City Council and Concurrent Authorities
April 19, 2022

In addition to presenting an analysis of traffic operating conditions, this traffic impact study also presents analysis of project-related impacts on
ƒ demand for public transit services,
ƒ demand for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and
ƒ vehicle miles traveled.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

INTRODUCTION

STUDY PURPOSE
This traffic impact study presents an analys is 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 th e project site for light industrial land uses, primarily “high - cube” 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 proj ect 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, a nd is used primarily for the storage and/or consolidation of manufactured goods (and, to a le sser 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 l ogistics 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
A total of approximately 2,900 parking stalls woul d 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 Ma riposa Road in the northeastern portion of the project site. In this traffic impact study, thes e 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 proj ect 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 Marf argoa 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, neithe r intersection would have southeastbound -to- northeastbound left-turn movements. The abse nce of a need for vehicle storage for southeastbound-to-northeastbound left-turn move ment at the Southeast Project Driveway intersection results in the distance between the two intersections being available for the northwestbound-to-southwestbound left-turn move ment at the Northwest Project Driveway. As a result, the distance between the two project dri veway intersections is considered to be adequate.

In the near-term future, this traffic impact study assumes the Southe ast Project Driveway connection with Mariposa Road would include signa lized intersection control. In the near-term future, the Northwest Project Driveway would in clude 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 la nes (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 c onnection and the Northwest Proj ect 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
on the City of Stockton General Plan. Anal ysis of traffic operating conditions under the following five scenarios is presented in this traffic impact study:
ƒ Existing Conditions,
ƒ EPAP No Mariposa Industrial Park Project,
ƒ EPAP Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project,
ƒ Cumulative No Project, and
ƒ Cumulative Plus Project.

Existing Plus Approved Projects conditions are a near-term background condition which includes existing traffic levels, and traffic a ssociated with approved but unconstructed land use development projects in vicinity of the project site.

Cumulative conditions with th e 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 as sumes 2040 conditions with future development consistent with the General Plan.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
KDD Andersonn & Associates,, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 1

VICINITY MAP
07 80-18 RA 3/11/20 21

PROJECT

LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 2

SITE PLAN
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 3

STRIPING PLAN
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

EXISTING SETTING
This section of this traffic imp act 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 tr affic 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, incl uding 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 road way. The portion of Mariposa Road southeast of Carpenter Road has a 55 mph posted speed limit. Between Carpenter Road and 8 th 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
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 4

STUDY AREA
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21

ARCH RD

AUSTIN RD

PROJECT

LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 continue s 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 east- northeast of Mariposa Road. To the west-southwest, Carpenter Road terminates at SR 99 East Frontage Road, approximately 0.8 mile west-sou thwest of Mariposa Ro ad. 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 Munfor d Avenue is at Mariposa Road. To the west- southwest, Munford Avenue terminates at SR 99 East Frontage Road, approximately 0.4 mile west- southwest 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 & Stageco ach 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 west- southwest of Mariposa Road, the roadway continues as 8
th Street. Discontinuous portions of 8 th
Street extend to the southwest portion of Stockton.

Golden Gate Avenue is a northwest-to-southeast roadway w ith 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-thir d 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 te rminus at the Crosstown Freeway. Discontinuous portions of Golden Gate Avenue are present north of the Crosstown Freeway.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 ex tends 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 west- northwest 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 fro m 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 segm ents 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 ea st 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, termin ating 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 Arch- Airport 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 tw o-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 Routesmap (City of Stockton 2017) describe truc k 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
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:
ƒ Mariposa Road from Dr. Martin Luther Ki ng Jr. Boulevard to east-southeast of Austin Road is a route for vehicles transporting flammable liquids. ƒ Sperry Road/Arch Airport Road/Arch Road from McKinley Avenue to Austin Road is a City designated truck route.
ƒ 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.
ƒ Munford Avenue from Mariposa Road to 3730 Munford Avenue is designated by the County as an STAA truck route.
ƒ 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. ƒ 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.
ƒ French Camp Road/Sperry Road/Arch Airport Road/Arch Road from I-5 to Austin Road is a designated STAA truck route. Por tions are designated by the City and portions are designated by the County.
ƒ Qantas Lane from Arch-Airport Road to Boeing Way, and Boeing Way from Qantas Lane to Airport Way are City designated STAA truck routes. ƒ 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.):
ƒ SR 99 north of Fremont Street,
ƒ SR 99 south of Arch Road,
ƒ Crosstown Freeway west of SR 99,
ƒ Golden Gate Avenue west of SR 99,
ƒ Golden Gate Avenue east of SR 99,
ƒ Mariposa Road west of SR 99,
ƒ Boeing Way west of Qantas Lane,
ƒ Arch-Airport Road west of Qantas Lane, and
ƒ Airport Way.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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)
ƒ Stockton Metropolitan Area Fixed Route Service operates 33 fixed routes within the Stockton metropolitan area.
ƒ 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. ƒ 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.
ƒ SJRTD operates two Dial-a-Ride services. General Public Dial-A-Ride is a curb-to- curb service in areas not currently being served by RTD or other local transportation providers. Passengers are required to us e 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. ƒ 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:
ƒ Fixed routes 385 and 390,
ƒ Hopper routes 91 and 95, and
ƒ Express route 44.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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. ƒ the Calvary First Church on Kelley Drive north of Hammer Lane; ƒ the Hammer Crossing Shopping Center at Hammer Lane and Sampson Road; ƒ the Lifesong Church, 3034 Michigan Avenue; and
ƒ 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. Accord ing to Caltrans guidelines, bicycle facilities are generally divided into four categories:
ƒ 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.
ƒ 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.
ƒ 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.
ƒ 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 onFigure 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
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 5

EXISTING AND PLANNED BICYCLE NETWORK
07 80-13 RA 7/9/20 21
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS
The traffic-related effects of th e 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 & 8
th 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 wereonly 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
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 6

STUDY INTERSECTIONS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21

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

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 acces s routes, were analyzed. The following roadway segments were selected for analysis in consu ltation 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 8
th 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 road way 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
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 7

STUDY ROADWAY SEGMENTS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21

ARCH RD

AUSTIN RD

PROJECT

LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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 a ssessed 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 st udy ramp junctions from study intersections and study roadway segments listed previously.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 8

STUDY FREEWAY MERGE, DIVERGE, AND WEAVE AREAS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21

ARCH RD

AUSTIN RD

PROJECT

LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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 inc onsistency 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 character istics associated with the various LOS for intersections are presented in Table 1.

