The key roadways in the project vicinity are described below. Exhibit displays the existing number of lanes on the study roadways.

4.2 TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION This section presents the key assumptions, methods, and results of analysis for the transportation and circulation impacts of the proposed project. This section is based on a traffic analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers Transportation Consultants (June 2009), which is attached as Appendix B to this report. 4.2.1 EXISTING SETTING This section discusses the transportation-related context in which the proposed project would be constructed and would operate, including a description of the study area and the street network that serves the potential project sites; existing transit service, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities near the project site; definitions of intersection and roadway segment LOS; and a summary of current conditions. Exhibit 4.2-1 identifies the study area roadways and the potential project sites. EXISTING ROADWAY SYSTEM The key roadways in the project vicinity are described below. Exhibit 4.2-2 displays the existing number of lanes on the study roadways. State Route 99 State Route 99 (SR 99) is a north-south freeway within the study area with interchanges at Elk Grove Boulevard and Grant Line Road. It consists of two lanes in each direction from south of Grant Line Road to just south of Elk Grove Boulevard, where a High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane is added in each direction. Elk Grove Boulevard Elk Grove Boulevard is a major east-west roadway that extends from Interstate 5 (I-5) to Grant Line Road. Through the study area, Elk Grove Boulevard is a four-lane roadway from East Stockton Boulevard to Elk Grove- Florin Road. East of Elk-Grove Florin Road, Elk Grove Boulevard narrows to two-lanes. Elk Grove-Florin Road Elk Grove-Florin Road is a north-south roadway that extends from East Stockton Boulevard to Florin Road in unincorporated Sacramento County where it becomes Watt Avenue. In the study area, Elk Grove-Florin Road is two-lanes south of Elk Grove Boulevard, with four lanes to the north. Waterman Road Waterman Road is a north-south two-lane roadway that extends from Grant Line Road to north of Calvine Road. Bradshaw Road Bradshaw Road is a north-south two-lane roadway that extends from Grant Line Road to Folsom Boulevard (in unincorporated Sacramento County). Through the study area, Bradshaw Road has two-lanes. East Stockton Boulevard East Stockton Boulevard is a north-south roadway that extends from south of Grant Line Road to Elk Grove Boulevard where it turns into Emerald Vista Drive. East Stockton Boulevard has three-lanes (two northbound and one southbound) for about 1,200 feet south of Elk Grove Boulevard and two lanes to the south. City of Elk Grove 4.2-1 Traffic and Circulation

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Traffic Study Intersections Exhibit 4.2-1 Traffic and Circulation 4.2-2 City of Elk Grove

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Number of Lanes Existing Conditions Exhibit 4.2-2 City of Elk Grove 4.2-3 Traffic and Circulation

Grant Line Road Grant Line Road is a major north-south roadway that extends from SR 99 to White Rock Road in unincorporated Sacramento County. Through the study area, Grant Line Road is two-lanes. Kammerer Road Kammerer Road is an east-west two-lane roadway that extends from West Stockton Boulevard to Bruceville Road. The easterly portion of Kammerer Road will be realigned in conjunction with the ongoing construction of the SR 99/Grant Line Road interchange. The existing conditions described above for these roadways do not assume any of the improvements currently under construction at the SR 99/Grant Line Road interchange. As shown in Inset A of Exhibit 4.2-1, the existing conditions assume northbound SR 99 with a hook on-ramp and off-ramp to East Stockton Boulevard, which has stop-control for northbound and southbound traffic. Southbound SR 99 has a hook on-ramp and off-ramp to West Stockton Boulevard, which also includes stop-control for northbound and southbound traffic. EXISTING PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICE The City of Elk Grove operates fixed-route bus service (e-tran) within the study area. Although Kammerer Road and the southern portion of Grant Line Road have no routes or stops, numerous routes with stops are available within the study area, including East Stockton Boulevard (Route 60), Elk Grove-Florin Road (Routes 57, 59, 60, 158), Elk Grove Boulevard (Routes 70, 156, 162), and Grant Line/Waterman Road (Routes 58, 160). Some of these services are peak hour only or have long headways. No existing transit services extend directly to the two potential project sites. EXISTING BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Bicycle facilities do not exist near the potential project sites due to the industrial character of the area, although there are some intermittent pedestrian facilities (including sidewalks and crosswalks). Within the study area, crosswalks are generally provided at signalized intersections and sidewalks exist along the frontage of most developed properties. Class II (on-street with signing and striping) bike lanes are provided on Elk Grove-Florin Road, and portions of Elk Grove Boulevard and East Stockton Boulevard. STUDY AREA The following 24 intersections and 21 roadway segments were selected for analysis under existing conditions based on their proximity to the potential project sites, their expected usage by project traffic, and/or existing operational deficiencies that could be exacerbated by the project. Intersections 1 State Route 99 SB Ramps / Elk Grove Boulevard 2 State Route 99 NB On-Ramp / Elk Grove Boulevard 3 Elk Grove Boulevard / East Stockton Boulevard 4 State Route 99 NB Off-Ramp / East Stockton Boulevard 5 Elk Grove Boulevard / Elk Grove-Florin Road 6 Elk Grove Boulevard / Waterman Road 7 Elk Grove Boulevard / Bradshaw Road 8 Elk Grove-Florin Road / East Stockton Boulevard 9 Union Parkway / East Stockton Boulevard 10 Elkmont Way / East Stockton Boulevard 11 Grant Line Road / West Stockton Boulevard Traffic and Circulation 4.2-4 City of Elk Grove

