4.11 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "4.11 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION"

Transcription

1 4.11 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION INTRODUCTION This section addresses the potential for the Proposed Project to impact traffic and circulation. Information in this section is summarized from the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared for the Proposed Project by Abrams Associates Traffic Engineering, Inc. (Abrams Associates, 2016; Appendix U). Following an overview of the existing traffic setting in Section and the relevant regulatory setting in Section , project-related impacts and recommended mitigation measures are presented in Section and , respectively ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Existing Roadway Network Access to the project site is provided via the existing roadway network shown in Figure Direct access to the project site is provided via Mt. Shasta Boulevard for trucks and via Ski Village Drive for employee and visitor passenger vehicles. Roadways that would be utilized by project related traffic are described below. Interstate 5 (I-5). I-5 is a major interstate freeway facility that traverses in the north-south direction through the State. I-5 serves as the primary regional thoroughfare in Siskiyou County (County) connecting to the City of Yreka to the north and the cities of Mt. Shasta and Dunsmuir to the south. Mt. Shasta Boulevard. Mt. Shasta Boulevard is a north-south arterial roadway that extends north from State Route (SR) 89 to terminate to the north at Spring Hill Drive and I-5. The posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour (mph) in the vicinity of the project site. Speed limit increases to 45 mph approximately 750 feet north of the truck access point. Everitt Memorial Highway. Everitt Memorial Highway extends north from Rockfellow Drive and travels up the western flank of Mt. Shasta to terminate at the Panther Meadow Trailhead. The posted speed limit is 35 mph in the vicinity of the project site. Ski Village Drive. Ski Village Drive is a collector roadway that extends east from Mt. Shasta Boulevard to terminate to the east at Everitt Memorial Highway. The posted speed limit is 35 mph in the vicinity of the project site. Spring Hill Drive. Spring Hill Drive is a north-south arterial roadway that extends north from Mt. Shasta Boulevard to terminate to the north of Abrams Lake Road in the vicinity of the Black Butte Transfer Station. The speed limit is 35 mph in the vicinity of the project site. Nixon Road. Nixon Road is a two-lane residential roadway with a 25 mph speed limit that extends west from the intersection of Ski Village Drive and Mt. Shasta Boulevard and curves back to terminate at another intersection with Mt. Shasta Boulevard. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

2 BLVD Mt Shasta Quarry NORTH LEGEND # Study Area Intersections NOT TO SCALE N. OLD S TA GE RD EVERITT MEMORIAL HIGHWAY SPRING HILL RD N. O L D SPRING HILL DR PINE GROVE DR STAGE RD 1 MT SHASTA Mt Shasta City Park 5 2 SKI VILLAGE DR 5 W YE H K A WAY SCHILLING WAY NI X ON RD KINGSTON RD 3 4 Mt Shasta City KOA Shastice Park Mt Shasta Memorial Park N. OLD STAGE RD LASSEN Big Spring Creek LN ROCKFELLOW DR LAKE ST MCCLOUD AVE N ADAMS DR Wagon Creek N. WASHINGTON DR Browns Lake SOURCE: Abrams Associates Traffic Engineering, Inc.; AES, 1/5/2017 Crystal Geyser / Figure Study Area Intersections

3 Planned Roadway Improvements The most significant planned roadway improvement in the area is the potential extension of Kingston Road to Mt. Shasta Boulevard via Nixon Road. This connection, a proposed collector, would provide for a shorter distance between the northern parts of the City of Mt. Shasta (City) to the Mercy Medical Center. Another planned arterial road in the area would extend east from Spring Hill Drive to connect with Everitt Memorial Drive. While these improvements have been identified in the Mt. Shasta General Plan, development cannot be guaranteed. Therefore, these improvements were not included within the traffic analysis. Existing Traffic Conditions Level of Service (LOS) Level of service (LOS) is an expression, in the form of a scale, of the relationship between the capacity of an intersection (or roadway segment) to accommodate the volume of traffic moving through it at any given time. The LOS scale describes traffic flow with six ratings ranging from A to F, with A indicating relatively free flow of traffic and F indicating stop-and-go traffic characterized by traffic jams. For unsignalized (all-way stop controlled and two-way stop controlled) intersections, the average control delay and LOS operating conditions are calculated by approach (e.g. northbound) and movement (e.g., northbound left-turn) for those movements that are subject to delay. In general, the operating conditions for unsignalized intersections are presented for the worst approach. Table summarizes the relationship between LOS and average control delay at unsignalized intersections. Level of Service TABLE UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS Description of Operations Average Delay (seconds/vehicle) A No delay for stop-controlled approaches. 0 to 10 B Operations with minor delays. > 10 to 15 C Operations with moderate delays. > 15 to 25 D Operations with some delays. > 25 to 35 E Operations with high delays and long queues. > 35 to 50 F Source: TRB, Operation with extreme congestion, with very high delays and long queues unacceptable to most drivers. > 50 Study Area Intersections Five study intersections within the City and the County were selected for analysis, based on surveys of existing (2016) traffic in the area and the traffic added by the Proposed Project 1. Abrams Associates conducted traffic counts at study area intersections from 7:00 to 9:00 AM and from 4:00 to 6:00 PM at the beginning of June 2016, when local schools were in session. Peak hours were selected based on the 1 The Abrams Lake interchange was not selected for further analysis due to existing traffic volumes at this interchange and Proposed Project added traffic volumes (a maximum of 15 trips per hour). AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

