16
Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Criteria Pollutants
AIR-1: The project applicant, to reduce carbon monoxide concentrations to an acceptable level, shall contribute fair-share costs to an improvement on the Mariposa Road and Carpenter Road intersection that would widen the northeast-bound Carpenter Road approach to include an exclusive northeast-bound-to northwest-bound left-turn lane, and a combined through/right-turn lane.
The applicant will be
responsible for payment of
fair share costs.
The Department of Public Works will
be responsible for ensuring that fair
share costs are paid prior to approval
of improvement plans.
3 SU
Rationale:
DEIR, Pages 6-
16 to 6-19
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1575
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation Responsibility Monitoring/Reporting Responsibility
CEQA Finding,
Significance with
Mitigation,
Sources
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Appendix, Page 2
7.0 BIOLOGY
Special-Status Species and Habitats. This is a potentially significant issue BIO-1: The developer shall apply to the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) for coverage under the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Open Space and Habitat Conservation Plan (SJMSCP).
The project site shall be inspected by the SJMSCP biologist, who will recommend which Incidental Take Minimization Measures (ITMMs) set forth in the SJMSCP should be implemented. The project applicant shall pay the required SJMSCP fee, if any, and be responsible for the implementation of the specified ITMMs.
The ODS will be responsible
for submitting the SJMSCP
coverage application,
payment of required fees
and implementation of
ITMMs. The ODS’
Engineer will be responsible
for incorporating ITMM
requirements in the project
plans and specifications.
The Contractor will be
responsible for adherence to
the plans and specifications,
hiring a qualified biologist if
required and implementing
the biologist
recommendations.
The Community Development
Department will verify that SJMSCP
coverage has been obtained and that
other mitigation measures have been
implemented as required by ITMMs.
1, NS
Rationale:
DEIR, Pages 7-
15 to 7-17
State and Federally Protected Wetlands. This is a potentially significant issue BIO-2: Prior to the start of construction work in the area where seasonal wetlands have been identified, the project developer shall conduct a wetland delineation identifying jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. and wetlands. The delineation shall be verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). The delineation shall be used to determine if any project work will encroach upon any jurisdictional water, thereby necessitating an appropriate permit. For any development work that may affect a delineated jurisdictional Water, the project developer shall obtain any necessary permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers prior to the start of development work within these locations.
Depending on the Corps permit issued, the project applicant shall also apply for a Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the Central The ODS will be responsible
for obtaining the required
wetland delineation and
verification, for proposing
adequate mitigation, for
obtaining required permits
and providing proof of
issuance to the City.
The City will be responsible for
ensuring that the wetland delineation
has been completed, required permits
have been issued and that specified
mitigation measures are incorporated
into project plans and specifications.
1, NS
Rationale:
DEIR, Pages 7-
17, 7-19
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1576
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation Responsibility Monitoring/Reporting Responsibility
CEQA Finding,
Significance with
Mitigation,
Sources
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Appendix, Page 3 Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. If the seasonal wetlands are avoided, or if phased development occurs in areas where no wetlands have been identified, then this mitigation measure does not apply.
BIO-3: Prior to the start of construction work in North Littlejohns Creek, the project developer shall obtain any necessary permits from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Central Valley Flood Protection Board. The project developer shall comply with all conditions attached to any required permit.
The ODS will be responsible
for obtaining the required
permits and providing proof
of issuance to the City.
The City will be responsible for
ensuring that required permits have
been issued.
1, NS
Rationale:
DEIR, Pages 7-
17, 7-19
BIO-4: Prior to the start of construction work in the area where seasonal wetlands have been identified, the project developer shall obtain any necessary Waste Discharge Requirements from the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Pursuant to the San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan, the filling of seasonal wetlands containing vernal pool invertebrates shall be delayed until the wetlands are dry and SJCOG biologists can collect the surface soils from the wetlands, to store them for future use on off-site seasonal wetland creation on SJCOG preserve lands. If the seasonal wetlands are avoided, then this mitigation measure does not apply.
The ODS will be responsible
for obtaining Waste
Discharge Requirements if
necessary and for timing of
fill in coordination with the
SJCOG biologists.
The City will be responsible for
ensuring that Waste Discharge
Requirements have been obtained and
that seasonal wetland fill is
coordinated with SJCOG.
1, NS
Rationale:
DEIR, Page 7-
17- 7-19
Local Biological Requirements
BIO-5: If removal of any oak tree on the project site is required, a certified arborist shall survey the oak trees proposed for removal to determine if they are Heritage Trees as defined in Stockton Municipal Code Chapter 16.130. The arborist report with its findings shall be submitted to the City’s Community Development Department. If Heritage Trees are determined to exist on the property, removal of any such tree shall require a permit to be issued by the City in accordance with Stockton Municipal Code Chapter 16.130. The permittee shall comply with all permit conditions, including tree replacement at specified ratios.