12 Grant line Road / East Stockton Boulevard 13 Grant Line Road / Waterman Road 14 Grant Line Road / Bradshaw Road 15 Elk Grove Boulevard / Grant Line Road 16 Grant Line Road / Bond Road 17 Grant Line Road / Wilton Road 18 Grant Line Road / Sheldon Road 19 Grant Line Road / Calvine Road 20 Bilby Road / Bruceville Road 21 Kammerer Road / Bruceville Road 22 State Route 99 NB Ramps / East Stockton Boulevard 23 State Route 99 SB Ramps / West Stockton Boulevard 24 Kammerer Road / East Stockton Boulevard Roadway Segments 1 Kammerer Road State Route 99 to Bruceville Road 2 Grant Line Road State Route 99 to Waterman Road 3 Grant Line Road Waterman Road to Bradshaw Road 4 Grant Line Road Bradshaw Road to Elk Grove Boulevard 5 Grant Line Road Elk Grove Boulevard to Bond Road 6 Grant Line Road Bond Road to Wilton Road 7 Grant Line Road Wilton Road to Sheldon Road 8 Grant Line Road Sheldon Road to Calvine Road 9 Waterman Road Bond Road to Elk Grove Boulevard 10 Waterman Road Elk Grove Boulevard to Grant Line Road 11 Elk Grove-Florin Road Bond Road to Elk Grove Boulevard 12 Elk Grove-Florin Road Elk Grove Boulevard to East Stockton Boulevard 13 Elk Grove Boulevard State Route 99 to Elk Grove-Florin Road 14 Elk Grove Boulevard Elk Grove-Florin Road to Waterman Road 15 Elk Grove Boulevard Waterman Road to Bradshaw Road 16 Elk Grove Boulevard Bradshaw Road to Grant Line Road 17 East Stockton Road Elk Grove Boulevard to Elk Grove-Florin Road 18 East Stockton Road Elk Grove-Florin Road to Grant Line Road 19 Bradshaw Road Bond Road to Elk Grove Boulevard 20 Bradshaw Road Elk Grove Boulevard to Grant Line Road 21 Kammerer Road east of Bruceville Road PLANNED FACILITIES The existing study intersections and roadways listed above along with the following planned roadways and intersections were selected for analysis under baseline and cumulative conditions, unless otherwise noted: Intersections 25 Grant Line Road / Survey Road 26 State Route 99 NB Off-Ramp / Grant Line Road 27 State Route 99 SB Off-Ramp / Grant Line Road 28 Kammerer Road / Promenade Parkway 29 Kammerer Road / Lent Ranch Parkway 30 Kammerer Road / Lotz Parkway 31 Kammerer Road / Big Horn Boulevard (cumulative only) City of Elk Grove 4.2-5 Traffic and Circulation

Roadway Segment 22 Big Horn Boulevard north of Kammerer Road (cumulative only) EXISTING INTERSECTION AND ROADWAY SEGMENT OPERATIONS Existing traffic counts at the 24 study intersections and 21 study roadway segments were collected in September 2005, May 2007, or July 2008. The roadway segments were counted over a 24-hour period during the mid-week. The intersections were counted during the a.m. (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.) and p.m. (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) peak periods. To account for potential growth between 2005 and 2008, the 2005 counts were balanced to the counts collected in 2007 and 2008 for use in the existing conditions analysis. The traffic counts are provided in Appendix B. ROADWAY SEGMENT OPERATIONS Level of service (LOS) is a qualitative measure describing the operating condition of intersections and roadways. LOS ranges from A through F, which represents driving conditions from best to worst, respectively. In general, LOS A represents free-flow conditions with no congestion, and LOS F represents severe congestion and delay under stop-and-go conditions. Exhibit 4.2-3 shows the average daily traffic (ADT) volume and LOS on the study roadway segments. As shown, the majority of the study roadways operate at LOS D or better under existing conditions, except for the segment of Elk Grove Boulevard from Elk Grove-Florin Road to Waterman Road (19,100 ADT), which operates at LOS F. INTERSECTION OPERATIONS Exhibits 4.2-4a and 4.2-4b display the existing a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes at the study intersections. Ten of the 24 intersections are controlled by traffic signals and the other 14 are controlled by stop signs. Table 4.2-1 indicates that five of the 24 study intersections operate at LOS E or F during one or both peak hours. All but one of these deficient intersections is at or near the SR 99/Grant Line Road and SR 99/Elk Grove Boulevard interchange. Number of Lanes 1 Table 4.2-1 Level of Service Definitions for Study Roadways Maximum Daily Volume LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E 2 10,800 12,600 14,400 16,200 18,000 4 21,600 25,200 28,800 32,400 36,000 6 32,400 37,800 43,200 48,600 54,000 8 43,200 50,400 57,600 64,800 72,000 Notes: 1 Elk Grove General Plan Background Report shows all study roadways with moderate access control. Source: City of Elk Grove s Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, July 2000. Traffic and Circulation 4.2-6 City of Elk Grove

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Roadway Level of Service Existing Conditions Exhibit 4.2-3 City of Elk Grove 4.2-7 Traffic and Circulation

4.2.2 REGULATORY CONTEXT LOCAL City of Elk Grove General Plan The City of Elk Grove General Plan (General Plan) Circulation Element (City of Elk Grove 2008) addresses the city s development pattern, and the movement of people and goods within the region. Several relevant policies are documented below. CI-13: The City shall require that all roadways and intersections in Elk Grove operate at a minimum Level of Service D at all times. CI-14: The City recognizes that Level of Service D may not be achieved on some roadway segments, and may also not be achieved at some intersections. Roadways on which LOS D is projected to be exceeded are shown in the General Plan Background Report, based on the latest traffic modeling conducted by the City. On these roadways, the City shall ensure that improvements to construct the ultimate roadway system as shown in this Circulation Element are completed, with the recognition that maintenance of the desired level of service may not be achievable. Cl-14-Action: The City shall develop criteria to determine which roadway segments and intersections will not achieve the desired level of service standard. CI-15: Development projects shall be required to provide funding or to construct roadway / intersection improvements to implement the City s Circulation Master Plan. The payment of established traffic impact or similar fees shall be considered to provide compliance with the requirements of this policy with regard to those facilities included in the fee program, provided that the City finds that the fee adequately funds all required roadway and intersection improvements. If payment of established fees is used to provide compliance with this policy, the City may also require the payment of additional fees if necessary to cover the fair share cost of facilities not included in the fee program. CI-16: Where a development project is required to perform new roadway construction or road widening, the entire roadway shall be completed to its planned width from curb to-curb prior to the operation of the project for which the improvements were constructed, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Such roadway construction shall also provide facilities adequate to ensure pedestrian safety as determined by the City Engineer. CI-17: The City shall regulate truck travel as appropriate for the transport of goods, consistent with circulation, air quality, congestion management, and land use goals. CI-18: To the extent possible, major traffic routes for residential areas should be separate from those used by the city s industrial areas, with the purpose of avoiding traffic conflicts and potential safety problems. CI-19: The circulation system serving the city s industrial areas should be designed to safely accommodate heavy truck traffic. Bicycles CI-5-Action 5: The City shall develop and implement Pedestrian and Bikeway Master Plans to provide safe and convenient pedestrian and on- and off-street bicycle facilities throughout the City. Traffic and Circulation 4.2-8 City of Elk Grove