4 highest one-hour volumes recorded during each of the two hour counts conducted. For this analysis, AM peak hour is defined as 7:45 to 8:45 AM and PM peak hour is defined as 4:15 to 5:15 PM. Table presents current AM and PM peak hour levels of service at the study area intersections. As shown, all study intersections currently operate acceptably at LOS B or above. TABLE EXISTING (2016) INTERSECTION LOS CONDITIONS Intersection Control Peak Hour 1 Spring Hill Rd & Mt. Shasta Blvd TWSC 2 Ski Village Dr & Mt. Shasta Blvd TWSC 3 S. Nixon Rd & Mt. Shasta Blvd TWSC 4 Project Entrance & Mt. Shasta Blvd TWSC 5 Everitt Memorial Highway & Ski Village Dr TWSC Source: Abrams Associates, 2016 (Appendix U). Delay Existing Los AM 9.8 A PM 10.5 B AM 10.6 B PM 11.0 B AM 9.6 A PM 10.4 B AM 10.2 B PM 10.9 B AM 8.8 A PM 8.7 A Study Area Roadway Segments The Circulation Element of the Mt. Shasta General Plan shows the approximate average daily traffic (ADT) that a particular roadway can typically accommodate for each LOS (Table ). ADT volumes for study area roadway segments were estimated based on the PM peak hour traffic counts conducted by Abrams Associates at each of the study area intersections. Study area roadway segments are as follows: Spring Hill Drive, from Spring Hill Road to Mt. Shasta Blvd; Mt. Shasta Blvd, from Spring Hill Drive to Ski Village Drive; Mt. Shasta Blvd, from Ski Village Drive to Nixon Road (south); Mt. Shasta Blvd, south of Nixon Road (south); Ski Village Drive, from Mt. Shasta Blvd to Plant entrance; and Ski Village Drive, from Plant entrance to Everitt Memorial Highway. TABLE ROAD TYPE AND APPROXIMATE AVERAGE DAILY TRIPS BY LOS Road Type Average Daily Trips (ADT) LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E 4-Lane Divided Arterial w/turn Lane 22,000 25,000 29,000 32,500 36,000 2-Lane Arterial w/turn Lane 11,000 12,500 14,500 16,000 18,000 2-Lane Arterial 9,000 10,500 12,000 13,500 15,000 2-Lane Collector 6,000 7,500 9,000 10,500 12,000 Local 600 1,200 2,000 3,000 4,500 Source: City of Mt. Shasta, AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

5 All study area roadway segments existing ADT volumes are below the 6,000 ADT threshold for 2-lane collectors. Therefore, all study area roadway segments currently operate at LOS A. Study Area Freeway Operations AM and PM peak period traffic counts were conducted on the freeway ramps and the I-5 mainline freeway at the Abrams Lake Interchange by Abrams Associates in June of 2016 as part of the data collection for the Proposed Project. Based on those traffic counts, the I-5 freeway was determined to have its highest volumes during the PM peak hour when there were 1,200 vehicles per hour recorded in the northbound direction and 1,085 vehicles per hour in the southbound direction. According to criteria in the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (2002), the I- 5 freeway currently operates at LOS A in this area. Bikeways, Pedestrian Facilities, Public Transportation System Everitt Memorial Highway and Mt. Shasta Boulevard are identified in the Mt. Shasta General Plan as conceptual primary bike routes, though the General Plan does not distinguish whether these roadways are classified as Class II or Class III routes. In addition, a planned Class I multi-modal trail in the vicinity of the project site would connect the downtown area of the City with the Mt. Shasta City Park. Some areas along the eastern side of Mt. Shasta Boulevard in the vicinity of the project site have sidewalks; however, there are no sidewalks along Ski Village Drive in the vicinity of the project site. Bus transit service in the project area is provided by Siskiyou County and is known as the Siskiyou Transit and General Express (STAGE). Siskiyou Transit operates local bus routes from Yreka and Hornbrook south all the way down to Dunsmuir. The route runs on approximately 1.5 hour headways Monday through Friday from about 6:30 AM to 9:00 PM. Limited Saturday service is also offered between Yreka and Dunsmuir. The nearest bus stop to the project site is located approximately 0.75 miles from the project site near the intersection of Mt. Shasta Boulevard and Ivy Street REGULATORY CONTEXT State California Department of Transportation Caltrans manages interregional transportation, including the management and construction of the California highway system. In addition, Caltrans is responsible for the permitting and regulation of state roadways. I-5 is the only roadway in the project area that falls under Caltrans jurisdiction. Caltrans establishes performance standards that apply to specific routes and publishes those standards in transportation concept reports (TCRs). Performance standards in TCRs are often expressed as LOS standards. LOS standards are established based on current operating conditions, surrounding land uses, local policies, and current plans for improvement on the facility. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