Level of service at both signalized and unsignal ized 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 6 th 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
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
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 instal lation 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 wo rst movement is substa ntial 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 Numb er 3) from the California Department of Transportation document California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (California Department of Transportation 2014). This warrant was applied wher e 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 standa rds. 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 si gn-controlled intersections are presented in the technical appendix.

Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis Procedures
Roadway segment LOS was analyzed for this tra ffic 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:
ƒ different types of facilities (i.e., freeways, arterials, and collectors); ƒ different number of lanes; and
ƒ different area types (i.e., new versus existing).

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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
As described in City of Stockton 2018b:
“Thresholds for arterials and collectors w ere 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 Softwarepackage 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 calculati ng 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 ac celeration 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, th e freeway and ramp volumes for the facility are documented. For this traffic study, the freeway a nd ramp volumes are identified for all facilities where capacity has been exceeded.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 mete ring into account, the LOS are considered to conservatively describe worse cast operating conditions.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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.
† = V olume exceeds capacity. Therefore, the LOS is F. V/C ratio shown in lieu of density.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
Travel Forecasting
As part of the General Plan update process, the Ci ty 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:
ƒ Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP), and
ƒ 2040 Conditions with the General Plan.

The City’s travel model produces forecasts of da ily traffic volumes. The forecasts of daily volumes generated by the C ity’s travel model are adequate for use in the analys is of roadway segment LOS, and are used for daily volume forecas ts 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 “balan ce”. 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 Bo ard’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 th e 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 Ca lifornia 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 guidelin es are based on policies presented in the City General Plan. More specifically, the General P lan policies define range s of LOS considered to Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 imp act. However, recent changes to CEQA have changed how lead agen cies 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) ha s certified and adopted, changes to the CEQA Guidelines that identify vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the most appropriate metric to evaluate a p roject’s transportation impacts. Wi th the California Natural Resources Agency’s ce rtification and adoption of the changes to the CEQA Guidelines, automobile delay, as measured by “level of service” and other similar metrics, generally no longer c onstitutes 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 (Stei nberg 2013). As a result, the City guidelines specify use of LOS in determining whether a projec t 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 imp act 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 projec t is consistent or inconsistent with General Plan policies on LOS, and whether the magnit ude of inconsistency should be considered significant or less than significant.

General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria
As noted immediately above, in this traffic im pact study the significance of the proposed project’s inconsistency with General Plan polic ies 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 unac ceptable, 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
“The City of Stockton’s General Plan has a LOS ‘D’ standard for its r oadway 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 c onsidered 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 descri bed above are also applied to roadway segme nts 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 se gments 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 cap acity, an increase in density is not identified; however, the densit ies 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 Ge neral 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 a nd 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 traf fic impact study to the intersection of Mariposa Road & 8
th Street/Farmington Road.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 th e SR 99 corridor in this traffic impact study; LOS E and F are considered unacceptable. In th is 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 incons istency with General Plan policies will be considered significant if:
ƒ the project would result in traffic operating conditions changing from an acceptable LOS to an unacceptable LOS, or
ƒ when LOS without the project is already unacceptable, the project would result in a substantial degradation of traffic operati ng 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 Tran sportation 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 fa cilities larger than the maximum feasible sizes applied in this traffic impact study. However, fo r the following reasons, this traffic impact study considers these sizes to be not feasible.
ƒ Pedestrian Safety – The amount of time required by pedestrians to walk across an intersection leg with more than seven ap proach lanes is considered excessive.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
The possibility of signal lights changing be fore pedestrians are able to exit the intersection is considered unacceptably high.
ƒ Vehicle Safety – When a vehicle enters an inters ection 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 inters ection before the subject vehicle has departed is considered unacceptably high.
ƒ 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 an d vehicles to exit an overly-large intersection becomes excessive. This result s in the intersection operating with an unacceptable degree of inefficiency.
ƒ Engineering Constraints – Overhead structures and equipment are required to traverse both intersection approaches an d 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 th e 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 threshol ds 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 Maripo sa 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
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 project- related travel to the amount of travel that woul d 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 w ith the land uses currently designated in the City of Stockton General Plan.

At the time the analysis presented in this traf fic impact study commenced, the City of Stockton had not adop ted 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 prese nted 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 Maripo sa 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, traf fic volumes have at times been lower than normal. With the pandemic, places of employmen t, schools, social and re creational 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 collec ted during the pandemic could result in volumes that are unrepresentatively lo w. 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 sinc e the outbreak. Data collected be fore the outbreak of Covid-19 are from previously-prepared traffic analyses and from StreetLight Data (https://www.streetlightdata.com/). Data from ne w 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, de scribed immediately below. This approach was also applied to roadway segment and ramp juncti on 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 Re port for the Sanchez-Hoggan Annexation (City of Stockton 2020) were used in this traffic impact study.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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 intersection s listed above are presented in the technical appendix. The peak period intersection turni ng 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 th at 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 pa ndemic could be unrepresentatively low. To ensure representative data are presented in th is 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 da ta 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 & 8
th 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 intersec tions 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:
ƒ the southwest leg of the intersection of Mariposa Road & Stagecoach Road, ƒ the southwest leg of the intersection of Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road, and ƒ 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
Using the approach described above results in vol umes 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 collec ted for this traffic impact study were disaggregated to light-duty vehicles (e.g., au tomobiles) and heavy vehicles (e.g., heavy-duty trucks). These data were used to estimate heav y 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. p eak 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 improve ments 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 traf fic 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 befo re the outbreak of Covid-19, and current new traffic volume count data collected since the outbreak.

Roadway segment traffic volume count data we re collected for 24-hour periods for the Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Re port 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
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Av e
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden G ate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden G ate 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Future Roadway
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwes t Projec t 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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) 136
643 (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
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Future Roadway
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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
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
At study roadway segment 105, Mariposa Road between SR 99 and 8 th Street/Farmington Road, pre-Covid-19 traffic volume count data for wee kday 24-hour periods were collected from StreetLight Data. These data represent Tuesda y through Thursday volumes collected during six non-holiday months between March 2019 a nd 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 Tuesda y 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 P rogram 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:
ƒ 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
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
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 traf fic 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 befo re 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 Re port 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
At the following study ramp junctions, pre-Covi d-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 Thursd ay 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 da ta collected from StreetLight Data, peak hour traffic volume data for freeway facilities were collected from the Calt rans 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
201
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
204
SR 99 at Golden Gate Av enue
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
207
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
202
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Crosstow n Freeway And Fremont St
205
SR 99 at Golden Gate Av enue
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
208
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Southbound On-Ramp (Slip) Merge
203
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Dive rge
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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
(3488) 2289
3472 (4203)
3584 (3976)
(3158) 3590
N.T.S.

Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
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
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 Dive rge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 12

EXISTING FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,

AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES

AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
3281 (3378)
(2920) 2525
3281 (3378)
(2920) 2525
N.T.S.

Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 Of f-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

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 road way improvements associated with previously- approved but as yet unconstructed projects are assu med in this condition. This scenario does not include development of the proposed Mariposa Industrial Park proj ect. The EPAP No Project condition, therefore, serves as the baseline condi tion used to assess the significance of near-term project-related traffic effects.

TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
In consultation with City of Stockton staff (M oore 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 inTable 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 previously- approved 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 th e 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
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Av e
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden G ate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden G ate 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Future Roadway
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwes t Projec t 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
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
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
201
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
204
SR 99 at Golden Gate Av enue
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
207
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
202
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Crosstow n Freeway And Fremont St
205
SR 99 at Golden Gate Av enue
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
208
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Southbound On-Ramp (Slip) Merge
203
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Dive rge
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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
(4637) 3043
3890 (5783)
4789 (5329)
(3478) 5209
N.T.S.

Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
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
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 Dive rge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 16

EPAP NO PROJECT FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,

AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES

AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
3164 (3472)
(2713) 2467
3164 (3472)
(2713) 2467
N.T.S.

Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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 pres enting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.

Traffic volumes under EPAP No Project condit ions would be generally higher than under Existing Conditions and, as a result, vehicle dela y 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 intersectio ns to achieve acceptable LOS. The following describes the three study intersections that wo uld 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 & 8 th 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:
ƒ Split the northeastbound combined through/right-turn lane into an exclusive northeastbound through lane and a “free” northeastbound-to-southeastbound right- turn lane.

The above improvement would be consistent wi th 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 th is 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
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
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 dur ing the a.m. peak hour, and LOS C with 27.8 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LO S E is considered unacceptable. The following improvement is recommended:
ƒ Change the signal timing to include overlap phasing on the northwestbound-to- northeastbound 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
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 w ould require re-struct uring 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 condi tion, and reconstruction of the interchange in the near-term future is not considered feasible. Th erefore, 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 woul d 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 segmen ts that would operate at unacceptable LOS under EPAP No Project conditions.
105. Mariposa Road Between SR 99 and 8
th 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:
ƒ 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 recommende d 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-Airpor t Road interchange on SR 99. The EPAP No Project scenario is considered a near-term condi tion, and reconstruction of the interchange in the near-term future is not considered feasible. Th erefore, improvement to this roadway segment is not recommended.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 unde r EPAP No Project conditions. The worksheets presenting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.

Traffic volumes under EPAP No Project condit ions would be generally higher than under Existing Conditions and, as a result, vehicle de nsity 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 ope rate at unacceptable LOS under EPAP No Project conditions:
ƒ 201. SR 99 Southbound Weave Area Between Fremont Street and Crosstown Freeway would operate at LOS F during the a.m. peak hour, ƒ 205. SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue Northbound On-Ramp Merge would operate at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour, and
ƒ 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
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 Of f-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
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 lan es on mainline SR 99, would be required to achieve acceptable LOS at this weave area. The EP AP No Project scenario is considered a near- term 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 we ave 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 futur e 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 futur e is not considered feasible. Therefore, improvements to this ramp junction area are not recommended.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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:
ƒ Trip Generation, the number of new trips generated by the project, ƒ Trip Distribution, the direction of travel for the new traffic, and ƒ 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 pr oject 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 pr ojects in the southeast Stockton area (City of Stockton 2014, and Tellez pers. comm.) with la nd 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 distribut ed over the study area roadway network. The geographical distribution of trips is based on th e relative attractiveness or utility of possible destinations. Trip distribution pe rcentages 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
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
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
KDD Andersonn & Associates,, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 17

EXISTING PLUS APPROVED PROJECTS

BACKGROUND TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21

ARCH RD

AUSTIN RD

PROJECT

LOCATION
NOTE: THESE PERCENTAGES APPLY TO ALL PROJECT TRIPS,
NOT JUST TRUCKS.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 18

CUMULATIVE BACKGROUND

TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21

ARCH RD

AUSTIN RD

PROJECT

LOCATION
NOTE: THESE PERCENTAGES APPLY TO ALL PROJECT TRIPS,
NOT JUST TRUCKS.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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:
ƒ the location of destinations of project-related trips, ƒ the magnitude of land uses that would attract project-related trips, and ƒ 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:
ƒ Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP), and
ƒ 2040 Cumulative Conditions.

The travel demand model for each of these two scen arios was used to estimate trip distribution percentages. Background (non-proj ect) 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 differ ent for each of the tw o 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 us ed 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 vo lumes anticipated for each study intersection in the peak hours. The a.m. peak hour and p.m. pe ak hour freeway ramp junction traffic volumes are presented in Figure 23 and Figure 24.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Av e
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden G ate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden G ate 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
0 (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
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwes t Projec t 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Av e
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden G ate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden G ate 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Signalized Intersection
CWLTL
“Free” Right Turn
Center Two-Way
Left Turn Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwes t Projec t 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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) 385
206 (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
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Signalized Intersection
CWLTL
“Free” Right Turn
Center Two-Way
Left Turn Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
201
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
204
SR 99 at Golden Gate Av enue
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
207
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
202
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Crosstow n Freeway And Fremont St
205
SR 99 at Golden Gate Av enue
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
208
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Southbound On-Ramp (Slip) Merge
203
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Dive rge
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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
(4750) 3100
3890 (5783)
4913 (5577)
(3552) 5246
N.T.S.

Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
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
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 Dive rge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 24

EPAP PLUS PROJECT FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,

AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES

AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
3192 (3493)
(2749) 2485
3192 (3493)
(2749) 2485
N.T.S.

Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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 Descriptionsection 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 acc eptable 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 w ith 145.8 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, base d on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the proj ect-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:
ƒ Split the northeastbound combined through/right-turn lane into an exclusive northeastbound through lane and a “free” northeastbound-to-southeastbound right- turn lane.

The above improvement would be consistent wi th the recommended improvement (described below) for Roadway Segment 105, Mariposa Road Between SR 99 and 8 th 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
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 th is intersection is considered wide enough to accommodate the above improvement.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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
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
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 inter section 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. Co mpared 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 significa nt. 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:
ƒ 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 w ith 28.4 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS E is considered unacceptable. Howe ver, 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
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 hou r, 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 ch ange in delay would not be greater than a five se cond 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 roadw ay 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
General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is c onsidered 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:
ƒ 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 Ex isting 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 traf fic 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 proj ect-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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 junctio n 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. LO S 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 Criteriasection 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 Criteriasection 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
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 Of f-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

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-than- significant 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 alo ng 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 an d 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

CUMULATIVE NO PROJECT CONDITIONS
The Cumulative No Project condition represe nts 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 c ondition does not include developm ent of the Mariposa Industrial Park project as proposed. Consistent w ith the approach described in the City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (City of Stockton 2003), this scenario serves as baseline condition for de termining 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 us ed 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 inTable 22.

ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The analysis of Cumulative No Project condi tions 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:
ƒ widening of Mariposa Road northwest of Carpenter Road to six lanes, ƒ widening of Mariposa Road southeast of Carpenter Road to four lanes, and ƒ widening of SR 99 from north of the Crosstown Freeway to south of Arch Road to eight lanes.

The resulting number of travel lanes assume d for study roadway segments are shown in Table

22. Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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

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 road way segment would operate at LOS E. LOS E is considered unacceptable. This roadway se gment 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:
ƒ 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. Howe ver, 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

CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT IMPACTS
The analysis of Cumulative Plus Project conditionsdescribes 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 Impactssection of this traffic impact study. Table 24 displays the resulting Cumulative Plus Project roadway segment daily traffic volumes.

Development of forecasts of future year back ground 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 b een previously described in the Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project Impactsand 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 roa dway segments under Cumulative Plus Project conditions. Nine of the 12 roadway se gments 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
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
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. Co mpared 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 Gene ral Plan policies to a less than significant level:
ƒ 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

PROJECT SITE ACCESS
To assess the adequacy of project site access unde r long-term future conditions, LOS at the two project site driveway intersections were analyz ed under Cumulative Pl us 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 p roject 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
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 25

CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT

INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES

AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
N.T.S.
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwest Project Dwy
15 Mariposa Rd / Southeast Project Dwy
Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
As noted earlier in the Significance Thresholds section of this traffic imp act study, the effects of the proposed project on VMT are deter mined by comparing travel associated with the Mariposa Industrial Park project as proposed to travel assoc iated 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 ha s 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 pro ject would be the same as the Industrial land uses currently designated in the City of St ockton 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 T R4.3A, 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.” Because the Mariposa Industrial Park project would not result in a 15 percent reduction in VMT, the project is considered to have a significa nt 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 Re ductions 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 refe rence 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 Co mmute Trip Reduction Program - Voluntary
The Mariposa Industrial Park project will implement a Commute Trip Reduction Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
(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 w ith 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:
ƒ Carpooling encouragement
ƒ Ride-matching assistance
ƒ Preferential carpool parking
ƒ Flexible work schedules for carpools
ƒ Half time transportation coordinator
ƒ Vanpool assistance
ƒ Bicycle end-trip facilities (parking, showers and lockers) Other strategies may also include:
ƒ new employee orientation of trip reduction and alternative mode options, ƒ event promotions and publications,
ƒ flexible work schedule for all employees,
ƒ transit subsidies,
ƒ parking cash-out or priced parking,
ƒ shuttles,
ƒ emergency ride home, and
ƒ 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. En d-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 w ill implement an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle. A v anpool 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 us ually 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
Implementation of the measures listed above would reduce project-related VMT and reduce the significance of the impact on VMT. However, quan tification 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. Whil e 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:
ƒ hours of operation, including times of the day when work shift would change; ƒ the portion of work positions which would be full-time versus part-time; ƒ feasibility of implementing flexible work schedules; and ƒ 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

REFERENCES

DOCUMENTS CITED
California Air Pollution Control Officers Associ ation. 2010. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures - A Resource for Local Gove rnment 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 Tran sportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. Stockton, CA.

Stockton, City of. 2004. Tr avel Demand Model Development Report October 2004. St ockton, 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 204 0 General Plan Update and Utility Master Plan Supplements Draft EIR. Stockton, CA.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 Dr aft Environmental Impact Report For The Sanchez- Hoggan Annexation. Stockton, CA.

Trafficware. 2019. Trafficware Internet Website. http://www.trafficware.com/ Transportation Research Board. 1982. Natio nal Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 255, Highway Traffic Data for Ur banized 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 Anders on & 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 & As sociates. 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 messa ge 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

TECHNICAL APPENDICES

IN SEPARATE ELECTRONIC FILES
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
 

 
%

 










Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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

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
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

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 Servic e - 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 T rip 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
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

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 Volu mes 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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Executive Summaryis 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 si ze and is proposed to include 3,616,870 building square feet (sf) of high-cube warehouse industrial land use.

Access to the Mariposa Industria l Park site would be provided via two driveway connections to Mariposa Road.

This traffic impact study includes analysis of:
ƒ 15 intersections,
ƒ 12 roadway segments, and
ƒ 13 freeway ramp junction areas.

These study facilities are analyzed under the following five development scenarios:
ƒ Existing Conditions,
ƒ Near-Term Future Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP) No Mariposa Industrial Park Project Conditions,
ƒ Near-Term Future EPAP Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project Conditions, ƒ Long-Term Future Cumulative No Mariposa Industrial Park Project Conditions, and ƒ 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 freewa y 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. Thi s 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
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 c onsidered 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. Th erefore, 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
ƒ demand for public transit services,
ƒ demand for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and
ƒ vehicle miles traveled.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

INTRODUCTION

STUDY PURPOSE
This traffic impact study presents an analys is 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 th e project site for light industrial land uses, primarily “high - cube” 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 proj ect 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, a nd is used primarily for the storage and/or consolidation of manufactured goods (and, to a le sser 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 l ogistics 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
A total of approximately 2,900 parking stalls woul d 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 Ma riposa Road in the northeastern portion of the project site. In this traffic impact study, thes e 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 proj ect 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 Marf argoa 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, neithe r intersection would have southeastbound -to- northeastbound left-turn movements. The abse nce of a need for vehicle storage for southeastbound-to-northeastbound left-turn move ment at the Southeast Project Driveway intersection results in the distance between the two intersections being available for the northwestbound-to-southwestbound left-turn move ment at the Northwest Project Driveway. As a result, the distance between the two project dri veway intersections is considered to be adequate.