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations Existing Conditions Exhibit 4.2-4a City of Elk Grove 4.2-9 Traffic and Circulation

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations Existing Conditions Exhibit 4.2-4b City of Elk Grove 4.2-11 Traffic and Circulation

4.2.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES METHOD OF ANALYSIS The analysis of traffic impacts evaluated the a.m. and p.m. peak-hour service levels at the study intersections and roadway segments for the following conditions: Existing, Baseline No Project, and Baseline Plus Project. The following discussion summarizes the process and assumptions that were used to develop the analysis. Intersections The study intersections were analyzed using procedures and methodologies contained in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (2000 HCM). Table 4.2-2 displays the average control delay per vehicle for each LOS range for signalized and unsignalized intersections. The LOS for signalized and all-way stop-controlled intersections is based on the average delay of all vehicles passing through the intersection. The LOS for side-street stopcontrolled intersections is based on the delay for the minor street movement with the greatest delay. Roadway Segments Roadway segments were analyzed by comparing average daily traffic volumes to capacity thresholds presented in the City of Elk Grove s Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (July 2000). Consistent with assumptions in the City s General Plan background report, all study roadways were assumed to have moderate access control. Table 4.2-3 identifies daily volume thresholds for each LOS category for two-, four-, six-, and eight-lane roadways with moderate access control. THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE Based on Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines and standards established in the City of Elk Grove s Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, an impact on transportation and circulation would be significant if implementation of the proposed project would: degrade operation at an intersection or roadway segment from LOS A through LOS D to LOS E or LOS F; increase the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio by more than 0.05 at roadway segments that operate or will operate in future conditions at unacceptable LOS without the project; increase delay by more than five seconds at study intersections that are, or will be, operating at unacceptable LOS without the project; result in an appreciable number of pedestrians or bicyclists along routes where no designated bicycle facilities or pedestrian walkways exist; substantially increase hazards caused by a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses; create a demand for public transit services substantially above that which is provided, or planned to be provided, by local transit providers or disrupt or interfere with existing or planned public transit services or facilities; or result in inadequate parking capacity. City of Elk Grove 4.2-13 Traffic and Circulation

Table 4.2-2 Intersection Control Delay and Level of Service Existing Conditions Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay 1 LOS 2 Delay 1 LOS 2 1. State Route 99 SB Ramps / Elk Grove Boulevard Signal 23 C 37 D 2. State Route 99 NB On-Ramp / Elk Grove Boulevard Signal 11 B 16 B 3. Elk Grove Boulevard / East Stockton Boulevard Signal 28 C 50 D 4. State Route 99 NB Off-Ramp / East Stockton Boulevard Side-Street Stop 18 C >80 F 5. Elk Grove Boulevard / Elk Grove-Florin Road Signal 26 C 48 D 6. Elk Grove Boulevard / Waterman Road Signal 26 C 31 C 7. Elk Grove Boulevard / Bradshaw Road All-Way Stop 11 B 13 B 8. Elk Grove-Florin Road / East Stockton Boulevard Side-Street Stop 17 C 20 C 9. Union Parkway / East Stockton Boulevard Side-Street Stop 15 C 15 C 10. Elkmont Way / East Stockton Boulevard All-Way Stop 10 B 14 B 11. Grant line Road / West Stockton Boulevard Side-Street Stop >80 F >80 F 12. Grant line Road / East Stockton Boulevard Signal 52 D 47 D 13. Grant Line Road / Waterman Road Side-Street Stop 15 B 16 C 14. Grant Line Road / Bradshaw Road Side-Street Stop 11 B 13 B 15. Elk Grove Boulevard / Grant Line Road All-Way Stop 10 A 10 B 16. Grant Line Road / Bond Road Signal 19 B 18 B 17. Grant Line Road / Wilton Road Signal 25 C 45 D 18 Grant Line Road / Sheldon Road Side-Street Stop >80 F 56 F 19 Grant Line Road / Calvine Road Signal 14 B 10 A 20. Bilby Road / Bruceville Road Signal 10 A 11 B 21. Kammerer Road / Bruceville Road Side-Street Stop 10 A 11 B 22. State Route 99 NB Ramps / East Stockton Boulevard Side-Street Stop >80 F >80 F 23. State Route 99 SB Ramps / West Stockton Boulevard Side-Street Stop 41 E 45 E 24. Kammerer Road / East Stockton Boulevard Side-Street Stop 10 A 9 A Notes: 1 For signalized and all-way stop-controlled intersections, the overall average intersection control delay is reported in seconds per vehicle. For side-street stop-controlled intersections, the average control delay for the worst movement is reported in seconds per vehicle. >80 is reported when Synchro is unable to calculate the average control delay for stop-controlled intersections due to oversaturated conditions. 2 Level of Service based on Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board 2000). Shading indicates that the intersection operates unacceptably based on the significance criteria. Source: Fehr & Peers 2009. Traffic and Circulation 4.2-14 City of Elk Grove