6 Local Siskiyou County General Plan The Circulation Element (1988) included in the Siskiyou County General Plan was prepared pursuant to Section 65302(b) of the California Government Code. The Circulation Element addresses the location and extent of existing and planned transportation routes, terminals, and other local public utilities and facilities. The Circulation Element identifies roadway and transit goals and objectives that have been adopted to ensure that the transportation system of the County will have adequate capacity to serve planned growth. Applicable goals and objectives are listed below. Goals Goal 5 Goal 6 Take into consideration the needs of those who must rely on public transportation. Provide for a coordinated system between all modes of travel: such as rail, air, bus, truck, private auto, bicycle, pedestrian, equestrian, and recreational vehicles. Objectives Objective A Objective D Objective E Develop and refine a system of high standard collector and arterial roads that improves traffic safety and reduced travel time within the County. Provide, if feasible, a public transportation system within and connecting major population centers. Develop, when feasible, a safe and adequate system of pedestrian walkways and bicycle routes and trails. City of Mt. Shasta General Plan Circulation Element Although the project site is not within the City s jurisdiction, relevant local goals and polices are listed below as they relate to adjacent and cumulative development in the City. The General Plan Circulation Element provides long-term policies concerning the movement of people, goods, and services, and addresses streets and highways, public transit, rail and air transportation, non-motorized transportation, and public utilities. The General Plan is broken down into various objectives and programs that each have goals, policies, and implementation measures. The following General Plan goals, policies, and implementation measures are applicable to transportation and circulation: General Plan Objectives and Programs Level of Service Goal CI-1: Ensure that land development does not exceed road capacities. Policy CI-1.2: Level of service C shall be the minimum acceptable service level during normal conditions. Peak-hour reduction to level of service D may be permitted provided there are plans in place to make improvements required to improve the level of service. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

7 Implementation Measure CI-1.2(b): When a road segment or intersection is found to be approaching Level of Service C (defined as ADT being within ten percent of the highest LOS C traffic volume threshold), or to have significant safety issues related to the volume of use, the City shall initiate plans for improvements designed to increase capacity, and/or to improve other operational features of the roadway or intersection to improve the LOS and traffic safety. Implementation Measure CI-1.2(c): The improvements shall be designed to be initiated by the time traffic volume is approaching Level of Service D. This may result in the generation of impact fees as a means of accumulating funds for the improvements caused by private development. Implementation Measure CI-1.2(d): The City shall require traffic analysis to be conducted for all projects that will generate sufficient traffic to use 10 percent or more of the capacity of the roadway at LOS C as shown in Table 4-2. When a project will potentially impact a state highway, consideration will be given to the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies to determine when and how a related traffic study should be completed. Implementation Measure CI-1.2(e): Projects that will impact streets and/or intersections that currently, or are projected to operate, at below LOS C, shall prepare a traffic analysis to determine the extent to which they impact the streets and/or intersections. For facilities that are (short-term conditions), or will be (cumulative condition), operating at unacceptable Levels of Service without the project, an impact is considered significant if the Circulation Element City of Mt. Shasta General Plan 4-5 project: 1) increases the average delay at intersections by more than five seconds, or 2) increases the volume-tocapacity ratio by 0.05 or more on a roadway segment. Implementation Measure CI-1.2(f): If a street and/or intersection is impacted by a project for short-term conditions, and the project's pro-rata share is equal to or above twenty five (25) percent, then the project shall be required to construct the necessary improvements to maintain an acceptable level of service. Implementation Measure CI-1.2(g): If a street and/or intersection is impacted by a project for cumulative conditions, and the project's pro-rata share is below twenty five (25) percent, then the project shall be required to pay their pro-rata share of the cost of constructing these improvements. Implementation Measure CI-1.2(h): The City shall regulate truck travel as appropriate for the transport of goods, consistent with circulation, air quality, noise, and land use goals. Siskiyou County Local Transportation Commission (SCLTC) The Siskiyou County Local Transportation Commission (SCLTC) is designated as the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) for the County. This local entity monitors and coordinates AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