In the near-term future, this traffic impact study assumes the Southe ast Project Driveway connection with Mariposa Road would include signa lized intersection control. In the near-term future, the Northwest Project Driveway would in clude 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 la nes (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 c onnection and the Northwest Proj ect 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
on the City of Stockton General Plan. Anal ysis of traffic operating conditions under the following five scenarios is presented in this traffic impact study:
ƒ Existing Conditions,
ƒ EPAP No Mariposa Industrial Park Project,
ƒ EPAP Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project,
ƒ Cumulative No Project, and
ƒ Cumulative Plus Project.

Existing Plus Approved Projects conditions are a near-term background condition which includes existing traffic levels, and traffic a ssociated with approved but unconstructed land use development projects in vicinity of the project site.

Cumulative conditions with th e 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 as sumes 2040 conditions with future development consistent with the General Plan.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
KDD Andersonn & Associates,, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 1

VICINITY MAP
07 80-18 RA 3/11/20 21

PROJECT

LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 2

SITE PLAN
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 3

STRIPING PLAN
0780-18 RA 7/9/2021
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

EXISTING SETTING
This section of this traffic imp act 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 tr affic 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, incl uding 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 road way. The portion of Mariposa Road southeast of Carpenter Road has a 55 mph posted speed limit. Between Carpenter Road and 8 th 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
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 4

STUDY AREA
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21

ARCH RD

AUSTIN RD

PROJECT

LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 continue s 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 east- northeast of Mariposa Road. To the west-southwest, Carpenter Road terminates at SR 99 East Frontage Road, approximately 0.8 mile west-sou thwest of Mariposa Ro ad. 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 Munfor d Avenue is at Mariposa Road. To the west- southwest, Munford Avenue terminates at SR 99 East Frontage Road, approximately 0.4 mile west- southwest 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 & Stageco ach 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 west- southwest of Mariposa Road, the roadway continues as 8
th Street. Discontinuous portions of 8 th
Street extend to the southwest portion of Stockton.

Golden Gate Avenue is a northwest-to-southeast roadway w ith 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-thir d 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 te rminus at the Crosstown Freeway. Discontinuous portions of Golden Gate Avenue are present north of the Crosstown Freeway.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 ex tends 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 west- northwest 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 fro m 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 segm ents 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 ea st 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, termin ating 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 Arch- Airport 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 tw o-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 Routesmap (City of Stockton 2017) describe truc k 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
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:
ƒ Mariposa Road from Dr. Martin Luther Ki ng Jr. Boulevard to east-southeast of Austin Road is a route for vehicles transporting flammable liquids. ƒ Sperry Road/Arch Airport Road/Arch Road from McKinley Avenue to Austin Road is a City designated truck route.
ƒ 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.
ƒ Munford Avenue from Mariposa Road to 3730 Munford Avenue is designated by the County as an STAA truck route.
ƒ 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. ƒ 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.
ƒ French Camp Road/Sperry Road/Arch Airport Road/Arch Road from I-5 to Austin Road is a designated STAA truck route. Por tions are designated by the City and portions are designated by the County.
ƒ Qantas Lane from Arch-Airport Road to Boeing Way, and Boeing Way from Qantas Lane to Airport Way are City designated STAA truck routes. ƒ 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.):
ƒ SR 99 north of Fremont Street,
ƒ SR 99 south of Arch Road,
ƒ Crosstown Freeway west of SR 99,
ƒ Golden Gate Avenue west of SR 99,
ƒ Golden Gate Avenue east of SR 99,
ƒ Mariposa Road west of SR 99,
ƒ Boeing Way west of Qantas Lane,
ƒ Arch-Airport Road west of Qantas Lane, and
ƒ Airport Way.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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)
ƒ Stockton Metropolitan Area Fixed Route Service operates 33 fixed routes within the Stockton metropolitan area.
ƒ 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. ƒ 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.
ƒ SJRTD operates two Dial-a-Ride services. General Public Dial-A-Ride is a curb-to- curb service in areas not currently being served by RTD or other local transportation providers. Passengers are required to us e 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. ƒ 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:
ƒ Fixed routes 385 and 390,
ƒ Hopper routes 91 and 95, and
ƒ Express route 44.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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. ƒ the Calvary First Church on Kelley Drive north of Hammer Lane; ƒ the Hammer Crossing Shopping Center at Hammer Lane and Sampson Road; ƒ the Lifesong Church, 3034 Michigan Avenue; and
ƒ 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. Accord ing to Caltrans guidelines, bicycle facilities are generally divided into four categories:
ƒ 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.
ƒ 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.
ƒ 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.
ƒ 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 onFigure 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
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 5

EXISTING AND PLANNED BICYCLE NETWORK
07 80-13 RA 7/9/20 21
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS
The traffic-related effects of th e 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 & 8
th 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 wereonly 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
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 6

STUDY INTERSECTIONS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21

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

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 acces s routes, were analyzed. The following roadway segments were selected for analysis in consu ltation 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 8
th 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 road way 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
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 7

STUDY ROADWAY SEGMENTS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21

ARCH RD

AUSTIN RD

PROJECT

LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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 a ssessed 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 st udy ramp junctions from study intersections and study roadway segments listed previously.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 8

STUDY FREEWAY MERGE, DIVERGE, AND WEAVE AREAS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21

ARCH RD

AUSTIN RD

PROJECT

LOCATION
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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 inc onsistency 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 character istics associated with the various LOS for intersections are presented in Table 1.

Level of service at both signalized and unsignal ized 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 6 th 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
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
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 instal lation 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 wo rst movement is substa ntial 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 Numb er 3) from the California Department of Transportation document California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (California Department of Transportation 2014). This warrant was applied wher e 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 standa rds. 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 si gn-controlled intersections are presented in the technical appendix.