Level of Service Table 4.2-3 Level of Service Definitions for Study Intersections Signalized Average Control Delay (seconds / vehicle) Unsignalized A 10.0 10.0 B 10.1 20.0 10.1 15.0 C 20.1 35.0 15.1 25.0 D 35.1 55.0 25.1 35.0 E 55.1 80.0 35.1 50.0 F > 80.0 >50.0 Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board 2000. The project site is located in a commercial and industrial area, so few pedestrians or cyclists pass by the site. Development of the project might result in minor demand for public transit services by employees, although the number of riders would be small. The introduction of project employees to the area could increase a desirable demand for expanded pedestrian and bicycle facilities (e.g., bike lanes) in the local area. Similar to the public transit service demand, the demand for pedestrian and bicycle facilities generated by the proposed project would be small. Therefore, the potential impacts related to pedestrians, cyclists, or public transit are not evaluated further. Baseline No Project Conditions Traffic Model Assumptions and Forecasting Methodologies Baseline no project weekday and peak hour traffic volume forecasts for study roadways and intersections were developed using v.01 of the SACMET regional travel demand model. This version of the SACMET travel demand model contains the latest land uses for Phased I and II of the Laguna Ridge Specific Plan (2,500 dwelling units north of Poppy Ridge Road), Sterling Meadows, and Elk Grove Marketplace retail parcels. No development was assumed south of Kammerer Road. The following roadway improvements within the study area were assumed under baseline conditions without the proposed project: Lotz Parkway constructed as a four-lane arterial from Big Horn Boulevard across Whitelock Parkway to Poppy Ridge Road, and as a two-lane arterial from just south of Poppy Ridge Road to Kammerer Road. Promenade Parkway constructed as a six-lane arterial from Kammerer Road north to Lent Ranch Parkway, and as a four-lane arterial from Lent Ranch Parkway to its intersection with Lotz Parkway (just south of Whitelock Parkway). Kammerer Road realigned to connect directly with the SR 99 / Grant Line Road interchange and widened from two to six lanes from Survey Road easterly to a short distance west of Lotz Parkway. SR 99 / Grant Line Road interchange upgraded to an L-9 configuration with diagonal on- and off-ramps, loop on-ramps, a six-lane overcrossing, and traffic signals at both ramp-terminal intersections. The above improvements, specifically the reconfiguration of the SR 99 / Grant Line Road interchange and the realignment of Kammerer Road, changes the list of intersections analyzed under baseline conditions from those evaluated under existing conditions: City of Elk Grove 4.2-15 Traffic and Circulation

The SR 99 ramp terminal intersections with East Stockton Boulevard and West Stockton Boulevard (intersections 22 and 23 under existing conditions) are replaced by the SR 99 ramp terminal intersections with Grant Line Road (intersections 26 and 27 under baseline conditions). East Stockton Boulevard is realigned to the east to connect with Survey Road. Thus, East Stockton / Grant Line Road (intersection 12 under existing conditions) is replaced with Survey Road / Grant Line Road (intersection 25 under baseline conditions). Kammerer Road is realigned to connect with Grant Line Road. West Stockton Boulevard / Kammerer Road (intersection 24 under existing conditions) is replaced with Promenade Parkway / Grant Line Road and Kammerer Road / Lent Ranch Road (intersections 28 and 29 under baseline conditions). The above study intersection changes are illustrated in Exhibit 4.2-1. The analysis did not assume a new interchange on SR 99 between Elk Grove Boulevard and Grant Line Road, nor did it assume a loop on-ramp from East Stockton Boulevard (at the SR 99 / Elk Grove Boulevard interchange) onto northbound SR 99. Traffic Forecasts The baseline no project traffic forecasts for daily, a.m. peak hour, and p.m. peak hour conditions were developed by adding the difference between the baseline no project and existing year traffic model forecast to the existing traffic counts. In situations where the street currently does not exist, the baseline no project forecast was used directly and then balanced with forecasts from intersections where an existing traffic count was collected. In some instances, modifications to the traffic model s forecasts were necessary to estimate more accurately the amount of traffic entering and/or exiting specific parcels. For example, adjustments were made at Promenade Parkway based on more detailed trip generation and distribution assumptions developed for a site access analysis of the Elk Grove Promenade. Traffic Operations Analysis Roadway Segment Operations Exhibit 4.2-5 identifies the ADT volume and LOS on the study roadway segments under baseline conditions. As shown, the majority of the study roadways continue to operate at LOS D or better under baseline no project conditions except for the following roadway segments: Kammerer Road Promenade Parkway to State Route 99 (68,100 ADT, LOS F) Grant Line Road Survey Road to Waterman Road (38,300 ADT, LOS F) Grant Line Road Bond Road to Wilton Road (17,000 ADT, LOS E) Elk Grove Boulevard State Route 99 to Elk Grove-Florin Road (36,100 ADT, LOS F) Elk Grove Boulevard Elk Grove-Florin Road to Waterman Road (19,500 ADT, LOS F) Intersection Operations Exhibits 4.2-6a and 4.2-6b display the baseline no project peak hour traffic forecasts and lane configurations at the study intersections. The study intersections were reanalyzed under baseline no project conditions. Table 4.2-4 displays the results. Table 4.2-4 indicates that 14 of the study intersections operate at LOS E or F during one or both peak hours. All but two of these deficient intersections are located near or on Elk Grove Boulevard and Kammerer Road / Grant Line Road. Traffic and Circulation 4.2-16 City of Elk Grove

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Roadway Level of Service Baseline No Project Conditions Exhibit 4.2-5 City of Elk Grove 4.2-17 Traffic and Circulation