8 project eligibility for state highway funding and public transportation. SCLTC coordinates its activities with various County Departments; as well as State and local government entities, to solve specific transportation problems which are of community concern IMPACTS Method of Analysis As discussed in Section 4.0, to provide a conservative analysis, this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) evaluates impacts resulting from all modifications undertaken and proposed by Crystal Geyser Water Company (CGWC) to operate the proposed bottling facilities; therefore, the environmental impacts of construction activities occurring prior to the publication of the Notice of Preparation (NOP) in June 2016, proposed future construction activities, and operation are evaluated below. The environmental setting as it existed in 2013, when CGWC purchased the property, forms the baseline from which impacts associated with prior construction activities are measured and evaluated, and the existing environmental setting (2016) forms the baseline from which proposed construction activities and operation is measured. Because little to no growth has occurred in the project area, the environmental baseline with respect to traffic levels has not changed appreciably between 2013 and June The potential for traffic impacts resulting from off-site sewer improvements in South Old Stage Road is also addressed below. The potential for environmental impacts from the off-site improvements described in Section 3.7 that would serve the Proposed Project, but would occur with or without the Proposed Project, is analyzed in Section 4.12, Utilities. Environmental effects from the planned City of Mt. Shasta State-Mandated Wastewater Treatment and Outfall Improvement Project are discussed in Section , Impact Environmental effects from the proposed Lassen Substation Project are discussed in Section , Impact Unsignalized Intersections Existing operational conditions at the five study intersections have been evaluated according to the requirements set forth by Caltrans, the County, and the City. Analysis of traffic operations was conducted using the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) LOS methodology with Synchro software. For unsignalized intersections, the average control delay and LOS operating conditions are calculated by approach and movement. Operating conditions for unsignalized intersections are presented for the worst approach. See Table for a summary of the relationship between LOS and average control delay at unsignalized intersections. Roadway Segments The Mt. Shasta General Plan specifies that an analysis of the ADT volumes be conducted on roadways that could potentially receive a significant amount of additional traffic from a project. As discussed under Section , traffic counts were conducted on all key roadways that would receive a significant amount of Proposed Project traffic. ADT volumes for each roadway segment were calculated by adding the Proposed Project traffic volumes to existing and projected cumulative roadway ADT volumes. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

9 Traffic Signal Warrants Evaluation of unsignalized LOS has been supplemented by consideration of the need for traffic signals based on the Traffic Signal Warrant criteria published in the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Cumulative Traffic Volume Forecasts Study intersection cumulative traffic volumes were calculated based on traffic volume data for the Abrams Lake and Mt. Shasta Boulevard Interchanges from the Caltrans Traffic Census Program, which indicated a 0.5 percent per year increase in background traffic. The 0.5 percent per year growth rate was applied through year 2040 to forecast traffic volumes under cumulative conditions. Thresholds of Significance Criteria for determining the significance of impacts to traffic and circulation have been developed based on Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act s (CEQA s) Guidelines and relevant agency guidelines. Impacts to the existing transportation network would be considered significant if the Proposed Project would: Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including, but not limited to, intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths and mass transit. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to, level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. Specifically, the Proposed Project would have a significant impact if it would: o o Cause an unsignalized intersection or roadway segment within Siskiyou County or the City of Mt. Shasta currently operating at LOS C or better to worsen to LOS D or worse with the addition of Proposed Project traffic. Cause a facility maintained by Caltrans currently operating at LOS C or better to worsen to LOS D or worse with the addition of Proposed Project traffic. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). Result in inadequate emergency vehicle access. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

10 Effects Found Not to be Significant As discussed within the Initial Study for the Proposed Project included within Appendix C, the Proposed Project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns. Therefore, further discussion of this issue area is not included within this EIR. Project Impacts Proposed Project Trip Generation Trip Generation Trip generation results for the Proposed Project are based on the number of proposed employees and trip generation rates for light industrial uses (Land Use Code 110) taken from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9 th Edition. The total trip generation reflects all vehicle trips that would be counted at the project driveways, both inbound and outbound. Table shows the trip generation for the Proposed Project. TABLE PROPOSED PROJECT TRIP GENERATION AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Land Use Size ADT In Out Total In Out Total Light Industrial Trip Rates Crystal Geyser Project Trip Generation 60 employees Project Truck Trips Passenger Car Equivalents for Project Truck Trips Total Project Trip Generation Notes: 1 - Truck trips were converted to passenger car equivalents by multiplying them by a factor of 1.5. Source: ITE, As shown in Table , the Proposed Project is anticipated to generate approximately 53 vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and 56 trips during the PM peak hour. For purposes of determining the reasonable worst-case Proposed Project traffic impacts, the trips generated by the Proposed Project are estimated for the peak commute hours that occur from 7:45 AM to 8:45 AM and from 4:15 PM to 5:15 PM. These are the time periods when the project traffic would generally contribute to the greatest amount of congestion. Under Wastewater Treatment Option 4, reverse osmosis (RO) reject water would hauled off the project site for disposal. These haul trucks would result in approximately 3 to 6 trips per week under the initial phase and 6 to 12 trips per week under full production. These trips would occur during off-peak hours and are therefore considered negligible to analysis of Proposed Project traffic impacts. For this reason, these trips were not added to the Proposed Project trip generation described above. Trip Distribution Trip distribution was based on the Proposed Project s proximity to the freeway interchange, the existing directional split at nearby intersections, and the overall land use patterns in the area. Approximately 30 AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