Roadway Segment Level of Service Analysis Procedures
Roadway segment LOS was analyzed for this tra ffic 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:
ƒ different types of facilities (i.e., freeways, arterials, and collectors); ƒ different number of lanes; and
ƒ different area types (i.e., new versus existing).

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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
As described in City of Stockton 2018b:
“Thresholds for arterials and collectors w ere 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 Softwarepackage 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 calculati ng 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 ac celeration 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, th e freeway and ramp volumes for the facility are documented. For this traffic study, the freeway a nd ramp volumes are identified for all facilities where capacity has been exceeded.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 mete ring into account, the LOS are considered to conservatively describe worse cast operating conditions.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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.
† = V olume exceeds capacity. Therefore, the LOS is F. V/C ratio shown in lieu of density.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
Travel Forecasting
As part of the General Plan update process, the Ci ty 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:
ƒ Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP), and
ƒ 2040 Conditions with the General Plan.

The City’s travel model produces forecasts of da ily traffic volumes. The forecasts of daily volumes generated by the C ity’s travel model are adequate for use in the analys is of roadway segment LOS, and are used for daily volume forecas ts 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 “balan ce”. 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 Bo ard’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 th e 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 Ca lifornia 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 guidelin es are based on policies presented in the City General Plan. More specifically, the General P lan policies define range s of LOS considered to Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 imp act. However, recent changes to CEQA have changed how lead agen cies 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) ha s certified and adopted, changes to the CEQA Guidelines that identify vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the most appropriate metric to evaluate a p roject’s transportation impacts. Wi th the California Natural Resources Agency’s ce rtification and adoption of the changes to the CEQA Guidelines, automobile delay, as measured by “level of service” and other similar metrics, generally no longer c onstitutes 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 (Stei nberg 2013). As a result, the City guidelines specify use of LOS in determining whether a projec t 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 imp act 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 projec t is consistent or inconsistent with General Plan policies on LOS, and whether the magnit ude of inconsistency should be considered significant or less than significant.

General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria
As noted immediately above, in this traffic im pact study the significance of the proposed project’s inconsistency with General Plan polic ies 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 unac ceptable, 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
“The City of Stockton’s General Plan has a LOS ‘D’ standard for its r oadway 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 c onsidered 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 descri bed above are also applied to roadway segme nts 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 se gments 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 cap acity, an increase in density is not identified; however, the densit ies 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 Ge neral 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 a nd 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 traf fic impact study to the intersection of Mariposa Road & 8
th Street/Farmington Road.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 th e SR 99 corridor in this traffic impact study; LOS E and F are considered unacceptable. In th is 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 incons istency with General Plan policies will be considered significant if:
ƒ the project would result in traffic operating conditions changing from an acceptable LOS to an unacceptable LOS, or
ƒ when LOS without the project is already unacceptable, the project would result in a substantial degradation of traffic operati ng 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 Tran sportation 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 fa cilities larger than the maximum feasible sizes applied in this traffic impact study. However, fo r the following reasons, this traffic impact study considers these sizes to be not feasible.
ƒ Pedestrian Safety – The amount of time required by pedestrians to walk across an intersection leg with more than seven ap proach lanes is considered excessive.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
The possibility of signal lights changing be fore pedestrians are able to exit the intersection is considered unacceptably high.
ƒ Vehicle Safety – When a vehicle enters an inters ection 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 inters ection before the subject vehicle has departed is considered unacceptably high.
ƒ 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 an d vehicles to exit an overly-large intersection becomes excessive. This result s in the intersection operating with an unacceptable degree of inefficiency.
ƒ Engineering Constraints – Overhead structures and equipment are required to traverse both intersection approaches an d 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 th e 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 threshol ds 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 Maripo sa 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
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 project- related travel to the amount of travel that woul d 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 w ith the land uses currently designated in the City of Stockton General Plan.

At the time the analysis presented in this traf fic impact study commenced, the City of Stockton had not adop ted 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 prese nted 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 Maripo sa 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, traf fic volumes have at times been lower than normal. With the pandemic, places of employmen t, schools, social and re creational 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 collec ted during the pandemic could result in volumes that are unrepresentatively lo w. 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 sinc e the outbreak. Data collected be fore the outbreak of Covid-19 are from previously-prepared traffic analyses and from StreetLight Data (https://www.streetlightdata.com/). Data from ne w 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, de scribed immediately below. This approach was also applied to roadway segment and ramp juncti on 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 Re port for the Sanchez-Hoggan Annexation (City of Stockton 2020) were used in this traffic impact study.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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 intersection s listed above are presented in the technical appendix. The peak period intersection turni ng 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 th at 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 pa ndemic could be unrepresentatively low. To ensure representative data are presented in th is 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 da ta 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 & 8
th 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 intersec tions 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:
ƒ the southwest leg of the intersection of Mariposa Road & Stagecoach Road, ƒ the southwest leg of the intersection of Mariposa Road & Carpenter Road, and ƒ 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
Using the approach described above results in vol umes 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 collec ted for this traffic impact study were disaggregated to light-duty vehicles (e.g., au tomobiles) and heavy vehicles (e.g., heavy-duty trucks). These data were used to estimate heav y 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. p eak 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 improve ments 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 traf fic 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 befo re the outbreak of Covid-19, and current new traffic volume count data collected since the outbreak.

Roadway segment traffic volume count data we re collected for 24-hour periods for the Public Review Draft Environmental Impact Re port 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
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Av e
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden G ate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden G ate 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Future Roadway
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwes t Projec t 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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) 136
643 (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
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Future Roadway
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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
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
At study roadway segment 105, Mariposa Road between SR 99 and 8 th Street/Farmington Road, pre-Covid-19 traffic volume count data for wee kday 24-hour periods were collected from StreetLight Data. These data represent Tuesda y through Thursday volumes collected during six non-holiday months between March 2019 a nd 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 Tuesda y 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 P rogram 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:
ƒ 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
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
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 traf fic 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 befo re 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 Re port 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
At the following study ramp junctions, pre-Covi d-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 Thursd ay 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 da ta collected from StreetLight Data, peak hour traffic volume data for freeway facilities were collected from the Calt rans 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
201
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
204
SR 99 at Golden Gate Av enue
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
207
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
202
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Crosstow n Freeway And Fremont St
205
SR 99 at Golden Gate Av enue
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
208
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Southbound On-Ramp (Slip) Merge
203
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Dive rge
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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
(3488) 2289
3472 (4203)
3584 (3976)
(3158) 3590
N.T.S.

Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
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
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 Dive rge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 12

EXISTING FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,

AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES

AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
3281 (3378)
(2920) 2525
3281 (3378)
(2920) 2525
N.T.S.

Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 Of f-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

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 road way improvements associated with previously- approved but as yet unconstructed projects are assu med in this condition. This scenario does not include development of the proposed Mariposa Industrial Park proj ect. The EPAP No Project condition, therefore, serves as the baseline condi tion used to assess the significance of near-term project-related traffic effects.

TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECASTS
In consultation with City of Stockton staff (M oore 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 inTable 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 previously- approved 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 th e 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
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Av e
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden G ate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden G ate 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Future Roadway
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwes t Projec t 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
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
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
201
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
204
SR 99 at Golden Gate Av enue
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
207
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
202
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Crosstow n Freeway And Fremont St
205
SR 99 at Golden Gate Av enue
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
208
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Southbound On-Ramp (Slip) Merge
203
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Dive rge
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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
(4637) 3043
3890 (5783)
4789 (5329)
(3478) 5209
N.T.S.

Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
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
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 Dive rge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 16

EPAP NO PROJECT FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,

AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES

AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
3164 (3472)
(2713) 2467
3164 (3472)
(2713) 2467
N.T.S.

Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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 pres enting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.

Traffic volumes under EPAP No Project condit ions would be generally higher than under Existing Conditions and, as a result, vehicle dela y 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 intersectio ns to achieve acceptable LOS. The following describes the three study intersections that wo uld 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 & 8 th 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:
ƒ Split the northeastbound combined through/right-turn lane into an exclusive northeastbound through lane and a “free” northeastbound-to-southeastbound right- turn lane.

The above improvement would be consistent wi th 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 th is 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
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
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 dur ing the a.m. peak hour, and LOS C with 27.8 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LO S E is considered unacceptable. The following improvement is recommended:
ƒ Change the signal timing to include overlap phasing on the northwestbound-to- northeastbound 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
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 w ould require re-struct uring 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 condi tion, and reconstruction of the interchange in the near-term future is not considered feasible. Th erefore, 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 woul d 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 segmen ts that would operate at unacceptable LOS under EPAP No Project conditions.
105. Mariposa Road Between SR 99 and 8
th 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:
ƒ 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 recommende d 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-Airpor t Road interchange on SR 99. The EPAP No Project scenario is considered a near-term condi tion, and reconstruction of the interchange in the near-term future is not considered feasible. Th erefore, improvement to this roadway segment is not recommended.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 unde r EPAP No Project conditions. The worksheets presenting the calculation of LOS are included in the technical appendix.

Traffic volumes under EPAP No Project condit ions would be generally higher than under Existing Conditions and, as a result, vehicle de nsity 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 ope rate at unacceptable LOS under EPAP No Project conditions:
ƒ 201. SR 99 Southbound Weave Area Between Fremont Street and Crosstown Freeway would operate at LOS F during the a.m. peak hour, ƒ 205. SR 99 at Golden Gate Avenue Northbound On-Ramp Merge would operate at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour, and
ƒ 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
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 Of f-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
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 lan es on mainline SR 99, would be required to achieve acceptable LOS at this weave area. The EP AP No Project scenario is considered a near- term 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 we ave 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 futur e 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 futur e is not considered feasible. Therefore, improvements to this ramp junction area are not recommended.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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:
ƒ Trip Generation, the number of new trips generated by the project, ƒ Trip Distribution, the direction of travel for the new traffic, and ƒ 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 pr oject 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 pr ojects in the southeast Stockton area (City of Stockton 2014, and Tellez pers. comm.) with la nd 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 distribut ed over the study area roadway network. The geographical distribution of trips is based on th e relative attractiveness or utility of possible destinations. Trip distribution pe rcentages 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
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
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
KDD Andersonn & Associates,, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 17

EXISTING PLUS APPROVED PROJECTS

BACKGROUND TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21

ARCH RD

AUSTIN RD

PROJECT

LOCATION
NOTE: THESE PERCENTAGES APPLY TO ALL PROJECT TRIPS,
NOT JUST TRUCKS.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 18

CUMULATIVE BACKGROUND

TRIP DISTRIBUTION PERCENTAGES
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21

ARCH RD

AUSTIN RD

PROJECT

LOCATION
NOTE: THESE PERCENTAGES APPLY TO ALL PROJECT TRIPS,
NOT JUST TRUCKS.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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:
ƒ the location of destinations of project-related trips, ƒ the magnitude of land uses that would attract project-related trips, and ƒ 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:
ƒ Existing Plus Approved Projects (EPAP), and
ƒ 2040 Cumulative Conditions.

The travel demand model for each of these two scen arios was used to estimate trip distribution percentages. Background (non-proj ect) 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 differ ent for each of the tw o 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 us ed 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 vo lumes anticipated for each study intersection in the peak hours. The a.m. peak hour and p.m. pe ak hour freeway ramp junction traffic volumes are presented in Figure 23 and Figure 24.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Av e
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden G ate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden G ate 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
0 (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
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwes t Projec t 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
7 Mariposa Rd / Stagecoach Rd
8 Mariposa Rd / Munford Av e
9 Mariposa Rd / Carpenter Rd
1 Golden G ate Ave / SR 99 SB Ramps
4 Mariposa Rd / SR 99 West Frontage Rd
2 Golden G ate 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Signalized Intersection
CWLTL
“Free” Right Turn
Center Two-Way
Left Turn Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
10 Austin Rd / Mariposa Rd
13 Arch Airport Rd/ SR 99
11 Austin Rd/ Arch Rd
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwes t Projec t 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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
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) 385
206 (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
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Signalized Intersection
CWLTL
“Free” Right Turn
Center Two-Way
Left Turn Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
201
SR 99 Southbound Weave Area
Between Crosstown Freeway And Fremont St
204
SR 99 at Golden Gate Av enue
Southbound Off-Ramp Diverge
207
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Mariposa Rd and Golden Gate Ave
202
SR 99 Northbound Weave Area
Between Crosstow n Freeway And Fremont St
205
SR 99 at Golden Gate Av enue
Northbound On-Ramp Merge
208
SR 99 at Mariposa Rd
Southbound On-Ramp (Slip) Merge
203
SR 99 Northbound
At Crosstown Freeway Off-Ramp Dive rge
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
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
(4750) 3100
3890 (5783)
4913 (5577)
(3552) 5246
N.T.S.

Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
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
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 Dive rge
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 24

EPAP PLUS PROJECT FREEWAY RAMP MERGE, DIVERGE,

AND WEAVE AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES

AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
3192 (3493)
(2749) 2485
3192 (3493)
(2749) 2485
N.T.S.

Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Number of Arrows Indicate
Number of Lanes
Weave Area Auxillary Lane
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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 Descriptionsection 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 acc eptable 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 w ith 145.8 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, base d on criteria presented in the General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the proj ect-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:
ƒ Split the northeastbound combined through/right-turn lane into an exclusive northeastbound through lane and a “free” northeastbound-to-southeastbound right- turn lane.

The above improvement would be consistent wi th the recommended improvement (described below) for Roadway Segment 105, Mariposa Road Between SR 99 and 8 th 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
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 th is intersection is considered wide enough to accommodate the above improvement.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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
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
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 inter section 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. Co mpared 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 significa nt. 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:
ƒ 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 w ith 28.4 seconds of delay during the p.m. peak hour. LOS E is considered unacceptable. Howe ver, 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
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 hou r, 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 ch ange in delay would not be greater than a five se cond 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 roadw ay 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
General Plan Policy Consistency Criteria section of this traffic impact study, the project-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is c onsidered 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:
ƒ 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 Ex isting 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 traf fic 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 proj ect-related inconsistency with General Plan policies is considered less than significant and no improvements are recommended.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

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 junctio n 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. LO S 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 Criteriasection 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 Criteriasection 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
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 Of f-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

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-than- significant 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 alo ng 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 an d 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

CUMULATIVE NO PROJECT CONDITIONS
The Cumulative No Project condition represe nts 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 c ondition does not include developm ent of the Mariposa Industrial Park project as proposed. Consistent w ith the approach described in the City of Stockton Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (City of Stockton 2003), this scenario serves as baseline condition for de termining 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 us ed 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 inTable 22.

ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The analysis of Cumulative No Project condi tions 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:
ƒ widening of Mariposa Road northwest of Carpenter Road to six lanes, ƒ widening of Mariposa Road southeast of Carpenter Road to four lanes, and ƒ widening of SR 99 from north of the Crosstown Freeway to south of Arch Road to eight lanes.

The resulting number of travel lanes assume d for study roadway segments are shown in Table

22. Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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

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 road way segment would operate at LOS E. LOS E is considered unacceptable. This roadway se gment 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:
ƒ 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. Howe ver, 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

CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT IMPACTS
The analysis of Cumulative Plus Project conditionsdescribes 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 Impactssection of this traffic impact study. Table 24 displays the resulting Cumulative Plus Project roadway segment daily traffic volumes.

Development of forecasts of future year back ground 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 b een previously described in the Existing Plus Approved Projects Plus Mariposa Industrial Park Project Impactsand 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 roa dway segments under Cumulative Plus Project conditions. Nine of the 12 roadway se gments 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
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
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. Co mpared 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 Gene ral Plan policies to a less than significant level:
ƒ 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

PROJECT SITE ACCESS
To assess the adequacy of project site access unde r long-term future conditions, LOS at the two project site driveway intersections were analyz ed under Cumulative Pl us 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 p roject 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
KD Anderson & Associates, Inc.

Transportation Engineers
figure 25

CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT

INTERSECTION TRAFFIC VOLUMES

AND LANE CONFIGURATIONS
07 80-18 RA 7/9/20 21
N.T.S.
14 Mariposa Rd / Northwest Project Dwy
15 Mariposa Rd / Southeast Project Dwy
Legend
AM Peak Hour VolumeXX
PM Peak Hour Volume(XX)
Signalized Intersection
“Free” Right Turn
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
As noted earlier in the Significance Thresholds section of this traffic imp act study, the effects of the proposed project on VMT are deter mined by comparing travel associated with the Mariposa Industrial Park project as proposed to travel assoc iated 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 ha s 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 pro ject would be the same as the Industrial land uses currently designated in the City of St ockton 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 T R4.3A, 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.” Because the Mariposa Industrial Park project would not result in a 15 percent reduction in VMT, the project is considered to have a significa nt 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 Re ductions 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 refe rence 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 Co mmute Trip Reduction Program - Voluntary
The Mariposa Industrial Park project will implement a Commute Trip Reduction Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
(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 w ith 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:
ƒ Carpooling encouragement
ƒ Ride-matching assistance
ƒ Preferential carpool parking
ƒ Flexible work schedules for carpools
ƒ Half time transportation coordinator
ƒ Vanpool assistance
ƒ Bicycle end-trip facilities (parking, showers and lockers) Other strategies may also include:
ƒ new employee orientation of trip reduction and alternative mode options, ƒ event promotions and publications,
ƒ flexible work schedule for all employees,
ƒ transit subsidies,
ƒ parking cash-out or priced parking,
ƒ shuttles,
ƒ emergency ride home, and
ƒ 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. En d-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 w ill implement an employer-sponsored vanpool or shuttle. A v anpool 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 us ually 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
Implementation of the measures listed above would reduce project-related VMT and reduce the significance of the impact on VMT. However, quan tification 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. Whil e 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:
ƒ hours of operation, including times of the day when work shift would change; ƒ the portion of work positions which would be full-time versus part-time; ƒ feasibility of implementing flexible work schedules; and ƒ 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

REFERENCES

DOCUMENTS CITED
California Air Pollution Control Officers Associ ation. 2010. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures - A Resource for Local Gove rnment 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 Tran sportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. Stockton, CA.

Stockton, City of. 2004. Tr avel Demand Model Development Report October 2004. St ockton, 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 204 0 General Plan Update and Utility Master Plan Supplements Draft EIR. Stockton, CA.

Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report
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 Dr aft Environmental Impact Report For The Sanchez- Hoggan Annexation. Stockton, CA.

Trafficware. 2019. Trafficware Internet Website. http://www.trafficware.com/ Transportation Research Board. 1982. Natio nal Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 255, Highway Traffic Data for Ur banized 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 Anders on & 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 & As sociates. 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 messa ge 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

TECHNICAL APPENDICES

IN SEPARATE ELECTRONIC FILES
Exhibit 1 - Final Environmental Impact Report