Table 4.2-4 Intersection Control Delay and Level of Service Baseline Conditions Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay 1 LOS 2 Delay 1 LOS 2 1. State Route 99 SB Ramps / Elk Grove Boulevard Signal >80 F >80 F 2. State Route 99 NB On-Ramp / Elk Grove Boulevard Signal 19 B 23 C 3. Elk Grove Boulevard / East Stockton Boulevard Signal 50 D 75 E 4. State Route 99 NB Off-Ramp / East Stockton Boulevard Side-Street Stop >80 F >80 F 5. Elk Grove Boulevard / Elk Grove-Florin Road Signal 32 C >80 F 6. Elk Grove Boulevard / Waterman Road Signal 31 C 39 D 7. Elk Grove Boulevard / Bradshaw Road All-Way Stop 15 B 33 D 8. Elk Grove Florin Road / East Stockton Boulevard Side-Street Stop 32 D >80 F 9. Union Parkway / East Stockton Boulevard Side-Street Stop 14 B 21 C 10. Elkmont Way / East Stockton Boulevard All-Way Stop 12 B 44 E 13. Grant Line Road / Waterman Road Signal 14 B 25 C 14. Grant Line Road / Bradshaw Road Side-Street Stop 44 E 56 F 15. Elk Grove Boulevard / Grant Line Road Side-Street Stop 78 F >80 F 16. Grant Line Road / Bond Road Side-Street Stop 38 D 34 C 17. Grant Line Road / Wilton Road Signal >80 F >80 F 18. Grant Line Road / Sheldon Road Side-Street Stop >80 F >80 F 19. Grant Line Road / Calvine Road All-Way Stop 20 B 10 A 20. Bilby Road / Bruceville Road Signal >80 F >80 F 21. Kammerer Road / Bruceville Road Signal 12 B 40 E 25. Grant Line Road / East Stockton Boulevard Side-Street Stop 24 C 37 D 26. Grant Line Road / NB State Route 99 Ramps Signal 50 D 73 E 27. Grant Line Road / SB State Route 99 Ramps Signal 54 D 51 D 28. Kammerer Road / Promenade Parkway Side-Street Stop >80 F >80 F 29. Kammerer Road / Lent Ranch Parkway Signal 15 B 14 B 30. Kammerer Road / Lotz Parkway Signal 16 B 12 B Notes: 1 For signalized and all-way stop-controlled intersections, the overall average intersection control delay is reported in seconds per vehicle. For side-street stop-controlled intersections, the average control delay for the worst movement is reported in seconds per vehicle. >80 is reported when Synchro is unable to calculate the average control delay for stop-controlled intersections due to oversaturated conditions. 2 Level of Service based on Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board 2000). Shading indicates that the intersection operates unacceptably based on the significance criteria. Source: Fehr & Peers 2008. Traffic and Circulation 4.2-18 City of Elk Grove

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations Baseline No Project Conditions Exhibit 4.2-6a City of Elk Grove 4.2-19 Traffic and Circulation

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations Baseline No Project Conditions Exhibit 4.2-6b City of Elk Grove 4.2-21 Traffic and Circulation

BASELINE PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS This section describes effects of the baseline plus project conditions on the surrounding transportation system. Exhibit 4.2-7 identifies the potential project site locations. The amount of traffic associated with the proposed project was estimated using a three-step process: 1 Trip generation Estimated the amount of traffic entering and exiting the project sites. 2 Trip distribution Projected the paths used to approach and depart from the sites, along with the percentage of traffic using each path. 3 Trip assignment Assigned the trips to specific roadway segments and intersection turning movements. The results of this process are described in detail below. TRIP GENERATION Project trip generation was based on its planned maximum capacity. This maximum capacity was broken down by permitted daily peak tonnage for each project component, including a materials recovery facility, hazardous household waste collection center, special wastes collection center, and other permitted uses. From these specified peak tonnages, the number and type of vehicles needed to transport the waste was estimated, resulting in an estimate of daily vehicles of each type (Residential Recycling / Green Waste, Commercial Garbage and Recycling, Self Haul, etc). Due to the large percentage of truck traffic that would be generated by the proposed project, truck trips were converted into passenger car equivalents (PCEs) to account for the impact of truck traffic on roadway operations. PCE rates are based on the size and carrying capacity of a vehicle. According to the Transportation Research Board s Special Report 223, heavy vehicles range from 1.5 to 3.7 PCEs. The number of trips would occur during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods was estimated based on the Sacramento Recycling and Transfer Station Study (HDR Engineering 2007), which collected hourly traffic counts at an existing waste transfer facility during the peak periods. For the purposes of assigning PCE-trips to the adjacent roadway network, one-half of truck-trips were assumed to be entering the site and one-half of truck-trips were assumed to be exiting the site during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. For employee trips, 85 percent of employees were assumed to enter the site during the a.m. peak hour and exit the site during the p.m. peak hour, which reflects inbound / outbound trip percentages for typical industrial uses in Trip Generation, 7 th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers 2003). The proposed project s peak hour and daily trip generation was estimated under two scenarios: 1. Franchise Commercial Hauler: Assumes that commercial garbage and recycling services are conducted by a single franchise entity. 2. Multiple Commercial Haulers: Assumes that commercial garbage and recycling services are conducted by multiple commercial entities. The franchise commercial haulers scenario has a slightly lower trip generation, as it assumes that a franchise entity would consolidate waste collection and delivery into fewer trucks, to save on equipment and fuel costs. The scenario with multiple commercial haulers assumes a higher trip generation, as more companies would be delivering waste to the transfer facility. Tables 4.2-5 and 4.2-6 identify the project PCE trip generation for each scenario for weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. A more detailed description of how the project s trip generation was developed is provided in Appendix B. City of Elk Grove 4.2-23 Traffic and Circulation

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Potential Project Site Locations Exhibit 4.2-7 Traffic and Circulation 4.2-24 City of Elk Grove