11 percent of Proposed Project traffic is anticipated to come from the north on I-5, 40 percent is anticipated to come from the south via Mt. Shasta Boulevard, and 30 percent is anticipated to arrive via Everitt Memorial Highway. As discussed in Section 3.0 and shown on Figure , trucks would be directed to access I-5 via the Mt. Shasta Boulevard and Abrams Lake Road interchanges. Approximately 70 percent of truck trips would be to and from the south on I-5. Significance IMPACT Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC IMPACTS Proposed Project Wastewater Treatment Options 1-3: Less than Significant Proposed Project Wastewater Treatment Option 4: Significant Off-Site Sewer Improvements: Significant MM : Wastewater Treatment Option 4 Develop a Traffic Control Plan MM S : Off-Site Sewer Improvements Develop a Traffic Control Plan Proposed Project Previous Construction Activities As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, CGWC has installed the majority of the new equipment needed for the operation of the proposed bottling plant facilities that did not require a discretionary action from the County. Installation of the equipment generated approximately 330 truck trips related to the delivery of equipment and materials and approximately 1,100 car trips related to construction worker commutes over the course of a year. Additionally, all study area intersections operate at LOS A or LOS B, above the City and County standard of LOS C. The number of trips generated by previous construction activities was not substantial enough to cause study area intersections to drop below acceptable levels of service, given that modifications to the Plant were made intermittently between February 2015 and February Therefore, traffic impacts associated with prior construction activities are less than significant. Proposed Project Future Construction Activities (All Options for Wastewater Treatment) Construction of the remaining project components may require some limited heavy equipment be transported on and off the site throughout the construction of the Proposed Project. Transportation of heavy equipment could cause traffic impacts in the vicinity of the project site during construction. However, each load would be required to obtain all necessary permits, which include conditions to abide by, such as the Siskiyou County Transportation Permit s restrictions on movement during nighttime or low visibility conditions. Additionally, hauling equipment to and from the project site each month would be short-term and temporary. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

12 LEGEND Project Site?? Ð N OR TH! ol Feet ,600 ak?? A m br a d er Truck Routes? S pr ill gh in Dr???? Mo un ts has ta B Ski Village Dr CGW C Dr lv d SOURCE: OpenStreetMap, 2016; AES, 11/9/2016 Crystal Geyser / Figure Truck Route to Project Site

13 The weekday work is expected to begin around 7:00 AM and end around 4:00 PM. The construction worker arrival peak would occur between 6:30 AM and 7:30 AM, and the departure peak would occur between 4:00 PM and 5:00 PM. It should be noted that the number of trips generated during construction would not only be temporary, but would also be approximately 50 percent less than the Proposed Project trip generation at buildout. Based on past construction of similar projects, construction workers could require parking for up to 20 vehicles during the peak construction period. Additionally, deliveries, visits, and other activities may generate peak non-worker parking demand of 5 to 10 trucks and automobiles per day. Therefore, up to 30 vehicle parking spaces may be required during the peak construction period just for the construction employees. The project construction traffic would not exceed the traffic that would be generated by the Proposed Project and will be subject to oversight by the City Engineer. As discussed below under Impacts , , and , traffic volumes generated during operation of the Proposed Project would not have significant impacts on the study area intersections or roadway segments. Therefore, traffic volumes generated by construction activities, which would be approximately 50 percent less than Proposed Project operational traffic volumes, would not lead to significant impacts on study area intersections or roadway segments. This impact would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. Wastewater Treatment Option 4 In addition to the effects described above, wastewater Treatment Option 4 includes the development of a pipeline connecting the northern section of the project site across Ski Village Drive to the central section of the project site where the bottling plant is located. Construction of the off-site pipeline could potentially cause traffic delays during in-road work, which is a potentially significant impact. As described in Mitigation Measure , construction contractors would be required to submit a TCP to the County for off-site improvements. The TCP would be subject to review and approval by the County (for work with the Ski Village Drive right-of-way) and would include measures to decrease impacts to traffic during development of off-site pipelines. Further, impacts to traffic as a result of off-site improvements would be temporary. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure , impacts as a result of off-site reclaimed water pipeline construction under Wastewater Treatment Option 4 would be less than significant. Off-Site Sewer Improvements As described in Section 3.7, the Proposed Project includes upsizing a limiting sewer pipe section in order to accommodate an increase in wastewater flows to the City s municipal sewer system. Pipeline upsizing would take place within South Old Stage Road. Construction of the off-site pipelines could potentially cause traffic delays during in-road work, which is a significant impact. As described in Mitigation Measure S , construction contractors would be required to submit a Traffic Control Plan (TCP) to the applicable jurisdiction agencies for off-site improvements. The TCP would be subject to review and approval by the City (for work within South Old Stage Road right-of-way) and would include measures to decrease impacts to traffic during development of off-site pipelines. Further, impacts to traffic as a result of off-site improvements would be temporary. Therefore, with AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