The ODS will be responsible
for surveying oak trees to be
removed, preparation of an
arborist report and obtaining
permits for removal of
Heritage trees, if any.
The City will be responsible for
review of the arborist report and
ensuring that any necessary tree
removal permits have been obtained.
1, NS
Rationale:
DEIR, Pages 7-
17, 7-20
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1577
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation Responsibility Monitoring/Reporting Responsibility
CEQA Finding,
Significance with
Mitigation,
Sources
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Appendix, Page 4
8.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Archaeological and Tribal Cultural Resources. This is a potentially significant issue.
The ODS’ Engineer will be
responsible for incorporating
these requirements in the
project plans and specifications. The Contractor will
be responsible for reporting
discoveries to the City, for
hiring a qualified
archaeologist to analyze the
discovery and coordinate
with Native American tribes
as necessary, and for
implementing the
archaeologist’s treatment
recommendations.
The City will be responsible for
ensuring that cultural resource
requirements have been incorporated
into project plans and specifications
and that discovery reports are
properly documented.
1, NS
Rationale:
DEIR, Pages 8-
7, 8-7
CULT-1: If any subsurface archaeological resources, including human burials and associated funerary objects, are encountered during construction, all construction activities within a 50-foot radius of the encounter shall be immediately halted until a qualified archaeologist can examine these materials and evaluate their significance. The City shall be immediately notified in the event of a discovery. If burial resources or tribal cultural resources are discovered, the City shall notify the appropriate tribal representative, who may examine the materials with the archaeologist and advise the City as to their significance.
The archaeologist, in consultation with the tribal representative if contacted, shall recommend mitigation measures needed to reduce potential cultural resource effects to a level that is less than significant in a written report to the City, with a copy to the tribal representative.
The City shall be responsible for implementing the report recommendations. Avoidance is the preferred means of disposition of tribal cultural resources. The contractor shall be responsible for retaining qualified professionals, implementing recommended mitigation measures, and documenting mitigation efforts in written reports to the City.
Human Burials. This is a potentially significant issue.
CULT-2: If project construction encounters evidence of human burial or scattered human remains, the contractor shall immediately notify the County Coroner and the City, which shall in turn notify the appropriate tribal representative. The City shall notify other federal and State agencies as required. The City will be responsible for compliance with the requirements of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and with any direction provided by the County Coroner.
The ODS contractor will be
responsible for suspending
construction activity if
human remains are
encountered, reporting finds
to the City and County
Coroner and retaining a
qualified archaeologist to
The City will be responsible for
responding to reports of burial or
human remain finds as required,
including notification of and
coordination with Native American
representatives.
1, NS
Rationale:
DEIR, Pages 8-8
Exhibit 3 - Findings and MMRP Revised 1578
Impact/Mitigation Measures Implementation Responsibility Monitoring/Reporting Responsibility
CEQA Finding,
Significance with
Mitigation,
Sources
Mariposa Industrial Park, Findings and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Table Appendix, Page 5 If the human remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which will notify and appoint a Most Likely Descendant.
The Most Likely Descendant will work with the archaeologist to decide the proper treatment of the human remains and any associated funerary objects in accordance with California Public Resources Code Sections 5097.98 and 5097.991. Avoidance is the preferred means of disposition of the burial resources.
evaluate the find and
provide a written report to
the City. The City will be
responsible for notifying
Native American
representatives and for
overseeing compliance with
Public Resources Code
requirements.
9.0 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Impact GEO-5: Paleontological Resources and Unique Geological Features.
GEO-2: If any subsurface paleontological resources are encountered during construction, all construction activities within a 50-foot radius of the encounter shall be immediately halted until a qualified paleontologist can examine these materials, initially evaluate their significance and, if potentially significant, recommend measures on the disposition of the resource. The City shall be immediately notified in the event of a discovery. The contractor shall be responsible for retaining qualified professionals, implementing recommended mitigation measures, and documenting mitigation efforts in written reports to the City.
The ODS will be responsible
for incorporating
requirements in project
plans and specifications. The
ODS contractor will be
responsible for suspending
construction activity if
paleontological resources
are encountered, reporting
finds to the City and
retaining a qualified
paleontologist to evaluate
the find and provide a
written report to the City.
The City will be responsible for
ensuring that paleontology
requirements have been incorporated
into project plans and specifications
and that discovery reports are
properly documented.
1, NS
Rationale: DEIR