Table 4.2-5 Daily, AM, and PM Trip Generation (Franchised Commercial Hauler) Vehicle Types Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) Ratio 1 Total Vehicles Per Day Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PCE Total Trips 1 Percent of Daily Trips 2 Total Vehicles Total PCE s Percent of Daily Trips 2 Total Vehicles Total PCE s Residential Garbage Recycling / Green Waste Commercial Garbage and Recycling Commercial Self Haul (5 ton trucks) Residential Self Haul (pickup trucks) Private Self Haul HHW 3 (cars and pickup trucks) 2.7 99 535 5.8% 6 31 4.0% 4 21 2.7 97 524 5.8% 6 30 4.0% 4 21 1.5 44 132 6.9% 3 9 7.3% 3 10 1 144 288 6.9% 10 20 7.3% 11 21 1 60 120 6.9% 4 8 7.3% 4 9 Employee Cars and Pickup Trucks 1 100 200 10.7% 11 21 10.7% 11 21 Buy-Back (cars and pickup trucks) Outbound Transfer Trucks / Trailers (18 Wheelers) Outbound from MRF 3 Transfer Truck / Trailers (18 Wheelers) Outbound HHW Vans and Flatbeds (Up to 18 Wheelers) 1 40 80 6.9% 3 6 7.3% 3 6 3.7 91 673 4.2% 4 28 4.8% 4 32 3.7 23 170 4.2% 1 7 4.8% 1 8 3.7 1 7 4.2% 0 0 4.8% 0 0 Total 699 2,729 48 160 45 149 Notes: 1 PCE = Passenger Car Equivalent 2 3 Percent of Daily Traffic 6.9% 5.9% 6.4% 5.5% Percent of Daily Trips from Sacramento Transfer and Recycling Traffic Study 2006. PCE and percent daily trip percentage from buy-back assumed the same as residential self haul. Vehicle counts are based on a permitted maximum waste acceptance of 2,000 tons per day of Municipal Solid Waste and 500 tons per day of recyclable materials. HHW = Household Hazardous Waste MRF = Material Recovery Facility Source: Fehr & Peers 2009. City of Elk Grove 4.2-25 Traffic and Circulation

Table 4.2-6 Daily, AM, and PM Trip Generation (Multiple Commercial Haulers) Vehicle Types Residential Garbage Recycling/ Green Waste Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) Ratio 1 Total Vehicles Per Day Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PCE Total Trips 1 Percent of Daily Trips 2 Total Vehicles Total PCE s Percent of Daily Trips 2 Total Vehicles Total PCE s 2.7 99 535 5.8% 6 31 4.0% 4 21 Commercial Garbage and Recycling 2.7 199 1,075 5.8% 12 62 4.0% 8 43 Commercial Self Haul (5 ton trucks) Residential Self Haul (pickup trucks) Private Self Haul HHW (cars and pickup trucks) 1.5 44 132 6.9% 3 9 7.3% 3 10 1 144 288 6.9% 10 20 7.3% 11 21 1 60 120 6.9% 4 8 7.3% 4 9 Employee Cars and Pickup Trucks 1 100 200 10.7% 11 21 10.7% 11 21 Buy-Back (cars and pickup trucks) 1 40 80 6.9% 3 6 7.3% 3 6 Outbound Transfer Trucks/Trailers (18 Wheelers) Outbound from MRF 3 Transfer Truck/Trailers (18 Wheelers) Outbound HHW Vans and Flatbeds (Up to 18 Wheelers) 3.7 91 673 4.2% 4 28 4.8% 4 32 3.7 23 170 4.2% 1 7 4.8% 1 8 3.7 1 7 4.2% 0 0 4.8% 0 0 Total 801 3,280 54 192 49 171 Notes: 1 PCE = Passenger Car Equivalent 2 3 Percent of Daily Traffic 6.7% 5.9% 6.1% 5.2% Percent of Daily Trips from Sacramento Transfer and Recycling Traffic Study 2006. PCE and percent daily trip percentage from buy-back assumed the same as residential self haul. Vehicle counts are based on a permitted maximum waste acceptance of 2,000 tons per day of Municipal Solid Waste and 500 tons per day of recyclable materials. HHW = Household Hazardous Waste MRF = Material Recovery Facility Source: Fehr & Peers 2009. Traffic and Circulation 4.2-26 City of Elk Grove

TRIP DISTRIBUTION Three trip distribution patterns were developed under baseline conditions one for residential trips, another for commercial trips, and a third for outbound vehicles transporting waste from the project site to landfills and recycling centers outside of Elk Grove. Exhibit 4.2-8 identifies the residential trip distribution pattern, which is based on the location of residential land uses in Elk Grove assumed under baseline conditions. Certain types of trips into the project site would have a residential origin or destination, these include: Residential garbage recycling / waste Residential self haul (pickup trucks) Private self haul household waste Employee cars and pickup trucks Buy-back cars and pickup trucks Exhibit 4.2-9 shows the commercial trip distribution pattern, which is based on the location of commercial land uses in Elk Grove under baseline conditions. The types of trips into the project site that would have a commercial origin or destination include: Commercial garbage and recycling Commercial self haul (5 ton trucks) Outbound vehicles only have two destinations north on Grant Line Road to the landfills in unincorporated Sacramento County and south on SR 99 to landfills and recycling centers in San Joaquin County and other points south. To provide for a conservative analysis, all outbound transfer trucks/trailers and household waste vans and flatbeds trips (totaling 92 daily trips or about 680 PCEs) were assumed to be distributed on both northbound Grant Line Road and southbound SR 99. Outbound material recycling facility vehicles (totaling 23 daily trips or about 170 PCEs) are assumed to distribute 100 percent southbound on SR 99, due to the lack of a recycling facility in unincorporated Sacramento County. TRIP ASSIGNMENT The trip generation and distribution estimates described above were used to assign trips for the project sites to the surrounding roadway network. The trips from Table 4.2-5 were added to the baseline no project volumes using the distribution patterns described for residential, commercial, and outbound vehicles to develop baseline plus project conditions franchised commercial hauler scenario. Likewise, the trips from Table 4.2-6 were added to the baseline no project volumes using the distribution patterns described for each trip type to develop volumes for baseline plus project conditions multiple commercial hauler scenario. Estimating plus project volumes by adding project trips to no project volumes likely provides an overestimate of overall volumes under plus project conditions. This is because waste collection already occurs in the City. The proposed project simply provides a local alternative for processing the waste, rather than transporting it to a facility outside of the City. However, by locating a transfer facility in the City, some roadway facilities would experience a net increase in trips. For this reason, it was decided to analyze trips associated with the transfer facility as new trips, to provide for the most conservative analysis. Exhibit 4.2-10 shows daily traffic volumes and LOS on study roadway segments once project traffic (from both the franchise commercial haulers and multiple commercial haulers scenarios) is added to no project volumes. Exhibits 4.2-11a, 4.2-11b and 4.2-11c show peak hour turning movements at study intersections under baseline plus project conditions for franchised commercial haulers, and Exhibits 4.2-12a, 4.2-12b, and 4.2-12c summarize peak hour turning movements at study intersections for the multiple commercial hauler scenario. City of Elk Grove 4.2-27 Traffic and Circulation