14 implementation of Mitigation Measure S , impacts as a result of off-site pipeline construction would be less than significant. Significance IMPACT Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation INCREASED TRAFFIC VOLUMES AT STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS UNDER EXISTING CONDITIONS EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS None Required Table presents the projected AM and PM peak hour operations, including delay and accompanying levels of service, at all study area intersections under existing and existing plus project conditions. As shown in Table , the Proposed Project would not cause any intersections during the AM or PM peak hour to degrade from an acceptable LOS C or above to an unacceptable LOS D or below. Therefore, impacts to study area intersections under existing plus project conditions would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. TABLE EXISTINGPLUS PROJECT INTERSECTION LOS CONDITIONS Intersection Control Peak Hour 1 Spring Hill Rd & Mt. Shasta Blvd TWSC 2 Ski Village Dr & Mt. Shasta Blvd TWSC 3 S. Nixon Rd & Mt. Shasta Blvd TWSC 4 Project Entrance & Mt. Shasta Blvd TWSC 5 Everitt Memorial Highway & Ski Village Dr TWSC Source: Abrams Associates, 2016 (Appendix U). Existing Existing Plus Project Delay Los Delay LOS AM 9.8 A 10.1 B PM 10.5 B 10.8 B AM 10.6 B 11.2 B PM 11.0 B 12.1 B AM 9.6 A 9.9 A PM 10.4 B 10.7 B AM 10.2 B 10.2 B PM 10.9 B 10.9 B AM 8.8 A 8.8 A PM 8.7 A 8.8 A AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

15 Significance IMPACT Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation INCREASED TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON STUDY AREA ROADWAYS EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS None Required ADT was calculated for all key roadways in the study area that could potentially be impacted by the Proposed Project. ADT volumes under existing plus project conditions are shown in Figure As shown in Figure , ADT volumes on all study area roadways would be below 6,000, the ADT figure that correlates to LOS A for 2-lane collector roadways in the Mt. Shasta General Plan (see Table ) 2. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the Proposed Project would cause a study area roadway to operate unacceptably due to added traffic. Impacts to study area roadways under existing plus project conditions would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. Significance IMPACT Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation INCREASED TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON FREEWAY FACILITIES EXISTING PLUS PROJECT CONDITIONS None Required Based on traffic counts conducted by Abrams Associates in June 2016, the I-5 freeway was determined to have its highest volumes during the PM peak hour when there were 1,200 vehicles per hour recorded in the southbound direction and 1,085 vehicles per hour in the northbound direction. Based on the Proposed Project s trip generation (including shift and delivery schedules), no more than approximately 20 peak hour trips would be added to any one segment of the I-5 freeway. Twenty (20) peak hour trips equates to an increase of less than one percent of existing freeway traffic volumes. As discussed in Section , according to the criteria in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, the I-5 freeway currently operates at LOS A in this area (Caltrans, 2002). Based on the review of freeway operations, the Proposed Project trip generation, and the Caltrans standards, further analysis of freeway operations is not warranted and this impact would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. 2 It should be noted that all affected roadway segments are classified as arterials in the Mt. Shasta General Plan except for Ski Village Drive, which is classified as a collector. The ADT volume that correlates to LOS A for arterial roadways is defined as 9,000 in the Mt. Shasta General Plan. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

16 Mt Shasta Quarry NORTH ADT Volumes for Roadway Segments NOT TO SCALE N. OLD S TA GE RD SPRING HILL RD W YE H K A WAY N. OLD STAGE RD SCHILLING WAY 800 PINE GROVE DR SPRING HILL DR 1 Mt Shasta City Park Mt Shasta City KOA Shastice Park Mt Shasta Memorial Park Big Spring Creek MT SHASTA BLVD EVERITT MEMORIAL HIGHWAY 5 2 SKI VILLAGE DR NI X ON RD KINGSTON RD LASSEN LN ROCKFELLOW DR N. OLD STAGE RD 4400 LAKE ST MCCLOUD AVE N ADAMS DR Wagon Creek N. WASHINGTON DR Browns Lake SOURCE: Abrams Associates Traffic Engineering, Inc.; AES, 11/3/2016 Crystal Geyser / Figure Study Area Roadway ADT Existing Plus Project