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Residential Trip Distribution Baseline Conditions Exhibit 4.2-8 Traffic and Circulation 4.2-28 City of Elk Grove

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Non-residential Trip Distribution Baseline Conditions Exhibit 4.2-9 City of Elk Grove 4.2-29 Traffic and Circulation

Differences between the two potential project sites were evaluated by separately analyzing the two study intersections that would provide site access for each site location. Elkmont Way / East Stockton Boulevard Grant Line Road / Survey Road The volumes of these intersections under each potential site location are identified on the peak hour turning movement figures. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES IMPACT 4.2-1 Roadway Segments. The proposed project would increase ADT for roadways within the study area. However, in no case does the project increase ADT volumes enough to result in additional segments operating unacceptably or increase the volume-to-capacity ratio of already-deficient segments by 0.05. Therefore, this impact would be considered less than significant. The majority of the study roadways continue to operate at LOS D or better under baseline plus project conditions, as identified in Exhibit 4.2-10. While the proposed project would increase ADT on all of the study segments, in no case does the project increase ADT volumes enough to result in additional segments operating unacceptably or increase the volume-to-capacity ratio of already-deficient segments by 0.05. Similar to baseline no project conditions, the following segments would operate unacceptably: Kammerer Road Promenade Parkway to SR 99: Franchised Commercial Haulers (68,400 ADT, LOS F), Multiple Commercial Haulers (68,600 ADT, LOS F) Grant Line Road Survey Road to Waterman Road: Franchised Commercial Haulers and Multiple Commercial Haulers (39,200 ADT, LOS F)Grant Line Road Bond Road to Wilton Road: Franchised Commercial Haulers and Multiple Commercial Haulers (17,700 ADT, LOS E) Elk Grove Boulevard SR 99 to Elk Grove-Florin Road: Franchised Commercial Haulers and Multiple Commercial Haulers (36,100 ADT, LOS F) Elk Grove Boulevard Grove-Florin Road to Waterman Road: Franchised Commercial Haulers and Multiple Commercial Haulers (19,500 ADT, LOS F) Because the proposed project would not increase the V/C ratio of these already-deficient segments by 0.05 or more, the project s traffic contribution to roadway segments would be considered a less-than-significant impact. Mitigation Measure 4.2-1 Roadway Segments No mitigation measures would be necessary. Level of Significance after Mitigation The project s impacts on roadway segments would be less than significant. Traffic and Circulation 4.2-30 City of Elk Grove

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Average Daily Traffic volume and Level of Service Baseline Plus Project Conditions Exhibit 4.2-10 City of Elk Grove 4.2-31 Traffic and Circulation

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations Baseline Plus Project Conditions (Franchised Commercial Hauler) Exhibit 4.2-11a City of Elk Grove 4.2-33 Traffic and Circulation

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations Baseline Plus Project Conditions (Franchised Commercial Hauler) Exhibit 4.2-11b City of Elk Grove 4.2-35 Traffic and Circulation

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations Baseline Plus Project Conditions (Franchised Commercial Hauler) Exhibit 4.2-11c City of Elk Grove 4.2-37 Traffic and Circulation

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations Baseline Plus Project Conditions (Multiple Commercial Haulers) Exhibit 4.2-12a City of Elk Grove 4.2-39 Traffic and Circulation

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations Baseline Plus Project Conditions (Multiple Commercial Haulers) Exhibit 4.2-12b City of Elk Grove 4.2-41 Traffic and Circulation

Source: Fehr & Peers 2009, Adapted by 2009 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes and Lane Configurations Baseline Plus Project Conditions (Multiple Commercial Haulers) Exhibit 4.2-12c City of Elk Grove 4.2-43 Traffic and Circulation

IMPACT 4.2-2 Elk Grove-Florin Road / East Stockton Boulevard Intersection. The addition of project traffic to baseline traffic conditions would degrade operations below acceptable levels at the Elk Grove-Florin Road / East Stockton Boulevard Intersection. This impact would be considered significant. The Elk Grove-Florin Road / East Stockton Boulevard Intersection operates at LOS D in the a.m. peak hour and at LOS F during the p.m. peak hour. The addition of project traffic to baseline traffic conditions would degrade acceptable operations to unacceptable levels (LOS E) in the a.m. peak hour and would increase the average delay at this intersection by more than five seconds in the p.m. peak hour (Table 4.2-7). The project s traffic contribution to this intersection would be considered a significant impact. Table 4.2-7 Intersection Control Delay and Level of Service Baseline Plus Project Conditions Intersection 1. State Route 99 SB Ramps/ Elk Grove Boulevard 2. State Route 99 NB On- Ramp / Elk Grove Boulevard 3. Elk Grove Boulevard / East Stockton Boulevard 4. State Route 99 NB Off- Ramp / East Stockton Boulevard 5. Elk Grove Boulevard / Elk Grove-Florin Road 6. Elk Grove Boulevard / Waterman Road 7. Elk Grove Boulevard / Bradshaw Road 8. Elk Grove Florin Road / East Stockton Boulevard 9. Site 4 - Union Parkway / East Stockton Boulevard 9. Site 5 - Union Parkway / East Stockton Boulevard 9. Sites 2 and 3 - Union Parkway / East Stockton Boulevard 10. Site 4 - Elkmont Way / East Stockton Boulevard Traffic Control Baseline No Project Conditions AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Baseline Plus Franchise Commercial Haulers AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Baseline Plus Multiple Commercial Haulers AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Signal > 80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F Signal 19 / B 23 / C 19 / B 24 / C 18 / B 24 / C Signal 50 / D 75 / E 51 / D 77 / E 52 / D 78 / E Side-Street Stop >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F Signal 32 / C >80 / F 32 / C >80 / F 32 / C >80 / F Signal 31 / C 39 / D 32 / C 40 / D 32 / C 40 / D All-Way Stop Side-Street Stop Side-Street Stop Side-Street Stop Side-Street Stop All-Way Stop 15 / B 33 / D 15 / B 33 / D 15 / B 34 / D 32 / D >80 / F 35 / E >80 / F 36 / E >80 / F 14 / B 21 / C 14 / B 21 / C 14 / B 21 / C -- -- 14 / B 21 / C 14 / B 21 / C -- -- 14 / B 21 / C 14 / B 21 / C 12 / B 44 / E 16 / C >80 / F 17 / C >80 / F City of Elk Grove 4.2-45 Traffic and Circulation

Table 4.2-7 Intersection Control Delay and Level of Service Baseline Plus Project Conditions Intersection 10. Site 5 - Elkmont Way / East Stockton Boulevard 10. Sites 2 and 3 - Elkmont Way / East Stockton Blvd 13. Grant Line Road / Waterman Road 14. Grant Line Road / Bradshaw Road 15. Elk Grove Boulevard / Grant Line Road 16. Grant Line Road / Bond Road 17. Grant Line Road / Wilton Road 18 Grant Line Road / Sheldon Road 19 Grant Line Road / Calvine Road 20. Bilby Road / Bruceville Road 21. Kammerer Road / Bruceville Road 25. Site 4 - Grant Line Road / East Stockton Boulevard 25. Site 5 - Grant Line Road / East Stockton Boulevard 25. Sites 2 and 3 - Grant Line Road / East Stockton Blvd. 26 Grant Line Road / NB State Route 99 Ramps 27. Grant Line Road / SB State Route 99 Ramps Traffic Control Side-Street Stop Side-Street Stop Baseline No Project Conditions AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Baseline Plus Franchise Commercial Haulers AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Baseline Plus Multiple Commercial Haulers AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 -- -- 13 / B 48 / E 13 / B 48 / E -- -- 13 / B 47 / E 13 / B 47 / E Signal 14 / B 25 / C 14 / B 26 / C 14 / B 26 / C Side-Street Stop All-Way Stop 44 / E 56 / F 49 / E 65 / F 49 / E 65 / F 78 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F Signal 38 / D 34 / D 40 / D 36 / D 40 / D 36 / D Signal >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F Side-Street Stop >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F Signal 20 / B 10 / A 21 / C 10 / A 21 / C 10 / A Signal >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F Side-Street Stop 12 / B 40 / E 12 / B 41 / E 12 / B 42 / E Signal 24 / C 37 / D 27 / C 41 / D 27 / C 42 / D Signal -- -- 27 / C 41 / D 27 / C 41 / D Signal -- -- 32 / C 36 / D 33 / C 36 / D Signal 50 / D 73 / E 48 / D3 71 / E3 47 / D3 71 / E3 Signal 54 / D 51 / D 48 / D 65 / E 48 / D3 64 / E Traffic and Circulation 4.2-46 City of Elk Grove

Table 4.2-7 Intersection Control Delay and Level of Service Baseline Plus Project Conditions Intersection 28. Kammerer Road / Promenade Parkway 29. Kammerer Road / Lent Ranch Parkway 30. Kammerer Road / Lotz Parkway Traffic Control Baseline No Project Conditions AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Baseline Plus Franchise Commercial Haulers AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Baseline Plus Multiple Commercial Haulers AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Delay 1 /LOS 2 Signal >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F >80 / F Signal 15 / B 14 / B 15 / B 14 / B 15 / B 14 / B Signal 16 / B 12 / B 16 / B 12 / B 16 / B 12 / B Notes: 1 For signalized and all-way stop-controlled intersections, the overall average intersection control delay is reported in seconds per vehicle. For side-street stop-controlled intersections, the average control delay for the worst movement is reported in seconds per vehicle. >80 is reported when Synchro is unable to calculate the average control delay for stop-controlled intersections due to oversaturated conditions. 2 Level of Service based on Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board 2000). 3 Project trips were added to non-critical movements which have low vehicle delay. Because the overall intersection delay is an average of all the movements, the addition of the project volume decreases the overall intersection delay. Shading indicates that the intersection operates unacceptably based on the significance criteria. Bold italic indicates project impact based on the significance criteria. Source: Fehr & Peers 2009 Mitigation Measure 4.2-2. Elk Grove-Florin Road / East Stockton Boulevard Intersection Install a traffic signal at the Elk Grove-Florin Road / East Stockton Boulevard intersection as planned for in the City s Capital Improvement Program. Currently this improvement is included in the fee program and is anticipated to be constructed prior to the operations of the transfer station. If the improvement is not in place, this project will be required to construct it. Level of Significance after Mitigation This mitigation would provide LOS C operations in the a.m. and LOS D operations in the p.m. peak hour with the addition of project traffic. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce the impact to a less-thansignificant level. Exhibit 4.2-13 identifies the baseline plus project conditions with the identified mitigation measures implemented. IMPACT 4.2-3 Elkmont Way / East Stockton Boulevard Intersection (Site 4 Only). The addition of project traffic to baseline traffic conditions would degrade already unacceptable operations at the Elkmont Way / East Stockton Boulevard Intersection if Site 4 is selected as the preferred facility site. No impact would occur at this intersection if Site 2 is selected. The impact at this intersection with the development of Site 4 would be considered significant. The Elkmont Way / East Stockton Boulevard Intersection operates at LOS E in the p.m. peak hour. The addition of project traffic associated with the development of Site 4 to baseline traffic conditions would increase the average delay at this intersection by more than five seconds in the p.m. peak hour (Table 4.2-7). The project s traffic contribution to this intersection would be considered a significant impact if Site 4 is selected as the preferred facility site. No impact would occur at this intersection if Site 2 is selected. Mitigation Measure 4.2-3. Elkmont Way / East Stockton Boulevard Intersection (Site 4 Only) City of Elk Grove 4.2-47 Traffic and Circulation