17 Significance IMPACT Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation INCREASED IMPACTS TO HAZARDS DUE TO ROADWAY DESIGN FEATURES OR INCOMPATIBLE USES None Required The Proposed Project would require all truck traffic to use the Mt. Shasta Boulevard driveway. Based on traffic analysis in the TIA, Abrams Associates determined that the proposed access plan should function well and there should be no capacity or safety problems at the project site entrances (Appendix U). The entrances were reviewed for safety and it was determined they both have adequate sight distance according to Caltrans standards. Based on the analysis of traffic operations by Abrams Associates there were no queuing problems or other capacity issues identified that would warrant further improvements or changes at the project access intersections (Appendix U). An analysis of the need for traffic signals at the study area intersections (including the project site entrances) was conservatively conducted based on the cumulative plus project LOS results and the California MUTCD, which identifies nine traffic signal warrants that are required to be investigated to determine the potential for a traffic signal. The analysis indicated that none of the unsignalized study intersections would warrant installation of a traffic signal. At the intersection of Spring Hill Drive with Mt. Shasta Boulevard and the I-5 ramps, traffic has been perceived to be hazardous due to high speeds. Traffic coming off the southbound off-ramp does not stop and generally travels at high speeds due to the straight alignment of the off-ramp approaching the intersection. For traffic at the stop sign on the eastbound Spring Hill Drive approach looking south, and at the stop sign on the eastbound Spring Hill Drive approach looking north, the sight distance meets the minimum stopping distance (360 feet and 500 feet, respectively) for the speed limits of 45 mph and 55 mph, respectively. Therefore, this intersection is not considered hazardous as it meets current guidelines for sight distance 3. Additionally, this intersection is currently operating under acceptable LOS thresholds, which are based on intersection delay and safe operation. The Proposed Project would not substantially degrade the LOS of this intersection or otherwise obstruct site distances at this intersection. The existing project site design, with respect to traffic circulation and site access, conforms to applicable design standards and the Proposed Project would not create any significant impacts to pedestrians, bicyclists or traffic operations, nor create safety problems due to roadway design features or incompatible uses. Therefore, impacts related increased hazards and vehicle safety would be less-than-significant and no mitigation is required. Additionally, as part of the Proposed Project, a sign at the truck entrance would installed near the intersection of Mt. Shasta Boulevard and CGWC Drive to reduce the likelihood that trucks miss the turn-off. 3 Although, this intersection is not considered hazardous as it meets current guidelines for sight distance for the posted speed limits, the potential for speeding in the area under existing conditions has resulted in concerns about safety. The TIA provides the City with recommendations to address these concerns by further trimming back vegetation along the eastern side of Mt. Shasta Boulevard. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

18 Significance IMPACT Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation IMPACTS TO EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS Proposed Project Wastewater Treatment Options 1-3: Less than Significant Proposed Project Wastewater Treatment Option 4: Potentially Significant Off-Site Sewer Improvements: Potentially Significant MM : Wastewater Treatment Option 4 Develop a Traffic Control Plan MM S : Off-Site Sewer Improvements Develop a Traffic Control Plan Proposed Project All Options for Wastewater Treatment Sufficient emergency access is determined by factors such as number of access points, roadway width, and proximity to fire stations. The site plan for the Proposed Project includes a primary entrance on Ski Village Drive with secondary access onto Mt. Shasta Boulevard. All lane widths within the project site would meet the minimum width that can accommodate emergency vehicles (as determined by the International Fire Code section 503.2), and the final emergency vehicle access plan would be subject to final approval from the Fire Department. Therefore, the development of the Proposed Project is expected to have less-than-significant impacts to emergency vehicle access and no mitigation is required. Proposed Project Wastewater Treatment Option 4 In addition to the effects described above, wastewater Treatment Option 4 includes the development of a pipeline connecting the northern section of the project site across Ski Village Drive to the central section of the project site where the bottling plant is located. Construction of the off-site pipeline could potentially cause temporary lane closures during in-road work. This would result in a potentially significant impact to emergency vehicle access. Implementation of Mitigation Measure would ensure that a TCP is implemented and approved for off-site construction improvements, including the provision of adequate emergency access during any necessary lane closures. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation. Off-Site Sewer Improvements During the construction of off-site wastewater improvements under Wastewater Treatment Options 1 and 2, temporary lane closures may be required to complete the required pipeline upgrades. This would result in a potentially significant impact to emergency vehicle access. Implementation of Mitigation Measure S would ensure that a TCP is implemented and approved for off-site construction improvements, including the provision of adequate emergency access during any necessary lane closures. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

19 Significance IMPACT Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation CONFLICT WITH ADOPTED POLICIES, PLANS, OR PROGRAMS REGARDING BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, OR PUBLIC TRANSIT FACILITIES, OR OTHERWISE DECREASE THE PERFORMANCE OR SAFETY OF SUCH FACILITIES None Required The Proposed Project could generate additional pedestrian and bicycle traffic in the area from employees who may choose to travel by alternative modes, thereby potentially increasing conflicts between vehicles bicycles, and pedestrians. Though the Proposed Project may increase pedestrian and bicycle traffic in the vicinity of the project site, it will not significantly impact or change the design of any existing bicycle facilities or create any new safety problems for pedestrians or bicyclists in the area as the Proposed Project does not include off-site roadway alterations and would not significantly increase traffic along study area roadways. Therefore, impacts to bicycle and pedestrian facilities would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. The Proposed Project would not interfere with any existing bus routes nor remove or relocate any existing bus stops. The Proposed Project would not conflict with any transit plans or goals of the County. The Proposed Project could generate additional transit ridership. Based on existing travel patterns in the area and ITE data on transit use for light industrial land uses, it is anticipated that up to 7 percent of employees may use public transit. Based on the currently proposed maximum of 60 employees, up to 5 employees may use public transit. This small increase in ridership would not be expected to impact existing transit operations in the area. Therefore, Proposed Project impacts to the transit system would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. Cumulative Impacts Significance IMPACT Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation INCREASED TRAFFIC VOLUMES AT STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS UNDER CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS None Required Table presents the projected AM and PM peak hour operations, including delay and accompanying levels of service, at all study area intersections under cumulative (2040) conditions with and without the Proposed Project. As shown in Table , the Proposed Project would not cause any intersections during the AM or PM peak hour to degrade from an acceptable LOS C or above to an unacceptable LOS D or below. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

20 Therefore, impacts to study area intersections under cumulative conditions would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. Intersection TABLE CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT LOS CONDITIONS Control 1 Spring Hill Rd & Mt. Shasta Blvd TWSC 2 Ski Village Dr & Mt. Shasta Blvd TWSC 3 S. Nixon Rd & Mt. Shasta Blvd TWSC 4 Project Entrance & Mt. Shasta Blvd TWSC 5 Everitt Memorial Highway & Ski Village Dr TWSC Source: Abrams Associates, 2016 (Appendix U). Peak Hour Cumulative Cumulative Plus Project Delay Los Delay Los AM 10.0 B 10.3 B PM 10.8 B 11.2 B AM 11.0 B 11.7 B PM 11.5 B 12.8 B AM 9.8 A 10.0 B PM 10.8 B 11.2 B AM 10.5 B 10.5 A PM 11.4 B 11.4 B AM 8.9 A 8.9 A PM 8.8 A 8.8 A Significance IMPACT Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation INCREASED TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON STUDY AREA ROADWAYS UNDER CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS None Required ADT was calculated for all key roadways in the study area that could potentially be impacted by the Proposed Project. ADT volumes under the cumulative plus project conditions are shown in Figure As shown in Figure , ADT volumes on all study area roadways would be below 6,000, the ADT figure that correlates to LOS A for 2-lane collector roadways in the Mt. Shasta General Plan (see Table ) 4. ADT volumes on the study area roadways under cumulative plus project conditions are significantly below the guidelines that correlate to unacceptable conditions. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the Proposed Project would cause a study area roadway to operate unacceptably due to added traffic. Impacts to study area roadways under cumulative conditions would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. 4 See footnote 2. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project

21 Mt Shasta Quarry NORTH ADT Volumes for Roadway Segments NOT TO SCALE N. OLD S TA GE RD SPRING HILL RD N. O L D SPRING HILL DR 800 EVERITT MEMORIAL HIGHWAY W YE H K A WAY STAGE RD SCHILLING WAY PINE GROVE DR 5 Mt Shasta City Park NI X 5100 ON RD 1700 SKI VILLAGE 5600 DR KINGSTON RD Mt Shasta City KOA Shastice Park LASSEN LN ROCKFELLOW DR Mt Shasta Memorial Park N. OLD STAGE RD Big Spring Creek 5000 MT SHASTA BLVD LAKE ST MCCLOUD AVE N ADAMS DR Wagon Creek N. WASHINGTON DR Browns Lake SOURCE: Abrams Associates Traffic Engineering, Inc.; AES, 11/3/2016 Crystal Geyser / Figure Study Area Roadway ADT Cumulative Plus Project

22 IMPACT Significance Mitigation Measures Significance After Mitigation INCREASED TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON FREEWAY FACILITIES UNDER CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS None Required As discussed under Impact , traffic counts were conducted on the freeway ramps and the I-5 mainline freeway at the Abrams Lake Interchange in June According to the criteria in the Caltrans Guide for Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, I-5 currently operates at LOS A in the project area (Caltrans, 2002). It is anticipated that I-5 would continue to operate at LOS C or better under cumulative conditions (Appendix U). The Proposed Project would add no more than 20 peak hour trips to any one segment of the I-5 freeway. Therefore, based on the review of freeway operations under cumulative conditions, the Proposed Project trip generation, and Caltrans standards, further analysis of freeway operations is not warranted and this impact would be less than significant and no mitigation is required MITIGATION MEASURES MM Wastewater Treatment Option 4 Develop a Traffic Control Plan Prior to commencement of off-site pipeline construction across Ski Village Drive under Wastewater Treatment Option 4, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a formal TCP, including signage, to the County for approval. The Applicant shall maintain a copy of the approved TCP at the project site for the duration of the TCP implementation period. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce the impacts of the off-site sewer improvements: MM S Off-Site Sewer Improvements Develop a Traffic Control Plan Prior to commencement of construction of the off-site sewer improvement within South Old Stage Road under Wastewater Treatment Options 1 and 2, the construction contractors shall prepare and submit a formal TCP, including signage, to the County and City for approval. The contractors shall maintain a copy of the approved TCP at the project site for the duration of the TCP implementation period. AES Crystal Geyser Bottling Plant Project